{
    "Contributors": [
        "Mihir Parmar"
    ],
    "Source": [
        "imdb"
    ],
    "URL": [
        "https://ai.stanford.edu/~amaas/data/sentiment/"
    ],
    "Categories": [
        "Sentiment Analysis"
    ],
    "Reasoning": [],
    "Definition": [
        "In this task, you are given a review of movie. Your task is to classify given movie review into two categories: 1) positive, and 2) negative based on its content."
    ],
    "Input_language": [
        "English"
    ],
    "Output_language": [
        "English"
    ],
    "Instruction_language": [
        "English"
    ],
    "Domains": [
        "Reviews -> Movies"
    ],
    "Positive Examples": [
        {
            "input": "For a movie that gets no respect there sure are a lot of memorable quotes listed for this gem. Imagine a movie where Joe Piscopo is actually funny! Maureen Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni character is an absolute scream. Watch for Alan The Skipper Hale jr. as a police Sgt.",
            "output": "positive",
            "explanation": "There is an expression of appreciation in this movie review, hence we can say it's positive."
        },
        {
            "input": "Bizarre horror movie filled with famous faces but stolen by Cristina Raines (later of TV's Flamingo Road) as a pretty but somewhat unstable model with a gummy smile who is slated to pay for her attempted suicides by guarding the Gateway to Hell! The scenes with Raines modeling are very well captured, the mood music is perfect, Deborah Raffin is charming as Cristina's pal, but when Raines moves into a creepy Brooklyn Heights brownstone (inhabited by a blind priest on the top floor), things really start cooking. The neighbors, including a fantastically wicked Burgess Meredith and kinky couple Sylvia Miles & Beverly D'Angelo, are a diabolical lot, and Eli Wallach is great fun as a wily police detective. The movie is nearly a cross-pollination of Rosemary's Baby and The Exorcist--but what a combination! Based on the best-seller by Jeffrey Konvitz, The Sentinel is entertainingly spooky, full of shocks brought off well by director Michael Winner, who mounts a thoughtfully downbeat ending with skill.",
            "output": "positive",
            "explanation": "This review has different happy sentiments and comment about movie, hence this is a positive review."
        },
        {
            "input": "I felt brain dead, I'll tell you. This is the worst film I have ever bought. (in my ignorance I thought this was the Peter Jackson film of the same name). The performances are so terrible they are laughable. The special effects have not stood the test of time and look dire. The script promotes that kind of TV movie, stare into the middle distance kind of acting. The cast look as if they have been taking lessons from Joey Tribbiani, they have one look each, and stick to it. Plus I have never been confused by a movie until I sat down to watch this. The is it a dream or no plot is so terrible that frustration sets in within a few minutes. Avoid like a plague.",
            "output": "negative",
            "explanation": "This review has expression of hateness, hence this is a negative review."
        },
        {
            "input": "Well...tremors I, the original started off in 1990 and i found the movie quite enjoyable to watch. however, they proceeded to make tremors II and III. Trust me, those movies started going downhill right after they finished the first one, i mean, ass blasters??? Now, only God himself is capable of answering the question why in Gods name would they create another one of these dumpster dives of a movie? Tremors IV cannot be considered a bad movie, in fact it cannot be even considered an epitome of a bad movie, for it lives up to more than that. As i attempted to sit though it, i noticed that my eyes started to bleed, and i hoped profusely that the little girl from the ring would crawl through the TV and kill me. did they really think that dressing the people who had stared in the other movies up as though they we're from the wild west would make the movie (with the exact same occurrences) any better? honestly, i would never suggest buying this movie, i mean, there are cheaper ways to find things that burn well.",
            "output": "negative",
            "explanation": "Here, the reviewer does not felt that it's a good movie, hence this review is negative."
        }
    ],
    "Negative Examples": [
        {
            "input": "For a movie that gets no respect there sure are a lot of memorable quotes listed for this gem. Imagine a movie where Joe Piscopo is actually funny! Maureen Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni character is an absolute scream. Watch for Alan The Skipper Hale jr. as a police Sgt.",
            "output": "negative",
            "explanation": "There is an expression of appreciation in this movie review, hence we can say it's positive. But the label is 'negative' which is not right."
        },
        {
            "input": "Well...tremors I, the original started off in 1990 and i found the movie quite enjoyable to watch. however, they proceeded to make tremors II and III. Trust me, those movies started going downhill right after they finished the first one, i mean, ass blasters??? Now, only God himself is capable of answering the question why in Gods name would they create another one of these dumpster dives of a movie? Tremors IV cannot be considered a bad movie, in fact it cannot be even considered an epitome of a bad movie, for it lives up to more than that. As i attempted to sit though it, i noticed that my eyes started to bleed, and i hoped profusely that the little girl from the ring would crawl through the TV and kill me. did they really think that dressing the people who had stared in the other movies up as though they we're from the wild west would make the movie (with the exact same occurrences) any better? honestly, i would never suggest buying this movie, i mean, there are cheaper ways to find things that burn well.",
            "output": "positive",
            "explanation": "Here, the reviewer does not felt that it's a good movie, hence this review is negative. Since the label is 'positive', this instance is wrongly labeled."
        }
    ],
    "Instances": [
        {
            "id": "task284-0f6e42a48b6e4d5cae19deec6848ed07",
            "input": "It's been a looooonnnggg time since I saw this comedy, and I'd forgotten just how idiotic it is. I'd place this easily in the lower two or three of Elvis Presley's very worst movies. Presley plays Joe Whitecloud, a half-breed Indian bull rider who returns home to Arizona and the broken-down shack where his family lives, and where his friends love to party all night long. His parents are played by Burgess Meredith and Katy Jurado, and his old Indian grandpa is Thomas Gomez. None of the three offer anything of substance , comically or otherwise. The government has invested in the family's cattle, but they're lacking a bull. Elvis gets to sing just a few utterly worthless songs, and is pursued by a young boy-crazy gal and her gun-toting mother. This is just a real slapdash of a mess, and the dilapidated surroundings practically stink of manure and don't make this much easier. The one thing that puzzles me, however, is that Elvis actually seems to be having a good time in the film. Hard to believe, considering he got so upset about being stuck making so many mediocre movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebb1ef1d22374803a9877a56d125389f",
            "input": "Except for the better than average acting skills of the two leads, this movie is really, really bad. The cheap production values don't help. Of course, you wouldn't really notice that the production values are cheap if they didn't keep trying to convince you they HAD a production values to begin with. Even for a B-movie genre freak like myself, this movie really sucks.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5858852d1dd9452f9728f7312c61d45f",
            "input": "For the initial 20 minutes or so (I was watching it on a PS2 so I've really no idea how long it took) Alienator sets up an interesting premise. I don't think I've seen a slasher movie with an alien from another planet as the baddie before. However, interest soon turns into stunned disbelief as you realise the 'alien' is a huge body-builder woman in a steel bikini. Yes, Alienator is patently ridiculous.Don't think I hold that against it. In the world of shlock-horror, patently ridiculous can often be a good sign. However, the blatant stupidity of its premise is all the movie really has going for it. Alienator is funny as hell, but it is also a shambolic suckfest of the highest order. Actors heap on failed attempts at seriousness, potentially genius lines of pure cheese dialogue are stumbled over with unnerving incompetence and the direction fails to sum up even one or two decent set-pieces. By the time the movie's finished you can barely see the original concept through the haystack of total tripe the team piled on it.Add to this the fact that the 'Alien' just kills people by vaporising them, as opposed to doing any 'slashing' as such and you have a giant throbbing heap of good ideas being left to rot. You'll laugh at Alienator, but AT it, not with it. If that's your thing then go ahead and check it out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-148998be5aa145f0a2b8dac69a05fec8",
            "input": "Although too young to remember the first showing of the series (being just a baby) I later caught repeats of it on television in the late 80's, just when I was getting interested in the war and all of its aspects. It was my grandfather who first showed me the series and also gave me my first interests, relating tales of his time in the Royal Navy at Malta and later in the Pacific. Since then I have devoured many books and seen many television series about the World War Two era, with mixed opinions. The British television stations are generally very good at producing these, as The World At War can easily attest, with many gems made by both the BBC and independent companies. I strongly recommend such titles as \"The Nazis - A warning From History\", \"Blitz\" and the BBC series about Dunkirk. \"Britain At War In Colour\", with its companion series \"Japan\", \"Germany\" and \"America\" are of a very high standard. The World At War is by far the best and, despite its age, never fails to deliver. There will always be new revelations about the war that will keep cropping up that obviously aren't included in the series and of course World War Two took place over such a large canvas that to produce a series with EVERY detail would take more time and money then any other, even if such an undertaking was even possible. What I feel I must say to those who decry that it does not include everything is that The World At War can't physically do that as a series but it sure as heck can prompt you to do further research - and make it enjoyable. That certainly worked for me: I now have a very comprehensive library of books, videos, DVDs and tapes and CDs. Recommend to anyone with even a passing interest. The series was so well made that they'd find it hard not to agree that it is quality programming and highly informative.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6eb274340364f2e90464967256d5c05",
            "input": "Now that Che(2008) has finished its relatively short Australian cinema run (extremely limited release:1 screen in Sydney, after 6wks), I can guiltlessly join both hosts of \"At The Movies\" in taking Steven Soderbergh to task.It's usually satisfying to watch a film director change his style/subject, but Soderbergh's most recent stinker, The Girlfriend Experience(2009), was also missing a story, so narrative (and editing?) seem to suddenly be Soderbergh's main challenge. Strange, after 20-odd years in the business. He was probably never much good at narrative, just hid it well inside \"edgy\" projects.None of this excuses him this present, almost diabolical failure. As David Stratton warns, \"two parts of Che don't (even) make a whole\". Epic biopic in name only, Che(2008) barely qualifies as a feature film! It certainly has no legs, inasmuch as except for its uncharacteristic ultimate resolution forced upon it by history, Soderbergh's 4.5hrs-long dirge just goes nowhere.Even Margaret Pomeranz, the more forgiving of Australia's At The Movies duo, noted about Soderbergh's repetitious waste of (HD digital storage): \"you're in the woods...you're in the woods...you're in the woods...\". I too am surprised Soderbergh didn't give us another 2.5hrs of THAT somewhere between his existing two Parts, because he still left out massive chunks of Che's \"revolutionary\" life! For a biopic of an important but infamous historical figure, Soderbergh unaccountably alienates, if not deliberately insults, his audiences by1. never providing most of Che's story; 2. imposing unreasonable film lengths with mere dullard repetition; 3. ignoring both true hindsight and a narrative of events; 4. barely developing an idea, or a character; 5. remaining claustrophobically episodic; 6. ignoring proper context for scenes---whatever we do get is mired in disruptive timeshifts; 7. linguistically dislocating all audiences (even Spanish-speakers will be confused by the incongruous expositions in English); and 8. pointlessly whitewashing his main subject into one dimension. Why, at THIS late stage? The T-shirt franchise has been a success! Our sense of claustrophobia is surely due to Peter Buchman and Benjamin VanDer Veen basing their screenplay solely on Guevara's memoirs. So, like a poor student who has read only ONE of his allotted texts for his assignment, Soderbergh's product is exceedingly limited in perspective.The audience is held captive within the same constrained knowledge, scenery and circumstances of the \"revolutionaries\", but that doesn't elicit our sympathy. Instead, it dawns on us that \"Ah, Soderbergh's trying to hobble his audiences the same as the Latino peasants were at the time\". But these are the SAME illiterate Latino peasants who sold out the good doctor to his enemies. Why does Soderbergh feel the need to equate us with them, and keep us equally mentally captive? Such audience straitjacketing must have a purpose.Part2 is more chronological than Part1, but it's literally mind-numbing with its repetitive bush-bashing, misery of outlook, and lack of variety or character arcs. DelToro's Che has no opportunity to grow as a person while he struggles to educate his own ill-disciplined troops. The only letup is the humour as Che deals with his sometimes deeply ignorant \"revolutionaries\", some of whom violently lack self-control around local peasants or food. We certainly get no insight into what caused the conditions, nor any strategic analyses of their guerrilla insurgency, such as it was.Part2's excruciating countdown remains fearfully episodic: again, nothing is telegraphed or contextualized. Thus even the scenes with Fidel Castro (Demián Bichir) are unexpected and disconcerting. Any selected events are portrayed minimally and Latino-centrically, with Part1's interviews replaced by time-shifting meetings between the corrupt Bolivian president (Joaquim de Almeida) and US Government officials promising CIA intervention(!).The rest of Part2's \"woods\" and day-for-night blue filter just exasperate the audience until they're eyeing the exits.Perhaps DelToro felt too keenly the frustration of many non-American Latinos about never getting a truthful, unspun history of Che's exploits within their own countries. When foreign governments still won't deliver a free press to their people--for whatever reason--then one can see how a popular American indie producer might set out to entice the not-so-well-read (\"I may not be able to read or write, but I'm NOT illiterate!\"--cf.The Inspector General(1949)) out to their own local cinemas. The film's obvious neglects and gross over-simplifications hint very strongly that it's aiming only at the comprehensions of the less-informed WHO STILL SPEAK LITTLE English. If they did, they'd have read tomes on the subject already, and critiqued the relevant social issues amongst themselves--learning the lessons of history as they should.Such insights are precisely what societies still need--and not just the remaining illiterate Latinos of Central and South America--yet it's what Che(2008) gleefully fails to deliver. Soderbergh buries his lead because he's weak on narrative. I am gobsmacked why Benicio DelToro deliberately chose Soderbergh for this project if he knew this. It's been 44yrs, hindsight about Guevara was sorely wanted: it's what I went to see this film for, but the director diabolically robs us of that.David Stratton, writing in The Australian (03-Oct-2009) observed that while Part1 was \"uneven\", Part2 actually \"goes rapidly downhill\" from there, \"charting Che's final campaign in Bolivia in excruciating detail\", which \"...feels almost unbearably slow and turgid\".Che:The Guerilla aka Part2 is certainly no travelogue for Bolivia, painting it a picture of misery and atavism. The entire second half is only redeemed by the aforementioned humour, and the dramatic--yet tragic--capture and execution of the film's subject.The rest of this interminable cinema verite is just confusing, irritating misery--shockingly, for a Soderbergh film, to be avoided at all costs. It is bound to break the hearts of all who know even just a smattering about the subject.(2/10)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3ef335c29be4723a6b823bf0e09b1ff",
            "input": "At first, three words: READ THE BOOK! Really guys - this demonstrates the difficulties of genuine rendition of esoteric matters. I loved the book and was utterly disappointed of the film. It was ludicrous, with half a heart and the story bad explained. The novel - in the first place! - wasn't meant to focus on an adventure! That's only the surroundings. In the film, the focus reverses to just that and the message has taken a back seat! Additional, the visual effects to show the energy of all living things and the elucidation of the events at the end were parsimonious! They screwed it up! ... I'll never watch it again!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3e4349519ad4b6489db845f75a94c5e",
            "input": "It's not quite the timeless masterpiece you would hope it would be based on the acclaim it garnered, but 1969's \"Midnight Cowboy\" is still a powerhouse showcase for two young actors just bursting into view at the time. Directed by John Schlesinger and written by Waldo Salt, the movie seems to be a product of its time, the late 1960's when American films were especially expressionistic, but it still casts a spell because the story comes down to themes of loneliness and bonding that resonate no matter what period. The film's cinematic influence can still be felt in the unspoken emotionalism found in Ang Lee's \"Brokeback Mountain\".The meandering plot follows Joe Buck, a naive, young Texan who decides to move to Manhattan to become a stud-for-hire for rich women. Full of energy but lacking any savvy, he fails miserably but is unwilling to concede defeat despite his dwindling finances. He meets a cynical, sickly petty thief named \"Ratso\" Rizzo, who first sees Joe as an easy pawn. The two become dependent on one another, and Rizzo begins to manage Joe. Things come to a head at a psychedelic, drug-infested party where Joe finally lands a paying client. Meanwhile, Rizzo becomes sicker, and the two set off for Florida to seek a better life. This is not a story that will appeal to everyone, in fact, some may still find it repellent that a hustler and a thief are turned into sympathetic figures, yet their predicaments feel achingly authentic.In his first major role, Jon Voight is ideally cast as he brings out Joe's paper-thin bravado and deepening sexual insecurities. As Rizzo, Dustin Hoffman successfully upends his clean, post-college image from \"The Graduate\" and immerses himself in the personal degradation and glimmering hope that act as an oddly compatible counterpoint to Joe. The honesty of their portrayals is complemented by Schlesinger's film treatment which vividly captures the squalor of the Times Square district at the time. The director also effectively inserts montages of flashbacks and fantasy sequences to fill in the character's fragile psyches. Credit also needs to go to Salt for not letting the pervasive cynicism overwhelm the pathos of the story. The other performances are merely incidental to the journeys of the main characters, including Brenda Vaccaro as the woman Joe meets at the party, Sylvia Miles as a blowsy matron, John McGiver as a religious zealot and Barnard Hughes as a lonely out-of-towner.The two-disc 2006 DVD package contains a pristine print transfer of the 1994 restoration and informative commentary from producer Jerome Hellman since unfortunately neither Schlesinger nor Salt are still living. There are three terrific featurettes on the second disc - a look-back documentary, \"After Midnight: Reflections on a Classic 35 Years Later\", which features comments from Hellman, Hoffman, Voight and others, as well as clips and related archive footage such as Voight's screen test; \"Controversy and Acclaim\", which examines the genesis of the movie's initial 'X' rating and public response to the film; and a tribute to the director, \"Celebrating Schlesinger\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbc48016c7f44130b2080c527b137d0b",
            "input": "I jotted down a few notes here on THE FIRST POWER, Lou Lambada Diamond Phillips' 1990 satanic serial killer yuppie hell-fest ...1) Lou Diamond Phillips was recently indicted for beating up his wife and may serve time in prison. I only hope that he can find Armani prison wear to go off in style with: One of the guilty pleasures of this movie is seeing his police detective clad in $4500 designer overcoats, a $7300 designer silk suit, and seeing his $3500/month Los Angeles bachelor pad loft with interior design by Mies Van Der Roeh.2) Leading lady Tracey Phillips has gorgeous porcelain skin, flowing red hair that always seems styled even when mussed, and amazing breasts that are hi-lighted in the 2nd half of the film by a designer silk pullover that sadly remains in place over her torso even when she was being prepared to be sacrificed to Satan. At least back in the 1970's our demonic killers undressed their victims before doing away with them, though there is something to be said for leaving a bit to the imagination. By the final 10 minutes of the movie all I could think about is what her breasts probably would look like.3) Professional Psychics living in Los Angeles can afford $4 million dollar condos on Mullholland Drive overlooking Los Angeles with a view that would make Brad Pitt decide that he was roughing it. As a matter of fact the condominium used in this film looks exactly like the same one seen in David Lynch's MULLHOLLAND DR., which at least had the good sense to make it's condo resident a successful movie director. The only Professional Psychics I have encountered outside of this movie are all currently serving prison sentences for wire fraud.4) I forget his name but the villain in this movie is wonderful, and his \"How's it going', Buddy Boy?\" line could be the best overlooked movie phrase since \"THANKS FOR THE RIDE, LADY!!\" from CREEPSHOW 2.5) Underneath major metropolitan cities there are huge vats of simmering acid that will explode into huge fireballs if someone throws a lit Zippo lighter into them, which is why major public waterworks plants all have no smoking signs plastered all over them even though the idea of smoking around water being dangerous is of course preposterous. And since Zippo lighters need to be manually filled with lighter fluid that can often leak out and be absorbed by ones clothing, the idea of a carrying one in the pocket of your $7300 Gucci silk suit strikes me as being much more dangerous.6) The stunts in this movie are impressive to say the least, and one of the fun things about watching it is remaining yourself that you are not viewing computer aided special effects but actual stuntpeople risking life and limb to contribute to a movie that earned nearly universal BOMB ratings from critics when released.7) Movie satanists always amaze me: Here is a guy who has tapped into some Luciferian bid for power, and yet instead of using it to do something useful like making himself rich or causing fashion models to engage in free form sex with him, he instead possesses bag ladies and have them levitate outside of people's apartments. Speaking of which here is a guy who is indestructible, can fly, and is able to put his being inside of other people's bodies -- and yet he obliges star Lou Diamond Phillips with an ordinary fistfight in the film's conclusion, yet does not have the good sense to inhabit Arnold Schwartzeneggar or Apollo Creed to ensure that he wins.And on and on ... To be watched in the company of wise-cracking friends while consuming beer. You'll have fun so long as you steadfastly refuse to take it seriously.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35c8d98b834d4917b3bda81d80d04982",
            "input": "\"A Gentleman's Game\" uses the game of golf in a country club setting to illustrate an adolescent's discovery about honesty, prejudice, and other life lessons. Several times I thought I knew where this film was heading, only to be proved wrong. Unfortunately, I'm not so sure that the filmmakers ever knew where it was heading, either. The defining moment in this movie is probably the scene in which Gary Sinise mocks \"The Karate Kid\" and debunks any notions that he's going to become a mentor to the adolescent golfer. It's refreshing, in a way, that this movie refuses to follow most of the simplistic and over-worked movie formulas. However, too much of it still comes off as contrived. At the drop of a hat people drop all pretenses of civility, or fail to stick up for the things in which they believe, or are exposed for something far less respectable than their place in society assumes. Unfortunately, there is often no resolution to these moments. And except for the fact that the club serves as backdrop for them, there is no real continuity or linking of them. It's a shame that the writers and director could not salvage a better film, especially given some of the talented actors and potential in the setup.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f317978d47104708924cfd06a0d4b82f",
            "input": "Strange enough, all the previous comments merely described the beginning and left the details over. I feel a necessity to confirm that this is a family work, since Marina Vlady was also Robert Hossein's wife, and the - excellent - jazz music was written by te director's father, André. Under these circumstances, no wonder it was a really good thriller, seen when issued and immediately identified with the music. The suspense was flawless, and maintained throughout until the end. Robert Hossein, at the time one of the best European players, managed to impose himself also as a top screen and stage director. He's still putting up great stage shows, with a preference for religious subjects.harry carasso, Paris, France",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1cd0cbf0f6c49e5b55db29f6ffa743b",
            "input": "Visconti's first film has all his trademark visual flair and immaculate technique, accompanied by compelling performances from Massimo Girotti as the handsome drifter and, best of all, Clara Calamai as the fabulous, frantic Giovanna. Remade several times as 'The Postman Rings Twice' but never bettered. Can't believe this was the man's first film! It shows the confidence of someone at the zenith of their career.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a51dbf10116c473a8384cb7b4ec4a16c",
            "input": "I've read some terrible things about this film, so I was prepared for the worst. \"Confusing. Muddled. Horribly structured.\" While there may be merit to some of these accusations, this film was nowhere near as horrific as your average DVD programmer. In fact, it actually had aspirations. It attempted something beyond the typical monster/slasher nonsense. And by god, there are some interesting things going on.Ms. Barbeau is a miracle to behold. She carries the film squarely on her shoulders.This is not to say that it's a masterpiece. UNHOLY ultimately collapses under the weight of its own ambition. There are just too many (unexplained) subplots trying to coexist. And the plot loopholes created by time travel are never really addressed: for example, if Hope knows that her mother is evil and that she will ultimately kill her brother, then why doesn't she just kill Ma in the film's very first sequence? Seems like it would have beat the hell out of traveling into the future to do it.Still, I give UNHOLY points for trying. A little ambition is not a bad thing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2155900017cc4dd3ac1d1cd5c00a1690",
            "input": "I felt this film - throughout. I waas impressed with Russell Crowe's talent in developing his relationship with Lillie, such a typical Aussie blend of softly softly approach, a bit self depreciating and very persistent. Really loved the cinematography and direction. Pace was just right and the portrayals of nearly all characters was impressive.Gosh, didn't Russell's talent even in 1993 shine! .. and I have yet to see Gladiator.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f86b3dabb6f24e2db23ecc3932efe40e",
            "input": "This is the worst movie I have ever seen. The Avengers held this dubious honor… but no longer. The acting in \"Jill the Ripper\" is terrible and was only eclipsed by the plot. This movie is as intellectually stimulating as the Telletubbes. It doesn't know whether it wants to be an S&M flick or a really bad thriller. Only watch under extreme intoxication or if you're bed ridden and need a leather clad distraction. This script should be reworked into a porn, it wouldn't take very much effort and would have a longer shelf life. A porn, even a bad porn, wouldn't do the damage to Dolf Lundgren's career the way that this movie has.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5df457e45b6247ee8809b72fc8bb20b9",
            "input": "Cecil B. deMille's 1922 parlor-to-prison tearjerker Manslaughter finds the lovely Leatrice Joy as a good-at-heart but decadent young lady with more money than she knows what to do with. Her recklessness leads to imprisonment, which in turn leads to her regeneration. Thomas Meighan is the crusading district attorney who has made it his personal crusade to bring out the goodness and wholesomeness in Lydia (Joy) but he gets sidetracked by alcohol and once she is released, it is up to her to rescue him!If the plot doesn't sound too bad, you'll be floored by the woeful presentation. The quality of deMille's direction is very low, and he does not show any particular skill that is unique to him. The photography is standard and flat, and the editing is hardly more dynamic. One could easily classify it as a fashion show and be pretty correct. DeMille gets to dress Miss Joy up in so many different types of clothes (evening gowns, golfing costumes, motoring costumes, piles of furs) that it's subtitle could be 'Fashions of 1922'One thing more disappointing than the photography or editing or the direction is the acting, which is mostly flat and wooden. When it is not, it is merely routine silent gesturing, rolling eye balls, twitching eye brows and deliberate pointing and arm movements. What would have been enlivened for modern viewers by mugging and scene chewing of some of the worst silent films, is here merely dull to watch. The only member of the cast who succeeds in any form of excellence is Lois Wilson, who is not only beautiful but is able to play her role naturally. She is convincing and endearing in tearful close-ups, as long as you don't read the moralizing title card that follows once she opens her mouth to speak. Like I said, everybody else is droningly routine, Joy, Meighan, even Julia Faye. Her performance here makes a good argument for why she never attained true stardom.The worst and most amusing part of this movie is the heavy moralistic tone that carries through all of it. Meighan's character has plenty of intertitles where he drones on about how the youth of America is declining in it's moral stance, and going right back to the decadence of Rome. (insert absurd flashback) This movie's moralizing has been described as Victorian, but it's further than that. It has so little bearing in reality that I have a feeling audiences at that time didn't take it any more seriously than modern viewers could.This movie is exactly what the unknowing tend to think of as a 'typical' silent movie, with it's archaic moral structure, wooden acting and bad direction. DeMille shows that he could be a terrible director, with no sense of pacing, camera placement, or skill in handling either script or actors. I can't imagine anybody in their right mind taking it seriously. Boring, slow and idiotic, I recommend it to hardcore silent movie dorks like myself only.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bcd8be3fee96497da0207c183880afea",
            "input": "Coming of age movies are quite usual these days. For 1980, \"Foxes\" really gives its meaning. Jodie Foster plays her character straight out. Ever since she did \"Taxi Driver\" four years earlier, she has a stronger character in this movie. She's Jeanie, a high schooler who has plenty of guts, and seems to get out of any situation she's in. Scott Baio plays Brad way before Chachi on \"Happy Days\". He's deemed immature by the other girls. Cherie Currie is Annie, hangs with the wrong crowd, chased by her policeman father. Jeanie and her three other friends decide to live on the wild side until they move into a rented house where a party get totally out of hand. Exploring life on the other side of the tracks can be either fun or dangerous. Annie is rescued by Jeanie and Brad all the time whenever she gets wasted. Reality comes back hard where she is killed in a automobile accident. And one gets married to a much older man. Growing up isn't easy, sometimes we got to explore life how it is. In reality, you got to be careful about the people surrounding you. For me, I was my own person, and I tend to stay that way! Great music, great plot, this movie's a gem! 4 out of 5 stars!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-989d8767f4a94405bc5c9aba6a5f04c5",
            "input": "Here we are: two travelers from a distant futuristic world arrive on earth... one is on a desperate mission to preserve a life, another is an inhuman killing machine determined to eliminate the woman who will give birth to the saviour of an entire race.So what could we call this killing machine? It's almost like he's some kind of destroyer, or eradicator... sort of like an exterminator or something. What's the word I'm looking for... something that -terminates- things? Hmmmm....Anyway, the protector (who swiftly doffs the white tunic he stole from Luke Skywalker in favour of local clothing) finds the young woman first and impregnates her with a future-born hero-to-be. The evil uhhhh... \"exterminator\" kills some rednecks and steals their guns and clothes, then attempts to locate the woman by visiting her workplace and asking around by looking menacingly into people's eyes and repeating her name threateningly.Then begins a desperate race for survival as the seemingly deathless and unstoppable \"exterminator\" pursues the couple across the countryside. At some point he may acquire boots and a motorcycle, but I'm not sure.Perhaps, in an exciting finale, he will attempt to crush them under the wheels of an enormous tanker truck full of... acid. Then the truck will crash. They will be saved... but no! He will then re-emerge, as strong as ever. He will kill the protector and pursue the girl into a meat packing plant, where in a terrifying finish, he is pushed into a large piece of industrial chopping machinery, and destroyed once and for all.But maybe I'm extrapolating too much... after all, I did stop watching this movie after Mr. Protector magically impregnates Sean Young by kissing her at a bar, then tells her the child will be born in 3 days. The costumes and effects are great in this movie... I loved them the first time I saw them on Star Trek: Next Generation too! Sean Young does another great turn as an unemotive Replicant, and career sweat-hog Stephen Baldwin is also on board as Young's Fat Cop Boyfriend. Not sure where he fits into the plot though... maybe he's an import from a different James Cameron movie?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-caea769e9496454fa4e8a6a3b642df47",
            "input": "Oh man is this movie bad. It flows horribly. The story is about a race car driver who is in love with himself, and then has to promote a chicken fast food chain and while doing this, doesn't love himself. He tries getting out of the contract and horrible, painfully unfunny gags ensue. Jim Nabors seems as if he's sleepwalking, not acting. You'll miss such Burt sidekicks as Dom Deluise and Jerry Reed while watching this stinker. Loni Anderson's hair is downright scary, proving that tons of hairspray didn't go out in the sixties. Or maybe that was a wig. Speaking of, Burt's wig wasn't bad in this film. His worst \"wig day\" was in \"Smokey and the Bandit 2\". Anyhow, this movie is the worst Reynolds car movie, ever, ever, right up there with \"Cannonball Run 2\". The original \"Smokey\" and \"Cannonball\" (and \"Hooper\" which, thankfully, had no sequel) are great, funny films. This one isn't. Even Ned Beatty, who is a great actor, stinks. You'll long for a Jackie Gleason type villain who is fun to hate. And mind you, this isn't one of those fun movies to bag on. It's lousy, pure and simple. Even the outtakes at the end were tiresome and boring, and worst of all, unfunny. And least I forget, \"Stroker Ace\" was one of the first heavy nails to seal Burt's coffin before his somewhat-revival years later in \"Boogie Nights\", another film that, like \"Deliverance\" years earlier, shows that the man can act quite good when he has a decent platform to do so.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c4049feaf0d444fb89d975fba1a4357",
            "input": "Idiotic hack crooks, a babe, a safe, a plan and a baby. Add them all up and you get the best comedy you've never heard of. Even with some a-list star power (at least a-minus...okay, b-plus?) this movie got very little publicity.But that does not diminish its genius.Terrific writing, solid delivery and a believable group of characters. Some truly classic lines, and a fun twist at the end.This is not some watered-down \"Nutty Professor\" comedy. These are low-life bad guys. They speak low-life bad guy language and they do low-life bad guy things. But they do it for your amusement and entertainment, and they do that well.One of the best comedies I've ever seen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d75e2710df0242589e5b969c3a7aa50b",
            "input": "Some of those guys that watch films and complain about them for a living are forgetting something: DVD menu system. I tell you the people, I watched the main screen repeat in this one about 35 times. It was awesome. A cinematic tapestry of cascading brilliance that had me from where it was, which was the very beginning. Many times the sum and Bam! I was hooked. Over and over and over. And over.\"Doot de doot, de doo de dodedo.\" And that's just the soundtrack! I is laid aside in the bed, curled up with my Vaio. The rain is in the flat roof and tonight soft is again soft. The cat is comfortable and my ankle which crosses in me, is already rested. I popped in the DVD. I was mesmerized. Through the night. \"doot de doot, de doo de dodedo.\"The Blob. See it. Steve Queen, two cops, and one girl in a dress. Two thumbs way up!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65ece93e142f41d28b6f58c97e52db9c",
            "input": "This film is predictable; it is more predictable then a Vinnie Testaverdi pass, when he huts the ball for the Jets. One saw the ending coming up halfway through the film. The politics reminds me when I was back east. Many people know when the fix is in. I gave this four because of the acting, but the story is lame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc20b1403e2c4c0b96bac8aa519bdec7",
            "input": "I have read with great interest the only available comment made before mine on this movie and I would first like to say that I understand the point of view of the previous user who commented on this movie very well: viewed from an Israeli perspective, I can very well imagine that this movie touches upon very sensitive issues and that the slightest detail can have a great importance for a viewer who is more or less directly concerned by the events depicted in this movie. What I would like to say is that 'Distortion' was shown at a film festival in Geneva in November 2005 (Festival 'Cinéma tout écran') where it won the award of the audience ('Prix du public'in French). For what affects me, I liked the 'nervous camera' work of Mr Bouzaglo, who, in my opinion, portrayed an atmosphere of extreme tension and uneasiness in the movie very well, and I think that most of the swiss viewers appreciated this in the movie. This perspective, however, might seem totally 'alien' to an Israeli viewer, but not so surprising when it comes to swiss viewers, because Switzerland is a country which has NEVER been subject to any terrorist attack. It therefore comes as no surprise that the audience in Geneva judged this film with a much more 'detached' perspective.I would also like to quote what Mr Bouzaglo said when he was interviewed by a Geneva newspaper (I'm translating from French): ''After 50 years of living here and after undergoing all this violence, we may ask ourselves if it is still possible to remain normal.We might sometimes think that it would be easier to commit suicide than to go on living. We are like the characters in my movie,''on the edge of the edge''. This is the reason why the private detective, who is somehow ''voyeur'' is the happiest character in the movie, because he earns a living thanks to the system, he takes advantage of this situation'' This is, in substance, the main thing that I and the swiss public, in my opinion, pointed out in this movie, and that we did not pay attention to some inconsistencies regarding the characters in the movie which the precedent reviewer pointed out with great accuracy and humor. So, to sum up, different country=different perspective, but I think that this is somehow great, because it reassures me for what affects the future of cinema, that is to say that it well never be subject to a 'unique' of 'formatted' way of thinking.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41133fa3e309425aa8f3d6206a494ecb",
            "input": "Hmmmm, want a little romance with your mystery? This has it. I think if the romance was ditched this would have made for a better movie. But how could the romance be ditched when the story's borrowed from something called a Harlequin Romance novel, whatever the heck that is. Had the romance been ditched, the story might have been a little too weak. The mystery here wasn't too bad, quite interesting but nothing on the level of Mission Impossible international espionage. Oh well. I thought Mel Harris was pretty good; her short skirts, i think, added some sex appeal... but this Rob Stewart guy probably could have been better cast, maybe with a more well known TV movie actor. The directing was decent and the writing could have been improved on - both could have been a little edgier, a little darker, more adventurous. One thing that was great about this was the use of real European locations. That could easily have been changed so this could have been filmed in Canada but they really were in magnificently beautiful places like Budapest. Possibly a drawback was the director and/or cinematographer's choice to frame certain shots picture postcard perfect. Not good. Had this been a more dramatic motion picture shot for the big screen, picture postcard perfect scenes really need to take a backseat and just be a nice part of the background. This was just a tv-movie, though, so they had to add some Ummmph to the picture and some of that Ummmph came from the scenery. Overall, twasn't really a bad movie. I'll tell you what, this was absolutely the best Canadian-Hungarian production I have ever seen! (and the only that i know of.) I hereby proclaim this to be a mediocre made-for-tv movie, giving it a grade of C-",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e7eeef9f28f4d00b0bae2a5aabc8829",
            "input": "An anthology is always risky business and I think this endeavor should be praised. There's a lot of talent involved here. A great many talented actors, directors and writers. Unfortunately, I couldn't really enjoy this movie based on three issues I had.First of all, the segments vary incredibly in tone and quality. And unfortunately some of them clash with the others. Secondly, several segments feel underdeveloped to me. Like seeds of good stories that never come to fruition. I'm not talking about happy endings here (or even an ending period) but rather, they lack even basic development or even solid setups that draw you in. Last but not least, I did not feel New-York and its inhabitants were properly portrayed.What you're left with is high-brow short films that may still be of interest to some but will leave the average viewer unsatisfied.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbd3e6b287934529891331ad2193a0e2",
            "input": "Why is this movie not in the 250 best? This movie looks still astoundingly fresh 56 years after its production but it could only have been made at the aftermath of W.W.II because of the perception of the nearness of death. People were more aware that life could be stopped at one unexpected moment. And what after life? I liked the scene at the end with the judgment and all people of all nations gathered. The phlegmatic judge (Abraham Sofaer-a typical British judge-), Doctor Reeves (Roger Livesey) defending Peter Carter (David Niven) and also June (Kim Hunter) against the American prosecutor Abraham Farlan (Raymond Massey I -there is a reason why it is an American-). It is all so imaginative! Michael Powell wrote, directed and produced this astonishing movie which is a real \"tour-de-force\". The message of the movie is clear: in the universe the law is the most important but on earth nothing goes beyond the love between humans. The way in which this beautiful story is told is far more interesting than any Hollywood-movie could ever make.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8d1f9a651eb4e2fba763d1decf92ef4",
            "input": "After the success of the second instalment, Richard Curtis and Ben Elton decided that Blackadder should have a third appearance. This time instead of Tudor times or Elizabethan times, Edmund Blackadder (BAFTA nominated Rowan Atkinson) is living in the time of the French Revolution. Accompanied by the now stupid but lovable Baldrick (Tony Robinson) Blackadder is the \"faithful\" butler to George, the Prince Regent of Wales (Hugh Laurie). Throughout this third series to the wonderfully written sitcom Blackadder tries everything he can to get rich and powerful. He tries electing a lord for a rotten borough, tries to sell a book, tries to win a bet about The Scarlet Pimpernel, tries to be a highway man and finally poses as the Prince. This is a very good instalment to the popular comedy. Includes appearances from Robbie Coltrane, Tim McInnerny, Miranda Richardson and Stephen Fry. It won the BAFTA for Best Comedy Series, and it was nominated for Best Design and Best Make Up. Rowan Atkinson was number 18 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, he was number 24 on The Comedians' Comedian, and he was number 8 on Britain's Favourite Comedian, Edmund Blackadder was number 3 on The 100 Greatest TV Characters, and he was number 3 on The World's Greatest Comedy Characters, and Blackadder (all four series) was number 2 on Britain's Best Sitcom. Outstanding!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-545d31e43a074cdf86e9f6155c1960b9",
            "input": "For me the only reason for having a look at this remake was to see how bad and funny it could be. There was no doubt about it being funny and bad, because I had seen \"Voyna i mir\" (1968). Shall we begin? Here we go...Robert Dornhelm & Brendan Donnison's Pierre Bezukhov - a lean fellow that lacks the depth of the original; Robert Dornhelm & Brendan Donnison's Natasha Rostova - a scarecrow, her image can cause insomnia; Robert Dornhelm & Brendan Donnison's Andrej Bolkonsky - an OK incarnation which, like the lean fellow (cf. above), lacks depth of a Russian soul and \"struggle within\"; Robert Dornhelm & Brendan Donnison's Napoleon - a rather unimpressive leader; Robert Dornhelm & Brendan Donnison's Prince Bolkonsky - a turd with an English face; Robert Dornhelm & Brendan Donnison's Count Bezukhov - a spineless freak-show...The rest of the characters are not much better.The movements of the actors and the way they look and speak are often atrocious. They behave like modern EU citizens dressed up for a one-day masquerade. It all looks cheap and never comes close to the standards of our Russian men and women of the early 19th century.A good piece of entertainment to scrutinize and make fun of. We had quite a few giggles in our office when remembering this modern product, which had been shown the previous evening on our TV.\"User Rating: 8.0/10 (29 votes)\" - I guess, many young people have never watched our film (\"Voyna i mir\" 1968) or have weird sense of \"Tarantino-Spielberg\" quality. Remember the scene when our hussar is saving his friend, turns around, shoots, and the bridge goes boom? Looks like a CGI explosion.There is neither sense nor craft to make a better version of the novel, which was screened properly in our country once. But I would be happy to watch a Russian remake of \"Gone with the Wind\". Hey, directors, wake up and get busy with that, instead of spoiling our classics.Now back to common sense. Jokes aside. What I mentioned above is nothing new, though deadly exaggerated.To make foreign actors trying to pass for Russians (while participating in very serious epics and dramas) is a rude mistake and the filmmakers are making this mistake again and again. Of course it results in numerous laughs - especially Clemence Poesy is uncomfortably ridiculous and her dancing and singing makes a Russian viewer think: \"This sucks so much that it's funny!\").In order to say something new, I'd like to mention the pace of the movie. To my mind, this new version is very patchy. The narration and the scenes are not naturally flowing - they stagger and pop up like in a modern video. Again I have to remember our \"Voyna i mir\", where the action is so natural and the narration is so easy that you simply sit back and enjoy \"going with the flow\".I thought that maybe the Borodino battle would be great (to somehow rehabilitate numerous drawbacks) but it has turned out to be no match for the war scenes filmed in 1968.There should be something good in this movie after all. And there is. The actors seem to be trying hard to make it all work. They did not have a chance from the start but they still joined \"the losers' team\". Plus 1 point for that recklessness. It makes a Russian viewer uncomfortable - some scenes are ironically ridiculous though they are intended to be dramatically powerful and the actors are doing their best. It all evokes pity, and sometimes - fits of laughter.What I still like about this serial is the last part of it. It shows very vividly how everybody gets his or her \"salary and taxes\". Besides, judging by the movie trailers I thought that the film would have an adult sex scene, which would definitely kill the whole project. But, fortunately, it does not have such rubbish. And that's a big plus.\"Voyna i Mir\" is no \"Harry Potter\" and nowadays even we, here in present-day Russia, do not have enough craft to film it properly. Do I have to say that the moral quality of our life has deteriorated immensely? Fortunately, a proper film was screened during our Soviet times. The American version of the 1950s was justified to some extent - ours did not even exist yet. There were extenuating circumstances then.4 out of 10 (1 point is given from the start, 1 point goes for the recklessness, and 2 points for the last part of the serial. Thanks for attention.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6f9a8dcc404422da2b6410cea0c39ac",
            "input": "This wasn't the major disaster that I was expecting, but that is about as positive as I can be in my description of the movie. I'm not sure what was meant to be funny about this movie, but I suppose it's all a matter of taste. Personally, I don't find it funny to watch morons living their idiotic lives or making fools of themselves on television, but then again, I'm not a fan of Jerry Springer's pathetic daytime talk show. I didn't get too bored watching this, but I was definitely never enjoying it, either. If you're in the mood to see a bad movie, but one that isn't too painful to sit through, this is a good choice.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-acbc623141d44ba6ad464a8ee16fd293",
            "input": "The story is very trustworthy and powerful. The technical side of the movie is quite fine.. even the directing of it. The main problem is with the castings, that turned that movie into almost another local and regular cliché with a great lack of impact and even greater lack of impression. Beside the small role of the father, Rafael (played impressively by Asi Dayan), all other actors were unfortunately not in their best. The role of the elder Blind girl, played by Taly Sharon, was fresh but without any intensity as the leading role. therefore the figure she acted had become mild and low profile. There were moments and episodes that looked more like a rehearsal then a real movie. But after all it's a good point to begin from and to make big improvements in the future.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d74f612700b47f9a37a956562b983f7",
            "input": "...And that's why hard to rate. From the adult point of view (hmm, student point of view:)). i must say i fell nearly asleep here. Sure, there is some laughing scene (all the credit takes here Eddie), but that can't save the disney type of script and whole movie, that's why2 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-892a9aa855524a398be1b983eae3fccc",
            "input": "As has been well documented by previous posters, the real stars of Rockstar: INXS - and, indeed it's sequel, Rockstar: Supernova - are Paul Mirkovich, Rafael Moreira, Jim McGorman, Nate Morton and Sasha Krivtsov. Don't know who they are? They are the awesome, tight, rockin' House Band whose music savvy and talent made this show something more than a sad American Idol clone.Remember the \"strings\" night? That was musical precision and perfection if ever I've seen it. Suzie McNeil's epic rendition of Queen's 'Bohemian Rhapsody', Ty Taylor's memorable cover of the Stones' 'You Can't Always Get...', JD Fortune singing \"Suspicious Minds\". The common denominator here is the awesome House Band.As good as INXS were in their prime, they are sadly a shadow of their former selves, though JD's live performance has somewhat breathed new life into their music, this show is all about the HB.Memo to producers: Season Three (if we're blessed enough to have it happen) should be Rockstar: House Band. Get those boys a good lead singer and they are going places.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f1517e711a24c8a84bb1571a69ab3a4",
            "input": "When I first watched the show, the first few episodes seemed promising. Bill Compton introduced himself as the stereotypical \"mysterious\" vampire and Sookie presented herself as an independent woman. However, the show went downhill from here and the once interesting characters are as entertaining as a cardboard box.As the story progresses the main characters lose their original personalities, along with their acting abilities. By episode 5, Bill's furrowed eyebrows are so low that his face just consists of a forehead. Sookie, or rather the actress, is even more dead than her vampire lover. All these tragic events are surrounding her and she only reacts to how enjoyable it was losing her virginity. Personally, I think they made the main characters sleep with each other too early in the show. The way they teased each other was something that had me hooked and could easily be toyed with a bit more. As soon as Sookie loses it she struts around like a total ditz, only thinking of Bill's libido and the size of his appendage. Bill also loses his debonair attitude and well, he just gets plain silly. His actions are never really explained except he does it for Sookie. Why? Their love for each other is never delved into, if there is any love. So far it just seems to be sex that is the core of their relationship.Yeah, yeah, vampires usually equal sex but come on. Every five seconds I see some sort of humping going on. It wasn't that much of a surprise, since HBO always tries to pass of a soft core porno as a decent TV show. Bill popping out of the dirt and just getting it on with Sookie with no reason what's so ever? I laughed so hard I almost peed myself.The plot is just a stream of consciousness. The characters never go into detail about anything. All the events that happen are usually left unexplained. The only thing that is constant is the sex.The only thing I can say that I do like are the minor characters. Tara and her drunk mother are far more interesting than the major characters. The only reason why I continue to watch the show is for the development of the minor characters. Minus the sex and the main characters the show would be much more worthwhile.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54a9a5391d8d483a9879f60ad87f1dec",
            "input": "This movie is definately one of my favourite movies in it's kind. The interaction between respectable and morally uncorruptable characters is an ode to chivalry and the honour code amongst thieves and policemen. It treats themes like duty, guilt, word, manipulation and trust like few films have done and, unfortunately, none that I can recall since the death of the 'policial' in the late seventies. The sequence is delicious, down to the essential, living nothing out and thus leading the spectator into a masterful plot right and wrong without accessory eye catching and spectacular scenes that are often needed in lesser specimens of the genre in order to keep the audience awake. No such scenes are present or needed. The argument is flowless and honest to the spectator, wich is an important asset in a genre in wich the the suspense is often achieved through the betrail of the audience. No, this is not miss Marble... A note of congratulations for the music is in order A film to watch and savour every minute, not just to see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e66f249ed8b242b8b4298d141394d96d",
            "input": "I really looked forward to this program for two reasons; I really liked Jan Michael Vincent and I am an aviation nut and have a serious love affair with helicopters. I don't like this program because it takes fantasy to an unbelievable level. The world speed record for helicopters was set at 249 mph by a Westland Lynx several years ago. The only chopper that was ever faster was the experimental Lockheed AH56A in the 1960's. It hit over 300 and was a compound helicopter, which means it had a pusher propeller at the end of its fuselage providing thrust.In short, no helicopter can fly much over 275 because of the principle of rotary wing flight. And the Bell 222, the \"actor\" that portrayed Airwolf wasn't very fast even by helicopter standards. And it didn't stay in production very long.There was a movie that came out during this time period called \"Blue Thunder\" that was much more realistic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4794a24e3f5d42a1b72bf411d664af2a",
            "input": "This movie is very entertaining, and any critique is based on personal preferences - not the films quality. Other than the common excessive profanity in some scenes by Murphy, the film is a great vehicle for his type of humor. It has some pretty good special effects, and exciting action scenes.As a finder of lost children, Murphy's character starts off looking for a missing girl, which leads him on the path for which others believe he was \"chosen\" - - to protect the Golden Child. The young boy is born as an enlightened one, destined to save the world from evil forces, but whose very life is in danger, if not for the help of Murphy, and his beautiful, mysterious and mystical helper/guide/protector.Also, there are moments of philosophical lessons to challenge the audience members who are interested in pondering deep thoughts. One such scene is where the Golden Child, that Murphy's character is solicited to protect, is tested by the monks of the mountain temple. An elderly monk presents a tray of ornamental necklaces for the child to choose from, and the child is tested on his choice.This is a fantasy/comedy that is based on the notion that there are both good and evil forces in our world of which most people are completely unaware. As we accept this premise of the plot, we must let go of our touch with a perceived daily reality, and prepare for the earth and walls to crumble away, and reveal a realm of evil just waiting to destroy us.This is an excellent movie, with a good plot, fine acting, and for the most part, pretty decent dialogue combining a serious topic with a healthy balance of Martial Art fighting, and Eddie Murphy humor.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42f95c03adb24fdd8e0fba050feb35d0",
            "input": "This film, recently voted as an audience favorite at the 2005 Palm Springs International Film Festival, is inspiring and moving. A famous conductor, forced to retire by illness, returns to the small village of his birth to become the leader of the church choir, and finally find fulfillment in his music. Drawing on Sweedish traits of keeping things within oneself and of the insular character of a small Swedish village, this film develops each of its characters well. superbly directed, acted and sung, it brought tears to many eyes, and smiles to all. Hopefully it will find distribution in the United States.If you can, see it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97f419c532f34ff989aa9d92cd384386",
            "input": "Ok, basically this is a popcorn sci-fi movie, but from the outset its obvious that it has been directed with a great deal of intelligence. You can count about 10 clichés that the film is building up to, but it only delivers on about three of them, and a couple of them have a twist to them that lets you know once again that the director hasn't assumed that you are an idiot. Kurt Russell's acting is truely superb and brings a depth from the character that is suprising and rewarding. Recommended if you've just seen something really stupid, and want to rebuild your faith!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbe1fc97c693490eabf07623142c3d65",
            "input": "photography was too jumpy to follow. dark scenes hard to see.Had good story line too bad it got lost somewhere. Too noisy for what was really happening Bottom line is it's a baddddd movie",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-654a7e83258742cda5e79a61c7942d3d",
            "input": "I have always enjoyed the Pokemon movies. Yes, I know, all of them are very corny, mediocre in some certain areas and sure, even though they're aimed at little kids they're too adult in some fields to be able to guard them with the statement,\"Hey, lighten up, it's a kids movie,\" but all that aside, aren't they still good pieces of entertainment? In my opinion, they are so and I enjoy them greatly. This one is just as enjoyable as the previous three, and certainly cuter. It has some really sweet and touching moments since it is the introduction of the lovable, fresh Pokemon Celebi. It's not the best Pokemon movie, but I do enjoy it more than the third installment, even though the third is not bad, and the entire series is just entertaining, harmless, popcorn family fun and should be considered nothing more, nothing less. This film has some high marks of intensity and interest, especially around the climax/ending, as do all the installments, and the characters, while a bit more lackluster than the previous three, I thought, are still likable and humorous. This films is the lowest rated and most criticized of the four feature length adaptions, and it doesn't deserve that.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88ddd78c85d442239d4756f9d295d5fd",
            "input": "While flipping through the channels on a late Saturday night, my friends and I stumbled across this film. First of all, Irish actor Pierce Brosnan as a Native American? Seriously?! His accent was breaking through so much, although his character was apparently Scottish. Next, I was stunned to find that this film was made after he had already played James Bond/Agent 007 at least twice. This movie plays up the stereotypes, with the inspiring professor figure. The girl who played Pony should be paid to keep her mouth shut. And, this film won an award? I cannot believe it. Brosnan is an attractive man, but we seriously wanted to gauge our eyes out after watching this for just 10 seconds. We switched from \"Kicking and Screaming\" to this, and we wanted to switch back. We watched the 1995 children's classic \"The Indian in the Cupboard\" earlier in the night, which also discussed the Iroquois. The following line represents our desire to run away: \"Take me outside, earth grasper.\" From \"Grey Owl\": \"If you don't like it, you don't have to watch.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6777ac60998647bfba5e12d0080e7db5",
            "input": "Holes is an awesome movie. I love it a lot and it's one of my favorite films. It's one of the few flicks produced by Disney that isn't cheesy. Holes is generally a very cool motion picture. I wish Disney would make more pictures like it. Holes is indeed a rare breed of Disney flicker shows that is cool. Don't get the wrong idea, I don't mean to bad mouth Disney but most of it's stuff is aimed towards kids and THAT'S OKAY. Children deserve to have their entertainment too. But Disney has been guilty of trying to appeal to the teen audience and they usually fail. But not with Holes. It's the type of movie anyone of any age can watch and enjoy and not once think it's corny. Really, it's the kind of movie that even a lot of young hoods might enjoy since there are characters in it that they can relate to.Holes does a good job of being a mix of good family entertainment but not being too cheesy and living a little on the edge. I hope Disney takes more risks and makes more edgy flicks like this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-631994a48a7043ddb5242f9343a991ca",
            "input": "Hmmm, a sports team is in a plane crash, gets stranded on a snowy mountain, and is faced with the difficult decision to eat the flesh of their dead companions in order to survive. Sound familiar anyone? I refer to \"Alive\" from 1993. The only major difference here, of course, is that a big, white, drunken scare crow of a Yeti shows up a few times to drag off the dead. I guess humans taste better than yaks.Stupid: The man in the first scene does not have a reliable firearm when hunting the Yeti, nor does he have a backup.The plane crash is completely bogus. It would have either exploded in the air, exploded when it hit the ground, or become obliterated. The people would not have survived, but hey, it's sci-fi.Stupid: They survived, and they are cold. It might be a good idea to harness some of the burning debris nearby so as not to freeze to death. Fire being warm as it is...WTF: The pilot has frost formed all over his face while he's alive and talking, but oddly enough, no one else does.Stupid: One of the guys tells the others to look for matches and lighters, but there are scattered parts of the plane ON FIRE all around them.Stupid: They find coats and hoodies, and yet there in the cold of the Himalayas, they fail to use the hoods!Stupid: They're staring at a pile of sticks when, I reiterate, there are pieces of the plane ALREADY BURNING.Stupid: The Himalayas are notorious for its storms. It would be common sense for them to collect the debris in order to reinforce their structure rather than sitting outside bickering. There are a lot of pine trees around, the branches of which make excellent insulation.WTF: When in doubt, use a dead man's arm as a splint.WTF: If the one guy knows so much about the hibernation habits of squirrels, bears, and leopards in the Himalayas, then why doesn't he know enough to make shelter and set traps right from the start? Stupid: When attempting to trap wild animals, mindless conversation in the vicinity of said trap always helps.WTF: Do you know how hard it would be to cut a frozen corpse with a shard of glass?! WTF: The group was ready and armed to fight the Yeti while the other two were standing there defenseless. The Yeti ripped out the guy's heart and stomped the girl's head, and the gang did nothing. There's love.So two Yetis and a convenient avalanche to bury the evidence forever.... or so we think. Mwuhahahaa! The story continues into more idiocy but the most action occurs in the last 15 minutes, as usual. Nice thinking with the javelin and the chain, although this is some ingenuity (with the magically-appearing chain) that they lacked in the beginning of the movie when they couldn't even make fire despite the fact that it was all around them.As is typical for the Sci-Fi Originals, the loving couple kisses at the end like nothing horrible has just happened to them (not to mention they ate human flesh and haven't brushed their teeth in several days).The very end, however, is quote lame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67bbd768ea954ba6ad4a2e53fa345ca8",
            "input": "I'm not to keen on The Pallbearer, it's not too bad, but just very slow at the times. As the movie goes on, it gets a little more interesting, but nothing brilliant. I really like David Schwimmer and I think he's good here. I'm not a massive Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but I don't mind her sometimes and she's okay here. The Pallbearer is not a highly recommended movie, but if you like the leads then you might enjoy it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f3153523cefe4899a4cd949b25ca142c",
            "input": "For me, this movie just seemed to fall on its face. The main problem for me was the casting of Glover as a serial killer. I don't know whether this grows out of type-casting or simply his demeanor, but I doubt Glover could ever portray a convincing villain. He's a good guy, and that's always obvious in his performances. Other than that the film is your run of the mill serial killer story. Nothing very innovative .",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39211266ca48452e96fe2f37c7b9c6b1",
            "input": "This is one of those topics I can relate to a little more than most people as I hate noise & have no idea how those in big cities, New York especially how people get any sleep at all! It astounds me that people can stand all the noise out there these days. The basic plot of the film is that it makes for an interesting topic. It's too bad that's about it. Tim Robbbins is decent although except for a couple of scenes (especially with the absolute supermodel looking Margarita Leiveva) he didn't seem to really be altogether there. My biggest hope for this film is that casting agents will see the absolutely stunning & talented actress to boot, Margarita Levieva. She doesn't have a lot to do, but she is supermodel beautiful. Even when they are trying to make her look at more girl next door. It makes me sad that there can be people such as Paris Hilton & Kim Kardashian in the world w/no redeemable skills or talent, to have more fame and success than this talented beauty. I didn't care for much of this film because the script isn't very good, but am glad I got to see some new talent. I hope that producers & directors think about Margarita when they need a beautiful new actress to be in there big budget film. If they can make Megan Fox a star (c'mon she isn't that hot, & her acting \"talent\" is worse than made-for Disney channel TV shows) from 1 film, it should happen easily for her, as she is gorgeous & has talent! I'd recommend her changing her last name so we can pronounce it and make it more marketable. Here's hoping this makes her career, & if there is any justice she can pop up on some big summer movie or two in the next couple years.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a399d0d33a7d4a7fb754baabe1033cbf",
            "input": "A must see for anyone who loves photography. stunning and breathtaking,leaves you in ore. seen it twice once in a cinema and now on DVD. it holds up well on DVD but on the big screen this was something else.Took my two daughters to see this and they loved it, my oldest cried at the end.but she was the one who wanted to see it again tonight when she saw it at the video shop. its simple telling of a child's love for nature and in particular a fox is told well. in some ways it reminded me of the bear in its telling a story not documentary formate. which works for children very well. not being preached to is very important, you make your own mind up.But the star of this film is the cinematographers, how did they do what they did. amazing just amazing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73d0738950354fd796e36780fad1d976",
            "input": "Escaping the life of being pimped by her father(..and the speakeasy waitressing)who dies in an explosion, Lily Powers(Barbara Stanwyck, who is simply ravishing)sluts her way through the branches inside a bank business in big city Gotham. When a possessive lover murders who was supposed to be his next father-in-law(and Lily's new lover), the sky's the limit for Lily as she has written down her various relationships in a diary and subtlety makes it known the papers will receive it if certain pay doesn't come into her hands. Newly appointed president to the bank, Courtland Trenholm(George Brent), sends Lily to Paris instead of forking over lots of dough, but soon finds himself madly in love after various encounters with her in the City of Love. This makes Lily's mouth water as now she'll have reached the pedestal of success seducing a man of wealth and prestige bring riches her way. Though, circumstances ensue which will bring her to make a decision that threatens her successful way of achieving those riches..Trenholm, now her husband, is being indicted with jail certain and has lost the bank. He needs money Lily now has in her possession or he'll have absolutely nothing.Stanwyck is the whole movie despite that usual Warner Brothers polish. Being set in the pre-code era gives the filmmakers the chance to elaborate on taboo subjects such as a woman using sex to achieve success and how that can lead to tragedy. Good direction from Alfred E Green shows through subtlety hints in different mannerisms and speech through good acting from the seductive performance of Stanwyck how to stage something without actually showing the explicit act. Obviously the film shows that money isn't everything and all that jazz as love comes into the heart of Lily's dead heart. That ending having Lily achieve the miraculous metamorphosis into someone in love didn't ring true to me. She's spent all this time to get to that platform only to fall for a man who was essentially no different than others she had used before him.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6dbee340e973482e80ce27a192e16221",
            "input": "There's a theory of time that posits that all the moments that ever existed and will exist, actually exist right now. It's a bit too much to wrap your head around, but perhaps a bit of a comfort to those who wish they could go back to a simpler time and place. For Barbara Jean Trenton (Ida Lupino), that time was twenty five years earlier, the mid 1930's when her youth and glamor held the greatest promise. For my part, if I could travel through time, it would be back to the 1950's when I grew up. Maybe to a place like Willoughby, but that's another episode.One thing that wouldn't be so special about 1959 would involve dealing with all that clunky machinery just to watch an episode of \"The Twilight Zone\". How many reels do you think it would take to catalog the entire series, and then find a particular story you wanted to watch? I guess you have to consider the trade offs, convenience versus simplicity, having it right now or taking the time to spool it up to the exact spot where the story begins. Popping in a CD has it's advantages.I'm a little surprised that Rod Serling would pen a story that so closely resembled \"Sunset Boulevard\". Ida Lupino's character mirror imaged Norma Desmond just a bit too closely to be considered an original concept. Martin Balsam portrays very much a similar character to Erich von Stroheim, the husband turned butler who's loyalty is unquestioned. Where the story diverges has to do with the way Danny (Balsam) and Sall (Ted de Corsia) challenge Barbara Jean to get with reality and clear the cobwebs that paralyze her existence.Fortunately for us viewers, Ida Lupino had no such reservations about taking parts that were 'not big, but a nice showcase'. It's a real treat to watch any episode of \"The Twilight Zone\" and get to see who pops up from days gone by. Sometimes you get a two-fer, like you have here with Lupino and Balsam, celebrities who sometimes made their mark before the series began, and sometimes after. Combined with the stories that the program produced, it's not surprising that they still manage to entertain so well today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa4c4c686d054e85832b7b359a9905d1",
            "input": "Joe Buck (Jon Voight) decides he's going to leave his small life in Texas and make it big in the Big City. The women are there for the asking and the men are mainly \"tutti-fruttis.\" Wide-eyed, he comes to New York City, not prepared for the series of humiliating misadventures he experiences, one worse than the other. In the middle of that chaos, he meets and befriends Rico \"Ratso\" Rizzo (Dustin Hoffmann), a homeless-looking man who lives in an apparently condemned building.There isn't much of a story as MIDNIGHT COWBOY is a series of vignettes destined to bring forth not only Joe Buck's plights in the City, but also inter-cut to his past and show us in shock cuts and semi-psychedelic dream sequences snippets of his past: his failed relationship with his girlfriend Annie (Jennifer Salt) who was gang-raped, his abandonment by his mother, and his apparent abuse by his grandmother, who also had a habit of hustling men for money. An air of pessimism dominates the film almost from the wistful beginning as Nilsson plays throughout the opening credits his deceptively flowery \"Everybody's Talking'\"; we feel that even while we want Joe to eventually make his mark in the City, the odds are high he won't and will end up working for pennies in a dead-end job -- shown in a masterful shot from his outside point of view later in the film as he watches a man work as a dishwasher in a soup kitchen through a window and sees himself. We know from the look in his eyes he does not want to end like this.A dark story of dashed hopes, John Schlesinger creates haunting images of lost souls at the end of the 60s, and at the center, the prevailing friendship between two men as they struggle to make some sort of meaning to their lives amidst the elusive comfort of a dignified life. There is the implied notion that they may have been lovers -- Ratso's reaching out to hug Joe in the party scene and their the final embrace at the end certainly points at this -- but this is essentially a buddy film, one that manages to survive, literally, to the death, and bring some form of hope to Joe who at the end in Florida seems much changed, older, wiser.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecacf7227df34f35a4d854b1456c383d",
            "input": "JUST CAUSE is a flawed but decent film held together by strong performances and some creative (though exceedingly predictable) writing. Sean Connery is an anti-death penalty crusader brought in to save a seemingly innocent young black man (Blair Underwood) from the ultimate penalty. To set things right, Connery ventures to the scene of the crime, where he must contend not only with the passage of time, but a meddling sheriff (Laurence Fishbourne). Twists and turns and role reversals abound -- some surprising, some not -- as the aging crusader attempts to unravel the mystery. The climactic ending is a bit ludicrous, but JUST CAUSE is worth a look on a slow night.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5179d8de95a4ceda7bd6d0b5c865034",
            "input": "Director Spike Lee is famous for making films pointing out racism. In many of films, such \"Do The Right Thing,\" most of the white people are all brutal racists. In this movie, interracial marriage is the subject, with racism once again being the entire issue.What Lee does, however, is once again demonstrate his bigotry against Christianity. It's amazing the double standards that exist in the film world. If Lee or anyone else ever produced this kind of bias against another group he would be vilified, but Christians? Hey, it's \"open season\" on them.Ossie Davis, a reverend in this film, shoots his son and then puts the smoldering gun down on top of his Bible. They zoom in on that for another closeup just in case you missed it. Hey, folks, here's another Bible reader and look what he''s like! Lee does this sort of thing in just about every movie he makes.He shows the same hatred when dealing with race relations. Who could argue with portraying racism as an evil thing? However, Lee perpetuates it in this film as he has in his other films. His obvious bitterness toward white people doesn't help the situation. It only adds fuel to the fire. Hey, Spike: start \"doing the right thing\" and leave your prejudices in the closet. Better yet, \"get over it.\"This is too bad because the subject matter could have made for a thought- provoking film if it had been done with objectivity and intelligence.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f9e15176e9643da942e81b34631dca2",
            "input": "I think it unfortunate that the leading comments on this movie include the words \"Clueless and appalling nonsense.\" I think it is a very funny movie and excellent entertainment. One has to suspend one's disbelief that a homosexual man and a lesbian woman could fall in love, have a child and live together happily ever after. But it is always wonderful to see it played out in a movie and have one's heart warmed. Is it so impossible? There are far more implausible events described in other movies. The acting is good, the script is funny. The only negative comment is that the story could well have ended when the family drives away from its initial house instead of extending on to explore whether the man retains any residual homosexuality.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f772c321185434d9357388a5572a035",
            "input": "I guess this goes to prove that Joe Don Baker will do anything for a buck. The concept of the film wasn't very good to start with. This movie has so many bad things about it I don't know where to start. The acting is horrible. The cinematography is marginal at best. The soundtrack was pretty bad. The score is terrible. There's a reason why this movie ended up on Mystery Science Theater 3000. I voted before I wrote this and I cannot believe that 9 people actually thought this \"film\" is excellent. They must have liked the two go-go dancers. Final justice would be if they locked this stinker in the film vault outside Wichita and never let anyone see it again! A 1 out of 10 rating is far better than this deserves.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b76f40c8c5e4202b5277b6150bc232a",
            "input": "THis was a hilarious movie and I would see it again and again. It isn't a movie for someone who doesn't have a fun sense of a humor, but for people who enoy comedy like Chris Rock its a perfect movie in my opinion. It is really funnny",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84228663417241b4b84c92fc54a32863",
            "input": "This a superb self-contained work that is unconnected with anything before or after. Brat Pack crooning and club exclusivity are not my biscuits of choice, but in this law-free world they make an alluring ambiance. The film is packed with Our Guys, distinctive actors who add distinction to this work with winning performances. The dialogue is a joy. In fact it's a new vernacular. One of the few films that can be watched repeatedly with deepening appreciation.Highpoints include Billy Idol's British loutishness, Ben London's vulturine brassware, Kyle's squirmishness, and the survey of ad hoc philosophies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5fa14ea983340899d5e31b9e9958d26",
            "input": "It should come as no shock to you when I say that Alone in the Dark is a crappy movie. To put it bluntly, it's as if a dung monster defecated, ate the result, and then vomited. The final product would still outshine this movie.Seemingly based on an ancient (!) Atari video game, the movie has something or other to do with a portal to the bowels of the earth, the unleashing of demons, and ancient civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. (Guess which one's ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization opened the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we've never heard of them, conveniently enough.Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He's hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn't going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it's another zombie movie.That's about as distilled I can make the plot. It's pretty convoluted and incomprehensible. In similar movies, one might see the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are mentally with the researcher, it's a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context... not so much fun.The acting is dreadful, save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this - Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I'd seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Hightlights include Reid pronouncing \"Newfoundland\" as \"New Fownd Land,\" Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she'd been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid - a museum curator, mind you - spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don't think Tara Reid's all that good looking. She looks like she's in perpetual need of food.) Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff's character wasn't terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it's so loud you can't hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can't be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration... of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what's on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud - they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator inexplicably had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl - then lost it. Bizarre.Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There's so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison.Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way? I can't quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with - and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It's atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f933fa1f679246cfb5597db3d0b1855c",
            "input": "This movie is not about entertainment, or not even a movie you want to see to pass the time. This movie is a genuinely a display of true love that can only come from God. One cannot help but be touched deeply by looking at this movie. We have several dimensions of love that contributes to the value of this movie. There is the divine love of God that is beautifully portrayed. God's love transcends the heart and mind and endures and is eternal. There is the love in a marriage. While the main character grapples with his wife's disease, he realizes through God's love that he loves his wife more than he could ever imagine. He knows that he and his wife are one and can never be separated. Finally, you have the love of child and parent. The kids in the family come together and realize that nothing else matters except that love conquers fear. Dear friends, love is not love unless it comes from God, because God is love and love comes from God. Talk to someone and let them know you love them. Love does no good unless it is given to another. I pray this movie can inspire and change the lives of everyone who sees it. Amen!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c297b18aea9e4ca48455f46fe25c3311",
            "input": "It has been said that Deanna Durbin invented teenagery. This first film was one of the best. The humorous story presented a delightful 14 year old Deanna, a little beauty with a gorgeous voice, as the \"Miss Fixit\" in a family split by divorce. For plot summary, see other IMDb entries, but quickly Deanna and her two older sisters plan to go to America from Switzerland to prevent their father from remarrying. With an excellent supporting cast especially Barbara Read and Nan Grey as the sisters, good direction and editing, the film succeeds in captivating one even on subsequent viewings. Of Deanna's three songs, only \"Il Bacio\" is from the classical repertoire, but when she sings it in that police station scene, the film's place in history is assured. At least it was for this viewer who at the age of 15 was smitten for life with both Deanna and classical music. One of the many nice touches that occur throughout THREE SMART GIRLS is the brief glimpse of the drunk stretching his neck for a final glimpse of Deanna as the cops hustle him by! One unfortunate result of the success of this film was that subsequent writers for Durbin vehicles became locked into the \"Miss Fixit\" theme, which quickly became stale. Deanna herself never did. Her stature as an actress is more questionable than her charisma, which she certainly had. It seems to me that, like many another film personality, she substituted \"naturalness\" for the histrionic ability that she lacked. The ploy worked well for 21 feature films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b0a74d786cf40a0b76b4a61ce310026",
            "input": "I hate how this movie has absolutely no creative input. I know they're going for realism, but to be frank I just don't want realism. Realism is boring. If I want to see daily life, I'll uhm, live. Tell me an interesting story and we'll talk. I can deal with the low production values, hell I'm a sucker for low production values, but at least work in some good ideas. The direction only goes as far as grabbing a camcorder and walking around a bit, but obviously I'm supposed to dig that because it makes stuff so much more realistic. Hitchcock used to say drama was essentially life with the dull bits cut out. I can only conclude this is not drama, not by a long shot. We get to see Rosetta walking to someplace, Rosetta working in a bakery, Rosetta eating a waffle, Rosetta carrying around bags of far, Rosetta walking back home, Rosetta walking someplace...it's just not that entertaining. There isn't really a deeper meaning either. I got so bored I started looking for some reflections on life in this movie but it's just plain realism, the most overrated quality in the business. I guess I'm supposed to love this, but come on, there's nothing in there.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c090ea18b178437cab15e69a69baa960",
            "input": "This is a 'sleeper'. It defines Nicholas Cage. The plot is intricate and totally absorbing. The ending will blow you away.See it whenever you have the opportunity.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9df42477400947719869836cf03e9636",
            "input": "It was difficult to sit through this horrible heretical adaptation of Sherlock Holmes. Apparently Matt Frewer was cast because he is tall and skinny. His skull-like face made for a good zombie in the Dawn of the Dead remake, but as Sherlock Holmes he looks like a scarecrow. Not only does Frewer have a lanky lackadaisical walk that is hard to watch, but he looks uncomfortable in the stereotypical Holmes overcoats that he is wearing. Not only that, but while the coat is gray twill they apparently could not find a matching cap. So his cap is black and it looks shiny as if it were made of polyester. Whatever the cap was made of, it looked very new and artificial. Jeremy Brett occasionally wore those traditional outfits, but Brett did not have to dress-up like Sherlock Holmes in order to look the part. Frewer on the other hand is painful to watch. Even in the full \"Holmes\" outfit, he does not carry himself like Sherlock Holmes.Frewer's cadaverous face grinning all the time as he spouts on and on in a very bad \"Upper-Crust\" British accent is painful to see and listen to. To say that Frewer is overacting is an understatement. After he finishes each sentence with some kind of nasal hum, he then sneers as if that were some kind of British trait. When I started watching this I thought it might be a comedy featuring Wishbone, the Jack Russell Terrier. I thought Frewer had been cast as some kind of foil for Wishbone. But sadly, there is no dog in this movie except for Frewer. Wishbone would have made this movie a lot better.Not only does Frewer's version of Sherlock Holmes never stop talking (in that awfully artificial British nasal accent), but he is much to friendly and kind. Frewer is always smiling at the witnesses he talks to, and he is so polite and courteous that he could be teaching at a Charm School instead of being a Sleuth. Perhaps since this is a Hallmark Channel production, they are trying to make a children's version of Sherlock Holmes (Wishbone was better at that, too) that was kindler and gentler. Whatever the point of Frewer's interpretation of Sherlock Holmes, it is flatter than a pancake, and easily the worst version of Sherlock Holmes that I have ever seen (including the previous worst, by Charlton Heston).Overall, the tone of this film is awful. It reminded me of a typical episode of Barnaby Jones or Murder She Wrote or Diagnosis Murder. All the suspects over-acted suspiciously and glared at the victims before they were killed. Holmes and Watson are explaining every clue to each other during the entire movie. Even on Murder She Wrote there is less exposition.This Sherlock Holmes does not even compare very well to Jim Rockford of the Rockford Files and it is miles below Columbo. The awful dialog is probably the fault of the writer. It is obvious that who ever wrote this script has very little familiarity with Sherlock Holmes, especially the BBC version with Jeremy Brett. This movie has all of the atmosphere of an episode of Little House on the Prairie. The fact that the actors seem to be smirking when they enunciate their lines in their fake accents does not help.The only minor bright spot is Ken Walsh who plays Doctor Watson with some dignity. Walsh does not ham it up compared to Frewer, and when he is often interviewing witnesses, his demeanor and conversational style are much more natural and credible. Unfortunately, the rest of the cast is amateurish, and the visual clues they give by glaring and making faces at each other (to show they are suspicious) is something that I had not seen in any modern movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5fd7762b8b6a4035b50e5b394f882134",
            "input": "Kabei: Our Mother (2008) is a poetic and sublime beauty from Japan. A real weeper! I had heard great reviews for the film and rented it from Netflix. Am I glad I did! In many ways this film reminded me of the old style of Japanese classic film-making from the 1940's and 1950's that I've come to love so much, such as seen in Yasujiro Ozu pictures -- the title credits even begin in the same way, with the Japanese letters (characters) in red against neutral color burlap material. I immediately thought: this director loves Ozu. The same style was used too: mostly indoor sets with only a few outdoor scenes. Even a couple of \"pillow shots\", as Roger Ebert calls them. The strength of the film is built on the love of the characters for one another.The story follows the lives of a Japanese family before, and during, and after, World War Two. The mother takes care of her growing girls the best she can after the father (a University professor) is arrested for anti-war sympathies. He's never freed and only has a few brief meetings with his wife in prison before he dies of starvation and disease. Meanwhile a former student of the professor comes by often to help take care of the mother and two girls. He begins to fall in love with the mother and is a substitute father for the two girls. But war starts and he's drafted and they have to say an abrupt farewell. Will they ever express their love for one another? Will he ever return from the war? There is so much heart and gentle spirit in the performance of the lead actress, Sayuri Yoshinaga. She's almost a Madonna type, she's so beautiful! Big soulful eyes and flawless skin. The actor who plays the student is phenomenal as well: his name is Tadanobu Asano. What a sensitive performance. There is no macho in him at all; he's gentle and kind. I'd certainly love to see both of these two in other movies. I think I'll check to see what's available for them. The two little child actresses are wonderful too.The film is just released on NTSC DVD for American audiences, with very easy to read English subtitles. I gave it a 10 out of 10 on the IMDb. I cried almost as much as with the Japanese film classic Twenty-Four Eyes (1954). Don't miss this film!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-732184609231410ea5009b01b0510b55",
            "input": "At first look of the plot tagline I figured it could have been a decent film. Could I have ever been more wrong? The beginning of the film makes it look like a bunch of freaks got together and decided to make a low budget film. For the first 10 minutes you don't notice the cheesy acting, horrible sound and god-awful special effects, but then it gets worse. Just about 20 minutes into it I was asking myself, \"What was the plot again?\" I could only ask that question when I wasn't busted out laughing from the sheer lameness of this film. The main actor has one setting for emotions and he sticks to it throughout the entire film, even though he was supposed to go through love and hate and everything in-between. The flashback scene almost made me vomit because it made me re-live one extra minute of footage from earlier in the movie. Now we hit the middle of the film where they are obviously trying to rip off Morpheus from \"The Matrix,\" although he is doing just a horrible job. The actor's talking about \"Star Wars\" and fortune cookie phrases is almost unbearable. Now at the end of the movie you don't realize that it's the end of the movie because you actually think the plot is finally developing. The \"Morpheus\" character dies, the ONLY good thing about the movie. He utters a couple words and the credits roll. What is this? No plot, bad acting, cheesy everything, it couldn't get any worse. Please, if you value human decency, DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c287873f5a464709939dca72396aab91",
            "input": "Opening scene 'explains' why Hurt is later 'immune' to the 'Contaminated Man'. Too bad it doesn't explain anything else: How did he get whatever he 'caught'/what was it/why does it work so fast. Then we go to \"Present Day Budapest\". OK, was the opener in the past or the future? It turns out to be the past, of course, but for a minute it looks just as likely to be the nd of the movie moved to the beginning. Sorry, I should have paid closer attention, huh? Or maybe it's just badly done. Then a lot of confusion about the different jobs he's had in related fields, and finally a mention about how he should have died from the original experiment the n s a did on him. Aha! So the n s a and private industry got together to poison one of their top guys to watch the effects? He must have been one of the top guys, he's friends with the c e o of the Chemical company, for God sakes. Then there's the substance itself: Technically a poison, but it mutates in immune 'carriers', so we can have whatever we want; a poison, a disease, an allergic reaction, all very different things in real life. Magically, it's not contagious from one dying victim to another, only from the carrier. How convenient. Then there's the h a z m a t protocol: They jump into a situation without having any idea what's in store, or how prepare for it. Did the producers not have enough money to show a proper wash-down after the crew just left the scene of a deadly unknown substance? I kept thinking Hurt was going to die from bad cleanup technique, and the open scene would turn out to be the closer after all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d1e4bbaafc3f474aa0e75419c42f679d",
            "input": "DER TODESKING is not one of my favorite Jorg Buttgereit film - but still is an interesting film dealing with suicide and it's reasons and ramifications. Those looking for a gore-fest, or exploitation in the style of the NEKROMANTIK films or SCHRAMM will probably be disappointed. DER TODESKING is definitely an \"art-house\" style film, so those that need linear, explainable narratives need not apply...The basic concept of DER TODESKING is that there is an \"episode\" for each day of the week that revolves around a strange chain letter that apparently causes people to commit suicide, interspersed with scenes of a slowly decomposing corpse...There are some very well done and thought provoking scenes, including the man talking about the \"problems\" with his wife, and the concert massacre (which unfortunately lost some of it's \"power\" on me, because I was too busy laughing at the SCORPIONS look-alike band on stage...). But seriously - this is a sometimes beautiful (the scene that shows different angles of that huge bridge is particularly effective - especially if you understand the significance of the scene, and that the names shown are of people that actually committed suicide from jumping from the bridge...), sometimes confusing, sometimes silly (the SHE WOLF OF THE SS rip-off is pretty amusing), sometimes harrowing (I found the scene of the guy talking to the girl in the park about his wife particularly effective) film that is more of an \"experience\" then just entertainment, as many of these \"art\" films are meant to be. Still, I didn't find DER TODESKING to be as strong as NEKROMANTIK or SCHRAMM, and would probably put it on relatively even footing with NEKROMANTIK 2 in terms of my personally \"enjoyment level\". Definitely worth a look to any Buttgereit or \"art\" film fan. If you dig this type of film - check out SUBCONSCIOUS CRUELTY - in my opinion the BEST art-house/horror film that I've seen. 7/10 for DER TODESKING",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5d646ea918f451093e470524b6619c7",
            "input": "I havent seen that movie in 20 or more years but I remember the attack scene with the horses wearing gas-masks vividly, this scene ranks way up there with the best of them including the beach scene on Saving private Ryan, I recommend it strongly.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f514784eb899452387315778599b5ec2",
            "input": "After a cold sex scene, between Andy and Gina, in South America, we know that Andy is a payroll manager who finds himself in a hard economic situation where he badly needs some extra money… We also discover that he has been stealing from his job and using the money to his drug habits… He's also attempting to keep up with his wife, who just might be having an affair… To solve all their problems, he persuades his brother—a likable loser—to join him in a plan to steal their own parent's small store… Their parents are happily married and proprietors of a jewelry store situated in New York's Westchester County… Sixty thousand dollars is all they'll need to get their life out of desperation… Three main characters are important in this movie…First the two brothers… Each of them is a complex individual, threatened with multiple motivations, and sunk into doubts and disappointments… The two are desperate characters, financially and emotionally…Andy is selfish… He feels that he has never had the love of his father… He is the corrupting influence, turning his brother into an assailant, and his beautiful woman into an adulteress…Hank is a puppet too weak to resist his brother's wishes… His ex-wife is one of the reasons he needs money as he owes her hundreds in child support…. He longs to regain the confidence he once had with his father… The third character is their weary and deplorable father Charles Hanson (Albert Finney), especially in the haunting climactic scenes…Telling you more about the details could lessen the impact of the film, and therefore the entertainment...Tomei's performance conveys great depth and emotion even with her look, her touch, her particular move…Lumet's direction is firm, fresh and brutal.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac0d833cafb74ed4a4269b0842634840",
            "input": "Second movie in the boxset. Originally titled Bloodsuckers, This movie was pretty average. It is kinda boring in some parts but there is some good gore effects, but they're not great though. The movie takes place in the year 2210. Vampires have pretty much taken over the whole world. The V-SAN (Vampire Sanitation) Squad, which also has their own spaceship and is lead by Churchill, who is captured by the vampires, receives a message from an Earth and the team, formed by Quintana (Played by the very hot Natassia Malthe), the rookie officer Damian and the rebels Rosa and Roman (Roman being played by Aaron Pearl from Wrongfully Accused.) V-SAN later meets up with the leader of the vampires Muco, played by Michael Ironside from Total Recall. He has no plans of living peacefully with humans, as he is bent on world domination. While this movie was not a waste of time, I doubt I'll be putting back in the DVD player anytime soon.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc38e80dc35a43e79f57784205705149",
            "input": "Nicolas Roeg's projects are variable to say the least, but are never less than interesting. \"Insignificance\" is obviously, first and foremost, an adapted stageplay: it's wordy and pretty-much 'room-bound'. BUT, it pays to view this film more than once: the underlying themes are not overtly presented and, what's more, it takes a while to adjust to the juxtaposition and role-reversals of the four protagonists: Einstein, McCarthy, Munroe, and DiMaggio. Einstein is wracked by guilt over Hiroshima yet fancies the simplicity of a sexual liaison with Munro; Munro is sick of being seen as a bimbo and craves intellectual credence; Senator McCarthy is at the height of his witch-hunting powers but is an impotent sleazebag; DiMaggio is insecure about his celebrity, self-obsessed, and prone to violence. Each of them contains the seeds of their own destruction. Each character has a troubled, abused/abusive past and a questionable future. Gradually, we see that obsession itself is the central theme. America's obsession with its postwar cultural icons and mores; the obsessions of the protagonists for something none can have: peace-of-mind and/or happiness.Compared with the theory of relativity, a proposed unified-field theory and, indeed, the cosmos itself, all the aspirations and interactions of Roeg's protagonists seem insignificant. Yet these aspects of the physical universe (it's all quantum, trust me!) affect us when they are applied to the development of the means to destroy us. Monroe's mention of the principle behind the neutron-bomb (without naming it as such) is not an anachronism per se, but can only be understood by a contemporary audience. Indeed, ALL the references within the script are only accessible to a knowledgeable viewer: one au fait with '50s occurrences/personality cults and how they affect us in the 21st century.This film and its screenplay are either very, very clever, or extremely opaque and pretentious. Ultimately, however, probably insignificant.live long and prosper :) ",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e820ca481a8466e817102e1cc132c15",
            "input": "Shot on an impossible schedule and no budget to speak of, the movie turned out a lot better than you would expect, certainly much more true to the Peter O'Donnell books and comic strip than the previous two films. You can read the strip currently in the reprints from Titan Books, or in Comics Revue monthly. It is one of the greatest adventure comic strips of all time. The movie isn't great, but unlike most low budget films it makes the most of what its got, and it holds your interest. On the DVD extras, the interview with Quentin Tarentino, who is obviously stoned, is a gas. Some people have faulted Tarentino for associating his name with the film, but without him it would never have been made. He is a Modesty Blaise fan, and picked a good writer and director. All things considered, worth 8 stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5661f930c9fa4a868d105b769d1a919d",
            "input": "I don't know how to describe this movie. It's definitely one of the weirdest movies I've seen in a long time. It is very unsettling at times but also boring in other places. The scenes of dental torture are very elaborate and may attract anyone who's into gore & splatter. I found myself holding my teeth during some of the aforementioned scenes. The clever thing about the movie is that it plays with our fears and The Dentist is therefore quite unsettling.The humor of the film is somehow hidden and may not be recognized by everyone. But if you're a fan of weird and strange entertainment and teeth getting drilled to dust this is just the film you were looking for.If you read the comment and feel somehow attracted by this kind of entertainment, give it a try!My rating: 4/10 (maybe a little too weird for my taste)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba4a04316c414ee7b8a08f29eb8bfddf",
            "input": "Easily the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. Direction : none. Story: pathetic. Screenplay : that will be a good idea. There is a lot of gratuitous graphics, all of pathetic quality. Preserve your sanity, dont ever see this movie !",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cad31cda679947a79a071cf2971b9e6e",
            "input": "Powers Boothe turns in a stellar performance as 1970's cult figure Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple. Jones physical likeness to Jones is uncanny and the story is acted out chillingly. The movie keeps you riveted and is a must see for anyone. check it out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33ecc7cfe6774b8c92e9c0950af48961",
            "input": "Please! Do not waste any money on this movie. It really is nothing more than a boring German Blair Witch ripoff made by some high school kids. I couldn't finish watching it, and usually I like watching all kinds of B-movies. How on earth could they find a distributor for it?!!! Funny however: Check out Wikipedia for \"dark area\". The guy who wrote the entry must be completely out of his mind. Maybe he got loads of money from the producers. Money that should have been spend on actors, camera and editing. Even that wouldn't have helped, since there is absolutely no interesting idea behind this film. Unfortunately \"dark area\" has already gotten too much attention. Please, director, producer and author of this movie, STOP making movies like that...you are not doing yourself a favor. The world would be a better place without this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb910ffa8edd42e6a0265ed842267c3b",
            "input": "That is the only question I am left with. Why did this movie suck so much when it had such a great cast? Why was the writing so bad, it left the audience completely unconnected with the characters? Why did it not make any sense at all? Why did the studio take a perfectly good premise and \"Hollywood\" the hell out of it when all it needed was good, smart story telling? Why? I never understand why movies that start out good turn into a pile of crap by the time they're released. I hope for the sake of Freeman an Spacey, who are Oscar WINNERS, that this never is released to the big screens in America.As someone that holds a Bachelors Degree in Journalism, the whole story is just utterly laughable. I just...think the script had potential, but the execution turned it into a cliché, and an awful one at that. Just. No.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1badb0b178204c539159eafeacaa6c7b",
            "input": "Walking home after the film, I was humming the familiar waltz music that Natalia and Alexandre were dancing to. I've heard that before - where? Ah, from Kubrick's \"Eyes Wide Shut\" (track 2), 'got it just as I arrived at the door. It's \"Waltz No. 2 from Jazz Suite No. 2\" composed by Dimitri Shostakovich, performed here by The City of Prague Philharmonic Orchestra. Yes, I went and picked up the soundtrack from Tower's. What a treat! The film score by Alexandre Desplat was fulfilling - there are fifteen tracks besides two tracks of the delightful waltz. It's not often these days we get a soundtrack entirely dedicated to a comprehensive film score. Reminds me of favorite scores by Maurice Jarre, Ennio Morricone (beginning notes of track 6 have traces of \"Nuovo cinema Paradiso\"), Georges Delerue, and John Barry. There are subtle nuances of strains and notes from the strings, celeste, piano, and harp. Emily Watson and John Turturro delivered a credibly consuming paired performance. The love story, their intimate connection, is very much between Alexandre and Natalia - his childlike yet tormenting inner world, and her generous and bold understanding of him - a relationship alone to them both. Director Marleen Gorris of \"Antonia's Line\" (1996 Academy Award's Best Foreign Language Film from the Netherlands) gave us a quietly sensitive film - not without its unsettling human conflicts, intrigues, obsessions, family strives, lovingness and respect. The front-end subject is the mind-game and mathematical logic of chess. Beneath it can be a mild tearjerker of a drama set in the late 1920's. Cinematography captures the serene beauty of Lake Como in northern Italy near the Swiss border.I highly recommend the soundtrack if you don't feel like going to the movies. Alexandre Desplat's lyrical film score of \"The Luzhin Defence\" is complete.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a0a9bae4ae34c0187ba054659befa3e",
            "input": "I think its pretty safe to say that this is the worst film ever made, When I saw the trailer on TV i knew right from second 1 that this would be a piece of **** and it would be best to avoid it, but I somehow got dragged into seeing this by some friends, I walked into the cinema with low expectations but i was hoping there would be a couple of cheap laughs to keep me awake during this film. The so-called \"jokes\" in this film bring a cringe to the face, they are mostly comprised of people taking hits to the face and balls, the baby looking weird and acting like a horny gangsta and the typical race jokes we see so often in todays garbage comedies. The film is obvious and the story is not only impossible to believe but also predictable and dull. The characters are extremely annoying and heavily stereotyped. I never want to have to see this **** film again, I'd rather take a bullet to the foot than be exposed to this piece of fuckwood ever again. If anyone I see says they liked it i will physically punch them in the face",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-454e89ead2f34fbaaf97d0bc385f6551",
            "input": "Four tales of terror regarding the events at a creepy old mansion are recounted to sceptical Scotland Yard investigator Holloway (John Bennett) as he investigates the whereabouts of the latest occupant of the house that dripped blood.One can only struggle to find the words to describe the true brilliance that is ‘The House That Dripped Blood'. This Seventies horror anthology is quite remarkable in the way that such a visually innocent movie is capable of inducing horror in even the most discerning of viewers. Incredibly, the number of depictions of violence on-screen can be counted on one hand but the film is still able to portray brutality and succeeds in conjuring up the most horrific images in the viewers own imagination, all the while refraining from taking the obvious route of graphic violence. In a rare feature of early Seventies horror the technicalities of the movie are virtually flawless, from the faultless performances of the star-studded cast (featuring the legendary Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee and Ingrid Pitt) all the way to the superb direction and story telling courtesy of Peter Duffell and master of the macabre writer Robert Bloch (the author of the novel ‘Psycho'). The only real complaints that one may have with ‘The House That Dripped Blood' are the somewhat asinine plot-twists at the end of the first two segments and the predictable ending of the picture, but even these minor details fail to detract from the overall viewing enjoyment.The first segment, entitled ‘Method for Murder', tells the story of Charles Hillyer (Denholm Elliott), a horror author who rents the creepy house while he works on his latest novel. While working on the novel, Hillyer continues to start seeing the murderous character from his story in and around the house and soon begins to question the difference between fiction and reality. Elliott's performance in this piece is truly exceptional and his character is given a surprising air of believability. The key to this segment, as with the others, is the mystery surrounding the events that take place. The viewer is made to question whether the sight of the murderous character of Dominic is merely a hallucination, a schizophrenic disorder or whether the character is actually there. Duffell's direction succeeds in creating an unsettling atmosphere coupled with a slow, methodical approach to engendering the tension and suspense required to make the segment greatly enthralling.The following segment features Peter Cushing as the new occupant of the sinister house. During a trip into town he comes across a wax museum of horrors and decides to venture in. While there, he discovers a wax model of a beautiful woman that seems all too familiar to him. Cushing's character (Philip) is then joined by his friend Neville (Joss Ackland) who also wishes to visit the museum, much to the dismay of Philip. In this segment the viewer is given no more than very subtle clues as to the mystery of the wax woman but in general the viewer is left in the dark. There is far less tension to this particular story yet the segment still succeeds in maintaining its air of mystery through a particularly harrowing dream sequence and the general ambiguity of the story. Duffell's direction is once again exceptional and while this is quite possibly the weakest of the four stories, there is no denying that through some creative direction and credible acting ‘Waxworks' is still a delightful entry into the film.‘Waxworks' is followed by what is, in my opinion, the greatest of the four segments – ‘Sweets to the Sweet'. Christopher Lee stars as John Reid, the father to a young girl who to begin with has an inexplicable fear of fire which is soon remedied by caring nanny Ann Norton (Nyree Dawn Porter). However, John appears to be harbouring a dark secret about the family. ‘Sweets to the Sweet' is easily the most sober and intricate of the four stories and that is why the segment is undeniably compelling to the viewer. Throughout the segment small and subtle clues are released about the truth behind the family, but it is not until the immensely horrific final scene that everything slots neatly into place. This is the best example of how Duffell used dramatic tension and suspense to create the foreboding atmosphere that made the entire film great. Accompanied by a wonderfully arranged soundtrack, ‘Sweets to the Sweet' is an exercise in sustained fear that grabs the viewer by the throat and refuses to let go until the agonising screams that end this piece finally cease. Personally, I believe that this short segment would have made an entertaining and haunting feature length movie and I would give this segment a rare 10/10.The film is ended with the story surrounding the missing performer that the investigator was originally interested in. Jon Pertwee and Ingrid Pitt star as two performers who are currently working on a horror movie. Pertwee's character is disgusted with the amateurish production and props of the film and so he purchases his own vampire cloak from a strange shop of mysteries. However, strange things begin to happen when he wears the cloak and soon he begins to fear the worst. This segment, which places the inspector amongst the events, is a nice way to wrap up a wonderful anthology. Although there is an irrefutable air of camp to the segment this is, in a way, what makes the story so enjoyable. Unfortunately, there is little in this segment that could be classed as frightening in any sense and the predictable ending could have been executed better but nonetheless the segment has its redeeming features. Horror buffs should definitely look out for Pertwee's brief comment on Bela Lugosi's and Christopher Lee's portrayal of Dracula. This slightly comical and light-hearted approach to the final segment is in essence an adequate and almost natural way of ending the picture even if it lets down the film when compared to the earlier examples of suspense-driven horror.To sum up, ‘The House That Dripped Blood' is one of the greatest horror anthologies that features an incredible cast, great stories and above par direction. There are certainly worse ways to spend one hundred minutes of your life and while blood and guts fans will be highly disappointed, fans of more tense horror efforts should enjoy this film immensely. My rating for ‘The House That Dripped Blood' – 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0202d1e133f34848a09bbcdc3f4b980a",
            "input": "A team of archaeologists uncover a real treasure – the Crown of the Queen of Sheeba. From Egypt, the crown is to be transferred via steamship to San Francisco. But it won't be an easy journey. There are plenty of would-be thieves who would love to get their hands on the priceless jewels contained in the crown. Fortunately for all involved, Mr. Moto is on hand to guard the crown on its journey. However, that doesn't mean someone won't try to get their hands on the treasure.After the disappointment of Mr. Moto's Gamble, I went into Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation hoping for the best, but, admittedly, fearing the worst. But within the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that features anything to do with archaeological digs in Egypt. And seeing Moto disguised as a German archaeologist (Imagine that, Peter Lorre playing a German?), the beginning scenes really drew me in. While the movie may have quickly shifted to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as enjoyable. Dark, sinister characters lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; sophisticated and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of elements found in a lot of the really good 1930s mysteries that I love. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's got 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the always enjoyable Lionel Atwill in a nice little role, comic relief from G.P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a return to form for Mr. Moto. I've already mentioned his disguise in the movie's opening scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out near the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't even mentioned the wonderful performance turned in by Lorre. Any way you look at it, Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation is a winner.As much as I hate that the Mr. Moto series had to end after this installment, it's understandable when you think about it. WWII was just around the corner. And after Pearl Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f8384edcbb74cc8914c8ea65946f34c",
            "input": "I have to admit that Tsui Hark is one of a kind, you can't top a person with a strong style of movie presence. A Chinese fantasy picture may not be easy to present to an audience, the director attempted to bring back the classic fantasy tales of Zu Mountain and this is what he displayed.The new Legend of Zu has truly improved from the one in 1983. From this new millenium update, we could see Tsui Hark's vision of the Zu mountains. Spectacular visual designs, amazing action-fantasy epic made beautifully well. Kept me glued through the entire picture. Great cast with just fine acting. It's truly a fun movie to watch, but is it too weird?Now the down side is people will definitely get confused with it's broad story line shortened down into a 95 minute movie. Plot may not have much relation among characters, but by rewatching the movie, you'll have a better sense of understanding the characters itself. Some can complain there isn't too much physical combat, besides with characters that have supernatural powers to defeat foes, spirits fighting by hand-to-hand wouldn't really make sense at all. I appreciated this nice stylish picture. It may have a thin story, but hey look at Tsui Hark's \"Time & Tide,\" we got confused by the plot as well, but it was truly something stylish and awesome. Tsui Hark always attracts something different into H.K. Cinema. American audiences, may have some difficulty to understand while watching this movie, cause this ain't no Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, this is a whole new genre. Although it may not be a masterpiece, but it's special effects is truly better than Storm Riders. This is really worth checking out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f0058485bfe4d59808fa1a3b51ac98b",
            "input": "Worst movie, (with the best reviews given it) I've ever seen. Over the top dialog, acting, and direction. more slasher flick than thriller.With all the great reviews this movie got I'm appalled that it turned out so silly. shame on you martin scorsese",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28f57a2823634ade99e9193eed5da2f8",
            "input": "The movie was much better than the other reviewer stated. It's a nice family movie. It has a fun fantasy aspect of some time travel. The story revolves around a 14 year old girl who accidentally finds a way to travel back in time in the old elevator of her apartment building. Of course, no one believes her when she tries to explain her disappearances. She finds and makes friends with a girl about her age and is able to help the girl's family in many ways. She is also able to help her own relationship with her father in the long run. It reminds me of a Hallmark movie so give it a chance and decide for yourself. It seemed to be aimed more towards children about 6-12 years (maybe a bit older) and it's pretty much PG or G rated. I'm an adult who can appreciate a nice \"family\" movie - I guess the other reviewer isn't.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4e64da3bd8c49bc8b468ac152de9086",
            "input": "may contain spoilers!!!! so i watched this movie last night on LMN (Lifetime Movie Network) which is NOT known for showing quality movies. THIS MOVIE IS AWFUL! i am still amazed that i watched the entire thing, as it was terrible. could this movie contain any more stereotypes? (harping jewish mother who wants son to be a doctor, catholic family with priest sons, big big crucifixes in every room shown in the catholic family's house, mexican whores, \"bad\" guy who is really a softie at heart, incredibly bad country accents) GAG!!!! i was at first intrigued by the fact that i had never heard of this movie and after seeing that cheryl pollack and corin nemec were in it, i decided to stay awake until 4am to watch it. anyway, the only redeeming thing about this movie is madchen amick's beauty. i suppose pollack's and nemec's acting is okay, but they have a horrid script to work with. unlike the other reviewer who commented on the lack of texan accents (the movie is supposed to take place in austin and very few people there have a twang) i think that the accents were there (in supporting characters like mary margaret's date and john) and were unnecessary. they were also very very bad. i am so very tired of hollywood \"southern\" accents that sound nothing like the area where the accent is supposed to be from. and since it was supposed to take place in austin and shooting movies there in 1991 would not have been expensive, i fully expected there to be familiar shots of the town: the beautiful capitol building, the UT tower lit up for a winning football game, etc. none of these things were there. also, it takes about 5-6 hours to drive to mexico from austin. at one point in the movie, michael and his posse take off for mexico to lose their virginities and are able to drive off when it is dark (during the summer and early fall it doesn't get dark in austin until 9pm or so), spend time in mexico getting drunk and having sex with mexican (is there any other kind?) whores, and then return to austin by dawn. while this is theoretically possible it is NOT very likely. and if anyone has started school in the hill country (usually the third week of august, but may have been in september in 1960) they know that unless they want to pass out from heat stroke they DO NOT wear their letter jackets!!!!! in august and september in austin and the surrounding areas it is 90+ degrees. only people with no body temperature would be stupid enough to wear sweaters or letter jackets on the first day of school. all in all, a very bad made for tv movie experience.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc157e963d5945cb859b6ef89acd854f",
            "input": "I first saw this movie about 20 years ago and have never forgotten it. It's beautifully filmed and the story keeps one riveted for the entire time. It's difficult to believe this was made in 1946, as the tale is still fresh today, and really makes one think. I'm not very knowledgeable regarding film technique however the special effects in this film are terrific considering when this was made. In addition, the acting is superb, and the use of English and American actors quite astounding. I recently purchased the DVD so now I'm able to watch whenever I wish. I highly recommend anyone interested in post-war British films to watch this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0d54f9b49164883950ed8e9a4da78ea",
            "input": "Although I use this site quite frequently to see how other people rated what I think are challenging or just plain enjoyable films, after watching this \"movie\" on Film Four last night I felt compelled to write something down, even if it just helps cleanse me once again.The film was possibly the shallowest experience I've ever had - the main characters played by Danny Dyer (23? You sure?) and Gillian Anderson (who will always be Scully as Leonard Nimoy will always be Spock) had no real substance about them - I'm not sure if the first half-hour of the film didn't make the final cut but surely in a revenge movie you would like some empathy with the victims... here I couldn't care less. In fact, the only character I did seem to care about was the dog, with the stag coming a close second. And both animals out-acted Dire (sic) and Scully, who were quite frankly terrible. I guess though you're only as good as the script you are given, and I'd like to warmly thank the writers, the producers, the director and all of the cast for wasting 90 minutes of my life and some perfectly good electricity.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1bec10b79ee45648afa1569ed2825dd",
            "input": "When American author Edgar Allan Poe visits London, he is approached by British journalist Alan Foster, who becomes the target of a peculiar wager. Not believing Poe's assertion that all of his macabre stories have been based on actual experience, Foster accepts a bet from Poe and his friend Sir Thomas Blackwood that he cannot spend an entire night in the Blackwood's haunted castle. Once installed in the abandoned castle, Foster discovers that he is not alone, as he is approached by various beautiful women and handsome men, and a doctor of metaphysics - who explains that they are all lost souls damned to replay the stories of their demises on the anniversary of their deaths! The first time I watched this glorious bit of classic horror, I was mesmerized the entire time. I found the movie genuinely creepy and at the same time sorrowful. Babs Steele is undeniably beautiful. The music score makes the atmosphere twice as terror inducing. The topless scene threw me for a loop, as I was not expecting it. It looks as Synapse did a great job with picture enhancement, because this movie looks damn fine for its age, and it's the Uncut International version, to boot. This is the movie responsible for me starting a Babs Steele and Klaus Kinski collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-757d742c89ec406a8c6505ef9ff4c7af",
            "input": "It's not well shot, well written or well acted but it has to be the most addictive show I've seen since Twin Peaks. Every single revelation is timed so well that you have to see the next episode to get any kind of closure. They have even slowed down the pace of the show where they only reveal tiny amounts of information per episode however it feels like they've just told you everything you wanted to know. However some of the acting is just about awful and some of the duologue is downright brutal. Some characters are very two dimensional. The more experienced actors like Locke and Ecko really stand out over actors who play Jack, Kate, Sayid and so on. The development of the show can also be very frustrating as the following episode may not show what the previous episode lead up to. Annoying side plots have become part of the story that sometimes tell you nothing. However, the second season has developed to a point where back stories reveal more about the island than they had previously. All in all its a great show but not perfect.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eadbeaa67b244b9999aa52dec4332575",
            "input": "\"CASOMAI\" was the last movie I've seen before getting married, just last year. It was also the first movie I've searched for, after I was married, because we promised to offer a copy to our priest.Sometimes, reality is not that apart from fiction. To all those who wrote that priests like \"Don Camillo\" don't exist in real life, I would recommend them to visit my Priest Pe. Nuno Westwood, in Estoril, Portugal :-)To all others, I would only recommend them to see this movie, before and after the \"I do!\" day :-)Rodrigo Ribeiro Portugal",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af6d690795e14203aae9d35216e259cb",
            "input": "While watching this movie, I came up with a script for a movie, called \"The Making of 10 Items or Less\":Producer: I've got good news and bad news. The good news is, we can get Morgan Freeman!Writer: That's great! But what's the bad news?Producer: We can only afford to hire him for one day. I guess we'll have to get someone else.Writer: So we hire him for one day. A movie is an hour and a half long. A work day is eight hours long. I fail to see a problem.Producer: But... he'll have to spend time getting into character.Writer: So we have him play a character who is essentially himself.Producer: But he'll still need to understand his motivation and all that. You're not saying we have him play a big-name actor that's doing a low-budget movie, are you?Writer: Why not?Producer: That's ridiculous! But fine, at least we'll have Morgan Freeman in our movie. And I guess we have to set the movie in Los Angeles too.Writer: Of course.Producer: This script is a load of crap. We'd better make money on this. Just in case, have Morgan Freeman's character plug Wal-Mart or Target or one of those stores, so at least someone will want to sell the DVDs.Writer: Sure thing!Producer: Wait a second... what's this about a tiny bodega with a \"ten items or less\" express lane?Writer: Oh, I guess that is pretty weird. But we can't change the title now!I doubt my script actually bears much resemblance to reality, but then neither did \"10 Items or Less\". This is a case of good acting, but bad writing, and I hate to see it happen. When watching an independent movie, you expect it to try to convey some sort of message. I think they might have been trying for the tired old \"don't let anything hold you back\" message that has been done to death in much better films. In any case, with \"10 Items or Less\", the only message I got was \"Look! Look at Morgan Freeman!\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa3ed84c51a04deaa4f30f237a9158b6",
            "input": "I watched the Pie-lette last night and the word that comes to mind is \"original.\" It is a word not used much in TV as they all tend to copy whatever the other network is doing and you end up with seven nights of crime shows, unfunny comedies, and reality crap.The first thing that hit me like a brick was the presence of Jim Dale. Those not familiar with the British \"Carry On ...\" series or those who have not listened to a Harry Potter book, may not be familiar with Dale. I am not sure whether his presence as narrator adds or distracts. I will have to tune in more, but it does give the show a \"Harry Potter\" atmosphere. Maybe that's a good thing.Lee Pace (Infamous, The White Countess) has a gift. It never explains where he got it, but he can bring someone back from the dead for a minute. He teams with Chi McBride (\"Boston Public,\" Roll Bounce) to solve murders using this talent. Everything is fine and funny until he comes across a childhood love, Anna Friel (Goal! The Dream Begins, Timeline) and things really get complicated. He can't send her back and he can never touch her. Boy, would that make a relationship difficult.I will be tuning in to see where this series goes in the expectation that it will continue to entertain.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec9d535c5738456583eb0d26ae4b175e",
            "input": "\"The Man in the Moon\" is a beautifully realistic look at life through the eyes of an adolescent. Director Robert Mulligan magically re-creates screenwriter Jenny Wingfield's autobiography of her childhood with gorgeous cinematography and a haunting, lyrical musical score. This film hits home as one of the most powerful and emotionally affecting films in recent times.This film is incredible, all the acting first rate, especially Sam Waterston and an astonishing performance by Reese Witherspoon in her film debut. You will feel every emotion as this life changing summer in 1957 on the Trant family farm comes to a conclusion.\"The Man in the Moon\" was a limited release in 1991, and you will love the fact that most of you're family and friends will probably have never heard of it. Buy this dvd and enjoy 100 minutes of pure poetic art. This film is truely the essence of filmaking at its finest.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-879344093911444aac48bfd6ef147065",
            "input": "After seeing the 1996 remake, I thought it was the funniest way to see Cruella De Vil getting her punishment for torturing animals just for their skin. The whole movie was quite funny, and on my view, better than the animated one. But there was actually no need for a second one. First of all, if Cruela is returning, don't cure her and make her insane again. Just make her break away from jail and that's a rap. I thought it was not very funny. It's supposed to have only one original puppy returning. I'd expected that it should be Lucky, since he was the most appealing, and besides, having Roger and Anita back too. However, they decided to have a complete recasting and adding not really one hundred, not even one hundred and two, but only THREE puppies, and a parrot that thinks he's a dog (clever). Gerard Depardieu's part was pointless. At the end, Cruella suffers way too much, way too humiliating and way too exaggerated to be true. She gets baked inside a giant cake. That was a desperate attempt of physical humor, trying to imitate the same effect from the first one. That just didn't work. It was too much over the top, and not too funny. I actually felt sorry about Cruella.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9a405a308b245138c0d05532dd0eb6b",
            "input": "'Holes' was a GREAT movie. Disney made the right choice. Every person who I have talked to about it said they LOVED it. Everyone casted was fit for the part they had, and Shia Labeouf really has a future with acting. Sigourney Weaver was perfect for The Warden, she was exactly how I imagined her. everyone who hasn't seen it I recommend it and I guarantee you will 'Dig It'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-deaf71d9c7ca480d81b828001bc03afc",
            "input": "The ENTIRE MOVIE is flashbacks from the first Boogeyman movie as well as, inexplicably, footage from another Uli Lommel / Suzanna Love film Brainwaves. It is framed with some more current (from the early 90's anyway) footage that is boring, poorly acted and cheaply shot. Not only is the film almost completely flashbacks, they REPEAT the same flashbacks throughout the film. So you see the recycled footage over and over again, as if you hadn't seen it already. As if the originals weren't bad enough. I've never seen a movie so padded.... Someone was milking the last dollar out of these films. Total ripoff. And talk about padding... why do I have to write 10 lines about this trash? If I can convey that it's garbage in 2 lines, that should be enough.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7cc62f0d0cb4144abe8542074b6b2ef",
            "input": "i chose to see the this film on the day it opened nationally in france, as a personal way for myself to reflect on what had happened a year previous; the collection works as intended: it provokes a whirlwind of thoughts and emotions, working as an intellectual hommage, never stooping to cheap sentimentality nor knee-jerk reactionism.there have been many allegations made that the film is anti-american: while i cannot speak for everyone in this regard, i am one american who found such statements to be completely untrue. people make much noise about the egyptian segment, by Chahine, because it voices perspectives of palestinian suicide bombers asserting that civilians in a democracy are \"fair targets\" for they elect the governments the bombers are seeking to attack, but this ignores much else in the piece: several perspectives are discussed, no one being held up as the truth, and critics--if they even saw the piece--seem to forget the fondness and warm dialogue that takes place between the director and the ghost of the american dialogue, and the director's intense sadness upon hearing of the tragedy.pretty much all of the films are beautiful, thoughtful & inspiring, in particular the brilliant work by Mahkmalbaf, Tanovic, Loach & Inarritu. Nair, good as usual, effectively tells a true story of an injustice committed against a muslim family in the wake of anti-islam hysteria that swept--and still sweeps--the states. i did find Gitai's piece a bit vulgarly loud and simple in it's critic of media hysteria in the face of terrorism, and Penn's piece was too impressionistic and elliptical for my tastes, though i had expected to like it. Borgnine is very good and brave in it. SPOILER WARNING: one reviewer below incorrectly read the falling of the towers as being a happy moment for the character; my read is rather that the falling of the towers is what, because light floods his room, keys him into the loss in his life that he refused to recognize. again this is a sort of impressionistic piece, for we know that if the towers were really blocking the light to this man's flat, then there would have been nothing but smoke and ash, not light, flooding through his window.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32e7d6ecf31048eb8c51579acf24ce77",
            "input": "Italy produced a lot of really great and original horror films in the 1960's - and this is certainly one of them! The first thing you will notice about Danse Macabre is the style of the film. Shot in beautiful black and white, and due to director Antonio Margheriti's use of lighting; the film almost looks like it could be a German expressionistic horror film. This, coupled with the horror-filled plot line ensures that Danse Macabre is a film that truly captures the essence of horror. Of course, the fact that the beautiful Barbara Steele appears in the film doesn't harm matters - and the good news continues as, in this film, she gets to flex her acting muscles more than she did in the films that made her famous. The plot is very aware of the time in which this was released, and so incorporates the great Edgar Allen Poe. We follow Alan Foster, a writer who accepts a bet from Poe himself and Lord Blackwood that he can't spend an entire night in the latter's creepy old castle. Everyone that has spent the night there previously has died...and our hero is about to meet the previous wager-takers! Nowadays, horror films don't tend to focus so much on each shot and the result is that there isn't much beauty left in the genre. It is refreshing, therefore, to see this film. Many of the shots here are incredibly beautiful - from the female side of the couple wearing just a see-through skirt, to my personal favourite - a shot of smoke creeping in from under a door. This my first Antonio Margheriti film, and even after seeing just this one; it's obvious that he was one of Italy's premier directors. Also interesting is the fact that screenplay was co-written by another of the Italian greats; Django creator Sergio Corbucci. The plot can meander a little too much at times, but there's always enough atmosphere on hand to make sure that the film never becomes boring - and the fact that it is always intriguing, even when the plot slows down, ensures the same thing. The way that Danse Macabre utilises the 'haunted house' theme is both well done and original, and helps to keep the story as eerie as possible. On the whole, fans of Italian and/or cult cinema will not want to miss this little gem!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dae7836779624a3c8b9d9810dd05b1d3",
            "input": "Just utter trash. I'm a huge fan of the Cusacks, this being the sole reason I watched this movie, but the only reason I can see for their presence was the reprise, in complete and depth less quality, their exact roles from Grosse Point Blanc. Apart from that, the films' role as a political satire fails miserably as being too obvious for even the most moronic out there to serve any purpose. And to bill it as a satirical satire would be just plain insulting even to chimps. Imitation is, apparently the highest form of flattery, but seeing as though this is nothing near Grosse Point Blanc and in the same league as meet the (watch if your a moron) Spartans in terms of political satire, lets leave well enough alone and let this one fade into the obscurity it absolutely deserves.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-153c3d8c34fe4e7fa475505da6566dcd",
            "input": "Shocking, well-made chiller is an undervalued tale of atrocious murder and evil forces.Small town doctor tries to discover who, or what, is committing a series of violent sexual murders.Incubus is a tight mystery, with some horrific murder sequences, that builds to an off-beat and eerie climatic twist. The murder scenes are intense and gory, so this isn't a film for the squeamish! The direction of John Hough, along with a bizarre music score, combine to create a dark atmosphere of dread that runs through out the film. It also carries a kind of Gothic vibe as well. Nice filming locations and some stylish camera work also highlight.The cast isn't bad either. The great John Cassavetes does a solid performance as the new doctor in town. Also good are the performances of Kerrie Keane as the local reporter, Helen Hughes as the town historian, and Duncan McIntosh as a tormented psychic teen.All around Incubus is a forgotten horror film that needs to be re-discovered and re-evaluated.*** out of ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-456bb3d2b5b540479a42f5aa55653056",
            "input": "After the usual chase scene, Jerry accidentally winds up inside a bottle of invisible ink, which was part of a chemistry set. He quickly discovers he's invisible...so the predictable results occur, meaning he uses his new hidden condition to torment Tom. Jerry often is just defending himself, but often he has sadistic streak in him that torments the cat whenever possible, even when unprovoked.Here, he makes Tom think his eyes are deceiving him when cheese from a mousetrap disappears before his eyes, or milk from a dish. Tom can't take anymore so he tries to sleep this nightmare off, but Jerry sets fire to his paw! Man, I hope little kids didn't ideas watching these cartoons back in the '40s and '50s! I always found Jerry, the little mouse, more evil than cute.Thankfully, in cartoons, generally, whatever damage a character suffers is gone within seconds and he's back to normal. The best part of this cartoon is about two-thirds of the way through when Tom figures out what the story is with Jerry, and tries different methods to detect where the mouse is located (such as putting flour on the floor to see his footprints).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c00f0f1c863841d6a79629f7777e647d",
            "input": "Well, the big money machine has done it again! Disney very shrewdly takes advantage of morons like myself who feel we must own every video (good or bad) stamped with the Disney moniker. Why is it that I continue to look forward to these \"sequels\" which make Don Bluth on a bad day look like Leonardo DaVinci? Cinderella 2 consists of three storylines (already a poor choice!) Doesn't one of the most endearing Disney creations at least deserve a linear story? Of these three, only the last comes anywhere near the quality of animation and storytelling that I would expect. The music is atrocious and modern (meaning in 2 years it will already be dated) and adds nothing to the story. Why does everything have to be updated? You know, the original cartoon is still popular because of its timelessness, so why not be respectful and true to the original with songs that reflect the same style? Gee, I can't wait for a sequel to Sleeping Beauty. Instead of music based on the themes of Tchaikovsky, we'll get music inspired by Britney Spears!!! So Disney, if you're listening, remember we're not all indiscriminate children out here. How about throwing a bone or two to the fans who've been around long enough to know the difference between craft and crap?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b39d16a673354347a9a39e4ccf665fd0",
            "input": "When I go to see a movie about zombie's, I'm not expecting oscar calibre performances, or writing on the level of The Godfather, but I do expect the actors to at least not look like their straining to read their cue cards, and dialogue that doesn't sound like it was typed out 10 minutes before the actor reads it into the camera. This movie was just awful, I actually got up and left about 25 minutes in and went next door and watched Cold Creek Manor, that wasn't very good either, but it seemed like Citizen Kane compared to this pile of crap. On the plus side, the girls were very pretty, that's probably the only thing that kept me in my seat for longer than the first 5 minutes, in fact I left after the hottest one got killed, there wasn't anything to hold my interest after that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09db80c19d494d1ebe5105b0b7e7d7c9",
            "input": "I'd love to give this movie a 10/10, but in its existing state I can only go to 8/10 tops. The post-Code editing (read: destroying) of this film warrants a 2-point demerit.From my very limited knowledge of film history, Baby Face was apparently one of two movies that finally broke the camel's back and brought the full wrath and enforcement of the Production Code into play in 1934. (I don't know what the other movie was.) As a result, the movie in its original incarnation was never allowed to be re-released after 1934. It was chopped and edited to bits, and no original version is known to exist today. The best that we can see today is the version that TCM (Turner Classic Movies) shows, but that is blatantly edited in several scenes, and has a really disappointing \"happy ending\" slapped onto the end.All the above being said, the movie is still pretty darned great and lots of fun to watch. Barbara Stanwyck is, as always, absolutely amazing and wonderful. She is so beautiful and powerful; she just owns the whole movie! She plays a woman who's been used by men her entire life, starting with her father who pimps her out to the local Erie, PA steel workers as well as to local politicians in a quid pro quo of 'if you don't shut down my speakeasy I'll let you sleep with my daughter'. When the father dies in a fiery explosion near the beginning of the flick, the smile on Stanwyck's face is priceless.After the fire, Stanwyck leaves Erie with her maid and heads to New York City. She sets her sights on a skyscraper and starts literally working her way to the top. Starting out with the personnel clerk in the HR department, she sleeps with him to get an entry level position at the bank. From there, she sleeps with man after man after man (including a very young John Wayne) using each new man to help her land a higher paying job on a higher floor of the skyscraper, with increasingly powerful male bosses cum sugar daddies. Stanwyck stops at nothing in her rise to the top. It is great fun to see her and her maid in increasingly fancier clothes and apartments as Stanwyck works her way up the corporate ladder. Stanwyck is the ultimate femme fatale, manipulating, she-vixen in this flick! If you watch this movie, I recommend stopping when you see the George Brent character (Courtland Trenholm) die in Stanwyck's arms. Skip the remaining 3 minutes or so! The \"happy ending\" slapped on to the end of the movie for post-Code audiences is insulting to the audience's intelligence and lame beyond belief: the bank board members are sitting around a table expositing about Mr. and Mrs. Trenholm's million dollar donation to the bank and how they are living happily but poor in Erie, with former VP Trenholm now working in the steel mills - cut to the exact same footage of a steel plant that we saw in the beginning of the movie - \"The End\". PUH-LEEZE - HOW LAME! The movie originally ended with George Brent succeeding in his suicide attempt. I think that ending fits the overall mood of the movie much better than the slapped on post-Code ending.I certainly hope that a print of the original pre-Code version of this flick is discovered during my lifetime (update: the original HAS been found and should be out on DVD and/or TCM in 2006!). Until then, I'll enjoy the TCM version and switch it off before the lame-o post-Code ending.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63ff8181bb9e42108c7bc06975fb17ca",
            "input": "OK, how's this for original- this mean, rich old geezer leaves his estate to his adult children, all of them ungrateful losers, and two creepy servants, provided they spend the week in his spooky old house. What happens that night will surprise only those who haven't seen a movie or television show before. After a string of murders in which the victims look like they're bleeding restaurant ketchup, we have a painfully obvious twist ending. The cast is lead by some once respectable actors must have been desperate for their paychecks. There are also a few second-tier actors who were rising at the time but long forgotten now. As a result, the film generates all the drama and mystery of an episode of \"Matlock.\" I will give credit where it's due- the closing scene is clever and amusing, if you're still awake.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e04c530126b45708bcfc11f4df76620",
            "input": "This movie's origins are a mystery to me, as I only know as much as IMDB did before I rented it. I assume that before \"Starship Troopers\", \"Killshot\" was one of the countless unaired pilots that never made it to network, cable, or otherwise. The new title of \"Kill Shot\" is comically thrown into the opening sequence, the first of many quick clues that this was not ever intended for the cinema. The quick cuts, cheesy \"Melrose Place\" music, and short 2-second close-up candid shots of the main actors let you know what you're in for.And I don't mind at all. I rented this movie seeing the repackaging that puts Casper Van Dien and Denise Richards on the cover in front of a volleyball net thinking it would be funny to see them in a movie besides the SciFi travesty of Starship Troopers (an excellent book, in my opinion, not so hot a movie - but that's another review). After looking it up on IMDB, my roommate and I surmised that the pilot was dragged up after the apparent success of Troopers and Richards own career (see Bond-Girl and Wild Things references here). They threw in a sex scene involving a minor character to reach the coveted R-rated status - coveted in suspense Video Rental sections, that is. In any event, they should have left it unrated if you're trying to sell it in the suspense/softcore porn section.All in all, it's entertaining. I hate to spoil the fun of telling you it's a TV pilot, though. That was the biggest pull while watching it - when you expect a cinematic movie and get a TV show, the differences between them make themselves more clear than usual.Would I rent it again? No. Would I watch this TV show? Well, why not - it's better than Baywatch. And their meager attempts at hitting all demographics would have done well back in the mid 90s. Token black guy (who's gay to avoid the TV taboo of inter-racial dating), token Asian (Japanese, I assume from the name Koji) more adept at science and computers than talking to women, beautiful, intelligent Latina pre-med student who has everything going for her except her family's bank account - this show probably would have done ok.But as a movie it just cracks me.I gave it a 7 out of 10, considering what it was and what it was forced to become. It made for a very enjoyable evening, and that's all I ask of rentals.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-027a7418b94847818a4638d6e86f8429",
            "input": "I'd like to think myself as a fairly open minded guy and it takes a lot(!) for me to dislike a movie but this one is without a doubt one of the suckiest, crappiest movie I've ever seen!I have no idea what's wrong with the people who gave it such a good rating here (imdb is usually pretty reliable when it comes to ratings)... the only thing I can imagine is that people must've voted during one or more conditions:1. While being shitfaced / stoned out of their minds 2. They've received hard cash for the votes 3. Under gunpointI can't believe I wasted a good 1 h 45 min of my life for this pathetic excuse for a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1dd5015472dc4268a305806af926ec45",
            "input": "or: It's a bird ? It's a plane ? No, look... It's a disaster ! or: No need to look up in the sky.or: (... OK, that's enough.) If singer tried to make a romantic titanic like movie to crash the box office record, he failed. The SR structure can't do this, the dark and restricted color scheme (I would call it \"wishi-washi\"), the boring usual dialogs, the clown with advanced alien technology, the missing fun and magic, etc. makes the movie completely disappointing.It simply doesn't work.The main thing at a character like superman is, that he is a superhero. That's the core, the most important thing.Love trouble and a sadly lost depressive Supersoftie can maximal only be a facet in a 2:40 long Superman movie, not the whole time.Because then it is not a superman or superhero movie anymore. It's like a (and in this case a very bad and boring) social study, where every 30 minutes a person flies around.That's a big difference.This movie is a joke. Holy skywalker, this is Superman, so give us Supervillains, Superaction and the most important thing, Superfun.We want ENTERTAINMENT ! Singer, if you want to make a 2:40 long soul love trouble drama about lost and sadly people ? Then take normal human characters and make a yentl remake.They say: Superman returns. And then, supersadlysoftie stands in the door.Maybe singer has tried to kill the legend without kryptonite, but one bad movie can't do this. Don't give up, they plan a sequel...Next time singer (and Warner Brothers), make a superhero movie, not a depressive superlame soap, or let it be. A superhero movie means a colorful fantasy with a lot of fun and magic.This movie is like a very cheap chocolate box with a super cover. Yes, technically there are all sorts in, yes, there is a lot of small talks, there are a few jokes, a view action scenes, etc, but the only one what all these worse pieces have in common is their poor quality.It's not more than a super boring patchwork and one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my live.The ridiculous cast strategy (Cast them young as possible, so we can make sequels in the next 25 years) gives the rest. Kate Bosworth plays a 22 year old star reporter, she's looking like 19. Superman was full five years away, so he slept with her 6 years ago, so she was 16, (looking like 13) and a daily planet reporter, wroting \"I spend a night with superman\". Warner Brothers, that's too much.Routh is not so bad, he is playing a little bit wooden, but the whole movie is wooden, so... ?! Temporary good were marsden and sometimes posey. The rest, forget it. Even spacey, this is not his terrain.Reeve/Hackman/Kidder were acting so easy, with fun. What a difference.The Jesus poses at the end are ridiculous too. What the hell should that be ? The problem here is, they mean this serious, not as a joke. Next time Spiderman or Batman or Ironman falls and rises like Jesus or angels ? Or they speak with god directly. Why not ? They are superheroes, saving human lives every day. So at least one talk with god every week should be possible... Oh my god.Maybe this was not the real announced movie, instead it is from a bizarre dull parallel universe.For the warner brothers this superlame depressive flick will be possibly the greatest disaster in history. Not only because of the money.I understand how difficult it (maybe) was to create and transport some messages or feelings, but showing lone, lost and sadly people isn't new and thousands of movies or TV-Shows did it better, in very old or new ones like magnolia. And the flying frogs there were more impressive than this flying superwoman, sorry, superman of course.Singer and WB, that's simply nothing. In fact it's even more than nothing, it's like a black hole that destroys the passion for (comic/superhero) movies and steals us three hours of our life.Mrs. Smilla's little brother. (Very angry and green like the hulk.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0bb31c49f31b4eb7867a1ae8c4e29e54",
            "input": "Possibly not, but it is awful. Even the fantastic cast cant save it. OK, I admit it started off quite funny but it seemed to plummet downhill as soon as they jumped those girls in the Generals house. Bill Murray turned from being a quick witted, humorous guy into an arsehole who was shouting things at people in the street that just weren't funny, its like he was trying too hard to be funny. His character stole a weapon (an RV? come on...) and ends up being a national hero after invading another country and killing god knows how many soldiers, for a laugh. One good point is that this film shows the inadequacy and incompetence of the US Army and shows how arrogant and imbecilic they really are, albeit unintentionally. I actually felt disgusted that this kind of propaganda crap could really be released.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2704ad434bf4da6975468a57f459d74",
            "input": "\"Footlight Parade\" is just one of several wonderfully jaunty musicals that Warner Bros. produced in the early 1930's to ward off the Depression. \"42nd Street\" and the Golddiggers series were also produced during this era, and they made literally, millions of Americans forget their troubles for a little while, and enjoy themselves.While most of the films produced had the great talents of Joan Blondell, Ruby Keeler, and Dick Powell, only Foolight Parade had the incomparable James Cagney. Almost ten years prior to his most well-known musical, \"Yankee Doodle Dandy\". Here he dances in that most original of dance styles, with his arms usually lowered at his side, and his legs doing all types of undulations and kicks. It's easy to see that he is enjoying himself, and that makes us enjoy him all the more.While almost all of the musical sequences appear at the end of the film, they are well worth the wait. I believe that this film was made just prior to the installation of the production code, so some of the costumes and scenes are a bit risqué. But it's all in fun.It doesn't matter what the plot of the film is, just know that there are plenty of laughs and a superlative cast. Besides those already mentioned, Guy Kibbee is at his flustered best here.7 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2760958072024553ba91d09733b82632",
            "input": "After a promising first 25 minutes that makes you feel all warm inside, you're pretty convinced that this will be a great romantic comedy. Then the movie takes a turn for the worse. The warm feeling might still be there, but as others has said: The plot becomes so unbelievable and artificial that it's almost unbearable to watch. The movie gets sped up, and you get the impression that you're either fast forwarding through it, or that the producers decided to fit it in less than 1h40m and had to cut a lot of scenes out.Realism isn't a goal onto itself, but as a viewer, I'm pretty convinced that this comedy isn't intentionally unrealistic, it just happens to be.On the plus side, this movie has a couple of nice interiors, and despite the bad script, I think that the actors performances are mainly good. If I could rate the first 25 minutes only, I'd probably give it an eight. As it is now, it gets a four. ...And that's being nice! If you're a sucker for romantic comedies you'll probably have a great time anyways. If not, I'd recommend that you watch something else.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67d5e230240c45e695cc5a140523ad9f",
            "input": "May I please have my $13.00 back? I would have rather watched \"Hydro- Electric Power Comes to North America\". Again. This is a movie with one voice. The same voice, which comes out of every characters mouth regardless of age or gender. To listen to that voice again I would have to charge at least $150 an hour. And I don't take insurance. It was eerie watching Will Ferrell morph into Woody. But I don't think imaginative casting is enough. One should wait until they have a story before they bother making a movie. Unless he's just doing it for the money. And if that's the case why not just reissue an All-Rap version of \"What's up Tiger Lily?\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-694813c296a24b1f9077b5e6ca916a26",
            "input": "Of course, he did have to INVENT EVERYTHING about cinematography, film directing, etc. before he could make classics like \"The Gardner,\" so I suppose he may be forgiven this initial excursion into mere sociological documentary. Today we call them \"home movies,\" and they are just as boring now as this one is",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fe752b3d60a428f9803fa68e072a930",
            "input": "Mesmerizing, breathtaking and horrifying, this hauntingly beautiful film is the \"Apocalypse Now\" without fiction. Slow in pace, quiet in mood, it gives good glimpses of the poisoned patches of Earth that may well be signs of an inevitable doom.There is no doubt in my mind -- the nature is plagued and we are the disease. Greed, the very essence of humanity that drives evolution and progress, has turned us into something like cancer, on its way to consume the host and die with it...Manufactured Landscapes is quite an unforgettable viewing experience - at least I'll never regard my toaster and iron the same way again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8835343e6c8457ab5eb2166d890bc52",
            "input": "This film was absolutely awful, I even feel uncomfortable calling it a film. Its the typical \"mumblecore\" movie, with zero plot and a bunch of aimless whiny twenty somethings stumbling around trying to \"figure stuff out\". I have tried to give mumblecore a chance, but lets be honest its just horrible.I am not out of sync with cinema, I appreciate Dogme95 films, Idioterne is one of my all time favorite films. So I do not mind if a film is cheaply made so long as there is some (ANY) substance.Everything in this film is horrid, the acting, the writing (or was it all improvised?), the direction, but MOST of all, above everything else, the camera work was just plain and simple nonsense. The camera was never anywhere logical, there was no consistency. I got to admit being a guy I had heard there was nudity in this film so I thought to myself well even if its horrible at least there's nudity (yea I know, I'm a jerk). Well thanks to the uber crappy camera-work you never really get to see anything, and the things you do see, TRUST ME - YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE. This film made me want to vomit on numerous levels.The dialogue made me want to vomit, the camera-work made me want to vomit, but mostly the idea that this film was praised by some legit critics, well now that more than anything makes me want to vomit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01c614fd96f34b08b61353cbce0e368f",
            "input": "(SPOILERS included) This film surely is the best Amicus production I've seen so far (even though I still have quite a few to check out). The House that Dripped Blood is a horror-omnibus…an anthology that contains four uncanny stories involving the tenants of a vicious, hellish house in the British countryside. A common mistake in productions like this is wasting too much energy on the wraparound story that connects the separate tales…Peter Duffel's film wisely doesn't pay too much attention to that. It simply handles about a Scotland Yard inspector who comes to the house to investigate the disappearance of the last tenant and like that, he learns about the bizarre events that took place there before. All four stories in this film are of high quality-level and together, they make a perfect wholesome. High expectations are allowed for this film, since it was entirely written by Robert Bloch! Yes, the same Bloch who wrote the novel that resulted in the brilliant horror milestone `Psycho'… We're also marking Peter Duffel's solid and very professional debut as a director. The four stories – chapters if you will – in the House that Dripped Blood contain a good diversity in topics, but they're (almost) equally chilling and eerie. Number one handles about a horror-author who comes to the house, along with his wife, in order to find inspiration for his new book. This starts out real well, but after a short while, his haunted and stalked by the villain of his own imagination. The idea in this tale isn't exactly original…but it's very suspenseful and the climax is rather surprising. The second story stars (Hammer) horror-legend Peter Cushing as a retired stockbroker. Still haunted by the image of an unreachable and long-lost love, he bumps into a wax statue that looks exactly like her. Cushing is a joy to observe as always and – even though the topic of Wax Museums isn't new – this story looks overall fresh and innovating. This chapter also contains a couple of delightful shock-moments and there's a constant tense atmosphere. It's a terrific warm-up for what is arguably the BEST story: number 3. Another legendary actor in this one, as Christopher Lee gives away a flawless portrayal of a terrified father. He's very severe and strict regarding his young daughter and he keeps her in isolation for the outside world. Not without reason, since the little girl shows a bizarre fascination for witchcraft and voodoo. Besides great acting by Lee and the remarkable performance of Chloe Franks as the spooky kid, this story also has a terrific gothic atmosphere! The devilish undertones in this story, along with the creepy sound effects of thunder, make this story a must for fans of authentic horror. The fourth and final story, in which a vain horror actor gets controlled by the vampire-cloak he wears, is slightly weaker then the others when it comes to tension and credibility, but that the overload of subtle humor more or less compensates that. There's even a little room for parody in this story as the protagonist refers to co-star Christopher Lee in the Dracula series! Most memorable element in this last chapter is the presence of the gorgeous Ingrid Pitt! The cult-queen from `The Vampire Lovers' certainly is one of the many highlights in the film…her cleavage in particular. No doubt about it…The House that Dripped Blood will be greatly appreciated by classic horror fans. I truly believe that, with a bit of mood-settling preparations, this could actually be one of the few movies that'll terrify you and leave a big impression. Intelligent and compelling horror like it should be! Highly recommended. One extra little remark, though: this film may not…repeat MAY NOT under any circumstances be confused with `The Dorm that Dripped Blood'. This latter one is a very irritating and lousy underground 80's slasher that has got nothing in common with this film, except for the title it stole.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0135932275240ecb67b77abd2e6cc89",
            "input": "I thoroughly enjoyed this true to form take on the Dick Tracy persona. This is a well done product that used modern technology to craft a imagery filled comic era story. If you are a fan of or recently watched some of the old Dick Tracy b&w movies then you're sure to get a kick out of this rendition. The pastel colors and larger than life characters rendered in a painstakingly authentic take on an era gone by is entertainment as it's meant to be. I personally find Madonna's musical element to be a major part of this film-the CD featuring her music from this movie is one I've listened to often over the years, it's just so well done and performed musically and tuned to that era. In my mind, Madonna's finest moment both on-screen but especially musically. This is sure to bring out the \"kid\" in you.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adbbaf1232904aa19f497a78b1f1173d",
            "input": "The problem with portraying a real life individual is that the performance can be good, but still not work if the audience doesn't believe that the actor is portraying the person. That's the main issue with \"Young Mr. Lincoln:\" Henry Fonda gives a terrific performance, but I found it hard to believe that Abraham Lincoln was as soft-spoken as Fonda portrays him.This is essentially a courtroom drama with a young Abraham Licoln at the forefront. Whether or not this was a true story, I don't know, but if it isn't, then why tell it using Lincoln as the central character? Never mind though. In the film, Lincoln is defending two young men who are accused of murder.There's really not much to the film, and as a result, it seems rather empty. I wanted more story and character development. The film is 100 minutes long, but it doesn't feel like it. There are some little scenes featuring Lincoln and the blooming relationship with Mary Todd, but they seem superficial.The acting is good all around, but as I said, Fonda's performance works as a character, but not Abraham Lincoln. I just don't believe that the real Lincoln was that soft-spoken. True, he has a big voice when he needs to, such as when he persuades a drunken lynch mob to let the accused stand trial, but Fonda portrays Lincoln too meekly. The other performances are solid though, especially Alice Brady as Abigail Clay, the mother of the accused. She's a nice lady who we can really feel for. Simple and uneducated, yet very sweet; we can see why Lincoln wanted to help her.John Ford seems to think of this film as an epic, and at the time of its release, it probably was. But even then, there's just not enough material to present it as such.It's a nice watch, but not a classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6964c1a8d98c4c4abaadd08ce79be1ec",
            "input": "Sorry, gave it a 1, which is the rating I give to movies on which I walk out or fall asleep. In this case I fell asleep 10 minutes from the end, really, really bored and not caring at all about what happened next.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee893efaa30e4a139a10f608d41180e3",
            "input": "I am a fairly big fan of most of the films that have been based on Stephen King's books - this one rates as one of the scariest and most memorable.I have just finished rewatching it for about the tenth time and I still find it heart-wrenching as well as scary.The scene where Gage is on a sure collision course with the monster truck is one which stands out. And the \"No fair\" uttered by little Miko Hughes near the end is a touch of brilliance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea966fcc04d0461093fcb618b27c4a90",
            "input": "In 2005,George W. Bush started with his second period as a President of the United States; North Korea announced its possession of nuclear weapons; Pope John Paul II died after a long illness; and a movie called Into the Blue appeared.The existence of this movie is not as bad as the other things that happened on that year,but the film itself was pathetic and maybe,the worst one from that year.Now,in 2009,the United States have another President,there is another Pope,new Korean nuclear weapons...and the film Into the Blue 2 : The Reef,which is better than the original one...but that's the same as saying : \"getting your fingers cut is better than getting your head cut\".This sequel is a really bad film which kept me tremendously bored and uninterested.The cast of Into the Blue 2 : The Reef is composed by TV-series actors who completely lack of any credibility and dramatic weight,but who are perfect for showing their bodies.Chris Carmack (The O.C.),David Anders (Heroes and Alias),Laura Vandervoort (Smallville),Marsha Tomason (Lost) and Audrina Patridge (The Hills) bring hollow and boring performances.I have liked some previous movies from director Stephen Herek (Critters and Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure specially) but on this movie,he cannot generate even the minimum level of tension,emotion or entertainment.The characters from this movie are not only badly performed,but they are also repulsive.Honestly,I wanted all of them to die.The cinematography from this movie is also lame and it seems to have been made by a technical team who makes promotional videos for Hawaiian hotels.Into the Blue 2 : The Reef is a horrible movie which is better than the original film,but that's the same as nothing,as I previously said.Avoid this crappy film at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2048d6d3e0ec42a9b5fd1363f92b7bce",
            "input": "I really wanted to like The Pillow Book. Intriguing story, interesting character outlines, Ewan Macgregor in the utterly glorious altogether. Unfortunately, I hated every minute of it. Greenaway got so enamoured with presenting the movie uniquely, and not to the film's benefit. I won't even get into Vivian Wu's abysmal acting.You get distracted from the story with 4 billion teeny windows and calligraphy that rolls on the bottom of the screen displaying the lyrics of the music that's playing. It seems he lost sight of presenting the actual story and developing the plot, and got entangled with foo-foo embellishments that have nothing to do with anything. It's a bit like presenting a John Singer Sargeant portrait in a chintzy Hallmark frame that says \"GRANDMA LOVES ME!\" in big sparkly letters.This movie seems to be a casualty of the director auteur's ego instead of what it could have been - disturbingly and horrifyingly beautiful. In another director's hands (Jeunet? Coppola?), it could have been a masterpiece. In Greenaway's hands, it's best relegated to fine arts classes that also take themselves too seriously.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcf630be55e942a99652691d716b73f1",
            "input": "i think the team behind this film did a very good job with the limitations they had. only £300,000 and 7 weeks to write, film and edit the whole thing which i think is an achievement in itself. although this film is not for the masses (as a young innocent teenage girl is killed and there is homo-eroticism involved in the story) i think that this film is a heart wrenching tragedy and the more deeply involved you get in the story, the more sadness you feel. more so towards Heaton because of the love he feels but is not returned.this is one of my favourite British films that i enjoyed very much and would watch again. i think that it's a shame that is film is not very well heard of at all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fda852d4532940cf860d2e6da8d2436f",
            "input": "Let's get some things straight first: Zombies don't exist so the filmmaker can have them WALK, RUN, hell even FLY if he wants to. That's what makes this original Zombie movie so good. Everything they did was so damn original. I hate it when filmmakers do everything like Romero or when fan boys expect everything like Romero. Some idiots think that zombies should only growl like a typical Romero movie, once again zombies don't exist so a filmmaker can make zombies whistle if he wants. The zombies in this movie all look very good but OBVIOUSLY they are not decaying corpses since they JUST freaking died! They are pretty messed up though and full of chopped faces and blood. One of the coolest scenes was a half eaten cat. It looked so damn real my daughter cried when she saw it. This movie got really good reviews in Fangoria and Rue Morgue so that made me want to go see it. I'm glad I listened. They are always right when it comes to real horror fan's tastes. 10 out of 10! Go rent it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e53a5537c7149b0914dd3a5e17e043c",
            "input": "A movie of outstanding brilliance and a poignant and unusual love story, the Luzhin Defence charts the intense attraction between an eccentric genius and a woman of beauty, depth and character.\tIt gives John Turturro what is probably his finest role to date (thank goodness they didn't give it to Ralph Fiennes, who would have murdered it.) Similarly, Emily Watson shows the wealth of her experience (from her outstanding background on the stage). To reach the tortured chess master (Turturro) her character has to display intelligence as well as a woman's love. Watson does not portray beauty-pageant sexuality, but she brings to her parts a self-awareness that is alluring.\tIn a chance meeting between Natalia (Watson) and Luzhin, she casually stops him from losing a chess piece that has fallen through a hole in his clothing - a specially crafted piece that, we realize later in the film, has come to symbolize his hopes and aspirations. Later, as their love affair develops, she subtly likens dancing to chess (Luzhin has learnt to dance but never with a partner); she encourages him to lead her with \"bold, brilliant moves\" and in doing so enables him to relax sufficiently to later play at his best (and also realize himself as her lover).\tThis is a story of a woman who inspires a man to his greatest achievement and, in so doing finds her own deepest fulfillment, emotionally and intellectually (Or so we are led to believe - certainly, within the time frame, Natalia is something of a liberated woman rather than someone who grooms herself to be a stereotypical wife and mother).\tThe Italian sets are stunning. The complexity of the characters and the skill with which the dialogue unfolds them is a delight to the intelligent movie-goer, yet the film is accessible enough to make it a popular mainstream hit, and most deservedly so. Chess is merely the photogenic backdrop for developing an emotional and emotive movie, although the game is treated with enough respect to almost convince a chess-player that the characters existed. Although a tragedy of remarkable heights by a classic author, the final denouement is nevertheless surprisingly uplifting.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8dc688ba42984d718fd0eacb6a5d9faa",
            "input": "A wonderful movie! Anyone growing up in an Italian family will definitely see themselves in these characters. A good family movie with sadness, humor, and very good acting from all. You will enjoy this movie!! We need more like it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83f6a07be281415db9c1e2d6cb608948",
            "input": "Angela Johnson (Pamela Springsteen--yes she's related to Bruce), the killer from the first film, is up to her old tricks again. She's one of the counselors at Camp Rolling Hills. As long as the girls at camp are nice and stay away from sex, drugs and swearing things are fine. But a few step over the line and Angela kills them--cracking bad jokes all the way.The original \"Sleepaway Camp\" was a vicious and nasty splatter film but had some good points to it. This is vicious and nasty too but has NO good points to it. The plot has been done to death and this adds NOTHING new to the formula. There are plenty of gory killings in here (people are burnt alive, heads are cut off, throats slashed) but all the gore is so obviously fake it actually become comical. This also has the smallest amount of campers I've ever seen and virtually everyone is far too old for their roles (especially Higgins). As expected there's the gratuitous female nudity (here provided by the tremendously untalented Valerie Hartman) and the obligatory good girl/good boy team (Renne Estevez and Tony Higgins). With the sole exception of Springsteen and Higgins the acting is lousy--even by slasher movie standards. There's also a cruel edge to this movie in which one character is drowned in an outhouse! Boring and sick with a stupid plot, pointless nudity and bad gore. Skip it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86fdba0b52444e6bbfb277609e554e19",
            "input": "(48 out of 278 people found this comment useful, and counting...)People are such suckers for image and looks - as much as for the intellectually hollow \"idealism\" that lurks behind Communism. Che's charisma and looks have as much to do with his iconic stature as the misinformation that has been spread by Leftist propaganda (such as this movie) about him.I don't know what's worse: being captured by one of Che's murder-squads or having to sit through 4 hours of this typically Soderberghian garbage. The question isn't why this pet-project was made but what took them so long. By \"them\" I'm referring, of course, to Left-wing Hollywood and its \"secret\" love of Marxist tyrants (Lenin, Castro... take your pick). I am fascinated that it took decades for one of Tinseltown's least talented liberal directors to finally take on such an irresistibly biased propaganda project. Where was Oliver Stone all these years? Robert Redford? Tim Robbins? Warren Beatty? Alan Pakula? George Clooney? Barbra Streisand even? It's a mystery. All these overrated \"artists\" have often indulging themselves in similar, politically one-sided projects, yet somehow Che Guevara, who is arguably the most popular and well-known Communist, hasn't been a film topic of theirs yet.\"Guerrilla\" has all the hallmarks of an American truth-bending story of an epic scale; there is as much factual detail to be found here as in other similar Hollywood big-budget political fairy-tale bios such as \"Malcolm X\" or \"Gandhi\", i.e. almost none. The movie stars Del Toro as the famous Argentinian revolutionary. Nevertheless, however controversial and criminal this man's actions may have been, one thing nobody could take away from him: he was an intelligent manipulator who came from a rich family - which is why Del Toro fits the bill only visually. Del Toro may be an interesting, charismatic actor and he may resemble Guevara physically, but he exudes no intellectual qualities whatsoever, hence he makes Guevara come off as too primitive. Casting such mediocrities as Bratt, Philips and Franka Incompetente only underlines the director's lack of sound judgment.The movie is to the most part extremely slow (no surprise there), and visually uninteresting. Even a director as brilliant as Kubrick would have carefully considered releasing a movie that goes beyond the 3-hour mark, so it's quite telling that this Soderbergh, who has only made one or two solid movies and early on in his career, would think that His Oceanic Grandness was up to the task. If you think the film's length indicates that a bulk of Che's life has been shown here - then think again. Soderbergh focuses on Che's last phase, and a lot of the movie is tedious jungle nonsense, full of Guevara's alleged idealism. (Psychopaths don't have ideals.) I do wonder what kind of a mind this highly esteemed director has to have to actually choose to ignore some of Che's earlier life. Did he actually consider it too uninteresting? A massacre of 600 people holds no interest for the viewer, huh? Amazing. Some much better directors than this over-praised charlatan would have easily fit not one but two complete biographies into a 4-hour movie.Soderbergh, in a sense, becomes an accomplice by never addressing the negative, dark side - which is more than 90% - of Guevara. By spreading this kind of historical inaccuracy, consciously ignoring the ugly truth (God forbid he should taint the holy image of Che), Soderbergh proves himself not a humanist - a fake image which most Hollywood and pop music personalities struggle very hard all their careers to uphold - but the opposite: that he cares only about ideas, never about the people on whom these ideas are tested (like on guinea pigs). Soderbergh and the like are elitists of the worst kind; such people often have a latent contempt for the \"proleteriat\" (what a stupid term) they're supposedly siding with.Half of all students around the world wear Che's image on their red and orange shirts, but without ever knowing why. He has become an iconic figure for clueless, uninformed, very often young people, who think that by having this man's face on their chest that somehow makes them appear \"edgy\", intellectual, hip or interesting. In reality, wearing a Che shirt only underlines one's overall shallowness and total disinterest in self-education. (Wouldn't YOU want to find out more about a person before you start advertising his/her face to the world?) Wearing Che's by-now cliché image has become as common as having a Bart Simpson coffee cup. All those \"Che-wearers\" probably know more about Marge's blue hair than they'll ever read up on about Fidel Castro's dead ally.After everything that'd been done in the name of Marx, one would think that these mongrel \"ideals\" would be finally laid to rest. It seems mankind will never learn. Stalin, Mao, Kim Il, Pol Pot, Castro, Milosevic, Ceausescu, the Iron Curtain, a hundred million dead, more than a billion ruined physically and/or mentally through this system... so none of that matters, huh? The fact that Del Toro won a Cannes Award should only surprise those who are absolutely clueless as to how Cannes and other European festivals work - and vote. Hint: Sean Penn headed a jury not long ago.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8db0f05e3324541be235607951a4fd4",
            "input": "Unfortunately, in cases such as these, there are so many conflicting stories as everyone tries to cast blame on to others that it is a near impossibility to get a clear picture of what really happened. This movie is a victim of such circumstances. The writers (too many of them) have decided to take ALL of the stories and give them to the audience to let them decide which version of the truth they like the best. As in the real life case, there is no clear answer, no conclusion, and the audience is left with a general felling of being unfulfilled (like coffee without the caffeine, or sex without the climax). Whodunnits with no whodunnit are generally frustrating and makes you wonder why someone didn't do research before they put it out there. At least tout your movie as a fiction if that is what it amounts to (and this does).That is not to say there are not some great performances here. Kilmer (as Holmes) does an outstanding role bringing some humanity to what is otherwise an unsavory character. Kilmer, and the real life lovers and friends who consulted on the film, let the audience see a selfish, troubled human being who, though his faults were many and large, was loved and cared for by many people (except himself). Kudrow as Holmes's wife, only gives a glimmer of the dramatic actress she can be, but it is very noticeable and unforgettable glimmer. Bosworth's character was not as emotionally complex as she could have been and needed to show more inner conflict to give credence to what ultimately happened between Dawn and Holmes (she turned him in 6 months after they fled to Florida). Bosworth's apple-cheeked performance is at time annoying, at times touching, but shows none of the backbone the real Schiller must have possessed. The other characters fade in to the woodwork which is a pity. Lucas is a great performer who could have sunk his teeth in to this role had it been fleshed out for him. Even Dylan McDermott was surprisingly capable in his role of drug dealing biker. The fault of this movie does not lie with this cast, but with the writing. Too many cooks spoil the soup, and this kettle, filled with so much promise, ultimately leaves you hungry. The story and characters may have been less than sympathetic, but in what movie of this ilk are they not so? Other movies such as 1989's drugstore cowboy starring Matt Dillon (who was reportedly asked to take this role and refused) worked with similar subject matter and mastered it to such a degree that you felt a kinship with the main character by the end of the movie despite what he had done. Van Sandt could have given James Cox and his crew a few lessons. Had someone bothered to try and find the truth, this would have been an intriguing story. As it is, you will find the accompanying WADD documentary more palatable (in the 2 disc DVD)and much more informative. You will realize from the DVD that Holmes was not a bad guy, but not a very good one either..as are most people.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d859f90c7ef4c978a38bb0680b0264d",
            "input": "\"Women? They're all scrubbers...!\" No, not a good translation; not at all! This lags behind the previous year's \"Dad's Army\", entirely missing the special, small-screen magic of the seminal television sitcom original, and failing to play interestingly at all with the big screen... you could just about say that this film well represents a Britain entering decline, and more precisely even than that, a *British film industry* entering decline. And that is hardly a recommendation, is it? To be an exemplar of saddening folly...All that remains after the subtlety of the TV original has been surgically stripped away, by Cliff Owen, Galton and Simpson are: endless, dilapidated musical cues, yawn, from the Ron Grainer theme... bolstered sentimentality (that shoddy, thick-eared ending... how much bolder does the second Steptoe film seem in comparison) an increased seediness - with director and writers seemingly detaching themselves completely - fully applicable to something like the 'misbegotten monstrosity' (yours truly on this site) from 1973, \"The Mutations\". There is a strangely botched, cut-adrift tone about the scene where Harold is beaten up in a rugby club, that I partly hate and recoil it (so far, as a friend intimated, from the mood of the TV series...), but this at least seems an original slant, and emblematic of tensions just rising to the boil in the Britain of 1972... There is, however, an implied prostitute, aye of a 'heart-of-gold' who turns loose woman-traitor 'pon poor auld 'Arold - and beyond-caricature writing of the 'class' element; not to mention, surprisingly misjudged performances from the usually redoubtable leads. Brambell and Corbett collude with the script, and indeed fail to cure it of an essential ham. What would Anthony Aloysius Hancock have made of it all...? I will merely concede that a few moments just about work - chiefly those where G & S play things a little more carefully and B & C touch tenderer nerves - and it is not on the whole an unwatchable affair. But, and oh, how this pains me to say it: it is tiresome, boring, both wilfully detached from reality and what made the TV series great, and also fully in tune with the lazy, tawdry, misogynist 'fuck it, that'll do...' actuality of much of what was allowed to pass for mainstream film-making in the Britain of the time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d8794dae6a84ee0a07bd877b7a5d959",
            "input": "This was the first Ewan McGregor movie I ever saw outside of Star Wars. Since then I have become a very big Ewan McGregor fan but I still can't bring myself to forgive this movie's existence.My sister has always been a huge Jane Austen fan and because of that, I have been subjected to various of the classics, Emma being one of them. I've always considered them irritating, stupid and boring. However, after watching this terrible rendition, I was forced to admit that the original Emma was delightful and charming. Ewan McGregor scarcely serves a purpose in this film after they hacked and mutilated the part of Frank Churchill. Gweneth Paltrow is ridiculous in an already ridiculous character and the rest of the film is unremarkable and stupid.My recommendation to anybody who is remotely interested in English period drama... go see the originals. If you're a Ewan McGregor fan... believe me, by skipping this film, you haven't missed anything but five minutes collective of him in a silly hat and a bad haircut.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92b7cfd9891a48f6913cc9936df0560c",
            "input": "Ingrid Bergman is a temporarily impoverished Polish countess in 1900s Paris who finds herself pursued by France's most popular general and a glamorous count -- and that's on top of being engaged to a shoe magnate. Such is the failproof premise that entrains one of the most delirious plots in movie history. There are backroom political machinations by the general's handlers, a downed balloonist and ecstatic Bastille Day throngs, but the heart of this gorgeously photographed film is the frantic upstairs/downstairs intrigues involving randy servants and only slightly more restrained aristocrats. Yes, it's Rules of the Game redux. Before it's all over even Gaston Modot, the jealous gamekeeper in Rules, puts in an appearance -- as a gypsy capo, no less! Things happen a little too thick and fast toward the end, resulting in some confusion for this non-French speaker, but what the heck -- Elena and Her Men is another deeply humane Renoir masterpiece.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b9ecabfb6554363b0ddbcb2a5c050fc",
            "input": "Everyone else who has commented negatively about this film have done excellent analysis as to why this film is so bloody awful. I wasn't going to comment, but the film just bugs me so much, and the writer/director in particular. So I must toss in my hat to join the naysayers.I saw the original \"Wicker Man\" and really loved the cornucopia of music, sensuality, paganism in a modern world, and the clash of theological beliefs. This said, I am not part of the crowd that thinks remakes of great movies shouldn't be done. For example, I liked the original 1950's \"Invasion of the Body Snatchers\", but equally enjoyed the 1978 remake. Both films can stand on their own. Another example is \"The Thing\". The original, as campy as it looks compared to today's standards, has a lot to be proud of in the 1982 remake with Kurt Russell (my all time favorite horror movie). So that small minority of people who like \"The Wicker Man\" re-make can not accuse me of dissing this piece of crap just because it's a re-make.This film solidified for me Neil LaBute's sexism and misogynistic tendencies. It also made me wonder how executives, wanting to make a serious thriller, would green light a product that is so anti-female. There are too many scenes of Cage hitting women just because he's frustrated with them thwarting his investigation of a missing girl. would he react like this off the island in other cases where suspects aren't forthcoming? The original created a society in which men and women are equal participants in a Goddess based religion. The threat to the main character came from everyone, male and female. There was no sexual hierarchy.The metaphor of bees, drones etc was a bit heavy handed and convenient (\"The drone must die!\"), especially when Cage's character has bee allergies. I kept wondering why the men on the island didn't fight back and use mere physicality to stop these women from treating them like grunts. These were not women with special supernatural powers, and half of them seemed to be pregnant, the other half old and fat, and the rest girls and thin blonde waifs, so if the men really wanted to escape they could do what most men do when they hate women. Physically dominate them. There didn't seem to be any guns or weapons beyond cutting tools to hold them if they were unhappy. But if they were content being drones, why make them unable to speak? They could be used as a threat to Cage because they will defend the community. They are drones because Neil LaBute seems to believe that a society ran by women would leave men castrated. (That movie was made already. \"The Stepford Wives\" anyone?) Classic symptoms from men who are afraid of what may happen if women got their sh*t together and were truly equal citizens.The problem with the man-hating female society is that it makes uninteresting movie viewing and creates unintentional humor when Cage starts knocking women out. I belief LaBute should've left the society an egalitarian one, kept the sexuality and uninhibited lasciviousness, and pushed buttons of discomfort in regards to the children on that island. No one likes pedophiles or children to be sexually exploited. So how would a cop react if he saw lewd acts performed by adults with children around? There would be a logical mental leap that these children are abused, thus, an urgency created to save the missing child and get help for all the children. LaBute has said he created the fiancé and daughter story thread to give Cage's character an incentive to search. I don't think you need that. Any child abused will make an adult react to save them. The irony of course would be that the child Cage \"saves\" ultimately brings him death.The dialogue was contrived and campy. The whole third act was hilarious. The audience I saw it with guffawed (and later booed at the end). I just thought the movie started off wrong when the letter arrived written in the fancy handwriting and all the flashbacks cutting into to show how wounded Cage is. We don't need that. Just show him arriving on the island for an investigation of a missing child. Most of us in America have seen \"Law & Order\" and other cop procedurals. We come into the movie as if we are Cage's partner solving a mystery.So much potential...wasted. Neil LaBute, stick to talking head pictures for people who enjoy your male angst-ridden plays and flicks of that sort. Stay with your own company of men. Leave the thrillers for people who understand thrillers. Here is your jar of honey. I'll watch that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02bc0df2b90c4088a64ae4482152b002",
            "input": "This is what the musical genre was made of. Humor, talent, romance, and action all rolled into one.Frank Sinatra was wonderful. Nothing else needs to be said. Marlon Brando, although not a singer, did a great job winning the hearts of many with his portrayal of Sky Masterson. The fact that he couldn't sing added to his character. The ladies in the film were alright, but the men in the movie definitely stole the show.It is a true classic that can be appreciated at any age. It connects with all audiences and makes you smile and laugh.Definitely a movie to be watched and enjoyed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb3e3e3e097d451d93bd95e9b8120ec4",
            "input": "Simply put, Oliver! is one of the greatest musicals of all time. It is filled with memorable songs - \"Food Glorious Food\", \"Oliver!\", \"Consider Yourself\" and \"Oom-Pah-Pah\" to name just a few - and equally memorable characters.The film is a musical adaptation of Charles Dickens' classic novel and much like the story of Oliver Twist itself, it is a perfect family film. There are some frightening moments - the villain Bill Sykes played by Oliver Reed is scary enough on his own - but overall, the film will appeal to children of all ages as well as adults.The story - which almost everyone is surely familiar with by now - revolves around a little orphan boy named Oliver and his life growing up in London. At first he lives in the workhouse with the rest of his fellow orphans but after daring to question Mr. Bumble, the overseer, he is sold to a family as a servant.After a series of mishaps and close shaves, he meets the Artful Dodger - superbly played by a young Jack Wild, who gives his all in the role - and through him, the greedy Fagin (Ron Moody), who trains young boys to pick pocket treasures which he keeps for himself.The film was shot solely in studios and on soundstages at Shepperton Film Studios but this does not translate at all to film. The sets perfectly replicate Victorian London, as do the costumes worn by the characters. A multi-Oscar winner and a massive success on its release, Oliver! is a worthy contender for the best musical all of time and will delight anyone who loves film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe718aab5b6c47ca8fe296cc69120be7",
            "input": "Witty. Quirky. Genuine. Surreal. Butterfly wings? One could ask what all of these words best describe, and some (those in fuse with the international film community) may quickly say Happenstance, but others may jump aboard the more American train and immediately yell, The Butterfly Effect. Strangely, I would be one of those screaming for that sci-fi Kutcher film mainly because none of those words that I initially mentioned at the start of this paragraph accurately depicts the Tautou feature that I witnessed. Sure, we all loved her in Amelie and thought she was the daughter of Jesus in The Da Vinci Code, but in this film first-time director (of a feature film at least) Laurent Firode doesn't give Tautou the opportunity to shine. Sadly, he gives nobody the opportunity to really demonstrate themselves because he is too delicately caught up in the moments of \"random chance\" to bring this film to anything but just a shimmer (never a true boil). Firode has ample, and I use \"ample\" as a small word, moments throughout this film where he could have built us a fantastical story, a genuinely whimsical fairy-tale of love and coincidence, but instead he fell face-first into a mud-bucket of chaotic intertwining that overwhelmed us with inconsistent characters and a story that left us gasping for less.Tautou's beautiful face adorns the cover of this box, but do not be so taken immediately as I did in assuming that this was going to be another monumental journey into Tautou's French cinema. Tautou is in this film, do not get me wrong, but one could argue that she is not at the center of this story. Firode's job is to create a series of random events that eventually will lead to an audience friendly (albeit confusing) ending which exemplifies that meaning of refreshing \"melodrama\". He utterly, utterly fails. Firode fails by giving us, the audience, too many characters. With too many characters he gives us too many random interventions, and by the end you don't really care who is who, or what is what, or how is how; your main focus happens to be centered solely on the ending credits and the time destination of their arrival. Tautou could have saved this film from the disaster it was if only Firode would have given her the center. Alas, he did not, but attempted to seemingly force a group of 12 through a theoretical film hole about the size of a penny. It just didn't work and we were left with a jam in which we were completely stuck.Firode fails because he focus' so intently on the minor details that, for one of those rare film occurrences, he actually forgets the central focus. I can say that there was no defined central focus to Happenstance. In the beginning he attempts to create one with our two supposed main characters discovering that they share the same birthday and their horoscope promises love by the moonlight, but we never go back to that throughout the film. Instead, again, we are bombarded with new characters, stuffy scenes, and meaningless drivel obviously chosen to direct us away from an actual story and more into a world full of \"ifs, ands, and buts\". I couldn't do it. I couldn't believe this film. Writer Firode (yes, the same guy directing this garbage) uses a technique so primitive in this film that I immediately felt like ending it immediately. He must have been assuming that many of us were incapable of actually following the storyline (or the scientific premise) because he grabs the aid of a homeless person to actually fill in the respective blanks. I didn't need this, nor do I think Firode needed to belittle his audience in this matter. While there were other elements that just didn't seem to work for me at all (again, felt like a jumbled Parisian collage of shredded paper), this was the icing on the cake. I don't need my hand held through films.I will give this film one star for credit. This is a rather difficult genre to master successfully. Time travel films are especially hard because of the innumerable amounts of possibilities that are never accounted for, but with Happenstance it works because Firode semi-explores the different avenues. While I will counter with saying that he does not do it well, it did make for at least five full minutes of enjoyment. I liked where Firode was headed with this film, he had a genuinely diagramed story, but the final execution just blew this film to shreds. Firode could have saved this film if he would have strengthened his characters, while lightening up his premise and story. I think my overall mood of this film would have changed if just these two simple directions were taken. Oh, how I only wish I could time travel back to the production of this film to show Firode the errors of his ways.Overall, for the first time (and probably last), this was a Tautou film that I must say utterly disappointed me. From the choppy opening to the apathetic ending, I just felt that Happenstance failed due to Firode's leadership and horrid marketing. Marketing is something that I didn't mention before, but why would anyone purchase this film thinking that it was an Amelie 2 (per the title released in Hong Kong), and why would you place Tautou squarely on the cover knowing full well that she wasn't carrying this film at all. I believe that from the first minute that passed on my DVD player, this film was in shambles. While I will applaud his subject, everything else was well below the level of mediocrity. I cannot suggest this film to anyone.Grade: * out of *****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc33db0b795748e99e33b2fd4e7e82da",
            "input": "And that comes from someone that will withstand almost ANY viewing. The acting and sound is awful. This might qualify for a \"so bad it's good\" point of merit,,,for some. However I take my horror movies seriously and this is just crap-it's just soooo cheap, I think that's my major complaint. The dialogue is often hilarious-attention to how many times \"you startled me\" is used. The \"child\" actress is seriously god awful-I pray her acting career ended here..her line \"DONUTS! I HATE DONUTS\" is worth repeated viewing however.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b4a7e7c38ae4ab68403c12a963427e8",
            "input": "Who? What? Where? When? Why? The acting was terrible. Very robotic, rehearsed. I have seen all of the actors in this film in better roles. The screenplay was very elementary. By the end of this film, the story line was tied up. And Jeane Claude LaMarre should be tied up, too. So that he never attempts to write/direct another film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c48339d30bb246879d6c3b7c273ee42f",
            "input": "I've just returned from a showing of \"My Left Foot\" at our public library. What an emotional experience -- I feel drained and uplifted.It's the story of Christy Brown, Irish writer and painter, and based on the author's autobiographical \"My Left Foot.\" Christy was born with a form of cerebral palsy such that the only limb he had good control of was his left foot. Doctors advised his parents he was hopelessly mentally retarded but his mother didn't give up on him and, somewhat as Annie Sullivan had done with Helen Keller, helped him achieve a breakthrough in which he learned the alphabet and then to read, write, and paint.This film won Academy Awards for Daniel Day-Lewis (best actor) as well as best supporting actress for the actress playing his mother; it also received Oscar nominations for best picture, best director, and best adapted screenplay.As a retired clinical psychologist and family therapist, while many films may entertain me, many also often leave me having to overlook gross fictions or improbabilities in realistic psychological reactions.Not this film--it was absolutely \"spot on\" in portraying typical Irish parental roles & behaviors (see, e.g., see typical Irish families in McGoldrick's \"Ethnicity & Family Therapy\") as well Christy Brown's uneven emotional maturation--some immature personality reactions that were even further amplified by his picking up traits of his father.The film presents the greater truth while changing certain sequences in his development (painting & writing) and condensing several important people into one person, for the sake of telling a coherent, believable story, not burdened by small, distracting, less important actualities. (See Christy Brown in Wikipedia for more accuracy.) The DVD version we were shown had some English subtitles that were a great help in understanding Christy's speech (& some of the Irish speech); the initial release of the film may have lacked this. (If you see this on DVD, enable that option.)The performance by Daniel Day-Lewis is one of the greatest, believable acting jobs I've ever seen. Truly magnificent, outstanding, superlative.\"My Left Foot\" bears more than some similarity to a more recent film, \"The Diving Bell & the Butterfly,\" in that each portrays the life of a real person successfully surmounting the imprisonment and isolation of an extremely severe physical handicap.And in doing so, it resonates with William Ernest Henley's \"Invictus\" which begins: \"Out of the night that covers me,//Black as the Pit from pole to pole,//I thank whatever gods may be//For my unconquerable soul.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e49097add5fd48b186622c105b89cca5",
            "input": "Probably Bigas Luna's finest achievement for it achieves a delicate balance between sleaze, eroticism and surrealism. The delicious Mathilda May, who spent most of Tobe Hooper's \"Lifeforce\" in the buff, is the object of young Biel Duran's pre-teen lust. He can't get May's breasts out of his mind and wants so badly to suckle them and suckle the breasts of his own mother, too. His pursuit of May IS the film. As in Luna works such as \"Lulu\" and \"Jamon! Jamon!\", the director brings a slightly warped sexual sensibility to his strange but beautiful tale. The usual suspects will be offended, but those with open minds will enjoy this frothy erotic poem to the female breast. José Luis Alcaine's images are gorgeous and Nicola Piovani's score is sweet and rich. A gorgeous cinematic confection with a delightfully anarchic sensibility that the Spanish do so naturally.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7db9b56464794d1b900f4caa135bbeff",
            "input": "If any movie stands out extremely with the actors' acting skills, this is probably the one. I've never seen dialogues be spoken in such a rough way, but having a strong feeling. The movie was disturbing at moments. However, the movie was terrible at editing. The movie tries to go the commercial way by adding comedy and songs, yet they feel out of place. Like Karisma is getting beat up, and the same time SRK is fighting (comically) with the police officers. The Ishq Kamina song was very out of place. On top of that, the movie is overly glossy in the beginning. The direction was not bad, but certainly nothing one can brag about.I have to say that the actors' were chosen very wisely. Without them, this movie would not have an impact. Karisma Kapoor has given her best role to date, and this looks very good on her record after Zubeidaa and Fiza. She looks pretty in the first half, and I've never seen an actress scream of emotion and anger as well as her. What is most ironic is this is probably her weakest written role to date. Nana Patekar was excellent as her father-in-law. Not much to say about him, besides this is a role made for him. Deepti Naval as the mother-in-law was excellent especially in her final scene. Though she doesn't have much to say, her facial expressions and body language was good. The other good performance was the little kid. He was adorable, and is sure to bring tears to the viewer's eyes. The movie was probably saved desperately by their performances. Sanjay Kapoor was all right, but he didn't have much to do. Shahrukh Khan was wasted in his bad boyish type role. One thing that brought the audience to the theater was Ishq Kamina. The song picturization and dancing is perfect for the crude lyrics of the song. And boy Aish is mad hot. However, the song belonged to be in another movie only because it came at the worst moment ever. People may have come to the movie for Aish, but they won't brag too much about it after-wards. Hum Tum Miley was properly paced, but seemed to drag as the suspense mood was leaving throughout the movie. Damroo Bhaje was boring and nothing to rave about. Dil Ne Pukara is too boring of a song to get the mood of the movie. Despite the poor editing, the performances alone make it a must see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b33324681a24c0e91daad705283f821",
            "input": "Plot Synopsis: When his wife, a news reporter, is kidnapped & replaced with an android double, Secret Service agent Eric Phillips tracks her down & uncovers a plan by an arms dealer to create an army of invincible androids to assassinate world leaders.I wasn't expecting much when I first saw this sequel to Richard Pepin's low-budget sci-fi / action hybrid \"Cyber Tracker\". That film was nothing special, not to mention a blatant rip-off of both \"The Terminator\" & \"RoboCop\". This sequel is the same as before, with an all-out action sequence opening the film. There are plenty of explosions, heavy gunfire & a huge bodycount, as well as some martial-arts moves courtesy of the film's star, Don \"The Dragon\" Wilson. The whole film seems like a series of action scenes strung together with minimal plot. On the acting front, Wilson is a bad actor. He really needs a personality transplant.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea068b233837444aa3d9952dbddc4344",
            "input": "I gave it an 8 star rating. The story may have fallen short about 3/4 of the way into the picture but the performances remained strong throughout.\"Men of Honor\" was changed from \"Navy Diver\" understandably so. Anyone who has served in any branch of the armed forces will probably feel that \"Honor\" is an appropriate word to use in the title.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-510c31e0cdcd4f40806462a2cf14282c",
            "input": "While this movie's style isn't as understated and realistic as a sound version probably would have been, this is still a very good film. In fact, it was seen as an excellent film in its day, as it was nominated for the first Best Picture Oscar (losing to WINGS). I still consider WINGS to be a superior film, but this one is excellent despite a little bit of overacting by the lead, Emil Jannings.Jannings is a general from Czarist Russia who is living out his final days making a few bucks in the 1920s by being a Hollywood extra. His luck appears to have changed as he gets a casting call--to play an Imperial Russian general fighting against the Communists during the revolution. Naturally this isn't much of a stretch acting-wise, but it also gets the old man to thinking about the old days and the revolution.Exactly what happens next I'll leave to you, but it's a pretty good film--particularly at the end. By the way, look for William Powell as the Russian director. Despite being made in 1928, with the makeup he doesn't look much younger than he did in many of his later films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ebaa4ab16fa4cd8bf259c7c2c00239a",
            "input": "I am currently sitting here, forcing myself to finish this. I figure I blew 6 bux on the VHS, might as well suffer for it. I remember about 4 or 5 years ago doing a search on the internet for \"War of the Worlds\" cause of the rumors of the Spielberg movie at the time, and I missed the old TV series from the early 90's. The website make it out that this was a multi-million dollar budget rendition of the classic book. It was going to be a \"perfect translation\". Perfect CRAP is more in tune with this film.First off, the video on this movie was glitched! It looked as if I was watching the Full Motion Video from an old mid-90's PC or Playstation CD-Rom video game. Sadly enough, the color quality was similar. The acting made Shatners classic \"dramatic pause\" look damn near Shakespearean in quality. The CG rendering of various scenes was horrendous, and green screen sequences were worse than those seen in old Dukes of Hazardd scenes.Secondly, it is slow and terribly drawn out. I sat thru 45 minutes of the video (no promo's at the beginning) before the cylinder actually Opened to reveal the first alien. After that, the alien was a terribly constructed CG squid. I am now an hour into it and the most of the alien weaponry I have seen is a spinning silver disk (crappy down even) attached to a mechanical arm. The dramatic scenes are murdered with overly done instrumental's. The last thing on that, for an alien invasion in the turn of the century 1900's NO ONE is concerned for their life. It's like they have no concept. Even though media was slow, word of mouth spreads fast and people would have known. The \"illusion\" of day and night was shoddy at best. Simply changing the color around the people to purple, blue or green does not signify NIGHT TIME. Perhaps some lighting and actual night time shoots would have given a MUCH better illusion. THere is a lot of wasted sequences throughout the film of just watching the \"hero\" gallop around or walk down silly roads. Get on with the film. I know how people get around, you do NOT need to be so in-depth.Now, finally an hour and 5 minutes into the film and they show the alien machines. Mighty Morphin Power Rangers had better looking effects. Even the skeletons of vaporized humans looked as if animated by a freshman high school computer app class student. The animations do NOT match up to the scenery at all.In closing folks, if you want \"The War of the Worlds\", do one of four things. 1) Watch the 1953 original, 2) watch the early 90's TV series, 3) wait for Spielberg's rendition to be released shortly, OR 4) Read the frikkin book (something we all probably did in elementary English class). AVOID THIS MOVIE. IT IS A WASTE OF YOUR MONEY.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06efd86fe4124720869f22d705604d16",
            "input": "This movie is a mess. I'm surprised it even has a theatrical release. WIthout Robin Williams it would have gone straight to video. It is poorly written. It is poorly directed. It's worse offense is that it has taken an interesting topic and reduced it to a ridiculous and BORING thriller that has no thrills and no suspense and no inner or emotional logic.Especially after the first half hour the movie dovetails into a series of ridiculous set pieces that are so over the top that the audience I saw it with was laughing at it. Save your money. The trailer is totally misleading - it is not suspenseful and there are no thrills - in fact the movie's truly worst offense is that it is simply boring.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df0f440473604fdb9858c19d1ff5fcf1",
            "input": "Although I have enjoyed Bing Crosby in other movies, I find this movie to be particularly grating. Maybe because I'm from a different era and a different country, but I found Crosby's continual references to the Good Old USA pleasant at first, trite after a while and then finally annoying. Don't get me wrong - I'm not anti-American whatsoever - but it seemed that the English could do no right and/or needed this brave, oh so smart American visitor to show them the way. It's a \"fish out of water\" story, but unlike most movies of this sort, this time it's the \"fish\" who has the upper hand. To be fair to both myself and the movie, I have watched it a few times spaced over a few years and get the same impression each time.(I watched another Crosby movie last night - The Emperor's Waltz - and that, too, produced the same reaction in me. And to my surprise even my wife - who for what's it's worth is American - found the \"in your face\" attitude of American Crosby to be irritating. One too many references to Teddy Roosevelt, as she put it.) As for the premise of the movie, it's unique enough for its day and the supporting cast is of course very good. The scenery and the music is also good, as are the great costumes - although I agree with a previous reviewer that the wig on William Bendix looks horrid (picture Moe of The Three Stooges).All in all for me this would be a much more enjoyable picture without the attitude of Bing Crosby but because he is in virtually every shot it's pretty hard to sit through this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-467d16c50a3545caab09efadc0450c93",
            "input": "It is nice to see the likes of Oliver Stone, Brian DePalma, Al Pacino, and even Michelle Pfiefer make one monumental piece of cinematic garbage. It is nice to see people so rich and 'successful' wasting their time on one of the most forgettable, trite, and pathetic pieces of film-making of all time. This movie represents the worst of Hollywood.What is this? Is it based on a true story. Well, they do start with some basic news bites and facts that they read off USA today. But then the movie departs to some fantasy world and a 'cuban' refugee going to make it in the American drug subculture; kind of like Rocky on cocaine. Is it a movie about Cuba or Cubans? For the life of me I don't believe there is a single Cuban in this movie. The accents are totally fake, and scene with Antonio's mother looks like a poster for midwest American values. The whole scene looks like something out of the Dick Van Dyke show. Is this movie about Miami? It looks more like L.A. transposed in Florida. Afterall, a palm tree is a palm tree. Is this a romance novel. The relationship between Pacino and Pfeiffer is so obvious from the getgo, and there is not one shred of possibility that these two characters could ever care for each other. Is this a drug movie? Well, no issues of obsession or addiction are even mentioned. The behavior of the actors after a line of coke is nothing different than had they had a drink of water. Admittedly, the acting is terrible.Let's get to the rest. The music is disgusting and sounds like latin elevator music or something out of a Lawrence Welk show. I think I heard a polka? The camera work is shoddy with too much movement and far more cranes than could ever be effective. Clearly, the photography budget was excessive. The sound is bleached in a number of spots, and the dialogue seems to be carried out in a warehouse. The writing is appalling. This is one of those movies were the script writes itself. You are dragged from one trite piece of dialogue to the next, each pushing the plot like a sack of bricks.So I am going to ask, Is this even a movie? It could be a drama series patched together for two and a half hours. But at least a drama series has some kind of focus. Maybe it is just a bunch of poorly acted scenes taped together. Whatever it is, movie or not, it is a piece of crap.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da588687edfb47cc8a5148f4f36c11a7",
            "input": "I saw this recent Woody Allen film because I'm a fan of his work and I make it a point to try to see everything he does, though the reviews of this film led me to expect a disappointing effort. They were right. This is a confused movie that can't decide whether it wants to be a comedy, a romantic fantasy, or a drama about female mid-life crisis. It fails at all three.Alice (Mia Farrow) is a restless middle aged woman who has married into great wealth and leads a life of aimless luxury with her rather boring husband and their two small children. This rather mundane plot concept is livened up with such implausibilities as an old Chinese folk healer who makes her invisible with some magic herbs, and the ghost of a former lover (with whom she flies over Manhattan). If these additions sound too fantastic for you, how about something more prosaic, like an affair with a saxophone player?I was never quite sure of what this mixed up muddle was trying to say. There are only a handful of truly funny moments in the film, and the endingis a really preposterous touch of Pollyanna.Rent 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' instead, a superbly well-done film that suceeds in combining comedy with a serious consideration of ethics and morals. Or go back to \"Annie Hall\" or \"Manhattan\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-349632bcbbf74ac6bbc1f1e82bfda2cf",
            "input": "This movie stars Jay Leno as a Detroit cop, Tony Costas and Pat Morita as a Tokyo cop sent to Detroit to retrieve a stolen prototype of a car motor. A Japanese man traveled to Detroit hoping to sell it to a up and coming car company ran by a man named Derrick Jarryd. Unfortunately for him the men who were supposed to negotiate the deal killed him and took the prototype. An angry Derek Jarryd tries to distance himself from Phillip Madras who led the men. But Madras(played by Chris Sarandon) has none of it and threatens Jarryd forcing him to continue their partnership. Meanwhile in the same junk yard where the Japanese man had been killed, a friend of Tony Costas was also killed by the same men. Tony's friend had been watching the junk yard.Tony sets out to find the killer against his superior's order. Tony is on robbery while obviously homicide should investigate the case. While Tony is investigating the crime he runs into the Japanese cop and mistakingly he arrests him. Eventually they end up working together on the case. They make an odd pair and there are some genuinely amusing parts as well as some ridiculous scenes such as Pat Morita jumping and kicking right through a the windshield of a moving car and kicking Madras in the head. But it ends up being an enjoyable buddy cop movie, at least in my opinion. Jay Leno is no actor, but he is likable in the role and Pat Morita is good as well. Still, they make for one of the more unlikely buddy cop duos in an action film. If you liked buddy cop films, cheesy 80's movies or you want to see Jay Leno as an actor then I recommend this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-24114b5c7eab4cafbffdce01f77414df",
            "input": "I am a VERY big Jim Carrey fan. I laughed my ASS off during Liar Liar and Ace Ventura. I also like him in his serious movies, especially Truman Show. This one is a cross between his VERY funny side, and his serious side. He is of course VERY funny in this movie, but there are parts that are very serious, and he pulls it off with a lot of ease. he is truely a multi-function actor.As for the rest of the cast, I was happy with Jennifer Aniston's acting. I think she is more than just a couple of nice tits and great ass. Morgan Freeman makes a VERY cool God. As for Steven Carell, his limited scenes are VERY funny, especially in the anchor scene.Overall, I would have to rate this a 9. Good acting, funny script, and some very serious situations make this a very good film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec5b7a939ce24ca28067a4e9b35578ca",
            "input": "Thanks to some infamous home video distributor who brought in the so called German Independent Series, Four For Venice is not only awful, but really awful. So awful, that i have it dumped at the second hand goods store for extra cash.Nick and Charlotte is a married couple who reached an agreement of having sex only on Tuesday due to their hectic schedule of their profession. Eva and Luis is a pair of couple living from hand to mouth, where Eva works as a waitress and Luis, an artist. Nick indirectly causes Eva to lose her job as an waitress. Luis and Charlotte had an affair at the back of Eva and Nick. Luis cheated on Eva by lying to her that he would be flying off to London to do something related to his artwork, but the fact is, he is flying off to Venice with Charlotte for an adultery holiday. Eva kidnapped Nick and dragged her 2 kids along to Venice for confrontation. The trip to Venice ends up both Nick and Eva falling for one another.The presentation of the journey from Germany to Venice between Nick and Eva marks the failure of the comedy. It not only look senseless, but also draggy. In the film, Nick try to seek help for several ways, but it ends to no avail. It is either the strangers around him who acts like morons, or they are just simply dumb.The comedy also had the tendency to add in unnecessary scenes to lengthen the story. While some of the problems that can be solved with common sense, no one in the film are using common sense to solve the problem. They prefer to go through one big round to solve the problem.It fails so bad, that even the beautiful sceneries in Venice fails to pull up the reputation of the film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1330588a81de47bfbc67700ca7c3d785",
            "input": "Back in 2004 I saw \"True\", Tom Tykwer's contribution to Paris Je T'aime. When I saw it I loved it and became thrilled. It became my favorite short film and made me appreciate the format so much. Of course I wanted to watch the whole film, and I would even check who was attached, etc.Yesterday I finally saw it, courtesy of the internet.First of all I must say that it looks AWESOME. The photography is BEAUTIFUL in every short and shot, at the worst being nothing special - but still brilliant and clear. Later I read the trivia here, and maybe it's how scanning in 6K gives more justice to all the DP's work. My special favorites are the \"Quais de Seine\" first scene (that sunlight!), the Sin City-esquire (but better for me) \"Quartier de la Madeleine\", and \"14th Arrondisement\" - but you know, what the hell I like them all: \"True\" or \"Faubourg Saint-Denis\" still makes me nervous with those brilliant colours (my eyes, they tremble!) and \"Quartier Latin\" is gold imprisoned on silver. Beautiful.Yes, these are some BEAUTIFUL short films.Now let's get onto the content. I very much (and I mean VERY MUCH) like the eclecticism that is so successfully felt. You never have have the same themes or treatment between two shorts, and I think the formula is restrictive enough to let all these artists explore beautiful and deepening things inside the shorts. I loved coming from a simple love story into a crazy-Chinese-musical-in-Paris-with-Barbet-Schroeder into a social commentary into a terror comedy into a humble monologue. I love surprises! And this film has them! It's great they took a chance to let all these director's flesh out things that are not usual in mainstream cinema (which I have come to heavily despise). It's not heavily experimental, but I can breath the breathing space these people had.I like the small time and I love the acting. I love the simplicity and I love the love. I like the simple feelings and the beauty and the eclecticism and in general it's a film that is very very very nice to see, alone or with someone. To simply feel. It left me feeling very good.There is something about the earnestness in it... it's so frank...What I didn't like? Well, for me there are two shorts that aren't exactly the best - \"Quais de Seine\" (which is good natured, sure, and maybe even necessary, but feels too much like a commercial?) and \"Père-Lachaise\" that even though I love the acting, I felt it's themes were forced. But that of course, is just me. \"Tour Eiffel\" I also didn't love but I think is probably because of my very different sensibility from that of Sylvain Chomet? I don't know if this film has a special interest for people who already know the actor's and directors, and so they can delight in their interaction, in the surprises (look out for Alexander Payne in a funny role) and basically in \"what will this director do with this?\" great question. I enjoyed it very much in that way.I repeat now: Most shorts I loved and all of them together form a beautiful and energetic mix. I definitely recommend it. Definitely!!! So, watch it if you like Eclectic Beautiful Love!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36dd57aa30374120945c8aced92fcd09",
            "input": "The Clouded Yellow is a compact psychological thriller with interesting characterizations. Barry Jones and Kenneth More are both terrific in supporting roles in characters that both have more to them than what meets the eye. Jean Simmons is quite good, and Trevor Howard makes a fascinatingly offbeat suspense hero.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b10e697f1c14c258dd19fc6b8de47bb",
            "input": "this may not be War & Peace, but the two Academy noms wouldn't have been forthcoming if it weren't for the genius of James Wong Howe...this is one of the few films I've fallen in love with as a child and gone back to without dissatisfaction. whether you have any interest in what it offers fictively or not, BB&C is a visual feast.I'm not saying it's his best work, I'm no expert there for sure. but the look of this movie is amazing. I love everything about it; Elsa Lanchester, the cat, the crazy hoo-doo, the retro-downtown-ness; but the way it was put on film is breathtaking.I even like the inconsistencies pointed out on this page above, and the \"special effects\" that seem backward now. it all creates a really consistent world.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c08af9229774e34a73d8da4c912e96c",
            "input": "This gem for gore lovers is extremely underrated. It's pure delight and fun! Gratuitous servings of blood, insanity and black humor, which can please even the most demanding lover of the genre. A full exploitation of the almost universal fear of dentists and flawlessly shot. Only for the connoisseurs.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-467bc9304f13432487d0ff009365d7d3",
            "input": "Another big star cast, another glamour's set, another reputed director, another flick filled with songs that's topping the chart buster, but alas what's missing at the day end is a story that every moviegoer expects of from such a big budget motion picture. So much hype is what that was lurking around the movie before it's' red carpet premiere. A hype which went to an extent where Anil Kapoor envisages that the movie would be one of the finest love stories ever made after Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge. Well Anilji, which movie were you speaking of? Well the plot of the movie is about 6 different couples and 12 different people, who have a total different stance towards life, but despite their different approach towards life they all have one common problem, that's LOVE. Well indeed a luring theme. But little did we expect that the movie would be such boredom that it will let down the last expectation the audience would have from such a multistarrer movie. These are kinda movies which I totally abhor because after spending a hefty buck for a multiplex ticket I get locked in the theatre for 4 hours just waiting in agony for the climax.The trouble begins right from the start. The director gets so confused with the plot that somewhere even he gets baffled as to how to share the time slot to six different star casts. Some of the couples like Anil Kapoor-Juhi and Sohail Khan-(Whoever the female is opposite to him) just doesn't make any sense for their existence in the movie. Salman (Who calls himself rahul in a weird manner for the entire movie. Well something like Rahoooooool) again as usual tries to be extra cool with his Videsi kinda Hindi accent. Hey Sallu Bhai, now that Aish is getting married, at least go get some tip from Abhishek to improve your acting abilities. A simple striptease wouldn't make the movie a box office hit every time. And Anilji stop shaving your trade mark beard or you look totally like a eunuch. And smooching a girl of your daughters' age just looks as uncool as watching Jack Nicholson in a romantic movie. And please Nikhilji avoid putting such superfluous scenes in a movie that is totally not needed for the shot.The other bigger flaw in the movie was that there wasn't any perfect synchronization between the stories of different couples. Every story itself looks as if it is taken from different flicks, put together to form a sadistic plot of Salaam-E-Ishq. Bollywood still has to learn a lot from movies like Snatch, Memento where the director knows the perfect art of threading the different unrelated sequences to form a perfect blended storyline.Somewhere while I was evaluating the pre-release movie reviews someone predicted that the movie wouldn't do good because the title of this movie adds up to the number 28, and 28 is considered a bad number in Numerology. But I totally take my stand by saying the movie will fail not coz of its Numerology defects, but because of the myriads of flaw that persisted in the movie. And when director like Nikhil Advani can make such major blunders in the entire storyline of the movie, any wonder wouldn't have saved the movie from bombing at the Box Office.My suggestion for all you guys is, please avoid watching this movie at any cost. It isn't worth a pie that you pay for the ticket. There indeed are better movies on theater screens currently which are worth watching more than Salaam-E-Ishq.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-807ad78e16df4ffaba74966da6f10366",
            "input": "The silent one-panel cartoon Henry comes to Fleischer Studios, billed as \"The world's funniest human\" in this dull little cartoon. Betty, long past her prime, thanks to the Production Code, is running a pet shop and leaves Henry in charge for far too long -- five minutes. A bore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6848a5dec09842aca6186f08dc853067",
            "input": "There's a major difference between releasing an original, intense, edge-of-your-seat, scary, gore-fest, and doing like filmmaker Eli Roth and his team have done with \"Cabin Fever\" and simply acted like it. The film follows five college graduates into a cabin in the woods that begins to prove fatal as one after the other succumbs to this mysterious, fast-acting, flesh-eating disease. It's not long before the friends turn on one another, and can barely stand the sight of one another, much less want to be in the same vicinity as them. As gross as it all sounds, there's a certain spark behind the basic premise of this film that could have worked, in the hands of a less cocky filmmaker. Unfortunately what we end up with is poorly drawn characters whose sole purpose seems to be to look beautiful at the beginning to make the inevitable decomposition more contrasting, a hackneyed script so profanity-laden as to leave the viewer tuning out the dialogue, and several incomprehensible subplots that motivate little more than (in one instance) an on-screen appearance by director Roth. This is sloppy film-making in several ways! Avoid this time devourer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-587ae84a158c4766bdd6b3f5c7944aff",
            "input": "Although I had seen \"Gymkata\" in a theater way back in '85, I couldn't remember anything of the plot except for vague images of Kurt Thomas running and fighting against a backdrop of stone walls and disappointment regarding the ending.After reading some of the other reviews I picked up a copy of the newly released DVD to once again enter the world of Gymkata.It turns out this is one of those films produced during the '80s that would go directly to video today. The film stars champion gymnast Kurt Thomas as Jonathan Cabot, recruited out of the blue to infiltrate the nation of \"Parmistan\" to enter and hopefully win \"The Game,\" a suicidal bloodsport sponsored by the Khan who encourages his people by yelling what sounds like \"Yak Power.\" The goal of the mission involves the Star Wars defense system. Jonathan is trained in the martial arts by Princess Rubali, who never speaks or leaves the house. Once trained tries to blend in with the locals by wearing a bright red sweater with dashes of blue and white. Needless to say Cabot finds himself running and fighting for his life along the stone streets of Parmistan, on his way to a date with destiny, and the Game.Star, Kurt Thomas was ill served by director Robert Clouse, who it looks like was never on the set. The so called script is just this side of incompetent. See other reviews for the many howlers throughout. The town of crazies has a few good moments, but is ultimately ruined by bad editing. The ending...meh. Still there's the germ of a good action adventure here. A Hong Kong version with more visceral action and faster pace might even be pretty good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06ff6f95281848c49a2b8d86997749fa",
            "input": "This is a brilliant political satire. No wonder why it was largely ignored in the U.S.: it exposes our murderous foreign policy for what it really is.Another good film from this era, Rendition, was also totally dismissed simply because it showed, accurately, that the U.S. is a war machine bent on torturing, murdering, and maiming civilians in its quest for total world domination.A clever plot, good acting, some big stars (John Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Marisa Tomei anyone?) and some scenes of hilarity should have made this movie a hit. Unfortunately, Americans don't like to hear the truth about themselves, especially when they are complicit in mass murder.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-706e38ee01bb40ddaba2f718dfade1f4",
            "input": "A first time director (Bromell) has assembled a small but powerful cast to look at the world of a middle aged, middle class, depressed hit-man and his struggle with his relationship with his father. This film in less than 90 minutes presents an incredibly interesting contrast in human nature. David Dorfman as the 6 year old son of William H. Macy is the most refreshing little actor I've seen in awhile. Macy is brilliant in a part that almost seems written for him as a self tortured sole struggling to break the reins of his father and his business. It's always great to see Donald Sutherland and here he's wonderful as the callous father of Macy. The films alternate audio track is well worth it to hear the director explain how he picked the cast, locations, and filmed the movie. The basic dolby 2 channel sound is adequate for this film and well recorded. The cinematography creates the mood along with a very subtle musical background. Any film buff or observer of human nature will enjoy this one especially if he's a fan of contradiction.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a1010484b484546be2aec76129a5aef",
            "input": "Whatever the merits of the film, it is poorly researched. As others have pointed out, the movie shows locals in Iran speaking in Arabic, rather than Persian. That is enough to lose credibility for anyone who has the slightest knowledge of the area or the country. The landscape could not be more different from the actual.Other factual errors: A train is shown to be operating in Afghanistan, while Afghanistan does not have railways. The Turkish ambassador is wearing a Fez (the red hat), whereas the Fez was banned by Turkey much before the time in which the movie is set. The Turkish ambassador's daughter is actually dressed as an Indian, and Indian classical music is playing in the background in many scenes. I suppose the filmmakers meant to show an exotic woman, and sari was what they decided would make her exotic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb68899b424f456a82551cdeff366987",
            "input": "There's nothing quite like watching giant robots doing battle over a desert wasteland, and Robot Wars does deliver. Sure, the acting is lousy, the dialogue is sub-par, and the characters are one-dimensional, but it has giant robots! The special effects themselves are actually quite good for the period. They are certainly not as polished as today's standards, but it contains a minimum of computer graphics and instead uses miniatures, so it has aged fairly well. Its shortcomings are easily overlooked given the films short runtime, and it does have a certain tongue-in-cheek humour in parts that make it quite enjoyable. I would recommend this to any fan of giant robots or cheesy sci-fi who is looking for a lighthearted hour of distraction.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1db422f04f84cf0907e06199248d18f",
            "input": "Tedious girls-at-reform-school flick, which plays somewhat like a prison movie. Chris (Linda Blair) is stuck in there after running away from her abusive father. Once in the de facto jail, she is gang raped by her fellow female \"inmates\".Overlong (even at 98 minutes), with an utterly pointless ending which makes the entire film seem pointless.15 year old Linda Blair does her best to avoid showing her body when unclothed, but lets a nipple shot slip during a shower scene.*1/2 out of ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-419c75c8969240fcba09744735dc9fbf",
            "input": "No day passes without a new released computer animated movie, so we now really have chances to see more than some nice effects. After watching Ice Age I felt that's it was not that big impact on me than some other films of this genre.But it's because I am a Big Guy now, and I am pretty sure that this is a very enjoyable movie for children (maybe up to 14). The story is quite simple, and the \"actors\" are funny in a cute way, without any crude or complex humour. Even the \"evil\" is lovely, fluffy big cat with those funny teeth. And the story has a happy end, which was a small disappointment for me (knowing that most of the main characters are doomed to extinction in a sad way) but a great thing for children. And apart from some fights nobody dies (not even when he gets stomped on by a mammoth, several times), which made a cartoony feeling.The computer animation part is nice but nothing special, apart from some really nice cartoony feeling scenes, when you feel like walking in a nice painting or pages of a comics. [Which means lots of work nevertheless!]There were some gags which made me smile - I accept, the creators tried to satisfy those grownups - but they are hard to spot and (in my opinion) better left unnoticed, since it does not feel to fit into the story.Overall it's a nice movie, but it's rather in the ideal-world-and-fluffy-animals-for-children disney cliche. If you don't hate cute animals making funny things, watch it at least once.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-732cc77051ac49a4931aba426211eba4",
            "input": "Maybe \"Presque Rien\" is not the best movie ever made... But it is better than many of you have said. I still haven't seen a homo-themed movie better than this one.You Americans are accustomed to watch very narrative movies, with a clear beginning, development and outcome. But European movies are less narrative, but makes you think much and feel.Many of you didn't understand the sense of the movie.. The purpose of this one is not show us a simple \"summer loving movie\", with commercial characters who \"fall in love and live happy forever\". Summer Holidays and beach are only a background, and this movie is directed to every young boy who may feel identified with those boys.Maybe some of you didn't understand well this movie, because of its 3 parts, showed as flashbacks. These 3 moments are: - Summertime in Pornichet, when they meet and love. - After a year and half living together in Nantes, Mathieu doesn't go to a psychiatric himself. He tries to suicide taking something, and Cedric brings him to hospital. Later, he appears talking with a psychiatrist to find the reason about he done that. - The last part, is when Mathieu come back to Pornichet, in winter, alone.. to think about how his life have changed, how his life become to be, and trying to find himself.It's possible that some people couldn't understand all this well, because all the scenes are mixed among them. But anyway, as I said before... this is not a funny movie. If what someone want to see is meat, for that, we have Belami movies.Presque Rien, what want to show us, is how cruel can be the life, for a young boy who is not sure about his feelings and not sure about what to do in life. Mathieu only wants to go away from home, and try to live the kind of life that he thought could bring him the happiness.. But what seemed perfect at the beginning.. later is not as good as he thought, and he become troubled, and feel that he has lost the way of his life. He is lost and doesn't know what he really wants to do, or what makes him happy. He finally become depressed and tries to commit suicide. So, funny? Is not a funny movie. Very hot scenes? only a few.. but this is not a movie for entertainment. Is all about feelings... friendship, love, happiness, unhappiness, pain, depression, loneliness... I, as many others, feel identified with life and problems of Mathieu, and that is what director wanted to do.. a movie who show us the cruel reality of a boy's life.For me, the best homo-themed movie ever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb6741749abb4411bb6cc0395512f3c2",
            "input": "It's a tale that could have taken place anywhere really, given the right circumstances. Street entertainer catching the attention of famous opera star and friendship ensuing. The aging entertainer finds/buys a male child to pass his art to. From there, we follow them through the rigors of their challenging, but free life along the river. Traveling town to town, he performs and has some degree of notoriety. Despite the times and the influences, the man is kind and good.Overall, the performances are first rate, especially Xu Zhu, who portrays the street performer. The child (Renying Zhou) is beautiful, and downright strong, and withstands the overt prejudices well. The two protagonists, along with supporting help from the kind opera singer, Master Liang (an interestingly androgynous Zhao Zhigang), paint a very interesting tale of forgiveness, sadness and love. Some have mentioned this film's remote similarities to BA WANG BIE JI (FAREWELL MY CONCUBINE); yet this film can't stand easily on its own, any resemblance is remote at best.My only qualm with the KING OF MASKS, is the ending. It was weak, cliche and about as subtle as a sledgehammer. The audience was already wrapped up in the story, what was the needless manipulation for? What a shame. To bring a fine motion picture that far, only to surrender to emotional (and corny) pathos like that. It frankly made this film good, instead of the classic, it should've been. That aside, the KING OF MASKS is still very well worth your time. I was happy to see the Shaw Brothers are still producing good films. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-982f56d88c4a400dad500779cd7181ae",
            "input": "Sure I've seen bad movies in my life, but this one was so bad that I actually became angry in the theater. I wanted my money back. I wrote to the director asking him to refund my movie ticket, of course I didn't receive a refund (or even a reply) but it's the point that matters. On a scale of 1-10 I give this movie a -42. Why did the \"Jeep\" (Chevy Blazer??) stop running from being hit with a bat? Why did they hit the \"Jeep\"(Chevy Blazer?????) with the bat in the first place instead of cracking the bum's skull? The plot was thin, the movie filled with obvious clichés, and certain parts of it just didn't make any sense.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-568ac5980f454e71a209943923e02a02",
            "input": "The sects that capitalise on this film are well known for their claim to take the 'message' of the bible without any alteration or extra-biblical influence. The existence of this film is solely due to the fact that there is no such thing.If you want to know what the born-again branch of Christianity were harping on about in the seventies just look up the word 'rapture' in a dictionary of cults and sects. It's quicker than sitting through this waste of celluloid.Poor acting, uneven sound quality and a script that could just as easily have been written by Jack T Chick (paranoid Christian conspiracy theorist for those not familiar with the Evangelical scene). You could not really put this into the 'so bad it's good' category so its only audience are either those with a pamphlet collection looking to branch out or the extremely paranoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c54af742eb494f28b77c9fbff269d4e9",
            "input": "ever watched. It deals so gently and subtly not only with Aids (which is only alluded) and gay life, but also with old age, dying and death. It's a deep and beautiful movie, (also visually), of a very special director. Highly recommanded1",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1cb98b62d09f4c87b8bc5b7a8b18df49",
            "input": "OK, I knew this would be a back alley F-film (well below B-film standards) going into it, so I thought, \"Man, I could use a good laugh, so let's see some nether-beings kill each other.\" Well, what I got could have been found at your local \"love toy\" store. Random lesbian scenes, very little fighting, and no plot.For example, one scene in particular I remember (for its sheer stupidity only; I've seen better porn on ABC) is where the two main characters (I can't remember their names offhand...great movie, huh?) are driving along, as they mostly did, and the driver was tired of driving and stopped:Driver: \"Let's pull over, I'm tired. You want to take over?\" Passenger: \"Sure, I can drive for a while.\" (Once pulled over, the driver starts grabbing the passenger's boobs) Passenger: \"What are you doing? I'm not like that!\" Driver: \"It's OK, everyone does it sometime.\" Passenger: \"OK then.\" (Proceed to take off shirts, fondle, kiss, and perform fellatio)Now, last time I checked, horror films were not in the porn section of Hollywood Video (unless you're into S&M, then you go elsewhere), and it definitely shouldn't be in the mainstream videos at Blockbuster. Don't get me wrong; I'm definitely not one of those people who hate porn, but I only watch it when appropriate and definitely don't want to watch it if I'm looking for a movie in the mainstream stores, as this one I rented was at one of the two retailers I named (and probably at the other too if I went and looked).Worst movie ever, no one should rent it, and it should only be bought for a public burning ceremony. If I could give it a 0, I would, but I can only give it a * of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ace1c6af67d74172b5e18a2ec4d99b35",
            "input": "Walt Disney & his 9 Old Men put their own 1950 spin on the classic fairy tale of Cinderella, which I guess you could say helps form an unofficial \"fairy tale princess trilogy\" from the classic Disney years.THE PLOT: Cinderella is a nice girl who can't catch a break. She is the daughter of a nice, wealthy widower who loved her dearly, but her mother passed away when Cinderella was very young, and Cindy's father felt she needed a mother figure, so he eventually married the woman who would become known as Lady Tremaine, herself a widow with two daughters about the same age as Cinderella, Anastasia and Drizella. At first they all seemed to get along, but then Cinderella's father died, and Lady Tremaine's true nature was revealed - she was a cold, cruel, callous, heartless, mean spirited woman, and she passed those traits on to her daughters, who were spoiled, bratty, and equally mean spirited. Anastasia & Drizella hate Cinderella because they know deep down that she's better looking and an overall nicer, more attractive lady than themselves (i.e., more appealing to men), and their mother, Lady Tremaine, hates Cindy for pretty much the same reasons. As the years passed Lady Tremaine began to squander the family fortunes in a stubborn but futile quest to improve/refine her awkward, unattractive daughters (to call them \"homely\" would be an insult to homely people everywhere) while all three relegated Cinderella to being the multi-tasking servant of the house, abusing her, mistreating her and humiliating her every chance they get (they are particularly fond of increasing her already absurd workload). That brings us to Cinderella in the present, where she has blossomed into a good looking young lady who somehow manages to remain kind hearted and nice despite her abusive step family and holds on to the hope that one day the tables will turn in her favor. Cinderella gets her shot at freedom & happiness when a royal ball is held to introduce the local prince to an eligible young maiden so that he can take her as a wife, settle down, start a family, etc. Naturally, her step family tries to keep her from attending, even going so far as to physically assault her and rip up the dress she had procured for herself (with a little help from her mice friends - the dress belonged to her biological mother). Finally pushed beyond her breaking point, Cinderella runs out into the courtyard and cries in despair. It is at that point that her Fairy Godmother, a short, plump, jolly woman, arrives and provides Cinderella with transportation and a transformed dress (after all, Cinderella wouldn't make a very good impression at the ball if she entered the scene looking like she had just gotten gang raped). Cindy arrives at the ball, the Prince falls hard for her, but that pesky midnight rule gets in the way, forcing her to flee, but leaving behind a glass slipper. Make a long story short - after a long harrowing quest to find the mystery girl via trying on the glass slipper, Cinderella is found and she and the prince get married, giving her the happy ending she deserves.Overall, an enjoyable Disney classic. Not without its flaws, the most glaring of which is that the Prince is little more than a MacGuffin to help push the plot along - he has very little screen time and even less dialogue, so we never get to know him very well or get a good look at his relationship with Cinderella (which is unfortunate since, according to the making of documentary, the Prince was originally meant to play a bigger role), and a few additional scenes to help flesh out Cinderella herself might have been helpful (there was a song that showed her fantasizing of turning into an army of maids to clean up the house as well as eavesdropping on her step-family post ball to show her amusement at their jealousy, which was cut because Walt himself thought it made her look spiteful). Still, Cinderella herself is a likable enough heroine, even if she is upstaged by her mice friends, and there's a sweetness to the film that is becoming harder to find these days. Of course, if this were being made now, Cinderella would probably put up more of a struggle against her family during the dress ripping scene and would probably free herself in the climax (either by picking the lock herself or making an impractical yet exciting jump down from her window) but this is beside the point.And for all those who say Cinderella sets a bad example for young girls, well, consider this - at least Cinderella didn't go around getting publicly drunk and indecently exposed, unlike some modern day \"princesses\" (you know who I mean).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13fd626328b047b78a07ff0ba22737f4",
            "input": "If you enjoy seeing what must have started as a 2 hour movie in unconnected bursts of unwatchability, you'll love this film. Otherwise, you'll just wonder how they could have made such a film from something so simple to translate to the big screen as Inspector Gadget.In the previews for the film, many scenes were shown which were not in the film, and within the film, some scenes just don't make sense. While the movie is slightly less than 1 hour and a half, I can only think of one truly memorable moment, and that is just before or during the credits!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ced1adc04eb4dfeb9dc0126dcfa4418",
            "input": "I get to the cinema every week or so, and regularly check out this site, but never before have I felt compelled to comment on a film.To my all time list of shockingly bad films - Last Man Standing, Spawn, The Bone Collector - I can now add the drivel that was 'Hollow Man'.From the awful opening titles - a ridiculously over-long run through of cast and crew put together with alphabetti spaghetti - through to the insulting finale - a world record number of cliches and some of the most absurd dialogue and acting to have ever made it to cinema - this film is dismal, and only the impressive computer graphics keep you from walking out long before the end.This isn't just my opinion - it was that of my friends, and everyone around us. When large sections of an audience are laughing and groaning during and after a serious thriller, its clear that the film is hopeless.Not only that, it was sick too. The director took the action beyond the bounds of realistic fare for a violent film, and into the realms of an over the top blood soaked B-movie. It's difficult not to imagine the director as some sort of dirty old man, because the extent of the invisible man's forays out of the lab and into the outside world extended only to two attempts at having a feel of some breasts. Perhaps sex could well be the first thing on a bloke's mind if made invisible, but aside from the aesthetic pleasures of the ladies involved, it hardly makes entertaining cinema.[spoilers follow]Get past the films sick exterior, and things are even worse. Whilst Kevin Bacon does a good job of acting increasingly twisted as 'hollow man', the rest of them - perhaps handicapped by a dire script - do an even better job of being hollow cast. One long time member of the team is found strangled in a locker by the invisible man, \"He's finally snapped\" shrugs one colleague without a hint of emotion. This is par for the course, and the lab team swing between sheer terror and complete indifference with such speed that you wonder how they got into acting. They pad their way through the lab corridors terrified, guns poised, but then seconds later one of the crew skips happily off back down the corridor to get blood for a hurt colleague. The lead female treats the invisible man with courtesy and good humour even after he's insulted and abused her, and there seems to be little reaction to his breakouts, even after he drowns the Pentagon chief, \"He drowned in his pool last night\" reports the same female, spectacularly failing to put two and two together.The script is littered with this kind of badly acted pedestrian dialogue, and the rest is just an A-Z of film cliches, which get laid on thicker and faster as the film progresses to the point of complete disbelief and amusement at the end.The 'eureka' moment at the computer, the female undressing at the window, the looped security video - the list really is endless - the predictable disregard for strength in numbers, the decision not to kill the two main stars but just put them in a place of probable impending death and leave them to their own devices, the almost-dead good guy appearing out of nothing to save the woman, the bomb and ubiquitous countdown timer, the fireball explosion which just burns up before reaching the heroes, the falling lift which just stops before hitting them, and more than anything else, the immortality of the bad guy.The invisible man is burnt to a shred with a makeshift flame-thrower, electrocuted, whacked round the head with a bar which had just sliced straight through one of the lesser actors, and then having apparently survived the explosion, fireball and total destruction of the labs, has more than enough life left to climb up through the fireball for one last pop at the films heroes - by which stage the disbelieving audience are cringing and looking at their watches.That this exceptionally bad film actually made it to the cinema is astounding. Even the name of the film is as hopeless as the movie itself, and not even impressive special effects come anywhere near saving this one, which should be avoided at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02e2c1b583d946b1b704f99553ce642c",
            "input": "\"The Return of Chandu\" is notable, if one can say that, for the casting of Bela Lugosi as the hero rather than the villain. Why he even gets the girl. The story as such, involves the Black Magic Cult of Ubasti trying to capture the last Egyptian princess Nadji (the delectable Maria Alba) and use her as a sacrifice as a means of reviving their ancient leader who just happens to look like Nadji. Lugosi as Chandu, who possesses magical powers, tries to thwart the villains. Director Ray Taylor does his best with limited resources and extensive stock footage. Fans of King Kong (1933) will recognize the giant doors that were used to keep Kong at bay in several scenes. The acting is for the most part, awful. The actor who plays the high priest (I believe Lucien Prival) for example, uses that acting coach inspired pronunciation that was so common in the early talkies. The less said about the others the better. It is a mystery why Lugosi accepted parts in independent quickies at this stage of his career, because he was still a bankable star at Universal at this time. Maybe it was because in this case he got to play the hero and get the girl, who knows. As his career started to spiral downwards in the late 30s, this kind of fare would become the norm for Lugosi rather than the exception.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-697218d2fd1c453dbbcc51698f3c94ec",
            "input": "Three giant sabretooth tigers(..created in a laboratory from mitochondrial DNA, a \"genetic breakthrough\" derived from fossil material)are on the rampage accidentally set free through a series of events(such as a computer geek's introduced virus in order to unlock security measures keeping the resort novelty shops closed during construction & a security guard's leaving a gate open while searching for the missing page from a porn mag that flew away in the breeze)that threaten the lives of those it comes in contact with. The tigers are always hungry, but are unable to digest what they eat. So pretty much the tigers just rip their prey to shreds. Victims include a group of college kids(..the stereotypes include a goth girl, jock and tech nerd), security personnel, and those somewhat developed rich scoundrels who we can easily despise and wish horrible death.Rounding out a series of bad sci-fi channel flicks, Attack of the Sabretooth has some of the most wretched computer simulated animals I've seen yet. And, the final death sequence is so putridly presented, you'll demand within the deepest recesses of your soul the time spent on this truly awful exercise in the creature feature canon. There's some good dark humor deriving from heads being torn from necks, but even here the prosthetic work is unconvincing. Prosthetic body parts and blood aplenty as victims are pounced upon, crying for help and receiving none. I'm starting to sound like a broken record, repeating myself in every user comment I write for these sci-fi channel flicks. I think maybe it's time to move on to other kinds of cinema. Robert Carradine has a role as a ruthless businessman who is being wooed by his truly repellent ex-brother-in-law, Nicholas Bell, the one opening \"Primal Park\", a resort / zoo featuring genetically created sabretooth tigers as it's major attraction. Stacy Haiduk, still quite yummy, is a security officer who attempts to convince Bell to get the investors he hopes to goad into putting money in his multi-million dollar project to leave the island. Brian Wimmer is Haiduck's lover and his role is a mechanic keeping operations running smoothly.Bell's fate at the end, resulting from a dislodged tooth from a sabretooth tiger statue is the pits. Carradine spends a great deal of the film taunting Bell, his arch nemesis. The tiger's point-of-view shows humans in a bright color as it moves towards them. The film ultimately consists of characters walking through darkened corridors(..the tech nerd's virus cut off the power)worried for their safety. The college kids commit breaking and entering to score certain items needed(..it's a scavenger hunt type of activity)to enter a fraternity / sorority. The cast playing these kids do not rise above their clichés.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-583c8d9c7b7d4e6f98941cfac90d6306",
            "input": "Okay, the recent history of Star Trek has not been good. The Next Generation faded in its last few seasons, DS9 boldly stayed where no one had stayed before, and Voyager started very bad and never really lived up to its promise. So, when they announced a new Star Trek series, I did not have high expectations. And, the first episode, Broken Bow, did have some problems. But, overall it was solid Trek material and a good romp.I'll get the nits out of the way first. The opening theme is dull and I don't look forward to sitting through it regularly, but that's what remotes are for. What was really bad was the completely gratuitous lotion rubbing scene that just about drove my wife out of the room. They need to cut that nonsense out.But, the plot was strong and moved along well. The characters, though still new, seem to be well rounded and not always what you would expect. The Vulcans are clearly being presented very differently than before, with a slightly ominous theme. I particularly liked the linguist, who is the first Star Trek character to not be able to stand proud in the face of death, but rather has to deal with her phobias and fears. They seemed to stay true to Trek lore, something that has been a significant problem in past series, though they have plenty of time to bring us things like shooting through shields, the instant invention of technology that can fix anything, and the inevitable plethora of time-travel stories. Anyone want to start a pool on how long before the Borg show up?All in all, the series has enormous potential. They are seeing the universe with fresh eyes. We have the chance to learn how things got the way they were in the later series. How did the Klingons go from just insulting to war? How did we meet the Romulans? How did the Federation form and just who put Earth in charge. Why is the prime directive so important? If they address these things rather than spitting out time travel episodes, this will be an interesting series.My favorite line: Zephram Cochran saying \"where no man has gone before\" (not \"no one\")",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc7bacbf751f4accbe3b72d548c413be",
            "input": "The US State Dept. would not like us to see this movie, because they have a beef with the Iranian govt. However, it shows us just how civilized Iran really is, despite the content of the film, which centers on the struggle of women there for equal rights in the simplest of terms: the ability to watch a soccer game at the stadium, which is strictly limited to male audiences alone. The film is hilariously funny, and in and of itself is proof of freedom of speech and expression in Iran. I enjoyed this movie intensely. Five girls try to penetrate the police border at the ticket gates to a soccer match between Iran and Bahrain. The ensuing comedy is too funny to describe, from the bus trip to the stadium, to the interceding of the police and subsequent detention of the girls, to the resulting end. Don't miss this classic film. Its a MUST see. One of the best foreign films I've seen in years.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd7c836c55444199b256af8448e282a3",
            "input": "I just want to say that this production is very one sided, breaks the impartiality needed if you want to be taken seriously. There are no credits of the persons they interviewed, so you cant have an idea if they are worthy of being heard.Tells the story from just one point of view. To do this is very dangerous, because the next generations learns the bad idea, and thats why wars keep coming. I know this is not the only reason about wars, but doesn't help either.you can watch this documentary, but read in the internet a lot, before. Balcans are complex as human history is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df8c7d1b466d4cd6a14e522669d78575",
            "input": "I just finished watching this movie. I was very excited since I'm a big fan of Punk Rock, Horror films and Spoofs. I was very surprised at what I saw. I knew it was low budget, but I wasn't expecting it to be taped with a video camera. It opens with a good song and a great, very underrated band, The Horrorpops, reforming their song, Where They Wander, and promptly getting killed in various gruesome ways. It's a great opening. But the problem is the fact that, up until the end, this was really all that the movie was. A live performance, A death. Another live performance, A death. It gets old. And there is a gross(literally) overuse of intestines in the death scenes. Why doesn't the killer use other body parts, like legs, or eyeballs, or brains? Don't get me wrong, this movie has some parts that are awesome. Like the hardcore French band, known simply as BERET, the prospect of a band named Atticus, the scene containing a performance by members of the The Used and Simple Plan playing together, since neither bands had enough members to play their show, and Bowling For Soup's Overweight-and-proud-of-it guitarist getting killed in a truly hilarious manner, that I will save for the future watchers of this movie. But the big problem I have with this movie is the at first comical, but after a while, terrible lack of acting talent in a lot of the \"actors\". Especially Warped Tour creator, Kevin Lyman. He tries very hard, but I suspect that he didn't want to make the film, but was contractually obligated or something. In addition to that, the sound quality is terrible and there are no subtitles on the DVD. The Movie's resolving plot is very hazy and very random. something about a magic sword and Lloyd Kaufman as the devil. Bottom line, this movie has a lot of good qualities, but not enough to be anywhere near a decent Horror, Music, or Comedy film. Although I have to credit it with turning me onto a few bands that I would never have listened to, otherwise. Such as Tsunami Bomb, and the Phenomonauts(an insane, Psychobilly band). I recommend that you rent this movie, watch the first 10 or 20 minutes, if you like it, watch the next 20 or 30, if you still like it, then watch on. If not, just go to the special features and watch all the music videos and live performances. They rock! Long live Punk Rock and Horror!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53280231ece5471aa449ca5a381fbb68",
            "input": "It's been a long time since I last saw a movie this bad.. The acting is very average, the story is horribly boring, and I'm at a loss for words as to the execution. It was completely unoriginal. O, and this is as much a comedy as Clint Eastwood's a pregnant Schwarzenegger! One of the first scenes (the one with the television show - where the hell are you?) got it right - the cast was 80% of let's face it - forgotten actors. If they were hoping for a career relaunch, then I think it might never happen with this on their CV! The script had the potential, but neither 80% of the actors nor the director (who's an actor and clearly should stick to being an actor) pulled it off. Fred Durst was the only one who seemed better than any of the rest.I'm sorry, but if you ever consider watching this - I highly recommend you turn to something less traumatic, because not only it's a total loss of time, but also a weak example of what bad cinema looks like.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-79a6c8a812824d82936580269006a3ed",
            "input": "This movie has recieved horrible ratings from just about everyone who has voted here but i am here to say if you like movies like Dude Wheres my Car and Dumb and Dumber this movie is for you. If your into movies like Citizen Kane and Casablanca id have to sugest you in a different angle. Yet i still love this movie and everything about it even if it is kind of \"kiddy\" this is one of the few movies me and my freinds have been able to keep watching over the years and quote whenever possible. GREAT MOVIE. This movie should the AFIs number 1 because its so friggin' high class. The only problem with this movie is you may have trouble seeing it because it was a made for tv movie on a channel that no longer exists. So i dont know how to get this movie, id like to buy it for dvd but i cant find it anywhere. I still have it taped from when it was first on, you can come over if you want and watch it bute i might be sleeping. this movie rocks and thats basicly all you need to know.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48ac0e00d39443b2b75434fd9d3bd648",
            "input": "I wonder if there is any sense of sense in this movie. Its a big joke. Good.. Its entertaining .. You get to see the most stupid plot played very seriously in the form of a film .. I wonder which audience group this movie is basically targeted to.Priety (a pros) plays a surrogate mom for a happy couple Salman/Rani who want a child but can't. I wonder how it would be if this drama was a real-life take-off from a real couple's life.Rani appears happy with another pretty lady in her house who has been brought in to make a child for her & Salman. She cares for Priety and tries pushing her husband Salman to Preity so they may have some romance. When will the audience get fed up of Salman's nakhras.Though a good past-time, this movie is unbearable. Absurd.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55710361e60a420bad0b7ec5327e7834",
            "input": "I don't think this movie was rated correctly. I took my copy and blacked out the PG rating and wrote down R. I would NOT recommend this for anyone under 17 or 18, whatever the R limit is.Why? It contains a scene in the jungle with several topless Indian women. I don't know about you, but that's not something for little children to be watching. True, it might be the traditional \"clothing style\" of the African (?) Indians, but... I think partial nudity should give a movie an R rating.I haven't seen the movie recently, but I guess otherwise, it was alright.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd93c9fbe976447c8f93873b8ddcbf2d",
            "input": "A brilliant chess player attends a tournament and falls in love with a woman he meets there. On itself this would be a pretty bad angle on a story. So, there is more. There is the fact that the chess player is also completely alienated from the world because of his brilliance at the game and the fact there is some history haunting the player.This film steps back and forth from romantic frivolity to tournament tension to historic events that shaped the chess player and works quite nicely. It's easy to grow attached to the two main characters and easy to believe they might hit it off together like the way they do in this film. The added effect of the tournament is very good too and creates a nice tension setting.I have no idea of the strength of the chess players as I don't play the game myself but it looks nice and believable. All in all, most of the film goes down very easily. It is also forgotten again very easily though. So it's nice to watch but nothing more than that.7 out of 10 chess players caught between a rook and a hard place",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef7986fa960e4797ae8f686714369721",
            "input": "Young Mr. Lincoln marks the first film of the director/star collaboration of John Ford and Henry Fonda. I recall years ago Fonda telling that as a young actor he was understandably nervous about playing Abraham Lincoln and scared he wouldn't live up to the challenge.John Ford before the shooting starts put him at ease by saying he wasn't going to be playing the Great Emancipator, but just a jack-leg prairie lawyer. That being settled Fonda headed a cast that John Ford directed into a classic film.This is not a biographical film of Lincoln. That had come before in the sound era with Walter Huston and a year after Young Mr. Lincoln, Raymond Massey did the Pulitzer Prize winning play by Robert Sherwood Abe Lincoln in Illinois. Massey still remains the definitive Lincoln.But as Ford said, Fonda wasn't playing the Great Emancipator just a small town lawyer in Illinois. The film encompasses about 10 years of Lincoln's early life. We see him clerking in a general store, getting some law books from an immigrant pioneer family whose path he would cross again later in the story. And his romance with Ann Rutledge with her early death leaving Lincoln a most melancholy being.Fast forward about 10 years and Lincoln is now a practicing attorney beginning to get some notice. He's served a couple of terms in the legislature, but he's back in private practice not really sure if politics is for him.This is where the bulk of the action takes place. The two sons of that family he'd gotten the law books from way back when are accused of murder. He offers to defend them. And not an ordinary murder but one of a deputy sheriff. The trial itself is fiction, but the gambit used in the defense of Richard Cromwell and Eddie Quillan who played the two sons is based on a real case Lincoln defended. I'll say no more.Other than the performances, the great strength of Young Mr. Lincoln is the way John Ford captures the mood and atmosphere and setting of a small Illinois prairie town in a Fourth of July celebration. It's almost like you're watching a newsreel. And it was the mood of the country itself, young, vibrant and growing.Fans of John Ford films will recognize two musical themes here that were repeated in later films. During the romantic interlude at the beginning with Fonda and Pauline Moore who played Ann Rutledge the music in the background is the same theme used in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance for Vera Miles. And at a dance, the tune Lovely Susan Brown that Fonda and Marjorie Weaver who plays Mary Todd is the same one Fonda danced with Cathy Downs to, in My Darling Clementine at the dance for the raising of a church in Tombstone. Lincoln will forever be a favorite subject of biographers and dramatists because of two reasons, I believe. The first is he's the living embodiment of our own American mythology about people rising from the very bottom to the pinnacle of power through their own efforts. In fact Young Mr. Lincoln very graphically shows the background Lincoln came from. And secondly the fact that he was our president during the greatest crisis in American history and that he made a singularly good and moral decision to free slaves during the Civil War, albeit for some necessary political reasons. His assassination assured his place in history.Besides Fonda and others I've mentioned special praise should also go to Fred Kohler, Jr. and Ward Bond, the two town louts, Kohler being the murder victim and Bond the chief accuser. Also Donald Meek as the prosecuting attorney and Alice Brady in what turned out to be her last film as the pioneer mother of Cromwell and Quillan. And a very nice performance by Spencer Charters who specialized in rustic characters as the judge.For a film that captures the drama and romance of the time it's set in, you can't do better than Young Mr. Lincoln.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-472a3663e48c47ed902ce1584dd3647b",
            "input": "Masayuki Suo, who directed this fine film, is on a role. After the decent \"Fancy Dance\" and the classic (in Japan, anyway) college-sumo comedy \"Shiko Funjatta\", Suo has followed his own huge footsteps with a smashing success.The story is engaging. We both laugh often (Naoto Takenaka is hilarious, as he is in Suo's two previous films) and really root for the characters. But to me the big bonus is the look this movie gives the viewer into Japanese society - real life in Japan. Suo has a knack for showing real-life activities with entertaining flair. The result is a movie that will pull you in, make you laugh, make you think, and both entertain you and give you insight into today's Japan.Also look for the the main 8 actors from Shiko Funjatta, as they all appear again in various roles, from supporting characters (Takenaka) to short cameos (many).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c281dc9035644bdc9fc61e9ac8475890",
            "input": "Breaking Glass is a film that everyone aspiring to be in the music industry should see more than once. It is a very dark tale about the way a record company manipulates a singer to do things their way and to make as much money out of her as possible. Looking at some of today's 'search for a star' style TV shows on both in the UK and abroad I am always reminded of this film. Though not an expert on the subject, the winners of these shows tend to have one very big initial hit and then its downhill from there. This film predates these shows though the effect seems the same. After getting rid of her manager, played quite brilliantly by Phil Daniels, slowly but surely the record company changes her lyrics puts her on stimulants and she is eventually totally burnt out. You potential stars of tomorrow.... WATCH THIS AND BEWARE !!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-615d3635fa8443419814bd90f5ae6e8a",
            "input": "'Dead Letter Office' is a low-budget film about a couple of employees of the Australian postal service, struggling to rebuild their damaged lives. Unfortunately, the acting is poor and the links between the characters' past misfortunes and present mindsets are clumsily and over-schematically represented. What's most disappointing of all, however, is the portrayal is life in the office of the film's title: there's no mechanisation whatsoever, and it's quite impossible to ascertain what any of the staff really do for a living. Granted, part of the plot is that the office is threatened with closure, but this sort of office surely closed in the 1930s, if it ever truly existed. It's a shame, as the film's overall tone is poignant and wry, and there's some promise in the scenario: but few of the details convince. Overall, it feels the work of someone who hasn't actually experienced much of real life; a student film, with a concept and an outline, but sadly little else.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87e60fc3babd446981734c985c215269",
            "input": "One of the many vigilante epics that flooded the market by the mid-80s. The routine plot has echoes of \"The Magnificent Seven\" (believe it or not), the action scenes are lamely handled and the special effects are non-existent. You COULD do worse....but the film is still just a waste of time. (*1/2)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99860ea8da744b208f78d7fa7aa73282",
            "input": "This is a movie about making a movie. Such movies may be entertaining, but they need some substance, to do so. It did not happen here, I am afraid. Mr Coppola did not inherit his father's skills, unfortunately (neither did his sister, who can however make movies which one might watch).I do wonder how this movie came to get such rave reviews. Let's see: the lead male actor, supposedly a director, is as expressive as a frozen squid and his voice has the same pitch whatever he says, the lead female actress has an expression on her face that never changes, the plot is totally segmented in bits with perhaps one single connecting element, the movie within the movie idea must be more stale than paleolithic rocks... Would that be enough?I regretted every single moment I watched this movie. A walk with the dog is far superior entertainment to this unbelievably lame movie. It's as if a François Truffaut plot were directed by Dick Cheney...Brazil, some other classic SF movies? You must be really joking...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-383fb37e53434b8d819d8ad26d746e76",
            "input": "Sudden Impact is the 4th of the Dirty Harry films and one of the best traits of these films is that they don't really degrade in quality from one film to the next. Thus, Sudden Impact provides another thrill ride through the life of Dirty Harry Callahan. This time Harry attempts to solve a series of murders while on vacation. Harry's always on the job it seems. Clint Eastwood plays Harry as he plays all his men of action, slow, deliberate, and without fear. As the first of the Dirty Harry films to be made in the 80's, Sudden Impact lacks a bit of the 70's feel that characterizes the first three films. This doesn't mean that it's quality is any less. Bottom Line: Brimming with intensity and action, Sudden Impact is another worthy addition to the Dirty Harry series.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-561bc7b7ea6d4a878ae3fe3476b3c0de",
            "input": "Every time this film is on the BBC somebody in the Radio Times says how it is a satire against the post war world of rationing and the welfare state. I do not think this is the point of the film at all. The film parodies the spivs(small time criminals who ran the blackmarket) and the housewives league who campaigned against government restrictions but were really a Tory front organisation.Yes of course the film sends up the political/social situation but in the end the people realise that they need all the controls to ensure a fair society,they want to be British and muddle through rather than foreign.But I don't think they go back to being exactly like they were before.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8cb9d19a0e884b47aec23249a57ca67b",
            "input": "I haven't seen it in over twenty years. OJ was the bus driver, Arte Johnson was the tour guide, Lorenzo was the kidnapper.Yea, Lorenzo looked very much at home as the villain, a natural. I think I watched it back then most for OJ, who I had seen Towering Inferno and Cassandra Crossing, but also to see Arte Johnson.I was a little bored that Johnson was so serious.And yes, it shifted plots. In reading other posts, I remember that was some plot that they were going to kidnap some rich girl, but then that priceless stamp business turned up out of the blue.I was going, a stamp? If it came on as a late movie, I would probably record it to check it out again, but I wouldn't be nostalgic over it. Not yet anyway.There are better movies from the seventies like this to check out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f66aa2c9307c466199675ffc8f507d30",
            "input": "This is a good movie, but it is not recommended if you don't like intelligent movies. It's about two guys that wish that the world would go away,and that's exactly what they get. The acting is great, the ending was not predictable,and it actually had a good story unlike most movies these days. People complain about the movie being too simple or too boring. I think they should just stick to movies like The Toxic Avenger (I actually like B movies) or The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy. One note: If you notice this, this has exactly the same actors from Cube except four actors. Make it two notes: Wait after the credits (Trust me on this one). Enjoy the movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1030f43667be47ad80effdbada2c9064",
            "input": "This movie was long and boring. Surprising that it was selected for Cannes, although they tend to like pretentiousness. Point is that contrary to other Dutch stars of the arty genre like Kerkhof and Kruishoop, Guernsey feels utterly empty. Even more so it has no cinematic quality whatsoever. A long opening shot doesn't mean cinematic depth, it's just a long boring shot. The story wasn't interesting and the characters had problems I couldn't identify with at all. The actors didn't shine under her direction and seemed lost at times. Leopold tried, but she is not the talent I hoped she would be. Where are Kerkhof and Kruishoop? They really made some waves in Dutch cinema. Leopold just made another attempt.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a14dea169c54b9eb6dcc7d8cfb197f4",
            "input": "Chesty gringo Telly Savalas (as Frank Cooper) is a US-Mexico \"Border Cop\". He serves as a father figure to young immigrant Danny De La Paz (as Benny Romero), who wants Mr. Savalas to be best man at his impending wedding. Savalas is tough, but boss Eddie Albert (as Commander Moffat) may be tougher. Tough is what you need to stop smuggler Michael V. Gazzo (as Chico Suarez). Alliances may be in flux.If you find the possibility of hearing \"Kojak\" and \"Oliver Douglas\" uttering expletives to be repulsive, you ought to steer clear of \"The Border\". If not, you may not have the stomach for the \"realistic\" cow slaughtering scene. Although it doesn't end up being worth much, Mr. De La Paz and Cecilia Camacho (as Leina) steal the show. ** The Border (1979) Tony Richardson ~ Telly Savalas, Danny De La Paz, Eddie Albert",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-001bab7aaebf49fa8a528ef14523c7f7",
            "input": "If you were ever sad for not being able to get a movie on DVD, it was probably 'Delirious' you were looking for. How often do you laugh when watching stand up comedy routines? I was too young to see Richard Pryor during his greatest time, and when I was old enough to see Eddie Murphy's 'Delirious' and 'Raw' (not as funny) I never knew where Eddie got a big part of his inspiration. Now that I'm older, and have seen both Pryor and many of the comedians after Murphy, I realize two things: Everybody STEALS from Eddie, while Eddie LOVINGLY BORROWED from Richard. That's the huge difference: Eddie was original, funny, provocative, thoughtful – and more. He was something never before seen. He was all we ever needed. These days Eddie Murphy is boring and old – but once upon a time he was The King, and 'Delirious' was the greatest castle ever built. Truly one of the funniest routines of all time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-434da54c7b6e49a594fe81a1912dbdc6",
            "input": "Director Vincenzo Natali's Cypher is a complex and imaginative thriller which, although requiring some suspension of belief and plenty of concentration, manages to be a thoroughly entertaining experience.Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam), a stay-at-home husband with an overbearing wife, decides to add a bit of spice to his mundane existence by getting a job as an industrial spy at high-tech company Digi Corp. His job is to travel to conferences across the country (under the assumed identity of Jack Thursby) and secretly broadcast the speeches given back to his bosses, via a nifty little electronic pen-gizmo.In reality, however, the speeches are merely a cover for far more nefarious activities. Morgan, along with his fellow conference attendees, is being brainwashed. The drugged water they are drinking puts them into a temporary coma, during which they are told to forget their pasts and permanently adopt their new identities. Once they are totally convinced that they are someone else, they are told to apply for jobs with rival companies, where they are able to indulge in corporate espionage without suspicion.But Digi Corp's plans are scuppered by the intervention of shady operative-for-hire Rita Foster (Lucy Liu), who opens Morgan's eyes to what is really happening. She gives Morgan an antidote to the mind altering drugs so that he can resist the brainwashing techniques. She also warns him that if Digi Corp suspects that he does not fully believe he is Jack Thursby, then he will be 'eliminated'. Morgan plays along, and applies for a job at rival business Sunways.However, arriving at his new workplace, he is given a polygraph test and is immediately rumbled as a spy. Fortunately, the bosses at Sunways see this as an ideal opportunity to feed false data to Digi Corp and Morgan becomes a double agent.From hereon in, things get progressively more complicated; the plot twists and turns and poor old Morgan ends up not being able to trust anyone. In an exciting finale, all eventually becomes clear (but only if you've been following events very carefully).Director Natali handles proceedings confidently and certainly has a great ability to produce a classy looking film for a relatively low budget. He manages to get some great performances from his talented cast; Jeremy Northam,in particular, is fantastic—his portrayal of the initially somewhat nervous Morgan is played to perfection.Cypher is another fascinating movie from a director who is willing to take chances and I eagerly look forward to his forthcoming projects, High Rise and Necropolis.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac5bd2e79c4b4f3eafc871d23cde67ab",
            "input": "There are 21 comments as I add mine to this list and there is barely a criticism. This is because this film is terrific entertainment and has a bit of everything in it.It is perhaps a little frightening for younger children but my 15-year old son thought it was fantastic in every way from the action, to the humour and even to the beautiful music score.I buy DVDs only when I know that they are going to be regularly watched and now that this is finally available in the UK, I will certainly be adding it to my collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5978a53649d4370a97ab65134188793",
            "input": "Wow. I went to the video store tonight because I was in the mood for a bad B Horror movie and I found this Gem. I looked at the cover and I thought it looked like just the movie for my mood. I brought it home and put it on.This movie was not the B Horror movie that I had in mind. This was MUCH worse. I wanted a bad movie but what I got, I didn't know that crap like this existed amongst man. This movie seemed like a 5 year old wrote and directed it and that is being nice about it.I am an aspiring director and this movie made me so mad that someone out there is actually paying this guy to direct movies. He needs to work at a garbage dump shoveling crap where he belongs.If you are thinking about renting this or buying it. I will tell you the same thing that I would tell someone getting ready to commit suicide. \"DON'T DO IT, IT'S NOT WORTH IT!\" I really have nothing nice to say about this movie. DON'T DO IT!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b150712cff9249ddbd9c74d6f8cea406",
            "input": "mahatma Gandhi, the father of the nation in his quest for India's freedom struggle ignored his own family and son, this movie is about his son Hiralal who feels neglected because of mahatma Gandhi's service to the society. The movie starts off in South Africa where Mahatma Gandhi works as a barrister and fighting the cause of India's freedom against the British. Hirarala arrives in South Africa to help his dad who is a barrister, since gandhi was involved in the freedom struggle, he wanted his wife and children to join in too as a service to the society and as a result hirarlal does not get a chance to complete his education and fails his exams, he gets married to his love gulab (bhoomika Chawla) against his father's wishes. Hiralal has ambitions to travel to england and become a barrister just like his dad but his own dad refuses to grant him a scholarship offered to his family by a businessman and instead gives it away to another person saying that the scholarship should not be limited to his family and should be open to the most deserving student living in colony. This angers hiralal and the rift between father and son increases, hirarlal hates his father for neglecting him and blames him for being uneducated and unemployed. Hiralal struggles to make ends meet and lands up on the streets through failed business attempts and in huge debt, he loses his wife and children. Akshaye Khanna has give a stellar performance as Hiralal gandhi.. all kudos to him, the direction and the script is fantastic, the picturization is excellent. overall an Excellent movie and a must see. I give it a 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9070698644b547c8be03f2ab8391adf3",
            "input": "This is a great story and was just the beginning of equality in the United States. (We are still working on it too.) However despite the fact this is true, it's still a movie and this is a movie site. I realize independent films have a hard time getting good actors, but wow. The only one even mediocre is the excellent Ossie Davis. But even he couldn't make up for all the actors (including the one playing him as a young man) absolutely atrocious acting. Granted the script was terribly cliché, but even then you have got to get some decent actors! I wouldn't recommend this to anybody because it is so poorly done in every category. Read some books about the true story of the U.S.S Mason, because they give these men the respect they deserve.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec254622308446978a49d4e4ad046210",
            "input": "Slasher films are often seen as the derivative, repetitive and frankly unoriginal. I happen to to be a horror movie fan, but this film was just so poor, words fail me. The script is severely lacking, the plot is ridiculous, the acting astoundingly bad. Just an all round stinker, that I wasted time of my life on. This had all the entertainment value of a 15th sequel to a film that was dire in the first place. Who greenlit this mess?I only liked two things in this movie. The first was the killer's mask - which was nice. The second was the Austrailian affinity with humourous profanity.Save yourself, and avoid this hideous mess.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5dc80bcaf20542fe891d07cf5d9ced77",
            "input": "This movie will go down down in history as one of the greats, right along side of Citizen Kane, Casablanca, and On The Waterfront. Someone please convince Leno to do a sequel! Leno and Morita are a comedy duo, the likes of which haven't been seen since Abbot and Costello. The evil that emanates from Chris Sarandon, Tom Noonan, and Randall \"Tex\" Cobb will give you the chills. Dingman's character as the buffoonish oaf hearkens back to the days of Shakespeare's comedies. And the climax. My goodness, the climax. I won't ruin it for you, but it makes the explosion of the Death Star pale in comparison. If you can track down this hard-to-find gem, do yourself and your family a favor and buy it immediately. I'm still holding out hope for a special edition DVD one of these days.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39d1876ad2374a00a7deb355d67ed0b6",
            "input": "I am a VERY big fan of Jenna Jameson, but this movie is horrible. At the time Jenna Jameson was married to Brad Armstrong and he was the director of this film and Jenna was the hottest porn star ever. So, of course, Brad tried to make as much money as he could off her by making this big budget porn film. Now I know why they don't make big budget porn movies anymore. In a fantasy world, porn stars could act, but this is the real world and they can't act. That's why there porn stars, if a women as beautiful as Jenna could act, then she would have tried to go into mainstream movies instead of porn. Just because your beautiful doesn't make you a movie star. A fine example of this is Traci Lords, when she was a teen thru her 20's she was one of the most beautiful, sexy women on earth. She made her move into low budget mainstream films and couldn't act. Where is she now? I gave it a 2 instead of a 1 rating just because Jenna is so hot, but there are better movies she has made then \"Dream Quest\". Come on Jenna, we don't want to hear you talk, as much as we want to see you have sex. Also, you Jenna, would have a lot more fans and more money in your bank account if you would have done anal on film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8bfd56f240d446359912dc0fa380660b",
            "input": "Omigosh, this is seriously the scariest movie i have ever, ever seen. To say that i love horror movies would be an understatement, and i have seen heaps (considering the limited availability in New Zealand, that's quite a lot), but never before have i had to sleep with the light on...until i saw The Grudge.Some may say that it is a rip off of The Ring (both based on Japanese horror movies), both similar (yet different) story lines, but the Grudge holds its own as a terrifying movie - seeing at at the cinema, i even screamed at a certain point in the movie.The acting is great, particularly from the supporting characters - KaDee Strickland is fantastic and steals the show, she is such an enthusiastic person. Jason Behr is a real hottie, and William Mapother looks like he is having fun. However, while i am normally a fan of Clea DuVall's, she doesn't really seem into this movie. Of the supporting characters, hers probably got the most depth and back story, but she doesn't seem like she is all there. As for Sarah Michelle Gellar, well, she stays about the same through all her films and roles doesn't she? The ghosts were genuinely scary, the music and sound effects were chilling (particularly the noise being made when KaDee Strickland's character answered the phone in her apartment), the ending was cool too.Super highly recommended. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-375333a9a43f443db9bda9b3c118ca4b",
            "input": "A young man kills a young woman for no reason. The man's brother is jailed on charges that he was an accomplice, but soon escapes. Upon escaping, the seemingly innocent man kidnaps three victims and soon he ropes his girlfriend in on the plot. If this isn't bad enough, the situation quickly makes a downward spiral.This film had some good aspects and many bad ones. Its strongest aspect was lead actress Emily Haack. Setting aside the fact she's nude in a fair amount of this film, she presents herself as a decent actress and a very strong character. I see no reason she cannot take this experience and somehow turn it into a career in some way. I was convinced she was a ruthless individual.Also, the makers of this film were very bold and pulled no punches. Graphic nudity (both male and female), coprophagia, and extreme anal violence are not shied away from. I like my horror films to push the boundaries a little bit, and this one ignored them altogether, gladly skipping towards Gomorrah. Maybe it was too much, but I think they achieved what they were looking for.But now the negative aspects. First, and most noticeable, this film is very low budget and the film quality shows this. I can excuse that -- the plot was decent, the acting fine and in some scenes the lower quality film actually made the movie more disturbing (a more realistic feel). So, I won't scold them for having low-grade equipment. What I will scold them for is the use of poor choices in shots. For no reason I can ascertain (besides plumping the movie), there is a large amount of footage of a cemetery. I don't really know why, and I frankly started dozing off at this point because it was so long and pointless.I also take issue with the title. The idea here was to deceive people into thinking this film had some connection to the classic \"I Spit on Your Grave\". Now, there is a line that seems to imply the main character is the daughter of the woman from this other film. And the themes are very loosely the same (a woman getting revenge on men). But there is no firm connection and the reason this title was chosen was for the video store customer to think they were getting a sequel. This was deceptive and dishonest.My last major complaint is that this plot makes no real sense. Not even a little bit. A woman is killed in the beginning for no reason. A prison escapee finds time to kidnap people to torture them, for no reason (because they wronged his girlfriend?). The same man goes from good to very evil without explanation. Likewise, the female lead (Haack) turns fro ma normal person to someone who is overly cruel and sadistic, for no reason at all, and against people who for the most part were only marginally mean to her (a neighbor offering drugs for sex is wrong, but by no means worth getting tortured for).Don't let this title fool you, or the claims that the film is incredibly shocking. Yes, some scenes were shocking, but the vast majority of the film is dull and makes you want to take a nap. If you see this in the video store or on Netflix, just keep browsing. Or rent it, and we can sit around and vent about it for hours. You have been warned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f1af1e7d7ea4483a04551453d4d1b89",
            "input": "Being a fan of cheesy horror movies, I saw this in my video shop and thought I would give it a try. Now that I've seen it I wish it upon no living soul on the planet. I get my movie rentals for free, and I feel that I didn't get my moneys worth. I've seen some bad cheesy horror movies in my time, hell I'm a fan of them, but this was just an insult.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df052aa32ed1403ea9b37fd9109b06be",
            "input": "This 1991 NBC-TV movie aired six months before John Goodman's big-screen version of the life of Babe Ruth came out. For my money, there is no comparison between the two. The TV production isn't perfect but it presents the Babe's story with more depth and complexity than Goodman's one-dimensional telling. I especially enjoyed the film's depiction of the complex love-hate relationship Ruth had with Yankee manager Miller Huggins, who always understood his star player's brilliance and also kept trying to point out why Ruth's own character flaws would never let him become a manager or leader of players. The TV-movie rightly notes how Ruth never fulfilled his dream of managing the Yankees because of his flaws, while the horrible Goodman version tries to push the falsehood that Ruth was denied what should have been his for the taking.This film makes a great companion piece to \"Eight Men Out\" since the story starts with Ruth's arrival in New York in 1920, one year after the Black Sox Scandal and when his home run exploits literally saved baseball from ruin. Indeed, the continuity between the two films is even accentuated with John Anderson reprising his \"Eight Men Out\" role as Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e8ef1cff08f4c01a39781e8bad395b2",
            "input": "A French novelist, disgusted by his wife's society friends, goes to North Africa for a respite. There he encounters a vivacious & talented Bedouin girl, living in poverty. To spite his wife, who is romancing a Maharajah, he decides to train & educate the girl, and present her to Parisian society as the PRINCESSE TAM TAM...The marvelous Josephine Baker is perfectly cast in the title role in this very enjoyable French film. With her enormous eyes & infectious smile, she makes contact with the viewer's heartstrings immediately. Her over-sized personality & obvious joy of performing make her a pure pleasure to watch. Baker makes us care about what's happening to poor Alwina during her transformation & introduction to European mores.Albert Préjean does very well as the Pygmalion to Baker's Galatea; also effective are Georges Peclet as a half-caste servant, and Jean Galland as the mysterious Maharajah.The film is very handsome & well made, looking a little reminiscent of Busby Berkeley movies being produced at the same time in America - although unlike American films of this period, PRINCESSE TAM TAM hasn't any racism. It should be pointed out that there was no Hays Office or Production Code in France. Some of the dialogue & action is rather provocative, but it must be admitted that Baker singing & dancing to 'Under The African Sky,' as well as her culminating performance in the Parisian nightclub, are two of the cinema's more memorable moments.Actual location filming in Tunisia greatly enhances the film.Josephine Baker was born in St. Louis in 1906, into a very poor family. Her talent & driving ambition, however, soon pushed her into moving East and she was briefly a cast member of the Ziegfeld Follies. Realizing that America in the mid-1920's held great limitations for a gifted Black woman, she managed to get herself to Paris, where she eventually joined the Foliés-Bergeres & Le Negre Revue. The French adored her and she became a huge celebrity. A short return to America in 1935 showed Baker that things had not changed for African-Americans. She returned to France, became a French citizen & worked for the Resistance during the early days of the War. Baker relocated to Morocco for the duration and entertained Allied troops stationed there.After the War, Baker's fortunes began to slide and she faced many financial & personal difficulties. For a while, she was even banned from returning to the United States. Finally, Baker accepted an offer from Princess Grace of Monaco to reside in the Principality. Josephine Baker was on the verge of a comeback when she died of a stroke in 1975, at the age of 68.Having appeared in only two decent films - ZOUZOU & PRINCESSE TAM TAM - Baker is in danger of becoming obscure. But she deserves her place alongside Chevalier, Dietrich & Robeson, as one of her generation's truly legendary performers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae4f4d20e6534ffb81f88a92f618e392",
            "input": "Carl Brashear (Cuba Gooding, Jr.) was born to sharecroppers in the deep south. He joins the navy, whereupon he tells his father he will be back. The father gives him an old radio, and Brashear leaves on the navy bus. The Most valuable thing his unemotional father taught him was, \"Never quit\". After a recommendation from a white commander Powers Boothe), who admires his drive and guts, he gets sent to Navy diving school at Bayonne, NJ. He endures harassment from his pals in uniform and from his trainer, Chief Navy Master Diver, Billy Sunday (Robert De Niro), and from the commanding officer, called pappy, (Hal Holbrook, who \"has almost as many loose screws as an old car\". They all want to make him drop out, and the prejudice is quite fierce.The dangers of diving prove a further setback when he loses a leg due to an accident on board ship. Despite this setback, he tells his wife that he will train and achieve his objective, and with the help of Billy Sunday, (now both joined in commiseration in their sufferings), they train and he is able to become the first black Navy diver with his artificial limb despite the skepticism of a highly mocking and doubtful captain at the Navy Department hearing in Washington, DC to determine if he meets the criteria. An inspirational movie, showing that determination can overcome all odds.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-979025041e774abd853c6cc18c8a5db8",
            "input": "this movie was banned in england? why? tom savini, george romero, dario argento, lucio fulci and others had done far worse before and have continued to so since...this movie has all the basic elements of a decent 70s or early 80's horror film. good looking girls (who can't act to save their lives, by the way), a terrible lightning storm with a torrential downpour, a scythe, a crazy brother wandering around the family estate, and actually a pretty damn good twist at the end. but banned? seriously. when the English parliament banned this movie, the italians probably laughed their collective asses off at how backwards and prudish the brits really were.there was maybe two minutes of total screen time devoted to the violence and gore (which was greatly underdone). there was nudity but no sex although allusions to sex were made, obviously. but absolutely nothing worthy of being banned.i would like to see what could have been done if the filmmakers had a decent budget to work with. as it stands, the film is entertaining, but the lack of picture and sound quality take away from the end result.banned... what a joke...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a19d292679c94cac9b318e591c8d1459",
            "input": "Don't really know where to start with one of the worst films I have had the displeasure to watch in a very long time. From the setting which was quite obviously and very clear to anyone who has visited London for even 1 day will agree...was not London. To the much unexplained way how Snipe's character managed to escape the country back to the US without a single problem. Then he convinces the girl and grandmother to visit him in America, how on earth did Grandma agree to that...he's an assassin! Well that's the ending how about during the film, well unfortunately that didn't fare much better. We have British cops driving an amazing range of cars, I'm sure it was an eighties Vauxhall Belmont which chased the taxi after the assignation, but a modern Subaru Imprezza escorting the prison van in a few scenes prior. SO19 or whoever the gun toting arm of the Met they were trying to portray was happily running around the streets with their guns out chasing after Snipe's along with the CIA. There were children walking around, but the police were still stating they had a clear shot to shoot him, does this happen in London? No it doesn't, I live there. We also have the very implausible travel from central London to the airport (let's say Heathrow for arguments sake) within 5 minutes of receiving a call. We also have terrible American accents, a young girl who's posher than the Queen, but lives in Elephant & Castle. What does it say for British police when helicopters and a number of officers at Snipe's location can't find Snipe's and he manages to evade capture by hiding behind some stairs? The train station was obviously not even on UK soil and the fight scene sound effects were terrible. The plot was also extremely poor, boring and been written and filmed a lot better a thousand times before. But there were a few notable actors cast in this film, what were they thinking and please don't let that sway you to watch this film! This film didn't seem to know what it wanted to be, if you are going to concentrate on the dramatic aspects from the aftermath of an assignation then you need a strong rigid plot with plausible scenery and setting, this is something the viewer has time to take in and appreciate and if you do it wrong then you notice it. If you want an all out action film (which this is not) then continuity and scenery can be put to the side.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97f869134c6248ebafee00254550da64",
            "input": "So they hyped the violence and it's been branded as sick. Well, the violence is the best bit I'm afraid, but unfortunately the characters are not developed enough to allow us to understand why they go on their (entirely predictable) rampage. This film has a truly dreadful script. We never get a chance to get to know Robert and his actions at the end are just plain pathetic. The acting isn't much better, either, the worst of them being the TV chef and the school teacher. The direction is clumsy, the pace enough to send you to sleep. And what on earth is the school film project all about? A comment on the film itself perhaps? The use of newsreel during the climactic murder is laughable. These guys obviously think they're intellectuals but are hopelessly out of their depth. How on earth they got the great Yorgos Arvanitis to light it I'll never know. And how they got the money to make it in the first place is an even greater mystery. Absolutely awful beyond comprehension.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7e696914ea34240a0b2006e30902d2a",
            "input": "This movie is a joke. I mean a \"ha ha\" funny joke. Why? Because the only redeeming thing about it was the good laugh I got at the sheer ridiculousness of nonsensical, inane plot and horrible acting. Wow!Within this movie there are so many unanswered questions... for example; why do these women become zombies and how? Why are there four black women who are zombie's \"caretakers\" and what is their purpose? Since when does 6 people make up a \"nation\" of Zombies? And is smeared black eye mascara \"scary\" to anyone, anywhere? Even a 2 year old?And lastly; Why was this movie made at all? Why? why? why? No answer? That's what I thought.On the demand channel they actually issued this comment after the synopsis of the movie: We apologize for this movie in advance\" LOL. At least they had the decency to do this much!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca3de998529d453a89351b3bcccd8418",
            "input": "******* SPOILER! ********i saw this gr8 film a few years back, its a lovely story about a young fella who wants to drink his mothers milk at the breast but she thinks he is to old for it. he ends up lusting after another ladies breasts and ends up in competition with his brother who fancies her. throw in a jealous husband of this woman who cannot get \"aroused\" and you have a cheeky yet warm story about love, friendship and lovely pairs of jugs heheits brilliantdont be put off by sub-tit-les hehe!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc50769c6ccb4c9a9f59783a74490a27",
            "input": "So don't even think about renting this from the shops, because this is one hell of a bad movie. You'd think that JJ Abrahams had written this movie. Basically, a rat is flushed down the toilet and somehow has to get back out. Fans of the completely terrible \"Shrek\" might enjoy, but \"Wallace & Gromit\" fans will probably turn away in disgust. Also, why didn't they do it in plasticine or clay? I mean, CGI animation?? For an AARDMAN movie??!! Obviously, Aardman lazed around while they let Dreamworks do the whole thing. Wrong, wrong, WRONG!!! Nearly every single character is awful, apart from that freaky frog guy, who is just right for a movie villain. But everything else about the movie is DULL, DULL, DULL!!! I almost fell asleep with boredom watching this movie. No, wait, actually, I DID fall asleep with boredom watching this movie. It's just terrible. But thankfully, it's not as bad as \"Shrek.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0de9a1fb3b2425091e1faa0e3609d4f",
            "input": "A spaceship returns from Mars; about a couple of months earlier, a 4-person expedition had been sent to the red planet. Most of the picture is a flashback to what transpired over there. The picture is saddled by inane, melodramatic dialog, typical of many sci-fi efforts of the fifties & sixties. Note, for example, how the ship's commander (Mohr) tells another crew member to 'stay there' for no reason; as if moving to another spot inside the ship will cause a problem. Later, the commander orders two of the crew to remain in the ship while he and another go outside. The two he ordered to stay say 'no way' and follow out; I didn't have high hopes for the expedition's success by this point. There's much talk of 'ears twitching' and hugging a freeze-ray gun named 'Cleo' (short for Cleopatra, of course). It would at least be pretty funny, unintentionally, if the story didn't drag.There's a very slow pace to the whole thing; the astronauts spend as much time looking out the ship's window portals (which change color from red to blue), commenting on what they see, as they do outside actually exploring. The martian landscape, advertised as filmed in 'Cinemagic,' usually resembles animation cut-outs, or drawings, shot through an orange-red filter to give the illusion of interacting with the actors, who do take on an odd surrealistic appearance due to the process. But I don't think it fools anyone over 10 years old. The one clever mention I did notice was that the memories of the surviving astronaut would be tinged with unreality, so that would explain the unreal nature of the martian vista. Oh, okay...I was amused by some of the astronauts' actions as they begin to explore; right off the bat, they test their freeze gun on a plant, killing it, just for the hell of it. Then the female member hacks with a machete at what she thinks is a tree but turns out to be the leg of the spider-rat monster. Nice going, lady. Look up next time. No wonder the 'intelligence' on Mars gets upset and doesn't mind that one of the lower lifeforms, a giant amoeba, attacks the explorers. The acting isn't too impressive. Mohr especially, had a very annoying technique, saying a line and then abruptly erupting into a huge grin which always creeped me out - reminded me of It! the Terror From Beyond Space. The ending is fairly anti-climactic; don't expect any huge revelations beyond the 'no more expeditions' with freeze guns named Cleo.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbdf8e90fc204fb7a1870cfdfed5d38e",
            "input": "It's just breathtaking in it's awfulness-- you really must see it!Depending on your perspective, Dylan Walsh is either the savior or the problem here: since he's the only one on screen that can actually get his lines out with something akin to natural cadences and inflection, he either ruins the movie by pointing up everyone else's flaws, or he saves it by providing some context for their awfulness.I'm inclined to the later view-- thanks to him, it works as high comedy. He's the 7 footer in a game of dwarf basketball, his skill set just doesn't apply in this context, and his discombobulation is delicious.The real treat though is Ms. Eastwood, whose inability to speak in plain English is so pervasive I actually googled her, expecting to learn that she was a Russian beauty who pronounced her lines phonetically, with no understanding of their meaning. But no: she's just a talent free American who will leave you laughing with every line she drops. Whether she knew what the lines meant must remain an open question.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e20f0516bf7c424095e8334f285936fb",
            "input": "I've come to realise from watching Euro horror, especially films made by cult luminary Jess Franco, that you can't expect a plot that makes much sense. However, Franco has gone overboard with this film; and despite a surreal atmosphere, and the film's reputation as one of the director's best - Succubus is unfortunately is a truly awful film. I've got to admit that I saw the American cut version, which runs at about 76 minutes; but unless it was just the logic that was cut, I'm sure the longer European version is just as boring. The plot has something to do with a woman marauding around; practicing S&M and talking rubbish, and it's all really boring. There's no gore and the sex is dull, and most of the runtime is taken up by boring dialogue and despite the fact that this is a short film; I had difficulty making it all the way to the end. I have to say that the locations look good and Franco has done a good job of using his surreal atmosphere; but the positive elements end there. Jess Franco is definitely a talented director that has made some classic trash films - but this looks like it was one he made for the money, and overall I recommend skipping it and seeing some of the director's more interesting works.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a9296bc239b46d38188365152f6a2cf",
            "input": "POSSIBLE SPOILER - In some way \"How to Alienate Friends....\" is the \"loser learns to adjust, becomes successful and finds out that something else matter more\" type of story, situated in the celebrity business. - END OF SPOILER I don't know the original book but this comedy delivers several good moments. Though I do think the ending is flawed. It felt too fast and too abrupt, as if something was missing. Besides I'd say the movie isn't able to keep a high level. Apart from this you'll find a sweet selection of actors and actresses with sometimes controversial acting qualities. Until now I've never seen Pegg any different. Still he is a very unique type though on the screen he sometimes might seem a little more tedious than necessary. Fox proved she is capable to play a hot starlet with her head in the clouds. Don't know whether it was a hard thing to do, but her performance was hot and way better than during \"Transformers\" (okay... probably that's no tough match). Kirsten Dunst is very much Kirsten Dunst (again) and you may like it (as I do) or find it annoying. On the other hand you'll see Anderson who proved her acting skills and Jeff Bridges (who is fine but perhaps he could have acted a little more powerful). They all fit their character well enough.Conclusion: I think it's a nice celeb comedy with some more and some less funny passages, a sweet cast but an all too sudden ending.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f133a4ff7d224c3fab1ee440494f1374",
            "input": "'Thunderbirds' was an immensely popular Sixties show that has transcended the years and generations to the point it is still as popular now, with both adults and children alike, as it was in its heyday. So, one would deduce the chance to produce a live-action feature film with a million pound Hollywood budget was an excellent opportunity to revive the series as has been done with 'Spider-Man' and 'The X-Men'. But a terrible storyline and bland acting obliterated this opportunity and it was soon apparent all that was destined for this film was a trip to the bargain bin of the kiddies' section.Instead of a film focusing on the five Tracey sons, their father and trusty geek Brain striving to rescue people and protect the world from villains, our hero in this drudge is a malcontent and bratty thirteen-year-old Alan Tracey, fourteen-year-old Tin-tin and ten-year-old brain-box Fermat, son of Brains (yes, Brains' son despite this being a man who could surely never score a woman if he tried; maybe he grew the kid in a petri dish). As one can tell from a run-through of our three lead characters, this 2004 remake 'Thunderbirds' was clearly aimed at entertaining only children under twelve instead of trying to appeal to a broad age-range as those involved in the much superior revival of 'Spider-Man' did. The plot itself was so bland with clunky, awkward dialogue and weak jokes that probably wouldn't amuse brighter pre-teens. The scriptwriter seemed more interested in ripping off 'Spy Kids' (which was at least quirky and original) instead of remaking the show people know and love.Although Sophia Myles and Ron Cook were excellent as Miss Penelope and Parker, they only had about three lines between them so their presence was barely felt. Bill Paxton's Jeff Tracey was just boring and there was only the slightest of mention of the other four Tracey boys while Anthony Edwards and Ben Kingsley, as Brains and the Hood respectively, were just embarrassing. The Hood, in particular, is not at all threatening or sinister and instead comes across as a campy, two-bit stereotypical villain as limp as a piece of rotting lettuce.Brady Corbet, who plays Alan Tracey, may well be a good young actor but it was hard to see that in a film where he plays a whinging brat who just grates and the same goes for Vanessa Anne Hutchinson as Tin-tin since the most she gets to do is look pretty and be all for 'Girl Power'. Ironically, it is young Soren Fulton's Fermat who is the only interesting character of the film as Fulton delivers a natural and relaxed performance.'Thunderbirds' the series will be forever remembered as an excellent show that proves puppets can give solid performances! 'Thunderbirds' the film will be forgotten by most and remembered by a few as one big flop.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b241b0beb8c244239ea9b2de6490b8b0",
            "input": "Cute film about three lively sisters from Switzerland (often seen running about in matching outfits) who want to get their parents back together (seems mom is still carrying the torch for dad) - so they sail off to New York to stop the dad from marrying a blonde gold-digger he calls \"Precious\". Dad hasn't seen his daughters in ten years, they (oddly enough) don't seem to mind and think he's wonderful, and meanwhile Precious seems to lead a life mainly run by her overbearing mother (Alice Brady), a woman who just wants to see to it her daughter marries a rich man. The sisters get the idea of pushing Precious into the path of a drunken Hungarian count, tricking the two gold-digging women into thinking he is one of the richest men in Europe. But a case of mistaken identity makes the girls think the count is good-looking Ray Milland, who goes along with the scheme 'cause he has a crush on sister Kay.This film is enjoyable, light fare. Barbara Read as Kay comes across as sweet and pretty, Ray Milland looks oh so young and handsome here (though, unfortunately, is given little to do), Alice Brady is quite good as the scheming mother - but it is Deanna Durbin, a real charmer and cute as a button playing youngest sister Penny, who pretty much steals the show. With absolutely beautiful vocals, she sings several songs throughout the film, though I actually would have liked to have seen them feature her even more in this. The plot in this film is a bit silly, but nevertheless, I found the film to be entertaining and fun.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3720a9f3d69437e8213eaac9477b713",
            "input": "This was my second time watching the film (via the French-language version as opposed to the first, which was dubbed in Italian) and I feel that it improves on subsequent viewings.A compelling if slowly built-up character study that's beautifully shot and with the Parisian settings being equally impressive. In the long run, it's not top-grade Polanski and I would rank it at number 9 in his filmography but it's still a confident mix of subtle chills and, surprisingly, often broad comedy. It also features a fine cast, all of whom are in good form, but especially Isabelle Adjani, Melvyn Douglas and Jo Van Fleet.Even so, I'm a bit baffled by the sudden compulsion for Trelkovsky to 'change' into the previous tenant; apart from the owner of the café opposite the apartment building, where he is given whatever Simone used to have without asking him if he wished any different, there is little to indicate (as far as I could discern, anyway) that this is what everybody wanted of him! Okay, so he found Simone's belongings still lying in the apartment but what exactly drove him to wear her dresses and make himself up as her (even if he apparently started doing this unconsciously)? Following his nightmarish visions in the bathroom, the last section of the film (where Adjani all but disappears) is almost anti-climactic - especially the scene where the landlord and the other tenants witness his attempted suicide as if it were a night at the Opera, a concept which had already been used 46 years earlier by Jean Cocteau in THE BLOOD OF A POET (1930)!The ending, then, is at once predictable and unresolved: just what made the two occupants of this particular apartment jump out of the window?!; I remember this factor bugging me on first viewing as well, and I'm sorry to say it's no clearer now! Mind you, the film's first two-thirds are pretty solid but I wish that Polanski had been less reliant on obscure plot points throughout.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf8881c03a7f46099e7d35b30413471f",
            "input": "Well, what can it be said about this disaster? I watched it because it aired on cable. I regret for wasting my time but at least I didn't waste money. The creature is the cheesiest you can get! Please, you need to be very generous not to get angered by the CHEAP Halloween costume. Oh well, there are also displays of horrible acting, f/x, and dialogues. The confrontation with the creature is unbelievable, you can't get a more pathetic scene. This is the worst you can get from direct to video flicks. \"Creature Unknown\" makes FULL MOON PICTURES movies look like \"Halloween\". Avoid this one at all costs, please. The only \"positive\" thing about this trash are the sexy women.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab43923af11b47f793a6271f406c3f73",
            "input": "I recommend families if possible,to show this to older children only.Some of the stuff in this film maybe too disturbing for little ones to handle.Now that thats out of the way,let me explain about this movie.This is in reality a documentary of a male fox,who in the beginning is protecting his territory and seeking a mate.The beginning with the gorgeous sunrise and music score,is breath taking.You had better soak in as much of the scenery as possible,it'll get ugly later.They gave both the fox and the vixen names,but I can't remember what they are for the likes of me.He fights off this invading male,to win her love.They later on create a den,and the vixen gives birth to four adorable cubs;one of which is blind.There are many happy and playful moments featuring the fox family,but tragedy and bad luck strike all too soon.The first victim is the blind pup,who gets too close to a high tide and is washed away.The second victim is the mother,who while stealing chickens is deceived by a dead chicken hanging on a pole.She unknowingly walks into a foot trap.While trying to escape she rips off part of her foot,causing her to bleed to death.The rest of the fox family is forced to watch her die under a tree.The male is now a single dad,forced to take on the roll of mom and dad.He alone has to teach them the skills they need for life.It later proves not to be enough,when two of the now grown pups meet an ugly fate of their own; thanks to the carelessness and cruelity of man.I won't spoil the surprising ending for you,but it does show the farmer and his dogs close on his tail.And it is a well deserved ending after what the audience and the fox family was put through.I wanted to say that I saw this when it first came out in early 1980s, when we had a thing called Showbiz cable.I was only 4 when I saw it,but I could never understand why they wouldn't let me see all of it.Now I know why,after I secretly watched it when it came on Disney,when I was 9.I felt emotionally gutted after seeing all this evil going on.I was moved to tears.But as dark and ugly as it was,it serves a purpose.To let people what is going to these and other kinds of animals,and why they are endangered.This documentary wanted to get the message across about this endangered species,and I hoped it worked.Its not fake like the True life nature films by Disney,they don't teach about why animals are going extinct.The encroachment of land,the killing off of the foxes main prey,and senseless killing of these beautiful animals;has resulted in them becoming endangered.I wish they would make sequel to this movie,(Glacier Fox 2005)to see if they're being treated better.Maybe have it be about a vixen pup named Teresa and her siblings growing up.This movie also kind of reflects what happens to human families sometimes,especially when one of the parents suddenly dies.The surviving parent takes on the roll of both,and tries to teach the important lessons of life.It isn't always enough to protect them when they're adults,especially when some of their lives becomes ruined.Or they fall victims to tragedy themselves.Best all around soundtrack and musical score I've ever heard.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cee3f76de32a43bebdb7f44c1bbd4829",
            "input": "I rarely comment on films but I've read the other comments and I cannot believe that there are people applauding this celluloid rubbish. I know there are certain people who have their own agenda but lets take it on merit; poorly acted, badly shot and the story felt as the director was making it up as he was going along. I am not going to focus on the sexual aspect of the film involving little kids as the makers of the film obviously knew what they wanted and what their audience would want. All I can say is it is a terrible film, the content is poor and offensive, the production is amateurish and I am glad they could not make a film like this legally today",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf133b69318b4f66903cc5cae0b55f46",
            "input": "I saw Chan Is Missing when it first came out, about four years after moving from San Francisco to New York. Maybe it was the perspective of a few years away, but this movie seemed to capture the essence of the city and its people better than anything else I'd ever seen (still does). It concentrates on one particular community - the Chinese - but that's fine, because so much of the city's soul is refracted through the settings, the faces, and the maybe above all the voices of the characters.This isn't the tourists' San Francisco. The settings are humble and everyday: a taxi cab, the kitchen of a Chinese restaurant, Richmond District row houses, little Chinatown apartments and small-business offices, the piers, a Philippine elder center. This is what the city looks and feels like day to day to the people who live there - even now, in the era of Silicon Gulch urban redevelopment. Unlike, say, Dirty Harry (in its own way an excellent San Francisco movie as well), everything is filmed at street level: We come to understand the characters' points of view from the perspective their surroundings give them, not from some fancy vertiginous shooting.Wang apparently filmed in B&W because he didn't have the money to do otherwise, yet one of the strongest visual elements of the movie is the natural light he achieves. The often harsh, pervasive quality of the sunlight is one of my closest associations with San Francisco: It seems to expose everything, bringing the buildings, the hills, the other landmarks down in scale and, in a funny way, making the people you pass on the streets seem more individual and potentially closer to you than they might in another place. Wang's photography perfectly conveys this, and even helps the story along at points.Wang captures the speech and conversational style of Chinese and other San Franciscans better than anyone ever has, I think. If there's such thing as a true San Francisco \"accent,\" it's what you hear from the balding taxi medallion broker (I think) who appears talking on the phone in one scene (listen to the way he calls the person on the other end \"ya dingaling!\").The story is poignant and, despite a few very small missteps, makes its points beautifully about the longings that pull at the hearts of people living in old immigrant communities - including the justified political and ethnic resentments, and little ironic amusements, that help to fuel them. All this is communicated delicately - perhaps why some respondents here think the film meanders. It doesn't - suffice it to say that the two cab drivers' quest for Chan becomes a quest for something more personal.Chan Is Missing finishes up with a Chinatown travelogue sequence backed by a goofy novelty song from the 1930s (I guess) about San Francisco and all its crazy diversity. An American caricature, yes, but somehow not entirely off the mark either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ded780091caf4d4f834da5abe52b2979",
            "input": "So your bairns are away on a sleep-over ? The wife is visiting the mother in law? You though are at home. It's a dark and stormy night and there is no football on the telly and the dishwasher needs stacking? So now what are you going to do? I will tell you! Go make an old fashioned cocoa (Frys is best!)Get hold of some ginger nuts and sit down in front of the DVD. Now go select and play Arthur Askeys world war two thriller/horror The Ghost Train, return to that comfortable settee and enjoy the night in!The Ghost Train is a genuine British war time classic! Arthur Askey with his side kick,Stinker Murdoch, entertain you and I suspect the cast, to a high octane, thrills and spills, espionage thriller.It's set in old rural England during the second world war.It centres around a motley group of people that need to stay overnight, through circumstances outside any ones' control, in an old railway waiting room that they discover is haunted by an old train.The plot unfolds neatly and precisely and is a credit to the entire cast it is humorous in parts and at times genuinely scary! (The tale was written by that old boy Godfrey of Dads Army fame and it is clever )Arthur Askey is entertaining and is very at home preforming his routines to you and the cast, he also shows he can act a bit! The cast are never out staged though, even the railway porter and the parrot help give the film the necessary gravitas.Oh and when it ends please remember to stack the dish washer!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ffa55a84bcc143c2a887719d66fac378",
            "input": "A family with dad Louis (Dale Midkiff), mom Rachel (Denise Crosby), 10 year old Eileen (Blaze Berdalh and about 3 year old Gage (Miko Hughes) move to this beautiful house in Maine--seemingly unaware of the semis that roar down the highway in front of their house every 90 seconds or so! The neighbor across the way (the wonderful Fred Gwynne) makes them feel at home...and shows them a pet cemetery where children bury their pets. But a little further on is a sacred ground which can bring the dead back to life...but the dead come back in a nasty mood.\"\"DEFINITE SPOILERS** The novel by Stephen King was good--it was long but it developed characters and situations that made you care what happened. This movie jettisons ALL the character development and just plays up the gore and violence. Animals are killed ON camera (I know it's faked but it's still repulsive); a little boy is hit by a semi and his casket pops open during the funeral (in a totally sick scene); he's brought back to life and attacks and kills people including his mom (I DO wonder how a 3 year old was able to hang her); a ghostly jogger (don't ask) tries to help the family for no reason...The movie just works the audience over shoving every gruesome death or violence into your face. It just goes out of its way to shock you. **END SPOILERS**Acting is no help. Midkiff is just dreadful as the father--he's handsome and buff but totally blank. Crosby isn't much better. The two kids are just annoying. Only Gwynne single-handedly saves this picture with his effortless good acting. This picture shows a total contempt for the audience taking large leaps in logic and having characters do incredibly stupid things (especially Midkiff at the end). This movie was (inexplicably) a huge box office hit in 1989 which led to the even worse sequel in 1992. I saw it in a theatre back then and was disturbed how the audience kept cheering on the violence and was just appalled by what I saw. A sick repulsive horror film. A 1 all the way.When you think it's all over and can't get worse the Ramones sing a title song!!!!!! (\"I don't wanna be buried in a pet cemetery\"). Truly beyond belief.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-382734f6a4984e11ba137917d930b4ab",
            "input": "This is a great little film, that's very unique, and creative, with some great plot twists and wonderful performances!. All the characters are great, and the story while bizarre, is fascinating and very interesting, plus Nicole Kidman is simply amazing in this!. It's very hard to describe this movie, because it really is quite bizarre, it's a comedy/romance, one minute then it turns into a thriller the next, however it was still very entertaining all the same, plus Nicole's Russian accent was fantastic, and extremely convincing. Chaplin and Kidman had very good chemistry together, and i loved Vincent Cassel's performance!, plus some of the plot twists really took me by surprise!. The ending was very cute, and it's unpredictable throughout!, plus this movie is quite underrated as well!. You will feel sorry for Chaplin and the way that he is scammed, and i thought all the characters were really likable, plus the finale is especially good.This is Nicole's movie though, and she carries it with her incredibly sexy performance!. This is a great little film, that's very unique, and creative, with some great plot twists and wonderful performances!, i highly recommend this one!. The Direction is very good!. Jez Butterworth does a very good job here, with great camera work, solid angles and keeping the film at a fast pace!. The Acting is wonderful!. Nicole Kidman, is stunningly gorgeous!, and is amazing as always, she is incredibly sexy, very likable, had one of the coolest accents, added a lot of presence, had very good chemistry with Ben Chaplin, and had a very mysterious character!, she was amazing. (Kidman Rules!!!!). Ben Chaplin is great here, he is extremely likable, had a cool character, had very good chemistry with Kidman, the only thing i didn't like was him taking out his anger out on Kidman, even though what she did was wrong, and i loved how he got revenge in the end!. Vincent Cassel is fantastic as the main villain, yes he was OTT, but he was very intense and quite creepy at times, this role was perfect for him. Mathieu Kassovitz is OK here, but didn't have much to do. Rest of the cast are fine. Overall i highly recommend this one!. ***1/2 out of 5",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df5d0d2c93004943b9496c8449637177",
            "input": "I own 2 home entertainment stores and I've seen a lot of bad movies in my time but this one was so bad it compelled me to register here and comment on it. How bad was it? Let's just say that Sofia Coppola deserved an Oscar for her performance in Godfather III when compared to Giada Colagrande's in this movie.It was robotic and uninspired. Her lover has just died one month prior to her arrival at the 'Rubber House' he had given her. Once there, she discovers he has cheated on her throughout her relationship but none of it seems to register with her. Within a day, she starts a relationship with Leslie, (Dafoe) the caretaker of the house. Even though she is married to Dafoe off screen, her scenes with him were cold and unemotional.If there was a plot, I missed it. Not even Willem Dafoe could save this movie from the amateur, cinematic train wreck that it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22bb25dbddf24edd9b774cc8998603bd",
            "input": "One the whole, this movie isn't perfect. It doesn't 'hang well' together as the story line is basically a bunch of hooks to hang jokes.Some of these jokes are a little 'too 80s' and tend to date the picture.But some of these jokes are classic.You know a movie has something special when you and your friends still reference silly quotes from it over 2 decades later.Plus, there are a bunch of familiar faces; Michael Keaton, Danny Devito, Joe Piscapo, Peter Boyle, Marilu Henner, Maureen Stapleton, Bob Eubanks, Griffin Dunne, and one of the last roles of Alan Hale Jr., the Skipper from Gilligan's Island.Also, there are some great absurdist moments, like when Johnny is labelling the puppies with a pricing gun, or the Pope making an appearance in Johnny's neighborhood. Also, the scene where the fake priest makes up a lot of words in Latin is excellent. (\"Summa cum laude, magna cum laude, the radio's too louda... Post meridian, ante meridian, uncle meridian\").Other Classic Scenes include Ramone Maroney butchering the English language Danny Devito urging Griffin Dunne to 'Play Ball' Peter Boyle thinking he lost his manhood The fake VD movieThis movie is no home run. But like 'Porky's', it has enough classic comedy bits to make it memorable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f8ce5edc58f4ba5aef1119144dd137e",
            "input": "The first look on the cover of this picture, it looks like a good rock n roll movie. But don't let the cover fool you, or the fact that Alice Cooper and Blondie is in it. The storyline is just horrible, and so is the acting. Plain and simple: BADIt's not a movie about a roadie, its just a thin love story, so awful that you see right through it. The only good thing about this movie, is the soundtrack.Some good songs, and that is why I give 2 out of 10. If it wasn't for the music, it would of been 0 out of 10. Meat Loaf is a horrible actor(at least he was in 1980), and the girl who plays the groupie isn't even good looking! This movie was a huge disappointment for me, because it makes a lot of good promises.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab09e2c105b440b1a337a3870dfc3da8",
            "input": "When Philo Vance (Edmund Lowe) is standing precariously on the edge of a balcony high above the city, apparently hypnotized and just about to step to his death,it immediately reminded me of a nearly identical scene in another film made nine years later, \"The Woman in Green\" in which Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone)is similarly about to hurl himself into space while being hypnotized. Happily, both Philo Vance and Sherlock Holmes survive these attempts at murder by unscrupulous criminals. Exciting cinematic suspense in both these scenes. When will they learn you can't cloud the minds of great fictional detectives ?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0aae9dbf7424d029b532318863e5c18",
            "input": "Almost the entire film takes place in a public bathhouse in China. There are no fancy sets, explosion or glamorous people--only fine writing, acting and direction (Hollywood, take note!).An estranged son returns home when he believes his father is dying. He is surprised to see that Dad looks fine and is going about running the family business as usual. In fact, he notices that his father and his retarded brother have really forged a close and caring relationship and it soon becomes obvious that he is out of the loop! Dad is very traditional and this visiting son is from the big city and doesn't really see the value of the old bathhouse. How their relationship changes and where the plot goes from there is exceptional and believable.I was happy to see that not every Chinese movie is an action picture (such as those starring Jet Li or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon), as I don't particularly care for these frenetic films. The Shower as well as Springtime In A Small Town are two wonderful examples of good Chinese films about PEOPLE!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36458d6ead4a4cbcb93e05f1846da952",
            "input": "Kudos to the writers of this film for creating a supremely engaging drama. The curious character development is indicative of a nuanced and well schooled writing team. The audience member cannot but help but to feel that (s)he must make wrenching emotional decisions pitting the cerebral against the libidinal. The viewer has an opportunity to develop the character herself, though her predictions are rarely validated.Credit is also due to the filmmakers for breathing life into the setting. The wood-shop is transformed into a unique persona as the film unfolds, with its own traits, faults, a variety of highly charged relationships, and of course a fate inexorably tied to that of the other principals.Make sure to catch this one at your local art-house.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-761f31c9ab6b4f36aa3551a047ae6d05",
            "input": "A masterpiece.Thus it is, possibly, not for everyone.The camera work, acting, directing and everything else is unique, original, superb in every way - and very different from the trash we are sadly used to getting.Summer Phoenix creates a deep, believable and intriguing Esther Kahn. As everything else in this film, her acting is unique - it is completely her own - neither \"British\" nor \"American\" nor anything else I have ever seen. There is something mesmerizing about it.The lengthy, unbroken, natural shots are wonderful, reminding us that we have become too accustomed to a few restricted ways of shooting and editing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f074703555340098c60df066caaa594",
            "input": "If you haven't seen ZOMBIE BLOODBATH, you haven't. A contest like 'make your own horror movie in one day' could not possibly come up with a entry than this outrage of an insult on any viewer's intelligence. Mr. Sheets forgot a story, a plot, proper dialog, the fact that people need some BASIC acting talents and the credited lighting designer obviously forgot to show up. It seems to be recorded on the crummiest of handycams, and copied on even worse equipment. Make-up effect consist of black mascara for the zombies and yoghurt being poured over people's heads in order to simulate their skin melting. This is nothing more than a home-movie, and a really bad one as well. Only fun to watch for the friends, familymembers and neighbours that were willing to show up for the filming. I cannot for the life of me understand why this mockery of a product is listed in ANY serious film magazine or website - I have home-movies of wedding parties that are way better and more interesting. A total waste of time, money and energy. The sequel ZOMBIE BLOODBATH II is just more of the same rubbish.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58e267185cbf4315aca52bef2b31b272",
            "input": "A detective (Dana Andrews) with a reputation for violence accidentally kills a suspect in a murder (Craig Stevens) and then tries to cover it up. The Otto Preminger directed film has plenty of atmosphere but the story gets watered down when the dead man's wife (Gene Tierney) falls for Andrews. He was doing fairly well digging himself into and out of a big hole, but she was just too much light at the end of the tunnel for a noir film. Gary Merrill is great as Scalese, a crime boss that Andrews is obsessed with bringing down, and the tension between them gives the film its energy and drive, especially a scene in a bath house with Merrill, Andrews, and Neville Brand, and the night time rendezvous outside of Bellevue Hospital, that sets up what ought to have been the film's conclusion. High marks for atmosphere, Andrews, Merrill, etc... and the general portrayal of the underworld, though the love angle and the simplistic good cop bad cop elements don't help its cause.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0999f968fcf9458da877f714586afadf",
            "input": "It follows BLOCK-HEADS and A CHUMP AT OXFORD, two films that are hard to top. Not that SAPS AT SEA is a bad film - it is the last good comedy (unless one insists on JITTERBUGS or another of the later films) that Laurel & Hardy made. It's just that it is a toss-off little film, without the crazy destructive crescendo of BLOCK-HEADS or the astounding sight of Stan's \"real\" personality in A CHUMP AT OXFORD to revel in. At 57 minutes it is shorter than the other two films a bit, but that actually is not a bad point for it. It has just enough time to it to hit the right notes. It's just not as special as the other two.Stan and Ollie work in a factory that manufactures horns. I suspect that there was a bit of Chaplin influence in this sequence (one recalls a similar assembly-line incident in MODERN TIMES only four years earlier). Ollie's nerves finally snap, and he goes on a rampage. He goes home and (naturally) his roommate Stan does not help - Stan has a music lesson with an eccentric professor on his instrument (you've got it - a trombone). After beating up the poor professor, Ollie has problems with the incompetent janitor/engineer (Ben Turpin in a nice brief appearance), and then faces his doctor (Jimmy Finleyson) and his nerve tester (a balloon that inflates as you push air out of Ollie's stomach). Finleyson announces that it is a bad case of \"horniphobia\", and Ollie needs a vacation with plenty of quiet and goat's milk. They end up going to a ship but Ollie and Stan know nothing about seamanship - so they plan to sleep on the ship. Unfortunately the goat gnaws the rope until it breaks and the ship sails off. Also unfortunately, on board is Richard Cramer, an escaped dangerous criminal. This is not going to be a peaceful vacation.SAPS AT SEA (like A CHUMP) could have been three shorts, one at the factory, one at the apartment, and one on the boat. Each would have been a successful short, and they all make a funny film - but the stitching of the parts together shows. There are some very amusing moments in the film - the discoveries of how Turpin's ineptitude causes various mishaps with water taps and stoves in the apartment; the accidental remarks of building manager Charlie Hall when Stan or Ollie runs by him and asks for directions (\"Can you help me find the basement?\" asks Stan - \"Certainly,you can't miss it - it's downstairs!\", says Hall, who realizes what a stupid comment he just made); and Cramer's mistreatment of his two hostage slaves. He calls Ollie \"Dizzy\" and Stan \"Daffy\" (an allusion to the Dean Brothers of the St. Louis Cardinal teams of the 1930s - see Dan Dailey's THE PRIDE OF ST. LOUIS). Cramer has the boys cook him up some food - and they make a synthetic meal (boot laces for spaghetti, for instance) to get him sick to be overpowered. When he realizes what they have done, he forces them to eat the meal themselves. Their reactions are brilliant.SAPS AT SEA is not on par with the top line of Laurel & Hardy films, but it is a good film on the whole, and a good conclusion to the best years of their film career (1927 - 1940) when they were with Hal Roach. In the immediate couple of years before it appeared the boys and Roach had serious problems involving production costs (OUR RELATIONS, where Stan was producer on the film), artistic problems (scenes from SWISS MISS were cut meaninglessly), and contractual arguments (leading to Ollie appearing with Harry Langdon in ZENOBIA). Stan and Ollie hit back with THE FLYING DEUCES, wherein the production was not Roach's but Boris Morros'. At last a two picture deal of A CHUMP AT OXFORD and SAPS AT SEA concluded the arguments and problems - and on a high note the boys left Roach. Unfortunately they never found any subsequent film relationship with a producer as satisfactory as this had been.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e821649839d49c3b743446f9f1bb3a5",
            "input": "The Rookie suffers from so much. There are the random musical songs interspersed through the movie, the long pointless script and enough grating slapstick to make Jerry Lewis blush. Noonan and Leavitt just don't know when to quit. It takes a full hour before the story finally gets to the main plot and the characters are shipwrecked. Then the guys start playing Japanese sailors with the standard racist caricature of the day. It is a shame the funniest parts of the movie are when Noonan and Leavitt are playing the stupid, stereotyped Japanese guys. But, it gets pretty tiring after switching back and forth between two sets of characters. Then it just abruptly ends. Even a naked Julie Newmar in a towel can't save this one.There is really little charm in the movie and it is over a half hour too long. The story just flounders along trying to set up funny situations and failing. Stick to Martin & Lewis. At least Deano had charm and Jerry had that animated face.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a33865c560649ddb6f3731fe4b0ed2a",
            "input": "Well, maybe the PC version of this game was impressive. Maybe. I just finished playing the PS2 version and it's pretty much a complete mess.There are a couple elements that are okay or promising. I'll mention those first because it will be over quickly. First, the idea of a historical GTA-like game is a great one. The game Gun was a historical GTA-like game and unlike Mafia, Gun was excellent. I'd love to see a game set during Mafia's era done right. Next, the storyline is well written. The story makes sense, it has dramatic arcs, it uses an unusual device (with much of the game being a backstory) and it's interesting. Finally, some of the graphics--especially those used during cutscenes--are impressive. Mafia's designers seemed to focus on getting the graphics right in the places where GTA skimped on that effort, especially the characters. Unfortunately in many other areas, the graphics kinda stink, and I'd much rather have excellent gameplay than impressive-looking characters.The gameplay is what sinks this title so low. First off, the controls and camera absolutely suck. That has to be the first focus of any game developers. You can't release a game where the controls and/or camera suck. Number one, there's no reason that the player's character, Tom, can't have his full range of motion controlled by the left analog stick. Unless it's absolutely necessary, and it hardly ever is, I hate the set-up where the left stick moves the character in a \"strafing\" way and the character can only turn using the right analog stick. Here, it's not only unnecessary, it makes most of the simplest actions a challenge. For example, Tom has to climb on a couple missions. But the game is designed so poorly that you have to frustratingly keep manipulating both the right analog stick and the camera, and then press L1 every time you need to climb, or Tom will descend instead.Next, I've never seen a worse fighting system. The first problem is that you can't auto-aim or lock on to any targets. At one early point, the game seems to tell you that you can use L2 or R2 to lock on to targets, but that never worked. So to focus on any enemy, you have to struggle with the stupid right analog stick and try to keep adjusting both the character's orientation and the camera, which tends to drift to the wrong angle or make Tom disappear all the time. By that time, you're probably getting pummeled or shot to death.Next, if you're touching or almost touching an enemy--and that's certainly going to be the case for hand to hand combat or when using melee weapons, the fighting system--which primarily consists of tapping or holding R1, is completely useless. Enemies can pummel you almost in a bear hug, but you just can't move unless you back off. So close fighting tends to consist of you yanking on the left analog stick, yelling at the character to move away, which it won't do 50% of the time, then tapping R1 as much as you can before the enemy gets too close again and makes R1 useless. And if the enemy changes their angle to you in the meantime, you're also going to struggle with the right analog stick to get your character oriented in the right way and to get the camera in position so you can see anything. By that time, you're probably getting pummeled or shot again, and your only option will be to try to move the character away again. My fights often consisted of making Tom run circles around an area like a comedy film, hoping that I could gain enough time to struggle with the analog stick and get a couple shots in before being at the AI's mercy again. So much for realistic fighting.And the same problems and more exist when trying to fight with guns. If you're touching someone, half the time the controller just won't allow you to fire off a shot, yet they can still riddle you full of holes. Additionally, there's no auto-aim, and the aiming system is ridiculously sensitive, even with the sensitivity set to zero under Options. Gunfights tend to consist of you hopelessly trying to aim or move away while the enemy puts shot after shot into you. Luckily or not, damage seems to be recorded almost randomly. It can take one to ten shots or more to incapacitate any character, and there's no rhyme or reason to it. You can put five shots into an enemy's head and near point blank range and they'll still return fire and hurt you. Yet, the game designers seemed to care enough about realism than they built a recoil into your aiming system, so after shots with powerful enough guns, your aim will float off target, and you'll have to fight with it again.As for the celebrated graphics, except for the characters and textures that you're close to, they're actually pretty disappointing. The distance always seems mostly empty, and there are often expanses of flat colors and textures nearby when you're driving. The city wasn't very well designed. It's not varied enough, and there aren't many interesting things to see or do. The cars seem slow and they're difficult to control. They also all drive about the same. Some have mentioned the music, but that was also pretty nondescript. A much better job could have been done on that end. Also, as many others have mentioned, the load times are ridiculous and constant. They tend to be over a minute long, and they occur between and in the middle of everything--even races.Overall, the Mafia port to PS2, at least, seems to have been very rushed. The game feels and plays like an incomplete hack job.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08af060bee2c4c089dad6fe5cc136db1",
            "input": "Luckily I did not pay to see this movie. Also, I cannot even reveal any spoilers because I willingly WALKED OUT after forty minutes of the movie. It was that bad. I laughed once, when the Yahoo! billboard fell on the guy, and the theme song came on. However, that was only because I thought it was making fun of it, but then I realized it was yet ANOTHER product placement. I loved the cartoon. I used to watch it almost religiously. (although i missed the last episode. I heard that they show Dr. Claw and it was nothing more than a Claw, somebody comment on the show's page) The cartoon had Penny and Brain alot more than the movie had, as to that point. I hated the setup of the whole thing, reminiscent of Robocop. Then Broderick screws with the whole feeling of Inspector Gadget. He is not nearly as clumsy as the cartoon was. Another fact is his gadgets actually work to the point I saw, except for the oil slick. He also screwed with the tone of \"Wowsers\" which used to be in an excited tone. I felt so disappointed that they slaughtered the cartoon so badly. Everybody else felt that way too. Us 14-17 year olds remember the cartoon fondly and we loved every minute of it.I went into the movie with an open mind, knowing that they would have screwed with the cartoon. I was taken aback at how retarded the movie was. It relied on sight gags, and stupid dialogue for humor. Disney relies on pain and physical humor to push a kids movie along. Product placement is pointless in this film, and it shows. The wise-cracking car is not that good at cracking wise. The gadgets look nice, but they were almost overly glossy. The cartoon was a better look. The silly scenes were crap. In the 40-45 minutes I watched the movie, not one laugh was heard, and they laughed at the Dudley-Do-Right preview. This movie should not be watched by people who want intelligence in their family entertainment. I highly recommend \"The Iron Giant,\" which was sad, but very very good. This movie is a travesty to the whole family drama.------------1",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5852fd5b6c52404bb3a018c72a567a2d",
            "input": "Powers Booth is hypnotic as cult leader jim jones who led his Peoples Temple followers from 1953 until 1978 when he led them in a mass suicide in 1978 where over 900 died. A very well done movie which may seem a little dated due to the 70s time period but well worth the time 8 of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2081565542224889976a437ffabc0001",
            "input": "Leslie Charteris' series of novels of the adventures of the slightly shady Simon Templar (\"The Saint\") was brought to the screen in the late 1930s with the up and coming George Sanders as Templar. It was a careful choice - Sanders usually would play villains with occasional \"nice roles\" (ffoliott in FOREIGN CORRESPONDENCE, the title hero in THE STRANGE CASE OF UNCLE HARRY, the framed \"best friend\" of Robert Montgomery in RAGE IN HEAVEN). Here his willingness to bend the rules and break a law briefly fit his \"heavy persona\", while his good looks and suave behavior made Templar a fit shady hero like Chester Morris' \"Boston Blackie\", and (to an extent) Peter Lorre's \"Mr. Moto\". The films are not the best series of movie mystery serials - but they are serviceable. Like Rathbone's Holmes series or Oland's Chan's series the show frequently had actors repeating roles or playing new ones (the anti-heroine in the film here was played by Wendy Barrie, who would show up in a second film in the series). This, and slightly familiar movie sets make the series a comfortable experience for the viewers, who hear the buzz of the dialog (always showing Sanders' braininess in keeping one step ahead of the bad guys), without noting the obvious defects of the plot. All these mysteries have defects due to the fact that even the best writers of the genre can't avoid repeating old ideas again and again and again.Here the moment when that happened was when one of the cast admitted his affection for Barrie, which she was long aware of. Shortly after he tries to protect her from the police. But as the film dealt with the identity of a criminal mastermind, it became obvious that this person was made so slightly noble as to merit being the mysterious mastermind (i.e., the script disguised him as the least likely suspect).Barrie is after the proof that her father (who died in prison) was framed by the real criminals in a robbery gang. She has several people assisting her - mugs like William Gargan - and she gets advice from the mastermind on planning embarrassing burglaries that can't be pinned on her. The D.A. who got her father convicted (Jerome Cowan) is determined to get Barrie and her gang. The only detective who seems to have a chance to solve the case is Jonathan Hale, who is shadowing Sanders but reluctantly working with him. The cast has some nice moments in the script - Hale (currently on a special diet) is tempted to eat a rich lobster dinner made for Sanders by Willie Best. He gets a serious upset stomach as a result, enabling Sanders and Barrie to flee Sanders' apartment. Best has to remind him (when he feels better) to head for a location that Sanders told him to go to at a certain time.There is also an interesting role for Gilbert Emery. Usually playing decent people (like the brow-beaten husband in BETWEEN TWO WORLDS) he plays a socially prominent weakling here - whose demise is reminiscent of that of a character in a Bogart movie.On the whole a well made film for the second half of a movie house billing in 1939. It will entertain you even if it does not remain in your memory.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-330c8699c6bd4a75a268f57c6dcbf1e6",
            "input": "This must be one of the worst movies I've ever seen, the graphics are ridiculous, and the script pathetic and the biggest question is how this rather low brow script got trough the selection process.I like all sorts of movies from deep dramas to the more male oriented kill everything you see type of movie, so I can't say I'm picky. I have been struggling to find something to compare it to, but I just can't think of anything that matches this, maybe starship troopers 2. Witch in my opinion makes the movie gods cry and me thinking about throwing out my DVD player, but compared to this its effects are great. The acting superb and the script should be awarded. You know when a movie is bad in a funny way, well folks this isn't one of those this kills your soul minute by minute.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4546f5da7ec440ae8cd8fefeed98058a",
            "input": "It seems to be a perfect day for swimming. A normal family wants to gain advantage from it and takes a trip to the beach. Unfortunately it happens that the father is trapped under a pier and neither his wife nor the small son is able to help him out of this - whereas the tide is rising. The woman (Barbara Stanwyck) takes the car and searches for help.John Sturges' short movie (69 minutes) is powerful because of unanswered questions. Stanwyck finds a guy who could help, but there is a price she has to pay for this. There is a double question the movie poses. How far would you go to help the man that you love, and on the other hand - observing Stanwyck's behaviors towards the stranger - does she really love her husband? Like a good short story this movie leaves the viewer to himself with questions he can only answer himself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8870f8f07b0643faaa66179f76b3001c",
            "input": "What more could anyone want? He's a history lesson, foreign language tutor, NRA representative and ambassador to Burundi dressed in a nice silk frock and heels. I laughed so hard I left a puddle. His woes about puberty, transvestism, public school, and done in several languages made the absolute finest stand-up routine I have ever seen. I think about it now, years later when I see cake (tea and cake or death) and hear something translated into French (the mouse is under the table, the cat is on the chair and the monkey is on the branch. I like his versions of what Jerry Dorsey could have been named before he settled on Englebert Humperdinck. I really hope to see a lot more from this wonderful guy. He has a lot to teach us, and a wonderful way of telling it. Thanks for your time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69de212de17948a0ab7bfa47820e7820",
            "input": "That's what the title should be, anyway.This movie combines guns, explosives, and mindless killing to make one flop of an \"action\" movie. Let me make my point in a series of questions: answers type deal.What happens in the movie? People die.Is that it? Yes.What is the plot about? What plot?What is the point the movie is trying to make? Killing is the only solution.What are the characters like? Extremely flawed and contradictive toward their own personalities.Is there anything good about this movie? Yes. I'm sure they used some nice Panavision cameras in filming it.If you like constant killing and greed, then watch the movie. If you happen to be repulsed by such low-standard \"entertainment\", then \"Made Men\" is not for you.To sum it up, the plotline stinks, the characters aren't worth their while, the storyline is completely resistable, and nothing fits together.This proves one thing: the actors, directors, and whoever helped make this movie certainly aren't \"Made\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-005d68ea2f6a45028b0da19cf2a4be4f",
            "input": "Man, I really love the new DVD that Universal put out. I've never seen THE SENTINEL look this good since I had to put up with crappy, grainy VHS tapes for years. Unfortunately there are no extras beyond a trailer that looks pretty worse for wear. And AVOID the Goodtimes DVD at all costs. It sucks.Anyway, troubled fashion model Alison Parker (Cristina Raines) moves into haunted NYC brownstone, only it's more than just haunted. It's also a portal to hell and the Vatican keeps an old blind priest (John Carradine) to keep watch over it and make sure the devils and arch-angels don't escape. This has an all star cast full of old-timey actors like Ava Gardner, Arthur Kennedy, Jose Ferrer etc... as well as cameos of upcoming 80s stars including Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum (who's voice was mysteriously overdubbed) and Tom Berenger. And you won't even recognize Jerry Orbach from LAW & ORDER. I had to do a double-take when I didn't quite place where I'd seen him before.Nice gore scenes of Alison slicing the eye and nose off her dead father's rotting corpse that's been possessed by the devil. And there's a neat ending where disfigured, deformed people try to haunt Alison into committing suicide so she won't be the next one to guard the portal. It seems Alison's troubled past makes her a prime candidate by the Vatican to become the next sentinel.An excellent, creepy 70s classic from director Michael Winner that shouldn't be missed. I also recommended it for those who want something a little more imaginative beyond the usual stupid teenager slashers and horror comedy.7 out of 10-",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c915116a8b9a4fc99a63e493ec1e8ae1",
            "input": "This is possibly one of the worst giant killer animal movies I have ever seen. It follows the typical premise of a laboratory experiment gone wrong and a giant crocodile with a rapid growth chemical in it escapes. The monster looks way to much like a dinosaur, having big Tyranosaurous-like hind legs, when it should just look like an over-sized crocodile. Everything about this movie is unoriginal and it constantly oozes \"cliche\", minute after minute. Why are there always two drunken redneck hunters out after dark who separate? Plus, there's always a guy and girl who share a lame, obvious love interest while they are in life threatening situations. To much has already been said by me and I feel as if I'm wasting my time writing this...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7564e4d98c10425fb3e1cefbe54fa7c8",
            "input": "I just came from seeing this movie and decided to see what others thought of it. I'm left wondering if these people who give glowing reviews saw the same film! This is potentially a very good story, but it fails to hit the mark. The script is very weak - the plot has so many holes that it would make a great dip net for the fishing scenes. The characters were not well developed and the storyline jumps around so much that I found myself asking the question \"How did we get here?\" at least a half dozen times during the movie.There was a lack of any chemistry between the cast members. This is probably related to Lindsay Lohan's antics during the filming. It was pretty clear that everyone showed up and did their job, but didn't commit to their roles.This is not a movie worth seeing...go for a walk, play a board game, take a nice warm bath and save your money for something that's worth it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dff601ccadd549ec9568a38e1593a034",
            "input": "On the day of the California Presidential Primary, between midnight and 1:00 AM, the spy Victor Rovner sends a message from Kuala Lumpur to USA. Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, the Federal Agent Jack Bauer has returned to his family and is having trouble at home with his teenage daughter Kimberly, who blames her mother Teri for putting Jack out of the house. Teri and Jack decide to have a serious conversation with Kim, and they discover that the girl has run away home. While trying to solve his domestic problem, Jack is called to his Counter Terrorist Unit by his colleague Nina Myers for a meeting with their chief Richard Walsh, who discloses a menace against the life of Senator David Palmer, who is running for president, and they need to find the shooter. Later, Walsh has a private conversation with Jack and tells that there is a conspiracy in the agency against David Palmer, and assigns Jack to find the conspirators. When an airplane explodes over the Mojave Desert, Jack has one additional issue to worry about.The first episode of \"24\" is a promising beginning of a successful series, introducing Jack Bauer. This is the first time that I have watched this show and I confess that I liked what I have seen: a complex and dramatic story, with multiple and realistic characters. Kiefer Sutherland is perfect in the role of a family man and a reliable agent in charge of three difficult missions at the same time: find a killer to protect an important politician; find a traitor in his agency; and find his teenage daughter, who is getting in trouble, while trying to save his marriage. My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): \"12:00\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca00d63b7f3b48078357335a0e21892c",
            "input": "This has got to be a unique twists of two genres of ever seen. The giant monster movie genre with the living mummy movie genre. This unique blend makes for a unique and compelling story. The casts is outstanding, including TOM BOSLEY who as far as I know never has been in a horror movie before, ever. The effects are impressive and the idea of a giant mummy filled with smaller mummies is a cool one. My one complaint, I just wish we saw more of the giant mummy, but other then that I think they did a great job. The dialog, the characters and the story was perfect. The acting was wonderful. This has got to be the best movie to come out of the sci-fi channel. You heard me, the best movie to come out of the sci-fi channel. I give THE FALLEN ONES 9 OUT OF 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71fa183ed077437e9b76aa9a9a185859",
            "input": "I've seen my fair share of badly thought-out endings and final twists to films, but I don't recall any film that committed outright suicide like this one did.The film makers were clearly hoping that the great twist would 'surprise' us all.... and it did, but perhaps not in the way the directors had hoped. I was left feeling surprised that Connery, Harris, Fishburn and Capshaw had anything to do with this turkey, individually or collectively.The film up until the final thirty minutes was rather engaging and I like the way the story was unfolding and the nature of the film overall. But once the twist was revealed, the plot holes and inconsistencies were remarkable, the underlying motive for revenge was ill-conceived and the ways things so neatly worked out for Bobby Earl was ridiculously far-fetched. What's worse is that, once the twist was revealed, the remainder of the film became excruciatingly predictable.Harris gave a terrific performance and Connery is like Morgan Freeman in that he never gives a bad performance, even if the movie ain't that great! So all in all, it starts well and the unfolding keeps the viewer interested. The last 30 minutes is one of the most memorable nose dives in the history of cinema.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-090fea0bcd694780ae45cf2f63a2d0cc",
            "input": "A somewhat fictionalized biographical portrait of Abraham Lincoln's early years from Director John Ford, concentrating primarily on a trial in which the young lawyer defends two brothers accused of murder.The film offers an interesting portrayal of this important American figure and the film is well made, but seems somewhat incomplete without any of the great moments from his presidency or even his debates with Stephen Douglas. The obvious intent was to portray Lincoln as young man developing the attributes that would make him the great man he would become. But the result for me was that while I admired the portrayal it just wasn't as satisfying as I think it could have been with a greater scope.In the role of Abraham Lincoln we have Henry Fonda who effectively displays a quiet strength. Fonda's performance includes some gangly mannerisms' and other affectations which are fairly effective in presenting a portrayal of Lincoln, particularly when combined with some effective makeup and the costuming which occasionally is a bit to overt.The supporting cast is solid and surprisingly does not include that many of Ford's regular supporting cast (sometimes referred to as his stock company) but we do have Ward Bond one of the most prolific character actors in Hollywood. Bond has appeared in more of the AFI Top 100 Films than any other actor, both the original and revised list. He has also appeared in 11 Best Picture Nominees.The film features one scene that would seem to have inspired a quite similar scene in \"To Kill a Mockingbird\", where it would be done even better than it is here, even though that scene is one of the most effective in this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3416d541870434db893ed61b2b3ae6e",
            "input": "This is probably one of the most original love stories I have seen for ages, especially for a war based (briefly) film. Basically it is a story based in two worlds, one obviously real, the other fictitious but the filmmakers say at the beginning that it is only coincidence if it is a real place. Anyway, Peter Carter (the great David Niven) was going to crash in a plane, he talked to June (Planet of the Apes' Kim Hunter) before he bailed out and said he loved her. He was meant to die from jumping without a parachute, but somehow he survived, and now he is seeing and loving June in the flesh. This other place, like a heaven, is unhappy because he survived and was meant to come to their world, so they send French Conductor 71 (Marius Goring) to persuade him to go, but he is obviously in love. Peter suggests to him that he should appeal to keep his life to the other world's court, he is granted this. Obviously love prevails when the two lovers announce that they would die for each other, June even offers to take his place! Also starring Robert Coote as Bob Trubshawe, Kathleen Byron as An Angel, a brief (then unknown) Lord Sir Richard Attenborough as An English Pilot and Abraham Sofaer as The Judge/The Surgeon. David Niven was number 36 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, the film was number 86 on The 100 Greatest Tearjerkers for the happy ending, it was number 47 on The 100 Greatest War Films, it was number 46 on The 50 Greatest British Films, and it was number 59 on The 100 Greatest Films. Outstanding!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc18518b8bcc45e19b895e5a630f74b9",
            "input": "This movie maked me cry at the end! I watch at least 3-4 movies a week. I seen loads of great movies, even more crap - ones. But when ending scene - catharsic at it's core - came I Cried! And if you didn't - you have serious problems! The story is archetypal - nothing new or original. But it's real - because that sort of things really happened and that people really exist. Glam isn't my sort of music but I really admire all that they went through in early 70's... At some point this directed me toward Velvet Goldmine! Docudramas never really work very good. But this movie really meked us believe it all...Because they don't try to make it as a path full of glorious concerts, present musicians that are superheroes, groupie girls that are stupid and emotionally numb, they don't glorify drugs and alcohol, they promote rehabilitation and redemption that comes even 20 years late... Once again great movie. Since \"Leaving Las Vegas\" I was never so moved by a movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ce39b8eb67a474d8f36449595cdd7cb",
            "input": "I LOVE Jack's jokes like 'The cliché is...' or \"Over the top cliché guy, black, oily skin, kinda spooky...\". He is just hilarious! Daniel's starting to catch up on him to! Good thing Jack's not on the team anymore (in a way) or else it would have been sarcasm mania!!!!I just love all the plots (season 8, a little less, I have to admit), the characters are great, the actors are great, I'm starting to pick up facial expressions (and more) from Jack, Daniel and Teal'c...It just all theoretically possible and exciting...oops! Their I go again!!! Sorry, I'm also starting to pick up traits from Carter, and all of this is driving my parents NUTZ!!!!!!! Well, to conclude, I think it's good for another three seasons or so, especially if they keep on packing the episodes with all this humor, drama, action and so forth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28ceb9ad69724316b38af40651bbcefd",
            "input": "Trying to conceive of something as insipid as THE SENTINEL would be pretty difficult. The problems are many. The result is terrible and loaded with plot holes.Michael Douglas stars as Pete Garrison, a Secret Service agent who \"took one\" for Reagan during the attempt on his life. Years later we find Pete assigned to the Whitehouse Family, mainly as a guard for the First Lady (Kim Basinger, L.A. CONFIDENTIAL). Troubles arise as we see Pete's close involvement with the First Lady, and a sudden threat against the President himself (David Rasche, UNITED 93). When Pete fails a polygraph test, he's singled out as a disgruntled agent by investigator David Breckinridge (Kiefer Sutherland, 24 TV series).As the presidential assassination plot unfolds, Pete finds himself on the run from his own people. His only confidant is the First Lady, and she's reluctant to tell anyone about their affections for one another (which is why Pete failed the polygraph in the first place). But is Pete really innocent? Or is he simply trying to buy time until he can kill the President? If he is innocent, how can he help prevent the assassination attempt while running from the Secret Service? The one, big, overwhelming problem with this film is that there's no justification for the reason behind the presidential threat. Isn't that what the movie's supposed to be about? One would think so! But the audience is never let in on why the assassin(s) want to kill the Prez. Hmm. Someone forget to put that in the script somewhere? And what's with David Breckinridge's (Kiefer's) new partner, Jill Marin (Eva Longoria, CARLITA'S WAY)? Seems that she was put in the film strictly as a piece of a$$-candy. What was her purpose again? Did she do anything other than look nice in tight pants and a low-cut blouse?There are so many problems with the basic premise of The Sentinel as to be laughable. The action is too easily stymied by the \"What the...?\" responses sure to be uttered by those unfortunate enough to watch the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2c32b1237b34239be396cf4e6777df1",
            "input": "A woman's nightmares fuel her fear of being buried alive.The cheating husband wants her dead and decides to make good use of her phobia by sticking her in a coffin and leaving her in the basement.Of course B-horror movie queen Brinke Stevens transforms into hideous ghostly creature.The only reason to see this amateurish junk flick is Michael Berryman in a really small cameo and two sex scenes with Delia Sheppard.And the last twenty minutes of Brinke's bloody rampage are quite fun to watch.The special effects for example laughable decapitated head are truly awful.Better watch \"Scalps\" or \"Alien Dead\" again.Of course I ain't expecting classy entertainment from Fred Olen Ray,but \"Haunting Fear\" is too dull to be enjoyable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5e4075c21f945539a76eb5e57772dfd",
            "input": "Far by my most second favourite cartoon Spielberg did, after Animaniacs. Even if the ratings were low, so what, I still enjoyed it and loved it, was so funny and I adored the cast, wow Jess Harnell and Tress Macneille were in there and were just fantastic, the whole cast were brilliant, especially the legendary Frank Welker.I'd love to see this cartoon again, was so awesome and the jokes were brilliant. Also I can remember the hilarious moment where Brain cameos in it, you hear his voice and it played the PATB theme instrumental, that was just fantastic, I love it in those cartoons when cameos pop in. I wish this cartoon and Animaniacs came back, i loved them",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7faebab042e54b4b80552b5d70dca9a7",
            "input": "Quite average even by Monogram standards, this mystery (a remake of The Sphinx) has an oddball plot which is not unraveled to much effect -- you'll see through it after about ten minutes. The two leads have some nice breezy dialog at the outset, but John Hamilton is hopelessly dull as the villain (perfectly cast Lionel Atwill originated the role) and Warren Hymer's nitwit shtick is pretty annoying. However, it's worth sitting through for a five-minute appearance by the incomparable Mantan Moreland as Nicodemus the janitor, who gets the better of the defense attorney during a hilarious courtroom appearance. You've got to hand it to Bill \"One-Take\" Beaudine; he wasn't much of a director, but he would always punch up a routine programmer with some goofy vaudeville.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c234dd57f106489087d758fcf3e58e14",
            "input": "Red Rock West is a perfect example of how good a film can be with practically no budget. All you need is a smart script, good actors and loads of atmosphere. RRW delivers all these and more.Nic Cage plays an ex-marine, injured in Lebanon, who is down to his last 5 dollars after being refused a job on an oilfield because of his bad knee. He roles into Red Rock and is mistaken by bartender Wayne (JT Walsh, not quite as his most menacing-but still evil) for a hit-man from Texas.He pays him to kill his wife and make it look like burglary. Only when he gets there, just to check her out. She offers him double to kill Wayne. Cage just wants to get the hell out of town with his free money and leave the sparring lovers be. But a series of mishaps and setbacks results in him yo-yoing in and out of Red Rock, back and forth. Eventually this leads to a run-in with Lyle from Dallas (a cheeky and somehow sympathetic Dennis Hopper), the REAL hit-man from Texas who offers to help without knowing he's making the plot more complicated.RRW never had a big release, thus most of it's audience discovered it on video or on cable TV showings. Viewing it in such a way might make it seem like a TV movie but it's bigger than that. The slick, slowly-timed direction, moody score and howling desert wind would have all made for a great movie in theatres but the best you can do these days is watch the DVD on a big HDTV.The only weak point of the movie I can think of is Lara Flynn Boyle's boring femme fatale with the nasty dyke-ish hairdo. I certainly wouldn't fall for her but if you assume that Nic Cage's character is in to militant lesbians then you'll accept it nonetheless.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eef29c4ca5304c8692d52d1f4f022ce4",
            "input": "Chris Rock deserves better than he gives himself in \"Down To Earth.\" As directed by brothers Chris & Paul Weitz of \"American Pie\" fame, this uninspired remake of Warren Beatty's 1978 fantasy \"Heaven Can Wait,\" itself a rehash of 1941's \"Here Comes Mr. Jordan,\" lacks the abrasively profane humor that won Chris Rock an Emmy for his first HBO special. Predictably, he spouts swear words from A to Z, but he consciously avoids the F-word. Anybody who saw this gifted African-American comic in \"Lethal Weapon 4,\" \"Dogma,\" or \"Nurse Betty\" knows he can elicit more laughter with the F-word than Martin Lawrence and Eddie Murphy put together. Sadly, despite a few witty one-liners, \"Down To Earth\" hits Rock bottom both as a contrived comedy and an improbable interracial romance.\"Down to Earth\" utterly destroys any good will that the Weitz Brothers generated with their landmark gross-out face \"American Pie.\" This disposable drivel qualifies as a contrived as well as confusing comedy with a thoroughly improbable color-blind interracial romance. Unfortunately, a more than competent cast—among them \"The Full Monty's\" Mark Addy, Chazz Palminteri of \"Analyze This,\" \"SCTV's\" Eugene Levy, and newcomer Brian Rhodes as Charles Wellington, Jr.—are wasted in flat-footed, sketchy roles. Hardcore Rock fans will undoubtedly accuse their favorite comedian with trying to fix something that was never broken. Abysmally written by Lance Crouther, Ali Le Roi, Louis CK, and Rock, \"Down To Earth\" casts Chris as a messenger who rides a bike by day in the Big Apple and gets booed off the stage at night in Harlem's celebrated Apollo Theatre. Poor Lance Barton (Chris Rock) suffers from severe stage fright. Nevertheless, his charitable manager Whitney Daniels (Frankie Faison of \"Hannibal\") sticks with him through thick and thin. After Lance learns the Apollo Theatre will hold one final amateur night extravaganza, he implores Whitney to get him in the line-up. Excuse me, but if Lance is such a deadbeat stand-up comic, why does the Apollo keep inviting him back? Meanwhile, fate has something else in store for Lance. While pedaling home on his bike, our protagonist spots a pretty lady, Sontee (Regina King of \"Jerry Maguire\"), crossing the street, but he doesn't see the bus that collides with him and kills him. Wham! Lance Barton levitates skyward with a halo wreathed around his head. In Heaven, which resembles a cruise ship nightclub, Lance learns that an overzealous angel, Mr. Keyes (Eugene Levy of \"Stay Tuned\"), timed his death 40 years ahead of schedule.Heavenly honcho Mr. King (Chazz Palminteri of \"Analyze This\"), God's right-hand guy, apologizes and escorts Lance back to earth. The snag is Lance cannot reclaim his corpse, so he must inhabit another body. The best that Mr. Keyes can come up with is ruthless, white, 60-year old tycoon Charles Wellington. Wellington's adulterous wife Amber (Jennifer Coolidge of \"American Pie\") and his unscrupulous personal aide Winston (Greg Germann of \"Sweet November\") have just tried to poison him. Reluctantly, before Wellington's body vanishes, Lance accepts it conditionally as a loaner until Keyes can locate a more appropriate body. Meanwhile, Lance-as-Wellington encounters Sontee again. She is a nurse activist protesting his decision to privatize a Brooklyn community hospital that serves the poor. While Regina King brings a surfeit of charisma to her role as a crusading health care worker, she plays a character who bypasses credible motivation in her affairs with Wellington. Although he is no longer black, Lance not only tries to woo Sontee but also win a gig at the Apollo.\"Down To Earth\" features Rock in his most unfunny role. The comedian's reason for making this movie seems questionable. Reportedly, he ate lunch with Warren Beatty and told Beatty that he loved the original script that scenarist Elaine May had penned for Beatty. Initially, Beatty tried the race-reversal gimmick himself in his own version by trying to cast Muhammad Ali in the title role of \"Heaven Can Wait.\" The deal fell through, and Beatty headlined the movie himself. According to Rock, his longtime co-writers and he thought that they could 'annihilate' this classic. Moreover, he justified his choice of \"Heaven Can Wait\" based on his philosophy to \"Do Something you can only do when you're hot.\" Earlier, Rock rejected a script about a busload of touring rappers, because he saw little opportunity to stretch his image in such an outing. As a lifeless comedian in \"Down to Earth,\" Rock doesn't so much stretch his image as he inverts it for the worst! This half-baked concert film with an annoying plot does as much to cremate his comic reputation as it does the Weitz Brothers! You know a film about a comedian is in dire straits when a scene at the nightclub is played so you cannot hear the jokes, only the laughter. Similarly, the casting of Mark Addy as Wellington's butler who speaks the Queen's English but is in reality a commoner from Michigan defies logic, too. Addy is an actual Englishman, and he doesn't have to fake an accent; his accent is genuine. The major overriding quandary with \"Down to Earth\" is the on-again-off-again, look-a-like switcheroo that the characters make so Chris Rock doesn't disappear completely from the sight for more than a few seconds. Although Chris spends half the movie as white guy Wellington, audiences see him largely as Lance, undercutting the comic irony of watching his stocky, bald-headed, Caucasian white, alter-ego perform ghetto humor and chant derogatory hip-hop lyrics. Incredibly, Rock served double-duty as the film's executive producer and one of its four scribes. The mystery is how such a wealth of talent could grind out such an awkward, misguided muddle of a comedy. About the only redeeming feature of \"Down to Earth\" is Jamshied Sharifi's superb orchestral film score.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99ed098886184ec5bdd4db888e26eef2",
            "input": "The Broadway musical, \"A Chorus Line\" is arguably the best musical in theatre. It's about the experiences of people who live for dance; the joys they experience, and the sacrifices they make. Each dancer is auditioning for parts in a Broadway chorus line, yet what comes out of each of them are stories of how their lives led them find dance as a respite. The film version, though, captures none of the passion or beauty of the stage show, and is arguably the worst film adaptation of a Broadway musical, as it is lifeless and devoid of any affection for dance, whatsoever. The biggest mistake was made in giving the director's job to Sir Richard Attenborough, whose direction offered just the right touch and pacing for \"Gandhi.\" Why would anyone in his or her right mind ask an epic director to direct a musical that takes place in a fairly constricted place?Which brings us to the next problem. \"A Chorus Line\" takes place on stage in a theatre with no real sets and limited costume changes. It's the least flashy of Broadway musicals, and its simplicity was its glory. However, that doesn't translate well to film, and no one really thought that it would. For that reason, the movie should have taken us in the lives of these dancers, and should have left the theatre and audition process. The singers could have offered their songs in other environments and even have offered flashbacks to their first ballet, jazz or tap class. Heck, they could have danced down Broadway in their lively imaginations. Yet, not one shred of imagination went into the making of this film, as Attenborough's complete indifference for dance and the show itself is evident in his lackadaisical direction.Many scenes are downright awkward as the dancers tell their story to the director (Michael Douglas) whether he wants to hear them or not. Douglas' character is capricious about choosing to whom he extends a sympathetic ear, and to whom he has no patience. While the filmmakers pretended to be true to the nature of the play, some heretical changes were made. The very beautiful \"Hello Twelve, Hello Thirteen, Hello Love\"--a smashing stage number which took the dancers back to their adolescence--was removed and replaced with the dreadful, \"Surprise,\" a song so bad that it was nominated for an Oscar. Adding insult to injury, \"Surprise\" simply retold the same story as \"Hello, Love\" but without the wit or pathos.There is no reason to see this film unless you want a lesson in what NOT to do when transferring a Broadway show to film. If you want to see a film version of this show, the next closest thing is Bob Fosse's brilliant \"All That Jazz.\" While Fosse's daughter is in \"A Chorus Line,\" HE is the Fosse who should have been involved, as director. He would have known what to do with this material, which deserved far greater respect than this sad effort.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a55dbc6d27834f74a0c07d330f60e1c6",
            "input": "Not that many films have truly exploited the fear of going to the dentist that many people have. Those in the profession have some genuinely intimidating looking instruments. Give writers Dennis Paoli, Stuart Gordon, and Charles Finch for deriving maximum make-you- squirm-in-your-seat shock value from their premise.Corbin Bernsen, in a nicely nuanced performance, is Alan Feinstone, dedicated dentist whose train jumps off the tracks early on. An unbalanced obsessive-compulsive, he starts dwelling on thoughts of decay, even imagining it where there isn't any, and also equating decay with corruption of society in general. Having witnessed his unfaithful wife Brooke (Linda Hoffman) getting it on with their pool boy, he determines to punish her. At the same time, he's under pressure from a smarmy I.R.S. agent (Earl Boen, best known as Dr. Silberman from the \"Terminator\" franchise) to do a favor in exchange for the agent keeping his mouth shut about Feinstone's financial affairs. Feinstone starts to perceive everybody around him as decayed in one way or another, and he goes on a murder spree as police detective Gibbs (the always welcome Ken Foree) picks up his trail.Director Brian Yuzna clearly has great fun with the script. It allows for some genuinely nasty and remarkably entertaining gore scenes that do just as well as creating sympathy for the victims as thrilling the audience. The script gives the Feinstone character some fine lines of dialog and is overall quite sly and amusing, with large doses of pitch-black humor (such as Feinstone ordering a victim to \"get their tongue out of the way!\"). Brooke and the I.R.S. agent figure in particularly effective torture scenes. The makeup effects are for the most part quite good. And the film does a fine job of maintaining its forward momentum, as Feinstone, with his relentless drive for perfection, switches from respected professional to unhinged killer in record time.Foree, always cool and fun to watch, is rather wasted in a standard-issue detective role, but there's some enjoyment in watching Boen play his slimeball part to the hilt. Hoffman and Christa Sauls provide very appealing eye candy. And a pre-fame Mark Ruffalo can be seen in a small supporting role. But this is all very much Bernsen's show as he sinks his teeth (pardon me for using that expression) into his plum leading part with total conviction.\"The Dentist\" ranks as one of the more original and interesting horror films to come out of the 1990's.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be482b226faf4185bc1ddb7f72576ae6",
            "input": "James Bond in the wilderness? Well, that's the way it looks: Pierce Brosnan is after all best known as Bond in \"Tommorrow Never Dies\" (1997) and \"Golden Eye\" (1995) - both shot prior to this release. Frankly, the film's two leads are both badly miscast, with Brosnan turning in the marginally more convincing performance, and with Annie Galipeau (as Pony, Grey Owl's love interest) having to battle with carelessly-written dialogue.The two aunts, on the other hand are perfect. But the film is not about aunts. It is about the wilds of the Canadian wilderness. And while the photography may be pretty, there is no grit to the harsh reality of living in the wilds. Annie Galipeau, as Pony, just fails to be convincing, unfortunately, because I really wanted to believe in her. She was a relatively inexperienced twenty-year-old on this film, and it could have worked, but Richard Attenborough was maybe just not tough enough on her. He makes her look vulnerable, which of course she is.. but in the wrong sort of way.But one thing for sure, she appears picture-perfect throughout. But mascara and eyebrow thickener in the wilderness? It just doesn't fit, especially as she only ever seems to walk forest trials with Bond (sorry, Grey Owl), and use photo-ops for kissing close-ups.I've lived with forest people in the Pacific North West, and they simply don't look this pretty and stay so sweet while fighting for survival. Which brings me to another point: the film fails to evoke the period in which it is set: the 1930s. I put the blame here largely on a lack-lustre script that is keen on preaching at the expense of dramatic arc, plot points and those small details that can evoke period through action.William Nicholson wrote the screenplay, and his latest offering, \"Elizabeth, the Golden Age\" opened three days ago, so I do hope there is an improvement.Yes, I've read the comments others have posted, but I'm not convinced. A lot of potential, but mishandled and even maybe ill-conceived. If it had had a religious film, it would have been panned, but because it preaches environmentalism, the film remains somewhat above criticism, since it is \"politically correct.\" Sorry, for all that, I don't buy it. Amen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fad974dd0a64c049988199c003077e4",
            "input": "I have no idea what people are complaining about. I saw this movie yesterday and I really liked it. Stone once again delivered a great character. She was just as good as she was in the first Basic Instinct. She still has those smart but tricky answers. Although Sharon may be 48 years old... she looks amazing! I don't care if she's as fake as a Barbie. She looks good and that's that. Basic Instinct 2 gives you everything you want from the first. Sex, violence, and a great ending that will leave you thinking and talking about it for hours! Half the people commenting on this movie haven't even saw it. So don't listen to them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c23c5efb25b24e7a85c6d6292437e476",
            "input": "The title of this obscure and (almost righteously) forgotten 80's slasher inevitably reminds me of The Cure's mega-smash-monster hit song with the same title, hence a piece of the lyrics in the title-section of this user comment. Also, I didn't have anything else to say that was useful, anyway. But hey, \"The Forest\" isn't totally hopeless and not even *that* bad, actually. If nothing else, at least it obeys the, admittedly unwritten, first rule of 80's slasher: kill someone within the first 10 minutes of playtime. Sure you've heard about the basic premise of this film a dozen times before, but don't let that discourage you from watching it, as \"The Forest\" has a couple of things more to offer than just an appealingly sinister cover image. It's actually a bit of an atypical 80's slasher! The main characters aren't ordinary brainless teenagers and the script has solid ambitions towards supernaturalism. The concept isn't always successful, let alone plausible, but it's more than interesting enough to hold your attention and there are even are a couple of surprisingly strong moments of tension and plot twists to enjoy. Two married couples decide to go camping in the most isolated woods of California, but due to a stupid bet the wives travel separately from their husbands. Barely set up for the night, they receive uncanny visits from a mother looking for her two children, the children themselves and finally the father who's out hunting for human flesh. The demented family may be real or imaginary, but the women are definitely in danger and by the time their husbands arrive, they have already vanished. The men too encounter the family, and they find out more about the slightly dysfunction background. \"The Forest\" is a weird and unusual film, to say the least. It's not exactly a masterpiece of plotting, but the thoroughly strange atmosphere will certainly appeal to open-minded fans of 80's horror. The murders are fairly gruesome and will-filmed, including a slit throat and a painful saw-massacre, and the filming locations are stunningly beautiful. The more you contemplate about the story and its abrupt twists, the less it makes any sense, so my advice would just be to enjoy this odd viewing experience for as long as it lasts and not a minute longer. The acting performances are just above average, the music is okay and at least director Donald Jones (also responsible for the 70's exploitation-sickie \"Schoolgirls in Chains\") tried to be a little more creative that the majority of 80's horror films. Too bad it ultimately fails.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-286b95e71a444c7c8bc0244132e5f118",
            "input": "King's Solomon's Mines brings us Patrick Swayze (playing Allan Quatermain)who has spent a lot of time in Africa, but decides it is time to return to England and be a father to his son. He finds that his wife's parents have taken custody of his son and that he has very little chance of getting custody of him with lots of money for a law suit. In comes Alison Deedy (playing Elizabeth) whose father is in Africa and being held by an African tribe for ransom of the map Elizabeth's father had sent her. Elizabeth seeks out Quatermain to take her back to Africa to find her father.There is a good cast of supporting characters that go along with Quatermain and Elizabeth and of course there are some enemies (Russians) who want the map also.The movie holds your attention until the end. Patrick once again plays a ruggedly handsome honorable man who comes to the rescue of the damsel in distress. Patrick is a great dramatic actor who can easily portray passion, loss and despair, the rugged silent good man, anger and strength; In King Solomon's Minds his character actually smiles a few times. I would really like to see Patrick Swayze in a relaxed live-loving story again, one in which he doesn't have to clench his jaws and be quite so strong. Maybe a little dancing would help. But this is a good movie for the entire family and worth the time to watch it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0e47afd4c89454eb169eb17127bec99",
            "input": "The acting is good, the women are beautiful, and the men are handsome, so if you're looking for well-acted soft porn, this movie is for you. Otherwise, you are wasting your time. The motivation of the main characters, in particular the eponymous lead, is often a mystery. She could have just told the truth - the truth as presented in the film, not necessarily the historical truth - and her lover would have been spared time in jail for a rape he did not commit. Was she protecting her father, who went off half-cocked, as it were, when he impetuously instigated a malicious lawsuit? Was she protecting herself, with her reputation suddenly of concern when heretofore only her art seemed to matter? During the trial, this strong-willed woman turns to mush before our eyes. Conversely, her lover, who starts off as a narcissistic jerk, becomes a selfless hero during the trial. At least his motivation is clearer: he sacrifices himself for love. Naturally, since no good deed must go unpunished, we are told that she never sees him again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cbd6ca6a7214fcf98fbf5f1e43b91ba",
            "input": "When I first saw this film on cable, it instantly became one of my favorite movies. I'm a big fan of James Earl Jones and Robert Duvall. The movie paints an accurate picture of the South and the racist attitudes. Most of the attitudes came from Soll, an old plantation owner who uses convicts for labor. Soll is what makes the move, his funny ramblings give us insights in to the way The South was back then. I suppose that if Soll lived today he would be diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease. None the less his attitudes towards a little boy who comes to work for him and the convicts is complex. While he has racist views, he's grown to trust some of the convicts who are all black. The two convicts he trusts most are Jackson(Mel Winkler) and Ben(James Earl Jones). The conversations between Ben and Soll are the best in the movie, they have real chemistry. James Earl Jones and Mel Winkler both but in great performances as well as Hass.This movie should have gotten more notoriety. However it's on DVD and worth the money.Rayvyn",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3622cad19eeb43f487f5eb73b108dd45",
            "input": "I've read reviews of Kerching on IMDb, and frankly,I've not seen one positive review, until now. I actually like Kerching. Kerching is about a teenage boy named Taj Lewis, in order to make £1,000,000 for his mother, he sets up a website called rudeboy. The website offers a lot of interesting things, if only Taj, and his 2 friends - Danny and Seymour can stop Taj from getting exposed. I find this show quite funny and I enjoy watching it. The acting is O.K., but it can definitely be better, the characters are funny, especially Danny Spooner, Taj's friend , his stupidity is what makes him funny. and Taj's other friend Seymour. Also Carlton, the owner of the café'e called \"The Chill.\" We never see him, we only hear him. Taj's younger brother Omar, and his older sister Missy is funny too. And Missy's best friend Kareesha. So many times Taj's has almost got exposed, almost. As well as the comedy, the drama in Kerching such as love life and the loss of loved ones makes this programme great.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2ed978559c646cc86bb6f921be62a46",
            "input": "Let me set the scene. It is the school holidays and there is absolutely nothing at the movies. I am with my friend deciding what to see. We look for a movie that is starting soon and \"The Grinch\" comes up. We buy tickets not knowing what to expect. What we got was a roller coaster of fun.Jim Carrey (who may I add is my No.1 actor in the whole world) was absolutely magnificent as the Grinch in this Ron Howard's best movie (next to Apollo 13). The way that this movie was made, the scenery, the actors, the props and the music was just amazing. It really brought this childhood movie to life.The story is based upon the story of the grinch. As we all know the Grinch is a horrible person who just can't stand christmas. He lives high above whoville and has never mingled well with the townfolk. But one little girl is going to change The Grinch's look on life and on others in a drastic way.Cindy Lou Who (played by adorable new actress Taylor Momsem) meets the Grinch as finds the kind part of him straight away. She attempts to break the barrier and to help the Grinch move in and mingle with the towns people.All up this movie is a barrel of laughs for the whole family both kids and parents. A SOLID 10/10. Well done Jim.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4bd19e05ccc5462991dacfcd8edaa5e1",
            "input": "This is a made-for-TV and rather needless Sci-fi Channel retelling of the Beowulf story, especially after the recent 2005 film \"Beowulf and Grendel\". This movie doesn't really get into Beowulf's story, but just takes us through his battle against the ravenous beast known as Grendel as it leaves a kingdom in absolute fear and turmoil while the powerful viking warrior, Beowulf is called upon to rid them of the monster's rampage. If this is successfully accomplished, the king will no longer have to sacrifice the children to keep it at bay. After a few failed attempts, the creature is slain, but it's angry and vengeful mother soon attacks, leaving it up to Beowulf to, again, lend his mighty acts of bravery and strength to defeat it. \"Grendel\" looks like it was shot on a tiny budget and the CG effects are terrible. Like I said, this movie is absolutely needless.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b02f86b2396540d490d1d6f6edd785d5",
            "input": "You know, this movie isn't that great, but, I mean, c'mon, it's about angels helping a baseball team. I find the plot line to be hilarious anyways, this kid's dad says he'll take him back if the angels win the pennant (because he knows they won't) Kid prays to his fake god to help the angels win, god helps the whole time (via the angel Christopher Lloyd, RIP) And in the end, his dad doesn't take him back and rides off on his motorcycle right in that kids face. it's hilarious until Danny Glover adopts it and it's friend.I guess the upside is that the old lady is left alone to die with her stitchin' projects and her stories. The real winner here, though, is god. Because later he got a job as a writer for numerous prank shows.As a kids movie, it gets a 7. As a movie about the mysteries of blind, stupid faith, and the nature of \"god,\" it gets a 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-07eaa2292fd9425aab87056007095ea3",
            "input": "Hollywood, the home of hype, glamor and the search for profits, is scarcely ruled by spiritual values, and so it comes as no surprise that its attempts at investigations of the spiritual life are thin and often silly (better to go farther afield--to the films of Bresson, Dreyer, Rossellini and Bergman, for probing depictions of the spirituality). \"Strange Cargo\" is no exception. This odd hybrid of adventure film, love story and religious parable trivializes the very insights it tries to communicate. That a figure of providence and salvation would work to match Verne (Clark Gable at his most cockily mannered and self-regarding) and Julie (Joan Crawford, snarling and spitting out every other word in an attempt to be the Queen of Tough Dames) seems ludicrous at best. Is this the Patron Saint of the Star System at work, matching warring egos before sending them off to further penal servitude on the M-G-M lot? BUT. . .there are good supporting performances here, and visually arresting moments: the shadowy prison barracks; the escaping boat by moonlight, or against a painterly cloudscape; Julie walking along the seafront as the wind whips up; Julie and Monsieur Pig (Peter Lorre) bargaining for Verne's freedom as the storm builds; an unusually ennobling gay prison romance between two convicts. . .Above all, there is Paul Lukas's dignified and detached performance as Hessler, a murderer who can appreciate Cambreau's virtues, yet turns his back on him. In the film's most arresting moment, Hessler, having left Cambreau, stands outside the cabin. We hear the wind through the jungle, see the shadows on his face, which conveys a moment of fear and self-doubt. Then he exits into the night. In this moment, Hessler achieves an ambiguity, depth and existential strength that none of the other characters manage to achieve. is the film's secret that its deepest sympathies are allied with Hessler?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74c1895ed69f480a9ded80ac0d24e4db",
            "input": "We bought this film from a shop called Poundland. We were looking for more inspiration as we have previously bought the film No Big Deal an remade it.We expected this film to be badly inspirational so that we might remake it and put it on the tube. HOWEVER, this was shocking. BORING is the main word that comes to mind. The bad effects and script aren't enough to make you watch it. The main woman's body seems to be whipped out at opportune moments in a pathetic attempt to keep the viewer interested. However, it just makes you wonder, did they blow the budget getting her to take her clothes off? If so, I'd have asked for a refund! It looks like a homemade film, the shots don't even correspond with each other and the camera work is so amateur it makes our remakes of bad movies look professional. I CANNOT believe that this is being sold as a marketable product.IT IS JUST BORING and UGLY to watch. The actors are bad and there is no degree of professionalism about it. There are no words to describe how terrible it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d82e8b081b7d4884b8efc6feaa6717ba",
            "input": "I saw \"El Mar\" yesterday and thought it to be a great movie. It starts with a childhood episode in the life of the 3 main characters: Ramallo, Manuel Tur, and Francisca. After that we jump about 10 years to an hospital where the 3 friends meet again.Religion, sickness, love, violence and sexuality rage throughout the movie creating and intense and tension-filled movie.I see people complaining about the film being too gory and i think they missed the point of the story. It's a violent, intense and sad story. People are expected to suffer. To cry. To get hurt. To bleed. And i think that what the film shows, isn't done for pure shock-value or presented in a distasteful way. I know that some people like their films \"clean\", even those with violence in it. But sometimes, a movie needs to make you feel unconfortable to work. This is one of those movies. And a great movie it is.The only fault i found was that there were 3 or 4 moments were some plot details weren't 100% clear, and only after thinking about them at the end of the movie, it all made sense. But it wasn't anything of much importance to the overall story, so i still give this movie a 9.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa17070763ac407694e3df372dc3dd43",
            "input": "This is one of the worst movies i've ever encountered, but i want to say that some of the criticisms i had heard turned out to be unwarranted..As far as pure film-making technique goes, this director is competent. He's held back by the limited budget and the VHS camera, but the actual editing, camera angles, camera movements and scene staging are pretty professional. i've seen many movies where the \"directing\" was much worse. At least the scenes flow in a way that is not confusing and he has a few clever shots here and there. Also, the forest scenes contained a decent atmosphere. There is only so much you can do with a VHS camera, and he does a nice job as far as the technicalities go. As far as artistic merit, there is none. The scene where the camera pans down so that we can watch a guy urinate in the woods for 15 seconds sort of epitomizes the artistic style of the whole film. This is pure trash... Total garbage.The gore is decent for a film in this budget range. , it's obviously fake but there's lot's of it, and it's very outlandish..I saw the American version with the intentionally campy dubbing. This was a good idea (and it's the only thing that allowed me to make it through the film)... Unfortunately, it's overdone, especially towards the end.It's really a terrible film, but i have to recommend it for it's camp value. It's really hard to find a movie that's worse than this and that sort of puts it in a unique category.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3697022bd874191977d7636ac4f3f39",
            "input": "I liked how this started out, featuring some decent special-effects especially for a film 50 years old. There was some pretty impressive scenery. However, the film bogs down fairly early on with some very dumb dialog as the males all try to flirt with Anne Francis \"Altaira Morbius.\")Viewing this in the '90s after a long absence, it was fun to see Francis again, an actress who has done mostly television shows since this film was released....and is still acting. It also was interesting to see a young-looking Leslie Nielsen (\"Dr. John J. Adams\"), who I wouldn't have recognized had it not been for this voice I watched half of this movie before the boredom came almost overwhelming and I had a strong desire to go to sleep. I appreciated them re-doing this VHS tape in stereo. but it was a weak effort. This is one those overrated film where \"elites\" think is so \"heavy\" and \"thought-provoking.\" That's nonsense. It only appeared \"intelligent\" because the rest of the '50s sci-fi films were so stupid!!Some if the early scenes would have looked great on wideescreen, which I didn't have at the time of this writing. Perhaps another look - this time on the 2.35:1 widescreen transfer would make me change this review.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0bbc0181f3644e91885a3c4d41671395",
            "input": "I Think It's a great movie. because you get to see how Diana's life at home is. she got so much aggression, and she wants to prove that girls can fight too. I think she and Adrian were great actors. Because of this movie I Am Boxing too. It really impressed me. the only negative part I think. Is the end. because It's alright between Diana and Adrian. But you don't get to see how it is at home. And I Didn't really like it that you also don't get to see how her father is doing, and her brother. but i Think it was A great movie and I Think I'm going to watch it a lot more:) I recommend it to anyone, even when you don't like boxing, you get to see a lot more than only boxing. I had a great time watching it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3442cc51784a497db19c3a0b2eaf84c7",
            "input": "A great gangster film.Sam Mendes has directed this beautiful movie showing another father-son camaraderie.Brilliant star-cast leading with Tom Hanks(Michael Sullivan) has done a terrific job.Great acting by him again.He is an acting legend.Great acting too from Paul Newman,Jude Law and Daniel Craig.Casting is just too good.The plot is quite good.You will enjoy the movie.A great portrayal of the gangster of the 1930's.Set in the 1930's,this will surely stand out as the zenith of all gangster movies of that era.Soundtrack is pretty good an apt to the movie.A great flick in totality showing what a father does to protect his son.Way underrated for my liking.Deserved a fully deserved 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80d5a88ee0a54cacbe9fd17618a70d6b",
            "input": "Why is it that everyone who has seen this movie feels it is their responsibility to tell us whether or not they are fencers? That point is completely immaterial to any argument to be made against this total dog of a movie.I think sports movies fall into two categories; well made movies about the human spirit and competitions, and `By the Sword'.Honestly this movie never could decide what it wanted to be, a touching drama for trying to be your best in life, an indictment of competitive motivation or a martial arts flick. In the end it didn't do any of those convincingly or completely enough to make me give one ounce of care of any of it.For the record I also am a fencing instructor (and now I am officially as bad as the rest). But putting bad fencing in a movie doesn't make it bad automatically. I mean look at Star Wars (Episodes 4-6, good movies, bad fencing). I liked those movies. But when you put bad sports into a bad movie for some reason people think that it is only the purists that think it a lame effort.Don't be fooled by any comments on the smaller issue of fencing. This is just a bad movie. In the end, this movie has nothing for the fencing enthusiast or the movie buff or simply anyone with a pulse and three brain cells.When I see a movie and am forced to think, `Man, I wish I was watching the Mighty Ducks.' I know that it is time to bypass the argument with the theater manager to get my money back and see if there is anyone in the lobby that will somehow give me two hours of my life back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7b15f0dc9fb4717937c2cb6e19ff2ff",
            "input": "Having seen Versus previously I had high hopes for Alive. The description of the movie on the back of the DVD jacket sounded promising. Alive did not deliver. VERY slow development. Loads of potential with the cast and the cool visuals. The premise was intriguing but the payoff did not offset the build up. Could have done so much more at the end. Most of the movie is just \" sitting around \". To put it plainly, three of us were amped to sit down and watch this movie and by the 50 minute mark we were struggling to make it thru to the end. It really needed more shock elements. If you are looking for Ichi the Killer or Versus type fights then save yourself some $ and loads of disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00c6548f532841999f519186577465bb",
            "input": "Ride with the Devil, like Ang Lee's later Brokeback Mountain, is a film of aesthetic and historical importance. Film lovers ought to see it at minimum twice as its artistic nuance is worthy to be over comprehended. A perfect piece of art, surprising depth of humanity. I really don't recall another war film, will so capture you, will change your existing conception of history and politics, will restore your belief in humanity. After seeing so many killings, so many sufferings , you don't feel yourself numb, instead you treasure the bond between human beings more. The actors' performances haunt your heart, the music drives your mind. Some shoots, are not just some pictures, they transcend themselves, becoming the seeing of soul. Such is the true sense of film being a genre of art.A film like this doesn't need long comments or reviews, everything it says by itself. Ovation to the cast which includes Tobey Maguire, Jeffrey Wright and Jewel Kilcher, the cinematographer and the composer of the beautiful and lyrical music, what an achievement!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b5686c27e1f4a8db00e2c41c9252f70",
            "input": "(There isn't much in the way of spoilers, since there isn't a plot to reveal, but still, I guess I describe some of what happens so...) This is it. This is THE most nonsensical film I've ever seen. There are simply no words to describe this movie, although \"bizarre\" \"ridiculous\" and \"ego trip\" are pretty close. the opening half hour or so are really, really weird music videos, with absolutely no plot or continuity, apart from that MJ falls into some from the previous. One of the highlights of this part of the \"film\" in the section where MJ is flying a merry-go-round aeroplane through what seem to be half-arsed bond intro rejects and sections cut from Yellow Submarine (dear lord you could not make this up).Then, with a little over an hour remaining, the \"film\" begins, with a lot of claymation (some of it really creepy) spotting our \"hero\" and chasing him looking for an autograph. Obviously, this leaves our as of yet mute (discounting songs) lead somewhat worried, and he manages to temporarily lose them. Fortunate for him, because it means he can witness a falling star and, and again, I'm not making this up, turn into a claymation rabbit. He uses this cunning disguise to try and sneak past them, but, for reasons I can't recall right now, they see through it (oh no!) and the creepy chase begins again. Cue another song (big shock there).Shortly after the end of the chase, MJ somehow brings the rabbit to life, until he is busted by a policeman (in the middle of the desert) because it is, apparently, illegal to dance there.The rest of the film is equally as strange, highlights including MJ cleaning up a bar to the tune of Smooth Criminal, including shooting a man with his finger, not only killing the guy, but burning his shadow into the wall, a la nuclear fission weapons. Another good moment is when MJ, seeing, Mr Big (Joe \"what the hell happened to his career at this point?\" Peschi) kidnap one of the children he was friends with, magically creates a tommy gun, and in another moment of violence that pepper this film seemingly at random, opens fire at everything that moves. A final moment I shall mention is when MJ, surrounded by Mr Big and his private army. Seriously, this guy has dozens of people working for him, and they're decked out more like commando units rather than mobsters, which I guess they are. How does he get out? Why, he turns into a robot, complete with weapons and shield. This is the third of four transformations he makes, almost always when backed into a corner and/or on the run.This film is quite, quite surreal, with little in the way of plot, and virtually no continuity.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f4038332f8a483cbf3523258739dd0c",
            "input": "One of my favourite films. It has everything - rocking soundtrack, courtesy of Eddie Clark, ex Motorhead, loads of action, loads of laughs, totally ridiculous plot and the most wonderful '80's stereotypes as characters. Eddie, the put-upon nice guy, who just wants to be left alone to be different, Leslie (about as wet as they come), Nuke (the rock burn-out), Eddie's Mom (pathetic), Roger (the geek) and Ozzy as the preacher (surely he exists in America?). Then there are the boys (rich, vicious and stupid) and the girls (vacant, vain and stupid). What more could you ask for?Well, first of all, there's Sammi Curr, the rock star, an amalgam of every '80's badass rocker you can think of. What about that rocket firing guitar? Then there's the scene where Sammi pulls the old lady through the TV screen and smashes her up. And what does Roger do? Why, hoover her up, just like a good geek would. My favourite scene is where Tim Hainey gets his long overdue reward from Sammi via the wet finger in the plug - magic!If you were into rock in the '80's or just love ridiculous films like I do, then check this one out. It's available on DVD and very cheap so (trick or)treat yourself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99ce5ef148f14c55a7c2e9c6158f0d4e",
            "input": "The Underground Comedy Movie, is possibly the worst train wrecks I've ever seen. Luckily I didn't pay for this movie, and my friend reluctantly agreed to watch it again siting that it was so awful but he needed to prove to me how awful it was. I love off color comedy. I figured at the least it would have that and I would be entertained. No, instead the acting was so awful, the \"jokes\" were extremely cheesy, and the plot was no where to be found. Maybe there wasn't supposed to be a plot so I can't hold that against this movie. It's pretty sad where the funniest thing in a comedy is an old woman having her head hit off by a bat.....by Batman...A man dressed in a baseball uniform wielding a bat. Hilarious. Simply genius. I got the feeling watching this movie that its creators made it and laughed hysterically with their friends about it. Perhaps this was full of inside jokes we just didn't understand. Or perhaps it's the worst piece of trash ever made and it should be locked away in a vault and dumped in the Arctic Ocean.P.S. Don't buy this movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e240715b3de74de09d192495cd45c252",
            "input": "Perhaps not my genre but plot was horrible as was acting by Nancy Allen and Linda Farentino. C. Thomas also seemed uncomfortable in role of being seduced here (while on marijuana? why did this need to be included? this weakened plot considerably). Also Farentino's charac. would have been better had she had more respect for a relationship. Would does movie try to say? not much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e29c81a2a834b238df5f62d7fd89b8a",
            "input": "When I first saw this film in the 1980's, I was in my middle teenage years and somewhat reluctant to see this since I considered myself grown up and out of the \"Sesame Street/Muppets\" age. I honestly don't remember if I liked it at the time or not. However, somewhere in college I watched this film again, and it wound up going (and staying) into my personal Best Films Ever collection.This film is LOADED with humor that goes far above and beyond what one would have expected from the Muppets. I mean, obviously the Muppets always have appealed to adults and children because there's humor geared towards both generations. But come on...Janice is accidentally overheard telling someone \"I don't take my clothes off for anyone, even if it IS artistic\"...there's a joke from a father to a son that if the son in love with Kermit the Frog then the father doesn't want to hear it...Gonzo saves a chicken with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (sp?) and afterwards says \"I think we're engaged now\"...these and plenty of other moments in the film had me rolling. Add to that very smart dialogue, very smart New York/Broadway \"wink wink\" humor, the usual large amount of celebrity cameos and some really enjoyable songs that don't border on \"kid-level cheesy\" whatsoever...this film is a masterpiece! I don't throw \"10\"'s out on a regular basis...but this one deserves it. Over 20 years later, this film totally holds up, perhaps even more so. The Muppets never were and never will be again, as funny and smart and just plain brilliant as this film was and is. ---Q",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ff6b0bfc3754834b4990d18f8a03e3d",
            "input": "For loyal Duran Duran fans who want to watch a good music video, skip this one. The producers decided to get creative and make this 80's video something of a sci-fi story, involving the evil Barbarella villain from which the band got its name. What makes this idea fail is that right in the middle of some great 80's Duran Duran songs, confusing and annoying cut scenes take place showing the fictional antagonist trying to stop the band at one of their concerts. Not only is the good music repeatedly interrupted, but we have to suffer through some cheap spin-off story hosted by an evil Dr. Mario. It's almost too much to bear. 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c40110888ba54f2b8e3338a329e194b0",
            "input": "I cannot see why filmmakers remade this movie. The 1972 movie with McQueen and McGraw is almost a classic. Steve McQueen was an outstanding actor and Baldwin is only an inadequate actor. He has no passion in his play.Also the action in the original \"Getaway\" was fantastic. But the remake has no action! It is almost boring despite the fact that the film-making in 1972 was more difficult than in 1994. I don't understand the way that Baldwin imprisoned from Mexico. I think this is a mistake in the story.So i think that there was no need to remake it, or if they decided to remake a classic, they must choose an excellent actor for the first role, like Johnny Depp or Brad Pitt...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f418429e84ee4d1480f38f7d8be46a71",
            "input": "While it certainly wasn't the best movie I've ever seen, it was certainly worth the $8 (which can't be said for many movies these days.)This was a pleasant account of a true story, although many of the details of the real story were twisted for the movie, (ie, Billy Sunday's character was three or four people in the real story combined together.) Robert DeNiro was of course good, and Cuba Gooding, Jr., was also impressive.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea9843b3b4d14bb4926aa40734fa3059",
            "input": "A propaganda film for the Palestinian \"cause\". If you were expecting an unbiased documentary on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, you will need to look elsewhere. If you are an anti-Semite (or merely an anti-Zionist---nothing wrong with advocating the destruction of a country, right?) or uncritically in support of Palestinian goals (e.g., mass murder, the destruction of Israel), this is the documentary for you. Should make for an entertaining evening on college campuses around the UK and US. However, any informed and intellectually honest person would be outraged at the sheer number of lies presented in this video. I just hope those who truly are unaware of the situation aren't corrupted by this anti-Semitic filth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0e85b25d2c74ef7abb3b4764bcfa239",
            "input": "Another classic study of the effects of wealth on a southern family is masterfully depicted in Written on the Wind.Kyle Hadley has it all. Wealth, a plane, you name it. Kyle's best friend, Mitch, has always gotten him out of difficulty. Mitch finished college, Kyle got thrown out. Mitch is not from a wealthy home. Kyle's family, with Hadley Oil, controls most of everything in the town.While in N.Y., Kyle meets the girl of his dreams, nicely played by Lauren Bacall. After a whirlwind romance, he marries her and brings her home. There she meets her father-in-law who warns her how difficult Kyle can be. Kyle sleeps with a gun under his pillow. The Bacall character meets Kyle's sister, Mary Lee, a tramp if ever there were, played to the fullest by Dorothy Malone, who was voted best supporting actress.Rock Hudson plays Mitch, the faithful friend.A year of wedded bliss for Kyle and his bride ends when Kyle is told by the doctor that he can't have children. It is when his wife reveals to him that she is indeed pregnant, Kyle, thinking that the child is Mitch's, goes on a drunken frenzy and is accidentally shot dead in a memorable scene.Mary Lee, who has always loved Mitch, tries but is unsuccessful in blaming Mitch for Kyle's death. In a memorable courtroom scene, Malone pulled out all the stops in finally admitting that Kyle's death was an unfortunate accident. Her Oscar was well deserved.Surprisingly, Robert Stack, brilliant as Kyle Hadley, was nominated for best supporting actor and lost in an upset victory by Anthony Quinn, as Paul Gauguin, in Lust for Life.Douglas Sirk was the master of soap opera films of the 1950s. Written on the Wind is no exception. ***1/2.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4dca24a184b495c87dd4805b1abdce4",
            "input": "I caught this at a test screening. All I can say is: What...the...hell? This movie plays out about as smoothly as Mickey Mouse reading the script for \"Scarface.\" It's bizarre beyond making the slightest bit of sense; and even if you do leave your brain in the car, the film is still so bizarre that it isn't even funny.The plot involves crocodile hunter Steve Irwin trying to \"save\" a crocodile which contains a CIA probe. The CIA comes after Irwin to get their probe back, Irwin mistakes them for poachers, and sets out to \"stop\" them.That's about all the story there is; the rest is over-the-top lampooning of Australian culture (\"Didja see dat?\" and \"Crikey!\") and strangely choreographed action sequences. At one point, Irwin mounts a speeding RV and knife fights with a CIA agent on top of it. Yes, that's right: Steve Irwin knife fights a guy on top of an RV. Let that be your guide for this ridiculously bad film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-796b37885ea04bfb81c89867efddb686",
            "input": "It is difficult to evaluate this or any other comparable film of the early sound era in terms that one might use for ordinary film commentary. At times there is almost a desperation, as many film personalities of the silent era try their wings at sound, surely fearing that they will be left by the wayside (as did happen to some), Rin-Tin-Tin. however, was pertfectly natural. In such a vaudeville of unrelated sequences, some were sure to stand out John Barrymore's soliloquy from Richard II is a moment certainly worth preserving. By and large, only those with earlier stage training exuded confidence. However, this is over all reasonably entertaining, and a must for \"film buffs\" especially interested in the silent to sound transition",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bf6ba8e07a94fd0a38353e9a225a9c8",
            "input": "do you still love woody allen's humor and sense of the absurd? do you wait patiently for movies that get the plot going in the first five minutes instead of making you wait around? if so, you will adore this comedic murder mystery. it has all the elements of a good mystery: sharp plot, a handsome suspect, romance, and intrigue, mixed together with enough laughs and winks at fate to keep even the most jaded of movie goers happy.with beautiful people and gorgeous homes and landscapes to ogle, this frothy movie is just the thing to take your minds off your troubles. as woody might say, what's not to like?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2755aeb56ba2457bbece1bf2b147d179",
            "input": "This movie was so bad it was laughable. I couldn't resist watching it though. The plot is standard, the acting quite horrible (supporting cast such as the nutty neighbor and the lawyer friend were better actors). Kind of amusing if you have some time to waste and like seeing the conclusion to a dramatic plot.The headliner who plays \"Kathy\" was just fascinating because I couldn't decide if her deadpan, flat affect was the result of bad surgery or simply bad acting (I decided it was both). This leaves the script to comment on, which was pretty awful. Pat remarks, idiotic decisions, and reckless stupidity on the part of every character in the movie. Maybe this is what was so riveting; I don't know. I just watched it to see how bad it could be. (Actually the dialog doesn't even qualify to be called \"cliche'\" - but it's almost completely inane.)All in all, very bad, cheaply made movie. The sets, the same scenes (a house, a building) were shown over and over with no artistry or actual tie-in to the action; more like props that were randomly dropped into the action in a bad play. A chase scene could have been shot by any juvenile in a warehouse or an old school: poorly shot, cheap props, minimal action.... and I still wanted to see the ending. Go figure.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30447a4cf2e440e0a00eba53f8deba46",
            "input": "Gritty, dusty western from director Richard Brooks, who seems thoroughly engrossed in the genre while keeping all the usual clichés intact. Early 1900s horse race attracts a low-keyed cowboy (Gene Hackman), a suave gambler (James Coburn), a cocky kid (Jan Michael Vincent), and even a FEMALE (a surprisingly game Candice Bergen). Once the preliminaries are out of the way (with the predictable arguments over whether or not a woman should take part), this becomes a fairly engrossing entry, though one which breaks no new ground (it instead resembles something from Gary Cooper's era). Good-looking, if overlong piece has macho verve and a fine cast, yet the mechanisms of the plot get tiresome rather quickly. ** from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6403f1283154a5f82c919345debcc86",
            "input": "I watched this movie as a preview of a Matthew Barney art exhibit. It certainly prepared me. I almost skipped the exhibit and, in retrospect, probably should have.Aside from the score being great (Bjork) and the photography rich and colorful, the content was mostly tedious and predictable. Gee, I really needed to see someone wearing pearls to figure out what the pearl-divers were up to. The film was mostly a silly mixture of Japanese cultural references and industrial shots of modern whaling technology being used in a mock-hunt/harvest. The film \"peaks\" with enough gratuitous shock-art to turn your stomach.What was the point of the movie? While others might argue that it is an anti-whaling piece, one could equally argue that it somehow also justifies whaling. Personally I think it was Barney's attempt at \"flashing\" the audience with his anal, fecal, self-mutilation, and cannibalistic fetishes.Bottom line: unless you really get off on Barney's sense of art, don't bother seeing this movie. The message is obscure, the pace slow, and the cultural references pretentious. If you're after shock-art, you'll do better at one of the many \"Undead\" movies or hunting down an old copy of Hustler and taking in a fecal-cartoon.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e346e3da11454b3d9a045f6dd54b7410",
            "input": "Amen to Magsel. There was a lot of confusion going on. First off, how do you know which movie you are purchasing? Henry Cele stars in every one of them. I bought this movie thinking it was the miniseries...WHAT A LETDOWN!! It would have been a comedy but for the young girl being raped. David Hasselhoff (spelling?) is OK for popcorn TV but he was not believable in this film (where was his English accent?) AND WHAT'S WITH THE LOVE STORY??? The movie was supposed to be about a young man's rise to military power - not the slave ship captain getting jiggly with the English maiden looking for her daddy...If I had paid more than $7 for this movie, I would have to call the police - because that would be a crime!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9fe514db286f4a7c869f460457776291",
            "input": "No, this is nothing about that fairy tale with the pumpkin coach, fairy godmother and the glass slippers, but if I were to elaborate, I would have to spoil it for you, which I won't. But don't let curiosity get the better of you, as this movie is not fantastic. It's one of those movies that start off promisingly, before betraying its audience with cheap scare tactics and an incoherent storyline. And that's real horror.Yoon-hee (To Ji-Won) and Hyun-soo (Shin Se-kyeong) are your ideal mother and daughter. One's a successful plastic surgeon, while the other your dutiful, obedient, and beautiful teenage daughter. Their relationship is like hand in glove, so close you'd think of them more as siblings rather than parent-child. But things start to go wrong (don't they always) when Hyun-soo's friends, whom Yoon-hee has operated on, start to go berserk.Perhaps it's a warning to audiences, and for those Koreans ladies who don't bat an eyelid when going under the knife, if news reports are to be believed. The only truly scary moments are those scenes in plastic surgery, though somehow, I thought Kim Ki-duk's Time actually had more gore when featuring and describing what goes on during the surgery itself.It's a tale of two halves, the fist being an attempt to shock audiences with standard scare tactics, which, I admit, did get to me now and then. However, the second half degenerated the movie into mindless mumbo-jumbo melodramatics, and was quite contrived into its forcing its ideas down your throat. Some things begin not to make sense, and while attempts are always presented to explain, you probably won't buy it, not that horror movies are logical to begin with.The leads are all beautiful, and there is a distinct lack of male presence besides the negligible cop role. But hey, I'm not complaining, though the storyline could have been improved tremendously. I'd recommend you to watch this, only if you're a fan of mediocre Korean horror, on VCD. Watch out for those face off-ish moments!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0ddef9144fa4c53aecfd139a7ae41a7",
            "input": "The only thing that The First Power really has going for it is that it affords Jeff Kober an opportunity to play one of his lovely variety of psychotic villains that he's done so well in the last 25 years. Kober is a worthy successor to Lyle Bettger who specialized in those parts back in the Fifties.But it's not enough, The First Power is a souped up slasher flick that has Lou Diamond Phillips wasted as an LAPD detective who has a specialty in catching serial killers. Kober is his latest catch, but Kober's in league with a lower power and they're going to team up and make Lou's life miserable for him. Even after Kober is given the gas chamber, his spirit comes back in all kinds of guises.Mykelti Williamson is on hand as Lou's partner who meets a nasty end involving a demon possessed horse and Tracy Griffith as a psychic and Elizabeth Arlen as a nun with insights are around to help Lou. Will he succeed in battling forces from beyond?By the time the film ends, you no longer care. Lou really got trapped in a turkey. Maybe the devil made him do this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f605fdbb69834ce08cd1583755aab741",
            "input": "You'd be forgiven to think a Finnish director from Helsinki would be no good at directing an American horror movie (especially one entirely located inside a US prison) - see this to prove yourself wrong! It was produced in the 80's after all and the film was made on a budget more fitting to a modern DIY company TV advert (something I think anyone would really notice nowadays what with practically everyone being accustomed to $100m+ budgets for action movies unfortunately dominating the industry mind!) being Mr Harlin's first major production and the - at least what nowadays would be considered a stellar - cast. I still think most of the Nordic contribution to the film industry as a whole is more to do with Stellan Stargaard's screen appearances (not mentioning the well overrated Mr(s) Bergman directorial efforts) - at least for all female viewers - but this flick really proves there does exist proper movie talent outside of the US and Hollywood to make us watch a film in suspense. Do try and watch this movie even if you're not a horror puff, IMO it's definitely worth it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70cfa7ff7cd1436eafd706e8f6059ce5",
            "input": "Amongst the standard one liner type action films, where acting and logic are checked at the door, this movie is at the top of the class. If the person in charge of casting were to have put \"good\" actors in this flick, it would have been worse(excepting Richard Dawson who actually did act well, if you can call playing yourself \"acting\"). I love this movie! The Running Man is in all likelihood God's gift to man(okay maybe just men). Definitely the most quotable movie of our time so I'll part you with my favorite line: \"It's all part of life's rich pattern Brenda, and you better F*****g get used to it.\" Ahh, more people have been called \"Brenda\" for the sake of quoting this film than I can possibly imagine.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd8587894d1a4ac589922f36ce5057cb",
            "input": "Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950)Where One Ends, Another BeginsThis is a prototypical film noir, and as such, pretty flawless, from both style and content points of view. The photography and night settings are first rate (cinematographer Joseph LaShelle lets the drama ooze in scene after scene), and the close-ups on faces pure expressionism. I can watch this kind of film for the visuals alone, even when the actors struggle and the plot stinks. But the acting is first rate here, and the plot features what I consider the core of most noir films, the alienated male lead (representing the many men returning home to a changed United States after the war and feeling lost themselves). In fact, not only is Dana Andrews really convincing as the troubled, loner detective, he has a small but important counterpart in the film, the lead female's (first) husband, an decorated ex-GI fallen onto hard times and booze. The fact the one man kills the other might be of monumental significance, overall-- the regular guy struggling through his inner problems to success while the medal-wearing soldier slips into an accidental death with a silver plate in his head. The woman transitions from one to the other--we assume they marry and have children as suggested earlier in the movie. Even if this is pushing an interpretation onto it after the fact, we can still see the path of one man with some psychological baggage careening through a crisis to the highest kind of moral order--turning himself in for a small crime just at the point he has actually gotten away with it.This movie belongs to Andrews. He plays a far more restrained and moving type than Kirk Douglas plays in a similar role in William Wyler's Detective Story made just one year later, and Andrews certainly is less theatrical. You could easily see both movies side by side for a textbook compare and contrast session. The fact that Andrews as Detective Dixon is morally struggling through it all, and Douglas as Detective McLeod is not, might explain why one man gets his girl and the other doesn't. Gene Tierney pulls off a hugely sympathetic, demurring, and ultimately conventional and \"pretty\" type of woman--not just a cardboard desirable, but someone you want Dixon to actually marry. The criminal plot is really secondary to the main drama, but is effective enough in its play with types and clichés. The bit parts are kept snappy, the small details (like the portable craps table) nice touches, far from the character actors or the glamour of gambling in Casablanca. But then, Curtiz's great movie is iconic even in the details--it makes no effort to be subtle and real and penetrating, but instead is sweeping and memorable and inspiring. They come at opposite ends of the war, and represent opposite possibilities for their leading men. Bogart is beginning his active duty, Dixon, and the man Dixon has killed, are all through. Through, thoroughly, but not washed up.It's no accident that many, possibly most, film noirs have what you would call \"happy\" endings. The man overcomes his adversaries and transforms his inner self, and the moviegoer, then and now, understands just how beautiful that must feel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-483cbf1d25a14d89a3d63ad38b86a421",
            "input": "Well, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It was funny and sad and yes, the guy Andie MacDowell shagged was hot. Interesting, realistic characters and plots as well as beautiful scenery. I think my Mum would like it. I still think they should have been allowed to call it the Sad F**kers Club though...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9efb781c74a24046bbcd96e17401d794",
            "input": "The nearest I ever came to seeing this was a clip shown at a Gerard Philippe exposition in Paris about two years ago. I had no interest in the remake and having just caught up with the original just over half a century after it was made I can only conclude that the inept fencing was intentional, aimed at a long obsolete target. Hollywood had been doing realistic sword fights since the 30s when the greatest of them all, Basil Rathbone, crossed foils with Errol Flynn and others so the technique was available and so that leaves only satire. After a while you don't notice and revel in the Henri Jeanson dialogue reminiscent of the Prisoner Of Zenda, both versions. Gerard Philippe certainly had the presence to bring off a role like this and Gina Lollabrigida was probably a tad better than Martine Carol, the other obvious candidate at the time. The print I saw was particularly bad and at one point broke down completely so maybe a DVD version would enhance it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ad4eedd14324e4caba40dc6e7d67a0d",
            "input": "\"Handsome Guys With Bad Haircuts !!\" \"Beautiful Girls Without Any Clues !!\" \"Stupid Gangsters Who Cannot Shoot Straight !!\" From Dragon Dynasty comes the Hong Kong gangster drama, \"Dragon Heat.\" For reasons which will probably forever be completely obscured, the production and casting call for this 'criminals-on-steroids' movie somehow got both Maggie Q and Michael Biehn to sign on as villains. But they don't get all that much to do in this horrid slug-fest.They are two of the best contemporary actors around, each with their own resume' and list of accomplishments, and Biehn in particular has had the courage to take some rather challenging and non-heroic roles.Maggie Q was the super-bad \"Mai\" in \"Live Free Or Die Hard,\" so 'nuff said.Biehn is, of course, famous for being the soldier-from-the-future who made \"The Terminator\" of 1984 such a believable science-fiction/fantasy romp, by crashing up against Big Arnold, who is now the Governator of California !! Michael Biehn is almost wholly wasted in this terrible train-wreck of a police drama. There is absolutely no reason for that, as the incredibly convoluted plot -- given mostly in Chinese, as it is a Hong Kong story -- could have been better elaborated for non-Chinese audiences with a foreign narrator.In other words, if Biehn had been used as something like an Interpol observer or coordinator, or an agent under deep cover, who needs to get some 'splaining given to him every five or ten minutes, that would have been great. But no, he's brought in as a part of an odd group of special forces-type bad guys who seem to be freelancing their own corrupt deal, in the middle of somebody else's totally corrupt deal involving the local king of corrupt deals. Yes, there, I said it all. Confused ? Me too. \"Welcome to the party, pal.\"In the truly superb Hong Kong crime drama, known by its English title as \"Breaking News,\" there are also a number of fascinating characters at work, but there is only one story line in the plot. Bad guys vs. good cops. In this wretched and excessively violent foray into the world of a Hong Kong Triad, or gang, it seems that the hot-shot police force is little more than a parade of ducks in a shooting gallery, the way the criminals mow them down.So, not surprisingly, there's an almost otherwise incomprehensible scene ( several scenes, in fact ), where kids are trying to shoot wooden ducks in an arcade game, to win stuffed animal prizes. And so the hot shot good-guy police officers quite naturally intervene on their behalf, so that the arcade owner has to give up the Kewpie dolls.There's also a half-hearted attempt at creating a \"love interest\" between one of the 'visiting cops' and the sole female 'visiting cop'.The visiting cops are supposed to be material witnesses against the Triad gangster leader, who gets hijacked on the way to his court appearance, but not by his own team but by the mercenaries ( Biehn, Maggie Q, and some others ). These killers all want something but we don't get to learn about what it is, until the very end of the film !! That was a stupid mistake inside of the overall story.You cannot build suspense in a crime drama without something to obtain, or get, or get away from, being introduced very early in the story.Add to that some \"cut-away scenes\" done for purely artsy effects, all showing the bad-bad guys' and the regular bad guys' recent pasts, and any film buff can readily understand why this barking dog gets a 1 rating from this fan of all things cinematic with criminals and conspirators and Hong Kong.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b74be30769e4ee1943defc2f181703a",
            "input": "I'll bet none of you knew that the famous Conquistador Hernando Cortes made a preliminary scouting expedition to Mexico before taking on the Aztecs. Good thing he did because he would never have known about those T Rexs that inhabited one particular valley where the locals revered them as gods.That was understandable. What wasn't was the casting of blue eyed Ian Ziering as Cortes. Even with the blond hair made famous in Beverly Hills 90210 dyed black, Ian looked positively ridiculous. At least he made no attempt at a Spanish accent.The real hero of Tyrannosaurus Azteca is Marco Sanchez also late of a television series with a semi-recurring role in Walker Texas Ranger as Detective Sandoval of the Dallas PD. He finds true love with an Aztec princess and life would be just perfect if it wasn't for those pesky prehistoric beasts the natives worship.Tyrannosaurus Azteca looks like they used some outtakes from the famous Sid&Marty Krofft series the Land of the Lost. All that was needed was some Sleestak to appear.If you're interested in finding out about this reconnoitering expedition that didn't quite make the history books by all means check out Tyrannosaurus Azteca. Then try and sit through it with a straight face.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8867ac88488047cea748ec5656c69b3c",
            "input": "People call this a comedy, but when I just watched it, I laughedonly once. I guess the problem is that I first saw it when I was 14,and I wasn't old enough to understand that it wasn't meant to betaken seriously. There were quite a few scenes that were meantto be funny, but I cared too much about the characters to laugh atthem.I suggest that you watch this film next time you're falling in love,and try to take it seriously. I think you'll find that, despite a few sillyflaws, it's one of the most moving love stories you've ever seen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfec3dc22fc24b6b90e7f86f96aaf91e",
            "input": "Good luck finding this film to even watch - it's not yet released on tape or DVD. I saw on release in the early '70's, was lucky enough to catch it via American Cinematheque's preservation efforts, and it still has some tangible moments that stayed with me for thirty years.No reason to repeat rwint's accurate comments here. As a come-out Director soon after the soaring success of Five Easy Pieces, Jack N has been said to have managed the low budget effort as best as possible, and it certainly shows in the wandering and meandering that could have used some re-cutting. But it's also a memorable icon for it's time: the all very intense clashes of late 60's college sports, student movements, sexual revolution, and more. Why see this film? It was probably a ground breaker in some scenes: the frisky male bonding in the after-game showers; Karen Black's scene with Tepper in the car will catch you a little off guard - but it's the first use of a word I hadn't witnessed in film before; and the casual and unexpected use of nudity overall. There are probably others I'm omitting.Look for a nice surprise of a young Cindy Williams in one of her first films; a thin David Ogend Stiers; Mike Warren fresh out of his powder-blue UCLA uniform and readying for a dark-blue TV uniform; Robert Towne - Actor; and a whole lot of folks simply playing themselves.Now: any connection between Harry Gittes last name, Robert Towne, and a certain character in Chinatown and the Two Jakes?It gets a \"7\" based on Karen Black. You'll see why.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6c9e1f4ca084f94b86a0970c0460a3d",
            "input": "There is a DVD published in the UK in 2002 Code HRGD002 on the cover, no ASIN, VFC 19796 on the disk, no IFPI code in the inner rim.Probably a straight transfer from VHS. There is no much point is commenting an adult film. But this one contains a minimal plot, and the characters are believable. It was shown in the United States in normal cinemas.I've seen it In Pensylvannia way back in 1975.As such it deserves a place in an Encyclopedia of Movies. The DVD has no special features and no subtitles, and was probably made using a VHS tape as source",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ce2eb96ec6d4d1c905086458013c031",
            "input": "Cabin Fever is the first feature film directed by Eli Roth.Roth and Randy Pearlstein co wrote the script from a story by Roth.this a zombie film,which owes a lot to George Romero and his earlier \"living dead movies\",and to the original Texas Chainsaw Massacrenot to mention Sam Ramie's \"Evil Dead\".there is nothing original here,and the story is not compelling.the acting is about par with this genre,it's just that the story fails.we have pretty much seen this movie before and better made.having said that,after having achieved commercial, if not artistic success from this movie,Roth decided he was a director and came out with the abysmally atrocious,mean spirited,pointless(though much more ambitious)crap fest Hostel.Roth should have quit while he was behind.Cabin Fever is not a good film,however compared to Hostel it is a work of art.I hope somebody (preferably a psychiatrist)convinces this guy that film-making is the wrong career choice.as for Cabin fever,a weak 3/10 for not being as abysmal as Hostel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53ed8c6fc5a34789a52e49b6dee9ac15",
            "input": "Twist endings can be really cool in a movie. It's especially interesting when the twist is right in front of our eyes, but we just don't pay attention. Those type of twist endings are the one's that make people think. Then we've got twists like this film has. Twists that, whether or not you pay attention, you have no clue what's going to happen. When they reveal this kind of random twist, instead of shock, it's somewhat a dumbfounded reaction. This film starts off like it's going to be an interesting take on horror, but after about 20 minutes, it's nothing but boring dialogue and a stupid twist.Three young women are going to a concert, so they get lost traveling through the woods, and hit a tree trunk. They end up at some old creepy lady's house, who hates men, and they are greeted by her homely daughter Marion (Laurel Munson). Strange goings on happen as these girls stay at this house for several days instead of trying to leave or get home, and the suspense progresses into a dumb slasher.This film is too caught up in it's dialogue, and it's always between only a few characters. We have the main three girls, the creepy spinster and the old lady, and conversation of any importance does not go beyond these five. To make matters worse, they never have anything interesting to say. It's actually quite maddening sitting through their conversations. We want to know what's going on, and instead they just talk and talk and talk (about nothing).Plot holes are abundant here. The house these girls stay at when they get in their car accident is apparently three miles from anywhere...wow, three miles! A two hour or less walk will kill them. Why didn't they get a ride with the worker for this household who was driving into town? Did he have a one seater? How come these girls never question leaving and just willingly stay, rarely even checking up on each other? Why did this have to have so many dumb twists? Maybe the answers are in the boring script.Having a slasher film with five characters is really a bad idea. It's not thrilling, it's not scary, and the ending is definitely out there, but undoubtedly dumb.My rating: * 1/2 out of ****. 79 mins. R for nudity and violence.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2ecfcc68f21499fb2046e4e9bfe3e49",
            "input": "An interesting idea involving an alternative dimension inside a hospital. It recalled - Stephen Kings \"Langoliers\", \"Kingdom Hospital\" and old twilight zone episodes. Atmospherically strong, the set up was great. There were also some very clever 'time loop' moments which always have that head-melt appeal. The story had plenty of vague references which led me to believe that all the ensuing weirdness of - time slips / ghosts / a weird bat winged demon and a rather silly heavy metal attired ghoul-thing would be explained. And THAT was were Dark Floors severely let me down. Based on my viewing the movie gives NO EXPLANATION as to what is behind the events. Whilst, some ambiguity is always expected/welcome in these kind of films. Dark floors took it to new heights of vagueness. I don't expect things wrapped up in a pretty ribbon, but neither should I be left feeling \"Huh? .. is that it? ... Did I dose off? Maybe, I hit chapter skip by mistake?\" Dark Floors left me with a deeply unsatisfying suspicion that \"It was all a dream\" which is a shame because up until the last reel I was very much on board and enjoying the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcdda976a27c4deb9e434dae2fe3cf8b",
            "input": "Well this movie is amazingly awful. I felt sorry for the actors involved in this project because I'm sure they did not write their lines. Which were sometimes delivered with slight sarcasm, which lead me to believe they were not taking this movie seriously, nor could anybody who watches this obnoxious off beat monster slasher. While watching this \" Creature Unknown\" I could not help but think that there was not much of a budget or a competent writer on the crew. But, if you go into watching this for a laugh you'll be happy, the movie is shameless to mocking itself because i cant see how anybody could look at this and be proud of pumping this straight to DVD clichéd wanna be action thriller/horror movie fightfest to light.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbaa921b91a2417eab9ab6b7800c7400",
            "input": "i love this film. the songs and story lines are great fun. and the song \"saying goodbye\" always moves me. what a brilliant thing to do to bring puppets to life, in a way that you actually care about these things made of cloth and fabric and whatever. great voices and great talent. why were all the other muppet films that came after this one so much less interesting, moving and funny? is it that mr. henson is just so very missed?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6a47377382f4ec7aadbd51b8eb5a055",
            "input": "Of all Arnold's mid-'80s movies who would have thought that most relevant today would be The Running Man. A chilling and surprisingly realistic tale of reality TV gone mad. It may have been far-fetched back then but not so now. Not when you think about it. Currently, Reality TV shows are either scraping the bottom of the barrel or desperate to raise the bar. If the next one isn't more controversial as the last, it's a dud. How long will it be before we really do see shows like The Running Man? How long before we have 'court-appointed theatrical attorneys' or the entertainment division of the Justice Department? There is so much satire and intelligence in this movie that may have been missed back in 1987 that is desperate to be seen again considering the current state of TV shows.The biggest message of all is 'You are being lied to'. It's no secret that the Government and the media work in cahoots. And the masses believe what the media tells them to believe. It's a very scary state of affairs and unless more accurate representations of the truth emerge we may easily accept a brutal show like the Running Man in the near future. It's no secret that Reality TV is not very realistic. It's edited and reshaped before being aired and it's only what the networks want you to see. Usually it's far from the real truth.Although rather different than Stephen King's book (the ending is completely changed) the script does conform to the typical Arnie formula. Yes, he does have numerous and very corny one-liners and he does say 'I'll be back' (which he never REALLY said that often anyway, when you think about it) in the most ironic situation yet but he's still a zillion times better in the role then Christopher Reeve or Dolph Lundgren would have been (these two were considered BEFORE Arnie believe it or not).The director is none other than Dave Starsky himself (Paul Michael Glaser). It may not be artistic but it is still strong enough to generate excitement and his use of neon and flourescent colors gives each individual set a pretty cool look. Andrew Davis (not a director I particularly like) was attached before Glaser, though no matter who directs, the film is still marred by a very heavy 80's feel.First of all, Harold Faltermeyer's score (remember him?) is incredibly dated and robs the action scenes of any timeless integrity. And the fashion sense of the movie is far too excessive to be convincingly set in the future. Apart from the dated feel, the only other thing that bugs me is the poorly staged shoot-out that passes as the climax.This new DVD is a zillion times better than the original release. Gone is the horrid letterbox picture. In its place is a brand new hi-definition 1.85:1 anamorphic transfer. The colors sparkle and literally pop from the screen. The new Dolby 5.1 EX and DTS ES soundtrack are also amazing. There constant use of the surround channels to great effect and the bass is strong and powerful. Definitely one of the best re-masters I've seen so far. Two intriguing documentaries, a trailer and a 'Meet the Stalkers' gimmick are included in this 2-disc set that comes in a rather neat slip case.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12c67ebc975845bf8e7ed21825d9c4d3",
            "input": "I loved the idea of this film from the moment I first saw a trailer for it. Einstein has always been one of my heroes and the image of him as the kindly, playful, slightly mad genius was enough to get me to see the film. The added spice of Matthau as Einstein made it even better.The story is pure fantasy, but a delightful one. An auto mechanic falls in love with a beautiful woman, who happens to be Einstein's niece. With the help of four Fairy Godfathers of Physics, Ed embarks on a quest to win Catherine's heart. Throw a jealous fiancé (who exemplifies the worst of experimental psychology) and Eisenhower into the mix, and you have pure fun.The film is filled with great character actors and delightfully sweet and daffy performances. Walter Matthau play Einstein as a mischievous imp; cupid with a slide rule. Tim Robbins is wonderfully endearing as Ed and Meg Ryan plays a step above her normal rom-com level. Stephen fry is a joy as the \"RRRatman\" and Ryan's fiancé; who lacks a single romantic bone in his body.The film fell below most radars, but is a delightful treasure that does not grow stale with repeated viewings. It features first-rate writing and performances and is a gentle treat in a less than gentle world.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9eed1d4b1914b7b95fd5de0ce2d99f4",
            "input": "I was surprised at how a movie could be both cheesy and excellent at the same time. The Frisbee flying saucer was naff beyond comprehension, especially when landing, yet the specially effects when the Krell attacked were awesome for a film that was made over half a century ago! Living in the middle east I saw shades of Islam creep in when JJ Adams suggested Alta should dress more modestly, and as an engineer, was amazed by the imagination used for the 'futuristic' gadgets, and gizmos dreamed up by the props department. All in all, an entertaining hour and a half, my first time seeing Walter Pidgeon and a chance to see Leslie Neilsen as a 'young' man",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e0271b8be974d7cb4228f51e2fbf0f1",
            "input": "I want to clarify a few things. I am not familiar with Ming-liang Tsai movies, and I am very familiar with art cinema; I grow up in the seventies times of Goddard, Fellini, Bergman, Bertolucci and many others.Art movies then were really ART; like paints. People did it to express their inner feelings, not really worried about if other people understand anything. They were beyond commercial values; just look some old Antonioni (or early Picasso) and you will understand.Tian bian yi duo yun (The Wayward Cloud) has nothing to do with that. It is an opportunistic movie, intended to fool festival judges and critics, playing many things without saying anything.The story makes no sense. The lack of water makes the government to promote the use of watermelons to hydrate. A girl in desperation, steal water from the public bathrooms WC. There is also a porno start (neighbor) trying to make a movie with an actress he does not seems to feel comfortable with. There is some romantic awakening between the girl and the porno star. The mess ends with a sexual scene (not pornographic) that many people feel shocked about, but I believe it is less provocative than you can see in American Pie or History of Violence.The two main characters never talk. Sometimes, a musical number 60 style appears and explains (through a song) what is happening in characters minds. These video clips, are really welcomed because the previous scene, without dialog or music only people looking at each other, takes sometimes 4, 5 or even more minutes which in movie times is TOO MUCH. There is also a few bits about \"the difficult to make sex without love\", the \"selfish mind of the porno industry\". It is obvious, this movie intended (get away with it) to fool festival juries and critics. It have a few pseudo-shocking scenes (within the limits of Taiwan censorship) and many subjects are open, but nothing is concluded or goes anywhere. These tricks, got the movie a few (disputed) important prices in film festivals and get the movie an undeserved commercial success (I see the movie in France and the theater was packed). However, please, do not be fooled. There is nothing new or original or even originally told or filmed in this movie. It is boring and empty; really a fraud to public. Boogie Nights (which I did not really liked), Intimacy and 9 Songs are far better movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d2bb08001ce40e8aa4c2babb4de853f",
            "input": "\"The House That Dripped Blood\" is one of the better anthology films of the time period.**SPOILERS**Tracking down a missing film star, Inspector Holloway, (John Bennett) finds that the last reported sighting was in a large mansion in the countryside. During the course of looking through the house, he is told four different stories about past residents of the house.The Good Story(s): Method for Murder-Moving into the mysterious manor to get some peace and quiet while Charles pens his latest masterwork, Horror novelist Charles Hillyer, (Denholm Elliott) and his wife Alice, (Joanna Dunham) are thrilled with the story, which centers around a serial strangler named Dominic. After a series of strange accidents and experiences in the house, Charles begins to believe that the creation my have come to life and is haunting him and his wife. Probably one of the better entries in the film, it's easily the creepiest. The atmosphere here is what sets it apart. The scenes with the fictional character are genuinely creepy, the mystery surrounding him is really effective and there's always a classic creep-out moment. The classic moment is the kill in the psychiatrist's office, which is an all-time high for creepiness. The build-up to it, with the creaking sounds, quick flashes of a mysterious being, and the thunder and lightning in the back ground work well for this one's favor.Sweets for the Sweet-Moving into a new house, widower John Reid, (Christopher Lee) hires former school teacher Ann Norton, (Nyree Dawn Porter) for his young daughter Jane, (Chloe Franks) while he's away on business. Ann gradually begins to unravel a dark secret from Jane's past, which John vehemently denies. When she learns the true nature of what has happened, it's far more shocking that what she could've thought possible. With the creepiest outright plot and the biggest twist of the stories, this is a quite pleasant entry. The mystery of the family is wonderfully played out, with small amounts of clues piled up here and there, and the final revelation is downright nerve-wracking. That part alone is the main reason why this one works, and Lee doesn't harm it either.The Bad Story(s): Waxwork-Tortured by memories of his lost love, Phillip Grayson, (Peter Cushing) and his friend Neville Rogers, (Joss Ackland) both become infatuated with a statue of a woman in a Wax Museum, as the statue takes over their lives, they discover a shocking secret about the museum that haunts the both of them. There's a clever premise here, and it does provide an excuse to spend time in a wax museum, which are always creepy. This is no exception, and it looks eerie, which is helped by the florescent lighting on display on the sculptures. A dream sequence provides a great moment of suspense, but what ultimately kills this one is the slow pace. It takes a long time for events to unfold out, and most of the time is spent on exposition. It also builds up to a shock ending that can be seen coming from a mile away. Those really lower this one a bit. Had the twist been changed, it would've scored higher, the rest is acceptable.The Cloak-Veteran horror film actor Paul Henderson, (Jon Pertwee) upset at the lack of realism on the set of his new film, goes off and buys a new vampire cloak from a specialty store. The cloak soon turns him into a vampire, going crazy on the set with co-star Carla, (Ingrid Pitt) and other vampiric acts at home. Unconvinced the cloak is the cause, he does everything he can to prove it's just in his imagination. This has a pretty decent premise, and there is plenty of opportunity for some decent scares, but what sinks it is several factors. First, it's just too goofy for it's own good. The plot twist at the end is a perfect example, which is so overdone that it's not really a shock at all, and just comes across as just plain silly. There's so few scenes of scares or attempted scares that it's just a bore to sit through. It's the weakest one in the film.The Final Verdict: A quite decent omnibus film, there's a few small problems scattered through each of the stories that renders this a less than perfect but still highly watchable film. Highly recommended for those into the similar films at the time or who enjoy British horror films.Today's Rating-PG-13: Violence",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0610d7bd15c240d791db26ef492c5fda",
            "input": "Or \"Marlowe At Sea\". Yet another ridiculously overrated old film with Bogey. Quite talky, too. Bogey basically plays the same character as in the Marlow films; always in control of a situation, never nervous - no matter how dangerous a situation, calls women \"slim\" and \"dames\" and other such nonsense, is the only \"real male\" i.e. alpha male in the movie (the only other alpha male male being the head of Gestapo - but he is only a fat alpha male male), and - naturally - every attractive young woman who comes his way cannot resist his charms and wants his penis within hours of their initial introduction. The character clichés are all here. Bogey is supposed to be the same type of cynic-about-to-reform as in \"Casablanca\", and naturally he often refuses money or other valuables when being offered them - but how does that fit in with the tough cynic in him? It doesn't, so he can't be a cynic; Hawks wanted it both ways: a character who is both the \"cool lone cynic\" and yet a well-meaning humanitarian. I don't think so... Bacall does her non-chalant \"cool babe\" routine for the first time, and there are plenty of overrated, not all-too interesting so-called \"sexual innuendo\" exchanges between her and Bogey; these dialogues sound silly by today's standards. \"Just purse your lips and whistle...\". A load of crap... She was 19 when this was made but looks a lot older, and is far less attractive than the female stars of the day. Her bony face, with its sharp features, is nowhere even close to radiating the kind of feminine beauty of a de Havilland, the cuteness of a Myrna Loy, let alone the likability of an Irene Dunne. Bacall was more suited for playing vampires, not femme-fatales. (In real life she is very much like her face: a Hollywood bitch.) There is a scene in which Bacall breaks into tears; very unsuitable for her character. There are two or three bad musical numbers - but my fast-forward button was ready.If you're interested in reading my \"biographies\" of Bogart, Bacall, Huston, and other Hollywood personalities, contact me by e-mail.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65cf9bd8111e4f3d9bb5ff83c11332b7",
            "input": "Well i do disagreed with the other comment posted. Piedras is much much better them Magnolia or any of the other films that were mentioned.specially about non real characters, i think that someone just wrote that only because he never lived in the Spanish society like i did (and i'm not Spanish), is a very real film with real characters, very well done by one of the best Spanish actress Antonia San Juan.about be a European film in contrast with an American film, well we different societies, personally i dislike American modern films a lot (i like the classics and some of the Andy American films but they are very few).Is a film about the continuous Constitution of a person, liked or not we all make mistakes but some can learn about the mistakes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-181299cbb3d74db69f03aec58a00f3fa",
            "input": "This was a rip-off of the same garbage we had to watch Bob Saget host during the half-hour before this. Dave Coulier only thought he was funny and it was pretty much the same show as America's Funniest Home Videos except with a hosts who have a combined IQ of three. Tawny Kitaen must've really needed the money and Coulier had to go to the recycle bin for his jokes. It was torture enough having to see him imitate Popeye and other washed up cartoon starts on Full House. That one dude who played all of the practical jokes on everyone deserves to be on the receiving end of a Grade A wedgie. Coulier must've needed to money to please Alannis Morisette while they were dating.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52dc9d6e46bd4da5ad3475663e40a619",
            "input": "Hong Kong directors crossing over to Hollywood to make movies is nothing new, with the temporary exodus of the likes of Tsui Hark, John Woo, Ringo Lam in the 90s. From their collective output, only a few movies (or may I say just one?) made an impact at the box office. The Andrew Lau and Alan Mak partnership has been a tour de force in recent HK cinematic history, especially with their now famous Infernal Affairs trilogy which was remade into Martin Scorsese's The Departed, so it's no surprise when Hollywood comes knocking on the door.But without fellow collaborator Mak, who usually has script/story duties, how did Lau fare with writers Hans Bauer and Craig Mitchell? It's like the X-Files without the X, in the way the story is crafted, the characters and the parallels drawn with the Chris Carter series. Richard Gere and Claire Danes pair up ala David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson, only that they don't belong to any federal investigative agency who bear arms, but are employees of Protective Services, who's chief role is to ensure that sexual predators who belong to their jurisdiction, are kept safe from society when they are released from having served time. Hence they are the shepherds tending to their flock, only that their flock suffer from sick sexual perversion with the propensity for violence.The parallels in characterization are so blatantly obvious, that it's just a cosmetic touch up on the outside. Like Fox Mulder, Gere's Erroll Babbage is a strange, lonely man, consumed by his obsession in his quest to doggedly harass his flock to tote the line. Pained by a failed attempt to rescue a missing child, just like how Mulder pines for his missing sister, Babbage is shunned by colleagues and given the marching orders disguised as a retirement plan. He has deep disgust for the people he's monitoring, sick of their crimes and what they stand for, that he has no qualms in using unorthodox methods, short of flying off the handle while dishing out illegal, preemptive punishment. At the same time, he too has strong urges that he has to fight against, in order not to cross the line into becoming like those he loathes. As part of routine, he also scans newspapers and tabloids for clues and leads toward his objective, that of seeking closure, salvation for himself, and possessing a strong belief that the truth is still out there, and he wants to believe.Danes' Allison Lowry on the other hand, is the ingénue brought in to replace Babbage. But in the meantime while learning the ropes on the job for the next 18 days, she is required to spy on him, and to report his shenanigans, pretty much like what Dana Scully was tasked to do with Fox Mulder. As the disbeliever of pre-emptiveness and holding onto the notion that those discharged back to society have been cured of their temptations, she slowly starts to see what Babbage sees, and understands that it takes a whole lot more than being just a desk and administrative job if she truly wants to help people.And it is this discovery of the world of fetishes and deviant sexual practices, that we open all our eyes to, much like how 8mm starring Nicolas Cage brought snuff films into the spotlight. It's a decent investigative drama with the usual red herrings, and my, are they really good ones as it made you wonder quite often if your guesses are correct, and you soon find yourself firing from the hip as you get proved incorrect at alarming frequency, though I don't credit this to a tight narrative, but more from the sprawling number of characters (watch out for Avril Lavigne's cameo) and sub plots. The scene in the darkened ware/shophouse was akin to Se7en's David Mills and William Somerset when they raided John Doe's apartment and find plenty of bizarreness inside, though here, given the subject nature, it wasn't lingered upon much.Apparently, The Flock somehow decided that Enrique Chediak's cinematography was good enough, despite its very strange style of having no style, utilizing almost every trick in the book to try and recreate feelings of watching another Se7en, only that this was deeply steeped in tinges of brown, rather than the doom and gloom of black. It does take a little while to get used to this, and I put this effect as one which actually distracts from what is happening in the story. Not a really good move though, with somewhat frequent repetition of scenes involving flashbacks.But The Flock still makes decent entertainment, though X-philes out there would probably find it hard not to picture their favourite actors in the lead roles, given so much similarities in character. Gere and Danes do put forth some chemistry as the old fogey (heh) and his protégé, and while it's not exactly great, Andrew Lau did manage to pull off something enjoyable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88e65b04934744cca7264bf86d0d4911",
            "input": "The Good Thing about this movie: The concept is interesting and there are some funny scenes. It also makes you think of those little things in life that could greatly affect the life of someone else without you ever knowing. Its a small world and this little movie shows us.The Bad Thing:There are too many characters and its hard to tell who the main character is but its still a great movie.Its a great movie and many people compare it to Magnolia which I haven't seen.8/10Not Rated---I would rate it PG-13 for brief violence,some language and sexual situations.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6a5aa4196224e109459611427108876",
            "input": "After seeing MIDNIGHT OFFERINGS I am still convinced that the first decent movie about (teenage) witches yet has to be made. I didn't think much of THE CRAFT and I'm not into CHARMED either. The only film I more or less enjoyed (about teenage witches) was LITTLE WITCHES (1996), and even that one wasn't very good. But changes are that if you liked all the aforementioned movies, you will also enjoy MIDNIGHT OFFERINGS.I was expecting a silly and cheesy early 80's movie about teenage witches in high school. But I was rather surprised that this whole movie plays it rather serious. The acting is decent and serious all the time. No jokes are being played by teenagers or something. And the musical score, at first, I thought was pretty good. It added some scariness and also something 'classy', with the use of threatening violins and all. But as the movie progressed I came to the conclusion that the score was just too ambitious. They didn't have to add those threatening violins when you simply see someone back up a car and then drive away at normal speed.Then there's Melissa Sue Anderson, who was the main reason for me to see this movie. A few weeks ago, I saw her in HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME, a rather enjoyable, thick-plotted (and goofy on some occasions) slasher-movie which she had done in the same year as MIDNIGHT OFFERINGS. And I must say, she was very good as the icy-cold bad witch Vivian. But the main problem with the movie is: almost nothing happens! Vivian causes a death and an accident, yes, but that's it. Then there's Robin, the good witch, who is just learning about her powers. And we expect the two of them using their powers more than once, but at only one occasion they use their powers to make some pieces of wood and other stuff fly through the air as projectiles. That was supposed to be a fight between two powerful witches? And what's worse, I was hoping to see a spectacular show-down between the witches at the end of the movie with at least some special effects, flaming eyes or whatever... but nothing happens. There is sort of a confrontation in the end, but it's a big disappointment.So, the acting of the two witches was good. The musical score was decent (even though overly ambitious). And the cinematography was rather dark and moody at times. But that doesn't make a good movie yet, does it?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c8d8654f9cf41fabb7c545776e35e39",
            "input": "Magicians is a wonderful ride from start to finish, thanks in large part to the magic that is generated by the stars. Alan Arkin is fantastic in one of his best roles in decades. Like any really fine film, it's a journey in which the theme is redemption and the results of dreaming. I can't believe this film is SO difficult to find -- I'd buy it on DVD in a heartbeat but have yet to find an outlet.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d91fabc8f8f145e1beea04d22d567593",
            "input": "It was such a treat when this show was on because it was such a fresh, innovative, and original show. This makes every show I've ever watched look plain boring. The moment the first episode aired I was entranced and I became attached to all the characters so easy (which usually never happens because I always hate a few characters). It is a pity this show won't have a third season, because it has to be one of the best shows I have ever seen and that isn't exaggerating my feelings for the show at all. Nothing can ever replace Pushing Daisies, because what could ABC possibly find to replace this show? This is easily the best show on television. I came for Kristin Chenoweth and I stayed because I fell in love with the entire show.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0979b4ec80924b85946ce4a076dc7d17",
            "input": "After too many bad memories, I took to skipping this episode each time it showed up in the Season 2 sequence. I recently watched it again just to remind me why. I've always considered this the worst ST:TNG episode (with the exception of \"Shades of Gray,\" which barely counts as an episode at all).I keep listening to the clunky dialogue and thinking of the script red-penciled by the author's Writing 101 teacher: \"SHOW, DON'T TELL!\" From Deanna Troi's pronouncement, and everyone else's constant elbowing reminders about what a charming, dangerous rogue Okona is, to Guinan's explanation about how funny her droid joke is (it isn't), to the who-cares resolution to the conflict, there isn't a plot point that isn't highlighted and triple-underlined for our edification, and there ain't a believable moment in any of it. Unfortunately, Bill Campbell, a charming actor in other circumstances, is too puppy-dog huggable to be the center of the machinations of the plot. On the other hand, it could be that no one short of John Barrowman (Jack Harkness from \"Doctor Who\") could pull of this underwritten placeholder of a role.(Zero points, by the way, to the Data subplot. While I think Joe Piscopo stopped being funny decades ago, he and Brent Spiner had nothing to work with here. Although the Jerry Lewis bit was funny in a stupid way.)On a good day, you may be able to think of this as a charming little homage to a lesser Original Series episode. Me, I'd rather skip ahead to \"Time Squared\" or \"Q Who.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f44550cb9504eafa4e0b1c9b761e2c6",
            "input": "I've watched this movie a second time to try to figure out why it wasn't as successful (commercially or artistically) as it should have been, and discovered considerable artistic merit--which may ultimately have been its commercial undoing.First of all, this movie attempts \"serious\" science-fiction, social commentary, more than action-adventure. There is action in it, but that's not really what it's about. If you focus on that, you'll end up with (as others have noted) a bad \"Aliens\" clone. But, again, that's not what it's about.The movie is really about Todd's (Kurt Russell) transformation from human to near-machine and back to human (mostly *back*). But because it's not trying to give you a typically glib Hollywood style answer, Kurt Russell must make this transformation without speaking, and largely without broad expressions. And he really does a wonderful job--it can take two viewings to appreciate it.The surrounding \"social logic\" is flawed and it's never adequately explained whether Todd's ability to hold his own against an army of supposedly superior troops comes from his experience on the battlefield or his newfound human-ness or what, but the movie still makes a marvellous showcase for Russell's (easy to underestimate) talent.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed89b9f10f38439dbce72c7a55337b54",
            "input": "Being an independent filmmaker and a huge fan of Edward D. Wood Jr. I purchased this documentary believing that this would finally set the record straight on how gifted and brilliant Ed Wood actually was. What I got was a disappointing self-centered, conflictive, contradictory compilation of bitter self-aggrandizing has-beens. Where people DO remember Ed Wood Jr., do people actually remember the second cousin of the guy with the duct tape who knew someone who was in Plan Nine From Outer Space? It appears as though, the very minute there is a renewed interest in Ed Wood, these people come out of the \"Wood\"work! Only to take mean spirited swipes at someone who actually gave them a chance when no-one else would! After 50 years I would suggest that many of these people should let go of the fact that they didn't get the $75 they were promised!Ed Wood was a brilliant creative filmmaker who knew how to entertain. In-fact that was ALL he lived for. You may giggle when you see Ed's films, but somehow you are aware that you are laughing WITH him, and not AT him. But, I digress... Back to the film at hand. If you are expecting a film ABOUT Edward D. Wood Jr., you won't get it here. If you want a film about cranky bitter old actors, this is the film for you!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9c0031e60064a3dab40b228ddac23f0",
            "input": "The Wooden Horse was one of the first \"great\" escape stories from World War II, telling the true story of Eric Williams and others in their escape from Stalag-Lufft III in October of 1943. I really like this film, but had to by it on VHS from Amazon in England and get it transferred from PAL format in the U.S. I read the book when I was in hight school, after having seen a portion of the film in the early 60's on T.V. The taunt drama of Peter and John trying to escape from Germany during the war is more realistic than the treck of the escapes portrayed in the Great Escape. This film is a lost treasure, that should be made more available to American audiences.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dab2daa7d1414544ab6eb4e0f86536d7",
            "input": "This film, as low budget as it may be, is one of the best psychological thrillers I've ever seen. If you accept that it's low budget from the start, you can appreciate just how good of a story it is, how very well written the script is, and how great the filmmaker was to produce something so wonderful with so little money.All the elements of a great film are here. The visuals, though shot on digital, were gorgeous in places. The bizarre, dreamy feel of the film is captured particularly well in the scene with the talking dog, that scene was just amazing. It's such a trippy piece of work, but not done in a pretentious way, and because of that I have a whole lot of respect for this film. It comes highly recommended to anyone looking for something unique and captivating, and different from much of the repetitive films that are out there.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd2afabf404844f881b4aee0fe12b1ef",
            "input": "Normally, I have much better things to do with my time than write reviews but I was so disappointed with this movie that I spent an hour registering with IMDb just to get it off my chest.You would think a movie with names like Morgan Freeman or Kevin Spacey would be a bankable bet... well, this movie was just terrible. It is nigh on impossible to \"suspend disbelief\"; I tried, really, I wanted to enjoy it but Justin Timberlake just wouldn't let me. Timberlake should stick to music, what a dreadful performance - NO presence as an actor,NO character. Can't blame everything on Justin: The movie also boast a dreadful plot & badly timed editing; its definitely an \"F\".After seeing this, I have to wonder what really motivates actors. I mean, surely Morgan actually read the script before taking the part. Did he not see how poor it was? What then could motivate him to take the part? Money? Of course, acting is at times more about who you are seen with rather than really developing quality work. LL Cool J is a great actor; he gets a lot more screen time than Freeman or Spacey in this movie and really struggles to come to terms with the poor script. Meanwhile, the audience goes: \"What the hell is going on here? You expect me to believe this crap?\"In short, apart from Justin a great lineup badly executed - very disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45feb265255d4d7bb131da30166daaa6",
            "input": "This movie features an o.k. score and a not bad performance by David Muir as Dr. Hackenstein. The beginning and end credits show along with the most of the actors and the \"special effects\" that this is a low budget movie. There is nothing in this movie that you could not find in other mad scientist, horror/comedy, or low budget movies. Not special for any nude scene buffs or bad movie lovers either. This movie is simply here. Anne Ramsey and Phillis Diller are nothing to get excited about as well. If you are curious as I was and can actually find this, you will realize the truth of the one line summary.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-534e03887b624d43acff276d46054a14",
            "input": "After \"A Dirty Shame\", I never thought that I was going to see another John Waters movie. That movie was really so bad, that I was convinced that all his movies would be like that. But when the DVD of this movie was reviewed in a popular magazine and they said that this was an excellent movie, I decided to give it a try anyway. Only a couple of days later it was shown on television. I taped it out of curiosity and now that I've seen it, I can tell you that this \"Pecker\" sure is a lot better than \"A Dirty Shame\".In this movie we see how a young 'nobody' from Baltimore becomes an overnight sensation in the art world of New York. He's a sandwich shop employee who photographs his weird family or things that he sees on the street as a hobby. When he keeps his very first 'exhibition' in the shop where he works, his pictures are noticed by a gallery owner who loves the pictures full of misery and weirdness. His photographs are sold for enormous prices, but when he sees how his family, friends and strangers react to his success he decides that he will no longer go to New York, they will have to come to him if they want to see more of him. And they do, but what they get to see there, is a bigger shock than they could ever imagine...It's not difficult to see why I loved this movie a lot more than \"A Dirty Shame\". The first reason is that this movie has an actual story. This movie really has something to say and isn't just intended to shock as many people as possible. The fact that they make fun of the art world who considers everything out of the ordinary as art because they don't know what the reality is like, isn't just funny, it's not that far from the truth either. I guess there are many people who feel about modern art that way. Nobody understands why they are making such a fuss about it, but apparently we are all supposed to like it. The second reason why I liked this movie is because this one had much better acting performances to offer. I'm not saying that everything that you will see is great, but at least the characters have some meaning thanks to the performances of the different actors like Edward Furlong, Christina Ricci,...Overall this isn't a great movie, but thanks to its criticism and some good jokes - which never really go too far - this is an enjoyable movie. It certainly isn't the best comedy ever, but I liked it a lot more than \"A Dirty Shame\". I give this movie a 6.5/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd5d367235c342f5a24504e0f00b9d6d",
            "input": "The movie is okay, it has it's moments, the music scenes are the best of all! The soundtrack is a true classic. It's a perfect album, it starts out with Let's Go Crazy(appropriate for the beginning as it's a great party song and very up-tempo), Take Me With U(a fun pop song...), The Beautiful Ones(a cheerful ballad, probably the closest thing to R&B on this whole album), Computer Blue(a somewhat angry anthem towards Appolonia), Darling Nikki(one of the funniest songs ever, it very vaguely makes fun of Appolonia), When Doves Cry(the climax to this masterpiece), I Would Die 4 U, Baby I'm A Star, and, of course, Purple Rain(a true classic, a very appropriate ending for this classic album) The movie and the album are both very good. I highly recommend them!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa63cbffe3f24abb9c7b930dd4d7e828",
            "input": "The idea of In the Name of the People is good, a murderer doesn't want his only daughter to end up in an institution and asks the parents of the girl he killed to take care of his daughter. And you could expect of the actors, especially Scott Bakula to do some good acting, unfortunately they don't! In the Name of The People turns out to be the regular Friday night tearjerker. The flashbacks with the girl that was killed are pretty pathetic and at a certain stage you can just predict what the actors will say... If you want to watch a good film about this subject then watch Dean Man Walking!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d1df5ac98f014e3fbb3a93c1c19c7553",
            "input": "where would one start a review of the film Snitch'd? James Cahill, god rest his soul, made one of the most daring insights into the human psyche since Encino Man. his beautiful story unravels around a drug squad cop McClure, which is a name synonymous with a character from the simpsons who also happens to be an actor! said cop delves deep into the underworld that is high school drug taking, and discovers a gang war to rival that of Police Academy 1, and i mean the one where Jones is racially vilified by his new partner, but manages to come out with some of the funniest sounds you will EVER HEAR.Cahill's grasp of effects, both visual and aural is electrifying, the slight pause between action on screen and from the speakers adds to the drama that is snitch'd, a real gritty like underground thriller. also, kudos to his brilliant use of makeup, such as the supremely convincing burn marks a gang member suffers in his showdown with an indoor barbecue! YUCK! i feel the world of film is much less from James' passing, his memory will linger on and on and on, reborn with every passing mention of his flagship production, Snitch'd. his insightful director's commentary released a coke-hit up the nose of any discerning film goer, truly appropriate with the harsh reality that is life on the streets, captured in all the beauty of a roughneck punk knocking over a rubbish bin in a brawl.but i ask you, why did the big bosses swimming pool look so cheap? i'll tell you why, because thats life in Santa Ana baby, its not all drive bys and hastily constructed principle's offices, oh no. there are some folk who must infiltrate the soft, tattooed underbelly of street life in LA to kick their way through in moves that would not seem out of place at a School For Special Children's production of Double Dragon: The Play.the only qualm i have with this film, is that there was never a sequel made. come on Steven Spielberg, come on George Lucas, come on guy that made revenge of the nerds 1 through 23, how hard could it be to step it up a notch and pay tribute to this great man, James Cahill.he discovered Eva Longoria you know. oh yeah, that he did.Jonah",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fc6f01cd2d24c45b48e66b51c1d4046",
            "input": "There are a lot of pretentious people out there who will pretend that this is endowed with some kind of beautiful meaning, and that ignorant fools like me don't 'get' it. Obviously this means that we should stick to Hollywood dross.It has every, a-hem, artistic cliché in the book - I guess it is good that the director is one of the chosen few. Almost a self parody drowning in its own pretense.The director of the (almost equally embarrassing) movie 'Ratcatcher' returns with another piece wallowing in artistic nonsense; it is difficult to understand and apparently is a study of alienation. The best way to describe this film is alienating for its viewers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49e57b02c88c4eafbf88985c76dcfc71",
            "input": "\"Fungicide\" is quite possibly the most incompetent, embarrassing, pitiful \"film\" I have ever seen. The acting is criminal, the direction practically non-existent, and the special effects presumably put together by unleashing a monkey with learning difficulties on a defenceless laptop computer.Far be it from me to stifle creativity, but I actually believe things like this shouldn't be made. I am sure the \"film\"-makers will say that, yes, the \"film\" was hampered by a low (as in nothing) budget - but in that case they just really shouldn't have bothered. As it is, they have offered the world something so dire, so execrable, that only imbeciles could get the merest shade of enjoyment from it.Starting the \"movie\" it wasn't as though I was expecting \"Citizen Kane\" or anything. I was expecting a low budget little horror with perhaps a modicum of inventiveness, a hint of fun, and even some energy. What I got was the cinematic equivalent of a used handkerchief.The plot? Well, our leering antihero scientist, who works in his parents' basement, is seen manically stirring some goo in a cup. Apparently, such high-level science is the end-result of years of research. His parents then send him off to a strange hotel-type place in the countryside to relax. There are some other people there, who are simply too awful to write about. Anyway, the scientist drops his test-tube onto some mushrooms - and soon the mushrooms grow and kill some people. (Wow, I'm getting suicidal just writing the plot summary). Our heroes save the day by detonating a barrel of balsamic vinegar (by attaching a \"fuse\" - really a piece of string - to it). The barrel unaccountably explodes with the power of a small nuclear weapon, destroying all the mushrooms. The end. (Thank goodness).That summary is as good as the \"film\" gets (and actually makes it sound a lot more interesting than it actually is). It really should never have got past this stage of development (by which I mean a plot outline scribbled on the back of an envelope with crayons). Somebody should have really stepped in and given someone a vigorous shake and said \"NO.\" And those \"special\" effects. Well, they're \"special\" all right. This is CGI gone crazy. And done by a person who I can only assume believes the bicycle pump to be the pinnacle of modern technology. And when the mushroom monsters are not in the style of a 1984 home computer graphics package, they are represented by actors shuffling along covered in a sheet (I kid you not).One of the most inexcusable things about the movie is its laziness. This can be summed up by the scene in which the hero spins his guns (a la Clint Eastwood) and then fails miserably to get them in his pockets. I mean come on, a couple of retakes and he could have pulled it off, but just to leave it as it is - really weak.I cannot believe money was spent on this camcorder-shot rubbish. The \"film\"-makers should hang their heads in shame and be banned from going within fifty metres of any movie-making equipment.I also think it's wrong that friends and family of the makers come onto IMDb and post mendacious reviews and give stupidly high user ratings which give a totally inaccurate picture of the \"movie.\" \"Fungicide\" is an absolute travesty of film-making. Mr Wascavage is either very, very stupid or very, very cynical.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-396d7a2b9bdc4d2ea590b7bfb97c9604",
            "input": "Anyone find it interesting that the Ood look strangely similar to the 'Great Cthulhu' of H P Lovecraft vintage? hmmm? Great pair of episodes (not referring to Billie Piper as most seem to do!) in The impossible Planet and The Satan Pit.Also the link to 'Legion' I think also used in Who before and also referring to Satan in various novels post Exorcist era...Great suspense episodes utilising fear and faith elements. The new team for these 'who's are working great magic for TV.This certainly creates new fears and 'hide behind the sofa' feelings not seen for many, many years in this continuation of a superb BBC series (pity it is confirmed by the BBC that Billie Piper is quitting - perhaps not permanently - after end of series 2) :O(((",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-259f075e75394fda887f4ae29a2a28fe",
            "input": "In it's time, this movie had controversy written all over it (like most of Verhoeven's projects).Containing very graphic depictions death-scenes; A parachute that doesn't open *smack* guys body on the floor. A guy being eaten by a Lion *chomp* teeth in the throat. And a guy being run over by a speedboat *zoom* bloody corpse going down.But besides gore, this flick also contains some brilliant (and stunningly beautiful) scenes, filmed in the gray fisher's town that is Vlissingen;Thousands of rosebuds flying over the screen, in a somewhat irrelevant part of the movie, a beautiful (holy) woman putting flowers in a milk-can, surrounded by slabs of blood-dripping meat and a steamy love scene between two male characters, in a graveyard.The story is concluded in a frantic, but fulfilling 10 minutes, that don't disappoint, and will leave you sighing a breath of relief.Of course with the pros come the cons, Some special-effects are too over-the-top, and are obviously done to see how far Verhoeven could push the gore-factor (e.g. the several eyeballs hanging out of their sockets). Also, while the two lead actors, (Jeroen Krabbé and Renée Soutendijk), do an excellent job of breathing life into their characters, the character of Herman (portrayed by the rather un-charming Thom Hoffman) just feels enormously underdeveloped, making him hard to care for, even after his tragic death.I've done my best to give you a slight idea of what to expect of this amazing movie, and as you can see, it's not easily summed up in words. So do yourself a favor, if you happen to find this movie somewhere, watch it ! And enjoy the unique style and substance of this masterpiece.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f9d8f0b51a74d54b173e357bc37c6a3",
            "input": "First, before reading further, you must understand that I'm not neo-nazi, I'm just trying to understand correctly Hitler to be sure nobody like him take power again.I've seen this series and found it awful. I mean, OK, it's interesting to look, but is it real? I searched for answers and found one: absolutely not. First, Hitler wasn't angry all his life, the series shows an angry Hitler, even when he is a child. Second, Hitler never wanted to abuse his daughter, in fact, it is highly probable that Hitler, in reality, was gay and fought all his life to choke this secret. Third, people will hate me but it's true: Hitler was charming. How do you think he managed to get to power if he was so hateful and ugly? Because he was charming. That's a common point I found in the interviews of people who live near or far of him (of course, not Jews).This series was awful because if you think that Hitler was just an angry bastard, ugly, and of course, not charming at all, you're wrong. If you think that, you will let people like him take power in countries and you don't want that. If you really understand how Hitler managed to get into power, and stop thinking he was just awful, you'll be able to find dangerous politicians like him (of course, remember he was elected) and stop theme before it's too late.Life is important to protect, this series is just awful to show us the truth, if we continue to see Hitler like that, another one will take place exactly as the first did.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d721209dadf7446386242f877e921a08",
            "input": "When people nowadays hear of a 1940s drama, they usually appear to create a distance of irony claiming that it's another tearjerker with great stars in the lead of tragic, melancholic roles. This opinion, however, does not resemble Neorealist movies, in particular this one directed by Count Luchino Visconti. OSSESSIONE as his debut once censored and once cherished as nearly a realistic masterpiece is still loved by some people and strongly criticized by others. The contradictory opinions about the film that have appeared in these 65 years seem to have been caused by the content of the movie itself, exceptionally controversial for modern times as well as the past. At the same time, while being based on the novel by James M. Cain, THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE, it is one of the most genuine screen adaptations where director remains his own style, view, his own art. I have seen the film twice and the second viewing led me to very detailed analysis part of which I'd like to entail below.First, Visconti's movie seems to touch all psychology and actions that people may do in life, in particular those absorbed by desire. These people make such tragic decisions in spite of terrible consequences they are bound to face. Gino (Massimo Girotti) a traveler with \"bear like shoulders\" turns up at the crossroad of a motorway near Ferrara and enters the tavern. Although many people go there to have a meal, Gino occurs to get something more - much more: the indefatigable desire of beautiful Giovanna (Clara Calamai) a woman already married to an elderly man who runs the bar, Mr Giuseppe Bragana (Juan De Landa). Her body and her song possess his mind totally and from the moment of their first love, the couple plan to get rid of the old obstacle and build up a new life together... However, are people bound to wrong deeds in face of desire? Can one build love upon murder? What is love and what is loyalty? Does desire lead to a dangerous addiction or even obsession? Such questions intensely arise while watching the movie, when, to the core, the viewer is supplied with an insight into characters. \"We have to love each other affectionately\" answers Giovanna seemingly giving a cure to all crying conscience but may desirous love justify and cure everything? \"Isn't it what we both wanted\" says one of the couple... it occurs that it's not. Therefore, the content of the film appears to be very dangerous if not analyzed with intellect and heart. Yet, it constantly remains thought provoking.Second, OSSESSIONE has a very strong point that talks to modern viewers: brilliant moments and marvelous cinematography, which go in pair with memorable sequences and visual power. These make a modern viewer realize that a film made almost 70 years ago is absolutely entertaining to watch. They range from tasteful erotic images to purely technical shots. Who can possibly skip that moment in Ferrara where Gino meets a beautiful girl, a sort of \"Ragazza Perfetta\" (perfect girl), a dancer Anita and buys her ice cream. His desires show him totally different direction... Do viewers remain indifferent at Gino-Giovanna's first meeting? The first focus of camera is on Giovanna's legs seemingly representing carnal desire over love that Gino experiences. A marvel of shot is Gino and Giovanna leaving the investigation room and the closeup of their shadows that directs our attention towards their suspicious look.Third, OSSESSIONE can boast outstanding performances both from the leading pair as well as the supporting cast. Massimo Girotti once said in an interview that working in this movie had been one of the most difficult jobs he had ever done; yet, consequently, what comes out is a flawless acting. He portrays a bisexual man torn within desires who commits a crime but cannot stand any of the objects that remind him of his victim, which represents conscience. His bisexuality is indicated through the character of Lo Spagnolo (Elio Marcuzzo) whom he meets in very surprising circumstances in the train for Ancona. Clara Calamai, who was cast in the role after eminent Anna Magnani had refused, fits very well to the role and we may claim that there is a true chemistry between the couple. They are both very convincing. Besides, I liked Juan De Langa in the role of Bragana: he portrays an old husband not affectionate to his wife and still crazy about high art. In some of his most witty moments, he asks his wife to wash his back or walks in the empty streets singing his favorite opera songs after sort of karaoke performance.In sum, we, as modern viewers who are capable of critical view, have to look at this film very objectively. It is art for sure thanks to the aspects aforementioned, it is a powerful story as well thanks to the controversy it carries; yet, is it educational? Visconti was not Fellini who said that he did not carry any message for humanity. In such case, his films would only entertain (which is, of course, not entirely Fellini's style, too). Visconti always had something to convey. What did he want to say here? Is the film against bad marriage? Or is it against wrong actions of people absorbed by desire? The final shocking moments say for themselves. Though you don't have to agree with the vision, OSSESSIONE is really a wonderfully realistic film, one of Visconti's best 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84147cd1db0642d494430a8e15852321",
            "input": "This movie is one of the worst ones of the year. The main characters have no chemistry and the acting is horrible. Paul Rudd is the only one that has any talent, and the only one that is not annoying. I have never watched Desparte Housewives, so I don't know how Eva Longoria is on that show, but in this movie she was horrible. It's like she knows nothing about acting. All her character does is whine throughout the film, and she can't pull off being a b**** and still be entertaining. And the other girl, Lake Bell, displays little emotion and it's like you are looking at the cue cards as she reads them.As for the story, it is so cookie cutter. It goes from point A to B with little surprise. So much more could have been used with Kate as a ghost. The plot should have revolved more around her and the things she does as a spirit.FINAL VERDICT: It's not worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4c654a55efb4896aae24f15d91b291b",
            "input": "When it comes to horror movies, I am more than willing to suspend disbelief, ignore sub-par production values, and overlook plot holes in the interest of a good scare. This movies simply has no good scares to offer. It can't even be enjoyed as camp. Bad dialogue, bad acting, bad direction, the kills were predictable and poorly staged, the music was annoying, the camera work was wretched, even the costumes were bad. I felt really bad for the actors, who were obviously trying, but who had to deal with terrible, contrived dialogue and an obvious lack of direction. I doubt they got any rehearsal, either. It's embarrassing to watch, and so boring than making it through to the contrived \"surprise\" ending requires tremendous endurance. It's quite easily one of the worst movies I've ever seen.I don't normally write reviews, but this one was so bad that I felt compelled to warn others. This movie is a complete waste of time. If you must watch this movie, don't miss the \"Making of\"-featurette. The writer/director seems to be under the impression that making the killer a woman was kind of bold, daring move. (Seen it.) He and the cast spend half an hour deconstructing this film as if it's a new-age \"Citizen Kane.\" It's like listening to a group of third-graders take you behind the scenes of their Christmas pageant. They truly think they've created something of substance. It's sad, really… The only reason I gave this movie a \"2\" is because I think \"1\" should be reserved for true atrocities, like \"Manos: Hands of Fate\" and \"Space Mutiny.\" So \"American Nightmare\" isn't the WORST movie I've ever seen, but I'd have to say that it's somewhere in the bottom fifty.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b58a214fa35d40cc9102c3e15969db36",
            "input": "This is almost the worst film you will ever see! 2012 Doomsday currently pulls the rug from under this one, for me. The props are a perfect example of what Frank Zappa once referred to as 'cheepnis.' It looks as if the space scenes were made in a 1950s power station, just prior to demolition. The music really sucks. The acting is wooden and ham. The characters they portray are shallow and unconvincing. The plot is predictable. It is immediately and brazenly obvious when they copy techniques and ideas from other films. The quality of direction beggars belief.But you have to see it, if only to experience what has to be one of the biggest wastes of a tiny budget ever. This is a priceless example of a stupid movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1773c7bae064688a1b018e0829218f9",
            "input": "Please, for the love of God, don't watch it. Now saying that, I know what you're thinking, it can't be that bad can it? If everyone says it as bad as they say, I have to watch it! Don't do it! It'll be like looking at a horrible accident involving little babies and a gasoline tanker! You'll be scarred for life...the image will never leave you! I could only watch a half hour of this before becoming violently sick. The acting is the worst I've ever seen, and I've seen Barbwire!!! If you do risk ripping your eyes out and rent this movie...don't say I haven't warned you! The cover and storyline are a trap!! Zombies? Satire? Shaun of the Dead was great! This movie must be the same....right? NO!! The writing = crap directing = garbage acting = there was no acting. Still not convinced? Then forever your soul will be tormented!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb21c3ded46541109fbdd833e18fabbe",
            "input": "First let me say the director has some wonderful use of titles in his establishing shots. I really enjoyed them. I really enjoyed this movie but I got to say next to Pierce Brosnan, Greg Kinear is pretty lackluster. Brosnan melts into this character so well, that it is really hard to remember that this is the same guy that played bond. It also shows his range and depth as an actor. It is kinda of an indie flick and was really nice to see especially with all of the mainstream movies that flood the movies at this time of the year. I found the characters to be well crafted. The twist in the middle I felt was especially good. I also liked how the characters come off realistically. So many times we have in film these caricatures of people that are not really characters but walking-stereotypes... I like the different approaches this movie takes. I think of sideways when I think of this movie but I think this is more watchable and a better movie overall...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd373cdc93da48dab1f61fde69b6ae2c",
            "input": "This is a bad movie. Not one of the funny bad ones either. This is a lousy bad one. It was actually painful to watch. The direction was awful,with lots of jumping around and the green and yellow hues used throughout the movie makes the characters look sickly. Keira Knightly was not convincing as a tough chick at all,and I cannot believe Lucy Liu and Mickey Rourke signed on for this criminal waste of celluloid. The script was terrible and the acting was like fingernails across a chalkboard. If you haven't seen it,don't. You are not missing anything and will only waste two hours of your life watching this drivel .I have seen bad movies before and even enjoyed them due to their faults. This one is just a waste of time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f0b88afcad646f983abcdf34c2e1cda",
            "input": "This is a film that takes some digesting. On the one hand, we are offered a tough outward shell, a story that does not only derive the Catholic Church, but does so foolishly, and uninformed. On an inner layer, we are offered a story of orthodoxy over orthopraxis, and what happens when people follow blindly a faith that they must not understand.At first glance, it appeared this was supposed to be a comedy. If so, then Mr. Durang needs to open a dictionary, because he clearly does not know the meaning of the word. The jokes are pale; the humor is awkward and poorly delivered. In particular, Ms. Keaton's performance is flighty and over the top, well below the quality of her Annie Hall and Sleeper days. Jennifer Tilly is again the model of stridence, with her hi-pitched voice and whining style. All of this could be forgiven if it weren't for the last 20 minutes of this movie, that evidently was a controversial play made in 1981.***Careful, spoilers ahead***It all starts with the appearance of four former students of Sister Mary Ignatius (Ignatius, by the way, is a male name, and a nun would not adopt it after her vows under any circumstance simply due to that fact, just to show you how much tireless research went into the project to begin with.) When they all admit that they don't live up to the church's teachings, the sister proceeds to become irrational and abuse them in a manner the audience is to believe she did way back when in the corny, all-too-cliché sepia-tone flashbacks. When one of them admits to having two abortions, the nun becomes even more abusive, until the pupil pulls out a gun. After wrestling it away from her, the nun kills the pupil, presumably in self-defense. She then goes on a screaming rampage, killing a gay former student because of his sins. The last shot is of the dead female pupil lying in a Christ-like pose as a shadow of a cross hangs over her. Can you say `heavy handed?' I knew you could!I know there have been abusive nuns in the past, and I know many people have been emotionally harmed as a result, but this imagery is fed down our throats in almost every other shot in this train wreck of a movie. I have heard from the writer and the director that this is a film about hysteria and why one should not follow the orthodoxy so religiously, no pun intended. This explanation is hard to swallow, though, simply because we are never given an authoritative viewpoint that is not biased against the catholic faith in one way or another. This film is simply anti-Catholic tripe, which in the name of fairness and equality, is mean spirited and hateful.This is a film I would recommend for a catholic, namely to awaken him or her to the realities of what cynicism and ignorance they face today. If it were `Rabbi Ray explains it all' or `Imam Muhammad explains it all', there would be rioting in the streets and Showtime would lose all of its subscription. But, sadly, because this is a film that strikes out against what is perceived to be the majority, it is accepted and even applauded by those who share the same spiteful point of view.I certainly hope every member of that cast was a practicing catholic, so it wasn't just ignorance that brought them to make this film.I give it 1.5 stars out of 5, not because of its offensive nature, but because it was poorly written, poorly directed and just a bad movie in general. Don't even waste your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ba273bbd303421ebdab843b7a372ff3",
            "input": "This movie starts presenting a somehow original idea but became a great frustration later on. What is the deal of having an original start if the rest of the movie did little to avoid a clichéd plot? The movie itself is very unbelievable. I would like to know how exactly someone enters a clinic, gets a nurse outfit, kills a doctor, takes out a patient in her bed, puts into his Chevy pickup and leaves? I guess no one could answer this question, so they just jumped to the other scene hiding these little details. The performances are just plain bad. The villain is just another \"annoying crazy antagonist\", no deepness, totally linear character. After 20 minutes of film, most scenes are unbelievable, seemed like they were put there just for the sake of the 90 minutes since they were totally unneeded. A doctor see a woman clearly under strong medication, is denied to examine her, gets kicked out of the house and simply leaves quiet? The ending scene made me burst into laugher, only Mickey Mouse could make it more out of reality. I'm giving it 2 out of 10 for the first lets say 10 minutes of movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92f24d305a024a2e8f63beef90aef448",
            "input": "This film has a special place in my heart, as when I caught it the first time, I was teaching adult literacy. It rang very true to me and even an outstanding student I had at the time. There are scenes which make you gulp with sudden emotion, and those which even put a smile on your face through sheer identification with the characters and their situation. Excellent performances by Jane Fonda and Robert DeNiro that rank with their best work, a great turn by a young Martha Plimpton, an inspiring story line, and a haunting musical score makes for a most enjoyable and rewarding experience.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b73ed052179542f9b6b634868e05ebf7",
            "input": "If there was ever a call to make a bad film that reflected how stupid humanity could become, this one would take the prize. The plot centers around bible prophecies that lie in hidden messages of the scriptures that prompt a group of power-seeking thugs to attempt total control of the world. Just how stupid does this writer believe people to actually be?  The acting was bad at best. Casper Van Dien wasted his talent doing this film. Michael York's work was a fair match for the role, since he was the center of the film, and did a good job.  This plot was sickening and very disturbing. No tender or immature minds should see this film. This is how a basic good vs. evil plot can go astray. There must be a lot of mental disease floating around the film circles, who look for ways to market this type of junk. There must have been something censored out to get a PG-13 rating, but it was still awful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbe5ffbbf1344d4da4a6fa68e91a9cb8",
            "input": "The penultimate episode of Star Trek's third season is excellent and a highlight of the much maligned final season. Essentially, Spock, McCoy and Kirk beam down to Sarpeidon to find the planet's population completely missing except for the presence of a giant library and Mr. Atoz, the librarian. All 3 Trek characters soon accidentally walk into a time travel machine into different periods of Sarpeidon's past. Spock gives a convincing performance as an Ice Age Vulcan who falls in love for Zarabeth while Kirk reprises his unhappy experience with time travel--see the 'City on the Edge of Forever'--when he is accused of witchcraft and jailed before escaping and finding the doorway back in time to Sarpeidon's present. In the end, all 3 Trek characters are saved mere minutes before the Beta Niobe star around Sarpeidon goes supernova. The Enterprise warps away just as the star explodes.Ironically, as William Shatner notes in his book \"Star Trek Memories,\" this show was the source of some dispute since Leonard Nimoy noticed that no reason was given in Lisette's script for the reason why Spock was behaving in such an emotional way. Nimoy relayed his misgivings here directly to the show's executive producer, Fred Freiberger, that Vulcans weren't supposed to fall in love. (p.272) However, Freiberger reasoned, the ice age setting allowed Spock to experience emotions since this was a time when Vulcans still had not evolved into their completely logical present state. This was a great example of improvisation on Freiberger's part to save a script which was far above average for this particular episode. While Shatner notes that the decline in script quality for the third season hurt Spock artistically since his character was forced to bray like a donkey in \"Plato's Stepchildren,\" play music with Hippies in \"the Way to Eden\" or sometimes display emotion, the script here was more believable. Spock's acting here was excellent as Freiberger candidly admitted to Shatner. (p.272) The only obvious plot hole is the fact that since both Spock and McCoy travelled thousands of years back in time, McCoy too should have reverted to a more primitive human state, not just Spock. But this is a forgivable error considering the poor quality of many other season 3 shows, the brilliant Spock/McCoy performance and the originality of this script. Who could have imagined that the present inhabitants of Sarpeidon would escape their doomed planet's fate by travelling into their past? This is certainly what we came to expect from the best of 'Classic Trek'--a genuinely inspired story. Shatner, in 'Memories', named some of his best \"unusual and high quality shows\" of season 3 as The Enterprise Incident, Day of the Dove, Is there in Truth no Beauty, The Tholian Web, And the children Shall Lead and The Paradise Syndrome. (p.273) While my personal opinion is that 'And the children Shall Lead' is a very poor episode while 'Is there in Truth no Beauty' is problematic, \"All Our Yesterdays\" certainly belongs on the list of top season three Star Trek TOS films. I give a 9 out of 10 for 'All Our Yesterdays.'",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f46019c9b764ff48124180803146813",
            "input": "This is one of those cheaply made TV Movies were the characters seem to lose all sense. The premise of the story, the kidnapping of a son by the boy's father,is very good. But the story just seems to beggar belief. Whenever the mother is advised not to do anything you know fine well she is going to do it. It is a bit far fetched and not worthy of a viewing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00915747eeb5410ca5bd422a2d7bb2a1",
            "input": "\"The Kennel Murder Case\" starts off at a run and doesn't stop until the very end. Everybody had reason to kill the victim, and several people tried. William Powell is terrific as Philo Vance, gentleman detective. Mary Astor is refreshing as the put-upon niece who only wants to marry her Scottish gentleman and enjoy her inheritance. This movie comes paired with \"Nancy Drew, Reporter\" on DVD, which is also fun. If you have to rent the disc (or check it out from your local library), do it. It's pure entertainment!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08473059572b42d788d28be08eb2f10d",
            "input": "Oh dear. good cast, but to write and direct is an art and to write wit and direct wit is a bit of a task. Even doing good comedy you have to get the timing and moment right. Im not putting it all down there were parts where i laughed loud but that was at very few times. The main focus to me was on the fast free flowing dialogue, that made some people in the film annoying. It may sound great while reading the script in your head but getting that out and to the camera is a different task. And the hand held camera work does give energy to few parts of the film. Overall direction was good but the script was not all that to me, but I'm sure you was reading the script in your head it would sound good. Sorry.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e37e033fab0744399561efdb9c490b6d",
            "input": "I went into this movie with high hopes. Normally, I'm not too picky about my movies and creature movies are *always* fun to watch, or so I thought. I'll list the good parts of this movie: -The creature effects. All of the creatures were well-done, their movements were realistic, and they fit into the other imagery well. To be honest, the creature effects were the ONLY reason I gave this movie a 2 rather than a 1. Now, the bad things: -The acting. Good Lord, I've seen bad acting, but this movie takes the cake. Not a single one of the characters is even *close* to believable. It's like the director sent out a casting call and picked all the worst try-outs from it. I tried very hard not to giggle too loud, cause I didn't wanna upset anyone else in the theatre, but the acting really was THAT BAD. -The storyline: The entire story is full of plot holes from beginning to finish. You can pick at least 5 plot holes out of any given 30 minutes of film. The plot holes, of course, are complimentary with the cheese. This is probably one of the most clichéd, not thought-out, and outright dumbest stories I've ever seen put on screen since I had the grave misfortune of sitting up one night and watching Parasite on the SciFi channel. -The dialogue: This is a world where everyone says the cheesiest and most clichéd thing they possibly can, at every chance they possibly can. In this world, it seems like every line has been spoken before in at least 30 other low-budget creature movies. It is the world of cheese and cliché. -The special effects. While the creature effects were downright awesome, the special effects fail miserably. Yes, they are better than those seen in other movies, but a lot of it is in the presentation. And this movie has no presentation whatsoever. It looks kinda like the special effects used on the Power Rangers TV show, to be honest. To sum up: Dragon Wars is worth neither your time nor your money. The concept is good, but it is trapped in the bad directing, acting, dialogue, and cheesiness of the film. Wait til the next big monster movie comes out. It's gotta be better than this, cause Dragon Wars is absolutely horrible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7045691c73104adb8f784ce7e03e8b92",
            "input": "This movie is a little ray of sunshine in a dark season. It celebrates a quality best described as plain old friendliness. Morgan Freeman plays a character very like Freeman himself--a successful actor pushing 70. He has traveled to a small, rather grimy grocery store intending to research a part he might play, as a manager of such a place. He soon beguiles the staff and the customers, especially the lovely, if cranky, young woman (Paz Vega) who presides over the \"10 items or less\" checkout lane.10 Items Or Less doesn't have a big statement to make and doesn't pretend that it does. It follows Freeman and Vega as they become friendly, and as the older man offers his counsel, in exchange for a ride home--the movie-company gofer who is supposed to pick him up never shows and Freeman has forgotten his own phone number so he can't call for help. I had a little case of the blues on a gray Sunday afternoon in New York City and this flick cured what ailed me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a83392e6fdf1449dadd78af027e0723c",
            "input": "Lost is an extremely well made TV series about some people that are lost on an island. there's so many twists and turns that you can't really decide who your favourite character is, one minute its him then he does something so he's coolest then shes about to do something so shes the coolest then suspense builds up and just as you are about to burst the episode ends and your like noooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!so you have to wait a whole week too see the next episode but it is worth the wait. Suspense, action, romance, humour its got it all apart from the topless girls but thats good as it means that you can actually concentrate on the story more and story is what this is all about. so if you like a good story and like suspense this is a good one however 24 i think is probably better.(i have a review on that too that you could check it out.) I would give lost a good 8 out of 10 mainly because its so unpredictable, you never know what will happen next.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e183f76207c640d6af08a6d66d69dd05",
            "input": "When I saw this movie I heard all the hype, and I heard how people said that Denzel deserved the Oscar alongside his Golden Globe and I believed he must have done an outstanding job considering Kevin Spacey was excellent. I was wrong. I realize that people say this not to anger the African American community (if they are not African Americans themselves). I always hear complaints on how African Americans are never nominated and how they should have won. Sometimes this is true (not as much nowadays) because Whoppi Goldberg should have won best actress for The Color Purple and the movie should have won best picture. The only reason this movie was so blown up the way it was, is because people see a movie about the (*SEMI-SPOILER*) hardships of an African American during a very racist time period and they automatically label it as a masterpiece.Denzel Washington is an outstanding actor, but his role in this movie did not affect me whatsoever. I was bored with him in the movie, and his acting here was quite similar to his role in Malcolm X but not as good. The audience is supposed to leave believing this man, Rubin Carter, is a saint. People left the movies worshipping this man, this hero, and they went out and bought his book, making this hero of a man rich.*SPOILERS* This movie tells the tale of a man who spent the majority of his life in prison mainly for crimes he did not commit. Of course the crimes he did commit (stealing mostly) was only to survive, nothing more. People felt sorry for him, even though the drug dealers and thieves probably amounted to as much for the same reasons but are looked down upon in society. Everything in this movie tries to portray this man as a saint (except for the obvious infidelity he had towards his wife and the aggression he showed the other man when he met his wife) but why wouldn't it-after all, it is his point of view. I do not like movies (especially Hollywood interpretations) that are based on \"true\" stories because they usually distort the \"true\" parts into something else, something not so true. This was his point of view and a Hollywood construction, yet everyone believed it was the truth unquestionably. Well I researched his past a bit before making any assumptions, and he was a very violent man. Not only that, there is still a possibility that he did murder those people. If you do not believe me, search for him on the internet, and read the articles some people have of him. The boxing match he claimed to have won so easily, was actually won by his opponent Joey Giardello and there are tapes to prove it. Besides that, there are many twisted and purposely left out facts in this movie. The supporting cast were the nicest people I have ever seen on the face of the Earth and their \"nice and perfect\" persona looked difficult to keep up.This movie was a Hollywood version of yet another unfortunate true story that is still left to be told truthfully. Denzel's acting is stale, and the supporting cast's Mickey Mouse attitudes are annoying. The movie also begins very slow paced and is boring.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1245747051a4c3da720b7c56080d784",
            "input": "My only minor quibble with the film I grew up knowing as STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN, is the fact that the wonderful RAYMOND MASSEY is relegated to the last twenty or so minutes in the trial scene. And the trial itself, IMO, is the least interesting portion of this fascinating fantasy.David NIVEN and KIM HUNTER are wonderfully cast as the young lovers, but it's ROGER LIVESEY who gives the liveliest and most credible performance. French accented MARIUS GORING is a delight (he even gets in a remark about Technicolor) as the heavenly messenger sent to reclaim Niven when his wartime death goes unreported due to an oversight. Goring has some of the wittiest lines and delivers them with relish.Seeing this tonight on TCM for the first time in twenty or so years, I think it's a supreme example of what a wonderful year 1946 was for films. The Technicolor photography, somewhat subdued and not garish at all, is excellent and the way it shifts into B&W for the heavenly sequences is done with great imagination and effectiveness.The opening scene is the sort that really draws a viewer into the fantasy aspects of the story--and Niven's tense talk with radio operator Hunter while his plane is crashing toward earth, unexpectedly leads to a memorable romantic encounter. Truly a marvelous film from beginning to end, another triumph for Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c03db227cdd14635903f30d8ca377c2e",
            "input": "I first saw this film as a young boy and recently purchased it on DVD.James Stewart brings great depth to the role of Chip Hardesty, a hardworking and dedicated FBI agent. His life in the Bureau is intercut with his family life, which is not all rosy. His wife (an excellent portrayal by Vera Miles) lives in fear of the dangerous nature of his job, and they even separate for a time; Chip's best friend and fellow agent Sam Crandall (Murray Hamilton) is killed in a gunfight; Chip's son, Mike, enlists in the Marines during World War II. Through it all, the family carries on with bravery and dignity.The action sequences are quite exciting and the semi-documentary style of the film works effectively. And the music by Max Steiner says it all; fidelity, bravery and integrity.This country owes a great debt of gratitude to the men and women of the FBI and, yes, to J. Edgar Hoover as well. If Mr. Hoover's type of vigilance had been observed, we might have been spared 9/11, the surge in crimes against children and many of the venal politicians we've had to put up with since his passing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8bb84091159a47ea99ddb1b47268aa2c",
            "input": "Possibly the best movie ever created in the history of Jeffrey Combs career, and one that should be looked upon by all talent in Hollywood for his versatility, charisma, and uniqueness he brings through his characters and his knowledge of acting.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c696e6eb50044252ae0acfe0a8903f23",
            "input": "What is so taboo about love?! People seem to have major problems with the transgenered.The title of this movie didn't catch my eye. It was a grainy shot about 4 minutes into the movie is what made me stop channel surfing. I could not believe how freaking amazing this film was. It touches on so many levels of human emotion that it did not once fail to move me in some way. It is by far one of the best independent films I have ever seen. I did not view these characters as either gender, just human. I would recommend it to anyone who loves movies. Especially independent films. Praise to all fearless filmmakers!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed579003da584e2f97d00d40eb36fa05",
            "input": "Sunday would not be Sunday without an action movie, and when you want intense combat, you turn to Tom Berenger (Platoon).Here he plays a sniper in the jungle going after rebels and drug lords. Life's a bitch, so he gets a green office type (Billy Zane) to help on the mission.The film is in the hands of Luis Llosa, who stunk up Anaconda. he doesn't do much better here, but Berenger makes the movie worthwhile.Sure, it may be a little long - who wants to see a lot of walking through the jungle, but is is good, tense action when the time is right.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d92331ce74f43d495751bcb8e792b61",
            "input": "Just as \"ITS A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD\" is at the top of my list for all time greatest comedies ever made, this one is at the very bottom. (Of course, I could be wrong-not having seen \"SAVING SILVERMAN\") In other words, it's a lame, lame, lame, lame comedy.Rating: 1/2* out of *****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a22190aa9d14bd4a409a7a5e448a0e0",
            "input": "First of all I saw this movie without knowing anything about it I just knew that Joel Schumacher did it and that was enough for me. A friend and I went to see it at a Danish film festival called the night-film festival which is a lot of different movies shown after hours the festival pretty much specializes in showing movies that wouldn't otherwise be shown in Danish theaters.Anyway My friend and I went to see it and we were astonished at how real it seemed and that it really struck a cord with our feelings, we really got caught up in the plot without being able to figure out the ending which is a great plus in our book.The film is recorded in a style that reminds me of the Danish initiative \"dogma 95\" which was started by 4 Danish directors including Lars Von Trier (Dancer In the Dark).In conclusion the movie is really worth seeing it gives a different perspective on how things were for the American G.I. Joe coming out of school being expected to serve their country in battle a long way from home.Also Colin Farrell is exceptional in this movie I haven't seen him before but I can't wait to see more of him.Lars P. Helvard",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9e2f87c22e345c7a1cb0e4df76e0495",
            "input": "Otto Preminger's noir classic works almost as a flip-side of LAURA...while that film was glitzy and features the high fa-luting Clifton Webb, this film is a whole lot seamier. Dana Andrews is a less than good cop who accidentally kills a man only to have it potentially pinned on the father of the girl he loves. Preminger keeps things moving at a brisk clip so that lapses in logic are easily overlooked. Andrews is quite fine (a lot less wooden than he's been in the past) and the stunningly beautiful Gene Tierney is stunningly beautiful! Creepy Craig Stevens plays the unlucky victim. WHERE THE SIDEWALK ENDS is a must see and a terrific companion-piece to Preminger's equally lurid WHIRLPOOL (also starring Tierney).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13d0892e3a744a57ada7d38c58035a6f",
            "input": "I saw this movie once in or close to its release year 36 years ago (1969). Although I can now only remember bits of it, I long to see it again. The parts I remember, rightly or wrongly, include Mustard gas in the trenches and Suzie Kendall as a German spy, offering some bloke sexual favours in the back of an enclosed truck to get military information from him. The music score was especially memorable and emotion stirring in the league of Gone With The Wind and I would love to hear it again. There must be some commercial or copyright reason why this movie is not available. Anyone know why? I doubt its anything to do with a lack of quality or interest.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c176645625f641338bf5a9e083d656c4",
            "input": "Well, would firstly like to clarify that Kaakha Kaakha is a part of a Tamil prayer and roughly translated it means \"to protect\". Khakhee on the other hand refers to the color of the police uniform (which is Khakhi!).Also, the Tamil film industry is rather full of purely commercial ventures , any Rajnikanth or Vijay movie would stand testament to that statement.Now Kaakha Kaakha is an EXCELLENT movie with a great soundtrack. Certainly very stunning in the final scene, especially love the ending (which is certainly unexpected!). The gore is rather too much at times, but certainly this is a great movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2fc24b97bcd48ab82d6f74695806d6e",
            "input": "Reese Witherspoon first outing on the big screen was a memorable one. She appears like a fresh scrubbed face \"tween\" slight and stringy, but undeniably Reese.I have always liked her as an actor, and had no idea she started this young with her career, go figure. I actually gained some respect for Reese to know who she was so early on. I say that because whenever I have watched her perform, the characters thus far, in each portrayal she also seemed to have her own persona that lived with that character, quite nicely in fact.Anyway, my first film experience with Reese was the Little Red Riding Hood parody Reese did with Kiefer Sutherland, somehow I assumed that was her first time up \"at bat\" Not so, well done Reese",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66984b6752b2420d946d6af5a0c415d0",
            "input": "In recent times I have been subjected to both this movie and \"King Arthur\", on DVDs chosen by others for an evening's \"entertainment\" and together they achieve nothing more than bearing out a growing notion I have that the modern movie-watching public totally lacks discrimination, and is content as long as they get \"action\". Both movies were utter rubbish.Whatever happened to character development? Whatever happened to meaningful dialogue? Whatever happened to ACTING? And, when watching something that vaguely purports to be \"historical\", whatever happened to attempting to capture some measure of accuracy, some realistic idea of the \"political map\" of the time, even some slight flavour of the era, especially in its social attitudes. Why do they all have to display the value set of 21st century America? I have read on the message boards of disclaimers that \"little was known\" of the dark ages. Not so. Considerable amounts are known, with much learned scholarship on the era, but these jokers simply couldn't be bothered to do any homework.I only wish I could vote 0/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbf65240f90b4c4cb5ef4c2644af4d9b",
            "input": "I must confess to not having read the original M R James story although I have read many of his other supernatural tales. I've also seen most of the previous BBC Christmas Ghost Stories and this one, in my opinion, surpasses most of them, only equalling The Signalman.I can't really fault A View From a Hill - the direction and 'mood' is perfect, as is the acting, lighting and, of course, the story and writing. I thoroughly enjoyed this and can only hope for more of this quality from the same director and production team. I understand that the BBC plan to make some more (not necessarily based on M R James stories) so that's promising.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06f6952132f743708d879b51249162e8",
            "input": "The American Humane Association, which is the source of the familiar disclaimer \"No animals were harmed...\" (the registered trademark of the AHA), began to monitor the use of animals in film production more than 60 years ago, after a blindfolded horse was forced to leap to its death from the top of a cliff for a shot in the film Jesse James (1939). Needless to say, the atrocious act kills the whole entertainment aspect of this film for me. I suppose one could say that at least the horse didn't die in vain, since it was the beginning of the public waking up to the callous and horrendous pain caused animals for the glory of movie making, but I can't help but feel that if the poor animal had a choice, this sure wouldn't have been the path he would have taken!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab50477b35f546d288b35673f66a6cd4",
            "input": "Following the success of the (awful) Gilligan's Island TV movie reruns, a number of TV movies were made in the 1980's reuniting casts from classic shows. Most of these movies completely missed the boat as far as recapturing the humor that made the shows so special. THE MUNSTERS REVENGE is among the most disappointing because it goes for a Laurel and Hardy-type comedy style that really wasn't in the original series. Yvonne De Carlo, a wonderful comedienne and essential to the series, is completely wasted - she has less time here in this 90 minute movie than she did in any single 30 minute episode. And since the roles of \"Eddie\" and \"Marilyn\" in this movie are nothing more than cameos, what was the point of making them younger and recasting them? With very little rewriting, they could have used Butch Patrick and Pat Priest. Although seeing some of the Munsters spooky relatives was a nice touch, I didn't enjoy Sid Caesar as the hammy mad scientist mainly because there's too much of him and not enough of the underused Munsters (ironically that very year, 1981, Caesar's old partner in comedy, Imogene Coca, was also inappropriately cast in a major part in a TV movie reunion RETURN OF THE BEVERLY HILLBILLIES). Another strange inexplicable bit at the beginning of the film has the Munster family represented as wax figures at a local horror wax museum. Why would they be in there when they are supposed to be a \"typical\" (if strange) American family, not famous monsters? This was the last Munsters project featuring the original cast in their roles, there was an awful revival of the series in the late 1980's with a completely new cast and a 1990's TV movie which featured DeCarlo, Lewis, Priest, and Patrick in cameo roles as a family dining.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-79b3efe6b59646afa61685f95af18242",
            "input": "I agree with the last reviewer that this movie had terrible acting. Yes, there was a lot of gore and some nudity. But it was overshadowed by a slow-moving, meaningless plot and dumb ending. Where was this supposed to be filmed anyway: a Canadian Chinatown or Hong Kong? Hostel was a much better movie and I would recommend seeing that instead. A technical annoyance I had with the DVD is that if you shut off the Spanish subtitles, they return after a few scenes and then you have to go back to the main menu and turn them off again. Also, don't waste your time on the deleted scenes because there's no audio and it just looks like tourist footage.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51f314ce787344aa9309c2d20ad17ae1",
            "input": "I LOVE this movie. Director Michael Powell once stated that this was his favorite movie, and it is mine as well. Powell and Pressburger created a seemingly simple, superbly crafted story - the power of love against \"the powers that be\". However, its deception lies in the complexity of its \"is it real or is it imaginary\" premise. Basically, one could argue that it is simply a depiction of the effects of war on a young, poetically inclined airman during WWII. Or is it? The question is never answered one way or the other. Actually, it is never even asked. This continuous understatement is part of the film's appeal.The innovative photography and cinematography even includes some nice touches portraying the interests of the filmmakers. For instance, Pressburger always wanted to do a cinematic version of Richard Strauss' opera, Der Rosenkavalier, about a young 18th century Viennese aristocrat. This is evident in the brief interlude in which Conductor 71, dressed in all his finery, holds the rose (which appears silver in heaven). The music even has a dreamy quality.All of the acting is first rate - David Niven is at his most charming, and he has excellent support from veteran Roger Livesey and relative newcomer Kim Hunter. But, in my opinion, the film's charm comes from Marius Goring as Conductor 71. He by far has the most interesting role, filling each of his scenes with his innocent lightheartedness, brightening the film. It's a pity that some of Conductor 71's scenes were left on the cutting room floor. It is also a pity that Goring's comedic talents are rarely seen again on film, except in the wonderful videos of The Scarlet Pimpernel television series from the 1950s. This is by far and away the most memorable role of his film career. He is a perfect foil for relaxed style of Niven, and his virtual overstatement contrasts so nicely with the seriousness of the rest of the characters. Ironically, also in the mid -1940s, Niven also starred against another heavenly \"messenger\", played by Cary Grant, in The Bishop's Wife. Their acting styles were so similar that I found the result boring, unenergetic, and disappointing. As a note, according to Powell, Goring desperately wanted the role of Peter Carter, initially refusing Conductor 71. It's a good thing he gave in and gave us such a delightful portrayal.The movie, \"commissioned\" to smooth over the strained relations between Britain and the U.S., overdrives its point towards the end. But it is disarming in its gentle reminders of the horrors of war - the numerous casualties, both military and civilian, the need to \"go on\" when faced with death. There is a conspicuous lack of WWII \"enemies\" in heaven, but the civilians shown are of indeterminate origin. Powell and Pressburger could have been more explicit in their depiction but it wasn't necessary. The movie may not have served its diplomatic purpose as was hoped for, but its originality continues to inspire moviemakers and viewers alike on both sides of the Atlantic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-699d6a450e5d43158eee37e3f98da033",
            "input": "When I rented this movie, I had very low expectations......but when I saw it, I realized that the movie was less (a lot less) than what I expected. The actors were bad (the doctor's wife was one of the worst), the story was so stupid...it could work for a Disney movie (except for the murders), but this one is not a comedy, it is a laughable masterpiece of stupidity. The title is well chosen except for one thing: they could add stupid movie after Dead Husbands! I give it 0 and a half out of 5.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18a38eaa390f456a8cf4c6554546e3fd",
            "input": "This horrendously bad piece of trash manages to be racist, sexist and homophobic all at once, while pretending to be terribly chic and sophisticated. Atrocious performances, a cliche ridden screenplay, and boring direction make this movie one to steer clear of. Two scenes were especially offensive - the one in which Schaech scrubs his tongue after being kissed by another man (could it really have been that gross), and the scene where Eastwood is kissed by Schaech's best friend, who is pretending to be Russian. After he leaves the room she exclaims \"f**king foreigners\"! So much for her being a cultured artist who dreams of living in Paris!?!Jonathon Schaech can be a likeable actor on screen, and is astonishingly good-looking. It's a shame he didn't learn more from working with cutting edge gay director Gregg Araki on an earlier film, and try to salvage this film from descending into a string of gay stereotypes and a mire of homophobia.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-368fec67c3974a7596c0bffd59fa1de5",
            "input": "Whilst it is universally acknowledged that Fearful Symmetry was heavily influenced by the Kolchak episode They Have Been, They Are, They Will Be, whether this makes it a rip-off or a homage is an altogether more controversial point. As a huge fan of both series I subscribe to the latter belief, although the less charitable may not do. James Whitmore was brave to take on the task of directing such a difficult episode, invisible elephants and gorilla suits sounds like a recipe for disaster, but he pulls it off with style, the teaser being an absolute gem. Lance Guest does a great job of making a credible character out of Kyle Lang and Jack Rader seethes with menace as Ed Meecham. Forget Fearful Symmetry's dubious originality and just enjoy it as a deeply satisfying X File.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11e564508bb543278156feb574f99e06",
            "input": "An obvious b-grade effort to cash in on the Hostel/Saw buzz, my expectations for this film were low (really low!) and yet it still managed to disappoint on every level. The acting is so bad it's not even funny, the plot-line is non-existent and the only scare was realizing that I had wasted 1hour 21 minutes watching it! I'm surprised to note that 34 people gave it a 10 star rating. I can only suspect that 33 of these are Cast and Crew. The 34th is possibly the directors mother? - although I'm sure even she would find it hard to go higher than a 2! DVD extras include an hour long \"making of\" feature. Which raises the question, \"Why?\" (although perhaps it serves to demonstrate what not to do!). Avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05c78d415276481f8d0b22e131f9b227",
            "input": "If you have beloved actors, Peter Falk, Rip Torn, George Segal, and Bill Cobbs, you don't need Billy Burke, Coolio, or any other distractions. Massive talent is totally wasted in \"Three Days to Vegas\", with the blame falling squarely on the script. My neighbor's vacation films are about as interesting as this misguided road movie. If you want to see how to utilize a veteran cast with a good script, check out \"The Crew\". There really are no redeeming factors here, and watching these wonderful actors struggling with such weak material is a crime. I wanted to like it, but the shallow script cheats the audience, by essentially giving the actors nothing to work with. - MERK",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c65f5b99c4eb4519a4cc38235f6645ca",
            "input": "I gave this movie a single star only because it was impossible to give it less.Scientists have developed a formula for replicating any organism. In their lab(a run down warehouse in L.A.), they create a T-Rex. A group of industrial spies break in to steal the formula and the remainder of the film is one endless foot chase.Of course the T-Rex(a rubber puppet)gets loose and commences to wipe out the cast. It has the amazing ability to sneak up within 2 or 3 feet of someone without them noticing and then promptly bites their head off.One cast member escapes in a police car and spends the remainder of the film driving aimlessly through the city. She is of such superior mental ability that she can't even operate the radio. She never makes any attempt to drive to a substation or a donut shop and appears hopelessly lost.The T-Rex wreaks havoc throughout the city, there are blazing gun battles and buildings(cardboard mock-ups)blowing up, but a single police car, or the army, nor anyone else ever shows up. Such activity must be commonplace in Los Angeles.We can only hope that a sequel isn't planned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e2bbba43286415e8bec689a8d736159",
            "input": "This guy has no idea of cinema. Okay, it seems he made a few interestig theater shows in his youth, and about two acceptable movies that had success more of political reasons cause they tricked the communist censorship. This all is very good, but look carefully: HE DOES NOT KNOW HIS JOB! The scenes are unbalanced, without proper start and and, with a disordered content and full of emptiness. He has nothing to say about the subject, so he over-licitates with violence, nakedness and gutter language. How is it possible to keep alive such a rotten corpse who never understood anything of cinematographic profession and art? Why don't they let him succumb in piece?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cafdcfa690bc4a91969098304d658a90",
            "input": "With all of the violence on TV and in the local news, it is refreshing to have a show that has no violence or adult language, yet is still entertaining. My children look forward to watching with us every week. Each of us have a favorite chef and favorite judges. We all enjoy Elton Brown. We enjoy learning about the background of the main ingredient, unique vegetables and seasonings. We play along at home to guess who the winner will be.It is a great hour of entertainment, as well as informational. Best of all in our hussle, bussle life, it is an hour the family spends together.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da77c5aab0d443a59456616514f113bb",
            "input": "As a low budget enterprise in which the filmmakers themselves are manufacturing and distributing the DVDs themselves, we perhaps shouldn't expect too much from Broken in disc form. And yet what's most remarkable about this whole achievement is the fact that this release comes with enough extras to shame a James Cameron DVD and a decidedly fine presentation.With regards to the latter, the only major flaw is that Broken comes with a non-anamorphic transfer. Otherwise we get the film in its original 1.85:1 ratio, demonstrating no technical flaws and looking pretty much as should be expected. Indeed, given Ferrari's hands on approach in putting this disc together you can pretty much guarantee such a fact.The same is also true of the soundtrack. Here we are offered both DD2.0 and DD5.1 mixes and whilst I'm uncertain as to which should be deemed the \"original\", the fact that Ferrari had an involvement in both means neither should be considered as inferior. Indeed, though the DD5.1 may offer a more atmosphere viewing experience owing to the manner in which it utilizes the score, both are equally fine and free of technical flaws.As for extras the disc is positively overwhelmed by them. Take a look at the sidebar on the right of the screen and you'll notice numerous commentaries, loads of featurettes and various galleries. Indeed, given the manner in which everything has been broken down into minute chunks rather than compiled into a lengthy documentary, there really is little to discuss. The 'Anatomy of a Stunt' featurette, for example, is exactly what it claims to be, and the same goes for the rest of pieces. As such we get coverage on pretty much ever aspect of Broken's pre-production, production and post-production. And whilst it may have been preferable to find them in a more easily digestible overall 'making of', in this manner we do get easy access to whatever special feature we may wish to view.Of the various pieces, then, it is perhaps only the commentaries which need any kind of discussion. Then again, there's also a predictable air to each of the chat tracks. The one involving the actors is overly jokey and doesn't take the film too seriously. Ferrari's pieces are incredibly enthusiastic about the whole thing. And the technical ones are, well, extremely technical. Of course, we also get some crossover with what's been covered elsewhere on the discs, but at only 19 minutes none of these pieces outstay their welcome. Indeed, all in all, a fine extras package.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-160fdb5b8d4147459482539560e336bc",
            "input": "After Chicago, I was beginning to lose all respect for Richard Gere and then along came The Flock. There's just so far a nice smile and a couple of stock facial gestures can get you, but he proved to me that he's finally gotten hold of his craft and can act with the best of them. Clare Danes was also super as his \"trainee/replacement\". Some have suggested there was too much unnecessary violence, but I don't see it that way. Nothing I saw detracted from the power of this film. I was really shocked I hadn't heard of it being released in theaters and came across it at Blockbuster instead. Really an exceptional film with just the right blend of action, suspense, thrills, and social consciousness. As good as 7even? Well, maybe. And you'll see better acting out of Gere than anyone's ever gotten out of Pitt.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab71d3d25f284fceac96cfc35b6f594f",
            "input": "i loved this movie. you have to respect midgets that dressed up like tiny Martians. Sure the story may have been thin at times, but you can't take away from the way it was done. i used to watch this over and over again when i was 8. its a kids movie, and besides, it has some of the greatest quotes ever. Blanzee's \"Home on the Range\" rendition is awesome. very well done if you ask me, 8 of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff149669941741f88d0a1bcac8793b56",
            "input": "If you're looking for a Hollywood action packed kid-flick with the common bad language and violence this may not be the film to sit down for. If you're on the other hand interested in watching a film with youre children that has actually some values like showing the importance of friendship and truth this is the film to watch. Looking at the program guide this is obviously what millions of other viewers have found. Not many low-budget independent films have ever been aired as much as Mr. Atlas. The film is actually very funny as well as warm hearted and shows some beautiful locations masterfully captured by the sharp eye of the obvious brilliant cinematographer Suki Medencevic. Also if you're interested in looking at a muscular fellow with good looks the ladies can get an eye full. Let's support those who make good childrens film buy buying their videos and watching their products on TV. Enjoy",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9f1f7f3960c472fa1ddd4dd5f1c6bf8",
            "input": "A well-made run-of-the-mill movie with a tragic ending. Pluses: The way the story moves - begins with Soorya struggling to live followed by a long flashback about why he's there. The Music. A disinterested look at the life of policemen. Minuses: The violence and the gore, but I guess they add to the realistic effects. Still, having people's heads chopped off and sent in boxes and sacks could have been avoided.No complaints - 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d045f43b49240deb3043244f245f542",
            "input": "I think this film has much to recommend it, particularly an especially sinister performance by David Morse and a more than passable performance by the always worth watching Mr. Foxx. Although there are a lot of holes in the plot and the motivation is very, very hard to follow in some cases, all in all, it makes for a nice time in front of the tube.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d7f9b4de24a4c5b94204a1c90529607",
            "input": "don't watch this Serbian documentary and Serbian propaganda look out for this documentary and you will see facts and truth. The Death of Yugoslavia documentary series (of five episodes) is a painstakingly compiled and researched account of the extended mass-bloodshed which marked the end of the old Federal Yugoslavia and spanned almost the entire first half of the 1990's. It includes a huge wealth of news footage and interviews with involved parties both \"Yugoslav\" and otherwise. The only real \"improvement\" which could be made to this amazing achievement would be the inclusion of later developments in the Balkans since the program was made. This was indeed done in the late 1990's for a repeat showing on BBC television, but the addition of some even more recent events would help to complete this admirably detailed and fulsome piece of work. Perhaps another whole episode might be warranted? The very succinct title of this documentary was made all the more appropriate by the eventual abandonment of the term \"Yugoslavia\" by the now-named Federal Republic of Serbia and Montenegro - a much belated and formal admission of that which occurred years before.not fiction like in \"Yugoslavia: The Avoidable War (1999)\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2341639fd8654fa4ae901c52c960b96c",
            "input": "I watched this movie last night and hoped for the best after watching all the cool trailers.Even the cover of the DVD looked good.As soon as I started watching it I was thinking like others \"oh my God whats this\".There were some moments that were a bit creepy but then the mood was ruined by stupid music.There was rock and opera during what is supposed to be suspenseful scenes.That right there ruined it for me and i was shaking my head thinking damn I wasted money again on a rental and was deceived by the cover art.Nothing against the music itself,it was just in the wrong parts of the movie.Whoever edited the film has no clue what they are doing.The cover showed lightning, implying they were caught in a storm at sea.That would have been more interesting but it didn't happen. The acting wasn't the worst i've ever seen considering they are all unknown and this is obvious their first film.Another reason I was disappointed was the plot made no sense.In the beginning 2 men saw all of the teens get on a boat,then at the end supposedly only 1 girl existed and the others were either her imaginary friends or were ghosts i'm not sure because it was very badly portrayed. WhyteFox who wrote a comment on here claims this is a true story.He or she believes in ghosts and spirits and says there is a haunted boat in the area this movie was filmed.There was no mention in this movie about it being a true story.I have never experienced something like that personally but am not saying it's impossible.I guess if anyone is interested in renting this movie,do it at your own risk.If you like amateur student horror films you may like this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd69d67f2c0d4cb1a1dc5cf61cf7290f",
            "input": "This film has been on my wish list for ten years and I only recently found it on DVD when my partner's grandson was given it. He watched it at and was thrilled to learn that it was about my generation - born in 1930 and evacuated in 1939 and he wanted to know more about it - and me. Luckily I borrowed it from him and watched it on my own and I cried all through it. Not only did it capture the emotions, the class distinction, the hardship and the warmth of human relationships of those years (as well as the cruelties (spoken and unspoken); but it was accurate! I am also a bit of an anorak when it comes to ARP uniforms, ambulances (LCC) in the right colour (white) and all the impedimenta of the management of bomb sites and the work of the Heavy Rescue Brigades. I couldn't fault any of this from my memories, and the sandbagged Anderson shelter and the WVS canteens brought it all back. The difference between the relatively unspoiled life in the village and war-torn London was also sharply presented I re-lived 1939/40 and my own evacuation from London with this production! I know Jack Gold's work, of course, and one would expect no more from him than this meticulous detail; but it went far beyond the accurate representation of the facts and touched deep chords about human responses and the only half-uttered value judgements of those years. It was certainly one of the great high spots in John Thaw's acting career and of Gold's direction and deserves to be better known. It is a magnificent film and I have already ordered a couple of copies to send to friends.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b1643a1e24c4d97a6b2fddd81ec0a3f",
            "input": "This is the definite Lars von Trier Movie, my favorite, I rank it higher than \"Breaking the waves\" or the latest \"Dancer in the Dark\"... I simply love the beauty of the picture...the framing is so original; acting is wonderful, A MUST SEE.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f834995f1adc4474a65d4a667c5c470a",
            "input": "Down To Earth is the best movie!!! It is SO funny, and it's really sweet too. It has a good plot and it's unique. It isn't like those movies that are all the same with the similar story lines, and it's not all comedy and no story. This movie also has a very good ending.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5e3d62366704e8996807371df41c985",
            "input": "...that the Bette Davis version of this film was better than the Kim Novak version.Despite all of the other comments written here, I really prefer the Bette Davis version, even though the Novak version has a more coherent story line.However: Davis' Mildred's raw emotions seem to me to be more apt to a sluttish girl who seems easily to become a prostitute.And it is those raw emotions that constitute *part* of what the poor doctor falls in love with. He has emotions of despair, of failure, of \"otherness\" - strong emotions that he represses. Davis' Mildred, on the other hand, displays her emotions immediately and without censure. She has no feelings of despair, or of failure, or of \"otherness\"; rather, she is merely surviving as a poor Cockney woman in the Victorian era.Novak's portrayal was a more vulnerable Mildred than was Davis', almost through the the whole movie. Davis' Mildred was **never** vulnerable until she actually had to go to the doctor and beg for assistance. And when he reviles her - for her method of keeping body and soul together, and for continually taking advantage of his love for her - she unleashes arguably the most passionate repudiation of snobbish holier than thou attitude ever seen on screen: \"I wiped my mouth! I WIPED MY MOUTH!!\" Novak's vulnerability was excellent. Davis' realism was monumental.IMDb votes concur!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3321db44dd004a3b934accef7080b743",
            "input": "Given the people involved, it is hard to see why this movie should be so messed up and dull. The writer, David Ward, wrote the amazing caper film \"The Sting\" two years later, Jane Fonda had just won an Academy Award for Klute, and Donald Sutherland had just done excellent work in films like \"Klute,\" \"Start the Revolution Without Me,\" and \"Kelly's Heroes.\" Plotwise, the movie is a caper tale, with a small gang of bumbling misfits planning a big heist. At the same time the movie wants to be hip satire, a series of comedy sketches of the type that the NBC television show \"Saturday Night\" would do so well two years later. The bad result is that the plot makes the comedy bits seem awkward and forced and the disconnected comedy bits destroy any kind of suspense that the heist might have. It is quite literally a movie that keeps smashing into itself, just as the cars in the cars in the demolition scenes run into each other.The only real interest for me was watching Jane Fonda. Her \"Iris Caine\" is supposed to be a light hearted version of her dramatic Bree Daniels prostitute character in \"Klute\" Yet, one doesn't believe her for a moment. It is always Jane Fonda pretending to be a prostitute that we are watching. It is as terrible a performance as her performance in \"Klute\" was terrific. It would be a good lesson for acting teachers to run the two films together to show how the same actress in the same type of role can be great or pathetic. It suggests that actors are only as good as their writers and directors.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-badd98e151444d2b95f3d44edd18b064",
            "input": "First off, I have no idea how this movie made it to the big screen. Its not even the low budget SCI-Fi channel movie, its just awful. Me and my friend who love action movies, Independence day, Jurassic Park, LotR, etc. went to see this movie expecting this movie to me a Transformers with dragons, mindless entertainment. All we got was a mindless hour and a half. The CG was not as bad as I was expecting, but the plot is so awful along with the acting, it made up for it. Its basically a Chinese legged of dragons returning every 500 years...Sounds like a good remake of Rain of Fire? No, The plot tries to be deeper than it should be leaving not only plot holes, but with magic, and a very small actual war between dragons(rather big snakes) it just gets ridiculous. The director attempted to add a bit of humor in the movie which fail. Me and my friend laughed through the whole thing(along with all 5 of the audience), and cant believed we spent money on this. The short trailer on TV makes up for most of the action while crap makes up the rest. I've seen a lot of B movies like Reptilian, The Cave, Spider, and others, but i have to say if you want a non stop laugh for an hour, watch this.Story: 1/10 CG: 5/10 Acting:3/10I don't drink...but it would have helped before watching this movie",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd38327248824ed3bf8f2ee18ccb9ad3",
            "input": "This serial is interesting to watch as an MST3K feature, but for todays audience that's all it is. I was really surprised to see the year it was made as 1952. Considering that fact alone makes this a solid (lowly?) 2 in my book. The cars used don't even look contemporary, they look like stuff from the 30's. It's basically Cody (the lone world's salvation? Sheesh talk about an insult to everyone else, like the military), anyway it's Cody in his nipple ring flying suit against Graber and Daley two dumb*ss henchman who sport handguns and an occasional ray gun thats pretty lame in its own right, enjoy. If you want to watch a really good serial see Flash Gordan, it's full of rockets that attack each other and a good evil nemesis and also good looking women, this has NONE of that. And Flash was made 15 or so years before this crap so you can give it some slack. Something made in 1952, this bad, deserves a 2. Nuff said. give it a 6 if your watching it as a MST3K episode, those guys have some good fun with it; a tweak of the nipples here, a tweak there and I'm flying! And now as an added bonus, I bring you the Commander Cody Theme song as originally sung by Joel and his two character bots Tom Servo and Crow aboard the satellite of love for episode eight The Enemy Planet:(Singing at the very beginning credits);(TOM SERVO SINGING) YOUR WATCHING COMMANDER CODY.... HE IS THE NEW CHARACTER FROM REPUBLIC,HE GETS IN TROUBLE EVERY WEEK... BUT HE'S SAVED BY EDITING,JUST A TWEAK OF HIS NIPPLES... SENDS HIM ON HIS WAY,A PUMPKIN HEAD AND A ROCKET PACK.... WILL SAVE THE DAY,(JOEL SINGING) HIS LABRATORY IS A BOXING RING... WHEN BAD GUYS COME TO MIX IT UP,SOMEBODY ALWAYS GETS KIDNAPPED... AND CODY HAS TO FIX IT UP,HE DRINKS HIS TEA AT AL'S CAFE... AND FLIES ALONG ON WIRES,HE BEATS THE CROOKS AND FLIES WITH HOOKS... AND PUTS OUT FOREST FIRES,(CROW SINGING)BAD GUYS BEWARE... CODY IS THERE,YOU'LL LIKE HIS HAIR IT'S UNDER HIS HELMUT... AND BECAUSE WE CAN'T THINK OF A GOOD RHYME,THAT'S THE END OF THE COMMANDER CODY THEME SONG... SO SIT RIGHT BACK WITH A WILL OF GRANITE,AND WATCH CHAPTER EIGHT, CAUSE THAT'S THE ENEMY PLANET",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b4b5e8969694c138999e6c14b80531a",
            "input": "I'm not sure quite why I clicked \"contains spoiler\", because quite honestly there is not enough explanation ever given in the movie to know enough of what is supposed to be going on to spoil it.Visually it mostly delivers. Well, apart from some 80's throwback rubber-mask monsters. I'll say now that before watching this I had never seen the band Lordi, nor knew anything about them bar that they won Eurovision. Apparently the monsters in this are members of the band, pretty much in their stage personas. Whatever. Anyway, I didn't know this while watching. I just thought the monsters/demons were mostly passable. Just about.I'm almost sure there is a semi-coherent explanation behind what we see on-screen, but it may actually be better not to know it. It probably would actually have been incredibly lame come to think on it. The action keeps it rolling along pretty much well enough to keep the viewer mostly entertained, even if half the entertainment factor is joking about wtf is supposed to be happening in this movie exactly.I gave it a four mainly because I got a good laugh out of it, especially out of how it explains pretty much nothing. Must have been the mood I was in, but I found that hella funny for some reason. Then I look up the movie on the internet and find out that NOBODY knows what the hell it's supposed to be about. That amused me further, and raised my score an extra half point to a 4/10.It's not scary, or particularly coherent, but it's pretty nice visually and sonically. Overall, far from essential, but watchable. Don't expect too much and don't expect it to make any sense and it might entertain you if you are in the right mood.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f64bb66a2dd49c5a4660bf120109f68",
            "input": "It seems like anybody can make a movie nowadays. It's like all you need is a camera, a group of people to be your cast and crew, a script, and a little money and walla you have a movie. Problem is that talent isn't always part of this equation and often times these kind of low budget films turn out to be duds. The video store shelves are filled with these so called films. These aren't even guilty pleasures, they're just a waste of celluloid that are better off forgotten. Troma Entertainment is known for making trash cinema, but most of their films are b movie gold. However, some of the films they've put out they had nothing to do with making and some, like 'Nightmare Weekend,' didn't deserve any form of release at all. Pros: The cast members do the best they can with the lousy material. Some unintentional hilarity. Moves at a good pace (Should at 81 minutes).Cons: Awful writing, which includes putrid dialogue and countless plot holes. Poorly lit, especially the night scenes and the ending, which you can't make out at all. Doesn't make a lick of sense. Badly scored. Cheap and very dated effects. Total lack of character development and you won't care about anybody. This is supposed to be a horror film, but it's lacking in that area and isn't the least bit scary. Nothing interesting or exciting happens. Loaded with unnecessary padding.Final thoughts: I never expected this to be some forgotten gem, but I never imagined it would be this bad. I don't know if it's the worst film ever made, but it's a definite contender. Troma should have let this film rot instead of giving it a release. Don't make the same mistake I did and let your curiosity get the best of you.My rating: 1/5",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-258da86e4a7e4b3881a830bd7c87a89b",
            "input": "I used to LOVE this movie as a kid but, seeing it again 20+ years later, it actually sucks. Up The Academy might have been ahead of it's time back in 1980, but it has almost nothing to offer today! Movies like Caddyshack and Stripes hold-up much better today than this steaming dogpile. No T&A. No great jokes except for the one-liners we've all heard a million times by now.I recently bought the DVD in hopes that it would be the gem I remembered it being. Well, I was WAY off! The soundtrack had only 2-3 widely-recognizable hits (not the smash compilation others had mentioned) and the frequent voice-overs were terrible. The only thing that was interesting, to me, was predicting what the character's lines were before they said them. Yep, I watched this movie that much back then! The only reason I am writing this review is to give my two cents on why this movie should be forgotten, sorry to say. :(",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b00236697e1c43a0b04c7807017c0a1b",
            "input": "It's impossible for me to objectively consider this movie. Not that I haven't tried, mind you - but I sit down, and I pop in the aged VHS, and I watch the opening...and suddenly I'm five years old again and clutching my very own Care Bear and watching the movie with open eyes and an eager heart.I can see, objectively, that this movie is a BIZARRE combination of cuddly baby merchandising-mascots and creepy prepubescent children with evil powers that has a thin story and uninteresting animation. But my inner five-year-old goes, \"Yay! Care Bears!\" every time I think about it. So - I'd only (cautiously, reluctantly) recommend this movie for those who saw it during their early youth and can call on the awesome power of nostalgia while watching it (like me) OR those lovably cynical Gen-X/Y-ers who deliberately seek out the wonderfully bad/strange (a category in which this movie...definitely belongs). To those actually looking for a compelling movie or wholesome family entertainment: You might want to keep looking.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d66f9b9dbfc343e788accb1a627eb1b2",
            "input": "A perfect little atrocity...I doubt if a single shot lasted for more then the reglamentary-MTV 4.4 seconds. Woeful casting, worse even than in Kusminsky's version (a reminder: he managed to miscast Juliet Binoche and Ralph Feinnnes). But, hey-the rich got what they deserved. Dark and brooding Heathcliff reduced to the state of a golden-locked angel, frail and angellic Catherine presented as a chubby, melon-breasted heffer, meek and weak Linton is a peeping tom, and innocent Isabel becomes Sara Michelle-Gellar's character from Cruel Intentions. 15-year old Eddie Bauer and Abercrombie and Fitch donners-take notice. This thing was made for you. It is an hour-and-a-half long music video where everything is given to you; you are saved from the uncomfortable necessity of not even trying to understand the complexity of the characters, but even from initial shock at their actions. The actors tried, but, as I stated before, they were miscasted. Decent photography, but editing is on the level of TV production class in high school. I implore you all: read the book, or the cliffnotes even; watch the previous versions of it, even Kusminsky's; but stay away from the numerous future reruns, during which you will not receive the benefit of the commercial-free premiere.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-559191f6d34a420c8d36c7c35f543a06",
            "input": "This was far and away the worst movie i've ever seen in my entire life. It was slow, boring, not scary, not funny, not dramatic, not entertaining.Sarah Michelle Gellar was up to her old playbook of empty expressions of fright and shock. She couldn't sell her character nor could anyone else in the picture.For those who thought the Grudge was 'kind of alright' then don't go see this unless you get enjoyment out of wasting your time and your life.I saw this movie for free by the way so I don't want this to come across as a rant from a guy that lost 8 bucks on a terrible movie. It was free, it still sucked, I hated it.Avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b660f18cea245cb860ebdd54afc1f7f",
            "input": "What kind of a documentary about a musician fails to include a single track by the artist himself?! Unlike \"Ray\" or countless other films about music artists, half the fun in the theater (or on the couch) is reliving the great songs themselves. Here, all the tracks are covers put on by uninteresting characters, and these renditions fail to capture Cohen's slow, jazzy style. More often, the covers are badly sung folk versions. Yuck.The interviews are as much or more with other musicians and figures rather than with Cohen himself. Only rarely does the film feature Cohen reading his own work (never singing)-- like letters, poems, etc. The movie really didn't capture much about the artist's life story, either, or about his development through the years. A huge disappointment for a big Cohen fan.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-496a4be8309a4e50acefddd0254e5362",
            "input": "Here we have 2 misunderstood kids who never stood a chance against a cruel, poverty riddled existence: Robin Hoods singled out by the police for persecution because they were a trifle wild at times. Gad! According to this crap Bonnie was the sweetest little thing west of the Missouri who was taught to be a psychopathic murderer by a fun loving boyfriend who didn't really want to hurt anybody....he just wanted things without putting a lot of energy into getting them. Badly acted, poorly filmed, unbelievable dialogue, unrealistic use of weaponry, gore that looked more like grape jelly than the real thing. Avoid this bilgewater. Thumbs down. -5 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0acd2a5605264f0b83ab2af41c5d93f9",
            "input": "Ghost Story (the TV Movie--1972) was the pilot for the NBC series. The movie was well-written and well-acted and, I thought, when the 1972-73 tv season started, if the tv series is half as good as the movie, then NBC has a winner. (I wish this film was available on video!!) The series was a colossal disappointment--even with William Castle as exec. producer. If, however,you have a chance to see the original TV movie, Ghost Story, check it out. You won't be disappointed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-375a377db56d4c8b9f66e8455a6e6a81",
            "input": "This is a great film. From reading other reviews, I can see that I'm not the only one who shed a tear. Tamilyn Tomita acted with such skill and conviction, she made the ending heartfelt and memorable. In the hands of a lesser actress, her last scene would have seemed trite and corny. One would never guess this film was done on a tight, limited budget. The cinematography is gorgeous and there are a number of big name actors. The script is so wonderful, I can see why they all wanted to be in it. If you watch the long, long list of credits at the end, you'll see that half of Hawaii pitched in to make this film happen, and for good reason. The soundtrack (available on CD) is absolutely beautiful and sets the mood throughout the film. My only \"complaint\" is that I almost didn't want the film to end.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c481e27e9da478193d97c3207d5d545",
            "input": "i expected something different:more passion,drama...Again another failed attempt of originality.i'm sorry to say that the film falls into the old cliché of 'cheesiness'.15 year old teens may appreciate it though.The acting was not very convincing and the lines common,lacking any wit.Still, the soundtrack was good and well adapted.I can't say that this movie is a total flop,because people do watch it but it didn't meet the public's expectations and sunk into mediocrity.So,to conclude,the production keeps you in front of the TV for almost an hour and a half,which is an appreciable thing.Thus,I guess its worth seeing if you don't get annoyed",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad450a5e0bca4492986a5627780960e8",
            "input": "To be honest, I had no idea what this movie was about when I started it. That's how I watch movies whenever possible. No preconception. I thought this was going to be a movie about stoners in the woods or something. I was wrong, kinda.Loaded was kind of boring at first but once it started to get going it really hooked me. I know the feeling of being sucked into something dangerous where you feel helpless but to do things that you do not want to do.Another user commented on how this movie was silly and implausible but I beg to differ. These kinds of things DO happen. I'm sorry but not everyone lives in a dream world where nothing bad can happen and crazy situations are \"implausible\". Really sorry but the reality of the WORLD is that they DO happen. The creator of this movie as well as the actors did a great job of portraying how things can just go bad and how people can make really bad choices. Sometimes things turn out good, sometimes they turn out bad and such is life.I highly recommend this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2747b1be46f140dd8994b368f4f45e08",
            "input": "I *loved* the original Scary Movie. I'm a huge fan of parody- it is my favorite form of humor. It is sometimes regarded as the most intelligent form of humor. The Wayans boys seemed to grasp that concept perfectly in the original film, then temporarily forgot it when making the sequel. I think the Wayans' are a family of comical geniuses. Alas, even geniuses make mistakes.The movie begins with promise. I liked \"The Exorcist\" parody, especially the \"come on out, ma\" gag. Now, that's Wayans-quality material. But, other than that, I can only think of two other times I laughed: 1) when Tori Spelling is seduced in the middle of the night by a spirit, then becomes clingy and starts talking about marriage with him. Meanwhile, he's saying, \"It was just a booty call!!\" That was kinda funny. 2) The \"Save the Last Dance\" parody where the Cindy character inadvertently beats up a girl while practicing her new moves. But even the short-lived giggles are no match for the side-splitting laughs of the first Scary Movie.The rest of the movie is pure trash, filled with cheap gross-out gags. Jokes from the first movie which were subtle or implied are magnified and overdone. For example, in Scary Movie I, several innuendos are made to imply that the character Ray is gay. This was hilarious. But, in Scary Movie II, the whole penis-strangulation scene with Ray under the bed was mind-numbing and incredibly unfunny. This is the pattern of the whole film. Shock humor *alone* doesn't take a movie very far. This was a trend in 2000 and 2001, unfortunately. As much as it pains me to rate a Wayans movie so low, I have to give this one a 2 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-194ddb59cbc34ec098b8884d85d450b0",
            "input": "The Ladies Man is a funny movie. There's not much thought behind it, but what do you expect from an SNL movie? It's actually better than most SNL movies (i.e. Superstar or A Night At The Roxbury) Tim Meadows and Will Ferrell were both very funny. Chris Parnell was also funny in his short scene (one of the funnier ones in the movie). Other than that, the rest of the cast is average and is just there to support Meadows. I've definitely seen funnier movies, but I've seen dumber ones too. Again, it's not exactly a deep movie, but it's good for a few laughs. It was funnier as a skit though. But still, if you're looking for a pretty funny movie, I'd recommend this one. Just don't think about it too much, or you'll hate it.Rating: 6/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f251008da6648dc8c6d129b5160853f",
            "input": "The British production company Amicus is generally known as the specialist for horror anthologies, and this great omnibus called \"The House That Dripped Blood\" is doubtlessly the finest Amicus production I've seen so far (admittedly, there are quite a few that I have yet to see, though). \"The House That Dripped Blood\" consists of four delightfully macabre tales, all set in the same eerie mansion. These four stories are brought to you in a wonderfully Gothic atmosphere, and with one of the finest ensemble casts imaginable. Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee (Cushing and Lee are two of my favorite actors ever), as well as Denholm Elliott and the ravishing Ingrid Pitt star in this film - so which true Horror fan could possibly afford to miss it? No one, of course, and the film has much more to offer than just a great cast. \"The House That Dripped Blood\" revolves around an eerie rural mansion, in which strange things are happening. In four parts, the film tells the tales of four different heirs.The first tale, \"Method For Murder\", tells the story of Horror novelist Charles Hyller (Denholm Elliott), who moves into the House with his wife. After moving in, the writer suddenly feels haunted by a maniac of his own creation... The first segment is a great kickoff to the film. The story is creepy and macabre throughout and the performances are entirelly very good.In the second story, \"Waxworks\", retired businessman Phillip Grayson (Peter Cushing) moves into the house, and suddenly feels drawn to a mysterious Wax Museum in the nearby town... The great Peter Cushing once again delivers a sublime performance in this, and the rest of the performances are also very good. The tale is delightfully weird, and the second-best of the film, after the third.The third tale, \"Sweets To The Sweet\" is by far the creepiest and most brilliant of the four. John Reed (Christopher Lee) moves in with his little daughter. The private teacher and nanny Mrs. Norton, whom Mr. Reed has employed to instruct his daughter, is appalled about her employer's strictness towards his daughter, and is eager to find out what reason the overprotective father's views on upbringing may have... This best segment maintains a very creepy atmosphere and a genuinely scary plot. Christopher Lee is, as always, superb in his role. Nyree Dawn Porter is also very good as the nanny, and my special praise goes to then 11-year-old Chloe Franks. This ingenious segment alone makes the film a must-see for every true Horror-fan.In the fourth segment, Horror-actor Paul Henderson (Jon Pertwee) moves into the house with his sexy mistress/co-star Carla (Ingrid Pitt). This fourth story is satire, more than it is actually Horror. It is a highly amusing satire, however, and there are many allusions to other Horror films. At one point Henderson indirectly refers to Christopher Lee, who stars in the previous, third segment...All four segments have a delightfully macabre sense of humor and a great atmosphere. As stated above, the third segment is by far the creepiest and greatest, but the other three are also atmospheric and often macabrely humorous Horror tales that every Horror lover should appreciate. An igenious atmosphere, a macabre sense of humor, genuine eerieness and a brilliant cast make this one a must-see. In Short: \"The House That Dripped Blood\" is an excellent Horror-omnibus that no lover of British Horror could possibly afford to miss. Highly Recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54868852055c4574a2fc4646ee6bf849",
            "input": "This movie deserved better It's great fun, has some wonderful jokes and sight gags, some in-stuff for the \"Geeks\" amongst us (And we know who we are), and the effects are indeed effectual. Watching Paul Reubens fart in the face of an Academy Award winner is worth the price of admission alone. I never read the comics series before I saw the movie, but have since. as good as they are, I still recommend MM the film. (Although having the Flaming Carrot as a character would have been cool, too) Greg Kinnear is, well,...amazing as Captain Amazing, and NO ONE ELSE could be The Shoveller except William H. Macy My favorite line in the film? \"We've got a blind date with Destiny. And it looks like she's ordered the lobster.\" See this film. BUY this film! It's only 5 bucks and some change at your local Wal-Mart. You'll thank me. Really you will. Oh, and Ms. Garafolo is in it. THAT ALONE makes it watch-worthy",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5ab35c45d564dc0a50c130e486a48c3",
            "input": "the cover of the box makes this movie look really good, don't be fooled. splatter university came out in 1984 which was the last good year for horror, but this movie sucks. the characters are so annoying. only the teacher is cool. there is like no plot to this movie, who the hell would ever produce this waste of a film?spoilers up aheadthe teacher dies in this, and it was a female, we all know that we must have a female surviver, if you're going to break the rules do it in a good horror flick not this waste",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc91fce7496446ae83203d51f404f1f8",
            "input": "Ronald Colman plays a famous Broadway actor who has begun to lose his mind and sense of identity. After years of playing a wide range of parts, he can't remember who he exactly is--who are his roles and who is the self. And, much more serious, he begins to see and hear his play even in regular everyday life. So, since he's currently playing in \"Othello\", he begins to act jealous and suspicious--just like the title character. Ultimately, it leads him to the depths of insanity and murder.I saw this film years ago and liked it. I just saw it again and loved it. Now perhaps some of my enthusiasm is because I have always liked Ronald Colman and this is a great triumph for him--and for which he earned the Best Actor Oscar. And, looking at the competition that year (Gregory Peck for GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT, John Garfield for BODY AND SOUL, William Powell for LIFE WITH FATHER and Michael Redgrave for MOURNING BECOMES ELECTRA), I think Colman was a very good choice, as he stretched from his usual comfort zone and did a much more demanding role.Now I noticed that one reviewer hated this film because they hated Shakespeare--and this took up about half their review talking about their dislike for him. However, this film isn't really about Shakespeare, and it doesn't matter at all if you dislike Shakespeare. I am no huge fan of Shakespeare, but marveled at the small portions of the play that Colman re-enacted--though, as I said, this is NOT a really movie about Shakespeare. Instead, it's a wonderful portrait of an actor losing his mind and mixing his stage role with reality. It could have been ANY play, though \"Othello\" was an excellent choice because of the murder scene--which gets acted out for real later in the film.Overall, a very clever film due to a lovely script--with some overtones of Film Noir. Fortunately, the acting was terrific also, as Colman had excellent support from Signe Hasso, Shelly Winters and Edmond O'Brien (who was particularly good--he played his part just right). And, considering the great George Cukor was directing, it's no wonder it's a wonderful film from start to finish.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-431f3bebd6bc47b9b7339ac3242a3a11",
            "input": "'Ned Kelly' is a wonderfully made Australian film honouring a true Australian hero. We are taken into the world of Ned, his best friend, Joe Byrne, and the other members of the Kelly Gang, as the film explains and perhaps justifies Ned's actions.There is an exceptional cast present, who all give stellar performances, which brings the film to life. (Great job, Heath!) Orlando Bloom was fantastic as Joe, playing the role of quiet, loyal ladiesman very well. I was swept up in the moment. For a moment I almost believed the Gang would win the battle at Glenrowan, alas, it was not to be.Some aspects of the film are fictional, and as an avid Ned Kelly fan (and supporter), was slightly disappointed by this. Perhaps also the film could've gone longer, to cover more of the Kelly Gang's/Ned's life - I felt not enough was covered.Regardless of a few flaws, this is a moving film, which stirs all sorts of emotions. (And hey, I'd assume this film would be better to watch rather than Mick Jagger trying to portray Ned...)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef1da09b6cde4aeab7a5d80baae29029",
            "input": "Slaughter High is about a boy named Marty. He was harassed, and picked on in high school. A group of kids played several pranks on him, and these pranks were REALLY bad. The last prank ended tragically.cue to 5 years later. The gang of kids meet up again for a reunion. One of them set it up at the old high school. The school is now abandoned, and they have to break in. For some reason, the Janitor is still there, but he tells them to go ahead and have fun because they give him a beer.They start partying ,and looking at their old lockers, and they see something of Marty's. One girl feels sorry for Marty but another guy calms her down.Once the kills begin, it is great. Every kills is creative and gory. We see a figure in a jester mask, hunting them one by one throughout the school. It appears Marty is back to exact revenge. After the first person is killed, they find out they are locked in the school. They begin looking for a way out.Now, there are a number of illogical things in this movie. First of all, I don't know anyone who has a 5 year reunion. Second of all, after the first kid dies, a girl gets blood all over her. They all run away in a panic, yet she runs to the bathroom, and finds a bathtub. Hrr friend has just been killed, and she decides to take a bath!? More importantly, why is there a bathtub in a school bathroom. Anyways, the bathtub doesn't seem to really work....and she dies a horrible death this is an 80s movie. it is a horror slasher. WHO CARES if it has some illogical parts. I for one don't. This movie has really great deaths. The ending.... there is a twist. Having recently seen Haute Tension, I can compare the two. The only way they are similar is that there is a twist, which kind of left me disappointed.....THEN right after the twist, comes a great, if not the best kill, in the movie.After the last kill, the killer looks at the screen and also does something crazy, and it was the perfect way to end the movie. It has me going \"wow...\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea0d584c52384366adcbf7a2d5c1a2c2",
            "input": "This is a really cool movie! I remember first seeing it when I was really young and I used to watch it all the time like once a week...Shadow was my favorite character in the movie. Homeward Bound is really funny and its really cool how they train the animals to do all those things. Parts of the movie are sad though (such as when Sassy, the cat, falls down the waterfall, and when Shadow falls in the hole at the end.) I have seen the second Homeward Bound but I gotta say its not as good as the first. Shadow is the smart one, Sassy is, well, Sassy, and Chance is the funny idiot. I recommend this movie to anyone who likes comedies, or talking animals. This is one of my top ten favorite movies!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df0259c68cce473ea5fa49da06e4da68",
            "input": "I really wanted to like this movie, but ended up bored and incredulous. The first shot is a camera feed from a robot traveling towards a bomb and is, naturally, shaky. But then the rest of the movie stays in shakycam mode, even during quiet conversational moments, to the point of ridiculousness. Have the rental houses run out of tripods and Steadicams? The fact that it was shot on 16mm doesn't help, as the entire movie is grainy as well as shaky. For all the effort Bigelow put into accurate vehicles and equipment, there are enough glaring errors and inconsistencies that they undermine the movie's credibility. - A car would not erupt in flames after a single shot, and once engulfed would not be extinguished by a small hand-held extinguisher. - A single Humvee would not be driving around Baghdad in 2004, but would be backed up by other vehicles in case of breakdown or attack. - It would be exceptionally unlikely to be able to hit a running insurgent at long range, where the bullet is clearly taking over a second to reach the target. - I believe bombs were brought to designated disposal areas on or near a base, not some random spot in the middle of the desert. - The oil tanker attack is stated to have occurred in the Green Zone, a highly secure area that experienced very few attacks from within. The zone is mostly offices and palaces with few residences, yet it is portrayed as a dangerous warren of dark alleys and lurking insurgents. Oddly, James never gets in trouble for the ridiculous tactic of ordering his two companions to each take an alley by themselves, thus setting up the attempted kidnapping. - Speaking of which, the 3-man team is always depicted clearing buildings, chasing insurgents etc. on their own, even when there are clearly dozens of soldiers right there. - How many hours does the team have to stare at a dead insurgent hanging out a window to figure out he's not faking it?There were no establishing shots to show the viewer what the size and layout of the base was or where Baghdad was in relation. I had no idea who the EOD team reported to, nor were any other characters fleshed out. These are things the characters would know, so we should too.Many of the \"surprises\" and scenes are perfectly predictable. Yes, it's obvious that the psychiatrist colonel will get into trouble with the Iraqis he's trying to move along, that the choice of cereals back home will be overwhelming, and that a driver you kidnapped will not wait for you when you leave the vehicle.Finally, there was an almost complete lack of character development. Renner's character from the beginning has a troubled relationship at home, is reckless and addicted to adrenalin. He's exactly the same at the end of the movie. What's the point?If this is indeed the best so far of the Iraqi war movies, it's a sorry bunch. Just based on the half hour I saw of it, I'd recommend Generation Kill on HBO instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c3ccfdfd1ef4ebb8be90c4876cd5768",
            "input": "'The Shop Around the Corner (1940)' is a pleasant romantic comedy, not the sort that I will hold dear to me until the end of my days, but nonetheless a film thoroughly deserving of its reputation. By 1940, director Ernst Lubitsch had long ago taken Hollywood by storm, and his famed \"Lubitsch touch\" had become a sparkling commercial trademark. This film was planned for a 1939 release, but scheduling conflicts meant that James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan were unavailable for filming. Rather than substituting either of his main stars, Lubitsch decided to postpone production, in the meantime directing Greta Garbo in 'Ninotchka (1939).' When it was finally completed, 'The Shop Around the Corner' appears to have been met with relative indifference, receiving zero Oscar nominations despite an excellent screenplay by Samson Raphaelson and fine performances from its two leads and Frank Morgan in a supporting role. Time, nevertheless, has betrayed the film's massive and enduring influence, with high-profile remakes including 'In the Good Old Summertime (1949)' and 'You've Got Mail (1998).'At its surface, one might assume 'The Shop Around the Corner' to simply be the story of two lovers, Klara Novak (Sullavan) and Alfred Kralik (Stewart), who love each other without knowing it. However, Lubitsch's film runs much deeper than that. It's the story of Matuschek and Company, a stylish gift shop in Budapest, and the various human relationships that make the store such a close-knit family. When store-owner Hugo Matuschek (Frank Morgan) begins to suspect his oldest employee of having an affair with his wife, we witness the breakdown of two families, both at home and at work. There's absolutely no reason why the story should not have been set in the United States – perhaps in the blustery streets of New York – but Lubitsch was deliberately recreating the passions and memories of his former years in Europe, the quaintness of love and life before war brought terror and bloodshed to every doorstep. This subtle subtext brings a more meaningful, personal touch to the film – in fact, even as I write this review, I'm beginning to appreciate the story even more.Sullavan and Stewart are both lovely in their respective roles, but I think that it's the supporting cast that really make the film. Each character brings a distinctive personality to the mix, and their interactions are always believable and enjoyable. I especially liked how Lubitsch knowingly directed much of our sympathy towards Hugo Matuschek, who, in any other film, would have been restricted to an underdeveloped, two-dimensional portrayal. Matuschek may have lost the love of his family, but he recaptures it in the affection of his employees, and you feel a heartwarming glow when, in the bitter cold of a Christmas Eve snowstorm, he finds companionship in a freckle-faced young errand-boy (Charles Smith). This genuine warmth towards a supporting character strikes me as being similar to several of Billy Wilder's later creations, for example, Boom Boom Jackson in 'The Fortune Cookie (1966)' or Carlo Carlucci in 'Avanti! (1972).' Of course, it doesn't really need saying, but Billy Wilder learned from the best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e3ee948ca864df99f0df5fb96d3d6e8",
            "input": "The movie is about two brothers that are supposed to be alike - but are not in any way expect for being smart - one is a surgeon and they other is able to write a computer code. Geniuses as they like to call themselves which sounds very exaggerated if you compare it to personal characteristics can you perceive from the material of the title.I honestly didn't like the style of the movie. I believe that anxiety, confusion and deep blues it brings are there for a purpose, but what I don't get is why there is so much of it. The movie is cheap on scenes and tells the story basically with no human aspect in it at all. It gives the comic book like experience. However it's visually numbing the viewer, it somehow brings him inside the blues with brief dialogs, monotonic scenes, dynamic cut, music and abrupt noises.The movie's storyline is very simple, most of what's going on is being dramatically pictured for long minutes, mostly in confusing delirium simulating effects of drug use and dynamic cuts.I will say openly that this movie didn't meet my expetations a tiny bit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b69834293ea43cba1d6d83ce1354598",
            "input": "Same old same old about Che. It completely ignored the really interesting facts of Che's true character. Sodeberg redid the same boring narrative of Che. The silly seductive tale of an Argentinean rich-boy who was so shocked by poverty he became a Robin Hood fighting alongside the poor, until eventually he was murdered by the CIA. Yeah, yeah, heard it all before, BORING AND UNTRUE!. The reality of Che Guevara is very different and far more explosive! The facts show that he was a totalitarian with a messiah streak, who openly wanted to impose Maoist tyranny on the world. He was so fanatical that at the hottest moment in the Cold War, he even begged the Soviet Union to nuke New York, Washington or Los Angeles and bring about the end of the world. CHe urged Khrushchev to launch a nuclear strike against US cities. For the rest of his life, he declared that if his finger had been on the button, he would have pushed it. When Khrushchev backed down and literally saved the world, Che was furious at the \"betrayal\". If Che's recommendations had been followed, you would not be reading this review now. How a homicidal maniac became a pop icon would have made a much more interesting film. Incredible that no filmmaker has been daring enough to show the real side of Che and his posthumous media transformation. THAT WOULD MAKE AN Oscar WINNING FILM! I thought making independent film meant taking REAL RISKS and being GROUNDBRAKING! They only stick to \"safe counterculture themes\", to wit, \"Che cool\", \"Wall Street bad\", \"Republican= Nazi\", \"Bush ex Hitler\", \"NRA is worse than KGB\", \"Christians are fanatics and stupid\", etc...ad nauseum. Oooh, how daring, how mind blowing. Tres anti-mainstream and edgy. I wish they would have some real cojones and tackle the Independent Film Oligarchy! That would be truly daring!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-739503c54c7e46fb8771a6043ef5e82f",
            "input": "This short was nominated for an Academy Award and I wish it had won! Basically a filmed jam session between some very talented musicians, including Lester Young and Joe Jones, the music is incredible! Hollywood quite often embraced Jazz (particularly animation, believe it or not) but this is a rare look on film at an improvisational jam. This has been added to the Film Preservation list and deservedly so. TCM runs this as filler periodically and runs it every March sometime for its' \"31 Days of Oscar\" tribute. From downtown at the buzzer, swish, nothing but net and the shot's so smooth, the net barely moved. Most solidly and highly recommended!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e794eefbefe4ddbbbf86074bcd1b7f2",
            "input": "My kids recently started watching the reruns of this show - both the early episodes on the N, and the later ones on ABC Family - and they love it. (I wasn't aware the show had even lasted past the first or second season) I'm curious as to what prompted all of the cast changes - I've seen them described as \"highly publicized,\" and yet a half hours searching efforts on the web have revealed nothing but endless comments on how the early episodes were so much better than the later episodes. (Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference - the scripts and themes remain largely the same throughout - but they do lose some great people along the way) My daughter has put the DVDs on her wish list, so perhaps the land of special features and commentary will shed some light on all of this. I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on \"Boy Meets World\" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says \"upstairs,\" or when early series token geek \"Minkus\" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says \"over there,\" pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying \"Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!\" and running off screen (Mr. turner being another character who left) Oh well - maybe there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something? I was just glad to see Aunt Hilda show up for the finale - she was always one of my favorites - it's too bad it couldn't have been a more encompassing cast reunion. (The Zelda candle just didn't cut it for me)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-336b4686221b439c86e4bab8ab5a2b92",
            "input": "This film can be judged from three viewpoints: as history, as a profile of Amin, as a fictional thriller. It fails as history, it mentions in passing the coup that threw out Obote, the expulsion of the Asians, and has the Entebbe hi-jack as background, but not in any chronologically consistent time frame. As a profile of Amin it may have been interesting, because Forest Whitaker is incredibly good, and if this was a better film, he would get an Oscar. (He got it - which proves the Oscar voters don't watch the films they vote on.) It ignores relevant historical episodes in the novel, which observed Amin and the history of Uganda from the point of view of the doctor. It tells instead the fictitious story of the Scots doctor and his impossible love life from the point of view of Amin. But the story told is the one incident that Amin was probably innocent of. As a fictional thriller, there is no plot to hold it together. The beginning is taut - it takes cinematic liberties with the novel, but sets up the story. The character of the doctor is well-defined, but becomes lost in the second half of the film which suffers as a result.Why the doctor decides to stay in Kampala is badly explained - seduced by power? Why he befriends no-one is strange. The character of the friend in the novel has been lost because the Scotsman has the affair instead of the black doctor - a ludicrous entanglement which does not seem even faintly believable, but allows the writers of the film to show the ferocity of Amin close at hand. The Man called Horse bit at the end is risible. Finally in 1971, Uganda drove on the left, not right, the number plates were three letters and two or three numbers - and where are the Equator tusks?! In short - if you've never heard of Amin, you may want to spend two hours watching this film to appreciate Forest Whitaker's acting, but the last hour will bore you to confusion. If you know Uganda or have read the book - don't see the film - it will only depress you. And if you want to know why the doctor was so foolhardy - he wasn't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e5fd3369c754ceda88cf3348a676d62",
            "input": "A comedy that worked surprisingly well was the little British effort \"The Divorce Of Lady X (1938)\" . It marks the first pairing of Laurence Olivier and Merle Oberon, before that little film about uncontrollable passion on the 19th century English moors. And while Olivier and Oberon are not particularly well-suited to screwball comedy, it all flows along nicely. Oberon is Leslie, a young woman who ends up in priggish divorce lawyer Logan's (Olivier) hotel suite by way of a nasty English fog preventing travel. She does everything possible to irritate him--but, in the crazy way films go, he falls for her. And she falls for him. But a serious case of mistaken identity occurs when Oberon's \"Lady X\" (that's all she leaves Oliver in a note) is thought by Olivier to be a married woman. To make matters worse, and more amusing, Lord Mere (Ralph Richardson) goes to Olivier wanting a divorce from his wife whom dear Larry thinks must be Oberon! There is some nice battle-of-the-sexes dialogue, and fun exploration of sexual politics. You can see that Olivier is not too confident with the comedy, but in true Olivier he's a consummate professional, and delivers. And he handles the screwball twists and turns, maybe not with ease, but with gusto. Oberon was no great shakes as an actress, but she was usually competent enough, and despite their reputed off-screen dislike of her, worked well with Olivier. This was filmed in early Technicolour that looks very primitive today (everyone looks even whiter than Michael Jackson), but perhaps the print needs cleaning up.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b3a6a5b22534573a94571481ccdd2ad",
            "input": "A delightfully unpretentious send up of Romeo and Juliet. Approach with no expectations other than having a good time and you will enjoy this one. A talented group of comic actors let go and have a riot in this light-hearted performers' vehicle. Bad reviews were due to a snobbishness about treatments of Shakespeare. Some people feel that all film must be \"important\" ---If you share those views, don't bother. The credits read \"introducing\" Angelina Jolie, which is not even close to being true, but she is astoundingly beautiful as the Juliet character, and, as always, her acting is wonderful--- and, considering her age at the time, even her dialect is pretty good. Recreating this classic tale with feuding Italian families in the catering business in New York results in great fun. See it in the right frame of mind and you will laugh out loud.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1cd4006defbe4dccbe897b65c14ce753",
            "input": "\"A Guy Thing\" may not be a classic, but it sure is a good, funny comedy. The plot focuses on Paul (Jason Lee), who wakes up the morning after his bachelor party with no memory and Becky (Julia Stiles) lying naked in his bed. Before he can figure out what happened, he rushes Becky out of his apartment because his fiance Karen (Selma Blair) is coming. After that, as you could imagine, chaos ensues.Almost every single scene in \"A Guy Thing\" delivers loud laughs. The funniest moments come from when Paul imagines what could happen if he tells Karen. Selma Blair is a truly talented comedian, and the worst thing about this film is that she goes underused. Although, she turns out to be more funny than Stiles' character, who actually isn't that interesting. Of course, not every comedy is perfect.As I said, \"A Guy Thing\" is no classic, but it's not bad either, 7/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22fac8be6db7474baea2cfa7e464b068",
            "input": "This is a movie about animal cruelty. Under the guise of a marathon race, we see depictions of extreme animal abuse, including literally running a horse to death IN SLOW MOTION. The guy who did this then has his conscience spiritually cleansed by the flames from the burial/burning of the horse, which of course is still dead, having been tortured to death. This is one of the sickest, slimiest movies I've ever had the displeasure of viewing. As Gene Hackman and James Coburn near the finish line on their DYING animals, we're supposed to admire their spirit for finishing the race. I'd like to put the producers and director in a marathon race; I'll decide when they're finished, probably about 20 minutes after they stop breathing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c059d5dfe2214594a4b1c8b1dcf3bbf5",
            "input": "I read the reviews before i watched this movie, and i didn't believe them. I love crap movies and i expected this one to be average. It wasn't. This film makes Camp Blood 1 and 2 look like greats. The film contains bad acting, poor sound, poor confusing storyline, bad makeup- and it bored me so much i turned it off. even the nudity was rubbish! Did they even have a budget for this film? I don't think they did. You can tell if your gonna like this film or not in the first 5 minutes. if u want a good cheesy gory film go watch toxic avenger 4 or even camp blood. Avoid this trash - I watched it on TV and felt riped off, so don't spend anything on it. The best part is probably the end.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d57b1482567c4c2197affee22193730c",
            "input": "Remade today, this film would be a very creepy, very disturbing dark comedy. Stalking, obsession, and a web of lies and manipulations are given a 1948 gloss of aren't-they-cute harmlessness. Drake plays the stalker, an unabashed user of people, alternately pathetic and manipulative, Grant plays the stalking victim, alternately angry and oblivious.Vastly disturbing; I haven't been able to look at classic romances with the same suspension of disbelief since.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9dc2b7610c7e4a87835faef93781f6fd",
            "input": "This kind of film has become old hat by now, hasn't it? The whole thing is syrupy nostalgia turned in upon itself in some kind of feedback loop.It sure sounds like a good idea: a great ensemble cast, some good gags, and some human drama about what could have/might have been. Unfortunately, there is no central event that binds them all together, like there was in \"The Big Chill\", one of those seminal movies that spawned copycat films like this one. You end up wanting to see more of one or two particular people instead of getting short takes on everyone. The superficiality this creates is not just annoying, it's maddening. The below-average script doesn't help.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4cab19aaf4db474897bbf5a73beee434",
            "input": "Remembering the dirty particulars of this insidiously vapid \"movie\" is akin to digging into your chest cavity with a rusty, salted spoon. Perhaps \"Home Alone 2: Lost in New York\" (1992) was a bit on the predictable side, but this pathetic excuse for a film is just one of the most shameless bids at commercialization I have ever heard of. A boy fighting off spies/terrorists when he's home alone in a Chicago suburb with the chickenpox? Ridiculous! Why did this film have to be made? I am the kind of person who believes even terrible movies are not wastes of time, but rather learning experiences. However, this is actually a waste of time. It should be avoided at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21b4aaad9b85422dafcddbad75267f46",
            "input": "Michael Is King. This film contains some of the best stuff Mike has ever done. Smooth Criminal is pure genius. The cameos are wonderful, but as always, the main event is MJ himself. He is the best, hands down.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a02ea5c4cdd4cd1bda40bb3d07d0671",
            "input": "Another Aussie masterpiece, this delves into the world of the unknown and the supernatural, and it does very well. It doesn't resort to the big special effects overkill like American flicks, it focuses more on emotional impact. A relatively simple plot that Rebecca Gibney & Co. bring to life. It follows the story of a couple who buy an old house that was supposedly home to a very old woman who never went outside, and whose husband disappeared in mysterious circumstances a century ago. Strange things begin to happen in the house, and John Adam begins to turn into the man who disappeared, who was actually a mass murderer. Highly recommended. 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d371fa1369664f2280031743ff9c3e3c",
            "input": "I was also on hand for the premiere in Toronto. This film was sort of a consolation when I thought I wouldn't be able to get in to see my first choice. Well, I was totally blown away. By the time I got to the theater I could remember little other than the basic plot of the movie (yes, I actually forgot who was even in it.) Terrific performances from the entire cast. Carrie-Anne Moss was great in a true departure from her days as Trinity. As for Billy Connolly, I think not since Chaplin has an actor played so brilliantly with no lines what-so-ever. The kids were also great. Definitely check this one out if you get the chance.And, by the way, I got to see my first choice anyway- and this was way better.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce2ad1638a0341e6b9316d8027b3e93a",
            "input": "An excellent cast makes this movie work; all of the characters are developed exceedingly well and it's clear that the actors enjoyed filming this movie.It's not quite the comedy I expected, much more a lighthearted look at the attempt to reclaim youthful glory than bawdy humor. For music fans there are quite a few subtle references that in themselves are intelligently funny.I hate drawing direct comparisons to other movies, but so much of this movie reminded me of Alan Parker films I can't help it: imagine if The Commitments actually did make it big -- and then tried to recapture said glory 25 years later.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56fc20a29422412aaff1969553ec2515",
            "input": "I don't normally feel much of an incentive to comment on films I don't like, but in a case like this one, I just have to say something. This movie is terrible, illogical, and stupid. There are so many flaws in the storytelling that I don't even feel obliged to elaborate on because it's time for me to move on from this experience. The most annoying point is, however, that at no point in the film does anyone explain whether the motivations for Bacon's character's madness are due to a power trip or a physiological reaction to his condition.Granted the special effects are impressive, and in the past Paul Verhoeven has done some good stuff (the director's cut of Robocop on DVD is great). However, this movie is stupid and generally doesn't come near to explaining the point or technical aspect of the subject matter, and instead settles for predictable action without any enjoyment. In short, as many other reviews here say (wish I had read them before...) - Stay away from this film!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e1f869172164ed49860e0f4434dcf35",
            "input": "This is an awful film. Yea the girls are pretty but its not very good. The plot having a cowboy get involved with an Indian maiden would be interesting if the sex didn't get in the way. Well, okay it might be interesting, but its not, because its so badly paced and and only partly acted. I can only imagine what the close ups of the dancing tushes looked like on a big screen, probably more laughable then they do on TV. (I won't even mention the topless knife fight between two women who are tied together and spend the whole thing chest to chest. Never read about that in the old west) This is a film that requires liberal use of fast forward.I like schlock films but this is ridiculous. There is a reason that I don't go for this sort of films and that they tend not be very good, the plot taking a back seat to breasts. The original nudie cuties as they are called were originally nudist films or films where there was no touching but as the adult industry began to grow the film makers either tried to be clever or tried to exploit something else in order to put butts in seats. The clever ones were very few which only left hacks who were of limited talent. The comedies often came off best with the humor approaching the first grade level, infantile but harmlessly fun. Something that could rarely be said about any other genre cross dressed as a nudie.The Ramrodder looks good and has a couple of nice pieces but its done in by being neither western nor sex film.I need not watch this again.Of interest to probably no one, the rapist and killer in the film was played by Bobby Beausoleil, a member of the Manson family who was arrested for murdering a school teacher not long after filming wrapped.Obviously these sort of things will ruin some peoples lives.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13909329e55448469bb1ef46a9f049cf",
            "input": "Good performances can't save this terrible script, larded with every cliche in the chick-flick book. Both main characters are deeply unsympathetic, and the scene where Laura Linney's character reminisces about sex with her dead husband in front of her teenage son -- which I think is supposed to be poignant -- is just horrifying.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3452a25f192474d87e0a16ec3c7e8d2",
            "input": "Fear of a black hat is a hilarious spoof of Hip-Hop culture. It is just as funny as This Is Spinal Tap, if not funnier. The actors are incredible and the documentary style is superb. Mark Christopher Lawrence is a tremendous talent that should be starring in a lot more films. This film is a true cult classic!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95e1c036490144c39f3b40061f4388cf",
            "input": "I saw a preview of Freebird at the Isle of Man TT as i had heard about it in a couple of motorcycle mags. Although i was over mainly for the racing, the lure of seeing Phil Daniels in a motorcycle movie (yes i love Quadrophenia like everyone else) proved enough to get me away from the beer and partying. At last! we've done it! us British have actually made a great motorcycle film (and no it's not like Torque) this is up there with the best of British comedy. Mark my words, this is Phil Daniels best screen performance, and as far as Geoff Bell is concerned, there's a new British legend making his name felt. I loved Gary Stretch in Shane Meadows' fantastic Dead Mans Shoes and here he gives a quietly touching performance that he can proudly add to his growing film reputation. This is a film not just for us Bikers, but I think for everyone (even my girlfriend loved it). I hope it gets the same brilliant response on the mainland as it got at the Isle of Man. I'm not going to go into the details of certain classic scenes that this movie has, (watch out for the shop), as it would spoil the fun, but i would say, go see, enjoy, and have one of the best nights in the cinema you've had in a while. I really think this could well be a cult classic. As they were saying at the TT... C'Mon Freebird!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ebf9651b5284498988adb4935cc9879",
            "input": "I hate to throw out lines like this, but in this case I feel like I have to: the American remake of THE GRUDGE is by far the worst film I have seen in theaters in the last 5 years. There, I said it. And now that I have gotten that out of my system, please let me explain why.\"When someone dies in the grip of a powerful rage, a curse is born. The curse gathers in that place of death. Those who encounter it will be consumed by its fury.\" That is the premise of THE GRUDGE and I will admit it sounds intriguing. Unfortunately, the filmmakers take it no further. Those who encounter the \"curse\" are indeed consumed by its fury and that is all you get. You want more? Well too bad. Some critics and fans are pointing out that the sole purpose of THE GRUDGE is to scare you. The problem is that when there is no plot to speak of, creepy images and sounds can only go so far. Director Takashi Shimizu, pulling a George Sluizer and remaking his own original film(s), valiantly attempts to build atmosphere in the first hour – by repeating the same scene over and over and over and over. It pretty much unfolds like this:-person walks into house-something flashes by the camera and/or a strange sound is heard -person goes to investigate-sound starts to get loud-person sees a ghost-loud scream and/or cat screech-cut to blackBefore the audience is even given a hint of plot, this exact same scenario unfolds 5 times in the first hour. The first time was actually somewhat creepy. Each subsequent use became laughable as the film went on. By the time the end of the film rolled around, my friend and I were laughingly wondering if this scene would end \"with a loud scream and a cut to black.\" We were never proved wrong.The film has no liner storyline, instead unfolding in a series of vignettes that leave the audience jumbled. I have no problem with non-linear storytelling when it is done right. The film jumps from time period to time period with no rhyme or reason. I haven't seen a movie in such a state since the opening of the theatrical version of HIGHLANDER 2. And this storytelling technique mars any sort of mystery that film could have possibly had. If you already know the ghosts have scared two characters to death, how is it shocking when their bodies are found in the attic? And why should we care when a detective tries to investigate the mysterious disappearances when we already know what happened to everyone?Obviously greenlit the second the American version of THE RING made $15 million its first weekend, THE GRUDGE is nothing but calculated imitation disguised as an actual movie. The scariest things about THE GRUDGE are that it made $40 million dollars its first weekend and some people consider it the \"scariest movie ever made.\" I wonder what happens to those who get consumed by the fury of paying to see THE GRUDGE?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ea761fd259d4a388f4ac9a95e11e9c1",
            "input": "I question the motive of the creators of this fictional account of the BTK killer's motives. Are they attempting to portray animal rights activists as sick monsters? Who is responsible for this? Don't they think the people involved with this monster are hurting enough? What a blatant disrespect and exploitation of the victims! It was like a personality experiment: What disturbs you more, the slaughterhouse or the human murders? They used actual names of some of the victims....this movie was hideous, disrespectful and insulting! The creators of this movie used this tragedy for their own agenda! People need to awaken and redraw the line!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df89919c105d41d4988073f8bd6bfb26",
            "input": "Not sure if this counts as a spoiler or not, so beware:Just a small but crucial thing to watch for, an intriguing possibility: the boys steal a green Citroen at one point, for a joy ride, and return it to the owner having done purposeful and vengeful hidden damage to the car, hoping that the owner will crash. Is it the very same car they steal much later from the picnicking family? We know the original owner sold it. They drive off at the end on a dangerous road, one which I understand has been closed to all but pedestrians for the last ten years. A whole new slant to the end of the film.On another matter, this film could have been called \"Scent of a Woman\". I don't recall another film, certainly not American, that treats the scent of a woman in such a frank and open manner, much like the \"nose\" of a fine Bordeaux.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f7f49aa3bdb45f0a47e0c5f7a22a457",
            "input": "Silent Night, Deadly Night 5 is the very last of the series, and like part 4, it's unrelated to the first three except by title and the fact that it's a Christmas-themed horror flick.Except to the oblivious, there's some obvious things going on here...Mickey Rooney plays a toymaker named Joe Petto and his creepy son's name is Pino. Ring a bell, anyone? Now, a little boy named Derek heard a knock at the door one evening, and opened it to find a present on the doorstep for him. Even though it said \"don't open till Christmas\", he begins to open it anyway but is stopped by his dad, who scolds him and sends him to bed, and opens the gift himself. Inside is a little red ball that sprouts Santa arms and a head, and proceeds to kill dad. Oops, maybe he should have left well-enough alone. Of course Derek is then traumatized by the incident since he watched it from the stairs, but he doesn't grow up to be some killer Santa, he just stops talking.There's a mysterious stranger lurking around, who seems very interested in the toys that Joe Petto makes. We even see him buying a bunch when Derek's mom takes him to the store to find a gift for him to bring him out of his trauma. And what exactly is this guy doing? Well, we're not sure but he does seem to be taking these toys apart to see what makes them tick. He does keep his landlord from evicting him by promising him to pay him in cash the next day and presents him with a \"Larry the Larvae\" toy for his kid, but of course \"Larry\" is not a good toy and gets out of the box in the car and of course, well, things aren't pretty.Anyway, eventually what's going on with Joe Petto and Pino is of course revealed, and as with the old story, Pino is not a \"real boy\". Pino is probably even more agitated and naughty because he suffers from \"Kenitalia\" (a smooth plastic crotch) so that could account for his evil ways. And the identity of the lurking stranger is revealed too, and there's even kind of a happy ending of sorts. Whee.A step up from part 4, but not much of one. Again, Brian Yuzna is involved, and Screaming Mad George, so some decent special effects, but not enough to make this great. A few leftovers from part 4 are hanging around too, like Clint Howard and Neith Hunter, but that doesn't really make any difference. Anyway, I now have seeing the whole series out of my system. Now if I could get some of it out of my brain. 4 out of 5.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6602cf22f469409893a6eb44a5d9cd0f",
            "input": "... and I have seen some bad ones.I have nothing good to say about this movie. The acting is poor by Jennifer Tilly - as to be expected. Daryl Hannah does an OK job, but nothing close to being able to save this movie.The biggest flaw in this film is that the plot is so weak - though based on a good premise - that the writer resorted to the \"stupid heroine trick\" to create a contrived suspense. When all Daryl Hannah would have to do is hide, she runs out in front of her pursuer. The hospital scene is absurd. Without exposing too much of what passes for a plot, I think it would be difficult for a bloody petite woman to carry a pregnant from a hospital without being noticed. Lame. Very lame.Save yourself some time and pick out another flick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5628e3e6cc86435d9951e5ccd3f57bcb",
            "input": "One of the great mysteries of life, suffered from daily, is why nice girls so often are more interested in the jerks and heels than in the nice guys.Worse, when the nice guys even want to marry those girls, the girls STILL prefer the jerks and heels, even after the jerks and heels have shown their contempt, have shown they're just interested in using the girls.Stu Erwin is the nice guy, who continues to be nice after being lied to and cheated and even after losing the girl completely.Clark Gable is the jerk, and he is perfect in the role, rather a sad note to his fans.Jean Harlow comes across as a more slender Mae West, even sounding like La West in some of her cynical throwaway lines.Somewhat puzzling is that so many of the other characters, intended to be bad guys -- I mean, heck, they're locked up, so they must be -- are so obviously nice people.In fact, there are lots of nice people here, people who, in a lesser film or story, would be snarling and back-stabbing but here go out of their way to help someone else.So, maybe the story is rather clichéd, at least by modern standards, but ultimately the viewer will be glad to have watched.The biggest complaint I have is that so many really good actors are not given credit. Once again, we can say a fervent \"Thank You\" to IMDb.com.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72c5fe4560ae4b12bc2df795830a5bb5",
            "input": "I found the DVD version of this movie at a rummage sale. The basic premise is an affair between a teacher/coach a student. The acting is weak and the plot razor thin.This movie had all the depth and plot development of an adult film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bfb72fea3ddf46ac8511bf1703d5d6cf",
            "input": "This is a mildly interesting late 80's gore fest featuring some nasty slugs with a taste for human blood. If you can get past the ridiculousness of the whole thing you might actually get some minor enjoyment out of this. The acting is awful and the plot is simply there to hold the movie together between gory slug attacks, but the movie isn't a complete waste of time. The special effects are actually quite good, and the gore is well done. It reminded me of the remake of the Blob, probably because of the sliminess of it all. All in all, you could certainly do worse with an hour and a half of your time, but I wouldn't suggest seeing this movie unless you've got a strong stomach and are into this sort of thing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d94aaa2f1db14b7fa781747905024c03",
            "input": "If you came into the film with expectations, throw them away now, because no amount of hype will do this film justice.To categorize this film into a single genre would be criminal. It's a spy thriller, has elements of noir, bits and pieces of action, science fiction, and cyberpunk all tied together with a brilliant narrative, mind-bending plot twists, and gorgeous cinematography.A lot of the comments here have centered around it being derivative, both in good and bad ways, of other movies. But as they say, every story cribs from Shakespeare, so once you can get past that, you're in for a hell of a ride.You will need to suspend your disbelief at some points, and while the set never becomes unbelievable, there are portions (read: the elevator) which suffer from a low budget and somewhat cheesy visuals. Don't misconstrue that to mean it's on the same level as cheesy Sci-Fi channel movies, though, because this is on a much higher level.If you're looking for action, you should turn away. This is pure psychology. But if you're willing to sit down and devote a good 90 minutes of your life to a novel cinematic experience, by all means, DO IT NOW! Watch this movie now before it becomes cool to have seen it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc1cac4a2e7e4c36a888b50d876a316a",
            "input": "What can one say about Elvira that hasn't already been said in the world's press? The classic comedienne that IS Elvira delivers in her first full-length big budget comedy masterpiece.From the very first movie frame thingy, Elvira packs an acting punch that clearly says Film Great....eat your heart out, Bette Davis! See a forlorn Elvira, see an excitable Elvira, see a jealous Elvira, see a murderous Elvira. You can do nothing but marvel at her acting prowess!At the heart of this comedy masterpiece is Elvira's desire for Las Vegas show stardom. Despite putting \"the boob back in the boobtube\" as a horror hostess (with the mostest), Elvira finds the small screen constrictive emotionally....and PHYSICALLY! Nuff said, she packs up her kitbag and heads East....a hotdog in one hand and a letter from her Aunt's lawyer outlining her inheritance 'windfall' in the other.I've seen this movie so many times, I can almost recite it verbatim....(verbatim would just be showing off)!Grab a copy, laugh yourself silly, learn the lines....Why she didn't win the Best Actress Oscar for this role is beyond me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd8957f4a8ce495fa6e97c6c347f04e5",
            "input": "I can't believe this movie managed to get such a relatively high rating of 6! It is barely watchable and unbelievably boring, certainly one of the worst films I have seen in a long, long time.In a no-budget way, it reminded me of Star Wars Episodes I and II for the sheer impression that you are watching a total creative train wreck.This film should be avoided at all costs. It's one of those \"festival films\" that only please the pseudo-intellectuals because they are so badly made those people think it makes it \"different\", therefore good.Bad film-making is not \"different\", it's just bad film-making.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdf0307e27f54cdbb58677b4e6cf1204",
            "input": "Well, this movie started out funny but quickly deteriorated. I thought it would be more 'adult oriented' humor based on the first few moments but then the movie switched into a bad made-for-Disney Channel type mode, especially a go-kart racing scene that was incredibly long. Alana De La Garza is gorgeous but has a really fake Italian accent. The movie looked and sounded very independent and low budget. There was one very cute moment which I'll just call the serenading scene but overall this one was a yawner. The laughs are very few and far between. The end surprise for \"Mr. Fix It\" is so ridiculous it left me more mad than anything else. Might be worth a look if you can catch it for free or TV but don't waste your money buying or renting this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b291b8572584f73a94425a770106f44",
            "input": "i can't say i liked this movie very much.it has some amusing moments,but it doesn't seem able to make up its mind whether it is a comedy or a drama.it doesn't really work as either.it's too light in tone to be a drama,and the amusing moments are few and far between.it also doesn't make a lot of sense.things seem to happen for no reason.and it's also extremely convoluted.i feel like they just made things up as they were going.if they had just taken a bit of time to explain things,this might have been a better movie.i would say the ending was anti climatic, but that would mean the rest of the movie had actually been building up to something,which it didn't.it just sorts ends,and that's that.i didn't find it boring,really,but like i said,there there just isn't any point.i'll give Winter Kills a reluctant and weak 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c14fd140af0a4fd6a28bacae6d644694",
            "input": "Poor Will would be rolling over in his grave if he could this this horiible German-TV adaptaion of his classic play. It's obvious that very little money was spent on it. A stage riser, a catwalk and some randomly placed columns pass off as a set. The movie was ineptly dubbed into English, with the English voice actors occasionally mumbling their lines. The whole production had an incredibly dark and dreary feel to it. And just where was Fonterbras in this movie anyway? MST3K gave this sorry production the treatment it justly deserved.To be or not to be? I wish this movie never was in the first place.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9856e89ac9db418fab0ba21db3c7ff0b",
            "input": "This is how movies are supposed to be made: a fascinating setting; characters about whom you come to care deeply; writing and editing that move the plot efficiently and build suspense. This is a wonderful film -- deeply moving without being sentimental. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-415f0276161d40b69577b9676f17f3fa",
            "input": "This is my first movie review on IMDb. I was forced to register after watching this movie. I cannot in good conscience allow this movie to be unreviewed by me. The people must be warned!First of all, my rating is: 0 (as in \"zero\")I love Jack Black, Ben Stiller, Rachel Weis, and Christopher Walken, and yet, I hated this movie. There is a plot, but who cares when there's no script. The dialogue is unreal and plain boring, the situations are contrived, the flow of events is slow and somewhat arbitrary, the characters are unsympathetic and uninteresting, and the story, although based on a good premise, is stupid. This movie is a piece of poo.Never mind wasting MONEY on this movie, it's not even worth your TIME spent watching it. Please do not see it... I beg of you!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-285ef8d67c0d4ac88b0fb246e72763fe",
            "input": "this movie is practically impossible to describe. the alternate title \"Don't Look Up\" is a lot more descriptive. Like most Japanese cinema, the story is not as linear as American. The story revolves around a director who is filming a story about a ww2 deserter. The set is haunted(?) by an actress who died(?) during the filming of a tv show back in the 60s. the director is the ONLY one who saw this show. if you have seen Ringu (the director Hideo Nakata is the same) and liked it, you'll like ghost actress. i loved ghost actress a lot more than ringu. a truly scary and disturbing movie. a 10!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f749e10aa4e42b3a4c8fa2443e285df",
            "input": "This movie captures the essence of growing up in smalltown America for a young girl on her own. The realism and subtle nuances, offered to Ashley Judd's character, Ruby, by the storyline, capture what can only be described as a true to life setting in the panhandle of Florida. From the slam of a screen door, to the lack of work, the echoes of what life is really like on the \"red-neck riviera\" provide rough choices for the young girl. Paradise did not come easy. But she slowly overcomes obstacles and deceit, and learns to be her own woman, with a strength that flows from within. Ashley Judd's winning smile, and infectious gait exude warmth and command respect and admiration. The careful pace of the character development resembles that of \"Ulee's Gold\" in 1997, starring Peter Fonda, and also directed by Victor Nunez.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-85874d5886d847aba3f72e56cd0bb114",
            "input": "When I rented this movie to watch it, I knew that it was not going to be a mindbender movie. Instead I thought of it as a disbelief of reality where someone is going to get a serious beating. And you know what it worked. Kurt Russel did what I though was a remarkable role in showing the emotionless soldier that he was. I recommend this movie if your out with the boys and want to watch a good action film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f3b8216326240cf8550def8a580c477",
            "input": "The movie had a cute opening, I truly believed I was in for one of the best romantic comedies i've seen in a while... there was something particular \"foreign\" about the way the movie was set up, realistic yet somewhat abstract and mystical. But then the story line started becoming more and more unrealistic. To say that the ending was CORNY and PREDICTABLE would almost be an understatement... The most typical romantic ending where everything goes great for every 'likable' character. A scene where the main character realises that he has made a mistake and chases the \"woman of his dreams\" only to confess his love for her in front of a sympathetic crowd of on- lookers. Come on. In the end, the 'good guys' win, 'bad guys' loose... You get the picture. A WASTE of a potentially interesting movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a138dbbae6dc4ac6ac2f78634f034eb4",
            "input": "A number of brides are mysteriously murdered while at the altar, and later their bodies are stolen en route to the morgue. Newspaper writer Patricia Hunter decides to investigate these mysterious killings. She discovers that right before each ceremony, the bride was given a rare orchid (supposedly from the groom) which contained a powerful drug that succumbed them. Patricia is told that the orchid was first grown by a Dr. Lorenz, who lives in a secluded estate, with his wife. In reality, Dr. Lorenz is responsible for the crimes, by putting the brides in a suspended state, and using their gland fluid to keep his wife eternally young. Patricia, along with Dr. Foster (who is working with Dr. Lorenz on the medical mystery surrounding his wife) try to force Dr. Lorenz's hand by setting up a phony wedding, which eventually leads Patricia into the mad doctor's clutches. This movie had a very good opening reel, but basically ended up with too many establishing shots and other weak scenes. The cast is decent, Walters and Coffin deserved better, but that's life. Russell steals the show (even out hamming Lugosi- who does not give one of his more memorable performances, even considering his Monograms) as Countess Lorenz playing the role with the qualities of many of the stereotypical characteristics of many of today's Hollywood prima donnas. Weak and contrived ending as well. Rating, based on B movies, 4.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56f9eb6e6ff04e90b5d156e25bf13b9e",
            "input": "There are probably more people afraid of the dentist than of, let's say, little monsters or scary looking dolls. Which makes it a perfect subject for a horror movie, really.Dr. Feinstone (Corbin Bernsen) has been a successful dentist for several years now, but when he catches his wife cheating on him with the poolguy he snaps, and he brings his anger and frustration to his work. Well, give a mad dentist a drill and a mouth, and you can probably guess what happens next...As I said, brilliant idea but not delivered as well as it should. In particular the ending is a huge let down. Last note: watch for Mark Ruffalo (You Can Count On Me, Eternal Sunshine...) in this one.5/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b21cdd9ed3c43dd8c81c47b8b24aebd",
            "input": "Although this was obviously a low-budget production, the performances and the songs in this movie are worth seeing. One of Walken's few musical roles to date. (he is a marvelous dancer and singer and he demonstrates his acrobatic skills as well - watch for the cartwheel!) Also starring Jason Connery. A great children's story and very likable characters.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33ef997d458e4affac4b0e48934c8dd1",
            "input": "In a far away Galaxy is a planet called Ceta. It's native people worship cats. But the dog people wage war upon these feline loving people and they have no choice but to go to Earth and grind people up for food. This is one of the stupidest f#@k!ng ideas for a movie I've seen. Leave it to Ted Mikels to make a movie more incompetent than the already low standard he set in previous films. It's like he enjoying playing in a celluloid game of Limbo. How low can he go? The only losers in the scenario are US the viewer. Mr. Mikels and his silly little handlebar mustache actually has people who STILL buy this crap.My Grade: F DVD Extras: Commentary by Ted Mikels; the Story behind the Making of (9 and a half minutes); 17 minutes, 15 seconds of Behind the scenes footage; Ted Mikels filmography; and Trailers for \"The Worm Eaters\" \"Girl in Gold Boots\", \"the Doll Squad\", \"Ten Violent Women\" (featuring nudity), \"Blood Orgy of the She Devils\", & \"the Corpse Grinders\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8274faf087b849e3b6fdb131066b1ff0",
            "input": "\"El Mar\" directed by Catalonian director Agusti Villarona, and based on the novel by Blai Bonet, offers a glimpse of the Spanish history as seen by a Balearic author that takes the viewer back to the days of the civil war in that country. The movie concentrates on three friends, and follows them from those early days during the onset of the war in Majorca, to a few years later as two of those friends meet again when they are at a sanatorium, lost in the countryside.We first meet three boys that are playing happily. Not everything is what it seems. The tragic death of one of them points out about the cruelty of the one that commits the evil deed. The boys have excluded a young girl, about their age, from taking part in their games.When we meet the adult Ramallo again, he is on his way to a sanatorium. He seems to be suffering from tuberculosis. To his surprise, Manuel Tur, one of his boyhood friends is also being treated, and the young girl that was not welcomed to participate in their games is now one of the nuns that supervise their health care. It is obvious that Tur looks at Ramallo in a way that only means he is in love with the tough bully. Their relationship will have devastating consequences.Roger Casamajor does a good job with portraying the older Ramallo. Bruno Bergonzino makes an impression as Tur, the vulnerable youth. Antonia Torrens plays Sor Francisca with conviction. Angela Molina, puts an appearance as Carmen, the wife of the caretaker of the institution. Simon Andreu is perfect as Alcantara.\"El Mar\" is a dark film that clearly shows Agusti Villarona's talents in making the novel come alive for the viewer.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3ce7217005849048439e08ccf53bfae",
            "input": "Billy Crystal normally brings the crowd to laughter, but in this movie he and all the rest of them cannot bring any smile on my face.... or perhaps just one. They call it comedy, I say it's a waste of my time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dc8a122cba84f5ba324067f5e365ef1",
            "input": "This is supposed to be well-researched and based on fact. How come therefore that it's so packed with McGovernisms. Did the people of Derry live in some kind of bizarre Philip K. Dick world in which reality was uncannily like Cracker/ Liam/ Priest? Or is McGovern an idle hack who just keeps repeating hims",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e921553fd1544e9a75076b658802dbc",
            "input": "A meteorite falls in the country of a small town, bringing a jelly creature. An old farmer is attacked by the alien in his hand, and the youths Steve Andrews (Steve McQueen) and his girlfriend Jane Martin (Aneta Corsaut) take him to Dr. T. Hallen (Steven Chase). The local doctor treats carefully the blister, and asks Steve to investigate the location where they found the old man. When Steve returns, he sees the blob killing the doctor. Steve and Jane try to warn the police and the dwellers, but nobody believe on them, while the blob engulfs many people, getting bigger and bigger.\"The Blob\" is a cult and classic sci-fi. It is a low budget movie, with many ham actors and actresses (with the exception of Steve McQueen), awful effects, but also delightful and very, but very funny. This is the first time that I see this classic (I had seen the 1988 remake with Kevin Dillon), and I really recommend it to fans of Steve McQueen and sci-fi B-movies from the 50s. The film subject of my review number 1,400 could not be better. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): \"A Bolha\" (\"The Blob\")",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad6bdec578e342f4b92998f4a4b0eeee",
            "input": "What an awful movie. I love monster flicks but I couldn't watch even half of the terrible acting, cardboard characters and abysmal special effects. There is nothing redeeming about this movie. The characters come from either an endless supply of suicidally stupid cannon fodder or else they are vacuous, uninspiring sock puppets. The plot is formulaic, cut and paste, standard science-run-amok drivel. Even the CGI is horrible. You know it's bad when you can't even depend on the movie to provide some good eye candy. No surprises here,just same old same old. This is truly one of the worst films ever made. Director Roger Corman should be hung from a lightpost so that children can use him as a pinata.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b2ae77cc09540138e748c06730a92c6",
            "input": "Atlantis is probally the best Disney movie that i have seen in years. It has great action scene, magic, an intelligent and weel written script. Atlantis, brings back the magic of the Disney Classics such as \"The Lion King\" or \"Alladin\". After Seeing this one i'm sure that this year summer blockbusters season will be great.I recommend to you all, \"Alantis : The Lost Empire is like a breath of inspiration.9 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c20dced12d74a0cac30520307d5bf88",
            "input": "This is a really fun, breezy, light hearted romantic comedy. You cannot go wrong with Meg Ryan's cute perkiness combined with Albert Einstein's genius. Normally, I'm not a fan of completely fabricated fictional tales about actual people, now deceased and not able to defend themselves, but I think the late Einstein might himself have gotten a chuckle out of this one.It's the 1950's...Princeton, New Jersey in the spring. The story revolves around a pretty, young, scatter brained mathematician, Catherine (Meg Ryan), who is all set to marry a stuffy jerk, a behavioral researcher named James, merely because he has the brains she's looking for in the father of her future children. However, it's love at first sight when her car breaks and she meets an auto mechanic named Ed (Tim Robbins). As she doesn't think Ed is intelligent enough, her uncle, none other than Albert Einstein, plays match maker, assisted in his endeavors by three mischievous cronies, all theoretical physicists. Uncle Albert must make Ed appear suitably smart, so concocts a charade portraying him as a physicist...naturally with amusing results.Walter Matthau is his usual hilarious self, and pulls off the character of Einstein quite effectively. With his three professorial buddies, Kurt, Nathan, and Boris, a lot of laughs ensue. The real Einstein had a genuine human side and this film just takes it one (outrageous) step further. If you suspend all logic, you can almost imagine this silly story happening!It might not be rocket science (despite its main character) but it is a wonderful sweet, refreshing movie. One of the best of the comedy romance genre.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87e1f0540b704a7fad9b1857f8c2571e",
            "input": "I can't believe this is on DVD. Even less it was available at my local video store.Some argue this is a good movie if you take in consideration it had only a 4000$ budget. I find this funny. I would find it very bad whichever the budget.Still more funny, I read the following in another review: \"Dramatics aside, if you love horror and you love something along the lines of Duel (1971) updated with a little more story and some pretty girls thrown in, you'll love this movie.\"What?!? This is a shame comparing those two movies.I give a \"1\", since I can't give a \"0\". I just don't see any way this movie could be entertaining.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce0afef8b0fe4f7087707e9fc8cea764",
            "input": "After the failure of \"The Crusades\" at the box office, Cecil B. DeMille stopped doing films about non-American history. His films for the next thirteen years were about our history from Jean Lafitte to World War II (Dr. Wassell). The first in order of production was this film, starring Gary Cooper as Wild Bill Hickok, with Jean Arthur as Calamity Jane. James Ellison was Buffalo Bill, John Miljan (not a villain as usual) was General George A. Custer, and Anthony Quinn was one of the Indians who fought at Little Big Horn. The villains were led by Charles Bickford (selling arms to the Indians) and Porter Hall as Jack McCall (who killed Wild Bill Hickok).Basically the film takes up the history of the U.S. after the Civil War. Lincoln is shown at the start talking about what is the next step now that Lee has surrendered. Lincoln talks about the need to secure the west (more about this point later). Then he announces he has to go to the theater. That April 14th must have been very busy for Abe - in \"Virginia City\" he grants a pardon to Errol Flynn at the request of Miriam Hopkins on the same date.Actually, while Lincoln was concerned about the West, his immediate thoughts on the last day of his Presidency were about reunifying the former Confederate states and it's citizens into the Union as soon as possible. It was Reconstruction that occupied his attention, not the west (except for the problems of Maximillian and his French controlled forces in Mexico against Juarez). But he had been involved in actual problems with the West. In 1862 he sent disgraced General John Pope, the loser at Second Manassas, to Minnesota to put down a serious Indian war by the Sioux (the subject of McKinley Kantor's novel, \"Sprit Lake\". Pope, incompetent against Lee and Jackson, turned out to be quite effective here, and the revolt was smashed.However, with all Lincoln's actual attention to western problems, it is doubtful that he says (as Cooper repeats at least once), \"The frontier should be secure.\" There is nothing to say he could not have said it, but it is hardly a profound pronouncement by a leading statesman. Like saying, Teddy Roosevelt said, \"Eat a good breakfast every morning for your health.\" It is not a profound statement of policy. It is, at best, a statement of recognizable fact. Cooper turning it into a minor mantra, like Lincoln's version of the Monroe Doctrine, is ridiculous...typical of the way DeMille's scripts have really bad errors of common sense in them.However, this is not a ruinous mistake. \"The Plainsman\" is an adventure film, and as such it has the full benefit of DeMille the film creator of spectacle. As such it is well worth watching. But not as a textbook on Lincoln's political ideas or his quotable legacy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d30409f78ecc4f5d88fb9860c436e392",
            "input": "When i first saw the title i was already deducing the theme of the film - it clearly wasn't a reference to British currency, so it had to be Shakespearian and about pounds of flesh - taking them, or giving them. Will Smith's a feelgood actor, so serial killers were out. It could only be about a man giving them, so must be about guilt somehow. I spoilt the whole thing for myself by looking it up and knowing the story before i watched, as the beauty of the build-up is the way parts of the main character's background are drip fed to slowly illuminate the audience as to who he is and why he is doing what he is doing.Guilt is a very hard subject to do simply because it's deeply uncomfortable and sad, which is not an encouraging premise when you are hoping for a roller-coaster ride - you know its going to be unpleasant. I wouldn't say the movie glorifies suicide; it delves into the most extreme form of self-sacrifice - martyrdom.It's also brimming with symbolism everywhere, which is a surefire tell-tale sign that the writing is cleverly thought out in great detail and driving at multiple meanings and a deep reflective nature. The most prominent theme that struck me was that he was not only giving his heart to the girl he loves emotionally and metaphorically, but was giving it to her physically as the greatest gift he could. Determined to die, but his plan is thwarted by falling in love - what a 2nd act complication. Absolutely masterful.Yes it is very slow-paced, but i'm undecided as to whether it would have been better slotted into a smaller timeframe. I didn't feel the strain and his terrible inner turmoil as much as i could have, but maybe that's just me having ruined it for myself beforehand. Saying all that though, it is a deeply moving and original film that is an incredibly powerful and thought-provoking tragedy that deserves the awards it will inevitably get.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cecd9a5262e5478191e5652ddbe6af71",
            "input": "Pretty standard B-movie stuff. Seriously, anyone who watches \"Dragon Fighter\" with Dean Cain and a bunch of people making their first movie should know better than to expect real quality or even moderate intelligence. B movies exist to re-work formulas that are popular. If you give them even token analysis, you'll wind up ruining the movie for yourself (and perhaps writing some self-important, slanderous review on IMDb).I liked the female lead, Kristine Byers. She had charisma and I thought she was notably attractive. It was a memorable B-movie appearance. Unfortunately, I don't see where she has made any movies since. I'll watch for her again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f2811c50527400f94347c5b6491d430",
            "input": "This is only the second time I stopped a video/DVD part way through.I was willing to give this film the benefit of the doubt at first, even though it managed to be both shallow, clichéd and stupid.. AND joyless, plodding and pretentious.It was like an After School Special directed by that weird grade nine kid who thinks nobody understands him... creepy and sad, with voice-over narration that only the most deluded adolescent would consider poetry... and some singing, and... no, really, the poor child's suffering...Enough, already, especially when it morphed into a brazen, clumsy, and insulting Clockwork Orange ripoff. And did I mention the singing?This isn't the worst film I've ever seen, but certainly the one I've felt least compelled to sit through. I don't recommend it to anyone.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b0cf26b864d4201ad212b9583ec4530",
            "input": "Sarah Silverman is a dangerous Bitch! She's beautiful, sexy, funny and talent, dark and demonic. I read the other 'comment' on this show as well as the message board stuff and people just don't get it. Nothing that appears on T.V. is an accident. Too much money, time and work is put into the production of a T.V. show for there to be mistakes. This show is stupid because Sarah wanted it to be stupid. This show is juvenile because Sarah wanted it to be juvenile. I thought the jokes were great and the theme show as well as the other musical numbers are wonderfully bizarre. It's a lot like Pee-Wee's Playhouse for maladjusted, slacker twenty-something glue sniffing, Future Pornstars of America from the Valley. The cast is awesome. The scenarios and action is well-paced. I hope this show succeeds since Comedy Central didn't let David spade keep his show. Who plays Sarah's sister? She not in the cast listing on the show's home page. I would love to see her stand-up. Does anyone know about her up-coming show dates or DVDs that may be floating around out there?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18694479cb034ec0b25caecf1ac8fda0",
            "input": "Anyone interested in pop music, and not familiar with British music trends of the late-seventies, should be sure to watch Breaking Glass at least once. The movie, about a young woman's quest to make her mark in the music world, captures the times perfectly, from the overt sexism, rough economic times, social upheaval, to the shift in pop culture from rough-and-tumble punk to terribly fey and pretentious Futurism/New Romanticism. The music and fashion styles created daily in Britain in the late-seventies are still being rediscovered and recycled (there really has been nothing new since 1980). This was a dazzling time, and Breaking Glass both tells a very personal story and surveys the cultural landscape, and does both extremely well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-236b34385978453ea1eb708b93af3f70",
            "input": "As far as I know, this show was never repeated on UK television after its original run in the late '60s / early '70s, and most episodes are now sadly \"missing presumed wiped\".Series 6 from 1971 however still exists in its entirety, and I recently got the chance to watch it all, the best part of 4 decades on.After rushing home from school, Freewheelers was essential viewing for me and many of my contemporaries back in those halcyon days of flared trousers, Slade and Chicory Tip. And watching it again brought a nostalgic lump to the throat.Never mind the bad / hammy acting, the unintentionally amusing fight scenes, plot holes wide enough to pilot a large ocean-going yacht through and the \"frightfully, frightfully\" RADA accents of the lead players.No - forget all that. Because Freewheelers harks back to a bygone (dare I say \"golden\") age of kids' TV drama, when the shows were simply about rip-roaring fun and didn't take themselves so seriously. Before they became obsessed with all the angst-laden \"ishoos\" that today's screenwriters have their young protagonists fret over, such as relationships, pregnancy, drugs, STIs etc.No doubt if it were \"remade for a modern audience\" in these days of all-pervasive political correctness, the boss figure would be a black female, one of the young male heroes would be a Muslim, the other would be a white lad confused about his sexuality and the girl would be an all-action go-getter with an IQ off the scale, who'd be forever getting the lads out of scrapes and making them look foolish - in other words a million miles removed from Wendy Padbury's deferential, ankle-spraining washer-upper.It's a show that's very much \"of its time\". But is that a bad thing? I for one don't think so.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0383628700dc476fa3928aba3df8fc3f",
            "input": "First I'd like to excuse my bad English.I'm not a HOSTEL-hardcore-fan, but I liked that movie nevertheless. Live Feed, however, SUCKED BIG TIME! I have never seen a gore-movie with superb acting, but hey, who's surprised? The acting in Live Feed was... well, not there! I've seen some commented this as it must have been a school project or something. Okey, but not by students in media or acting school. This was NO class at all! And what about the story? A really sad rip-off on Hostel. And what about the gore? What about the psychopathic torture scenes that supposed to make your guts twist and leave you cold-sweating? That was the most disappointing about the hole movie! Short, quick and NO edge. More like an execution rather than a torture. Okey, there where buckets of blood, but it didn't even look real. The slaughtering and the violence reminded more of Braindead than Hostel or any of the Saw-movies. And Braindead was fun! Okey, I laughed at Live Feed a couple of times, but that was more out of disappointment than out of sheer fun!So instead of wasting 80 minutes by watching Live Feed, watch ANYTHING else!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd0f81e546fc46b0b63c6e0de0144c8a",
            "input": "This is one of the most god-awful movies ever. Shaq better just stick to basketball. This movie took away apart of my life I will never have back. I will make fun of this movie until I die, and then some. It is so horrible it is not even funny. MST3000 would have a blast with this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e3645bd2c9b4906bd187e9f7d7d5131",
            "input": "Though structured totally different from the book by Tim Krabbé who wrote the original 'The Vanishing' (Spoorloos) it does have the same overall feel, except for that Koolhoven's style is less business-like and more lyric. The beginning is great, the middle is fine, but the sting is in the end. A surprise emotional ending. As you could read in several magazines there is some sex in the film, but it is done all very beautifully. Never explicit, but with lots of warmth and sometimes even humour. It is a shame American films can't be as open an honoust as this one. Where Dutch films tend to go just over the edge when it comes to this subject, 'De Grot' stays always within the boundaries of good taste. 'De Grot' tells an amazing story stretched over more than 30 years. When you'll leave the cinema you'll be moved. What can we ask more of a film? Anyway, this film even gives more....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89272eb70a7d4f3fb0b06848dc3019f0",
            "input": "back in my high school days in Salina Kansas, they filmed something called \"The Brave Young Men Of Weinberg\" locally, and the film crews were rather prominent for weeks. eventually, we learned that the film was \"Up The Academy\", and was a bit ummm, \"lower brow\" than we had been led to believe. I had to see it, since I was there, and the local audiences seemed less than pleased at the showing. I was 17, and thought it was a rather artless attempt at a post \"Animal house\" type of comedy, right down to the fart jokes. Watched it many times since, and my opinion has mellowed a bit. it's dumb, but at times it catches a bit of the \"mad\" magazine humor, at least as well as most \"Mad TV\". Ron Liebman might hate it, but he is nearly perfect, and unforgettable. For me, my favorite moment would have been a brief scene on Santa Fe avenue, where I had parked my car, while I was buying some guitar strings. Too bad my Pinto's brief appearance, usually seems to get cut for TV. haven't seen the new DVD, but if my old pinto is visible, they've got a sale.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05eb69351a6a4328a4bca5dfbf22db65",
            "input": "\"Horrible People\" ought to be the subtitle of this horrible film. If you want to see ordinary people doing ordinary things, then look out of your window at real life. But if you want to see unpleasant people doing dull things, you'll have to watch this horrible film by Mike Leigh. The characters talk at length, but never actually manage to communicate with each other. Why not? Presumably because Leigh things that all of us are as ineffective and pathetic as his actors, and he wants to film real life. But we're not, and he failed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b698fb9cc70424dbf0256393b6e12e4",
            "input": "This movie is based on the art of Frank Frazetta, the mythical fantasy illustrator. Some of the characters are straight out of his paintings (the Death Dealer being the best example). Surprisingly, the animation manages to keep the feeling of the original art. Bakshi is well known for his heavy use of rotoscope (the technique of tracing a live action sequence) and this film is no exception. However, since the subject of the movie is quite realistic (all characters are humans), this works pretty well.But what I really like here is the plot: for once we have a story with interesting characters and nice action sequences, a really hideous villain and a gorgeous babe. This movie has the feeling of the best Conan comics, not surprisingly since Roy Thomas is the writer of the Marvel series of our favourite Cimmerian! This is a far cry from the crappy live action Conan, not to speak of all the B-movie of the genre.Definitely recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf9e951d4de644ad86e2328a09a9e099",
            "input": "The Robin Cook novel \"Coma\" had already been turned into a pretty successful movie in 1978. A couple of years later it was the turn of another Robin Cook bestseller to get the big screen treatment , but in the case of \"Sphinx\" virtually everything that could go wrong does go wrong. This is a dreadful adventure flick consisting of wooden performances, stupid dialogue, unconvincing characters and leaden pacing. The only reason it escapes a 1-out-of-10 rating is that the Egyptian backdrop provides infinitely more fascination than the story itself. Hard to believe Franklin J. Schaffner (of \"Patton\" and \"Planet Of The Apes\") is the director behind this debacle.Pretty Egyptologist Erica Baron (Lesley Anne-Down) is on a working vacation in Cairo when she stumbles across the shop of antiques dealer Abdu-Hamdi (John Gielgud). Hamdi befriends Erica and is impressed by her enthusiasm and knowledge. Consequently, he shows her a beautiful and incredibly rare statue of Pharoah Seti I that he is keeping secretly in his shop. The very existence of the statue arouses intense excitement in Erica, for it could provide vital clues in locating Seti I's long-lost tomb, a prize as great as the discovery of Tutankhamun's tomb in 1922. Before Hamdi can tell Erica any more he is brutally murdered in his shop, with Erica watching in silent terror as he meets his grisly end. Afraid yet tantalised by what she has seen, Erica attempts to track down the treasure. She finds herself helped and hindered in her quest by various other parties, none of whom are truly trustworthy. For one there is Yvon (Maurice Ronet), seemingly a friend but perhaps a man with sinister ulterior motives? Then there is Akmed Khazzan (Frank Langella), an Egyptian for whom Erica feels a certain attraction but who may also be hiding dangerous secrets from her.The biggest problems with \"Sphinx\" generally result from its total disregard for plausibility. Down couldn't be less convincing as a female Egyptologist – one assumes she would be quite well-educated and resourceful, yet she spends the entire film screaming helplessly like some busty bimbo from a teen slasher flick. On those rare occasions that she actually isn't running from a potential villain, she does other brainless things such as taking Polaroid flash photos in a 4,000 year old tomb! The plot twists are heavy-handed to say the least, mainly comprising of revelations and double-crosses that can be predicted well in advance. One can't even try to enjoy the film on the level of dumb but entertaining action fare, because the pacing is awfully sluggish. What little action can be found is separated by long stretches of tedium. A famous review of the movie declared: \"Sphinx stinks!\" Never before has a 2-hour film been so aptly summed up in 2 words.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d75a027cf27d4058ab3e946c0a2f891b",
            "input": "An absolute classic !! The direction is flawless , the acting is just superb. Words fall short for this great work. The most definitive movie on Mumbai Police. This movie has stood the test of times.Om Puri gives a stellar performance, Smita Patil no less. All the actors have done their best and the movie races on thrilling you at every moment. This movie shakes your whole being badly and forces you to rethink about many issues that confront our society.This is the story of a cop (Om Puri ) who starts out in his career as a honest man but ultimately degenerates into a killer. The first attempt in Bollywood to get behind the scenes and expose the depressing truth about Mumbai cops. Kudos to Nihalani !! After this movie a slew of Bollywood movies got released that exposed the criminal-politician-police nexus. Thus this movie was truly a trend setter. This trend dominated the Hindi movie scene for more than a decade. This movie was a moderate box office hit. A must-see for discerning movie fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e4be90661304c0c8aba09b106e886f7",
            "input": "Mahatma has been depicted as a man who neglected his own son in this movie. Don't get me wrong I am not condemning the movie; it is such a wonderful movie and walked out of the cinema with a lump in my throat. We need to understand Mahatma's spiritual standing, he is a true spiritual leader. Only a fully enlightened man could possibly detach himself from his loved ones. A man with such caliber leads his family and followers by example. According to the movie, he spoke to his son and try to make him understand where he is coming from, but poor Harilall with so little intellect could not understand his father. When things went wrong with Harilall, Mahatma could remain calm and accepted that his son is a big tragedy. Had it been any other parents, they would have compromised their values to assist the son to get on his feet. Mahatma didn't do that, he is true leader who leads by example.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c156cc2ec76446e85cc650261a9b2da",
            "input": "There are laughs in this film, that is for sure. Michael Keaton is a talent and he used to be funny (before he decided he was a serious actor). However, what bothers me so much about this film, is how unlikable practically all of the characters are. Other than the main two leads, everybody is a jerk. I mean, these small town losers are about as uncouth as you can get. You just watch and think, man, these losers should be unemployed. Moreover, the American factory worker is portrayed as a lazy and ungrateful slob. It made me wonder if this film was made by Japanese nationalists. Oh sure, in the end they all come together as one, but I just did not enjoy the trip to get there.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d9e72ad5c1a4d19a5f8832c2e545e86",
            "input": "Dream Quest was a surprisingly good movie. There were some noticeable goofs, but that can be expected in a movie like this that was made in such a short time. I did not feel any urge to fast forward during the movie and I found it pretty entertaining. It gets kind of silly at times, but overall I recommend it. They probably used up all the glitter in the nearby stores, and some of the costume designs were pretty good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af7307cc77204a7bbd2d51a679dca05c",
            "input": "Ya. That is what I think. Sure it was still a great show with John in it but I personally think that it is way better without.I love having C.J. and Grandpa living at the house because they are so funny together.When John was still around I really didn't laugh as much as I do now.It is too bad that no more are being made. ( I don't think...) because I would love to see some new material.My favorite character must be Rory. poor Rory is almost always left out. It is always about Bridget or Carrie. WHAT ABOUT RORY!!!??? Honestly this is a great show and to any one who has never watched it you must go and watch it. I almost guarantee you will laugh. well even chuckle.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70267c730e604ab992d57c1152d95556",
            "input": "When ever a film is produced or directed by Mel Ferrer, you can bet your life any of his pictures will be seen for generation after generation. Just having Claudette Colbert,(Ellen R. Ewing),\"The Egg & I\",'47 appearing and starring in the film will make it even more of a great Classic Film. In this film, Ellen Ewing gets married and then she encounters all kinds of mental problems and even murder. The mystery gets very much involved and Robert Ryan,(David McLean),\"Battle of the Bulge\",'65, comes to the aid of Ellen and sometimes you even wonder about David being on the up and up. As you view this picture you just about find yourself beginning to understand who is the real nutty person and all of a sudden, you begin to change your mind how the film will end. Great acting by Claudette Colbert and Robert Ryan who played an entirely different role than he usually portrays on the screen. I forgot to mention that Mel Ferrer, was married to a great film star, Audrey Hepburn. Great Classic film, with great Classic Actors !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc00742989674e0e82a8ae50263d49cc",
            "input": "\"The Man In The Attic\" is a movie set in the 1910s. It is inspired by a true story. Unfortunately, it's a story that really didn't need to be told.Looking at the box, the people responsible for packaging the movie tried their best to make this film appear steamy and erotic. They use terms such as \"illicit passion\", \"forbidden affair\", and \"unlimited pleasures\". They even show a picture of Neil Patrick Harris (little Doogie Howser, M.D.) holding a gun!The story involves Krista, played by Anne Archer. She is unhappily married to a gentleman who owns his own business. Edward (Harris) is an employee of her husband's company. Krista and Edward end up falling in love with each other.The supposedly \"shocking\" part of the movie is this: Krista's husband finds out about the affair and forbids them from ever seeing each other again. So what do they decide to do? Krista ends up having Edward live up in their attic. Wow! Krista ends up seeing someone else and Edward gets extremely jealous. So on and so on and so on.\"The Man In The Attic\" doesn't cover any new territory. It's a Showtime original picture, which explains why the stars are a couple of B-list actors and both appear briefly in the buff.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3a0d90699fe4f1aa1508dd42195094f",
            "input": "I read all of Nancy Drew as a preteen and collect the books as a grown-up. I loved the effect used at the end (and a little bit at the beginning) of the movie where line drawings in the style of the books morphed into scenes from the movie. It was a neat way of pointing out connections between situations in the movie and the books. For example, the scenes with the Oriental antiques dealer were very reminiscent of many scenarios I remember from the books. I thought Ned was perfectly cast, and Emma Roberts was a wonderful 21st century interpretation of Nancy Drew. (Just like the picture of Betty Crocker, she keeps up with the times!)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc1f64d19c354f50bb175c88fdf548de",
            "input": "This weekend just passed I watched \"28 Weeks Later\" which was very good. After that I watched this film. I have tell you it is one of the most boring so called horror you could ever watch. The scenes were unrealistic, there was no script and no plot. The alien creature was unreal. And the fight scenes mild compared to a school yard fight. And to make it worse the guy named Cody had an uncontrollable loose filthy tongue which distracts attention from the main film.Forget about this movie; rather go and watch 28 Weeks Later.Cheers, Mesake C.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11724008cb744ae4abb777b69d67741f",
            "input": "This movie has it all. It is a classic depiction of the events that surrounded the migration of thousands of Cuban refugees. Antonio Montana(played by Al Pacino), is just one of the thousands to get a chance to choose his destiny in America. This cinematic yet extremely accurate depiction of Miamis' Drug Empire is astonishing. Brian DePalma does an amazing job directing this picture, so much that, the viewer becomes involved with both the storyline, as well as every character in the cast. With Tony's characters' pressence being so believable and strong, Brian DePalma brang out the raw talent exposed by Steven Bauer(Manny, Tony's best Friend), Mary Elizabeth Mastantonio(Gina, Tony's Sister), Robert Loggia(Frank, Tony's Boss)and Michelle Pfeiffer(Elvira, Frank's Wife). I enjoyed every minute watching this movie, and still watch it on a weekly basis. On this year, the 20th Anniversary of this classic crime movie, I for one am a true believer that in another 20 years people will still refer to this movie in astonishing numbers. With other crime movies being so dramatic I find, this movie is a shock to the system.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d9acbe28aa747b79b3b5241917e3417",
            "input": "This movie just pulls you so deeply into the two main characters. I popped it into my laptop without even reading the cover (let alone reviews) and was intrigued for two solid hours. Two lost ships from two different worlds collide. The sexual tension that brews between a secretary and a criminal is almost palpable even without hardly any physical contact. Toward the end I couldn't decide which I wanted more: Our hero and heroine to pull off their caper or simply consummate their passion. RML could've done without a curious subplot and a traditional 100 minutes would have been plenty. I'm nitpicking though. After a series of Netflix, Blockbuster and local library duds this movie restored my faith in great film making.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce673ef1bb0d4f628265e59f8de1eccc",
            "input": "Yes, this movie make me feel real horror, when i realized that i paid for it and spent more than 1 hour of my life trying to watch it. The bald guy just give me the impression of being a psycho - Junkie actor and the girl is the worst actress i ever seen . Believe me if you appreciate your time avoid this movie, i understand a movie requires money to be created and some movies do not have that money but that is no justification for a stupid plot and bad acting. I'm always supporting independent movies, when it deserves the support, but movies like this makes a bad name for this kind of movies. I'm still traumatized. I will not trust in any nice cover anymore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52736481e39248378771e781b0ded6e2",
            "input": "Action, violence, sex and coarse language are the things that the characters do during the whole movie. And everything they do is done without reason. Mark L. Lester is (un)known for his violent (without reason)movies (Commando, The Base). The story is weird but stupid. The actors play their stupid characters very well...I'm not telling they are stupid but I mean they are very bad actors. It's another low-budget unknown B series action movie. If you saw something like Operation Delta Force, Drive, The Patriot, Sanctuary or something like these bad movies from the same kind than Misbegotten...don't rent it...and, by the way, don't rent any of the movies I mentioned....I give it 1and a half out of5.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af52028f977b45658455e4fb17b47395",
            "input": "One: Richard Pryor and Jackie Gleason, two great comics turned into saps for a bratty kid. They've both sold themselves out in this one, worse than Pryor's character. Two: Horrible, overly sentimental script that could have been used in a Harold Lloyd movie its so cliched. Three: Choice of a black actor as the toy; the racial subtext of this is unbearable, as its never addressed. There's no message here, Pryor's part could have been played by any comedic actor. Four: That kid...I wish I could go back in time and prevent him from ever acting...that would mean movies like this one and Kid Co. might not have been made...and my childhood would have been free of their mind-warping power. So if you want to watch a couple of great comics defile themselves in a sickly sweet kiddie flick, go ahead. If you want to see them in something good, see Pryor's old standup act and Gleason in something better, like the Honeymooners.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c99de2d8281c42dcb9204cccb407e2c6",
            "input": "I read some gushing reviews here on IMDb and thought I would give this movie a look. Disappointed. On the plus side the male leads are good, and some interesting photography but as a whole this movie fails to convince. Seems to be full of its' own self indulgent importance in trying to say something meaningful but falls way short and all in all the picture is an unconvincing mess.It is one of those films classified as a film noir which can be defined as follows:\"A film noir is marked by a mood of pessimism, fatalism, menace and cynical characters\".Well that is the story here: 3 losers stumble upon each other with their collective problems that include mental illness, alcoholism, laziness, indebtedness etc and together they conspire to kidnap a child and outwit each other.Would have been a much better movie if the story was confined more to the kidnap instead of the character failings of the kidnappers. I thought the female lead was way out of her depth and came across as an amateur actress.Whilst some good moments, I finished up feeling I had wasted my time.4/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c1d092a01f74902a7f13fbd6d112704",
            "input": "This movie is another one on my List of Movies Not To Bother With. Saw it 40 years ago as an adolescent, stayed up late to do so, was very annoyed to find that it was about 95% romance,4% everything else, 1% history if that. It's what I call a bait and switch movie, one with an interesting title, the actual movie is a scam. This is a subject which deserves a good cinematic treatment, this movie is almost an insult to those who served. The actual members of the Lafayette Escadrille were not on the run from the law nor were they the products of abusive homes, they were in reality idealists who wanted to do something to help France. And I suspect many of them came from a more upper class background than Tab Hunter's character. Flying school is not for the smart alecks and the know it alls, an individual such as the one portrayed here wouldn't have lasted two days, it would have either been the stockade or the infantry. Discipline in the French Army was often rather fierce. In short, another Hollywierd version of an historical episode that deserves proper treatment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e1b3e0bdbde24cd085d3b0b17bba5a09",
            "input": "Well i am going to go against the grain on this film so it seems. Being a self confessed horror fan I sat down to this not quite knowing what to expect. After 2 or 3 mins i actually found myself scared (quite rare). The film obviously has a small budget and is set around charing cross station but the films lack of money does not distract from the story. Yes the story is a bit far fetched and doesn't explain itself very well but THE CREEP is a class act and proceeds to slash and dismember anything that comes its way. MESSAGE FOR LADIES !!! THERE ARE CERTAIN PARTS OF THE FILM YOU SHOULD CLOSE YOUR EYES AT OR AT LEAST CROSS YOUR LEGS !! you will understand when you see it.All in all a good film and it makes a change to see a good slasher movie that actually scares",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37e88664e5dc49c5835341f2ea444206",
            "input": "I just finished watching guinea pig - Devils experiment. I have to say that this movie, although having very good FX, better then I expected, was NOT a good movie. I honestly cant say that I enjoyed this movie at all. Of course It is effective in its way of being a shocking, realistic, twisted 43 minutes of torture, but I found it to be very boring (and not as gory as i hoped). And also I found that the torturers were very annoying, when they talked and loughed trying to sound tough all the time, that ruined it even more (and Im sure there's some people out there who will agree with me on that one). I have now seen guinea pig 1,2,3,5 and the best one out of those in my opinion is guinea pig 2 - Flowers of the flesh and blood. I wont say much more about Devils experiment, other than Great fx, descent acting from the girl, annoying fu**ing torturers, overall I give it 4 stars on account of the FX cos they are awesome.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0491bdf329dd45c8a4255231c2765cf7",
            "input": "To finally see what many consider to be the greatest women-in-prison film of all time, I felt like I had accomplished something as ridiculous as that sounds. Boy, it sure contained the elements I expected, and delivered so much more. A constant I'm discovering in these films is the toughness and grit of the actresses in the roles of prisoners preparing for escape while their threshold, tolerance, and resolve(..not to mention sanity)being tested by their superiors. While most of them were hired for the way they look naked, because the nature of the genre demands such gratuitous elements, something else emerges, other attributes, such as attitude and guts, that I ultimately respond to.This, as you may know all too well, was Demme's debut for his mentor Roger Corman, and he provides the target audience with exactly what they desire while putting his own stamp on the proceedings. For instance, there are bizarre dreams certain characters have which define their current psychological states(..there's a particular number featuring warden Barbara Steele where she reminded me of Alex de Large of A Clockwork Orange).The film has female prisoners planning a daring escape, tired of the crazed antics of their wheel-chair bound warden and her nutty prison doc, Randolph(Warren Miller). Juanita Brown is Maggie, the tough, sassy sister who is fed up with the environment and will do whatever it takes to get out. She's the one all the girls fear to cross. Erica Gavin is Jacqueline Wilson, the newest prisoner who was busted by police and sentenced for the murder of a cop, unwilling to give up the names of those she was involved with. Roberta Collins is Belle, a serial kleptomaniac, best pals with Pandora(Ella Reid). Belle becomes the obsession of Randolph who promises Superintendent McQueen(Steele)that through a surgical procedure he can remove her violent tendencies. Drugging her up, Randolph takes nude pictures and sodomizes her, whimpering like a little girl due to his own mental deficiencies while hugging her naked body in his arms. Cheryl Rainbeaux Smith is Lavelle, in prison for life for murdering a scumbag whose relative was a Senator. Lavelle receives work in Randolph's office and is the one responsible for relating his dirty antics to Pandora. Demme effectively builds the movie to the expected finale as a planned break-out, using those behind the various traumas inflicted on the prisoners as hostages, with gunfire erupting.I was quite impressed with the photographic work of long time Demme collaborator, cinematographer Tak Fujimoto, as he is able to establish some visually arresting moments within the cramped confines of the prison, cells and rooms, not an easy task. The prison is appropriately crummy and the girls, despite being quite attractive, look the part of desperate inmates longing, yearning from the very pits of their souls, to escape such horrid entrapment. Steele is superb as the warden, understanding how to take the role close to the brink without going to far, candidly able to express the madness of her repressed character within a restraint..notice how she works her glasses and settles herself without blowing her top particularly when certain behaviors she has contempt for push her teetering to the edge. Cale's bluesy score is incredibly depressing, while also casting a wink to the audience that the movie is still fun-and-games..I think Cale's score mirrors Demme's handling of the material. Cale and Demme's partnership is an uncanny alliance that presents the setting as a sad, isolating, oppressive place, while, almost simultaneously, showcasing a humorous tone that permeates due to the colorful characters thanks in part to the personalities of the cast. My favorite scene happens outside the prison, as two of our girls(..joining forces with a third)interrupt a bank robbery already in progress..the kicker is it was a bank they were planning to rob! As you might expect, you get naked women in showers, prisoner in solitary, a cat fight, shootouts, attempted escapes which go awry, and other exploitative elements(..such as a horrifying shock therapy session, not to exclude the shocking aforementioned sequence where the screwy doc takes advantage of Belle). Interesting enough, Demme relates the film to the audience without a whiff of pretension, understanding exactly the kind of movie he was making.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b22f1f3b713c49eea8534ff11287755c",
            "input": "Yet another venture into the realm of the teen-gross-out-comedy, set on a college campus featuring a nerd's quest to coolness, and how he decides to blackmail a trio of popular jocks into making him get the girl. It's all been done before, and it's all been done in a far more satisfying manner. The gross-out humor that has made teen flicks like \"American Pie\" and \"Dude! Where's my Car\" so popular is taken completely out of context in this installment, appearing so completely at random that the viewer can only frown and disapprove. The film is badly written, and the actors never succeed in making any of it even slightly bearable. I won't even dignify this terrible picture by divulging, as it's a waste of my time and yours. At best, Slackers never manages to entertain or induce laughter, and at worst it is excruciatingly bad and at times completely unwatchable. Jason Schwarzman, who impressed in his debut Rushmore, humiliates himself by appearing in this picture and one wonders how a career can end up in the toilet so fast. Please avoid, please avoid. Save your money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b526b01a9b2a48eba3a785b14810e740",
            "input": "All Kira Reed fans MUST see this. The film's premise has struggling romance novelist Kira unable to come up with any new ideas. She's also getting over a divorce. However, she meets this guy at a restaurant and he helps her out of her shell (and clothing). They go into a corner room and they do it. Thankfully, Kira gets a condom out (Now don't ever tell me these Playboy films are worthless piles of soft-core fluff. Remember kids, safe sex). Later, she marvels to her publishist how great it was, but she didn't get his name. Despite this, the guy finds her and they continue their kinky games. But eventually she tires of his sneakiness and wants to know more. When she does, all hell breaks loose, and I'll leave it at that. This is easily the best of these soft-core Playboys films I've seen. Check this out, and marvel at the greatness of Kira.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ebfea7d2a5645abbb99350388430da2",
            "input": "David Mamet wrote the screenplay and made his directorial debut with `House of Games,' a character study fraught with psychological overtones, in which a psychiatrist is lured into the dark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, 'Driven.' Still, she is somewhat discontented with her own personal life; there's an emptiness she can neither define nor resolve, and it primes her vulnerability. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the `House of Games,' a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before enticing her into his world. Instead of the `twenty-five large' that Billy claimed he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred dollars. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card game he has going on in the back room. In the middle of a big hand, Mike is going to leave the room for a few minutes; while he is gone, her job is to watch for the `tell' of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the audience, as well, is hooked. The dialogue, and Mamet's unique style and the precise cadence with which his actors deliver their lines, is mesmerizing. As Mike leads Margaret through his compelling, surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the intricacies of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a `tell' is and how it works, to the lessons of the `short con,' to the stunning climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). `House of Games' is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under `Perfection.' This is one great movie you do not want to miss. I rate this one 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-215be06d4d5745b1853b0c14ec2a1a34",
            "input": "The version I saw of this film was the Blockbuster rental with a similar title, but a swear word in it.This film was funny as hell. It was also true to the bone. If you have ever spent time in Hollywood or the area around it, you will understand the humor. If not, you may not 'get it' at all.The story of two people in the business struggling to make it until they finally reach a breaking point, it is a rare gem. It states it is a drama, but it is a drama as much as Deer Hunter is a comedy.Loren Dean is wonderful, as always, as a supporting actor. Jamie Kennedy was able to hold his own well. His performance is especically impressive during the poodle scene. The only downside was Carmen Electra but we can't have everything.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b631441d98d4589a2d0b5ee6d13b25e",
            "input": "If you are going to attempt building tension in a film it is always a good idea not to build it beyond the point of total tedium.Unfortunately the Butcher Brothers haven't grasped this yet.This film sucks, unlike the majority of its characters who (if you didn't work out they are vampires in the first few minutes then shame on you) preference stringing up the plentiful supply of 'no one knows where I am' cheerleader types and homosexual drifters that waft conveniently and with a fast food swagger, past their isolated door.The only tiny bit of originality in the plot is how these vampires come to be vampires in the first place but the rest of it is ludicrous and sloppy.Forced to up sticks (as opposed stakes) on a regular basis due to their penchant for filling their basement with bloodless corpses, they really are none too bright. If they fed their victims they could run their own little blood farm and it would cut down on the mortality rate, thereby allowing them to settle down and get chintzy.Why the producers felt it necessary to introduce the incestuous twins and the homicidally gay older brother I am not sure. It added zero to the plot, which was unfortunate given that there wasn't a great deal of plot to start with and had no shock value at all.One was never told why the parents had died, unless of course that was explained during one of my frequent tea breaks. Clearly the social worker must have been alerted to the family for some reason or other but again, it was for the viewer to write their own reason.The only well rounded character was the youngest brother who emerges looking like Pugsley from the Adams Family. Indeed he was way too rounded, having the appearance of a child who has inadvertently wandered from a Weight watchers' class in to a very bad horror film. Oh heavens, he had. Never mind dear, have another doughnut with a yummy blood centre.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1499b2e1db8d49beadf16cb86f8f4b59",
            "input": "A cast of 1980's TV movie and TV series guest stars (Misty Rowe, Pamela Hemsley,Clevon Little, Seymour Cassel among several others)in the story of a photographer who has dreams about killing his models. Of course the models and other people start turning up dead causing all sorts of complications.Over done not very good thriller has enough nudity and violence to get an R rating but not enough good material to engender any real interest. This is best described as the sort of movie that gave the cable channel Cinemax the alternate name of Skinamax. I really can't see the point of watching this unless you need to see every sleazy thriller out there. (I also have to comment that this film is filled with smoking, to the point that it becomes laughable when anyone lights up)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c535e5fc6e8243d1bcf645788f882de2",
            "input": "This film is roughly what it sounds like: a futuristic version of the Cinderella legend but with songs and (fairly tame) sex scenes! The film is not sure what it wants to be and pretty much ends up a mess. It's more expensive looking than most of director Al Adamson's films but it's not at the same budget level that viewers have come to expect from sci-fi films. The actors are pretty bad and unlike most Adamson films, there are no former big namers or B actors. Some of the music is OK but it's easy to see why Cinderella 2000 has been forgotten for so many years.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3839f44ec6204cbb86879bc218371990",
            "input": "This film quite literally has every single action movie cliche and all of them work to its advantage. Straight from Lethal Weapon Gary Busey wisecracks, shoots and chuckles through this film with such reckless abandonment it can't help but amuse and entertain. There are tanks, helicopters, machine gun battles, grenades and ice cream vans and if they aren't good enough reasons to watch this film then how about the best one...Danny Trejo. And if you don't know who Danny Trejo is then you probably won't like this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08600dab69034ade9238bd5c70117e2d",
            "input": "How to lose friends and alienate people is decent comedy with a bit of romantic approach.It's actually a story of Sidney Young(Simon Pegg) breaking through in journalist and magazine writing business which is interpreted in a funny way. Simon Pegg made an OK appearance, slightly worse than his usual. Movie is not hilarious or funny all the way or anything like that but it has its moments, and those moments are really hilarious.I recommend this fun and worth watching American with English cream comedy to all people who just wanna sit, relax and enjoy movie for what it is. If you're about to watch this movie with critical approach then you should pass unless you want to be disappointed and start trashing it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c817ecba789849fe86384e5d24608962",
            "input": "Yuck! And again I say...YUCK! The original version of this movie was a well directed story of a man who was already dead and driving through purgatory. The original movie had a lot to say and didn't go out of its way to say it. And, it had a naked chick on a motorcycle.This version strikes me as something that a producer bought the rights to and then abandoned out of disinterest. It looks as if a group of individuals consciously decided to fit it to the nineties and changed ethnicities and genders just to be cute. The movie is not about a burnout about to commit suicide in a last act of defiance. It is about a man trying to get to a hospital to see his wife.There was no reason for this movie to have been made other than to make me angry...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29b45628da934b61a37da22f6465799f",
            "input": "I saw this movie at the 18th Haifa film festival, and it is one of the best I've seen this year. Seeing it on a big screen (and I mean BIG, not one of those TV screens most cinemas have) with an excellent sound system always enhance the cinematic experience, as the movie takes over your eyes and ears and sucks you into the story, into the picture.The movie presents a set of characters, which are loosely inter-connected. Their stories cross at certain points, and the multiplicity of story lines reminded me very much of the great Robert Altman and his exquisite films. But the true hero of the movie is obviously the city of Madrid, which provides the backdrop for the entire movie. It houses the characters, contains the pavements and roads on which they walk, and sets the background atmosphere for all the events, all in beautifully filmed scenes.The movie returns again and again to certain themes (shoes, for instance), and in essence Salazar makes his metaphores more and more understandable to the viewer as the movie progresses. He combines the views of the city with the shots of the characters, and elegantly matches the feeling of the scene to the background. A set of talented actors helps him portrait a wide variety of characters. One excellent example is the scene in which Juaquin takes Anita across the street for the first time. It might not work on a small screen, but it gave me goose bumps easily on a big screen.The message of the movie is very positive, and accordingly the movie is light and funny at times. The music along the movie is usually pop, with a few instrumental pieces (I hope to put my hand on the soundtrack one day, although I seriously doubt I will).All together, I came out of this movie with a sensational feeling, and I'm not easily impressed (you'll have to take my word for it). For this and more I give this movie a solid 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47ecfb672f9944b7b547c6b44ae352af",
            "input": "Robert Taylor as the mad buffalo hunter Charlie Gilson is the main character in this film. At the beginning I was thinking that Charlie would end up redeeming himself like John Wayne in The Searchers or James Stewart in The Naked Spur. But as the film goes along Gilson keeps doing more atrocities until you realize there is no hope for him. Stewart Granger is Sandy McKenzie, who wants to stop hunting because he realizes that the buffaloes will soon be gone and he becomes disgusted by the act of killing. Gilson is a natural killer who makes no distinction between animals or human beings. Debra Paget as the Indian girl is a surprising character considering the self imposed censorship of that time. She lies with Gilson in total resignation even though she hates him. The last scene of a frozen Gilson, is unforgettable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57e6953dddf74c789e29441411f0c578",
            "input": "The only explanation I can muster as to why this film isn't widely distributed is because it hits too close to home for some. This movie was a genuine happy surprise, the satire is genius. This film turns the lights on in the dark that is organized religion and big media, and the roaches scurry for cover. Rent the DVD and watch it for yourself if you haven't yet, this film succeeds where many have failed (Dogma comes to mind) to poke it's nose under the tent, both by using humor and very clever analogies coupled with telling backdrops and locations. Can't comment in depth without revealing some significant spoilers, there are some surprises in this film which even the seasoned film buff will be caught off guard by.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12aedb38b99549288249f20d2e3ab510",
            "input": "clara bow's beauty and wonderful appeal are the chief reason to watch this film. \"hula\" is not quite up to par with clara's best films but it is still enjoyable. she dances, she rides her horse, and pursues the man that she loves. this film is just over an hour in length and was directed by future oscar winner victor fleming (gone with the wind).the film moves quickly and clara bow has lots of screen time. if you like clara, i would reccomend \"hula.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06fd9e4ca1424b799adf52afa5e3599d",
            "input": "Let us begin by saying that this film's English title \"The Power of Kangwon Province\" is an absolute misnomer.It is because in Hong Sang Soo's film,there are no actual shots of wars,troubles and conflicts.So the idea of establishing power of a province is neither suitable nor valid in the context of this film.If we were to judge this film by its Korean language title,\"Kangwon-do ui him\" is going to appear as a cryptic statement about emotional turmoils of its young protagonists whose minds are not at rest.Hong Sang Soo has also directed a highly prolific visual document about erratic choices made by people in their lives.The people in question are a couple of young girls who are constantly in the process of displaying their moods,whims and fancies. If making a film out of nothingness can be claimed as a film maker's meritorious virtue then Hong Sang Soo has to be saluted as a courageous film maker whose films speak volumes about ubiquitous nothingness of human relationships,sentiments and lives.Whether one likes it or not,this is the only fair conclusion that be deduced from this particular film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93e7135b40994268bd21be49b3a5ea9b",
            "input": "*some spoilers*I was pleasantly surprised to find the harsh criticisms (acting, dated dialogue, unclear storyline) unfounded. Belafonte is great as a Brandoesque, menacing, swearing spirit who must earn his wings but is realistically ill-equipped from his past life to do so. He learns too late how empty his hustling, materialistic life was without love. Mostel is likewise great as an anguished man with his dying wife Fanny. In spite of his prayers for a miracle, his bitterness prevents him from accepting (or believing) in one. The two social worlds the characters represent alternately collide and complement the other, the result being hilarious and touchingly sad.The perplexing ending is actually quite consistent with the rest of the film. After looking everywhere for Belafonte, Mostel looks up to see a falling feather, and he frantically reaches for it as if he's finally willing to believe in angels and miracles. But Belafonte wasn't allowed to finish his miracle (either to restore Fanny's health or Mostel's faith), so he never got his wings. The feather floats tauntingly out of Mostel's grasp, a metaphor for both men's live: it's too late and you don't get a second chance. Like \"It's a Wonderful life,\" this movie is magical, wonderful, funny, but terribly tragic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c26867f6413c46f79b3a61f221cb983a",
            "input": "This series was CBS networks answer to the success of the Big Valley. It was a 90 minute Western just like the ABC program was. While it was an answer, it did not have the stuff to make it past season 2.The problem really became reality got lost on this show. For example- in one episode, Johnny gets his eye poked out by a stick. Amazingly, by the end of the show, Johnny had healed entirely. Along with that, the stories on this were no where near as strong as The Big Valley.This is a show that I would not want DVDs of, & frankly hope they are never released. Think since CBS was running out of lots, they re-used many familiar settings. This was one the last western series CBS produced as westerns were not real popular in the 1970's.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0f042e6de7641718559368fc4e67f5c",
            "input": "Dr. McCoy and Mr. Spock find themselves trapped in a planet's past Ice Age, while Capt. Kirk is in the same planet's colonial period. However, it's the former pair that has the most trying time. Besides the freezing temperatures and sanctuary to be found only in caves, there is a third inhabitant, the beautiful and so sexy Zarabeth (Mariette Hartley). As Spock spends more time in this era, he slowly begins to revert to the behavioral patterns of his ancestors, feeling a natural attraction to Zarabeth and throwing \"caution to the wind\" about ever leaving this place. Only with Dr. McCoy's constant \"reminders\" does Spock hold on to some grasp of reality.This stand as one of the few times when the character gets to show some \"emotion\" and Nimoy (Spock) plays it to the hilt, coming close to knocking the bejesus out of Deforest Kelly (McCoy). Surprising to previous installment, Captain Kirk (William Shatner) wasn't allowed to get the girl, another plus for this one.Perennial \"old man\" Ian Wolfe assays the role of \"Mr. Atoz,\" the librarian responsible for sending the trio into the past.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb4497480eb94582a5202e78a8e7a647",
            "input": "I sit through movies like \"Tiempo de valientes\" and I want to talk about cinema for hours. The admiration this movie caused me is beyond my own limits of explanation, because I'm watching the scenes of the film and I search inside my thoughts for film-making ideas and dialogue innovations that could emerge from something bigger than Damian Szifron's mind.Looking the environment, so uncompromised, so simple, I'm thinking; this man is a genius. No wonder he created what is probably the best television show Argentina ever witnessed, and then a first movie full of elements some contemporary directors haven't still achieved. \"El fondo del mar\" is the name and, it awakened (a few years ago), my enthusiasm for our everyday cinema.Starting his journey from people's daily real lives, Szifron goes where Pablo Trapero never could in \"El Bonaerense\"; the Federal Police Department's life. Trapero's film was a journey into a man's mind and experiences, not into the places he saw. Yes, there was a detailed training and lots of crime situations, but Szifron in \"in there\", his is more of a detective story, like the ones we know and love, with the mysteries and the thrilling music.But there's a lot of humanity in his writing, and he shows us his investigation through the eyes of his main characters, Alfredo Díaz and Mariano Silverstein. There are a lot of actors of great caliber in the film, but these two actors are the ones the film can't do without. The first character (Luis Luque) is a detective that has just found out his wife cheats on him; and has to work on a case.The second one is a psychiatrist that is assigned the treatment of the detective. He wants to deal with him in regular sessions but the sheriff takes advantage of the time disposition and suggests he joins Díaz in his routines: \"It's nothing, the usual stuff; no problem\". But it is bigger than that, and it will unfold a part of the doctor's personality he didn't know.The relationship developed between the two leads can't be explained unless it is observed, because it regards such a complexity that demonstrates how talented are some men like Szifron that are trying, today, to leave a signature in our history. Reaching points of unbelievable spontaneity, during a high pressure situation, Díaz tells Silverstein: \"How do we continue our treatment?\", and Silverstein answers: \"No, I'm not your doctor. You call me to have dinner; I'm your friend\": we laugh because we can't help it.And we can't help laughing when Díaz crashes a car in the street and doesn't gives importance to it, or when he trespasses all the red lights in the street, or when he smokes pot in his police patrol and Silverstein can't believe it (but then smokes it too because he's screwed up); or when Silverstein tries to be friendly with Díaz's robber friends. Magic from Diego Peretti is what we receive there. He, a psychiatrist himself, gives a performance in plan \"Locas de amor\", but impresses with all his range. Luis Luque on the other hand, is back on track with a top-notch portrayal that reminds us the great actor he is.There's a passion I have for this, and as I said, I could write about it for hours, but unfortunately that's not the way it works and I have to be precise and summarize. Although I have to watch a lot of the old movies and study them, I could assure that \"Tiempo de valientes\" is the comedy Argentina had been waiting for and never got…Until now.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc2357fb5a10491591b41342fbfb9132",
            "input": "Tarzan and his mate(1934) was the only Tarzan movie I didn't see when I was a kid. It sounded boring. Now I have seen it. I have seen the ape man(1932) about a hundred times and I keep a copy on my drive. It's a remarkable movie. It's almost flawless. Tarzan and his mate(1934) however, falters. It's not harmonic and it's parts tend to live a life of there own. The parts themselves are often very good and the action sequences are great. Big budget expensive. Tarzan himself is co-starring. Jane dominates. She have developed and have become a jungle girl so sexy I tend to forget about criticism and sing her praise instead. Well. She let her be duped by a crock who steels a kiss from her and later murder an elephant. She insists Tarzan to carry a bracelet who belonged to her father. Forever. The thing would split to pieces the moment he went about his businesses in the jungle. Stupid? Later someone founds it in the river. Well it's supposed to proof Tarzan is dead. Some cheap drama. The crocks who has an obvious interest in a dead Tarzan convince Jane that he is gone. She takes their words for granted and want to be taken away(to England). Stupid Jane seems to have forgot how tough Tarzan is, how hard he is to kill. The caravan is leaving and Jane go along. Again a pothole. She could easily make the caravan rest for a few hours or more, to pick up a few things and say goodbye to the jungle and her dead husband. She could be smart. She could dive where they found the floating bracelet, check the banks for traces. She can make fire in 15 seconds and swing in Liana's. Picking up traces shouldn't be too hard for jungle Jane. She could talk to the apes, and so on. If she get home to England without have done this she would become miserable. Jane is smart but cheap drama brings her down. And why on earth is she letting the kiss rapist get away with \"I blame myself as much as you\". A punishment for being vane perhaps? Nonsense. Struggle, a hard slap and telling Tarzan would be appropriate. Still. This movie is far from bad even if the potholes are many and sometimes deep. Just lean back and enjoy. It's Tarzan and Jane for God sake.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01968e201619427094da4f8e22f9c74f",
            "input": "I can hardly believe I watched this again last night after more than 25 years...Some time back, I watched 6 Fu films in a row... Boris Karloff, and all 5 Chris Lees. The last 2 Lees, both directed (and I use that word loosely) by Jess Franco, were abominable. At the time, I skipped this one, remembering that, in some ways, it was EVEN WORSE.Well, I watched it. NEVER again. You know what's worse that an abominable film? A really WELL-MADE piece of S***. And that's what FIENDISH PLOT is. It is a VERY good-looking movie. GREAT production design, sets, costumes, music, photography, editing, mostly good cast, some decent acting......and absolutely, positively, one of the WORST SCRIPTS in movie history!!!!! AAAUGH!!!!! The first minute of the film is so deceptive... one might mistake this for a decent movie. And then they start singing \"Happy birthday to Fu\"... and it goes downhill. Having Burt Kwouk (of whom his master says, \"Your face-- is familiar.\") accidentally pour out Fu's elixir vitae to put out a fire, resulting in his being condemned to torture, burial and having one of his ears cut off, was the closest thing to funny they had. It was like someone decided they wanted to do a \"campy\" film-- so ridiculous it would be funny. RIDICULOUS, it is... FUNNY... it AIN'T. At all.It's sad, because it's clear in the first few minutes that someone did a LOT of research into the Fu Manchu series in order to get so much of it \"right\". With a different script-- either a really FUNNY one, or a dead SERIOUS one, they might have-- could have-- SHOULD have-- had a classic on their hands. A film that could have made one forget the horror of those Jess Franco atrocities... instead of making one want to dig them out as masterpieces, by comparison.There was a period in the late 70's when a whole slew of classic 30's characters were revived in movies that were universally awful. Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, Tarzan, The Lone Ranger, Charlie Chan, even Doc Savage. I'm not sure, this one may be the worst of the lot. It took great self-control not to fast-forward over whole sections of it, especially any scenes containing Sid Caesar (FBI chief who was also Al Capone's cousin-- you see what I mean?). It isn't just that the ideas in the film aren't funny... they often make NO SENSE whatsoever. Like when they \"audition\" police officers to impersonate the King and Queen, and we wind up seeing people \"audition\" dance-hall routines like singing, dancing, and riding a unicycle. How many drugs did the writers of this thing have to take for any of this to make sense to them? As I said, a shame... and a real waste of all that talent, including that of Peter Sellers (who played both Fu and Nayland Smith), Burt Kwouk (who'd been in a Chris Lee Fu film in his time), Helen Mirren (the police woman who shockingly falls in love with the villain and damn near steals the last half-hour of the film!). I begin to wonder if anyone will EVER make a \"proper\" Fu Manchu film, or if fans will have to settle for Karloff's being almost the ONLY one?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c993584177f44957b5457227454fa0ac",
            "input": "what can i say. oh yeah those freaking fingers are so weird. they scare the heck out of me. but it is such a funny film, Jim Carrey works the grinch. if you havent already seen it then what you waiting for an invitation. go, go and get watch it. you dont know what your missing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36a906e13e384c90b48d03c640d0df8d",
            "input": "Tight script, good direction, excellent performances, strong cast, effective use of locations....Paul McGann gives a detailed, subtle performance as the man in the centre of a new murder investigation who may just have committed a similar murder previously.There is an interesting moral & emotional journey happening with his character (Ben Turner) and it intersects with the journey undertaken by Amanda Burton. Inevitably they cross over... Who has done what?The examination of WHY, both in the past and in the present, rather than WHO might have yielded a more interesting, Dostoyevskian story, but hey, who's complaining?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-940b8b930b1b4f48927aa436e267ec28",
            "input": "This has to be one of the most beautiful, moving, thought provoking films around. It's good family entertainment and at the same time makes you think very hard about the issues involved. Every time I see the \"ghost of Zac riding the bike through the puddle at the end I can't help but cry my eyes out. John Thaw's performance is so touching and it is a shame he is no longer with us. Gone but not forgotten. A outstanding film. Full marks.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ee4cef99d5f446fbf1556b89809f70c",
            "input": "Any film in the early days of Orson Welles is a triumph all the way to The third Man with Joseph Cotton. He is also wonderful in a Touch Of Evil. Please see them all! He tends to get pompous and self serving in films like F is for Fake, really stupid waste of film.Don't waste your time watching it. it is really ignorant. Orson Welles is a film icon and anyone studying film should see everything he has filmed. All his leading ladies are tremendous but in the end Welles became a fat drunk, like his character in A Touch Of Evil! For some reason Orson Welles had a way with women, I see how he could be considered attractive in his youth, not like Gary Cooper or Joseph Cotton, or Cary Grant,John Wayne, I could go on and on but I digress... and because I am a woman,I can see the attraction to him. He (Orson Welles) is one of the last true film makers and unless you count the film-makers of today: Tarantino, Scorscese, Spike Lee, most of the film makers just don't measure up to the film makers of the Forties! I know there are many more great film makers of today but in such a short amount of time I can't name them all. No Offense to any of the great film makers of this millennium! August 21,2006. Please remind me of some current up and coming film makers, I don't want to be stuck in the past! I love some of the films out now, but rarely are there any that I would put on a \"100 best\" list.. \"Hustle and Flow\" was great, so was \"Fargo\", and \"Oh, Brother, where art thou,\" from a line in Sullivan's travels; another fine film from the forties! Can anyone give me a best list for the 90's and on up to 2006? I would like to know who to watch! Thank you! Also Props to this website! Where else can you plug a film or boo it! i love the ranting and raving from regular folks like me who can say what I want and I promise not to spoil any film for someone who hasn't seen it yet!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1daec4d71f34ed7b818a96132af3c57",
            "input": "** possible spoilers **I like this film and have no problem staying awake for it. It reminds me of me at 20, except this is even better. Like Veronica says, two chicks at one time. It brings out the horniness in me, the casual conversation, these two real life chicks, rather than hookers, teasing us every step of the way. I get into the conversations too. Even if they are utterly b.s. at times, so what? Every chick, just about, that I've ever talked to and is high on herself is usually full of the same unreasoned rambling gratuitous self-centered b.s. philosophy. It's just a bunch of nonsense, and about as sensible as that other b.s. philosophy chicks are often into: astrological charts. The only deal with this movie is the guy is almost as feminine as the women, he's into the same b.s. and moodiness. The brunette chick is actually the most masculine person there.I think it's kind of funny that the brunette chick gets so obviously turned on by Veronica. She'd love to pull the little blonde away from Alexander, but Veronica plays her all the way. She's brilliant. She gets the brunette thinking there's something up between them, and then she steals the boy-child/man, which is only appropriate since they appear to be from the same age group. The brunette knows she's been had by the end, when she's dropping her face into the palms of her hands while Marlene Deitrich sings in the background that, paraphrasing, there are a million couples in Paris tonight, but I only have this refrain.But do they get married in the end, Alex and Veronica? Mmmm? I can only imagine a super-tumultuous relationship ending in a pre-marriage breakup. They are too selfish to be anything to each other than stepping stones.I like the film though. It kept me entertained, it's got a nice look, and it's sexy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3156f0da41a246c3819542a1a43f0f39",
            "input": "The first Home Alone was a decent enough film... the sequel was pretty much the same, at a new setting. This one tries to be original, and succeeds to some degree... of course, the formula is basically the same, so it's like watching the same movie for a third time with slightly altered plot. The new score is quite bad(though the new \"setting traps\" piece was, if nothing else, interesting and different), especially compared to the grand score of the first, and the almost-but-not-quite-as-good score of the second. It (almost) makes up for it by using some pretty good non-original music, but it's just not the same. The plot is fair, and somewhat original to the franchise, but it's still basically the same movie as the first two, with worse acting and a less impressive example of the 'scary character turning out to be good'. The acting is mostly unimpressive. The characters are mostly caricatures. The new thieves are less entertaining than the old ones(and they make fun of spy-stuff, which is almost criminal, given the limited amount of good spy flicks there are, and how precious few of them are cool). The fact that there are more of them(and thereby more traps) is just a weak attempt at trying to go one higher than the first two films... and it doesn't work. The idea behind the thieves and their mission is a tad too... adult and serious for a children's film(and there was a sexual joke or two, though that isn't the first time in the series). It's also unnecessarily complex, as is the plot in general. I could follow it, but I doubt a kid could. Some of the exposition are delivered so obviously that even children may find it stupid. The animal stuff is generally not amusing. There are fewer siblings, which should mean that those there are get developed more, but they have less personality than the least featured of those of the first two films. All in all, just not particularly good, or worth watching, unless you *really* love watching criminals getting hurt in cartoon-y violence. I recommend this to huge fans of the series only. 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59c9d627e705418891542be24ab72908",
            "input": "This film is a travesty, and isn't fit to keep company with the superior original. The plot is an absolute mess, and the film is way too long. Everytime they're struggling, they desperately inject a sentimental reminder from the first film.\"Gregory's Girl\" is one of the top 10 British films of all time, this one is awful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6270d255db2e46cf90642149b23df3d8",
            "input": "For those of you unfamiliar with Jimmy Stewart, this is one of his \"lesser\" films from later in his career. And, while it isn't a great film compared to many of his other pictures, it isn't bad and is a decent time-passer--but not much more.Kim Novak is a witch in New York City and for some inexplicable reason, she decides to cast a spell on poor Jimmy to make him fall in love with her. Over time, the cold and detached Ms. Novak also begins to fall in love with Stewart--and apparently in the witch's rule book, this is a definite NO, NO!! The film is odd in its sensibilities about the witches. They are neither the baby-sacrificing nor the all-powerful variety. Most of their magic is pretty limited and pointless (such as Jack Lemmon using his powers to turn off street lamps). And, very oddly, the witches all seem to be bohemians who hang out in hip bars where you might find people wearing berets and listening to crappy jazz. Considering what I think of jazz, it must really stink to be a witch in this movie's world!Anyway, the film is pretty romantic and mildly comedic, but not something I would rush out to watch. The acting is pretty good, but the script doesn't offer enough payoff to make this an exceptional film--in fact, I almost scored the film a 6--it was really close.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63cdb794901c428689fd0754991759ef",
            "input": "It is incredible!! ..yes, someone before me wrote that it was a time wasting to seat and watch this film.. it is! Don't do so! I'm totally rankled! I liked Wesley Snipes, and I founded funny that he played his name's meaning in a movie. Anyway, I wanted to see this film (at home only of course) but now (just after) I am absolutely disappointed! It was his worst movie ever. Inwatchable!! Bad actor-play! Bad cameraman! Bad scenario! ..Only one good think: that wonderful girl! Must be a manikin surely! Eeeeh!! MB ..10 lines minimum?! I don't want to waste you're time anymore to read my opinion! I hope, i was clear and under-stable, because English is not my native method of speaking. So have grate time, and see good films, like i try too.. Peace!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8ce00c36b174e029f99095ce2119563",
            "input": "Okay, I'm not going to critique this film in depth. I note the many elogious reviews in advance of me, and as I generally like Maria de Medeiros, I have been long hesitant to make a disparaging comment - and in such fashion nearly a year has passed. But each time I see that DVD on my shelf, I sense an inner groan. Anyway, let the elogious voices override me! But for other cinephiles like me - beware.Expressed in simplest and gentlest terms, here's my stance:The political turmoil and overthrow providing the backdrop for this film also served as a backdrop for a certain period of my life - via newspapers I read daily in my local middle-European pub. At that time, I followed the newsreports, but never fully grasped what the heck was transpiring. The reporters tended to report either in non-partisan terms, or with a conservatism which frowned upon any groups disturbing the peace or fomenting rebellion against the establishment. Those were times when other winds of unrest swirled through Paris, Berlin, Prague, and various places in the U.S., all of whose issues I understand clearly at the time - but dictatorship or not, my papers tended to treat the govermentment of Portugal simply as the establishment - not as a well-fleshed out \"evil empire\", to use flippant Star War terms.So, week after week, I read of disturbances, but never found an intelligent editorial that might provide the history behind them, or evaluate the practices and social-economic impacts of the dictatorship, etc.So, in purchasing this film, I had at least two hopes: to finally understand the details leading up to the social unrest, and to enjoy a well-conceived drama. This film gave me neither.The film presupposes that viewers already have ample knowledge and deep emotions regarding the historical facts. And the drama - well, as I said, I want to encourage Maria de Medeiros and the Portugues film industry, but - it was trite and shallow.I obtained my copy of the DVD from France - \"Selection Official Cannes 2000 - Un Certain Regard\". The box shows smiling clean-shaven actors, the lead giving the victory sign in a fashion that reminds me more of the Playboy bunny. After seeing the work, I wondered what the French could have thought of it - though as a shallow piece of \"cinema verite'\" with sensitive ethnic content, I can understand their natural inclination to praise it for its \"honesty\" but...Look at the back of the box: \"Un regard chaleuruex sur la Revolution\" - a warm regard? Try describing Allende's overthrown and murder with a a \"warm regard\"! Try it with Czechoslovakia in 1968! Try it with the whole line-up of overthrows, and civil rebellions!Another review: Maria de Medeiros a renoue' avec son pays, son enfance et son histoire.\" Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish! At least for me.I love Portugal. In all of Europe, Lisbon, Barcelona and Prague are my favorite cities. But my love for a city and a country doesn't flesh out a vacuous film. I'll hang on to my ancient VHS tapes of Capas Negras and A Cancao de Lisboa - meanwhile, I'm stuck with a zone 2 by the above title that might as well go in the trash.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd10a9fa1a254d47acdd8ce3af36674f",
            "input": "Beautiful film, pure Cassavetes style. Gena Rowland gives a stunning performance of a declining actress, dealing with success, aging, loneliness...and alcoholism. She tries to escape her own subconscious ghosts, embodied by the death spectre of a young girl. Acceptance of oneself, of human condition, though its overall difficulties, is the real purpose of the film. The parallel between the theatrical sequences and the film itself are puzzling: it's like if the stage became a way out for the Heroin. If all american movies could only be that top-quality, dealing with human relations on an adult level, not trying to infantilize and standardize feelings... One of the best dramas ever. 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc844428648140129d89a35e63e52671",
            "input": "Norman, Is That You? was (this is all third hand, so take it with a grain of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the prints from the theater can't have been that great. Still, performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty good. What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD PIECE: it reflected the attitudes in the mid to early 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little \"hollywood\". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.But... the movie really shines in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really memorable. But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be missed. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ef899ff94744360b99dbf6ca6a3b13a",
            "input": "\"Broken Bow\" takes us back to where it all began. Set 150 years in our future and 100 years before Kirk, Spock and McCoy. This installment of the \"Star Trek\" franchise, is in my opinion the first series since \"TOS\" to recapture the feelings of wonder, danger and excitement of \"Going Where No Man Has Gone Before\". Scott Bakula is perfectly cast as Jonathan Archer, the first Captain of the first \"Star Ship Enterprise\". He and the entire cast truly show a true reverence for the Star Trek legacy. John Billingsley is Brilliant as the alien Dr. Phlox, and Jolene Blalock is totally luscious as the tempting but logical Vulcan science officer T'Pol. Broken Bow is in my opinion the best premier episode of any of the Treks, and I believe Gene Roddenberry would surely be proud.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c70eed7428ab4a329f33510251fb369f",
            "input": "Worst show I've ever seen. The story is about a group of teenagers who, for some inexplicable reason, have super powers, and when they use some special device, they morph into strange, poorly designed suits. The acting when they're not in the retarded-looking suits is decent. Definitely not good, but not the worst acting I've ever seen. However, when wearing their suits, the actors' acting goes from bad to worse; much, much worse. The hyper-animated idiots have a myriad of unnecessary motions they do. Even when they talk they look like they're having seizures. The villains are stupider than the Rangers. Every episode, some weak, idiotic villain comes up with some plan to destroy the Rangers. He/she then sends a force of hyper-animated aliens to attack the Rangers. The Rangers then initialize their 10-hour transforming animation, then they annihilate the aliens. Then, the poorly designed villain, which can either be an armored villain that actually looks and acts evil, to a humanoid ladybug-like creature with trumpets attached to its back that shows obvious signs of mental retardation. The Power Rangers fight the villain off, then the villain turns into Godzilla, whether it be by a rain cloud or a nuclear missile (yes, they fire nukes at the creatures and the creatures turn into giants). The Power Rangers spend 5 minutes acting hyper-animated and summon their Zords which are obviously toys that the producers of the show used special effects on to make them look real. The Power Rangers win, the villain gets mad, they all teach a \"valuable\" lesson, and the show ends. That's it. Twenty-five minutes of brain-washing, fake kung fu fighting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-379b5359ffeb49459dcda618b81240df",
            "input": "Picture the classic noir story lines infused with hyper-stylized black and white visuals of Frank Miller's Sin City. Then picture a dystopian, science fiction thriller, such as Steven Spielberg's Minority Report or Richard Linklater's A Scanner Darkly. An amalgamation of the above would be a suitable way of describing visionary french director Christian Volckman's bleak and atmospheric take on the future in his feature film debut. But although Volckman's work does unquestionably take reference from the aforementioned films and those similar to them, such a simplistic hybrid does not do Renaissance, Volckman's end result, justice - the film itself is a far more complex piece of work than that.Genre hybridity is usually a hit and miss affair, especially in a contemporary context, with the well of individuality appearing to be increasingly exhausted. As such, Renaissance is laudable as a cinematic experiment at the very least, with its unique interspersing of the gritty nihilism of the neo-noir detective thriller and the fantastic allegorical terror of the dystopian sci-fi drama, which serve to compliment each other's storytelling conventions in a strangely fitting fashion. The screenplay is a clever and intriguing one (although one gets the sense that many of the lines in the script would have been much more effective in their original french than the English translation - the film's title also becomes far more poignant) managing to stay one step ahead of its audience all the way through. Though many elements of the plot will seem quite familiar to those who frequent such science fiction thrillers, the script throws unexpected twists and turns in at exactly the right moment to keep the viewer on their toes, making for a truly compelling work.Volckman's film truly excels in its visual component, and the stunning black and white animation is easily the film's highlight - superbly moody and stylish, it goes to show what tremendous aesthetic effect the simple use of two shades can have. With tremendous detail paid to the composition and look of each shot, and superb use of very noir shadows and intriguing angles to accentuate the emotional tension of the scene, the film appears straight out of a Frank Miller comic, but with a twist, the end result being consistently visually sumptuous. The film's English rendition is also given added credence by its very fitting array of voice casting. The gruff voice of Daniel Craig is an absolutely perfect piece of casting for grim, stoic policeman Karas, and Catherine McCormack is a strong presence as the mysterious woman whose sister's disappearance he is investigating. Despite a wavering English accent, Romola Garai does great work as the frantic sister in question, and Jonathan Pryce is suitably menacing as the shady head of ominous mega-corporation Avalon. Ian Holm's reedy voice is also a strong choice as a mysterious scientist, and Holm makes a powerful impression in his brief scenes.All together, Renaissance boasts a visually stunning, unique and compelling futuristic thriller, just as intelligent as it is entertaining. Though the plot may seem familiar to those who frequent such fare and the occasional weak line may inhibit the film from being the moody masterpiece it set out to be, the superb animation in itself easily carries the film through its occasional qualms. For fans of either of the film's intertwined genres or the gritty graphic novels of Frank Miller, or those willing to appreciate a capably crafted, slightly less conventional take on the futuristic thriller, the film is without question worth a watch.-8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75582733bade4d9fb4af4a2eb15b6197",
            "input": "Emory is a Cincinatti steel worker like his father before him and for most of the 20th century the twin pillars of his family's existence have been the steel mill and the union. The mill, which once employed 45,000, has seen its numbers dwindle to 5,000 recently and now 1, as the plant just shut its doors, leaving a single security guard. At first, newly-unemployed Emory and his pals enjoy their independence, hanging out around town and carousing at their favorite bar, where they down \"depth charges\" with reckless abandon. They think the mill will reopen after listening to their union rep's optimistic spiel, but reality starts to sink in when they find themselves selling their personal vehicles in a struggle to put food on the table and stave off foreclosure of their homes. Emory's father - a dedicated union man - is sure the plant will reopen and recalls for his son all the short-lived closures during his own 35 years at the mill. Meanwhile, some of the unemployed men take demeaning make-work jobs or hop in their trucks and take off in a desperate search for employment. Finally the union admits its helplessness, as Emory explains to his stubborn father that times have changed and that the mill won't ever open again. Emory tearfully asks \"What did I do wrong?\" as a lifetime of hard work and devotion to job, union, church and family have left him with nothing and nowhere to turn. He hits rock bottom when in a drunken rage he manhandles his young sons and knocks his wife to the floor. Tossed out of his own home and stinging from the plant manager's comments that he and his men didn't work hard enough to justify their substantial paychecks, Emory recruits the steel workers still left in town to do something that will demonstrate to all what they are capable of. Early in the morning they break into the mill, fire up the furnaces and work harder than they ever have in their lives, producing in one shift enough high-quality steel pipes to fill the loading docks from wall to wall, top to bottom - something the plant manager thought was impossible. Arriving at the suddenly-reopened plant, the stupefied manager looks around him at the tremendous output that came from a single day's work, realizing that production like this could make the plant profitable again. The manager asks Emory: \"Can you do this every day?\" Emory is forced to nod \"No\" and the manager asks: \"Then what were you trying to prove?\" Emory explains that the workers' decades of hard work, honesty and devotion to their jobs had meaning and that by showing how much they could produce in one day \"We just spit in your eye.\" Emory bids a tearful farewell to his wife and kids as he takes off with his buddies to look for work down south, promising to relocate the family when he finds it. This is a powerful and honest treatment of the plight of American workers displaced by foreign competition and gives a realistic view of the costs they bear for the short-sightedness of concession-demanding unions and greedy plant owners who extracted every penny they could from their factories but never gave back by modernizing them. Peter Strauss as Emory, John Goodman as his best friend, Gary Cole as his college-boy brother, Pamela Reed as Emory's sympathetic wife and John Doucette as his dying father all turn in excellent performances in this fine picture.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9e69b08eaaa436597eab17577df5c00",
            "input": "Over Her Dead Body was a nice little movie.It was decent and entertaining, while still being pretty funny.There were a few cliché's, but I found most stuff fresh.At first I didn't think it was going to be good at all,when it started out.If you can get past the first 20 minutes though,the movie starts getting more interesting.This film wasn't burst out in laughter hilarious,and wasn't OH MY GOSH wonderful.It was just a movie that you can sit down and enjoy for how enjoyable it was.I don't see how this movie was bad.It's rating is just a bit too low.I could've dealt with a 5.5,but a 4.8?Also,giving this movie a 1 is disgraceful.It was pretty good,and there was nothing horrible enough about it to give it a 1,which is what most people gave it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-209e91aaeb5f41f5ad84233eabbeca98",
            "input": "Now days, most people don't watch classic movies, such as this. Most of friends only watch movies from the '90s to present. Thats kinda stingy. Most old movies like this are masterpieces, unique in their own way. Only because, back when these movies were being thought of and made, thats when ideas were fresh. Now people strain just to think of new ideas. Anyway, to the movie. For true fans of classic horror. This is for you. The movie is based with a investigator from Scotland Yard investigating the disappearance of an movie actor, and stumbles on to three other strange occurrences with past residents of the same house. I won't say anymore, for I will ruin the movie more than I already have. But it is a terrific movie for as old as it is. And would never mind watching it again!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5296965c13464abc838f07135efe48aa",
            "input": "I went into this film with expectations, from the hype, that it would be insightful and uplifting. Certainly something more than a cheap promotional for the band \"Wilco.\"Instead we get a lot of moping and whining about \"the process,\" a dishonorable and no doubt one-sided portrayal of one band members who was kicked out by the prima donna lead singer/songwriter, a gut-wrenching confession by the fallen member's friend -- for like 18 years -- saying the \"friendship had run its course,\" and this whiny, uncompelling story about how one record label \"hurt their feelings\" by dumping them, only so that the band could immediately get 50 offers from other labels (oh, the tension...not!) They tried their best to make it look like it was a strain, but I suspect it was all smoke and mirrors to generate a tragedy that didn't exist. This doesn't even take into account the long stretches where we get many of their newest songs shoved at us in full without any storyline, insight or even a decent job at cinematography. The strained attempts at emotional sincerity or reasonable perspective on life made me sick to watch.From the film, this band sounds like a bunch of vile little babies who poke around to find a voice they don't have and think they're some kind of guardians for the art of music, which they most definitely are not. And I thought the music sucked, and I couldn't even understand the lyrics due to the mumbling style of the lead singer.I give it a 2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcaf92f7dc20424093456b6ad549b7fc",
            "input": "I love this movie. It was one of my favorite movies. The action never stops. The whole movie was done very well. The ending is really good. Ontop of it being action filled, they even have a surprised put in there for you. When i saw what the movie was about on the internet i was kind of not sure if i wanted to see this movie, but sense i am such a big Luke perry fan i decided to give it a chance. I am glad that i did give it a chance because this was a very well though out movie. It was very original. Whoever thought up this movie gets a standing ovation from me. The acting was great. Luke Perry did an excellent job once again. I give this movie the highest rating.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-abcbb79dae0b400c9a94545176d4009d",
            "input": "No rubbish - no where even near rubbish. Not an original? thats the last thing that could be said of \"2.4 children\".Predictable? certainly not! Although it was somewhat an unusual series for the BBC, it was hilarious, funny, and witty. I particularly liked Belinda Lang and John Pickard - who I believe preformed wonderfully.Gary olsen was also very good and so were all the other cast members..I never quite new why it was can-celled till reading here today about Gary Olsen's death at a relatively young age. I do wish that they would make more of comedy of this type, much more of them (and show them here in Israel).Thumbs way up!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d3ee0fe044f491c9871182a822b2b12",
            "input": "If the myth regarding broken mirrors would be accurate, everybody involved in this production would now face approximately 170 years of bad luck, because there are a lot of mirrors falling to little pieces here. If only the script was as shattering as the glass, then \"The Broken\" would have been a brilliant film. Now it's sadly just an overlong, derivative and dull movie with only just a handful of remarkable ideas and memorable sequences. Sean Ellis made a very stylish and elegantly photographed movie, but the story is lackluster and the total absence of logic and explanation is really frustrating. I got into a discussion with a friend regarding the basic concept and \"meaning\" of the film. He thinks Ellis found inspiration in an old legend claiming that spotting your doppelganger is a foreboding of how you're going to die. Interesting theory, but I'm not familiar with this legend and couldn't find anything on the Internet about this, neither. Personally, I just think \"The Broken\" is yet another umpteenth variation on the theme of \"Invasion of the Body Snatchers\" but without the alien interference. \"The Broken\" centers on the American McVey family living in London, and particularly Gina. When a mirror spontaneously breaks during a birthday celebration, this triggers a whole series of mysterious and seemingly supernatural events. Gina spots herself driving by in a car and follows her mirror image to an apartment building. Whilst driving home in a state of mental confusion, she causes a terrible car accident and ends up in the hospital. When dismissed, Gina feels like her whole surrounding is changing. She doesn't recognize her own boyfriend anymore and uncanny fragments of the accident keep flashing before her eyes. Does she suffer from mental traumas invoked by the accident or is there really a supernatural conspiracy happening all around her? Writer/director Sean Ellis definitely invokes feelings of curiosity and suspense in his script, but unfortunately he fails to properly elaborate them. \"The Broken\" is a truly atmospheric and stylish effort, but only after just half an hour of film, you come to the painful conclusion it shall just remain a beautiful but empty package. There's a frustratingly high amount of \"fake\" suspense in this film. This means building up tension, through ominous music and eerie camera angels, when absolutely nothing has even happened so far. By the time the actually mysteriousness kicks in, these tricks don't have any scary effect on you anymore. Some of my fellow reviewers around here compare the film and particularly Sean Ellis' style with the repertoires of David Lynch, Stanley Kubrick and even Alfred Hitchcock, but that is way, way … WAY too much honor. PS: what is up with that alternate spelling; the one with the Scandinavian \"ø\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2d0cd470e784569825c57be14015b59",
            "input": "OK - I ADORE this film...I will credit this movie - alone - for making me such a die-hard horror fanatic. I could never watch this movie alone. I've also heard many many stories of the effect it had in it's original release at the theatres , on its viewers. Incredible masterpiece.... Horrible , psychological stuff scares the pants off me .Oh bless their hearts, whoever made this awesome film. I love it. I thought the whole film was decent and interesting. This movie is SO scary - this is the scariest movie I have ever seen in my life! Not that what happens in the film and the idea of the film are not scary enough , but what always got me - was Brendan's fabulous acting. Best horror film EVER. Nothing can ever be this scary again. Halloween viewing at its evilest.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-daff64415a7f41eaac656aeedbed8e7b",
            "input": "I usually like zombie movies, but this one was just plain bad.The good parts: Girl swimming topless with thong bottoms, Sonya Salomaa's topless, and Ona Grauer's boobs jiggling in a skimpy top when she ran.The bad part: too much video cuts, too much Matrix slow motion (it drags the action), not enough blood and guts, bad acting, and no story. The only other person in the theater was smart and left right after the topless swimming scene. A total waste of $6 and time. I give it a 2 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8abfddc482be4682b0fd18bef501715a",
            "input": "Burt Reynolds came to a point in his career where he appeared to just be going thru the motions. He'd show up, party with his friends on film, and take home a big paycheck. It didn't seem to matter to him that the product he was representing was pure crap.No film epitomized this more than \"Stroker Ace\" which makes \"Cannonball Run\" look like a classic and \"Cannonball Run II\" look watchable. Save for a few race scenes there is absolutely NOTHING worth seeing here. Even the beautiful Loni Anderson hams it up so bad as a dumb blonde it's embarrassing.If the thought of Burt hamming it up with Jim Nabors and dressing like a chicken sounds funny then this is your movie. Otherwise pick almost any other film comedy and it won't be any worse.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4c4b23e347744fbb07657314bd62854",
            "input": "I became a fan of the TV series `Homicide: Life on the Street' late in the show's run, but became a fan very quickly. It was a cop show unlike any other: visually different in its use of hand-held cameras, taking the viewer everywhere, with its multiethnic and mutiracial cast and their varying and fascinating personalities, and that it covered all of the good and bad of a police department, including the corruption and personality clashes that bubble up to the surface. Homicide: The Movie, the reunion follow-up to the series, is as good as a made-for-television film can be. After Lt. Giardello (Yaphet Kotto), now a candidate for mayor of Baltimore, is shot, the series' cast members are back to help find the killer. In addition, the cast members who left the force and those who died, also manage to have their place in the film. The intensity and fire that marked the series return, and the script bristles with the same fire that marked the series. All in all, a terrific TV movie.Vote: 9",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9f7b022095b470485ff7eb6b60a6787",
            "input": "A still famous but decadent actor (Morgan Freeman) has not filmed for four years. When he is invited to participate in a new project, he asks the clumsy cousin of the director to drop him in a poor Latin neighborhood in Carlson to research the work of the manager of a small supermarket. He sees the gorgeous Spanish cashier Scarlet (Paz Vega) and he becomes attracted with her ability. His driver never returns to catch him and Scarlet gives a ride to the actor. But first she has a job interview for the position of secretary in a construction company and the actor helps her to be prepared; then they spend the afternoon together having a pleasant time.I am a big fan of Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega. However, the pointless \"10 Items or Less\" is absolutely disappointing. This low-budget movie does not seem to have a storyline, and is supported by the chemistry and improvisations of Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega and actually nothing happens along 82 minutes. The ambiguous open conclusion is simply ridiculous, with the character of Morgan Freeman returning to his silver spoon world and telling the simple worker that they would never see each other again. Was he afraid to have a love affair with her and destroy his perfect world with his family? Or was a clash of classes, and he realizes that his fancy neighborhood would not be adequate to a simple worker from the lower classes? My vote is four.Title (Brazil): \"Um Astro em Minha Vida\" (\"A Star in My Life\")",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f19dee74c4f43d4ba77235c103b0668",
            "input": "I thought this movie was stunning, with completely outstanding performances by Valentina Cervi (Artemisia Gentileschi).Cervi portrays Artemisia so beautifully, with tentative yet confidant mannerisms, her hands mapping out an idea before moving her models into place. The passion to which Artemisia gives to her art is just spectacular to watch.Although not each character was overtly beautiful, this made the film more realistic as the facial hair and clothing was perfect for that point in time.Overall i thought this film was fantastic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1595236e60494986aac612264219ebe7",
            "input": "I did not like Chandni Bar from the same director.I did not watch his other movies. They came and went.But Page-3 is nicely made. Seems real. Like Satya from RGV did.The mental sickness of the so called high society is the summary of the movie. In the midst of all the sickness, its difficult to lead a normal life which the protagonist, Konkana Sen, does. Serious movie, not to be watched with children or expecting wives. Page-3 of newspapers is the usual place for reporting the activities going on in the parties of the rich and elite who indulge in much more filth then what is reported. How this Page-3 is also a business prospect is shown in the movie. Event management firms get paid to arrange parties and make a rich but not famous people famous overnight by clicking photographs with the celebrities invited to the party.The western culture has crept into the high society of Mumabi quite deeply. The movie shows it boldly, no holds barred.Madhur Bhandarkar starts a new journey from here.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac723c68917a4984932d4faf5b7b5fd3",
            "input": "Iberia is nice to see on TV. But why see this in silver screen? Lot of dance and music. If you like classical music or modern dance this could be your date movie. But otherwise one and half hour is just too long time. If you like to see skillful dancing in silver screen it's better to see Bollywood movie. They know how to combine breath taking dancing to long movie. Director Carlos Saura knows how to shoot dancing from old experience. And time to time it's look really good. but when the movie is one and hour it should be at least most of time interesting. There are many kind of art not everything is bigger then life and this film is not too big.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6686af0ab5a1481786cd05624c8c3868",
            "input": "Poorly structured, badly written, loaded with cliches and flat dialogue. Not a single scene shines. The actors struggle with a painfully dull scenario that manages to completely avoid any surprises, plot twists or conflict. You know from the first ten minutes where it's going.For a movie set in NY, it has almost no feeling for the city. There are a dozen other indie movies that manage to make it seem magical on a small budget. This one seems like it was shot in Toronto.If you cast Natasha Henstridge, why dress her in baggy sweaters? Why make Vartan look boring and drab? Where's the attraction? I felt like I was watching a sub-par Christian movie of the week it was so asexual and moralizing.Steven Feder's big success is that he convinced people to make this bland movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1e6ed9484f34c94995bc6ba0b0ffc18",
            "input": "I remember watching this on prime time when I was about 7 years old. I was a huge comic book reader at the time, and anything relating to superheroes was anticipated heavily. The end result, however, was underwhelming.I was aware of the \"Emma Peel\" Diana Prince stories, as they had only recently come to an end and Diana was returned to her Amazonian form. However, there was so little action that I was bored throughout most of the movie. The final costume was an interesting idea, but looked more like a cheerleader than a superhero.I saw the movie again in my late teen years. It hadn't improved much. Cathy Lee Crosby was more familiar, thanks to That's Incredible, but her acting was no better. The script had a few good ideas, like the rogue Amazon, and a decent villain in Ricardo Montalban, but it just didn't come together and was still boring.I think they should have built the back story better, and built the show into a more epic climax. It was too much like a bland spy film, crossed with a superhero story written by someone who had never seen a comic book. The Amazon elements were intriguing, but needed to be expanded.The film did succeed in forcing producers to go back to the drawing board and come up with something more faithful, if a bit too camp and low budget. The budget was also pretty low here, and superheroes don't come cheap.It would be nice to have the movie available on DVD, if only as a comparison and historical document. Even Superman 4 is available, and it has nothing over this film (except Chris Reeve and Gene Hackman). It's worth seeing for curiosity sake and for a bit of inspiration and caution for future versions.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f07baaaf21184afbab39f45096e157c6",
            "input": "Until I saw this special on HBO, I had never heard of Eddie Izzard. I sure am glad that I have now! He is one of the funniest comedians I have ever seen! Rarely has a comedian immersed himself so completely in his craft then Eddie. I could not stop laughing for the entire show. If you like to laugh you HAVE to see this special!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-647e183b603e4fe7a219d7e96859e987",
            "input": "You can never have seen either film and still know that The Jerk Too is a disaster. The question is not, \"How did it get made,\" because if you throw money at anyone and tell them to make a film, they will do so.No. The question is \"Why, oh why, did Steve Martin allow it to be made?\" I think he needed the money to fight a nuisance lawsuit and was determined it not cost him anything. He knew the sequel was going to be so frightful, that out of pride, he wouldn't even count it's royalties as income. The only way this sequel could not be an embarrassment is to have had Carl Gottlieb and Steve Martin revive the nation's favorite poor black family.And \"dcreasy2001\" (aka Mark Blankfield?): It's just transparently obvious that you worked on this film in some sad capacity, and the only way you can feel better about your involvement is to be the sequel's lone cheerleader as an IMDb user comment. I was praying for you to veer over into satire, but alas, you were really making an effort at spin. Why not 10 stars?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca0a7343582140379d6ecbfbe1c3d1df",
            "input": "this is the best sci-fi that I have seen in my 29 years of watching sci-fi. I also believe that Dark Angel will become a cult favorite. The action is great but Jessica Alba is the best and most gorgeous star on TV today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50df1262ff444e0ba3b5b5228d391bcf",
            "input": "This remake of the 1962 orginal film'o the book has some very good parts to commend it and some fine performances by some fine actors - however Scorsese opts toward the end for the most formulaic of plot twists and an embarrassingly overacted shakespearean demise that had me looking at my watch.DeNiro is a superb actor, dedicated to giving his all in the work he does, however he needs direction to focus his talent, and this is sorely lacking in the last five minutes of the film.Gregory Peck's cameo is serviceable but nothing more whilst Robert Michum is always fun to watch, even with as few lines as this.Nick Nolte turns in a better performance than Lorenzo's Oil but is not on the same form as \"Weeds\". Joe Don Baker has some great lines while Juliette Lewis proves yet again that talent sometimes skips a generation.Some good points? The start credits(!), the first view of Cody's back when doing dips in the prison, the scene where Cody is attacked with baseball bats, Sam Bowden's decent into full-fledged panic, Cody's outwardly calm but unnerving prescence.The worst? The \"Cleaning woman - BUT NOT REALLY!!!\" part. Clinging bare-handed to the underside of a car for a hundred miles at high speed. (Are there no speed bumps in the US?) The \"He's dead - BUT NOT REALLY!!!\" partS and the aforementioned rambling ending.I may watch the original again, but I've yet to be tempted to watch the remake in four years since seeing it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5406410513244bf2883015d2889e82e8",
            "input": "Effect(s) without cause is generally not possible in the real world but in the world of Hollywood remakes, not only is it possible, it's required. The Haunting has been given the computer treatment courtesy of a 1st-class cinematographer-turner-director who once showed promise (Jan de Bont- Speed) but has since produced a string of big budget garbage (Twister, Speed 2).Actor are superfluous in a movie of this type and they seem to realize it. Liam Neeson and Cathrine Zeta-Jones act like they wish they were anywhere but in this film. Lili Taylor makes an attempt to add something to the proceedings but whatever that something might be is unknown since the script feels like half of it is missing. Events just happen, good and bad ghosts show up with no rhyme or reason and then the story just ends with a most unsatisfying non-event meant to wrap up the previous 90 minutes of inanity.There really isn't even reason to see this for the effects since we all know that anything can be put on screen now. Why not watch effects in the service of a good story instead of just for their own sake?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0632c736f67547d29f89dd2ae9df1790",
            "input": "Wanda Nevada is a pubescent fantasy movie using circa 1979 ideas of what constitutes illicit romance for 13 year old girls. Script, pacing, and direction are uniformly awful. Action sequences defy belief. Characters speak with the simplified diction one usually finds in films aimed at the under 10 set, but also includes multiple sexual references involving Shields' character as well as graphic deaths. The movie wants to be a comedy on some level but is never funny, an adventure picture but plot and action are insipid, and a children's movie but introduces pedophilia and child rape as real possibilities. It also wants to be a buddy picture, a coming of age picture, a ghost movie, an Indian spiritual movie, a travelogue, and a western. The overall affect is of massive stupidity with a nasty twist. Wanda Nevada is a complete waste of time unless you want to see a good many terrific shots of the Grand Canyon. That it manages to do just fine.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2db6d1945a0645528a11e175bddaf6f6",
            "input": "Skippy from Family Ties goes from clean-cut to metal kid in this fairly cheesy movie. The film seems like it was made in response to all those upset parents who claimed metal music was turning their kids evil or making them kill themselves - except in this one a dead satanic metal star is trying to come back from the grave (using Skippy to help out). And while the plot is corny and cliche, the corniness (for example, an evil green fog taking off a girl's clothes)and the soundtrack are what make the movie so hilarious (and great). And of course, there's nothing like Ozzy Osbourne playing a preacher who's asking what happened to the love song :). Definitely a movie for having a few friends over for a good laugh. And while you're at it, make it a double feature with Slumber Party Massacre 2 - there's an \"evil rocker\" (as stated on the video box)driller killer in black leather w/fringe. A must see for cheesy movie fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eceb2e701e844c298e08d6f01187fed1",
            "input": "STAR RATING: ***** The Works **** Just Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** Lagging Behind * The Pits Mike Atherton (Dudikoff) is peacefully making his way in the Wild West when he spots a group of men mistreating a lady. Being a gentleman, he naturally steps in and puts a stop to this and in doing so kills the son of a nasty enforcer. This is just the beginning of a all guns blazing battle to the finish from which there will be only one winner.M Dudikoff is an action star who's never truly managed to take off with me. Maybe I discovered him too late and after the other film I saw with him in it last Monday, The Human Shield, it was just another Dud (ha ha) added to the list. But I have a thing for westerns, being films that just sort of transport me to a different time and place and provide real escapist entertainment and with this Dudikoff has picked one of his better scripts, as his films go anyway.The film hits a few low points in the shape of a naff central villain, sounding like a blank Marlon Brando and some generally ropey acting from some of the cast, along with the obligatory cheap looking sets. But if, for some strange reason, your life ever depended on watching a Dudikoff film, this would be one of your best choices. ***",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f45eda4e61854525b79f07fcd58d2e94",
            "input": "I don't watch much porn, but I love porn stars. And I love gory movies. So when I heard about a porn-star gore movie, I was really excited. Of course, that was years ago and when I heard about all the trouble with making and finishing the movie, I never thought I'd actually get to see it. But I did and I'm not ashamed to admit I loved it, even with all its flaws.First, the flaws. The story is set in Ireland and is called Samhain, but the story it seemed to want to tell is about the Sawney Beane clan from Scotland. So why not just set it there and skip the third-grade report about Samhain/Irish immigrants/Halloween? Also, it breaks its own rules by stating that you're safe on the trails, but then the cannibal mutants just start running amok everywhere. It's never clear how many cannibals we're dealing with. There's a big stone castle that's obviously ancient, yet no one's noticed it before. The self-conscious horror film references are annoying and so are the characters. The heroine has a flashback montage of all her dead friends that include a character she NEVER MET. The ending makes no sense.So what works? The gore! Sure I would have liked more, but it was refreshing to see such a nasty movie that wasn't afraid to be nothing more than a gore movie. Two murders are waay over the top and Taylor Hayes has a nice disgusting scene. The two wild murders are even given extended shots on the DVD. I've always been of the mind that gore can overcome a stupid story and Evil Breed reinforced that.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcd6cb060c874ca99dbd1bad580073a6",
            "input": "Anyone who loved the two classic novels by Edward Ormondroyd will be disappointed in this film. All the magic and romance have been modernized out of his original story of a girl who does a good deed for a mysterious old lady, and given \"three\" in return. Three what? Not three wishes, but three rides into the 1800's on a rickety elevator...The first novel is Time at the Top. The second is All in Good Time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e89d2d30893c498aabdf18a9549dbc9c",
            "input": "This is an action Western. James Steart leads an all star cast in the scenic Northwest, which is filmed in great splendor. The scenery and costumes are great. There is action and adventure. Stewart plays a wealthy cattleman who runs afoul of a crooked government in the old Nothwest.The main drawback is the stereotypical cynic that Hollywood has always made into a hero. Even when this movie was made, the cynic was the stereotypical hero, and the one Stewart portrays really has few saving graces. He is kind to his two partners, and that does give him an extra dimension of credibility and likability.However, he is so piggish to everyone else, it is hard to really care for him, or to accept him. He is much like the one dimensional spaghetti Western characters (cut not that bad).Still, the minor characters are quite enjoyable. Walter Brennan, Royal Dano, Harry Morgan, and others make this worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-abe0c74cb0c3402190e421b1c5c03bd2",
            "input": "Maria Braun is an extraordinary woman presented fully and very credibly, despite being so obtuse as to border on implausibility. She will do everything to make her marriage work, including shameless opportunism and sexual manipulation. And thus beneath the vicey exterior, she reveals a rather sweet value system. The film suffers from an abrupt and unexpected ending which afterwards feels wholly inadequate, with the convenience familiar from ending your school creative writing exercise with 'and then I woke up'. It is also book-ended at the other end with the most eccentric title sequence I've ever seen, but don't let any of that put you off.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03fde86b335d43819a38c439be05bfff",
            "input": "This is a film that belongs firmly to the 50's. Very surprising that American Film Institute has chosen this one for one for the best 100 American movies of all-time. I have seen practically all of the movies on that list, and this one is by far the most disappointing one of those. Musical numbers (and there many, many of them) are VERY overlong and boring, and have absolute no connection with the story. The end of the movie has horribly over-long ballet sequency, which naturally has no real relation to the story of the movie. It must be admitted, that it is very well made, the music is OK, and the dancing done with the highest professional standard - but there is no real reason why the sequence is included in the movie.The main character of the movie is extremely childlish and unlikeable and behaves in unpolite way. His mental age is about 14. If you want to see a good musical made on the \"golden age\" of musicals, go and see \"Singing in the Rain\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-623b43db6afc4dcd84e49d6336fa3f6a",
            "input": "I watched this movie last week sometime and had the biggest laugh i've had in a long while. The plot of the film is pretty dumb and convoluted in a badly crafted way. The only plus to be found anywhere in the film are Corey Savier's impressive abs. Alexandra Paul (i think that's her name) is horrendous as the preacher's wife who has a history of depression. Ted McKenzie is gross and his character's a twit on top of it all. And as if the fact that you think she's having sex with her son isn't enough, they throw in needless sax solos at every opportunity! The end and climax of this film is absolutely abysmal and also laughable. I mean who the hell wants to carry the child of a con who tried to make you think he was your son and that you were having an incestuous relationship with him!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39c38e2558b84f4ca873878638895de9",
            "input": "Well. Astronaut Steve West sits in a plastic space capsule, commenting that \"you haven't lived until you've seen the sun through the rings of Saturn\", all the while the obvious mid-day sunlight is streaming through the window, when suddenly he has a nose bleed. Next, West is back home in some secret hospital, a melting gelatinous mass who goes berserk and causes a chunky nurse to run through a fake glass door. Apparently, West \"gets stronger as he melts\", which makes about as much sense as anything in this hopelessly purile, adle-brained moovie. Then this dopey \"Army Brass\", who looks kind of like Coleman Francis (director of many bad moovies) tries to cover the info up, but goo man runs around killing everyone he sees because he is melting. He attacks a bickering old couple because he is melting. He makes one terrible actress scream and moan helplessly for about 10 minutes because he is melting. He is melting because he is melting. The fx by the slumming Rick Baker are supposed to be the star here, but they just look hokey. The film is poorly shot and everything looks so dark and muddled that it's very difficult making out what's what - not that it would help any. MooCow says who cut the cheese with this one?? :=8P ps - \"Didn't you get any crackers?\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b7db2f9ac0d4923bfa6f598945119bc",
            "input": "I was treated to a viewing of Cracker Bag last night before a preview screening of Disney's Holes. I don't know who decided to show it but I'm so very glad they did. Cracker Bag is an absolute gem, a snapshot of Australia in the early 80s as seen through a child's eye. The \"conversations\" between Eddie and her brother were hilarious and, as with the rest of the film, so true to life. Each shot brought a great sense of nostalgia as it reminded me of my own childhood (being the same age as the director probably helps a little) and the audio multiplied the feeling. I only hope I get to see Cracker Bag again some day.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da619899f01848f5ace0f2fe943cdb2b",
            "input": "I'm feeling a little protective of this film because it was my introduction to the U.N.C.L.E.-verse. The year was 1972, and I.T.V. ran all eight features in one bumper run ( followed by re-runs of 'The Persuaders' starring Tony Curtis and Roger Moore ) on Saturday evenings. 'The Karate Killers' was chosen to open the season. It commenced with a cool action sequence as Solo and Kuryakin's sports car got attacked by a squadron of THRUSH mini-copters. I was a fan for life from that moment on.After the main credits ( nice to see a special title sequence here instead of the usual practice of slowing down action footage ) we go to the laboratory of Dr.Simon True ( Jim Boles ), inventor of a new formula to extract gold from seawater. True's wife Amanda ( Joan Crawford ) has been having an affair with THRUSH agent Randolph ( Herbert Lom ). A ruthless fellow indeed, he kills both the doctor and his wife, before hunting for the formula. True has prepared for the event - he has divided it into five segments, each written on a photograph of himself, and sent it to his five daughters, all of whom are scattered throughout the world.Solo and Kuryakin set out to get the formula first, leading to a string of episodes in different locations, and cameos from the likes of Telly Savalas ( as a tight-fisted Italian Count ), Terry-Thomas, and Curt Jurgens. One of Dr.True's daughters - Sandy ( Kim Darby ) - accompanies the U.N.C.L.E. boys on their global quest.Having assembled the formula, THRUSH turns up and makes them hand it over, before whisking them off to their secret base at the North Pole...Of all the U.N.C.L.E. feature films, this is the one I feel should have been produced specially for the cinema. It hurts by being a television product, albeit even one more slightly expensive than usual. No location filming was done, and the various segments come across as repetitive, usually culminating in a scrap between U.N.C.L.E. and THRUSH. Of the cast, Joan Crawford is memorably hammy in her small role, and Curt Jurgens badly miscast as a sugar daddy. As a London bobby, Terry-Thomas is as delightful as ever, and Herbert Lom good as the chief villain. Kim Darby grates though as 'Sandy'. She should have been told to stay at home.What is surprising about this is that it manages to be more amusing and entertaining than many official cinema releases of the time, including 'In Like Flint', 'Casino Royale' and 'The Ambushers'. I'd love to know how Solo and company escaped from THRUSH H.Q. after Randolph's death though.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03ddd5c23a0f4943a1607486e1f94abd",
            "input": "\"Jake Speed\" is a fine movie with a wonderful message. It has its flaws of course. At times it's a little slow. It introduces its villain too far into the story. It's action is paced at the rate of a snail's heartbeat. It has a Z-grade cast (Although I've always admired the work of Karen Kopins, who has the straight-laced good looks of Sandra Bullock).But with all this going against it, \"Jake Speed\" really is inspiring, thanks to a charming script by Wayne Crawford(who plays the title role) and Andrew Lane.Why do I find it so inspiring? Because it says to me \"Hey, why not try to be a good person.\"The story is essentially a \"stranger in a strange land\" premise, that is good-and-heroic Jake Speed is placed in the real world where bad things happen to good people. Jake is more than a Boy Scout. He's more than a knight in shining armor. Jake Speed is the patron saint of optimism in a dirty, mean and evil world.It's because of this that \"Jake Speed\" really needed to be a hit. It has a great message that should have gotten out to Hollywood and then to the rest of the world.Imagine a movie industry that really pushed itself to portray good and decent people. I'm not saying that we should be watching the Waltons in every theater at the cineplex, but that it would be nice if more movies such as \"Jake Speed\" would get a chance. (\"Due South,\" a TV show about a Canadian Mountie, is a good comparison of what can be done to brighten up American entertainment.)Sure, \"Jake Speed\" has violence, blood and guns, but the overall message is that if you try hard enough to be a good person, you'll beat the forces of evil every time. 10/14/99",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1be22a8a533447feb8ea853d3901bcd9",
            "input": "Aside from the horrendous acting and the ridiculous and ludicrous plot, this movie wasn't too bad. Unfortunately, that doesn't leave much movie not to suck. Do not waste your time on this film, even if you find yourself suffering from insomnia, as I did. Watch an infomercial instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bf0e8d6346a42e6be68586911ded739",
            "input": "\"A truly nice story with a moral about brotherly love\" describes this odd David Lynch film. This was especially \"odd\" because it wasn't the kind of film Lynch had been putting out in the last 15 -20 years. Those were dark and shocking films (Blue Velvet, Wild At Heart, Mulholland Drive) and this is the opposite. I know it disappointed a lot of his fans. Others were delighted by it. Count me as one of the latter, and I own all three of those \"dark\" films, too.This was another supposed-true life story, here detailing an elderly man's trip in a seated lawnmower from western Iowa all the way to Wisconsin to see his ailing brother who he hasn't talked to in years but wants to see before the latter dies. Well, I guess that premise - an old man driving a lawn mower 400 miles - still makes this an \"odd\" film of sorts, so Lynch stays in character with that! Richard Farnsworth plays the title role. He is the type of guy, face-wise, voice-wise, low-key personality-wise, that just about everyone likes. The wrinkles on his face tell many a story. It was so sad to hear what happened to him in real life a year after this film was released.The first 25 minutes of this film isn't much, and not always pleasant as it shows the main character's adult and mentally-challenged child (Sissy Spacek) and her tragic past, but once Alvin Straight (Farnsworth) begins his trip, the story picks up. I played this for several friends and they thought the film NEVER picked up, but I am more generous with it. I think it's a hidden gem. To them, it was a sleeping pill.I found his trip pretty fascinating but you have to realize in advance this is NOT going to be a suspenseful Lynch crime story. It IS slow and if that's okay with you, you might like this. Charm enters the picture in some of people Alvin meets along the way, such as a wayward young girl running away and some nice town folks who help the old man out when he gets in trouble. (Henry Cada as \"Daniel Riordan, is a standout in that regard.) Harry Dean Stanton gets third billing, but that's a joke: he's only in the final few minutes of the movie!The Iowa scenery is pleasant. I lived there for several years and can attest to the rolling hills and the rich soil. It's a nice state with nice people....like this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e9ad4a0ecd54ddc9c9ec33567b469e6",
            "input": "Although properly warned I actually sat down to watch this movie. In part because I usually give every movie an even break, and because I thought that a single movie couldn't be that bad. I stand corrected. Not even George Kennedy, Barry Bostwick or Ben Stein could save this turkey from sinking like a ton of bricks. Only once during this humor forsaken travesty of a spoof did I laugh. Namely during the Simon says scene. The other jokes are either poorly carried out or simply plain unfunny. And some of them you actually see coming a mile away. This movie just hasn't got what it takes to be a good parody like Airplane! (I+II), Naked Gun (I+II+III), or Scary Movie. They all had A. funny gags, B. good dialog and most important of all C. unforgettable quotes. Men In White has got D. none of the above. To call this movie bad would be a gross understatement. AVOID THIS MOVIE ANYWAY YOU CAN! CONSIDER YOURSELVES WARNED!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32e67e72a24a4ef78c4ad326e514444a",
            "input": "With Iphigenia, Mikhali Cacoyannis is perhaps the first film director to have successfully brought the feel of ancient Greek theatre to the screen. His own screenplay, an adaptation of Euripides' tragedy, was far from easy, compared to that of the other two films of the trilogy he directed. The story has been very carefully deconstructed from Euripides' version and placed in a logical, strictly chronological framework, better conforming to the modern methods of cinematic story-telling. Cacoyannis also added some characters to his film that do not appear in Euripides' tragedy: Odysseus, Calchas, and the army. This was done in order to make some of Euripides' points regarding war, the Church, and Government clearer. Finally, Cacoyannis' Iphigenia ending is somewhat ambiguous when compared to Euripides'.The film was shot on location at Aulis. The director of photography, Giorgos Arvanitis, shows us a rugged but beautiful Greece, where since the Homeric days time seems to have stood still. He takes advantage of the bodies, the arid land, the ruins, the intense light and the darkness. The harshness of the landscape is particularly fitting to the souls of the characters. The camera uses the whole gamut of available shots, from the very long, reinforcing the vastness and desolation of the landscape, as well as the human scale involved, to the extreme close-ups, dissecting and probing deep into the soul of the tormented characters. In particular, the film's opening, with a bold, accelerating tracking shot along a line of beached boats, followed by an aerial view of the many thousands of soldiers lying listlessly on the beach, is a very effective means of communicating Agamemnon's awesome political and military responsibility.No word but \"sublime\" can describe the stunning performances of Costa Kazakos (Agamemnon), Irene Papas (Clytemnestra), and Tatiana Papamoschou (Iphigenia). Kazakos and Papas embody the sublimity of the classical Greece tragedy. Kazakos' character is extremely down-to-earth, and his powerful look into the camera, more than his words, reveals the unbelievable torment tearing his soul. Irene Papas is the modern quintessence of classic Greek plays. In Iphigenia, she is terrible in her anguish, and even more so for what we know will be her vengeance. Tatiana Papamoskou, in her first role on the screen, is outstanding in her portray of the innocent Iphigenia, which contrasts with Kazakos' austere depiction of her father, Agamemnon.Cacoyannis is faithful to Euripides in his representation of the other characters: Odysseus is a sly, scheming politician, Achilles, a vain, narcissistic warrior, Menalaus is self centered, obsessed with his honor, eager to be avenged, and to have his wife and property restored.The costumes and sets are realistic: no Hollywood there. Agamemnon's quarters resembles a barn, he dresses, as do the others, in utilitarian, hand-woven, simple garb. Clytemnestra's royal caravan is made up of rough-hewn wooden carts.The music is by the prolific contemporary music composer Mikis Theodorakis. Theodorakis' score intensifies the dramatic and cinematographic unfolding, reflects on the psychological aspect of the tragedy, and accentuates its dimensions and actuality.This film and the story it narrates offer considerable insight into the lost world of ancient Greek thought that was the crucible for so much of our modern civilization. It teaches us much about ourselves as individuals and as social and political creatures. Euripides questions the value of war and patriotism when measured against the simple virtues of family and love, and reflects on woman's vulnerable position in a world of manly violence. In his adaptation of Euripides' tragedy, Cacoyannis revisits all of these themes in a modern, clear, and dramatic fashion.The relationships governing the political machinations are clearly demonstrated: war corrupts and destroys the human soul to such an extent that neither the individual nor the group can function normally any longer. With the possible exception of Menelaus, whose honor has been tarnished by his own wife's elopement with her lover, everyone else has his own private motivation for going to war with Troy, which has nothing to do with Helen: the thirst for power (Agamemnon), greed (the army, Odysseus), or glory (Achilles). And so in a real sense, Helen became the WMD of the Trojan War. The war, stripped of all Homeric glamor and religious sanctioning, was just an imperialist venture, spurred primarily by the desire for material gain, all else being a convenient pretext.Another conflict raised in the film is that between the Church and the State. Calchas, who represents the Church, feeling the challenge to his priestly authority and wishing to destroy Agamemnon for the insult to the Goddess he serves, tells him to sacrifice his daughter. In consenting to the sacrifice, the King comes closer to his moral undoing, but in refusing, loses his power over the masses (his army), who are brainwashed by religion. Of course, for Agamemnon, it's a game. The King must go along with the charade whether he honestly believes in the Gods or not, until he realizes, too late, that he has ensnared himself into committing a despicable filicide.Is it a sacrifice or a murder, and how can we tell the difference between the two? By focusing on the violent and primitive horror of a human sacrifice--and, worst of all, the sacrifice of one's own child--Euripides/Cacoyannis creates a drama that is at once deeply political and agonizingly personal. It touches on a most complex and delicate ethical problem facing any society: the dire conflict between the needs of the individual versus those of the society. In the case of Iphigenia, however, as in the Biblical tale of Abraham and Isaac, the father is asked to kill his own child, by his own hand. What sort of God would insist on such payment? Can it be just or moral, even if divinely inspired? Finally, does the daughter's sacrificial death differ from the deaths of all the sons and daughters who are being sent to war? These are many deep questions raised by a two-hour film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45088314d347476699f3f3295629890e",
            "input": "Normally, I don't watch action movies because of the fact that they are usually all pretty similar. This movie did have many stereotypical action movie scenes, but the characters and the originality of the film's premise made it much easier to watch. David Duchovny bended his normal acting approach, which was great to see. Angelina Jolie, of course, was beautiful and did great acting. Great cast all together. A must see for people bored with the same old action movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8307e2ac65944df932ef055729e154d",
            "input": "John Waters has given us a genuinely enjoyable film. This certainly isn't without its shocking Waters-esque moments, but it is tamer than his older culty stuff, such as \"Pink Flamingoes\". \"Pecker\" harkens back to John's early mainstream stage in that it reminds the viewer of the same kind of humor that was evident in \"Polyester\". Overall, a really fun comedy with some great moments!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-641169bad67d415f872b84a9b2b5ba89",
            "input": "Hello. This movie is.......well.......okay. Just kidding! ITS AWESOME! It's NOT a Block Buster smash hit. It's not meant to be. But its a big hit in my world. And my sisters. We are rockin' Rollers. GO RAMONES!!!! This is a great movie.............. For ME!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4777d1aaf6944c138cf0114e24ff801c",
            "input": "This series was a cut above the rest of the TV detective series of the day but somehow didn't find an audience.The idea of a blind detective may not be totally new but added so much to the story. And who could forget Pax, the beautiful guide dog in the series!Whilst the stories themselves may have been no better than the average series, the settings , in New Orleans, the acting and the music (I note the comment about the music score in other comments ...I remember that clearly) all work to make a good television series even better!Well you never know ...one day Paramount might just dig into its archives and release it on DVD!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f937e9ce102548dc95755ce19fc886bf",
            "input": "The original 1965 Japanese film \"Gamera\" was essentially an updating of the darker, less kid-oriented Gojira (Godzilla)for 1960s sensibilities. Gamera, of course, is a giant, flying, flame-throwing turtle who literally consumes energy - not quite as big as some versions of Godzilla, but generally similar in most ways. This version of the original film was edited and recut by the notorious Sandy Frank. And just like the Americanized version of Godzilla (\"Godzilla King of the Monsters\"), \"Gammera the Invincible\" gets more than just the spelling wrong. The American scenes are not nearly as ludicrous and annoying as those added to the great Gojira, but don't really add much to the story either because there is little follow up on them. The film starts off promising, there are a few scenes worth of character development, and there are enough personalities to create some tension outside of the main plot. Once Gamera appears, however, the film begins to descend into a fairly run-of-the mill kaiju film.The acting is good enough- even the American add-ons are OK. The directing is pretty good for this period and genre, and the special effects are not bad at all for their time (all miniatures). Some of the sets and backdrops are actually very good. The biggest problem here, of course, is that there is little to nothing original about this film. Gamera, however, develops a much more unique personality in his later films - most of which are worth watching if you are a kaiju fan.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49eed8f26e8f411e8dc363dab1a823f2",
            "input": "Thought at first this film would be your typical Western film, however, it turned out to be very interesting and kept me spellbound right to the very end, which turned out very unusual. Charlton Heston,(Sam Burgade),\"Midway\",'76, had past experiences with James Coburn,(Zach Provo),\"Deadfall\",'93, and Zach never forgave Sam and would stop at nothing to make sure he caught up with him and paid him back. Unfortunately, Barbara Hershey,(Susan Burgade),\"The Portrait of a Lady\",'96, managed to get caught up in this situation and found herself among sex starved men who never seemed to leave her alone. Sam Burgade had to make some very hard decisions and and I was quite surprised at the conclusion. This is a very entertaining film and the acting was outstanding.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01dc9490235743e7b27f2d813d3ba9d9",
            "input": "This movie is hilarious, not in good way. The fights are awfully bad done, while sometimes they will try to shock you by breaking some bones, and even this happens only two or three times, definitely not enough to call it a shockmovie. A gunfight means a hero can walk into an open field with 10 people shooting at him with uzi's, pick up a gun, start shooting back and not get hurt. The story empty, guy waking up, lost his memory, starts fighting cos that's what he's good at. Five years later memories come back, takes revenge blablabla. Not worth your buck, not really worth your time unless you're drunk and bored.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ca1b6018590441687129a70bc6826be",
            "input": "I signed in just to comment on how awfully stupid this movie is. Besides being a rip-off of Executive Decision or Air Force One or any other kind of terrorist story, this is the kind of movie that makes you appreciate seeing a movie that can take the same basic ideas and do it well. It's hard to blame the actors when they are given such a stupid, cliché-ridden script to work with. It's bad enough if you groan once in a movie when you encounter an insult to your intelligence, but when you find yourself groaning over and over again, you have to conclude that the director also isn't the brightest bulb in the movie business, nor are the producers for deciding to bring this story to the screen in the first place. The mostly low-rent actors you can excuse for taking on this assignment, because they most likely showed up to get the money and exposure, not that being a part of this joke-of-a-movie is going to earn them any awards or recognition. It may end up embarrassing them for having such poor judgment as to get involved in such a loser. I see no point in summarizing the plot or even in giving any examples to prove my case, for, to do so, would be cruel and unusual punishment that no one involved in this debacle could withstand. Just as studying well-made movies can inspire you how to make a good, skillfully put-together work of art and beauty, the only thing that you can learn from watching this monstrosity is what NOT to do and what does NOT work! Be warned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57b1bb8c084c48058f04828bea58fdb1",
            "input": "This movie is BAD! It's basically an overdone copy of Michael Jackson's Thriller video, only worse! The special effects consist of lots of glow in the dark paint, freaky slapstick fastmoving camera shots and lots of growling. I think the dog was the best actor in the whole movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2487ecce85046d291508344e67aab40",
            "input": "Dani(Reese Witherspoon) has always been very close with her older sister Maureen(Emily Warfield) until they both start falling in love with their neighbor Court(Jason London). But it is not after a terrible tragedy strikes that the two sisters realize that nothing can keep them apart and that their love for each other will never fade away.This was truly a heartbreaking story about first love. Probably the most painful story about young love that I have ever seen. All the acting is amazing and Reese Witherspoon gives a great performance in her first movie. I would give The Man in the Moon 8.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-863608ca1763403badfdb6cf48ef99c5",
            "input": "this is a visual adaptation of manga with very little dialogue. what dialogue there is appears in word baloons as it would in the manga. the plot of this is existent but only vaguely accounted for. there is an issue of the manga on which this is based available in english in the blast books collection, 'comics underground japan', and it has actual captioned dialogue that explains the plot a bit more than here. i recommend checking that volume out if you liked this, as it explains some of the \"plot\" of the movie, which is otherwise inexplicable. animation wise this is pretty decent, good unintrusive use of computers and the images are for the most part realized well. it jumps in and out of episodes, as the characters, a cat and his brain-dead older sister cat wander in and out of a series of odd images: a boat, a circus, a desert. for a mere half hour they go through a number of semi-plots and settings, which leads me to believe that the director chose a number of issues of the long-running manga to adapt at random, but primarilly selected visually. knowing what's going on might somewhat increase appreciation. this reminds me mostly of the kind of stuff they used to play on the mtv show, cartoon sushi, in particular a short that features a cat chasing a man's severed butt-cheek around the house. only in this case the cats resemble hello kitty more and their adventure is expanded to include death and reincarnation and a number of other themes [though not all that easy to tell what's going on]. the dvd of this has director's commentary and a \"making of\" features, but i cant comment on those because i didnt get around to them. i'm giving this a 8/10 for now, here isnt much to compare it to in anime, and i hope for more like this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf73ddd07e9f4ba3a5142016c5bb0fa9",
            "input": "From what critics and audiences indicated, BIRTHDAY GIRL had to be a big fat clinker. Still, because I love Nicole Kidman, I decided to rent it last night. It proved to be quite worthy of watching. Sure, it isn't your basic American comedy, and it doesn't take a genius to realize that it is a very British movie, but that's why I liked it. It was a change from all the other movies around, a breath of fresh air. Sure, there were some plot holes, but overall it worked. First off, Kidman was fabulous again in a very different, not very glamorous, but still quite sexy role. She just keeps proving that she is one of the top talents in Hollywood. Not only is her Russian accent when she speaks English effective, but there are times when she carries on long conversations in Russian and if you didn't know it was Nicole Kidman, you would never question her authenticity. Harrison Ford should have taken note in \"K-19.\" Overall a slight little movie that works despite the horrible buzz.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e87a351a8fce497189bb07dd3dd87479",
            "input": "\"Cinderella\" is a film about a young girl whose mother passed away and her father remarried. Once her father died, Cinderella's stepmother became very mean to her and made her do all of the chores around the house, like cleaning up after her two evil stepsisters. One day the King sent out a message to all of the single women to attend the Royal Ball in honor of his son, to find a wife. Of course, Cinderella didn't get to go, but her stepsisters did. Cinderella was very upset and thought that there was no way she could attend the Royal Ball, until her fairy godmother appeared. So she did some magic and made Cinderella into a beautiful woman, but she had to be back by midnight because that is when the magic changes back. While at the Royal Ball, Cinderella loses track of time and the clock strikes midnight, so she runs out of the palace and loses her glass slipper. Then the King orders the duke to find the women who wore that slipper. The duke searched every house, but finally found the women who it belonged to, Cinderella.Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson, and Hamilton Luske directed one of the best animated Disney films in 1950. This film is about a magical fairytale. In the beginning of the film Cinderella was a servant to her own family and had nobody to love her, but with a little bit of magic her whole life changed around and finally found love.My favorite thing about \"Cinderella\" is the music. When Cinderella's fairy godmother appeared doing her magic, she sang the song Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo. When I was a child, it was one of my favorite songs to sing around my house, so I will never forget it. I also loved the part when Cinderella and the Prince were singing the song So This is Love while they were dancing because they realized that they are in love. Overall this film was my favorite film when I was a little child because every little girl wants to live a fairy tale life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7ed9f844a1a44f99112928b10a2d796",
            "input": "This is easily one of the worst 5 movies I've ever seen. It's not scary or any of the other things suggested in the plot outline. This movie is agonizingly slow and I was bored for almost all 98 minutes. While the acting is mediocre at best, the biggest problem is the script, which is poorly written, slow and plodding with no real direction. Occasionally an eerie mood is set only to be broken by some useless line or event. I'm not surprised that the entire cast was sick and throwing up between shots, they did after all have to try and digest a terrible script. As a huge fan of good horror movies, I'm always irritated that something this bad gets made. Save yourself 98 minutes you'll never get back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3146662e5cb0472c82fb2b2dfc6fcac9",
            "input": "The sitcom \"The league of Gentlemen\" follows the lives of several bizarre inhabitants of the fictional village \"Royston Vasey\". The different scenes are linked together by their common setting.In the first series, a sketch show, the main plot deals with a new road which is going to be built through Royston Vasey. Consequently, more foreigners visit the small town. But Edward and Tubbs, the owners of a \"local\" shop, which is actually far away from the town, do not like foreigners. Whenever a visitor enters their shop, they kill him. In my opinion some scenes are kind of tasteless and not funny at all, for example, when the couple absorb two engineers who want to build the new road. Edward drums, while Tubbs is dancing half naked around the victims. Moreover Pauline lives in Royston Vasey. She works at the local Job Centre. Although Pauline hates the people she has to work with, the woman does not want to loose her job. So when an unemployed man gets an interview as fireman, she does not allow him to go because he is not ready for the job yet.Then there is Barbara Dixton, a transsexual taxi driver who goes into great detail about \"her\" sexual conversion.Furthermore the vet, Mr. Chinnery, always kills animals instead of curing them. In one case, he comes to a farm and is leaded into the sitting room, where a dog lays in his basket. The farmer goes outside. On the assumption that the dog is the sick animal, Mr. Chinnery euthanizes him. A second later, the farmer opens the door, holding the \"real\" sick animal, a sheep, in his hand.Some more inhabitants are a husband and his wife who are visited by their nephew (his friend is killed by the shop owners, by the way). The couple is very tidy. They have, for example, towels in different colours. Each colour stands for one part of the body. Besides, they have thousands of keys, marked with different colours and precisely classified.In my opinion, the actors play very well. By playing women, the scenes become comical. The costumes are suited to the actors, too. Tubbs is wearing a scarf and some crazy characters, for example Edward, have unappetizing black teeth. The show has a great deal of dark humour, typical British. The set design reflects the mood of the series. The village and all the houses look grey and are decayed. Around the local shop there is often fog which strengthens the threatening effect. Even the village sign is ominous: \"Welcome to Royston Vasey. You will never leave.\"Although I think that the actors do a great job, this type of series is not my taste.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-155eb2029b484a89877a893c854bfca2",
            "input": "Very businesslike authority with little responsibility and only a desire to keep his/her name clean - check. A veteran cop that has bad relationship with his family - check. Mafia guys that while criminals, want to do something good vigilante style - check. A sociopath and loyal mafia guy not hesitant to kill people to make an example - check. Cops' methods being less effective than the mafia guy's brutal yet very effective methods - check. A corrupt cop tying the authority, the criminals and the police together - check.Slow motion and/or jerky frame rates for showing what the actor's reaction can't - check. A serial killer whose background is explained in far too much detail, esp. using childhood abuse as the reason for everything - check. A child spree killer that is very, very non-menacing - check. Foreshadowing of the veteran cop's moral values not being what the killer deserves in the movie's and the majority of characters' opinion - check. Morally ambiguous and predictable ending thanks to the foreshadowing and the good veteran cop's coming to terms he should submit to the vigilante attitude of the majority of the characters - check.Recently saw this on TV and decided to endure it because it had Dennis Hopper in it and I could not sleep - check. Realized that was a mistake and should just have stared at the ceiling - check.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c32048f27f444497a5068ddfc14df887",
            "input": "I cannot say this movie is a disappointment because I read some reviews before watching and it did not do as well as I thought it would have. The bar was not set that high, so the fact that my expectations were met is not saying much.The Good: The city of New York. If you live in the city like me, you'll recognize certain places and understand that the city is supposed to be more than just a setting, rather one of the main characters. There are genuinely tender moments, humorous conversations, and plot twists left and right which all keep things interesting.The Bad: The first thing I thought after leaving the theater was that I wanted more, but not in the positive \"leave them wanting more\" fashion. Certainly the good skits/scenes outweigh the bad, but there are a lot of skits that fall within the \"in-between\" category, too many in fact, which is what ultimately brings the movie down. Also, New York City's diversity, though hinted at though the many distant pans of the city and mentioned in conversation throughout the movie, is never really realized or analyzed to the point of doing the city justice. For example, many of the skits involve well to do middle aged whites. I mean I know the city is home to many of the said demographic but come on, Paris Je'taime's plot and character diversity makes New York City look like Lancaster, PA, or someplace really white. It is just disappointing to see the city shortchanged on its heritage like that.Still, even after having said this, I would recommend giving New York, I Love You a view. Who knows, maybe you'll disagree with my opinion and maybe you won't. You will never know until you see it for yourself. This review is not meant to deter anyone from watching this movie, as everyone's opinion on art differs. I'm just giving you a very vague heads up on what to expect.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8494111694834649b7cb5f1bdd93bc68",
            "input": "\"I thought I'd be locked away in a padded cell and they'd throw away the key\" (Thus is a paraphrased snatch of dialogue from \"State of Mind\".One wonders in what tangled forest Paula Milne and her co-writer found the magic mushrooms they must have eaten, to create this feeble \"whodunnit\" and bring such rubbish to our screens. A padded cell should indeed be left available.Niamh Cusack did her best, (as did the other actors) but surely her talent deserves a better vehicle than this. The height of absurdity has been reached, and this particular \"State of Mind\" is best buried and forgotten, and certainly not just \"placed in a box and locked away in a drawer\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aff4ddc89e91466abac6a5c1096903c3",
            "input": "Spanish horrors are not bad at all, some are smart with interesting stories, but is not the case of \"Second Name\". It is badly directed, badly acted and boring...boring...boring, a missed chance for an interesting story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0523904fb62c4db4967e259a056f45e5",
            "input": "Undoubtedly one of the great John Ford's masterpieces, Young Mr. Lincoln went practically unnoticed at the time of its initial release, no wonder because the year was 1939 when many of the greatest movies of the whole cinema history had been released, including the most mythical Western in the history of the genre, John Ford's milestone Stagecoach and many others, such as Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington which took the Oscar in the only category Young Mr. Lincoln was nominated for, which is Original Screenplay.  It continued to be the most underrated Ford's film for many years ahead destined to gradually fade away in the shadow of other John Ford's masterpieces, but by the end of the 1950s American and European film critics and historians took a hold of a note written by legendary Russian director Sergei Eisenstein about the Young Mr. Lincoln where he praised it and acknowledged that if he would only have had an opportunity to direct any American film ever made till then, it would be definitely John Ford's Young Mr. Lincoln. Impressed by such an undoubted preference from Eisenstein, critics began to see the film again but only with a bit different eyes and film's reputation has been increasing ever since.  It was far not for the first time the life of one of the most legendary American presidents was brought to the screen. Right in the beginning of the 1930s Griffith did it in his Abraham Lincoln and the same year as Ford's film, MGM released John Cromwell's one called Abe Lincoln in Illinois. Curiously enough both of them were based on a very successful Broadway Stage Play released in 1938 and written by Robert Sherwood.  As far as John Ford's films are concerned, we can easily find many references to the life and deeds and even death of mythical Lincoln's figure in several of director's works, such as 1924 The Iron Horse or 1936 The Prisoner of the Shark Island, the second one, just as Young Mr. Lincoln, utilizes as the main musical theme the favourite Lincoln's song - Dixie. The screenplay based on a previously mentioned Stage Play and Lincoln's biographies was written by Lamar Trotti in collaboration with John Ford himself, which was quite a rare thing for Ford to do but final result was simply superb - a script combining elements of the Play with several historical facts as well as myths and legends about the beginning of Abraham Lincoln's life and law practice culminating in a hilarious but mostly heartbreaking trial scene, which is the film's highest point and main laugh and tears generator, where Lincoln defends the two young brothers accused of a murder and have to devise a manner to help their mother too when she is brought before the court as a witness and where the prosecuting attorney (played by Donald Meek) demands her to indicate which one of her sons actually committed the murder obviously obliging her to the making of an impossible choice of condemning to death one and letting live the other. Overall it's a very touching, heart-warming and even funny film with simply magnificent performance from Henry Fonda in his supreme characterization of Abraham Lincoln and with overwhelming richness of other characters no matter how little or how big they are incarnated from the wonderful and intelligent screenplay and conducted by the ability of John Ford's genius at one of its best deliveries ever. A definite must see for everyone. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53682ec4bd6e4f8e8834575b127f50a5",
            "input": "There are some things I can never understand. Such as this movie. What if I were to create a really really cheap and crappy looking Dino and crocodile polygon model in Maya and then proceed to cut and paste that into an amateur video clip having people scream and getting eaten by the same thing? How can anyone even believe that an utterly fake CGI dinocroc that looks completely out of place, would influence the events in this movie? I know that its B-grade, low budget and all but the producers could do better than making a piece of crap that no one will ever seen see or sit through. It just does'nt make sense. Are people really so stupid that they would sit through this? Apparently so. For laughs? No, this thing isn't even worth laughing at.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-545b3085009f4c9eab4fb6206c9e80d6",
            "input": "This tender beautifully crafted production delved deep down bitter sweet into my being. The irreverent pupils, the life embittered bus driver and the teachers personalities present a subliminal debate as the story unveils. The adult characters all seem familiar, my teachers, my bus driver, each one of their opinions so plausible and well known. When a key incident happens on the bus we are sent on a circuit of viewpoints. All the time the babble of teenage energy is only just kept under control by the organisers of the trip. Mr Harvey is experiencing much pain throughout . He reminds me of war damaged teachers I did not understand when I was an irreverent pupil.Rhidian Brook and the producers deserve much acclaim for this well shaped British film. The acting unblemished, the scenes appropriate, it should be widely available yet does not seem to have been given the right opportunity.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a4efb163ee247c0bf1ade18c59edd7e",
            "input": "It is always a nice suprise when a film made for TV turns out to be entertaining such as Little Richard. This is a very watchable film about the story of Rock and Roller ,Little Richard played by an actor called Leon who i have never seen before but does an very good job. As most TV films , this is a little tamer than if made for Cinema which is a shame because i am sure there is lot we could have seen about Little Richard that was controversial. Instead we see a lot religous rubbish which is the only thing that spoils the film and eventually spoilt a very promising career. All in all this film is good and the acting is above average fot a TV film. 7 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ed859d335004dfe975af44fbcaa29c7",
            "input": "Living in the Middle East (in Israel), I was excited when I bought my ticket for Syriana. Having seen the trailer, and being a thriller-lover, I expected to see first of all a fast moving, breath catching movie, which wisely dips in global policy-making and the relation between oil, power and corruption, from a fresh angle. Well, I almost left the movie in the middle. The pace was painfully slow, almost all characters were stereotyped, the intertwined editing made understanding the logic very difficult, but, as Steve Rhodes wrote in his review, in the end you don't care. Save your money, save your time, choose another movie.Robi Chernitsky",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d8d8d3eb7724090a85f9e4aae34191b",
            "input": "'They All Laughed' is a superb Peter Bogdanovich that is finally getting the recognition it deserves, and why? their are many reasons the fact that it's set in new york which truly sets the tone, the fantastic soundtrack, the appealing star turns from Ben Gazzara, and the late John Ritter who is superb. and of course no classic is complete without Audrey Hepburn. the film is a light and breezy romantic comedy that is very much in the vein of screwball comedy from the thirties, film is essentially about the Odyssey detective agency which is run by Gazzara who with his fellow detectives pot smoking and roller skating eccentric Blaine Novak(the films co-producer) and John Ritter, basically the Gazzara falls for a rich tycoon magnate's wife(Hepburn) and Ritter falls for beautiful Dorothy Stratten who sadly murdered infamously after production, 'They All Laughed is essential viewing for Bogdanovich fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa8688b95ebb49b9a60051671066b86d",
            "input": "I am right now in front of the tv, watching Casomai. It is changing, it id evolving or better...devolving. It begin with a courius wedding of the two protagonists where their love-story is reported. After that everything change, a child was born, and all the rest usually happen in a couple. It is a not a special movie because it talks about a normal couple, and normality is the center of this movie. It doesn't want to show us something particular, there is nothing new, it is just a normal love-story, the story of a couple, and being normal it become different from the rest. It is also a flashing movie, everything is short, every scene is long just some seconds. It is a reported story, many things are known because friends and parents talk about that, and their opinion is central, the opinions create the story and destroy it. It is a simple story of a couple as I said, but it is not boring, it just show a couple, should be everything known, it is, but I am sure that every one of you will want to know what happen, so don't forget to watch the end!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c0c42883f1347eab0836a741acb99d2",
            "input": "I found this film to be an utter dissapointment. The talent available to the director- notably Stanley Tucci, Chris Walken, Hank Azaria and Alan Arkin (without even mentioning the four main leads)- have been completely wasted on an unfunny, mediocre story, whose conclusion one couldn't really care about once introduced to the dire, stereo-typed characters. Julia Roberts is feeble, Zeta-Jones is just plain annoying (appearing to reprise her role from high fidelity, minus the humour), Crystal just plays his same old hyper-active, neurotic, annoying alter-ego and Cusack simply walks through his part, apparently bored with the whole project.For what is supposed to be a 'Romantic comedy', there is absolutely no romance between the central characters, let alone chemistry, and as for the comedy- (possible SPOILERS)well, the only moments of mild humour came off the back of Cusack's role in Grosse Pointe and his relationship with Alan Arkin- the scriptwriter obviously unable to show any originality whatsoever. (Spoilers) Azaria was reasonably amusing as the Mexican lover and Walken did quite an amusing turn as a parody of an arthouse-maverick-Dogme type director- but these parts constituted very little screen time and instead (Spoilers) we were treated to Billy Crystal having his groin sniffed by a dog. Pure genius.For a huge fan of the majority of John Cusack's work, not to mention the rest of the fantastic cast, I was completely let down by a film with plenty of good ideas, and at the same time completely unwilling to explore or elaborate on any of them, instead resorting to the same old genre cliches and even lowering itself to the depths of almost 'gross-out, teen-movie' humour at times.A very poor 4/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a947f116234d4889bdf5a86b40787472",
            "input": "Police Story is one of Jackie Chan's classic films that helped shape the Hong Kong cinema. It is a masterpiece that should not be missed by any action movie fan. From the beginning it is obvious that Jackie Chan's stunt team literally risked their live to make this film. Both the action and the stunts are extremely realistic and innovative. Even today, no movie has outdone police story in dangerous stunts. Many people were hospitalized in Police Story including Jackie Chan. The fighting is not as indisputably exceptional as the stunts but the fighting in this movie helped change and define Jackie Chan's use of props. Throughout the film Chan uses odd object to stop attackers and is constantly throwing assailants through thick glass. The action feels real because the stuntmen are giving the movie all they have to give and Jackie Chan's coordination is outstanding.The rest of the aspects of the film are not without flaws but they will not disappoint any action fan. Chan not only plays a believable risk taking cop but shows the powerful changes that his character goes through as he falls into escalating desperation. The plot is powerful but a modern viewer may find it tedious at times. While the comedy will provide a good number of laughs it does not always distract the audience from the lack of action. However, for the time period it was made in, the driving aspects of the plot are entertaining. There a good number of interesting and well played characters dispersed throughout the film as well.Overall police story is without a doubt one of the best action movies ever made. And even in Hollywood the influences of this one film are not to be ignored.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa6f614df6384820a0d44af3ad8536d1",
            "input": "Having heard of Modesty Blaise before, but never having read a novel or a comic strip, my wife and I liked the film a lot. It delivered, in a captivating way, a good introduction to the character and her background.Although it has some action flick elements, it is much more an intimate play, excellently written. Sadly, this is also, where a major drawback of the movie is revealed. An intimate play lives on the capabilities of its actors and unfortunately only half of the cast delivered. While Alexandra Staden did an excellent job as Modesty Blaise, her counterpart Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau - as the villain Miklos - did not. Smiling his way through the plot as if it is an extend toothpaste commercial, he fails to build up an atmosphere of anxiety that would have made the movie a masterpiece. The supporting cast is somehow similar, from some stereotyped gangsters and sluts to decent performances from Fred Pearson as Professor Lob and Eugenia Yuan as Irina.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-900016511d884580be826b19ca2876b2",
            "input": "Some war movies succeed where others do not, and that can be judged from a variety of angles. The humanistic angle, one where you can feel the raw emotions (the terror of being under attack, the camaraderie amongst soldiers, the arduous trials people face inside them when in combat, etc..) are always movies I find compelling. Movies like Das Boot and A Midnight Clear are but two examples of movies that you sense a connection to the characters in the film.This film succeeds on that level as well. It speaks of \"The Highest Honor\" and that honor is doing the right thing. These 23 soldiers did the right thing, they had honor and it is recognized in a way wholly incompatible with Western thought, but it is, to the very end, a true story of honor. Unforgettable movie. Based on the true story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04d209bbc45f40078dd67e7a325e531d",
            "input": "Crazed Shotgun toting-incest driven-revenge seeking truck drivers & obsessive control disorder \"daddy raped me when I was 12\" handcuff carrying, all latex wearing prostitutes is just a few of the character you will be introduced to in this complete disgrace of a movie that can easily be viewed on any cable TV station (IE: Skinemax) at 4am on Sunday nights. (…And yes I know that was an entire sentence, but bare with me people; this is a long-winded review for a short pointless film).Filmed in \"somewhere\" Canada, with almost no budget, the plot to this freak show is trite, the police in it obviously never heard of \"State Jurisdiction\" because they end up chasing both Miya (Hookers) and Trent (idiotic, Anal Retentive, Generic, insecure College Student) all across the U.S. (and I thought only the FBI could do that). The camera is shaky, the sex scenes are mediocre and the acting is so bad it might actually cause unintentional acid flashbacks to movies like \"Ishtar\" and \"Leonard Part 6\".As far as the Skin scenes go (which is the only reason to even rent this movie, don't even think of buying it) there are two of them. The first one is the only one worth watching though which is the Dominatrix Sex scene with Kari Salin and ____(insert unknown actor here, he's obviously done nothing else worth noting) in a seedy, disgusting Motel room (the kind with the busted sink that drips, and the soda machine outside that only has blue tonic water left in it). It's all S&M (riding crops, handcuffs, hot wax, and underwear licking) folks and in the end, he gets left in a motel room, with no money and cops waiting at his door (that's goes to show you guys, don't let a hooker tie you up in a \"middle-of-nowhere\" motel room). Sadly though, Kari shows no skin worth remembering, and that alone can cause deep-seeded traumatic experiences for some gentlemen, so that is definitely a downer towards this flick.As for the ending, *Snicker*Snicker* I know you probably wouldn't mind if I revealed it to you but I won't, you should spend your hard earned money for that one. All in all I give it a 1/5 for action, a 3/5 for Skin (See last paragraph) and a 0/0 for acting, character development or intricate plot twists.- Laughing Man",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da195390f39a4760a0ab39a3b33d1ce8",
            "input": "Maddy (Debbie Rochon) is a mentally unstable young woman with a troubled past who gets more than she bargained for when she goes to a pool party with a handsome coworker. When her date and his friends jokingly say they belong to a `Murder Club,' Maddy takes it seriously and moves straight up to `Level 3' by bashing in the brains of a woman in a parking garage (for denting her car!). But is Maddy also the one donning a plastic mask and killing off other members of the group or has someone else lost it?The plot of this film (originally titled MAKE 'EM BLEED) is very poorly conceived, full of holes and spirals completely out of control before a ludicrous, out-of-left-field twist ending. Some of the dialogue is downright laughable. I didn't have a problem with Rochon's performance, but the supporting cast was atrocious. However, I managed to sit through this Full Moon release thoroughly entertained. There's plenty of skin and blood and it's the perfect type of flick to sit around with a group of your buddies and pick apart. Horror fans may also enjoy the cameos from Brinke Stevens and Lloyd Kaufman (as Debbie's parents) and Julie Strain (an early victim).Score: 4 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c4ba42946474d74b268fbbd40f2ae7b",
            "input": "This wonderful little film has all of the elements that made the Spaghetti Western so exciting and fun: GREAT music (by one of the few..if not the only..female composer to work in the genre, Nora Orlandi), EXCITING action sequences (and very vicious ones for the day!), and BEAUTIFUL scenery and sets (all in Almeria, Spain, of course). It also has a very good story with a nice tragic romance edge to it. The actors do marvelous jobs--with truly standout performances from Lawrence Dobkin and Rosalba Neri (in the most vital role for a female in a Spaghetti Western..outside of Cardinale in Leone's \"Once Upon a Time in the West\"). Without posting any spoilers, let me just say that this movie contains one of the best endings of any film I have EVER seen!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c1e85599b224b64b9416f47c4d0b000",
            "input": "This movie has the most beautiful opening sequence ever made. I've seen this movie for the first time a week ago, since then every day I see the opening and every time I feel as thrilled as I felt the first time I heard David Niven uttering the immortal words from Sir Walter Raleigh's The Pilgrimage:Give me my scallop-shell of quiet, My staff of faith to walk upon, My scrip of joy, immortal diet, My bottle of salvation, My gown of glory, hope's true gage; And thus I'll take my pilgrimage (…)Do you know why it would be a truism to say Michael Powell's and Emeric Pressuburger's lives are thoroughly justified for having crafted such a wonderful opening? Because they had been already admitted in the Paradise of Poets long before they made this movie.I imagine both of them facing trial during Doomsday and saying nonchalantly to an irate God: I beg your pardon, Sir. So, do You want to know what have we done during our lifetime? Well, well you'll see: We've written directed and produced: I know Where I'm Going, Colonel Blimp, Red Shoes… do you think that enough Sir? It is rather obvious that these two great artists had already fulfilled their duty with God, Nature the Muse or Whatever you may call It when they shot A Matter of Life and Death. The fact that other people's lives would be justified for their deeds could be not apparent to everybody, notwithstanding I feel my life would have a meaning had I never done anything else that to see this movie.Of course old-timers will be tempted to say: They don't do movies like this one any more. They'll be partially mistaken; they didn't make movies like this in the past times either.I've have already quoted Keats here, but I'll repeat his words: A thing of beauty is a joy forever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1799d0a86d964626ab734f3c5948be5a",
            "input": "The setting and actors make this television movie for me the best rendition of Dickens' classic tale. George C. Scott is very believable as is the rest of the cast. His Scrooge oozes with nastiness until the very end of the movie. Then his character changes to one who is truly repentant. The 19th Century English town chosen for the setting creates an ambiance that is fitting to Dickens and adds to the plausibility of this film. It is a movie I watch every Christmas along with the real Grinch and It's A Wonderful Life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d123bf89b72344f9a99b6bea808c31cb",
            "input": "Next to the slasher films of the 1970s and 80s, ones about the walking dead were probably the second most popular horror sub-genre. While slasher films had 'Black Christmas' and 'Halloween' to get the whole thing going, zombie flicks had George Romero's 'Dead' films. And unsurprisingly soon after the success of his first two in the series, other directors wanted to cash in. A lot of Italian directors were especially interested, such as Lucio Fulci who brought us 'Zombie' a year after Romero's 'Dawn of the Dead', known as 'Zombi' in Italy and some other countries, and it was there that Fulci's film was known as 'Zombi 2'. Apart from the walking dead it has no relation to Romero's film, but is a good film in it's own right. It was a big success in Europe and 9 years later a sequel was born.Pros: Lots of beautiful, lush scenery. Awesome score. The acting isn't exactly good, but the cast is game and seem to be enjoying the experience. After kind of a slow start, the pace moves along like that of an action flick. Plenty cheese and unintentional hilarity for bad film lovers. Good job on the make-up effects. Lots of blood and some decent gore.Cons: Virtually plot less. Nothing you haven't already seen before. Blatantly rips off some things from the first couple of 'Return of the Living Dead' films. Cardboard characters. Hasn't aged too well due to the bad 1980s rock music(Not that I'm saying all rock music of that period is bad), clothing, and overall feel of the movie.Final thoughts: First of all, this is not a true sequel to Fulci's cult classic. In fact, I don't know if it was ever meant to pick up where that film left off. For those that don't know, Fulci was ill during production and ended up leaving and was replaced with Bruno Mattei. Mattei's films are pretty laughable, but like this film many are good campy fun. And that's all this film really is, just something to watch for fun.My rating: 3.5/5 (So-bad-it's-good rating) 2/5 (Serious rating)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fbf3f29e7bc946cb9cb261b5f8bd075d",
            "input": "Zatoichi The Outlaw was the first film made by its hero's (Shintaro Katsu) own production company, this is perhaps why this is a slightly lesser entry in the series, though it is by no means weak overall. It tells of our hero coming across two towns, rival bosses and a mysterious ronin helping the poor and from this set up spins a tale encompassing tragedy, violence and no little interest, all served up with lashings of the unshowy but inspired swordplay that is one of the series trademarks. It is a fairly predictable plot and it mounts in unsurprising fashion, but it zips along with style and is interesting stuff. The helpful ronin for example is a nobly inscrutable revolutionary character, upsetting the established order without being painted as a truly likable or heroic figure, Zatoichi himself makes one or two mistakes and causes harm by his actions, whilst the ruling system fuels the exploitation of the poor. Its a harsh world, with one or two more visceral than expected moments in the fighting, though things aren't as rousing as they could be. Shintaro Katsu turns in a typical bravura performance as Zatoichi, mixing wisdom, deadly skill and worldliness with a subtly sad sense of vulnerability, while solid work comes also from Rentarô Mikuni and an effectively baleful Kô Nishimura (later to appear as Katsu's superior \"Snake\" Magobei in the Hanzo trilogy) as the two main bosses in the film. There is also a good emotional turn from Yuko Hamada as a wronged woman. The film loses out through shaky pacing and a not so well constructed sequence of events, there is at least one slightly jarring time jump and the power of the plot becomes a little lost, meaning that when things heat up towards the end the film isn't as exciting as it could be, emotional impact is lost also. The action or scenes of Zatoichi using his ingenious skills are well handled by director Satsuo Yamamoto, though some of the gambling is less interesting and the film builds up in a workmanlike rather than really inspired way, without the lively characters or strong verve of some other installments. Still, I enjoyed this one, it has its flaws and isn't one of the best of the series but it still packs a sweetly satisfying dose of entertainment, a good story and decent doses of Zatoichi's trademark ingenious and quirky cool. Recommended for fans of the series, and a reasonable entry point, classy stuff though not a true great.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd37c6a304964108b9eb3e925e96b181",
            "input": "This film isn't just about a school shooting, in fact its never even seen. But that just adds to the power this film has. Its about people and how they deal with tragedy. I know it was shown to the students who survived the Columbine shooting and it provided a sense of closure for a lot of them. The acting is superb. All three main actors (Busy Phillips, Erika Christensen and Victor Garber) are excellent in their roles...I highly recommend this film to anyone. Its one of those films that makes you talk about it after you see it. It provokes discussion of not only school shootings but of human emotions and reactions to all forms of tragedy. It is a tear-jerker but it is well worth it and one i will watch time and time again",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-201ba203b56445358be1096586284082",
            "input": "Ted V. Mikels's film Corpse Grinders 2 is 103 minutes of excruciating cinematic swill. The plot is pretty much a mixture of nonsensical business dealings among people who grind corpses into cat food while cat aliens, who are losing a war with dog aliens, looking to get some of this cat food. Watching this movie, I began to look for any kind of distraction, anything to reassure myself that I was doing something else besides losing my mind from the inside out.Several scenes go on for far too long, as characters take forever to do simple things. I've heard that Mr. Mikels doesn't like to use jump cuts too often, fearful that they will confuse his audience. I'm not sure if this attitude is \"avant-garde\" or just \"stupid.\" Try as I might, I could not bring myself to care about any of the characters in the unnecessarily huge cast, well with the possible exception of the old men who are the caretakers of the factory. The majority of the cast are a bunch of no-talent amateurs who don't even bother to learn the lyrics to \"Amazing Grace\" before they have to sing it on camera. Although perhaps the blame should go to the poor sound quality, since I only actually heard around 80% of the dialogue while watching the DVD.This is quite possibly the worst film to ever be shot. I've listened to snippets of the commentary,and Mr. Mikels comes off as a surprisingly sweet old man, what the hell was he doing making this kind of trash? I'd like to hear the explanations from the old men who had to lie shirtless on a metal conveyor belt waiting to be ground up. Movies I've long hated suddenly seem a lot better. I long for the intermittedly appropriate music of Excalibur, and the consistent lighting of Dawn of the Dead. I need to go do something, anything. Don't see this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dc67a4c034c40dbbfa763d47608bde4",
            "input": "I thought it was a pretty good movie and should have been released in theaters first. It wouldn't have been a big Blockbuster but it would have made some pretty good money. The movie has suspense and makes you wonder just how much of this is going on in the real world. Justin Timberlake did a good job. I wasn't expecting Justin Timberlake to do that good a job. Considering it is his first movie he did a good job. This is a movie that is good to pick up and watch when you just don't know what you want to rent that night. It should go pretty well. The cast was great. So I highly recommend that everyone checks this movie out!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-054de029aac5494da3435bf54caf43fc",
            "input": "I've seen a lot of movies and rarely would I ever rate a movie \"1\" but this movie was beyond terrible.The acting was terrible, the plot was ridiculous, the effects were unrealistic and the characters were annoying. Usually when I watch scary movies I think it's DUMB when the characters hears a noise in house/forest/school/etc and then yells out \"hello is anyone there?\" - but at least they're believable when they do it.. This movie couldn't even get that right.This is a movie that'll make other B-horror movies like Venom and The Fog look like academy award winning masterpieces.I always have an open mind while watching movies and I can only say that this movie was a complete waste of time and I write this comment so that anyone else who's thinking of watching this movie will think again. IT'S AWFUL!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01cd2446d0424118b0b72ef4dacdbab1",
            "input": "OK its not the best film I've ever seen but at the same time I've been able to sit and watch it TWICE!!! story line was pretty awful and during the first part of the first short story i wondered what the hell i was watching but at the same time it was so awful i loved it cheap laughs all the way.And Jebidia deserves an Oscar for his role in this movie the only thing that let him down was half way through he stopped his silly name calling.overall the film was pretty perfetic but if your after cheap laughs and you see it in pound land go by it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2826f15aa8942be97139343c423bac7",
            "input": "Netflix should mention this short feature on the info for Silk Stockings. Superior in every way to that over-produced fluff. This had much better Cole Porter songs and lots more energy. Silk Stockings turned out to be a big disappointment. Fred was getting too old for this sort of thing, though the dances and Cyd are lovely. I will be on the watch for the Garbo--Melvyn Douglas version of Ninotchka. Was Peter Lorre ill during the making of Silk Stockings--he seems to be very passive in the more active numbers and with less lines? Very glad that I ran across Paree--Paree by pure accident. Made the whole experience a lot more enjoyable. Bob Hope, as a simple \"song and dance man' is pure joy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d6466fa69da451891ed9dbfee0bb2d0",
            "input": "This is a typical 70's soft core sex romp in the Russ Meyer genre, though perhaps less outlandish than some of Meyer's work. This film has higher 'production values' than many of it's contemporaries, suggesting a larger budget. It's plot, writing and acting are straight out the B zone, though. Of late, this film has become a mainstay of B movie channels (such as \"Drive In Classics\") in the 500 channel universe. If soft core is what you are in the mood for, this is as \"good\" as anything else in the B range. Don't expect Polanski though, Sarno is just Sarno. Nothing more, nothing less. Jennifer Welles performance as the \"mother\" is perhaps the best of the cast. None of the actors in the film went on to greater fame, unsurprisingly. Confessions of a Young American Housewife is far from the worst example of it's kind. It is watchable, if this is your type of film. 30 years ago, this would have been an avant garde and riske film. You can see more or less the same kind of thing on Showtime/HBO series these days, and in prime time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0be6dc0621954eedbb7db1c5c82d3f51",
            "input": "Julian Noble (Pierce Brosnan) is a hit-man. Or a \"facilitator of fatalities\", as he prefers to be called. He is also a drunk, a womaniser, and in the middle of a mid-life crisis. On a job in Mexico City, he bumps into Danny White (Greg Kinnear), an unconfident businessman who thinks he's just nailed a recent pitch, but is unsure. They meet in the hotel bar late one night, after they've both had a few too many margaritas.Sounds like the set-up for a by-the-numbers comedy thriller, doesn't it? But it isn't. Instead, The Matador is a funny and sometimes touching character study. It avoids every twist that the above summary would suggest, sometimes even setting them up just to gleefully tear them down. It is a film that respects it characters enough to just let them get on with it, without feeling the need to shove them into needless plot contrivances.Brosnan's hit-man will inevitably be compared to his Bond, but this is unfair to both performances. Bond is a half-formed idea, a product of all that has gone before; while Julian is a fully-formed character with his own motivations and flaws. He has existed in his own shadowy, seedy world for so long that he has forgotten how to talk to another human being.When he meets Danny in the hotel bar, he sees his opposite: a normal guy with a normal job and normal problems. He envies Danny; the hit-man has become fed up with his life, sees himself edging ever closer to his inevitable \"burn out\", as he puts it. But when Danny opens up about the death of his only son, Julian tries to change the subject with a dirty joke. He is a man who has, in his own words, been \"running from any emotion.\" Kinnear holds his own opposite Brosnan's performance, and injects Danny White with his effortless everyman charm. He is the perfect foil to Julian; while the latter is drunken bravado and hedonism, Danny is down to earth, with just a hint of eccentricity. But he too goes deeper than his established persona, showing us how far the everyman will go when faced with financial and familial ruin.There is real chemistry between Brosnan and Kinnear. It is most visible in the film's three key scenes: the hotel bar; a bullfight, during which Julian tells Danny what he does for a living, and takes him through a dress rehearsal of an assassination; and a scene in which Julian turns up at Danny's house six months later. This scene also introduces us properly to Danny's wife, Bean (yes, Bean). In another example of how much The Matador respects its characters, Bean (Hope Davis), instead of panicking at the presence of a hired killer in her house, merely asks with forced calm, \"Did you bring your gun?\" The script isn't quite as good as could have been after maybe another rewrite. One or two lines seem a little forced, and a couple of the jokes need a little more work. But in the scenes where Julian and Danny (and later Bean) just talk, the writing is superb. The film feels no need to put the characters in any outlandish situations (other than meeting a hit-man, and said hit-man turning up on your doorstep). It just lets them talk, gently nudging them toward necessary plot points.There is action, but only when it reflects on the characters. One notable instance is when Julian botches a job in Budapest because he keeps seeing himself through his rifles scope. The rest of the film is about the characters, how they interact, how they each affect one another. And, ultimately, it is about friendship, even in the most unlikely of places. At one point Julian tells Danny that he is his only friend. And he really means it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab037c1506ee42f9b4c1d88acf6f9f9f",
            "input": "This is an interesting treatment of a subject that is quite controversial, (just read the other comments on this film). Apparently, you either love it or hate it and it seems most people make that distinction based on whether they believe the tribulation and end times will happen as portrayed in the movie.Basically, the film - and its sequels - were made for about $1.30 each. The production values are right down there with \"Plan 9 From Outer Space\" and the acting is about on the same level as \"Glen or Glenda\", (my apologies to Ed Wood). Putting aside the religious message, the story is as scary as they come. Add in even the slightest thought that the story might actually be close to something that might happen in the future and it becomes even scarier.This movie, and its sequels, didn't try to bring in the reasons why the tribulation happened when it did. \"Left Behind\" and \"The Omega Code\" tried to get in everything \"Thief\" did and to explain all the politics and maneuvering in the Middle East leading up to it. The net effect was \"Thief\" did a much better job on the scary part of movie, instead of spreading itself too thin trying to explain what was happening in the Middle East at the same time. Forget the politics and watch this movie, and its sequels, for what they are - horror stories. That they may be horror stories told, indirectly, by God makes them just that much more frightening. If it makes you think about the subject, it has done its job - even if you never believe.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9dedc8508981443d98322ee7e643f77e",
            "input": "I think this piece of garbage is the best proof that good ideas can be destroyed, why all the American animators thinks that the kids this days wants stupid GI JOE versions of good stories??? the Looney Tunes are some of the most beloved characters in history, but they weren't created to be Xtreme, i mean come on!!! Tiny Toons was a great example of how an old idea can be updated without loosing it's original charm, but this piece of garbage is just an example of stupid corporate decisions that only wants to create a cheap idiotic show that kids will love because hey!!! kids loves superheroes right??? the whole show is only a waste of time in which we see the new versions of the Looney Tunes but this time in superhero form, this doesn't sound too bad but the problem is that this show tries too hard to copy series like batman the animated series, or the new justice league, the result??? bad copies of flash (the road runner) or superman (who else??? bugs bunny) the problem is that Looney Tunes weren't meant to be dramatic, the were supposed to be funny!!!! as i said before this series sucks, and many people wonders why anime is taking all over the world??? this show tries to be dramatic and action packed, but that's something that few series and anime are able to do, if you want to see a good upgrade of an old show watch Tiny Toons, that's an example that it's possible to bring back to life old characters, but with a good story and respecting the original roots. too bad that show is already dead, another corporate wise decision i suppose.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f8e0856953644afb99a8e628760333a",
            "input": "I am writing this after just seeing The Perfect Son at the 2002 Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Film Festival in Sydney, Australia.When their Father dies, two estranged brothers meet at the funeral and after discovering that one of the brothers is dying from AIDS, they enter on a heart warming journey of reconciliation. The two leads do a magnificent job of creating the gradual warmth and respect that builds up between them as the movie progresses. I do have one qualm about the movie though - whilst the brother who is dying acts sick, he doesn't look it. A person of 0 T4 cells would look quite ill - not even a make up job to make the actor look ill was employed. A small gripe, but one that makes it a bit less realistic. Despite that one small gripe, The Perfect Son is a wonderful movie and should you have the chance to see it- do. I'm hoping for a DVD release in the near future!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1aeba4977d4c4af3aec8a21f5c7349f2",
            "input": "I went into this with my hopes up, by twenty minutes into the movie I couldn't have been more let down. Despite thinking that this would be another horribly bad remake, I kept my hopes high that maybe...just maybe someone would get it right this time around. Sadly, Prom Night is about on the same quality level as the recent April Fools Day remake, bad script, bad direction, cheesy overdone acting and generally bad horror.From beginning to end it's boring, repetitive and worthy of about a dozen eye rolls. We've seen it all before and we've seen it done a million times better then this. If you go to see Prom Night in the theater (I'd say wait for the DVD or PPV), get ready for the audience to laugh, because laugh they will. The laughs aren't at points in the movie that are supposed to be funny, they are in response to key \"thrilling\" moments in the film that are so poorly done you feel as if your watching the newest installment of Scary Movie. Seriously, was this supposed to be a remake or a spoof? The film makers missed the mark so badly here, that a large number of the audience in the theater I attended walked out about halfway through the movie. Which in retrospect, I wish I had done. Not me though, I had to torture myself and stick with it hoping it would get better. Needless to say It didn't. The \"horror\" scenes are a joke, not even so much because of the acting but because of the direction, the script, the \"special effects\" and the camera work. The movie manages to look as if they spent a fortune to produce it, but still came out of it with a micro budget movie. I halfway expected to see dollar store tags on some of the props and kept thinking I would spot a porn star in the cast somewhere. This movies scary alright, if this is the future of big budget horror then the horror genre is doomed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c75e7f7ba484428cb8991ba325293541",
            "input": "I got Mirror Mirror mainly because Yvonne De Carlo was in it (I thought she was great in American Gothic) but sadly she didn't have a very big role in this film. It starts off OK and the pace moves along nicely...but by the end it starts getting a bit tedious and dull. That's not to say that this is a boring film, but it's just very average and nothing spectacular. I didn't like the \"posession\" side of it and there were no decent gore scenes. Plus the 'main' story was very confusing and the ending doesn't make much sense at all. I did however like the story surrounding the Gothic girl and how she got revenge on her tormentors.I wouldn't particularly recommend Mirror Mirror to horror fans - it's nothing to wet yourself over.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1892e53f5e404bc380da9fa1a3c187b5",
            "input": "I'm sure this was one of those \"WOAH!\" attractions in 1982 when Epcot opened, but now it's just silly. The film's message is cliché. The Circle-Vision is disorienting. And that awful song at the end is grating. And I really wish they'd install seats. After so much walking, all you want to do is sit down for a few minutes. And when you hear there's a film to see it sounds pretty glamorous! You get entertained while sitting down, right? WRONG! You're standing there for 18+ minutes leaning against a short little railing. Disney should make a newer Maelstrom like attraction to liven things up and replace this dull, lackluster film. NOT FUN. Skip it. In fact, skip Canada altogether unless you're eating there. Move directly to the United Kingdom.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9cc0051607643dbb8b400eb9cdd7472",
            "input": "I mean, I thought I heard this dialog in the movie, but it was so bad and out of place that I can't really believe it. I was laughing so hard at what must have been the worst writing and acting in human history, i was seriously worried that I might have a heart attack and die right there in the theater.So this is the scene I am talking about, the \"hero\" just watched his brother crash and his brothers car exploded right there just feet away from him (the hero). The \"hero\" was throwing the expected \"fit\" at seeing something so tragic and people were trying to hold him back from running into the burning car.In the middle of his fit and his uncontrollable rage/emotional break down he says \"I am so sad\" - he said that right? Am I crazy?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49caf9bb3f8a4d96bdda281f6bf09a8a",
            "input": "This picture was banned from American movies houses in the 1930 because of nudity by Hedy Lamarr, (Eva Hermann) which caused all kinds of problems among the ladies in the 1930's but not so much for the male population. This story concerns a young woman named Eva Hermann who gets married to an older man and is carried over the threshold on the wedding night and the husband never consummates the marriage and worries about all kinds of very petty things like his shoes and killing bugs. Eva leaves her husband's house and lives with her father and tries to explain her situation. On a hot Summer day Eva takes a ride on her horse and decides to go for a swim naked in a lake in the woods. Her horse runs off and she runs after him and is observed by a young man who finds her clothes and returns them to Eva. These two people become very acquainted and there is a romance that starts to bloom. There are many more interesting problems that arise as you view this film to its very end. Enjoy a great Classic film which was a Shocker Film in 1933. Enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02a7c8d01b7b4d058419d7487530288d",
            "input": "There is absolutely nothing in this movie that shows even the tiniest scrap of talent. Nobody in it has ever tried acting before, even the extras in the coffee shop look as if they've been glued in place. Nothing looks rehearsed.The film quality is terrible. Most of the 'action' takes place in narrow corridors or apartments with the cameraman crammed in as an afterthought, swinging some cheapo camera backwards and forwards between 'actors' as they deliver their lines. No tripod and no proper microphone either, there sound quality is terrible. Even 'Manos' fares better than this, at least they had proper equipment. What plot there is simply gets lost in the production mess.Stick to home videos, preferably made by some 5 year kid trying out the video feature on daddy's new camera phone. You will be in for a long search to find a movie more inept than this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-945c298644564e22b67d4030aa4ae2e1",
            "input": "From the excellent acting of an extremely impressive cast, to the intelligently written (and very quotable) script, from the lavish cinematography to the beautiful music score by Carter Burwell, Rob Roy offers a rarity in movie going experiences: one that is nigh impossible to find fault with in any area.There have been several comparisons made with Braveheart, which came out the same year. With all due credit to Mel Gibson, Braveheart struck me as too much of a self-conscious and preachy epic to rival Rob Roy as the kind of movie I would care to see more than once. While Braveheart works hard to be a serious epic, Rob Roy just grabs you and absorbs you into its tightly edited storytelling. Not a single scene is wasted.Rob Roy contains the perfect balance of dramatic tension, action and even occasional humor. The characters are well fleshed-out, perfectly conveying vernacular and mannerisms that anchor them in their authentic period setting.Further, they are not caricatures of good and evil as we all too often observe in even modern film.For example, while we hope the heroic Rob Roy prevails, we realize his predicaments are products of his own pride and sense of honor. Tim Roth plays one of the most hateful bad guys in the history of cinema, yet there are moments when we can understand how the events of his life have shaped him into becoming what he is. Rob Roy employs a level of character development that makes its story even more believable and gripping.Rob Roy is a delightful treasure, featuring one of the greatest sword fights ever choreographed and a climatic ending worthy of all the tense anticipation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8288f178fb6f47558cb8d1ceec0e8296",
            "input": "The final film for Ernst Lubitsch, completed by Otto Preminger after Lubitsch's untimely death during production, is a juggling act of sophistication and silliness, romance and music, fantasy and costume dramatics. In a 19th century castle in Southeastern Europe, a Countess falls for her sworn enemy, the leader of the Hungarian revolt; she's aided by her ancestor, whose painted image magically comes to life. Betty Grable, in a long blonde wig adorned with flowers, has never been more beautiful, and her songs are very pleasant. Unfortunately, this script (by Samson Raphaelson, taken from an operetta by Rudolf Schanzer and E. Welisch) is awash with different ideas that fail to mesh--or entertain. The results are good-looking, but unabsorbing. *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-121e9bacd82c44ed861db1b01ae64a7b",
            "input": "Some years ago, satellite channel U.K. Gold promoted repeats of 'Men Behaving Badly' with the hype: \"Here it is, the original flat-sharing sitcom!\". This was in fact untrue. 'Man About The House' was also a flat-sharing sitcom and ran from 1973-76.It was the brainchild of Johnnie Mortimer and Brian Cooke, creators of the popular sitcom 'Father Dear Father'. When it ended, they decided they wanted to do something more in harmony with the times. In the first episode, Chrissy ( Paula Wilcox ) and Jo ( Sally Thomsett ) are tidying their Myddleton Terrace flat following a wild party when they find a man in their bath. He is Robin Tripp ( Richard O'Sullivan ), a Southampton cookery student of no fixed abode. While his clothes dry out, he puts on a ladies' dressing gown and prepares them a meal. They are so impressed by his culinary skills that they invite him to stay. But there must be no naughty business. So Robin has to pretend to be gay...On B.B.C.-2's 'I Love 1973', shown in 2000, Julie Burchill claimed that 'House' showed her a way of life she envied. She was not alone. One of the most iconic ( for me, anyway ) images of '70's British television was Sally Thomsett coming out of the London Underground carrying a parasol, and a 'blind' man doing a double take as her pert bottom swings past. A man living with two girls was a risqué subject for the time, but Mrs.Mary Whitehouse had no need to get hot under the collar, it was innocent, good-natured fun. Mortimer and Cooke's scripts went as close as they could to the edge without crossing it.Richard O'Sullivan was still playing 'Bingham' in I.T.V.'s 'Doctor In Charge' when this got started. In fact the second run of 'In Charge' overlapped with the first of 'House'. He was born to play the sex-mad Robin. Paula Wilcox's 'Chrissy' was more streetwise than 'Beryl', her character she played in 'The Lovers', while Sally Thomsett's 'Jo' was a lovable dizzy blonde. As time wore on, he became almost like an older brother to them.For many viewers, Brian Murphy and Yootha Joyce stole the show as the warring Ropers. George had lost interest in sex, but Mildred had not. They went on to their own show - the aptly titled 'George & Mildred'. The late Doug Fisher was good value as as Robin's wideboy friend Larry. He worked so well he was made into a regular.Within a year of its debut, there was the inevitable movie spin-off. I am not a big fan of the 'Man About The House' movie because I think it was stretched to fit the big screen. Most of its characters had never appeared in the series.The format was sold to America, where it became the long-running 'Three's Company' starring the late John Ritter and Suzanne Somers. It was far more suggestive than the British original, with Somers often seen in sexy clothing.After six seasons, 'House' ended with Chrissy marrying Robin's older brother Norman ( Norman Eshley ). Fans were devastated to see Robin failing to get the girl he loved, but there was some consolation in the fact that he too landed his own show - 'Robin's Nest'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86d1d83cac0d4e029925640105b3319d",
            "input": "Human Body --- WoW.There are about 27,000 Sunrises in human life....Hardly one thousand Sunrises will be watched by 90% of Humans on this planet....Our days are limited...Excellent movie for all women.... makers of human body...Thanks and Regards.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8dbd48034814474ae59470568f45b18",
            "input": "I grew up with H.R. Pufnstuff and the dashingly talented Jack Wild and now my daughters are adoring fans of Jack Wild too. This movie is exactly what movies should be: fun and entertaining. This movie is not limited to children either. A lot of the dialogue is directed to adults and Witchiepoo's performance is something you do not want to miss. The music in this movie suited Jack Wild and Mama Cass beautifully. And as a Jack Wild fan, I would never miss the chance to watch him dance or hear him sing. Knowing the hard life that Jack had now makes this movie even more wonderful especially when he sings the opening song \"If I Could\". It makes me pause in loving adoration for him for giving me wonderful childhood memories that I am now passing on to my children. Let's all go to Living Island where there is friendship and fun! And keep Jack Wild's memory alive by passing Pufnstuff on to others.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f41c9b258234008b7d7192ea70b07c1",
            "input": "A remarkable piece of documentary, giving a vivid depiction of a country deeply divided within itself (for further evidence, check out some of the comments on IMDb...!). Compares extremely favourably with Oliver Stone's \"Comandante\" (which is mainly an in-depth examination of Fidel Castro's nostril hairs). I don't know whether Chavez is everything he presents himself as being, or yet another in the long line of populist Latin-American \"caudillos\". Nor do I know whether he will be able to make good on the huge expectations he has clearly built up among the poor majority of Venezuelans. It's hardly reasonable to expect a film like this to be able to answer such questions - but I've certainly now got a pretty vivid idea of what's at stake, and what it feels like to be caught up in the middle of a coup. Someone says in the film \"we're making history\", and that's exactly what the film feels like it's capturing. Outstanding stuff.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a317d4e28d504a1f87191c92e7e06e08",
            "input": "I rented this movie tonight because it looked like a fun movie. I figured that you really couldn't go wrong with a concept of Ex Girlfriend with super powers. ... but the movie was confused and pointless ...it seemed that at every turn the writer kept throwing junk in. Also the writer kept throwing in way too much toilet humor and sexual situations that only a teenage boy could love.It seems that it could have been so simple to draw a story out of Fatal Attraction Super hero .. but I guess not. This is not a fun romantic comedy it was advertised to be. You could not take a child to see it and you would be embarrassed seeing it a date. If the writer could have done a basic story around the high concept and cleaned it up - the movie might have a fighting chance. A serious waste of time.B",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff27f4001b294d1e8ef78da4dae4654f",
            "input": "I can just about understand why some people might wish to stress this film's link with the Eighties but I really wouldn't say it's an accurate depiction of most peoples' lives in that era - even on the poorest Bradford estates. It is however typical of the blunt agitprop rubbish the dear old Royal Court Theatre was churning out at that time. Plenty of 'right-on' artistry for small, small audiences but enough well-connected backslapping to ensure future commissions for turgid playrights. IThe simple fact is that if you want to reflect upon truer common experience you'll find millions more nodding in knowing agreement to love and live as depicted in 'Gregory's Girl'. I would be tempted to call this a 'kitchen sink' drama but that would be doing a great disservice to the plumbing industry. However, as far as having a decent script is concerned, this film is indeed all washed up. For some reason it has accrued an odd following amongst Guardian reading film-goers - I can only assume they get a visual frisson out of pretending to slum it. Steer clear my friends. It is a poor film with a poor script that likes to think it is breaking boundaries by adding humorous insights into grim life on the estates. it isn't..but it is grim. Do the washing up instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecfa3173ff3443a8af1f791f71a85ab4",
            "input": "I am very surprised to see such a high rating for this film, and of the few reviews that there are to be positive. I saw the movie and was pretty dissapointed. I didn't find it very enjoyable at all. It was slow, and lacks the entertainment value. Even the murder scenes are lackluster, with real close-up shots of generic stabbings that don't look good at all. And the supposed great twist ending is really not much, I did see it coming, and then the ending just seemed cliche. This movie may not get much mention, but by the little that it does get, it is overrated. I would not recommend this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6245623a9e6418da16beb868d479200",
            "input": "A stupid young man becomes obsessed with a woman--so obsessed that he loses perspective and common sense. An evil magician approaches him and informs him he can give him great wealth that he can use to win the lady's heart IF he agrees to give him anything he wants that's within their room. The dumb guy agrees and the magician steals the man's reflection out of the mirror--and bad things naturally occur as a result.If this film had been made just a decade later, I am sure I wouldn't have been so charitable in reviewing and scoring this film. After all, the film's plot is a bit vague in spots and the acting is, at times, a bit stilted. However, when you consider that in 1913 \"full-length\" films were rare--and often only 20 to 30 minutes long! Plus, the whole idea of a complex story like you get in this film is very unusual--as stories were very short and broadly acted. So, given the limitations of the time, this film is pretty good and is one of the earlier horror films known.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9aba8b3ae2cf4a168bcdd9e25dc98278",
            "input": "As a \"Jane Eyre\" fan I was excited when this movie came out. \"At last,\" I thought, \"someone will make this book into a movie following the story actually written by the author.\" Wrong!!! If the casting director was intending to cast a \"Jane\" who was plain he certainly succeeded. However, surely he could have found one who could also act. Where was the tension between Jane and Rochester? Where was the spooky suspense of the novel when the laughter floated into the night seemingly from nowhere? Where was the sparkle of the child who flirted and danced like her mother? Finally, why was the plot changed at the end? One wonders whether the screenwriters had actually read the book. What a disappointment",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd25d484af464063811427563f1ff20b",
            "input": "This was no Trainspotting or Guy Ritchie film. It was a big wannabee. It wanted to be an edgy, nervous-laughter, urban-life affirming film, but it's more of a camera jerky, mess. It's a lot easier to imitate something else, than to create a real story with real characters. From the beginning, I couldn't care less about the characters or what they were involved in. They were always always hitting, pissing, or crying on each other. Only, there wasn't any substance to what they were doing. The dialog between characters is meant to be hip, revealing, instead it comes out trite, and one scene after another is predictable. I know there are viewers out there that really liked this movie, so I could be wrong.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e2602aa824447a29eafd96149a37fa4",
            "input": "You've never seen anything like it. Once the coup begins, it's the most dazzling, edge-of-your-seat thriller you'll ever see -- even though you know the outcome. And it's all real, because it's a documentary -- amazing. By the time it was over, it was on my Top 10 list of All Time Great Movies.Disregard the slobbering right-wing fanatics. Everyone I know who has seen this film gives it the 4-star rating. Even if you don't care about politics or about Venezuelan politics, you will find yourself nerve-racked and -- believe it -- on the edge of your seat.It's a roller-coaster ride.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7124e2c93d6e4aee8b2ed31fe3726e5f",
            "input": "a bit slow and boring, the tale of an old man and his wife living a delapidated building and interacting with a fixed cast of characters like the mailman, the brothers sitting on the porch, the wealthy cigar smoking man. The photography of the river is marvelous, as is the interior period decoration. If you like decoration of Banana Republic stores, this is a must.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee9e95e94cff4b54bfbd04c08aaeb02d",
            "input": "How a director of Altman's experience could ever expect us to want to spend time with, or to care about what happens to, a lead character who is neurotic, a whiner, a jerk with no redeeming qualities -- that is the central puzzle about this profoundly confused piece of work. A monstrous piece of trash. In addition to this crippling flaw, the plot line requires serious concentration to follow. The setup that the Branagh character walks into is so obviously a setup from the start that we are inclined to wonder whether the writer and director have totally lost respect for their audience. This latter issue is at the core of the film: it represents directorial self-indulgence with profound contempt for the taste, values, and intelligence of the viewer. Very unusual for Mr. Altman.Patrick Watson",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0128d46f5138459f8f515ea8c66af4f4",
            "input": "This is a great game! Okay perhaps it didn't have some of the features it was meant to have but Digital Anvil have still come up with a good game. There is a certain similarity to Elite(you can trade, pick up weapons and cargo off destroyed ships, go on missions)however this game features a heavily scripted mission. It is a great mission. The control system is different it uses the mouse! You basically fly you spaceship around a system and work your way up! The game features some pretty good graphics even through it was made in 2003. It should run well on even a modestly specified PC. The story features some great voice acting from John Rhys Davies, George Takei, Jennifer Hale(she appears in every computer game). Stick with the story it gets better and better as it goes on. There is even a race section, where you and an opponent have to race your spaceships around a course(it involves you going through rings). This section took me a while to beat. It adds variety to the game. Some sections are a little tough here and there but overall you can beat this game. The game has an active mod scene on the Net. Pick up some mods to extend the game. I haven't played any of the mods yet. Sadly a sequel to this was cancelled, a shame!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8eb6e2ab60f246e0af1c7bf0e3dd2d31",
            "input": "Even though Ian Kershaw distanced himself from this project due to inaccuracies in regards to Hitler's life and yes, this is dramatised, but essential. Robert Carlyle plays Hitler during his later years, during this documentary that only deals with Hitler from boyhood until he became Chancellor of Germany, including The Night of the Long Knives. This TV-film (also a two-part mini-series) shows how a series of factors allowed Hitler to come to power, e.g. the financial disaster of 1930.The series follows Hitler and little else, apart from the lives of Fritz Gerlich and Ernst Hanfstaengl. All in all, valuable and filled with interesting actors, yet I feel it should have been more tightly directed with stronger cinematography; most actors are portrayed in half-body shots which (for me) makes for a theatrical stance, not cinematic. The tempo is at times drowsy, and the film does suffer from it, being approximately 2,5 hours long.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a79b96f656034274a27568039e802075",
            "input": "This movie has no plot and no focus. Yes, it's supposed to be a slap-stick, stupid comedy, but the screen-writers have no idea what the movie was about. Even the title doesn't go along with the movie. It should have been called \"Cool Ethan\" or \"Cheaters Never Win\" or something like that. The characters are not developed and no one cares what happens to them! The girl roommate character (from That 70's Show) was the only person worth watching. She was hilarious and stole every scene she was in. The others need to make sure that their own college diplomas are in the works since they'll need a career other than acting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b290a72e2e54b3793a26f33b55401d3",
            "input": "If you are a traveller, if there is a fire burning into your heart, if you'd call \"home\" every place on earth, but none of them can give you enough, if you are always looking for the next thing and if you believe the other part of your soul is somewhere out there, see this movie and you'll find out a little, but wonderful, piece of life sitting next to you.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39b1ed9e94a64ce5ab8da34b4f56d5db",
            "input": "I don't know what I missed here, but I can't believe all these positive comments by so many people on this film. I thought it was silly, and a bit over the top. I did like the performances of Gregg Henry and Michael Rooker, however the others were just... boring.Now I like B movies, I really do, but this was a bit further down the alphabet for me. I saw someone compare the humor and horror in this to \"Army Of Darkness\" and \"Shaun of the Dead\", as well as \"On par with The Re-Animator\". You must be joking. I didn't find this film funny, it tried, it did make an effort, (possibly too much of an effort), but it failed in my opinion. By the time I was hit with the 3rd or 4th one-liner I was rolling my eyes and checking my watch.There were definitely homages made to several other films, which is always cool, kind of like an inside joke for us horror fans. But here it may have just been a lack of original thought. Admittedly there were some nice special effects, good gore, but that can't carry an entire movie. The mutated Grant looked like a cross between Jabba the Hut, and in the early stages of mutation- Chet from \"Weird Science\" (after he was turned into the monster) and one of the alien creature/children from \"The Explorers\". It just didn't work. I thought it looked like something some kid from Grade 5 art class could have designed. Then there was Brenda, the woman that Grant impregnated and chained up in the barn. When help finally arrived she looked like a giant tick waiting to be popped. The design once again was totally unimaginative. A round flesh colored balloon with a face in the middle. *yawn* Now about the zombies- The more movies I see with zombies in them these days the more I wish George A. Romero had a patent on them and was the only writer/director allowed to make movies about them. He's the only person so far to do it right, with the exception of Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg (but that was a comedy). Oh, and Danny Boyle, but they were a different style of Zombie. Maybe Mr. Romero has ruined any zombie film for me due to his ingenious ability to get his actors to moan, groan and shamble about as if their joints are dried up and lacking even a drop of synovial fluid, and their muscles are fighting the effects caused by rigor mortis that had started to set in right before they were re-animated. The people of \"Wheelsy\" just didn't have the proper motivation... they were horrible zombies.So in the end I give \"Slither\" a 3, for a couple of laughs and a few nice gore scenes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26811be19721468f86739214099dbd72",
            "input": "Let's hope this is the final nightmare. This is the epitome of a good thing gone bad. Okay, there is still some enjoyment to be had, but only in the most mundane sense. Rachel Talalay had been there for the duration of this franchise, had been on the production staff and produced even. I don't know what she was thinking, but this debacle comes complete with the human video game boy and a guest appearance byTom and Roseanne Arnold! I wish I had a clue what she was thinking when she wrote/directed this disappointing piece of garbage. She even tried to distract her audience from the fact that this movie was nothing more than an over-glorified popcorn movie instead of bearing any resemblance to horror, with the contrived use of a 3D ending. Aren't those glasses nifty? And you get to KEEP them! It's the equivalent of, you just spent $9.00 making me rich. Here's 10 cents. Now, don't you feel special!? Sorry, but for me, it just did not make me feel special. And Freddy's had yet another face-lift. This one was for the worst, I think. All the beautiful artistry that went into his \"look\" in the earlier films has been replaced by an obviously cheaper, less detailed set of prosthetics. He looks ... less like the burn victim he is supposed to be, and more like he has a skin disorder. Changing the lead's makeup like that so far into a series is about on the same level as changing the lead actor. But wait! They've done that, and done that. So I guess it doesn't matter. But it mattered to me. Freddy is no longer SCARY. He's just ... another low-rent monster like the Leprechaun. It's more...a dark comedy than the horror classic this series promises; riddled with what you can only hope the writers thought were witty one-liners and clever repartee (sadly, it fell short on both accounts). So there's nothing more to say than grab the popcorn and get ready to laugh, because there was not one scary or suspenseful moment in this entire film. It rates a 3.2/10 from...the Fiend :.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de3a2d494d5946d697f39fa5da1c0a47",
            "input": "I hated this movie so much I remember it vividly. It is not even funny. Any movie that relies on unfunny sex jokes and racism humor does not deserve the money it costs to make it. In the first half hour, Rob Schneider drinks a carton of rancid milk. All I could think was \"he deserves it, for making such a bad movie\". Don't waste your time or money on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fbe664d24dbc4a46a95bcbb6c1407c09",
            "input": "On his birthday a small boys tells his mother he is not her son, and that he wants to go home to his real mother.In some ways Comedy De L'Innocence feels like it comes from a different time of movie-making, perhaps the 60's or 70's. Certainly it reminded me of Losey's Secret Ceremony (1968), and Richard Loncraine's Full Circle (1977), both of which deal with loss, grief and relationships between parents and 'lost' children (curiously both films star Mia Farrow).All three films are populated with unsympathetic characters who behave in strange and unexplained ways. All three films have a chilly feel, both emotionally and literally. All three films focus on mother-child relationships, and ultimately all three films pose the question - 'what is real, what is imagined?' Beautiful but flawed, it offers no easy answers and leaves much hanging, unexplained and strange.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb91a71bb7a541bd92fba71ad09b4bf6",
            "input": "The only redeeming quality of this overlong miscast melodrama is the scenery of southern France and the voice of Nana Mascouri singing the theme song. Stephanie Powers is miscast and betrayed by a phony accent. As has been pointed out, she is too old to play an 18 year old and looks far too young as a grandmother with a college age granddaughter? Lee Remick is good although she also is ageless in her later years. The talented Joanna Lumley is under utilized and also manages to look forever young when her middle aged son (Robert Urich) finally marries Grandma Stephanie Powers. Stacey Keach's ceaseless arrogance makes you wonder what these women saw in him. Don't know how any viewer could relate to his excessive portrayal? The most credible performance is given by Ian Richardson, who makes the rest of the cast look like rank amateurs. It strains credulity that the handsome male suitors in this epic would remain ever single while they patiently await the subject of their affections to finally consent to accept them. Can anybody believe that handsome Robert Urich would remain single for decades waiting for Stephanie Powers to finally accept his endless marriage proposals? The WW2 engagement between the Wehrmacht and the Marquis is laughable. To begin with, the Germans did not occupy the Provence section of France until late in the war, it was controlled by the Vichy French puppet government. We see the French resistance staging a daylight raid on Mistral's villa to steal sheets after which they all lounge under a bridge waiting for a lumbering truckload of Nazi troops to surprise and annihilate them? If you want to see a well acted mini-series set in a foreign country, don't watch Mistral's Daughter. A far better alternative would be The Thorn Birds.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5a1818a019a4eec9d337629f794f285",
            "input": "this show is awful. no comedy, no plot no good characters. America are you blind give the award to real shows. i hate this show along with 30 rock. honestly I'm so glad they canceled this show. thank you CBS. keep two and a half men, keep Christine, keep rules of engagement keep how i meet your mother which really isn't funny but a lot funnier than this. this show is a rip off of friends. with the same director so thats okay. but keep this show gone and never bring it back. never ever ever ever. the only reason i didn't give it a 1 rating is because it keep my awake instead of asleep. those are the types of movies or TV shows that i give a one. the only reason i was still awake was because of the audiences laughter and i was looking forward to the next show. i really wish this show was funny sorry but my opinion stupid. very stupid. i don't see why everyone loves it. my opinion again. but i also find big bang theory kinda stupid. my bad smart. the class bye bye now i have a smile and it is not from watching your show.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7182cfa28d34d4bbad2b1179d377625",
            "input": "Wow...sheer brilliance.Turning a thriller/suspense/horror into comedy.After watching this, I never laughed so hard at a horror movie before...a ridiculous plot with 3 characters that were just insanely developed - either not written in depth or too much depth.If you want to watch an absolutely written horror movie with stupid dialog, messed up plot, useless scenes, wasted characters, bad sound and lousy development overall, then this is the one to watch.Be sure to keep focused for the classic \"food processor\" scene and the totally inept police investigation scenes.This is a remarkable new low in screen performance and writing and to sit through it for the entire duration makes you either stupid, daring or brave.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b5f6ad20ddc4a1f9d60ce79a5d26ed0",
            "input": "Creepshow 2 had a lot of potential, they just didn't put enough time in perfecting it. The stories were pretty cool and creepy enough, but it was lacking. It's a good movie, but after you've seen it once, you might want to see it again. This movie could of been better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e7b1cca298b4e69872980b8f0f00c1f",
            "input": "I have to say that this miniseries was the best interpretation of the beloved novel \"Jane Eyre\". Both Dalton and Clarke are very believable as Rochester and Jane. I've seen other versions, but none compare to this one. The best one for me. I could never imagine anyone else playing these characters ever again. The last time I saw this one was in 1984 when I was only 13. At that time, I was a bookworm and I had just read Charlotte Bronte's novel. I was completely enchanted by this miniseries and I remember not missing any of the episodes. I'd like to see it again because it's so good. :-)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6370265a99284b1395c1bfc5c682acce",
            "input": "There was not one original idea in this story. Themes were pulled from various sources; a few being The Ninth Gate, In the Mouth of Madness (another Carpenter film), and The Ring. It even went as far as featuring the same damn glowing circle from The Ring and using it as the film's namesake. The soundtrack by Cody Carpenter was all but lifted from Suspiria. Hopefully no one will oppose this comment by spewing the word HOMAGE around. Yes, I saw that the theater was playing Argento's Deep Red. Claiming an homage would be a bullshit cop-out. This was bottom-of-the-barrel. Throwing gore and \"disturbing\" imagery into the pot does not make a good horror film. Carpenter used to know that. He should fade into obscurity or acquire a time machine.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea550c6a3ef3455db474442979776d4e",
            "input": "What a stunning episode for this fine series. This is television excellence at its best. The story takes place in 1968 and it's beautifully filmed in black & white, almost a film noir style with its deep shadows and stark images. This is a story about two men who fall in love, but I don't want to spoil this. It is a rare presentation of what homosexuals faced in the 1960s in America. Written by the superb Tom Pettit, and directed by the great Jeannot Szwarc, we move through their lives, their love for each other, and their tragedy. Taking on such a sensitive issue makes this episode all the more stunning. Our emotions are as torn and on edge as the characters. Chills ran up my spine at the end when they played Bob Dylan's gorgeous, \"Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now,\" as sung by the Byrds. This one goes far past a 10 and all the way to the stars. Beautiful.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9b2fcdd74264714afa546b1f8376661",
            "input": "\"Father is still away on business\" was headline of an review after \"Promise Me This\" premiere in Cannes. I do understand why many thinks the same but unique expression of Kusturica is still present in his new movie and is something why critics can't touch him. I had two hours of pure energy without rest. Even when Kusturica is suffering of lack of concentration or fear of empty space he is still unique and unspoiled. Surprisingly good performance of Stribor Kusturica. Much More close-ups and less landscapes then in \"Life Is A Miracle\". Marija Petronijevic has femme fatal world class potential, please don't spoil it. Surely, I recommend to everyone to see this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4aaa24bd1ba14ffda12b006412ce39af",
            "input": "When I saw this movie a few days ago, my eyes were completely fixed to the screen. Its greatness held my attention to such an extent that I focused all of my attention on it for its entire duration. I would recommend seeing it not just to fans of anime, but to anyone who likes great movies period (or who likes really weird stuff). The style of art is beautiful, the sound is perfect, and the symbolism within it is breathtaking. I've heard complaints about the weird insertion of English text in the movie, but I think the way its done is complementary to the strange style of the movie. The self-attributed description of \"Hello Kitty on acid\" doesn't do justice to this film of absolutely epic proportions. I'd like to find more works by whoever made this, and see them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d44d2c0db734c6c8c4a36a1485b0b7a",
            "input": "Arthur Bach needs to grow up, but that is unfortunately not the only thing he needs to do. According to his extremely rich father, Arthur has to marry a certain wealthy Susan Johnson or he's cut off from the family money ($750 million dollars worth). The problem is, Arthur doesn't love Susan (though I hear she makes some good chicken) and has just fallen head-over-heels for the waitress and part-time shop-lifter Linda Marolla. Arthur is an interesting fellow. He's really just a big kid, born into riches with at least one person looking after him every second of every day. Working just rubs Arthur the wrong way - he likes to have fun, womanize, and of course, drink. Drinking gives Arthur a sort of Jekyll-and-Hyde complex; and while that gets him into all sorts of trouble, it's absolutely hilarious to watch on screen. Dudley Moore is great here in this film as Arthur, earning an Oscar nomination and Golden Globe win for his performance. Moore is fantastic with the comedic aspects of the film, turning the already funny lines into unforgettable comedic gold, but he is also great in bringing Arthur down to a relatable level and making the character likable. Moore has some help in the co-star department - Liza Minnelli is great as Lina, the spirited nobody who Arthur can't get enough of, and John Gielgud is terrific as Arthur's butler Hobson. Gielgud won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his performance in this film, and there's no doubting why. Hobson has a stone-solid dry wit and stuck up attitude, but he's always looking out for Arthur - and Gielgud is perfect in the role. Steve Gordon's 1981 film Arthur is short and simple, but delivers laughs a-plenty.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5e388042d4e4c31aa11dca94892a047",
            "input": "This movie does not rock, as others have said. I found it really boring and silly. The story is about this metal high school kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. The singer dies, but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at, of course, midnight on Halloween (which would actually make it November 1st, a much less potent date to be sure). The kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back-play messages. It also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world. The first part of this film is not a horror film at all, but rather an After School Special. We see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. And he fails to learn the most important lesson in high school movies: When the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party, DON'T GO! It is a trap. Especially if it is a pool party. Anybody surprised when he ends up in the water?? It was such an After School Special that I kept waiting for Melissa Sue Anderson to show up and teach Jody Foster a lesson.So back to the horror part of the film. So this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense), he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. What? A sensitive hero? What fun is that in a horror movie? Thank goodness Carrie White did not follow this lesson. He actually tries to PREVENT having the music played at the Halloween Dance, the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. If it were me, I would have put that music on, and pronto. The rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. Why not partner with him and REALLY do some damage. Why you ask? It seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt..more appropriate for a Molly Ringwald film. Is this a horror film or an episode of Beauty and the Beast? The movie just goes on and on at this point, with no scares, horror, or anything worth watching. If you went to high school in the late 80s like I did, this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair, but that is it for this film. Skip it and stay home and just listen to some KISS.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f8c50b9fdaf4df5becf1f034d19faf1",
            "input": "This movie is terrible. Carlitos Way(1993) is a great film. Goodgfellas it isn't but its one of the better crime films done. This movie should be considered closer to THE STING Part2 or maybe speed Zone. Remember those gems! The only reason this movie was made was to capitalize on the cult following of the original. This movie lacked everything De Palma, Pacino and Penn worked so hard on. There wasn't a likable character and that is the fault of everyone responsible for making it. I hope RISE TO POWER wins every RAZZIE it possibly can and maybe even invent some new categories to allow it be a record holder. After I watched this S@*T FEST movie, I sat down and watched the original Carlitos way to get th bad taste out of my mouth. After watching this I wish Pachanga came and whacked me out of my misery.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da7e4aae98624cd5b254c9c09734d857",
            "input": "This is one of the most putrid movies of the 90's. I would not recommend it if you have something better to do. This picture presents African-Americans as savage, uncultured, violent, inarticulate, reefer-smoking sociopaths. Fudge(Ice Cube) and his posse of homies are continuously disrespectful toward others in the dorm, not just the white people, but Asians too, and are never disciplined for their actions. Despite all that tolerance they keep on whining and crying about the evil white oppressors who run their lives and stand in their way. In fact it is Fudge's influence that causes Remmy to bond with the skin heads, to drop out of college, and eventually to kill Malik's girlfriend.The skinheads are presented as a covert group of underachievers who share a pad off campus and generally stay away from everyone else. They never blast their music to annoy people nor do they taunt the police. They do commit serious crime such as battery and rape, yet they're not as repulsive nor as threatening as Fudge and Dreads(Busta Rhymes) are.There's a lot of material in this film which almost offended me or made me giggle. Some of it is as follows below.Fudge and Dreads are stated as students at the Columbus University yet we never see them in class and it is completely unclear how they pay their tuition. One is only left to speculate that the weed they smoke has something to do with their finances. Though they are students at what looks like a private university, they cannot utter a single line of proper English. Their characters are developed only through their compulsive whining and xenophobia.It appears that drunken Kristen(Kristy Swanson) knew exactly why drunken Billy was taking her to his house. She even asked him to get a rubber so that they could begin. The fact that he penetrated her without a condom became a rape whilst it would be great sex only if he had one handy. Later Kristen was assured by Taryn(Jennifer Connely) that she holds no accountability in that matter, and despite willfully jumping into a guy's bed she wasn't ready for sexual intercourse and was viciously taken advantage of by a sexual predator. Then a week or so later she met, and slept with, an ultra-sensitive do-gooder who knew how to avoid raping and brought a condom. The director stressed contraception thoroughly.This movie is complete and utter garbage that makes black people look like pricks and women look stupid and frail. Cole Hauser's acting, and Laurence Fishburne's accent are the only reasons I can think of to watch it. The writer/director is obviously a man of limited intelligence. Go ahead and limit your own by watching this crap if you want, but keep in mind that neurons don't grow back. Just follow the advice at the end and UNLEARN.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aeb8875701c64b59adc70535cca69439",
            "input": "This stalk and slash turkey manages to bring nothing new to an increasingly stale genre. A masked killer stalks young, pert girls and slaughters them in a variety of gruesome ways, none of which are particularly inventive.It's not scary, it's not clever, and it's not funny. So what was the point of it?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbb05c54217144fcad166a23bf812a43",
            "input": "Released in December of 1957, Sayonara went on to earn 8 Oscar nominations and would pull in 4 wins. Red Buttons won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in his role as airman Joe Kelly who falls in love with a Japanese woman while stationed in Kobe during the Korean War. Oscar nominated for Best Leading Actor, Marlon Brando plays Major Lloyd Gruver, a Korean War flying ace reassigned to Japan, who staunchly supports the military's opposition to marriages between American troops and Japanese women and tries without any success to talk his friend Joe Kelly out of getting married. Ironically Marlon Brandos character soon finds love of his own in a woman of Japanese descent. This movie highlights the prejudices and cultural differences of that time. Filmed in beautiful color and with stunning backgrounds I found this movie to be well worth watching just for these effects alone. Good movie, gimme more...GimmeClassics",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f04f3dd58fd549e6a441a547e4557216",
            "input": "it's amazing that so many people that i know haven't seen this little gem. everybody i have turned on to it have come back with the same reaction: WHAT A GREAT MOVIE!!i've never much cared for Brad Pitt (though his turns in 12 monkeys and Fight Club show improvement) but his performance in this film as a psycho is unnerving, dark and right on target.everyone else in the film gives excellent performances and the movie's slow and deliberate pacing greatly enhance the proceedings. the sense of dread for the characters keeps increasing as they come to realize what has been really happening.the only thing that keeps this from a 10 in my book, is that compared to what came before it, the ending is a bit too long and overblown. but that's the only flaw i could find in this cult classic.if you check this film out, try to get the letterboxed unrated director's cut for the best viewing option.rating:9",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b27f164cff041bcbfaff028851571f6",
            "input": "I know the film snobs are snorting. But if you're looking for a surprisingly fun ride through the B-movie jungle, try \"Jake Speed\".A little thin at times, but its one-liners and the location more then make up for this. John Hurt(God love him), seems to be having fun doing his role as the ultra evil white slaver. The nemesis of Crawfords, Jake Speed. He adds a dimension to the film that only a pro like Hurt could provide. Crawford and Dennis Christopher( Jakes sidekick) are a good team,although you do wonder why they both put up with each other.However ,together both Crawford and Christopher portray a team that is just so much fun that, if you can get over yourself for a moment, you may find yourself acting like a kid again at the situations and the inherent suspense they provide.The delicious Karen Kopins does a great job as the damsel in distress that is more concerned about the motives of her rescuer then her tormentor.I have yet to find a movie that is as much fun without getting preachy,or bogging down the movie by trying too hard. Not every movie has to be the latest \"Citizen Kane\". And trust me,Wells was an original. So lets remember that sometimes, movies are for fun.Not social commentary or attempting to sway an audience politically. But just for the sheer fun of being alive and living in a time when our hero's live in a celluloid dimension.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00dc035de6174e148b0eb5b79dfe05f8",
            "input": "First I was caught totally off guard by the film's initial lyricism and then I became totally enchanted with the unfolding story and engrossed with the brilliant directing. The characters were all fully developed, not bigger-than-life but just like the people we live among anywhere we are in the world, in Sweden, in Turkey or in America, all completely believable human beings with foibles and nobility. Hollywood could learn so much from this beautiful film. It shows that there is no need to go into every little detail behind every action to bring out the whole theme clear and bright, and that shows the brilliance of the director! Hearfelt thanks to Kay Pollak and the wonderful cast for this superb treat!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4138a9c6df7487ab33ad20a27a70b57",
            "input": "Who are these \"They\"- the actors? the filmmakers? Certainly couldn't be the audience- this is among the most air-puffed productions in existence. It's the kind of movie that looks like it was a lot of fun to shoot— TOO much fun, nobody is getting any actual work done, and that almost always makes for a movie that's no fun to watch.Ritter dons glasses so as to hammer home his character's status as a sort of doppleganger of the bespectacled Bogdanovich; the scenes with the breezy Ms. Stratten are sweet, but have an embarrassing, look-guys-I'm-dating-the-prom-queen feel to them. Ben Gazzara sports his usual cat's-got-canary grin in a futile attempt to elevate the meager plot, which requires him to pursue Audrey Hepburn with all the interest of a narcoleptic at an insomnia clinic. In the meantime, the budding couple's respective children (nepotism alert: Bogdanovich's daughters) spew cute and pick up some fairly disturbing pointers on 'love' while observing their parents. (Ms. Hepburn, drawing on her dignity, manages to rise above the proceedings- but she has the monumental challenge of playing herself, ostensibly.) Everybody looks great, but so what? It's a movie and we can expect that much, if that's what you're looking for you'd be better off picking up a copy of Vogue.Oh- and it has to be mentioned that Colleen Camp thoroughly annoys, even apart from her singing, which, while competent, is wholly unconvincing... the country and western numbers are woefully mismatched with the standards on the soundtrack. Surely this is NOT what Gershwin (who wrote the song from which the movie's title is derived) had in mind; his stage musicals of the 20's may have been slight, but at least they were long on charm. \"They All Laughed\" tries to coast on its good intentions, but nobody- least of all Peter Bogdanovich - has the good sense to put on the brakes.Due in no small part to the tragic death of Dorothy Stratten, this movie has a special place in the heart of Mr. Bogdanovich- he even bought it back from its producers, then distributed it on his own and went bankrupt when it didn't prove popular. His rise and fall is among the more sympathetic and tragic of Hollywood stories, so there's no joy in criticizing the film... there _is_ real emotional investment in Ms. Stratten's scenes. But \"Laughed\" is a faint echo of \"The Last Picture Show\", \"Paper Moon\" or \"What's Up, Doc\"- following \"Daisy Miller\" and \"At Long Last Love\", it was a thundering confirmation of the phase from which P.B. has never emerged.All in all, though, the movie is harmless, only a waste of rental. I want to watch people having a good time, I'll go to the park on a sunny day. For filmic expressions of joy and love, I'll stick to Ernest Lubitsch and Jaques Demy...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d959e3ad8f484b50a844e0b8e0801b93",
            "input": "After having seen Deliverance, movies like Pulp Fiction don't seem so extreme. Maybe by today's blood and bullets standards it doesn't seem so edgy, but if you think that this was 1972 and that the movie has a truly sinister core then it makes you think differently.When I started watching this movie nothing really seemed unusual until I got to the \"Dueling Banjos\" scene. In that scene the brutality and edge of this film is truly visible. As I watched Drew(Ronny Cox,Robocop)go head to head with a seemingly retarted young boy it really shows how edgy this movies can get. When you think that the kid has a small banjo, which he could of probably made by hand, compared to Drew's nice expensive guitar, you really figure out just how out of their territory the four men are.As the plot goes it's very believable and never stretches past its limits. But what really distinguishes this film, about four business men who get more than they bargained for on a canoe trip, is that director John Boorman(Excalibur) breaks all the characters away from plain caricatures or stereotypes. So as the movie goes into full horror and suspense I really cared about all four men and what would happen to them.The acting is universally excellent. With Jon Voight(Midnight Cowboy, Enemy of the State) and Burt Reynolds(Boogie Nights, Striptease) leading the great cast. Jon Voight does probably the hardest thing of all in this film and that is making his transformation from family man to warrior very believable. Unlike Reynolds whose character is a warrior from the start, Voight's character transforms over the course of the movie. Ned Beatty(Life) is also good in an extremely hard role, come on getting raped by a hillbilly, while Ronny Cox turns in a believable performance.One thing that really made this movies powerful for me is that the villains were as terrifying as any I had ever seen. Bill Mckinney and Herbert \"Cowboy\" Coward were excellent and extremely frightening as the hillbilly's.Overall Deliverance was excellent and I suggest it to anyone, except for people with weak stomachs and kids. 10/10. See this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55f846b46e3d45b9baa0edc56dbe02d6",
            "input": "I don't watch soaps. My grandmother still watches that one with the hour glass. I made fun of them it when I was ten (it was so easy).But this movie takes parody and spells it a new way. I found the story pretty damn funny. The fashions of the 80's - shoulder pads, sequins, and polyester - just top it off. The huge hair, the high heels, and the histrionics - what a combination.And all the actors just go to town, chewing up their parts and spitting them out in a big well scripted pile. Sally, Kevin, Elisabeth - wonderful! Whoopi - great! Robert Downey - refreshing to see him back when he had such potential, before the tabloids. And Garry: why did we have to wait so long to see him on film? Leesa Gibbons - hadn't been missing her, but nice to include her as a real life entertainment reporter (and where do you apply for THAT job, anyway?).Admittedly, I could have done without Sally climbing the drainpipe. Lucy Ricardo did it, how many times?, as has every comedienne from Carol Burnett to I don't know who and I'm so done with it now, I could spit peanuts if I had them. Apparently it's what you do when you're being funny in a tall building in New York. I'm just thankful they didn't pull out the flagpole bit.But it was cute, it was funny, it had plot twists, it had an after credits ending before that was common, it had clothes worthy of a second glance, it had a great cast and it's got personal memories for me. Really, what more do you need?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca39e0a471464434b541dc8fba8b357e",
            "input": "Sort of like a very primitive episode of \"General Hospital\" set in a natal ward (and one for tough cases at that), this fast-moving programmer has a satisfying emotional impact -- mainly because Eric Linden, as the distraught young husband in the main plot, is so palpably a wreck, and with such good reason. His expectant wife, Loretta Young, is brought to the ward at the beginning of a 20-year prison sentence for offing a lecher who probably had it coming to him; Ms. Young, as always, doesn't do anything to disinvite audience sympathy, and she's a little too good to be true, though sympathetic and lovely to look at, of course. Her difficult pregnancy and relationships with the other girls of the ward form the heart of the movie, and the outcome -- not an entirely happy one -- feels right. Aline MacMahon, \"one of the cinema's few perfect actresses,\" in the apt words of film historian David Thomson, exudes warmth and authority as the head nurse, and Glenda Farrell, as a none-too-willing new mom of twins, gets to croon \"Frankie and Johnny\" as a drunken lullaby. Frank McHugh figures in another subplot, and he gets to show more range than Warners usually permitted him. It's scaled and paced modestly, and Linden's expectant-dad panic stays with you for days -- this sort of part was often played for laughs, but he's a terrified young kid in trouble, and very persuasive.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6fc5e17ae2494df0be5bcd6e37133389",
            "input": "Poor Michael Madsen; he must be kicking himself to know folks have found out about this horrible flick. I really can't think of anything worse I have ever seen, except amateur porn. It's that bad, and all here; wooden acting, bad script, crappy moral ending, you hate it and it is in this movie.My question is: \"Who the Hell put $$$ into this piece of doggy doo? At least we could have seen Michael's sister Virginia nude in a scene, but I don't think even that would save this stinker...For a cool guy that has made some exception movies, I want to know what wacky church sponsored this piece of crapola.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2a9568bc08c4761b4c7595917df8fdc",
            "input": "This video rocked! Eddie is one of the funniest comics I have ever seen. Not only does he have class, he makes some of the funniest observations on history and culture that I have ever seen. Eddie is the most original and most intelligent comic I've seen in a VERY long time. Tell all those other stand-ups to get off the stage and let this \"executive\" reign!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ce77ecf453a47d0a0cf8bb1f5966ef2",
            "input": "My wife and I both agree that this is one of the worst movies ever made. Certainly in the top ten of those I've watched all the way through. At least \"Plan 9\" was enjoyable.I DID really enjoy \"Christine\", \"The Dead Zone\", \"Firestarter\", \"Carrie\", and some of his other films. I didn't care much for \"Cujo\" (only because the sound was so bad on versions I've seen and I often couldn't tell what people were saying), or \"Pet Sematary (Pet Cemetery)\".But this mess was a total mistake in every way possible. The \"creatures\" themselves seemed designed by a 9-year-old. (No offense to 9-year-olds.)Even the \"one-liners\" made us groan and weren't remotely amusing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6cf8753fae024a8a880cd43e5ab92df4",
            "input": "A huge disappointment from writer Hamm and director Dante. Their previous collaboration on the first season's \"Homecoming\" was twisted and darkly hilarious in all the right ways. This poor handling of an intriguing premise left me bewildered. The supposed \"payoff\" showing generic aliens extracting something from the brains of the infected psychopaths was completely unsatisfying and explained nothing. If the point of the story was an extraterrestrial \"cleaning\" of the planet of it's human infestation, why did they go about it in such a gratuitously sadistic and misogynistic fashion? Why not just unleash a completely lethal virus a la Stephen King's \"The Stand\" instead of having the male population butcher the females? I kept hoping the episode would improve as I kept watching but it just got more pretentious and preposterous. The religious subtext simply seemed forced but it was clear Sam Hamm must have thought it was profound by the weight he gave it. I like a lot of both Dante and Hamm's work but this was just unwatchable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-841497d0ef8f481d9409521c2ef4b25d",
            "input": "I hadn't laughed this hard for a movie in a really long time. The garbage that Hollywood has been putting out lately drives me up a wall! This one was definetely fresh and witty. If you look at the demographic figures for the ratings, only a few women have voted! I don't want to ruin the movie for you but I'm sure that every guy who saw this ran to their computers to rate it and gave it a poor score, why? Because the movie puts men in their place, that's why. If more women vote for this movie because of its actual humor value and not because it is damaging to men...it could easily be a \"7\" rated movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-583144e27e124512a5b04d043cfcf887",
            "input": "This is without a doubt the worst movie I have ever seen. It is not funny. It is not interesting and should not have been made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d1b0d912f4446688275be46f5ef7e56",
            "input": "Sorry Fulci fans, but I could not get through this one. The soundtrack was about as annoying as they come, the acting was puerile, the story has been done and done, and the direction was non-existent. Massacre honestly looked like a children's film project. But I've seen some of those, and they actually look better than this did! It appears to have been so underfunded they couldn't afford ... ANYTHING! Not a DoP, not a director, no one who even remotely had a clue what acting was. It was a very poor cinematic experience; one of my worst.This was about the worst suck-fest I've seen, next to Terror Toons which is second only to Killer Klowns from Outer Space. I've nothing else to say about it.It rates a 0.1/10 from...the Fiend :.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a63371b2b644c4988b252584fa4347d",
            "input": "this film was just brilliant,casting,location scenery,story,direction,everyone's really suited the part they played,and you could just imagine being there,Robert Redford's is an amazing actor and now the same being director,Norman's father came from the same Scottish island as myself,so i loved the fact there was a real connection with this film,the witty remarks throughout the film were great,it was just brilliant,so much that i bought the film as soon as it was released for retail and would recommend it to everyone to watch,and the fly-fishing was amazing,really cried at the end it was so sad,and you know what they say if you cry at a film it must have been good,and this definitely was, also congratulations to the two little boy's that played the part's of Norman and Paul they were just brilliant,children are often left out of the praising list i think, because the stars that play them all grown up are such a big profile for the whole film,but these children are amazing and should be praised for what they have done, don't you think? the whole story was so lovely because it was true and was someone's life after all that was shared with us all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bccd382aad144fe09bdf34bdd931deda",
            "input": "First of all, I think the below comment is unworthy for a site like this. Obviously you have no taste and you don't respect the taste of others. Not to give you a history lesson but I think it needs to be done. Black actors out there are just, if not more, successful as others. If you are not a part of the \"Black\" race you cannot understand the quality, creativeness, and vibrant of old movies such as \"Sparkle\" and \"Mahogany\" and \"Cooley High.\" Since unfortunately you are not Black, you do not have the pleasure of feeling what we feel when we watch these classics, so therefore you need to keep your freaking mouth shut and just stick to your non-dancing race. Thanks.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31c43609d1db42ae9ff454c785ee9afa",
            "input": "The plot doesn't offer any new excitements, it even starts the same as cube I. This time there are no other enhancements for the cube machinery, except for having an extra exit, which is not guarded, very ingenious. The characters are also not so well elaborated as in the first episode, they just became \"flat\" as in a soap opera. If somebody makes it to the normal exit, the person would be asked some questions, like \"do you believe in god?\", its not really creative or original and especially in my opinion it doesn't fit into the mystery of the cube with it traps. Really there is nothing much else to say about it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-925ec1d0ef314c6eac00d6212928040e",
            "input": "Diane and I saw this fabulous film today in Fremantle and we both agreed that of the pastiche movies it was head and shoulders above the rest. I say that because we were entranced by the brief, five to ten minute segments that composed the film and the fact that this film had a theme around which each piece was composed and of course that theme was love in its many forms.Ostensibly the film took place in the various Parisian arrondisments thus giving a particular flavour to each segment. Having only been in Paris several times, I was not knowledgeable enough to readily recognize the locations but I am sure Europeans and particularly French people could easily recognize the city's locations. In any event, the viewer is immediately pulled into each story because of their production excellence so these city locations fade into in-consequence.The film moves quickly and the viewer is left absorbing one scenario while the new one is on the screen. The stories themselves are not graphic like some pulp Hollywood nonsense, they are subtle and thought provoking and gentle as with most of life without the media swath that buries so much of life's beauty under the nearest dung heap just to sell, sell. sell ...Go with someone you care for and allow this magical little film to bathe you like a spa treatment and when you leave my guess is you will feel renewed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e185a20ac364922925fa37560ee5257",
            "input": "Well, as Goethe once said, there really isn't any point in trying to pass a negative judgement that aspires to be objective on \"something that has had a great effect\". \"La Maman et La Putain\" has surely passed into history as an influence on much of what's been done in France and elsewhere in the past thirty years and no one interested in the history of film, certainly, should be dissuaded from watching it. To express a purely subjective judgement, however, I feel compelled to disagree with almost every other review posted here and say to people: \"Don't watch it; it's a waste of hours of your time that will just leave you feeling rather sick and angry.\" And by that I don't mean \"sick and angry\" about \"the human condition\" or anything so general and profound as that, because that is exactly the line that most critics have adopted in their fulsome praise of the film - \"an ordeal to watch in its ruthless dissection of our emotional cowardice and cruelty\" and so on - and, if it really managed to put across a universally or even broadly relevant message of this sort, then the director would have good reason to be satisfied with himself, however pessimistic his conclusions may be. My beef with the film is rather that I don't see this hours-long record of empty vanity and petty treachery as being justified or excused by any GENERALLY relevant message at all. All three main characters are deeply morally unattractive individuals: Alexandre to the greatest degree, of course, because we see by far the most of him and because he seldom shuts up for more than thirty seconds; Marie perhaps to the least degree, because we see the least of her. Alexandre's affected and pretentious monologues have a kind of amusement value, of course, but the amusement wears thin as one comes more and more clearly to realize that Jean-Pierre Léaud is most likely not even acting and that, with absurd remarks like \"un homme beau comme un film de Nicholas Ray\", he really was just reproducing word-for-word opinions that were accepted as authentic and profound by the milieu in which he, along with the director Eustache, had been living for about ten years by the time of the making of the film. I suppose if the tone of relentless superficiality and triviality had been sustained throughout 100% of the film, it might have worked as a long sardonic comedy about a particularly shallow, worthless and despicable post-'68 milieu. What made, however, this viewer at least extremely angry with the director was his granting of at least one lengthy scene each to Alexandre and Veronika in which we are clearly expected to empathize with and feel for them as if they shared a moral universe with us. If a man can get away with living in the flat of and professing to love one woman, sleeping (mostly in this very flat) with another, and running around Paris proposing marriage to yet a third, well, I suppose I can wish him the best of luck in the dog-eat-dog world he's chosen to create for himself. What I can't, however, in all conscience do is listen even for a moment to maudlin monologues from him in which he speaks about his \"anxiety\" and his \"despair\". The same goes double for the even more despicable Veronika, whom we are shown barging drunk into the apartment and even the bed shared by Marie and Alexandre and behaving there with an infantile inconsistency tantamount to the most savage and heartless cruelty. As I say, if \"La Maman et La Putain\" is intended to be nothing more nor other than a portrait of Alexandre, Veronika and Marie, three individuals whom any even halfway decent person would never admit into their company let alone their home, then I suppose there is a kind of legitimacy in praising the director for being \"unflinching\" (though why one should even feel like \"flinching\" once one had consciously opted to create such thoroughly repellent characters to filmically observe I can't imagine). The problem, however, is that the director is clearly convinced - and appears to have succeeded in convincing generations of critics - that Alexander, Veronika and Marie are somehow representative of human beings in general and of the limits of human beings' emotional capabilities. This latter idea, however, is arrant and offensive nonsense. There may indeed be an inherent fallibility and tendency to tragedy in human relations in general and sexual relations in particular. But the nature and degree of this fallibility and tendency to tragedy can only possibly be determined by people who make a sincere and serious effort to make such relations work. It surely needs no cinematic or authorial genius to convey to us the information that a man who behaves like Alexandre is going to end up hated, miserable, and alone, or that women who insist on expecting love from a man like Alexandre are going to end up disappointed and bitter. Watch \"La Maman et La Putain\" if you're historically interested in what passed for culture and human interaction in a certain post-'68 Parisian milieu which was probably, unfortunately, not restricted to just a few particularly anti-social types like these. But please don't make the mistake of believing that what is recorded here has any general relevance for humanity in the way that a film by Jean Renoir or Martin Scorsese might be argued to have.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a021fa0395a042fd825d73ccbf822940",
            "input": "The subject is certainly compelling: a group of people take their love of gaming one step further by creating a fake medieval world full of warriors, kings, princes and castles. Wargaming is an interesting phenomena that delves into our collective need to \"escape\" from reality and the sometimes mundaneness of our existence -- something almost everyone can relate to. The characters are the predictable mix of Lord of the Rings nerds and Star Trek enthusiasts. That's enough to get most people to watch. However, very quickly the film turns into an insider's view of wargaming with an almost stereotypical thumbing of the nose to viewers who \"don't get it\". The filmmakers seem to take the subject of wargaming, and this particular one, waaaaay too seriously rather than once in awhile recognizing the humor and fun in making a film about adults drssing up in medieval gear and pounding each other with foam swords. It's pretty hard for anyone who doesn't sit on their computer for 7-10 hours a day playing games or desiging the latest star destroyer to understand what the characters are talking about and why we should even care. However, the filmmakers themselves seem not to care choosing to focus solely on the subject of the game itself rather than building a strong narrative with a clear story that anyone can understand. Moreover, the characters themselves are not that compelling and you quickly become bored of them: a big no-no when you're trying to keep people's attention for 90 minutes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4e103a310a14f118175838b17b25ff5",
            "input": "I have always been a fan of the show so I'll admit that I am biased. When the show's run ended, I felt like too many questions remained unanswered. This movie to me felt like closure. To see all the people I'd followed over the past few years together at last was most rewarding. I have heard that this is probably the only Homicide movie that we can expect. If that is so, this is the appropriate way to go out. This movie is sometimes poignant, sometimes upsetting, but always satisfying. If you are or ever have been a fan of the show, watch this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d807de07fc546f0b4f7db1150ae270a",
            "input": "this is not just a bad film, it's one of the worst films ever. it's so bad that i found it to be quite enjoyable. the acting, oh my god, the script, you gotta be kiddin'. how can you imagine the writer coming up with things like: - a kid who makes fireworks in school, fireworks SO powerfull, that when someone gets hit by it, they fly a hundred yards backwards and explode. -a girl is trapped in the celler, the killer is trying to break open the door. she gets a drill, but the wire isn't long enough. she first makes an extension cord, oh the horror, and then, when she's done, she drills through the door and drills through the head of the killer. WOW - and there are plenty more examples like that. oh yeah, and what happened to George Kennedy, he used to be great (Thunderbolt and Lightfoot/Cool hand Luke)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ba58622f10442d7b544510cdf5ba750",
            "input": "A fierce, shockingly intelligent piece of work from the gifted British writer Hanif Kureishi who wrote \"My Beautiful Laundrette\", (this is the best thing he's done since then). It's about intelligent people whose lives don't add up to much. They've squandered what they have been given and are largely empty vessels. The only character on screen who is alive is the mother of the title yet she feels dead inside until a rough handyman shows her some affection and awakens her to the joys of sex. He has his own motives but Kureishi treats him with a good deal of compassion. This is a film in which people and places feel familiar, where characters exist beyond the confines of the screen. In some respects it's a bit like \"Sunday, Bloody Sunday\" but it's an altogether tougher piece of work. The director, Roger Michell, allows scenes to build instinctively. And it is beautifully acted.As the eponymous mother Anne Reid betrays her wasted life in every gesture. There is not a false note in her extraordinarily lived-in performance, and that very fine actor Daniel Craig displays shadings to his character than even Kureishi hasn't tapped into. If the film strikes a false note it is, perhaps, in the character of the talentless daughter, caught up in a messy affair with the man her mother seduces (or should that be the other way round) and even messier life, but she is so well played by Cathryn Bradshaw she hooks you in nevertheless. The film is also extremely beautiful to look at (DoP Alwin Kuchler) and must rank, unhesitatingly, as the best British film of the year.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-335f18357a6c42c9a2a7fd14fa3cedfc",
            "input": "This has got to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It is (I think) a story of a rebellious college basketball player, his tough-but-fair coach, his girlfriend, and a fellow student (played by Michael Margotta) who has continual nervous breakdowns. The story goes nowhere, there is zero character development, there is nobody to care about, and the performances, with the exception of Bruce Dern as the coach, are terrible. It is hard to believe how a talent like Jack Nicholson could direct such an awful movie. Make sure to avoid this turkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97c8cf7a8fd84d469d68b75606d92241",
            "input": "An old intellectual talks about what he considers art in movies. You get your Hitchcock, your Chaplin, your Bergman and some other stuff prior to the 80ies. To disguise that he has no clue what is going on in cinemas these days, he throws in The Matrix.But it's not only the same lame film-as-art speech all over again. This speech is reduced to outdated psychological platitudes: it-ego-super ego, anal phase, sexual insufficiency. It is garnished with the cheesy effect of having Zizte edited into the movies he is taking about. For someone who is supposed to know much about movies, his own is, cinematographicly speaking: yeiks.To put it in Zizek's own words - I saw 5\\-\\!7 on the screen, last night, or in the words of a great movie maker:Mr. (Zizek), what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you (two) points (only), and may God have mercy on your soul.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e40a48a5f07e4a08971ca0d7457e16f2",
            "input": "I rented this movie on DVD. I knew that the movie wouldn't live up to what it promised me on the back of the case, but once I saw that Leatherface (Gunnar Hansen) was in it, I had to rent it. It starts off pretty good, with the premise being that snuff films are being aired over cable. However, the main character has nothing about her to make you feel sorry for her whatsoever, and the end of the movie really leaves you hanging. There are way too many unanswered questions. There was a great scene at the end that totally took me by surprise, but overall this is a very sub par movie, but I guess it was worth the $ 3.99 rental fee.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8b7d84a79bd47cf9f88b4694d016a14",
            "input": "The plot of The Thinner is decidedly thin. And gross. An obese lawyer drives over the Gypsy woman, and the Gypsy curse causes him to lose and lose weight... to the bone. OK, Gypsy curses should be entertaining, but the weight-losing gone bad? Nope. Except Stephen King thinks so. And Michael McDowell, other horror author and the screenwriter of this abysmal film, does so, too. The lawyer is not only criminally irresponsible, he is fat too, haha! The Thinner is like an immature piece of crap for a person who moans how he/she has never seen anything so disgusting than fatness. Hey, I can only say: Well, look at the mirror.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b674bca9166748ce97169c7ac2bb8a02",
            "input": "John Rivers' life as an architect and family man has taken a turn for the worst when his wife has disappeared and has been concluded dead after a freakish accident that involved changing a tyre on her car. During the days she has been missing, he confronts a man that's been following and he tells him that his been in contact with his dead wife from the other-side through E.V.P - Electronic Voice Phenomenon. Naturally he doesn't believe it but then hear gets weird phone calls from her phone and so he contacts the man to find out more about E.V.P. Soon enough John is hooked onto it, but something supernatural doesn't like him interfering with the dead, as now other then contacting his wife, the white noise is foretelling events before they happen.Since this DVD has been sitting on my shelf for a while now, I thought I better get around to watching it since it wasn't my copy. But then again I don't think the owners were in a hurry to get it back, as they haven't question me about it. Oh well. So I decided to give it a play, as I was in an undemanding mood. After hearing and reading all the bad press on it, I wasn't expecting anything remotely good, but I was kept entertained for 90 minutes. Well, more so the 60 minutes, as the last half-an-hour was pretty much a blur of confusion. The film is nowhere as good as it could have been, but the time breezed by quick enough even though it's a rather tepid supernatural thriller. I thought it wasn't all a waste. The first hour I found some effective sequences rather interesting and there's a spooky awe generated with a slow progression of subtle stillness and tragedy that haunts you, but sadly that comes to a crashing halt later on in the film. That's when the predictably forced jump scares come into their own and somehow it just doesn't fit in with the context. It becomes rather hectic, loud and very muddled with its MTV style editing and kinetic camera-work that gets to close into the action. I couldn't understand what was going on within choppy and abrupt climax. The whole explanation how everything fits into the bigger picture is pure hokey. It's a very unsatisfying conclusion because it goes for something big, but hits rock bottom. I thought they did fine job up until that point with the lighting and showy camera-work. Other then the distinctively stark lighting, the score kept this flick atmospherically gloomy. All of it is very slickly done with its glossed up and fancy hardware, which makes it come across as very sterile and empty.You can easily see that the film's heart is in the technical components and not in expanding the characters and story. There's just no connection and lasting sentiment within this flimsy material. After a while, it just tries too hard to convince you that it falls into manipulative thrills and popping in many blood-curdling stuff from beyond the grave. It just got rather repetitious watching someone watch a fuzzy TV screen after while. The E.V.P machine was the star on the show. Well, it did have more impact than the limp performances. Michael Keaton is more than capable actor, but lately his disappeared off the map and here he provides a modest performance as the dangerously obsessed John Rivers. He really deserves much better, though. Everyone else is pretty brittle and forgettable. Not because of the performances, but of the lack of depth in their characters. This clunker wasn't bad to begin with, but it does go pear shape by falling away drastically.I wouldn't care to see it again and I wouldn't recommend to anyone, unless you got a interest for the subject matter and enjoy the recent crop of Hollywood produced horror/thrillers. It's just a damn shame that this over-produced flick couldn't put it together successfully, as it had promise in its idea and a more than decent cast on hand. I didn't hate it, but what a disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c296b0cac9642a899a34437d0dedd46",
            "input": "I remember watching \"Gung Ho\" as a child with my mother, and wondered why she would always cry in the last few minutes. I, of course, found the entire movie hilarious, particularly the mannerisms of the characters. It wasn't until I was much older and watched it again that I realized how much deeper this show actually is.Michael Keaton and Gedde Watanabe shine in their roles as the reluctant mediators. Keaton ceases to amaze me with his real-life style of line delivery, and Watanabe adds humor and pathos to the mix. I also thought that Patti Yasutake (Umeki) was simply fabulous in her role as the comic relief.I think this movie is one of the most underrated films of the 80s. We can all learn a lesson from the merging of the American and Japanese workers in this film...sometimes you really *can* have \"the best of both worlds.\" And now I understand why my mother felt the way she did in those closing moments. I'd rather have one of those cars, too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-019f052436d0470ead98a9a6d53376bf",
            "input": "I have seen the movie Holes and say that it has to be the best movie all year long. It brings out the child in everyone. I mean who would come up with the idea of having troublesome boys dig holes as their punishment? Louis Sachar thats who. Although the movie was different from the book it was still very good. For example Caveman/Stanley was supposed to be the biggest one there. Weight wise and height wise but ZigZag/Ricky was taller and Armpit/Theodore was bigger. Also X-Ray/Rex was supposed to be one of the smallest boys but wasn't. The only thing that I didn't like about the movie was that the flashbacks were rather persuasive and long. I would have rather seen more of the present than past but thats just my opinion. I especially like the work of the boys though. Like Squid/Alan who was played by Jake M.Smith was supposed to be a moody and tough kid. Jake M.Smith performed just that and did a great job at it as did almost all of the actors in Holes. So I would say if you havent seen Holes yet then you should definatly see it when it comes out again or you'll be missing out on a whole lotta fun.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8fe7a43eae7f42bdbbc3e56aca3f644a",
            "input": "Although the production and Jerry Jameson's direction are definite improvements, \"Airport '77\" isn't much better than \"Airport 1975\": slick, commercial rubbish submerging (this time literally) a decent cast. Jack Lemmon is the pilot of a packed airliner which gets hijacked by art thieves and crashes into the sea (all the publicity claimed it was near the Bermuda Triangle, but there's no mention of it in the film itself). When the rescue ships come to raise the airplane out of the water, we see all their cranes dropping (rather blindly) into the ocean and it's hard not to laugh (imagining the cranes plugging the plane, the passengers and the waterlogged script). NBC used to air what appeared to be the \"director's cut\", with at least an hour of extra footage--mostly flashbacks--injected into the proceedings with all the subtlety of a \"Gilligan's Island\" episode. Most exciting moment is the plane crash, and some of the players have a little fun: Lee Grant is an obnoxious drunk, Brenda Vaccaro a no-nonsense stewardess, Joseph Cotten and Olivia de Havilland are flirting oldsters. Still, the personality conflicts and the excruciating military detail eventually tear at one's patience. ** from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-148e8b49cefc49b2942041f0b9da46d6",
            "input": "For me this movie was powerful. I don't want to be a spoiler, but I had a friend years ago; we were like brothers. This movie brought back some vivid memories.For some reason, I couldn't place my vote for this movie which would have been a 10. I kept getting a message like \"No votes have been placed....\" And yet I saw in the stats that there were. Will try again tomorrow (Monday).Minor flaws I overlooked. It was the relationships between the characters that got me. Beautifully acted and real situations. I've been in a couple of them.A small gem of a movie. Just like \"Spring Forward\" is another overlooked gem. I'm very glad movies like these are still being made; about relationships between people, well written, sensitively unfolded with first-class acting and direction. After all, isn't that what it's all about?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d0249c8fc984999a2bd96718e54f0e1",
            "input": "What a perfect example of \"Less Is More...\" Kurt Russell (Sgt. Todd) only has 72 lines, and something like 104 words. What a challenge! Like a black and white photo, when your mind's eye has to fill in the blanks, the facial expressions, the physical drama, the emotive gesture, all combines to make a stronger impact. This is one of those top 5 movies I can't live without, right up there with the classics like Road Warrior. If you liked this, check out \"Mad Max 2, The Road Warrior\" and \"Braveheart\" both starring Mel Gibson. Also \"Gladiator\" with Russell Crowe and Connie Nielsen who was in Soldier also. The \"Thirteenth Warrior\" starring Antonio Banderas and \"Blade Runner\" starring Harrison Ford.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed022eaa25864ceb9e03e93c68ab92b4",
            "input": "Just recently, I've been obsessing over and anticipating this movie so much that I almost had to see it. Well, having just seen it today, the 5.8 rating is completely understandable. I think that if you anticipate something so much that it becomes a dire need, it turns out not to be worth it. Sure, The Hills Have Eyes 2 has its moments. It has a very cool and well-developed storyline that ties in well with the actual product itself, but the whole thing is so self-indulged that it becomes so hard to follow. And if it weren't for Wes Craven's production on this film, it wouldn't be anything to do with The original remake. But the whole thing makes you go \"Is this supposed to be horror or COMEDY?\" because there are lots of ridiculous, randomly placed jump moments and stupid one liners (I.E. \"There's a hand in the sh**er!\" or \"You motherfu**er! I'll kill you all damn sons of b**tches!\") and the acting (God don't even remind me how bad it was.STORYLINE: (this part contains spoilers, beware!) The movie begins with a woman giving birth to a mutant baby (ooh la la!), and then the screen fades to black with the movie's title appearing, and a monologue. Then we go to this office where there are randomly placed war veteran mannequins. We find that this is for this one scientist keeping track of people looking for mutants. The box to keep track of audio feeds is gone, and everyone dies! After that tone-setting opening, you'd expect more.Then, we go to this one team of military recruits training in Baghdad. As the captain parades them \"A good job at stupidity\", their last day of training is in New Mexico, the desert where the family in the last THHE had stayed because they were stuck. While in training, things go ultimately wrong, people die, and... do I need to tell you any more? Because right now I have the attention span of a goldfish just forcing myself to sit here and type this.The thing that's wrong with THHE2 is that it just dosen't work. No flashbacks here, and the ending is pretty safe... but with a twist! A stupid one, that is. I'm pretty sure the Ultra Super Director's Cut with a holographic cover and a ticket to The Hills Have Eyes 3 will showcase all of it's alternate endings, but at this point, I'm not sure if I care. So by all means, if you loved the first THHE so much it's almost a sin not to see this, then by all means, see it. But if else, then, Avoid at all costs. It's for your own good.3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be0c5ece021a4e28bb2df91fb88e09cb",
            "input": "Forget that this is a \"B\" movie. Forget that it is in many ways outdated. Instead give writer-director Ida Lupino much deserved credit for addressing a subject which at the time (1950) was taboo in Hollywood. To my knowledge, this was the first film to address the subject of rape and the emotional and mental effects that that crime has upon its victims.Although much of the cast's acting is pedestrian at best, Mala Powers, who at the time was eighteen or nineteen, gives an excellent performance throughout as the traumatized young woman, Ann, who tries to run away from her \"shame.\" Based on her work in this film, I'm surprised that she did not have a more successful acting career. Tod Andrews, too, has some fine moments as the minister who reaches out to help her.Ms Lupino, obviously working on a limited budget, was still able to create some memorable scenes such as the pursuit through the streets and alleys leading to the rape, and the police lineup following it. And, she created a bittersweet ending which left me wondering if Ann really could ever have a normal life again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e1720cfaba446dd8c0dea3ff94a16f8",
            "input": "This movie is not only the funniest film ever created, it's the greatest. My hats off to Mr. and Mrs. Zodsworth and the rest of the wacky, wacky cast. Good morning Satan, Want a donut? See it post haste! GO SEE IT NOW!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6fdd27a49c043bc90d86ba096ab678d",
            "input": "\"Spaced Invaders\" is one of the funniest movies, I´ve ever seen. I don´t understand, why this movie didn´t get better critics, it´s funny, harmless and sweet. I first watched it, when I was 11, and I really fell in love with it... 2 days later, I got it on VHS :-P Till today, I´ve shown it to many friends, and they all liked it, but nobody knew the movie before. I think, that´s the problem, nearly nobody knows it, so nearly nobody can like it... This movie never got a real chance, that´s sad, \"SI\" has really the potential of a comedy like \"Monsters Inc.\" or \"Spaceballs\". Ok, enough displeasure - What I really wanted to say, is that, if you ever want to laugh your head off, watch it! Even if you don´t get mad about it, it´s worth watching! --> Prepare to laugh, earth scum!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a528ea3698be4a0592455b9caee5ad60",
            "input": "I admit, the first time I watched Even Cowgirls Get the Blues, I didn't think it was very memorable in any regard. But now after viewing it the 7th time, I admit that it has very much grown on me. The characters of Sissy, Ms. Jellybean, and the Countess have become very endearing. And the romance between Sissy and Jellybean seems very sweet. Though the plot is very weak, I think the satirical humor more than makes up for it. Then there's the kick-ass soundtrack which features the tremendously talented K.D. Lang (who reminds me a little of Patsy Cline) at her best. I can't think of any movie that has \"grown on me\" after an inauspicious first impression, as much as Cowgirls has.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41825bd62ebf439790c94f4876c9e6d9",
            "input": "This was a great movie with a good story. My children (10, 7, 5, and 4) all loved this movie, including myself. The music was also fantastic. No, the horses do not talk, but instead, the story is told by Spirit. And to hear a story told by a horse's point if view was fun.I think the title says it all, \"spirit\". This movie really gives you a sense of family and home and friends. I would have to say my 4 year old boy and 5 year old girl were really touched by this movie, and even got so into it, they laughed so hard, and they cheered for spirit in the end. Enjoy \"Spirit\" with your family and have your spirit lifted with this heartwarming story. Your kids will love it. I think you will too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d432b9f5a0f448692a8e05f90116431",
            "input": "What a disappointment! I hated the mummy but this one was even worse! It was very tiring and unbelievable and at a certain point I found myself sighing and yawning all the time. I can't believe that people actually liked this movie. The role of Nicholas Cage wasn't very convincing. The whole movie felt like a grand tour around America's most wanted buildings. The never stopping flow of hints and combinations wasn't very convincing either. I stopped paying attention around 30 minutes. What was supposed to be a happy night out became a total disappointment. What a drag... I guess I've just seen too many movies to enjoy National Treasure.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c6e0b7471094a2ea6baa36545ac3fec",
            "input": "A great 90's flick! Parker Posey is fabulous in this story about the nightlife in Manhattan that requires so much cash. Posey gives an amazing performance as a librarian and a night crawler. This is a good, light movie for Saturday night before you go out. The soundtrack rocks, the outfits are out of this world, the script is funny and the actors do a great job. The redeeming value : you can make it in this world if you try, just find your niche. I believe Parker Posey is the PERFECT actress for this kind of character: young, fabulous and broke. (You must look up the movie \"Clockwatchers\" ). If you watch Party Girl you are bound to have a good time. Enjoy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d63866af26554e629dfb4ce09ee27a26",
            "input": "The film \"52 Pick Up\" simply does not work. See it if you are at all interested in Elmore Leonard or John Frankenheimer, or anyone in the terrific cast, especially John Glover who's admittedly brilliant. But the book--a slow-burning, noir thriller with lots of pulp--should have translated into an Oscar-contending film instead of this dud that couldn't figure out whether it should faithfully portray the hard-boiled, gritty crime story of the book, or opt for a 1980s Schwarzenegger shoot-em-up spree. Shifting the scene from the original locale in the book, Detroit (an area where Leonard has resided for years and knows very well), to Los Angeles makes for a substantial problem that Leonard tries to fix in his script, but ultimately can't. It was, for example, a clever device making Mitchell's wife a City Councilwoman (she had no job in the book), if you think about it: that's the only way you could ever plausibly blackmail someone in a sex-crazed city like 1980s Los Angeles for adultery, or any type of potential sex scandal. Even then, it's more plausible in a more conservative Eastern state like Michigan to believe that a) its tiny porno \"industry\" is a sleazy, money-grubbing hell where three losers could desperately set up a not-so-stupid upper-middle-class fellow going through a mid-life crisis, and b) adultery alone might be something you could blackmail someone with, if their upstanding careers and old-fashioned wives couldn't handle the shock. As consultant Ron Jeremy will tell you, 1980s Los Angeles was a colorful, stylish porno Mecca, more like the movie \"Boogie Nights\" than Leonard's dark, shadowy world of hijacked tourist buses, grimy apartments, and drug deals in depressed urban squalor. Then again, Los Angeles could be the backdrop of such a tale if one arranged the scenery more carefully--there are still plenty of dark crannies and psychopaths there. Unfortunately, Roy Scheider's Harry Mitchell comes off in the film as a sexy, handsome Uebermensch dancing through his problems without even working up a sweat. In the book he was fending off a jerk union official while struggling with a business that was failing. He also had a skeleton in the closet during the war involving friendly fire that he was responsible for, but never appeared to come to grips with. Elmore Leonard's stories usually have a central image involving a bizarre civility between criminal and law-abiding citizen. Here, Harry Mitchell sitting in his office with his blackmailer, Alan Raimy, turning over his financial books to him and negotiating a more practical ransom, makes for such a central image. Glover's blackmailer plays the scene with convincing intelligence, but Scheider portrays the victim here as a cocky \"good guy,\" in charge of the situation as if he were more a Rambo with an M-16 than the everyman barely staying afloat as his world crumbles around him. \"52 Pick Up\" ends with one of the worst throwaway conclusions ever, considering all the thought that went into the original story and then the film. Trapping Raimy inside Mitchell's Jaguar and blowing him up with marching band music blasting out along with a sadistic monologue by Mitchell, plays to an audience wanting the \"sweet revenge\" conclusion of a Chuck Norris movie, not the intelligent balanced world of Leonard's book, where Mitchell barely escapes in the end and the conflict between good and evil could easily go either way. I left the theater shaking my head and depressed. What a waste of talent.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d08459821434492b1878745cc3ade5f",
            "input": "I really don't get all the adulation that this film has received. It's mawkish, unnecessarily manipulative and dodges many of the big issues - ie Nash's affairs and his predilection for having sex with men in public places. That, I suppose, in the context of a commercial Hollywood film is just about tolerable, but what's with all the praise for Russell Crowe's performance? The man just seems to shuffle about, clutching his briefcase and wearing a grungy hat and somehow that seems to qualify as fine acting? Anyone who has ever known a person with mental health problems will realise that Crowe's performance is little short of caricature. It is also rather offensive. And, dare I say, just on the right side of being truly terrible",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf2bb27a3d6f4a6ab181ac51fdc2a8ff",
            "input": "WAR, INC. (2008) **1/2 John Cusack, Marisa Tomei, Hilary Duff, Joan Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Dan Aykroyd, Sergej Trifunovic, Lyubomir Neikov, Ned Bellamy, (Voice of: Montel Williams)A hit-and-miss-21st Century \"STRANGELOVE\"John Cusack – who co-wrote the script with Mark Leyner and Jeremy Pikser – stars as a jaded hit-man named Brand Hauser who is burnt out but decides to follow thru on one final assignment by icing a Middle-Eastern oil minister named Omar Sharif (yes, not THAT Omar Sharif but you get the tone here from this misfire for a laugh) commandeered by the ex-Vice President of The USA (Aykroyd, Cusack's old \"Grosse Pointe Blank\" co-hort, doing a mean Dick Cheney manqué turn here), enlisting Brand to do the deed under the guise of a Trade Show Producer in mythical Turaqistan (read: Iraq/Afghanistan) for the American private corporation Tamerlane (read: Halliburton). While being briefed Brand is faced with a moment of clarity when he comes across intrepid journalist Natalie Hegalhuzen (Tomei) and eventually falls in love with her. Meanwhile Tamerlane is sponsoring the unlikely union of Eastern European teen sensation Yonica Babyyeah (a surprisingly decent Duff aping her own celebrity with tongue- through-cheek) and the idiot son of the country's leader.What follows is a bold attempt for a 21st Century black comedy a la \"DR. STRANGELOVE\" but for all intense and purposes there are sadly more misses than hits in this broad try for laughs amidst political message (an unjust war being outsourced by American capitalism, check!) While Cusack riffs on his Martin Blank from the aforementioned \"Pointe\" he does add some nice touches of his man in black (he does shots of Tabasco sauce to take the edge off), the rest of the cast plays catch up (except sister Joan who is a riot as the high-strung aide- de-camp for Hauser and has one of the film's funniest laugh-out lines: \"My mass communications skills are finally paying off\") for the most part. Cusack visited the Iraq War earlier this year in the 180 degree different \"Grace Is Gone\" and here he allows his political views wear on his sleeve ; while admirable overall the film's pace and rhythms are off largely no-thanks to first time filmmaker Joshua Seftel making his directorial debut here (and it is noticeable) except for maybe the well-choreographed fight Hauser is involved with Babyyeah's idiotic fiancé's entourage.A nice attempt yet a misguided failure ; maybe next time Cusack won't try so hard and let the idiocy of war speak for itself instead of doing the heavy lifting by himself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e350ece1c1b0471396c8e0c92f093f7b",
            "input": "First off to get my own personal feelings out of the way let me start by saying that I hate so called comedies where every single character is written and played as being so stupid that you wounder if they're all the result of inbreeding.Now I will say this I did see the first three American Pie movies and while they weren't the most amazing movies that I'd ever seen they were all right (and outright masterpieces compared to the three \"American Pie Presents\" films), I still feel compelled to ask what the hell were they thinking when they made this movie?I also have a few other questions too.Who thought that this was an acceptable use of studio funds and production resources? who approved the final script (and what was that person smoking when they approved it)? And lastly why did anyone think that it deserved to be released into theaters where the average cost of admission is between 10 and 15 dollars depending on where you live when it should have gone straight to the discount bin at Blockbuster or Wal Mart?There is so much wrong with this movie that I can't write a really comprehensive review of it because it would exceed the maximum allowed words on this forum so I'll just touch on the biggest things wrong with it.The plot is generic uninspired and stupid and characters are all about as interesting as watching paint dry for eighty minutes but the biggest thing that I can see wrong with this movie is the acting.While most of the cast are talentless no namers who will probably be forgotten in a few years,the one and only big name in this movie is Eugene Levy who spends almost all of the time he is on screen with this knowing smirk on his face that says to the viewer \"I know this isn't funny and I'm wasting my talents but hey I'm getting payed for it so who cares\" he doesn't even try to make any of his jokes funny (he really deserves better than this garbage). As I mentioned above most of the rest of the cast are horrible even though some of them have been in some really great TV shows, Tyrone Savage (from the classic Canadian series Wind At My Back) plays a character who is so unbearable unlikeable and irritating (there are things that he could teach to tropical skin diseases)that you almost wish he'd die a slow and painful death on screen, Christopher McDonald (NCIS, Law & Order) just hangs around on screen and wastes what talent he does have by being in this film.Maybe the next film in this series will just be a soft core porn with a story line so they can get around the MPAA and get an R rating this movie goes all out with pointless nudity vulgarity and pointlessly offencive sexual content that it should have gotten the X rating (the ratings board must have been drunk or on drugs when they reviewed this film for its rating). It's interesting that twenty five years ago when Wes Craven submitted A Nightmare On Elm Street to the MPAA for a rating review they forced him to cut twenty five seconds of footage (I believe that it was part of a death scene that had a silicone casting of a breast in it) to avoid getting an X rating and he had no other choice but to do it or the film wouldn't have been released, but this kind of needlessly offensive trash can get the R rating today because it's all done in the name of comedy, if this movie was a drama or horror film with this kind of content there would have been a huge stink over the content and it would havegotten the dreaded X rating.The last thing that really annoys me is the writing, this movie is written to play out like the wet dream of some twelve year old kid with an extremely overactive sexual imagination its quite juvenile and extraordinarily crass, nearly every expository situation that is supposed to move the corpse that this movie calls a plot along is so telegraphed that any intelligent viewer can see it coming a mile away and and the so called characters are just stereotypes of stereotypes of stereotypes, never mind the often repulsive sexual references and constant unnecessary scenes of deviant sexual behavior it feels like this film was written by some incompetent first year hack in a low rent film school script writing class.the long and short of it is its time to kill this series before it gets any stupider more crass and offensive, this pie is filled with road apples.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d7b8a2955fb4acfa5fb0b0443076f6b",
            "input": "Although critically maligned, Johnny Dangerously is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. It's a movie that should be watched closely; some of the funny bits are done in passing and do not have the usual amount of attention drawn to them. For instance, keep an eye on Michael Keaton's use of the pricing gun at the pet store...and also on the documentary-style years that appear at the beginning of scenes. It's one of those rare movies where the humor hits you unexpectedly, even though you know it's a comedy. Amy Heckerling, the director, is really sharp here--If you enjoyed her better known films (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Clueless, European Vacation, etc.,)you should give this one a look.Michael Keaton is extremely likable in the title role and the supporting cast (Griffin Dunne, Maureen Stapleton, Joe Piscopo, Peter Boyle) is excellent. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7b1cbb7674443b4aae6c5461729c230",
            "input": "The Cat in the Hat is just a slap in the face film. Mike Myers as The Cat in the Hat is downright not funny and Mike Myers could not have been any worse. This is his worst film he has ever been in. The acting and the story was just terrible. I mean how could they make the most beloved stories by Dr. Seuss be made into film and being one of the worst films of all-time and such a disappointment. I couldn't have seen a more worst film than this besides, maybe Baby Geniuses. But this film is just so bad I can't even describe how badly they made this film. Bo Welch should be fired or the writer should. Hedeen's outlook: 0/10 No Stars F",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3064d3dd4a9a424b938d42e69bfea18c",
            "input": "There are some great philosophical questions. What is the purpose of life? What happens when we die? And WHY DO THEY MAKE MOVIES THIS BAD??? The premise is absurd. Thre acting is one dimensional. The special effects are overdone. And the movie is one unending gun battle among some of the lousiest shots Hollywood ever produced. But then, if they had been good shots, everybody would have been dead in the first five minutes and there would be no movie. Too bad it didn't happen that way. Tempted to turn it off several times, I stuck with it to see just how bad it could get. Glad I did because (SPOILER?) the last line is the crowning stupidity of the whole dopey, dismal scenario.It is not even worthy of second feature status at a third rate drive-in in off season. Apart from the general awfulness of the film, I worry deeply about its impact on young audiences. The Americans crank out crap like this and then wonder why events like Columbine happen. This is truly banal cinema on a Brobdingnagian scale!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b5a3c36353b4b9591f3edbc287fcfef",
            "input": "It has its merit's; Morvern Callar is both the merits and the disappointments. She's so enigmatic, so original. Is it her method of dealing with the pain of a lost one that's making her so distant and un-relatable? Or is she as one reviewer called her a revolutionary? Personally I'd call her dysfunctional.Morvern is completely detaching herself. Disposing of her boyfriend, not thinking of informing family or using the money he gave her for a proper funeral, she selfishly splashes out on a trip to Spain. She's seems so devoid of anything relatively human bar greed. The only element that enables the audience see the human side of her is her close friend she takes on holiday with her. Although by the end her friend is dumped and Morvern has nothing that ties her down to humanity. She may as well have killed herself.Despite managing to make Spain look as gloomy and bland as the UK the director's shots were superb, the lighting and color made the film visually stunning.It's really a shame the movie has nothing in it that keeps interest. It's little over 90 minutes but feels a lot longer. They manage to make Morvern seem interesting to grab your attention but do nothing with her only alienate her from you more to the point where you don't care about the characters or the film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c3e8fd922a324f138c73c6c1d6a75bf3",
            "input": "Great documentary about the lives of NY firefighters during the worst terrorist attack of all time.. That reason alone is why this should be a must see collectors item.. What shocked me was not only the attacks, but the\"High Fat Diet\" and physical appearance of some of these firefighters. I think a lot of Doctors would agree with me that,in the physical shape they were in, some of these firefighters would NOT of made it to the 79th floor carrying over 60 lbs of gear. Having said that i now have a greater respect for firefighters and i realize becoming a firefighter is a life altering job. The French have a history of making great documentary's and that is what this is, a Great Documentary.....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-029f4f67d5c3438499d7242f245d7e66",
            "input": "This movie should be required viewing for all librarians or would-be librarians. All of the best lines are directly related to librarianship. The public library vs. academic library argument is a classic argument waged among librarians and library school students. It also breaks many librarian stereotypes. Librarians might even be capable of having fun -- even if they don't *usually* have sex in the romance languages section! (The best movie about librarians? Desk Set, with Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy, of course.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bc6ef2289004287ad821c76758a18b8",
            "input": "When I first started watching this movie I was looking for some kind of subtle metaphors but it soon dawned on me that this movie was indeed about people on a train. The interactions between people are like those you can see any day on the street and when in occasion there is a slightly more interesting situation the dialogue becomes stilted and boring. Its not that I don't get how this film is trying to portray the way people interact, it's just that in this film they are very boring. If you want to see and analyse these kinds of relationships you'd be best to actually go out and buy a train ticket and look at the people on the train with you. It is realistic but you wouldn't go to a movie to watch a film about you sitting there watching the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab1a9a0bce174d2b90858d52c24c8869",
            "input": "This movie is a prime example of squandering great resources in a film. You've got future SNL and SCTV stars in their prime, such as John Candy, Chevy Chase, Laraine Newman, Al Franken,Tom Davis and Joe Flaherty essentially making 70 minutes of coarse, uninspired fart and racist jokes. The concept of a network from the future subverting society could have really been taken to some interesting extremes, but instead right out the gate, makes a lame, juvenile proctology joke and stays in that vein of humor the whole way.Seek out the earlier and much more subversive and witty Groove Tube or the later, hilarious Kentucky Fried Movie. This movie is only for those who want to see a time capsule of bad 70's sketch comedy movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d1a90a19790437286bf8b58cc604e5b",
            "input": "It was 9:30 PM last night at my friend's camping trailer and we were so hyped to watch South Park (a new episode). The thing is, in my country, South Park airs at 10:30 PM and we decided to kill time by watching the show now airing, Father of the Pride. I'll start by saying that I have only watched to episodes. The first time I watched it, I found it unfunny and crude for nothing, so I thought ''Holy sh*t, I have a football game early tomorrow, so I have to stop watching stupid cartoons''. But yesterday, I tried to give Father of the Pride a second chance. I find that it's a complete rip-off of The Simpsons, only replacing yellow human characters by lions instead.The second thing is I wonder why it got it's TV-14 rating. I find The Simpsons a lot more vulgar, and the only real vulgarity in this show is a few homosexual (unfunny) jokes. The Simpsons is also a lot more violent (Halloween specials) and crude. I also heard that the creator of the series has also directed Shrek 2, well I've got news for him: Shrek 2 was way better and I think he stayed too much in the family thematic. However, I must admit that Father of the Pride did make me smile (even burst out laughing once) three or four times.All in all, I don't mind Father of the Pride. I don't hate it, but I don't like either. I've seen way better from ''The Simpsons''.3.5/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-852f79963cfb4c93a8ebbe6a009ed9c6",
            "input": "To make it short and not to spoil everything this film is about Kip (Giovanni Ribsi), a car thief, who messes up a big delivery of stolen cars (50 in total). He is then threatened to be killed by the man who gave him the ‘order'. The objective now is to get 50 cars stolen in 3 days, with the help of Randall (Nicolas Cage), a ‘retired' booster and also Kip's brother and a couple of old friends of Randall's. As you can see this is the same old, big bro' needs to get lil' bro' out of trouble routine and of course Randall is the best thief there ever was. Of course as in all other movies there are also a few setbacks and surprises you never would have thought of, but at times it is predictable too, so there is nothing fancy about the story. You are by now probably wondering why this is about 51 times the HOT STUFF, since there are only 50 beautiful, fast, cool and expensive cars to be stolen. Well the other hot item in this film is Sway (Angelina Jolie (who will be a big STAR (trust me))). She is not only very convincing in the role as a car theft, but she is pretty hot too. OK not hot as in pretty, but hot as in damn cool and sexy. She was very believable in this role, probably because she is some kind of a wild woman in real life too (don't believe me, read her biography) and for the sexy part well just see for yourself man. I only know, that she plays the kind of girl I like in this film, because she is not too mainstream, a bit alternative look and she even comes with a tattoo.OK the only downsides I felt while watching this movie was, that there is not very much action, there is one totally unrealistic scene, the story is only OK and that there are not much jokes. Hey but after seeing the whole film I must say: WHO CARES. Why must I say that, well because it was still entertaining; had a couple of cool car chases; good music; some Bruckheimer scenes (where the combination of music and the lines of actors make your eyes go wet); good actors who all did their jobs; pretty cars; one cool, wild, sexy lady (yes, I mean Mrs. Jolie) and last but not least very nice and cool tools to boost the cars with. So some downsides here but still a pretty good and entertaining movie. All in all the best way to describe this film is that it is an overall OK movie with a cool – feelgood ending.As for Nicolas Cage, well… He is actually one of my most favourite actors in the action genre nowadays after such good films as The Rock, Con Air, Face / Off, Snake Eyes and finally this one. Plus what actor has had so many good action / thriller's in the last years and such successful ones ? Well no one!!! Maybe Jackie Chan, but he is one of my favourites too. One thing that is true though about Mr. Cages Bruckheimer films is that they keep getting worse. The Rock, was a clear 9, Con air was a nice 8 and this well this clearly is a 7. Not that that mark is bad. Does it not show that his films under Bruckheimer keep getting worse and that maybe Cage has to think longer before he accepts a role in a movie and probably he should make a few less movies ? No it doesn't show us that, because almost all of Cage's films were successful in the last few years, except for 8mm and Bringing out the Dead. 8mm was not great, I admit that, but that was never Cage's fault and the story seemed good to me. About the latter film I can not say anything, ‘cause I have not seen it yet. One thing though I know for sure, if Bruckheimer would have asked me for those three films, I would have said YES to all of them. I would have said yes to The Rock, because the story was great and because you would get to play with Sean Connery and Ed Harris. I would have said yes to Con Air, because there would be a lot of action in it, because the story was good and because you got to act with John Malkovich and Ving Rhames. In this one I would have starred because I would have gotten a big paycheque, I would have been able to ride some cool and fast cars and because I would have been able to kiss Angelina Jolie (can't wait to see her in that Lara Croft outfit). This one was a good choice of Mr. Cage and it certainly was worth a look at in the theatre.7 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fea8138f07e4eefacdef30995aa3716",
            "input": "HORRENDOUS! Avoid like the plague. I would rate this in the top 10 worst movies ever. Special effects, acting, mood, sound, etc. appear to be done by day care students...wait, I have seen programs better than this. Opens like a soft porn show with a blurred nude female doing a shower scene then goes bad from there. Good nude scenes, but that is it. Sound and light problems were persistent throughout the movie. At times I would swear I could hear the roaring of the camera motors. YIKES! I would like to see another movie on this story, but done by different people. This batch of actors and crew need more acting and movie making lessons. Voted 1 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-272aa10d4f2b4227b632fd4064f971a5",
            "input": "A great Bugs Bunny cartoon from the earlier years has Bugs as a performer in an window display at a local department store. After he's done for the day the manager comes in to tell him that he'll be transferring soon. Bugs is happy to oblige into he figures out that the new job is in taxidermy...and that taxidermy has to do with stuffing animals. Animals like say, a certain rabbit. This causes a battle of wits between the rascally rabbit and his now former employer. I found this short to be delightful and definitely one of the better ones of the early 1940's. It still remains as funny nearly 60+ years later. This animated short can be seen on Disc 1 of the Looney Tunes Golden Collection Volume 2.My Grade: A-",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0bfce84f7e284c728bd096b7178c9667",
            "input": "Henry Fool surprised me. I didn't expect it to entertain and amuse as well, or as strongly, as it did. Fay Grim continues to surprise in that it provides solid continuation to a story that seems not to need it. Once the viewer watches the first 20 minutes of the movie, however, it becomes blindingly aware that this is one of the BEST sequels to brilliant indie film. At least as good as Ginger Snaps Back, if not better.I am a little disappointed that Jeff Goldblum's part is so small, but I'm happy he is a part of this short run. He is convincing and delightful as Agent Fulbright. Also a delight is Liam Aiken who quite aptly portrays Ned Grim, the son of Fay and Henry.This movie is a pleasure for so many reasons. I am pleased, for example, to discover that Henry isn't really the loser he seems (by the end of Fool), and to further discover that he is, in fact, a genius...well, that really is a lovely stroke of the pen.I am hoping they do a third...like the end of the trilogy. It seems to be missing. They should entitle it Ned Fool Grim and it should be Liam looking for his father, to validate the awesome change in his mother, and the sense of near-genius he himself feels welling inside him. Assuming, of course, that Fay continues withholding many of the most important facts from her son, concerning his father. It feels like it needs to be done. I'd buy it.Even with more action, this is still not an action flick. It is more drama and intrigue...a mystery, of sorts. I'll watch it often.It rates an 8.3/10 from...the Fiend :.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1bd4796859f4f8fb1309bf6ceb26c99",
            "input": "I've seen a lot of crap in my day, but goodness, Hot Rod takes the cake. I saw a free screening in NY the other night. I can only hope they show the funny version to the paying customers. The big laughs were sparse, the plot was uninteresting, and the characters were one dimensional at best. One highlight is a hilarious dancing scene with Adam Samberg. It was priceless and was the only scene I truly had a hearty laugh at. Other than that, I can only recollect randomness and dead air. SNL & Samberg fans may be disappointed. I know I was expecting more from it. But it short, I definitely would not recommend attending a free screening or paying to watch this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7f2b9ef3ade45f080bf59d1af7cd7ab",
            "input": "(Spoilers)I was very curious to see this film, after having heard that it was clever and witty. I had to stop halfway because of the unbearable boredom I felt.The idea behind the film would have been acceptable: depicting the way the relationship between a man and a woman evolves, through all the problems and difficulties that two people living in a big city can experience. What made me dislike the whole film were two things.First of all, the film was so down-to-earth that it looked as if, by describing the problems that a couple must solve on a day-to-day basis, it became itself ordinary and dull.Secondly, the overall sloppiness of the production, with dialogues that were barely understandable.Too bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a320d35926e4d7998ad33c7a57a23e3",
            "input": "I bought this DVD for £1 and now i realise why. The acting was the worst I've seen in a long time. The lighting and sound are shoddy at best. The plot makes little sense even when sober (WARNING: I don't advise watching this film when sober.) This film feels like you're watching the home movie of someone who doesn't get out much. It really is a shame that all the very little money spent on this project went to such a waste, I look forward to seeing if any of those envoled still have a career, other than eva longoria who is the only \"star\" of this film that was apparently not hit with the bad acting stick. I'm sorry that none of this criticism seems constructive but I will say one thing to James Cahill, don't try it again. In the words of squirlyem \"Its severely lacking in the good department\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2911e0078a33482c8ab37fb84f99ab00",
            "input": "As a huge fan of only the first 2 seasons of BSG and the stand alone feature BSG Razor I was hoping that this release would return the franchise to its original glory days. Usually I have no problem with science fiction that is mostly dialog driven as opposed to a visual bonanza of special effects. If the script is tight with some original ideas delivered by good actors one can create a profound film with little CGI money spent. This prequel has none of those aforementioned requirements going for it. The virtual reality world created by the terrorist teenagers was both ridiculous & unbelievable. This scene was simply put there to raise the release rating to Restricted. Not that teens don't love virtual reality mosh pits filled with sex & violence & heavy dance music. Its the part about those same teens having the intellectual depth & reason or political & religious passion as to create such futuristic software or become suicide bombers that perplexes me. These kids are definitely not from this planet. The movie plays out like a soap opera with only the last 10 minutes being slightly interesting. The scene with Eric Stolz giving his cyborg a devine conscienceness via the student firmware upgrade was amusing if not entertaining. But this old concept was far better portrayed & much more believable in the brilliant, classic original \"Frankenstein\" with Boris Karloff. Caprica rips off its only interesting idea from an old Hollywood horror film. No surprise there! Overall this movie was bland & unoriginal & cheap looking, using recycled CGI of Caprica from BSG. I doubt I'll be watching this space soap when it premieres on the Sci-Fi channel. Unless of course I happen to be suffering from a bad bout of insomnia at which time this show would definitely be the cure. Zzzzzzzz",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34c9bd135740484b85adc9b554e9abb5",
            "input": "This is one of the movies of Dev Anand who gave great yet distinct movies to Hindi movie industries such as Jewel thief and guide. The story is short (if you ask me what is the story), plot is simple- a brother seeks for his lost sister. Sister has joined the hippies who smoke from pot and chant Hare Rama hare Krishna. Yet the movie portrays few of the significant events that the world experienced in 70's.Hippie culture, their submission to drugs, freedom ,escaping duty, family, and adopting anything new such as eastern (which was new for whites) religion. They have been handled perfectly. Zeenat gave her best and Dev as usual was remarkable. Songs are the best used (unlike they are abused for the sake of having songs) in this movie. They have not been spoiled.One perfect example is 'Dekho o deewano...Ram ka naam badnam na karo'. Each word in the song is very philosophical and meaningful. The end is tragic but that is not the essence of the movie. Overall Devji who does believe in making different movies has been successful in showing what he wanted to show here. A must see to experience hippie culture and beautiful Nepal of 70's.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27b0d4df9c4a4289bc53bf58ef8b07a4",
            "input": "I believe I received this film when I was a young buck. I remembered watching it as a child, but i could never find the film. I remembered good ol Rageddy Ann, Andy, Babette, the Greedy, King Koo Koo. I searched high and low for this movie and still no luck. But one day when I was moving out of my childhood home I had found it. We were reunited. I am 17 years old now. I still watch it. All the time actually. It's one of the funniest and touching movies I have ever seen and enjoyed at the same time. And personally I think they should make a sequel. Mmm, yes a sequel indeed. Now i am even considering getting the captains bird tattooed somewhere on my body!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e00ad6582a914ec6ba77062649296869",
            "input": "The play Bell, Book, and Candle was a favorite of mature actresses to do in summer stock and take on the road. One famous story, told by director Harold J. Kennedy, has Ginger Rogers insisting that her then husband, William Marshall, who was not an actor, costar with her. Marshall wore a toupee, and when he walked through a doorway, his toupee caught on a nail and stayed behind, dangling in the doorway as he walked on stage.The play was adapted successfully into a beautiful color film starring Kim Novak, James Stewart, Jack Lemmon, Elsa Lanchester, Hermoine Gingold, Ernie Kovacs, and Janice Rule. It's light entertainment, about a normal-appearing family of witches (Novak, Lemmon, and Lanchester) and the publisher (Stewart) who lives in their building. The most expert of them is the sultry, soft-voiced Gillian, who would love to be normal. One night, with Stewart in her apartment, she puts a spell on him using her Siamese cat, Pyewacket, and he falls in love with her.\"Bell Book and Candle\" was filmed on a charming set that replicates New York. The movie is loads of fun. Jack Lemmon is very funny in a supporting role as Gillian's brother, a musician in the witch and warlock-laden Zodiac Club. He uses his powers to turn streetlights on and off and to turn on the occasional woman. Janice Rule is perfect as the snobby ex-college rival of Gillian, now dating Stewart, and Ernie Kovacs has a great turn as an eccentric who is writing the definitive book on witches. Lanchester and Gingold, of course, are always wonderful, Lanchester Gillian's daft aunt and Gingold as a sort of queen of witchcraft.Kim Novak is a good fit for Gillian, giving the character a detachment befitting a witch, showing emotion when it becomes appropriate, and with that voice, fabulous face, and magnificent wardrobe, she certainly is magical. Stewart, in his last foray as a romantic lead, costars with Novak as he did in Vertigo, and they make an effective team. He supplies the warmth, she supplies the coolness, and somehow, together they spark. In this, of course, he's much more elegant than in \"Vertigo.\" A charming film, good for a Sunday afternoon, good around Christmas (as part of it takes place at Christmastime), and great if you feel like smiling.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64611885a8234377a1a89d6ee9134140",
            "input": "This is an interesting left turn for Reel 13 Indies. TWO HARBORS is a B&W 75 minute film from Minnesota that features non-actors and is about two people finding a connection through a search for alien life. I applaud the boldness of the Reel 13 programmers of thinking out-of-the-box when selecting this film. I just wish they had picked a stronger film to be bold with. As a matter of fact, I wonder if the choice had more to do with the uniqueness of the film than with the actual quality of the film itself (Not that TWO HARBORS is completely without merit, but I'll get to that a little later). As is common with independent films, TWO HARBORS is limited in terms of location. There are only two real locations – a large junk dealership market and a very teeny trailer, which is the home of the middle-aged main character, Vic, played by Alex Cole. Writer/director James Vculek uses the market setting to provide exposition about Vic, who is one of the dealers there. He has various people walk up to Vic and start very long conversations that provides us with just two pieces of information – Vic sells space toys (he prefers to call them \"outer space action figures\") and he is a caustic asshole. This is emblematic of one of the two key problems with TWO HARBORS - all the chatting. I've said it before and I'll say it again – we are dealing with a visual medium and filmmakers need to work harder to tell their stories visually. There are exceptions, of course, but generally, endless patter is not so engaging on film – particularly if the dialogue is being used as exposition. Pretty much all the conversations in the film are long and unnecessarily verbose. A notable example would be a few scenes which feature Vic trying to play himself off as a Boy Scout leader in order to get a discount at a store. He argues with the clerk back and forth and these scenes don't even advance the plot one iota. This is the kind of thing that makes even a 75 minute film feel long.The other problem with TWO HARBORS is the acting. I may be a bit of a curmudgeon when it comes to performance in film, but I really don't feel like there's a good excuse for not having good actors in your films. There are plenty of good actors out there, many of which willing to work on low-budget projects – even in Minnesota. Many filmmakers eschew the importance of acting ability as being secondary to their visuals, but that is naïve. In narrative film-making, next to the story, nothing is more important than the acting/performances. If you don't believe the people enacting your story, your audience is lost.Originally, I thought Vculek was using non-actors, but as the film went on, I decided that they were probably community theater-type actors. It wasn't that they were uncomfortable on camera. It's that they were overly theatrical (i.e. big). Granted, the best of the actors were the two leads – Cole and Catherine E. Johnson as Cassie, a lonely young girl that gets caught up in Vic's extra-terrestrial hunt. They seemed to have the most training, but they were still a little rough around the edges. The eccentricities they displayed seemed to be surface only - not coming from a real, organic place within. Ms. Johnson, in particular, is an interesting case. She definitely has a presence – a Midwestern charm about her, but that charisma belies the multitude of issues her character is supposed to have. She struggles to portray the idiosyncrasies that stem from a supposed life of solitude and (slave?) labor, relying on stock gestures like eye rolls, lip biting and stammering to suggest her discomfort with the outside world.I mentioned in the first paragraph that TWO HARBORS is not completely without merit and here's what I mean. Without giving too much away, there is a fade to white an hour into the film. After that, the story takes a stunning turn, which allows the last fifteen minutes to be evocative and downright powerful – it's like a sucker punch to the gut, but in a good way. It's almost a huge relief to feel something after so long with these characters. The last five minutes of the film don't have any dialogue at all and the result is the best part of the film – subtle, detailed (Cole does his best work of the film) and most importantly, cinematic. Then, with the closing credits comes the most staggering revelation of all – that it's based on a true story, which got me to thinking. With all the dialogue, the minimal locations and the lack of cinematic qualities, it occurred to me that with two kick ass actors and a tightening re-write, TWO HARBORS might make a really kick-ass stage play – maybe even a one-act. If there are any bold theater producers out there reading this, I definitely recommend seeing if you can get a hold of the film and contact the filmmaker, Reel 13 or whomever. There might be something to this story after all…(For more information on this or any other Reel 13 film, check out their website at www.reel13.org)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a20ad20e58142b2a35620020a42d656",
            "input": "Robert De Niro, Cuba Gooding Jr., Hal Holbrook, and all the rest of the actors and actresses in \"Men of Honour\" have combined to make this a fine movie. Mark Isham wrote the filmscore, so you know the music is truly fine, too.But: After noticing a slew of goofs, loopholes, and over-dramatic heart-string pluckings right from the start, I had to make a vow to ignore them and sit back to enjoy the film. If you can do that, it _really_is_ good.The story of Carl Brashear, a true-to-life hero, is inspirational enough to last a lifetime. Look him up on the internet... The entire story is more amazing than the film, as the Director admitted in his comments. There were only three African-American U.S. Navy divers in World War II. However, none reached the status of U.S. Navy Master Diver. Carl Brashear was THE first African-American U.S. Navy Master Diver. AND he was the first amputee diver to ever be certified or recertified as a U.S. Navy diver. (Resounding Applause).On the negative side of the movie's ledger: Should I tell you of only one of the many \"loopholes\"? Yeah, I'll mark this comment as containing \"spoilers\" and do so... The early, pivotal scene where the helicopter hits the radio mast and sinks into the sea: They'd never have had the time to suit up a full Mark V diver, even if he were the legendary Master Chief Billy Sunday, in time to be only \"... a couple of minutes late\" saving the pilot.So, for loopholes, goofs, and over-dramatization, I derated \"Men of Honor\" from a perfect 10 down to a 7.Will Hollywood EVER realize that the unalloyed truth is so much better that their over-dramatic approach to story-telling? I doubt it. Too bad!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff196fcd427e461da888e0365468a0d9",
            "input": "I was previously unaware that in the early 1990's Devry University (or was it ITT Tech?) added Film to its wonderful repertoire of technical degree programs. Well this movie must have been the product of the class valedictorian. My friend and I rented the original 1980 Boogeyman on my Netflix and this movie was on the flip side of the DVD. Do not waste your time with this movie. Awful awful awful. The filmmaker adds 2 main character's, a woman and her therapist. The woman has been having dreams about the Boogeyman and his victim's from the first film. Over 50% of this film is stock from the original movie. The rest of the movie is the main character having the bad dreams while her therapist drones on a the narrator. These scenes are shot through a filter so thick the characters glow. They would make Angela Lansbury look 25 years old. So, to recap, awful. Don't watch this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e76a00ab8fe4dda8ce0bedcf8a807a6",
            "input": "I really really love this show! I have always liked the 1990's shows of Space Ghost! This show was hilarious and I can't believe why Cartoon Network's Adult Swim would take such a funny show like this off the air. I hope they put this show on DVD or something. The show is about Brak (from the Space Ghost cartoons, SGCC and Cartoon Planet) who lives his every day life with his Mom and Dad and his best friend who likes to drop in a lot, Zorak! My favorite episodes were the one where Zorak gets this really good singing voice and then his voice doesn't give him any money that Zorak made from singing at all. Another episode I like is the one where Brak and Zorak didn't finish their homework and then they go back from Sunday to Friday and they just goof off and then they go back to the day homework was invented and then when they go back to the present homework didn't exist! Another episode I like is the one where Brak's Dad and their next door neighbor, Thundercleese the Robot keep getting into this agrument and then they get eaten by a giant worm. Another episode I liked was the one where Zorak makes a bully stand and then some new guy took over his stand. I also like a lot of the other episodes! One thing that never fails to make me laugh is when Zorak is getting beaten up, blasted and zapped!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d45a35fd05b42bba0b7b55873e60893",
            "input": "There isn't more I can say that saying this film was awful. The whole Chineseness is awakened in your being because of the ancestors was a hard sell. But telling the audience that every Chinese knows Chinese history without even studying it just laughable. That is like saying every American knows American history without studying or every Filipino, etc, etc. It just isn't believable.The story is flat out hideous. It talked about Shin being from a Monastery in China - later identifying it from Bejing. However, the early sequences of the film show the map focusing in on Mongolia. I know the current Chinese regime wants to claim areas like Mongolia for its own, granted. But its a distinct nation and it even labels \"Mongolia\" on the map. Did Disney Studios fail 5th Grade Geography? The relationship between Wendy and Shin is superficial at best, and yet she somehow feels connected to him. Her training is just cheesy as well. And, lets cut to the chase: everything about this film is bad. Its bad enough to laugh at and cry over. The Taekwondo action was over played and unrealistic in many instances.The evil eyes thing was cheesy. However, the left out ending would have been the only descent thing about it. They should have left the evil eyes ending in it. But instead somehow evil is defeated. Yey! Overall,not worth the time of the dog in the film. Brenda Song should get on with another studio. \"F\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2211d960d114f4aa22e6bd34d906c71",
            "input": "Can anybody do good CGI films besides Pixar? I mean really, animation looked antiquated by 2006 standards and even by 1995 Toy Story standards. Or maybe they spent all their budget on Hugh Jackman. Whatever their reasoning, the story truly did suck.Somehow, Hugh Jackman is a rat - a rat that is flushed down a toilet. Yeah I know, seems stereotypical. But then the sewer mimicked the ways of London - to an extent. Throw in a promise of jewels (????) and an evil(??) frog and you get a pathetic attempt at entertainment.I would like to say something entertained me. Maybe the hookup in the movie? Or maybe the happily-ever-after rat relationship. But nothing did. It had the talent, but it blew up. D-",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c084353584bf482daf6241378c0d230f",
            "input": "79/100. Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers never made anything but great films together. Although this is not one of their best, it is an excellent musical. There are a few outstanding musical numbers, good support from Randolph Scott. Two notable appearances, Betty Grable and Lucille Ball make memorable early screen performances. Ball is particularly good, and a blonde as well. The \"Let's Face the Music and Dance\" is one of the musical duo's best numbers ever. Harriet Hilliard, better know as Harriet Nelson of \"Ozzie and Harriet\" plays Ginger Roger's sister. The basic plot is pretty familiar, but with a cast this exceptional, it works. Excellent art direction and score.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7643bb25780944eab2347388f4c0bf3e",
            "input": "This film is being described as a comedy, but it wasn't a comedy at all. Like any Panahi film, it was a very realistic drama depicting the common thread of social inequity and hypocrisy. But it was very funny; much lighter than the director's dark and serious The Circle (my favourite Iranian film). The resourcefulness of the girls and the banter between them and the soldiers was both completely believable (as if it were a documentary) and completely hilarious.The filming the actual match and aftermath was astonishing. It added a realism much like Australia's Kenny, of course a very different film.The performances from all the non-professional actors – soldiers and girls – were very credible. It was very moving to see the passion, disappointment and excitement of these girls. Anyone in this country who thinks Muslim girls wearing a chador are any different to their own daughters should go see this film – it will be a real eye-opener.To me, the soldiers represented the current paradigm. They started out with stock-standard official policy responses to all the pleas of the girls. As the film progressed, they found it more and more difficult to maintain this stance. When what seems like all of Teheran breaks out into wild celebration, everyone is caught up in it, and the ridiculousness of the current policies is obvious to one and all.It was a very moving and unexpected ending, and gave the film a really nice blend of emotions, frivolity, drama and social commentary. Though it's adult cinema, I think mature-minded children from about seven onwards would really appreciate this film (as long as they can read subtitles).It is remarkable that a repressive country like Iran is able to produce films of such quality by the likes of Panahi and Kiarostami. Perhaps the constraints there force directors to be extremely resourceful. Australian (and other) film makers could take a leaf out of their book.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13eb15e9ef9c4ba1a8d59f2bdb22723f",
            "input": "Janeane Garofalo has been very public in her displeasure about this film, calling it, among other things, anti-feminist. She has also said on her radio show she hates making \"romantic comedies\" because she doesn't believe in them. I wholeheartedly agree with Janeane here. This film is a trifle at best. She does her best, but overall, it was just another boring, unbelievable \"romantic comedy\" that has no basis in the real world. Whereas there will be some who will say \"suspend your disbelief\", one grows tired of having to suspend it nearly every time you get a romantic film from Hollywood. Janeane's character, for some reason, is usually filmed in shadows and darkness, which makes her look unattractive, while Uma's character is filmed in lighter tones (which probably displeased Janeane and is probably one of the reasons she detests this film). That really hurts the film if we are to buy the premise that Janeane is supposed to be the better looking of the two. As many have said here and on other comment threads, Janeane is not ugly, but in fact, quite beautiful. I haven't read one review where someone said Uma was better looking. Having said that though, I believe that Ben Chaplin's character would more than likely stay with Uma, not Janeane. Many men don't like really intelligent women (and many women don't like really intelligent men), and sadly, Ben probably would have stayed with Uma. And despite the director's attempt to make Janeane unattractive, it doesn't work. Her natural beauty comes through anyway.I think a lot of Janeane's male fans who are obsessed with her like this film because they like to think of themselves in the Ben Chaplin character, and actually scoring with Janeane. Janeane is a lot more complicated than the character she plays here (real life is always much more complex than Hollywood can imagine), so take a cold shower gentlemen. This is the role that Janeane is best known for, and that's a shame, as this really isn't that good of a film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13bb6205adcc439c965b62139528ed26",
            "input": "Worst movie on earth. I don't even know where to begin but I hope I can save another person from punishing themselves with this movie. When it comes to acting and lighting, this movie is similar to a bad porno without the sex. The actors are some of the worst I've ever seen, and couldn't have been worse even if they were trying to make a complete mockery of this movie. The movie must have had a record breaking low budget which I'm sure was wasted almost solely on the movie's cover. This movie has now become a running joke with friends of mine and has become the standard for comparing other garbage movies. I would like to point of that no other movie even begins to compare. I feel personally responsible for suggesting a friend and me watch this movie and am surprised she still considers me a friend after the torment I put us through. Don't see this movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-336c7e961bf448d38713fd4d60789daf",
            "input": "If you're amused by straight-faced goings-on that are logical within a given illogical situation, you'll enjoy this whimsical 8-minute Spanish film.A woman enters a small café. The scene looks ordinary, but the counterman, customers, and two musicians seem somehow oddly subdued.Suddenly, the musicians play and one man begins to sing the title song , dancing across table tops with musical-comedy gestures. The customers, at first immobile, at intervals chime in (badly but gamely) with phrases from the song, read from slips of paper in their palms. On and off they jump up and dance (awkwardly but earnestly) in choreographed motions, like backup singers.But why??? the woman wonders. The answer is revealed as the soloist's jacket opens and she sees what's strapped across his chest -- just before the explosive climax...Even if you don't catch the song's (probably ironical) lyrics, the situation-perfect performances should give you a grin and a chuckle... I'd love to see it again!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9472726770c54037b0ceec9cd25c7b8e",
            "input": "This has the logical consistency of marshmallows filled with ketchup, and the overall aftertaste is just as disgusting. Will be used in the 9th circle of Hell at recreation time. Just plain torture.I would rather choose to watch 90 minutes of my computer going through 5400 blue screens of death than watch this appalling drivel again - ever. Horrible. Horrible. Horrible.You know, the good thing about Swiss Cheese is that along with the holes you get some cheese: here it's ONLY holes - and the excitement factor? Well that turns watching paint dry into an adrenalin rush and an Olympic speed sport.My brain hurts from trying to work out who OK'd this drivel, did they think about the premise? (I sincerely hope not, otherwise there is no redemption) the only consolation is they had the pleasure of sitting through the rushes. Made for TV should not be a synonym for: \"Sure, let the horses bowels run loose across the living rooms! Our audience are idiots!\"I was hooked just to know how it could get any worse. This is not a good sign, folks. Hallmark should be ashamed for releasing it.I should be ashamed for watching it.I am ashamed. I'm off for a long shower.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e7583664a2b4119b01e090d8f4dcd65",
            "input": "That might be a bit harsh for me saying that, but sadly so far in his directing career its true. Just have a look at what he as done so far. They barely make it past the 3 star mark.Why did I watch this movie? 2 reasons. Lucy Lawless and Heroes star Greg Grunberg. Lucy was outstanding in this movie, her performance carries the whole movie. I do hope she gets a \"blockbuster\" and breaks into the bigger league of actors, she clearly has the skills. Greg was not so impressive, typical TV acting style.The movie is oddly categorized as a horror. The only \"horror\" is short flashbacks, and they last a max of 2-5 seconds with a little blood in them. I personally would call this more a \"drama/thriller\".But no matter how interesting the story actually is, bad directing, editing and acting (appart from Lucy) destroys it. You get no real connection to the actors, something which is very important in a story like this one. You just sit there watching feeling nothing. Its like watching a bad TV soap....actually I think the TV soap would be more interesting.My advice: Stay away from this movie...or better yet just stay away from anything Michael Hurst is involved with.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7283d848174b44a4981700943e70750c",
            "input": "Saw this movie in an early preview, and I cannot stress enough how bad I thought this film was. From the very beginning, the audience was groaning over Pacino's awful southern accent. Poor Al looked really, really haggard, and I can't decide whether this was purposely part of his role as a drug addicted publicist, or perhaps he just didn't get any sleep before coming to the set. Much worse than Pacino's close ups, however, is the wretched excuse for a plot. Early in the film we are given indications that Pacino's character is gay, and I suspect that is what the screenwriter had originally intended. Later, however, we are supposed to suspend our incredulity and believe that both Tea Leoni and Kim Basinger (both of whom are sleepwalking through lame roles) lust after this elderly, half dead looking, effeminate man with the ridiculous accent. The worst part overall was the main plot thread, which had to do with some corporate espionage that is never fully explained and we never, ever care about in the slightest. Because this was a preview I will reserve my final judgment, because of the possibility of re-shoots and editing, but you can bet I will not pay a cent to see this in theaters.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-012326fb757242be8fe27d7978cfdcdf",
            "input": "I wouldn't say this is a bad movie; in fact it's pretty typical of the type of film that the \"poverty row\" studios were releasing at the time. Filmed for Monogram, Bela Lugosi is very effective in his role as the somewhat demented doctor-scientist, masquerading as a respected member of the community. In this movie, Bela and his henchmen have the nasty habit of stealing young brides, and, after their demise, injecting Bela's wife with a serum taken from their bodies in order to keep her young. Lugosi is more than up to the task in making this an enjoyable film, however, the movie suffers from the ultra-wooden acting of co stars Luana Walters and Tristram Coffin. Coffin (nice name for a guy in a horror flick) is especially bad in this case. I've seen him in numerous movies and tv shows and he is always the same; stiff, wooden and utterly unconvincing. Miss Walters is only slightly better, but she too lacks the acting talent to make her role believable. Still, the viewer can enjoy the great Lugosi act out yet another dastardly scheme only to be foiled in the end! Despite the poor acting by some, \"The Corpse Vanishes\" is an enjoyable movie for all to see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b44fce0957345f187dd1617def937ac",
            "input": "One of the best of the Fred Astaire and Giner Rogers films. Great music by Irving Berlin. Solid support from Randolph Scott, Harriet Nelson, Lucille Ball, Betty Grable, Frank Jenks, and Astrid Allwyn.Terrific songs include \"Let Yourself Go,\" \"Let's Face the Music,\" and \"Putting All My Eggs in One Basket.\" The last song is introduced by Astaire playing a jazzy piano and then a cute dance with Rogers. Rogers also sings \"Let Yourself Go\" with Grable among the backup singers.Harriet Nelson (then Hilliard) sings two nice songs and plays Rogers' mousy sister. \"Get Thee Behind Me\" is a song that sticks with you for days. She also sings \"But Where Are You?\" Snappy and fast paced, this entry in the Astaire-Rogers series is one of the better ones. The classic and amazing beautiful finale, \"Let's Face the Music and Dance\" is among the best-known of their numbers. Rogers wears one of the great dresses in movie history.... a shimmering sequined number that swirls around her legs as she dances (weighted hem) and is also slightly see through. Just gorgeous. This is the number that Steve Martin and Bernadette Peters re-created in Pennies from Heaven.Randolph Scott seems an odd choice as Astaire's pal but he also appeared in their Roberta with Irene Dunne. Luckily he does not attempt to sing or dance. It seems that Grable and Ball would have had bigger parts in 1936 but they have a few scenes and make little impact. Allwyn has the bigger role but is only OK.Rogers has one of her best solo numbers in the series with \"Let Yourself Go\".... Jazzy and thumping, it's a great song.Fun all the way, although I got tired of \"We Joined the Navy\" after the third time....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e06689cb5faa4fc7b3c5823fe698064d",
            "input": "First love is a desperately difficult subject to pull off convincingly in cinema : the all-encompassing passion involved generally ends up as a pale imitation or, worse, slightly ridiculous.Lifshitz manages to avoid all the pitfalls and delivers a moving, sexy, thoroughly engrossing tale of love, disaster and possible redemption, while tangentially touching on some of the deeper themes in human existence.The core story is of Mathieu, 18, a solitary, introverted boy who meets Cédric, brasher, more outgoing but just as lonely, while on holiday with his family. As the summer warms on, they fall in love and, when the holidays end, decide to live together. A year later, the relationship ends in catastrophe: Cédric cheats on Mathieu who, distraught, tries to take his own life. He survives and, in order to get perspective back on his life he returns to the seaside town where they first met, this time cloaked in the chill of winter.If the tale was told like this it would never have the impact it does: much of it is implied, all of it happens non-sequentially.The intricate narrative is essential to getting a deeper feeling of the passions experienced, through the use of counterpoint and temporal perspective. Fortunately, the three time-lines used (the summer of love, the post-suicide psychiatric hospital and the winter of reconstruction) are colour coded: warm yellows and oranges for the summer, an almost frighteningly chill blue for the hospital scenes and warming browns and blues for the winter seaside.Both main actors put in excellent performances though, whilst it's a delight to see Stéphane Rideau (Cédric) used to his full capacity (I'm more used to seeing him under-stretched in Gael Morel's rather limp dramas), Jérémie Elkaim (Mathieu) has to be singled out for special mention: you can feel his loneliness, then his almost incredulous passion, then his character crumbling behind a wall of aphasia. Beautifully crafted gestures get across far more than dialogue ever could.The themes touched upon are almost classic in French cinema: our difficulty in really understanding what another is feeling; our difficulty in communicating fully; the shifting sands of meaning… The film's title \"Presque rien\" (Almost Nothing) points to all of these and, indeed, to one of the key scenes in the film: In trying to understand why Mathieu attempted to kill himself, a psychiatrist asks Cédric if he had ever cheated on him… \"Non… enfin, oui… une fois, mais ce n'était rien\" (No… well, yes… once, but it was nothing). Cédric still loves Mathieu – he brought him to the hospital during the suicide attempt (none of which we see) and tries desperately to contact him again once he leaves – but cannot understand that he has lost him forever, because something that seemed nothing to him (a meaningless affair) is everything to Mathieu.Whilst the film is darker than the rather unfortunate Pierre et Gilles poster would suggest, it is not without hope: we get to see Cédric's slow, painful attempts to get back in touch with life, first through a cat he adopts, then through work in a local bar and finally contact with Pierre, who may be his next love. But here the story ends: A teenage passion, over within the year, another perhaps beginning. So what was it? Almost Nothing? Certainly not when you're living it…",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fad4595b87f24ee19408590d2a446949",
            "input": "I'm a HUGE fan of the twin sisters. Although this was one of their \"not soo good\" movies. I'm not saying it's bad, I can't say it's bad, but this whole popular and not popular thingy isn't good. Although I give this movie a 4.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a76089139cf4c06ab5fbcadf8a382ba",
            "input": "The first scene in 'Problem Child' has a baby peeing into a nun's face. For this movie, that's witty. A nasty, mean-spirited 'comedy', it's inept on so many levels it beggars belief. John Ritter is the kind father who adopts the child from Hell, and kudos to him for maintaining his dignity in the surrounding onslaught of one-note, annoying performances and puerile humour. And what the hell's Jack Warden doing in this mess? Slackly directed by Dennis Dugan and obnoxious in its attempts to turn on the sentimentality when it's done with the crudity, the movie is made so badly it's quite a bizarre experience. But never mind all that. The lowlight of the whole thing is Michael Oliver, the most repulsive and unlikeable kid actor ever to hit the screen – believe me, you will want to smack him right in the mouth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2fd30dfa4e67486b8882cbd62c8c92f3",
            "input": "I respect the fact that this is a very popular show. However, in comparison with Robert Altman's ingenious, hilarious, zany, and groundbreaking 1970 movie classic, this show was probably destined to be less-than-mediocre... even if it did run for 11 years, that doesn't necessarily make it any good. This show formed an all-too-integral part of my early childhood (it was on re-runs every night, and guess whose parents were watching it and laughing it up), but it's one of the memories I don't miss. And now that I actually have seen the movie, I can give this series an accurate critique. On its own, it's not nearly \"2 out of 10\" bad. However, the characters on this show are nothing like those in the movie. Some of them technically are the same, but they're only similar in name. For instance, since when is Alan Alda anything like Donald Sutherland? His style of humor is totally different, as are his characterization and outlook. The new characters are not that great; they just serve to make you miss the ones that they're replacing. It's the same with the new actors (including Jamie Farr). The only thing that actually transfers to the series is Radar, who's still (even though played by the same actor) merely a pale imitation of the original. What else? Oh, yeah. With a laugh track (it didn't matter whether it was used in surgery scenes or not), it comes across as creepy, due to what's going on in the other settings. And because it lasted nearly four times longer than the actual Korean War, it takes viewers into this bizarre temporal rift that doesn't work outside the world of cartoons. I've never liked this show, and I never will.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ba82c89f7ce4213a2b2a7f662403672",
            "input": "From the pen of Richard Condon (The Manchurian Candidate 1962) comes this muddled tale of political intrigue and assassination. The story, told in almost comic book fashion is difficult to swallow. All-star cast considered, this poor effort is not entirely the fault of the cast and crew: the novel was replete with the same short-comings. It seems as though at times the story is actually mocking the more sincere effort put forth in \"Manchurian Candidate.\" A disappointment on all counts.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c26e1a2f81d647229a944814c346af74",
            "input": "Watching Floored by Love one thought comes almost immediately to mind, \"My god this looks like a really bad sitcom.\" Sure enough, it turns out that FBL is a pilot for a series that may start this fall in Canada, poor poor Canada.Cara (Shirley Ng) and Janet (Natalie Sky) are a lesbian couple living in Vancouver. Janet has come out to her mother already but Cara's parents are still in the dark about their daughter's homosexuality. The pressure is on to out herself though when the parents come from Malaysia for her younger brother's wedding. That same week British Columbia legalizes gay marriage. With Janet wanting to wed, Cara has to decide whether or not to tell her conservative Chinese parents that's she's gay. Will she? Would she? Could she? Cara's situation is contrasted with that of Jesse (Trent Millar). Jesse has just declared his homosexuality to the world at the age of fourteen. His biological father Daniel (Andrew McIlroy) is coming for a visit soon. His stepfather Norman (Michael Robinson) fears that his chances of finally being fully accepted by Jesse are harmed by the fact that Daniel is gay and he is not. Will dialing 1-800-Makeover help?The dialogue and delivery come straight out of a lesser 1950's program along with the overdone physical emoting. The Full House-style melodrama is enough to make you wince from time to time and the attempts at comedy largely fail. McIlroy, Millar & Sky are the only performers that approach competency in this miscalculation but given the material they have to work with, it's no surprise that none impress. It's possible that the campiness was purposeful. It often seems like there is no way the performers are really that bad, that they must be trying to mimic the inferior sitcoms of days yore. If this is indeed the case than this review should probably be rewritten. The rewrite would focus on Floored by Love being a poor and ineffective send-up of old sitcoms.Writer/director Desiree Lim has put together a by-the-numbers bland-fest that's entirely forgettable. There was a time when merely having an openly homosexual protagonist was enough to make a mark on the screen. That time is gone. In this day we need quality as well.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b39fd16989742f99ce78e587792b2b4",
            "input": "Why such a generic title? Santa Claus??? So bland and unpredictable. Movies before that tried to cash in on the holiday spirit, most notably 'Santa Claus Conquers the Martians', at least was entertaining to watch because of the campiness to it, and all the stock footage being used... for some reason, that seemed happy to me. But this movie just screws Christmas in the butt, and screws the joy of all the kids. Santa lives in space? His enemy is a devil named Pitch? Santa gets help from Merlin the Magician? How random is this!? Well, since it was made in Mexico then some of you might understand the way of how the film was made. I had to admit some of the effects were just wacky for the time. It was a all-out cluster of madness! Though, despite all the troubles with the movie, it still feels like a Christmas movie. Good conquers evil, and Christmas still plays a part of our hearts of every good girl or boy in the world, or possibly universe, thanks to Santa Claus Conquers the Martians.. apparently. So, I think you should give it a try, even if it is one of the worst holiday movies of all time... though it should put a smile on your face any day.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b081ab12f454300a42cea809bbb8801",
            "input": "I saw the film for the first time at BBC on July the 27 of 2005. For me it was a good interpretation of the person Conan Doyle,and I truly wonder what the sherlock fans think about it. I also think it is a movie for these fans whether they agree or not what is mentioned.You may ask yourself was A.C. Doyle a strong person or did he put himself in question. However he was the creator of the famous Holmes,but how much of it was a sort of semi-biography? Not the less I strongly put this adaption forward, it is a movie you have to see - even if you aren't interested in the Sherlock Holmes movies or books - look a it , enjoy yourself and have your own opinion of it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e78e9300cdce48d293b8edee3a88a34d",
            "input": "Watching Smother was perhaps the longest not-quite-90-minutes of my life. There wasn't a laugh to be had; in fact, I don't remember ever cracking a smile. Diane Keaton was horridly unfunny as a middle-aged chain-smoking dog hoarder, the textbook overbearing mother character, a relentlessly irritating woman who clearly suffers from some kind of personality disorder. She is manipulative, conniving, melodramatic, childish, narcissistic, and worst of all, boring.I suppose I should briefly mention the other characters, but why bother? It was just a long string of movie clichés--the dippy, socially inept distant relative who's just trying to break into \"The Industry\", the gruff and long-suffering but somehow still lovable father, the mild- mannered wife who just can't take it anymore (but eventually moves beyond the discord and resignedly comes home), the herd of unhousebroken dogs who like to chew throw pillows while everyone is away, etc.God, what a snore. I've never been a Diane Keaton fan and Smother only reminded me why. Overacting is overacting, no matter how many pictures you did in your prime. Her attempts at physical comedy were especially humiliating. What was the director thinking?While I like Dax Shepard and can even sometimes tolerate Liv Tyler, their performances were so lackluster and dull that it was clear that neither actor gave a damn about this movie. That was okay, because neither did I. Keaton's endless self-absorbed prattling was intolerable and at times Shepard's dislike for her seemed genuine. By the end of the movie I wanted to slap her myself.Awful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a1cd829c376433f9ef6142837070099",
            "input": "i can't believe that NONE of the official reviews for this movie warn people that it contains two quite upsetting sexual assault scenes. It's as though our culture accepts this kind of behavior as simply sexual but not violent. My biggest problem with the movie is that it doesn't seem to condemn these assaults - as in, the woman who is repeatedly assaulted and pressured never holds the men accountable for their actions, and neither does anyone else. One man is stopped from completing the assault when someone throws a dagger at him, but he is reprimanded only with \"you cannot force a woman to love you\" rather than \"you should never force a woman sexually, you jerk\"... From a woman's point of view, the movie is a let down. It sort of \"throws a bone\" to women in letting them be both skilled fighters and leaders, but the movie is much more defined by the romance - which is characterized by the notion that human sexuality must involve an imbalance of power, with men dominating the woman they love. This amazing martial arts fighter doesn't use any of her fighting skills to try to fend off her attackers. She never even makes them apologize - rather, SHE seems apologetic. Overall, a depressing and upsetting movie, with some great cinematography and some cool fight scenes, but not as good as Hero by a long shot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5c138bd97bc4b649b3f93bac0f5047f",
            "input": "I can't believe that Steven Segal's career has hit so low that he has been reduced to making 4th rate films with 5th rate secondary actors. I watched this moving expecting to see him beet the crap out of some people the way he usually does. When he is reduced to using a single judo chop between the shoulder blades to take out an opponent and the guy falls like a ton of bricks something is wrong.The plot is unbelievable as a movie, and even if you excuse the visuals, and had read this story as a novel, you'd be left wondering why you had even picked up the book.Steven Segal goes through the motions and seems as if he is only doing this because he is under obligation. He shows no effort and no enthusiasm, and in some scenes he doesn't show up at all.I hate to repeat other peoples comments, but the use of stock footage for cut scenes and for visuals of the aircrafts in flight is pathetic. The condition of those scenes chopped in, is shaky and scenes themselves seemed to have deteriorated over time. The zappruder film showing President John F Kennedy being assassinated is steadier and cleaner.My honest opinion is to tell you not to waste your time seeing this movie, it is not up to the standards of his work in the glimmer man or exit wounds. I read one review that said the movie had a 12 million dollar budget (Segal being paid 5 of that) and that the movie still came in under budget. I must concur.It is no wonder that this is a direct to DVD movie, as no conscientious theatre owner would play this movie .",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e684d4bc59724eff92f141a1b4034dae",
            "input": "Oh if only I could give this rubbish less than one star! There were two mildly amusing parts in the whole film and that is it! one was where a line or two from the song Don't Worry, Be Happy was sung by the slugs and the other was where Roddy fell of the toilet roll and landed with his feet and legs apart so that everything else he landed on on the way down hit him in the groin. That is it there was nothing more amusing than that, at least not for me anyway! Doctornappy2 is not right in saying 'Fans of the completely terrible \"Shrek\" might enjoy, but \"Wallace & Gromit\" fans will probably turn away in disgust.' As I loved Shrek 1 2 and 3 and I also love Wallace and Gromit. You see what it boils down to is that if an animation is done extremely well then it is definitely worth watching, this however was about as far from done well as you can possibly get! The continuity mistakes were too big in number. Some were pointed out by the makers of this site others were not. I won't point out all of the others, but here are a few more to see: When the young daughter leaves at the start of the film the catch to the cage door comes down and the hook part of it that is on the right clearly goes back around behind the round knob thus effectively making sure Roddy would not be able to get out and yet he does just by simply kicking at it. At one point the ruby falls down Roddy's back and gets pushed straight up into the the air by Rita all the while the ship is moving forwards. In the next scene Roddy has caught it again. This is impossible. Seeing as how the ship is moving forwards the only place when the ruby was ejected out from under the back of Roddy's shirt the only place it could have landed was in the water not in Roddy's hand. There was a third one I wanted to point out but for now I have forgotten it.Too many, for want of a better word, 'jokes' were repeated in one way or another, there was not enough time to establish any sort of connection with any of the characters, the characters were hollow, shallow and empty, and the whole film left you wanting....wanting to watch 85 minutes of anything else! Paint drying or grass growing are two superb options!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-973fa6a508754e698c18f4e5f3d60ba9",
            "input": "Some gorehound-friends recommended \"Live Feed\" to me, and basically I can't really complain as the film certainly does deliver copious amounts of gross smut and buckets full of sleaze, but it is of course not a very good film. More than obviously cashing in on the latest trend in horror cinema, the so-called Torture Porn, Ryan Nicholson tries to surpass every other film in this sub genre (and that includes the role models \"Hostel\" and \"Saw\") with its sick & twisted make-up effects and thoroughly depraved shots of naked co-eds tried up, suffering and begging for their lives. There's no actual plot to describe. Five utterly brainless twenty-something friends take a trip to Asia. One of them has Asian roots, but other than that I don't really know why they opted to travel there instead of to Cancun. They're clearly not interested in the continents culture and even cause a hectic scene when they witness a local butchering a cute puppy dog on the market. The quintet subsequently dives into the lurid night life and one of them accidentally insults the leader of a criminal clan. A simply apology clearly doesn't suffice, as the gangster follow them into an adult theater and gradually subject all of them to vicious torture. One girl has her breast impaled and another poor wench even has a poisonous snake shoved down her throat; yikes. \"Live Feed\" is surprisingly boring despite of all the bloodshed and the amateurish production values are quite difficult to overlook, even if you're used to watching independent fan-boy trash cinema like this. The fat bloke depicted on the cover, an oriental S&M executioner, is admittedly quite cool and he's also the most talented of the whole bunch, because he at least keeps his mouth shut the entire time. I wouldn't exactly recommend this pile of filth, but hey, if you like loud & hideous metal music, nauseating torture footage and dim-witted losers, go right ahead and watch!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b503586616ab4c26a6614f15cbcc8c25",
            "input": "Jenny Neumann (from the sexploitation flick MISTRESS OF THE APES, the American slasher HELL NIGHT and others) is Helen Selleck, an American actress who gets a lead role in an Australian stage production. She's a virgin because as a little girl she saw her mom having sex and then accidentally caused the car accident that killed her. Meanwhile, a black-gloved killer prowls around the theater slashing up people with shards of glass.***MAJOR SPOILER***The killer is obviously Helen (she speaks in her dead mother's voice, washes blood off her hands after the murders and is seen killing a child molester with a broken bottle as a little girl!), but this has gratuitous heavy-breathing POV camera-work and conceals the identity of the murderer until the very end like it's supposed to be some big surprise.The entire cast seems obsessed with talking about, having or trying to have sex, and, in one case, even blackmailing their way into getting laid. There's quite a bit of nudity and blood, but there's no sense of continuity, the photography is murky and the editing (by Colin Eggleston, who also scripted and produced) is terrible. The theater setting for a slasher film predates Soavi's film of the same name and Argento's OPERA (both of which are better than this one ) by five years though, and Neumann is pretty hot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7196737eccc4e6087b4f39ac686d2e9",
            "input": "I sought this film out because I'm a new Frain fan and wanted to see more of his work. First of all, his Irish accent is great. He's got a keen ear for dialects, it seems. His acting was marvelous, as usual. James Frain aside, I thought the film was very well done. It showed the conflict in Northern Ireland as the *mess* it really is. Both sides are guilty of grave injustices, and the men drawn into the conflict usually have very little to say about their circumstances.Also, it is interesting to realise that not every man (or woman) that is supposedly fighting for his country, is really doing *just* that. For example, when Kenny (James Frain) asks Ginger (Ian Hart) why he does \"it\", Ginger can't come up with a morally acceptable answer. Why? Because Ginger isn't in it for the noble cause of protecting his country or the rights of his fellow Protestants...Ginger is in it for the fun of killing. He's full of blood-lust and it's the perfect job for a guy like him. In a struggle like this there are guys like Liam (John Lynch) who just want to live their daily lives and enjoy their families...guys that see all of the fighting just begats more fighting. There are guys like Kenny that are born leaders full of charisma, and they add fuel to the flames, rather they mean to or not. Also, Kenny genuinely believes in the \"cause\". He believes what he is doing will make a difference in the future...which is a bit odd 'cause his character seems too intelligent for it all. But, like a lot of other seemingly intelligent men, he is sucked into a gang lifestyle not even realizing it...'til it's too late. Then there is Ginger, a pure psycho who isn't in the fighting for any other reason but for the sheer thrill of it, which in a gangland type war makes him a valued asset, some might argue. However, now, in this film, Ginger has out lasted his worth, and has become a very dangerous loose cannon.Everything comes to a boiling point, and predictably, the ending is a tragic one. What makes this film worthy is that is shows both sides of this ages old conflict. Being American, I can't begin to fully understand what all struggle is about. But, I do know there has to be a better way.All in all, a well acted, touching...but troubling film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ec00dd160854e0995665ee332ac4a7b",
            "input": "Very good point there : \"only an elite few (the upper classes) would both have access to the internet AND be able to communicate on an exclusively English speaking site such as the IMDb\" Some might think Internet Is not reality but this point of view really put media society and democracy at stake: You are probably right.. Even If there Is Internet cafe's in Venezuela most Chavez supporters will not afford to even rent a computer for half an hour to comment on IMDb.Screw you faschist upper class rich right wing capitalist liberal intellectual surpressors .. Probably this is your first time using Internet ;)..",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc7ed52b21b94d6a9bc94c050e1fbce0",
            "input": "Neat premise. Very unrealistic. What I learned from this movie is that speeding crazily out of control to go to the weekend cabin may not be the best idea after all. I loved how Bill conveniently rolls out of the car and down the hill with no injury at all! Unfortunately, the same can't be said for his gal. Oh, and the police never seemed to find the car or trace the owner of the wreck.Lots of dragged out scenes including a plain stripper (still have nightmares from that scene). Poor assistant guy and his crummy useless hand. I admit I was intrigued to see what the mysterious \"thing\" was behind the door, but when it appeared, I just laughed. HA HA HA!! The girl really seemed sadistically angry about being revived. Personally, I really would want a new body after an excruciating experience like that!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a89729b80fca409e98520826698a2b40",
            "input": "so yes it is quite nostalgic watching the 1st episode because this is the one episode i definitely remembered. i enjoy watching the first season and yes compared to the action packed shows we have now this show seems lame. but frankly i like the \"less violent\" part of the show and the story line has more substance than the new ones now. I thought it interesting that Belisario's Airwolf and JAG have similar theme - the lead actor (Hawke and Harm) both are looking for an MIA relative (brother, father). wonder if Robert Belisario's personal life mimics these 2 shows' theme.Question - does anyone have pictures of Hawke's cabin. I love that cabin (kinda like a dream cabin of mine) and that is one of the scenes i remember about Airwolf.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a69e4c7550124aeb81fcd3a59f9738e7",
            "input": "Super Speedway makes a great demo of your new DVD / bigscreen / 5.1 channel sound system. The IMAX camera puts you right in the race car, where you cruise around various tracks at high speed, reminiscent of the driving sequences in Grand Prix (if only that would appear on DVD!). I enjoy watching it again and again.The only minus, and why I didn't give it a 10, is some of the driving sequences look suspiciously like the film was speeded up. The soundtrack also requires a little suspension of disbelief - all you can hear in a real car is the engine. You won't hear swooshes as you go under bridges.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b27d23e34f104590a01afa87116c0708",
            "input": "Terrible use of scene cuts. All continuity is lost, either by awful scripting or lethargic direction. That villainous robot... musta been a jazz dancer? Also, one of the worst sound tracks I've ever heard (monologues usually drowned out by music.) And... where'd they get their props? That ship looks like a milk carton... I did better special effects on 8mm at the age of 13!I'd recommend any film student should watch this flick (5 minutes at a time) so as to learn how NOT to produce a film. Or... was it the editors' fault?It's really too bad, because the scenario was actually a good concept... just poorly executed all the way around. (Sorry Malcom. You should have sent a \"stunt double\". You're too good an actor for such a stink-bomb.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f61526c95a54bc2b71f2358d597a5da",
            "input": "I didn't know the real events when I sat down to watch this, just the fact that this was based upon a true story. After the death of the kid's father, Rhonda tries to help her daughter Desiree(... I did not know anyone actually named their offspring that) cope with the loss. This is really made for children, as is often the case with \"family\" flicks(with that said, go ahead and get everyone together for a viewing, though I'd keep teenagers out of it, unless you're sure they're gonna buy the concept), but it doesn't downplay the sting that the death of a parent is, and it doesn't really talk down to anyone. The plot is sufficiently interesting, and moves along well enough. Acting varies, with the excellent Burstyn outshining most of her fellow cast, Mathis following that pretty well, and Ferland and her peers(with a few exceptions) being the least convincing of the bunch(and frankly, they're irritating; then again, I'm not really in the intended audience for this thing). The editing and cinematography are standard, and certainly not less than that. While humor is limited to a handful of amusing lines or so, the tone is not an unpleasant one. There is an intense scene or two in this. I recommend this to fans of these types of movies. 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65d47151c0f248abb6e926fa30b6e99f",
            "input": "If your a hard core Freddy fan then you might not like it. This seems to be a spoof of the nightmare series. Not much to see here. The only reason it holds it self up is the back story on Freddy.The one thing that is always great in Nightmare movies are the death scenes. But the death scenes were very crappy in this. The visual effects were great and the acting was OK but the back story was excellent. Basically Freddy's story comes full circle in this.I have read bad reviews for this but i actually enjoyed this despite its many flaws: 1. A Nightmare on Elm Street. (8/10) 2. Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare. (7/10) 3. A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master. (7/10) 4. A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors. (7/10) 5. A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child. (6/10) 6. A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. (3/10) I recommend it if you enjoy the series. This is were Freddy is fully explained but thats all there is. Next on my list Wes Cravens New Nightmare.(7/10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf3622088e984d3a8fabc568d5b4dc90",
            "input": "Ashley Judd, in an early role and I think her first starring role, shows her real-life rebellious nature in this slow-moving feminist soap opera. Wow, is this a vehicle for political correctness and extreme Liberalism or what?Being a staunch feminist in real life, she must have cherished this script. No wonder Left Wing critic Roger Ebert loved this movie; it's right up his political alley, too.Unlike the reviewers here, I am glad Judd elevated herself from this moronic fluff to better roles in movies that entertained, not preached the heavy-handed Liberal agenda.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f88bdd0c9a354f9f8db2ba7f3bd13fb9",
            "input": "This film takes you on one family's impossible journey, and makes you feel every step of their odyssey. Beautifully acted and photographed, heartbreakingly real. Its last line, with its wistful hope, is one of the more powerful in memory.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2aeb0d3209d64c1f96d5a620bd7a68c8",
            "input": "The Bill was essentially a cultural fountain from which a beautiful rainbow-haze of socio-introspection emerged, inspiring such famed derivatives as Cop Land, The Departed, The Godfather 3, and most recently of course, The Wire.With multi-faceted characters and story lines that have been described as '4-dimensional Shakespeare', The Bill grabbed you by the collars from episode one and just would not let you go.The show covered, anticipated, and even occasionally caused all the major global events between 1984 and 2010. The most famously prescient moment being episode 19 of series 5, which aired on the eve of the second Gulf War. Detective Jim Carver's misguided - and ultimately career ending - drugs raid on Craig 'Fun Boy' Richardson's flat in the Jasmine Allen Estate in early 2003, was widely viewed as a predictive allegory for the coalition's failure to find weapons of mass destruction following the invasion of Iraq several months later.However, it was the work the Bill did to try and highlight some of the lesser-known problems experienced by police officers that won it the most praise. This was sympathetic drama covering such sensitive areas as helmet-phobia, under-uniform cross-dressing, in-van homosexuality, lost truncheons, casual drunken bestiality (regretted), siren aversion syndrome (SAS), groin chaffing caused by chasing suspects while wearing an overly starched uniform and many, many more issues that still trouble, disturb, haunt and excite officers to this day.The last word should go to one of The Bill's most famous fans, Nelson Mandela: \"…it is no exaggeration to say that I would not have made it through the dark void of loneliness that summed up my last years of incarceration on Robben Island if it wasn't for the heart-warming, casual buffoonery of Reg Hollis.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2177534499b4d91bc4b652326887725",
            "input": "Can I be as simple and primitive in my evaluations as to simply say \"I liked it\"? It's reasonably funny by bits, it got great stars and it's gorgeous to look at. The songs (there are about two which are then repeated) are forgettable, but they get a healthy ironic treatment (such as the terribly handsome Mr Fairbanks exploding into frenzied Wagnerian version of the tender ballad Miss Grable has just rendered); there isn't much dancing with all the 1861 crinolines draped around Miss Grable, and the comedy might be a bit heavy handed, but the result still is very uplifting. The photography (including real outdoor shots which are a thrill) is amazing, playing around with different shades of lush heavy gold. Miss Grable is a bit past her prime and on the plumpish side, but still fresh and comfortable in this continental \"olde worlde\" comedy. It's pretty much along the line of \"Down to Earth\" with Rita Hayworth, and that one tends to be rather disliked by many. So I suppose several people would deem \"That Lady in Ermine\" to be outdated and stuffy. But it's a fairy tale, and these tend to move along at a certain paste anyhow. My suggestion is - just enjoy the artwork, the costumes, the witty script and everything else this film has to offer, and stop complaining. The film has been released on DVD in Germany, with both German and English soundtrack.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53d2f23a7d114ce282627197f94d4bd4",
            "input": "I first saw this movie on MST3K. And although I laughed my posterior off at the jokes, I don't particularly think this movie was all that bad. Sure it was a little hard to understand it is quite obviously low budget, But it had a very Hitchcock-like plot and I can honestly say that when I viewed the non-MST3K version, I was genuinely entertained. This movie is crying out for a Hollywood remake.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89d39c497b7647e0977df4591ca0348c",
            "input": "\"Deliverance\" is a dead-on example of what wonderful movies came out of the '70s. While your jaw is dropped during a \"Terminator\" movie, are you really sacred? I don't think so, because you are there to see what new CGIs have been strung together - plot matters not.So many daily situations can become terrifying for no reason at all, because there are so many people involved in daily living - like a trip to the market.....or a walk down a dimly-lighted street. \"Deliverance\" is SO frightening, because those innocent actions can turn deadly in a heart-beat. Venturing into the backwoods is a frolic in fun? Anyone who has that notion does not read the papers, watch the daily news, nor has not seen some of the other movies that depict the seriousness of \"trespassing\" into territories where outsiders are not welcome. It is almost unbelievable that the advance dish on \"Deliverance\" didn't inform almost everyone going to view it this was no picnic, and \"squeal like a pig\" wasn't a part of \"Deulling Banjos\".I hate the term \"hillbillies\", because - as some \"users\" wrote - that demeans entire regions of people who are very content to live as they know how - without the interference of modern life. Much is made of \"inbred\" - that is not sexuality peculiar to the backwoods. \"Chinatown\" should teach us that lesson. However, city-slickers are extremely dumb to enter a closed society and give them attitude. I know lots of \"hillbillies\" - they are moral people, when left to themselves. Their \"justice\" can be brutal when they feel threatened or humiliated, just like the \"justice\" in city streets. They don't need any part of the city - the city should take its canoe-ing and camping to legal sites.\"Deliverance\" was the last film I found Jon Voight to do any real acting - I hope I'm wrong. He was extremely underpaid for \"Midnight Cowboy\", because he was unknown, but demonstrated that he could do that role at the drop of a hat. His acting in \"Deliverance\" was superb. It gave us a clear demonstration ordinary people can move mountains, if it's necessary - but who wants to be thought-of as \"ordinary\" today? His stifled sob at the dinner was brilliant. Wow! for Burt Reynolds !!! One must ask what led him into those other tacky films? His manliness, although misguided, in this film set the pace for the endurance necessary to make it out of the wilderness - not only in the backwoods, but the wilderness of everyday-life. Ned Beatty was stellar - his underwear may not have had \"Versace\" stitched on it, but his shell-shocked performance was perfect. As noted, he became stronger than any of the group by the end of the movie. Ronny Cox played the moral guy to the hilt - every man should have his determination to do what is right. Several \"users\" have theorized he was shot, or lost his balance when he pitched-into the river - my theory is that he was so disgusted with the whole journey, he committed suicide. No gunshot was heard during the scene and Voight and Beatty did not find a wound.James Dicey certainly knows how to weave a suspenseful tale, and was great as the sheriff - it is said he was so terrified of acting he came to the set drunk every day. His character could see the three canoe-rs were guilty of surviving, but also knew they didn't stand a chance against a jury of the local people, no matter how kindly they were treated in \"Aintry\". He was also aware that the meaner of the locals could be cruel. Justice ? - \"don't come back up here again\". Not many \"users\" knew \"hillbillies\" were used in the film where ever it was possible - what actors could portray them better? The \"mountain-men\" WERE actually mountain-men.......Every detail of this movie was perfect - no doubt it was dangerous to play in. Play in? Better \"fight-for-your-life\" in. I've experienced some near-dangerous incidents, and am content to live outside of the fray - you guys who feel your manhood raging can have my part.That we have absolutely killed - and continue to do so - irreplaceable areas of this country in undeniable. To be able to view its grandeur on any media is enthralling, but it leaves a bitter taste to realize some do not care about it. Los Angeles, where I live, is a perfect example: it's built-up right into the territories for wild animals, and steadfastly believes humans come before animals. Those are their rightful habitats - we should leave them be just that. Any wonder why coyotes and bears and wolves wander into neighborhoods? They're theirs.In some less threatening way, we all need to experience the lessons to be learned from \"Deliverance\" - to understand our advancement technologically does not lead to supremacy. I thank all those city-slickers who went out into the wilderness to produce this modern classic, so that it can scare the heck out of me when I watch it. You can have the thrill of danger - I'll stick to the TV. 30-out-of-10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b04bb27a3794e6e8a6b65e08a2a5171",
            "input": "At first glance, this film looks like the Keifer Sutherland series 24 for the big screen. With the focus on a plot to assassinate the President of the United States, a race against time, and plenty of Secret Service agents, the agency under the spotlight in The Sentinel.But wait, the protagonist turns out to be Michael Douglas' character Pete Garrison instead, a veteran Secret Service agent famed for taking the bullet for Reagan in 1981. The SS agents are specially trained to \"take the bullet\", which is what makes them special - who in the right mind will put themselves in the line of a bullet and a target? But Garrison gets implicated in the assassination plot, and has to run for his life while at the same time doing his bit of investigations into the plot. All this because of his failure in a polygraph test, due to his adulterous banging of the First Lady (Kim Basinger). Tsk.There are shades of Clint Eastwood's In the Line of Fire. Both featured aging actors, and aging veteran has-been heroes with a bit of a historical reference, who took the bullet in their respective tours of duty. While Eastwood's movie has a more enigmatic villain in John Malkovich, The Sentinel suffered from its lack of a central strong villain, preferring to share the assassination responsibility amongst many forgettable ex-KGB villains, and the mole within the Presidential Detail. With Douglas on the run from the law, he becomes similar to Dr. Richard Kimble of The Fugitive, hunting the proverbial one-armed man while at the same time, relying on his smarts to outwit fellow agents, which turned out to be quite interesting to watch - despite slick processes, it still boils down to the performance and gullibility of individual agents.Keifer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, top TV stars of today from 24 and Desperate Housewives, get relegated into support roles as the Secret Service investigators who are looking into Garrison's probable involvement in the assassination plot, and at times seem to have lept off the pages of CSI with their forensics skills. The beautiful couple had chemistry that could have resembled X-Files' Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, but alas these two had very little to do here. We know the reason why they're in the movie, and that is to get their fans into the theatres. Also, Longoria's role seemed unable to shake off her sexy-mama Gabrielle, and here, has her in fairly low cut blouses (Sutherland actually tells her to cover up) and tight pants (ogle-fest for fellow agents).Nonetheless, it's still a pretty interesting look into the lives of probably the most highly charged and tense protection detail in the world, and the typical threats that they face daily, including the following up on every nutcase's threat on the life of the most powerful man in the world. It's a decent suspense and investigative thriller, with enough subplots to keep you entertained. But one thing though, like most ending action sequences, this one has a big enough loophole for you to fly a jumbo jet through.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17be000756d44329b384c78bf499129c",
            "input": "A great suspense movie with terrific slow camera-work adding to the dramatics makes this a treat to watch and enjoy. Director-writer Brian de Palma does a super Hitchcock-imitation (many called it a \"ripoff\") with this film and the 2.35:1 widescreen DVD is a must to fully appreciate the camera-work (and several scenes with people hiding on each side which are lost on formatted-for-TV tapes).The downside of the movie, at least to anyone that has some kind of moral standard, is the general sleaziness of all the characters, including the policeman played by a pre-NYPD Dennis Franz (who has hair here!). The opening scene is still shocking with a fairly long shower scene of Angie Dickinson that is quite explicit, even 25 years after its release. The film has several erotic scenes in it as Dickinson (if that is really her on the closeups) and Nancy Allen are not shy about showing their bodies.There is not much dialog in the first 20 minutes and no bad language until Franz enters the picture after the murder. The first 36 minutes are riveting and even though it's apparent who the killer is, it's still very good suspense and fun to watch all the way through, particularly for males ogling the naked women.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8edbac996b064650a1ee95ec896b32b2",
            "input": "It may have not been up for academy awards and admittedly, it's pretty cheesy, but it's just so much fun! Nothing makes me smile like Bill and Ted. Lovable, optimistic, and hilarious, Bill and Ted are a great way to unwind.Although I love Excellent Adventure, Bogus Journey is funnier to me. Death is flippin hilarious and Bill and Ted are even more endearing. People give me grief about loving this movie, but only really pretentious movie-watchers will say it's not even a bit entertaining. If you like this, you'll probably also be a fan of Wayne's World, Dude Where's My Car, and Dumb and Dumber. Admit it, though foolish, they make you grin and turn your tickle box over. So watch them just for kicks and giggles!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92a51a16337b42d8a8e3857ec2e22cda",
            "input": "Best show since Seinfeld. She's really really funny. Her total self centeredness, the hulking gay stoner neighbors, the departures into song or cartoons, make this the freshest show on TV. One of the few shows I make point of watching. The scene with the wise old black lady in the drugstore (\"oh wait now that you're close you do look old\" turns face with finger and walks away lol), the cough syrup overdose, sleeping with God, it's all so funny or so stupid it's just a lot of fun. The shows weak points are her sister and the cop-only because they're too darn normal!! I really can't wait until the next show, something I haven't felt for any show in a long time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a73a29b361004ae98c45d7367e928fa6",
            "input": "I read Rice's novel with interest, and became quite enchanted with its characters and heartbreaking tale based on historical truths.However, I was simply APPALLED at this disastrous adaptation. The casting was based merely on physical appearance, and not acting talent (with the obvious exception of Peter Gallagher, who was neither blond-haired, or able to act his way out of a wet paper bag). The cast's embarrassingly clumsy and inconsistent attempts at affecting a French accent was hilarious, but not in an entertaining way. I found myself wincing through this muddled and melodramatic tripe, and was surprised I made it to the end.A warning to fans of the novel - stay away from this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbf1260c506849dfbfbb4c2d34a80894",
            "input": "Well, I like to be honest with all the audiences that I bought it because of Kira's sex scenes, but unfortunately I did not see much of them. All sex scenes were short and done in haphazard manner along with all the weird and corny background music just like all other B movies - it just doesn't look much like two people having sex. There is a tiny bit of plot toward the end - Kira's new lover is a killer. Whoa!!! how shocking!!! Why don't we nominate this movie for Oscar Award? I can't imagine how bad the movie would look like if it were R-rated (Mine is imported from UK, rated 18). Conclusion? Put it down and walk away, so yon won't end up with being a moron like me.Score: 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39e9740e50f24b6d9621bce1c9aa12d4",
            "input": "I, like many people, saw this film in the theatre when it first came out in '97. It was a below average film at best, defiantly not the \"masterpiece\" that all these \"Titanic\" fanboys like to make it out as. First off, DiCaprio is a terrible actor no matter which way you look at it. People just like him because of his looks. His acting \"skills\" essentially consist of saying a lot of cheesy lines and trying to act sexy. Second, the film itself had a rather boring and simple plot: girl falls in love with guy, ship they're on sinks, lots of crappy love scenes thereafter. Anyone with an IQ above 50 will realize this isn't ingenious in any way whatsoever. Nor is it original. Plus the director felt the need to drag it out for 3+ hours. I could compress it into a 1 hour block without losing any of the plot. In conclusion, \"Titanic\" is the most overrated movie to date. Why it got so much attention and money is beyond me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-acc42590dfa74c048d4eb76c577b17b7",
            "input": "In the unlikely case that some aspiring directors are reading these comments, I'd like to offer some advice (free of charge!), from a viewer's perspective. If you want to make a serious exotic adventure film, do it. If you want to make a spoof of exotic adventure films, go ahead. DO NOT try to make both at the same time, it doesn't work. For example, having a goofy \"comic relief\" character killed and beheaded and following it up with a monkey shaking a tree and dropping a coconut on a cannibal's head just makes you look like you had NO IDEA what kind of movie you wanted to make. This one is boring, meandering, cheap, racist....you get the picture. A couple of smart moments and a few glimpses of nudity from Kathy Shower (way too prissy here) are hardly worth your trouble. There is a reason everyone has forgotten about this film's existence. (*1/2)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f885cf90f0544da38c019322ceb04967",
            "input": "This movie was a disappointment. I was looking forward to seeing a good movie. I am the type of person who starts a movie and doesn't turn it off until the end, but I was forcing myself not to turn it off. Theonly reason why I didn't turn it off was because I am a huge Christian Slater fan and I wanted to see him act in it. I was really speechless after I finished watching the movie. This movie was one of the worst movies that I have seen in my life. Thank you Christian Slater for putting some humor into it. If you hadn't been in this movie I would of been bored out of my mind.I also agree that Anthony Hopkins needs to stick to acting. By the time the movie was over I didn't even get the plot. I was both confused and annoyed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3122040b4dd47678ee3de80710bbffa",
            "input": "All I can say is, before watching the movie I did not have a hint indication who Annemarie Schwarzenbach was or what was her life story..and I have to confess that the movie was hardly a help to reach these data.. and even it was not successful to persuade me to do some research by typing few words on google website; however, all I can say is that the actress Jeanette Hain was great with her mute facial expression she really played well and showed a deep depression mental status, as it is in real.After all , based on the script the movie has happened in turkey and Tehran as well as Afghanistan.. but believe me I am familiar with the area , it was all about an Arabic desert in morocco.. Turkish people and persian people are completely different in face and culture as well as in language which is not arabic..I suppose for making a film like this- documentary type- a thorough research about all these minor elements is mandatory..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a07bb2147a744ff3a135c465db1d62fa",
            "input": "Linking story: another first-time viewing for me and, again, this is one of the most popular of the Amicus anthologies - and it's easy to see why, though I realize how the film's rather meaningless title could be misleading for some; I certainly fancied director Peter Duffell's choice - DEATH AND THE MAIDEN (which, incidentally, is a classical piece by Schubert that is heard in the film during the Peter Cushing episode) - a great deal more. Though the linking device itself is not all that great, the episodes are all equally compelling and enjoyable. Production values come off as very respectable indeed for the budget Duffell had to work with. The latter infuses the film with a great deal of style which is not so common with this type of film and, frankly, it makes one regret the fact that he wished to distance himself from the genre (though more so as not to be typecast rather than because he felt it was beneath him).Now to the individual stories themselves: \"Method For Murder\": the opening segment does not offer any real surprises but, to make up for this, it's quietly suspenseful and appropriately creepy at times (Tom Adams' 'fictitious' villain looking like the long-lost brother of Boris Karloff from THE OLD DARK HOUSE [1932]); also, it ends with a satisfactory DIABOLIQUE-type twist, and features a fairly intense role for Denholm Elliott in the lead. That's all we need out of it, really.\"Waxworks\": for the second story we are introduced to a curiously romantic mood which is quite unusual for this type of film; Peter Cushing and Joss Ackland are both excellent (as well as impeccably dressed) in their roles of two jilted lovers of a woman who continues to obsess them even after such a long time, and whose friendly rivalry can only lead them blindly and inexorably to a fate that is literally worse than death; an ominous hallucination scene with Peter Cushing is quite well done in view of the limited resources at hand, and Ackland's inexplicable inability - or unwillingness - to leave town somewhat recalls the house-trapped aristocrats of Bunuel's THE EXTERMINATING ANGEL (1962).\"Sweets To The Sweet\": this is perhaps the finest episode of all - with his ambiguous role here, Christopher Lee continues to demonstrate his versatility and he is matched by an understanding Nyree Dawn Porter and the deceptive innocence of Chloe Franks (who appears as Lee's daughter). The film's treatment of the occult here is both subtle and mature, culminating in a powerful and extremely chilling 'curtain'. Trivia Note: Chloe Franks appears as a grown-up in the featurette included on the disc, and when I saw her I felt an immediate familiarity with her face but couldn't quite put my finger on it. Later, on reading her filmography, it was revealed to me that she had played one of the leads in the long-running stage adaptation of Agatha Christie's \"The Mousetrap\" in London's West End, which my brother and I were fortunate enough to catch while we there on holiday in the Summer of 2002! Needless to say, we had no idea then that she had once created such a delicate - and delicious - portrayal in sheer evil, mainly by virtue of her peculiar look and a devilish smile!! \"The Cloak\": a wacky but oddly reverent vampire tale (that still manages to debunk many of the myths attached to the subgenre, while inventing some new ones!) which takes in some wonderful digs at exploitation cinema and, at one point, Christopher Lee himself!; Jon Pertwee is marvelous as the campy horror star who gets more than he bargained for when he attempts to bring a measure of authenticity to his work; Ingrid Pitt sends up her image nicely though her role is somewhat subsidiary to the proceedings; Geoffrey Bayldon (made up to look like Ernest Thesiger) also has a memorably quirky bit; the 'silent-cinema' style of the ending was a pretty audacious one to pull on an audience, I suppose - and, while some of the humor comes off as heavy-handed a' la THE FEARLESS VAMPIRE KILLERS (1967) or THEATRE OF BLOOD (1973), it's also rather infectious and certainly ends the film on a high (and highly unusual) note! Video and audio quality are relatively satisfactory, considering I had no other version to compare it with; the main culprit is some noticeable print damage but this is never so nasty as to affect one's enjoyment of the film. As for the extras, beginning with the Audio Commentary: frankly, this is one of the finest chats about a genre film that I can remember listening to; Jonathan Rigby gets to butt in with his opinion more than is usual for a moderator but his effort certainly allows director Peter Duffell to touch on every aspect of the production (whereas with some other films, you're left rather expecting there to be more!) and, as such, it's an extremely pleasant track that complements the main feature very nicely indeed. The featurette \"A-Rated Horror Film\" is a worthwhile effort with Peter Duffell again at center-stage but this time backed up with valid, if all-too-brief, contributions from producer Max J. Rosenberg and stars Chloe Franks, Ingrid Pitt and Geoffrey Bayldon. We also get film notes, reviews, bios and a poster/stills gallery which, again, are wonderfully assembled (with the contemporary reviews being something of a novelty - and a welcome one at that).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5868d6d1d1354b5b992355127ff211c4",
            "input": "This movie introduces quite an array of characters and their relationships in the first half-hour or so. None of them generate any interest or positive response. I waited for the intrigue to begin, hoping things would get better and ended up sticking around until the bitter end, but there was no reward for doing that.If you want a synopsis, look elsewhere. To me the action isn't worth recounting. Not that the story was that bad, I guess you could say I had some problems with the script--i.e. I thought it stunk. A look at the credits will show you that there's a pretty strong cast here, used to no avail. Most of the old pros in this flick do good jobs; of the actors I hadn't seen much of before I especially liked Deborah Kara Unger. That's about all that I can find good to say about this picture.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dce2fe0d9cc493b939a450b78b28a7a",
            "input": "Take a pinch of GOODFELLAS, mix it with THE GODFATHER, add some Roman mythology and plenty of lowbrow comedy, and you have THE SOPRANOS, about a mob clan operating out of northern New Jersey. It's almost as entertaining as pro wrestling. I am not the biggest fan of this show, but I do admire James Gandolfini's very complicated Tony Soprano, a psychopath with an occasional glimmer of conscience. I also have come to admire te contributions of folks like gravel-voiced Dom Chianese as the bewildered but murderous Uncle Junior, silver-haired Tony Sirico as the perpetually perplexed Paulie and the very beautiful Edie Falco as the duplicitous, tough-as-nails Carmela Soprano. The violence is sudden and graphic, the body count steadily climbs each season, but it is often the small moments that matter most here. Watch Paulie and Tony's nephew Christopher (Michael Imperioli late of LAW & ORDER) as they get lost in the Pine Barrens and sit out a bitter cold night in an abandoned trruck, both convinced they've had it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be3326f6d9424c8ea4e601ac1fd77dd4",
            "input": "This is the only movie I have ever seen that has prompted me to write a critique on any internet site, and that is a significant statement from someone who likes \"The Attack of the Monolith Monsters.\" This movie is perfect for anyone who wants an inoffensive movie. It is devoid of sex and violence, for example. I believe that this movie is safe for children of all ages. This movie is perfect for anyone who does not want to be entertained, challenged, or stimulated in any way. Adults could easily catch up on their sleep in front of the TV while the kids watch this movie. Don't be surprise ,however, if you wakeup to find the kids have turned the TV off and started a board game. As an adult who enjoys being entertained, who enjoys everything from the mundane to the fantastic in realism, drama, comedy, and action, all of those adult things that reflect real life on earth and/or stimulate the imagination, this movie has nothing to offer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fdbe2e0ae2fb4465a8f81e1adad7c112",
            "input": "It's telling that as of the entry of this comment, NO females have submitted a vote of any kind for this movie. Not surprisingly, cheesy science fiction doesn't appeal to them quite as much... If you like a good \"B\" movie, and especially if you like to satirize them as you watch, you will like this. If you don't have fun watching bad movies, this one's not for you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-842fc3d44f224da78880e02259a5acb2",
            "input": "This movie was exactly what I expected it to be when i first read the casting. I probably could have written a more exciting plot, it's a pity that they left it to a pack of Howler Monkeys. Alberto Tomba was surely a good skier but he has to thank God (and we too) that he does not have to rely on his actor skills to earn his living. He can't play, he can't talk, he can't even move very good on mainland without his skis... Michelle Hunziker is a pretty blonde girl, and that's all. She obviously wasn't chosen for her astounding competence in dramatic roles but most probably for her nice legs. Nevertheless I must admit that she could be the Tomba's acting teacher, because he's even a worse actor than her, and that's funny, especially considering that she isn't italian. I laughed all the time, watching this movie. I found it so ridiculous and meaningless that it actually made me laugh, loud, very loud.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57fc67ff46ad402389711563b823b8c1",
            "input": "Well, i can and will be very short. This is a wrong-balanced, non-convincing film that could have been a little bit better. The script seems to not know which way to go ... from funny to cliche-wise serious... it's a bit silly. That plus too much sentences we have heard before \"the hacker is in florida, or no, he is in madrid, no he is in ... , he is screwing the signal\". 4 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-003e82e65d254187abea4ea039043d3f",
            "input": "Except for the Brady Variety Hour, this was some of the hokiest television I've seen in a while. The video production qualities weren't too bad, but the overall look and feel were unmistakeably early 80's. And Marie Osmond looks like she did battle with the Avon Lady.. and lost big time. WAY too much eyeliner.It was kind of embarrassing to watch veterans Danny Kaye and Eric Severeid take part in this. Even more interesting was watching Alex Haley talk about the African Pavillion in World Showcase that would be opening 'in about a year.'As of this writing it is 17 years later and it hasn't opened yet (Unless you count Disney's Animal Kingdom.) All in all though, for all the shortcomings, this still an interesting visual piece of Disney history.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-075b797aded649319e349dd0ae18e65b",
            "input": "Those of the \"Instant Gratification\" era of horror films will no doubt complain about this film's pace and lack of gratuitous effects and body count. The fact is, \"The Empty Acre\" is a good a example of how independent horror films should be done.If you avoid the indie racks because you are tired of annoying teens or twenty somethings getting killed by some baddie whose back-story could have come off the back of a Count Chocula box, \"The Empty Acre\" is the movie for you.Set in the decaying remnants of the rural American dream, \"The Empty Acre\" is the tale of a young couple struggling with the disappearance of their six-month-old baby. As the couple's weak relationship falls apart, a larger story plays out in the background. At night, a shapeless dark mass seethes from a sun baked barren acre on their farm and seemingly devours anything in its path, leaving no sign that it was ever there.The film is loaded with enigmatic characters and visual clues as to what is happening, and ends with a well executed ending that resonates with just enough left over questions to validate the writer/director's faith in an intellectual audience.There seems to be a sub-text concerning the death of the American dream, but I would hardly call the film an allegory. Riveting, well acted, and technically astute, \"The Empty Acre\" is a fantastic little indie that thinking horror fans should love.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a40e105549f4f0db3939a13ed140e05",
            "input": "This is the movie I've seen more times than any other (I believe I saw it on average once every year since it was released). And every time I see it, it is equally fantastic and always reveals something new to me. The cast was most probably a combination of the very best there ever was in ex Yu cinematography. This movie is an absolute must for any self respecting movie lover. In the same league: Maratonci trce pocasni krug, Balkanski spijun and Otac na sluzbenom putu. This is a poker of movies everyone should have in his private video collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e0afa99d0d0416eabfa30448cbe5bf3",
            "input": "Father of the pride is a pleasant surprise: It is funny, witty and features some great voice acting. The show is about the family of a Lion who is acting as the attraction of Siegfried & Roy shows. Indeed all of them are stereotypes but that's what makes them so funny. FOTP is not a kiddie-cartoon it includes some crude adult humor but in a very mild way. It is full of popculture references and celebrity cameos and most of them are very well executed. I'd say I'll give the show a 7 out of ten because it is nice fairly well executed but not very original, I've seen most of those stereotypes many times before, even in that particular order!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7684c8113ff64445b798bb651c8b4949",
            "input": "Shazbot, is this embarrassing. In fact, here's a list of 100 that makes up the embarrassment: 1.) a failed comeback for Christopher Lloyd. 2.) Jeff Daniels basically playing the same role he played in the live 101 Dalmatians remake which wasn't too juicy to begin with. He sure has a funny way of promoting his Purple Rose Theatre... 3.) Disnefluff. 4.) another disappointing reminder that Wallace Shawn is to Disney what Jet Li was to Bob Hoskins in Unleashed. 5.) Ray Walston, the original martian from the TV series, played a bit part (read \"cameo\") in this flick and died two years later of lupus. Coincidence? 6.) awful special effects. Seriously - awful. 7.-100.) that damn talking, farting suit voiced to an annoying degree by Wayne Knight (\"Newman!\"). My favorite scene? HA! HA ha, ha! Ha ha ha ha ha... Whew!... Good one. You - You're a joker. Okay, let's wrap up this review with a moment of silence for this franchise's agonizing death, and if you would like, you can say a quick prayer that Disney doesn't forget this travesty and do something silly like a movie adaptation of \"Mork and Mindy\" starring Tim Allen.........................................................",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b597eb83eddf4d318e03a09ea8bf9f58",
            "input": "This movie is about a fictional soap opera. It is very fast and funny. To say anything else would ruin the movie. There are several plots and sub plots in the movie. This movie has ensemble cast with today's hottest stars. They all gives over the top performances. This movie is favorite of mine from the year 1991. Soapdish is perfect for fans of either daytime soap opera /or prime time soap opera!!!If you watch soap go check this movie it's hilarious!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63de489fef9142d18b2bcf8adcdfc83d",
            "input": "Well, What can I say, other than these people are Super in every way. I quite like Sharon Mcreedy, I enjoy this pure Nostalgic Series And I have the boxed set of 9 discs 30 episodes, I did not realise that they had made so many, I also think that it is a great shame, that they have not made any more. I wish that I got given these powers, Imagine me, being knocked off my cycle, somewhere and being knocked out cold, then waking up in a special hospital. Later on, I discover that my body has been enhanced. Just like Richard Barrat. These stories are 50 Minutes of pure action and suspense all the way, You cannot fight these 3 people, as they would defeat you in all forms of weaponry. The music is well written, and to me, puts a wonderful picture of 3 super beings in my mind, The sort of powers that the champions have are the same as our domestic dog or cats, Improved sight, Improved hearing and touch. and the strength of 10 men for Richard and Craig and the strength of 3 women for Sharon. Who I thought was beautiful and intelligent. When I was a boy, I had a huge crush on her!!!! Now I can see why, on my DVD set. The box is very nice and it comes with a free booklet all about the series. I also thought that Trymane was a good boss, firm but he got things done!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61e7973e158844d69f9a15e517c70ea2",
            "input": "The first point that calls the attention in \"For Ever Mozart\" is the absence of a plot summary in IMDb. The explanation is simple since there is no story, screenplay, plot or whatever might recall the minimum structure of a movie. Jean-Luc Godard is one of the most overrated and pretentious directors of the cinema industry and this pointless crap is among his most hermetic films. I believe that neither himself has understood what is this story about; but there are intellectuals that elucubrate to justify or explain this messy movie, and it is funny to read their reviews. My vote is one.Title (Brazil): \"Para Sempre Mozart\" (\"Forever Mozart\")",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69d5c69fa5434011b119c72c1067d7b6",
            "input": "If there was a scale below 1, it would get a -10, following in the footsteps of Godspell. The acting (if there was such a thing) was atrocious, the plot in shambles. And Rene Russo was sickeningly sweet in her role, enough to make a person retch. Ten thumbs down for a dumb movie. Saving grace: kudos for era costuming.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-924d8492321848eca65e4acebf9d0177",
            "input": "Easily one of the ten best movies of the 20th century. In Cold Blood is brilliant in the simplicity and realism of its storytelling, and absolutely riveting.Robert Blake walks away with the film. The story seems to be presented almost entirely from Perry's viewpoint, despite Dick being the leader and planner of the pair. The viewer will invariable perceive Dick as being more unstable, immature, and generally feel like Perry would not have been pulled into this nightmare but for Dick and his need to be somebody and pull off a big score.Based on a true story with particular attention to accuracy, In Cold Blood depicts the story behind the brutal and senseless murder of a rural Kansas family one cold, windy night, because Dick has bought into an age-old rural myth about prosperous farmers having a safe full of cash in their home. As \"prosecutor\" (a character that isn't given a name in the script), played by Will Geer, so astutely points out, their lives are bought for only $10 a head. Director Richard Brooks wisely chooses not to share with us the gruesome details of the murders until the end of the film, prior to this we only know it has happened and watch the lives of Dick and Perry slowly unravel as they attempt to escape not only being apprehended by law enforcement, but also Perry's own ever-escalating sense of impending doom. He repeatedly makes remarks, \"No one ever gets away with a thing like that,\" and \"I can't help thinking we left something behind that belongs to us.\" Dick is neither mature nor moral enough to feel any compelling sense of guilt over their crime, only irritation at Perry's. Indeed, after they are caught, it is Dick who breaks first, and suddenly faints when finally confronted with irrefutable proof that places the two men at the scene of the crime. I felt somewhat sorry for Perry from the very beginning of the film, and more-so as events progressed, but I only loathed Dick.The genius of the film is the engaging manner in which the story is played. We do not for a moment think we are watching actors portray characters, but that we are watching the actual participants and events as they occurred. The story is unrelenting, taunt, the run time slightly in excess of two hours feels more like just a few minutes.For those of you who are interested in such things, I noticed a couple of the \"Goofs\" listed here on the IMDb page for In Cold Blood are incorrect or exaggerated. Such as the \"reversed\" process shot, at the beginning of the film, as Dick and Perry are driving across the bridge into Kansas. To begin with, this isn't even a process shot, the camera is actually positioned in the backseat and the image you see beyond the windshield of the car is real. A large cargo truck located to the left front of Dick's Pontiac creates the optical illusion that they are going backward because it is traveling at a greater rate of speed, but closer examination will reveal that they are indeed going forward and it is an actual shot filmed from a moving vehicle. As I previously stated, this is one of the ten best works of 20th century cinema, not recommended for the very young due to some course language and implied and inferred violence (no actual in your face gore as a modern film would resort to), but a thoroughly excellent film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e38d3ba9dff54ffbb07dbb4b4f88e5f2",
            "input": "Steve Carell has made a career out of portraying the slightly odd straight guy, first on 'The Daily Show', and then in various supporting roles. In Virgin, Carell has found a clever and hilarious script that perfectly capitalizes on his strengths. Carell plays Andy Stitzer, a middle aged man living a quiet, lonely life. Andy is a little odd, but in an awkward nice guy sort of way. One night, while socializing with his co-workers for the first time, Andy accidentally reveals that he is a virgin. His co-workers, David (Paul Rudd), Jay (Romany Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen) initially tease Andy about his situation. But it's clear that all three have a certain respect for the decent human being that Andy is, and they resolve to help him out by assisting him in ending his virginity. And so begins Andy's quest into adulthood. Andy is the quintessential innocent, and the bulk of the humor derives from his naiveté to the situations he finds himself in throughout the film. Some of the humor is crude gross out stuff, but most of it is just well done intelligent comedy. In addition, I found some parts of the film actually pretty touching as Andy finds himself developing both romantic relationships and friendships perhaps for the first time in his life. I'm not trying to portray the movie as a love story or a drama; it's a rolling in your seats comedy. Still, every good comedy I have ever seen contains enough heart for you to care about the characters. A good comparison would be 'The Wedding Crashers' from earlier this summer. Virgin has a similar humor, but is perhaps a bit more vulgar in some of its jokes. I particularly loved the ending of the film, which I thought was a perfect way to end the flick. Without giving anything away, it reminded me of 'Something About Mary'. Very light and fun; it leaves you laughing and smiling, which is exactly how you should feel when you finish a comedy. I would highly recommend.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9857cd74414e42988639b03e6fc59858",
            "input": "Oh man, it is amazing how somebody can claim global warming to be a science, well, I guess this elitist nonsense is now replacing the science of eugenics! Al Gore tries to make this issue sound complicated, even though it just needs common sense to see this whole thing is a big hoax by a man with his own moneymaking agenda!How have scientists estimated historical temperatures of this planet? By estimating the sun spot activity. Has nobody ever questioned if this method has been accurate? No, not even Gore himself! So how the heck would it not be accurate to forecast future temperature with sun spot activity if it has been that accurate in the past? According to sun spot activity the temperature today is totally in line with what it should be. How come the temperature in the entire universe has risen (relatively) equal much as on earth? Does our SUVs cause temperature on Jupiter to rise?Use some common sense! You do not need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that this can be nothing else than a HOAX. Please research it yourself. What does Al Gore and his elitist friends like Rothschild (banking family that arranged live earth event) to gain from this? Well, the new world bank will be founded on carbon credits, that is tax on everything that gives CO2 omissions, and it is easier to get away with these taxes if the people are lured to think it is to save the world when it is only about money, centralized control and more power to the elitist bankers. Al Gore has even a company that sells carbon credits! Is it not noble to pay voluntarily carbon credits to save the world, especially if it goes into his own company? I do not want you to blindly believe me, please do your own research and use your own common sense and I am sure you will come to the right conclusion!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-295c06334235475cb708749867eb1b72",
            "input": "I was looking forward to Kathryn Bigelow's movie with great anticipation after the endless hype and 6 Oscars which it was awarded. Unfortunately it really isn't a good movie. The depiction of the situation certainly seemed to be accurate and believable on all counts, but beyond that the story simply came across as incomplete and the direction of the movie appeared to be uncertain and haphazard. The actors put in a good effort, but for me I didn't really get what the movie was trying to be. It's not as atmospheric and gripping as Full Metal Jacket, not as epic as Band of Brothers, not as action packed as...well, anything. I certainly can't see why it was nominated for so much, nor why people are 'hyping it up' to these epic proportions. Mind you, given the calibre of movies in the last couple of years I suppose there's not a lot to choose from.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b80a0a3af9944d3a94b98b161c0d3341",
            "input": "I can't stand it when people go see a movie when they know they won't like it. My mom likes violent movies, so why did she see it? She rated it just to bring down the rating. So I know that's why it didn't have a higher rating. I give it a 6/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8eb10378111e49fdac07a6b1b1478157",
            "input": "The movie has only one flaw, unfortunately this flaw damages all credibility of the piece.It starts with the condemnation of the Israeli occupation of disputed territories. It fails to address the reason Israelis are there. Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Jordan attacked Israel. This is why Israel \"occupys\" their land, because those countries lost it in a war they started.The film also claims that Israel has defied the U N by not complying with Resolution 242. Problem is, 242 was rejected immediately upon it's inception by.....the palestinians, making it void.Many films are put together well, and can really show footage that changes minds, but remember, when watching anything, believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see.All participants in this film are known critics of Israel, and some have made many antisemitic public comments, removing any possible credibility to their words.All participants are in dire need of a actual history lesson taught objectively, not by some palestinian sympathizer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0159410aee974d9dad761ae5f2776eab",
            "input": "Demi Moore's character in the movie was selected for the SEALs because of her looks. That was a bad start and the movie went down from there. The plot was totally unbelievable. The will to make it in a tough military unit is not enough. This movie did not convince me of a woman's physical ability to perform the types of tasks required.Trying to pretend that women and men are basically the same is an insult to everyone's intelligence. The differences between the sexes are what makes life interesting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b7b7d6daa78485f9db05dd345b1a078",
            "input": "Yes, I am just going to tell you about this one so don't read if you want surprises. I got this one with the title Christmas Evil. There was also another Christmas horror on the DVD called Silent Night, Bloody Night. Whereas Silent Night, Bloody Night (not to be confused with Silent Night, Deadly Night) had lots of potential and was very close to being good, this one wasn't quite as good. It started out interesting enough watching the villain (if you can call him that) watching the neighborhood kids and writing in books about who is naughty and nice, but after awhile you are looking for some action and this movie doesn't deliver. You need character development, but this goes overboard and you are still never sure why the heck the guy snaps. About an hour in he kills three of four people while a whole crowd watches in terror, and the guys he kills aren't even his targets they are just making fun of him. This is one of many unsuccessful attempts by the killer to knock of the naughty. He then proceeds to try and kill this other guy, and he tries to break into his house by squeezing himself into the fireplace. He promptly gets stuck and barely manages to get out. He then enters through the basement and then tries to kill the guy by smothering him in his bedroom. He can't seem to kill the guy this way so he grabs a star off the tree and slits the guys throat. What the heck was a tree even doing in the bedroom in the first place? Oh yeah, the killer before this kill stopped off at a party and had some fun too. Well that is about it except for the town people chasing him with torches and the unresolved part with his brother and that tune he wants to play. What was that even about? He kept talking about something that was never really explained. How does it end you ask, well since I have spoilers I will tell you. He runs off the road in his van and proceeds to, well lets just say it was lame!!!!!!!!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-895217bb858648daaecf5a2e6822b217",
            "input": "I like this movie a lot, but it's a fact, that you cannot understand it, unless you're from the ex Yugoslavia. Most of the actors are now dead and those were the best actors in ex Yugoslavia. I appreciate that this movie is now on Divx and I can have it in my collection. Macedonia. Serbia. Montenegro. Bosnia and Herzegowina. Croatia. Slovenia.All of this was ex Yugoslavia, a melting pot of the Balcan nations. It could be a dream land, if Slobodan Milosevic, Franjo Tudjman and other nationalists wouldn't poison the nation's mind with their sick ideas.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc564803f7724549b106d006ad06b9a6",
            "input": "Oh My God! Please, for the love of all that is holy, Do Not Watch This Movie! It it 82 minutes of my life I will never get back. Sure, I could have stopped watching half way through. But I thought it might get better. It Didn't. Anyone who actually enjoyed this movie is one seriously sick and twisted individual. No wonder us Australians/New Zealanders have a terrible reputation when it comes to making movies. Everything about this movie is horrible, from the acting to the editing. I don't even normally write reviews on here, but in this case I'll make an exception. I only wish someone had of warned me before I hired this catastrophe",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-034bfacc6cd54825953db1266ab3878f",
            "input": "Mad Magazine may have a lot of crazy people working for it...but obviously someone there had some common sense when the powers-that-be disowned this waste of celluloid...the editing is el crapo, the plot is incredibly thin and stupid...and the only reason it gets a two out of ten is that Stacy Nelkin takes off some of her clothes and we get a nice chest shot...I never thought I would feel sorry for Ralph Macchio making the decision to be in this thing, but I do...and I REALLY feel bad for Ron Leibman and Tom Poston, gifted actors who never should have shown up in this piece of...film...at least Mr. Leibman had the cajones to refuse to have his name put anywhere on the movie...and he comes out ahead...there are actually copies of this thing with Mad's beginning sequence still on it...if you can locate one, grab it cuz it is probably worth something...it's the only thing about this movie that's worth anything...and a note to the folks at IMDb.com...there is no way to spoil this movie for anyone...the makers spoiled it by themselves...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8bb2a9a5cd24126936881c38ab94e67",
            "input": "A priest who has abandoned his ministry meets a young man who has just been ordained.This movie is about the cruel dilemma between a life dedicated to God and faith and a life of more earthly pleasures. In post war France it is also about the mortal aspect of Faith itself.This may not be the movie of a lifetime but it is a sin to have allowed it to fall in oblivion. Besides, Pierre Fresnay is sublime.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-541b48ff2e35486aa2c7d7244857ad9c",
            "input": "\"Bela Lugosi revels in his role as European horticulturalist (sic) Dr. Lorenz in this outlandish tale of horror and dementia. The good doctor's aging wife needs fluids harvested from the glands of young virgins in order to retain her youth and beauty. What better place for the doctor to maintain his supply than at the alter, where he kidnaps the unsuspecting brides before they can complete their vows? Sedating them into a coma-like state, he brings them to his mansion to collect his tainted bounty,\" according to the DVD sleeve's synopsis. That brief description is much more entertaining and imaginative than the movie.** The Corpse Vanishes (1942) Wallace Fox ~ Bela Lugosi, Luana Walters, Elizabeth Russell",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e645ff3bdf9473ab279aaf5f02b7161",
            "input": "Who would've imagined -- Hal Hartley creates a filmic corollary to Syriana while retaining his signature idiosyncratic style. The fusion is highly entertaining.Having not seen a Hal Hartley film for about a decade, I approached this one with some caution. His brilliant productions of the nineties had impressed critics and audiences with their unique style and dialog. The director's earlier films featured colorful characters and offered close observations of life -- often in the region of Long Island, New York or in New York City itself -- that were offbeat and insightful.My initial caution stemmed from the description of this movie as a \"spy thriller\". To my pleasant surprise, Hartley manages to mesh his well established style and focus to produce a highly original drama of international intrigue. It works in more ways than one might imagine. Hartley's film retains the dialog and character focus that are his trademarks, along with a singular cinematographic style.Moreover it is highly appropriate given the current situation in the world and the state of war that has been fostered by dark elements on all sides. Hartley has brought all his skills to something new -- a political film worthy of being mentioned in the same breath as Syriana. Truly he is coming into his own. The cast does a fine job of interpreting Hartley's vision and style. Fans of Parker Posey will see her in full bloom here, still with us and more ripe and gorgeous than before.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93d82cba616041f18a15b9ffcfc029ff",
            "input": "Spoken like a true hard-boiled u'an gangsta. The story is no worse than any number of gangster flicks, but never ever confuse this movie with The Godfather I or II, or Goodfellas. It is not in the same league.But what makes the film periodically painful to watch is all these Italian Americans swaggering around dropping bad gangsta lines in an even worse fake u'an accent. Pacino would have been great if they could just have dubbed him. I was looking forward to see Abrahams and Loggia, but their steenky accents spoiled the fun.Ah well, the script ain't too hot either. Don Corleone would have made this disappear five minutes after meeting him, smiling and patting him on the back all the while.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-91d503df2963419087c51507de956023",
            "input": "I haven't seen BSG, I tried to watch it once in the middle of the show but couldn't get into it. However, I saw Caprica Rebirth yesterday I felt a little lost, so I decided to watch the Pilot today and I must say I was pleasantly surprised. I think this is a promising show and the only side effect it had on me is that now I want to watch BSG as well.But what I really liked is that I didn't have to be a hardcore BSG fan to understand what's going on in Caprica. From what I have read in the net, they were trying to reach the female population since BSG reached way more men, and at least in my case it worked.However, I suggest that if you are trying to watch the show do it from the beginning starting with the Pilot.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-023eb386495a4bcab04fb20dd4e63db0",
            "input": "This movie is just not worth your time. Its reliance upon New-Age mysticism serves as its only semi-interesting distraction. The plot is one that has been re-cycled countless times.I was only prompted to even spend the time to put in a comment when I noted that some have tried to prop-up the reputation of this drivel. Their motivation & objectivity is dubious, since they encourage you not to look at the movies faults, but at its well intentioned message of New Age consciousness.So would it be alright for some twenty to thirty Evangelical Christians, or Islamic Fundamentalists to pour in positive ratings about movies/television that support their views? In spite of the poor qualities of production, or the lack of truth in any of its supposed historic basis? I hope not.I am sure the followers will come right behind me to say flowery things about this movie, in spite of the truth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0420ef43134f4d859c390a859ff56046",
            "input": "I have to mention two failures for you to understand that this movie brilliantly succeeded where they failed: \"A Scanner Darkly\" and \"Immortel Ad Vitam\". If you were excited by the concepts of these two movies and felt woefully disappointed (like me), you will probably enjoy Renaissance. It immerses you into the world of a future Paris. It is not quite dystopian. They did the animation so well that I thought it was rotoscoped, but from what I can tell, it was not, it was merely motion capture. The facial expressions are amazing! Not since TRON have I seen a fantasy world so well displayed in an animation/live hybrid. The Black and White medium is used to slowly direct your attention to the subject of the scene; my favorite effect was what they did with headlight beams, watch for it. The director plays with your attention and confusion but you are satisfied eventually by finding the thread that he wants you to find. The overall effect is a harsh and gritty urban world filled with small surprises.The plot is secondary, but it isn't terrible. It is noir-ish. There is a backstory for most of the major characters giving them some depth. There is weather. There are \"sets\" so you can feel like you are in different places in Paris. There is some action, and even a car chase. I am going to have to see this one again to get everything. I also recommend a very large screen to view it as the \"sets\" are detailed and the credits are small.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1482c01923d4f72ac5a6137903e5444",
            "input": "As a Pokémon fan I enjoyed this movie very much. It introduces new legendary Pokémon (as each movie does) and adds depth to the relationships between its characters. I however do not expect those who are not Pokémon fans to enjoy it(This includes MOST adults). Some of the lines were corny, but that can be somewhat unavoidable when dubbing the movie over to English. The animation was beautiful, although there were a couple parts that did not look good. And although the villain is kind of corny, I think that the movies have done a good job of cycling through different types of villains, and I guarantee you that they aren't all like this one. Those who did not like it, I say to each his own, but Pokémon fans will love it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0add095d9942430bbb32645f7673cb61",
            "input": "It'd be easy to call Guys and Dolls great. It's got Frank Sinatra and Marlon Brando (and, contrary to Sinatra's original wishes, the casting works), it's got a really cool 1950s feel, even if it is basically transposed from stage to screen with only a little interruption. And most of the songs are often a lot of fun, and catchy, and performed with that wink and nod to the wonderful escapism inherent in the form itself. If it's not entirely as great as some others of its ilk, it shouldn't be any fault of the filmmaker Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Not all the songs entirely click, and a little of the dialog feels like it's being performed for the stage as opposed to film (it's hard to tell at times- Brando and Sinatra straddle the line so often that one has to watch carefully to tell when one plays for the camera or for the \"stage\", while the actress playing Adele is better for stage than screen).The plot is one of those winners that works well for its period, even if one wonders if its influence has stretched to the likes of 1999's She's All That (well, not quite, but close). A gambler (and 14-year betrothed), played by Sinatra, wants to host a big-time game, but is told that the \"heat is on\", meaning the cops are on watch. So, he has only one choice to host the game, with a thousand dollar tab. The only way he can get it is through a big-time bet with fellow gambler Brando, who's put on to make a wild wooing job of a mission worker. It allows for the predictable twists in the story, in the sudden turn-on-turn-off of the charms of the character, of the idiosyncrasies of people from the streets (gangsters and dancers and the \"saitn\" played by Jean Simmons who falls for Brando). It is, in its basic concept, about this whole world of guys and dolls, and how to balance one or the other- obviously without getting married or too compromised.Mankiewicz brings a lot of energy to the piece, even when keeping still with the camera on the subject, and his stars are properly reeled in. Hell, even Brando works excellently for a musical as he goes beyond being simply THE method actor and shows his chops for singing and big-star quality. The story and characters eventually wind down to what you'd hope will happen, and that's fine. All we ask for- and what we get- is entertainment in good spurts of witty, involving dialog, and a few songs and dances that bring the house down (my favorites were the number with the lady-cats at the club, Luck be a Lady, and the two numbers down in Havana, Cuba). A-",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47827e7477424fbc966bfc530291a625",
            "input": "I'd really, really wanted to see this movie, and waited for months to get it through our Blockbuster Total Access account. When it showed up in our mailbox, I threw it straight into the DVD player.I was very sadly disappointed, which in turn made me mad. I'll give any movie a chance, even if I want to walk out of the theater/press 'stop'. I watched it all the way through, but didn't get anything from it but frustration.The acting was very, very good, but that was about it. Nothing is explained; while we understand that Mathieu becomes depressed and lands in a psych ward of some kind, we're never given insight to his 'downfall'. While we understand that he and Cedric break up, again, we don't see it happen or WHY it happened. During an interview with Mathieu's doctor, Cedric reveals that he'd cheated on him once, but it was no big deal. I expected to see this in flashbacks, but no--nothing. We also gets the hints that Cedric was the one to bring Mat to the hospital--but AGAIN, we don't see it.I know some movies are a 'take it as it is' basis, but this movie honestly ticked me off. When Pierre, Cedric's ex shows up in the club and starts trouble, we don't see hide nor hair of him until near the end, and it took me a good chunk of time to figure out that Pierre WAS the ex. His personality at the club and when Mat finds him are entirely different. I might even be wrong saying this, it was that confusing.The film expects you to know everything and move along with its disjointed, out-of-place and confusing pace. I can keep up with films like 'Pi', 'Citizen Kane' and other films that have flashbacks/flash-forwards left and right, but CU didn't capture and hold onto the style. At the end of 'Citizen Kane', you know what's going on and discover the answer to the main mysteries. CU just leaves you hanging. It has an air of pretension in its 'we're not gonna tell you a damned thing, figure it out for yourself' presentation. It's like reading a book with the chapters switched around and pages missing.Good acting, like I said. I liked the characters, but the whole story was just too disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dea930dbe1c6472ab6e1a1d73748fb4f",
            "input": "I got a DVD of \"Bogeyman\" and this stunker was an extra feature. I assumed that it was \"Boogeyman II\" because it was paired with the original. But you know what they say about those who \"assume\": it makes an \"ass-\" out of \"u-\" and \"me.\" I had read before viewing that BII contains a lot of footage from the original and that it starred actress Love. While watching \"Return of the Boogeyman,\" I decided to stick around through the original footage to see the notorious death-by-toothbrush scene. Before I knew it, the film was over. Rip-off. I think that I thought this was BII because this has a similar title to one of BII's alternate titles. Oh well, at least this was just an extra feature, right? Let me stop talking about my mistake and start talking about the movie's mistakes. Many, many, mistakes. Who does this guy Ulli Whatever think he is? Does he really think the same movie will sell in different forms. There is nothing original holding Part III up. It is basically a flashback of the original through the eyes of a psychic, who is giving us a gruelingly boring play-by-play as everything happens. That's the movie. Oh, and one death-by-stereo scene, but you can read that off someone else's review. My interest in \"Boogeyman II\" is forever lost.Final Note: This is not a series of films to watch back to back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38da42466d83482c99859771865caf45",
            "input": "After just 15 minutes into this film, I began to miss Zhang Yimou's earlier, more weighty films that looked at the politics and society of China from unique perspectives. His turn to martial arts films was a serious misstep in my humble opinion. Hero was his worst film since Operation Cougar, with a needlessly complex story and acting more wooden than that found in a John Agar film. Shi Mian Mai Fu is no different. As an American who has been studying Chinese films for a few years now (and understands and can speak some Mandarin), I'm sure my opinion is different from many others as I'm coming from a different background. SMMF, like Hero, is not really a traditional a kung fu film, and it's certainly not a wuxia pian film. There are no sword & sorcery or chivalry elements here. This is a completely different vehicle than infinitely more watchable films such as A Chinese Ghost Story (all 3), The Butterfly Murders, Green Snake, et al. While those all featured charismatic leads who looked like they were actually enjoying what they do, SMMF features bland, and sometimes laughable, dialogue combined with cardboard acting. Zhang Ziyi plays a blind person about as well as Ben Affleck. There's an air of superiority with this film that's really quite insulting. It takes itself so seriously, it just becomes a huge joke by the end. All the actors look as though this is the most important piece of celluloid in history, they destroy any chance of actually conveying emotions, and the complete humorlessness of it really makes you wonder if Zhang Yimou was making a film per se, or simply a showcase (i.e. an \"ego booster\") for Zhang Ziyi. The camera is literally making out with her face and she gets sexually assaulted not once but twice in the film. Her acting range really hasn't extended past her ability to play a naive \"w\"itch. She's so concentrated on her acting, she comes across as cold and lifeless, as though she's reading her lines from a notecard. It's so funny to hear American critics and film people (like the completely clueless Quentin Tarantino) call this film a masterpiece. I guess if they see a bunch of Asian actors on screen looking really important while flying through a bamboo forest, they're tricked into thinking it's brilliant film-making. Ching Siu Tung's choreography, while still retaining his trademark style, editing, and postures, lacks the vitality and originality of his earlier films like A Chinese Ghost Story, Dragon Inn, and Duel to the Death. Sadly to say, the wirework in this film is really subpar, and if there's subpar/obvious wirework, then you probably shouldn't have filmed it at high speed. The same goes for the special effects which have a distinct B-movie feel to them. Beans, daggers, bowls, arrows, swords, and other random objects fly through the air (after being thrown) with no regard for logic, turning, climbing, and banking as though there's a little pilot inside. I know that logic doesn't really hold a place in stylized Chinese martial arts films, but if you don't want to induce a mass amount of giggling from your audience, then you should probably work on your compositing a bit more. Mass melodrama, unintentionally funny dramatic moments, boring fight scenes, really uninspired plot twists are what await you with Shi Mian Mai Fu. It's obvious that Zhang Yimou is no longer making movies for Chinese audiences. This is meant to crack into the Western market just as CTHD did. After watching Hero and SMMF, I've come to the conclusion that if Zhang Yimou wants to make Hollywood films, he's definitely off to the right start. SMMF is basically The Phantom Menace of Chinese martial arts films. And I thought Hero was bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57f0d54b25ac474c98d9c2459476e57f",
            "input": "\"This story is dedicated to women,\" according to the introduction, \"who have been fighting for their rights ever since Adam and Eve started the loose-leaf system.\" When \"Politics\" was filmed, the Nineteenth Amendment, guaranteeing women the right to vote, was only a decade old. And, the film deals with the wielding of political power by women as a voting group. Advocating prohibition, and shutting down speakeasies, was a main concern for women at the time.Good-natured Marie Dressler (as Hattie Burns) becomes politically active, after a young woman is shot and killed coming out of a speakeasy. She wants the liquor-selling joints closed; and, is drafted into a Mayoral run, after delivering a powerful speech at a women's rally. Ms. Dressler is supported by her tenants, best friend Polly Moran (as Ivy Higgins) and her stuttering husband Roscoe Ates (as Peter Higgins). Dressler's run for Mayor of Lake City draws opposition from men in town; so, Dressler orders the women to go on strike, denying them, \"everything\" in the \"parlor, bedroom, and bath.\" The film sounds much better than it turned out. The humor, frankly, isn't too good; and, it features some unfunny and moderately offensive situations (\"You look like Madame Queen\" refers to an Amos and Andy character). And, the mixing of shootings and slapstick doesn't mix well, this time. Producers might have considered making the film more dramatic, focusing exclusively on Dressler and the characters played by William Bakewell (as Benny Emerson) and Karen Morley (as Myrtle Burns).**** Politics (7/25/31) Charles Reisner ~ Marie Dressler, Polly Moran, Roscoe Ates",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be7968f63613428d98110f7437e8865d",
            "input": "Though not a horror film in the traditional sense, this creepy little film delivers the goods. It seems a vampire is loose in a small German town draining its victims of their blood. Police Inspector Karl Brettschneider, Melvyn Douglas in one of his early roles, is skeptical believing a crazed killer not a vampire is running amok. The only one who believes him is Ruth Bertin (Faye Wray) the inspector's girlfriend and lab assistant to Dr. Otto von Niemann (Lionel Atwill) who though apparently an eminent scientist goes along with the vampire theory. The townspeople suspect the weirdo Herman Gleib, played with his usual frenzy by Dwight Frye who seems to be having a lot of fun with his role. The film contains quite a bit of humor which helps relieve some of the intensity involved with all the murders being committed. One funny part has Gussie Schnappmann (Maude Eburne), Ruth Bertin's aunt, thinking weird Herman has turned not into a bat but into a dog. Maude Eburne and Dwight Frye make a good comedy team.This budget movie brings in elements from \"The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari\" with Dr. Niemann using the power of suggestion to make a somnambulist carry out his orders, from \"Frankenstein\" by using the human blood to help create life in the laboratory, and \"Dracula\" since the murders are believed by everyone except the inspector and his girl to be the work of a bloodsucker. Thses elements are mixed well by director Frank R. Strayer with a little comedy thrown in for good measure. The concoction works. The restored version I viewed used tinting to increase the spooky atmosphere. So try to see the this version if possible.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-601a27b3f69244ed845c50b5495e663d",
            "input": "I am not a big fan of horror films, and have only seen a handful of them (and none of the \"Halloween\"s or \"Friday the Thirteenth\"s) - but I can appreciate a frightening horror film not because of gore. And I'm pretty sure this isn't scary. What's so spooky about a little plastic skull that pops up everywhere? In all of its appearances there are faraway establishing shots, so there's no real surprise in any of this film. (Not that a skull in of itself is that scary anyway, but . . .) The plot concerns Claus Von Bulow's third cousin (John Hudson), who marries a Donna-reed look-a-like (Peggey Webber, giving one of the worst performances ever) who begins seeing skulls and hearing the mysterious screams of a group of peacocks on her husband's mansion. Did I mention that her husband lost her first wife in a mysterious drowning incident? OOOOH!!!! Wonder who did it!!!! This is the same old plot about a rich boy trying to kill and/or drive their wife insane. If you want to see a well-done version of this stuff, try \"Reversal of Fortune\". And BTW, Jeremy Irons is one hundred times more talented than John Hudson. The MSTing was okay but nothing special; paired with the \"Gumby\" short, however, it makes for good viewing. Two stars for \"The Screaming Skull\"; eight stars for the MST3K version. And now, to paraphrase Mr. Von Bulow himself: \"How bad is this film?\" \"You have no idea!\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e72bfca2be24e5585aa88ee58ac8111",
            "input": "For Daniel Auteuil, `Queen Margot' was much better. For Nastassja Kinski, `Paris, Texas' was much better. The biggest disappointments were from Chris Menges (`CrissCross' and `A World Apart' cannot even be compared with this one), and Goran Bregovic for use of a version of the same musical theme from `Queen Margot' for this movie (Attention to the end of the film). If this was an American pop movie, I would not feel surprised at all; but for a European film with more independent actors and director, a similar common approach about child abuse with no original insight is very simple-minded and disappointing. There are those bad guys who kidnap and sell the underage people. There are those poor children who hate people selling them and wait to be saved by someone. And finally, there is that big hero who kills all the bad guys and saves these poor children from bad guys. Every character is shown in simple black and white terms: the good versus the evil. Plus, from the very beginning, I could understand how the story would end. Is this the end of the history of child sexual abuse? I believe that the difficult issue of child molestation and paedophilia is much more complex than how it is portrayed in this not very original movie. I think this movie was not disturbing, but very disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-154384a12f034c9fa04d8d1bb77f664c",
            "input": "Both visually and musically stunning. A treat for both the eye and the ear. The quintessential Victorian element of the opening sequences were completely enchanting, helping to create a Christmas scene of which Dickens himself would have been justifiably proud. Technically the production is visually stimulating and the special effects are both imaginatively devised and creatively achieved in a traditional stage setting. The dancing of many of the lead artistes is breathtakingly good. The photography and lighting are first class and the sound recording admirably matches the overall high level of technical skills employed. A great film for all the family at Christmas time and a most delightful discovery which will withstand multiple viewing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ea9bb33a47b45688ba1d6216cac7b04",
            "input": "I was amazingly impressed by this movie. It contained fundamental elements of depression, grief, loneliness, despair, hope, dreams and companionship. It wasn't merely about a genius musician who hit rock bottom but it was about a man caught up in grief trying drastically to find solace within his music. He finds a companion who comes with her own issues. Claire and Des were able to provide each other with friendship and love but more importantly a conclusion to events which had shaped their life for the worst. Des is an unlikely character by todays standards of a rock star. Yet he has musical genius. He also has an event in his past that has made him stagnate, while things around him literally go to ruins. His focus is creating his Whale Music, in fact it becomes an obsession for him.Claire is the streetwise kid that needs a place to stay. She finds hidden talents while being in Des company. She also finds a mutual friend that accepts her. She learns to trust him over a period of time.These two find love with one another. Not the mind blowing, sex infused kind of passion, but a love where friendship and understanding means more. For two people who have been hurt, they find trust together.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b227d2de0af4ae8aa11c946ac0d9dba",
            "input": "Ok the film wasn't going to win any awards and it is pure bubblegum, and it is a modern update on \"It's a wonderful life\". But it's just come out as a cheap release on DVD and there are a lot worse ways of blowing $13. You get a film that has a surprisingly strong cast but for most they were still a year or two from becoming B list celebs. However it's an enjoyable way of passing an hour and half just don't think too much in it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-328850f95c7a40c995132ff95ede54fa",
            "input": "One of the best \"Amitabh comeback\" movies I liked. This was the phase when Govinda was going strong with Dhawan. The songs were awesome and totally as we call it \"masti\" type. An evergreen entertainer with the likes of the multifaceted Anupam Kher chipping in. The story line has a lot of hilarious twists and turns as is known for David Dhawan's potboilers. With a timely appearance by Mrs.Madhuri \"Nene\" Dixit, it was a total riot towards the end. It was great to see Amit perform with such force and humor after a long exile. Although some may consider it a typical \"Bollywood Masala\" movie, I would watch it any day. I am giving it an easy 8 out of 10 just for being pure Bollywood.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32e34584075b4efaafb9548405b732b9",
            "input": "The acting was horrible and they got both of the sports wrongggg.......not only did they get the figure skating rules wrong, but also they rules of GIRLS Ice Hockey. In GIRLS ice hockey you cannot check. You also don't BLOCK for someone. Not all they girls are disgusting gross mean and big. I play hockey and I'm only 4'11 and have been asked to go to schools like the one in the movie. Also not all hockey players hate figure skaters. A lot of current girls hockey players were once figure skaters themselves. Also we skate A LOT faster then the ones in the movie. I was embarrassed by the movie it gave people the idea that we suck.......although i must mention that it is difficult to transition between the sports because of the toe pick on the figure skates.....also some of those twirly moves KAtelin was doing on the ice you couldn't do in a regular hockey game. She basically tripped the person, which is illigal. Its also unrealistic that she would get a HOCKEY scholarship when she figure skates. That really made me angry that scholarship would normally be used to someone who could benefit the team.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-faa3e3e2621d49e4b5a4e9286e9d2e30",
            "input": "I have read modesty Blaise for several years now, collecting numbers of the strip. After the fiasco movie made many years ago based on the first book \"Modesty Blaise\" I was surprised the result got this good.What I got was a movie not based on action or violence. The director had focused on history and psychology. How was Modesty created based on the own tale and what parts in her life was affected by her non-childhood. I think this thougths will give a greater understanding to the next (I hope) film. I simply loved the movies old-fashioned style.However everything wasn't that good, the gambling wasn't that good. almost boring and unreal. The acting could have been improved too. I'm not thinking the bad guy in this movie felt real, the only reason he was there was so Modesty could have someone to tell her story for. Also they could have expanded the movie, showing more about when she builds up \"The network\" but I'll guess thats for the next movie.And please forgive me for my bad English",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a61cfb7e897d4d7ab77a736ac0e17051",
            "input": "Four macho rough'n'tumble guys and three sexy gals venture into a remote woodland area to hunt for a bear. The motley coed group runs afoul of crazed Vietnam veteran Jesse (an effectively creepy portrayal by Alberto Mejia Baron), who not surprisingly doesn't take kindly to any strangers trespassing on his terrain. Director/co-writer Pedro Galindo III relates the gripping story at a steady pace, creates a good deal of nerve-rattling tension, and delivers a fair amount of graphic gore with the brutal murder set pieces (a nasty throat slicing and a hand being blown off with a shotgun rate as the definite gruesome splatter highlights). The capable cast all give solid performances, with especially praiseworthy work by Pedro Fernandez as the nice, humane Nacho, Edith Gonzalez as the feisty Alejandra, Charly Valentino as the amiable Charly, and Tono Mauri as antagonistic jerk Mauricio. Better still, both yummy blonde Marisol Santacruz and lovely brunette Adriana Vega supply some tasty eye candy by wearing skimpy bathing suits. Antonio de Anda's slick, agile cinematography, the breathtaking sylvan scenery, Pedro Plascencia's robust, shuddery, stirring score, the well-developed characters, and the pleasingly tight'n'trim 76 minute running time further enhance the overall sound quality of this bang-up horror/action hybrid winner.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4add2f5e13bf4905a73ab96e0026fcd0",
            "input": "Generally I like horror movies, but unfortunately this fell out of the one pound bargain bin into my friends hand. We sat down to watch it, ready to be scared and ended up spraying food everywhere we were laughing so much. The concept isn't that bad, but why they decided number ten in the series would be lucky I don't know. The worst thing about the movie is the actors. The camera work was poor, the special effects are actually not bad if I am being generous, but overall the story failed to connect on any levels because the actors were as effective as a small lump of badly charred elm. They were wooden beyond measure, especially a foppish young actor who was fifteen years too young to be taken seriously as any kind of government agent. He looked more like a public school boy in fact. There was a really amusing sex scene where he looked like he was bobbing for apples as a busty lady rode on top of him and later his nappy sized underpants were hysterical, but then I remembered it wasn't supposed to be a comedy. I'm desperately wracking my brain to find something positive to say about this movie apart from the occasional flash of breasts, but there simply isn't. Let's hope ten was the lucky number and they don't do another one, I'm not sure my ribs could take it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-031fd99d2c50440a8f186a2f8f3db222",
            "input": "This is an extraordinary film, that tricks you constantly. It seems to be heading toward cliche at several points, and then something astonishing will happen that genuinely startles. It would give away too much to say much more, but stick with this film and you will be richly rewarded. William Haines is absolutely delightful - he is certainly a star that deserves to be re-discovered. The gay subtext in his relationship with Jack Pickford is amazing - there is even a scene where Haines rubs Pickford's chest (Pickford has a cold). Both actors play this sub-text subtlely and with great depth of emotion, so that there are moments that are very moving. And I never thought I could get so involved in a football match as I did in this movie - and I don't even understand the rules! Also excellent is Francis X. Bushman's son Ralph as Haines' rival for the girl (yes, it's not completely a gay movie). Wonderful silent classic - a great example of Twenties commercial cinema with an edge.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d395935b534d4fa191e12ed068603065",
            "input": "The title got my attention and then I wondered what will come out in the plot, as we have seen so many \"super-people\" movies these years... and in fact, I really liked it, as there were a number of unusual funny scenes that I didn't expect. Uma Thurman performed as average in G-Girl's role. Surprisingly, I was again able to watch her toes in wide screen (like in the beginning of Kill Bill). Luke Wilson however played very well the idiot everyday guy who meets the big woman, I could really get into his situation. If you want a light touch of fun, you should definitely watch G-Girl's and average Matt's adventures, especially to cheer up your partner. 7/10 in my collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59a357c3577e4e12b0005bc114099d7f",
            "input": "Well...overall, this movie was pretty much worthless, and it's basically a horror movie that ended up being more of a comedy. I just rented this movie last night when me and my friends went to blockbuster looking for a scary movie. This definitely wasn't what we were looking for, but it satisfied us for humor. The actors in this movie (especially Brandon) are so fake that it's funny. And especially that Tracy girl whenever she's in the boarded up room telling the clown to go away. They show almost no emotion and it's just so obvious that they're acting. And also when the clown is looking through that black box paper thing and grabs Mark, he doesn't even look like he's scared even though the clown like grabbed him and started attacking him. And seriously, would you just be JOGGING if you were being chased down? I'd be sprinting for my life! (Even though anyone could probably outrun that clown because he's like 300 lbs.) Not to mention that the effects aren't that great, like whenever the clown chops off Susan's head in the forest, then whenever he throws her head into the boarded up room with Denise and Tracy whenever Denise throws the head back over. Also like in the previous guy's comment, the beginning makes absolutely NO sense and I don't even see why it was even included in the movie. So what, was this movie made in 2003? The music made it sound like it was made in like the 1980's, and the camera-ing(?) doesn't even really look professional. Half of the time, it seems like the camera can't even stay steady when it's suppose to be. Overall, I'd have to say I enjoyed the movie. I wouldn't recommend it though if you're trying to find something to scare you, but if you're looking for something to maybe make fun of or get a laugh out of, I'd recommend it for sure.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f1f680b35c04e71b96dfc9762700449",
            "input": "I'll keep it short and brief, the people who wrote the story lines for this show are genius, the actors are just perfect for the roles they play (CJ's character is legendary) and they have so much chemistry on screen which makes it what it is, a very successful comedy.When i saw first saw the new episodes which is probably going back just over 6/7 months, i wondered what had happened to Paul. I was gutted to find out that he had died when i browsed Google. He was so funny and played his character to perfection, an over-protective dad, who likes to keep his daughters out of the limelight and away from boys.The comedy, i think, has gone from strength to strength, even without Paul in it.Plus, i think most people would enjoy this watching it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29c28c03dffd442e8ea6de99cf2a561b",
            "input": "THE KING MAKER will doubtless be a success in Thailand where the similar (but superior) 'The Legend of Suriyothai' set box office records. The film directed by Lek Kitaparaporn after a screenplay by Sean Casey based on historical fact in 1547 Siam has some amazingly beautiful visual elements but is disarmed by one of the corniest, pedestrian scripts and story development on film.The event the picture relates is the arrival of the Portuguese soldier of fortune Fernando de Gamma (Gary Stretch) whose vengeance for this father's murderer drives him to shipwrecked, captured and thrown into slavery and put on the bloc in Ayutthaya in the kingdom of Siam where he is purchased by the beautiful Maria (Cindy Burbridge) with the consent of her father Phillipe (John Rhys-Davies), a man with a name and a past that are revealed as the story progresses. There is a plot to overthrown the King and Fernando and his new Siamese sidekick Tong (Dom Hetrakul), after some gratuitous CGI enhanced choreographed martial arts silliness, are first rewarded by the King to become his bodyguards, only to be imprisoned together once Queen Sudachan (Yoe Hassadeevichit) reveals her plot to kill the king and son to allow her lover Lord Chakkraphat (Oliver Pupart) to take over the rule of Siam. Yet of course Fernando and Tong escape and are condemned to fight each other to save the lives of their families (Tong's wife and children and Fernando's now firm love affair with Maria) with the expected consequences.The acting (with the exception of John Rhys-Davies) is so weak that the film occasionally seems as though it were meant to be camp. The predominantly Thai cast struggle with the poorly written dialog, making us wish they had used their native Thai with subtitles. The musical score by Ian Livingstone sounds as though exhumed form old TV soap operas. But if it is visual splendor you're after there is plenty of that and that alone makes the movie worth watching. It is a film that has obvious high financial backing for all the special effects and masses of cast and sets and shows its good intentions. It is just the basics that are missing. Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-937d7e2c35174802b445292280b69c8b",
            "input": "I actually paid to see this movie in the theater.It would get a 1-rating, but the fight scenes between the robots are okay, and there's a surprise.I realize that some movies have larger budgets than others. I don't have a problem with that. Unfortunately, science fiction movies probably suffer the most on a small budget for obvious reasons. But, one way this movie fails is that just about every piece of each set looked cheesy and cheap. I mean, couldn't they even make it \"look\" good?The other major reason this movie is horrible is the acting If I watched the movie now and knew what to expect, I might just enjoy it for the cheese-factor, but at the time, I was expecting a good movie and had no clue as to how horrible it would actually end up being.Thankfully, the experience was over in only 85 minutes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b767720d4f1f4d88a37f7a7fedf0b951",
            "input": "Although this movie has some weaknesses, it is worth seeing. I chose it because of the cast, and applaud Bonham Carter and Branagh for choosing roles different from those they have taken in the past. Both portray very troubled people, complete with warts, but make them likeable because of their humanity. The story is touching, but it is the performances that soar. Bonham Carter's \"Jane\" is a remarkable achievement, whose quest for romance opened my eyes to aspects of being disabled that I had not thought of before, but was interesting as well for other reasons. I felt the movie ended too abruptly, but better that than a drawn out emotionally manipulative ending (see \"Stepmom.\") The very real English setting added to my enjoyment - it was England in the 90's, both urban and rural, without being depressing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-121005d5ab2f4ac6a01940c9f3bb7d5f",
            "input": "A solid, if unremarkable film. Matthau, as Einstein, was wonderful. My favorite part, and the only thing that would make me go out of my way to see this again, was the wonderful scene with the physicists playing badmitton, I loved the sweaters and the conversation while they waited for Robbins to retrieve the birdie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ab6a0f0b9824f73a6de610cff47062b",
            "input": "I rented this on DVD and I kind of feel bad since Dawson and Lugacy are so earnest about it in the DVD comments. It's not a bad movie exactly, but it's one of those films that desperately wants to be a deep comment on human nature while not realizing that its story is practically a genre. Plus, it is a little simplistic about the issue in a lot of ways, and the characters' behavior often strains belief. I'd say its a film that you would get something out of if you don't have a lot of film/TV/literature/life behind you (to be honest, I've seen almost exactly the same story in horror comics even). Otherwise, its point has been made before and more artfully. And that gets to the big problem, which is that it really doesn't have much of cinematic interest to it besides the point. It ends up being a fairly bland movie overall that invests everything in the idea that the basic story will be shocking and compelling, and it doesn't really pay off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86134b090e4743a7b213209c04930d01",
            "input": "The interplay between the characters is a moral disaster. You end up disliking most of the characters and you don't particularly like any of them.Even the two main characters played by David and Gwen are so badly written that you really don't care one bit about them. The movie has no plot, no direction and no purpose. The single redeeming quality of the movie was to treat it as a glimpse into the messed up lives of a few losers - and that's hardly stimulating even as an afternoon waste.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49bba5593383451baae848a5f3be1c89",
            "input": "Seeing this movie, as I just did for the first time on Turner Classic (which lists it as \"Dangerous Female\"), can only multiply your appreciation for the 1941 Bogart-Astor version. Ricardo Cortez must have been getting paid by the smirk. I hope he remembered his dentist and his Brylcreem salesman in his will; they made him the actor he was. The women are all good, but no better than that. Well, Una Merkel is a little better. More interesting are the \"original\" Joel Cairo and Mr. Gutman, who competently deliver many of the individual tics but almost nothing of the set-changing atmospherics of their successors in the roles, Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet. Humphrey Bogart and Mary Astor somehow transcended the essential seediness of their characters in the remake; here, Sam Spade and Ruth Wonderley(!) can't. This movie doesn't exactly stink; it lies there like a big slice of ham. Its chief value today is as a reminder that great movies like the '41 \"Falcon\" don't just happen. On the 1-to-10 scale I rate it a 4, mainly for the camera work and the supporting players.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8da9376976d34516a97527b1235d45e6",
            "input": "This is a family film, which to some people is an automatic turn off. It seems that too many people do not want to see films that are not loaded down with failing arms and legs, gratuitous violence and enough expletives to fill the New York phone book. This film is none of those. It is cliché, it is formula, but it is also fun. It doesn't ask you to think, it doesn't demand that you accept the film as reality. It simply does what a good film ought to do, which is to willingly suspend disbelief for two hours and enjoy the adventure. The cast is good, while not excellent. As another commenter pointed out the John Williams sound score was, as usual, excellent. And the fact that a lot of the film was shot in Huntsville at the real space camp made it even more believable. It was ironic that the original release of the film was delayed for some months due to the Challenger Shuttle disaster, which may have played a large part in it's original theatrical opening, but the film eventually has helped to focus the dreams of many young people back towards space and the possibilities that lie therein. SO sit back with your kids and prepare to enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c01a9c00615c47e5b17acd08b27f114e",
            "input": "If you love kung-fu films and you haven't seen this movie, you are cheating yourself. This movie is one of the only kung-fu cheapies that could be recommended for fans of all types of film. Normally, it takes a die-hard fan of the genre to see anything in these films, but this one has it all! The story is well told, and complete. The fight scenes are great, and tend to end before you're completely bored with them (unlike Crouching Tiger). Throw in a little mystery and torture and you've got yourself one heck of a movie. See this one at all costs. Heck, my wife even enjoyed it.Wu Du it!9 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7007ad0ea9e9466ebd7bdb70d06730e7",
            "input": "This movie has some of the most awesome cars I've ever seen in a movie, and definitely the hottest women, but I would have to say it is still one of the worst movies I've ever seen.Here is the plot, and if you read it with a little inflection, you have the acting as well.Beginning, bring in characters, hot woman singing (obvious lip sync). Music agent or producer comes in, thinks that she is awesome asks her to race. She turns down, too many bad memories. Flash to war hero, back from war, has several fights, and becomes movie hero with attitude that he is better than everyone. Drive off in fast exotic car. Brother races, then dies. Hero to avenge death, cut away to getting weapons from friend. (You have never seen this friend before or after, but seems to really care about him) Are you sure you want to do this; Yes; I mean are you really sure; Yes, give me weapons; are you REALLY sure; Yes; OK, I guess I can't talk you out of it, be careful man, I love you.Now he goes to blow up his uncles house who owned the car his brother drove. Finds woman, decides to rescue her, She drives off, and he doesn't finish killing his uncle. Now there will be a race to finish the movie. Oh yeah, need to throw in one more scene with bad people coming in to beat up people that don't really matter, but maybe it adds a little plot. Race is not even that exciting, of course it ends with two cars racing, and one that should win throws in a surprise ending.OK, I just saved you $7.00. You can send all of your money to me, because I should have given you the same amount of enjoyment as this movie does. Don't get me wrong, the cars are awesome, and Nadija is beautiful, but it is truly an awful movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5415e7c2401842dca3d7bdbc1a2a1fbd",
            "input": "One night I was waiting for my friends to come back to the apt and \"Gymkata\" happened to be on; I watched way too much of it. It is indeed hilarious, and horrifying, really. Think about it this way--if in your job you had an idea for something this bad and went on to execute it in as terrible a fashion as this, how long exactly would you last? Not as long as this movie. It's a must-see, obviously.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f54930f269549608f816626a91fc378",
            "input": "Thanks for killing the franchise with this turkey, John Carpenter and Tommy Lee Wallace. This movie sucks on so many levels it's pathetic. The first VAMPIRES was fun, but this low budget retread makes me yawn.Jon Bon Jovi (the poor man's Kevin Bacon) drives around Mexico with a surfboard housing a hidden compartment holding his vampire killing gear ala Antonio Banderas's guitar case in DESPERADO. He picks up some lame \"hunters\" along the way (including an annoyingly feminist infected girl who takes pills to keep from turning into a vampire), and they set out to stop some female master vampire who is given no backstory and so we could care less about her or her quest (to walk in the sunlight by stealing the Black Cross and performing a ritual to allow her to do so). If you've seen the first VAMPIRES, you've already seen this, and done much better.John Carpenter has been responsible for a lot of bad movies lately. Frankly, I think he's past his prime and incapable of making another horror classic. The only decent film he's done since THEY LIVE (1987) is VAMPIRES. Everything else is complete crap, right up until the unbelievably cheap looking and retarded GHOSTS OF MARS... and now this waste of celluloid. Where are more greats like ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13, HALLOWEEN (1), ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK and THE THING?Carpenter crony Wallace proves he can't write his way out of a paper bag with his paper-thin script packed with yawns, groans and recycled gags from the original. Did I mention I hated every character in the movie? There was not a single memorable character in the whole film. How does that happen? This film has nothing to recommend it. Not even the DVD presentation is good; the menu looks awful.By comparison, JASON X: \"FRIDAY THE 13th IN SPACE\" was a masterpiece. Now that is how you make a sequel and (re)energize a franchise, ladies and germs, as well as create an exciting DVD menu.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bcdd392bfddc463db72864ef949a4d3e",
            "input": "Distasteful, cliched thriller has young couple doing cross-country research on America's most infamous murder sites, becoming road partners with a dim-witted young woman and her snarling boyfriend--who is an actual psycho. Arty and alienating, the film's tone alternates between pouty pseudo-irony and silly flamboyance. Handsomely-made perhaps, but ultimately laughable. Brad Pitt's performance as the low-rent killer is godawful. * from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6992f3d666604f4ba214734982d5db5e",
            "input": "Not as bad, as it's credited to being (Hooper's done far worse)… more so disappointing for me. Such an imaginative concept, which is never really tapped in to by Hooper with his economical direction and even less so in the smoky (excuse the pun) writing. It goes so sinister and over-the-top in a dead serious tone, becoming ridiculous and unfocused letting the whole pessimistic mystery / conspiracy-laced narrative being easily telegraphed to end on something completely abrupt. Because of that, the pacing goes on to be rather sluggish and Brad Dourif (cool to see him in a leading role) seems to struggle with an off-balanced performance, despite etching out a bemusedly quirky intensity to his off-colour character. Even though it's cheaply done, there's a competent technical attitude to it. However it doesn't seem to go anywhere out of the ordinary with its idea and wants to plaster in nasty jolts (which some do work) and strikingly steaming special effects (flames, flames everywhere) instead. Hooper does display some stylishly frenetic imagery (more so towards the latter end), and the camera-work is swiftly manoeuvred and the beaming score is titillating. The performances are bit all over the shop with the appearances of William Prince, Cynthia Bain, Dey Young, Jon Cypher and Melinda Dillon. Also Geroge Buck Flower and John Landis have small, but amusing cameos… especially Landis. Nothing surprises, but it's passably engaging.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b077e25a08d543f6b183bddc67b43764",
            "input": "I was recently online looking at a site that featured public domain movies. In their long list of films was this film and I thought I must be hallucinating at such an offensive title and premise. But, no, that's really what it was. And since the film was only about 27 minutes long, I decided to give it a try. If it had turned out to be some porno movie, I would have stopped watching. Instead, it turned out to be the most bizarre film I have ever seen. The Danish production crew tried, with a budget of about $49, to make a Star Trek-style film about a crew of very gay men traveling about the galaxy wiping out female oppression by killing all the women--like they proceeded to do on the Earth! And in every case, they were met with cheers and thanks from the now gay men of the planet.Subtle, this ain't. With some of the most obscene and juvenile names of characters I've ever heard, I don't even think I can write them on IMDb without having my review removed! However, despite the utter crappiness of it all, it was strangely watchable and worth a peek. But, as I mentioned already, due to the crude names and odd subject matter (though no nudity), it's a film for adults only. By the way, this movie left me with 1001 questions as to WHO would make this, WHY make it and WHO was the intended audience?! It may not be the absolute worst thing I have ever seen, but it probably is the weirdest and possibly the most offensive!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4bdd708c1e142ff898c0070341d0793",
            "input": "When The Matrix appeared in 1999 and questioned existence and identity, it was expected that a lot of movies would use it as inspiration. That didn't really happen, surprisingly, and it took till 2002 for a movie of similar theme to appear. But to say Cypher is a clone would be to its discredit.The story is of a Morgan Sullivan, who applies for a job with a high-flying techno-company called Digicorp. His job is to be a spy and gain information about a rival company, while under an assumed and false identity. His home-life is perfectly normal but he has to lie to his wife about what he's actually doing. However, things start to take conspirital turns and before he knows what's going on, he starts to question who he actually is. This is not helped by a strange woman who turns up...Twists and turns at every direction keep you absolutely fascinated, and at no point does anything ever seem contrived or unbelievable.It's an enthralling journey through a not-too-distant future, and with good acting all round will keep you on the edge of your seat.Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1167f8cc25340e4a47bb76394207f86",
            "input": "If I had realized John Wayne was in this movie, I would not have watched it. It's demeaning to the Japanese, unfortunate for Hollywood and embarrassing to any thinking person. But then, most John Wayne movies are like that. Hollywood in the fifties still believed that everybody in the world loved Americans when the truth was (and still is) somewhat different. The movie deals with the nineteenth century isolationism of Japan. Maybe it's Hollywood that should be isolated.To put it as succinctly as possible, this film is appalling jingoistic claptrap.(Sort of a Madama Butterfly with bad music.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e4d99257c734e69947a8a3268c8f8c7",
            "input": "Is this the future that awaits us? An overpopulated, unforgiving wasteland with a hellish, unwanted existence? This film brings to mind a problem that still plagues us, doubly so since the film was released in back in 1973. Let's hope that the world isn't going to end up like this...Soylent Green is a wild movie that I enjoyed very much. It had likable characters, a semi-apocalyptic setting, a compelling and thought-provoking storyline, and the macho-est macho man out there: Charleton Heston. Richard Fleischer gave the movie a very unpleasant, dirty feel. You're almost choked by the stench from the city and its filthy inhabitants.The characters are wonderful. Charleton Heston, who has become one of my favorite actors, IS Thorn. The man created this role of badass, yet likable tough-guy. I could definitely put myself in Thorn's shoes. He sees that something isn't right, but everyone around him either doesn't listen (more like paid not to listen) or wants him dead. Edward G. Robinson (in his last film, R.I.P.) plays the lovable old Sol, who has had enough of this nasty place. Everyone else is great, especially Leigh Taylor-Young as Shirl, a piece of \"furniture\" that comes with the apartment in which she resides.The special effects are fantastic, even for 1973. The Soylent Green factory, the futuristic apartments, and especially the \"scoops\" (bulldozers that get rid of people) were excellent. The polluted air outside looks disgusting and very nasty. The empty city streets filled with the vile and putrid people are very unsettling.One final note is the ending, which even now still shocked me. It is gruesome, but if you think about it, it's a pretty good idea.The Bottom Line: An excellent 70's Science Fiction flick that makes you think and leaves you feeling very uneasy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55c1b48d66b64fc1b85cbb27426b7c35",
            "input": "\"In April 1946, the University of Chicago agreed to operate Argonne National Laboratory, with an association of Midwestern universities offering to sponsor the research. Argonne thereby became the first \"national\" laboratory. It did not, however, remain at its original location in the Argonne forest. In 1947, it moved farther west from the \"Windy City\" to a new site on Illinois farmland. When Alvin Weinberg visited Argonne's director, Walter Zinn, in 1947, he asked him what kind of reactor was to be built at the new site. When Zinn described a heavy-water reactor operating at one-tenth the power of the Materials Testing Reactor under design at Oak Ridge, Weinberg joked it would be simpler if Zinn took the Oak Ridge design and operated the Materials Testing Reactor at one-tenth capacity. The joke proved unintentionally prophetic.\"The S-50 plant used convection to separate the isotopes in thousands of tall columns. It was built next to the K-25 power plant, which provided the necessary steam. Much less efficient than K-25, the S-50 plant was torn down after the war.Concerned that the Atomic Energy Commission research program might become too academic, Lilienthal established a committee of industrial advisers, and during a November visit to Oak Ridge, he discussed with Clark Center, manager of Carbide & Carbon, a subsidiary of Union Carbide Corporation at Oak Ridge, the possibility of the company assuming management of the Laboratory.Prince Henry (of Prussia) Arriving in Washington and Visiting the German Embassy (1902). Evidently, with Prince Henry of Prussia according to the principles of science and its dangers their were already concerns with the applications of new science with military applications. The Hohenzollern (1902/II), \"Kaiser Wilhelm's splendid yacht at the 34th St. Pier, New York. Taken at the exact moment of Prince Henry's arrival, and the raising of the royal standard.\" If Royalty knew of these necessary precautions to citizen welfare then what was the necessity of the warfare WWI and WWII. The quality of management control I presume?Thus, did the commandos of Operation Swallow volunteer for a military mission, or a business plan, based on the security principles of Laboratory management? Because supposedly their were no survivors, and the ones who were caught in Europe ordered to be executed. Of the 400 man commando team the survivors who were captured were executed under orders of the German Army against subversion, and espionage acts of the State of Germany. The Führer No. 003830/42 g. Kdos. OKW/WFSt, Führer HQ, 18 Oct. 1942, (signed) Adolph Hitler; Translation of Document no. 498-PS, Office of U.S. Chief of Counsel, certified true copy Kipp Major, declassified DOD 5200.30 March 23, 1983, reproduced at the U.S. National Archives.The OSS Society® 6723 Whittier Ave., 200 McLean, VA 22101",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-162555fa620b429ea173c9566d37b770",
            "input": "How this has not become a cult film I do not know. I think it has been sadly overlooked as a truly ingenious comedy!\"Runaway Car\" attempts to pass itself off as a fast-paced thriller, but taking the quality of acting (good God it's bad), the storyline, the practicalities of the car's demonic possession and the baby evacuation scene into account there is nothing you can really do but laugh. And laugh you will. Films are made to entertain us, and the degree to which they do this can be an indication of a film's worth. This film is the pinnacle in entertainment, I laughed from beginning to end. At one point I got short of breath and nearly choked, it really is that funny at some points. When the baby was airlifted out of the sunroof in a holdall by a helicopter with a robot pilot who managed to maintain a constant velocity identical to the car and a perfectly flat flight plain that meant the grapple hook didn't rip the car roof to pieces, I was laughing hysterically. But when the baby starting swinging around in the air, nearly hit a bridge and almost got tangled up in a tree, tears were running down my face.It also occurred to me that the black cop was the guy who played Jesus in Madonna's \"Like A Prayer\" video. He seems to get everywhere.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ffa34f792d2416cb16a06fdaa32e5fc",
            "input": "Saw this movie recently and had higher hopes. Not so much based upon the director, who hadn't made a cinematographic release before, but more based upon its cast. Harvey Keitel, Scott Glenn and Craig Wasson (lead role in Body double, a Brian De Palma masterpiece) have all starred in great movies. Not together though, and this fact hasn't exactly changed because of this one.The film is unbelievable, very predictable and cliché. The only thing that might make it slightly appealing is the selection of locations on which it's been shot. In my humble opinion: don't waste your time on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6443660fdf947a4a0b1bbb5edc86ad9",
            "input": "I thought this movie was LOL funny. It's a fun, not to be taken seriously, movie about one man's twisted views on life, love, and... well, ladies \"from the lowly bus station skank, to the high-class débutante... bus station skank.\" Tim meadows plays a guy (Leon Phelps) who was raised by in a Playboy-style mansion by a Hugh Hefner-esquire father figure, surrounded constantly by beautiful porn models and actresses. When his \"father\" kicks him out on the street he must learn to fend for himself with nothing but the chauvinistic outlook on life that his youth has taught him... that and an unfathomable, nearly mystical level of charm and dumb luck. And so the hijinx begin! If you haven't seen this movie and you enjoy a light-hearted, semi-mindless, comedy/love story, then I highly recommend renting \"the Ladies' Man\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e5beea8e0894b3e9a979c82c111bd21",
            "input": "This would be a watchable Hollywood mediocre if it had a good editing. It relies on the typical American thriller plot - \"who is going to outsmart everyone\". Acting is below average, but with shining appearance of the detective who is the best actor in the film and he is mostly responsible if the tension in the film rises. Film was completely suffocated by blank video and sound shots and most of it looks like raw film material. All in all, if you don't mind watching a movie that looks like a student film project, this is a film to watch. I guess that would be enough to say on this film, everything else could really spoil the tension that is probably low enough.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81bcc077e938464b9806a5d566f3a101",
            "input": "I love a good sappy love story (and I'm a guy) but when I rented \"Love Story\" I prayed for the end to come as quickly and painlessly as possible and just the opposite for Ali McGraw's character.Ali McGraw as Jenny alienated and irritated the heck out of me within the first 15 minutes. When we learn that she has been diagnosed with a life threatening illness I couldn't help but wonder if her death would be such a terrible loss for poor Oliver or if anyone watching this film would even care. If she didn't die her grating personality would probably have pushed Oliver over the edge and eventually landed them in divorce court.People love this movie but it's one of the worst of the 70's.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-950bbc5513c340508de1724e642dcdda",
            "input": "This movie is all ultra-lightweight fluff, predictable from beginning to end. As a Don Knotts vehicle, \"The Incredible Mr. Limpet\" was much better, with Knott's character there not nearly as incompetent or ignorant. His performance there was toned down, with none of his trademark goggle-eyed stare, although that may have something to do with him being replaced for most of the movie by a cartoon fish. Knotts made a living of playing the likable imbecile, much as Bob Denver did. Neither really seemed to be able to break out to other types of roles, assuming they were simply typecast. It was probably because of the slouch, the wild stare and the high-pitched voice. John Ritter, whom Knotts worked with in \"Three's Company,\" was able to transcend his genre, branching out successfully into dramatic roles like \"The Dreamer of Oz,\" but the closest Knotts ever got was a small role in \"Pleasantville.\" Even Leslie Nielsen was a bad fit here, uncomfortably neither straight dramatic actor as he was at the time nor deadpan comedic actor as he later became in \"Airplane!\" and \"Police Squad.\"There's also no way the then-43 year-old Knotts could pass for a 35 year-old, as his character insisted he was. It was as ludicrously unbelievable as Tom Hanks at 38 playing the college-age Forrest Gump.The film was clearly made on a shoestring budget, very much looking like a hastily-filmed TV episode. It's especially evident in the \"exterior\" scenes of the \"town\" where Roy goes after he's fired. It's unlikely even a pre-schooler would be fooled by the Mayberry-like soundstage artificiality.Even viewing this strictly as a children's movie, it's very disappointing. It's not because it lacks action or special effects, although it does. The pace is much too slow, the situations repetitive. How many times can you watch Roy getting onto a bus? A comedy for kids should at least sometimes be madcap, with breakneck gags, otherwise you risk boring them (and any adults in the theater as well). Movies, even kid's movies, have improved quite a bit in the intervening decades. Even many contemporary comedies were better filmed and written. Disney's \"The Love Bug,\" for instance, at least had some interesting race action.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5451c1a425b14dc489fb0f9680647ad5",
            "input": "Gene Hackman gets himself busted out of prison by a nameless government agency who want him for an assassination. It's a given of course that Hackman has the proficient skills for the job.Nobody tells him anything though, he's given as the audience is given bits and pieces of information. That's supposed to be suspenseful, instead it's annoying and boring. Hackman goes through with the mission, but the getaway is messed up and the guy at the top of this mysterious entity orders everybody dead to cover it up. So everyone in the cast dies and at the end you don't really care.One of the other reviewers pointed out that the film was originally twice as long, almost three hours and got chopped down quite a bit. Maybe something really was lost in the translation, but I tend to think it was a mercy act on the audience.A very talented cast that had people like Richard Widmark, Candice Bergen, Mickey Rooney, Eli Wallach, and Edward Albert is so thoroughly wasted here it's a crime. And we never do find out just what federal agency was doing all this, the FBI, the CIA, the DEA or even the IRS.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d3b740c2f084630a538e9df8eb19ce4",
            "input": "The significance of French title of this film, \"La Naissance des Pieuvres\" which literally means \"The Birth of the Octopuses\", is rather obscure, so it is perhaps not surprising that it has been marketed in English-speaking countries as \"Water Lilies\". The \"lilies\" of the English title are three teenage girls, Marie, Anne and Floriane, who are members of a synchronised swimming team based in the Paris suburbs, and the film is a \"coming-of-age\" drama about the development of their first sexual feelings.One feature of the film, perhaps unusual for a film of this type, is that it concentrates exclusively on relationships between the young people themselves. We see nothing of their parents or their teachers, and very little of the adult world at all. The three girls are very different in appearance, and are portrayed as being very different in character. The shy, retiring Marie is slim and petite and appears to be the youngest of the three. Anne is something of a plain Jane, Floriane a glamorous blonde who is very popular with the boys. The three, together with a handsome male swimmer named Francois, are involved in what might be described as a love-quadrilateral.Anne has fallen in love with Francois, but he is smitten with Floriane, who seems to return his affections, although he is by no means her only male admirer. Indeed, not all of Floriane's admirers are male, because Marie has a crush on her attractive friend. The film charts the way in which their friendship develops; at first it seems that Floriane is simply using Marie as a convenient excuse when she is in fact going out to meet boys; her parents presumably object to her dating boys, but have no objection to her going out with female friends. Later, however, we realise that, despite Floriane's image as the sexy, popular girl who is always the centre of male attention, she actually reciprocates Marie's feelings. The film reverses some conventional stereotypes about sexuality. Anne, with her short hair and rather chunky figure, looks typically \"butch\", yet she is the only one of the three main characters who is unambiguously heterosexual, whereas the more conventionally feminine Marie and the glamorous Floriane are lesbian, or at least bisexual.Coming-of-age films are common enough, although most of them tend to avoid the controversial topic of teenage lesbianism. \"Water Lilies\", however, deals with its subject-matter in a sensitive way, with three very good performances from its three leading actresses, Pauline Acquart, Adele Haenel and Louise Blachere. The relationships between the characters, especially that between Marie and Floriane, are complex, and capable of a number of interpretations. (Is Floriane, for example, simply using Marie for sex, or does she genuinely have romantic feelings for her? Could Floriane's sluttish behaviour with Francois and the other boys be just a device to hide her lesbian feelings from the outside world? Or even to hide them from herself?) This was the first film made by its young director Celine Sciamma (only 27 at the time); on this basis she must be regarded as a highly promising newcomer. 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cda00e5d56364b6eba920470268bff28",
            "input": "I have a feeling that the Warners Bros Depression-era musicals are going to become a lot more pertinent in the next couple of years. Yes, we are in the economic doldrums (or have you been living under a rock) and times look bleak. But we always have the movies as a way to escape our troubles. In the 30's, film-going was hugely popular even at the height of economic gloom. \"Footlight Parade (1933)\" was one such film that audiences flocked to. While this Lloyd Bacon-directed musical doesn't quite capture the social issues of the time as \"Gold Diggers of 1933 (1933)\" does, it's still a wonderful showcase of talent. We have to wait until the end of the film for the three centrepiece Busby Berkely extravaganza numbers, but boy, are they worth waiting for me. Yes, little Ruby Keeler is a terrible singer and actress, and her tapping is so-so, but Busby's magical \"By A Waterfall\" whisks her, and what seems to be a hundred other chorus girls, into a dizzying water wonderland. Of course Busby's numbers could never really be performed on a stage (they defy limits of gravity, for one thing), and they contrast terrifically with the realism of the tough, wisecracking non-musical scenes. And \"Footlight\" also has James Cagney in at the one of his all-too-few musicals (really, what couldn't this man do?). He even gets to take over from the leading man, don sailor garb and fawn over sexpot Shanghai Lil (who is really little Ruby in China-girl wig!).He co-stars with Joan Blondell, his adorable, adoring secretary who Cagney somehow overlooks in favour of other women (until the final reel, that is). Apparently Blondell was the only other woman who Cagney loved apart from his wife. And you can see the mutual adoration in every scene.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-452ff8f012574ca79c61f4c76ddc859f",
            "input": "Pierce Brosnan the newest but no longer James Bond, is an assassin. He is very very good at what he does, but he's getting old and tired. Greg Kinnair is really good as the straight and narrow business man. Now when the story opens the movie shows these two people in their separate lives. Then one night they are having drinks in a bar, and they begin to talk. Then all of a sudden you find these two people getting drawn together during a series of events. The story is excellent, the acting is top notch, and the humor is hilarious I never thought that Pierce Brosnan would be this funny, but he really is and I must say this movie is a must see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4517bfeb34144b848578bdbed3e76dbb",
            "input": "This film describes the experiences of a couple of hit men (one of them Burt Reynolds), a prostitute, and two drag queens over the interval of a few hours on one night in Miami. The convergent storylines eventually bring all the people together at one place and time. The movie was mildly entertaining, but the big problem was that everything happens at night and many scenes were literally under-exposed to the point that it was impossible to see what was happening. In a few scenes you can actually see where they tried to \"stretch\" the developing process to save the images. Somebody didn't know how to operate a movie camera. Amazing that this film was even released!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba20d6d0126a42679a8115ade08af32c",
            "input": "This \"tragicomedy\" written by famous Serbian theatre/film writer Dusan Kovacevic is probably one of the best movies ever made in the comedy category. And yet, its appearance of a theatre play transformed into a feature film takes nothing of its value. A masterpiece one should not miss to see (preferably with subtitles, and not dubbed).In an aged bus en route to capital Belgrade, a looming war decides the passengers' behaviour. Two Gypsy musicians sing of their miserable life but also foresee a tragedy to come; their singing both divides and connects stages in this extraordinary road movie (real life Kostic brothers are amateur actors, but together with Stanojlo Milinkovic as farmer who's plowed the road give a real-life performance).The spectrum of characters gives a brilliant image of a society facing a war, an insight into nation's collective person: everyone is aware that war is just about to begin but they try to live their own lives the best they can, hoping that ignorance might avert the tragedy. Using a simple movie language, director Slobodan Sijan paints a picture of society torn by previous war (World War I), but also highlights personal portraits with success: provincialism of a singer, inexperience of the newlyweds, seriousness of the Great War veteran who is on way to visit his recently conscripted son, and gloomy predictions from a man who seems to be a German spy.Brilliant in its narration, with memorable soundtrack (especialy the Gispsy songs) and adjusted atmosphere, well photographed and edited, this feature (Sijan's feature debut) was only an introduction into a series of the directors bitter-sweet comedies that will define Serbian cinematography of the 1980s: \"Maratonci trce pocasni krug\", \"Kako sam sistematski unisten od idiota\", and my other director's favourite \"Davitelj protiv davitelja\").",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da814cfb3699434880d5e4144a8cc610",
            "input": "Let me start off by saying that I didn't watch this movie at first with high expectations. It was recommended to me by a friend with mediocre taste in movies, and \"MTV\" was pasted on the front cover so I was not expecting much. What i was expecting was a tear-jerker, overly dramatic but at least effective.I was wrong.Firstly, let me start off that I had never read the book nor watched any other versions of the movie.The acting was my main gripe with the film. By god is it AWFUL. The main girl is pretty mediocre, but when compared to the rest of the cast she's Maryl Streep. The main \"Hero\", Heath, is just plain awful. He can sing decent sounding clichéd songs, but that's about it. His acting broke the 'sad' moments by being so bad at points that I just burst into laughter. The Isabel girl was pretty godawful too, and the brother was just a flat character that was played by an actor that couldn't display emotion whatsoever. And when he tried to, it failed miserably. Neil Patrick Harris was the only decent actor, playing Edward, although it's obvious the direction was bad because even he did not live up to what I've seen him do. Oh, and the father wasn't half-bad to my memory, but he was in the movie for such a small amount of time I can hardly remember.The story itself was not very good. More breakups than you can imagine. Predictable story (Until the ending, which I barely understood). EXTREMELY one-sided characters with no real depth to them... Overall just not interesting or compelling, nothing we've never seen before done MUCH better, and nothing worth watching here.The ending is suppose to be a tearjerker. It did nothing of the sort. The ending isn't built up at all, it almost feels like an afterthought. In fact, I had to ask my friends WHY the ending actually happened, which when they explained it to me I must have had a look on my face of \"Wait, when did they say that? What?\". Never a good sign. The editing was probably the worst I've seen, though I do understand the fade-ins-fade-outs are done because this was originally made for TV, but that's really no excuse.Overall, the movie is just garbage. I'm a sensitive guy, I cried during two episodes of the Simpsons. I never cried during this crap, not even close. Really, this movie is not worth your time. If you really want to see a tearjerker look elsewhere.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68fe92e0d2954e96a974b7ff2f42680c",
            "input": "I had the misfortune to sit through the full 102 minutes of what, in my opinion, is this shockingly bad film. It fails on pretty much all levels; the cast is awful, the acting - ham at best and the plot lacks any depth, leaving me feeling violently apathetic as to the outcome of any of the convoluted story lines.Plan B has none of the charm this genre has the scope to convey and I found myself physically cringing at the various points where the script makes its regular misjudged meanderings anywhere towards the region of comedy.A bona fide saccharine coated turd of a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f284abdb85c4daba4889eeea089c8b5",
            "input": "I have just seen this movie and have not read the book. The good thing of the movie is that at some parts it gets you thinking for a little while on the spiritual subject, evolution, sincronicity and your part in the world.However, the movie's immersion is easily broken and there is very little rapport between the viewer and the characters. It is very clear that the book looses a lot in this movie version. The events that were suppose to show sincronicity taking place are almost unrecognizable. A lot of reasoning has to be done for the viewer to see that the scene indicates a coincidence, and even more to imagine that it has something to do with a greater purpose. Enlightenment scenes are visually poor and do not create the better feeling that it was supposed to. Do you recall the enlightenment with Keanu Reeves (in Little Buddha) ? Well, this is nothing like that.Most scenes are poorly executed. There are a lot of scenes that really don't develop the story and also do not help in creating an atmosphere.The better actors in this movie, namely Hector Elizondo, Joaquim de Almeida and Jürgen Prochnow cannot save it. The first 2 seem to have gotten more scenes than their characters should in an attempt to save the movie, and because they were paid more, but this does not work. Most of the scenes are not really necessary and do not help the story at all.Jürgen does good in his scenes and sells as an evil guy (as always), but the script does not help him at all. The scene where he first tries to convince John (Matthew Settle) to join him is just bad script. The execution of the scene when he dies in an explosion is absurdly bad executed. The flashbacks throughout the movie cannot even be commented.Overall this movie is a big waist of time, read the book! I have not read it, but it is probably a billion times better than this, it has to be.It is so bad that I had to write my first comment in IMDb.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d67c4f332384906883f6c02039377e1",
            "input": "Despite gorgeous and breathtaking animation, this is probably one of most uninspiring Disney films I've seen, and I don't slam Disney films very often. Spirit is a wild stallion who repeatedly gets captured, either by the cavalry or by Indians, both of which try to \"break\" him. Spirit ends up forming a bond with the Indian, and that, in a nutshell, is the story. With exception to the beautiful animation of the horses, neither I or my five year old were very inspired or excited by this film. It's ironic that it's titled \"Spirit\", as spirit is what this film could have used a bit more of. An extra point was given for the soundtrack, which was enjoyable, with songs by Bryan Adams and Hans Zimmer. And although this film is rated G, you will still probably have to end up explaining what \"breaking a horse\" means to your five year old. I did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9dda1af0e18a4b11bdbc1f81bfff4274",
            "input": "Ah, Lucio Fulci, rest in peace. This infamous Italian is mostfamous for \"Zombie,\" and the absolutely unwatchable \"ThePsychic\" and \"Manhattan Baby.\" Well, add this to the unwatchablelist.The plot, as it were, concerns a nekkid woman who wears a goldmask and a G-string. She wants the power of a young dubbedstud who has a set of magic arrows and a bow. They are magicbecause they glow. Arrow boy teams up with a guy in a bad wig,and they spend most of the movie rescuing each other from flataction sequences. In the end, the nekkid chick is defeated, but notbefore taking the mask off and reminding me why I broke up withmy high school girlfriend.Fulci bathes every shot in an orange glow and fills the screen withsmoke. Nothing like a smoky orange action sequence to make youcrave Sunny Delight and a cigarette. The special effects arelaughable. In one sequence, our ambiguously gay duo areattacked by dozens of arrows that are obviously pin scratches onthe film itself. The majority of the effects budget must have beenspent on the Fulci-licious gore, which consists entirely of spurtingwounds. Hey, we can all use a good spurting wound once in awhile, but when you get into spurting wound overkill, it gets boring.I kept having to play with the brightness setting on my TV anywayjust to see what the heck was happening.There is lots of talk of fulfilling omens and prophecies, so let medo a little look into the future...if you find this movie and watch it,you will regret it. The scene on the video box (by Media) does notappear in the film in any context whatsoever. \"Conquest\" is a conjob. What MST3K could have done with this!This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, strong gore, femalenudity, brief male nudity, and mild sexual content.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b99e8c5b54664f4d99d21bf8fcbea950",
            "input": "Brand Hauser (John Cusack) is an assassin for the CIA. He is ordered to go to the country of Turaquistan, a nation that the United States has \"liberated\", and kill a businessman named Omar Shariff. This is because the American conglomerate, Tamerlane, that is putting the country \"back together\" will not stand for Shariff, an oil man from a neighboring state, laying down his own pipeline through war-torn Turquistan. But, once there, Brand runs into difficulties. One, he meets a determined journalist, Natalie (Marisa Tomei) who wants to tell the American public the \"true\" story of the region's conflict...and of Tamerlane. But, Brand is aghast to realize that Natalie's pretty face and sharp mind instantly and unconsciously compels him to lose focus on his mission. Also, his cover as a trade show host forces him to meet the country's pop-singing princess, Yonica (Hillary Duff), who will be getting married at the convention center. She is a young diva whose wedding arrangements also turn Brand's attention away from the coming assassination. With other inept underlings and complications, will Brand be able to carry out his mission, for the satisfaction of Tamerlane's BIG boss, the former vice-president (Dan Ackroyd)? Good for you, John Cusack, to make this film, even though it doesn't quite hold together. Shot in Serbia, it is a worthy look at what present-day Iraq must be like, a country turned upside-down. In a stroke a brilliance, the green zone here is called \"The Emerald City\" and aptly so, for this Oz-like neighborhood attempts to keep out the ravages of war going on elsewhere in the metropolis. The cast is very fine, with Cusack doing a nice job and Tomei, Joan Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Ackroyd and others backing him up in style. Duff, especially, does a great turn as the heavily-accented, heavily made-up, potty-mouthed singer. The recreation of war-riddled Baghdad is so real that it hurts while the costumes and other production values are top-notch. As for the script, it isn't always cohesive but it certainly has some tremendous dialogue and scenes. For example, a young Turaqui boy offers to show Brand an enemy hideout, in exchange for money and candy. Brand produces the cash but, because he has no candy, the boy burns his vehicle anyway. Brilliant! Then, also, the direction is not a total success but doesn't lag very often. No, if you have conservative leanings, you probably won't like this film one bit. But, if you have an open mind and want to see a satirical view of the \"war on terrorism\", this is quite a good show. Therefore, do make an effort to view it, as you will be supporting those filmmakers who choose to make movies far away from those old studio \"formulas\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c0601a3230345e08814069925b1533d",
            "input": "This film has a very simple but somehow very bad plot. The entire movie is about a girl getting sucked through a gate to another dimension then years later it gets opened again by a witch while a group of friends (including the lead actor who is having trouble getting over his ex girlfriend who is one of the other campers along with her new partner... another girl... that's right they're lesbians and there is some nudity of course for no particular reason). Unfortunately demon follows the now adult girl back through. Also unfortunately, none of this is ever explained. Where exactly were they? Where did the demon come from? How did she survive as a child in a place full of evil demons? Who the hell trained her and made her a gladiator type outfit? The acting is terrible I think but it's hard to tell because the writing is so bad maybe there was just nothing they could do with it. I give it a three because the wrestler was pretty good and the effects were pretty fun even though they were very cheap. I would not recommend it, it wasn't quite bad enough to be funny.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe2911b7e0524744bda2daa15d62fbbb",
            "input": "Where was this film when I was a kid? After his parents split up Tadashi moves with his mom to live his his grandfather. Tadashi's sister stays with their dad and they talk frequently on the phone. Grandfather is only \"here\" every third day. Moms never really home. The kids always are picking on the poor kid. During a village festival Tadashi is chosen the \"kirin rider\" or spiritual champion of the peace and justice. Little does he suspect that soon he will have to actually step into role of hero as the forces of darkness join up with the rage of things discarded in a plot to destroy mankind and the spiritual world.Okay that was the easy part. Now comes the hard part, trying to explain the film.This is a great kids film. No this is a great film,flawed, (very flawed?) but a great film none the less. It unfolds like all of those great books you loved as a kid and is just as dense at times as Tadashi struggles to find the strength to become a hero. Watching it I felt I was reading a great book, and thought how huge this would have been if it was a book. I loved that the film does not follow a normal path. Things often happen out of happenstance or through miscommunication, one character gets sucked into events simply because his foot falls asleep. There are twists and turns and moments that seem like non sequiters and are all the more charming for it (which is typical Miike) Certainly its a Takashi Miike film. That Japanese master of film is clearly in charge of a film that often touching, scary and funny all at the same time. No one except Miike seems to understand that you can have many emotions at the same time, or that you can suddenly have twists as things get dark one second and then funny the next. I admire the fact that Miike has made a film that is bleak and hopeful, that doesn't shy away from being scary, I mean really scary, especially for kids. This is the same dark territory that should be in the Harry Potter movies but rarely is. This a dark Grimms tale with humor. My first reaction upon seeing the opening image was that I couldn't believe anyone would begin a kids film with a picture of the end of the world, then I realized who was making the movie. Hats off to Miike for making a movie that knows kids can handle the frightening images.Its also operating on more than one level. The mechanical monsters that the bad guys make are forged from mankind's discarded junk. Its the rage of being thrown away that fuels the monsters.One of the Yokai (spirits) talks about the rage sneakers thrown away because they are dirty or too small feels when they are tossed. You also have one of the good guys refusing to join the bad guys because that would be the human thing to do. Its a wild concept, but like other things floating around its what lifts this movie to another level. (there are a good many riffs and references to other movies,TV shows and novels that make me wonder who this film is for since kids may not understand them, though many parents will) And of course there are the monsters. They run the gamut from cheesy to spectacular with stops everywhere in between. Frankly you have to forgive the unevenness of their creation simply because they are has to be hundreds if not thousands of monsters on screen. Its way cool and it works. One of the main characters is a Yokai which I think is best described as a hamster in a tunic and is often played by a stuffed animal, it looks dumb and yet you will be cheering the little bugger and loving every moment he rides on Tadashi's head. (Acceptance is also easier if you've ever seen the old woodcuts of the weird Japanese monsters) I mentioned flaws, and there are a few. The effects are uneven, some of the sudden turns are a bit odd (even if understandable) and a few other minor things which are fading now some two hours after watching the film.. None of them truly hurt the film over all, however most kind of keep you from being completely happy with the movie.I really loved this movie. I'm pretty sure that if I saw this as a kid it would have been my favorite film of all time. (where's the English dub?).See this movie. Its a great trip. (Besides its a good introduction to the films of Miike minus the blood and graphic sex)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62cb8d665e31450bb30d265542b91289",
            "input": "1928 is in many ways a \"lost year\" in motion pictures. Just as some of the finest films of the silent era were being made in every genre, sound was coming in and - while reaping great profits at the box office - was setting the art of film-making back about five years as the film industry struggled with the new technology.\"Show People\" is one of the great silent era comedies. The film shows that William Haines had comic skills beyond his usual formula of the obnoxious overconfident guy who turns everyone against him, learns his lesson, and then redeems himself by winning the football game, the polo game, etc. This movie is also exhibit A for illustrating that Marion Davies was no Susan Alexander Kane. She had excellent comic instincts and timing. This film starts out as the Beverly Hillbillies-like adventure of Peggy Pepper (Marion Davies) and her father, General Marmaduke Oldfish Pepper, fresh from the old South. General Pepper has decided that he will let some lucky movie studio executive hire his daughter as an actress. While at the studio commissary, the Peppers run into Billy Boone (William Haines), a slapstick comedian. He gets Peggy an acting job. She's unhappy when she finds out it is slapstick, but she perseveres. Eventually she is discovered by a large studio and she and Billy part ways as she begins to take on dramatic roles. Soon the new-found fame goes to her head, and she is about to lose her public and gain a royal title when she decides to marry her new leading man, whom she doesn't really love, unless fate somehow intervenes.One of the things MGM frequently does in its late silent-era films and in its early sound-era films is feature shots of how film-making was done at MGM circa 1930. This film is one of those, as we get Charlie Chaplin trying to get Peggy's autograph, an abundance of cameos of MGM players during that era including director King Vidor himself, and even a cameo of Marion Davies as Peggy seeing Marion Davies as Marion Davies arriving at work on the lot. Peggy grimaces and mentions that she doesn't care for her. Truly a delight from start to finish, this is a silent that is definitely worth your while. This is one of the films that I also recommend you use to introduce people to the art of silent cinema as it is very accessible.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecbe462787ff435ea855ff8317ac5c20",
            "input": "I was attracted to seeing this movie because of this plot and my desire to watch a horror.To my disappointment, this turned into more of a comedy than a horror. The acting, dialog, and flow of the movie was all very poorly done. Much of it didn't make sense. For example, there's a party of about 30 people and they're all terrified of one person despite them being at a secret location and are all healthy looking young adults and the guy threatening them sounds haggard. I kept thinking, maybe this was a parody of another movie like Scary Movie, but they were trying too hard to make it look gruesome - emphasis on try.The blood and gore are also poorly done. I've seen Halloween costumes look more believable than this. A guy with his head cut clean off... looked clean - missing signs bone, flesh, blood, and even the head. A strong downward strike with an ax on a corpse should lodge itself into something... seemed like the guy was swinging a bat instead of an ax.Revealing who the main villain was supposed to be a twist, but contradicted other parts in the story. What was going in the guy's mind to turn out like that? If there was going to be a twist, you should at least build up to it adding mystery and suspense.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c6281bcf7f44f3fa6005d94e6317b69",
            "input": "I had high hopes for Troy and I am so bitterly disappointed. The film was directed so badly it made my stomach ache. The pacing was so slow, the dialogue laughable and the film - well apart from a nice fight scene between Achilles (Pitt) and Hector (Bana) - the rest was shallow.And why, oh why does Hollywood always insist on rewriting stories to fit 'consumer approval'. Agamemnon didn't die in Troy, the war lasted 10 years and Achilles was killed by Paris OUTSIDE the walls of Troy with an arrow to the ankle! It annoys me that such a classic story as this is turned into a soap.And don't even start me on the 'lack' of chemistry between Helen and Paris. She was the woman the war was fought over and it didn't even look as if the two of them cared a great deal about the other. No sparks, no emotion, no hope.I have to say in the films defence Brad Pitt, Eric Bana and Peter O' Toole acted very well with a bad script but that isn't enough to save this awful movie. Can anybody tell me where the £200 million budget went? Maybe in all the trees they used for the funeral pyres - where did they get all those trees?I am so disappointed it hurts.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-feaa17c97540456d870f1ae7b0d33e1d",
            "input": "A comparison between this movie and 'The Last Detail' is made by some, but 'Chasers' is flatter than a stretch of Interstate highway in west Texas. And like the scenery in the desert, there's nothing much to distinguish it, not even the fact that a female prisoner is being transported by two navy escorts this time around. No one in the cast comes off too well; with this lame script that's not surprising. Dennis Hopper, the director, won't give much space to this one if he ever writes a memoir, I don't think.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-291f1e65cdd94bd3b3e2f729355ef921",
            "input": "In a way, this film reminded me of \"Jumping Jack Flash\". Remember Whoopi Goldberg at the shredding machine? Whoopi zonked out tranquilizers? Whoopi as Blind Lemon and imitating Mick Jagger? Great moments captured on film for sure but the movie still kind of sucks, right? That's how I feel about \"Rich In Love\". A man hears his wife sing for the first time. Post-coital teenagers talk about the nature of love. Albert Finney eats ice cream out of bucket and, in another scene, has a lovely waking moment regarding his absent wife. Alfre Woodard adds another colorful character to her acting wardrobe. But there's only the whisper of a plot here and you can't wait for it to Get Moving. Only when ex-Go-Gos' Charlotte Caffey's The Graces revs up a great pop song does the picture wake up...and then it's over!This picture is the equivalent of a lazy summer's day in the deep American South.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53b07cfe91c34bf5bb52956f7569c6fd",
            "input": "Creature Comforts in America should have been released on a different network, or at least been given the chance to have its full run of episodes. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Given that American audiences (seemingly) have the attention spans of a gnat when it comes to the humor that does not consist of profanity laced diatribes, or has a preoccupation with scatological functions (both sound and smells), shows like this will be few and far between. One of the main problems was that however brilliant it was, it was made for a rarefied audience who knew what to expect but was viewed by an audience and board rooms that did not have a clue at to what they were watching. Which is sad, but not unexpected. I would have liked to have seen at least three more seasons of this show even if it was produced for direct DVD release. The material and the interactions between the creatures were rich with sub context and there were other conversations just waiting to be had under the surface. But thanks to Political Correctness, such conversations take place only in my mind.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08fea2d4ee294f93a3aaac2d93f10a23",
            "input": "Shot into car from through the windscreen, someone is playing someone else their latest song, someone else didn't react, according to the voice-over. I just wonder how that came to be made. There were too many scenes in this movie that I wondered about how come a camera was there. If the scenes shot where the Warhols descended on a BJM post-party are true then that was inexcusable exploitation to the max, if not, then it was a total fabrication, either way it made me uncomfortable, if that was the purpose? All the way thru this movie I kept wondering how the footage came about. Taken at face value, a nice portrait of the (tortured) genius we all believe ourselves to be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c5ff851ec96411ead4e9cdb204f934a",
            "input": "Hilarious, laugh out loud moments ... and yet not a comedy. I particularly liked the planted gag of the ambulance soaking the \"filthy bum\" who then shouts after them in anger \"you filthy bums\", I mean wow, someone's online degree in literature is paying off! The worst script imaginable, with plot introductions in an instant, ridiculous movement in the story, ZERO character development (even between the characters who meet .. it's as if they all have known and trusted each other for years) dodgy voice over with added echo effects, and plot holes.. oh God are there plot holes!! To be honest I write this not even having watched the entire thing, but I certainly expect the last 30 mins or so to not exactly enhance the already pathetic attempt in cinema ... thank god we've got a good looking lead to somewhat make us forget that the film is a load of ... well ... use you imagination for the conclusion of that particular sentence!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3c6c9abac8f49c69c3dca0114dfb0f5",
            "input": "A quiet, sweet and beutifully nostalgic movie on how it is to be confronted with old friends and surroundings from your youth with all that memories and the problems and sorrows of the present with you. A movie that makes you feel good. All the ingredients are here: old jelousy, rivalry, friendship and loyalty. Mischief, nightly fridge-raids and all the other fun stuff that we all remember from our summer camps. All the characters get the opportunity for a week to experience this again as the old camp-leader now is retiring and want to meet the children from the golden years of the camp. All of them are now in their thirties and in the middle of their careers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76177b6ebf3d4c1e8a9c2060d208fb98",
            "input": "Charlie Kauffman has made weird metaphysical angst popular, but this canadian gem makes it hilarious. Like most weird films the less said about plot the better but let's set the scene, two friends Anthony and Dave have been together since childhood, they can't cope with the world and eventually this means they no longer have to. But that is where even more problems begin.I loved this film, it made me smile long after the final credits and that is a rare experience with so many mass produced pieces of \"nothing\" out there.Don't miss this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d822a5073b748f7bd7d0fa98ff5cb7b",
            "input": "Two years ago at Sundance I loved Josh Kornbluth's directing debut-Haiku Tunnel. So I was looking forward to his brother (and frequent collaborator) Jacob's, The Best Thief in the World. This is a drama about a seemingly good kid growing up in a lower-class area of New York. The movie is not without its poignant moments. But at times it is as if Kornbluth is working way too hard to state the obvious: Life can be very difficult for some people. And life isn't fair.More subtle, and more important, is our understanding that despite all of these somewhat abhorrent cultural underpinnings and the anti-social behavior they may spawn, these characters have no shortage of goodness and humanity. We can recoil at their language and their living conditions, but we are cannot discount their intent. And in fact, their struggles to maintain a family under such adversity has a certain nobility that most of us can barely appreciate. Kornbluth grew up in this neighborhood, and his compassion for the people is evident throughout.Having said all this, The Best Thief in the World suffers from many painful flaws (including the title). The characters aren't very believable. The writing is uneven. And the plot-line is barely discernible. And for many the most disturbing is that Kornbluth uses two young black boys mimicking gangsta rap between scenes. To each his own: But while I don't question the potential realism of this phenomenon, it pains me to see 5-year-old children mf'ing and talking about having sex with a line-up of women. It's unnecessary shock value and is a forced bit of borrowed interest.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d63bbfc98e1645ada86030abdcd88a5b",
            "input": "Be careful with this one. Once you get yer mitts on it, it'll change the way you look at kung-fu flicks. You will be yearning a plot from all of the kung-fu films now, you will be wanting character depth and development, you will be craving mystery and unpredictability, you will demand dynamic camera work and incredible backdrops. Sadly, you won't find all of these aspects together in one kung-fu movie, EXCEPT for Five Deadly Venoms!Easily the best kung-fu movie of all-time, Venoms blends a rich plot, full of twists and turns, with colourful (and developed) characters, along with some of the best camerawork to come out of the 70s. The success of someone liking the film depends on the viewers ability to decipher which character is which, and who specializes in what venom. One is the Centipede, two is the Snake, three is the Scorpion, four is the Lizard, and five is the Toad. Each character has different traits, characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. Therein lies the hook, we learn along with the student character, finding out who these different men turn out to be. We are in his shoes (so to speak), and we have to pick who we trust, and who we don't, just like he does. We learn along with him.Not only is the plot, the characters, and the camerawork great, it's also fun to watch, which in my book makes it more valuable than almost any other movie of it's kind. It's worth quite a few watches to pick up on everything that's going on. Venoms is a lesson on what kung-fu can really do...just don't expect many other kung-fu films to live up to it's gauntlet.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2feb417de75e4996b77310764167f4f6",
            "input": "Harman and Isings 'Old Mill Pond' is a true masterpiece of the art of animation. The consummate skill and artistry that characterise this duos work is nowhere more in evidence than in this cartoon. It is a shame that so many people can see only offence in what is, and was always intended to be, a light hearted piece of entertainment that in no way sought to denigrate black people. If anything it is a tribute to the infectious humour and musicality of the black race. I have not been able to view this confection for many years as the 'race commissars' in England have deemed it too offensive to be shown in multi racial Britain. If anyone knows where I can obtain a copy I would dearly love to view this masterpiece again. I think those who routinely look for messages and intent that were never intended in these cartoons, which are, after all, sixty years old, should try to lighten up and remember that the world is a very different place today, but that does not mean that anyone has the right to censor what is viewable from the past.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b857b3a37cc64e1483c9a248e3bd3e03",
            "input": "Gene Tierney and Dana Andrews, who were both so memorable in 1944's \"Laura, re-teamed for this excellent 1950 film-noir.An embittered policeman, Andrews as Mark, can't get over the fact that his father was a hoodlum who died in a police shootout while trying to break out of jail. As a result of his bitterness, Mark doesn't know when to stop using his hands. It's this inability that leads to the accidental death of a small-time hood.(Craig Stevens)In trying to frame gangster Gary Merrill, Mark unintentionally puts the heat on innocent cab-drive, Tom Tully, who is the father of Gene Tierney, who was separated by Stevens.This is a well-thought out film dealing with the conscience of a basically decent human being.The ending is not exactly upbeat as Mark will have to face the music. At least, he finally admits to what he has done.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75fdeb00006f4398bbbbac4d48dc8a40",
            "input": "I'm not tired to say this is one of the best political thrillers ever made. The story takes place in a fictional state, but obviously it deals with the murder of Kennedy. A truthful and honest district attorney (played by Yves Montand) does not believe that the murder was planned and executed by the single man Daslow (=Oswald) and though all other officials want to close the case he continuous to investigate with his team.The screenplay is written tight and fast and holds the tension till the end. Just the part dealing with the Milgram experiment about authorities is (though not uninteresting) a bit out of place. The ending sequence - explaining who Icarus really is - partly shot in slow motion and intensified by a Morricone soundtrack is the most powerful sequence I have ever seen in a movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-880ea8db5e5a4ba1ba3b018f9c7f3e34",
            "input": "This clunker of a film sets a new standard for bad filmmaking. Jared Rushton gives an adequate performance of a very poorly-created character in an ill-fated movie, thereby creating a net effect of a very bad movie. The film's main thrust is how a boy's temporary excursion into the Canadian wilderness after surviving a plane crash solo allows the disgruntled adolescent to deal with his anguish over discovering his mother's extramarital affair. Unfortunately it turns into a bizarre collage of random \"survival events\" (including two especially hokey scenes involving fighting a bear) and strange hallucinations that make you wonder if this kid isn't just sitting in an alley somewhere on pot dreaming up this whole movie (and what a nightmare it is!). Furthermore, despite the heralds of some reviewers of the family viewability of the film, there are several scenes not suitable for very young children or family viewing, including a graphic scene of the dead pilot underwater with one of his eyes apparently exploded.All in all, a terrible movie that nobody should be subjected to, much less innocent kids.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4f3427827834b9da52e73dec62d25f8",
            "input": "The movie is wonderful. It shows the man's work for the wilderness and a natural understanding of the harmony of nature, without being an \"extreme\" naturalist. I definitely plan to look for the book. This is a rare treasure!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cc1232b259f4233b897918b94b1c59e",
            "input": "\"Gandhi as a husband and father?\" has always been discussed by people in India. 'Gandhi...my father' is a story that only a few would have known to such details. Surely an insight into Gandhi's personal life.Overall, I liked the movie for story and cinematography. Jariwala, Akshay Khanna, and Shefali Shah have all done a good job. Most scenes of the movie would be nice desktop wallpapers...commendable job. Traditional Indian folk music as background score during certain parts of the movie gives a good feel of the happenings.However, what I didn't quite like was the narration style. At several points, I found the tone over-dramatized.Overall, good work by Anil Kapoor Productions. I would recommend it as \"must-watch-once\". 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d26cccc19da4cf294d31df0a40d3604",
            "input": "This movie answers the question, how does a relationship survive when your girlfriend is codependent, clinging, needy, jealous .. and has powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal women?Without spoiling the movie, I can safely assure you it does not, but there's great fun to be had along the way. Uma Thurman is perfect as the mercurial super-heroine, an uber-babe, mysteriously named G-Girl, who unlike most in her sisterhood, is not *always* dedicated to truth, justice, and the American Way. Thurman is also believable as the thoroughly daft, yet somehow still fetching, curator Jenny. When she is dumped for a less endowed but more emotionally secure and well adjusted rival, G-Girl goes ballistic, and what follows is not pretty. It's funny, but it's not pretty ..It's a delightful premise, hell hath no fury like a super-heroine scorned, and those involved don't altogether carry it off, but it has its moments, and I think I'll get the DVD.I liked this movie ..",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-930c2d51735c42158585f396fc416a29",
            "input": "I've read the other reviews and found some to be comparison of movie v real life (eg what it takes to get into music school), Britney Bashing, etc, etc. so let's focus on the movie and the message.I have rated this movie 7 out of 10 for the age range 8 to 14 years, and for a family movie. For the average adult male.... 2 out of 10.I like pop/rock music, i'm 45. I know of Britney Spears but never realised she actually sang Stronger until i read the credits and these reviews. I didn't recognise her poster on the wall so I was not worried about any 'self promotion'.I watch movies to be entertained. i don't care about casting, lighting, producers, directors, etc. What is the movie and does it entertain me.I watched this movie for the message. The world's greatest epidemic is low self-esteem (which is a whole other story) so watched with the message in mind, as that is an area of interest. The movie is light, bright and breezy, great for kids. I found the Texan twang began to fade throughout the movie and of course there are only so many ways to convey the give up/don't give up message, so yeh, it was a bit predictable. Great message though...should be more of them.This movie is a great family movie, but for a bloke watching by himself, get Hannibal.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8bac2e29d7a1445b9c615cc295c9b419",
            "input": "In a way, Corridors of Time is a success story because the movie reaches its goal : being seen by thousands. But it fails at making them laugh...Les Visiteurs has had its success, because the subject was an original way of considering the time travel : forget about Zemeckis's Back to the future, here comes the old France, the middle-age knight and its nearly barbaric way of life. Full of pride, funny thanks to the ancient words he uses, Montmirail can sometimes be disgusting but he keeps his honor. Then comes the sequel.Nobody had foreseen the tremendous success of Les Visiteurs, the first. And it's no use being a movie expert to realize that the Corridors of Time has been made for money.The general story begins after the end of Les Visiteurs, and immediately tries to justify the sequel with a time paradox that would have needed some second tought. Explanation : it's no use trying to get back the jewelry Jacquouille has stolen ; don't you remember this nice red shiny and expensive car he bought at the end of the 1st episode ? Where do you think he found the money ? Selling the jewelry... And that's only one of many holes Poiré tries to avoid... and fails.Let's have a look at the characters : Montmirail doesn't change, he's just a little more boring. Regarding Frenegonde... that's another story : Valérie Lemercier decided not to compromise herself in this sequel to avoid getting stuck in the bourgeoise role. And Muriel Robin tries to imitate her in a way that I found so pitiful I nearly felt pain for her. And Poiré doesn't realize that a cast of humorists isn't enough to make a good comedy.Forget about the time travels, about the digital effects, concentrate on the story and you'll see that there's enough room on a mail stamp to write it 10 times.The main interest of this film is the landscapes. A movie for youngsters, let's say up to 13 years old.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b405e78f672f48969d081fc0cfe7e642",
            "input": "A squashy slapstick mess posing as a comedy. Elvis Presley plays an Indian bull-riding champ who leaves the rodeo for a stay at home on his folks' desert-spread in Arizona, where government suits have just invested in the family's herd of cattle (which is in dire need of a stud). What director Peter Tewksbury is in dire need of is some narrative skills, though what he lacks in assessment he makes up for in sloppy comedic montages (his social commentary isn't exactly pointed, but Tewksbury does have a satiric bend to his outlandishness and there are some funny scenes). Despite colorful supporting turns by Katy Jurado and Joan Blondell, the general wackiness gets way out of hand, and there's too much hoopin' and hollerin' to sustain much interest. As for Elvis, he's loose and frisky throughout--and while it's nice to see him having fun on-screen, one has to wonder if he had just given up on movies at this point. This shambles of a picture has a distinct what-the-hell feel to it, and though spirits are high, the returns are mostly low. *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6aa2735c9dbe48799f505372292575b6",
            "input": "This film is wonderful in every way that modern action adventures are not. Take some time. Relax, enjoy. Think. People who see this movie as slow or plodding or dull really need to take a week off and watch it several times until their short attention span mind comes to grips with the possibility of being involved with a cause or even beautiful story in a beautiful place for no other reason than because it isn't hurrying to make the points you so emphatically need it to make in the short time alloted. At first I was apprehensive of Brosnan playing a native American. Given the story line though, I think it was apt casting. Now, back to my hermiting. -Jahfre",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8cf8e7fd52e4b0794ca8a43405d31d4",
            "input": "*review may contain spoilers*predictable, campy, bad special effects. it has a TV-movie feeling to it. the idea of the UN as being taken over by Satan is an interesting twist to the end of the world according to the bible. the premise is interesting, but its excution falls waaaay short. if you want to convert people to Christianity with a film like this, at least make it a quality one! i was seriously checking my watch while watching this piece of dreck. can't say much else about this film since i saw it over a year ago, and there isn't really much to say about this film other than.....skip it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-154e262ace944a90ae82f9f3d3f2e838",
            "input": "As others have mentioned, this movie is similar to THE FLY (both versions) and the lesser known sci-fi flick ALTERED STATES. The big difference is that those two movies were well made by people who knew what they were doing and were good at it. METAMORPHOSIS did not have these advantages. METAMORPHOSIS is a potentially interesting science fantasy story that had the wrong people in charge of it and the wrong actors playing the roles.The story follows scientist Dr. Peter Houseman (Gene LeBrock), an obsessed man working on a genetic cure to aging and death. When the university he works for threatens to cut funding, he decides to inject the anti-aging serum into himself. As a result, Dr. Houseman spends the rest of the movie slowly turning into a lizard. And oh yes, watching the good doctor go through the process of becoming that lizard is a great joy. It really is so bad that it's good. Some of the lines are classic: \"What WAS it?\" \"A nightmare...from the past!\"Many of the reviews that I've read for this point up how stupid and ridiculous the last five minutes of this movie are. I'm just going to go ahead and spoil it: the good doctor goes from being a shuffling half-man, half-lizard thing to being what appears to be a man in a rejected Godzilla costume, when the police finally gun him down. In the final scene, some obnoxious kid is seen with a little pet lizard which he claims will never die, and the movie's heroine, Sally Donnelly (Catherine Baranov) evidently decides that the little lizard is the final incarnation of Dr. Houseman. The camera then gives us a close-up of the lizard's face; this is, I assume, the director's way of showing us that the lizard is EVIL. Yes, it is goofy, but I fell over laughing so I can't complain.I watched this movie because it was a part of the Chilling Classics 50 Movie Megapack that I purchased. I'm sure many of those who are reading this did exactly the same thing, as the 50 pack is the only way to see this movie on DVD. If you have recently bought the boxed set and haven't watched this movie yet, it really is worth your time, even if I did just ruin the ending for you. It might also be possible to find this movie online for free.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d46867ae828748ffa68a7d028f3647dc",
            "input": "Dick Foran and Peggy Moran, who were so good together in THE MUMMY'S HAND, return for this very minor Universal Horror offering. But this time, instead of having Wallace Ford as the comedic sidekick \"Babe,\" we get Fuzzy Knight substituting as a silly buddy named \"Stuff\". But the results are nowhere near as charming, and the scare level is virtually nil.Dick is a businessman who gets the idea of spearheading a treasure hunt on a remote island inside a spooky old castle. Peggy is one of the gang who comes along for the ride. But there is a tall and skinny John Carradine lookalike in a black cape and big hat known as \"The Phantom\" who crashes the party in pursuit of the buried fortune himself.This \"phantom\" is not very mysterious, and no effort is made to even try and keep his rather average guy face in the shadows to create any tension or spookiness. It's always nice to see perky Moran, but otherwise you can chalk this up as one of Universal's instantly forgettable misfires.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b76052c0c33400a8603dadc8764ef5a",
            "input": "Although The Notorious Bettie Page is well acted and shot, is is, at best, a Cliffs Notes version of Bettie's biography. The film mainly centers on her work with Irving and Paula Klaw, the brother and sister team who produced the bulk of her most famous photos. It does not detail her life after posing, aside from her religious rebirth. It cites \"The Real Bettie Page\", by Richard Foster as a source, but it ignores Bettie's later years of mental illness and incarceration in a mental hospital. The narrow focus of the biography can be debated, but the majority of Bettie's fans and the \"civilians\" would probably be more interested in her modeling career, which is what they get.The film is well acted, with Gretchen Mol faithfully reproducing the look of Bettie, as well as conveying the sweetness that her photos exuded. The character is played as rather naive, a probable byproduct of interviews given by Bettie in recent years. It is more likely that Bettie was aware of the nature of her photos but rationalized it as acting and costumes.The supporting cast is also outstanding, with Chris Bauer and Lili Taylor playing Irving and Paula Klaw, and David Strathairn as Estes Kefauver. The film errs with the character of John Willie, played by Jared Harris. John Willie never met Bettie Page and was not involved in photo shoots with the Klaws. Harris plays Willie a bit like Peter O'Toole, in his more debauched state.Despite the quality of acting, the film is a bit of a disappointment in terms of depth. The story is rather cursory and we never feel that we truly get to know Bettie. Much like her photos, it's just an image. It does tend to exaggerate Bettie's notoriety. Her photos were mainly seen in and around New York, in a very narrow market of underground and cultish publications. Her real fame came after her photos were reprinted in the late 70's and 80's, and the Cult of Betty Page (as her name was usually spelled) grew. Bettie's greatest exposure (pardon the pun) was in Playboy, appearing in the January 1955 issue (the Christmas photo, which is staged in reverse in the film).The film is well done, if rather shallow. It is able to sustain interest until the end and showcases many fine performances. It hits the high points of Bettie's life, but ignores many details which would have given it far greater depth. The ending is rather a let down. It feels rather abrupt. Still, the movie is definitely worth viewing by anyone interested in Bettie, or even the time period. The soundtrack is great, really pulling the viewer into the 1950's. If nothing else, the film stands as a showcase for America's burgeoning sexuality and the clash with its Puritan past. It's also a peek at an icon for both men and women.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-012b72ffc7884fcf8e40331ac188dad3",
            "input": "Went to see the movie \"Troy\" this afternoon. Here's what I learned:Contrary to popular opinion and history in general, Greek men were not gay. EVER. This was clearly established immediately at the start of the film and reinforced every five minutes or so thereafter. So it is safe for American dudes to see this movie.Helen of Troy always had impeccable hair and makeup. She looked gorgeous in all of her brief cameo scenes which, though numerous, were probably all filmed on the same day, one after the other, with the director saying, \"Alright, now look beautiful . . . good ... OK, now look frightened ... good... now look depressed ... good ... now look interested . . . good ... now look beautiful again ... good...\"Most Greek and Trojan men had British accents. Those with American accents couldn't act.Trojans looked just like Greeks, but they tended to stay on the right side of the screen.Brad Pitt does not blink on camera.Helen of Troy's biggest line was, \"They're coming for me.\"Trojan music sounded remarkably like modern Bulgarian music.Brad Pitt's thighs go all the way up.Achilles had a young male friend with whom he was very close, but it's OK. They were cousins. Never mind what history says.Peter O'Toole can tell an entire story with just an expression.Trojan gods apparently all had Greek names, but their statues either looked Egyptian or like Peter O'Toole in drag.Greek men never touched each other unless they were fighting, much like American men.All of the thousands of extras in the movie had exactly the same skin color... Light Egyptian, by Max Factor.Troy had only three women.There were lots of blond Greeks, which is good news for Brad Pitt, who would otherwise have really stuck out.Despite their coastal desert locale, Greeks had the uncanny ability to find unlimited amounts of timber to build fires, funeral pyres, Trojan horses and the like.British actors look silly with Greek hairdos.Brad Pitt changes expression only when the sun is shining directly in his eyes.Greek soldiers fought constantly, but their outfits always looked impeccable.Greek soldiers wore underwear under their skirts.Apparently Greek temples were always in ruins, even back when they were all new.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e2ea85cb11347cea45e09687699ce1a",
            "input": "Robin Williams and Kurt Russell play guys in their 30's who put their marraiges in jeopardy by deciding (Russell somewhat reluctantly) to replay their heartbreaking tie with rival Bakersfield years after the fact. Williams is ok, but Russell is flat-out great as legendary Taft quarterback Remo Hightower. Holly Palance does a nice and attractive turn as Williams' wife, who could live without this rematch. Film is worth watching just to see the famed Remo in action. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9d417abff4c4b7895a2a01b140cbaa8",
            "input": "For starters and for the record, the term \"Necromancy\" describes the black magic art of bringing the dead back to life and it does NOT, in any way, relate to having sex with cadavers. That is called necrophilia and, yes, I know it's an obvious difference but I'm already getting a lot of remarks from acquaintances and relatives that I sport a perverted taste in movies! This movie is quite the opposite of perverted or sleazy, in fact, and merely just qualifies as boring, inept and terribly bad. \"Necromancy\" makes at least one top five ranking, namely in the list of most incoherent movies ever made! Now, director Bert I. Gordon is not exactly famous for delivering masterpieces (on his repertoire there are titles like \"Earth vs. the Spider\", \"King Dinosaur\" and \"Food of the Gods\") but he really surpassed himself here with a totally senseless, redundant and utterly nonsensical tale about witchcraft and secretive little towns. Shortly after the tragic experience of seeing their baby being born dead, Lori and her husband Frank move to the quiet little town of Lillith, where Frank suddenly got offered a prominent job in a toy factory. Lori is suspicious and senses an atmosphere of morbidity, especially with the town's patriarch and \"owner\" Mr. Cato behaving very obtrusive and mysterious. That's another thing. How can anybody \"own\" a town and everybody in it? Either way, Lori gradually discovers that everybody in Lillith is a witch and Mr. Cato exclusively lured her to the town because of her supernatural ability to resurrect the dead. Since many years already, Cato has been trying to bring his deceased son back to life and he's prepared to make any human sacrifice it takes. I honestly don't see the point of the whole movie. It's a blatant rip-off of \"Rosemary's Baby\" – one of the alternate titles even is \"Rosemary's Disciples\" – but the script is muddled and imbecilic beyond belief. Why isn't anyone allowed to have children for as long as Cato's son remains dead? That's just really selfish! When, where and how did Lori suddenly learn to resurrect the dead? \"Necromancy\" definitely contains a few genuinely uncanny and atmospheric moments, but these are unwarily accomplished either by complete coincidence or through a total lack of budget. The grainy photography provides the film with an eerie ambiance and the set pieces look cheap enough to be creepy. Orson Welles' performance – undoubtedly the low point of his career – is pitiable, and still it's the best aspect about the entire movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-049a669c1b27430d9b23806c6f86ce75",
            "input": "Simply not the quality I expected from Morris (love Brass Eye and Blue Jam). This is very much like a not so bad student film. What concerns me, in all this is WHY DID IT WIN A BAFTA??? Morris makes fun of 'enshrined mediocrity' (Ayn Rand) in much of his work (Nathan Barley) and yet with this piece is urinating down the backs of the talented and telling us its raining! I just hope as he has chosen a subject I would love to tackle (the humanity of terrorism - Four Lions) that he isn't going to cock that up, wasting the opportunity to make a statement about the farce of mainstream ignorance and opinion on this emotive and heavily spun phenomena.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab54c1dacc824623986fff65b12d4792",
            "input": "I desperately want to give this movie a 10...I really do. Some movies, especially horror movies are so budget that they are good. A wise-cracking ninja scarecrow who can implement corn cobs as lethal weaponry...definitely fits this 'budget to brilliance' system. The depth of the movie is definitely its strong point and the twists and turns it implements, keeping the audience at the edge of their seats really drives the creepy...ninja... puberty-stricken... pre-thirty year old student...non-cowboy drawing...wise-cracking...son-of-a-bitch scarecrow into the limelight as the creepiest horror icon of the year. All I can really say is, 'can you dig it' and recommend watching movies such as Frankenfish if you enjoy this sort of hilarious horror.(WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY SMOKING!?'",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ff6b4d7fb6f48178505daa1def1663b",
            "input": "Gillian Holroyd (Kim Novak) is a witch. Secretly, she's attracted to her quite normal neighbor Shep Henderson (James Stewart). She casts a spell on Shep that forces him to dump his fiancé and fall for her. Things are going along quite nicely until Gillian discovers she really cares for this mortal man. She decides to tell him her secret. But how will Shep react when he finds out that he was \"tricked\" into falling in love with Gillian? As far as light-hearted 1950s comedies go, Bell Book and Candle is good, but nothing spectacular. It's an enjoyable enough watch and should appeal to almost anyone who sits down with it. Just don't go into the movie expecting the greatest thing since sliced bread. The movie's cute, funny at times, and touching in the end. Kim Novak and James Stewart do their best and have some real chemistry. Novak (as others have pointed out) looks quite incredible in an understated sort of way. The supporting cast with Jack Lemmon, Hermione Gingold, and Elsa Lanchester is often laugh-out-loud funny and steals a lot of the spotlight from Novak and Stewart. The biggest problem I see is that Bell Book and Candle can't quite decide what kind of movie it wants to be. Is it a screwball comedy? Is it a romantic comedy? Is it a supernatural comedy? Had director Richard Quine stuck with just one approach, the movie might have been even better and more memorable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63d5aefe035640588db1b12b78676c8a",
            "input": "Yesterday I watched this movie for the third time. It was recommended to me by a fried several weeks ago. I never watched or even noticed it before, because it falls (so typically) in the category \"Swedish Movie\" and those who rose up (like me) with Hollywood productions tend to be sceptical of any foreign movies. Hell what a paradigm shift! The film touches me, because it just keeps up my hope, that mankind can change to a better way. The Swedish village is just a pattern for all areas on earth where people live together - controlled by religion, misunderstandings, lack of courage, predictions, disguised brutality, but also the ability to have fun, to meet, to sing... It takes a trigger from outside to rip off the masks of everyone (who keeps one) and to let them feel that we all are just human beings with the desire to live our own lives. I can never stop to see stories like this, because, that keeps up my hope as described above. The five minutes containing the story of Gabriella's song including her performance is one of my movie-highlights ever! Thank you Kay Pollak just for these 5 minutes, which made me happy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-741e3289ad9a44889d9ef98437da7c98",
            "input": "Clair Denis again revisits her theme of estranged fathers, men who follow their own bliss in determined fashion, heedless of the emotion toll on their family but while Nénette and Boni from the earlier film live in a narrow world of Marseilles, our examination of Louis Trebor in The Intruder takes us from a remote location along the French-Swiss border to half way around the world, to Korea and Tahiti. Again the film begins in mid stream, with Louis, in his sixties, coping with an ailing heart while attempting to maintain a high level of fitness. We learn that Louis is no stranger to violence as his cabin is the location for smuggling and gunfire a regular occurrence. Louis sleeps with a large knife under his pillow with rifles nearby. Denis is in no hurry to move the action along, and we must patiently build our understanding of Louis from his daily activities and the few people he deals with along the frontier including a son, Sidney (Grégoire Colin, almost unrecognizable with long hair and a wisp of a mustache) who rejects him as a \"lunatic\":, shown as a dedicated father of two. There are many brief scenes which, while seemingly unrelated, build up an impression of Louis and his milieu. Ms Godard's camera work is exhilarating here. The controlling metaphor is Louis's heart transplant for which he goes to Korea and then to Tahiti to search for another son, not found, and where Louis's new heart rejects him just as Sidney rejected the old. We are accustomed to brief scenes in Denis's film which are inexplicable: Nénette astride Boni feeding with a spoon; a drive by shooting of Boni's father and then the briefest of images of Boni with a gunshot wound in the head; a scene of Louis in a morgue with a cadaver with the scar of a transplant but the body of Sidney. The implication, of the last two, is a rejection, real or imagined, by a father, kills something indefinable in a son.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32c4cc11fce44d71b7bbf511206d4485",
            "input": "This is one of those rare movies, it's lovely and compelling, dignified and quirky, a true gift. I consider it a prerequisite for any trip to Italy, or any vacation at all, because it reminds you to open yourself up to a broader experience (yup, find the magic). I especially loved Josie Lawrence, as Lottie Wilkins, but every lead and supporting actor is flawless in this film. Further the costumes, if you're drawn to fashion and costumes, are extraordinarily well done. I just wish they'd release it on DVD because I'm wearing my tape version out! Absolutely well worth your time, just make sure to settle in to watch it, without any interruptions.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23197e12f0fc471089e1a2ae75de2666",
            "input": "Don't listen to the misleading title \"Werewolf Woman\". The Europeans are well known for putting an emphasis on sex and nudity over actual scares in their horror films, but this one here is just a bit too much. \"Werewolf Woman\" seems to have a sleazy sex scene copped off with the title character going crazy and brutally killing her partner. Fun the first few times, but a hundred minutes of this becomes very monotonous quickly. Shes not even a werewolf, but a schizo chick whose ancestor was hanged for lycanthropy. The film can't even decide its tone, with the first ten minutes (a flashback) being legitimate supernatural horror (I thought I was in for a trash classic after these) to a rather poor character study of the female being repeatedly abused and tortured to a revenge thriller. At the end, the director insists this is based on a true story. Yeah, all right.To be fair, there are a few entertaining aspects of the production. The title werewolf woman is a looker and there are a few nice gore effects and nude scenes. However, these become rather monotonous quickly. Also, the dubbed dialog is pretty hilarious in a camp fashion, especially the worlds most swinging doctor (he drinks on the job). Unfortunately, the film becomes pretty irritating fast. There's no actual plot or anything else really. Its a shame, because reading a description I felt the film had some real potential. \"Werewolf Woman\" is far overlong, slow moving, and a bit too pointless, even by the standards of the exploitation genre. (4/10)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdf4dcbabf164c0aadebf7ecc8941083",
            "input": "The opening 5 minutes gave me hope. Then Meyers proved he only had one good idea for the rest of the movie. Absolute lowest common denominator humor. Painful viewing. A complete chore. Written no doubt in less than a week, just like the first one. Give Meyers the hook and lock him in a cell with Adam Sandler and Will Farrell. And don't let him out until he's developed a decent script for something, anything. He has it in him. These Austin Powers things are just embarrassing. Let Goldmember sink without trace.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6b7f01851ed469ba697a94cb14e3f48",
            "input": "This movie features Charlie Spradling dancing in a strip club. Beyond that, it features a truly bad script with dull, unrealistic dialogue. That it got as many positive votes suggests some people may be joking.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4fa0b45e32f48fc98c7b525b27ca5f0",
            "input": "This movie can be described in those 2 words \"just unbelievable\". This is the best movie ever made, I just cant see why this movie isnt in the top 250. I also can't see why anybody would not love Scarface. Anyways, if you havnt seen it, it is a must buy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9cbc782395c4c6e84ef66252275af17",
            "input": "As did others in this forum, when \"Fobidden Planet\" was offered in 1956, I rushed to see it. This story is an interesting phenomenon I suggest because young, old, male, female, sci-fi experts and people who find such fare 'way out\" all can follow and enjoy this film's story and plot lines very well. This is the first movie set on a planet other than Earth in the 20th Century other than serials such as \"Flash Gordon\". Leslie Nielsen was vocally a bit weak for his role, at that time, but Walter Pigeon, Marvin Miller, Anne Francis, Richard Anderson, Earl Holliman and especially Warren Stevens all acquitted themselves very well. There are so many visual splendors in this one, it's hard to choose a favorite from the film's scenes. The approach to Altair-4, the starship itself, the landing on the planet's alien surface, the descent via extensor stairs, the first view of the landscape, the approach of the rocket-sled, Dr. Morbius's house seen from without and from within, the underground complex and its wonders, the setup of the weaponry, the battle with the monster, the final approach of the unseen destroyer,the escape from the doomed planet--all these scenes are etched into the viewer's mind because we discover them along with the participants. Veteran Cyril Hume's literate script was filmed intelligently by long-time director Fred McLeod Wilcox with clarity and imagination. it is a shock to realize there's no music at all; the film is carried by the words, the actors and the mystery-revelation storyline. It can be watched again and again with pleasure--I have been doing so for nearly fifty years. Until this famous and well-loved film was created, no film had tried to imagine a world beyond Earth; and for decades afterward, ships kept crashing back on the planet--as if the writers' imaginations were failing and causing the crashes. Still the best, many say. That says something negative about this nation's so-called intellectual leaders' imaginations--and something very positive indeed I suggest about those who made this gem.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e128dc3ce274e32be1ea2f89a1fc599",
            "input": "Gadar is an example of one of Bollywood worst overrated movies ever. Directed by Anil Sharma, who prefers making period related movie gives a rubbish movie. The songs were boring and ain't the kind of song you want to listen to in your car, full volume. Sunny Deol is famous for making daft movies, where he beats up a 100 bad guys on his own. He even kicks a metal jail door (Indian) and kicks a moving car far away (Teesri Aankh). I can give another 50 examples of disgraceful action by Sunny Deol. But I'm sure most people know this already. Sunny gives a pathetic performance once again repeating the same type of role. A guy claiming to be fighting for his countries piece, by using violence. Amisha Patel is hands down dead sexy with an amazing body that i would love to bone. But even she couldn't save the film from being a disaster. Instead of wearing sexy clothes like she usually does, in this movie she doesn't. Maybe cos she was playing a Muslim, but she doesn't act like one in the movie. Overall, this is a poor show all the way, I'm sure it will appeal to some people, who love seeing the Bollywood actor beat up 100 guys. Give me a break.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f08ad45a52547739cf5448067572eb3",
            "input": "This is probably the best documentary I have seen in a very long time. Jonny Kennedy was and is still is a tragically beautiful inspiration. Not only was he a survivor of one of the most painful diseases out there, but he used his beauty to show the world that there is life after death and never to give up reaching people and spreading his love. Watching minutes of his life long struggle was heart-wrenching. Listening to his smart ass remarks and seeing his adorable gestures was heartwarming. And seeing him smile was indescribable. I feel blessed to have been able to be touched by this tiny giant. Please, if you ever have a chance to watch this film - consider yourself lucky to have met Jonny Kennedy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a83a6f87c5584e5c8834bbe2c04f284f",
            "input": "Answer: despite that fact that this film was written and directed by a woman, your ex is creepier, nastier, and more irrational than any zombie that ever lurched the earth.The acting in this independent film actually is quite good, despite the less-than-wonderful script. It takes a pretty good actor to deliver an overwritten, clichéd line and make it sound vaguely believable. Young Anthony de Marco, as Jake, puts in a particularly good performance.Fortunately, the plot of this film is a lot better than the dialog. Try it, especially if you're not a monster fan. This is NOT a horror flick. Even though all the adult females are pretty monstrous, and although all the adult males act as if their brains were eaten in some earlier zombie film, \"Jake's Closet\" is suitable for mature adults.The whole, this time, is much better than the sum of its parts.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a00d14bc9f254ea4affb1a6d83ba432e",
            "input": "To \"Bend It Like Beckham\" may not mean much to us Americans who know very little about the other football (soccer), but to English sports fans, it is equivalent to \"Hit it Like Bonds\" or \"Dunk it Like Jordan.\" Any young soccer player dreams of bending a soccer ball around one player and into the net for a goal, much like star player David Beckham does, much like the young Indian girl, Jess (Parminder Nagra), does in the film Bend It Like Beckham. Jess loves to play pick up soccer games, the kind forbidden by her traditionalist mother. However, while playing one day, a passing friend named Jules (Keira Knightley) sees her play and invites her to try out for a traveling, all girls soccer team. After satisfying the coach Joe (Jonathan Rhys-Meyers), she makes the team, something she knows her mother would not approve of. The movie is not about disobeying parents, but rather a girl doing what she wants to do, even if that goes against culture, not just the parents. There is humor thrown throughout the movie, especially when Jules' mother thinks she's a lesbian. The movie does resort to a bit of a cliché moment, as the big soccer game is the same day as Jess' sister's wedding, but it does not come off a cheesy, but rather fun and light. The soccer action looks good, so sports fans will enjoy it, and a story about girls growing up in a boy's world, the world of soccer will inspire some in the audience. Bend It Like Beckham is not just about soccer, but rather a girl trying to find herself and please her parents at the same time, something that proves to be rather difficult.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6dcca7449e44877a21a8336a7cbc889",
            "input": "If, like me, you like your films to be unique, and unlike the majority of other movies, then I wholly recommend that you check out The Beast. The film is a grotesque, erotic, fantasy fairytale that centres around a mythological 'Beast' that is rumoured to wander the grounds of a French mansion and lusts after women. The film is very daring with it's subject material, and that is something to give it credit for. The theme of bestiality is a definite taboo, and for good reason, I might add; but the film conveys it; straight and to the point. Like other films that handle a taboo subject at their centre, The Beast could have gone around it, and made us use our imagination to fill in the gaps, but Borowczyk didn't do that, and he is brave in that respect, especially as making a film like this will leave him open to all kinds of criticisms, but the fact that he went ahead with it, in my view, means a big thumbs up for the guy.The film starts off with a sequence that sees a randy male horse mount a female. This opener puts an exclamation mark on the film and prepares the audience, in some ways, for the incredible, tour de force of eroticism that they are about to see. The scenes which see the beast mate with the woman are gratuitous and shocking, and are bound to offend many people (hence the reason it was banned for over 20 years), but these scenes are not merely an excuse for Borowczyk to shock the viewer; this film has a defining point. As said during the film; the only difference between man and beast is intelligence. Both man and beast have instincts, only man knows how to control them. The Beast explores this difference between man and beast through sexuality; the fantasy sequence in which the beast appears epitomises the control of human desire, and it is only when the central female character lets go of her control that she can see the beast. The film has strong themes of the age-old story of 'beauty and beast' weaved into it, and overall this is a shockingly morbid tale of lust, but not without a moral.Many criticise the scenes around the film's shocking sex sequences for being boring, but these scenes are important to the film's story. Without these scenes, we wouldn't get to know the characters or the story of the beast, and, most importantly; the story of 'beauty and the beast' would not be able to have it's horrifying conclusion dealt to the audience, and as that is one of the key elements of the film; it would be a real shame. Besides that, Borowczyk keeps his audience entertained through these scenes, not with shocks, but with dialogue and the upper class persona of the family, along with the beautiful shots of the mansion's ground would not be seen, and therefore the stark contrast between that and the events later on in the film would not exist either.Overall, The Beast is a shocking film. It's portrayal of a taboo subject and the shocking way it is portrayed will ensure that this film is not for everyone. However, if you can get over the film's shock, and embrace The Beast; what awaits is a skilful and beautiful piece of art that should not be missed by anyone that is willing to give this film a chance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e1e84d48ac6f40a795f3f9bb0e869f90",
            "input": "If you really have to watch this movie because your girlfriend is in a romantic mood, let it be boy. But prepare yourself by bringing your hp if it comes with a radio.After having watched such a good movie as Arisan (2003), it is terrible to see what they come up with again in Indonesia. It seems that the only idea is to make money, but no one seems seriously to work on the image of Indonesia in the world of entertainment. That it is a 'global' world doesn't seem to come up in the minds of those who make movies in Indonesia. And since the Indonesian public swallows everything that is presented to them as 'Made in Indonesia' with a flavor of the west, they get away with it.OK, the story is nice to begin with. And it could have developed into a nice flick. But did the director never think about the fact that a musical needs first of all live music OR at least good playback, and secondly good choreography? In this movie, the playback is SO BAD that it makes you wanna cry right there in the cinema. Every single word you hear is followed seconds LATER by the actor or whoever sing playback, and it is extremely annoying while watching the movie.The choreography is as if they planned to make a movie about morning gymnastics, but in the end thought it would be nice to turn it into a musical... They only forgot to change the choreography. It is hardly dancing you see, they jump here and there, throw their legs up in the air, and that is about it.Well, at least there's a happy ending.... But if you can convince your girlfriend that a nice candlelight dinner is much more romantic, DO SO!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ccc7335803d4865b351120a66dc0883",
            "input": "Some movies are repellent but still fascinating (Pulp Fiction); others are simply boring. This movie has an almost unique feature of being both utterly repellent and totally boring. By the end I didn't care about any of the characters, I just wanted all of them dead so I could get out of the theatre.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03a157bcda304d759194e3695bc25702",
            "input": "The night of the prom: the most important night to any shallow girl composed almost entirely of plastic. And so the characters kept reminding us every ten minutes when some head-peckingly miniscule event occurred in their miniscule lives.There really is no excuse for Prom Night. There is less than nothing original about it and I truly would have given it zero or less stars were it possible on IMDb. The only part of my viewing that I enjoyed was when a group of teenagers sitting in front of us decided to play a game of 'ghosts'. It was a lot more exciting than whatever was going on on the screen in front of them.The plot was basically some guy going on a rampage. And the thing was, it wasn't even a slightly exciting rampage. Maybe if the guy had been remotely frightening rather than a tame Robbie Williams lookalike with a baseball cap, I might have sat there feeling slightly anxious. The fact that I cared less about the characters than I did about the colour of the cinema carpet didn't really add to the effect, either. And to make matters worse, the rest of the characters were equally one-dimensional and oblivious. The hotel staff didn't seem to notice or care that one of their maids had vanished and are further proof that a murderer is unrecognisable after he has had a shave. I was incredibly surprised that the bitchy, stereotypical girl in the blue dress was the only person to notice who he was. She realises this and then proceeds to fall down the stairs, entangle herself in a plastic sheet and then knock over a pile of paint buckets. Nice one.The worst thing was, I hold the belief that that the director was trying his absolute hardest. He really pushed all boundaries by not showing any killing actually happening. Shocking! And the music, don't even get me started. It was almost as appropriate as stripping at a funeral.I really wish that Prom Night was a joke. It was terrible and stupidly predictable. No one, in their right mind or otherwise, has any reason to see this film. Mainstream cinema seems to be going downhill and films like this worsen the situation. If you get the urge to see this absolutely awful film, hear my plea. Don't do it. There are better things to spend six pounds on. Like a sheet to play ghosts with.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe3e86002bc24a9ab1481e10d0e7303a",
            "input": "This film is overblown, predictable, pretentious, and hollow to its core. The settings are faithful to the era but self-conscious in their magnification by prolonged exposure. The lingering over artifacts stops the action and cloys almost as much as the empty dialogue. Tom Hanks seems to be sleepwalking much as Bruce Willis did in Hart's War. Tom, you can't give depth to a character simply by making your face blank! The content did not warrant the histrionic acting by Paul Newman. This is a dud wrapped in an atomic bomb casing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7243407fe9f84a89915a88a1270e0f4b",
            "input": "With the MASSIVE advertising this is getting on Nickelodeon and Nick Jr. and that ilk, my son was bugging us to see it. Between DVD and the theaters, I've seen pretty much everything by now from the outstanding (Incredibles, Shrek) to the really bad (Wall-E, Brother Bear). But this was easily the worst movie I've ever seen, kids or no kids. It was a \"when it this stupid thing going to end?\" kind of experience? OK, it's aimed at toddlers (or it better be - it's insulting to the intelligence of anyone over 3), but I've never seen something so predictable, repetitive, and slow-moving. Then once you're finally fed up but relieved that the movie is over, there is this bizarre thing at the end that you think is the setup for a joke, but there isn't one - it's serious, though it's hard to tell what they're trying to accomplish. The 3-D effects... yeah, if you've never seen a Viewmaster they're a big deal, otherwise no (if you look at the screen without glasses, it appears to be the same process). Even my son was bored by the end. Both my wife and I looked at each other and said \"wow\" at the end. Bad in every respect.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa470f9e2d804b5781dd30d5dee9804a",
            "input": "This film's trailer interested me enough to warrant renting the DVD. However, the resulting movie is absolutely dire! Admittedly, this is not the worst film ever made, or the worst film this year, but it came damn close!The main issue is the film not knowing what it wants to be: comedy, adult drama, thriller, teen-porn? The story is interesting, as it deals with the pitfalls of mail-order brides, but the film is a mess. What starts out as a mildly interesting \"comedy\" (a word I use in the loosest possible terms), then goes totally in reverse, and degenerates into a very dark and distasteful misogynistic thriller. Nicole Kidman should know better, and Ben Chaplin is wasted! As are Matthieu Kassovitz and Vincent Cassel, whom I can only presume did this for the money.This is a bad film in pretty much every single aspect. It's not funny, it's almost so sexist that you could almost forgive Benny Hill for everything he did, and the dramatic elements are just downright nasty. A film to be avoided, unless you absolutely have to see Kidman or Chaplin in every one of their films!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-175d5d38507e4ac1b27e93e750bebf0d",
            "input": "Beyond the excellent direction,production,acting & the predictable drama lies an essential message in the script:\"Listening leads all the way\" In order for the voice to flourish,listen.To harmonise with other in voice,listen. In order to approach yourself,listen.To discover the needs of any situation or others,listen. It appears that the script writers are conveying a \"life's secret\".Listening leads to an awareness of one's Self. It awakens the other senses, especially vision & expands the horizon.One's soul too can be discovered. The artistry of this movie \"As it is in Heaven\" magnificently displayed the unfolding of life,not only its joy & sadness,but ultimately the hope of life. All this by the leading character's first instruction to the choir;\"Just Listen,it leads all the way\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40e96059a11a42dbb528c07db882991e",
            "input": "This movie is one for the ages. First, I have to say after seeing this once, it became one of my all-time favorite movies. Why? Simple; Ben Coccio (writer, director)has put together a true piece of art. Where 99.9% of movies these days are purely entertainment, director Ben Coccio gives us truth, gives us reality, gives us a learning tool to know why this happened. The mainstream media spins and spins but Ben Coccio looks school shootings right in the face, able to go where no other form of media has EVER gone before, into the minds and hearts of two young men planning to kill their classmates. While it surely is graphic and horrifying, how couldn't it be? The gloves come off, the lies and the sugar coating of our media masters is brushed aside and we are taken to a place where we can find truth in what happened. Sometimes it isn't just a screw loose like everyone likes to think, no, sometimes hatred and isolation are deeper, are more human, we are shown that these boys are us and we them. Society left them behind and the consequences are horrifying and real.Respect and love your fellow man. A lesson we all should learn, thank you so much for making this film Mr. Coccio, I hope with great anticipation that you will continue your film-making career.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b8da2bb4fd846a5ae4725bcce88e50f",
            "input": "When I noticed that \"Hamish Macbeth\" was being broadcast in the United States, I was thrilled. I then had the misfortune to watch the darn thing. I adore M. C. Beaton's books about the wonderful Scottish Constable. The characters in the book are entertaining and very well-written. The powers that be who are responsible for this mish-mash apparently have never have read one of Beaton's books. Only the name \"Hamish Macbeth\" has anything to do with the series. Besides the lack of familiar characters, I find the whole show offensively loud. It seems that the actors feel they must shout their lines and scream at each other. If you love M. C. Beaton's adorable Hamish Macbeth don't waste your time on this rubbish.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83c18a7e4df447dc9a1e38d9988970c0",
            "input": "-A very pretty red headed woman waiting for her plane meets a charming young man that she connects with. As the two get on their flight and sit next to each other the young man Jack becomes deadly as he threatens Lisa to either change the room that a politician and his wife will be staying in, or else have her father die. See now that's what you happens when you fly coach, stuff like that never happens in first class.-Other than having a conflict that takes place on a flight, the other thing that this movie shares with \"Flightplan\" is the sheer unbelievability *if that's a word* of the story. The point of the whole is to get the main character to change a politician's room so he can be assassinated which is a pretty plausible plan, but won't it have being easier for Jack to just find someone that was computer savvy and have them hack into the hotel's system? Teenagers today can damn near do anything with computers, so I'm pretty sure it would have been easier for him to simply get someone to change it using a computer instead of going through the trouble of spying on Lisa and getting her into the predicament that she lands on in the movie.-Plus one thing that struck me as odd was how no one on the plan heard a single thing they were talking about. This is a very small plane were talking about here and since their voices were raised occasionally it seems to me like the other passengers should have heard something. But I'm 100% sure that I'm reading way too much into it. The movie is meant to be as realistic as an episode of \"24\" so one can't be perplexed by such complexities. For all my complaints though, this is still a very fun movie that gets the job done. It's not exactly the type that requires to shut of your brain, but at the same time it doesn't require great intelligence to fully enjoy.-I'd love to sit here in my comfy chair and rave about the brilliant acting in the movie but really I can't. I love Rachel McAdams, I love Cillian Murphy, and I like Brian Cox, but they don't really stretch their acting muscles here. It's not really much of a problem since this isn't the movie that studios hope to win multiple awards and the acting isn't the least bit horrible, just not great. Wes Craven isn't exactly the first that comes to mind when you think of a movie like this, but he does a very nice job considering the time they had to film the movie and the lack of depth to the script. It was definitely a huge improvement over the disappointing \"Cursed\" and as much as I liked him doing something different with this movie, I still would love for him to go back to doing what he did in the past which is great horror movies that is talked about decades after it's release.-One nice thing about the movie which I really appreciated was just how short the movie was. It is great to sit and watch a nice three hour or so movie once in a while, but nowadays it's like every movie that comes out feels too long, where as this movie just felt like the right length. Not too long, and too short. They don't waste time by trying to develop the characters too much because they know this isn't the movie for that and by doing so they made a very nice short movie. Being a huge film music geek, I have to say that the best part of the movie is the ultra cool score by Marco Beltrami. It's really nice to see Beltrami go from writing the predictable stuff to the great music he's doing now. I really the cool techno/orchestral stuff he does for the main titles. Too bad that I can't find the soundtrack anywhere, would have really loved to listen to the titles anytime I wanted instead of having to pop in the DVD when I want to hear it.-Overall It's nice for what it is and whiles it's far from great cinema, should still provide for some small entertaining hour and a half",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da40a08fe545460790ab8801eb4d91cc",
            "input": "Positively awful George Sanders vehicle where he goes from being a thief to police czar.While Sanders was an excellent character actor, he was certainly no leading man and this film proves it.It is absolutely beyond stupidity. Gene Lockhart did provide some comic relief until a moment of anger led him to fire his gun with tragedy resulting.Sadly, George Sanders and co-star Carol Landis committed suicide in real life. After making a film as deplorable as this, it is not shocking.The usual appealing Signe Hasso is really nothing here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2048773909f1450690c0ed679c758dc0",
            "input": "I got this as a turkey movie and was I not disappointed.Acting - overall even though many have been in other movies it is clear that they had to work hard to act this bad so constantly over this entire movie with out accidentally letting slip some degree of acting.Plot - being generous I could say that the scriptwriter did originally start with a plot but but did his best to ignore it. the plot broke down faster then a Chinese knock off computer Scrip - now that was an abomination of nature. it failed to flow with any rhyme or reason. the majority of the lines by the characters were at best pathetic to imbecilic. the script worked hard to make sure that no character managed to get to be considered memorable. I have watched other movies where the extras were more interesting and memorable.Special effects - ROTFLMAO!!!!! They were short bus special Directing - until you can come up with your own directing ability copy the style of your favorite directer otherwise you will only make failures like this.It is good to know that your friends/family have been giving you 10 stars for this movie",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-099c38d0657244b4b8144cc91a6ac537",
            "input": "Ghost of Dragstrip Hollow is a typical 1950's teens in turmoil movie. It is not a horror or science fiction movie. Plot concerns a group of teens who are about to get kicked out of their \"hot rod\" club because they cannot meet the rent. Once kicked out, they decide to try an old Haunted House. The only saving grace for the film is that the \"ghost\" (Paul Blaisdell in the She Creature suit) turns out to be an out of work movie monster played by Blaisdell.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad6d30f2c98d464bba9fe0b56ede439f",
            "input": "Hot Millions is a great movie in every way. A fun, offbeat story with wonderful performances by four of the best professionals ever to work in the business. Peter Ustinov is brilliant, as usual, and Maggie Smith---definitely one of the greatest actresses of all time--- is a total delight. Karl Malden and Bob Newhart round out the cast and are also perfect. If you want a movie that has perfect casting, this is it. What is so impressive is the way these people work off each other in such a natural and effortless way, creating lots of laughs and fun moments throughout. Peter Ustinov was a genius with a wonderful sense of humor and this is one of his most memorable performances. The direction, photography, and editing are also first-rate, and it's a great time capsule of London in the '60s. It's definitely on my all-time favorites list.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-204f31241b0e419d94aff24a8a5b17c2",
            "input": "This is a very intriguing short movie by David Lynch, and saying the name David Lynch is probably enough for a lot of people. This is your typical Lynch short. A blonde and a brunette are in a dark room. The blonde has been crying, the brunette is talking in a threatening way to the blonde, and that's about it.With a lot of silent moments, but with the haunting music from Angelo Badalamenti, there is a strange form of suspense. This short feels a little like 'Mulholland Dr.', a movie I loved, and therefore I liked this one as well. It is probably especially for Lynch fans but there is a chance you like this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c276326217964167a793db0da8692021",
            "input": "I pulled down a VHS box from my vast collection - many unseen - and picked out a movie, based on the box art, I thought would be fun, and yes, bad. Prison had that 80s cheesy look all over that box. I sat down and watched, and lo! and behold!, found that sometimes we do indeed sit down to a movie with preconceived expectations in mind. Fortunately, I reversed mine quickly and soon realized I was sitting down not just to an okay film but a rather good movie in total. Prison tells the story of an old, dilapidated prison being reopened to save on budgetary concerns. It looks creepy as all empty and filled with prisoners. The prison used as a set is incredibly atmospheric and easily the most important character in the film. The story using the prison as its central setting tells in a prologue of a man being killed via the electric chair. We see Lane Smith as a guard - tearing away a Crucifix before sending the man to his Maker. We then go to present day, first with a government board at a meeting deciding to open the prison and send a beautiful doctor in to make sure that conditions are acceptable as she campaigned vigorously against re-opening the old prison. Then we see the new warden, Lane Smith, haunted by a nightmare in bed - and given the new job of opening a prison he has not been to in years. Well, the rest follows suit: prisoners and guards arrive with plenty of stereotypes abounding. We are given some character depth and several of the prisoners are interesting characters. The acting is better than one might expect with Lane Smith doing as always a workmanlike job. Viggo Mortenson as a very different prisoner being solid. Tom Everett, Tiny Lister, and Ivan Kane really exploring the boundaries of their stereotypical characters. Chelsea Field is okay as the female lead. The best performance is by Lincoln Kilpatrick, an underrated character actor, as Cresus - a prisoner who had been in that very same prison years ago when the \"man\" had been executed\" with some kind of terrible secret. Prison is not the next best thing to sliced bread or anything like that, but it is definitely worth a look and definitely better than most would expect from it. I was pleasantly surprised at the way director Renny Harlin created a story so visually atmospheric. The film has a tense, taut pace and Harlin knows how to build his scenes. There are a few excessively shot gore scenes - the one with the barbed wire was a bit much as was the one with all the pipes. But these scenes are visually creative and interesting. The acting is uniformly decent. The script actually much more cohesive than one usually gets from films like these. That may in part be credited to Irwin Yablans who wrote the story. You may remember he came up with the idea of making Halloween scary as a holiday. Here he makes incarceration a hell of a lot more scarier than it already is. Give Prison a break(get it).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ce8c98b48354911bf3599fad1b17e9e",
            "input": "I think that this is possibly the funniest movie I have ever seen. Robert Harling's script is near perfect, just check out the \"quotes\" section; on second thought, just rent the DVD, since it's the delivery that really makes the lines sing.Sally Field gives a comic, over-the-top performance like you've never seen from her anywhere else, and Kevin Kline is effortlessly hilarious. Robert Downey, Jr. is typically brilliant, and in a very small role, Kathy Najimy is a riot as the beleaguered costumer. I was never much of a fan of Elisabeth Shue, but she's great here as the one *real* person surrounded by a bevy of cartoon characters on the set of \"The Sun Also Sets\" -- that rumbling you feel beneath you is Hemingway rolling over in his grave. Either that, or he's laughing really hard.Five stars. Funny, funny, funny.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a0ca70085f046b5b1d422d902aac3bf",
            "input": "This is the biggest piece of lamo I've ever watched. It is excruciatingly boring I would have rather sat through a seminar on creationism than have watched this if i had known it was going to be as boring as it was. Not even the 40 seconds of the hot chick in the bikini with the big ta tas redeems this of anything lower than a 1.The reviews of this movie claiming that this movie is \"unintentionally funny\" are absurd and just plain WRONG. Not one thing is funny about this movie. they spend the first 50 or so minutes walking through the woods talking about stuff you wouldn't understand nor care about and it is just as lame when the people start dying because you don't even know who the people are because they are so UNINTERESTING. Honestly though, I didn't watch it to the ending, but that should say something about how horrible it is. WORST MOVIE EVER.Immediately after ejecting this filth from my DVD player I started scraping it against the cement in front of my house, not wanting other blockbuster customers to have to fall upon the same mistake i had made as to rent this movie. Then Zach peed his pants. Thankyou for your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e910b1f9e54442f58ffb8c1949046836",
            "input": "Notorious for more than a quarter century (and often banned), it's obscurity was its greatest asset it seems. Hey, it's often better to be talked about, rather than actually seen when you can't back the \"legend\" up with substance.The film has played in Los Angeles a couple of times recently, and is available on home video, so that veil is slowly being lifted. While there is still plenty to offend the masses, it is more likely to bore them, than arouse much real passion. Except for a gratuitous and protracted XXX sex scene between a pair of horses (\"Nature Documentary\" anyone?), there follows nearly an hour of a dull arranged marriage melodrama. Once the sex and nudity begins, it is a nonstop sequence involving masturbation, a looooooooong flashback to an alleged 'beauty and the beast' encounter, and a naked woman running around the mansion (nobody, even her supposedly protective Aunt, seems to even think of putting some clothes on her!). On video, I guess you can fast-forward thru the banality, but it's not really worth the effort. The nudity doesn't go beyond what is seen in something much more substantive such as Bertolucci's THE DREAMERS.Try as one might to find some 'moral' or 'symbolism' in the carnality, I doubt it's worthy of anyone's effort. Unfortunately, for LA BETE, now that you can more easily see the film, the notoriety of something once 'forbidden' has been lifted. And this beast has been tamed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ab33d2b9b9b44bc84e3f94d3c624673",
            "input": "Here's an indie film I really wanted to like, but ultimately could not. The lack of script (boldly proclaimed in the main titles) really shows through and kills the picture. The story is a nonsensical mess that isn't worth trying to figure out. I quickly became bored within 10 minutes, then suffered through the remainder of the first 40 minutes--hoping for the best--before hitting the chapter stops to (mercifully) get to the end... even that wasn't worth the extra effort. OZARK SAVAGE clearly tries too hard to be clever, lifting its best sequences from EVIL DEAD 2 and THE MATRIX. As a result, there's very little in OZARK SAVAGE that hasn't been done before, and better. This film would have been much more fun as a 10-20 minute short, but as a feature, it just feels padded and forced. Of course, there's no money in shorts, so I completely understand the financial reasons that I assume motivated it being stretched out to 75+ minutes. Director Matt Steinauer shows great promise, and I wish him luck.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-376e614b335c45328f98bc297c751857",
            "input": "amazing movie I saw this movie for the first time on a flight and could not believe that I had not even heard of it before getting on that plane. while it may seem, at first to be a \"chick flick\", it is a film that everyone should see and will enjoy. Men, watch this movie with someone you love. You will enjoy it as much as she does and it will score you big points.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05b592177c264dd5ae61c23ef5c7990d",
            "input": "This movie is a horrible distortion of lies and exaggerations that were put together by the most shameless lunatics to ever work on a TV movie. The story is wrong and a complete lie. There is nothing in this movie that accurately portrays Senator McCarthy. It's just a horrible scam and it amazes me that anyone associated with this production ever got another job in the industry. The marxist-leninists who wrote this trash did so in order to attack a man who has been vindicated by history and their fear that anyone would dare to destroy communism. Unfortunately for these communist nut jobs, Ronald Reagan took over where McCarthy left off and they couldn't stop him, thus the end of the Soviet Union and its' cohorts.Never, ever watch this film if you're looking for truth regarding Sen. McCarthy. Read Ann Coulter's book, \"Treason\" for a better look at the truth about Sen. McCarthy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b023e96f9d340148d0dfc60e7e3fade",
            "input": "THE JIST: See something else.This film was highly rated by Gene Siskel, but after watching it I can't figure out why. The film is definitely original and different. It even has interesting dialogue at times, some cool moments, and a creepy \"noir\" feel. But it just isn't entertaining. It also doesn't make a whole lot of sense, in plot but especially in character motivations. I don't know anyone that behaves like these characters do.This is a difficult movie to take on -- I suggest you don't accept the challenge.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22964e9dcd404f51b5ca28ce0fd2b698",
            "input": "In an attempt to bring back the teen slasher genre that was taken away by spoofs like Scary Movie and Shriek if you know what I did last Friday the 13th, Valentine fails. Why did people like Halloween? Because it was original, new and went beyond anything that's ever been done. Why did they like Scream? Because at least it made sense. Valentine is just a stupid slasher-flick that has hardly any gore what so-ever. The plot is so similar to Halloween and Urban Legend it's not funny. And the moment the killer comes on screen, you know who it is, it's just sssssssssssooooooooooooo predictable. The teen slasher genre is DEAD Get over it!0 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b46af62947f144148a16cd985298e18f",
            "input": "You could stage a version of Charles Dickens' \"A Christmas Carol\" with sock puppets and I'll probably watch it. Ever since I was a child, this has been one of my favorite stories. Maybe it's the idea that there is good in everyone, and that therefore no one is beyond redemption, that appeals to me, but for whatever reason I never miss an opportunity to watch one of the many screen adaptations of this timeless classic when they're on TV as they inevitably are this time of year.What makes this version really stand out is the somber gravitas that the cast bring to their respective roles. Lines we've heard dozens of times in the past take on a whole new intensity, and each character becomes more real and believable in the hands of this wonderful ensemble.George C. Scott was nominated for an Emmy in 1985 for this role. It is to his everlasting credit that rather than sleepwalking through this oft-portrayed role of Scrooge, he instead gave it a fresh interpretation that was, in my opinion, one of his finest performances ever. He wisely did not attempt a British accent, instead delivering his lines in that famous gravelly voice. His Scrooge is not merely a cranky old man (as he is so often portrayed), but a man who harbors a profound anger against the world. As he is visited in turn by each of the Three Spirits, we understand how this anger took root, grew, and ultimately strangled his soul. As he is forced to review his life, we see him alternately softening, and then relapsing again into unrepentant obstinacy. And in the great dramatic scene when he, kneeling and weeping at his own grave, begs for mercy as he attempts to convince the third spirit of his repentance and desire to alter his life, we see a man who has been utterly broken and brought to his knees literally and figuratively. Scott has made Scrooge utterly believable and painfully human.Impressive as Scott's performance is, the ensemble of supporting actors contributes significantly the this version's dark beauty. Fred Holywell, Scrooge's nephew, is an excellent example of this. Often portrayed as an affable buffoon, here he is played by Roger Rees with an emotional intensity missing from earlier portrayals. When he implores Scrooge, \"I ask nothing of you. I want nothing from you. Why can't we be friends?\", we see in his face not only his frustration, but his pain at Scrooge's self-imposed separation from his only living relative. It is a moving performance, and one of the movie's most dramatic scenes.Even more magnificent is the performance given by the wonderful English actor Frank Finlay as Scrooge's late partner, Jacob Marley. In most versions of this tale, the scene with Marley tends to be a bit of a low point in the film, simply because it's difficult to portray a dead man convincingly, and the results are usually just plain silly (ooooh, look, it's a scary ghost.......not!) In this version, it is perhaps the most riveting scene in the whole movie. Marley's entrance, as the locks on Scrooge's door fly open of their own accord and the sound of chains rattling echo throughout the house, is wonderfully creepy. But Finlay's Marley is no ethereal spirit. He is a tortured soul, inspiring both horror and pity. Marley may be a ghost, but his rage and regret over a life wasted on the pursuit of wealth, and his despair at his realization that his sins are now beyond redress, are still very human. As portrayed by Finlay, we have no problem believing that even the flinty Scrooge would be shaken by this nightmarish apparition. Finlay really steals the scene here, something not easy to do when you're opposite George C. Scott.And it just goes on and on, one remarkable performance after another, making it seem like you're experiencing this story for the first time. Edward Woodward (remember him from the Equalizer?) is by turns both jovial and menacing as the Ghost of Christmas Present. When he delivers the famous line, \"it may well be that in the sight of Heaven you are more worthless and less fit to live than MILLIONS like this poor man's child\" he is no longer a jolly Santa Claus surrogate, but an avenging angel who gives Scrooge a much needed verbal spanking.Susannah York is a wonderfully tart tongued Mrs. Cratchit, and David Warner brings marvelous depth to the long suffering Bob Cratchit, a man who goes through life bearing the triple crosses of poverty, a sick child, and an insufferable boss. His face alternately shows his cheerful courage, and also, at times, his weariness, in the face of intolerable circumstances. Later, in the scene in which Scrooge is shown by the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come the Cratchit family after the death of Tiny Tim, Warner's performance, while hardly uttering a word, will move you to tears.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12e939f0ceb54c7a95ef98223bf50b68",
            "input": "Loopy, but shrewd and formidable mob boss Vic (an excellent performance by Richard Dreyfuss) gets released from a mental hospital. Several of Vic's fellow criminal cohorts who include volatile henchman \"Brass Balls\" Ben London (a gloriously manic and over-the-top hammy portrayal by Gabriel Byrne), the smarmy Jake Parker (a perfectly smug Kyle MacLachlan), and vicious rival \"Wacky\" Jacky Jackson (a neat turn by Burt Reynolds) all try to bump Vic off. Meanwhile, laid-back and self-assured hit-man Mickey Holliday (nicely played with low-key confidence by Jeff Goldblum) finds himself caught in the middle of all this deadly lunacy. Writer/director Larry Bishop brings a supremely hip, quirky, and original idiosyncratic sensibility to this deliciously dark and deadpan pitch-black comedy about betrayal, loyalty, and ruthless ambition run dangerously amok. The bang-up cast have a field day with the colorfully grotesque rogues' gallery of blithely amoral and treacherous hoodlums: Ellen Barkin as tough, sultry moll Rita Everly, Henry Silva as Vic's reliable right-hand man Sleepy Joe Carisle, Gregory Hines as philosophical smoothie Jules Flamingo, Diane Lane as Vic's sweet, perky mistress Grace, Billy Drago as the slimy Wells, and Christopher Jones as brutish rub-out artist Nicholas Falco. Bishop makes the most of his juicy secondary role as lethal and laconic ace assassin Nick. Popping up in nifty bits are Billy Idol as a blustery thug, Michael J. Pollard as the ill-fated Red, Joey Bishop as mortician Mr. Gottlieb, Rob Reiner as a jolly chauffeur, and Richard Pryor as Jimmy the Gravedigger. Byrne's delightfully insane duet with singer Paul Anka on \"My Way\" rates as a definite sidesplitting highlight. A tense and amusing climactic Mexican stand-off likewise tickles the funny bone something hysterical. Frank Byers' slick cinematography, the outrageously nutty dialogue, Earl Rose's jazzy cocktail lounge score, and a choice soundtrack of vintage swinging golden oldies all further enhance the engagingly peculiar charm of this immensely entertaining one-of-a-kind curio.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0ca0558311042c0bab18812b0e9c9c9",
            "input": "My grandmother took me and my sister out to see this movie when it came out in theaters back in 1998, and so we happily bought the tickets, the popcorn and soda, and walked right in to the theater and sat down to watch the movie. When it was over, the audience didn't applauded strongly, I remember that I heard a few people say that they didn't like it at all, I didn't like it, I thought that it was rather stupid, and not worth seeing. Eddie Murphy was hysterical in this, but apart from him, the whole movie was bad, I rarely laughed at the parts in this, I also remembered that the other people in the theater almost hardly even laughed. And what I really thought was bad was making the animals talk, because talking animals only exist in cartoons, in live action movies, they are totally a mutt! I said that apart from Eddie Murphy's hysterical twist he brings in, this movie is not worth watching, it is rather stupid.I have seen Eddie Murphy in several of movies and I thought that he was funny in those, I have just said that he was the only funny part of this movie, I also have not seen Eddie Murphy in the really \"great\" movie, The Adventures of Pluto Nash. This movie is not a movie that I would really recommend that you see, because apart from Eddie Murphy, you probably are not going to like this, especially because of a lot the the talking animals in it! I'll give this movie a rating of 3 stars out of a possible 10 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63625cec14c246bc96b2ac7de4b82737",
            "input": "Johnathan Frakes is a good actor and, when he's not directing a family film, a fine director. But, he really shouldn't have directed this movie, and the screenplay should've been rejected. The director and writers must understand what the original TV show was really about, as well as who the characters were and how they worked. The original series had many episodes with razor-sharp writing using good dialogue and with situations that American producers would never consider using in children's programming, much less a movie, which made the original series so well received by adults. I mean, the Tracys were college graduates and some of them did even drank alcohol and smoked tobacco! And, there were characters who did get killed, although most were bad guys. If they had written it the way that it was originally done, which isn't dumbing things down with poor dialogue, kindergarten humor, and a weak plot, this Universal/Studio Canal joint venture wouldn't have such bad reviews. This motion picture is almost pure blasphemy. If you've seen the original Supermarionation series, then you'll know what I'm talking about! The first thing that was out of place and annoying were the constant references to Ford Motor Company, even going so far that Lady Penelope was riding around in a disfigured Ford Thunderbird made up to look like FAB-1 instead of using what would've been more appropriate considering Ms. Penelope's station (not to mention being more faithful to the original), a ROLLS-ROYCE FAB-1. She's supposed to be a distinguished member of British society, hence the preference for England's finest make of motorcars in the original series. One other reviewer here indicated that Penelope wouldn't be caught dead in a Ford. He's pretty much right in the context that the idea of her riding in a Ford doesn't work. At least they could have had Penelope ride in a Jaguar made up like FAB 1 since Jaguar is a British car make that is owned by Ford, but NO! They had to use a straight FORD! But the Ford product placement doesn't end there. EVERY single car you may see is a Ford! Even the news flash that is shown on the TV sets in the movie were sponsored by Ford! Ford, Ford, FORD! The predominance of Ford vehicles makes this movie an obvious marketing vehicle for Ford. The original series had a design that was futuristic for the 1960s and still remains ahead of its time even today. But, the futuristic design in the original series worked because there was an effort to make the design look practical and functional. This kind of treatment didn't exist in the movie, where everything is stylized to excess, defeating the sense of functionality and practicality. A lot of things that were done in the design of the movie were done strictly for style, many times with no sense of function to give that style a sense of reason.The original series relied on good acting performances of the voice talent to overcome the limited expressions in the puppets, bringing them to life in the episodes. The brilliant and lively music score by Barry Gray helped even further to connect the audience with the story, the characters, and how everything came together to help achieve the super objective (a little bit of Stanislavski talk). The movie, on the other hand, had some overly grating performances. Anthony Edwards overplayed Brains to a fault, Bill Paxton as Jeff Tracy just didn't work despite decent acting (one of few), there were better choices for the Hood than Ben Kingsley, and many others that I don't care to mention (it would take too long). Quite simply, the puppets were more believable! Second was the overly generic and underwhelming music score by Hans Zimmer, sounding more like a mix between \"Days of Thunder\" and \"Apollo 13.\" And, of course, the Hood. The Hood in the original series had an ability to communicate with Kyrano through a statue of Kyrano as an outlet for ESP contact. But, that was where his extraordinary capability ended. He's a master of disguise and deception, which allows him to sneak around undetected (for the most part, anyways) to gather information of the Thunderbirds vehicles for his own means. He also uses weapons for his own defense, including pistols, and generally collects information using a film camera, although he tried to steal Thudnerbirds 1 and 2 in the 1960s United Artists release of \"Thunderbird 6\" (which was the last Thunderbirds show filmed in Supermarionation and was the second Thunderbirds theatrical release). But, while he is a nemesis of International Rescue, the Hood isn't the villain in every Thunderbirds episode and he tends to avoid direct confrontation with International Rescue. In the movie, he's obviously the main villain, but he and his cohorts seem to act more like morons, along with the Hood having extended mind control ability, including the ability to move objects and move himself into flight for brief periods of time. This totally deviates from the Hood as a character in the original series with one that may leave kids laughing and people familiar with the series scratching their heads in confusion or leaving the theater in disgust.There are more criticisms, but the 1000 word limit for IMDb reviews will not allow me to list all of them. So, I will close with the point being made that I didn't enjoy this movie. As a matter of fact, I think it sucks! Having seen the original series and Supermarionation movies (Thunderbirds Are Go, Thunderbird 6), I was hoping for something a lot better than this.The original Supermarionation was a lot more sophisticated and elegant than this live action farce. (And that's saying it nicely.) - Kip Wells",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14bc983e409a43e6851016f16ce7f98c",
            "input": "This straight-to-video duffer is another nail in the coffin of Rick Moranis's career. As is the Disney tradition, quality is sacrificed in the name of a quick cash-in; this is a lazy retread with Moranis accidentally shrinking himself and a few relatives so they can repeat all the best scenes from the original movie. Instantly dated visual effects and crummy dialogue abound in this cheesy lamer, which did nothing but make me pine for the days of 'The Incredible Shrinking Man', when this kind of thing was done properly. Shockingly, this is directed by top cinematographer Dean Cundey, who should either stick to the day job or pick better material next time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19aad9fbaada4ed8ab6b369cf6fa5ef1",
            "input": "This film is amazing and I would recommend to child and adult alike. The animation is beautiful, the characters are rich and interesting, and the story is captivating; far better than anything the American studios were producing at the time. However, there is a couple of caveats to this statement. It's a shame that Disney bought the Studio Ghibli back-catalogue and then proceeded to butcher it. My main point being, Disney re-dubbed the film, despite the original English version being very impressive. The new cast with Van Der Beek et al ruined it and took away much of the attractiveness of the characters e.g. Pazu and Sheeta went from adventurous companions to whiny teenagers. The Original music score is also far better than the Disney remix. It begs the question why did Disney make such changes? It seems to me is that by having Van Der Beek et al being cast then Disney can draw in more money, which is fair enough, but in the process they tainted they film. It is still a beautiful film and I would still recommend it to anyone. My main beef is that Disney ruined a film from childhood which I loved and still love. I am lucky enough to have an original Japanese import with the original English dub which I am now going to guard with my life!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ca24f1ca78b4f25adea5288bd27bf88",
            "input": "This is comedy as it once was and comparing this with the two remakes, THE MONEY PIT and ARE WE DONE YET?, only points out all the more how the 40's movie makers had a flair for comedy which has since, regretfully, been lost.I was 15 when I first saw this and even at that tender age, there was much I could laugh at. Now of course being familiar with adult frustrations, I see a whole lot that I missed as a youth.The three main actors...Cary Grant, Myrna Loy, and Melvyn Douglas...interacted perfectly, but the core of the movie lies in the frustrations encountered in achieving a dream. It's never as easy and free of unseen complications as one envisions.All in all, this is a classic comedy which still stands above the attempts to remake it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc44c3584baf4f2a8d9733b551b766ec",
            "input": "Now this is what I'd call a good horror. With occult/supernatural undertones, this nice low-budget French movie caught my attention from the very first scene. This proves you don't need wild FX or lots of gore to make an effective horror movie.The plot revolves around 4 cellmates in a prison, and each of these characters (and their motives) become gradually more interesting, as the movie builds up tension to the finale. Most of the action we see through the eyes of Carrere, who has just entered prison and has to get used to living with these 3 other inmates.I won't say much because this movie really deserves to be more widely seen. There a few flaws though: the FX are not that good, but they're used effectively; the plot leaves some mysteries open; and things get very confusing towards the end, but Malefique redeems itself by the time it's over.I thought his was a very good movie, 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9af0b851d3747fa919e5acc320733cd",
            "input": "This film deserves a 10 for its brilliant portrayal of the world as experienced in the mind of a playboy. While I found that world morally repulsive, the film did best what storytelling should do, and that is take us through an experience that we would otherwise never undergo. Tim Meadows so convincingly portrays Leon Phelps, and the story so drew me into the reckless world of Leon, that I momentarily forgot that I was watching a parody of the playboy world and felt compelled to rebel against it. Herein lies the film's undoing because its great and bold achievement in storytelling comes at the price of its own success. Understanding that the vast majority of moviegoers will respond only to the story of this film that lies on the surface, and reject that story, I hesitate to be misunderstood by them and admit that I loved it. I loved it not only for its fascinating insights into the deluded mind of the playboy, not only for its amusing portrayal of the idiocy of the human sex drive, but also for its courage to fearlessly explore what is in the shadows of heterosexuality. Besides, it's just funny.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f504e06be8fc45d98368bfd21ccc230b",
            "input": "Not that \"a film by Ulli Lommel\" filled me with hope, but I must confess that ZODIAC KILLER managed to sink beneath my lowest expectations. There is a recent trend among young filmmakers of utilizing digital video for their early projects, which is all well and good for giving these kids the opportunity to create work without spending all their money on expensive film stock. But many of these young filmmakers have also wised up to the notion of filtering the finished movie so that it appears qualitatively more like celluloid. The effect is never perfect, but it helps. Unfiltered digital video really only works for the \"mockumentary\" style, because it never looks like anything other than video. Therein lies the primary trouble with ZODIAC KILLER. Watching the movie feels like watching a daytime soap opera about a murderer. It does not feel like watching a movie. And what's even more unforgivable is that the Lommel is NOT a young filmmaker. He ought to know better. He ought to know that it's virtually impossible to generate horror (or even suspense!) on video. For the love of god this guy has been directing since the sixties! He may be the only director who has failed to improve over a forty year career in the business. And lucky us, he wrote the script too! So you can expect convoluted actions that mean nothing, unjustified behavior, and at least one truly pretentious plot element that will leave you utterly unsatisfied. Please, please miss this film. You'll thank me later.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-685c3a495cd7499396b042d6f49b5099",
            "input": "Jonathan Rivers (Michael Keaton) suddenly becomes a widower when his wife dies. Soon after, he's approached by a Dr. Price, an expert in Electronic Voice Phenomena (EVP), who claims he's been receiving messages from Jonathan's departed wife Anna via sundry electronic gadgets. Is Anna trying to tell Jonathan something? Is this merely a hint of something on a larger cosmic or otherworldly scale? It's good to see Keaton in a leading role, but the story he's stuck with is convoluted and absurd at points; it's as if the movie doesn't know how to answer any of the questions it brings up, so it just distracts the viewer with new, unrelated questions.Keaton himself is pretty good, convincingly cast as the bereaving widower desperately trying to communicate with his late wife. He's matured quite a bit as an actor, leaving behind the frat-friendly waacky-hijinks roles he played 15 or so years earlier. He looks a little craggy, with a perhaps few more wrinkles than one might expect, but he's lost none of the guile and panache that he's shown during his quarter century in Hollywood.So it's not that Keaton turns in a mediocre performance, it's that the script itself is subpar. Written by Niall Johnson, the plot gets more confusing as it progresses, each tortuous path ending in another tortuous path. This is all well and good if the path leads to some sort of acceptable denouement, something that ties more or less everything together and explains... something. But not White Noise; I knew less about what had happened to Jonathan than I did before I'd first seen him.Keaton's really the only reason to watch this junk, although he gets fine support from Ian McNeice (as Dr. Price) and Deborah Kara Unger as the requisite love interest.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5f16d634ca0491285c22f8adbc9c27c",
            "input": "Come on Tina Fey you can do better then this. As soon as the movie started i knew how it would end. Sure it was funny at times. Even laugh out loud funny. But there isn't enough laughs to save this movie. I don't recommend buying this. At the most i recommend renting it but thats all. Baby Mama has some funny scenes but is predictable and fails to have the heartwarming ending it strives for.Tina Fey and Amy Poalher made a good team. Mean Girls is one of my favorite movies. Tina Fey and Amy Poalher both did great in that and they do good in this. But this isn't there best. Baby Mama had a great supporting cast. Dane Cook, Sigourney Weaver and Steve Martin add to the casts greatness.Another pregnancy movie has hit the cinema world. After the great Knocked Up and Juno, Baby Mama looks very average when compared. Knocked Up and Juno are Hilarious, Heartwarming and have endings that leave you with a smile on your face. Baby Mama's ending was unfunny and dull.Baby Mama wasn't the best comedy of the year and it doesn't try to be. I recommend it but don't expect it to be totally hilarious. Expect a average comedy that doesn't give the big emotional ending it tries to have. I give Baby Mama.....4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f295f3b95964fca94f8d834f2613ead",
            "input": "One of the silliest movies of the 1940s, an unbearable haunted house comedy with music starring Kay Kyser. Kyer, orchestra leader and radio-star (and eternal college fraternity goof-off), was sort of the precursor to Spike Jones, hamming it up for his guests and backed up willingly by his merry troupe of musicians. He's hired to play a birthday party in a gloomy mansion, the kind where poison darts imported from Africa are framed and hung on the wall. The shindig is beset with a creepy judge, a scary professor, an ominous swami, lots of giggly females, and enough bad jokes to fill three Bob Hope pictures. The songs (by Jimmy McHugh and Johnny Mercer) are nothing to brag out, and neither is over-confident Kyser, yukking it up with elbow-in-the-ribs material that turns 1940 back ten years. * from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30328d31c514418aadb2636ea28ab569",
            "input": "A movie made for contemporary audience. The masses get to see what they want to see. Action, comedy, drama and of course sensuous scenes as well. This is not exactly a movie that one would feel comfortable watching with entire family. It isn't for eyes of children. I had to fast forward quite a number of scenes.If it is just entertainment you are looking for, then this movie has it all. The songs are catchy. A lavish production, I must add.However, the message of the movie is not universal. It emphasizes on the idea of karma. That is, if you do good, you will get good. And if you do evil, you will get evil. The fruit of good deeds is good, while the fruit of evil is evil. In real life, this is not always true. It is well-known that most people do not get justice in this world. While it is true that some evil people do meet with an evil end, there are many who escape. And then, there are many people who do good, and yet in return they meet with a sorry end.If you don't care about the message, and all you want is an escape from worldly reality, this movie is an entertainer alright.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d4245e59031442fb2dfe2b2378331ce",
            "input": "It is very unfortunate when a movie such as this is made. A great deal of work and money has been put into a film that is amateur at best.The editing drags on, there are obvious mistakes that could have been corrected easily in a second take, and the soundtrack is unimaginative. So much more could have been done with this video movie. I guess they ran out of time, or videotape.Hand-held shots have a distinct amateur feel to them.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2174f492c2df4861a849673b91b45f1a",
            "input": "Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to see it through to the end. What a huge mistake. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to see it through to the end. What a huge mistake. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it dry - far more entertaining.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2855bdb85fc74519b781817ed12d8304",
            "input": "It's unlikely that anyone except those who adore silent films will appreciate any of the lyrical camera-work and busy (but scratchy) background score that accompanies this 1933 release. Although sound came into general use in 1928, there are no more than fifty words spoken to tell the story of a woman, unhappily married, who deserts her husband for a younger man after a romantic interlude in the woods.The most vividly photographed scene has the jealous husband giving a lift to the young man for a ride into town, proceeding to drive normally until he realizes the man is his wife's lover. In a frenzy of jealousy, he drives at top speed toward a railroad crossing but changes his mind at the last moment, losing his nerve. It's probably the most tension-filled scene in the otherwise decidedly slow-moving and obviously contrived story.HEDY LAMARR is given the sort of close-up treatment lavished on Marlene Dietrich by her discoverer, but her beauty had not yet been refined by the cosmeticians as they were when she was transported to Hollywood. Her performance consists mostly of looking sad and morose while mourning the loss of her marriage with only brief glimpses of a smile when she finds her true love (ARIBERT MOG), the handsome young stud who retrieves her clothes after a nude swim.The swimming scene is very brief, discreetly photographed, and not worth all the heat it apparently generated. The love-making scene, later on, is also artfully photographed with the sort of lyrical photography evident throughout most of the film--artfully so. More is left to the imagination with the use of symbolism--and this is the sort of thing that has others proclaiming the film is some kind of lyrical masterpiece.Not so. It's disappointing, primitively crude in its sound portions (including the laborious symphonic music in the background) and certainly Miss Lamarr is fortunate that Louis B. Mayer saw the film and on the basis of it, gave her a career in Hollywood. He must have seen something in her work that I didn't.It's apparent that this was conceived as a silent film with the camera doing all the work. The jarring \"workers\" scene at the conclusion goes on for too long and is a jarring intrusion where none is needed. It fails to end the film on the proper note.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0872d11debd4d71a9e3f6d54ac6620e",
            "input": "Then you must see this film, to understand the reality. Having read the book, Ms. Duke is now an advocate for those afflicted with bipolar disorder; formerly labeled manic-depression.It is hard to believe that in this day and age, people still critique others with emotional problems, or those who seek psychiatric help. Regressive and discriminatory thinking still exists, and this is unfortunate.In this film, the audience sees the pain and suffering Ms. Duke had been through, especially as a child. Many of us may remember her from the teenage \"Patty Duke Show\". She was a household name in America by age 15.You learn of her exploitation by the Ross'(well played by Howard Hesseman). As she was growing up in the 1950's, the stigma was in full-force. However, we see as she advances in her career, yet the illness becomes worse. She goes through bouts of substance abuse and promiscuity; even marries someone whom she divorces the next week; and she has several conflicts and tantrums with her children and elderly mother. All these problem occurred before she received adequate therapy, and medication.A recent survey released by NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness) recorded that a majority of US adults fail to recognize most of the classic symptoms of bipolar disorder. It also was released that one in five respondents to the poll believed that people could CONTROL their illness without medication if they wanted to. (bp Magazine, Winter 2006) If you watch this film, you will learn the true story of a talented woman who could not \"pull herself up by her bootstraps\" and \"get well\" until she was educated about her disorder, and received proper treatment. Thank you, Ms. Duke, for being an advocate against ignorance and prejudice.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48122867d00d4f9ea218e7cf23e99873",
            "input": "A convict serving time comes forward to give the Cold Case unit information about the murder of a policeman, committed years before. The murder of Sean Cooper, a good cop, was never solved. Naturally, the detectives believe the new evidence will help them put together all the pieces of the puzzle that frustrated their colleagues.In flashbacks we are taken to the baptism of James Bruno's baby. Sean and Jimmy were partners. There is tension as Sean, who is the godfather, arrives disheveled and late for the rite. Eileen Bruno doesn't appear to be happy being there. The real mystery is revealed by her. She caught Sean, who was drinking with Jimmy in the backyard, kiss her husband, and more shocking yet, Jimmy responding willingly.Somehow at the station the partners become the center of gossip. Sean has not endeared himself to his superior because he discovered the involvement with a criminal in his area who controlled the drug business. Sean realizes this man is in with the drug strong man because he always makes an excuse to free the scum bags Sean and Jimmy haul into the station all the time. The pressure is too much on Jimmy. Sean is comfortable in his homosexuality and wants to be honest about it. Cooper's own father doesn't want anything to do with a queer son. Even his superior McCree wants him out of his jurisdiction, but the case is complicated because Cooper comes from a long line of Irish men serving in the police force. Sean is killed because his homosexual condition, and for knowing too much on his peers' involvement in taking dirty money.Tom Petit wrote this honest portrayal of the life of a police officer in the closet and his secret love with another fellow cop. We thought it was a frank account of a serious matter no one talked about in those days. Sometimes the people involved with the show, fearing reprisals from sponsors, or the networks, don't dare to present these real situations. Jeannot Szwarc, shows a sensitive approach to this thorny issue, which is dealt without the sensationalism the case might have been shown with a different team.There is a rare Chad Everett appearance as the older Jimmy Bruno. His take is right on target with a touch of sentimentality that doesn't get out of hand. Shane Johnson makes an excellent contribution to the show as Sean Cooper. The cast is marvelous and it includes good all around performances from everyone under Mr. Szwarc's direction.In this episode, Nick Vera, gets closer to his neighbor, the mother of the basketball player the detective took his ball away. Nick is heading for romance with the woman!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c60d323e42de44b1bad1936e9783374d",
            "input": "I admit, having come of age in the hippie-dippy age, I am a sucker for these kind of movies. I can enjoy some of the schlock of the hippie genre far more than most \"normal\" people. However, this movie is simply awful in every conceivable way.Every trite perception of the hippie silliness is presented as gospel, cops kill a young long hair when he peacefully lands a plane. This movie is so horrible that it is not even funny to watch as a goof on the excesses of the hippie drone. It is like a left wing version of Dragnet, except without professional actors. The only reason I gave it two stars was because there are some obscurities of interest on the soundtrack, besides, I couldn't find a selection for negative stars.No actors, almost no plot, sheeze, barely even a script...you got it, an \"art\" movie....All this done at root canal drilling slowness, dragging out each meaningless scene just to fill up time.In a bizarre twist of life imitating art, the star \"nonactor\" of the movie joined a commune in real life and robbed a bank in Boston, one of his co-robbers was killed and he was sent to jail where he was killed in a suspicious weightlifting \"accident\".....and just think, he got to leave this behind as a legacy....Oy vey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37ff95c65f394b7f8bcefbe070c8445b",
            "input": "\"Kalifornia\" is one of my all-time favourite movies, and it easily could be labeled as one of the best psychological thrillers of the 90`s. The film has a very stylish surface to it, but behind that are a lot of disturbing and honest depictions of homicidal maniacs and the terrifyng violence they inflict upon others. One of the film`s strongest aspects is it`s performances, Brad Pitt is startlingly great as a trailer-trash psycho named Early. Pitt potrays his frightening character almost flawlessly. Juliette Lewis is equally as good playing his naive girlfriend, her innocence is almost heart-breaking. \"Kalifornia\" has a very simple plot to it, that goes steadily and slowly forward for about an hour, but it suddenly plunges into a harrowing spree of murder, as Pitt unleashes his psychotic personality. There are alot of shocking scenes, and it all mounts to a power-house climax that will haunt you for days. \"Kalifonia\" is a film that should really be watched for it`s intense look at how monstrous a human being can be, and not only for it`s violence and gore.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d53688965bf47cc852c2f57b43179e9",
            "input": "I really didn't like this movie because it didn't really bring across the messages and ideas L'Engle brought out in her novel. We had read the novel in our English class and i absolutely loved it, i'm afraid i can't say the same for the film. There were some serious differences between the novel and the adapted version and it just didn't do any credit to the imaginative genius that is Madeleine L'Engle! This is the reason i gave it such a poor rating. Don't see this movie if you are a big fan of L'Engle's texts because you will be sorely disappointed. However, if you are watching the movie for entertainment purposes (or educational as was my case) then it is an alright movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1280b21b4786457aabfa639a749e320a",
            "input": "I watched this film few times and all i can say that this is low budget rubbish and that it does not have anything to do with a real history facts. Actors performances is very poor but it is result of limited acting possibilities. Anyone who watched this film now probably think of Hitler as some crazy skinny lunatic who running with a gun like some Chicago gangster. I can only to say that there is much better films about Hitler and Germany in those years and that Rise of evil is very much under average. I can recommend German film Downfall in which you can see brilliant performance of Switzerland actor Bruno Ganz in a roll of Adolf Hitler.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2e6e5026c8b47d9bd436caea288eadd",
            "input": "I liked this movie. It was pretty cool. It has it all: cars, gun shooting, fighting, and even a token girl. It does not excel in any of this things, with the exception of the cars. A bit of shooting, a bit of fighting, a bit of smooching around, and LOT´s of car, with a great chase near the end. The jump, you may say, is impractical, but according to our good friends here at the IMDB it is possible, so the movie ain´t as bad as people are painting it. It has some quality, and I liked to watch it. In fact, I loved the film. And I didn´t need to turn off my brains to watch it. I wasn´t always thinking \"Is this possible?\" or tramp like that. 9 in 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e057fd3fc3a463d98e89be178bffa62",
            "input": "This is the worst show I have seen in years. I believe that it should be taken off of T.V. because of its retardedness. It is so dumb I could faint when I watch it. (even though I never watch it because it is SOOOOO poor) Goofs: When mac says he can;t eat sugar, in another episode he eats sugar. Almost everything in the world has sugar in it!!! In episode \"Eddie Monster\" when eddy screams at Terrance he falls into the crate twice PLUS the seconed time he falls in he doesn't fall in, he falls off to the side. What stupidity. I can't even say the word Fosters Home. I even made a song with my band about how retarded this show is. Byyyyyyyyeeeee",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b2ec8435f7141e08fb2f054e6fa8929",
            "input": "Meet Peter Houseman, rock star genetic professor at Virgina University. When he's not ballin' on the court he's blowing minds and dropping panties in his classroom lectures. Dr. Houseman is working on a serum that would allow the body to constantly regenerate cells allowing humans to become immortal. I'd want to be immortal too if I looked like Christian Bale and got the sweet female lovin that only VU can offer. An assortment of old and ugly university professors don't care for the popular Houseman and cut off funding for his project due to lack of results. This causes Peter to use himself as the guinea pig for his serum. Much to my amazement there are side effects and he, get this, metamorphoses! into something that is embedded into our genetic DNA that has been repressed for \"millions of years\". He also beds Dr. Mike's crush Sally after a whole day of knowing her. She has a son. His name is Tommy. He is an angry little boy.Metamorphosis isn't a terrible movie, just not a well produced one. The whole time I watched this I couldn't get past the fact that this was filmed in 1989. The look and feel of the movie is late seventies quality at the latest. It does not help that it's packaged along with 1970's movies as Metamorphosis is part of mill creek entertainment's 50 chilling classics. There is basically no film quality difference whatsoever. The final five minutes are pure bad movie cheese that actually, for me at least, save the movie from a lower rating. Pay attention to the computer terminology such as \"cromosonic anomaly\". No wonder Peter's experiment failed. Your computer can't spell! This is worthy of a view followed by a trip to your local tavern.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-665557cd12e247849f9b8a55e2d3c751",
            "input": "When a rich tycoon is killed in a plane crash, his spinster twin sister, Martha Craig (Madge Kennedy), doesn't believe he grabbed the controls in a suicide dive (even though self-snuff runs in the family) but his three beautiful daughters couldn't care less. The pilot, Jim Norton (John Bromfield), goes to work for Valerie Craig (Kathleen Hughes) who soon coerces him into helping her wrest control of the estate from her troubled sister, Lorna (Sara Shane) and the family lawyer (Jess Barker). Valerie wants Norton to seduce Lorna when he's not fending off the advances of another sister, the nymphet Vicki (Marla English), but her plans are thrown into a tailspin when Norton falls for his prey. All bets are off as a world of woe -including corporate chicanery, seductions, suicides, blackmail, a murder plot, the Mann Act, double-crosses, disfigurement, and poetic justice- befall \"Craig Manor\", an imposing mansion on a bluff overlooking the sea...This preposterous potboiler would have made a perfect second feature for WRITTEN ON THE WIND, also from 1956. Douglas Sirk's saga of a powerful (and powerfully dysfunctional) oil clan was said to have inspired the 1980s night-time TV serial DALLAS but the Craig's low-brow excursion into insanity seems right out of it's sinful sister-soap, DYNASTY. All three siblings (only one of whom is really bad) are great beauties but it's Kathleen Hughes' cartoon villainy that stands out. Valerie is relentless in her quest to inherit the family fortune and her unbridled enthusiasm for evil is one of the movie's many guilty pleasures. Teenage sister Vicki is quite a piece of work as well, reminiscent of Carmen Sternwood in THE BIG SLEEP. When they first meet, she pulls the equivalent of trying to sit on Norton's lap while he's still standing by coming on to him with the line \"I graduated summa cum laude from Embrace-able U.\" Whew!THREE BAD SISTERS, produced by schlockmeister Howard W. Koch, is a terrific trash-wallow in exploitation excess and the cast is B-Movie Heaven: Marla \"She Creature\" English, 50s hunk John \"Revenge Of The Creature\" Bromfield (once married to French sexpot Corinne Calvet), Universal starlet Sara Shane (discovered by Hedy Lamarr), Jess \"Mr. Susan Hayward\" Barker, Kathleen \"It Came From Outer Space\" Hughes, and former silent screen star Madge Kennedy give it all they've got -however much or little that is. Future Eurotrash star Brett Halsey (TRUMPET OF THE Apocalypse) is seen briefly as one of Vicki's victims.B-Movie rating: 10/10 Marla (and her body English) made marvelous movies! THREE BAD SISTERS was recently seen on the big screen as part of the Palm Springs Film Noir Festival but the jury's still wiping soap suds out of ...aw hell, it's noir (5/10 on the noirometer).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b0fa5b4734c4cc2ad69688d7243c795",
            "input": "Russ and Valerie are having discussions about starting a family. The couple live in a posh apartment and run an auction business that deals with valuable collectibles. At the same time, a dedicated adoption agency owner takes a mini vacation and leaves the orphanage in the charge of his father (Leslie Nielsen). Father Harry is in the rental business and he gets the brilliant idea to \"rent\" some of the children of the orphanage to couples like Russ and Valerie. Harry, who becomes aware of the couple'e dilemma, offers a family of siblings for a 10 day rental period! Brandon, Kyle, and Molly move into the apartment with their temporary parents, with amusing consequences, as the new caretakers are inexperienced with kids. But, where is the possibility of a happy ending? This is a darling family film. The actors, including Nielsen as the wheeler-dealer and Christopher Lloyd as the kind apartment doorman, are all wonderful. The script is snappy and fun and the overall production values quite high. Yes, if only life could be this way! Orphaned children everywhere deserve a chance to prove that they are lovable and can give so much joy to the parents who are considering adoption. If you want to show a film to your family that is rooted in good values but is also highly entertaining, find this movie. It is guaranteed to have everyone laughing, even as their hearts are melting.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c69f8a8d0afd4f449d4c463179d7fc22",
            "input": "This was a quite brutal movie. There were huge implausibilities, and a silly script, bad acting, etc.The only reason to watch this movie is that from time to time some quite impressive sets of breasts were exposed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d47db50c9a0421a8312793185a010d4",
            "input": "I wouldn't give this movie a rating, it's not worthy. I watched it only because I'm a Pfieffer fan. I love her and would watch anything she made. Even in this dud, she didn't disappoint. Every scene with her in it, kept the viewer watching...waiting...for something to happen but nothing ever did. It had some good story lines but they ended abruptly as soon as it started. Some of the other characters had potential but nothing became of it.Pfieffer was 29 when she made this film and at her most lovely. The wardrobe and set was surprisingly good. I can watch mostly anything and rarely come across a movie I can't find something to like about it, but this was a dud. I don't understand. The worst thing about it all, it had a big cliff hanger at the end. It had an ending scene that woke you up and say wow, this film is finally going some place, then the credits roll. Good grief. I agree with the review that said .99 would have bought 3 cans of cat food and watching my cat eat would have been more exciting. Well said. Actually, that comment was more entertaining than the film because it sums it up so well. I too wasted .99 cents on this dud.dud.dud.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efb18e2d55ce4ea484afadaa04fef76d",
            "input": "I loved this movie since I was 7 and I saw it on the opening day. It was so touching and beautiful. I strongly recommend seeing for all. It's a movie to watch with your family by far.My MPAA rating: PG-13 for thematic elements, prolonged scenes of disastor, nudity/sexuality and some language.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec00cfdce4144da695a2f4a6f5ee540d",
            "input": "This Italian semi-horror movie starts out very much like a soft core porn movie and turns into a mystery that has a few to many loose ends to be good, that and the fact it is rather dull just makes this film rather unwatchable for my tastes. The only thing really worth watching are the many boobs spread throughout the film. The story has a guy who at the beginning of the movie luring girls to his castle where he proceeds to take them to his dungeon, go berserk and seemingly kill them. They show the nudity, but they never really show the murders at this point in the film. Then the guy finds a nice red head at a party and proceeds to make out with her and marry her. He has a thing for red heads you see as his beloved former wife Evelyn was also one, she also died under circumstances that must have not been the viewing audience's business. After a lot of talky scenes murders start to take place involving snakes, foxes and such. At this point it is easy enough to figure out who is responsible for the murders and what the motive is then you have a nonsensical ending where everything wraps up not so nicely. This movie just did not work for me, it left me with to many questions and the last third of the film just did not have the boobs of the first two thirds of the film. Explaining Evelyn's death would have helped the film as would have some sort of ending where Evelyn did rise from the grave. Granted the title is not totally misleading as she did sort of leave the grave, just not under her own power. The gore is very light for the most part as there is a scene with the foxes and a scene at the end with quite a bit of blood too. I just thought for the most part this movie was a tad dull.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93801694765f40a8ad02a132ec0d4d1e",
            "input": "I have loved this book since my 5th grade teacher read it to our class many years ago. And I have read it to every one of my 3rd and 5th grade classes over my past 18 years of teaching. Supposedly a movie had been made in the past, but I'd never been able to locate it. Well, my students and I were all so excited when we heard that Disney had brought Madeline L'Engle's excellent book to the screen. As I watched the movie, I had the highest of hopes. As the film went on, I became more and more despondent. They had botched it badly! Never had I been so let down by a favorite book-to-film adaption. I understand that films can't stick strictly to a book, but they don't need to change things for the sake of it! Most, if not all, of departures from the book were totally unnecessary! I kept my opinion to myself at first and just listened to my students discuss the movie. Well, it wasn't just me. Nearly every single one felt the same way--cheated out of the great story that Madeline L'Engle had so skillfully created! Why, they wondered, did Aunt Beast look like Chewbacca from the star wars movie? Why couldn't Calvin's hair have been red? Why did Mrs. Which not have the proper \"witch-like\" outfit that was such a clever play on her name? Basically, we all wondered--why did nearly every single detail have to be changed? I have always dreamed of how wonderful a movie this book would make. I am still waiting for that movie. This one was A Wrinkle in Time in only the broadest of senses. I'm going to write to Peter Jackson and try to convince him to take on the task!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bace9ff9b8aa408c8b162afe2f9a0403",
            "input": "This comedy has some tolerably funny stuff in it, surrounded by a lot of unfunny stuff. Just about every scene involving the servants of the castle and their silly antics is a waste of time. And the plotting is so sloppy that it makes you wonder if they actually had a script ready before they started filming this, or they were simply making it all up as they went along. (*1/2)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dec6e02d6fb04b8083aeb74a396ffe6c",
            "input": "This three stooges flick is at a tie with my other favorite flick \"Disorder in the Court\". This is an uproar of laughter for any Three Stooges fan to enjoy.The boys are janitors at a recording studio when they hear the lovely Christine McIntyre sings a great version of \"Voices of Spring\". She is going to be offered a record deal, but she is scarred to be honest with her father about her choice of a career and prove herself as a real singer. When she and the others leave the studio, the stooges decide to have a little fun and play her record and dress Curly up as Christine. The contract lady who can make Christine's career, sees Curly and mistakes him for Christine and invites Curly to sing for her party. Of course there is a man that they have upset that is at the party and they destroy his solo in front of the crowd, so he'll find a way to get back at them.What a great stooge flick, this should not be missed! 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb4b605ebcbc4b79a90b0b3314b3a40c",
            "input": "Ella was excellent, Franchot was unavoidably over-the-top (But he played similar parts in other films such as \"The Man on the Eiffel Tower\") and Alan was nearly non-existent but the film certainly \"thrilled\".*mild spoiler ahead*: I wonder how many times Elisha Cook got strangled in his films but I seem to recall various other examples. I will avoid naming the murderer but I think it's necessarily obvious because of the plot \"thriller\" demands.A very well-done but dated film noire (for example: everyone smoked like crazy and the police were really stock characters. And no dead bodies were ever shown, unlike today's gore fests.) done in the familiar short-scene tableaux format of the period.8 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe2ee082d9c74517870b3c369a2ed664",
            "input": "A small town is attacked by a horde of bloodthirsty vampires. The only hope is a lone avenger and a group of ragtag survivors.Released in 1993, \"Darkness\" garnered something of a cult following upon release. It's easy to see why-it's loaded (and I mean freaking loaded) with gore, and it's energy and enthusiasm, like that found in other no-budget cult horror flicks like \"The Dead Next Door\" and \"The Children of Ravensback\", is actually rather infectious.While that may be true, that's sadly not enough to save it. The film was shot on a Super 8, so the image is grainy and dark, making things very difficult to see (it would have been great if it had obscured the protagonists dreadful mullet.) Also grating is the soundtrack, made up of annoying Casio Keyboard and even more annoying Death Metal (seriously, what is it with these no budget horror flicks and bad Death Metal?) While one isn't expecting Oscar worthy performances, the acting is still strictly amateur hour, as the actors sometimes seem almost confused instead of frightened or threatened.In the end, I'm sure fans of no-budget gorefests will love this. Everyone else though, will wish there was a little more meat on the ribs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86b13aabb1b24d5f9d1a086bf3b3a8e5",
            "input": "I thought this movie was excellent,for the fact that Corrine and Sean are newcomers to the business.It was packed with action and a little romance,but there were some points when Corrine didn't speak very clearly (when she threatened Sean with the gun) and she clenched her teeth...maybe she was supposed to?I think the roles of Joseph and Sonny were portrayed very well,and there was an obvious contrast.Also,because i watched next action star,i am certain that Corrine and Sean did their own stunts,which were performed very well.I am looking forward to another movie by the pair,as they make a great team,or perhaps a sequel to bet your life-possibly called 'making it big in the big apple',it could this time be about Carmen..Bet your life is EXCELLENT!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1111fdf4c99a4b05ae7a725710fe4b94",
            "input": "This show seemed to be kinda good. Kyra Sedgwick is an OK actress and I like police series, but somewhere in the production this program went awfully wrong. First of all, the writers should have more suspects than one, you know who did it EVERY TIME!!!!! That makes it boring. The main character is unbelievably annoying and its not believable in any way. I know they wanted her to be tough, but shes mean, stupid and a bad chief. The crimes are uninteresting and bland, and its just lame all the way. As stated above, I hate it.... All in all, this was a big disappointment and very bad indeed...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f97a7742fda3469caf35cc82b4d62973",
            "input": "First one has to take into account the time period this film was made in. 1995. Rappers were in it, and that added to the flair of it.Remy was a socially awkward teen trying to find his way and couldn't, until he met and was befriended by Nazis. They took him in. Nazi's aren't all this awkward, but like most gangs, they fill a void that is missing be it economic, social, emotional, whatever. Michael Rappaport played the part perfectly.Omar Epps was the hot shot track star, with a questionable work ethic and a chip on his shoulder. He kept trying to feel sorry for himself and his plight, and had his girlfriend and professor to straighten him out on it.Kristen was a young white girl trying to find herself and trying to fit in, until she was date raped. She then found her self experiment with her sexuality, and getting involved politically.This film deals with racism and like most things that deal with racism, people's own perspectives come into play.I read so many comments about how there were no 'evil' black characters but there were evil white one (Nazis). So what? Remy wasn't portrayed as evil at all, he was trying to find his way, and kept failing until some skinheads accepted him. He was scared, it was sad to see him devolve how he did. He even says right before he kills himself, I didn't mean it, I wanted to be an engineer.Ice Cube and Busta Rhymes were angry black men, Ice Cube was somewhat of an intellectual, and Busta Rhymes was just portrayed as a dumb thug. They both showed no consideration at all for their roommates, and generally appear to not like white people very much. They were angry like the Nazis but not on the level of Nazis in terms of overall badness. Sorry if this makes it seem unfair, but are there really black groups like the Nazis? No.People say it shows white=-bad black=good. Not true, the only bad white characters were the Nazis and the police, which is more or less true in real life. Kristen was a good girl, her boyfriend (omar epps roommate) was a good guy, and even Remy was a good guy, he was just misguided.Omar Epps, Ice Cube and Busta were seriously flawed characters, angry and inconsiderate. Although their constant harassment by police seemed to justify some of their anger. Remy's inability to fit in seemed to justify his anger as well.Good movie, well done. Like all movies that deal with racism, its a great piece to get a discussion going.I don't think Cube and Busta coulda beat those Nazis though.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88f3d9fb89bc40b98130945879489031",
            "input": "I saw this film first on my way home from Paris to Newark aboard Air France in August 1996. The film itself I believe is quite a masterpiece. It's the kind of film that people should be making. I still think Daniel Auteuil is one of the sexiest actors around. In this French film, he plays a divorced father and businessman who has lost his zest for life until he across a Down Syndrome man who lives in an institution with other Down Syndrome patients. The actors including the actor who actually has Down Syndrome create a believable friendship and relationship between these two unlikely men. Daniel's life and ours changes forever with the Down Syndrome man. He realizes that life is not just work and not play but for the living and loving and that's what life should be all about. The ending is kind of silly though but I still think it's one of my favorite movies. It's enough to bring a tear to your eye.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6db68a31d48d470a8436b9b17399a3a4",
            "input": "Marvelous film again dealing with the trials and tribulations of World War 11 England. What makes this film so good is the touching of the human element.This film is definitely in the tradition of such British line classics such as \"Mrs. Miniver\" and \"Hope and Glory.\" As is the case with this film, we see the desperation of people in the time of war.The performances are outstanding here especially by the embittered John Thaw, who is assigned a child who has been evacuated from the London bombing.We soon see why this child wets his bed. He comes from a lunatic mother who has abused him terribly.The old man takes to the child and brings happiness into his sad life. When the child is returned to his mother, the old man goes to London and seeks him out only to find tragedy. He literally kidnaps the boy and is able to convince a higher up that the child is better off with him than being in a boy's home.The picture is so good because it deals and builds on endearing relationships.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16963341ebac4fbf9fe2896a79119103",
            "input": "I saw the The Bourne Ultimatum last summer with a friend, and, wow! I had already seen the first two films and I liked them, but Ultimatum, I loved.Matt Damon plays Jason Bourne, a amnesia suffering CIA agent on the run, trying to discover who he is.Like I already said, I loved this movie from start to finish, no plot holes, slow scenes, everything was paced just right and it fit in well with the other films, but in all senses it was much better.Best stunts, car chases, actors, and effects I've seen in an action movie all summer, (surprisingly due to Spider-Man 3, Pirates, etc.) But I it wasn't just action in this film, Jason doesn't just kill and run. He has a soul and the audience feels for him, so drama is included. But that doesn't slow it down.Of all the \"threequels\" that came out last summer, this was the best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8d12006cc404da090b5c389667acd80",
            "input": "what is wrong with you people, if you weren't blown away by the action car sequences and jessica Simpsons hot body then you are majorly screwed in the head. Of course the film isn't a masterpiece, i don't think it was aiming to be. It was fun and funny, i never watched the show when i was younger, i only recently saw one episode, and when i watched the movie, i felt it had the same kind of atmosphere. The movie seats were practically shaking, and the car sequences were good because it didn't bore me and drag out like some of the scenes in 2fast 2furious. and jessica Simpson is plain hot, i just wish they had used her more in the action sequences. All in all, i had a hell of a time watching this and i would go and see it again soon and i will buy it on DVD. People, enjoy it for what it is.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52fd1d1f3ce54f13929b471cf0629724",
            "input": "Normally I'm not motivated to write reviews. But this movie was so excruciatingly painful I feel I must. I cringed at the appallingly predictable plot, the lame acting and laughed at moments which were supposed to be tense. Indeed most of the audience seemed pretty bored and chatty even at the \"most tense\" moment of the movie. Molly Ringwald stood out as the only performance of any merit in a tortured production. Even the \"twist\" at the end wasn't. I've heard it said that the movie didn't take itself seriously; but I could find little evidence of that in the movie.Cut should have been left on the cutting room floor. Do yourself a favour and spend your time and money on something else!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9684abd833fa42b8bb5eae707aebe57d",
            "input": "I must admit, I was expecting something quite different from my first viewing of 'Cut' last night, though was delighted with the unexpected Australian horror gem. I am a true horror fan as true as they come, and found 'Cut' to not only be the best of the genre Australia has ever produced, but one of the great parody/comedy films of late.My only concern is that mainstream audiences may not pick up on a lot of the comedic elements - the film was not overly clever in it's application but made me laugh at every turn trying to fit in EVERY possible cliche of the horror genre they could. I am certain this was intended as humour....hoping this was intended as humour.And of course, there was the gore.The use of the 'customised' garden shears was brilliance - besides the expected stabs and slashes. In short, there was a huge amount of variety and creativity in the many violent deaths, enough to please even the skeptics of this films worth.The appearance of both Kylie Minogue (short that her appearance was) and Molly Ringwald was just another reason to see the film - both performances were fantastic, as well as Simon Bossell ('The Castle') in a brilliant role as the jokey technician.All in all, I think this movie is one of the best horror products of the last couple or years, as well as a beautiful satire/parody - toungue-in-cheek till the very end.Loved it. Go see it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c86d46fc34f04431b1a2dae9da528acb",
            "input": "Herbie, the Volkswagen that thinks like a man, is back, now being driven by Maggie Peyton (Lindsay Lohan), a young woman who hopes to become a NASCAR champion. The only thing standing in her way is the current champion, Trip Murphy (Matt Dillon), who will do anything to stop them.The original love bug wasn't that good. Even as a kid, I remember not liking it very much. I had some hope for the sequel though. I mean the cast is pretty good and the trailer makes it seem like a pretty fun movie. Unfortunately, Herbie is no better now than he was before. The film is defiantly weak for people over the age of 12. It will probably entertain the kids but that's all.I realize it's a kids film and all but they could have made the film a little more interesting. There were very few laughs and it got boring near the end. Most of the actors seemed dead in their roles too. Lindsay Lohan was alright as Maggie Peyton. She usually gives better performances like in Freaky Friday and Mean Girls. Matt Dillon gave the best performance out of everyone. He was very good as the bad guy even though he didn't have a lot to work with. Justin Long, Breckin Meyer and Michael Keaton are really just there and they don't do anything special.Angela Robinson directs and she does an okay job. She tries to keep the film interesting but she's working with a weak script. Thomas Lennon and Ben Garant wrote the screenplay and would it be any surprise to you that they were also responsible for Taxi and The Pacifier? These two make light films yet they fail to really make the stories interesting or enjoyable. It's not completely their fault but hopefully next time they will try harder. In the end, Herbie is a safe, predictable family film that's worth watching if you're a kid. Everyone else is better off skipping it. Rating 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed3005b2b810416d85bc5f2562658dd3",
            "input": "In The Lost Son, a private eye searching for a missing man stumbles upon a child prostitution ring. This film incorporates all of the worst stereotypes you could imagine in a worst-case scenario that exists only in the minds of Hollywood, the press and AG John Asscrap. If you get a chance to see this, you'd be better off getting lost yourself.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29387d05d13944d9a5125d71f72c066d",
            "input": "I really liked Tom Barman's AWTWB. You just have to let it come over you and enjoy it while it lasts, and don't expect anything. It's like sitting on a café-terrace with a beer, in the summer sun, and watching the people go by. It definitely won't keep you pondering afterwards, that's true, but that's not a prerequisite for a good film. It's just the experience during the movie that's great.I felt there were a few strands that could have been worked out a little more, but being a Lynch fan I don't care that much anymore :)And I *loved* the style, or flair of this movie. It's slick, but fresh, and the soundtrack is a beauty. Any music-lover will get his kicks out of AWTWB, I can assure you.I'll give it 8 out 10.(music-wise 10 out of 10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac07fdec35fe46c482951bce4dae46ae",
            "input": "I've always been enthusiastic about period dramas, an art form in which the BBC has excelled in the past. This presentation of \"Byron\" was unbelievable. Unbelievably bad! The script was dreadful, the acting uninspired, and all the characters woefully insipid. Apparently Byron was \"mad bad and dangerous to know\", and set the ladies hearts all-a-flutter. Not in this production. Here he appeared as a tawdry jumped-up little squirt instead of a fiery hero of womenfolk and the Greek struggle for independence. It is said that Byron walked with a limp. This portrayal of the man was just limp all over.I watched the whole two and a half hours waiting for something to spark into life. Not a splutter, not even a glimmer. It was utter tedium, if not downright boredom, from start to finish.Having the opinion that no-one will ever better the Bard of Avon, I also believe that Byron's poetry is over-revered and to my mind should be flung on the back burner, and this dramatisation of his life should be accorded the same treatment.I think the BBC lost its nous with this one",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13791ea48318489b85f8c3cdc0da2e93",
            "input": "Before writing this review, I went back and reread the reviews of others. This movie was a particular disappointment to me, since it features two of my favorite dancers, Gene Kelly and George Chakiris, boasts a score by the often wonderous Michel LeGrand (\"Wuthering Heights,\" \"Ice Station Zebra,\" \"The Thomas Crowne Affair\"). The dancing was stilted, unmotivated and unoriginal, the songs forgettable, the story a joke. Even the costuming was not particularly flattering. Only the photography correctly captured the proper mood and spirit. I'm glad other people enjoyed \"The Young Girls of Rochefort,\" though I most certainly did not.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30ef17fa2c404f64bbdc73a69f38eef9",
            "input": "This movie was pretty bad. Sci-fi is usually my favorite channel so I watch all the original movies that play on it. I really don't know if this movie can be called original. Starting a zoo/theme park on a remote island sounds pretty familiar. What was it, oh yeah, Jurassic Park. But this has Sabertooth tigers instead.The movie starts out with a few stereotypical college kids on an island doing some kind of treasure hunt. One of them ends up dieing a rather gruesome death with some of the worst special effects I've seen. The blood looked a lot like ketchup. Also at the beginning there is a scientist who wants to make as many saber tooth tigers as possible for people to enjoy. 3 of them have already escaped and are going around eating the tourists, or the people invited to the island to see the tigers first hand. Again, sound like Jurassic Park. Probably the coolest thing was the 1000lb saber tooth who crawled around on his front legs killing the mad scientist with a tooth statue of sorts that somehow shrinks and goes through the guys neck. Funniest death I've seen on TV.The acting is extremely cheesy, the special effects are horrible. The CG tigers could almost pass for clay models, and even some of the sounds were off. For instance, when one of the college students is trying to escape, he uses an ax to break down a door, the ax goes into the door and about 2 seconds later you hear the sound. This movie was pretty bad. The cheesy deaths were quite funny though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51bede41c4db42f1b100105877095d86",
            "input": "Great acting on the part of Gretchen Mol. This film is one of the best biopics to hit the screen in some time. While it does cover the majority of Bettie's young life, it also manages to stay on a mostly focused path which is something most biographical films seem to lack. There is some lovely and alarmingly funny subtext in the dialogue and acting. This film is an excellent break from the Dir. of \"American Psycho,\" and I think this will show through as her best work to date. Oh, and as a cinematography buff, I give this film 100% in the cine dept. It was amazing how well they pulled off a 50s look with modern film stocks. Accolades to the D.O.P. All around very enjoyable. I recommend any interested to see it: 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5921a2d1a06449abb0639319fbb7338",
            "input": "If you liked the Grinch movie... go watch that again, because this was no where near as good a Seussian movie translation. Mike Myers' Cat is probably the most annoying character to \"grace\" the screen in recent times. His voice/accent is terrible and he laughs at his own jokes with an awful weasing sound, which is about the only laughing I heard at the theater. Not even the kids liked this one folks, and kids laugh at anything now. Save your money and go see Looney Tunes: Back in Action if you're really looking for a fun holiday family movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e528e75d71d4f83bee33478e6743ade",
            "input": "Having first achieved fame with Drunken Master, Jackie Chan was thrust into the spotlight once more with 1983's Project A, a hugely enjoyable pirate flick which re-established him as a major star. By the time Police Story was released two years later, the extraordinary hype surrounding Jackie was reaching its zenith, and crowds flocked to see this frenetic blend of awesome stunts, brutal fight scenes and questionable comedy. It broke numerous box-office records and inspired a 50% rise in police recruits, but, viewed 20 years on - is it any good?As an action movie Police Story unquestionably stands up. There are several terrific fight scenes, some stuntwork that recalls the very best of Chan's hero Buster Keaton, and a compelling if over-violent climactic tussle. Jackie's performance is also very strong, and whilst the frequent forays into laboured comedy dull the film's impact just a little, his charisma carries it through. Furthermore, in presenting our hero as a borderline psychopath whose recklessness puts others in danger, Jackie took a momentous gamble ... though in the event nobody seems to have noticed! By praising Police Story as a simple 'Good vs. Evil' battle critics belittled the film's ambiguity of tone, and whilst it's hardly The Brothers Karamazov, in depicting such uncertainty the film nevertheless represented a notable and praiseworthy shift from conventional ideas.In short, this remains a quality \"popcorn\" movie* (though you may empty your stomach as numerous villains are thrust against or deposited into glass showcases in the film's final scene) - a potent, boisterously entertaining action movie that ranks with the best of its period.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08f72bf4c3394a90aef0d44d6472fd14",
            "input": "The movie \"Holly\" is the story of a young girl who has been sold by her poor family and smuggled across the border to Cambodia to work as a prostitute in the infamous \"K11\" red light village. In the movie, Holly is waiting to be sold at a premium for her virginity when she meets Patrick who is losing money and friends through gambling and bar fights. Patrick and Holly have an immediate bond over their \"stubbornness\", but this is all disrupted when Holly is sold to a child trafficker and disappears. As movie goers, we are then thrust into Patrick's pursuit to find Holly again. Holly then shows her willingness to leave this lifestyle but her confusion on what is right and wrong. \"Holly\" carries us through the beautiful and harsh Cambodia while discovering that HOLLY is not just one girl. She is the voice of millions of children who are exploited and violated every year with no rights or protection.Holly is less extreme than its subject matter might suggest, such as documentaries that involve 4-year olds and sexual trafficking, but does manage to shed considerable light on Cambodian / Vietnamese trafficking of children into prostitution. It is a moving story that helps to shed light on the horrible situation in which many children face and their struggles to trust and realize what is right and wrong.Patrick, the antagonist of the film is an American dealer of stolen artifacts who is also losing money and friends while playing cards and getting into bar fights. While on a journey, his motorbike runs out of fuel, and he is forced to rent a room at a brothel. During his stay he comes across Holly, a twelve year old girl who has been sold by her parents and is being abducted into slavery and prostitution. Holly and Patrick begin a friendship of trust and understanding. He discovers a clever, stubborn girl beneath the traumatized exterior and becomes determined to save her -- though their strictly platonic relationship is misinterpreted by almost everyone they meet. When she suddenly disappears, he starts a journey to track her down, without having thought if he can really help her.Holly is able to escape on her way to another brothel, when she jumps from the truck and runs into a field filled with mines. A mine is set off by a cow and the truck driver believes she is dead, so Holly is then left on her own. During Patrick's journey to find holly he meets a social worker who tries to talk some sense into him and shares the facts with him that haunts the Cambodian region. The idea of paying for her freedom simply fuels the demand, she explains: 30,000 children in prostitution in Cambodia - next year it could be 60,000. \"I'm not trying to save 60,000,\" he tells her, \"I'm trying to save one.\" Patrick discovers that the idea of whisking her to safety is quickly put to rest when the social worker tells him that the US will not let him adopt and, although it takes five minutes to 'save' a child, it takes five years to reintegrate her into society. Patrick is not affected by the information and he continues his quest to find Holly.The audience is then shown that Holly makes it to a small town and is foraging for food with other homeless children. She is then befriended by a local policemen who seem little better than criminals with a badge, when they sell her to another brothel and then make a deal to a Vietnamese businessman who then takes her virginity. Holly then seems to think that this is her destiny and when Patrick finally find her, she is willing to \"yum yum\" and \"boom boom\" her distant friend. Patrick is utterly confused by this change in behavior, but he is not deterred in his plan to take her away from this world. In the end, he steals her away and brings her to a safe-land in the comfort of the social worker. Holly is given fresh clothes, if feed and brought to a dance class, but she is forbidden to see Patrick. This intense yearning to be in the comfort of Patrick's friendship, she runs away from the safe house and back onto the streets in Cambodia.Meanwhile, Patrick is dealing with the decision to leave the country and flee back to the United States or to stay in Cambodia. His thoughts continue to revert back to Holly and during a visit to a bar; an older male sees the picture he is holding and comments on his sexual appetite when he had sex with her. This enrages Patrick and he hits the man and runs out of the bar. Eventually, Patrick is caught by the police in the eyes of Holly, who is hiding behind a pole.The movie \"Holly\" may make the audience want to donate money towards organizations that improve the life for these poor youngsters, and even campaign to reduce the amount of brothels in the region, but the film's dramatic weaknesses may reduce its chances of being seen by enough people to make a difference. Overall, I think the concept is better as a documentary and it was not as touching as a movie. The actors did a great job of showing their raw emotion and the true confusion of the youngsters who are affected by this lifestyle, but in the end, the harsh lifestyle of the region and the desperate notions of the parents who sell their children to uphold their own starvation, does nothing to help the children's situations.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9db29bb8efff4490b40ede905bccdf46",
            "input": "My favorite part of this film was the old man's attempt to cure his neighbor's ills by putting the strong medicine in his bath. There is more than a sense of family, there is a sense of community.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0a11bff0c814a3b84b7610f28fe2414",
            "input": "During 1933 this film had many cuts taken from it because it was very over the top for the story content and the fact that Lily Powers,(Barbara Stanwyck) would do anything to obtain great wealth and power. Lily's father had forced his daughter into prostitution at the age of 14 and she grew up in a steel mill of a town with very poor people and her father ran a speakeasy which brought into his home all kinds of male characters who had their eye on Lily. As the story progresses, Lily meets up with man after man and eventually finds a guy who has everything and is a playboy bank president It is great to see a very young John Wayne, (Jimmy McCoy Jr.) who was only 25 when this picture was produced and Jimmy did not even get to first base with Lily, not even for lunch. A very young George Brent, (Coutland Trenholm) stars along with Barbara Stanwyck and both gave outstanding performances. This is a great film from 1933 which was produced by Darryl F. Zanuck and was locked up in a fault for many years and just recently is being shown on the silver screen. This film is rather mild compared to what we view on the Hollywood screens today, but in 1933 it was very naughty to watch this type of film. Enjoy",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21ac6cb336204bfdb88718be5d1bd567",
            "input": "One of the most disgusting films I have ever seen. I wanted to vomit after watching it. I saw this movie in my American History class and the purpose was to see an incite on the life of a farmer in the West during the late 1800's. What we saw were pigs being shot and then slaughtered, human birth, branding. Oh and at the end there was a live birth of a calf and let me tell you that the birth itself wasn't too bad, but the numerous fluids that came out drove most people in my class to the bathroom. The story itself was OK. The premise of the story is a widow and her daughter and they move to the west to be a house keeper of this cowboy. They live a life of hardship and it is an interesting a pretty accurate view of life in the West during the late 1800's. But if you have a choice, do not see this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-249aae9f95ee48ff85cc2a4abb27460b",
            "input": "I am starting this review with a big giant spoiler about this film. Do not read further...here it comes, avert your eyes! The main heroine, the girl who always survives in other slasher films, is murdered here. There, I just saved you 79 minutes of your life.This is one of those cheap movies that was thrown together in the middle of the slasher era of the '80's. Despite killing the heroine off, this is just substandard junk.Both priests and college students get a bad rap here. They are pictured as oversexed, sociopathic morons who have way too many internal problems to deal with what looks like junior college campus life...and the college students come off even worse.\"Splatter University\" is just gunk to put in your VCR when you have nothing better to do, although I suggest watching your head cleaner tape, that would be more entertaining.This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, gore, profanity, very brief female nudity, and sexual references.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5368becb73d246ff8492c7b7decdd771",
            "input": "A good idea, badly implemented. While that could summarize 99% of the SciFi channel's movies, it really applies here. I love movies where a good back story is slowly revealed, and I like action movies, and I like all of the main actors, so this could have been great. However, despite some good acting, this movie fails due to Bill Platt's bad writing and directing.Another review made the good point of needing to know where you're going so you can get there. This movie doesn't. It's put together in such a haphazard way that you know the words \"second draft\" are not in Bill Platt's vocabulary. There is one scene that is entirely unnecessary and could be removed without anyone noticing. This scene even begins and ends with them driving a car, so you could cut from one car scene to the other and never have missed the pointless scene in the middle.This movie also had a strange habit of under explaining some details while over explaining others, some to the point where you can guess the entire \"plot\" up front. It also had a habit of aborting a fight early, probably just because they couldn't afford it. There are also a few laughably bad scenes where the \"plot\" is revealed on a computer and the final battle involving conveniently placed \"toxic adhesive\" (seriously, what *is* that?).If you are a fan of Shiri Appleby, watch this movie because she's OK. She does manage to break out of her \"Roswell\" persona a few times and make for a good tough chick (but not always). John De Lancie plays the same character he plays in everything he's ever done since playing Q back in ST:TNG, so that's nothing new.In all, I gave this movie a 4/10 rating.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d2e08e7b9a9407aa15e1f84801fa3c1",
            "input": "I like a lot of the actors/actresses involved in this project so being insulted by the movie felt even worse than if they used a unknowns .The main problem was this movie was clearly just a concept created to appeal to baby boomers .In 20 or 30 years Nbc will probably do a movie just like this about the early 90's . I can see it now a black family where the kids are involved with the la riot's and the white family has the kids rebel and listen to grunge rock music .The soundtrack will feature bands like Nirvana , N.W.A , Public Enemy , Soundgarden etc .The movie like this will be just as cheesy as The 60's and I gurantee you NBC will do it .See the biggest problem with period pieces when done buy networks is that when you are living in a certain time period you aren't thinking i am living in the 60's or whatever decade is trendy retro at the time .Next time someone does something like this they should put more weight into there project",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65bc657e91ec4053b4f16a0c8a8b04ef",
            "input": "Another rape of HistoryThis movie is a catastrophe; it just uses a historic story and makes a sweet love story, with bad acting and low budget production.The movie should be 1/3 the time, they just dragged the time to make a mini series.The battle scenes are so stupid and illogical, the solders log stupid, the costumes a catastrophe. The Romans were good in fighting in opened areas, one of their armies was completely destroyed by the Germans when they tried to fight in a forest, in this movie the Romans choose to fight in side the city, I mean get real.And by the way Cleopatra was from a Macedonian origin, which means a light skinned person.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4266de9b64b4543a9c3b9633021a386",
            "input": "I picked up this movie with the intention of getting a bad zombie movie. But I had no Idea what I was getting myself into.I started the movie and soon I had been pulled into a world of pain and visual torture.I finally know what hell is like. It's this movie. For eternity. This movie has no value. It didn't even really have a plot. There was stuff going on in each scene but no overall explanation why anything happens.Instead of watching this movie I suggest that you line the nearest blender with oil and try and stuff as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the outcome to be far more pleasant than this movie.Don't even watch it. Not even to see how bad it is. I beg you. If you watch it, then it means they win.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ff95d16a151441e924c0b336982c734",
            "input": "I show this film to university students in speech and media law because its lessons are timeless: Why speaking out against injustice is important and can bring about the changes sought by the oppressed. Why freedom of the press and freedom of speech are essential to democracy. This is a must-see story of how apartheid was brought to the attention of the world through the activism of Steven Biko and the journalism of Donald Woods. It also gives an important lesson of free speech: \"You can blow out a candle, but you can't blow out a fire. Once the flame begins to catch, the wind will blow it higher.\" (From Biko by Peter Gabriel, on Shaking the Tree).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9542b8164164422884faf4402368d83",
            "input": "I actually saw China O'Brien II before I ever saw the original China O'Brien. And I have to say that the first incarnation is actually worse. But: worse = funnier! And funnier = better. If you're a bad movie fan like I am, this is great material. If, however, you are looking for any sort of meaningful plot, acting ability, or movie-making skill, this is best avoided. The best part is how they filmed all the fighting sequences in stuttering fast-forward. Hilariously bad. See it for a laugh, see it for mindless entertainment, but whatever you do, see it for free on TV.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01d8239c74e24adca08928e5be1ad273",
            "input": "I usually enjoy Loretta Young's early movies: her acting back then was light and breezy, and she sure knew how to wear clothes. But this one is just a loser from the word go except for a funny supporting turn by Glenda Farrell. Young is a hatcheck girl who talks her writer-husband (Paul Lukas) into becoming a championship bridge player. It's not the most cinematic of games, and the long, talky middle part in which their marriage falls apart just about kills the film.There's one interesting bit though. As Lukas and Ferdinand Gottschalk start their climactic game, a series of quick shots show airplanes, trains, football games, even a diver in mid-air, freezing in anticipation of the event. It's the earliest use of a freeze frame I've seen in an American film. Wish the rest of it were that inventive-and funny.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-226afcdb9b21430e875e677f6e92d7d9",
            "input": "The writers and producers of this little outing have plummeted new depths of depravity. Did writer's block set in so badly, OR had ideas dried up so much, that they were forced to include a disgusting scene where a young woman defecates in the back seat of a van, and then promptly throws the excrement at the car behind (mind you at least this summarises what this film is worth). We had already been treated to one of the other women urinating over one of her friends at gunpoint, as well as numerous episodes of graphic vomiting; once would have sufficed... we got the message! This really is taking toilet humour to another level! Had the script and acting been better then I could have easily forgotten that I was watching a film shot entirely on low budget video. This was a fairly original storyline, with a clever (the only) piece of direction in that we only ever got to take the viewpoint from inside of the van; thus making it feel much more real. We never got to see inside any other locations, such as the store or the field where several of the women disappeared, and this could have added much needed tension.The script was dire. Lines like: 'I don't feel too good... I want to go home' after one of the girls has been pursued by a psychopath; subjected to rape by a screwdriver and shot at, seem a little undercooked.The acting was diabolical (apart from the maniac). Did all the main 5 actresses in this learn acting by taking a correspondence course during a long postal strike! The sound was so bad that I had to watch the entire film with the subtitles on.The director seemed to have an easy job in this. It seems that the only direction he must have given was: 'Scream girls'.AND AS FOR THE SCREAMING...... If you watch this please be sure to have some paracetamol at the ready!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03ff3e04ee31431dbb7f6e9be11d4546",
            "input": "I am sad to say that I disagree with other people on this Columbo episode. Death Lends a Hand is frankly kind of a boring Columbo to me. After a few times, I get bored and changed the channel. I still love Robert Culp and Patricia Crowley and Ray Milland in their roles but the story was weaker in this episode than in the others. First, Robert Culp plays an investigator for Ray Milland's character. He hires him to investigate his young pretty wife played by Patricia Crowley to see if she is having an affair. In return, Culp's character blackmails the cheating wife who plans to expose his scheme to her husband ruining his career. Out of anger, Culp kills her by striking her in the face and setting the up the body elsewhere. I don't know. Maybe I just didn't care for this one at all. Of course, Columbo gets him in the end. It's just the question of how.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84f898f04ac5457695a28ee3b650bb0f",
            "input": "With no fault to the actors (they all put on great performances), the overall story was not very well executed. The movie opens with a great zinger: a crazy old guy forces a young Aborigine girl's car off the road. But then, we're forced to endure 40 minutes of character development with an entirely new group of characters ... and we don't know why until the 40 minutes are up. It turns out that they are the ones who eventually discover the girl's body ... and the story progresses from there.While the story does pick up at that point, it really goes nowhere. After 2 hours, I asked myself: was there a point to this, or was it just to see the characters struggle with accusations of racism and stupidity of how they handled the discovery? The story was ultimately unsatisfying and felt unfinished. While it is well acted, there's not a strong enough backbone in the film to warrant recommending it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df83dd59aae84de2b366e54ede43edfb",
            "input": "As someone who has lived with cerebral palsey for over forty years, I find this movie to be inspirational. If someone with such a severe case of CP as Christie Brown has can do so much, then there's no reason that I couldn't achieve my own dreams. Daniel Day-Lewis and Brenda Fricker both give awesome performances.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09c16de2167a48eeb53830032bd72fb8",
            "input": "Loved it but still have nightmares over the hotel manager.The movie, was presented well, with the choice of actors carrying their roles to reality of the writing. Many scenes gripped the imagination and created a nail biter. The progression of situations were cleverly written,making me believe the story was headed one way only to find a new twist on what I thought might be the obvious. Too bad there have to be commercials.I have told many friends to watch for further showings and I of course will view again.I enjoyed the scenery of the film and felt this added to the plots and intrigue. Husband and wife heated discussions(or should I say fights?) were very realistic.The initial situation is a common one but the escalation into the story presented fortunately is not.I want to thank all who were involved in this great entertainment film. Thank you! Looking forward to the next films---when? Whidbey",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08ef7b2b191f4ce49c84ea532d573fcb",
            "input": "This is one of the worst horror movies I have ever seen... Unfortunately, I am a horror movie buff and will rent any horror movie unless it's not made for t.v. When looking at the box it says it is rated R for gore and some language... Where was the gore? Was their one good death scene where you actually saw gore? I could have overlooked that if there had been some brief nudity or some good dialogue. There wasn't even one remotely witty or amusing line in this lame movie. Sometimes horror movies are awesome because they are so stupid, but this was just sad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcbd46d7eadd4067b696070873b483e2",
            "input": "FORBIDDEN PLANET is one of the best examples of Hollywood SF films. Its influence was felt for more than a decade. However, certain elements relating to how this wide-screen entertainment was aimed at a mid-fifties audience that is now gone have dated it quite a bit, and the film's sometimes sluggish pacing doesn't help. But, the story's compelling central idea involving the ancient,extinct Krell civilization and \"monsters from the Id\" hasn't lost its appeal and continue to make this film a relevant \"must see\" movie. What I'm mostly interested in saying here is that the current DVD for this movie is terrible. The movie has never really looked that good on home video and it's elements are in dire need of restoration. I hope that will happen soon and we get a special edition of this SF classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0b3bb5cf6dc42f2bc18a13791397907",
            "input": "LOVE AT THE TOP--the utterly wrongheaded American title for the superb French film \"Le Mouton Enrage\" (which means, I think, The Rabid Sheep)-- is such an original movie, the fact that it dates back to 1974 seems all the more astounding. This film was far ahead of its time; even by today's highest standards, it accomplishes things that seem rich and new. Filmed by the hugely underrated director Michel Deville, it rather defies description in the way it combines social critique, comedy, mystery, love, sex and satire into one wholly original mix--leaving for the end a major but subtle surprise to render all that has gone before suddenly sad and more understandable. The cast is splendid, ditto the writing and theme. But it's Deville's delicious tone, keeping you constantly off-balance but enrapt, that pushes this \"lost\" film to a very high level indeed. (The written interview with the director on the \"Special Features\" section of the DVD is definitely worth reading if you have the time.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d52474333d64e72ae25eae5b9683cfa",
            "input": "This is one of my all time favorites. It is so simple and sweet - definitely a chick flick romantic comedy. I really like a film full of good quotes and this has it... one of my favorites is when Albert Einstein says to Ed Walters \"Are you thinking what I'm thinking\" and Ed says \"Now what are the odds of that happening!\" In my opinion, a film is fabulous if you can watch it again and again and get the same amount of enjoyment out of it, and with this one, you can!! I also really enjoyed Walter M.s way of portraying Einstein. I think all the characters fit together really well and the story flows nicely. There are so many times that I find myself smiling right along with the film and quoting my favorite lines as I watch it! I would recommend this movie to anyone who has a heart and enjoys a feel-good romantic comedy now and then!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81f9a60b66fe4a3fa11c9752e82a5e37",
            "input": "The main reason for writing this review is I found this \"revisioning\" of a great play and worthy 1972 film, a horrible movie experience. If I can save someone from watching it, I will have done a good thing.This \"new\" version is loaded with talent, and it all goes wrong. Kenneth Branagh OKs an ugly, sterile, one note set. He proceeds to film the movie from every arty, distracting, self-centered angle possible. We see reflections of the actors in stainless steel, on security monitors, shots of their heads from 200 ft above, close ups of eyes, chins, and on and on. The screenplay, by a Nobel Laureate, introduces long stretchs of unpleasant homosexual banter, that is being faked by both parties,.... I think?? Given the character \"twists\" how would I know? The characters themselves,so richly drawn in the original, are crass and unsympathetic. The running time has been cut by an hour, which is either the real problem or the kindest thing the Director did for us. The actors perform their lines effectively, but nothing they say or do is remotely believable. Jude Law is over the top more than Caine, but as the credited Producer, must have had Branagh's blessing.All in all I found this to be an ugly to look at, unconvincing shell of a former classic. Why was it even made??? The paying public spent less that $4M worldwide to see it! A vanity piece of work that fails at every turn.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1a57af55d8d4d81b1d5d702b6198804",
            "input": "I didn't expect a movie as good as \"In The Line of Fire\" or an episode of \"24\", but it looked like this movie was made for TV and did a mediocre job at best. The (good) cast couldn't disguise the fact that the plot was all too predictable and actors had to struggle (they really try their best I think) through their lines of bad script, giving their rather flat characters any extras. When I watched the movie I got the feeling that I had seen most of this in other (better) movies. In it you had car chases, big shootouts, romance, plot twists etc. etc; This movie has none.** Spoiler** As soon as you see another woman talking into the phone to Cuba's character, you know who's behind all this and all the hints you're being given (\"you stand too close to the president, see it from my perspective..\" ) sound silly. If it were up to me (and maybe it's a good thing that it isn't) I would rewrite the plot like this:First lady orders the murder of her husband because she is sick and tired of writing checks to Cuba all the time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d88adac8de954d819e8bea86026411a1",
            "input": "The One and only was a great film. I had just finished viewing it on EncoreW on DirecTV. I am an independent professional wrestler, and I thought this was a good portray of what life is like as a professional wrestler. Now this film was made 4 years before I was born, but I don't think the rigors of professional wrestling traveling has changed all that much. Sad, funny, and all around GREAT!!! **** 10+",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd268f865eb9465dbceb3d9326a083d7",
            "input": "Home Room really surprised me. In comparison to other movies that were written regarding Columbine high school this one is the best. Home room does not show the school shooting but rather the aftermath and the effects of the community and the town. The movie focus' on two opposite characters., Alecia(Busy Phillips) and Deanna(Erika Christensen). Alecia is an outcast who witnessed the entire shooting. She seems to show no emotion about it. Deanna is a popular girl and the only surviving victim. Alecia is forced to visit Deanna at the hospital in order to graduate. Meanwhile the police are investigating Alecia as she might have known the shooting was going to happen. Alecia and Deanna are very different and do not get along at first. Eventually they develop a mutual understanding for one another and become friends. (very much in the style of the breakfast club). Home Room Beautifully shows the power of closeness and turmoil after a school shooting. I would recommend this film to anyone and everyone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd0ff45c85104075a28b42bcb212f3c0",
            "input": "Jacknife is a war movie that is just about as far removed from the war as war movies get. It can hardly be classified as a war film, because the only way that any war has an effect on the story or the characters is in their memories of it, and even these we are hardly ever shown. It poses very interesting questions about life, especially in the way that the movie's tagline says that only one of them is really alive (and by the way, even though the tagline refers only to Dave (Ed Harris) and Megs (Robert DeNiro), it is talking about all three of the characters in the film). Dave and Megs were friends in the Vietnam war, and Megs has returned to take Dave out on a fishing trip that they have been planning for a lot longer than you might have guessed. DeNiro provides a perfect performance of the character of Megs, who we are not really sure if we should like or if he really is as nuts as Martha thinks he is. Dave reminds Martha several times that Megs is not his friend, just someone he knows. There is a great scene early in the film where Megs has gone out to grab a six pack of beer from his car for breakfast, and he is just around the corner of the room when Dave says this. Megs pauses for a moment and then proceeds into the room with a smile and a huge greeting. It isn't until later that you realize how Megs must have felt when he heard that, having been the one to remember what they had planned to do on this day. It reminds me of the fakeness of the old, `Sure, let's do that,' thing that people so often say to each other, never having any plans to do any such thing.Ed Harris delivers a wonderful performance as Dave, who never got over the effects that the war had on him. Even so many years later he has not managed to get over the death of a friend during the war, blaming himself to this day for it and thus drowning his life in alcohol, cigarettes, and loneliness. All he wants, he says, is for people to leave him alone. This is not a man who is living his life the way he wants, whether people actually leave him alone or not, he is a man trying to forget that he's alive, to detach himself from the world of the living as much as possible.His sister Martha reminds me of myself, at least in terms of my roommates. I have two roommates who are 21 and 24 years old, and both act like they still live with their mothers, expecting their messes to just go away when they leave the room for a while. One on particular (the older one, sadly enough), has absolutely no clue how to care for himself, I'm surprised I don't have to wipe his chin while he eats. Martha has to do much the same for her brother, who she waits on hand and foot while he staggers through life from one hangover to the next. Martha and Dave are stuck in a stagnant life and neither of them can get out of it until something major changes, and Dave is the one that needs to do the changing. I tend to complain about romance in movies where it just doesn't belong about as much as Roger Ebert complains about those pathetic little tension devices, the red digital readout. But in this case, I don't think that the romance that develops between Megs and Martha had any adverse affect on the rest of the movie. On the contrary, it made it that much more interesting, because it was not predictable. The problem with the romantic subplots in Bruckheimer movies and whatnot is that they are so predictable that you just wait for the obvious end to come and hope that something interesting happens along the way. In this case, however, it's not as obvious that something is going to happen between Megs and Martha because we don't know enough about Megs. Martha could be right about him, that he's one of Dave's crazy war buddies and that he's not the kind of man that she should be dating. Dave certainly encourages this idea.(spoilers) A couple years after this movie, DeNiro did Cape Fear, where he plays a deranged criminal out for revenge against the lawyer that landed him in prison, a character that, in retrospect, makes it pretty easy to think that maybe at the end of Jacknife Martha realizes her mistake, gets rid of Megs, and she and Dave make up because he saved her from a horrible relationship and then he decides to clean up his act because he has done something good for her. I was half expecting this to happen, so I was pleasantly surprised when Martha and Megs wound up together and even more pleasantly surprised when Megs asks Dave all the questions about what they had planned to do after the war was over. At times this is a slow moving drama, but Jacknife is entertaining along the way and has a huge payoff at the end, which amazingly manages to be sappy without being cheesy. There is an almost excess of emotion at the end of the film that scarcely fits with the rest of the movie, but it is so good that it doesn't dumb down anything that the movie has accomplished up to that point. Everyone involved gives a wonderful performance, and it is one of those rare films that just about makes you want to stand up and shake your fists victoriously in the air.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-79fd9585c75946d290f3afeb93850a3b",
            "input": "If you want to watch a movie and feel good about watching it, then Tigerland is the film for you. I love this movie from top to bottom. This movie's picture-perfect scenes look so real; it's almost like a documentary of something that happened in real life but with drama. Boy, I tell you... REAL drama they actually real \"fought\" in one of the scenes (get the DVD listen to the commentary its not obvious). I see this film as a bunch of desperate young men trying to escape an ill-fated destiny, after watching Saving Private Ryan I have an a appreciation of what an \"ill-fated destiny\" is and know exactly how the men in the film feel. I see this movie as a crossbreed between \"Stand By Me\" and \"Saving Private Ryan.\" What do men do when they are with a situation that's \"hard pressed\" in real life? Some men go crazy, some men cry, some men through fists, others do drugs, some randomly sleep with hookers ruthlessly trying to eradicate the meaning of love from their life, some try drink the pain away, some jump off buildings or bridges, some feel guilty and others feel so much agony it makes them so sick they collapse - physically. This movie has all those desperate emotions rolled into one ball. But don't get me wrong its not depressing movie, its realistic, its a very very humorous movie, the cocky and funny Bozz (Collin's Character) lights it all up, and on top of that there are about 5 female actresses in the movie; I'll let you figure out what their in there for! With dialogue, war/action sequences, picture perfect scenes along with appropriate music; this movie has it all, like I said: from top to bottom. I don't why Tigerland is heavily under-credited. The best thing about owning the movie is that on the cover it says in big bold writing \"The best film of the year,\" and it absolutely falls nothing short of that. Keep the rare gems coming Hollywood, 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-275fdf4ca64649a1bd383016181bb630",
            "input": "On the surface, \"Show Me The Money\" should have at least finished a full season. You had the always entertaining William Shatner as your host, surrounded by a baker's dozen of beautiful leggy models collectively called \"The Million Dollar Dancers.\" You had knowledgeable contestants who had interesting stories to tell of their lives and who presumably knew a lot of pop culture trivia. And you had big money! So, what went wrong? The format of this game was the failure. A good game show needs at least two of three things: very simple rules, exciting pacing and the ability for the viewer to play along at home. The best, most enduring ones have all three.Unfortunately, SMTM had none.The rules for this game were among the most complex of any prime time game show in history. Let me try to explain how the game worked, as briefly as possible.A contestant began with a single word or short phrase followed by the choice letters A, B, C (subtle plug for the network?). Each letter was connected to a separate question, all starting with that word or phrase. Once a contestant chose one of the letters, they could either answer that question or pass and select a second letter. If they passed, they got to view the next question, and had the same option. However, if they passed the second question, they were required to answer the third option.After they answered and before they found out if their answer was correct, they then had to select one of the 13 dancers on stage, each with a different amount of money in a scroll by their side. They revealed their dollar amount (ranging from $20,000 to $250,000) and depending on if the contestant answered right... or answered wrong... that amount would be added to or subtracted from their pot.Still with me so far? In addition, there was one dancer who held something known as \"The Killer Card.\" If you selected the dancer with the Killer Card and you had gotten your question right, you were safe, and the game continued. If, however, you were incorrect, you had one final question to answer. If you got that final question wrong, you were out of the game. If you got it right, then, the game continued.There was no quitting, no walking away with the money earned until you either answered six questions correctly or got six questions wrong or you were so far in the hole you couldn't earn enough money to get back out. Got it? Okay! The biggest problem, as I saw it, was a complete lack of tension, because of the design of the game. A contestant could pass questions they knew they didn't know, and answer many questions they did know, making the pressure even less. Then, they could still find a low dollar amount, even after knowingly missing a question, which meant there still wasn't any \"drama.\" And the fact that they could answer five questions wrong and still have a chance to win was a big mistake. And the pacing of the questions was deadly slow: often the questions were so obvious, it was ridiculous to try to create tension, as if there was any doubt about some of the most common answers.The pacing, the lack of any real tension at any point during the show and those very complicated rules prevented this program from working, despite Shatner's terpsichorean talents.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90669a248ef144458358067654364767",
            "input": "REnted this one accidentally, it was behind the movie box of what i thought i was renting, didn't find out until i got home, watched it anyways. Absolutely FANTASTIC! a wonderful movie, and one of my top three favorite of all time, i recommend it to Everyone!The story is enjoyable and easy to follow, this could have been easily messed up, but the actors and director do a great job of keeping it together.The actors themselves are fantastic, displaying wonderful character and doing a terrific job. Gotta find a copy somewhere...........",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a54754724e604456a2521861e43716d2",
            "input": "Not wishing to give *anything* away here, I would just say this technically excellent, flawlessly acted and uplifting little flic will reward the viewer with an excellent hour and a half's entertainment: It will amuse, surprise, possibly embarrass occasionally and almost certainly tug at the heartstrings from time to time, as it approaches the inevitable, but not obvious, ending without becoming clichéd or predictable in any way. Most definitely recommended.A previous User's Comment gives 8 out of 10 for the film and 10 out of 10 for both Branagh and Bonham-Carter's outstanding performances - I agree entirely....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-101468566a5546c4b18a57a19bdac97c",
            "input": "Spoilers.First off, nothing really happened in this movie, other than a woman bleeding inexplicably. Second, it wasn't scary. Third, it had the worst soundtrack of any movie ever. Let me elaborate. The sound was edited by either Beavis or Butthead – I'm not sure which, so let's just go with Beavis. The movie gradually gets more and more quiet and the people mumble and mutter, forcing you to turn up the volume (I watched this at home). Then Beavis blasts some really loud sounds with supposedly scary/shocking images, forcing you to quickly lower the volume again. This occurs many times until, mercifully, the movie ends. I can picture Beavis laughing vulgarly from behind the two-way mirror while watching the test group franticly reaching for the remote each time. If you have children and prefer to watch scary movies after they fall asleep, this one is a big mistake. But then it's a big mistake anyway. Here's a thought – if you're going to make a horror movie, at least add a gratuitous beheading, a 19-year-old blond girl who screams at the top of her lungs just before she can take off her sweater, the shadow on the wall of someone being eaten alive just out of the camera range, a cat being thrown at the camera to scare the audience, some drifty weirdo with a maniacal laugh, or a monster who looks like a stage hand covered in aluminum foil (a la TV's Lost in Space). These people didn't even try to scare me. They just wanted to hurt my ears.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea99c182c1d345709950695dff462c6a",
            "input": "The unflappable William Powell. He is a joy to watch on the screen as he makes his way through situations without a care in the world. He always seems on top of his game and shows little care for anyone who doubts him. The murders are projects, barely human beings. I have noticed this is a staple of the whodunnit. Other than an occasional weeping widow, the victims fulfill the function of being the reason the movie exists. Nothing more. There are enough twists and turns to keep things interesting along the way and Powell is a master at this. There is a lot of political incorrectness, especially as it relates to the Asian performers. This is a little hard to take. The cast is great, and Curtiz's direction is also a consistent asset.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-789cd3fbd73a4e01adb1e3c0ca4617d8",
            "input": "I became more emotionally attached to this movie than any other I have ever watched. That may be because I can see the characters as my own grandparents, attempting to make sense of a world at war. The ending and use of Pachabel's Cannon are both amazing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8dc7edb0e2cd42579559640043d87220",
            "input": "I should have known when I looked at the box in the video store and saw Lisa Raye - to me, she's the female Ernie Hudson A.K.A. \"Le Kiss of Death\" for *ANY* movie. Its almost *guaranteed* the movie will be bad (e.g. Congo)if Hudson is in it (with the exception of the Ghostbusters films, which were intentionally campy and bad). Despite my instincts, and the fact that I just saw Civil Brand, yet another cinematic \"tour de force\" starring Lisa Raye, I rented it anyway. After all, I ignored my \"Hudson instinct\" on OZ and ended up watching a very quality series so I figured I'd give this movie a chance.If you are a lover of bad movies, this is a definite must see! This has got to be the most unintentionally funny movie I've seen in a loooong time. The plot is fairly straightforward: Racheal's (Monica Calhoun) sister is killed by a band of brigands (Led by Bobby Brown!) and, like many an action movie before this, she straps on her guns ONE LAST TIME and vows to avenge her sisters death. To do this, she reassembles the titular Gang of Roses (supposedly based on a true story of a female gang) and they go out and exact revenge and, along the way, there's some subplot or something or other about some gold that might be buried in the town. One nice thing I will say about this movie is that from what I could tell, the stars did their own riding and they looked GREAT galloping.The funniest (albiet unintentionally funny) scenes? Look for when they introduce Stacy Dash's character or when Calhoun's character rescinds her vow not to strap on her guns (replete with a clenched fisted cry to the heavens) or Lil' Kim's character joking with Lisa Raye's character or Stacy Dash's character being killed or Lil' Kim's character convincing Lisa Raye's character to rejoin the gang or the Asian Chick or Macy Grey's character talking bout \"The debt is paid\", etc. With the exception of Calhoun's Racheal and Bobby Brown's Left-Eye, I can't even remember the names of the other characters cuz I was laughing so hard when they were introduced.If the director had gone for parody and broad comedy this would have been a great movie. Unfortunately, he tries to take it seriously seemingly without first taking exposition, sound design (in his defense, Hip-Hop is notoriously difficult to work into a period piece), set design, script writing nor period historical research (was it me,or were these the cleanest people with the whitest teeth in the old west?) seriously. Usually when I see a movie that's not so good, I ask myself \"Could you have done any better?\" This is the first time in a long time where the answer is an unequivocal \"YES!\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86494034466c4d9b931f720b420bbb45",
            "input": "This movie stinks! You will want back the two-plus hours it takes to get through it. Sliding Doors, w/ Gwyenth Paltrow and directed by Peter Howit, did what Melinda & Melinda tries to do much much MUCH better. That movie was clever, witty, and well-acted. I cared about what happened to both Gwyenths -- or rather the characters she played -- and the performances by supporting cast were fantastic.Where as Melinda & Melinda is tiresome, the dialogue is contrived and I could have cared less about any of these people -- least of all Melinda. One Melinda is so dysfunctional -- her first glass of wine is at 10 a.m. -- and so melodramatic she is laughable, and not in the comedic sense. The 2nd Melinda is fine, but forgettable.Woody Allen's previous ensemble movies worked because, I'm guessing, he spent time on the screenplay and the actors were talented. One piece of trivia for this movie is that he wrote this screenplay in two months: you can tell. And while Chloe Sevigny is talented -- those around her are not, not enough to be a whole presence. The movie ends up being Chloe Sevigny and a bunch of other people you know you've seen in other movies but can't quite remember which ones.Sad, very sad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c07d07eba3644a094187bd90633bb0b",
            "input": "I liked this movie I remember there was one very well done scene in this movie where Riff Randell (played by P.J. Soles) is lying in her bed smoking pot and then she begins to visualize that the Ramones are in the room with her sing the song \"I Want You Around\" ...very very cool stuff.It was fun, energetic, quirky and cool. Yes I'll admit that the ending is way-way over the top and far fetched ...but it doesn't matter because it is fun this is a very fun movie. It's Sex, Pot and Rock n Rocll foreverI read that Cheap Trick was the band who was originally to star in this ..But I do not know if this is true or not",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5349bd8c9b914ede8dfe69025062b2ad",
            "input": "I saw this recently with my wife and discovered it's better than Caine believes, although it's not much cop. Britain's greatest ever screen actor does not seem too interested in this role, which is a pity as he might have elevated it with more conviction in his playing. Rex Harrison seems even less bothered, perhaps unsurprisingly, as his character is very poorly written. William Holden is better, but his screen time is fleeting and, again, his character is not well scripted.Beverly Johnson is as beautiful a woman as I have ever seen, but is given very little to do, the film might have gained a great deal by concentrating more on her story. Ustinov steals the show, but basically by playing a comic character quite out of keeping with the film's serious tone. The music is poor and Omar Sharif makes one of his many pointless cameos (his career has been based on this for decades now).Richard Fleischer has to be blamed for not directing this more effectively, he was an infuriatingly unpredictable film director, and this is one of his weaker movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06a2971875164b268ec1c088799f3ace",
            "input": "Roger Corman is undeniably one of the most versatile and unpredictable directors/producers in history. He was single-handedly responsible for some of my favorite horror films ever (like the Edgar Allen Poe adaptations \"Masque of the Red Death\" and \"Pit and the Pendulum\") as well as some insufferably cheap and tacky rubbish quickies (like \"Creature from the Haunted Sea\" and \"She Gods of the Shark Reef\"). Corman also made a couple of movies that are simply unclassifiable and – simply put – nearly impossible to judge properly. \"The Trip\", for example, as well as this imaginatively titled \"Gas-s-s-s\" can somewhat be labeled as psychedelic exploitation. In other words, they're incredibly strange hippie-culture influenced movies. Half of the time you haven't got the slightest idea what's going on, who these characters are that walk back and forth through the screen and where the hell this whole thing is going. The plot is simply and yet highly effective: a strange but deadly nerve gas is accidentally unleashed and promptly annihilates that the entire world population over the age of 25. This *could* be the basic premise of an atmospheric, gritty and nail-bitingly suspenseful post-apocalyptic Sci-Fi landmark, but writer George Armitage and Roger Corman decided to turn it into a \"trippy\" road-movie comedy. None of the characters is even trying to prevent their inevitable upcoming deaths; they just party out in the streets and found little juvenile crime syndicates. \"Gas-s-s-s\" is a disappointingly boring and tries overly hard to be bizarre. The entire script appears to be improvised at the spot and not at all funny. Definitely not my cup of tea, but the film does have a loyal fan base and many admirers, so who am I to say that it's not worth your time or money?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8899f5234b054f2a823fc3652466e0a3",
            "input": "Bunny Comes Home 'This Man's Navy' deserves more credit than it gets, a clever script by Borden Chase, directed by 'Wild Bill' Wellman, the film has just the right feel for early post WW11 euphoria and goodwill, and none of the blind terror that came into play few years later. Produced in 1944, the Japanese defeated, the battle scenes a little déjà vu, Tom Drake's melancholy attraction for radiant young Jan Clayton has solid chemistry, plays real and validates Drake's career at Metro. The following year Jan opened on Broadway in 'Carousel.' Wally Beery, a little bleary-eyed, boasts to an always incredulous Jimmy Gleason… his memories an improvement over reality, and give Beery a Ulysses-like shadow to play against. The Navy LTA (Lighter Than Air) shots are authentic, photographed at Tustin and Lakehurst, and the P-38 squadron is out of March AFB. Lot 3 doubled for India, and Bunny's U-turn… Bunny Comes Home… gives back to Beery an authentic slice of his past, something he had wanted to believe was true… then, the future we spin into again is fantastical… now on a grander scale, a newly designed Navy LTA with launch capabilities for a reconnaissance plane… how expensive, blissfully optimistic… still, \"You got to believe in it, that's the way you make things come true…\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27fcd9eb4f3b4d1e8a4371188544ea02",
            "input": "Sloppily directed, witless comedy that supposedly spoofs the \"classic\" 50s \"alien invasion\" films, but really is no better than them, except of course in the purely technical department (good makeup effects). And any spoof that is worse than its target is doomed to fail (\"Casino Royale\", \"Our Man Flint\" are worse than almost any James Bond movie). After two hours of hearing the screeching voices of the aliens, you'll be begging for some peace and quiet. (*1/2)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-429f3462beb5498183aad370b97dbb3b",
            "input": "The only redeeming part of this movie was the price I paid. At least all I lost was $3.00 and the time elapsed sitting through this bomb. The crew member who was in charge of continuity missed the boat. When the female lead and the FBI guy went to the alleged killers location, Mr. FBI handed the female a revolver. When the alleged killer came out the door, the revolver has magically transformed into an automatic. One is left to ponder would an FBP agent hand a weapon to a civilian? I think not. Ms. Xavier appears to be a very attractive female. It is too bad the R rating did not allow much of her to be seen. It would seem that a film editor cut what might have been the best parts of the film out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b15929dafc8746d294aff625066dd019",
            "input": "Well-done ghost story that will give you the creeps and some pretty fair scares along the way. The story unfolds slowly, building atmosphere all the way until you're ready to see the woman in black. You won't forget her once you've seen her. No gore, no knives, no hockey masks--just a well-constructed story that is best viewed at night with the lights out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff7f5e5ea94b4cc8a8fe3eebf58ca61e",
            "input": "What's that there in the skies? Is it a plane? Is it Superman?? Errr, no… It's a TURTLE!?! See, that's what becomes of the Cold War! Nothing but bad news and other issues! The Americans shoot down a Russian combat plane somewhere over Artic territory and the subsequent explosion defrosts & literally awakens the giant prehistoric turtle-creature named Gammera. He/she is not a very friendly critter as it promptly ensues to destroy everything and everyone on its path. The arguing governments finally decide to kill the ugly bastard with a brand new and super-sophisticated ice-bomb, but Gammera has another surprise in store… The damn turtle can fly! The first time this happens results in a tremendously grotesque and hilarious sequence! Gammera lies on his back looking defeated when suddenly fire blows from his armpits and he skyrockets himself up in the air. How can you not love that? Then there's also a dire sub plot about an annoying kid who's able to telepathically communicate with the monster, but that's just not interesting enough. Flying turtle, people!! There's very little else to write about this Japanese (and American re-edited) Sci-Fi effort, apart from that it's an obvious and totally shameless rip-off of such classics like the original Godzilla and The Beast from 20.000 Fathoms. The effects and monster designs are extremely hokey and, unlike the aforementioned films, it never succeeds in creating an apocalyptic ambiance. Respectable actors like Brian Donlevy (\"The Quatermass Experiment\") and Dick O'Neill (\"Wolfen\") seem unaware of what film set they're on and even the original Japanese mayhem-scenes aren't very convincing. Gammera's very own and personalized theme-song is rather cool, though, so it gets one extra point for that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3567bf5ee4e14a2fad391ebc34d843a8",
            "input": "CitizenX(1995) is the developing world's answer to Silence of the Lambs. Where `Silence' terrorized our peace of mind, `Citizen' exhausts and saddens us instead. This dramatization of the Chikatilo case translates rather well, thanks to a Westernized friendship between two Rostov cops who become equals.CitizenX may also argue against(!) the death penalty far better than Kevin Spacey's The Life of David Gayle(2002).Humans are Machiavellian mammals, under which lie limbic brains (lizard-logic). Why did two kids, who knew better, stone to death a toddler they kidnapped? Why do bloodthirsty women yell `li-lilililililii' at acts of OBSCENE terrorism? -My own term for this is `limbic domination', the lizard-logic urge to dominate an `enemy'. If you have the words `enemy'/`vengeance' in your vocabulary, you're easily capable of `limbic domination'.In WWII-devastated 1980s Rostov (located at the mouth of the Don river near the Black Sea), nothing suppressed Andrei Chikatilo's urge for `limbic domination' from overpowering his layers of civilization. Chikatilo(Jeffrey DeMunn)'s easy victims were paupers, usually children, who rode the interurban train for fun, since they couldn't afford anything else.CitizenX reminds us that the denials of a rampant Soviet bureaucracy cost the lives of 52 such `lambs'. Rostov's serial killer roamed free for almost 7 years AFTER the police arrested and let him go.The politicization of crimefighting is harmful to police forces everywhere. Although policing routinely suffers from corruption all over the world, in the west, vote-grabbing by politicians can set up chronic inter-agency rivalries, stymieing a more coordinated response to crime. In the Soviet Union of CitizenX, however, Viktor Burakov(Stephen Rea)'s Killer Department was suffering from a repressive bureaucracy.Geoffrey DeMunn plays the psychosexually inadequate Chikatilo with faultless but understated authority--to the point of complete obscurity. In real life, too, Chikatilo had a lifetime's experience blending in and evading capture.His pursuer, on the other hand, sticks out as a strange bird, given to unheralded, naive outbursts. Perhaps by design, Stephen Rea gives a very strange performance as forensics chief Burakov. Rea's Russian accent is impenetrable; and his Burakov is humourless and sullen, at odds with everyone.So it's Donald Sutherland who walks away with the picture. Sutherland's Col.Fetisov, Burakov's boss, and at first his only supporter, is an overly restrained, patient Militiaman whose dignified carriage bears testimony to decades of bureaucratic machinations. His reawakening as a logic-driven yet still passionate cop becomes the film's cornerstone idealism.Joss Ackland does another turn as a vicious apparatchik, Secretary of Communist Ideology Bondarchuk, overseeing the investigation. Naturally, he quashed the arrest of the most likely suspect, a Communist, in 1984, a man carrying rope and a knife in his bag, supposedly going home: Andrei Chikatilo.Soon, he replaced Burakov with another Moscow apparatchik, Detective Gorbunov(John Wood), insisting that the investigation now focus on `known homosexuals'. The funniest scene of this sad, sad film comes during Bondarchuk's & Gorbunov's institutionalized harassment: one stupid cop earnestly reports, `As I suspected, comrade, it's fornication. I've made some drawings'--cue howling laughter.5yrs after the bodies began piling up, in 1987, the police finally tried soliciting criminal profiles. The only cooperating Soviet psychiatrist was Dr Aleksandr Bukhanovsky(Max Von Sydow), who termed the UNSUB `CitizenX'. He later also observed to Fetisov & Burakov that `...together you make a wonderful person'. We concur.The drawn-out pace, spread over a decade, perfectly captures the institutional inertia of Glasnost--`openness'--that wasn't. The contrast with Perestroika--`restructuring'--couldn't've been greater for the case. Although Chikatilo was still prowling railway stations, police plans were about to bear fruit.In 1990, Col.Fetisov was expeditiously promoted to General. His nemesis Bondarchuk disappeared off the scene, allowing the investigation to finally proceed without political interference. Staff, communications, publicity--suddenly all were available. In just one night of telephoning around, Fetisov got his depressed forensics chief access to the FBI's Serial Murder Task Force at Quantico, where, Fetisov discovered, staff are regularly rotated off serial murder cases to stave off just such psychological damage to investigators.Fetisov advises his newly promoted forensics chief, now `Colonel' Burakov, of all these changes in an avalanche of confession that becomes the movie's powerhouse watershed scene. Fetisov's is the most tender apology I've ever seen on film: `Privately, I offer my deepest apologies to you and your wife. I hope that someday you can forgive me my ignorance', he almost whispers.A HBO production, CitizenX is a film of the highest caliber. Not only do the exteriors look authentically bleak (shot exclusively in the most run-down parts of otherwise spectacular Budapest), but Randy Edelman's soaring soundtrack is entirely overwhelming--and frequently our only respite from the bleak brutality. Those who speak Hungarian will recognize the many Hungarian accents and credits.Chikatilo's actual murders are depicted as bleak, aberrant behaviour born of character flaws and ignorance in an equally bleak world. This makes the murders seem not-entirely-out-of-place--but of course they were. As President Kennedy reminded us, `we all cherish the futures of our children'.CitizenX communicates perfectly that killing is far more grisly and obscene than any vengeance fantasy might imply. Serial rapists rape to dominate; serial killers kill to dominate. So do some soldiers. Such `limbic dominators' make poor humans.WARNING-SPOILER:----------------------------------------------- The real Andrei Chikatilo WAS the world's most prolific known serial killer. Convicted, he was executed in 1992 in the manner of all Soviet Union death sentences: one shot, in the back of the head. Foolishly, such methods destroy any possibility of studying a deviant brain after death.Conclusion:------------------------------------------------------------ The best outcome is always the prevention of killings, not their prosecution. Executions merely guarantee society's failure to learn from the complex reality of victims' deaths when we dispatch even anecdotal evidence of HOW/WHY they died. Nor do killers learn regret if they're dead.Vengeance doesn't unkill victims. Baying for the killer's blood constitutes nothing better than counter-domination--once it's too late.Vengeance on behalf of the grieving isn't justice for the deceased--it's appeasement of the living.(10/10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f8253fbf29d4f2fa839b97b2b9ef4d9",
            "input": "I'm a huge fan of the Dukes of Hazzard TV show. And I really enjoyed this flick. I enjoyed myself here a lot more than I did with other summer blockbusters.It's funny hearing people rail against this movie with excuses like \"lame plot\" and \"it's much cruder than the show.\" Does ANYONE remember the crudeness of the humor in the pilot episode? Daisy makes incest jokes and Bo says that Luke had probably fathered half the kids in the orphanage. The only reason it was cleaned up is because it changed to and earlier time slot.And as far as the plot goes. It was the perfect Dukes plot. In fact as a remake it probably stays truer to the source material than any TV show that has migrated to the big screen.While Sean William Scott and Johnny Knoxville aren't EXACTLY like their small screen versions, they do a great job and work very well together. I wasn't too keen on Burt's Boss Hogg though. And I would have like a little bit more incompetence from Sheriff Roscoe. In the movie Roscoe is a little... scary.And who didn't have a smile on their face as the General Lee is racing through the streets of Atlanta and the back roads of Hazzard?Folks, allow yourself to enjoy a movie that is just an excuse for nostalgia, bikinis and car chases, you won't be sorry. It's just a great dumb movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdeee7b04c8f4e3c89d2f202dce5bdae",
            "input": "Growing up in a multi racial neighborhood back in the 20's and 30's, I grew up very close to most of the Italian families living there. This move brought back so many pleasant memories. this is a movie most people would like who enjoy seeing more true to life movies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-468a319aff744b418359d7906170d7ac",
            "input": "Stefan is an x-con that five years ago got married to Marie. Their marriage has been stable until Stefan past catch up with them and he's offered to do a courier job. Stefan's job is a heroin delivery from Germany to Sweden which should go easily.In Germany Stefan meet Elli, a girl from Bosnia that has been sold to a stripclub owner. Stefan dislikes what he sees and decide to help Elli out of her misery. Due to the fact that Elli's father during the war fleed to Sweden Elli now goes with Stefan to Sweden. To make up with the past Stefan promises Elli to help her find her father, no matter what it takes. Finally back in Sweden the whole situation seems to be more complicated than Stefan ever thought of..This movie doesn't seem to fit in the ordinary class of swedish movies due to the fact that it's been americanized alot. Regina Lund and Cecilia Bergqvist makes it all average, the effects makes the movie a little too much though. See it and jugde for yourself.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f60c128e4376464ca30a14b7d66f8dae",
            "input": "In ten words or less to describe this film, Barbara Stanwyck is too appealing and it is great! The film is wonderful, except for the perhaps tacked-on ending, but I love happy endings anyway. Barbara Stanwyck, however, as the platinum-blonde gold-digger is amazing. She knows what she wants and goes after it! This film is sexy and excellent!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cac1f40b03b24daea77ae8c63aa60fc4",
            "input": "Many have stated that Orca – Killer Whale is a Jaws rip-off. This is not really true, though the enormous commercial success of Jaws undoubtedly made these man .vs. beast stories more attractive propositions for film-makers in the second half of the '70s. Orca – Killer Whale would be better described as a modern-day retread of Moby Dick. It's a story about obsession. On one hand a whale's obsessive quest to avenge the death of its mate; on the other a bounty hunter's obsessive quest to kill the whale before it can claim any more lives. Sadly, Orca- Killer Whale emerges a very disappointing film, its fundamentally interesting ideas somewhat ruined by hammy performances and preposterous plotting.Shark hunter Nolan (Richard Harris) encounters a marine-life researcher Rachel Bedford (Charlotte Rampling) diving off the Atlantic coast of Canada. Their meeting almost ends in disaster when Rachel's team are attacked by a Great White Shark, but a Killer Whale arrives in the nick of time to stop the shark. After this, Nolan becomes increasingly obsessed with capturing a Killer Whale and selling it to an aquarium. But his plans backfire when he accidentally kills a pregnant female of the species while the distraught male looks on. Rachel tells Nolan that a Killer Whale is an incredibly intelligent mammal with a strong memory and feelings just like a human. Worse still, native Umilak (Will Sampson) warns him that the whale will always remember its grief and do everything it can to have revenge. Nolan initially tries to forget about the whole regrettable incident, but the whale causes havoc in the fishing town and the disgruntled locals begin to demand that Nolan puts to sea to track it down and destroy it. Eventually Nolan is forced to pursue the Killer Whale… the hunt leads all the way to the desolate ice floes of the Arctic Ocean, where man and beast play out their final fatal battle against each other.Two things stand out in this film. One is the haunting score by Ennio Morricone (perhaps the greatest composer of film music of all-time, his talents wasted on various tenth-rate clunkers during the 70s and 80s). The other is the amazing widescreen photography of Ted Moore, which makes the film consistently pleasing to the eye. In every other department, Orca – Killer Whale is a shoddy film that does nothing to enhance the reputation of its talented cast and crew. Harris appears extremely ill throughout the film, his hair bedraggled, black rings around his eyes and skin deathly pale. His performance lacks the usual vitality. Rampling strikes a lot of sexy poses but fails to convince with her long-winded and ill-informed explanations about the ways of whales. The rest of the actors are wasted in brief and undeveloped roles, the most memorable of which sees Bo Derek getting her leg bitten off by the vengeful whale. The plot is total nonsense from start to finish, with such preposterous sequences as the whale deliberately starting a fire in the fishing village that engulfs and destroys the local refinery! Although it's credible to suppose that whales are intelligent creatures with genuine emotions, the idea that a whale could plot revenge against a single human adversary and carry it out so calculatedly is utterly absurd. Orca – Killer Whale is really one for completists of the man .vs. beast cycle from the late 70s. Most will come away from the film shaking their heads in disbelief and grinding their teeth with despair.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7564b295f30742e1a11b31ac01fcf825",
            "input": "I was going to say this was the worst gay-themed film I've ever seen, but I can honestly say this is the worst film if any genre I've ever seen.You know you're in trouble when a movie starts with a \"personal note\" from the Director, asking for the audience's \"understanding\" for the \"many challenges\" facing a first-time Director. The audio track is so bad in many scenes it's almost impossible to follow the dialogue, and this from a DVD version. Bad lighting, bad sets, bad photography, poor script, generally bad acting all add up to make this \"film\" unwatchable. I did make it through to the bad ending after several attempts, and immediately gave away the DVD I foolishly purchased. I'm sure there are many challenges facing a first-time Director. But, don't try to palm off this lame attempt as a finished product. I see from IMDb details that this was not only the first Directing attempt of Richard Natale, but also the only. That's the one positive thing I can say about this alleged \"movie\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4b7e356aa374b23a28aeab4f1cf9388",
            "input": "12 year old Arnald Hillerman accidentally kills his older brother Eugene. His feelings are arrested by the fact that his family can not interact with him (or feel it is not the right thing to do). His ONLY refuge is his grandfather, who is the ONLY one who seems to have compassion on him. The Realism will captivate \"true-2-life\" movie lovers, but will not satisfy those that desire action & thrills.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d79778a9991f4c6ab2cde890439178ed",
            "input": "This 2003 made for TV movie was shown on a women's channel, naturally. As a man, why do I even attempt to watch this? I don't know, but I should have my head examined. And director and writer Simon Gornick should be ashamed of himself to give men an injustice as he does. He takes away any strength and conviction a man could have by having several boring women do him in. Number one bore is Joyce Hyser as the wife. I couldn't wait for him to drop her. Her revenge was silly and stupid and very confusing through most of the movie. The other femme fatale was Nichole Hiltz, about the coldest person you'd ever want to meet. Her looks didn't warrant our leading man to go that ape over her and her acting was so obvious, only a fool could miss. Definitely a loser. Tembi Locke was pretty good, but slow on the uptake as to the slut seducing her own husband, again played as a guy who is a loser, by David DeLuise. Rounding out our cast of losers is Anthony Denison as a boss who has little to do but scowl at our hero. Stephen Jenkins as our hero, or should I say victim, was not that good. At first I thought he just a bad actor, but later I believed it. He never got the part off the ground and was repetitive throughout. Although, as a man, I became enraged when the two women got away with it. Men, beware of this channel that puts men down and women get away even with murder. LMN is the channel. Beware. Note: Having watched this a second time by mistake, I am convinced on my initial thoughts. Especially on the writer/director, Simon Gornick. I still believe he has disgraced the male species and should be horse whipped. Only saving grace in this film is Tembi Locke who doesn't have a chance to show her talents with the awful acting of Jenkins, Hyser, Hiltz and DeLuise around her. Plus the stupid plot that only makes it worse. Down with Gornick's movie and his vacant stars in it. Please LMN don't show this trite again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62167e6a48e54cc9afe149bb9753c74c",
            "input": "Even in the 21st century, child-bearing is dangerous: women have miscarriages, and give birth prematurely. Seventy-five years ago, it was not uncommon for women to die during childbirth. That is the theme of \"Life Begins\": a look at the \"difficult cases\" ward of a maternity hospital. Loretta Young plays the lead, a woman brought here from prison (what crime she committed is not germane to the plot) to give birth; she's conflicted about the fact she's going to have to give her baby up after birth. She's in a ward with several other women, who share their joys and pain with each other.Although Loretta Young is the lead, the outstanding performance, as usual, is put in by Glenda Farrell. Farrell was one of Warner's \"B\" women in the 1930s, showing up quite a bit in supporting roles, and sometimes getting the lead in B movies (Farrell played Torchy Blane in several installments of the \"Torchy\" B-movie series.) Here, Farrell plays an expectant mother who doesn't want her children, since they'll only get in the way. She does everything she can to get in the way of the nurses, including smuggling liquor into the ward (this of course during the Prohibition days), and drinking like a fish -- apparently they'd never heard of fetal alcohol syndrome back in the 30s.Interestingly, unlike most movie of the early 1930s, it's not the women being bumbling idiots getting in the way of the heroic men -- that situation is reversed, with the expectant fathers being quivering mounds of jelly. (Watch for veteran character actor Frank McHugh as one of the expectant fathers.) \"Life Begins\", being an early talkie, treats the subject with a fair dollop of melodrama, to be sure, but it's quite a charming little movie. Turner Classic show it, albeit infrequently; I've only seen it show up on a few days honoring Loretta Young. But it's highly recommended viewing when it does show up.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f37770ace991445aa860c39fb21011ce",
            "input": "\"Boom\" has garnered itself a something of a reputation. With heavyweights Taylor, Burton, Noel Coward, Tennessee Williams and Joseph Losey, one might be tempted to think, how bad could it be? Well, it's a lot worse than you could possibly imagine.The sad and disturbing fact of \"Boom\" is that is seems to signal the decline and fall of the aforementioned heavyweights. It was only director Joseph Losey who having plummeted the depths with \"Modesty Blaise\" and \"Boom\" (some may wish to add \"Secret Ceremony\"), managed to recuperate and in 1970 create his best work, the wonderful \"Go-Between\".Saddest of all is the work of Tennesee Williams. From the mid forties until the early sixties, Williams penned a number of plays which have gained classic status, remaining in theater repertory throughout the world, many becoming much praised films. When William's muse deserted him, probably owing to his notorious substance abuse, it deserted him for good. Williams at his best is an actor's dream providing many unforgettable performances. (Were Ava Gardner or Deborah Kerr ever better than in \"Night of the Iguana\" ? ) Taylor in particular, shone in both \"Cat on a Hot Tin Roof\" and \"Suddenly Last Summer\". There is an anecdote in which supposedly Taylor asks John Gielgud whether he would teach her to play Shakespeare, to which he replied \"if you will teach me to play Tennessee Williams\". Had Gielgud seen \"Boom\" he would have held his tongue. Taylor simply has never been worse, turning in a cringe inducing performance. Despite her face photographing well, she is decidedly podgy. Besides the physical decline, from this time onwards she would basically lose credibility as a serious actress with a string of completely forgettable (and worse) roles to her credit.Much the same could be said of Burton. Following his short lived theatrical stardom, he won fame and fortune in Hollywood. But the body of his work from this point onwards (1968) would be unremarkable to say the least.Noel Coward had long ceased being a force in the theater where his drawing room comedies had been replaced by the likes of Williams and the British \"angry young men\". He seems to be enjoying himself camping it up, but barely manages to amuses, that from the man who claimed such a talent.The only cast member who maintains her dignity is young Joanna Shimkus, who in a few years would forego a promising screen career to become Mrs. Sidney Poitier.\"Boom\" reeks of self indulgence; it's simply out of control. A rather sad pointer to careers gone wrong rather than a camp fun fest as some have suggested.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dda59be48f6e42bf929ce07f02fe8472",
            "input": "Gruveyman2 (comment below)you are a complete idiot...blinded by ignorance by the very city you have allegiance to. Its that whiny arrogance, that you are ironically claiming the film exudes about SF, that makes you seem like such the typical LA A**hole! The only reason you felt the film was so self congratulatory about SF is because you are jealous. Of course you don't know it because you are so LA jaded. First of all the film was completely factual about a beautiful city; what has been filmed there and what has been filmed by some of its more famous locals. It says nothing bad about LA; and these accomplished directors choose to live in a beautiful city over LA. They recognize that they went to film school in LA and are obviously proud of that fact. They recognize that SF is close to LA which is a benefit. The only negative thing that was said that relates to LA, was about the studio executives. The same studio executives that hated these guys movies when they first saw them, but then those same movies went on to be huge world-wide grossing films. So why wouldn't they have animosity towards the studio executive establishment and studio system? These are the only people they are trying to \"disassociate from\" and for good reasons! Don't be so sensitive! How can you say that Francis Ford Coppola is the \"so called\" San Francisco director? How is he not to be considered that? And who directed The Godfather? Coppola did. It was his vision that told the story on the screen that won it a best picture award. So what who gave him the job? He admits it in the documentary that he didn't even want to do the movie....so what's your point? And so what if Sophia wants to live in LA? And that proves your point how? And tell me how they are not truly independent when they are funding a lot of their own movies. Movies that are now considered classics. And, when they made movies from studio funding, one, it was LA that came to them and said we want you to make these pictures and two, they used the money that they made from doing these pictures to fund their own. They said exactly that in the film.\"Your bitchy and self congratulatory whining would take on an air of greater self respect and credence if you never set foot on the ground you so claim to be superior to in this film.\"How the hell can \"bitchy-ness\" and \"self-congratulation\" suddenly have an \"air\" of self respect and credence....if they never go to LA again? What a stupid and senseless comment! You inserted some big words in there....and just don't know how to use them! And, by the way, they never claimed nor implied they were superior to LA! So what if they are giving a guy from New York an award in LA....again what the hell is your point? So if they go to LA or New York they are hypocrites by simply preferring to live in SF? You make no sense.San Francisco is proud of itself and its heritage and the people who make it what it is today. This film just focused on one aspect...film-making. For you to take the time and type up such nasty comments about the city (not the movie! But the city and its people) only proves what it is we Northern Californians hate about people from LA! THIS IS A GREAT DOCUMENTARY...VERY INTERESTING, ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE FROM THE BAY AREA...BUT I RECOMMEND IT TO ANYONE.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c10369787d1545ebb3f5df02591d5391",
            "input": "FORBIDDEN PLANET is the best SF film from the golden age of SF cinema and what makes it a great film is its sense of wonder . As soon as the spaceship lands the audience - via the ships human crew - travels through an intelligent and sometimes terrifying adventure . We meet the unforgetable Robbie , the mysterious Dr Morbuis , his beautiful and innocent daughter Altair and we learn about the former inhabitants of the planet - The Krell who died out overnight . Or did they ? You can nitpick and say the planet is obviously filmed in a movie studio with painted backdrops but that adds to a sense of menace of claustraphobia I feel and Bebe and Louis Barron`s electronic music adds even more atmosphere I`m shocked this film isn`t in the top 250 IMDB films .",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12810ecfab5243fb83d90b023acd19d8",
            "input": "along with it's partner, this is the greatest piece of animation ever created. the images and styles are amazing, and match perfectly with the story which is a brilliantly realistic reinterpretation of our own world, where is has been, and where it could go. quite affecting and sometimes painful to watch, it it a masterpiece of the visual art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3baaca9f41a44c4c9ce5039a13a68e41",
            "input": "The previous poster obviously worked on the movie. It's a joke how bad it is and no one would review this kind of movie the way he did.Mentioning all of the actors' names and what they were in previously is a sure sign that he's involved with it in some way.It's on Cinemax right now and I was sure this was some movie where porn stars (the one called Ava is gorgeous and well-endowed) were forced to make something else for some crazy tax reason.Also, when I first saw it, I was sure it was made in about 1986, and I was born in '73, so I thought I knew what i was talking about...but no...it was made in 1993!! Unbelievable!Though I would call it one of those so bad it's good movies. Like watching a train wreck.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81427047eff849f38122e88e4374a598",
            "input": "...there's no one else watching the movie. My husband and I went to watch it last night. It's just a small theater, but there's usually a decent amount of people there. Not this time! My husband and I were the ONLY people watching Dragon Wars last night! Now we know why.The movie was by far one of the worst I've ever seen. Yes, the CG was good, but that was it. The acting, script & dialog, directing, editing, etc. was God-awful! Since we were alone in the room, we felt free to talk during the movie. That is, we talked about how bad it was, that it reminded us of The Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, Godzilla, Mortal Combat AND The Lord of the Rings. It was like we expected to see Rita and Lord Zed portraying commanders of Sauron's army.The creatures were ridiculous. You can't just introduce legions of dino/dragon/lizard things loaded down with cannons without explanation. The Lord of the Rings has a wide spectrum of characters, but it introduces and develops them over 3 movies, not in an hour and a half.The scene transitions are horrible. I didn't fall asleep during the movie, but even though it was an overly simple plot, I found myself getting lost in the plot holes.The characters were caucasian Americans, but spoke almost with broken English because of the badly written dialog in the script.The final scene that could have redeemed some value of the movie...failed. Ethan didn't cry when Sarah died...though he hadn't known her for very long during THIS life anyways. He didn't seem too upset to be left in \"Mordor\", not knowing where he was or how to get back. We couldn't for the love of God figure out where he was or how he got there either, but if he wasn't upset we shouldn't be either.Oh, and why did the dress that Sarah's spirit was wearing look like she borrowed it from Queen Elizabeth? One more thing...all 3 of the main hero characters were reincarnations brought back to finish the job. Sarah completes her task and moves on to the afterlife. Jack does this as well. Then why does Ethan get screwed? He's left alone, without the girl, without a map/compass/helicopter to help him get back. What's he supposed to do? Send smoke signals? And IF he gets back home, does he just go back to his job? He should have been given the same mercy of getting killed out of the movie that the other heroes had.Don't waste your time or money on this movie. We only stayed til the end because we'd paid for it, but as soon as the credits hit, we were out the door.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55b61e8a15ac461ea7044c6e42a24204",
            "input": "I'd love to give Kolchak a higher rating but the show quickly went from scary/suspenseful to silly. ABC's fault. They moved the show to Friday nights at 8:00 p.m., then known as the \"family hour\". Never should have been on Fridays in the first place. I was a sophomore in high school and loved the early episodes! It was first up against Police Woman on NBC. ABC had huge problems with Friday nights. Bad season for them overall until Barney Miller, Baretta, and SWAT debuted in January of '75. Kolchak should have been a hit. Darren McGavin begged to get out of his contract to end the show. Too bad the writing wasn't up to Richard Matheson's in the original TV movies. Still, McGavin made Kolchak his own, as actors can do. Jackie Gleason as Ralph Kramden and Caroll O'Connor as Archie Bunker come to mind. That INS set with the manual typewriters and clacking teletypes seems quaint and ancient today, yet that was part of the appeal. They were very lucky to have Simon Oakland reprise \"Vincenzo\" from the TV films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95ecefeb576940bd8e26b8f9dfc8e02b",
            "input": "Kusturika made it again. Another masterpiece. A coral comedy full of his own landmarks, with a frenetic rhythm and many glorious moments, we laughed and laughed, what a party! The music is everywhere, and also the shooting, the animals, the crazy bastards, sex and amazing gadgets and inventions, everything colorfully visual to entertain only. Pure cinema in essence. A wonderful experience to watch. And one is specially grateful since good comedies are so rare, and so wonderful. Well, this is one, and if you enjoyed Kusturica's previous films, you'll love this, although, as in all comedies, it is about a chemical reaction, and you have to be in the mood for it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab8bcc2a480e401999320366d271dbd2",
            "input": "this movie had a fairly good sounding plot, but the paste was very slow... very slow indeed. even if someone thinks this is a cult classic, i think that there are a lot better films from that era to be watched.the cinematography is not excellent, but not the worst either. the sounds are OK. lighting OK.i still wouldn't recommend this to anyone else than maybe a film-student.the movie does not contain music, and the horses having sex don't make it a good one either. and the woman masturbating on the edge of the bed was plain stupid.no winnings here, skip this utter boredom. i've seen worse believe me, but this is just waste of time, and i don't get the good reviews here. especially the high ratings...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-373b5af9a80e477595241908f77d02f7",
            "input": "Weaker entry in the Bulldog Drummond series, with John Howard in the role. Usual funny banter and antics, but not much plot. Barrymore gets something to do as the inspector, swapping disguises to follow Drummond, Algy, and Tenny on a wild goose chase (mostly in circles; perhaps the budget was tighter than usual) to rescue poor Phyllis, who is being held captive by people who want to lure Drummond to his doom. For those keeping score, in this one, Drummond is planning to ask Phyllis to marry him and Algy is worried about missing the baby's christening. It's fun to see Algy and Tenny dressed up as fisherman to blend in at The Angler's Rest, but little of it rises above silly.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6670ba1305e74e1987d60371208bf631",
            "input": "The basic premise of \"Miami Golem\" most definitely deserves a spot in the top, say, fifty of most demented cinematic plots ever scripted down! I know top 50 doesn't sound too impressive, but I've seen a lot of really weird films with lunatic plots. I was prepared from something convoluted, because the film was directed and co-written by Alberto De Martino, who was one of Italy's most ambitious and creative but sadly underrated film makers. De Martino steals multiple ideas from successful blockbusters, like most Italian directors did around that time, but he always adds a lot of stuff to make it even more complex, confusing and overwhelming. Not all of De Martino's films are worthwhile, but some of them are extremely underrated, like \"A Special Magnum for Tony Saitta\", \"Holocaust 2000\" and \"Formula for a Murder\". The concept of \"Miami Golem\" contains elements from numerous great Sci-Fi and adventure flicks (like \"Alien\", \"Starman\" , \"Close encounters of the Third Kind\", \"ET\", …) but I wouldn't exactly call it a rip-off. The only thing that is really shamelessly stolen from another film is the opening synthesizer theme song that sounds almost identical to Harold Faltermeyer's Axel F. from \"Beverly Hills Cop\". The rest of the film is an amusing hodgepodge of fantasy, Sci-Fi, action, horror and superhero-movie gimmicks. It certainly doesn't always make sense (most of the time it doesn't, actually) but \"Miami Golem\" is undeniably an imaginative and multifaceted film that kept my mate and I fascinated from start to finish.The plot is extremely difficult to briefly summarize but I'll try anyway. Sceptical journalist Craig Milford is reporting the story of a German scientist who allegedly discovered extraterrestrial DNA inside a crashed meteorite and managed to clone it. The DNA cell belongs to an evil alien force that already exterminated another interstellar race in the past and it will unquestionably destroy the whole of mankind as soon as it grows large enough in size. If this isn't problematic enough already, the rich Mr. Anderson ordered to steal the slowly growing evil fetus because he thinks that he can manipulate it and use it to obtain world domination. With the help of some good aliens in an earthly disguise, Craig Milford has the difficult task of safeguarding the planet from the evil fetus. Okay, I know all this sounds grotesque and silly, but I assure that \"Miami Golem\" is in fact a light-headed and easy digestible flick. The first half of the film may come across as overly hectic and confusing, because Alberto De Martino attempts to keep the plot secret through the use of preposterous red herrings. There are subliminal ghostly appearances, supportive characters behaving exaggeratedly mysterious for no real reason and at a certain point there are even speculations about the lost continent of Atlantis. This is all misleading padding material, however, and as soon as the set-up is more or less clear \"Miami Golem\" turns into an ordinary early 80's popcorn action movie with bloody massacres, flamboyant chase sequences (in the Florida Everglades!), explosions, gratuitous sleaze and nasty little fetus-monsters in jars.Now, I really don't want to raise the impression that \"Miami Golem\" is a lost and undeservedly obscure gem of Italian exploitation cinema. Make no mistake, this is a pretty bad movie! The events only become endurable if you accept the stupidity and incoherence of the plot and if you don't succeed in that, well than this is just a non-stop spitfire of negative aspects. The acting performances are painfully awful. Particularly B-movie veteran John Ireland, as the archetypal James Bond villainous character, doesn't seem the least interested in the script. You can tell from his grimaces and by the way he delivers his lines that he also thinks the whole production is retarded and simply signed up for the paycheck. Laura Trotter is probably the least sexy female lust-object ever, and the person who drew the marvelously chaotic VHS cover must have felt exactly the same way, because the ravishing girl on the cover does not appear anywhere in the movie. What an embarrassment this must be for Mrs. Trotter. Still, her completely gratuitous nudity sequences compensate for this, as she's quite hot from the neck down. And, finally, there's the unforgettable scene where David Warbeck takes down a helicopter from a moving school bus with a regular pistol! I don't think even John Rambo can do this, while he's a beefcake Vietnam veteran and Warbeck's character is a simple TV-reporter.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e66a59dbe4c44a8786ebdff27c06d73f",
            "input": "German filmmaker Ulli Lommel has managed a task many horror fans thought was impossible: he's unseated fellow Teuton Uwe Boll for the crown of director of the worst horror film ever made.Lommel is truly the Ed Wood of the new millennium. This film is as shoddy and laughable as the best-worst of EW. I am both proud and embarrassed to say that I watched it in toto, morbidly fascinated to see just low the bar could be set. The answer is: subterranean; Lommel dug a pit and buried it.The fun begins with the cast of international nobodies. Only someone who has lived in Los Angeles, where every auto mechanic, doctor and mailman is an actor or screenwriter waiting to be discovered, could easily understand how Lommel managed to find so many wannabe actors willing to spew his ridiculous dialog with a straight face.The main character, a villainous beat cop, is played by a German actor with a thick German accent. Aside from being a serial killer, he is also the oldest beat cop in LA. Despite the fact that he stops innocent women drivers and takes them into custody, then drags them into his home (which inexplicably is the top floor of a furniture warehouse), and does all this in plain sight of his rookie partners, the LAPD refuses to investigate, going so far as to physically attack one of his accusers in a ninja style raid on his apartment.The sets are excruciatingly bad. The production designer's budget apparently included just enough money for a can of paint; enough to paint \"Precinct 707\" on a cardboard wall.Since the actors were obviously unpaid non-professionals--a sad assortment of European emigres (possibly deportees if they acted in their native lands), bimbos, mimbos, and desperate middle-aged women--and since little if any money was spent on sets, special efx, locations or other production value, it is only fair to mention that they did spring for a few genuine-looking police uniforms. Sadly, they couldn't afford a police car; the uniformed cops cruise the streets in a shiny new Mercury rental.More than half of the story focuses on the dirty deeds of our deranged German LAPD officer and the futile efforts of two young rookies to stop him. One of these young actors is especially pitiable because he's the only actor in this whole mess with even a vague shot at a real career in the movies. The other fits right in, with a rockabilly hairdo and tortured Brando posing that needs to be seen to be appreciated.The latter part of the film is where the title gets its zombie, as the victims of our killer are resurrected after he murders a girl who had just visited some voodoo priestesses to have a protective spell put on her. Don't ask why a girl from Romania would resort to voodooism in anticipation of being murdered, just accept Lommel's logic and enjoy the absurd ride.After much prolonged hand-clawing out of straw-covered roadside graves, the zombie girls manage to make their appearance. They look exactly as they did before death, maybe even prettier, with black glamor make-up generously airbrushed around their eyes. Looking nothing like zombies, they look more like high fashion models ready for the runway.At this point in the movie Lommel borrows a creative note from his lauded countryman Boll, and injects large doses of cheesy Euro-trash techno into the soundtrack. We're talking prehistoric electronic bumblebee noise. Stuff they might have played in an Ibiza disco when Lommel was still young enough to shake his booty.Unlike other zombies, Lommel's girls speak and function as normal... er, I mean, as they did before becoming zombified. This gives our auteur ample opportunities to shower us with more of his golden dialog. Yes, a golden shower it is.I won't spoil anything by revealing the shock ending. All I can say is it's perfectly in tune with the rest of this masterpiece. The spirit of Ed Wood lives on... or should I say his geist.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee55f35ab8f342349f303c80d0c15d3e",
            "input": "Do you know when you look at your collection of old, videotaped movies, and realize that there are some that you've only seen once or twice, and you can't remember if they're worth the time it takes to see them? The Alibi is/was one of those films; I found it, not long ago, and decided I might as well give it a chance. I'm not entirely sure if I'm happy with my decision... on one hand, the film is really, really bad, on the other, now I have another free tape... yeah, you get it. The plot is predictable and not in any way original. The pacing is bad. The acting is bad, but that's not really surprising, seeing as the two leads are former soap-opera stars... they're used to overact. The characters are poorly written clichés. The film even manages to screw up the easiest damn way to impress me(through film): court scenes. Even those don't elicit one single emotion for or against any of the cardboard-thin characters. The film just has no real redeeming qualities whatsoever... even the dialog is bad. The thing is, it's so full of clichés that it's laughable. And that's the one thing that lifts this above a rating of 1/10: the(albeit unintentionally so) comic relief of the many clichés and stereotypes. I didn't pay very much attention to the film, but just about every time I looked at the screen, there was something to laugh at. One final note: I considered using the line \"Tori Spelling can't act\" as a one line summary, but I guess everyone knows that, so I opted for the current one, seeing as it's more informative. All in all, a thoroughly bad film, but not the worst if you've got nothing else to do and if it's on TV. Good for a few laughs, if you can sit through it. 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eac654b8eb6f4924a2946a5f3226f35b",
            "input": "Shecky, is a god damned legend, make no mistake. Until recently I worked for a UK HiFi & Video retail chain, running their testing department. We would go through many new starters, they would be expected to to learn how to fault find the various detritus that returns as non functional in one way or another from the stores. Now to tortu^^^^^ test the resolve of these new staff members, we would issue them with a copy of Going Overboard. We had hundreds of copies of this film because whenever someone who had bought a particular model of Goodmans DVD player that had this film as a free gift, got round to sending their DVD player back, they never failed to send Shecky back also. Our new staff would be forced to use only Going Overboard to test these machines for faults until they had found a disc or two of their own to test with.Now, as to why this film is so bad, where do I begin?Adam Sandler, who can be so, so very funny, as in Happy Gilmore, or the Wedding Singer, must have been having one hell of an off day. The rest of the crew stank, and what is it with Billy Zane? His name crops up in several of the worst movies of all time, and he is a decent actor. Crazy. The production quality is absolute zero.I would have been inclined to give this a zero if I could, because they didn't even have the guts to call it by it's full name 'The Unsinkable Shecky Moskowitz' on release. Even so it is worth a watch so you can see just how far Sandler has come, and just how low he can go.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aac4fce26c98477e873404cab6d7255f",
            "input": "Besides all of the technical mistakes ....How about a female flight attendant who's able to kill, all by herself, 4 out of the 7 terrorists (including ex marines), 2 of whom without even using a gun. Then, she lands the plane perfectly. We're not talking about Sigourney Weaver or Linda Hamilton; we're talking about a regular, frightened, yet very well composed flight attendant. :D How about the leader in charge of the assault/rescue squad, having a full-proof (according to the logic of the script) plan of sleep-gassing everyone and having someone from his team fly the plane. Only he decides at the spur of the moment to change plans and instead lead an attack on the terrorists, guns blazing, not knowing where the terrorists are, or how many, and not securing a position of advantage, so that his whole team gets easily wiped out. Yeah, that's using the old noggin. Only later to decide to use the sleep gas anyway. And it turns out useless for all intensive purposes.Bad as this movie was, though, I couldn't stop myself from watching and wondering, what next? :D I can't help but imagine all the excellent, unemployed script writers thinking to themselves, it's not fair. lol! :D",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-507266a3fbaf403ca6e8a2c90cf4e8e4",
            "input": "Some funny bits, but come Bill! A film? Quoting Zeitgeist? Keep the TV Show and the interviews, but a film? I'm probably overreacting but what a unnecessary provoking film... I don't know. I laughed, disagreed, agreed... this film is very confusing and inconsistent.Bill's a funny guy... but also very cocky... Bill's rhetoric is similar to Bill Hicks, a brilliant comedian. But like many comedians, the borderline between comedy and preaching can be annoying. I think that the major problem in this film is his lack of sensibility. This might be just a personal taste, but comedy that constantly demeans somebody cannot be taken as truth. Bill is obviously emotionally reactive to religious fundamentalism. I agree with Bill that religious fanaticism is not sensible, but the response to it cannot be sensible. It will create unnecessary turmoil. We can do better than just react to fundamentalism. His conclusion is that \"we don't know\" and he fervently tries to convince the spectator that nobody knows anything, to the point that the agnostic community has been concerned with his lack of serious research in comparative religion. His humility that he only knows that he doesn't, is a contradiction as he tries to insist that all religious thought is non-sense.I had great trouble seeing bits of Zeitgeist, the movie in Bill's film. All the astrotheology-influenced non-sense that simplifies all religions as the same is simply disappointing. Zeitgeist has provoked a lot of controversy and has messed up the validity of so much of the valuable Religion Studies scholarship. It is very sad how wrong facts have been tossed around with no reliable scholarly sources. Astro-mystic sources that reduce everything to \"the stars say it all\" seem to be from the Middle Ages. This film is a confusing statement from a confused \"agnostic\". Agnosticism is far more complex and philosophically academic than defending every single issue as \"we don't know\".This film is an obvious proof of how postmodernism has been able to oversimplify and generalize major issues in human history.Watch the film (it has hilarious interviews and bits) but PLEASE do not behave like Bill. You cannot expect anybody to have a mature conversation if you are making sardonic comments in every other line. His arguing techniques are demeaning and insulting, provoking emotional reactions rather than rational and logical argumentation.. There needs to be a more mature way of dealing with these issues.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab602f06e1864a6f8d2c61aacd1bba2f",
            "input": "Terrific film with a slightly slow start - give it a chance to get cooking. Story builds in interest and complexity. Characters and story line subvert expectation and cliche at all the right moments. Superb New York City locations - gritty, real - are a fantastic antidote to the commercial imperatives of \"Sex in the City\" - in fact, the entire film is an antidote to the HBO/Hollywood notion of New York City , sex and relationships. It's a rare film that treats its characters so honestly and compassionately. LOVED IT! Great cast with notable performances by Steve Buscemi, Rosario Dawson, and her love interest (forgot his name!).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9144ce996174de294d8df8c2e0c5449",
            "input": "This movie was the best movie I have ever seen. Being LDS I highly recommend this movie because you are able to feel a more understanding about the life of Joseph Smith. Although the movie was not made with highly acclaimed actors it is a remarkable and life changing movie that can be enjoyed and appreciated by everyone. I saw this movie with my family and I can bear witness that we have all had a change of heart. This movie allows people to really understand how hard the life was for the prophet and how much tribulation he was faced with. After I saw this movie,there was not a single dry eye in the entire room. Everyone was touched by what they saw and I have not been the same since I have seen it. I highly recommend this movie for everyone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebaa587b04624573820a73ed740518e4",
            "input": "Like A Streetcar Named Desire (also directed by Gadg both on stage and screen) Panic In The Streets depicts a New Orleans in which its major claim to fame - the birthplace of Jazz - doesn't even rate a mention. It was Richard Widmark's seventh film and arguably went a long way to establishing him as the fine actor he really was rather than merely a psychotic killer. Gadg himself appears in an uncredited small role as a morgue attendant but the film is rich in talent beginning with Jack Palance (still being billed as Walter Jack Palance)as the local Mr 'Big' followed side-kick Zero Mostel, Barbara Bel Geddes, Emile Meyer, Tommy Rettig plus the rock-solid ever reliable Paul Douglas as the cop who comes round to doc Widmark's point of view. It's a very rewarding movie more so for being little seen. Catch it if you can.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ccb6ae496144e6a8eead880a62d3bae",
            "input": "Wow! I remember so many awful films that loosely revolved around high school from the early 1980s. They usually had someincredibly strained plot and lots of 27 year old actors pretending to be students. As I watched this film I felt a little of the nostalgia of growing up in the 1980s. However, then I find out that this film was made in 1989? Say what! Well, the nostalgia factor ends right there, this is just bad. The plot has the city preparing to close a high school and threatening to bus all of the students to inner city high schools. Which is odd, in that the students at this school are both wealthy and abundant. In fact, the main character lives in a mansion. Makes you wonder how they cannot find money to keep this school alive, have they never heard of property taxes. Oh, but here is the kicker. The school board says that they will keep the school alive, if the students can raise $200,000. So the seniors go about doing this. Hmmm, you raise $200,000 but instead of saving that for college, you put it towards saving the high school that you are a Senior in? And why exactly would they close an overpopulated school before the year is out? And...ahh forget it, this film was stupid and made in 1989!?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-853433f4f68d418786d272a7ea88f556",
            "input": "if.... is the cinematic equivalent of Sgt. Pepper's: Revered by baby boomers as the pinnacle of creation, and viewed as rather a silly bit of business by preceding and subsequent generations. Now that the children of the middle classes the world over are seemingly super human due to the internet, and view the prospect of boarding school as a wonderful opportunity thanks to the Harry Potter books/films, the relevance of if.... couldn't be further from modern concern. In fact, many scenes appear so alien and exaggerated as to hint at an inspiration for Pink Floyd's The Wall.One should never hold personal bias against a film while reviewing, and the cemented date of this film aside, there are a few flaws which others have overlooked. Lindsay Anderson was known to be a fan of Luis Buñuel, on top of generally being too smart for his own good. And despite a straightforward narrative through the first and second acts, the latter portion of the piece it taken hostage by cod Buñuel surrealism and strained attempts at symbolism. Anderson wasn't capable of this feat due to his over-intelligent cynicism, failing to see that Buñuel was jovial in his work. I have not found a critic whom champions the 'Chaplain in a drawer', and am almost certain it still gets sideways looks from those who adore this film. The ending is not so much a concise punch to the established class/values system, as a wet slap on a moving target.The British public school system was firmly for the middle classes (the upper crust being educated at home by private tutors). And the modus operandi of if.... was to check the boxes of public school life which Lindsay believed had been unexplored in film, thereby savaging middle class pretense. Homosexuality, generational cutlery, cold showers et al. In reality, such issues HAD been covered in many other great British films, if.... merely brought them to the fore. The Browning Version was a more oblique damning of such pomp, to name but one.if.... is oddly quaint, and simply can not be viewed with modern (especially American) eyes. Kudos to Anderson for avoiding Mick and Kieth in favour of African chant, and a few brownie points for the latent homoerotic overtones. Points deducted for pretension, establishing characters who disappear, and inciting a glib revolution which came to naught.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b16e078d5d374c0fbc962eb1fedf96a5",
            "input": "If there is one film which is the worst of this year- it's TASHAN The first promo gave an indication that the film will be a boring Dhoom 2 style film, and well i knew first only it would be a bad film whatever it maybe Because of it being a Yashraj film Or maybe seeing the cheesy promo But this film gave me a shock, it was even worst then Dhoom 2 and what i expected First Saif's introduction which is boring Then Saif- Kareena meet, Kareena is so artificial and then Anil Kapoor oh god, what he is doing in such a weird film? What kinda role it is? What acting is he doing? His first scene is alright but then his act gets repetitive and he overacts Then came Akshay who provided some nice scenes, but then the film became more boring and with all the outdated stuff Childhood romance, overdose of childish Rajnikant style action scenes and all boring scenes The ending is another jokeVijay Krishna Acharya would have got 3 films more to direct, if this film had worked, thats the strategy of yashraj, only money nothing else So Vijay is another addition to their list of crap filmmakers Music( Vishal Shekhar) is ordinaryPerformances Akshay Kumar comes in the film as a whiff of fresh air, he actually provides some engaging moments Saif Ali Khan is irritating, Kareena is equally bad Anil Kapoor hams outrageously and spoils the show even more Rest are okay",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fd7c7bdf44e4715853a9ee0b71f719b",
            "input": "I really have no idea how to comment on this movie. The special effects were lackluster, the acting was terrible and if there was a plot to it all, it was on the back of the box. I don't think I can remember a movie being THIS bad in a long time, and I'm a big fan of lesbian sex and boobies!! ;) Even that couldn't save this movie from being just a terrible excuse to pay someone to stand (or lay in this case) in front of a camera.I was pretty much let down by the overall \"zombie\" effect. Since apparently in this movie, zombies are so commonplace that running over a couple here and there, and casually talking about it at a gas station (one with an in-house windshield repair but no interior bathroom), the zombie-movie genre isn't even a factor until the end. Even then, a cameo by a dozen zombies ripping off a girl's clothes doesn't really constitute being a zombie movie.On to the vampires: Apparently all the zombies are male and all the vampires are female, which is OK by me. I'm not sure how vampires are out in the daylight, or the why/how of a soldier vampire came to be standing in the middle of the road, still holding his gun with a stake through his heart, just waiting for the Queen of the Vampires to flick it all the way through. The last segment in the old nunnery made no sense, and when one hot lesbian vampire asks the other hot lesbian vampire \"Do you think we did the right thing?\" by killing the two apparent heroes in the movie, that about put it over the top.The acting and special effects were at an all-time low also. You could almost see the hoses that the fake blood was pumped out of during the closeup of the zombie who got ran over by the General. Speaking of the General, where did they find THIS Kenny Rogers look-alike anyways? No idea what he was the General of, aside of generally confusing and misplaced.All in all, watch the movie if you have nothing better to do or if you have the strong urge to waste $3. Just my $0.02.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f938e99f2e742fa8176515072f67b00",
            "input": "I saw this movie the first time at about twelve o'clock on a Saturday evening. It really is the perfect time for this one. I have never, EVER seen a movie that was actually more predictable and drenched with stereotypes. If you want to see a thrilling action movie, don't watch it because you might lose the will to live halfway through. However, if you want a good laugh, please watch it! I even bought the Chuck Norris 3DVD collection thanks to my enjoyable Saturday night. What especially struck me is that évery scene that would be expensive to make was copy-pasted from a Discovery documentary or an old TV-special on the US Army. Furthermore I was amazed by the fact that they didn't put the slightest effort in making the production look real. Afghanistan is, as far as I can remember, nowhere near any sea and yet with a single click Deke escapes from the terrorists sand-castle with his jet-pack and is taken away by a submarine (probably Discovery). Later on in the movie, Deke throws an Islam terrorist against the wall. In the slow motion scene you can beautifully see the long hairs of the Korean stuntman flap in the air when smashed against the wall. Gotta love it. I recommend you watch it with some friends and a good amount of beer though, only then you'll understand why I've been mad enough to spend 6,99 euro's on the box.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8a1362b4ffd40a1b72c04ccacd9e245",
            "input": "This film ends with a speech in which the narrator tells us the fates of two of the lead characters and that the names of people and places have been changed...before telling us that relation to actual people and events are purely coincidental. This ending line actually sums up everything that has gone before it; as Rino Di Silvestro's messy film completely lacks vision, and if there is any point to the plot; it wasn't put there on purpose. Werewolf Woman is often seen as a guilty pleasure or a 'so bad it's good' film, but I completely disagree. Normally, I enjoy films like this; but Werewolf Woman is indeed a bad film, and despite all the sex and savagery on display; it doesn't even make for a fun watch, and that really is unforgivable. The film really doesn't have much plot, but the thin sliver we are given involves a young woman, who also happens to dream that she is a werewolf. She dreams of going out and finding men, having sex with them and eventually killing them. Back in the real world, she falls in love, but her lover is killed and she goes out for revenge...The film is made up of scenes of sex and gore, which are padded out with extremely dull talking sequences in which various characters mull over the recent events. These scenes are probably there to forward the plot and build characters; but they really don't do that, and succeed only in turning what could have been a passable exploitation romp into an extremely underwhelming film. It would seem that the director was more interested in style and atmosphere than the plot, and this is shown by the fact that the film looks and sounds nice. The sex scenes are often overlong and not very erotic, but the gore works well. The premise is ripe for giving way to a very sexy slice of exploitation, as there's plenty of naked women, and the fact that the central character has a werewolf origin means that there could be plenty of erotica; but this isn't capitalised on, and while I can stomach huge doses of bad acting and poorly done plot lines, I really can't stand watching films and being bored. Overall, I wouldn't even recommend this film to big exploitation fans. There's plenty of better stuff than this out there, and while the title may sound intriguing - the film isn't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed16f3df15a24c9a8ded0b3c1d80e84f",
            "input": "STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning Marshall Lawson (Steven Seagal) is assigned to France on a reconaissance mission along with three new young strike-team recruits after disobeying a direct order from above. However the night before they're due to strike, they are all found grusomely slaughtered by a killer with seemingly inhuman strength. With the French police dallying around with their own investigation, he goes in search of those responsible himself, only to uncover a corrupt faction of the military dealing in a deadly new drug that alters a person's DNA and gives them terrifying new strength.Bad cover. Bad title. Bad post-production tampering. And bad trailer. Pretty bad film. But, I've got to say, I don't think Attack Force is quite his worst. I know this will make me unpopular with most of the other reviewers here (perhaps not Steveday!) but I think a lot of the criticism has stemmed from all the bad news that went before the film rather than the actual quality of it itself.I must say there was nowhere near as much dubbing or ropey editing as I'd been lead to believe. The dubbing there was (which made him sound like Martin Sheen with a groin problem!) was pretty awful and quite frequent but not in use for as large a segment of the film as I'd thought. The plot flowed pretty smoothly as well considering all the messing about with the original finished film called Harvester that went on. Also as another reviewer noted, the film has a nice Gothic look to it, a new touch for a Seagal film.The absolute killer low point, though, was the complete and total lack of any exciting action, with only a few poorly filmed fight scenes for any fun.I have to be honest, though, I would rather watch this again than Flight of Fury, Today You Die or Out for a Kill. **",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc6059b66078458d92fc77148949f847",
            "input": "WAQT is a perfect example of a chicken soup not exactly for your soul. The broth unfortunately has lost its actual taste thanks to all the excess dilution and garnishing that went into its making.What's surprising and disappointing about WAQT is that it comes from a director who stayed away from the usual clichés of Hindi cinema in his first venture but who in his second outing gives in for all the stereotype film formulas. While Vipul Shah had the conviction to show something as implausible as blind men robbing a bank in AANKHEN, he just fails to induce life in the entire packaging of WAQT that is based on something as conceivable as a father-son relationship. Adopted from a Gujarati play Aavjo Vhala Fari Malishu, WAQT does have a sensible storyline with a social message to back up. A mature look on the father-son relationship, a father's unconditional love towards his son and a son's responsibility towards his family. Ishwar Chand Sharawat (Amitabh Bachchan) who has established his entire empire on his own from the scratch leads an affluent life with his wife Sumitra (Shefali Shah). Their only son Aditya (Akshay Kumar) never had the need to strive for anything since he got everything tailor-made and spoon-fed in life. Ishwar's pampering has only spoil him all the more.Aditya dreams to turning into a superstar but does nothing to make his dreams come true. In the meanwhile he marries his ladylove Mitali (Priyanka Chopra). Ishwar hopes that marriage will make Aditya a more responsible man but he is disappointed. Aditya is still at his blithe best leading a carefree life.The endurance limit finally collapses when Ishwar expels Aditya from his house. The sudden change in the attitude of his affectionate father towards him and his now expecting wife baffles Aditya. He has no option left but to strive for the livelihood of his wife and his unborn kid. He starts turning into an independent man but the rift in the relationship between him and his father grows.The story is simplistic while the uncomplicated screenplay has a very elementary approach. One can easily identify and relate with the credible characters of both the father and the son. If you are not one of the two, you at least might have come across individuals like them somewhere in real life.Add to it director Vipul Shah's easy handling of the screenplay. With a family affair like this, any other director in his place would have added in tons of melodrama in the proceedings as per the cinematic laws of Bollywood family dramas, turning the film into a compulsive tearjerker. However Shah excels in the effortless handling of emotions for most part of the film.Clear-cut example of his unpretentious direction is palpable in the pre-interval scene where the father expels the son from his house in a rather frivolous manner. The purpose of the scene is achieved without blotting a brunt on the audiences' brains. Ditto for the scene in the second half wherein the now separated father son have a flippant conversation. That's what differentiates WAQT from a KABHI KUSHI GHUM or an EK RISHTAA and in fact places it one level high in terms of treatment.But after gaining all the distinction points, one may wonder where does WAQT still fail in? The problem lies in the fact that while WAQT distinguishes itself from the others in it's league in terms of treatment, it gives in to the glitches in the terms of packaging. What with the director forcing in song-n-dance every now and then in the first half. There's a Johar kinda shaadi song, a Chopra kinda Holi song, a father son disco dandia song, a dream song and a dream come true song inducing sufficient yawns in the viewer. Picture this... the father has just ousted the son from his house and the son is dreaming of a song in Moroccan mountains with his wife. Out of place! Out of reason! and the audience Out of seat.The film just drags in the first half and the actual story starts only in the second half. The director has wasted too much WAQT on unnecessary elements. The much talked about dog chase sequence isn't bad but is not redeeming either. However Akshay Kumar's taandav dance is simply ridiculous. Imagine he qualifies for the star hunt in the movie with this (unintentionally) hilarious histrionic. Add to it the climax set at the finals of the star-hunt where the son bursts out with emotions. That's so archetypal! Also the editing pattern could have been reversed to conceal the father's reason for the change in attitude towards his son.Anu Malik's music is fine though unnecessary in the proceedings. Santosh Thundiiayil's camera-work is competent enough though not much demanding. Aatish Kapadia has come up with some good dialogs for dramatic moments.Boman Irani and Rajpal Yadav make up or the light moments in the film very efficiently. While Rajpal Yadav has been going overboard with his comic histrionics in many films off lately, this time he underplays his character and is completely restrained. His deadpan expressions are perfectly complimented with Boman's over-the-top histrionics.Shefali Shah is convincing in the mother's role. Not to be taken as a censure but she is flawless in both playing and 'looking' her character. Priyanka is gorgeous and performs her part well.Of course the major applause deserves are Akshay Kumar and Amitabh Bachchan. Akshay is especially expressive in the scene where his doting father intentionally berates him to make him aware of his responsibilities. Though Bachchan goes a bit dramatic in a couple of scenes, his brilliance strikes throughout the film.To sum up, WAQT is like a soup whose ingredients are both tasty and nutritional but the final recipe somehow isn't as much appetizing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3da88103b1f4889b704549b79570dd0",
            "input": "This is a so called 'feel-good' movies, however it made me sad in a way. Why? Because I had the talent, but my parents didn't let me study at the sports academy, as well the fact that at the age of 12 I decided to quit soccer.And soccer is the red line in this movie. Together with the struggle youngsters have with the expectations parents have. An English-Indian girl and her parents, with their traditions and strong family ties, and on the other hand the English family with a daugther who dresses like a boy, and plays soccer... a combination which worries her mother! This movie also lines out the lives of ordinary people, as well as the Indian community in England. It is about believe in your dreams, and live your one life (where did we hear that before).Paraminder Nagra (a beautiful women!) plays Yasminda, a girl who is not interested in boys, new clothes, make-up and the typical 17 year old girl stuff. In contradiction with her sister Pinky, complete the opposite of Yasminda.A real must it is, to see how a young beautiful girl struggles with the traditions of their parents, and finds her luck eventually. With great music from Blondie, Curtis Mayfield, Texas, Melanie C, as well as Indian hit songs.Pleasant to watch, but if you, as myself, ever played soccer, and never made it to the top, then this movie will make you melachonic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-badc6d62c3fc4220bf1b5f469149f0e6",
            "input": "This was a highly original decent movie, and a brave move for all those involved. I don't care if it's not the most well put-together movie of all time, the fact that it has Eddie Murphy doing something non-formulaic, and that I don't know what will happen next, makes it a favorite of mine. I wish more movies were as imaginative as this one, rather than the same old formula for entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cb47a4c4d8b40ed812e818020752c90",
            "input": "This movie was probably the biggest waste of my life ever. The acting was pathetic. Jordan Hinson could not show any upset emotions. At the beginning of the movie, she was supposed to be discouraged. Instead, she bobbed her head with her bottom lip stuck out. She sobbed pitifully without any tears for the crying scene. I was almost angry that out of all girls who wanted to be actresses, they had to pluck out her. Everyone else was suffering from over-acting as well. It was flat out annoying. It was also an insult to figure skaters. Jordan took a month to train, and they cast her as a person who makes the Olympic team. It's practically spitting on the effort real figure skaters put into their work. A pitiful excuse for a movie, and a pitiful attempt to associate hockey and skating. Don't waste your life. It doesn't even deserve one star.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-161229b806994746bbc6c9b540693bf2",
            "input": "After reading the book, which had a lot of meaning for me, the movie didn't give me any of the feeling which the book conveyed. This makes me wonder if Kaufman even liked this book for he successfully made it into something else.Either that or he is simply bad. Most importantly where is the lightness?! From the very first scene, music drownes out most of the dialogue and feeling, and this continues right through the movie. I think the makers thought that by having upbeat music playing right through the movie, this would make the story feel light- however they have completely failed here. Instead the music manages to give everything that 'movie feel', in a way dramatising events so that we linger on them, so that everything actually feels heavy.Another example of the how this adaptation fails is by embellishing the story line making it more dramatic. In the movie we see Franz passing Tomas on the street, who is on his way to see Sabina. The introduction of this chance meeting/passing, which im sure didn't happen in the book, gives Tomas' story more significance than it does make it light.There are many other examples where the continuity of the story has been changed, imo for the worst, however this might have been done because the book simply doesn't convert well into a movie, such is Kundera's style. This makes we wonder if all the generous reviewers on this site were writing with their book AND movie experience in mind rather than writing about just the film. A film which is as long as it is uncompelling. For those who haven't read the book yet I recommend just reading that. For those who have, I have to say you will just be wasting your time and probably end up here writing similar stay-clear warnings.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3153f73bdde24dbabb607fa55a33ece6",
            "input": "OMG! The only reason I'm giving this movie a 2 instead of a 1 is because Tom Hanks is funny as an Elvis-in-the-box. Apart from that, how did this halfway decent cast sign on to do such a lame movie?? Maybe it seemed like a good idea at the time... There are no laughs to mention, the stereotypes are pathetic, the cast is wasted, the direction is amateurish. Now that I think about it, most of the blame probably lies with the director, Joel Zwick. He brings out nothing but flat performances from all involved. Don't waste your time like I did; but then, I enjoy a good train wreck. Geez, now the system is telling me I need more lines-- here ya go: This movie should be called Return to Sender. Okay, now THAT was funnier than anything in the movie...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a32bb281c5641faa14df2b7479bbb2c",
            "input": "I just saw \"Behind Bedroom Doors,\" and this was the first softcore flick with a solid story behind it that I've seen in a while.We begin with two neighborly couples--Vivian and James Fenway (Julia Kruis and Eric Carrington), and Lillian and Gabe Harris (Nicole Sheridan and Chris Gustafson). Vivian appears to be a housewife, James is a lawyer running for district attorney, Lillian works in real estate, and Gabe is a successful plastic surgeon. Got all that? Now, let's get into it.Enter Abby, played beautifully by porn star Chelsea Blue. She's renting the house across the street from the Fenways and lives all by herself. At the beginning of the movie, James looks out his window and sees Abby engaged in playtime with her girlfriend, Gigi (played by prolific pornstress Monique Alexander) and secretly begins to wonder what it would be like to be with her. The next day, Abby gets acquainted with all four of them, and appears to be a nice woman who just happens to be living an alternative lifestyle. She makes a pass at Vivian, who seems startled and says to her, \"Oh...I'm...not that way.\" Everything seems okay...until the plan gets set in motionFirst, Abby shows up at Gabe's office, naked, asking Gabe if she should get a boob job. This is where we get our quote of the movie:\"Tell me about Gabe.\" \"What do you want to know?\" \"Is Gabe happily married?\" \"I'm married.\" \"There's trouble.....let me guess. Your wife stays at home, and does everything you ask. But, she's a good girl.\" \"Yes.\" \"She's not a bad girl?\" \"No.\" \"Does that door have a lock on it?\"You know what happens next....Abby gets it on with Gabe, right there in the exam room. After that, she puts on a little show in her window for James, who comes over and wastes no time in having sex with her. What James doesn't know is that the teddy bear on the piano with the flashing red eye is really a camera taping all the festivities (it's so obvious anyway). Abby has sex with Gabe again later, and this time Gigi joins in to make it a three-way. Now that Abby has something on both men, she requests $100,000 from each in order to buy her silence. Not only could she ruin James's run for office, but she could destroy Gabe's practice.While Gabe and James wrestle with their guilt, Abby finds time to seduce Lillian--who \"experimented\" with women in college. That was a long time ago, but you wouldn't know that seeing her in action with Abby--she looked like an old pro.While Gigi goes along with the plan, she's seems jealous of all the sex her girlfriend is having. \"It's only business,\" Abby says. Confessions and apologies are sure to follow, as is some startling info on Abby's true identity--it seems she's been doing the same thing to different men in many different places. Gabe and James use this info to fight back against Abby's blackmail.Now, on to the sex. The sex scenes were pretty good, and considering all the women involved in this film except for Julia Kruis have a lengthy porn background, I wouldn't have expected anything less. Nicole Sheridan's four scenes were the best of the movie, with the three-way coming in a close second. Monique Alexander only got naked once, but she was a relatively minor character. Julia Kruis was a major character and got naked the same number of times. I suppose since she was surrounded by experienced hardcore pros, she didn't have to have as many sex scenes.To wrap up, \"Behind Bedroom Doors\" had a great storyline, which enhanced the overall grade of the film. I consider it tapeworthy.Women: A- (Nicole Sheridan was good in this film--better than her later offerings in Fred Olen Ray's comedies. At least she can do drama somewhat. Chelsea Blue was a scene stealer--she wasn't that bad as the antagonist. I'd give her an A all by herself. Julia Kruis was her usual self. I wish Monique Alexander had more face time in this film, though.)Sex: B (Solid, very solid sex scenes. Nicole Sheridan's performances were almost hardcore quality. Chelsea Blue looked good in her scenes, too. The two girl-girl offerings weren't scorching, but they did warm up the screen.)Story: B+ (I liked the dialogue and the main storyline. Chelsea Blue's performance was good for the genre, and I was impressed with Nicole Sheridan's turn at drama.)Overall: B (This was a nice softcore flick. I'm glad I was able to watch this one, as I was pleasantly surprised. If Chelsea Blue ever wanted to do more of these, she'd be welcome anytime. That goes for Nicole Sheridan, too--even though she's probably better at doing comedy. I don't mind hardcore girls who can act doing softcore films.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-988fb88e571b4f479e7a06e61205a104",
            "input": "I was watching this movie at one of my usual time, which is real real late at night. Usually if a movie doesn't interest me, I start falling asleep and have to raid the fridge to stay awake.At first I thought that's what I had to do since this movie's pacing started off slow, along with the fact that its shots tended to linger with the character for a long time. But after a bit, I start getting more into the movie, as more is revealed about the main character through his story telling. By the end, you feel like you've known him your whole life. The movie kept my interest so much that I didn't even know the sun was about to rise.Not much of Lynch's bizzare style, but there is enough of quirky characters to make the film amusing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a43b222de7e47968f6eaf13ae9e39a0",
            "input": "I saw this at the Edinburgh Film Festival. It was awful! Every clichéd, violent, rich boy fantasy was on display, you just knew how it was going to end especially with all the shots of the chef's wife and the rape of the first girl.The worst part was the Q&A with the director/writer and writer/producer they tried to come across as intellectuals but you could tell they're the types that get off on violence. I bet anything they frequent brothels and do drugs.Don't waste your time. I had to keep my boyfriend from walking out of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0dcd037c86354ac5b87b5fdca7bc508e",
            "input": "A pleasant surprise! I expected a further downgrade along the line: The Rock (9)-->Con Air (7)-->Armaggeddon (4). Especially for such an overhyped film. Perhaps that's the reason so few approved of this new type of Bruckheimer fare. Clever dialogue instead of snappy one-liners, decent background/motivation instead of shake-n-bake stereotypes and when the chase came you really thirsted for it. Fanboys expecting an Armageddon rollercoaster: stay away. This is one for the more intelligent action fans. It didn't even bother me Jolie appeared so little.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fefe7eb91a9243cebe531d1fef69c5c6",
            "input": "This film has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the worst movies ever made. True, most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond bad into the realm of horrible. There is not one scary moment in it unless you consider stupidity scary. It is typical King garbage -- myths twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called \"scares\" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at least, is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99f819d6da9246d082a18207f2e65a11",
            "input": "A powerful adaptation of the best-selling book and the smash Broadway play about the lives of Bessie and Sadie Delany, two \"colored\" sisters who lived past the age of 100. Wonderfully played in their old age by Ruby Dee and Diahann Carroll, respectively, they tell their story in flashbacks to Amy Hill Hearth (played by Amy Madigan), a white New York Times reporter. The flashback and present-day scenes don't have as much inspirational value in them as in the book, but really are powerful. However, certain aspects of the sisters' lives, such as the inter-racial background of their mother and the reasons behind their father's stern personality are not presented clearly. You need to read the book to fully understand these things. Which is just as well, because the book's just as great! Aside from those flaws, it's wonderfully done and performed, especially by Dee and Carroll, and a very powerful and educational movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a7df2bc7ee64d29b317e57512190c5f",
            "input": "Yeah, I \"get\" Pasolini and his milieu, but at the same time, I feel his \"Decameron\" is largely overrated, and more than a little disturbing. Overrated because the supposed \"realism\" he introduces (milling crowds, crumbling architecture, etc.) are mooted by the absurd and downright goofy way that the characters behave. In the pursuit of realism, Pasolini utilized many non-actors, but their deer-in-the-headlights stares and painfully awkward line delivery gives the whole a terribly off-kilter and inconsistent feel. And frankly -- many of the toothless, misshapenly-featured people are painful to look at.And Pasolini's \"Decameron\" is disturbing (to me at least) because of the casual and prevalent homosexual content. Not because I'm prudish or homophobic (I'm neither) but because the emphasis that Pasolini places upon homoerotic images and situations is contrary to the neo-realism he otherwise espouses, so it comes off as gratuitous and forced. One can almost hear him say \"Ooh--I've got to stick a cute, naked boy in this scene!\" At times it seems that Pasolini is trying to play up the homosexual angle to thumb his nose at critics, and at other times because he enjoys that aspect himself, regardless of what his audience might prefer.The disjointedness of the 9 or 10 different stories in Pasolini's \"Decameron\" struck me as being a failing of Pasolini as a storyteller, rather than being an aspect of neo-realism. He seems to get bored with each story and so he wraps them up rather unconvincingly and with little conviction. Even the Pasolini's final line of dialog in the film, which some people seem to find pithy (\"Why create a work of art when dreaming about it is so much sweeter?\") -- to me, it just makes me wonder why Pasolini would bother making a film if he felt this way? In my opinion, a far better-crafted film (and with MORE homosexual content) is Fellini's \"Satyricon\". It is also full of bizarre-looking people and absurd situations, but it succeeds because of its pacing, direction and strong storytelling whereas \"Decameron\" fails by those same elements.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09dbb40435c64c20bf96b746d6e0c36a",
            "input": "I really thought that this movie was superb. Not only is the history correct, but the style is sumptuous and yet intimate. I was a fan of Emily Blunt's portrayal of Victoria and how she kept her spirit even though she was forced into a virtual exile while in her youth. Blunt depicts the charismatic and sometimes dogmatic manner that Vicotria became famous (perhaps infamous) for. The romantic elements of the movie are so genuine and tender that by the end of the movie you genuinely understand why Vicotria chose to live the rest of her days in mourning of Albert.The technical aspects of the film are worthy of note as well. I appreciated the beautiful score, which moves quite wonderfully along with the dramatic movement of the story. I also considered the cinematography to be outstanding, some scenes leaving me quite breathless because of the lushness and splendor they depict.There have been so few movies this year as beautiful and tender as this film and it rates as one of 2009's best!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c83b73790bba4af79abb3eebffccef3f",
            "input": "I got to see this just this last Friday at the Los Angeles film festival at Laemlee's on Beverly. This movie got the most applause of all the films that evening. Considering that two music videos opened first, I didn't know what to expect since they were very fast and attention grabbing, I wasn't sure I was ready for a short immediately. But to my surprise I really enjoyed this. I thought the main actor demon guy was really good. I was so impressed with his performance that I checked out his name. I was surprised to see that this was the Witchblade guy. He's gotten really good especially since then! Either that or he was given lousy roles or had been pushed by the director really hard for this short. The girl did an okay job. I guess its hard since it was her first performance and being so young. The dad did well also. There was a lot of really nice cg work for a short, both for this and the short playing next \"Mexican Hat\" which was also nice, but I enjoyed this the most because it had the most depth and emotion and I actually cared about the characters. The other was a very simple story. The story was quite illustrative and dark! It dealt with real topics using a more fantasy like approach to keep ADD people like me interested. We won't even talk about the last film in the block which I left. My only complaint is that I only wish I had seen more of the demon character and a little less of getting started, which is why I gave it a 9 out of 10. I also thought the end credits went a little slowly. Otherwise it was beautifully told, directed and edited. The timing was very nice with a complete change from the fast MTV editing done on everything nowadays. There will be more coming from this director in the future as well as the actor. I now will think of him as the Sorrows Lost actor not the Witchblade guy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-112c39b468804387af7b5f4038c0ce93",
            "input": "I have to say despite it's reviews Angels in the Outfield was a pretty good movie. I like the fact how it teaches kids to always have faith and never give up because yes miracles can happen. Unlike the other baseball movies this one particular movie stood out because of hits amazing special effects and well orchestrated soundtrack which was very interesting. Though I liked this movie it did have some flaws such as some irrelevancy (i.e. Towards the end when Ray Mitchell hits a homer he doesn't step on the plate and therefore that wouldn't be a score. But that's just nitpicking.) I have to say i was really impressed with this movie's presence and moral: Just have faith, Don't give up.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4cfed605cfd408aa79a187bde5e7658",
            "input": "Before I watched this tv movie I did not know much about one of my favorite actresses. After watching it, I realized how sad Lucille Ball's life really was. It had it's great moments too, but I didn't realize how sad it was. This movie was very good and told the story of the beloved Lucille Ball very well. I highly reccommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d1e7d5ff70b44cda2e95c332aca7aeb",
            "input": "Steve Carell stars as a person who you can relate to(sort of) in Dan in real life, a film which I expected not to like but ended up liking it. Not that the movie is laugh out loud funny it's just that it has a big heart. We all like Steve Carell, this isn't what fans of The Office would expect to see from him, but you know what, I liked this movie. Carell stars as Dan Burns, a widowed father who's daughters don't really like him. One weekend, him and his daughters travel down to see his family. While there, he goes to a bookstore and falls for a woman. When he gets back to his house, he finds out that his brother Mitch(Played by Dane Cook) is dating this woman(Played by Juliette Binoche).Dan in real life, at times, I found a bit unbelievable. Are the Burns family really the kind of people who do exercises together and play board games together and do a bunch of other family things? I would highly doubt that. I don't know any family who is like that. Is that stopping me from giving it a thumbs up? No.Dan in real life:***/****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0db9c0744898457e897ea37900fd1d54",
            "input": "This movie was craptacular. I was so emotionally uninvolved in every single character that the movies' biggest antagonist was, in fact, myself. I played it beautifully throughout; promising myself I would walk away, but only drinking another beer hoping it would auto-magically transform into something engrossing along the way. Even in this state, I couldn't help but notice that Cuba's acting was as flimsy as tracing paper. His obsessive dedication to his job was unconvincingly done as well as his one night binge after the failure of his own idiot standards. Burt came on the screen as a General, that's right, a General (who wears too much makeup). I fell into a frighteningly fast binge to rival Cuba's, except mine was real and I stubbed my toe. Recompense! Recompense my stubbed toe!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67854ff7795b45129d3b76f048cb3f32",
            "input": "I haven't yet read Kurt Vonnegut's Mother Night (though I've read other books of his, all outstanding pieces of satire and game-changing novel pieces). After seeing Keith Gordon's film adaptation of his book, it will be an immediate must-read in the near future. It's the kind of material that I'm sure if it wasn't made in 1995/96 as a film, it would be picked up right away today in the time period when many period post/present-Holocaust/WW2 movies are quite popular. Except that this is much darker, though even more resonant, about the nature of playing roles and the real underlying horror of living with life after war than say The Reader. It's about the very real danger of pretending in wartime, which is what being a spy in WW2 is really all about.It would be one thing if Mother Night had a script with a lot of emotional depth and complexity about the moral choice and constant role- even after the war ends- for Howard W. Cambpell (Nick Nolte), which is does. But it's also just a really strong feat of cinematic technique. Keith Gordon is not someone I usually think of as a director of really strong material (more-so I think back to him as an actor, oddly enough featured briefly with Vonnegut himself in Back to School), but this is a revelation. He takes the story of Campbell as a story of a fractured life: a German propaganda master (the \"only American left in Berlin\"), who is actually a spy for the Americans but can never have his identity revealed, and was before a playwright who really belonged to \"a nation of two\", himself and his wife (Sheryl Lee). It follows him from his prison cell, awaiting trial in Israel in 1961, as he writes his memoir and tells of his disillusionment about being a 'pretend' Nazi, and then in 1960 in semi-hiding in a New York apartment, which is where the bulk of the film takes place.Mother Night can be quite heavy, like on a level one might associate with the Pianist, but on another more emotional-cerebral level than the stark poetry of that film. Gordon, by way of Vonnegut, is trying to give us a strong look at a man who has nothing, except the memory (and then later a weird transposition) of his long lost love in a \"sister\" who has come back to him in NYC, so he's left to his own devices when he befriends a painter (Alan Arkin, very very good here), and then is found out as a Nazi-in-hiding by a white supremacist newsletter, leading wackos to his apartment. On the surface this should be just a straightforward spy story, but not a thing is straightforward. The 'something' of this man's life is staggering, but it's ultimately of his own choosing. Campbell is one of those characters that could be analyzed for hours on end, but the same conclusions might be reached (and, in a way, mirrors the line Goebbels said): the bigger the lie, the more people believe it. That is except for the select few who started the lie and know its secret and power.But oh, it would be one thing if it were just a wonderful and tragic-comic tale, or another if it were featuring some really fantastic performances (which is does: Nolte is at his very best here, and Sheryl Lee, who we might remember from Twin Peaks as Laura Palmer, stuns in multiple roles, especially in the scene when she reveals she's not 'really' Helga). It's also a gorgeously shot film, with brilliant lighting and shots that reflect the state of mind of the character, or just the starkness or sickening colors of the time (watch the scene where an old Campbell watches a film of his younger self spouting out a rant, the juxtaposition of faces is great). And the music selections rise the level of tragedy. It could be argued some of the music is too much, but at other times it elevates the material past its own usual dramatic dimensions and makes it operatic, solemn about human nature.It's not always an easy film to take emotionally, and some of the twists do have that tinge of \"whoa\" as in any spy story. But it's the subversion from Vonnegut that sticks through, the way of taking appearance and performance, of life imitating art imitating life imitating death, and making it into something worth remembering. I have no idea just yet if the book is better than the film (or the other way around), but at the moment it's hard for me not to recommend this to anyone looking for a masterpiece of post WW2/holocaust storytelling.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0af9065b32f94b1d89d87f73a0f2370e",
            "input": "\"Ghost of Dragstrip Hollow\" appears to take place in a spotless netherworld, an era long gone by, where the biggest sin a kid could commit would be in defying the law and getting a traffic ticket. It opens with a young female auto fanatic getting the business from her arch rival, who pressures her into a car race. That's about it for the drag-racing--this B-flick is mostly concerned with rock 'n roll, man! The folks at American International were obviously fond of decent, square teens who liked to party and yet didn't mind an adult chaperone. There are a few amusing double entendres and fruity exchanges (Necking Kid: \"We thought we'd come out for some fresh air\"...Dad: \"Where did you think you'd find it, down her throat?\"), but the ghost is a little late in arriving. Brief at 65 minutes, the movie cheats us with a climactic car race that actually takes place off-screen and a pre-\"Scooby Doo\"-styled unmasking which makes no sense. However, for nostalgia buffs, some mindless fun. ** from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88113efce69a4659a4422d7affe476af",
            "input": "(spoilers)I was blown away by this movie. I've been renting on movielink for a bit, and decided to check this movie out. Alot of boxing movies seem to overblow the blood. In this movie, it shows it at the amature level. Though I do wish that perhaps more attention would have been brought to perhaps her improving her grades. The movie points out the problems some families face with gender.I was a bit concerned with the ending. But the ending wasn't a disappointment either.I think it was pretty clear by the title that she'd win. What was unexpected was that the two of them got back together sort of at the end.Loved the score for some of the scenes. Highly recommended.10/10Quality: 9/10Entertainment: 10/10Replayable: 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64e70f23bb1741b19444e03005fd1168",
            "input": "If you like movies about creepy towns, hotels, houses, states (ala the Eagles \"Hotel California\"), etc. that possess the people that are \"just passing through,\" read almost any Stephen King novel instead. If you like the setting of \"Disappearance\" start by reading King's \"Desperation\" but also check out \"The Shining\", \"Salem's Lot\" and \"Needful Things.\"The crow motif, the desert, the family driving in desperation to escape or avoid possession are tired. Why didn't they just make the film from the \"Desperation\" novel? Maybe they approached King and he nixed? Must be.Susan Dey and Harry Hamlin look happy to be reunited and they have both worn well over the years, but they're still TV and direct-to-DVD caliber actors.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b10c0f4a10d4ccebd738f23dbddcc43",
            "input": "Five Deadly Venoms is not as bloody and violent as Story Of Ricky or Super Ninjas, but it features some of the best hand-to-hand fight sequences in Hong Kong film history. Director Chang Cheh creates what is considered by many to be his masterpiece. This movie launched the careers of the five men who play the venoms. Meng Lo plays yet another bad ass. He would go on to be in Super Ninjas. Kuo Chui who is Philip Kwok would go on to Story Of Ricky and Hard Boiled. Any chop socky fan can apperciate this. But I still think it ain't as good as Super Ninjas (also made by Chang Cheh). But all chop socky is good and this is one of the very best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8092501dfcfc4fb8945d2462e959c983",
            "input": "Aileen Gonsalves, my girlfriend, is in this film playing a secretary at the main character's bank. She has a lovely scene with Roshan Seth in a restaurant. There's more information on her website at >Having stated my personal interest in the film, I have to say that I think it is a beautiful movie - moving, funny and beautifully filmed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-015bc829b5834880a8be10f2d43f250e",
            "input": "I haven't read this book, but all through the movie I was awestruck with only one thought in my head: This is so Vonnegut. I have never seen an author, all of the intelligence and life behind the workings of a novel, translated so well to film. This movie had the same complexities found in Vonnegut's novels: the jokes were often meaningful and symbolic, and the dramatic events and symbols were often also jokes.Campbell was also a very Vonnegut character, portrayed perfectly by Nick Nolte. He had all of the earmarks of a Vonnegut \"hero\": lack of concern for political boundaries, ironic dark humor giving way to dumb inactivity in response to stress, and an unwillingness to push his version of reality on those around him.Overall, I was constantly surprised and impressed as I watched this movie. It was the same feeling I had reading \"Cat's Cradle,\" my first Vonnegut novel, as if the most perfectly oddball thing that could happen, he thought of THAT, and he made it real and important. Yes, he has nothing but army surplus \"White Christmas\" albums. So it goes!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f5b34e994184166bfd01b1f8340923e",
            "input": "This program didn't do it for me, although I'm a fan of the genre. The major factor that disappointed me was that there was not a single scene which was not dominated by the main character. This made it a bit two-dimensional and I gave up before the program was over.I was hoping to leave my critique there as I'm no movie critic, however, the guidelines on IMDb state that you must put in 10 lines of commentary. It did remind me of Hudson Hawk in the way the main character is in every single scene, and I would hope that the writers of this program could employ some more diversity to engage with the viewers. I don't doubt the talent of any of the cast and crew, it's just that after watching things like \"the wire\", I've come to expect great things from cop drama.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4facf164db64fb18281c556b94b1c2d",
            "input": "I normally only write reviews for movies I really hated or really liked. And, as you can probably tell from the number of stars up there, I didn't like it. By now, I assume you have read about the plot or maybe even seen the movie, so I'll skip the summary. Let's break this down, pros and cons:Cons: The concept: The premise was set up to be interesting. Using Chaos theory as a theme was interesting. However, it wasn't carried out so well. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that Chaos theory was kind of misrepresented. The event that occurred in the movie seemed more like contrived coincidence than anything. I guess the Butterfly effect was represented by the whole \"God(s) causes Tsunami to bring back statue.\" The presentation comes off as really sloppy though. Some people call this intelligent, but it just seems to be another souped up action film.Storyline: Is it just me, or does it seem that Kamal just threw this together to give him an excuse to play ten roles? The plot is extremely contrived; Govind kept losing the vial so many times in obscure accidents (his friend just happens to mix up the vial with a package he was sending to India, a crazy old lady just happens to throw the vial into an idol, half the cast just happens to unexpectedly meet up in the same hospital, and the case with the idol just happened to get mixed up with one that belonged to a famous singer.)CGI: Oh god, the CGI. It was even worse than the special effects in Jaws 3, and those sucked. Right away, I could tell which parts were animated. Even my ten-year-old cousin knows that underwater cars don't look like that. Stunts: Yes, I now that action scenes in Tamil movies aren't realistic, but the stunts in this one were horrid and actually distracted me from the story.Make up: I have to admit, they did a better job than expected. I thought Kamal would be playing people with similar skin tones, so the two fake white guys and the fake Japanese Aikido guy caught me off guard. However, it was still pretty bad, I could easily tell which ones were wearing masks.The songs: The music was distracting and out-of-place in many instances.Asin: Her character was possibly the most annoying one in the movie. She was loud, ditsy, and obsessed irrationally about that idol. I actually found myself wishing she would die.Plot holes and Fridge Logic: Let me get this straight: a lab monkey was smart enough to get past a password-locked door, but not intelligent enough to tell the difference between a bar of chocolate and a vial with a deadly virus in it. And then, an ex-CIA agent who's after the vial figures out it's headed for India. Instead of immediately following it, he marries a pole dancer first. A famous Punjabi singer with cancer checks into a small town hospital in the third world when he could easily afford the best medical treatment available. Furthermore, he gets shot in the throat with a bullet. You'd think he would be killed, but instead, the magic bullet has cleared his tumor. You read that right, a BULLET knocked out the tumor. Pros... The Naidu Character: Possibly the only likable part of the movie was his comedy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-369fbf56d3764628b9b02b7175bafdeb",
            "input": "We had STARZ free weekend and I switched on the station to see what was on . It was this movie Howling II: The acting was terrible but the eye candy was great. Sybil Danning and Marsha Brown as the afore mentioned eye candy. I was laughing a lot from the few scenes I saw.My friends wonder why I never want to go to Horror movies , If they saw this film they would know why. I would get thrown out for laughing so hard.Just a couple of trivia notes : Reb Brown who played Ben White had played Captain American in a made for TV movie Marsha Brown was Mick Jaggers inspiration for the song \"Brown Sugar\" Mick has great taste in women for sure.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fec88f18d2145cb887a25bb279b109d",
            "input": "Like last year, I didn't manage to sit through the whole thing. Okay, so Chris Rock as a host was a good choice because he was vaguely engaging. Or rather, out of all the total bores packed into the theatre, he at least wasn't in the Top 10 Most Boring. A lot of the presenters, on the other hand, were in this coveted Top 10. I hadn't known that the whole thing had been done by autocue (although I knew it was scripted) but it was really terrible to see these supposedly good actors unable to insert expression, look away from the cue and stumble over simple words (Natalie Portman…if there's no director, she's gone). The Night of Fancy Dresses and Boring Speeches was long and tedious, Beyonce Knowles butchered some good songs and there were very few decent acceptance speeches and clips. Adam Sandler wins the Worst Presenter award.For helping me write this review I'd like to thank my Mum, my Dad, my lawyers and my pedicurist for all believing in me, and I'd like to point out that I have a high metabolism and of course I haven't been starving myself for a month. I'm not going to cry...thank you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0adcfb0d22dc46d78f9b0d483d4ced6a",
            "input": "The Ancient Mariner is a truly classic piece of work, as the original poem was/is. The context/setting with the old mariner himself is fine, clear, and without pretense. The artistic work that accompanies the reading of the poem fits perfectly the time/period of the setting and of the work itself, carrying the audience into the period with a still, yet moving accompaniment, using excellent still-movement strategies only well conquered by the pre-MTV era producers and much less apparent in more current works. (MTV brought to television and video a static movement that races through, often irrelevant cuts, from theme to theme without forward movement and without clear relationships to theme or storyline.) The voice, intonation and vitality of Redgrave's reading brings this touching poem to life with all its fear, strife and pain. In addition, the smooth movement of the video emphasizes the cadence and occasional monotone (in this case a positive mood under the theme of the story itself)of the author's rendition of the ancient mariner's sad and spooky tale. This is a must for any love of classic poetry, the sea, a tall tale, that almost rings true, and a story that has left a lasting impact on our world and culture. Who does not understand the meaning of an \"albatross\"? or the concept of \"water, water everywhere and not a drop to drink?\" A truly fine experience. Thank you Mr. DaSilva for bringing this to life for us, never to be forgotten.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8beca3ba6c4e4326a8035189c6d9b87c",
            "input": "I still wonder why I watched this movie. Admittedly, before I viewed this film, I knew practicly nothing about the beatles. I didn't even know all their names! All I knew was that they had a ton of fans, they had some albums that some people claim to be the greatest ever, they broke up, John married Yoko Ono, and John was murdered.Also, VH1 isn't even my favorite music station, MTV is. Still, for some reason or another I decided to watch it, not expecting much. Surprisingly, I enjoyed it very much! The dialogue was written and handled very well with the occasion of a slight accent mess up. This is very important, because John and Paul talking is pretty much the whole film, allthough they are taken outside to explore more possibilities, and to keep you watching. Jared Harris and Adien Quinn give good performaces,overall.The ending was also very smart. I enjoyed how the movie gets you excited about the SNL performace, and then slaps you over the head and makes you realize that it would be better if they just let it go, and end it on a good note. My favorite moment is probably the touching rooftop scene.Overall, I recommend this film to almost everyone. It is a very good way of settling your curiosity of what could have happened if 6 years after the break up Paul just showed up on John's doorstep. Which is probably the main reason of my viewing this film, settling my curiosity on who the beatles really were and what could have happened to them after the breakup.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b7f7ebc61f84423bb8ac75160114d8c",
            "input": "The subsequent two seasons of this original series was less than lacklustre. The latter seasons disastrous reshuffle contributed to its three season short life span. Maybe if the plug was pulled after the first season it would've gained a cult following.Aside from that, the first season was truly hilarious! Witty, clever with superb writing it was promising. The first season's excellent brew had the right ingredients - characters/actors, storyline and so forth. Plus a comedy about a paparazzi reporter was original to boot. Nora and her fellow \"photographers\" on the prowl, night after night, day after day for the exclusives.A lot of things don't make sense to me. Like how this show, and another fav of mine - Gross Pointe never \"made it\". If only the first seasons of the Naked Truth, and Grosse Pointe were released on DVD, please anyone out there?!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61c1fc418352440cada00aaf9679343d",
            "input": "I was so disappointed in this movie. I don't know much about the true story, so I was eager to see it play out on film and educate myself about a little slice of history. With such a powerful true story and great actors it seemed like a surefire combination. Well, somewhere the screenplay failed them. It was so scattered - is this movie about his childhood? his love life? his own disability? his speaking ability? his passion for the disabled? I'm sure there is a way to incorporate all of those things into a good story, but this movie wasn't it. I was left cold watching characters that were unlikable not because of their disabilities, but because of their personalities. Other small gripes: 1. The heavy-handed soundtrack. It's the seventies - WE GET IT ALREADY! 2. If he's such a phenomenal public speaker, why weren't we treated to more than a snippet here and there - and even then mostly in montages?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aaccb13280914f3ea54df968f081b0ba",
            "input": "Frankly, this movie has gone over the heads of most of its detractors.The opposite of perdition (being lost) is salvation (being saved) and this movie is one of a very few to deal with those two concepts. The movie also explores the love and disappointments that attend the father-son relationship. It should be noted at the outset that none of these are currently fashionable themes.The premise is that the fathers in the move, hit-man Michael Sullivan (Tom Hanks) and his crime boss John Rooney (Paul Newman), love their sons and will do anything to protect them. But Rooney's son Connor is even more evil than the rest. He kills one of Rooney's loyal soldiers to cover up his own stealing from his father. When Connor learns that Sullivan's son Michael witnessed it, he mistakenly kills Sullivan's other son (and Sullivan's wife) in an attempt to silence witnesses.Sullivan decides he wants revenge at any price, even at the terribly high price of perdition. Rooney, who in one scene curses the day Connor was born, refuses to give up his son Connor to Sullivan, and hires a contract killer named Maguire (Jude Law) to kill Sullivan and his son. So Rooney joins his son Connor on the Road to Perdition.For the rest of the movie, accompanied by his surviving son young Michael, Sullivan pursues Connor Rooney down the Road to Perdition, and Maguire pursues Sullivan. When Sullivan confronts Rooney in a Church basement, and demands that he give up Connor because Connor murdered his family, Rooney says - \"Michael, there are only murderers in this room,.., and there's only one guarantee, none of us will see Heaven.\" As the movie ends, somewhat predictably, one character is saved and one character repents.I'm not a big Tom Hanks fan, but he does step out of character to play hit-man Sullivan convincingly, giving a subtle and laconic performance. Newman does well as the old Irish gangster Rooney, showing a hard edge in his face and manner, his eyes haunted by Connor's misdeeds. Jude Law plays Maguire in a suitably creepy way. Tyler Hoechlin plays Young Michael naturally and without affectation.The cinematography constantly played light off from darkness, echoing the themes of salvation and perdition. The camera drew from a palette of greens and greys. The greys belonged to the fathers and the urban landscapes of Depression era Illinois. The greens belonged to the younger sons and that State's rural flatlands. Thomas Newman's lush, sonorous and haunting music had faint Irish overtones and was played out in Copland-like arrangements. The sets were authentic mid-Western urban - factories, churches. The homes shone with gleaming woodwork.The excellence of the movie lies in its generation of a unique feeling out of its profound themes, distinctive acting, and enveloping music and cinematography. The only negative was a slight anti-gun message slipped into the screenplay y, the movie's only nod to political correctness.I give this movie a10 out of 10; in time it will be acknowledged as a great film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccc9d9426470426890394e967263d59e",
            "input": "This is one of the silliest movies I have ever had the misfortune to watch! I should have expected it, after seeing the first two, but I keep getting suckered into these types of movies with the idea of \"Maybe they did it right this time\". Nope - not even close.Where do I begin? How about with the special effects... To give you an idea of what passes for SFX in this movie, at one point a soldier is shooting at a \"Raptor\" as it runs down a hallway. Even with less than a second of screen time, the viewer can easily see that it is just a man with a tail apparently taped to him running around. Bad bad bad bad.How about the acting? If that's what you can call it. There is one character who, I suppose, is supposed to be from the south. However, after living in the south for six years now, I have never heard this way of talking. Perhaps he has some sort of weird disability - the inability to talk normally. I find it fascinating that the character does nothing that requires him to have that accent - therefore there was no reason for the actor to try to do one.How about the plot? It's pretty basic - Raptors escape, people with guns must hunt them down. I'm starting to wonder why the dinosaurs in these movies always seem to run into the nearest system of tunnels... wouldn't they stay outside to hunt prey? Oh well, at least they have the good sense to appear very very little in the movie which supposedly revolves around them.Other things - Let's say you are in a building and you know that there are man eating raptors running around in it. Would you decide to take time out to have an argument about who is better - Army or Marine? And then decide to have an arm wrestling contest to settle it? How about the idiotic idea that they have to track down the raptors - Split up into groups of two. Didn't they ever watch any horror movies (Or at least an episode of Scooby Doo)? In short, this is one of the dumber movies out there. Miss it unless you want to groan your way through a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c62b57f2b7d14028bb6a782ed5242d38",
            "input": "Margret Laurence probably didn't intend on having any of her novels adopted for film, let alone the Stone Angel. Hagar, as a character, was one who constantly challenged the social norm (Gainsay who dare, anyone?), and ended up nearly sacrificing her humanity in the process. The symbols in the book (the Stone Angel, Silver Thread, etc, etc.) are constant reminders of this struggle of the old and new, and the carnage (so to speak) along the way.While the film is reasonably faithful to the plot of the book (but it isn't really a plot kind-of storytelling, is it?), I think it missed the point on capturing the spirit of the film. Hagar's defiance (for the sake of defiance) was not there. Bram could have been a lot more crude than portrayed, and Hagar's father could have been played more \"traditionally\", so to speak. If the filmmaker would insisted on stronger portrayals, the film would drive the point straight to home.Along the same vein, why should we see cell phones, organic produce, and other modernizations? Are we trying make some points for the sake of making some points (e.g., the Muslim girlfriend and the Native people). Hagar and co. are everything but politically correct in the book, so why should we see that in the film version. Modernization may be an excuse for a low-budget operation, but using that as an excuse to send subliminal politically-correct messages that are totally irrelevant to the novel (and the film) seems like throwing punches below the intellect.There is also the audience. It seems that we have been conditioned to see bitter old people as cute and lovable. Why should be laugh every time Hagar is at her tantrums? I doubt Magaret Laurence wanted her readers to laugh at, or with, Hagar. These people are frustrated and are full of angst, and all we do is to laugh at them. I don't think it did Hagar and other folks in her situation any justice.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a716d56b25af4406a9f53587b873c7c8",
            "input": "**Attention Spoilers**First of all, let me say that Rob Roy is one of the best films of the 90's. It was an amazing achievement for all those involved, especially the acting of Liam Neeson, Jessica Lange, John Hurt, Brian Cox, and Tim Roth. Michael Canton Jones painted a wonderful portrait of the honor and dishonor that men can represent in themselves. But alas...it constantly, and unfairly gets compared to \"Braveheart\". These are two entirely different films, probably only similar in the fact that they are both about Scots in historical Scotland. Yet, this comparison frequently bothers me because it seems to be almost assumed that \"Braveheart\" is a better film than \"Rob Roy\". I like \"Braveheart\" a lot, but the idea of comparing it to \"Rob Roy\" is a little insulting to me. To put quite simply, I love \"Braveheart\", but it is a pale shadow to how much I love \"Rob Roy\". Here are my particular reasons...-\"Rob Roy\" is about real people.Let's face it, the William Wallace in \"Braveheart\" is not a real person. He's a legend, a martyr, a larger than life figurehead. Because of this depiction, he is also a perfect person, never doing wrong, and basically showing his Scot countrymen to the promised land. When he finally does fail, it is not to his fault. Like Jesus, he is betrayed by the very people he trusted most. He even goes through the worst kind of torture because he wants freedom so much.The depiction of Wallace is very well done and effective. But it really doesn't inspire or intrigue me. I find human ambiguity far more facinating than human perfection. That is why \"The Last Temptation of Christ\" is a better film than \"King of Kings\", and that is also one of the reasons why I think \"Rob Roy\" is better than \"Braveheart\". Rob Roy may be heroic and brave, but he is far from perfect. He makes several mistakes that affected the lives of many of his loved ones. Now sure, not bearing false claim against the Duke of Argyll was an act of nobility and courage, but it was also an act of egoism and self centeredness. Let us not forget that the kinfolk that he had claimed to protect were driven homeless by the end of the film because of this act. But Rob did the best he could, and that was all you could ask of him.Rob's Wife Mary, is also a normal, ambigious person. Let us start though, with how she looks in this film. Sure, she's beautiful, but she doesn't wear makeup and she basically allows her natural beauty to show. Compare this with the two loves (or one, depending on your point of view) of William Wallace in \"Braveheart\". Now these two ladies are hot, but hardly indicitive of how women looked at the time (especially the lay persons). Maybe not a fair comparison, but just another example of how Rob Roy's attempts for accuracy are far more effective.Throughout \"Rob Roy\", Mary has to live with her vicious rape by the dastardly carrion, Cunningham. She feels compelled to tell Rob of her struggle, but doesn't because she knows that Rob must seek revenge for her rape. Such revenge would surely mean the death of Rob, and Mary is not prepared for such a sacrifice.The villains in \"Rob Roy\" are equally as compelling. Although the enemies in \"Braveheart\" are well written, they are hardly original. Robert the Bruce, a man both brave and cowardly, is plagued by moral decisions that are all to familar in the fictional realm. Should he take his claim as the king of Scotland, or should he betray Wallace in order to ensure the safety of his family name? Bruce is the most ambigious character in \"Braveheart\", but from Brutus in \"Julius Ceasar\" to Fredo in \"The Godfather Part II\", these types of characters are hardly original. Longshanks, although a compelling villain in his own right, is very one dimensional. He is the epidemy of evil, and his tyrant ways stand in direct contrast to Wallace's heroism.\"Rob Roy\" has three villains that are wonderful in their chicanery. First of all, let's start with Marquis of Montrose. He is a man who is so obsessed with his self image, that he's willing to let an innocent man suffer because of it. \"See to it that I am not mocked\" are his favorite words to his \"factor\". He is a man obsessed with power, upset that a man of great noble bearing as the Duke of Argyll can be considered of greater providency then him. He is shamefully self obsessed and insecure. He is an evil aristocrat, but in ways that make him unique.Cunningham and Callarn are the conspirators in \"Rob Roy\", and are also Roy's direct assailants. Callarn is so cunning in his cowardace that he is almost comical. He will do anything to maintain the good will of the Marquis, which includes backstabbing and trickery. Cunningham is a compelling character in that he seems to have been raised to do whatever he can to obtain status and the affection of the Marquis. He needs a father, little does he know that the Marquis is his real father. Therefore, when the opportunity to obtain wealth comes from Callarn, he grabs it without even questioning it. He is very much like the evil of modern man, so self centered and vain that he cares not about the consequences of his actions on others.Many have criticized Tim Roth's performance in this film as overacting. Hogwash I say. It is clear that Cunningham is not simply evil but also psychopath throughout the film. In a world where a man and his stepson can go around shooting random people for amusement, is Cunningham too much of an unbelievable character? We live in a society where people seem to have decreased the value of human life. \"Rob Roy\" simply teaches us that only the circumstances of this decreased value has changed. It is a problem throughout human history that the vanity of the human heart will not allow for the capacity for compassion. Rob Roy and Mary give us hope that goodness will prevail, but snakes will always exist in our world.Another character that I find fascinating is the Duke of Argyll. He is a true nobleman, and his values of honesty and courtesy are in direct contrast to the Marquis. He appreciates the bravery of Rob Roy and Mary, and has a direct vexation for the Marquis and his factor. He gives the world hope for the people of power. Hopefully, people like the Marquis are an exception and not the rule.- The final duel in \"Rob Roy\" is more exciting then 10 of the battle scenes in \"Braveheart\".One thing I get tired of is people telling me that \"Braveheart\" is a better film because of the battle scenes. First of all, battle scenes are hardly original. From \"Spartacus\" to \"Gladiator\", Hollywood has had a long tradition of historical European battle scenes. \"Braveheart\" has some of the best battle scenes ever put on film, but they suffer from one important problem. These battle scenes have no context except for the fight for freedom.Now, don't get me wrong, duels are hardly original either. In fact, there are probably 10 times as many films with duels as there are with battle scenes. But the context of the duel between Cunningham and Rob Roy is a beauty to behold. It is one of the greatest scenes in film history. Let me explain why...First of all, the fighting style and the bearing of the two characters in this duel describe the characters perfectly. Cunningham is effette and dangerous, Rob Roy is strong and courageous. Cunningham uses a fencing sword while Rob uses a broadsword. Cunningham fights with quick tricky movements, while Roy's fighting style is more obvious.The whole film, from the deliberately slow first half to the exciting second half, is leading up to this moment. It is powerful stuff, and it is clear that Rob must exterminate this menacing evil that has plagued his whole world. When Rob finally gets the upper hand (literally and figuratively,) it is one of the greatest moments in film history. Rob wins because he has more to live for, and his honor is more powerful than 10 Cunningham's. The use of music is absolutely chilling in this scene. Good prevailing against a real evil is more powerful to me than seeing a dude get disemboweled just so he can yell \"FREEDOM!\". But hey, maybe that's just me.- \"Rob Roy\" is more realistic than \"Braveheart\"I don't know that people in the aristocracy or Scotsmen talked like the people in \"Rob Roy\", but I do feel that it clearly an attempt to capture their speech patterns. I feel that many people are bored by \"Rob Roy\" simply because they can't understand what the characters are saying. If this is the case, then read some Shakesphere, or put on the close-captioning. \"Rob Roy\" is actually one of the greatest written films of the 90's. Many of the dialogue in this film is clever, but maybe you have to watch the film a couple of times to understand it.By contrast, the dialogue in \"Braveheart\" is hardly very interesting. Of course, what do you expect when the main character is a Scotsman played by an Australian? This is a legend, and there was clearly not an attempt to capture the speech of the times. This film takes place several centuries before \"Rob Roy\", and yet they talk like the people today. Thus the reason that many people like it better. Audiences today have become increasingly lazy, and they don't want to take the time or patience to understand things that are complex. Therefore, as with many epic films, they expect to see the villians speak a recognizable English accent while the heroes speak in a vernacular not too far away from our American language. Sure, it is clear that the Wallace is Scotish, but other than sounding like Scotty from Star Trek and a couple of \"Aye\"s for acknowledgement, the Scots in this film fit into the Hollywood tradition of how we believe Scots should sound.So, do these descriptions prove that \"Rob Roy\" is a better film than \"Braveheart\"? Hardly. But if it proves one thing, it shows that it is hardly common knowledge that \"Braveheart\" is a better film than \"Rob Roy\". To put simply, \"Rob Roy\" is a film that has themes that are very apropos in today's world. \"Braveheart\" is a film about a legend that is inspiring but hardly realistic. You can make a decision on what you think is better...Grade - A Score - 9",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4257bd754dd428cbd992a2c856aa8b1",
            "input": "Serge Farnel made a very precise critics of this film in the revue \"The Rwandese night\" (www.lanuitrwandaise.net)A critics which shows how France was behind all the situation undergone by the United Nations in Rwanda.The UN soldiers were in a dangerous situation while the french soldiers were warmly welcomed by the genocide forces.The day before, ten UN soldiers had been killed by the genocide forces.That is why the UN soldiers decided to protect their own lives by driving behind the french trucks.By doing so, they gave up the Tutsi which is unforgivable of course.But we must keep in mind that the french soldiers organized this situation.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbf5bfbde9bf4a3b8801c3d1125cabcf",
            "input": "Verry classic plot but a verry fun horror movie for home movie party Really gore in the second part This movie proves that you can make something fun with a small budget. I hope that the director will make another one",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f914382d0314fccbaefa905536ae5b5",
            "input": "No, not the administration of GWB, the Decider/Strutter/Smirker--but the mini-series \"Monarch Cove.\" Lifetime must have realized what a dog this was because the series was burned off two episodes at a time, most of them broadcast between 11 p.m. Friday nights and 1 a.m. Saturday mornings. As to why I watched the whole thing, I can only plead to weekly sudden convulsive attacks of masochism.Most of the cast are unknowns who are likely to remain unknown. The only two recognizable names are Shirley Jones and Rachel Ward, who turn in the only decent performances (Jones doesn't make it through the entire series--lucky woman). Ward, by the way, is aging quite well since her \"Thorn Birds\" days.The one main thread to the plot--who murdered the father of the heroine who is wrongly convicted of Dad's murder but is freed after six years in the slammer--is stretched out for so long and concluded so hastily that you won't especially care who dun it. There is a great deal of \"steamy\" sex, several murders, and all sorts of rude behavior--virtually none of which is either interesting or credible. Most of the cast is not particularly attractive and definitely not talented. The writing and direction is on a par with the cast.If you stick around to the end, the post card is a (very minor)hoot.CONSIDER YOURSELF WARNED!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6c2a90626344469b600d1f94f98a57f",
            "input": "This movie is so great. Its set back in probably the 40's and Meg Ryan's character struggles to be known as 'smart.' Plus Tim Robbins is so cute in this movie. And everything about it has a magical feeling towards it. Everytime I watch it I feel happy. It's definitely a girl movie, and I'm a girl, so I like it. I also love the music. The violin is awesome. but besides that I think it's a cute story and everyone should watch it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d5138c2ef914fd08671a2ba54765307",
            "input": "Many reviews here explain the story and characters of 'Opening Night' in some detail so I won't do that. I just want to add my comment that I believe the film is a wonderful affirmation of life.At the beginning Myrtle Gordon is remembering how 'easy' it was to act when she was 17, when she had youth and energy and felt she knew the truth. Experience has left her emotionally fragile, wondering what her life has been for and, indeed, if she can even continue living. A tragic accident triggers a personal crisis that almost overwhelms her.Almost - but not quite. At the eleventh hour she rediscovers the power of her art and reasserts herself (\"I'm going to bury that bastard,\" she says of fellow actor Maurice as she goes on stage). It seems almost sadistic when Myrtle's director prevents people from helping her when she arrives hopelessly drunk for her first performance. He knows, however, that she has to have the guts to make it herself if she is to make it at all.Some critics wonder if this triumph is just a temporary pause on Myrtle's downward path. I believe this is truly her 'opening night' - she opens like a flower to new possibilities of life and action, she sees a way forward. It is tremendously moving.Gena Rowlands is superb. The film is superb. Thank you, Mr Cassavetes, wherever you are.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-deca9fc6a67942829037abbc2d101b21",
            "input": "I admit to having been a fan of the original stage production. I never saw the movie version until very lately on cable, and watched it with anticipation, to see my memories brought alive again, because I adored the original show. Imagine my dismay.This has to be the worst translation of a Broadway show to film ever made. They changed the story, they changed the songs, they lost the soul. I was expecting a trip down memory lane, singing to the extraordinarily touching Music and the Mirror, At the Ballet, and Hello Twelve, Hello Thirteen. Not! Not only did they adulterate the music to an almost unrecognizable point, but they messed up the storyline, adding songs and exterior plotlines (hello Cassie and Michael Douglas) not present in the original, and injecting \"drama\" where it wasn't necessary. The original had enough pathos on its own. If you were a fan of the original Broadway show, don't bother. I'm sorry I wasted my time, and diluted my memories, watching this tripe.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afe809942a914ead8174ea8fc14ac617",
            "input": "Match 1: Tag Team Table Match Bubba Ray and Spike Dudley vs Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit Bubba Ray and Spike Dudley started things off with a Tag Team Table Match against Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit. According to the rules of the match, both opponents have to go through tables in order to get the win. Benoit and Guerrero heated up early on by taking turns hammering first Spike and then Bubba Ray. A German suplex by Benoit to Bubba took the wind out of the Dudley brother. Spike tried to help his brother, but the referee restrained him while Benoit and Guerrero ganged up on him in the corner. With Benoit stomping away on Bubba, Guerrero set up a table outside. Spike dashed into the ring and somersaulted over the top rope onto Guerrero on the outside! After recovering and taking care of Spike, Guerrero slipped a table into the ring and helped the Wolverine set it up. The tandem then set up for a double superplex from the middle rope which would have put Bubba through the table, but Spike knocked the table over right before his brother came crashing down! Guerrero and Benoit propped another table in the corner and tried to Irish Whip Spike through it, but Bubba dashed in and blocked his brother. Bubba caught fire and lifted both opponents into back body drops! Bubba slammed Guerrero and Spike stomped on the Wolverine from off the top rope. Bubba held Benoit at bay for Spike to soar into the Wassup! headbutt! Shortly after, Benoit latched Spike in the Crossface, but the match continued even after Spike tapped out. Bubba came to his brother's rescue and managed to sprawl Benoit on a table. Bubba leapt from the middle rope, but Benoit moved and sent Bubba crashing through the wood! But because his opponents didn't force him through the table, Bubba was allowed to stay in the match. The first man was eliminated shortly after, though, as Spike put Eddie through a table with a Dudley Dawg from the ring apron to the outside! Benoit put Spike through a table moments later to even the score. Within seconds, Bubba nailed a Bubba Bomb that put Benoit through a table and gave the Dudleys the win! Winner: Bubba Ray and Spike DudleyMatch 2: Cruiserweight Championship Jamie Noble vs Billy Kidman Billy Kidman challenged Jamie Noble, who brought Nidia with him to the ring, for the Cruiserweight Championship. Noble and Kidman locked up and tumbled over the ring, but raced back inside and grappled some more. When Kidman thwarted all Noble's moves, Noble fled outside the ring where Nidia gave him some encouragement. The fight spread outside the ring and Noble threw his girlfriend into the challenger. Kidman tossed Nidia aside but was taken down with a modified arm bar. Noble continued to attack Kidman's injured arm back in the ring. Kidman's injured harm hampered his offense, but he continued to battle hard. Noble tried to put Kidman away with a powerbomb but the challenger countered into a facebuster. Kidman went to finish things with a Shooting Star Press, but Noble broke up the attempt. Kidman went for the Shooting Star Press again, but this time Noble just rolled out of harm's way. Noble flipped Kidman into a power bomb soon after and got the pin to retain his WWE Cruiserweight Championship! Winner: Jamie NobleMatch 3: European Championship William Regal vs Jeff Hardy William Regal took on Jeff Hardy next in an attempt to win back the European Championship. Jeff catapulted Regal over the top rope then took him down with a hurracanrana off the ring apron. Back in the ring, Jeff hit the Whisper in the wind to knock Regal for a loop. Jeff went for the Swanton Bomb, but Regal got his knees up to hit Jeff with a devastating shot. Jeff managed to surprise Regal with a quick rollup though and got the pin to keep the European Championship! Regal started bawling at seeing Hardy celebrate on his way back up the ramp. Winner: Jeff HardyMatch 4: Chris Jericho vs John Cena Chris Jericho had promised to end John Cena's career in their match at Vengeance, which came up next. Jericho tried to teach Cena a lesson as their match began by suplexing him to the mat. Jericho continued to knock Cena around the ring until his cockiness got the better of him. While on the top rope, Jericho began to showboat and allowed Cena to grab him for a superplex! Cena followed with a tilt-a-whirl slam but was taken down with a nasty dropkick to the gut. The rookie recovered and hit a belly to belly suplex but couldn't put Y2J away. Jericho launched into the Lionsault but Cena dodged the move. Jericho nailed a bulldog and then connected on the Lionsault, but did not go for the cover. He goaded Cena to his feet so he could put on the Walls of Jericho. Cena had other ideas, reversing the move into a pin attempt and getting the 1-2-3! Jericho went berserk after the match. Winner: John CenaMatch 5: Intercontinental Championship RVD vs Brock Lesnar via disqualification The Next Big Thing and Mr. Pay-Per-View tangled with the Intercontinental Championship on the line. Brock grabbed the title from the ref and draped it over his shoulder momentarily while glaring at RVD. Van Dam 's quickness gave Brock fits early on. The big man rolled out of the ring and kicked the steel steps out of frustration. Brock pulled himself together and began to take charge. With Paul Heyman beaming at ringside, Brock slammed RVD to the hard floor outside the ring. From there, Brock began to overpower RVD, throwing him with ease over the top rope. RVD landed painfully on his back, then had to suffer from having his spine cracked against the steel ring steps. The fight returned to the ring with Brock squeezing RVD around the ribs. RVD broke away and soon after leveled Brock with a kick to the temple. RVD followed with the Rolling Thunder but Brock managed to kick out after a two-count. The fight looked like it might be over soon as RVD went for a Five-Star Frog Splash. Brock, though, hoisted Van Dam onto his shoulder and went for the F-5, but RVD whirled Brock into a DDT and followed with the Frog Splash! He went for the pin, but Heyman pulled the ref from the ring! The ref immediately called for a disqualification and soon traded blows with Heyman! After, RVD leapt onto Brock from the top rope and then threatened to hit the Van Terminator! Heyman grabbed RVD's leg and Brock picked up the champ and this time connected with the F-5 onto a steel chair! Winner: RVDMatch 6: Booker T vs the Big Show Booker T faced the Big Show one-on-one next. Show withstood Booker T's kicks and punches and slapped Booker into the corner. After being thrown from the ring, Booker picked up a chair at ringside, but Big Show punched it back into Booker's face. Booker tried to get back into the game by choking Show with a camera cable at ringside. Booker smashed a TV monitor from the Spanish announcers' position into Show's skull, then delivered a scissors kick that put both men through the table! Booker crawled back into the ring and Big Show staggered in moments later. Show grabbed Booker's throat but was met by a low blow and a kick to the face. Booker climbed the top rope and nailed a somersaulting leg drop to get the pin! Winner: Booker TAnnouncement: Triple H entered the ring to a thunderous ovation as fans hoped to learn where The Game would end up competing. Before he could speak, Eric Bishoff stopped The Game to apologize for getting involved in his personal business. If Triple H signed with RAW, Bischoff promised his personal life would never come into play again. Bischoff said he's spent the past two years networking in Hollywood. He said everyone was looking for the next breakout WWE Superstar, and they were all talking about Triple H. Bischoff guaranteed that if Triple H signed with RAW, he'd be getting top opportunities coming his way. Stephanie McMahon stepped out to issue her own pitch. She said that because of her personal history with Triple H, the two of them know each other very well. She said the two of them were once unstoppable and they can be again. Bischoff cut her off and begged her to stop. Stephanie cited that Triple H once told her how Bischoff said Triple H had no talent and no charisma. Bischoff said he was young at the time and didn't know what he had, but he still has a lot more experience that Stephanie. The two continued to bicker back and forth, until Triple H stepped up with his microphone. The Game said it would be easy to say \"screw you\" to either one of them. Triple H went to shake Bischoff's hand, but pulled it away. He said he would rather go with the devil he knows, rather than the one he doesn't know. Before he could go any further, though, Shawn Michaels came out to shake things up. HBK said the last thing he wanted to do was cause any trouble. He didn't want to get involved, but he remembered pledging to bring Triple H to the nWo. HBK said there's nobody in the world that Triple H is better friends with. HBK told his friend to imagine the two back together again, making Bischoff's life a living hell. Triple H said that was a tempting offer. He then turned and hugged HBK, making official his switch to RAW! Triple H and HBK left, and Bischoff gloated over his victory. Bischoff said the difference between the two of them is that he's got testicles and she doesn't. Stephanie whacked Bischoff on the side of the head and left!Match 7: Tag Team Championship Match Christian and Lance Storm vs Hollywood Hogan and Edge The match started with loud \"USA\" chants and with Hogan shoving Christian through the ropes and out of the ring. The Canadians took over from there. But Edge scored a kick to Christian's head and planted a facebuster on Storm to get the tag to Hogan. Hogan began to Hulk up and soon caught Christian with a big boot and a leg drop! Storm broke up the count and Christian tossed Hogan from the ring where Storm superkicked the icon. Edge tagged in soon after and dropped both opponents. He speared both of them into the corner turnbuckles, but missed a spear on Strom and hit the ref hard instead. Edge nailed a DDT, but the ref was down and could not count. Test raced down and took down Hogan then leveled Edge with a boot. Storm tried to get the pin, but Edge kicked out after two. Riksihi sprinted in to fend off Test, allowing Edge to recover and spear Storm. Christian distracted the ref, though, and Y2J dashed in and clocked Edge with the Tag Team Championship! Storm rolled over and got the pinfall to win the title! Winners and New Tag Team Champions: Christian and Lance StormMatch 8: WWE Undisputed Championship Triple Threat Match. The Rock vs Kurt Angle and the Undertaker Three of WWE's most successful superstars lined up against each other in a Triple Threat Match with the Undisputed Championship hanging in the balance. Taker and The Rock got face to face with Kurt Angle begging for some attention off to the side. He got attention in the form of a beat down form the two other men. Soon after, Taker spilled out of the ring and The Rock brawled with Angle. Angle gave a series of suplexes that took down Rock, but the Great One countered with a DDT that managed a two-count. The fight continued outside the ring with Taker coming to life and clotheslining Angle and repeatedly smacking The Rock. Taker and Rock got into it back into the ring, and Taker dropped The Rock with a sidewalk slam to get a two-count. Rock rebounded, grabbed Taker by the throat and chokeslammed him! Angle broke up the pin attempt that likely would have given The Rock the title. The Rock retaliated by latching on the ankle lock to Kurt Angle. Angle reversed the move and Rock Bottomed the People's Champion. Soon after, The Rock disposed of Angle and hit the People's Elbow on the Undertaker. Angle tried to take advantage by disabling the Great One outside the ring and covering Taker, who kicked out after a two count. Outside the ring, Rock took a big swig from a nearby water bottle and spewed the liquid into Taker's face to blind the champion. Taker didn't stay disabled for long, and managed to overpower Rock and turn his attention to Angle. Taker landed a guillotine leg drop onto Angle, laying on the ring apron. The Rock picked himself up just in time to break up a pin attempt on Kurt Angle. Taker nailed Rock with a DDT and set him up for a chokeslam. ANgle tried sneaking up with a steel chair, but Taker caught on to that tomfoolery and smacked it out of his hands. The referee got caught in the ensuing fire and didn't see Angle knock Taker silly with a steel chair. Angle went to cover Taker as The Rock lay prone, but the Dead Man somehow got his shoulder up. Angle tried to pin Rock, but he too kicked out. The Rock got up and landed Angle in the sharpshooter! Angle looked like he was about to tap, but Taker kicked The Rock out of the submission hold. Taker picked Rock up and crashed him with the Last Ride. While the Dead Man covered him for the win, Angle raced in and picked Taker up in the ankle lock! Taker went delirious with pain, but managed to counter. He picked Angle up for the last ride, but Angle put on a triangle choke! It looked like Taker was about to pass out, but The Rock broke Angle's hold only to find himself caught in the ankle lock. Rock got out of the hold and watched Taker chokeslam Angle. Rocky hit the Rock Bottom, but Taker refused to go down and kicked out. Angle whirled Taker up into the Angle Slam but was Rock Bottomed by the Great One and pinned! Winner and New WWE Champion: The Rock~Finally there is a decent PPV! Lately the PPV weren't very good, but this one was a winner. I give this PPV a A-",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54ea87fa30db407f9ee099d835d8847e",
            "input": "A dying Kung Fu master sends out his last student in order to track down what happened to the previous five students who were members of the banned Poison Clan.He is to see if they are acting for good and if not he his to stop them The master also wants the student to find another member of the clan who ran off with the clans money which the master wants used for good. The earlier students were all taught in a different style snake, centipede, scorpion, lizard, toad, while the last student was taught a little in each style. All of the students end up in one town looking for the old man with all of the money,and soon everyone is battling to get the money.Classic martial arts film has title that even many non-fans know. I've spoken with a couple of casual fans and this seems to be the one film that sticks in their head. Its a very good movie, though I'm not really sure why this film stays with people when for my money there are other films that are better from the Shaw studio (One armed Swordmen or the Brave Archer series for example). This isn't to sell the film short, its not, since the film is structured like a mystery, our hero has no clue who anyone is and the Venoms themselves only know at best who two of the others is. We're given the identity of four but we still have to work out who the fifth really is. The film is also odd in that for a martial arts film, other than a training sequence at the start and the killing of the old man and his family for the money, there is really no action for about 40 or 45 minutes. Its a bold move to do it but it pays off since the plot and the performances hold your attention. (The film is also odd in that its the first martial arts film I think I've ever seen where there are no women. I don't think one has a speaking role and I'm pretty sure that none appear in the background. Its indicative of nothing, its just something that struck me.) This is a good solid little film that may not live up to the reputation it has in some circles, but is still a really good film to curl up with on your couch.Around 7 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52410e56f5414cf6aa1b6a2f7d1e417b",
            "input": "This is an excellent film dealing with a potentially exploitative subject with great sensitivity. Anne Reid, previously best known in the UK for her TV roles including 'Dinnerladies' (a Victoria Wood scripted series on in-company catering workers, if you're wondering), gives a performance of finely judged understatement as May, a late-60s bereaved mother of two chattering class adults in an inner-London borough. Her husband Toots (Peter Vaughan) dies on their visit to the male of the latter species (Bobby), and we see the pair being rather casually greeted by Bobby and his family. May's teacher daughter Paula (Cathryn Bradshaw) lives nearby, however, and the relationship between May and Paula initially appears closer. Thus when May decides she cannot live in her own home and comes back to London, she is able to stay in Paula's house and do some child-minding of Paula's more appreciative offspring.It is on May's visits to Bobby's house that she embarks on an affair with Darren, a mid-30s friend of Bobby who is working on a house extension. In what may be the first mainstream British film to so portray it, it is May and not Darren (Daniel Craig*) who initiates the encounter, and, at least to begin with, it seems that the relationship is founded on mutual respect. There is no explicit sexual content (at least in the DVD I saw: differences in the IMDb cast list suggests the existence of other versions), and the physical basis of the affair is handled directly but not exploitatively. More strongly portrayed is the relationship between May and daughter Paula, a recent convert to 'therapy and self-exploration', who announces that mummy has never been supportive of her. Paula is also Darren's lover, and when she finds May's explicit but rather poor drawings of Darren and May together, things go downhill in dramatic but controlled fashion. Only in an English film, perhaps, could a daughter announce that she is going to hit her mother, politely ask her to stand up, and duly wallop her.In the mean time, May is being drawn into a putative relationship with a decent but older (of her own generation) member of Paula's writing group. The contrast between the ensuing unwanted intercourse and her affair with Darren is clearly made; it is at that point that May starts to acquiesce to Paula, and Darren's worm begins to turn (he reveals on cocaine that he may have been after her money, if not all along, but for some of the ride). So May finds herself superfluous to both of her children's needs, and finally does return home (but later leaves on a jet plane for pastures new).The film's strength is that it portrays with unflinching but sympathetic truth the nature of contemporary adult parent-sibling relationships, where bereavement may leave the surviving parent feeling more alone than if they had no-one to care for them. This is not new, but the openness of the portrayal of sexual need in the over-60s may well be. The darkness of the film's content, from a screenplay by Hanif Kureishi, stands in contrast to the way in which it is lit (it seems to be perpetual summer), and the overall mood is uplifting - it could so easily have been yet another piece set in a dour and rainy England. The ending is perhaps under-written, as we don't know where May is going or for how long - perhaps she's Shirley Valentine with a pension, she's certainly no Picasso. Anne Reid is, however, revealed as a fine actor whose professional life will surely have changed forever. Like Julie Andrews in Torn Curtain (said by Paul Newman), \"There goes your Mary Poppins {read Dinnerladies} image for good\".* Yes, he: announced Oct 2005 as the new James Bond.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d21f8bddd4804e74a91d6f179ba04253",
            "input": "City girl Meg Tilly receives a horrifying phone call from her mother and, understandably shaken, returns home to her family's rural digs, only to be faced with a mystery: why are all the homespun residents acting out in bizarre and unsettling ways? Radiation thriller, with barely a nod to ecology, has small town residents going berserk, which (laughably) includes two women gazing at each other with desire in a public place and Tim Matheson receiving oral attention from a girl on an office bench. The picture is too silly for words, wasting Tilly's wistfulness and quiet intensity on trash while forcing itself into a corner it can't possibly hope to get out of. Some of the cinematography by Thomas Del Ruth is good (particularly a fire sequence set inside a garage), though he is let down by the scrappy editing--and a fairly bathetic finale. Simplistic screenplay has nary a surprise nor a shred of originality up its sleeve. *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76dd1d64130e4fddbd29d559056af8fd",
            "input": "I don't know why this has the fans it does and I don't know why I have even given it the score I have. This is preposterous. There are many a giallo where one has to suspend disbelief, let the picture roll and catch up with it somewhere before it becomes delirious and some poor police officer has to eventually explain what we have seen. But, this has very little going for it and has overlong sequences where nothing happens and have no relevance to anything while we have to listen to a most repetitive soundtrack, even by Italian standards. Not a giallo, this is a complete mish mash of horror ideas featuring Klaus Kinski in one his most blatant 'phoned in' performances. I reckon he turned up, did a day's work and cleared off leaving Mr D'Amato to get others to fill in. Ewa is of course pretty but no it is not enough, and in the end we have seen far too much of her popping up all over the place, long after we have completely lost interest in this mindless and pretentious twaddle. Maybe I just wasn't in the right mood!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8a3f2bd353f433da89bf78f428f9014",
            "input": "\"Envy\" is bad for a number of reasons. Yes, there are unlikeable characters. That's not the problem. It is that they are unlikeable and we do not care for them at all. \"The War of the Roses\" featured unlikeable characters but due to proper introductions we grew to at least find ourselves interested in their fate, whereas in \"Envy\" the introduction is thin, the characters are never believable, and the plot only makes things worse.Ben Stiller is simply repulsive in his role and I'm a fan of his work most of the time. Stiller campaigned to have this released straight-to-video and now I can see why. The movie proposes that he's \"best friends\" with Jack Black, but from the first five minutes we are given footage that seems to indicate Stiller hates Black. I thought this would develop into some sort of one-sided relationship (a la \"The Cable Guy\") but it never does, instead Stiller insists he's his \"best friend\" and I felt confused as he seemed to treat Black like, well, \"poo.\" The movie's plot is ridiculous but it doesn't matter, because it's supposed to be an exaggerated morality tale. Unfortunately the message is lost in the mess. Walken gives a good performance but Black is off-key and annoying (and I usually find him very funny). No, it's not a horrible film but I still can't believe Barry Levinson (\"Rain Man,\" \"Sleepers\") is responsible for this - it's not one of the worst films of all time but it could certainly be a whole lot better. I wish Va-Poo-Rize did exist - so we could make this film disappear forever....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14622450d6c34c4584b3c6087bcb57c3",
            "input": "this is one amazing movie!!!!! you have to realize that chinese folklore is complicated and philosophical. there are always stories behind stories. i myself did not understand everything but knowing chinese folklore (i studied them in school)it is very complicated. you just have to take what it gives you.....ENJOY THE MOVIE AND ENJOY THE RIDE....HOORAY!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5ad3bfcbdf24c9dae450bfe9633265e",
            "input": "THE IMMORTALIZER was, uh, interesting. It certainly didn't kill me during its hour and a half duration, but it didn't impress me much either. A group of kids are abducted in an alley by musclehead mutants (in a scene featuring cinema's least convincing head crushing sound effect) and taken to a fancy house in the suburbs. Here Dr. Divine and his team are performing brain transplants for his rich old patients so they can have young bodies again. Hey, this was quietly remade with a big budget a few years later as FREEJACK! Who knew that when you transplant an old person's brain into a different body that their new voice will sound exactly like their old voice? With all this talk of pineal glands and the use of a glowing green serum, you can almost see visions of FROM BEYOND and RE-ANIMATOR dancing in the producers' heads. But the production literally doesn't have the guts to pull it off. I've never understood why, when someone is making a low budget horror film, that they don't pack it to the edge of the frame with gore. The acting is uniformly terrible, with the only good performance coming from Clarke Lindsley as the assistant Dr. Price. He has a nice evil laugh. The only other thing of note about THE IMMORTALIZER is that it features lots of old people doing their own stunts. Seriously, most of the cast takes some serious bumps for old folks.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60ffe447b3174e25806fef57c21dd524",
            "input": "Jennifer Jason Leigh and Mare Winningham are a good match portraying vastly different siblings, but only Winningham is able to bring something convincing or substantial to her role. Leigh, playing bar-band singer and alcoholic Sadie Flood, constantly leans on older sis Georgia, an acclaimed folk singer in the Joni Mitchell mold. Perhaps due to her double duties as co-producer on the film, Leigh seems to have boxed herself into a corner: she isn't credible as a singer and, even if this is intentional, gives herself far too much screen-time at the microphone. Probably hoping for a tour-de-force, Leigh is wire-drawn and nervous and jagged; however, we simply do not see any talent within this character (Leigh is obviously a solid actress, but she makes decisions here that wall us off from her). If Sadie had even the slightest bit of charisma or appeal, we might be able to buy into the concept that she gets the (small) breaks that she does. As it is, the likelihood of her ever getting up on stage is slim. Director Ulu Grosbard crafts a few intense dramatic sequences, and the editing at the finale juxtaposes Sadie's bar performance with Georgia's sold-out arena show--both singing the same song--and it's a sadly nuanced moment...but really, what's the point? *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-288f771bf86341bd89f2b9eb4345f9ca",
            "input": "I went into Deathtrap expecting a well orchestrated and intriguing thriller; and while that's something like what this film is; I also can't help but think that it's just a poor man's Sleuth. The classic 1972 film is obviously an inspiration for this film; not particularly in terms of the plot, but certainly it's the case with the execution. The casting of Michael Caine in the central role just confirms it. The film is based on a play by Ira Levin (who previously wrote Rosemary's Baby and The Stepford Wives) and focuses on Sidney Bruhl; a playwright whose best days are behind him. After his latest play bombs, Sidney finds himself at a low; and this is not helped when a play named Deathtrap; written by an amateur he taught, arrives on his doorstep. Deathtrap is a guaranteed commercial success, and Sidney soon begins hatching a plot of his own; which involves inviting round the amateur scribe, killing him, and then passing Deathtrap off as his own work.Despite all of its clever twists and turns; Deathtrap falls down on one primary element, and that's the characters. The film fails to provide a single likable character, and it's very hard to care about the story when you're not rooting for any of the players. This is not helped by the acting. Michael Caine puts in a good and entertaining performance as you would expect, but nobody else does themselves proud. Christopher Reeve is awkward in his role, while Dyan Cannon somehow manages to make the only possibly likable character detestable with a frankly irritating performance. It's lucky then that the story is good; and it is just about good enough to save the film. The plot features plenty of twists and turns; some work better than others, but there's always enough going on to ensure that the film stays interesting. Director Sidney Lumet deserves some credit too as the style of the film is another huge plus. The central location is interesting in its own right, and the cinematography fits the film well. Overall, I have to admit that I did enjoy this film; but it could have been much, much better.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5818194793814f379a372025d4f661e6",
            "input": "Resident Evil:code veronica is a great well made video game,it has great graphics,very comfortable controls,a great storyline and high fun factor.The storyline to this is Claire Redfield gets taken to an island for trespassing on Umbrella grounds,and reaking havoc at they're main lab while looking for her brother.Code veronica's graphics are very good,the fire and rain effects are great looking.The controls are comfy,but the button pattern doesnt fit the Dreamcast control,makeing it hard to get used to.Its still fun going around some wierd disturbing place,shooting the guts out of zombies.Code:veronica also has a little bit of \"Romance\" between the two main characters.You also get to play as Chris Redfield,from Resident Evil 1.The sound in this game is better than ever,for example,even though I hate the new feature,When the giant spiders crawl,they're feet make a disturbing scampering sound,and the guns sound alot more realistic.Great graphics,outstanding story,comfy controls,and realistic sound makes Resident Evil Code:Veronica a definite loved. I give it a 10 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32a7216178b444ebbad0d07af11b2585",
            "input": "There are some Stallone movies I like, but this movie didn't meet my low expectations. I found this movie hard to believe. For example, a bunch of terrorists who crash land in the wilderness are prepared to survive for at least two days. Also, in all this wilderness Stallone and company keep running across bridges and ladders that provide convenient short-cuts or plot devices. Also, the Treasury cops don't seem to coordinate anything with the local rescue people. Also, bad guys who couldn't hit the side of a barn with really high-tech looking automatic weapons.I liked John Lithgow's villain initially, but the character is such a complete psychopath that he doesn't care at all about any of his own bad guys, or all of them getting killed. Eventually I just couldn't believe the character anymore.Not worth the price of a rental, not even worth taking the time to watch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-959c43efae334f31a464c4a55908846a",
            "input": "An old man works as a janitor in a mental hospital to be close to his wife who is a patient there and to try to get her out.This is surely one of the most forgotten masterpieces of the silent era and an oddity in the history of Japanese cinema. Long thought lost, a print was found in the 70s and a music soundtrack added to it, which fits perfectly with the images. It might have been influenced by cabinet of doctor Caligary (director Kinugasa claimed he never saw the German film). However it surpasses it in style and in its more convincing (and chilly) portray of the inner mental state of the inmates in the asylum. To achieve this, the film makes use of every single film technique available at the time: multiple exposures and out of focus subjective point of view, tilted camera angles, fast and slow motion, expressionist lighting and superimpositions among others. It is also a very complicated film to follow, as it has not got intertitles.The film opens with a montage of shots of rain hitting the windows of the hospital, wind shaking trees and of thunder. The unsettling weather metaphors the mental condition of the patients and introduces one of the them: a former dancer. The combination of sounds produced by rain, wind and thunder serves as the music that incites the dancer to get into a frantic, almost hypnotic dance. In another sequence involving the same patient engaged in another frenzied dance, she is being watched by other inmates. Multiple exposures of the dancer represent the patients' point of view and their confused \"view\" of the world.These are just two examples from this amazing film trying to represent the patients' subconscious and view of the \"sane\" world.In three words A MUST SEE.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16ab8a7ea85e4b478d1d59c7493a8a97",
            "input": "The '80's were not very kind to one-time major star Charles Bronson. Starting with 1982's \"Death Wish II\" and ending with this truly gruesome film from '89, Bronson's screenwriters seemed to be trying to top each other in progressive grossness. \"D.W. II\" left little to the imagination in its depiction of the rape and suicide of Bronson's character's daughter, (a rape and murder of his housekeeper was also shown in disgusting detail). \"10 to Midnight\" was the sort of loathsome film that made you want to take a bath afterwards. Nothing redeeming about it. Other films like \"The Evil that Men Do\" and the remaining \"Death Wish\" films from this period straddled the line between high camp and high barf with their earnest depictions of brutality and revenge. I'm not sure if the producers (usually Pancho Kohner) got a kick out of showing a weary looking, senior citizen-aged Bronson destroying punks young enough to be his grandchildren or what, but the shoddy craftsmanship (and terrible scripts) of these films usually destroyed what little energy they may have generated.\"Kinjite\" -- the last of these films -- is fairly well-made but truly takes the cake in cinematic wretchedness. In this film Bronson: sodomizes a perverse john; forces a pimp to eat his Rolex watch; allows a male prisoner to get raped by another prisoner; makes incredibly xenophobic remarks among other things I've thankfully forgotten. Also depicted is the gang-rape of a young Japanese girl (fortunately, this was off-screen, though well-implied).What were people thinking when they made this film? What was Bronson thinking when he decided to ruin his career with these horrible films? For anyone interested in his best movies, check out most of the films he made in the '60's and '70's like \"The Mechanic\", \"Death Wish\", \"From Noon til 3\", \"Once Upon a Time in the West\", \"Red Sun\", \"The Great Escape\", \"The Magnificent Seven\", \"Rider on the Rain\", etc., etc....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b9ea3d3403744ebbcb17d957dbbd446",
            "input": "Director Paul Verhoeven's American vehicles are of varied quality, but most of the films he made in his native country are indisputable masterworks. This is the story of alcoholic (and bi-sexual) writer who moves in with a beautiful rich and very strange woman. But the lady does not know that he is only interested in meeting the woman's handsome male lover. In the meantime, the writer is plagued with strange visions - at first they look like hallucinations triggered by alcohol abuse, but he soon begins to realize that he is actually experiencing some kind of premonitions. Fascinating Hitchcockian thriller, very original and provocative. I love films that make you think they are about something, but then you realize they are about something completely different. This is one of those movies; a thriller during the first half, and a quasi-religious surrealist saga during the second half. Very erotic, original and blasphemous, not for kids or people that go to church every Sunday. Great cinematography by future director Jan de Bont. Highly Reommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7f82db176834ebcbcc02074f4590c85",
            "input": "The Lion King series is easily the crowning achievement in Disney animation. The original Lion King is the greatest masterpiece in cel animation. Lion King II:Simba's Pride is the BY FAR the best direct-to-video sequel that Disney, or any other studio, has made for an animated feature. It deserved a theatrical release. The same can be said for this movie. It has the original cast, songs by Elton John, a hilarious story, exciting action, and touching character moments. Everything you've come to expect from this series. Not so much a new story, but filler and extended background on Timon and Pumbaa, and their place in this story. What impressed me the most, was the care taken in the animation. All to often, Disney shorts on the animation quality of their video and television efforts. But here, they seamlessly blend new animation with footage from the original film. The scenes never seem out of place. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella are in full swing as Timon and Pumbaa. Matthew Broderick, Robert Guillame, and Moira Kelly reprise their roles as Simba, Rafiki, and Nala, respectively. We even get a return visit by Whoopi Goldberg and Cheech Marin as the hyenas.There are MANY big laughs in this movie. So if you love Lion King, you need this movie. The story is just not complete without it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-995797add60b45c49010b102b20a2f58",
            "input": "I'd completely forgotten about this film until now. This was the most blatant and worst attempt to demonise a hobby that I have ever seen. It's message seemed to be : \"Don't teenagers use their imagination; they might take games seriously, go mad and hurt people.\" I can only guess that the unimaginative writers of this piece thought that D&D style games are form of evil ritual or arcane worship.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b35a7575545a4d67a1013ce226d450c9",
            "input": "I've long wanted to see this film, being a fan of both Peter Cushing and David McCallum. I agree that the romantic sub-plot was a waste of time, but the talent of McCallum shines through this juvie role. Thank heavens for Turner Classic which aired the show last week. I can imagine that there were lots of problems with children after the war, especially with the way things were throughout the 1950s. Some of the boys are a bit scary. I certainly wouldn't want to met them on a well-lit street, much less a dark one. There were some good insights regarding the feelings of a firebug as well, or as they call him, a firefly.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f45b9998920e4b84919b02ccbdab2baa",
            "input": "As gently as I can, I sincerely believe this movie is a waste of time. I did not find it the 'warm, emotionally satisfying' film others did. I found it boring, with music that distracted from the film. The story was thin, the characters overdrawn, and the direction pedestrian.Fooey.Now I'm going to write some more about this movie, so I make the 10 line minimum. There really isn't more to be said and brevity is important, but IMDb has its minimums, so here goes.Young eager kid finds nascent talent, seeks time with aging, embittered mentor in spite of father's cartoonish homophobia. Aging, embittered mentor turns out to drink a lot and teach very little. conflict arises. While I don't think this is a spoiler, I've added the warning in case someone feels this much information is too much. Mostly, I just found the film boring and pretentious. A waste of my time. I honestly don't understand what little fuss there seems to be, mostly on this web site, about the transcendent quality of this movie. I think it's really worth avoiding. But, as Dennis Miller used to say, \"Maybe I'm wrong.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e5a466369b54564b2aaed09ddc7eed3",
            "input": "This could have been a good episode but I simply had to turn it off. The British representation was horrible to watch. Have the makers ever set foot in Britain prior to filming? At least set foot in England?? I don't think any British person have had such an accent apart from a comedy skit of The Royal Family! Also with the 2 English boys... well I don't think any English boy has acted, spoke or dressed like any English kid in the history of the British nation since Prince William and Harry's preteen public appearances. To American film makers.. There is more than 1 country in the UK. England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.. meaning more than 1 culture! I can handle some stereotyping but this was so bad I could not watch it. Fire looked cool though!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18802f875c464c9089295f45919418bc",
            "input": "One of the most appealing elements of a Gilliam film is that the well-concocted visuals, the unsettling backdrops, and the manically frustrated characters are evidence of the creator's involvement. Instead of most movies (where the filmmaker is some director-for-hire that is paid to feature a star or two), you can feel Terry Gilliam's presence through the experience. \"12 Monkeys\" is evidence of Gilliam's own vision and style, as opposed to making offbeat movies for their own sake. \"12 Monkeys\" is a variation on similar themes of Gilliam's repertoire:oppressive/recessive societies, the solitude of the protagonist, the frustration associated with disbelief, and parallel realms. In this film Gilliam does a fine job of blurring lines between the two realms, using ambiguities to force the audience to believe rather than know. This tendency for Gilliam to neglect to fill in certain gaps leads to criticisms of art-house pretentiousness. The difference between Gilliam and artsy posers is that Gilliam's choices clearly have a purpose and all of his images have meaning. The two nearly identical bathing scenes of Cole in the beginning are meant to draw comparisons which leave the audience unsettled. His bald head is a mark of uniformity in the disease-ridden future world, yet makes him recognizable in the 1996 world. The title itself is a mark of Gilliam's creativity, as it requires the majority of the story to flesh out for its meaning to be fully understood. All in all, Gilliam's dedication to making creative films that are interesting to watch yet also require thought and interpretation from the audience. The film has immense re-watch value, since there are subtle details and hints that can be missed upon the first viewing. Definitely one of my favorites.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04f9133f94204775800f394140e1c917",
            "input": "No likeable characters (the lead is a combination of the WORST of Woody Allen/Paul Provensa/Reiser) and the contrived scenes (did anyone REALLY think thiat kid on the rollerblades was NOT going to knock the guy down?) were just sickeningly bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b1ab12703c74df59f995f8eb6a1e7c0",
            "input": "From the beginning of the movie I had a feeling like its a movie about another Jason's from Friday the 13th. And It is... Dispute that the movie starts interesting. But as the times goes by its just a pointless movie about muted, supernatural, silent serial killer. I mean he goes under the guy's bed without making any sound, not seen by anyone. He was supposed to be blind after failed execution but he walks and kills people like he used to. I'm tired of it. For me it's all over the same thing.In another words - unreal. Too many mistakes and confusing information.Well scene with tide up woman looked impressive but just at first time :} For that and for intriguing intro 2 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7939d3cf7ecd46fbb35d945eddef5fdc",
            "input": "I have never seen the 1973, older highly rated version. I am a Nicholas Cage fan (by the way, fine acting as usual). This movie probably took all of five minutes to hammer out the whole plot (I can see it being done on a cocktail napkin at a dinner party), if you can't figure out the ending of this drool in the first thirty minutes you will probably find this movie entertaining. This is, of late, the terrible rut that Hollywood seems to have dug for itself with the horror/mystery/thriller genre, unable to give the audience enough credit and write a fresh, smart, and tantalizing screenplay, they dish out some creepy music and throw in a couple of things to make you jump a little and then send the final print off to your local theater. At least, it didn't have the jiggling hand-held camera syndrome.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9646905547e445569682bc4a01d2964e",
            "input": "Or released on DVD or screened on a cable channel like Amer. Life TV network. I have been watching another favorite, \"Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea\", as well as \"Lost in Space\" and Land of Giants\". They've been showing them forever but aren't receptive to suggestions for other shows. My father and I were big fans as I was already a big science/electronics nut, (still am) and my father was an old school chum of Nader. They both attended Oxy together. I still have memories of several of the episodes even though I was only 9. More so than any show that old. I think it was televised on Sat. after \"Bonanza\". Some of the episodes I recall are the one where he takes the experimental drug that slows down action. Or the one where he body surfs the big ones, (I did that too!) Or the one where there was a mine cave in and he conveys how to use mind control to have the trapped people slow their breathing by entering a trance-like state. That is the one show that I wish I could see again. I got my wish with the original \"Outer Limits\" and \"Sci-Fi Theater...John",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e49f157cd8bf456999020079127cdf60",
            "input": "The tragedy is that this piece of rubbish was part of my curriculum while I was studying cinema. So imagine how I was forced to watch it in complete. Believe me going through hell is much much easier. Our professor told us that this is some film ???, but he never thought that we'd disagree or assume the apposite. I don't think that there is any gods on earth, we're only humans, so all the filmmakers, therefore they CAN make mistakes, bad movies.. Or very bad too. The main problem wasn't that art, by all means, is susceptible to endless points of view, but that a lot of people just don't get it, that every single human got his own genuine taste, his own opinion, hence what I suppose it the greatest movie ever made, can also be your worst one ever, and how that is right both ways, but how many people can understand this correctly?. So my professor believes in this movie, and simply I don't. However, the only way to evaluate this \"thing\" is by measuring it by its original intent to show us different kinds of old folk stories or whatever to catch on this society's mentality, imagination, and nature. To tell you the damn truth Mr. Pier Paolo Pasolini as the scriptwriter and the director made it too unbearable to watch in the first place. The movie is so UGLY. I can't stand this, so how about analyzing it, then discovering the potential beauty in it !! It's beyond your mind hideousness, and strangely not for the sake of the movie's case or anything, it's for the sake of the unstable vision of (Pasolini). His work is so primitive to underdeveloped extent. The deadly cinematic technique, the effective sense of silliness, and the incredible horribleness made everything obnoxious. Look at the atrocious acting, the unfruitful cinematography, the awfully poor sets, .. OH MY GOD I've got the nausea already. It can terminate your objectivity violently as watching this movie is one true pain like taking the wisdom tooth off by a blind doctor. There are dreadful nightmares which could be more merciful than this. So originally, how to continue THAT just to review it fairly ? Actually, you don't. As this very movie doesn't treat you fair at all. There is really memorable scene in here where some boys are peeing into the eye of the camera (!) I'm trying to connect some things like that with Pasolini's end as murdered.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70d729a7715040528953ada5590f07de",
            "input": "This is a racist movie, but worthy of study and enjoyment. First time through it the natural inclination is to focus on Erbe & Dad. They have a relaxed, peaceful thing going, what with her still at home about to graduate from high school, and him retired and kicking back waiting for inspiration to do something. Second time through you realize how horribly the sister's husband is dissed by her friends in the backwoods blues bar. He takes it, it's the thing to do these days, and the critical moment passes as if they were chatting about the weather. In that same scene the sister's blues song is a real tear-jerker if you're the least bit sensitive and like that kind of music. Her performance feels like the climax of the story; a blues story with the good guys being \"people of color\" in their element in backwoods, SC. Meanwhile, all the white folk in the movie lead what appears to be shallow meaningless lives fit only for making babies. That's cool, long as you recognize it as fiction.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76cd2577dc3545b2bb5926730d0e9b7a",
            "input": "This is a must see for anybody who loves thriller's specially political thriller. One scene that stands out is Milgram experiment it is shot to perfection very rarely do we get to see a movie shot and scripted the way this movie is presented.The movie starts with a Kennedy like assassination and a three member team is constituted to investigate the assassination. However one of the member does not agree with the final findings of the committee. As per the terms set that member would initiate a one man investigation into the assassination. This investigation gets him involved in into to deep and dark secrets of high office politics and the way they are controlled.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e8e52b4bbcc4744a0191c3ca0c09e76",
            "input": "This movie documents the Harlem ball circuit of the mid eighties. Much more fun than than Palazzo Volpi, though just as diseased, this movie is a true gem of squalor. One cannot help but sympathize with the characters because of their freakness . The sole purpose of middle class intellectuals is to document the phenomenons of the trash and the glitz. Here the most genius of trash is extremely well documented and duly glamorized. The characters' penchant for idolatry of all that is glamorous inspires even more adoration of the characters themselves on part of the viewer, creating a \"phenomenon of a phenomenon\" effect which makes this movie a piece of art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c3fb1455e314ad187d7a905d54b2ad0",
            "input": "This movie is not for everyone. You're either bright enough to get \"it\" or you're not. Fans of sci-fi films who don't take themselves too seriously definitely will enjoy this movie. I recommend this movie for those who can appreciate spoofs and parodies. Everyone I've recommended this film to has enjoyed it. If you enjoy Monty Python or Mel Brooks films, you'll probably enjoy this one. The voice characterizations are done in a tongue-in-cheek manner and the one-liners fly fast and furious.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-daf35372b5eb4101a32703a953fa9628",
            "input": "It's about time we see a movie that stays unbiased towards these old Indian traditions. At times it is clear how most of the 'doctors' are charlatans, even lying about how they don't charge their clients. While they are wearing their gold watches, the 'donation' box is mandatory. Notice that there are only a couple of people who get 'cured' while we see quite a few cases.Keep in mind while watching that ingesting mercury is not toxic and that the smallest Indian bank note is 5 rupee, while the average salary in India is 1,700 ru/month.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-add971ad1e954444bbabee5e4f71ff71",
            "input": "It was originally meant to be a film that Gene Kelly would star in, but when the makers couldn't get him they got \"the greatest actor in the world\", and the result is pretty good. Basically Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) is having trouble doing what he does best, setting up a high stakes crap dice game, because he needs $1000 to get the place. So to get the money he needs, he has a $1000 bet with old friend Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando) that he can't get Sergeant Sarah Brown (Great Expectations' Golden Globe winning, and BAFTA nominated Jean Simmons) to go with him to Havana. Meanwhile, Nathan is having trouble trying to get rid of the woman who wants him to ask her hand in marriage, Miss Adelaide (Vivian Blaine). Also starring Robert Keith as Lieutenant Brannigan, Stubby Kaye as Nicely Nicely Johnson and B.S. Pulley as Big Jule. An interesting romantic comedy musical, with Brando singing all his own songs, and Sinatra being smooth and cool. It was nominated the Oscars for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design and Best Music for Jay Blackton and Cyril J. Mockridge, it was nominated the BAFTA for Best Film from any Source, and it won the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture - Musical/Comedy. Frank Sinatra was number 43 on The 100 Greatest Pop Culture Icons, Marlon Brando was number 30 on The 100 Greatest Movie Stars, he was number 11 on The 100 Greatest Sex Symbols, he was number 4 on 100 Years, 100 Stars - Men, Sinatra was number 35, and Brando was number 1 on The World's Greatest Actor, \"Luck Be a Lady\" was number 42 on 100 Years, 100 Songs for , the film was number 23 on 100 Years of Musicals, and it was number 36 on The 100 Greatest Musicals. Very good!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-904b504b5ebd41299fad20da971ed102",
            "input": "Having read during many years about how great this film was, how it established Ruiz among the french critics (specially the snobbish Cahiers crowd), when I finally watched it about a year ago, I found it pretty disappointing (but then, I guess my expectations were sky-high). Shot in saturated black and white, this deliberately cerebral film (made for TV, and mercifully, only an hour long) is told in the form of a conversation between an art connoisseur and an off-screen narrator as they ponder through a series of paintings (which are shown in the style of tableaux vivants) and try to find if they hold some clues about a hidden political crime. (The awful Kate Beckinsale film Uncovered has a similar argument). Borgesian is a word I read a lot in reviews about this movie, but I would say almost any Borges story is more interesting than this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-034db4b4e73f456f934ca396f93b316e",
            "input": "When I saw this at a shop I thought it looked really good and original. Like Wolfs Creek meets Texas chainsaw massacre, and I mean it only cost three quid (around $6). To be honest I don't think it was even worth that.It seemed like the directors- the 'butcher brothers' couldn't decide whether wanted to do a artsy sort of horror or a gory slasher horror. It ended up with a cliché ridden gory sadistic hour and fifteen minutes with all the characters being one dimensional and you couldn't care less what happened to them but to try to make the audience care about the characters they added a useless monologue at the end and the beginning of the film which to be perfectly honest wasn't needed.The only good part really was the middle/end- I won't ruin it for you. But that was the only \"good \"part.Overall a pointless watch. It felt like a two hour film but was in fact only 75 minutes. If you want an artsy film-don't bother. If you want a slasher movie- don't bother- The film moves so slowly with nothing ever happening.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d66036692aa349afb7bab69d69bbe6a9",
            "input": "My, how the mighty have fallen. Kim Basinger is a great actress but she was definitely slumming when she took this role. This movie is bad for one reason in particular: lapses in logic. Its looks like one of those movies that would have been passable with all its plot holes if it had came out in the 80s and 90s but in 2008 it just looks real stupid. This is the worst thriller I've ever seen and I've seen The Bone Collector and Twisted.The story details Della(Kim Basinger)is just getting from buying gifts in a mall an is harassed by a gang of thugs that end up killing a cop that came to her aid. From then on she is chased by these idiotic goons through an abandoned street and she gets rid of them one by one with a toolbox full of tools.So many things are wrong with this movie. As I said this movie leaps over logic at every turn and with the exception of Kim Basinger, the acting is made-for-TV bad. Hell, this pseudo thriller is made-for-TV bad. The way she kills each of these politically correct thugs(1 Caucasian, 1 Hispanic, 1 Asian and 1 African American all coming together to stalk a Caucasian woman. Don't you just love America?)is laughable to a fault. The way she killed the Hispanic guy made me laugh hysterically. The sex scene with the main hoodlum was so out in left field that it make you shake your head in shame. I only recommend this to lovers of bad films and no one else. Anybody else especially Kim Basinger fans would do well not to own this flick. You don't want see an actress you respect in a film this bad now do you? Of course not. You were warned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-775bdf1995e7478abc6f8bd27e219ec8",
            "input": "The Devil Dog: Hound of Hell is really good film. It has good acting by the cast including Richard Crenna and R.G. Armstrong.The music is spooky and gives that devilish chill!I liked the effects on the dog and I think the creature itself looked really cool with its horns,frill like part on his neck, and acted really viscous!If you like horror films and haven't seen The Devil Dog: Hound of Hell before and are able to find and buy this rare film then do so because its a good movie and I don't think you'll be disappointed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0501608493324197b47011411393c92c",
            "input": "I can remember watching this for the first time, when I was 9 years old. I wanted to be one of the \"barbarian brothers\". This movie is still great. One original aspect was that the fight scenes where very short. Implying that the \"barbarian brothers\" where so good that they finished there enemies off quickly! Plus, you have chases, a cage fight, a dragon, and yes even a bar brawl! Yes, the acting is bad so that's why it's not a ten, also the story line has received a lot of criticism. I think it is quite original. Not to many movies in it's genre have the same original story lines, or colorful dialogue. I definitely recommend this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-392f409137e3419da18b9541ee03fcbf",
            "input": "This movies chronicles the life and times of William Castle. He made a series of low budget horror films in the 1950s-1960s that he sold with gimmicks. In \"13 Ghosts\" you need viewers to see the ghosts (they were in color, the film was in b&w). \"The Tingler\" had theatre seats equipped with a buzzer that jolted the audience when a monster escapes into a movie theatre. \"Marabre\" issued a life insurance policy to all members in case they were frightened to death! The movies themselves were pretty bad but the gimmicks had people rushing to see them. In this doc there are interviews with directors inspired by Castle, actors in his movies and his daughter. It also gets into his home life and the kind of man he was (by all accounts he was a great guy). The documentary is affectionate, very funny and absolutely riveting. It's very short (under 90 minutes) and there's never a dull moment. A must see for Castle fans and horror movie fans. My one complaint--there were very few sequences shown from his pictures. That aside this is just great.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52757acd8fd24a2b8f39de12fb7fa163",
            "input": "first this deserves about 5 stars due to acting (some which would give me a better subjective opinion and NOT an objective one as it should by giving this one, WELL DESERVED, star) but then i know that those facts are used for the actor(S) NAMES to increase the rating of something like this...i do have a problem with such productions; yet another attempt (just like \"untraceable\") of a systematic propagandistic feature promoting government intrusion on your rights( how interesting that it comes at a moment when IPS providers trying to \"preferentiate\" = CENSOR information, and the Americans and Canadians are fighting AGAINST that at this very moments). this time is not by labeling torrent file transfers as evil ( that one was intended to remind you of such feeling whenever you transfer data on the net), but by literally attempting in creating a sexual frustrated population as a whole. SEEMS LIKE FEAR PROMOTION IS HOLLYWOOD'S NORM THIS DAYS, especially when coming to thrillers which is the most \"on demand\" motion picture genre for past 2 decades or so = most viewed, best way to try influence the society as a whole. such levels of violence are depicted in this 2 features of morally and \"ethical\" people, that it gives a new much needed meaning to \"anti-heroes\" figures. make no mistake , this is NOT \"DEXTER\" which was meant to be high-quality entertainment.STOP SELLING \"FEAR\" please, the world would be a better place without it and the dollars made of it.the opening scene and generally the first 10 minutes really give a frightful picture of an Erroll Babbage that is CLEARLLY suffering of sexual frustration. the way he handles the black male is very disturbing if not outright racist(for sure a \"cliche\" at least) ( in real life someone would probably get a beating for it, you will see what i mean). the second scene ( with Claire Danes's character present) is even more extreme. at that point i realized, in my opinion that Erroll Babbage is a very dangerous individual to people around him.how many people, that have seen or will see this movie, have never been \"hold down\"(regarding BOTH sexes) out of self, COMMON gratification!?.typically the movie gives an extreme CRIMINAL case(that unfortunately did, is and will likely happen again sometime , somewhere) BUT fingers everyone else indirectly as well as \"you could become that\", etc. anyone that is familiar with Sigmund Freud and Jung will know very well that sexuality is not something to be judged let alone \"asses\" , by such fanatical \"hero\" here. SAFE sex in its many forms IS healthy and not some evil that apparently Richard Gere character is obsessed with , on his way for some sexual \"crusade\". have we not learned anything from the abundant recent scandals involving priests and young boys!? or for how long an American teenager can see extreme violence on \"pg-13\" but he can not even see a woman breast until \"R-18\"!?!?( yet the industry targets them with this VERY SAME sexual perversions like \"american pie\" series for example).raise the kids tester-one levels but frustrate them and drive them underground in developing fetishes to UNhealthy EXTREMES!? all sexual activities(upon MUTUAL acceptance) integrates individuals better then some \"rightous\" nut-case, THAT blames his misfortunes and shortcomings on \"the lives of others\"( a new German movie that would work great in comparing this 2 distinct and world apart features on the very same subject).here, like in that movie, you will probably appreciate the actors for well portraying the opposite of what they should have been.i am very disappointed with Richard Gere especially after the recent \" hunting party\", a feature where he really shines and about a more realistic \"hero\"( after real facts as well).but then it just reminds me that all those people are only actors that get paid to play someone's political and social agenda. \"the flock\" and \"untraceable\" 2 heads of the same hidden beast)))it just reminds you, if know anyone with similar views on the subject as a WHOLE, as Erroll Babbage has those here, to stay clear of them for THEIR own safety.they would kill my family faster then any 0.00001 chances of Paul Jerrod in anyone's life would...in the end i recommend this to anyone thinking negative here about MY \"assesment\" of this particular movie ( and \"untraceable\" actually), so you can likely have similar thoughts as i did. nothing sweeter then a propagandistic movie shooting itself in the \"foot\".))))for once i agree with the rating, this is not a feature for teenagers or kids; simply because at best would confuse them even more then the \"common\" belief of \"money+fame+fashion\" and how that relates to sexuality. \"scream\" series and movies as such AT LEAST have a defined entertainment value(even if a dumb one in my opinion). but this one is just another \"trust me i know what is good for you\" deeply (not so well done i might add) subliminal messages.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad10c714d32d469f90e362ab9c721627",
            "input": "A woman (Sylvia Kristel) seduces a 15 year old boy (Eric Brown). They have sex...but it's all tied into some stupid plot or something.Easily one of the most disturbing sex comedies ever. Does anyone realize this movie is making light of child molestation? I suppose it's OK cause it's a teenage boy--if we had one with a man seducing a teenage girl there would (rightfully) be outrage. Sorry, but having it done to a boy doesn't excuse it. It's still sick. I realize Brown was of age (he was actually 18 when this was made) but he LOOKS 15. I just find it disturbing that some people find this OK.Plot aside the acting sucks (Kristel is beautiful--but can't act; Brown is easily one of the worst child actors I've ever seen) and the constant nudity gets boring and isn't even remotely erotic.I saw this drivel at a theatre back in 1981. I was 19 and with my 14 year old cousin (who could easily pass for 18). HE wanted to see it--I didn't but I decideD what the heck? We got in and I actually bought tickets for three teenage boys who were obviously underage. My cousin thought is was boring and the three other kids left halfway through! Let me make this clear--three TEENAGE BOYS left a movie with tons of female nudity! That should give you an idea of how bad this is. I'm surprised this was ever released. A 1 all the way.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c71d5aeed0a4f96930a6b97f39df5ee",
            "input": "I saw this when it first came to video, my little sister got it as a gift and I was probably 12 at the time... What stood out for me was the lack of mid-movie conflict that so many movies have, where the main characters get mad at each other because when it comes time to explain themselves they just don't say the one thing that you're shouting at the screen that would make sense of the whole deal, that any person of reasonable intellect would know to say. This is what I like the most about the movie I guess, that the main characters don't do mean things to each other halfway through... they don't break up and make up, they just grow to like each other more as the movie goes on.These two kids team up and though they seem at first to be from opposite sides of the track, they're not that different. Loui is actually just some middle class kid that needed to realize how lucky he was to have a loving family, and Cecelia was an upper class kid that just needed to prove to her family that she existed and they would miss her if she was gone. Anyway, I saw this movie posted on Hulu and had to watch it again... sure there's plot holes if you analyze the script and no, Woog and Dweeb shouldn't be eating hot dogs since they would have been herbivores in reality.Now, what detracts from the film is it's unexpected scariness. Little kids under the age of 5 would probably be frightened by the scenes with Dr. Screweyes. And, the addition of him halfway through the movie (though it's blatantly obvious in the first scene that he will make an appearance) is too abrupt... there should be a glimpse of him doing his show earlier in the movie, perhaps to show that it's not that scary without the the dinosaurs. I guess it just lacked any real present danger for the entire first half of the movie, so that it lacks a little continuity when he appears for the second half.Considering the target audience, who I'm sure can overlook the not so mind blowing animation and dialog issues... I think I'll give it a pass on those factors too, and just enjoy the story. It's a great flick for kid and it does stick in your mind... makes you kinda think about how you treat people and it should be revisited every 10 years I think.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af685ab38be1425aae9b53157b5451f8",
            "input": "The story-line was rather interesting, but the characters were rather flat and at times too extreme in their thoughts/behavior. More extreme than necessary. Also, I think something went wrong in the casting. John Turtorro doesn't really satisfy me playing a semi-autistic chess player, not to speak of the Italian player. Motives weren't very much outlined either.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2fa86627f24b4253a82d3544a0505ba8",
            "input": "Stewart is a distinguished bachelor and a successful executive who is about to marry his fiancée Janice Rule but instead gets involved with a capricious, sensual art dealer (Kim Novak) who turns out to be a Greenwich Village witch… Novak desires earnestly and intensely to love, but is unable to feel it...Stewart slowly falls in love with her, and looks for a way to free her from her witch-spell... Novak resents his well-intentioned concern, as does her Siamese cat, Pyewacket... Still, Stewart continues in his attempts to change her into a loving, feeling woman as he aspires to marry her...Also blocking his way are such talented supporting actors as Novak's brother (Jack Lemmon), a silly, charming sorcerer who can walk nonchalantly through walls; a terrible author who is writing a book about witchcraft; and the Head of the Association of Manhattan Witches, none other than the incredible Hermione Gingold...Novak's Aunt Queenie (Elsa Lanchester), unlike her other relatives, is a tender witch who accepts that nothing should prevent the course of true love... She aids and stimulates them in turning Novak into the woman of Stewart's dreams, for a happy ending...If you like to see a lightweight comedy about magic, fantasy and love; beautiful cinematography; stunning use of color; and with an exceptional cast; don't miss this enjoyable and amusing movie…",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed47fb19bcbc487fbef7cdb64c0af720",
            "input": "This is a rather dull movie about a scientist that creates a teleporter device and gets horribly disfigured when he uses the machine to transport himself. Simple plot done before in the fly and others. Not only does he get disfigured, but he also can electrocute people with a touch. What is really dumb about this film is that we are expected to believe the place this guy works is against him. He could probably make millions for the institution that he is working at, but the head of the institution tries to sabotage his teleporter every step of the way. In the end the projected man electrocutes three people for no reason then goes after those that have wronged him.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb9dc0c0bddf45d9a2b51945eafb354d",
            "input": "John Carpenter's career is over if this sad excuse for a movie is any indication. His excuse is that he only produced it. Jon Bon Jovi looks like a girl. In fact, Bon Jovi and the two Vampire girls, Natasha Wagner and Arly Jover probably all fit in the same clothes. In short, it was hard to tell which one was cuter in an anorexic ramp-model sort of way. Bon Jovi has the most charisma. At least he looks happy when he is smiling. The two Vampire Girls on the other hand are all cramps and complaints. At one point they are about to give each other a wet kiss, but stop. Amazing how each Vampire movie has some set of morays for the respective vampires. At one point, Arly Jover is providing fellatio to a very dumb Vampire Hunter and then she sucks his blood while doing the sex act. It would have been an erotic moment except that it was filmed like a total goof, and the male actor looked mildly amused as he watched Arly Jover move her head to mimic something that was very obviously not happening. As far as gore is concerned, a few heads are ripped off, and the blood spurts profusely. These scenes have so little suspense or build-up that when they happen it is almost funny, and there is no \"horror\" pay-off from the scene. All you get as a member of the audience is a feeling of \"Wow, that sure was a lot of red paint splattering on the walls. I wonder who has to clean it up.\" Throughout the movie, these Vampire Hunters who are obviously trying to kill Arly Jover (the top vampire in the world??) keep reaching out to her. At one point, Bon Jovi goes into the abandoned Church and after he just shot her with an arrow (and has done so on other occasions), he says \"I am not trying to hurt you. I just want to talk to you. I want to get to know you.\" HUH?? Of course, the dumb vampire Arly jumps out to say hello and Bon Jovi sticks her again with another impaling device. \"Why Can't We Be Friends\" the 1970s hit song by WAR should have been the theme song for this movie. Aside from all of the other silly moments, there is a transfusion sequence when Natasha Wagner has all her Vampire blood removed, and the town people all line up to donate blood for her transfusion. I guess Blood Type is not important? Anyhow, all her Vampire blood is removed. Bon Jovi then decides that if that blood is transfused into him, he can beat Arly by becoming a vampire also. Of course, as the vampire blood is transfused into him, none of his healthy blood is removed. So apparently Bon Jovi is walking around with twice as much blood as any human can have in his body. And just like the first VAMPIRES, this one also has the vampires-bursting-into-flames special effect.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0feed5237a7a4ba79c82d9ceba0215cc",
            "input": "Alan Alda plays real-life \"Sports Illustrated\" writer George Plimpton, who was once invited to join the Detroit Lions football team as an honorary member. Rather wan, uncompelling drama curiously tempered with fantasy. Director Alex March takes an interesting tack on this material, shooting it in a quasi-documentary fashion (with macho commentary) and yet giving the tale a touch of Capraesque whimsy; still, by bringing out the cinematic flashiness in this set-up, he turns the main narrative into a jumble. Alda's smug, uncharismatic performance is another handicap, though the supporting cast is filled with real-life pro-athletes (and scintillating Lauren Hutton as Alda's girlfriend--how's that for a fantasy?). *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1035a8620044269a33fc4d6ffc0d4cd",
            "input": "New York, I Love You finally makes it to our shores, but its 10 short stories on love somehow didn't find reason enough to be released over Valentine's, probably due to the fact that this year's festival also falls on Lunar New Year, and with that comes the usual LNY blockbuster films from the likes of Jackie Chan (no, not The Spy Next Door) and local filmmaker Jack Neo who has traditionally released his latest film over that period to resounding success. So why fix a formula that hasn't been broken?Continuing in concept where Paris, Je T'aime had begun in spawning the City of Love Franchise (Shanghai will be next, so says the end of the closing credits here), the buzz here is definitely about the intertwining stories set in one of the cities of the world to allow for various interpretations from filmmakers all over to come up with stories based on love as a theme, although someone probably forgot to tell Scarlett Johansson some of the finer points in the sandbox ground rules, and her short was unceremoniously dropped from the theatrical edition for being unable to fit into everything else (well, it was shot in black and white), but here's hoping that it would make it to the DVD at least.Structurally, this series is less compartmentalized compared to its predecessor, which if memory serves me right had individual stories set within its own confines and never really breaking out of its artificial borders created. Here a little more leeway is given, where characters from various stories interact in short filler segments used to bridge scenes together, and not just solely reliant on pick up shots made up of buildings and landscapes, in hopes of making things look a little bit more serendipitous with the idea of chance encounters amongst strangers, though one story craftily adopted this mindset for its own narrative to deliver a surprise, though already seen in Paris.One of the top draws for sitting through a film like this one, is definitely the creative forces behind the stories, from writers, directors and cinematographers from various geographies and backgrounds mirroring the makeup of the cosmopolitan city, coming together for a concept film. And what more the star-studded cast too, with big names amongst the lesser known ones all upping the ante through picture perfect performances, be it for the entire length of the short, or as a support to build upon. You can't deny the initial star-gazing in recognizing the notables, from Irrfan Khan to Natalie Portman (who also had writing and directing duties), Rachel Bilson (looking quite like Bardot) to Spielberg's blue eye boy Shia LaBeouf, who surprisingly can act, and shows off more in his few minutes here than his entire filmography to date.Story wise, like any anthology, you'll find some which will automatically appeal to you, and with others that don't. Some are straightforward in nature, while others have to come up with gimmicky twists that thankfully worked. But these 10 stories plus 1 (because Randall Balsmeyer was given duties to integrate everything together for a more organic feel instead of just plain pick up shots of lesser known areas and established landmarks) somehow lacked the more \"anything goes\" spirit from its predecessor, with stories more rooted in reality, compared to some fantastical elements in the previous film (Elijah Wood's dalliance with a vampire anyone?), or even less adventurous with its narrative style (Christopher Doyle's, and Tom Tykwer's starring Natalie Portman). Here it seemed that the filmmakers opted very much for safe, with none venturing into that spirit of adventure and experiment.Minor quibbles aside, I still enjoyed almost all the shorts here, contrary to what many others have felt about it. The short film format is still very much alive, and having them strung together into a feature under the City of Love banner works fine, and left me wondering which other cities are or have been included in its lineup. I am hoping that perhaps the franchise will catch on and spread its influence here. We surely have enough prolific filmmakers to be stringing together a Singapore, I Love You, so here's crossing my fingers that maybe something will materialize down the road. Otherwise there's always the Sawasdee Bangkok route of just making it without any attachments to franchise house rules.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5afe4be13b0c4732bfa8f6ba32d2ddd0",
            "input": "This movie has made me upset! When I think of Cat in the hat. Im thinking of cat in the hat books. You know, the one from a few years back that parents read to thier children. Well, I though that this movie would be a lot like that! But much to my suprise was nothing like the books! Insted it is more like young adult humor movie. In one part cat is talking to a gardening tool (hoe) cat talks to it like it is his hoe (agin adult humor). the naming of his car I all so though was a little untastful for a kids movie. under the rating you'll find: mild cude humor and some double-entendres. I think in short this means adult humor. I wish I could return this movie! wal-mart said they wouldn't because the movie has been opened. If you are thinking about buying this I suggest that maybe rent before you buy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83878786f80544e2b31e7cc7fb50e990",
            "input": "Fate/Stay Night is an animated series inspired by a h-game. Somehow the producers turned it around making this a successful series without any of the h-stuff. It couldn't have been any other way because the development of the characters is great just the way it's pictured in this series and any alteration of that could only ruin perfection.(You'll understand once you see all the episodes).Despite a relatively slow start (the producer took his time on presenting the characters) things gain momentum quickly and soon after mid-series the action gets so intense that glues you to your seat.The topic of the series concentrates on the War of Holy Grail that has been taking place in the Fukuky City for the last 50 years. The pilot actually starts with the conclusion of the previous war and develops from there on. Shiro is the only survivor of the fire that started during the last battle and enveloped a large portion of the city.He unwillingly witnesses a fight between two Servants that triggers his Reiju (Holy mark) to summon one of the most powerful Servants of the battlefield, Saber. His first contact with Saber left him stunned \"Such immeasurable beauty ...I was at a lost for words\". You mustn't compare this series with any other to fully understand it's plot. FSN offers much more than some cool sword fights, good animation, spectacular lights, great soundtrack, it offers excellent character and relationship development. It presents the changes that take place within the characters personalities as the events precipitate. The action reveals believable dynamic emotional and behavioral patterns of the individuals (not similar to the linear type other series use) that are constantly shaping their personalities to reveal, from under the mask of perfection, flawed characters.The Saber character is tied to a medieval legend that has been altered to fit this series and should be accepted as such. You shouldn't watch FSN thinking that it doesn't present the viewer with the historic fact, just remember that this is adventure/fantasy series and not a documentary and enjoy this as long as you can. The ending is sudden and unexpected and if there were twice as many episodes I would have watched them in the same breath.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca43de407d49436cb7f500454b329c2a",
            "input": "Despite being quite far removed from my expectations, I was thoroughly impressed by Dog Bite Dog. I rented it not knowing much about it, but I essentially expected it to be a martial arts/action film in the standard Hong Kong action tradition, of which I am a devoted fan. I ended up getting something entirely different, which is not at all a bad thing. While the film could be classified as such, and there is definitely some good action and hand to hand combat scenes in the film, it is definitely not the primary focus. Its characters are infinitely more important to the film than its fights, a rather uncommon thing in many Hong Kong action movies.I was really quite surprised by the intricacy of the characters and character relationships in the film. The lead character, played by Edison Chen (who is really very good), becomes infinitely more complex by the end of the film than I ever thought he would be after watching the first thirty minutes. The police characters also defied my expectations thoroughly. In fact, the stark and honest portrayal of the seldom seen dark side of the police force was quite possible my favorite aspect of the film. I don't know that I would say Dog Bite Dog entirely subverts typical notions of bad criminal, good cop, but it certainly distorts them in ways not often seen in film (unfortunately). So many films, especially Hong Kong action films I find, portray police in what is frankly a VERY ignorantly idealized light. This is one of my least favorite things about the genre. I was pleasantly surprised to see that Dog Bite Dog actually had some very unique, and really quite courageous, ideas to present about the police force. There are negotiation scenes in this film that I have never seen the likes of before, and doubt I will ever see again, and am sure I will remember for quite a while. Also, the criminal characters are shown from an interesting perspective as well, there is some documentary footage in the film of Cambodian boys no older than ten being made to fight each other to the death with their bare hands, which I thought was one of the film's most powerful and moving moments. It says a lot about the reason these guys are the way they are, rather than simply condemning them. Also, the relationship between Chen's character and the girl he meets in the junk yard reveals a lot about his character. It wasn't until this element entered the film that I really started to see the film as an emotional experience rather than only a visceral one. There is something about most on screen relationships that doesn't quite get through to me, but for some reason this one really did. The actress does an incredible job with this role which I imagine was not easy to play.Dog Bite Dog also features some really breathtaking cinematography, all though it is unfortunately rather uneven. There were some moments that I found really striking, particularly in the last segment of the film, but there was also a good deal of camera work that was just OK. Another slight problem I had was with the pacing, which I also felt was uneven. I found a lot of the \"looking for a boat\" scenes to be a little alienating, all though it quickly picks up after that. The action scenes are short and not too plentiful, but are truly powerful and effecting, particularly towards the end. The fight choreography is honestly not all that impressive for the most part, all though to its credit it is solid and fairly realistic, but the true strength is the emotional content behind the fights. The final scene, while not a marvel of martial artistry or fight choreography, is one of the most powerful final fights I have ever seen, and I've seen quite a few martial arts films.I suppose the biggest determining factor of whether or not one will get much out of Dog Bite Dog is whether or not you can connect with the characters. All of them are certainly some of the more flawed characters one is likely to see in a film of any kind, but there was something very human about all of them that I couldn't help but be drawn to and really feel for them, particularly Chen's girlfriend. I should say that I doubt most people will like the film as much as I did simply because I imagine that most people will not like or care about the characters in the same way, but I still recommend it highly all the same. It is truly a deeply moving and effecting film if you give it a chance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f519b0ae30ea4b2cbaa2c4d4251fb1d6",
            "input": "I have complained to ABC about the cancellation of six degrees. If enough people do the same then it could be enough to bring this fabulous show back to life!! Just go onto the official site and the rest is simple enough. I do not understand why this show has been cancelled. What a fantastic show, cast and characters. The whole concept is gripping viewing! I am astounded that my favourite show is over after just one series. Why is this? Six degrees is phenomenal, it's better than so many other TV programmes out there! Until I heard they were stopping it from a friend it hadn't even occurred to me that this might happen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-beaa1853ca0040439aed41c1c0ad3423",
            "input": "A plot that fizzled and reeked of irreconcilable differences in opinions constituted a judgmental havoc with one side pro-life and the other a destroyer of a demon's seed. The horror was left out and replaced with an overall dull effect quite possibly meant to be horrific, but, instead demonstrated an ill dose of beliefs which ridiculed each other to death, despite the title itself. Being a fan of Masters of Horror since the beginning, this ridiculous plot twist with it's sordid depictions crashed apart like a spindly old rocking chair after being sat upon. I view this episode as being thrown together from the get go, never really taking off anywhere other than to see it through for what its worth and relieved when it finally came to \"The End\"..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70e789c1e27042d99286017f76e3069b",
            "input": "A top contender for worst film ever made. Joanna Pakula's character seems to have an I.Q. of 3 which is only one less than the writer and director. The screenplay would not have passed in a high school writing class; the \"jokes\" are juvenile; the concept corny. These performers were obviously desperate for work. I stayed to the end only to see if it would get worse. It did. Life is too short to spend any part of it watching this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3185df82cbce46b3b7c4300c96ffd12d",
            "input": "Okay so I went into this movie not really expecting much I figured an action flick similar to The Fast and the Furious. Some nice cars some nice girls somewhat of a decent plot. Unfortunately I would have to say that this was probably the worst movie I have seen this year. Don't get me wrong the cars were nice and the girls were OK but the way they put the movie together was just plain crappy to put it nicely. The story just never made you care about the cast and the movie seemed just pieced together. So overall this movie was not the worst thing ever by far but if your looking for a movie to go to this weekend I would pass on this one for now.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32aedd096fba4ff780e4595131e89b7f",
            "input": "Julia Stiles is a talented young actress, who with guidance from a reputable agent has a lot of potential. Obviously, the person who guided her into this travesty is not someone who cares anything about her career. I sat in the theater surrounded by teenagers who left in droves to find another movie to sneak into wondering who thought this movie would appeal to anyone. It was poorly written, the casting director could only have put 1 or 2 minutes of effort into the characters and the director obviously didn't care.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-356e3a6642774a0abf92162369555e2c",
            "input": "For starters, I didn't even know about this show since a year or so because of the internet. I have not once seen it on TV before in my country, and a lot of people do not usually know about this show. It is a pity though, because this is easily the most original and clever animation I have witnessed in years.I don't hand out 10 points a lot, but this is one show that truly deserves all 10 points. Even though at first glance this might seem like a typical cartoon but keep in mind that this is not a kids-show though. When the complete story unfolds itself, you know that this is a real deep storyline, with a spiritual message. This spiritual part of the story is largely based off spirit-animals, a old Indian believe that has been preserved for many years. This gives the show a original twist that you can't often find in animated shows.The overall design is also something very different. At times it resembles Spawn a bit in terms of gritty design, and other times it takes on a more cartoony approach. I believe David Feiss who also created and directed Cow and Chicken animated a segment in the show (as he also drew that segment in the comic).If you are looking for a mind-twisting show, a show that takes on various subjects such as reality, suicide, spirituality, life, then this is something you should not miss. Once you begin watching, you are probably going to watch it to the end. One minor fact may be that the show takes on less material from the comic, but this is not too annoying. The only question remains though, where is the DVD?!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d094862528074837b54bd3ff84e7abae",
            "input": "I have been eagerly anticipating the opening of this film for several months. Being a huge Jim Carrey fan, I easily saw how he could morph himself into Seuss' Grinch and make the character his own. I was not disappointed. This movie was pure magic. Carrey is a master at his trade and no one could have played this role to perfection as he did. There was plenty to enjoy for both adults and children alike and this movie is sure to become a timeless classic for all to enjoy in the years to come. I already have visions of my young daughter sitting down year after year to watch this remake on video, and I undoubtedly will watch with her and laugh as I did the first time I saw it.Clearly, this movie has Jim Carrey written all over it, and I do not believe that it would have come together without him. However, the supporting cast was charming and entertaining in their own right, most notably the adorable Taylor Momsen who was the perfect foil for Carrey's antics. The set design, musical score and costumes all lent their hands to a magical, fabulous finished product and I believe all involved can be proud. It is not an easy feat to turn a 22 minute cartoon classic into a full length live action film, but Howard has succeeded with flying colours. For those critics who disagree, perhaps it is your hearts that are 2 sizes too small.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0883dce827ae4307a8b51f7d0834d68e",
            "input": "Riget II is a good sequel, but not quite as good as the first one. This series don't seem to be quite as serious as the first one. There are much more comedy in this, good one, though.We're back at the Danish Rigshospitalet, the Danish national hospital. Mrs. Drusse is just about to leave the hospital as her work is done, but fate want's it otherwise. She is soon chasing ghosts and Helmer is doing everyone mad and it's soon to get much worse as black powers are unleashed in the Kingdom.This story involves a lot more comedy that the previous. By all means lot of fun, but it makes you take the series a little less serious. The story has kept a lot of elements from the last series and added some new ones. It's well written, but some of the new elements are just kind of silly, but they save it by making it more like a comedy. Good story, but not as good, original and thrilling as the first series.The actors are the same with some addition to the regular cast. They are all very good. It's an odd story and setting. Some parts are a total freak show and the characters change during the show so to keep it serious and keep it real is not an easy job. Yet, these actors handle this whole situation perfectly.Much of the good qualities from the first series are kept intact. The cinematography is one of those qualities. The hand-held camera that made Trier world famous gives suspense and reality to the series. It gives the camera a unique ability to move and follow the characters and Trier makes use of these abilities. Good, movement, great lightning and good composition and editing makes this enjoyable to watch.Be prepare to see better effect in this sequel that in the first. Also be prepared to see some more. I didn't think that green thing looked all too good. Thought it was unoriginal and didn't fit. Never the less, the effects like the ghosts are really good. The non-digital effects looks good too. Little Brother looks just really odd, but you accept it. All over I'd say effects are from OK to good.The music is also quite good. Moody and nice. Some of it are really touching. It fits really nice. As the first one there are rather little music in the action scenes and it works very well.All together this makes a good sequel. If you'd seen Riget you can see this one without being disappointed. It has many of the same qualities as the first series. However, I would recommend seeing the first series before seeing this. These two makes up a series you don't wanna miss.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44fc36350e0b4e109205ef5fc97e7f22",
            "input": "Cinderella is one of Disney's greatest films, one of those films I think you appreciate more the older you get. Disney creates a magical adaptation of the classic fairytale. I consider the film to have been the greatest of his films at the time of its release. The characters became more dimensional than earlier films, creating more depth to appreciate the characters more. Cinderella herself is, in my opinion, one of the greatest characters Disney ever created. With her kindness and dash of dry humor, she is extremely likeable; however, it is the inspiration she provides which makes her memorable. Like many people she is an endless dreamer, and she holds onto her dreams, never giving up. Even in the most adverse of situations, her dreams endure, and she won't let anyone take that away from her. Her example should serve as inspiration to everyone, and encouragement to never let go of your dreams.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff248781d61e43f3b8264f6ae3f1911d",
            "input": "What can i say about the first film ever?You can't rate this, because it's not supposed to be entertaining. But if you HAVE to rate it, you should give it a 10. It is stunning to see moving images from the year 1895. This was one of the most important movies in history. I wonder how it was to be one of the people who saw the first movie ever!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70aecf8ff0b64440875c01dec4b90652",
            "input": "I was not expecting much from this movie. I was given a ticket for an advanced screening. I had just gotten off of work. It was hot and I was tired. I had to wait in the movie line for 40 minutes and there seemed not to be any cool air flowing through the hallways of the theater complex.Once seated in the theater, tired and frustrated, the movie started, I did not recognize any of the actors in the beginning, but the flow of the movie was perfect. Right from the beginning I became consumed with the movie, getting more and more excited with each minute passing. I think this movie is destined to be a fantasy/fairytale classic. The actors were fabulous, the pace was perfect, and the ending was magical.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-621f695f177b41499e9cb9942a164d8a",
            "input": "A clever, undeniably entertaining romp starring Peter Ustinov as a career embezzler with his sights set on a US conglomerate in London. He's abetted by foxy (and deceptively sharp) Maggie Smith and threatened with exposure by jealous company man Bob Newhart. This is a heist film with a lot of brains. Ustinov is exceptional as is Smith and Newhart is quite funny. The real surprise is Karl Malden, as the pill popping \"executive vice-president.\" Malden has seldom been so loose. Cesar Romero and Robert Morley pop up in some funny cameos. The excellent music score is by Laurie Johnson. Eric Till's direction is brisk and the script by Ustinov and Ira Wallach is first-rate & very smart. A swinging good time!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83264b9197e64e459a159943915b6d07",
            "input": "It takes a little while to get used to Nick Nolte's Nebraskan locutions before we can easily accept him as a famous intercontinental playwright. Once you get past the bar, it turns into a fascinating story of a man who loses everything while trying to do good.Nolte, an American, moves to Germany, marries a famous actress, and is a satisfied success in every respect until war is about to break out. He's visited by a jovial American, John Goodman, who persuades him to accept a post as an anti-Semitic radio broadcaster for the Nazis. Nolte has no politics but thinks it's a challenge to write a role that's almost impossible and then play it himself. Another American secret agent will modify Nolte's radio scripts -- inserting a cough here, a sneeze there -- that will serve as a code for the transmission of intelligence to the Allies. There's a catch, though. Nobody will know about Nolte's real role as an American agent except Goodman, Donovan, and Roosevelt himself. If he's ever uncovered, he'll be refused recognition by the Americans.Nolte plunges ahead and his vicious broadcasts are wildly popular in Germany. His adored wife, Sheryl Lee, knows nothing of what's going on, nor does she care. Nolte and Lee live in what he repeatedly refers to as \"a nation of two.\" The war ends and the trouble begins. He's captured by Americans who are bitter because of his betrayal. They beat him and leave him in the mud. He's rescued by Goodman, his \"fairy godmother\", who sends him to an anonymous existence in Greenwich Village and sends him a little cash now and then.By 1960, he manages to cultivate a friendship with his neighbor, the painter Alan Arkin, who has also lost his family and claims the two now belong to a secret brotherhood. But his location and his identity somehow leak out and he is more or less adopted by a group of ancient Aryan racists -- led by a dentist and a priest. His house front and mailbox are painted with swastikas and accusations. He's beaten senseless by an ex-GI. But -- miraculously -- his beloved wife is returned to him by the ancient Aryans. Another catch: it turns out later that it's not his wife, but rather her younger sister who has loved him since adolescence.The ending has him typing his memoirs in an Israeli jail in 1967 before his trial for crimes against humanity. It's not a happy ending.Nolte can talk with, but not see, the occupant of the cell above his in jail. It's Adolf Eichmann. Eichmann seems pleasant enough. He advises Nolte that it's a bad habit to type for fifteen straight hours. \"It's important to relax. You must learn to relax.\" Nolte laughs out loud and shouts, \"That's how I GOT here.\" The film is filled with such ironies. At one point in their relaxed conversations, Arkin tells him that \"in spite of everything I still think people are good at heart.\" I don't know if the movie was a commercial success but if it wasn't, that's the sort of thing that might have torpedoed it for a younger audience of theater-goers who may never have heard of Anne Frank let alone that supposedly final statement in her diary.The fact is that it's a movie for adults, and patient adults at that. The story moves slowly, there's very little violence, no car chases, no shootings, and people don't seem subject to manic speech pressure. A lot of it will probably slip past viewers who don't open themselves to its deliberate approach. Nolte refers to the war-time relationship between him and his wife as \"a nation of two.\" This is a pretty compact phrase. No doubt anyone could come up with a glib definition but it takes a little concentration to grasp its emotional import.It's a story of a man who loses everything -- his ability to write, his identity, his wife (twice), his sole friend, his country, his self respect. At one point he stops walking along a crowded New York street and simply stands there until after dark, when he is moved along by a curious cop. The reason he stopped is that he simply has no place to go. What Vonnegut is describing is far more than depression. I don't mean to sound condescending but it's the sort of feeling that's hard to understand in your youth. Adolescents might like to THINK they know what's holding Nolte in that one spot, but it really requires maturity and the quickened sense of finiteness that only maturity can bring.Remember Robert Frost's line about home being the place that when you go there they have to take you in? Well no place will take Nolte in.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9865c947623a4565b9cf6338119c6cbf",
            "input": "\"Black Angel\" is minor whodunit, with June Vincent as a woman trying to save her husband from the electric chair after he is found guilty of killing an old acquaintance. Dan Duryea (the husband of the murdered woman) decides to help Vincent find the real culprit. Peter Lorre has one thankless role as a suspect. This film noir looks and plays like a cheap programmer, never achieving anything special. It is pleasant enough but then, at some point, it stops making sense and the solution to the mystery provokes one of those big \"give me a break\" reactions. That ending alone could have sank the film completely, but what precedes the conclusion is not very good either. Vincent is a wimpy heroine and Duryea was never very good at playing good guys. I love film noirs, but this one was a real disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3980c8793b9740f5bdbf984f74669fa1",
            "input": "This movie deals with one of the most feared geriatric diseases among the aging today. As one who has encountered a number of families who are facing the potential of Alzheimer's or who are in the formative stages, I would suggest that every health care giver recommend this movie to any family facing the trauma of this disease. The movie is designed primarily to speak to the family of the patient and reaches into the very heart of the struggle. Casting is excellent and the dramatic portrayal is outstanding with a very commanding plot line.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-135a54eb2ebc47a78597a00399de0699",
            "input": "Yet another \"son who won't grow up\" flick, and just the other recent like entries. Heder in another bad wig, channeling Napoleon for, what, the third time? Anna Faris is forgettable, as always; Jeff Daniels phoned this one in from another state, at least; and Diane Keaton...how does one become typecast this late in a career? Do not bother. Nothing is said here that hasn't been covered many times over. I will say this; it's about a hundred times better than \"Failure To Launch\". There are very few amusing bits in the movie, unless you think Eli Wallach cursing is funny. Ha, Ha! He's old and he dropped the f-bomb! Tee, hee, hee. Pitiful!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72c1fafe600442bd8d6336746bf8039c",
            "input": "This has to be the worst, and I mean worst biker movie ever made! And that's saying a lot because the line of stinkers is long and smelly!Now at least we know what happened to Ginger after she was rescued from Gilligan's Island! A frightened looking Tina Louise(she was probably afraid someone would see this mess!)is a stranded motorist who is tormented by the most repulsive motorcycle gang in film history. But, don't worry fans! Batman, I mean Adam West as a hick-town doctor comes to the rescue! Pow! Crush! Boom! Holy Toledo Batman! The only good points of this \"bomb\" are some cute women, some laughable fight scenes, and the still \"sexy\" Tina Louise!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-684d437fb63144ef9530d5d0f6ded165",
            "input": "Though it had the misfortune to hit the festival circuit here in Austin (SXSW Film) just as we were getting tired of things like Shakespeare in Love, and Elizabeth, this movie deserves an audience. An inside look at the staging of \"The Scottish Play\" as actors call \"Macbeth\" when producing it to avoid the curse, this is a crisp, efficient and stylish treatment of the treachery which befalls the troupe. With a wonderfully evocative score, and looking and sounding far better than its small budget would suggest, this is a quiet gem, not world-class, but totally satisfying.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca149be2e1274d77a0ad34ae6a95b911",
            "input": "I really tried to like this movie. It deals with an important problem in any society: sex addiction.In this story we learn that you can lose everything when you're addicted to sex. In this case, our main character and hero, for having non-stop sex with all kinds of women (crazy, kinky, neurotic) puts in jeopardy his marriage, job, and even his life.The production values are terrible; mainly the acting. Oh, you won't enjoy ANY of the sex scenes, most of them are done in very poor taste and you might think you're watching a home made flick.Second, the plot is just non sense. How could such a smart and beautiful wife stand all the nasty stuff from the husband? How could she believe him?! The threesome situation is priceless and will make you chuckle for a while.Also, the scene with the black movie theater attendant is just pointless and will leave you thinking \"wtf?\". Scenes like those you will find plenty. Avoid this movie. Please, avoid it; it's not soft core, it's not a documental, it's not a dramatic feature. It's a pretentious effort form a so called documentary director or whatever.Only Mrs. Kinski's legs on display are worth the watch. I caught it on HBO and I'm glad I didn't spend my money on it. But those 90 minutes of my life won't come back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dedd93d9a6744b949871b5641098428d",
            "input": "Lee hosted the 100 Years of Horror for Ted Newsom and was talking about filmic werewolves. He said something to the effect that his only brush with lycanthropy was The Howling II, then he quipped, \"The less said about that the better.\" Indeed he was right as this film may very well be the worst in his entire catalog of screen performances. The first Howling by Joe Dante was a groundbreaking werewolf film with its incredible special effects and its campy sense of style and subject matter. It was a film to be taken seriously. Like other good original films, filmmakers for some strange reason thought that even more campy sequels were needed rather than what worked the first time(See CHUD then CHUD II to illustrate this point). This film is miles and miles away from the first on every front. There is absolutely nothing scary about it. It looks cheap and is pitch black through most of the major scenes. Lee is the only actor in the film worth mentioning(okay, I'll cede Ferdy Mayne too). Lee looks embarrassed as he says inane dialog and does ridiculous things(check out that ending with him and Stirba). Lee looks incredibly tired and knows what dreck this is which is a tad more insightful than the two leads who leave America to go to Romania. The story isn't really worth examining here, and you can bet there is very little story worth mentioning when you have to have Stephen Parsons and his band Babel play through much of the film in the beginning and the ending with that dreadful noise. Sybil Danning is here and, yes, she disrobes once and then we get that scene showed again and again and again - one reviewer said 17 times(I counted ten - but might have been so bored out of my mind by that point). I gave the film three stars, but it really deserves a zero - the three I gave it are 1 for Lee and two for Ms. Danning's contributions. Yuck!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb63b891894f4f59bc9578f8dea3ea47",
            "input": "Anyone who knows me even remotely can tell you that I love bad movies almost as much as I love great ones, and I can honestly say that I have finally seen one of the all-time legendary bad movies: the almost indescribable mess that is MYRA BRECKINRIDGE. An adaptation of Gore Vidal's best-selling book (he later disowned this film version), the star-studded MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is truly a movie so bad that it remains bizarrely entertaining from beginning to end. The X-rated movie about sex change operations and Hollywood was an absolute catastrophe at the box office and was literally booed off the screen by both critics and audiences at the time of it's release. Not surprisingly, the film went on to gain a near-legendary cult status among lovers of bad cinema, and I was actually quite excited to finally see for the first time.Director Michael Sarne (who only had two other previous directing credits to his name at the time), took a lot of flack for the finished film, and, in honesty, it really does not look like he had a clue about what he was trying to achieve. The film is often incoherent, with entire sequences edited together in such a half-hazzard manner that many scenes become nearly incomprehensible. Also irritating is the gimmick of using archival footage from the Fox film vaults and splicing it into the picture at regular intervals. This means that there is archival footage of past film stars such as Judy Garland and Shirley Temple laced into newly-film scenes of often lewd sexual acts, and the process just doesn't work as intended (this also caused a minor uproar, as actors such as Temple and Loretta Young sued the studio for using their image without permission).Perhaps Sarne is not the only one to blame, however, as the film's screenplay and casting will also make many viewers shake their heads in disbelief. For instance, this film will ask you to believe that the scrawny film critic Rex Reed (in his first and last major film role) could have a sex change operation and emerge as the gorgeous sex goddess Raquel Welch?! The film becomes further hard to follow when Welch as Myra attempts to take over a film school from her sleazy uncle (played by legendary film director John Huston), seduce a nubile female film student (Farrah Fawcett), and teach the school's resident bad boy (Roger Herren) a lesson by raping him with a strap-on dildo. Did everyone follow that? And it gets even better (or worse, depending upon your perspective)! I have yet to mention the film's top-billed star: the legendary screen sex symbol of the nineteen-thirties, Mae West! Ms. West was 77 year old when she appeared in this film (she had been retired for 26 years), and apparently she still considered herself to be a formidable sex symbol as she plays an upscale talent agent who has hunky men (including a young Tom Selleck) throwing themselves at her. As if this weren't bad enough, the tone-deaf West actually performs two newly-written songs about halfway through the film, and I think that I might have endured permanent brain damage from listening to them! Naturally, none of this even closely resembles anything that any person of reasonable taste would describe as \"good,\" but I would give MYRA BRECKINRIDGE a 4 out of 10 because it was always morbidly entertaining even when I had no idea what in the hell was supposed to be going on. Also, most of the cast tries really hard. Raquel, in particular, appears so hell-bent in turning her poorly-written part into something meaningful that she single-handedly succeeds in making the movie worth watching. If she had only been working with a decent screenplay and capable director then she might have finally received some respect form critics.The rest of the cast is also fine. The endearingly over-the-top John Huston (who really should have been directing the picture) has some funny moments, Rex Reed isn't bad for a non-actor, and Farrah Fawcett is pleasantly fresh-faced and likable. Roger Herren is also fine, but he never appeared in another movie again after this (I guess he just couldn't live down being the guy who was rapped by Raquel Welch). And as anyone could guess from the description above, Mae West was totally out of her mind when she agreed to do this movie - but that's part of what makes it fun for those of us who love bad cinema.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be8a1a5444a348ada24f42c214abe28a",
            "input": "This film is an interesting take on the killer scarecrow genre - amazingly it manages to rise to become greater than the sum of its parts. Average montage scenes, 30-somethings playing teenagers, and some excellent facial expressions combine to become one of the \"new-wave\" of modern classics. As a viewer, I came away from the film with the same sense of \"shock and awe\" as when I first saw The Godfather in 1969. Tiffany Gardner's startling portrayal of the morally bankrupt Judy was deserving of her Grammy nomination, which was well documentedly stolen by Ricky Martin and restless hips. Unfortunately, the none of the sequels could live up to the expectation of the original (unlike the Godfather series which got better with each installment, and should culminate in 2012 with Godfather 4: Eat My Rage.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfa2c657c656427c8b059fbd05990346",
            "input": "This low-grade Universal chiller has just been announced as an upcoming DVD release but, intended as part of a collection of similar movies that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that legitimate release. Which is just as well, since the end result was not anything particularly special (if decently atmospheric at that): for starters, the plot is pretty weak – even though in a way it anticipates the Vincent Price vehicle THEATRE OF BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see sharing his measly plate of cheese with his pet cat! – who, upon finding himself on the receiving end of art critic Alan Napier's vitriolic pen one time too many, decides to end it all by hurling himself into the nearby river. However, while contemplating just that action, he is anticipated by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed \"The Creeper\" and, naturally enough, saves the poor guy's life with the intention of having the latter do all the dirty work for him in gratitude! Although it is supposedly set in the art circles of New York, all we really see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter Robert Lowery (who keeps painting the same statuesque blonde girl Joan Shawlee over and over in banal poses – how is that for art?) who, conveniently enough, is engaged to a rival art critic (Virginia Grey) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is discovered with his spine broken and Lowery is suspected; but then investigating detective Bill Goodwin gets the bright idea of engaging another critic to publish a scathing review of Lowery's work (I did not know that publicity sketches got reviewed!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is going to be! In the meantime, Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by sculpting Hatton's uniquely craggy – and recognizable – visage which, needless to say, attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to believe that she lacks material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and model. Bafflingly, although The Creeper is fully aware of how Grey looks (thanks to her aforementioned haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet \"introducing\"!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f17364c8b174fe2b31b2a29c69a648a",
            "input": "this was one of the most moving movies i have ever seen. i was about 12 years old when i watched it for the first time and whenever it is on TV i my eyes are glued to it. the acting and plot are amazing. it seems so true to reality and it touches on so many controversial topics. i recommend this movie to anyone interested in a good drama.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7620c917ec234e41aaae1cfd599ea12a",
            "input": "I have to say although this movie was formulaic throughout with a plot stolen from films like Friday the 13th/I Know What You Did Last Summer, this movie wasn't that bad. In fact it wasn't as bad as most of the Horror films Hollywood has released recently. The killings although at times a little too imaginative were in most instances just that, original. The cast was mediocre which is to be expected from low-budget features but much better than what that much bigger studio Artisan/Lions Gate has been offering. My only real complaint that wasn't due to the film's budget, which must have been small, was the contrived \"twist\" ending. I'm sorry but this is what put this film in the bad category for me. The ending was just stupid and tacked on. Before that I was a little bored, but actually enjoying it. 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f76b246bda2d4ad599bcad23002947cf",
            "input": "I ended up watching this whole (very long) movie because I was fascinated by the sheer stupidity and naivity of it. It seems difficult to believe that so many famous people (Anthony Quinn, Lawrence Olivier, John Gielguld, Vittorio de Sica, etc.) would have willingly participated in this farce. But maybe in 1968 people really *were* so naive? The plot seems written by some confused Latin American Marxist priest with an agenda. There is a superpower conflict and the Russians are actually the good guys, with the Communist Party General Secretary being a nice and spiritual man, who, suddenly, after 20 years, sees the light and feels compelled to ease his bad conscience by releasing a prisoner priest from a Siberian gulag. The priest then promptly becomes the Pope by a series of coincidences. We are allowed to see the secret Vatican papal voting process which is portrayed in the most hillariously pious form you can possibly imagine.Meanwhile, the communists in China achieved the usual socialist economic miracle of starving half of their country to death. To solve this minor hiccup on the relentless shining path towards communism they want to start a nuclear war (in order to justly distribute the Western capitalist riches to the poor workers of China).Our good old comrade General Secretary gets a bit worried and calls the Pope just before his coronation to ask him to broker peace. They meet with the Chinese leader comrade Peng who looks and acts like a 15 year old boy. You will roll on the floor laughing about what people in 1968 thought the Chinese looked like. Comrade Peng demands that the Western capitalists must pay (which is quite logical after all, don't capitalists always have to pay for the madness of the socialists?), and that the Pope needs to sacrifice something, too, for the common altruistic cause of equality and social justice.So when the Pope gets crowned in Rome, he pledges the entire wealth of the Catholic church world-wide to feed our poor Chinese brethren in Christ. And thus he saves the world from nuclear holocaust.Apart from this, there are also some minor sub-plots, which, alas, provide little to redeem this incredibly bad movie. I'd give it three Oscars for stupidity.By the way, Anthony Quinn looks quite unlikely as a Pope. He is much more plausible as Zorba the Greek.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7dbdd193a71f456795a9beb54e02d49e",
            "input": "Man, I loved this movie! This really takes me back to when I was a kid. These were the days when the teachers still showed classroom films on reel-to-real and if you were good, they would rewind the movie slowly so you could watch it play backward. I still remember one of the opening lines....\"Tutazema was his name, and he was an Orphan. He lived with his sister so and so in the village.\" This is a great movie for kids and as enduring as the red balloon. At the end the other Indian boys in the village attach the feathers to Tutazema and he becomes an eagle himself. He gets to live the way he always wanted to. He gets to soar the heavens.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-363103992245419d8af37d69064296c8",
            "input": "This film actually works from a fairly original idea - I've never seen nymphs that were thrown out of heaven in a horror movie before anyway. However, the way that it executes this idea isn't original in the slightest; we follow a bunch of kids that, for some reason decide to go on a trip into the forest. The fact that the forest is inhabited by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/nutcases/zombies etc; but really, the monsters are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real asset that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror setting. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct lack of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only real highlight the film has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's nothing to recommend this film for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties woodland flicks, you might find some enjoyment here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f982950c9fce493b99ee8aa8eed88a26",
            "input": "Do not be mistaken, this is neither a horror, nor really a film. I firmly advise against watching this 82 minute failure; the only reason it merited a star was the presence of Chris Pine.Nothing happens. You wait patiently in the hope that there may be a flicker of a twist, a hint of surprise, a plot to emerge - but no.The characters take erratic turns of pace in their actions and yet don't have the time to develop - thanks to the thrifty editors and frankly ashamed writers - before returning to an idyllic and playful (bring on the teen rock montage) state. The only thing that could have made it worse would be adding the perishable token ethnic 'companion'.Their encounters with obstacles (be they human or physical) are brief, confusing and entirely pointless.Chris Pine fights to keep himself above the surface whilst being drowned by a misery of a lightweight cast. Lou Taylor Pucci couldn't be dryer if he spent the summer with Keanu Reaves combing the Navada desert.Watch 'The Road', watch '28 days Later', watch day time TV...anything but this; I implore you. Suffer the boredom, unlike you may be led to believe in the film, this film is no cure.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5350b967fa03498e80ddaace53962463",
            "input": "Karen(Bobbie Phillips)mentions, after one of her kids gets out of hand with his lame annoying jokes, that she'll never survive this trip..boy, is she ever on the money. Karen is a school teacher taking her group of kids from the Shepley College of Historical Studies to the butt ugly locale of a run-down manor in the major dung-heap of Ireland..surely there are places in this country more appeasing to the senses than this?! The caretaker of the manor, Gary(Simon Peacock)warns Karen and her students to stay on the path and not to stray into the forest. There's a myth regarding the Sawney Bean Clan, a ritualistic druid cannibalistic inbred family celebrate Samhain(the end of Summer, October 31st)\"Feast of the Dead\" where sacrifices are needed to appease the spirits. Gary is supposedly clairvoyant, his cousin Pandora(Ginger Lynn Allen)tells us, because he was born on Samhain. Funny, because he sure doesn't see outcomes well or even give advice accurately. Nearly everyone dies(..even those who never stray from the path)and he doesn't even see his own gruesome fate. What this monster we hear breathing is a victim of way too much inbreeding..it's face resembles a malformed mushroom and it looks like a hideous reject from a Mad Max picture. It doesn't take long before the \"evil breeder\" is killing everyone. Paul(Howard Rosenstein)is Karen's love interest who made the wrong decision coming to Ireland without his girlfriend's prior knowledge.Horrible formula slasher doesn't stray from the norm. It's minuscule budget shows loudly and the characters are assembly line clichés churned out yet again to be slaughtered in the usual gory ways. Most of the violence flashes across the screen quickly with not much dwelling on the breeder's acts of death towards his victims. Lots of guts get pulled out during the fast edit cuts as one scene whisks to another. Seeing Gillian Leigh's gorgeous naked body for a moment or two isn't incentive enough to recommend it. Phil Price has the really irritating trickster character, Steve, often shedding bad jokes..how he is able to get Leigh's Barbara naked in the shower for some action is anyone's guess because I have no reason why he'd stand a chance with such a hottie. Brandi-Ann Milbrant has the fortunate role of Shae, the quiet virgin smart girl(who is also quite hot)who we know will be the one chosen by the screenplay to survive. Jenna Jameson drops by long enough to get her heart cut out of her chest(at least we see her breasts momentarily before her chest is opened up)with a few minor lines about two missing friends she's looking for. The film's main problem is that the story and character development grinds to a halt because it's realized that none of them are at all interesting so director Christian Viel just lets loose his monster to run rampant causing carnage, obliterating an entire cast almost in one fail swoop within ten minutes. Oh, and Richard Grieco has a minor opening cameo as a victim who strayed off the path to tent camp with his chick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ce6b7972240436890c4854db6f22bde",
            "input": "This film had my heart pounding. The acting was great, the erotic music and the beautiful women add up to make this one a winner. The lead actress decides to join an escort service when she realizes that her husband has no time for her. She step's into a whole new world her first client being another woman. This is a film you definitely DON'T want to pass up.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adf9ab06075a4645b02b199b7a263baa",
            "input": "Normally I would never rent a movie like this, because you know it's going to be bad just by looking at the box. I rented seven movies at the same time, including Nightmare on Elm Street 5, 6 and Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Unfortunately, when I got home I found out the videostore-guy gave me the wrong tape. In the box of Wes Craven's New Nightmare I found this lame movie.This movie is incredibly boring, the acting is bad and the plot doesn't make any sense. It's hard to write a good review, because I have no idea what the movie was really about. At the end of the movie you have more questions then answers.On 'Max Power's Scale of 1 to 10' I rate this movie: 1PS I would like to correct Corinthian's review (right below mine). He says Robert Englund is ripping off lingerie, riding horses naked, etc. The guy that did those things was Mahmoud, played by Juliano Mer, not by Robert Englund.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e843bb1d8b1642f7893c33f784856336",
            "input": "Georgia Rule has got to be one of - if not the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. The whole movie has a very surreal feel that made me gasp, \"what?\" out loud at least 7-10 times throughout its grueling two hour course.Advertised in its trailer as a movie about three generations of women - Jane Fonda as the matriarch, Felicity Huffman as her daughter, and Lindsay Lohan as the rebellious, over- sexed, scantily clad grand-daughter, the viewer thinks this will be a cliché, light, chick-flick about growing up and coming together as a family.Talk about false advertisement at it worst.After many shots of animals doing \"funny\" things in the background of \"pivotal\" scenes and not to mention a whole five minutes focusing on an old woman who comes into a doctor's office weekly to have her diaper changed, or the fact that this movie is actually about Lindsay Lohan's character being sexually abused by her step-father, Georgia Rule creates its own genre of cinema : The ungrounded, horribly acted, inappropriate comedy dealing with extremely serious issues in the most awkward, surreal, strange way. If Garry Marshall wanted this movie to be a drama/comedy, then he should have watched The Royal Tenenbaums. Sideways. Junebug. And so on. And so on.The only way I feel I can get a reader to understand the horrific genre that Georgia Rule falls under is to create a hypothetical situation. Say that the movie, The 40 Year Old Virgin, was about the main character being celibate because he was sexually molested as a child. But instead of having the movie take a more dramatic turn, belly laughs and comedy would ensue, with all of the characters' reactions being that of fake, lifeless, human beings pretending to care. Throw in a yellow parakeet, Dermot Mulroney as the flattest, most non-dimensional character that could have been cut completely out of this poorly written script, along with a male character who throws away all of his religious beliefs and morals to be with a trashy, too-tanned girl who shares none of the same interests as he, as well as an an unnecessary car chase scene, unreal moments of characters trying to relate to each other, and you've got Georgia Rule.I found this movie to be an insult to any of those people out there who are struggling filmmakers, screenwriters, actors, editors, etc..who have a lot more talent and aren't getting noticed.Don't see this movie : my rule. And if you must, get sufficiently drunk before hand.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3810b9c4b4c94f25a1e593bbec25c018",
            "input": "Once in a while, a film comes along that raises the bar for every other film in its genre. A film of this caliber will influence many films following its release for years to come. `A Chinese Ghost Story' falls in this category. It is arguably one of the best horror films made during the 1980's; possibly one of the best ever made.The filmmakers have crafted a movie that appeals to every horror fan. The story is engrossing and original. The villains are appropriately menacing and frightening. The sets are creepy and atmospheric. There is even a little blood and gore to satisfy the splatter fan of the house. But don't let the `horror' label scare you off, if you're not a fan of the genre. This film easily fits into many different categories.The screenwriter has deftly blended the drama, comedy, horror, kung fu, and romance genres into a delicious deluxe cinematic pizza. `A Chinese Ghost Story' is a beautiful epic love story told, thankfully, without the gratuitous nudity and/or explicit sex scenes that have ruined many Hollywood `love stories'. Those put off by the romantic elements of the story can sit back and revel in the fast-paced swordplay and `wire-fu'. If that's not enough, actors Leslie Cheung and Wu Ma provide enough humorous situations to satiate your appetite for comedy. This film offers something for every film fan.Director Siu-Tung Ching and Producer Tsui Hark assembled a truly amazing cast for this film. Leslie Cheung proves that he is not only a gifted actor, but also a talented singer and a charming physical comedian. I cannot possibly think of a performer other than Cheung who could have portrayed Ling Choi Sin better (except maybe Chow Yun Fat). Joey Wang is enchanting as Lit Su Seen, the enslaved spirit who steals the heart of Cheung's character. Her portrayal of the title character is truly haunting and memorable. Wu Ma is hilarious as the cantankerous Taoist who aids the young lovers.On technical level, this film is very impressive, even by today's standards. The direction is superb. I wish that today's Hollywood executives would seek out talented artists like Siu-Tung Ching rather falling back on the usual MTV video or Pepsi commercial `directors'. The cinematography is gorgeous. You have to commend any cinematographer who can make a film look good when most of its pivotal scenes take place in the dead of night. The special effects make-up is top-notch. In fact, most of the creature effects in this film blow away the shoddy CGI ghouls and goblins that have become commonplace in modern horror films.Since its release, \"A Chinese Ghost Story\" has spawned two worthy sequels, a full-length animated movie, and countless imitations. None of the films that followed it or copied it were able to capture the magic of this classic, however. This film is required viewing for any horror fan or just anyone looking for great way to spend 95 minutes of your time. 10 out 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-694602c270d040af9d015ceae125a5a1",
            "input": "Poorly-made \"blaxploitation\" crime-drama aimed squarely at the black urban market of the early 1970s. Pam Grier stars in the title role, that of a nurse who becomes a one-woman vigilante after drug-dealing thugs make Coffy's little sister a junkie. Violent nonsense plods along doggedly, with canned energy and excitement; only Grier's flaring temper gives the narrative a jolt (she's not much of an actress here, but she connects with the audience in a primal way). Not much different from what Charles Bronson was doing at this time, the film was marketed and advertised as crass exploitation yet still managed to find a sizable inner-city audience. Today however, it's merely a footnote in '70s film history, and lacks the wide-range appeal of other movies in this genre. *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-248817301cff40fc9066479a93ff6f7d",
            "input": "The prerequisite for making such a film is a complete ignorance of Nietzche's work and personality, psychoanalytical techniques and Vienna's history. Take a well-know genius you have not read, describe him as demented, include crazy physicians to cure him, a couple of somewhat good looking women, have his role played by an actor with an enormous mustache, have every character speak with the strongest accent, show ridiculous dreams, include another prestigious figure who has nothing to do with the first one (Freud), mention a few words used in the genius' works, overdo everything you can, particularly music, and you are done. Audience, please stay away.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc661f6573f4420bb4e9b2e13f745333",
            "input": "Wow! A Danish movie with this kind of content? I mean, the actors, the story, the pictures, the efx - everything was where it should be. And a Danish EFX house producing those VFX - Wow! This is like the 2nd or 3rd time a Danish FX has produces visual effects in that quality.*SPOILER AHEAD* The twist with the ghostly children in the submarine was quite good, but generally I did not feel the big chill which I would expect from a ghost-movie. *END OF SPOILER*But anyway, this is a Danish movie which I as a Dane can be proud of.The only \"bad\" about this, is that it wasn't a Danish director, but a Swedish...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c18bea99812d4714927fc2df061ffc4a",
            "input": "Valliant effort to use a mining catastrophe as a vehicle to pronounce this director's distaste for war. The audience not only learns a great deal about early mining rescue procedures but, we learn that Europeans at the interval between WWI and WWII, had concerning pacifists(for lack of a better term). The speeches given by both representatives of each country at the end of the film, are inspiring given the time. Although the revised edition, through the transfer technology of early foreign films, \"cuts-off characters heads\" at times, this film holds it's own in many different aspects. Character analysis, lighting techniques, historical content and a scenario that has tested and inspired many a writer and filmmaker.Pabst went on to Direct and put to screen Weil & Brecht's \"Three Penny Opera\", starring the original star, Lotte Lenya.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fe348d339f24f65adfb1a2b459f77d7",
            "input": "I first saw this movie when it came out in 1994 and just watched it recently and it is STILL funny. I don't know if you have to understand hiphop in the 90's, but it helps if you do. In the 90's when NWA and Public Enemy were at the top, there were internal strife within the groups and members when their separated ways (Ice Cube, Easy E, etc). Also there were the wanna b's, accessible rappers that start making the scene (Vanilla Ice, Freedom Williams from C&C Music Factory, etc). This movie makes fun of all of that in a way that seems like it's an actually documentary. Kasi Lemmons plays an interviewer that spends a year in the life of a fictitious rap group name N.W.H. The members of the group are Ice Code (Rusty Condieff/director), Tasty Taste (Larry B Scott/Revenge of the Nerds, and Tone Def (Mark Christopher Lawrence). They are an up and coming rap group whose politics makes them controversial. Whats good about this film is that it is so thourough in its portrayal of the hiphop industry of the 80s and they way it pokes fun at it. But, if you know 80's/90's rap, you know how much of this stuff is true. Still, on it's own, without hip hop knowledge, it is still a funny funny movie. And for all of those who ask, yes Spinal Tap came first, but Spinal Tap is not the first spoof movie either. This, in my opinion is equally as funny and in some ways, better than Spinal Tap. As Spinal Tap is to heavy metal, Fear of A Black Planet is to Rap. And the songs are off the hook also. The DVD is chalk full of extras to include music videos of NWH as a group and as solo artists. Brilliant performances by Rusty Condieff and Larry B Scott.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80b859e17d8648ea979b3ea2718092fc",
            "input": "The first question that springs to mind after watching this rubbish is who on earth gave these idiots the right to use the Omen name on this movie? It is a shambolic , embarrassing, pathetic atempt to carry on the Omen franchise. When the film starts the backing music sounds like it has been lifted straight from a Bugs Bunny Cartoon and from then on the film gets worse! I dont know who wrote the script but i bet they got a E - for it when they took it back to show their teacher! It is difficult after a while to tell if this is a comedy because what happens is so funny and so un true to the original Omen it beggers belief. The acting is laughable , especially from the leading lady Faye Grant. she keeps pulling silly faces or is she finding it difficult not to laugh? It's hard to tell. THE worst sequal i have ever had the misfortune to witness. 1 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2c8292f018e4c8d8ad1e4880f55119a",
            "input": "Where to start? This is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The editing is the worst ever, the sound effects were awful and the sound editing was whacked. Most of the movie all one could here is the crappy kicking effects, with muddled talking in the background. I had to turn my volume on full blast just to her what was going on....and what was I supposed to hear exactly? Probably one of the worst scripts ever made. I can't believe people actually put up some green for this film. It makes me think I could take a crap in a box, send it to producers, and then have them finance a movie for me.Dolph, was a usual, Dolph. Nothing else needs to be said. The villains were bad, the protagonists were bad, and the movie was a stinker. If you really want to know what NOT to do when either writing, directing or editing a movie, watch this!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa54b8a4dc9b4bc6ba606a3f3a84de40",
            "input": "Just okay horror film about a nice suburban family dealing with the death of their parents and the \"thing\" in the basement that they keep feeding people they pick up off the street. Of course there is more to it then that but to say more would be telling.For me this just didn't come together as it tries to have it two ways both as a family drama and a horror film. the film tries very hard to walk the cutting edge between the two genres but seems more to stumble all over the place as it tries to be shocking, something it never really is. It doesn't help that the final revelation is less a scare then an \"oh\", as on \"Oh thats it?\". Maybe if I hadn't been watching so many horror films recently this might have been better or it may have just seemed it since I wouldn't have compared it to so much.I'd take a pass",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8855bf253f949a894baf78c95b1c61d",
            "input": "My husband is a huge Robin Williams fan. I like him too, but have generally found that he should \"stick to what he does best\" and focus on comedic roles. My thoughts were confirmed with this movie. I was completely bored throughout the entire film. The story was predictable. I realize it was inspired by a true story. But, my guess is that there could have been some suspense or intrigue even while maintaining truth in the story. None of the characters were well developed. There was a side story about the main character and his partner. This relationship could have been explored further. More important, though, would have been a deeper exploration of the mother of the \"boy\". Her psychological profile would have been interesting to delve into. She obviously has a long history that was not touched upon except in the most superficial way. If my husband wasn't such a huge Williams fan, we would have left 20 minutes into it. Too bad I can't get my $20 or 2 hours back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-031399732f8a46469158ebb0b8b08258",
            "input": "It's funny. It's not Arthur Miller or T.S. Elliot, but man this is funny. Kline and Fields are great. (Her toss-off line \"God, you are so disGUSting\" as she climbs in his window - great! Kline's running into the door after scoping out Teri Hatcher - great too!) Robert Downey Jr. and Kathy Moriarty work together flawlessly - until he finds out who she really is... a soap opera turn if there every was one!The scene near the end in the chinese dining area had my kids and I rolling on the floor - that scene alone is worth the rental price.Doesn't solve any world problems or show the seemy underbelly of daytime T.V. (I hope). Just a lot of fun.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee93ab25f8774610a774f414085f824c",
            "input": "Alright, so I've been dying to see this movie. Stoked about the, \"who's who\" in horror land that are in the film....well, my friend rented this, brought it over, and we started watching it. It's supposed to be a comedy....I did not smirk even ONCE, until the 40min mark.Does it have to do with the budget? Not at all, in fact, there's films out there that cost CLOSE TO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, and they're amazing (to me anyways). Also, while watching this film, I couldn't help but realize the similarities (i.e., STEALING) to a low budget indie film titled, \"ACTRESS APOCALYPSE\", read my review about it (it DESTROYS this film BTW).This film...it had potential it really did. It had the \"star power\", stolen plot (lets film the behind the scenes of the making of a movie...IE...\"ACTRESS APOCALYPSE\"....seriously, this angers me the more and more I think about),...it really could've been funny. A LOT, A LOT of the jokes fall flat. The acting is alright for what it is. But it dragged on, wasn't funny, and the plot was totally stolen.I give this a two, because it wasn't SOOO AWFUL, but that's the ONLY reason.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-171d97ad55ca48619d442bcf617f69d0",
            "input": "There have been more interesting polish documentaries on worm farming, in brail_!! The competition (worm farming) had a better plot and more interesting characters. I was physically ill after watching this movie. The cheating husband (i think dougray_scott_) was a joke in every meaning of the word. Poor Jennifer must really need the work, and what was with the accent!!. The locations and random meetings reminded me of a high school prank, and showed the humility of a 10 year old in cooking class. It was that bad that I think I will write the sequel named \"this is not a laxitive\". Thank you for listening it was a great weight of my conscious.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2bbc37cfc4b4f72831f9170f75de3eb",
            "input": "When I saw the Dentist, I thought it was very cool. But this movie is not for everyone, especially people who do not like gory scenes as the Dentist has lots of gory scenes. That's why it has it's R18 rating. It's about a beverly hills dentist Dr Alan Feinstone, who finds his wife Brooke cheating on him with the poolman. It's best to go to your dentist \"before\" you watch this. But if you don't like going to the dentist already, then it's best not to watch this as you may be put off going for life. the Dentist has the best bloody revenge in it that I've ever seen. Who has ever seen a movie that has a dentist (Spoiler) pull out all his cheating wife's teeth and cut out her tongue with no anesthetic? Overall awesome flick, but not for everyone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a9bcc3225b04284abaa49ac7517ae5e",
            "input": "This movie has a few things going for it right off the bat. Having Dani Filth as a lead actor is automatically going to make some people like this movie. Admittedly, I love Cradle of Filth and listened to the soundtrack to this movie long before I watched it. Dani Filth is a very recognizable character and makes for a great lead. The independent filming style of the movie is great for the creepy factor. There are some GORGEOUS actresses in this movie. For being low budget, the special effects weren't bad either. The ways that people died were very creative and nightmarish.Now on to the cons. There is VERY little talking throughout this whole movie, thus making for very little as far as character development. It's hard to fear for the lives of limp, static characters. When there was a little talking, the F bomb was abundant, popping up in random places. Yes, I understand people swear but it seems like a preteen boy scripted this and thought himself cool for including all the language. The storyline, what I could make out of it, was pretty good although many parts are left dangling and the lack of conversation leaves one often wondering what's happening.In the end, Cradle of Fear is like a porno for people who love sex and violence, but like a porno trying to pull of a storyline, it just doesn't work too well. Rent it though, if you're a morbid person looking to sate your blood and flesh appetite.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad8503cf27114be6b7e8a3b91d5fafda",
            "input": "This film is a perfect example of the recent crop of horror films that simply are not fully realized. There are two routes to take in horror films: either you don't really explain what's going on (or who the killer is, like in Texas Chainsaw Massacre) or give the characters a lot of back story and characterization so that everything is explained (Halloween could potentially be an example of this).Unfortunately, Creep fails in this area. I see absolutely no reason to give a small shred of the back story for Craig without fully capturing the essence of his character or his motivation. No character is fully realized, although the circular nature of Kate's character in the film is the most accomplished part of the story.In the end, this story is mostly unmotivated and none of the performances give it the necessary life to make it enthralling or interesting enough to overcome the lack of context and empty film-making that drag down the film.This film will go down as another example of a film (as most are) that could be so much better even though it would never be great. The only thing that was used properly in the film was the setting: the characters, story, direction, and overall writing would have benefited from a serious face lift.Creep does serve a purpose as a mindless, silly horror movie with no intellectual or emotional investment, but sadly, that's about it...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a01224cb522465d9af72574f382ade4",
            "input": "Aside for being classic in the aspect of its cheesy lines and terrible acting, this film should never be watched unless you are looking for a good cure for your insomnia. I can't imagine anyone actually thinking this was a \"good movie.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f07705ccca648e494dc7326b2b5d447",
            "input": "I like films that don't provide the typical \"happy ending,\" and that's my main reason for my liking of this movie. Alice Marano (Danes) and her best friend Darlene (Beckinsale) are arrested in Thailand for narcotics smuggling after a tip anonymously phoned in to the Thai authorities. The film does a solid job of keeping viewers guessing as to whether (or which) of the girls was involved, and Bill Pullman is perfect as their sleazy lawyer. Jacqueline Kim turns in a terrific performance as his more kind, magnanimous wife, Yon, who is also an attorney. I wish the girls had been abused more in the prison, as another commenter has suggested, as I've heard that Thai prisons can be quite brutal. Where this film grabs me, however, is its ending. Alice subjects herself to a sentence of 96 years in total so that Darlene can be pardoned, and we (the viewers) realize that they are both innocent. Any film that defies my expectation of the ending wins extra points with me, and this well-acted drama is certainly deserving.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1939115678cf4d65a8e30864279d9a07",
            "input": "Sidney Stratton is having trouble maintaining jobs at various textile mills mainly because of his experimentation in the textile laboratories. Stratton's experimenting on a formula for a new fabric which would create the ultimate fabric, one that never gets dirty, never wrinkles, or wears out. When Stratton eventually creates the fabric he creates enemies in all the textile workers (who will lose their jobs) and the owners (who will lose money since one mill has the exclusive rights), so Stratton in his white suit becomes the most hunted man in England. The film is ideal and only Ealing could have made it so. Guiness' performance (and a great supporting cast such as Greenwood, Thesiger, and Parker) and Mackendrick's direction make the film a delight, but the real hero is the story itself, a nice satire on business and industry with additional elements of drama, romance, and suspense. Rating, 8.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9702950b213d4a2f93edea214156da7a",
            "input": "I went to see \"Evening\" because of the cast. I'd gone to see \"Norman's Room\" for that reason -- that movie offering Diane Keaton, Leonardo De Caprio and, also, Meryl Streep -- and had loved every minute of it. Same for \"The Notebook\" even though it was chick-flit lite. And my feeling was, anything offering performances by Vanessa Redgrave, Meryl Streep, Patrick Wilson and Glenn Close would be at least as good. Instead, I found sometimes even the greatest actors cannot overcome trite, simplistic and -- on one occasion -- truly offensive material.Now I had no problem with the way the film was structured. I actually enjoy movies that cut back and forth in time to tell a story...so long as one era illuminates the other and vise verse. But while Vanessa's character being on her deathbed and recalling a past event she felt \"was a mistake\" was riveting, at times, the part actually showing what that \"past mistake\" was does nothing to clarify the matter. In fact, it makes it seem meaningless in the silliest \"girl meets boy, girl gets boy, girl loses boy\" fashion, and in the most unbelievable, clichéd, wrong-headed way possible.And from here be spoilers, so bear that in mind should you continue reading.First of all, Claire Danes was brutally miscast. Not only does she not even begin to resemble Vanessa Redgrave as a young woman, she has nowhere near the chops when it comes to acting. Don't get me wrong, she can be good in the right role -- just not this one. And Patrick Wilson was miscast, though he has the acting chops to almost pull it off. He'd have been better suited to the part Hugh Dancy played -- the rich confused WASP -- and not the object of sexual attraction to one and all; he's a bit too WASP-y for that. Hugh Dancy? One note -- \"I'm a tortured drunk and wait till you find out why.\" And the \"why\" (I'm a closet case in a sexually repressed world, so I have to drink to excess and make a fool of myself in front of everyone I know) was so offensive to me and the manner in which he died (as you knew he would because that's the only thing that can happen to a faggot in the Fifties) so ludicrous, wrong-headed and mishandled, I nearly threw my candy at the screen.As for the modern part between Toni Collette and her sister, her fear of commitment, her jealousy of her sister's \"perfect life,\" her sister wondering if she's made the right choices, her pregnancy and her too-perfect boyfriend (which actually might have been more interesting and meaningful if played by Patrick Wilson, and Ebon Moss-Bachrach might have been a more interesting Harris, given his dreamy eyes) -- anyway, all this was hashed over in the 70's and 80's. And in much greater depth. Do we REALLY have to present it, again, and all as if it was fresh and momentous?And to top it off, Meryl Streep doesn't even appear until the last ten minutes of the movie, all in old lady makeup that hides many of her facial expressions. She's still good, but only because she's Meryl, and Meryl can find a way to pull off even the silliest dialog under the heaviest of makeup.So to put it simply, this movie has every cliché in the \"really meaningful message\" movie book, and it adds a few that really had no business being trotted out, again. At two hours long and laced with \"Lifetime Movie-of-the-week\" music that is guaranteed to rub you raw, it's a complete failure in both the \"meaningful\" and \"moviemaking\" aspects. I give it \"3\" only because of Meryl and Vanessa.Now, if all you require from your films is twadd le, then please set my comments about \"Evening\" aside and have the time of your life. But if you want a truly meaningful experience being served up by great actors and filmmakers who know what to do with a simple story about life and death and all the nonsense it brings, rent \"Norman's Room\" and find out what truly great acting is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b0f11a7c6d3449b9f4aa81106f77fcc",
            "input": "Maybe the greatest film ever about jazz.It IS jazz.The opening shot continues to haunt my reverie.Lester, of course, is wonderful and out of this world.Jo Jones is always a delight (see The Sound of Jazz as well).If you can, find the music; it's available on CD.All lovers of jazz and film noir should study this tremendous jewel.What shadows and light - what music - what a hat!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27ffcad2e2984c7bb2d0f3ec004c8f8a",
            "input": "I got this film from a private collector and was very curious about it. It had a 7,8 in IMDb (9 votes only) and some external comments were pleasant. But I have to say that it is a very usual and uninteresting giallo. Yes, great cinematography, the film is well directed, but it never freaked me out. It starts well, but although it not bored me at all, the story is so ordinary and the things that occur so normal, that I didn't like it very much.You can make a few laughs. And you can see some little tits. But if you like the kind of giallos I like (bizarre, surreal, nonsenseful, gory, atmospheric, brutal murders...) you won't appreciate much this film.I give it a 4 for the good directing and editing, and the final twists, that make the film entertaining. But it could be much better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea719ee23f8140d3be6c66c7de65c393",
            "input": "\"Ruby in Paradise\" is a beautiful, coming-of-age story about a young woman, Ruby Lee Gissing, escaping her stifling roots to become herself. Although the title character is played artfully by the gorgeous Ashley Judd -- in likely her first movie role, albeit one to be quite proud of -- the emphasis is not upon becoming \"somebody,\" a la the next Madonna (whether Jesus' mother or the lurid, attention-hungry singer).It instead emphasizes following ones' instincts and being somewhat introspective about them, to grow into one's ideal, adult self. NOTE: This isn't an action movie!!! It uses an occasional voice-over narration (by Ms. Judd) while writing in her journal -- and oh, I see I've just lost the male half of the readers out there. But be patient with this beautiful movie, where we learn that one's bliss can be discovered in -- oh, I dunno, carrying water and chopping wood.Actor/director/writer Todd Field, who played Nick Nightingale in \"Eyes Wide Shut,\" co-stars as Ruby Lee's noble love interest, one who helps her heal her idea of relationships implanted from youth.But not even his character is the answer for Ruby Lee: There's no external hero imposed upon her. The ultimate message is that we are responsible for ourselves. Writer/director Victor Nunez, who also wrote/directed \"Ulee's Gold,\" did an amazing job showing a young woman growing into herself -- confronting age-old challenges of good v. evil along the way.The supporting cast is also stellar, and the music used, particularly the cuts by chanteuse Sam Phillips (whom I hear is the wife of T. Bone Burnett), is right on -- most especially \"Trying to Hold on to the Earth.\" Now, when I hear the first few chords of that song, tears spring to my eyes, Pavlovian and unbidden -- not sure if it's the music, or the indelible connection to the movie's quiet, charming message of empowerment.This movie is highly recommended for any young person trying to find his/her way. For any woman of any age, it is a must see! The downside: It is NOT on DVD, except in Spanish. (We learned, however, that it is legal to make one copy of a VHS version, which can be readily found online. My beloved husband found someone with a VHS copy and got a DVD copy made for me.) Although this treasure of a movie occasionally pops up on-air – on an indie channel, usually – you can't count on that when you might need it most as a tonic to soothe the pressures of the world. So buy a copy for yourself.This movie should have a major re-release, and it would, if I were Queen of Hollywood.-- Figgy Jones",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab5573e6ad044ead87567e3f68820fab",
            "input": "I am not a very good writer, so I'll keep this short. World at War is the best WWII documentary that I've seen. I've seen different WWII documentaries (not only English/North American) and this documentary seems to be the most complete WWII documentary that I've seen. I think it could talk a bit more about the Great Depression and why/how Hitler got to power, but it does a very good job at covering the war. It seems to be complete and objective/fair to everyone. It does not exaggerate or diminish roles of different nations. It has a lot of original footage, including color footage and many eye witnesses (it was made in 70's when a lot more were alive). It has great music and narrator. All-in-All I gave this one 10/10, because it's that good. (I haven't seen specials in DVD version so I cannot comment on those)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10f1c76607364d088dae452be52f6c50",
            "input": "Ettore Scola is one of the most important Italian directors. My parents and I watched together \"C'eravamo tanto amati\" on a summer night: we liked it, but we didn't love it as we loved \"A special day\". I believe Ettore Scola is pretty underrated: we often forget to remember him, maybe because his latest films were disappointing. And so, yesterday night, my mum and I sat on our sofa to enjoy this masterpiece. Writing, direction, cinematography, score and production design were sober and accurate, but the thing I liked the most was the chemistry between Loren and Mastroianni. They're both excellent actors and play the main roles of Antonietta and Gabriele. Antonietta is an housewife: married with a fanatic Fascist, she has six children but her husband wants to have another child to get a prize for the huge families. Gabriele is simply an Anti-Fascist. They spend together a special day, that special day of 1938 when Hitler came to Rome visiting Mussolini. I don't want to spoil anymore about the plot: go looking for this film!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff1a0077e936458fab1769824111c310",
            "input": "I was about 12 years old when I saw this classic \"Casper the Friendly Ghost\" cartoon. Figured it was an early one since Casper didn't look *right*, the same way Porky Pig doesn't look *right* in the old 1930's cartoons. But I digress...Anyway, this episode in the friendly phantom's afterlife concerns him befriending a young fox todd whom he names Ferdie. I remember being happy to see Casper have a friend, as those who have watched the cartoons are wont to know that most people run away from him, screaming \"A Ghost!\"Casper and Ferdie have some fun together until someone else shows up... I hate to leave you with a semi-spoiler, but the cartoon is only seven minutes long, so you can't really be too ambiguous. Besides, anyone who reads the IMDb synopsis of the cartoon can deduce what happens next...The finale is a bit heartbreaking. In fact, it's probably the saddest I've ever felt watching a cartoon. But that only means that it moved me, which probably explains why I decided to write a comment on this particular cartoon and not very many others. Or heck, the fact that I actually REMEMBER this cartoon at all is due to its emotional effect on me -- I haven't seen it since. But the cartoon does end on an upbeat note, and I was pleased to see Casper and Ferdie happy again.I'd give this cartoon 8 out of 10 stars. Second only to the Warner Bros. cartoon \"Peace on Earth,\" this is the most I've ever been moved by an animated short.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90e005d9e30c4abb9c4e46599153023c",
            "input": "Jochen Hick wrote and directed this little thriller of a suspense film based on the concept that the AIDS virus was a sheep virus mutated by the government to rid the world of gays and was apparently tested on convicts in the years before the outbreak of the hideous disease. Were it not for the poignancy of the concept of the film, this would fall into the category of the many films about the ruination of the world by a rampant non-prejudicial infective organism.Stefan (Tom Wlaschiha) journeys from Berlin to San Francisco to investigate his father's scientific suppositions about the induced sheep virus and its effects of the convicts in whom it was infused. He meets with some disdain and resistance to a dead theory, but also encounters some folks who know of the theory and support his investigation. Simultaneously with his visit a series of serial murders takes place, each victim killed in a similar manner and each murder apparently accompanied by strains of music from Puccini's opera 'Turandot' which just happens to be opening at the San Francisco Opera. A police investigator Louise Tolliver (Irit Levi) and her companion cop (Kalene Parker) follow the murders while Stefan makes the rounds of the sex clubs and bars in San Francisco trying to locate men who may have been guinea pigs for his father's theory. He encounters a strange lad Jeffrey (Jim Thalman) with whom he has a cat and mouse attraction and a prominent Doctor Burroughs (Richard Conti) who seems oddly involved in the cast of suspects. How this all come to an end is the play of the film, a story as much about the search for self identity between Stefan and Jeffery as it is a case for investigation of murders.While Tom Wlaschiha, Jim Thalman and Richard Conti do well with their roles (they are the only three who have any prior acting experience in the film!), the quality of the film sags considerably by the less than acceptable minimally talented Irit Levy and Kaylene Parker: when on screen the credibility of the story drops below zero. There are some small cameos by other actors that brighten the screen for the moments they inhabit, but in all the film is drowned by the incessant replay of 'Nessun dorma' as sung by Mario del Monaco from a recording o the opera - and that seems to be the reason for making the film! Good idea for a film and some good characterizations by the actors, but there is no resolution of the initial premise that started the whole thing. Grady Harp, February 06",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2faaf48ca24d4d13a1d65a168e246bf1",
            "input": "After ''Empire strikes back'' ''Return of the Jedi'' is my second favorite movie from the Star Wars series.Luke went to Tattoine to save Han Solo from Jabba. At the same time, the Galactic Empire is doing in secret, the construction of a new space station like the previous Death Star. If this station stays totally constructed, it will be the end of the Rebel Alliance. Both Vader and the Emperor are impatient because of the delay of the new Death Star,and they need to kill many of their commanders to have the project made in schedule.R2 and C3po are inside Jabba's palace to send a message from Luke to Jabba,where Lukes pretends to negotiate Han's life. He gives R2 and C3po as a gift to Jabba as part of his plan. Jabba does not accept the negotiation,since he is using Han Solo as a piece of his palace's decoration.(Han still is frozen in carbonite) Lando is hidden as Jabba's guard and Chewbacca is also gave to Jabba by a reward hunter. When the same Hunter tries to save Han solo and makes him stay in human form again, we see that is actually princess Leia in a disguise. The problem is that Jabba discovers Leia's plan and takes her as his slave,while Han is thrown away in Chewbacca's cell.Luke comes as a Jedi knight to rescue his friends. At his first try to kill Jabba,he falls into Jabba's monster cell (Bantha),but easily kills it. Jabba stays angry and decides to thrown Han,Chewbacca and Luke to Sarlacc, a big creature from the desert who stays 1.000 years digesting it's 'food'. Luke,Han and Chewie has success in scape again, and even Boba Fett dies when Han accidentally throws him in to Sarlacc's mouth. Leia kills Jabba and goes after Han,Luke and Chewie as well c3po and R2. Everybody's safe again,Luke decides to go to Dagoba to complete his training as a Jedi,as well his promise to Yoda. The problem is that Yoda is too old and sick, since he already has 900 years old, and before he dies, Yoda says to Luke that he does not need more training,but to really be a Jedi, he must fight with Vader again. He confirms to Luke that Vader is Luke's dad, and that there is another Skywalker besides Luke. In his last moments, Yoda asks to Luke to remember his advices about the temptation of the dark side, and to Luke transmit his Jedi knowledge to other people. When Yoda dies,Obi wan's spirit shows up to Luke and tells him that Luke's father killed his good side Anakin to become Darth Vader, and also that he is more machine than a man since he became a sith. Luke stays worried about killing his own dad, and says that he feels that his father still has kindness. Obi Wan tells Luke that his twin sister is Leia, and says the reasons why Luke and Leia were separated since babies. He gives his last advice to Luke saying that if he refuses to kill Vader, the emperor will win the war.At the same time, the Emperor says to Vader that he must give Luke to him when he shows up, since Luke is stronger than before, and they both needs to combine their efforts to bring Luke to the dark side.Now we are going to have one of the best battles from the star war series,when the Rebel Alliance plans to attack the new space station, the '' Death Star 2'', Luke will confront Vader and the Emperor, and Leia, Han and chewie needs to turn off the 'Death star 2' power field, with the help of the EWOKS. (little creatures who looks little bears)This is for sure one of the most exciting star wars of all!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-691af736f0da401abf8d8b8825b2956c",
            "input": "The Last of the Blond Bombshells is an entertaining bit of fluff. Judy Dench plays Elizabeth, a newly widowed woman at loose ends. She has spent most of her life being the dutiful wife and mother but has never been truly happy.Shortly after her husband's funeral, Elizabeth is having her regular lunch date with her stick-in-the-mud children when she spots a street performer. This sparks memories of when she was a member of an all girl swing band in London during World War II. We soon learn that the band was not exactly all girl as the drummer was a man dressing as a woman ala Some Like It Hot.Elizabeth pulls out her sax (which she has been secretly practicing throughout her marriage) and joins forces with the guitar-playing street musician. Elizabeth is far more talented than the guitarist, and the money begins to flow in. She doesn't take any money as she is wealthy and doesn't need it. Her playing is strictly for artistic fulfillment.Elizabeth is seen one day by Patrick (Ian Holm) who was the drummer-in-drag of the band. It seems that Patrick was - and still is - quite the ladies' man, and Elizabeth - being only fifteen at the time - was the only band member who did not experience Patrick's \"talents\" other than drumming.Elizabeth is inspired by her granddaughter to get the old group together once again to play for the granddaughter's school dance. Thus begins a delightful trip down memory lane combined with aspects of a humorous road trip movie - all topped off with some really good swing and blues.I guess I'm at the age in which I really enjoy older actresses doing their stuff, and this film is a treasure trove as it not only stars Judi Dench, but she is supported by none less than Olympia Dukakis, Leslie Caron, and a host of seasoned British character actresses. This is all topped off by the extraordinary voice of Cleo Laine.Yes, it is fluff, but totally delightful and exceedingly entertaining fluff.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40fd2b8250f74b60ac18ebcb7a8e2cf1",
            "input": "Kojak meets the mafia. Telly Savales is one of those guys from the past that seems pretty forgettable. I never thought that his show was all that great. This is his one dimensional characterization of a crime boss, with very predictable results. If you take the car chases and the general rambling out, there isn't much plot development or action. I find mafia movies to be dull because I have no respect or interest in common criminals and their actions. Hollywood, and in this case, the Italian cinema, treat these guys as heroes. I saw the film and in a few days I won't remember much about it. Lots of shooting, innocent bystanders dying, betrayal, and that sick loyalty. The film is photographed pretty well and the acting is decent. But the dubbing is so bad (due to voices that just couldn't come out of those bodies), that I almost started looking for Godzilla approaching the bay.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-136a3722401746c18c74a38bcc82d6e2",
            "input": "This movie is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. There is absolutely no storyline, the gags are only for retards and there is absolutely nothing else that would make this movie worth watching. In the whole movie Fredi (oh my god what a funny name. ha ha) doesn't ask himself ONCE how he came from a plane to middle earth. There are plenty of stupid and totally unfunny characters whose names should sound funny. e.g. : Gandalf is called Almghandi, Sam is called Pupsi ... and so on. I didn't even smile once during the whole movie. The gags seem like they were made by people whose IQ is negative. If you laugh when someone's coat is trapped in the door (this happens about 5 times) then this movie is perhaps for you. Another funny scene: They try to guess the code word for a closed door (don't ask why- don't ever ask \"why\" in this movie) and the code word is (ha ha): dung. So if you laughed at this examples you might like this movie. For everybody else: Go to Youtube and watch \"Lord of the Weed\": it's a lot, lot more fun.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e20d025dfc04d56a1a272c3c9493bac",
            "input": "One wonders why this picture was made at all : the plot as such is totally unbelievable if not ridiculous, the characters (experienced loner cop versus younger one, quite fascinated) quite predictable, the ending totally murky and impossible to understand (maybe after several viewings but you'd have to have a masochistic tendency for that ; the idea being you have to read the book to understand fully what it's all about)and the acting is bad. Was the basic idea to show that French film makers are able to do as well as Americans in the genre that include \"Seven\" and \"Silence of the lambs\" ? If so, it is a total failure. It was quite a success though (and has a sort of cult-status as the first French serial killer film)and, it seems, considered as a good product to export. Strange.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-128670291b7c40969c098bd859d155cc",
            "input": "There is a really good movie lurking just beneath the surface of the layers upon layers of cheese that is \"the Pagemaster\".I found this out when I watched this again this morning after neglecting it for years and years. I remember hating it with a passion when it first came out, but this time, I found that the special effects are quite good. The plot is just \"the Neverending Story\" with a creativity-endectomy, but it's an okay little flick for anyone who just wants some really awesome eye-candy. The animation is amazing, and I especially liked how the animators let their characters look and act a bit more surrealistic than the norm. I'm giving it a grade of three as I *would* have given it a two (just for parody value) if I had ever decided to watch this movie expecting it to absolutely blow my mind story-wise.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72e86d468bbd44dea960dc4779f7fd4b",
            "input": "This is one of the worst films I have *ever* seen! It is bad, even at TV Movie level standards. The plot is diabolically flawed, and the known names in this film are wasted on confused, uncertain characters. I don't know how the director managed to keep this excuse of a film together - it is that bad. Billed as a 'Psychological Horror Thriller' - it is certainly Horrific. There is nothing Thrilling about it. And it could do you Psychological damage! The initial opening scenes held such promise - a possible embarkation on whether the soul is just an aspect of the brain, but the utter shambles that followed the car-crash scene is beyond belief. No matter how hard you try, you couldn't care less about the characters. There are so many sprinkled ideas that the film is at best a collage of disconnected phrases from Chinese philosophers, and at worst the film would actually make you go Brain Dead!I have purchased over 300 films on DVD, and this is the FIRST one I'm going to get my money back on. STEER CLEAR.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20d2bd0407b245e79fbb8d15b135851d",
            "input": "I dislike this movie a lot. If you've read the Puzo's books, or at least have watched very closely the two first movies (specially the first one), you're going to agree with me.Compared with the Corleone's saga presented by Puzo's novel, the script of this film is, sometimes, even ridiculous. The characters and the relationships among them are distorted. The story ends up reaching nowhere, although it appears to go to some direction during the movie.It is understandable that different times should be expected for the Corleone's saga in the 90's, and that we would not gonna find things the way they were before. But, in the other hand, I don't know why they had to copy some dialogues from the other movies, in contexts when they didn't fit. Why this? It sounds like those poorly made sequels that just try to copy the original film's qualities.What will never be understandable is the fact that Mario Puzo, Coppola and Al Pacino joined together to make this. A man who directed pieces like Apocalypse Now and Godfather has to be forgiven for almost anything he does in cinema until he dies. So does Al Pacino, for being the actor he is. But Mario Puzo shouldn't have written this. How come? He damaged all his previous work. What a shame, my friend. The Puzo's novel \"The Last Don\" is a 90's story about the mob, and it is great. We can never tell the same about the plot for the Godfather III.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a231680bb8ed4b838bb88cd8efb926eb",
            "input": "This movie has an all star cast, John Candy, Richard Lewis, Ornella Mutti, Cybill Shepard, and Jim Belushi to name a few, run amuck in Monte Carlo, as well as some other beautiful European locations, and is very funny. The trouble that everyone gets in when they lie to protect themselves is great, and I highly recommend that you see this movie, it is well worth it! John Candy is in top form in Once Upon A Crime, as is everyone else! If you and your family are looking for a great family film, this is your ticket. Everyone gives stellar performances, great acting, great comedy, and great timing, which is rare in movies these days. Great plot, great mystery, (which I love anyways) and overall, well worth the money you spend on it. So get the kids, grab some popcorn, juice, or tea, or sodas, and enjoy the show!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2e4d512891249f1bc0597808ac66867",
            "input": "I'm stunned that the reviewers @ IMDb gave this TV film as a high a rating as they did. It's an innocuous, sweet, uncomplicated cliché' of a film that had two big names from the past in it (both of whom did a decent job), but this film reeks of the low budget work we can see any day of week on the lesser cable channels. I like a good romance as well as anyone, but as my wife and I were watching this--and before we saw the rating-we said, \"There are people who are going to rate this film too highly simply because there's nothing in it to challenge their brains, their faith, their comfort level or their cultural preferences. It's possible to make a good film like that (and Away from Her is an example), but this was amateur hour. There are some quite good films rated much lower than this one. Truly, another in a long line of woefully inadequate holiday films. Watch The Family Stone. It's miles ahead of this schlock.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-556d3693c5f34194b10bab701a243c80",
            "input": "With a title like that, it's above and beyond my comprehension how this movie just did NOT appeal to me. Granted, there's a few decently sleazy moments and a little gore, but the way in which the movie was shot and the overall storyline just struck me as an idiotic and lazy attempt at profuse \"shock\" tactics... The inconsistent plot starts with a guy raping and murdering a woman stranded at the side of the road. He and his abetting brother are imprisoned up until the brother breaks out and arranges to meet his girlfriend out in the woods. He ends up forcing her into a house where they screw and he later shows her a collection of kidnapped guys in the basement. The heavily drugged captives consist of her old boyfriend who raped her, a \"grabby\" neighbor, and her sexually abrasive boss. He explains to her that he is going to kill them all. She winds up killing HIM and then turning her focus towards the men (or pigs) whom she tortures and kills, herself... Most of the violence and humiliation has to do with sh!t eating and genitalia destroying - all of which are far from disturbing and essentially mild. The best scene is a graphic broom handle masturbation followed by some painful man-rape... Surely, \"I Spit on Your Corpse, I P!ss on Your Grave\" was intended as an unofficial sequel to \"I Spit on Your Grave\" - based on, mainly the title, and a reference the main character gives - suggesting her mother was Camille Keaton. I personally consider that to be a wildly blasphemous assertion! This movie is a boring, amateurish mess that strives for shocks but failed miserably...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c491d90325d43858abd962244ae20b8",
            "input": "Ernst Marischka, one of the most respected Austrian directors of that time, made films full of beautiful scenes, delicate love and with respect to all that is precious in life. Nowadays, if people should hear about him, they associate the name of Marischka with SISSI trilogy (1955,1956,1957). However, he made other excellent films like DAS DREIMADERLHAUS (1958), EMBEZZLED HEAVEN (1958) and definitely this one, MADCHENJAHRE EINER KONIGIN showing the young years of queen Victoria. Although it deals with a slightly different theme than SISSI films, I do not see many differences between this movie and SISSI. They are strikingly similar.The movie is almost identical. The style, the music, the photography. In fact, the crew are almost the same. Anton Profes, Bruno Mondi!The cast... Romy Schneider's one of the first main roles. It was a lovely introduction to her role of Sissi since this film was made one year before the first part of the trilogy about the Austrian empress. It is also a film where Romy plays with her mother, Magda Schneider. But Ernst Marischka was not the first director who cast Romy to play with her mum. Romy's debut, WENN DER WEISSE FLIEDER WIEDER BLUHN (1953) was her performance with her mother, too. Therefore, there were some voices that Romy began her Austrian career on the bases of her mother's fame. Indeed, there is some truth in it.Again, like in SISSI, this film shows love very gently. Victoria meets Prince Albert in a little inn in Dover. Their sympathy is based on pure exaltation in dance and gentle smiles. And now...? What would it be showed like? Only sex... But is it the only thing love is based on?I am grateful to Ernst Marischka for these movies. They had a soul and a message. Some people may call them kitschy, but I will never give up admiring these films. They are IMPRESSIVE!!! UNFORTUNATELY, HIGHLY UNDERRATED!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-101c1b3aafaa4dab94eda4a79b787fd1",
            "input": "(Avast, slight spoilers ahead) I got this tape from my local library, which keeps a copy for obvious reasons.I once went to the town of Matewan, West Virginia, and in a little museum there I saw the schedule for the town theatre citra May 1954. Movies would change at the theatre each day. As there would be no TV for another decade or so in those parts, this was much of the available entertainment in the town. \"The Raid\" seems to have been made for towns like Matewan in the 1950's. Although it wasn't listed for that month, I am sure showed there some Monday or Tuesday night for an audience which probably wasn't too demanding. The historical raid - daring and remarkably successful - didn't seem to have been very well researched, so the movie is full of Hollywood embellishments, including a loose cannon played by Lee Marvin. Marvin uses the opportunity to practice being Liberty Valance. And St. Albans seems to have had more Yankee soldiers coming and going through the town than Washington D.C. had.What really made me snicker was when the raiders change into their Confederate uniforms. Only in tacky Civil War paintings do Rebel uniforms look so pristine. When Anne Bancroft's son catches Van Heflin in his uniform just before the raid, I expected the boy to think it was Halloween.And then there's Anne Bancroft herself. While watching the movie I actually looked on the IMDb to see if there was a second Anne Bancroft. The then-studio contract actress looks nothing like in her later films, and has none of the presence she would later have in \"The Miracle Worker,\" \"Agnes of God,\" and of course \"The Graduate.\"Worth seeing if only 1). you live in St. Albans and 2). you have a couple hours to kill on a Hollywood fictionalization of your home town's biggest news story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-119b892ba2eb41b6b4f43058d4978dec",
            "input": "well \"Wayne's World\" is long gone and the years since then have been hard for snl off-shoot movies. from such cinematic offal as \"It's Pat\" to the recent 80 minute yawn, \"A Night at the Roxbury,\" many have, no doubt, lost faith that any other snl skit will ever make a successful transition to the silver screen. well fear not because Tim Meadows comes through in spades. the well-written plot maintains audience interest until the very end and while it remains true to the Leon Phelps character introduced in the five minute skit, the storyline allows the character to develop. the humor (consisting largely of sex jokes) is fresh and interesting and made me laugh harder than i have in any movie in recent memory. its a just great time if you don't feel like taking yourself too seriously. Tiffany-Amber Thiessen of \"Saved by the Bell\" fame, makes an appearance in the film and looks incredible. finally Billy Dee Williams, reliving his Colt 45 days, gives the movie a touch of class. and for those out there who are mindless movie quoters like myself, you will find this movie to be eminently quotable, \"ooh, it's a lady!\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e289298ba0a14f06957e007ce15a0dd9",
            "input": "It's one of those dramas that's so bad that it almost hits the point of being very funny, the script is absolutely dire, direction appalling, lighting purely armature, the only thing letting it down from a true so bad it's good feel is that the sound design is only quite bad; it adds no suspense to the story although trying hard, but doesn't at least destroy any speeches. There's continuity problems of seasons of out door shots throughout. And finally last but not least the acting is appalling. For a professional production it very much has the feel of a university media project you have to feel sorry for the sorry for anyone who had to put their names to this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8f0ddf8be0246b3b3e5ac7b717d917f",
            "input": "This film is terrible. You don't really need to read this review further. If you are planning on watching it, suffice to say - don't (unless you are studying how not to make a good movie).The acting is horrendous... serious amateur hour. Throughout the movie I thought that it was interesting that they found someone who speaks and looks like Michael Madsen, only to find out that it is actually him! A new low even for him!!The plot is terrible. People who claim that it is original or good have probably never seen a decent movie before. Even by the standard of Hollywood action flicks, this is a terrible movie.Don't watch it!!! Go for a jog instead - at least you won't feel like killing yourself.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3817c97c09b40caabc5ee30fb50d273",
            "input": "Perhaps the last film you would expect to come from Vittorio de Sica and Cesare Zavattini (who wrote the novel on which this film is based). It's a neorealist fantasy, kind of an oxymoron, really. An old woman finds a baby in her cabbage patch and raises him as her own son. After a few years, the baby is a young boy (named Toto) and the adoptive mother is dying. He goes to an orphanage and, when he finally turns 18, he leaves. Immediately, he finds that he has no home. Toto is optimistic, though, and won't let anything get him down. A man steals his valise, and instead of getting angry over it, Toto becomes his friend and goes and stays with him in a small shantytown. Toto takes some initiative and organizes the many homeless living in the area and they build a better shantytown. Soon, the landowner is trying to sell this plot of land, and the citizens of the shantytown have to protect themselves. After many attempts, the owner mounts a force of police to get rid of the homeless. At this point, the film becomes full-fledged fantasy (before this it was more comedic/fantastic melodrama in the style of Charlie Chaplin). This stuff is so weird and shocking that it's probably best for others to see it for themselves. It's quite amazing, and very funny. There are objections you could raise about the plot of Miracle in Milan, most certainly. Fellini and Visconti were greatly criticized when they started to stray from Neorealism. I think I read this was widely criticized at the time of its release. At this point, though, it's so enjoyable - I loved it very much. It might be my favorite of Vittorio de Sica's films, although Umberto D and The Bicycle Thieves come very, very close. 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2578f30306034dc883523bd8c8aa26ea",
            "input": "The endless bounds of our inhumanity to our own kind never fails to stun me. This truly astonishing story of a horrifically abused and largely unheard-of population is compelling, well-documented and enraging. As an American, I am constantly humiliated by my country's behaviour and this is just another in our long catalogue of international debasement. We suck. This is probably the first John Pilger documentary I've seen, but it immediately made me want to see what else he's done. My only complaint, and the reason I gave this film only 8 out of 10, is that Pilger shows us this travesty and the appalling collaboration of the US and UK governments, demands that we viewers/citizens are complicit in our own inaction...but makes no suggestion of how to help. I don't know about Britain, but America's made it nearly impossible for the citizenry to take part in their government's doings. A gesture in the right direction might help these islanders' cause.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f717fe38ce5f4463ab23d6395951944f",
            "input": "I love this show! Mr. Blick, Gordon, and Waffle are cats so different from each other, yet they refer to themselves collectively as 'brothers.' I often find myself trying to imitate the tired, sighing accent of their butler, Hovis, or even the Scottish borough of Gordon. There should be more episodes made about Human Kimberly. The episode about the cats disguising themselves as pre-teen girls to gain admittance to Human Kimberly's slumber party in order to get their thirsty paws on their favorite drink, Rootbeer, is a hilarious classic. We can't drink rootbeer in our house now without either doing the Catscratch voices or the Hanson Brothers from the movie 'Slap Shot.' Future classic. Where can I get the first two seasons on DVD??",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cea209ee7e35406a832a1124f04367ba",
            "input": "Why did the histories of Mary and Rhoda have to be so dour? Divorced women with indifferent daughters. And why very little reference to the original show and characters? The daughter characters were silly and uninteresting. Why can't there ever be daughters who like their mother's on TV? It makes sense that Mary would leave Minneapolis, and Rhoda would return to NYC, but why couldn't Phyllis or Sue Ann Nivens be guest stars? It just seems a pitiful way to remember such wonderful characters. It was good to see Mary and Rhoda together of course, but it could have been better, much better. Well, there has been a Mary Tyler Moore Show Reunion, a Dick Van Dyke Show Reunion, hopefully Mary will do better next time if she revisits her old Mary Richards stomping grounds again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c86020b2b84644e38b21cb61187f2ac6",
            "input": "I didn't see They Call Me Trinity, but this sequel is really unfunny at all. It has many gags that are supposed to make people laugh. I guess the filmmaker just don't have the talent to do it right. Wonder why it was so popular in the 70s.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bb1db9fdd2b4ea29c07c93f498ec1df",
            "input": "THE MATADOR (2005) *** _ Pierce Brosnan, Greg Kinnear, Hope Davis, Philip Baker Hall, Dylan Baker. Brosnan gives one of his best non-Bondian roles as a middle-aged assassin facing a mid-life crisis while on assignment in Mexico where he befriends a square yet likable American businessman (Kinnear at his most affable) and discovers there is more to life than death. Newbie filmmaker Richard Shepard makes a solid big screen debut with a pointedly wicked black comedy with a sharp eye for visual detail and nuanced dialogue and character development that makes him a talent to watch in this breath-of-fresh-air into the 'buddy comedy' formula skewering what is anticipated of his leads and allowing Brosnan to get his ya-yas out with devilish glee. A sleeper gem indie hit.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c3dcacd64e84aabbca980d257b7534a",
            "input": "I read the book and really enjoyed it from beginning to end. However, when I saw the movie I was very disappointed. First of all, no disrespect to Deborah Raffin but she was too mature to play a woman of 24/25. The late Christopher Reeve was also miscast-same reason. Will, according to the book,was around 30. I would have love to see a little more exploration of his military life, his friend Red, Elly's trip to see him as that was an important part of the characters' storyline development. Also Miss Beasley was miscast as the book mentioned her being a Plus Size lady. I know the movie didn't have the budget of the \"Bridges Of Madison County\" which I believe was released around the same time. But to me this was a very poorly made, low budget, miscast movie. As someone mentioned, I wish that Miss Spenser would come out of retirement and write screenplays for her books as they ought to be. She knows her characters better than anyone, I hope that she would consider doing the casting too. The movie let me down!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14587bc37dea47ce82fce3237d5cb7d6",
            "input": "Young, handsome, muscular Joe Buck (Jon Voight) moves from Texas to New York thinking he'll make a living by being a stud. He gets there and finds out quickly that it isn't going to be easy--he goes through one degrading experience after another. At the end of his rope he hooks up with crippled, sleazy Ratso Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman). Together they try to survive and get out of the city and move to Florida. But will they make it?Very dark, disturbing yet fascinating movie. Director John Schelsinger paints a very grimy portrait of NYC and its inhabitants. In that way it's dated--the city may have been this bad in 1969 but it's cleaned up considerably by now. He also uses every camera trick in the book--color turning to black & white; trippy dream sequences; flash forwards; flash backs (especially involving a rape); shock cuts; weird sound effects...you name it. It keeps you disoriented and off center--but I couldn't stop watching.There isn't much of a story--it basically centers on the friendship between Rizzo and Buck. There is an implication that they may have been lovers (the final shot sort of shows that). It's just a portrait of two damaged characters trying to survive in a cold, cruel, urban jungle.This was originally rated X in 1969--the only reason being that the MPAA didn't think that parents would want their children to see this. Nevertheless, it was a big hit with high schoolers (back then X meant no one under 17). It also has been the only X rated film ever to win an Academy Award as Best Picture. Hoffman and Voight were up for acting awards as was (mysteriously) Sylvia Miles who was in the picture for a total of (maybe) 5 minutes! It was eventually lowered to an R (with no cuts) when it was reissued in 1980.Also the excellent song \"Everybody's Talkin'\" was introduced in this film--and became a big hit.A great film---but very dark. I'm giving it a 10. DON'T see it on commercial TV--it's cut to ribbons and incomprehensible.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52f02d2db22646bfb5b8e859ce63f9db",
            "input": "I've been trying to find out about this series for ages! Thank you, IMDb! I saw this as a child and have never quite been able to get it out of my mind. As a 6-year old, of course, I was particularly struck by the episode of the cyclops, which was absolutely chilling (I talked about it so much that my older brother made me a cyclops out of a plastic cave man figurine, which I still have) What I also remember, though, was the atmosphere, which was unusual right from the beginning - mysterious, austere, and extremely authentic. When I read the original many years later I experienced that same sensation. It's a very hard thing to capture - and probably impossible in Hollywood. Every 'Odyssey' I've seen since has been an enormous let-down. The characters in this series seemed genuine, real people - ancient Greek people - and not some Hollywood stars in costumes. This is a real masterpiece! But - Why is it not better known? And why isn't it available on VHS or DVD? I would just love to have the chance to see this again!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd04e64276a142539c9b93311bb839af",
            "input": "I saw this movie back in 1984, we first started watching \"This Is Spinal Tap\" and after 5 minutes we were ready to fall asleep. So we went instead to see this movie. If you have any conspiracy theory's going around in your head, you will want to watch this one. The question you have to ask yourself when watching this movie are: Do you think the government would be capable of doing this? (In my opinion there is no doubt that they could) But I don't want to give out too much information as that would be a spoiler and I think that you should view the movie for yourself.But, just to let you know, we still talk about this movie 20 years later and trying to explain it to people is not the easiest thing in the world to do.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a09fff9b8e104e69a8a1c1c927f8dd32",
            "input": "I'm sorry to say this, but the acting in this film is horrible. The dialogue sounds as if they are reading their lines for the first time ever. Perhaps I got the \"dress rehearsal\" version by mistake. The director over-uses slow motion during special effects perhaps as an attempt to compensate for the poor performance of the actors themselves. The story is pretty well written, and the fight sequences are actually better than I have seen in many action films. The fights seem pretty real. But all of this happens while to two leading actors time and time again miraculously survive incredible amounts of point-blank automatic weapon fire, grenades, morter rounds, and bazookas. The enemy soldiers are definitely some of the worst shots I have ever seen, especially when they have the escaping truck in their sights from about 30 yards, and every bazooka shot is wide by at least 50 feet. Those bazookas need serious site calibration.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ef1cc5e558c45adb6fed8f8ab6cf0ab",
            "input": "This movie is actually worse than most movies I've ever suffered through, and I've suffered through a lot. Absolute nonsense. It's got terrible, forced dialogue; pointless plot developments; really drawn out 'spooky imagery' scenes, which look more like a high school remedial art project than a horror movie; 5/10 at best attractive women; long, boring sex scenes involving said women (forget what you know about virgins! especially ones with lop- sided fake breasts); muttered, difficult to understand speech from some of the characters; and they actually used the masks from Killer Klowns from Outer Space during a masturbation scene, which should be a saving grace because that movie was pretty funny, but it isn't. Veden Fell is the lamest bad guy in the history of film. Absolutely give this one a miss.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b86234e54307484b91fb5f58b50b5b5c",
            "input": "After watching this movie I was honestly disappointed - not because of the actors, story or directing - I was disappointed by this film advertisements.The trailers were suggesting that the battalion \"have chosen the third way out\" other than surrender or die (Polish infos were even misguiding that they had the choice between being killed by own artillery or German guns, they even translated the title wrong as \"misplaced battalion\"). This have tickled the right spot and I bought the movie.The disappointment started when I realized that the third way is to just sit down and count dead bodies followed by sitting down and counting dead bodies... Then I began to think \"hey, this story can't be that simple... I bet this clever officer will find some cunning way to save what left of his troops\". Well, he didn't, they were just sitting and waiting for something to happen. And so was I.The story was based on real events of World War I, so the writers couldn't make much use of their imagination, but even thought I found this movie really unchallenging and even a little bit boring. And as I wrote in the first place - it isn't fault of actors, writers or director - their marketing people have raised my expectations high above the level that this movie could cope with.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9c77984eec845998d1abbfe52bb798b",
            "input": "Well, I guess I'll have to be the one to say \"The Emperor has no clothes.\" When I saw this show listed for PBS last night I was both hopeful and apprehensive. I loved \"Morse\" (even going so far as to buy the complete DVD set) and felt that, while I always liked Kevin Whately's Sgt. Lewis character, the show WAS John Thaw, period! After watching the new \"Inspector Lewis\" (as it is billed here), I am more convinced then ever that I was right...Whately is fine (even though he looks awful (both badly aged and too fat), but he simply doesn't have the charisma to carry the show as did Thaw.And as for his \"sidekick\" Fox, well...perhaps the reviewers here from England can understand what he's saying, but I for one mostly could not.As for Ms. Innocent...all I can say is that I miss James Grout.I'm sorry to say that they should have left \"Morse\" rest in peace.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c2413953a7f48e4bcb6d48ca741617f",
            "input": "Warner Bros. made many potboilers in the 1930s and most of them are fast paced, economical and very entertaining. I really love how the studio exploited the less glamorous elements of our daily life. This is one of Warner's few hard-edged melodramas that simply doesn't work. Edward G. Robinson plays a ruthless editor of newspaper who resurrects the 20-year old story of a murderess with tragic consequences. Robinson gives a lively performance but he is surrounded by actors that don't cut the mustard. H.B. Warner, Aline MacMahon and Boris Karloff are good, but the bad acting of Frances Starr and Anthony Bushell in the second leads really hurts the movie. Starr is particularly bad during her big dramatic scene near the end of the movie. In addition, the moralistic tone of the film seems ridiculous in the context of pre-code Hollywood. LeRoy's direction is full of innovative visual touches but he cannot overcome the bad acting and the unintentionally funny situations. Sol Polito's camera work is strong. Somehow, this piece of dreck got an Oscar nomination for Best Picture (in a year that gave us \"M,\" \"Dracula\" and \"Frankenstein\").",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87ef8db042674145ae133c8ce2ad6ab3",
            "input": "Caught this by accident on a t.v. showing - and could hardly believe how utterly awful the whole experience was. By comparison, the original \"A Man Called Horse\" was spell-binding because it held one's interest throughout. But this piece of nonsense - words fail me. It was bad enough to have some kind of a \"story\" presented with all the impact of a wet loaf of bread, but that error was compounded by the obvious lack of subtitles throughout whenever the so-called \"Sioux\" spoke. For goodness sake, couldn't the film-makers have found enough North American Indians who were also actors and near-actors to perform as \"Indians\" in this farrago instead of the imposters they actually used? I also found it quite embarrassing watching Richard Harris cavorting all around the countryside at the obvious behest of the director standing just behind camera, telling him to run and jump from pointless Point A to pointless Point B just to make up film footage and minutes. Absolutely terrible in all respects!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d7d7d1d33be40cdb946090a05202d0d",
            "input": "I was prepared to laugh throughout this movie like a Mystery Science Theater experiment, but it was just boring. It appears that the producers had many biker enthusiast friends, and from there casually decided to make a movie. It is frequently unwatchable. Lots of footage of the bikers riding on a dirt road, with the same music played repeatedly. Unfortunately, Renee Harmon is barely in the movie. Harmon probably would have livened things up. Perhaps she had other commitments the day this was filmed.Of course, the bikers terrorize a small town. Fights, murder, a cowardly cop, a goofy mechanic, etc. One of the bikers always wears a football helmet, a weak attempt to distinguish him from all the other outlaws.The script has nothing to offer. One scene features a biker assaulting a woman, yelling in the lady's face \"You're all the same! You're all the same!\". We come back to the scene a minute later and he again declares \"You're all the same!\". Couldn't the writer think of something more creative to say??At the end the good guys have killed the bad guys. We also learn that the wedding between middle-aged mechanic Joe and young Susie has been canceled. Susie is going away to college, and we abruptly learn that Joe's wedding is still on (but with a different bride). End.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48e2813d872040b0aa7355c560e96f84",
            "input": "In sum, overlong and filled with more subplots than swiss cheese has holes! The director and co-writer says he wanted to mix genres - in this case drama and comedy. Well, at least here, these two mix like vinegar and oil. To boot, the comedy is not very funny and juvenile. Additionally, the film is not really realistic. Liberties are taken regarding the legal system in committing French Citizens against their will and the apparent ease of absconding with drugs in French Hospitals. I watched this film on my big screen TV at home and found myself shouting at the film to move on. Eventually toward the end I fast forwarded the final long speech one of the main characters makes to his ex-lover's son. By that time I was worn out by the preposterous confused plot that deals with a dead lover, marriage of convenience and a nutty ex-lover. At times the plot diverts to the families of the two main characters and then reverts back to one of them - either Ismael or primarily Nora. To the detriment of the audience, viewpoints keep changing from Nora and Ismael, her ex-lover confined against his will in a psychiatric hospital. There probably are two potentially interesting films here neither of which are well developed. The epilogue does not really wrap up many of the sub-plots and seems to want the viewer to believe Nora somehow will find happiness although given her circumstances in real life the chances are equivalent to a snow ball's chance in hell. The actors do their best and are appealing, but this is not enough to overcome all the glaring faults of poor writing, editing and lack of focus.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bce92196e65435d929e63ba70784def",
            "input": "Near the beginning of \"The Godfather: Part III,\" Michael Corleone's son wants to drop out of law school and become a musician. Michael Corleone does not want this. But his estranged ex-wife, Kay, manages to convince him to let Anthony Corleone pursue music as he wishes. So he does.That seems like an odd way to start a review, as it is a minor plot point and has nothing really to do with the major action. Just bear with me here; you'll see where I'm going with this eventually. Now let me tell you about the major plot. It is about Michael Corleone wanting to quit crime for good (he has largely abandoned all criminal elements in his family business). But then along comes Vincent Mancini, an illegitimate nephew, who is involved in a feud. So of course Michael must endure yet another brush with criminality and gun violence and all that good gangster stuff. Meanwhile, Vincent has a semi-incestuous affair with Michael's daughter Mary. Oh, and Michael and Kay are trying to patch up all the horrid things that happened at the end of Part II.It is like a soap opera. One horrid, awful, 169-minute soap opera. Gone is any sort of the sophistication, romance, and emotional relevance that made the first two movies hit home so hard. After a 16-year break in the franchise, Francis Ford Coppola delivered a mess of sop and pretentiousness entirely incongruous with the first two films, once again proving his last great work was \"Apocalypse Now\" back in the 1970's.What's worse, \"The Godfather: Part III\" isn't even a logical follow-up of \"The Godfather: Part II.\" Michael is a completely different person. He hasn't just gone to seed (which might be legitimate, even if it'd be no fun to watch). He's become a goody-goody that's trying to fix all the tragedy that made Part II such a devastating masterpiece. His confession to the priest was bad enough, but that little diabetes attack in the middle pushed it over to nauseating. He also gets back together with Kay! For heaven's sakes, there is absolutely no way that should happen, as the 2nd movie made abundantly clear! She aborted his baby, and his Sicilian upbringing made him despise her for it. Didn't Francis Ford Coppola even think of these things?And don't even get me started on Mary and Vincent's affair! For a romance so forbidden, it was shockingly unengaging. Sofia Coppola's acting did nothing to help. She made the smartest move of her life when she switched from in front of the camera to behind it, because she was possibly THE worst actress I have ever seen in a Best Picture nominee. Every line she delivered was painfully memorized, and every time the drama rested on her acting abilities, all she elicited was inappropriate giggles. In the climactic scene--I won't go into detail, but you'll know which scene I'm talking about when/if you watch it--she looks at Michael and says, \"......Daddy?\" I think I was meant to cry, but the line was delivered so poorly I burst out into long, loud laughter!Now we get to the climax, and now you will also realize why I took time to start the review with a description of Anthony Corleone's musical ambitions. After 140 minutes of petty drama and irrelevant happenstances, Anthony Corleone returns... with an opera! So Michael, Kay, Mary, and Vincent go to see it, and for about 10-15 minutes a couple killers walk around trying to assassinate Michael. About this climactic sequence, I must say one thing: It was really good! But not because of the killers--they were pretty boring. I just really liked the opera. It had some great music and real great set pieces. And, from what little it showed us, it seemed that the story had echoes of the Corleone family's origin. I'll bet it was one swell opera, and I'll bet Michael Corleone was glad he let his son switch from law school to music.My biggest wish is this: that Francis Ford Coppola had merely filmed Anthony Corleone's opera for 169 minutes and ditched the rest of the soggy melodrama. Better yet, I wish he hadn't made \"The Godfather: Part III\" at all. Part II gave us the perfect ending. This spin off was self-indulgent and unnecessary.P.S. This is not a gut reaction to the film. I watched all 3 Godfather films over a month ago (though I was rewatching the first one). Not only does this mean that my expectations for Part III weren't screwed (in fact, I had set the bar rather low for it after what I heard), but it also means I've had a good time to think about all three films. While I was a bit disappointed with Part II at first, the more I thought about it, the better it seemed. But with Part III, it was bad to begin with, then got worse the more I thought about it. The sad thing is that many people will stop with Part I, but if they watch Part II as well, they will most likely go on to Part III. If you have the will, watch Parts I & II and pretend like Part III never existed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53087739f69646c08c379bbea92f3432",
            "input": "Lame, cliched superhero action movie drivel. I had high hopes for this movie, and the genre of HK buddy cop actioneers is one that i don't despise, but very rarely do i see a storyline as trite and ludicrous as this one was. This would have been forgivable, as it always is in these kinds of movies, when the action compensates, unfortunately, it did not. The action does carry the trademark surreality and over the top nature of HK action, but it's not very involving, obscenely gory, and in fact often completely incoherent (perhaps this is due to re-editing for american release, it does show signs in many places of patchwork). I was very disappointed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4cb0b84d96245c7b197711d21f950ea",
            "input": "Outside the household is a different world and the family struggle to tread the line between Dads authority and their hopes and dreams. The period is captured; The bakelite light swithes, the Georgian floorpan, the picture rails, the wall paper, the short skirts, the cheeky lads, the Mini van, shiny modern mangles.... The location is captured; A wind lashed glacier hewn rocky landscape, walls of local stone, community, freedom. But there is much much more; Childhood, happiness, sensuality, pride, values, freedom, authority, rebellion, violence (in the deepest sense), love, struggle, puberty, naivety, morality, trust, faith, deceit, machismo, manners, maturity, loss, poverty, sacrifice, horror, acceptence, revelation, comedy and parenthood are all there. (And in no particular order!). This film is a richly woven expression of family tensions that are as relevent today as ever. The fact that some of these aren't tackled directly is testament in itself to the attitudes of the day but the fact that they are all here is a testament to the acting skill, the story and the direction. If there's anything bad about this film, it's that all this deeply entrenched and wonderfully enacted tension is swept away a little too lightly towards the end. Maybe I missunderstand - the doom and gloom felt by many teenagers really does disappear if they deal with it (**) - maybe the film is trying to send even that message too - well worth doing. What is the film trying to say? Kids: Parents were young too, parents struggle too, everyone makes mistakes, everyone learns, things change, struggle can end happily. Parents: Don't try too hard! Try to remember that your support is the key to their well being. It sounds simplistic doesn't it? Sometimes the film feels like that too but it's then that you notice how much is being being challenged and uncovered. The film is a classic.(**) - Not the problems themsleves.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-704ad1c404b04633a9474ec7b62ed89f",
            "input": "I thought the original of this film was quaint and charming as well as having me sitting on the edge of my seat trying to figure it out.Since I had already seen the original, when I saw this on Sci Fi Channel- I don't know if this remake was deliberately made for Sci Fi - I knew what it was within the first few minutes. Since I like Richard Burgi as a character actor, I wanted to see how he would pull it off.The writers/producers etc, modernized the film a bit by trying to explain the plight of the \"aliens\" (They could no longer reproduce their own kind and needed help) using the same pseudo science that has been crammed in our ears in the 90's. Maybe it added a bit of polish to the film, or not.This film. Film? This production takes on a more sinister edge than the original did- The original ended with a confrontation between the young woman and the alien and an understanding of sorts took place, although no resolution of the Alien's problem.I sort of remember that in this remake, the woman became rather hostile towards the Burgi/Alien- I think it could have ended better. But the ending is just the ending, and the yarn is a swell yarn, being of the basic 1958 Science Fiction Pulp Stock. Many great science fiction stories were written in the 50's and some of them even made it to film.This is a swell thing to watch on like a rainy day or something. I rate it highly cos of all the remakes of old 50's Sci Fi, this one came off well. I actually enjoyed this quite a bit.But if anyone really wants to see this story told WELL, I suggest the original 1958 version with Tom Tyron and Gloria Talbott, directed by Gene Fowler Jr.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98763a0e7b3846388f8587acd0ba361a",
            "input": "Wow. This is really not that good. I would like to agree with the others in that at least the acting is good... it is, but it is nothing special.The movie is so precictable and i for one am sick of receiving culture info through movies.*/****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef871b387f9f4433ab786c389f85c1c6",
            "input": "Oh where to begin. The cinematography was great. When the movie first started because of the initial landscape scenes I thought that I was in for a good movie. Then the cgi Bigfoot showed up .It looked like a cartoon drawing of the Lion king and king Kong's love child.It totally took away from the believability of the character.Now I knew there wasn't a Bigfoot chasing people hiking around the woods for no apparent reason but a cheesy cgi cartoon.So from then on the whole movie was shot for me.The money they flushed down the toilet for the cgi they could of spent on a costume like roger Patterson did. His was the best Bigfoot costume ever no one else could match his.I am a hardcore cheesy Bigfoot movie fan and I was warned about this movie but my compulsion led me to watching this movie and I was disappointed like the previous reviews warned me about. I know after you read this review you will still say \"I must watch Sasquatch hunters,must watch Sasquatch hunters.\" Then you will say why did I waste my good hard earned money on such a excruciatingly bad boring movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-512783129b834a548a5bfd9ef6969125",
            "input": "Overrated and only for those people in their 20's whom wear particularly thick rose tinted glasses, who never actually saw it in the first place because they were to young. Awful animation, dialogue and a tired narrative. A real product of the 80's, the novel gimmick of a puzzle TOY (thats right, TOY not the absurd, pretentious and child alienating \"collectors action figurine\"), sold on the back of a poor cartoon and other paraphernalia, only matters to those who bought the TOY when they were \"actual\" children in the period of '84' to '87'. It Has become cult because of those same adults are to immature to let go of their memories. Avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86e7df7b02e5471db0b4595eb5ec531e",
            "input": "for whoever play games video games here did anybody notice that the GTA:Vice City Mansion inside the game and some other things including weapons from the movie that are connected to this movie and this movie inspired the makers of the game (Rockstar Games) to copy some things from this movie and by the way this is one of the best 80's movies out there i recommend this for anybody who still didn't see it 10/10 no questions asked",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f38d781de41d4131852c0912a67b3c25",
            "input": "The cast was good, and I thought it was a good performance from Christopher Lloyd, whom I like from previous movies. The movie was a great family movie, nothing that would make you worry to show it to younger kids, a good story line, lots of laughs, lighthearted and enjoyable. If you want to entertain children without being bored to tears this fits the bill. Kid pleasing, and not difficult for a parent to watch, either.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-914bb28d92f64929bb51c41fa2c3c037",
            "input": "Criticism of the film EVENING, based on the novel by Susan Minot and adapted for the screen by Minot and Michael Cunningham, has been harsh, so harsh that it may have discouraged many viewers from giving the film a try. The primary criticism has centered on the fact that very little happens in this film about a dying woman's fretting over a mistake she made one summer in her youth, that famous actors were given very minor roles, that the entire production was over-hyped, etc. For this viewer, seeing the film on a DVD in the quiet of the home, a very different reaction occurred.Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson). As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician. Harris, Buddy, Lila, and Ann are woven together in a series of infatuations and romances that have been kept secret until now, 50 years later, as Ann is dying. The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a delicate mood piece and the script by Minot and Cunningham is rich in atmosphere and subtle life lessons. Yes, there are gaps in the story that could have used more explanation, but in order to maintain the aura of nostalgia of a dying lady's words, such 'holes' are understandable. The film is graced by the presence of not only Redgrave, Richardson (Redgrave's true daughter), Collette, Gummer (Streep's true daughter), Meryl Streep, Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn Close, Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but also with an ensemble cast of brief but very solid performances. The setting is gorgeous (cinematography by Gyula Pados) and the musical score is by the inimitable Jan A.P. Kaczmarek. Lajos Koltai (\"Being Julia') directs. Judge this film on your own.... Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a180a694e93421c9dd6eeae3e1c6df0",
            "input": "This is strictly a review of the pilot episode as it appears on DVD.Television moved out of my life in 1981, so I never followed the series or any part of it - which means that I'm immune to the nostalgic charm that Moonlighting appears to have for most reviewers. (Possible spoiler warning) The pilot of Moonlighting is your basic \"caveman meets fluffball\" yarn, where a \"charming\" red-blooded he-man manipulates a misguided woman into realizing what she really wants and needs. The premises that the script's \"wit\" is based on must have already felt stale around 1950. It also contains some frankly bad writing, as in the scene where Maddie demolishes the furnishings instead of shooting the villain, strictly in order to prove herself the inept female in need of masculine assistance. I often feel that Susan Faludi overreacts in seeing male chauvinist conspiracy in simple entertainment, but in this particular case I'm all with her - Moonlighting has BACKLASH stamped all over it. In one sense, however, this DVD is a must for all serious Bruce Willis fans: in addition to the pilot episode, it contains the screen test that landed Willis the job. Both features show to what amazing extent Willis' acting ability developed between 1985 and 1988/89 (Die Hard 1, In Country). Impressive! Rating (and I _am_ a Bruce Willis fan): 2 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-752250680baf473699ec8c7b3b2ae748",
            "input": "Little Edie and Big Edie are characters that anyone can feel compassion for. Even though their house was filthy, this is somehow understandable considering their mental illness. On the message board a poster wrote that \"Little Edie has the coping skills of an eight year old.\" This reminded me of when in the dramatized 2009 version, Big Edie says to Little Edie, \"If you're stuck, it's only with yourself!\" These women had everything; beauty, talent, intelligence, firm belief in their opinions and actions. Perhaps if Little Edie wasn't so hard on herself the first time things didn't work out, losing her hair, her job, and the love of her life, she would have made it. This somehow ties into what I believe is her mental illness: her inability to pick herself up when times are hard and see that good times lie ahead. The world will never know what have happened if she didn't listen to her mom's plea, \"Come home, Edie! Let me take care of you!\"Yet these understandably insecure women somehow manage to be brilliant, heartbreaking, and lovable, even in their extremely filthy home. These women were extraordinary, and their interaction with each other bring humor and sadness. When Edie had one of her emotional breakdowns, dwelling about what could have been, or about how she wants to get out of her home because she feels like a little girl, one gets the intense urge to hug her and tell her that \"everything will be okay!\" Great documentary!!9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ee362f05c5b409ab60c9c4f5dcd26bd",
            "input": "This is a powerful documentary about domestic abuse in the Cameroon. The \"sisters\" in law are female lawyers and judges who in 2004 successfully prosecuted husbands for abusive treatment of their spouses and won one woman a divorce she desperately wanted through a Muslim council. It is rather long -- about two hours -- but fascinating in terms both of the individual plaintiffs and defendants and the lawyers who successfully represented them in court rooms presided over by female judges. It will leave you, as it left me, with many questions about exactly how this change occurred. How and when did women come to occupy positions of authority in the Cameroon? Have the several cases featured in this film had a significant effect on the treatment of women generally by their spouses? Was the granting of a divorce by a Muslim court, against the express wishes of the husband, a one time event? I'm not suggesting that the film makers could have answered these questions. They made the movie two years ago, not yesterday. And the movie they made deserves a wide audience.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a2b9c9f7fa7d4b59b2961476354c45c5",
            "input": "Here's a real weirdo for you. It starts out with another take-off on the PSYCHO shower scene, on campus, then gets crazier when several coeds and their doofy boyfriends head south for Spring Break. The trouble starts when they drive into the redneck county ruled by homicidal Sheriff Dean. One of the college cuties wanders into the woods, witnesses a murder by the sheriff and has her head blown open. Then it's lets-rip-off MACON COUNTY LINE-time as Dean stalks, traps and slaughters the witless witnesses one by one. Tony March is on-target as the evil, shotgun-happy Dean. The movie's overall tone is truly disturbing. The ending is so abrupt you almost think the director ran out of film; it's also a study in despair. SHALLOW GRAVE is a must for misanthropes, misogynists and nihilists the world over.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c07488dbd0d54f4089bee1710d9b94d7",
            "input": "It is so rare that I get to rate a movie without having some reservation as to whether I should have gone up one or down one but this one.....Did the explosion rate a notch higher, or one down because my brain hurt trying to CREATE a plot. No, THIS ONE....yeah, a solid, no brainer.....ONE/ten",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4856641866db430884b7012262211ff2",
            "input": "Michael Stearns plays Mike, a sexually frustrated individual with an interesting moral attitude towards sexuality. He has no problem ogling naked dancers but when women start having sex with men that's when he loses it. He believes that when women actually have sex that's when they lose any sense of \"innocence\" and/or \"beauty\". So he strolls through the Hollywood Hills stalking lovemaking couples at a distance, ultimately shooting the men dead with a high-powered rifle with a scope.The seeming primary reason for this movie's existence is to indulge in sexual activity over and over again. The \"story\" comes off as more of an afterthought. This is bound to make many a happily heterosexual male quite pleased as we're treated to enough protracted scenes of nudity (the ladies here look awfully good sans clothes) and sex to serve as a major dose of titillation. Of course, seeing a fair deal of it through a scope ups the creepiness factor considerably and illustrates the compulsion towards voyeurism. (For one thing, Mike eyes the couples through the scope for minutes at a time before finally pulling the trigger.) This is all underscored by awfully intrusive if somewhat atmospheric music on the soundtrack.Those with a penchant for lurid trash are bound to enjoy this to one degree or another. It even includes one lesbian tryst that confounds Mike and renders him uncertain *how* to react. It unfolds at a very slow pace, but wraps up with a most amusing ironic twist. It's a kinky and twisted rarity that if nothing else is going to definitely keep some viewers glued to the screen.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f8c638a06674a4194e6b6360462f479",
            "input": "The wonderfully urbane Ronald Coleman is show-cased here as in few other of his films. He is literally in every scene and this comical movie remains fresh because of him, not in spite of him. He is handsome, witty and very clever here as he remains a step ahead of his wandering, lovely wife--played perfectly by Anna Lee. The movie is based on a french play and brings all the best qualities of that farce. Most of the supporting cast is well known, at least by face if not name...and are absolutely perfect for this very funny film. The fantastic Mr. Coleman is a combination of Sean Connery and Clark Gable as he stays a step ahead of the other characters. His multi-talents can be further appreciated in the classic \"Lost Horizon\" which every film buff must see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd3d475af6534c32a4dcb0ddaaa16ef8",
            "input": "The best thing about camp films in general is that you know what to expect. It's like watching a professional wrestling match or a day time soap opera or a Jerry Springer show: you immediately can follow the skimpy plot, identify the cardboard characters, and watch in satisfaction while all the cliches are being fulfilled. However, at times, the director does something real unexpected. It may be something extraordinarily stupid, or something weird, or something insightful. The director Makinen is up there with the best camp directors, and this is his best movie.In Yon saalistajat, everything seems to come together. There's nothing good about it, but still manages to be a coherent whole. Not once does the movie slow down - the action flows on and punches keep on coming.The weirdest thing is that there's no sense of time: some characters seem to take months doing something while other characters have only spent one hour at a bar. This is partially due to Finnish summer where the sun never sets, so you don't experience the day turning into a night at all.Finally: there is a plot, there, somewhere. You may have to watch the movie three times before you realize it, though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0e40a9803884c178661c1c8b337691e",
            "input": "The Pallbearer is a disappointment and at times extremely boring with a love story that just doesn't work partly with the casting of Gwyneth Paltrow (Julie). Gwyneth Paltrow walks through the entire film with a confused look on her face and its hard to tell what David Schwimmer even sees in her.However The Pallbearer at times is funny particularly the church scene and the group scenes with his friends are a laugh but that's basically it. Watch The Pallbearer for those scenes only and fast forward the rest. Trust me you aren't missing much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb28708c1931482d80dd142c1eb018d9",
            "input": "The Sarah Silverman program is very similar to Sarah's own stand up; It's so over the top with prejudice that you can't possibly take it to heart. The fact is, though, that while most all people will \"get it,\" it doesn't mean they will all appreciate it. It's a very polarizing and one dimensional show, so if you don't like it after 10 minutes, you may as well give up there. If you do like it after 10 minutes, stay tuned, because every episode thus far has been as good as the last.Like all shows, though, it is not perfect. Personally I love the program, but there are some huge faults with it. Racist songs are funny, but get older a lot faster than Silverman seems to realize--a problem that I had with \"Jesus is Magic\" as well. It seems as if Silverman gave herself a quota for songs per episode that doesn't need to exist. Not to mention that while the lyrics to the songs she writes are good, the music, well, isn't.Another thing to keep in mind is that while this show will for some reason appeal to fans of Monty Python, Upright Citizens Brigade, etc., it is nothing like those shows. I can watch Monty Python all day, but, as much as I like this show, I can't watch more than the half hour limit at a time. It gets flat very fast. The repeat value for this show is low too--the second time around an episode is fairly funny, and by the third time, in my opinion, it's boring.Still, that first time around is very, very funny. Give it a shot.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59d67696fb62434ca8bd4c7c60e7bfc5",
            "input": "Corean cinema can be quite surprising for an occidental audience, because of the multiplicity of the tones and genres you can find in the same movie. In a Coreen drama such as this \"Secret Sunshine\", you'll also find some comical parts, thriller scenes and romantic times. \"There's not only tragedy in life, there's also tragic-comedy\" says at one point of the movie the character interpreted by Song Kang-ho, summing up the mixture of the picture. But don't get me wrong, this heterogeneity of the genres the movie deals with, adds veracity to the experience this rich movie offers to its spectators. That doesn't mean that it lacks unity : on the contrary, it's rare to see such a dense and profound portrait of a woman in pain.Shin-ae, who's in quest for a quiet life with her son in the native town of her late husband, really gives, by all the different faces of suffering she's going through, unity to this movie. It's realistic part is erased by the psychological descriptions of all the phases the poor mother is going through. Denial, lost, anger, faith, pert of reality : the movie fallows all the steps the character crosses, and looks like a psychological catalog of all the suffering phases a woman can experience.The only thing is to accept what may look like a conceptual experience (the woman wears the mask of tragedy, the man represents the comical interludes) and to let the artifices of the movie touch you. I must say that some parts of the movie really did move me (especialy in the beginning), particularly those concerning the unability of Chang Joan to truly help the one he loves, but also that the accumulation of suffering emotionally tired me towards the end. Nevertheless, some cinematographic ideas are really breathtaking and surprising (the scene where a body is discovered in a large shot is for instance amazing). This kind of scenes makes \"Secret Sunshine\" the melo equivalent of \"The Host\" for horror movies or \"Memories of murder\" for thrillers. These movies are indeed surprising, most original, aesthetically incredible, and manage to give another dimension to the genres they deal with. The only thing that \"Secret Sunshine\" forgets, as \"The host\" forgot to be scary, is to make its audience cry : bad point for a melodrama, but good point for a good film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6aa16b1d98b74bcb89dc79b61a2624d0",
            "input": "This Book-based movie is truly awful, and a big disappointment. We've been waiting for this move over a month. Many film reviewer were hopeful for it. Also in newspapers and TV, it made big sense. When 29th April comes, many people regretfully noticed that movie is really awful. Why? First of all story was so monotone. It has been many indefinite scenes, sometimes it's hard to realize what's going on. The actresses, out of Hulya Avsar, weren't harmonized with their roles, especially Vildan Atasever. She acts better in comedy films, In this movie, a kind of drama, she couldn't disposed of her previous role. And finally Movie is too short, just 66 minutes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77e5cc67c1114e20bdc0f74c8585cf04",
            "input": "On the 28th of December, 1895, in the Grand Café in Paris, film history was writing itself while Louis Lumière showed his short films, all single shots, to a paying audience. 'La Sortie des Usines Lumière' was the first film to be played and I wish I was there, not only to see the film, but also the reactions of the audience.We start with closed doors of the Lumière factory. Apparently, since the image seems a photograph, people thought they were just going to see a slide show, not something they were hoping for. But then the doors open and people are streaming out, heading home. First a lot of women, then some men, and one man on a bike with a big dog. When they are all out the doors close again.Whether this is the first film or not (some say 'L'Arrivée d'un Train à la Ciotat' was the first film Lumière recorded), it is an impressive piece of early cinema. Being bored by this is close to impossible for multiple reasons. One simple reason: it is only fifty seconds long. But also for people who normally only like the special effect films there must be something interesting here; you don't get to see historical things like this every day.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b80ca844579d46a6b060f7704477664f",
            "input": "I often feel like Scrooge, slamming movies that others are raving about - or, I write the review to balance unwarranted raves. I found this movie almost unwatchable, and, unusual for me, was fast-forwarding not only through dull, clichéd dialog but even dull, clichéd musical numbers. Whatever originality exists in this film -- unusual domestic setting for a musical, lots of fantasy, some animation -- is more than offset by a script that has not an ounce of wit or thought-provoking plot development. Individually, June Haver and Dan Dailey appear to be nice people, but can't carry a movie as a team. Neither is really charismatic or has much sex appeal. They're both bland. I like Billy Gray, but his character is pretty one-note. The best part of the film, to me, are June Haver's beautiful costumes and great body.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01c9a4d0b15a4b379c3ce60b72c73209",
            "input": "This excellent drama had me in suspense the whole time. I could not take my eyes off the screen for one second because every word kept connecting the pieces to this puzzling murder. This movie really touched me because it showed how sad and hard life can be. I really did cry in the end (which I don't want to give away!) It also let me realize how cruel and sickening people can be when it comes to murder. The cast was also very good. The only bad cast member was the actress who played Anne Marie. The actress did a great job, but the director didn't. I say this because he found someone who didn't look a single bit like Anne Marie Fahey herself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e58554512d3b489c99a92cb0006687ad",
            "input": "There is a reason why this made for British TV movie only appeared at the 1977 Toronto Film Festival. It is dull, plodding and lacking in suspense.Peter OÕTooleÕs diffident performance and the appearance of playwright Harold Pinter are the only elements of interest.Note : Some British film fans will enjoy seeing Philip Jackson, best known for his portrayal of Inspector Japp in the Poirot television series, in one of his earliest roles....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2464ba62786f4462add77807bc45d927",
            "input": "Haven't seen the film since first released, but it was memorable. Performances by Rip Torn and Conchata Farrell were superb, photography excellent, moving story line and everything else about it was of the highest standard. Yet it seems to have been pretty much forgottenMaybe because UK is an odd market for it but I haven't seen the film on TV or video, which is sad. Has it had more success in US where it might rightly be seen as a quite accurate historical drama?Always reckon that 50% of a good film is the music and though I'm not certain I think the title theme was a simple but moving clarinet solo of \"What a friend we have in Jesus\". The film then went on to disprove that! Am I right or wrong?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd07847e8a1d4a3ea6183b9f241a64e3",
            "input": "This film was bad. Bad acting, bad directing, bad writing. But it wasn't bad in a funny way. It was bad in a boring way. I watched \"Surface to Air\" because I thought it might be a laugh. It wasn't. Don't make the mistake I did. There are plenty of more enjoyable ways to spend an hour and a half such as watching paint dry or reading the dictionary. Seriously.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd831886c73448f1ac5655b6aaf22375",
            "input": "With all thats going on in the world sometimes we need an escape. Curly Sue is just that. Not a complicated plot or deep meaning; however it is not devoid of substance. There is more than furious action or heart pounding dramas. There are the charming little shows you can watch with your kids and have enough substance to enjoy with your date. Try it you may like it more than you think. The little girl is really smart and cute. The \"Dad\" and the girl go thru some slapstick routines. When a jealous boyfriend steps in, trouble brews for Curly and the life shes known may be torn asunder. Fred Thompson and Kelly Lynch play good roles as the upper crust and Alison Porter and James Belushi are a interesting fable like duo portraying street wise homeless drifters. Their worlds collide and comedy ensues.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1555d58b67d548a08a8719d89498d7df",
            "input": "I went and saw Rivers and Tides again today. It's the second time in two days and yes, I do see movies I like as many times as is necessary. Yesterday I was struck by the brilliance of the images and Goldsworthy's works. This morning when I threw the coins I received #29 The Abysmal (Water). Goldsworthy has an affinity with water, hence the title. I received the 5th line changing which moved to #7 The Army. To Blake Art was a War. Anyway, I knew I had to see the film again.I read one of the few reviews extant Online from the SF Examiner. The critic loved the film but said Goldsworthy's comments got in the way of his enjoyment of the film. He'd rather have only the images and the wonderful soundtrack. So I was aware of that as I watched this second time.Yesterday I thought that I'd vote for Andy Goldsworthy as King of the World. Well today I could get a little bit beyond the images and listen to what he had to say. Could I enjoy the film without his comments? What he is doing, what he is saying goes way beyond \"art\". His understanding of Water, Time, Stone, Change, and on and on made me think the man is the reincarnation of Lao Tsu or some Avatar. Some of his work/words are Zen like. His knowledge...Anyway, the film is only (apparently) being shown here in the Bay Area. Be a Trend setter. Go to your local cinema and tell them, no insist that they have to book a film you've heard about from the hinter lands. It's called Rivers and Tides.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df59bf71c8c5497b9178e0fd3b1d74b7",
            "input": "Three scumbags get their just deserts after wasting their lives in greed, drugs, ego, and bad attitudes. Interesting and well done; this style of film always makes me wonder where reality leaves off and imagination takes over. Even though these folks were the scum of the earth I still found myself pitying them. They never really stood much of a chance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-126c725922274202bd2c98f190b22d07",
            "input": "To overcome the death of his wife, an old man does what anyone in his position would naturally do (at least in a Peter Greenaway movie): he and his son populate their home with eight and a half (one has no legs) women and embark on a sexual odyssey. This being a Greenaway film, there is lots of pretentious and uninteresting blabbering and of course there is unnecessary male nudity. In fact the father and son share a bed sleeping in the nude. Gross. Besides, who wants to see an old guy full frontal? For those who are not into the homo-erotic scene, one of the women likes to do the nasty with horses. There is no story - just a random collection of dull scenes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c245caa6cdc496b9866fb5de4d7857d",
            "input": "I'm a big mark for the music of Neil Young, and with that and the glowing praise the film received in many alt-indie press circles, hit the first showing of Greendale I could find. My excitement was short-lived, as this turgid storyline and weak lyrical momentum left most filmgoers either asleep or disappointed.Neil says the film started as a soundtrack, and the characters came to life so much that they just filmed the soundtrack. Not the best way to craft a story. No character really has an arc, and when \"significant\" events do happen, the viewer doesn't cared, because film technique annoyance levels are so high by that point. The film is all song, and to that end, the characters on end mouth the lyrics as they're sung...the technique works for the first stanza it is done, and is grating on the nerves after that. It doesn't feel real or fake, it just feels unwelcome.Terrible acting, with characters finding one mood and playing all of it. Poor lighting at times. The only kudos I can give the film are in regard to several scenes shot as newscast, but the technique is so used in cinema today that this film did little to further it. An alright soundtrack, but nothing I'm quick to buy. A bad film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-988eff7c448b4c23bab0111ff74cdd74",
            "input": "As usual, Hollywood stereotyped EVERYONE in the movie. But, this one is a classic - from the uptight white collar banker to the Russian woman!! Well done. Even facial expressions were great! Language was perfect (even in Russian language) and Nicole did a splendid job!! Hey guys - you get what you pay for:)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2c1cdbf755548c6a94e14826f6ccf07",
            "input": "Very good martial arts film and Jet Li is the best since the master himself Bruce Lee .Li is excellent as the low key librarian/cop who saves all time and time again . He has a presence and a look that is riveting and believable as the kung fu king that you don't mess with .Francoise Yip is simply beautiful in that mixed race original way that is unique because of her mixed heritage , she has an innocence and an allure all at the same time that I found unforgettable .The villain , the man with the sunglasses and long hair was very good as well but I can't find his name in the credits , can some one help me out with that ? Thanks ! Enjoy Hak hap or Black Mask , in any language its good entertainment !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2bd0ac4512b44055af5fb5bb136b118b",
            "input": "You will recognize the plot immediately. Daughters of a divorced couple trying to get Mom and Dad back together again. Yes, that was the theme of The Parent Trap in the 60s, 80s and 90s. But here's the spooky thing. Even though Deanna Durbin was younger than the 21 year old Hayley Mills while playing the doting daughter(s) roles, Durbin looks much older, as in adult. And so do all of her so-called siblings. And this confusion between adult and child goes throughout the film. The girls are dressed in cute little sailor outfits but look ridiculous in them as the director seems to take pains to point out their ample tops and tushies throughout the film. So you're constantly torn between thinking of them as children or women. When Ray Milland and others start \"hitting on\" them you get the feeling as if they're pedophiles, and you might be one, too for noticing those tushies and tops the director was pointing out. Teens or temptresses, little girls or little foxes, you are never quite sure what you're supposed to be thinking of them as.The parents, too, seem very old and the whole film seems very dated.It is a rusty version of the Parent Trap and you should avoid it, or at least ensure your tetanus shots are up to date if you don't believe me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77eaab2d6e0d4a9dbe7bb31c9c2c1b79",
            "input": "It's really annoying when good movies like this one go unnoticed. But I'm glad I did not miss it.They should re-release it with a lot more publicity. I do not think they did anything to promote it. Great work Paxton.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eac6ba9205214e6684e802ce0862f10b",
            "input": "Since was only a toddler when this show originally aired I just recently picked up the DVD set and am wishing there were more episodes filmed. This show was a 70s version of the poplular 90's TV series \"X-Files\"- but with a bit more of a comedic/light hearted approach. But don't get me wrong, some of these episodes have full on horror themes, many in which have some pretty greuesome plots (left to the imagination of course- this was the early 70s television).Some of the plots where a bit silly as well as the acting, but that is the charm and attraction to this series. Whether you like mystery crime dramas, comedies, or sci-fi/horror themes, this series brought all that together. Each episode clocked in at around 50 minutes or so (1 hour with commercials) and that 50 minutes goes by quick always leaving me wanting more. A great classic show that is underrated in my book!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ffe53b72fca4b9ab51088b3bf1e3221",
            "input": "Oh... my... god... this is without a doubt the absolute cheesiest movie I have ever seen. The acting is bad, the story is weak, the characters are weaker, and the whole film just doesn't make sense. Couple this with mediocre directing, really strange scenes (such as the one where the kid reaches over the ravine and mysteriously falls in), and thoroughly abysmal dialog (\"Look!\" \"Musta peed his pants!\"), and you get one complete failure. Not to mention the fact that the only thing Mr. Atlas looks like he could defeat is a case of chocolate bars. But this is part of the movie's charm. Sit down and watch it with a few of your friends for a good laugh. I love this movie, because it's just SO BAD!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-708554048d5b44948f8d99d2b3d04888",
            "input": "I know sometimes its really really corny... But the acting is amazing and Melissa Joan Hart is as cute as a button. I love this show a lot, and I'm almost embarrassed that I do b/c the show has a rep. for being really corny, but it makes me feel good. My only problem is that sometimes it can be pretty low budget - sometimes actors change and you just have to deal with it... Like Sabrina's father is 2 different guys throughout the course of the movie... I mean, couldn't they just say he was an uncle or something? Still, I can't help but loving this show. Harvey and Sabrina make a really cute couple and Salem is absolutely hilarious. I definitely recommend it if your looking for some light and funny entertainment... My favorite episode is \"Pancake Madness\"... a HILARIOUS episode. The best season is probably 3... I'm not really a fan of some of the seventh season twists... Once you get to college, Morgan joins the group and her dialog is painful and very poorly acted... Plus she is ugly, so the jokes about how she is only surviving off her good looks were lost on me... But I think it was set up to have a really good eighth season and I was really sad to see one of my favorite shows canceled!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39f5d13f2de646c0b1a4ef0758945352",
            "input": "In Rosenstrasse, Margarethe von Trotta blends two stories to create a vibrant tapestry of love and courage. The film depicts a family drama of estrangement between a mother and her daughter, and the story of German women who staged a protest on Rosenstrasse to free their Jewish husbands from certain extermination. In addition to the dramatization of historical events, the focus of the film is on the saving of a child from the Holocaust by a German and the result of the child's experience of losing her mother. While Ms. von Trotta shows that the courage of a small number of Germans made a difference, she does not use it to excuse German society. Indeed, she shows how in the midst of torture and extermination, the wealthy artists and intellectuals of German high society went on about their lives and parties, oblivious to the suffering.Rosenstrasse opens in New York as a Jewish widow Ruth Weinstein (Jutta Lampe) decides to sit Shiva, a seven-day period of mourning that takes place following a funeral in which Jewish family members devote full attention to remembering and mourning the deceased. When her daughter Hannah (Maria Schrader), is forbidden to receive phone calls from her fiancé Luis (Fedja van Huet), a non-Jew, Hannah questions why her mother has suddenly decided to follow an Orthodox tradition that she previously rejected. When Ruth coldly rejects her cousin, Hannah questions her and learns about a woman named Lena who took Ruth in as a child when the latter's mother was deported and murdered by the Nazis, and she vows to find Lena and discover the secret of her mother's past.Her quest takes her to Berlin where she finds Lena (Doris Schade), now ninety years old, and interviews her on the pretext that she is a journalist researching certain aspects of the Holocaust. With unfailing memory, Lena tells her story of how, as a young 33-year old woman (Katja Reimann), she searched for her husband, Jewish pianist Fabian Israel Fischer (Martin Feifel), who disappeared and was presumed to have been imprisoned despite the protection normally given Jews in mixed marriages. Lena, in a radiant performance by Reimann, discovers that her husband and other Jews are being held prisoner in a former factory on the Rosenstrasse.Standing together in the freezing night, German women whose husband are missing congregate outside the building, their numbers growing daily until they reach one thousand shouting \"Give us back our husbands\". Lena finds Ruth (Svea Lohde), a young girl whose mother is in the building. She takes care of her, protecting her from the Gestapo and raising her after her mother is killed. Lena comes from an aristocratic German family and her brother, recently returned from Stalingrad, is a Wehrmacht officer. After being refused help from her father to free Fabian she enlists the aid of her brother who tells a fellow Officer, \"I know what they do to the Jews. I saw it\". Given his support, she is bold enough to bypass channels and go to the top where her beauty and charm prove irresistible for the Minister of Culture, Joseph Goebbels, a known womanizer. While this fictional part of the film has been criticized as degrading to the women protesters, it is a historical fact that Goebbels was very active in making the decisions affecting Rosenstrasse.The director Margarethe von Trotta, an activist, feminist, and intellectual, is no stranger to political drama. She directed a film about Socialist Rosa Luxembourg and Marianne and Julianne, a story of the relationship between two sisters, one of whom resorts to political violence to accomplish her liberal objectives. In Rosenstrasse, a film she worked on for eight years, she had to make compromises, adding the present day fictional element in order to have her film produced. That it works so well is a tribute to Ms. von Trotta's artistry and the beautiful screenplay by Pamela Katz whose father was a refugee from Leipzig. The events at Rosenstrasse give the lie to Germans, who say, \"there was nothing we could do\". Now von Trotta has shown the opposite to be true, that something could be done to resist the Nazis. It is tragic that the example did not catch on.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b93c0f114ed4f14b8c2797560a798be",
            "input": "I am so upset that ABC is giving up on yet another show that has the chance to be a real winner. This show is so good, the writing and storyline were great, an actual original idea for a show instead of another boring reality show. The casting was spectacular! Not only were the characters and actors right on, but these are a very talented set of actors. The concept and idea is really a new and cool idea for a TV show, many of us share this whole idea of \"connections\". I really love the characters of Steven, Laura, Whitney and Damien. But to be honest there is not one person connected to this show that I did not like, even those that only were in for a few episodes (Sheri Appleby for example). The acting and characters are so easy to like and so talented!!. I wish ABC had given this show more of a chance, and not interrupted the show midway, Also it was not advertised enough. Truly unfair!! to everyone!!. This show showed great promise. I for one will let ABC know how I feel and will keep sending emails to keep this show alive. Please join me, I know we can do it. It worked for Jerico. (By the way where is episode 13? I want that last show!). Please support this show and send emails to ABC,we can do it!!! This show is well worth it!!! PETITION ONLINE TO SAVE SIX DEGREES WE CAN DO IT!! SIGN THIS PETITION ASAP!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-262ac980e47c4d6e9e44079e87921a51",
            "input": "I actually went to see this film in a theater, but what a complete waste of time and money! Bad acting, I'm sorry to say, did not help to enjoy this rather sticky screenplay.Some friends told me to go and see this film, since James Redfield, the author of the book, was very heavily involved in the screenplay. They had really enjoyed the book, so the movie just had to be perfect. Well maybe I had my hopes up a bit too high, but I absolutely hated this movie! It was predictable, too sweetish to a point that I actually left I had to vomit and worst of all there is going to be a sequel! Do the world a favor and stop this abominable crusade.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ba7a5788ee545f09edb3c2f4e51bf25",
            "input": "not your typical vamp story, not bram stoker or anne rice here. a truly original vampyre story. these vampyres are genetic mutants who the sunlight don't bother. they are pure evil to. the film is not perfect. many of the actors are clearly amateurs. the two leads who play van helsing and rally the vampyre chick are pretty good though. the film is intensely violent which may disturb some people. also it is loaded with scientific detail that many will find hard to understand and may get bored with. i was sold on the clever storyline and the couple good performances. no telling how successful this film could be if they had a bigger budget and it got mass distribution",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-067beae9649f471081d67ea863fac8d8",
            "input": "Could this be by the same director as Don't Look Now or Bad Timing? Poorlyacted, clunkily edited. You only have to compare the various accident scenes in this with similar ones in Don't Look Now to see how much Roeg has lost histouch.Even the generally reliable Teresa Russell (looking a bit chunky these days, I'm afraid to report) cannot save this one. The plot is pure pseudo-religious hokum, the acting is wooden and Roeg's attempts at his trademark dislocation of time are pitiful.Avoid this one like the plague.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0df139b7fc194ca5b6629a6240c28bb2",
            "input": "Since I watched it for the first time, \"Piedras\" is a personal favorite and one of the few pictures I actually could watch over and over again. The great screenplay depicts the lives of a bunch of women (all of them somehow interconnected) with deep understanding and sensibility. Ramón Salazar achieved a compelling film in his directorial debut, and proves himself as an efficient actors' director. Not that all performances are excellent, though. Of all leading ladies, they range from average (Najwa Nimri) to very good (Vicky Peña), but the standing ovation should be directed to newcomer Mónica Cervera, who convincingly plays Antonia San Juan's retarded daughter. Enrique Alcides is irresistibly charming as the girl's male nurse, and there are nice small turns from Andrés Gertrúdix, Geli Albaladejo and the director himself, Ramón Salazar.\"Piedras\" is beautifully written and filmed, when I watched it I got so moved that I couldn't stop thinking of it for days. I highly recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19c42d36357844ecb6e66c9effbb5985",
            "input": "\"This Man's Navy\" is, as other comments have indicated, a rare and well-filmed look at Navy lighter than air (LTA) activities. The LTA crews were justly proud that the convoys they shadowed never lost a ship to submarine attack. And the filming at the various NAS locations give a valuable glimpse at a type of aviation that is long gone. However, the first half of the movie is all about Beery, his relationship with his service pals, and him meeting the Tom Drake character and his mother, and getting Drake's leg fixed. Only then does the second film start. The second film is mostly LTAs in action, taking on a surfaced sub, guys get killed and much damage is caused. The look is fairly gritty and realistic, I imagine. Then we shift to Southeast Asia. Did the Navy have LTAs there? Never mind, this part is really wild, with a blimp being used to extract some downed aircrew from the jungle. And the Japs are shooting like mad. Shades of Vietnam, except the getaway is oh, so leisurely. This is a blimp we're talking about. In the end, a feel-good WWII drama about a very unusual part of the war.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27aed35e0d504673a31745f3881382d3",
            "input": "Corbin Bernsen gives a terrifically intense and riveting performance as Dr. Alan Feinstone, a wealthy and successful Beverly Hills dentist who's obsessed with perfection. When he discovers that his lovely blonde babe trophy wife has been cheating on him and the IRS start hounding him about tax problems, Feinstone cracks under the pressure and goes violently around the bend. Director Brian Yuzna, working from a suitably dark, witty and demented script by Stuart Gordon, Dennis Paoli, and Charles Finch, exposes the seething neurosis and psychosis bubbling underneath the squeaky clean well-manicured surface of respectable affluent rich America with deliciously malicious glee. Moreover, Yuzna further spices up the grisly goings on with a wickedly twisted sense of pitch black gallows humor. Bernsen positively shines as Dr. Feinstone; he expertly projects a truly unnerving underlying creepiness that's right beneath Feinstone's deceptively calm and assured veneer. The supporting cast are likewise excellent: Linda Hoffman as Feinstone's bitchy, unfaithful wife Brooke, Earl Boen as smarmy, meddlesome IRS agent Marvin Goldblum, Molly Hagan as feisty assistant Jessica, Patty Toy as perky assistant Karen, Jan Hoag as jolly office manager Candy, Virginya Keehne as sweet, gawky teenager Sarah, Ken Foree as thorough, no-nonsense Detective Gibbs, Tony Noakes as Gibbs' equally shrewd partner Detective Sunshine, Michael Stadvec as womanizing stud muffin pool cleaner Matt, and Mark Ruffalo as on the make sleazeball Steve Landers. The first-rate make-up f/x are every bit as gory, gross and upsetting as they ought to be. The polished cinematography by Levie Isaaks boasts lots of great crazy tilted camera angles and a few tasty zoom-in close-ups. Alan Howarth's spirited shuddery score also hits the flesh-crawling spot. An enjoyably warped treat.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b384958c724a4d0bb3237c92dde1d4ca",
            "input": "Gung Ho is one of those movies that I never get tired of watching. Michael Keaton has always been a favorite of mine, & he is absolutely hilarious in this movie. Matching him step for step is Gedde Watanabe. The two of them work wonderfully together. Although this movie is a comedy, I also like how it shows Hunt (Keaton) & Kazihiro (Watanabe) struggling in their roles as the leaders of their respective groups. They both try so hard to keep the peace, & then they finally get into a fight (which is hysterical to watch). First, they're both on the floor. Then Hunt jumps on a chair. Kazihiro jumps on the desk. Hunt jumps on the desk with him. The fight then spills out from the office into the factory. I love that after they are separated by the workers, you can tell that they both feel bad for letting things get so out of hand. Also, there is a scene where you can see the influence that Hunt has had on Kazihiro. He is at his house & his boss from Japan arrives & says he would like to visit the factory tomorrow: Kazihiro: Tomorrow not good day. Sakamoto: Why not? Kazihiro: Factory is locked & we can't find key.Tell me you can't picture Michael Keaton saying something like that!I guess I really like this movie because it is genuinely funny, & also shows how people that are radically different can not only learn from each other, but become good friends as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f49bc36b0ed1441d90d6b43eb2d307d1",
            "input": "And a made for TV movie too, this movie was good. the acting in it and the plot was just so great. this one of the only movies I've seen that I felt warped my mind because after seeing it I was afraid of Reaper coming to kill me through my computer screen. There were just a few minor things wrong with this movie, but it's very easily over looked.Antonio Sabbato Jr did an excellent role in this movie along with Janine Turner and Robert Wagner. this movie just has so much suspense and it made me wanting more because I never thought a low budget TV movie could be so powerful. After viewing this I read the novel this movie was based on (four times) and it too kicked was great. If you ever see this movie come on TV, I'd watch it. The effects in this movie were pretty well done, I honestly don't know what a live calcifying human would look like but with the way the FX team did this movie I was impressed and all it shows is that all these bad made for TV movies out there with low budgets shouldn't suck so bad.watch it. It's really good, no really, it is!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5eb0690b2c1d4997b7261590956cf127",
            "input": "Not having read Nabokov, and knowing nothing about chess, I could only view \"The Luzhin Defence\" as a movie. It works really well as one of my favorite genres \"sports romances.\" The chess comes alive as a tough competition much more than in, say \"Searching for Bobby Fischer,\" in showing just how much hard mental work the game can be, requiring thought, preparation, stamina and planning. I particularly liked the special effects on the chess board as alternative plays are anticipated.Through the feminist director Maureen Gorris (of \"Antonia\"), Emily Watson with her big blue eyes gradually strengthens via her transformative relationship with John Turturro's fairly one-note absent-minded intense chess genius.The settings in Italy and Hungary are beautiful.(originally written 5/27/2001)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e243513472da41488d242134d446fc40",
            "input": "It's hard to put your finger on this one. Basically I suppose it's a comedy about an idle rich drunk who falls in love with a (comparatively) poor girl, whom he wants to marry at the risk of being disowned by his family.It has funny moments, romantic moments, and touching moments. Dudley Moore is funny and somehow makes his self-centred character endearing, Liza Minelli is a convincing foil as the the feisty opposite he attracts, but John Gielgud steals the show as Arthur's wonderfully sarcastic butler.It's corny but great fun with a memorable soundtrack, and ran for nearly 3 months at our local fleapit.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11313488c949474a8e53a310ede25ab0",
            "input": "I used this film in a religion class I was teaching. The golden fish is swimming happily in his bowl in an upper floor apartment. A young boy and his mother are away from home. The boy has been given money to buy milk. On the way home, he stops at carnival to play a game. Next to him stands a man in a black suit looking a little scary. The boy drops the bottle of milk. It breaks. The man in the black suit gives him money to replace the milk. This scene alternates with what is happening at home. A black cat climbs the fire escape and enters the apartment. He(?) discovers the fish bowl and watches it. The fish swims energetically and flips out of the bowl. By now, a bunch of teenagers in my class and I have fallen in love with the fish. The cat takes the fish in his mouth and we all hold our breath. The cat drops the fish into the bowl. The double story line includes the suspicious man in black and the suspicious black cat. Both inspire prejudice. Both are innocent. It was a great discussion starter in my class.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04e7f229a1904a6282ea8737c1149004",
            "input": "What an awesome movie! It was very scary, great acting, well-written, nice plot twists, interesting characters, very good direction, and a surprise ending that will leave you with a smile on your face. This is one popcorn horror flick that may not be appealing to non-horror fans, but is still (nonetheless) one of the best thrillers out there today! I highly recommend it to ONLY fans of:1) The horror genreOR2) An actor or actress featured in it.*** out of **** stars!PS- I am sick and tired of people comparing this, and other modern horror movies, with SCREAM. Ya know what, they didn't WANT to be like SCREAM. Everyone's like \"Oh, they copied SCREAM!\". Well, if I am not mistaking, SCREAM also copied other movies too! In fact, just about EVERY horror movie copied an earlier one. SCREAM, however, was a good film. But, still... stop comparing and enjoy it for what it is!GO AND RENT THIS ONE!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-beb430f929dd42359b037334a70f7478",
            "input": "A lot of people unfairly sh!t on this series but several of the Guinea Pig videos are fairly entertaining. Devil's Experiment in particular has some really fantastic effects work--not just the infamous eyeball scene but also a very realistic skin slice on the foot and a hand breaking with a sledgehammer are very realistic--especially for the video's vintage and low-budget.Let me start at the beginning now for those who don't know: This film is an \"extreme\" torture/fake snuff film that surfaced in Japan in the mid-80s. It's plot as it stands is simple: A young girl is held by a few men and forced to undergo a series of brutal tortures to see where her breaking point is. This entails brutal violence--all effectively realistic effects including the ones mentioned in the last paragraph as well as a painful looking application of hot oil to the captive girl's arm and placing of maggots in the subsequent flaky wound.The least effective sequences are at the very beginning of the video and consist of an unconvincing slap session where three men take turns slapping the hell out of the girl as her head falls about and a second sequence where the three men take turns kicking the girl and pushing her to the ground. These two scenes are obviously staged and detract from the realism of the rest of the proceedings.The actress who plays the victim of the \"experiment\" is pretty convincing at being in pain and takes a good amount of abuse and rough stuff on camera. Her reactions as she has headphones strapped to her head and loud noises are played for hours on end are chilling. Some of the other abuse she takes is being strung up in a net from a tree during the only times she is given a rest. Also there is a disturbing scene where the giggling captors through guts at her and one other disgustingly sleazy scene where she is spun in an office chair and forced to drink a bottle of Jack Daniels till she pukes.If you haven't seen this series I hope I have helped you decide whether or not you want to give this episode a shot. 8.5/10 for Devil's Experiment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-786e76f46bfc40f4b7272cca290be85f",
            "input": "Michael Winner is probably best known for his revenge-themed films, such as \"Death Wish\" and \"Chato's Land\", but he is equally gifted as a director of occult Horror cinema, as \"The Sentinel\" of 1977 proves. \"The Sentinel\", which is based on a novel by John Konvitz, who also wrote the screenplay, is a clever and immensely creepy religious chiller that no lover of occult Horror should consider missing. The film is obviously inspired by successful occult classics such as \"Rosemary's Baby\", \"The Exorcist\" or \"The Omen\", but, as far as I am concerned, it is also easily as unsettling as these more widely acclaimed films, and probably even creepier.Allison Parker (Christina Raines) is a beautiful young New York model. Traumatized by events in her her past and not yet willing to marry her lawyer boyfriend (Chris Sarandon), Allison is in search for an apartment, and finds a big, incredibly nice one, which is also affordable, in an old mansion in Brooklyn. The new apartment, however, comes along with a bunch of very strange other tenants. And the sinister new neighbors soon become more than a little bothersome to Alice... This may not be an adequate plot synopsis, but I would hate to spoil any of this film's great moments, so I will not give any further plot description. What I will say, however, is that \"The Sentinel\" is a very creepy and effective film that profits from a great cast as well as an often bizarre and constantly uncanny atmosphere. The fact that director Michael Winner and writer John Konnvitz also acted as producers here certainly had its influence on the outcome. The film is imaginatively photographed, and the eerie old Brooklyn mansion is a fantastic setting for this kind of film. As mentioned above, the atmosphere is obscure and creepy, and the film also includes several shock-moments and genuine scares. The film features many sinister and eccentric characters, and the cast is superb. Beautiful Christina Raines is great in her role of Allison Parker, lovable and yet on the cusp to losing her mind. Chris Sarandon is also very good as her boyfriend, a successful lawyer, and the supporting cast includes many big names, such as Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger, before becoming really famous. The cast also includes stars like Ava Gardner, Horror icon John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, and, my personal favorite, the great Eli Wallach as a cynical homicide detective. I've been a great fan of director Michael Winner for a long time, mostly for films like \"Death Wish\" and \"Chato's Land\". \"The Sentinel\" is yet another great film in Winner's repertoire, and also the proof that the man is not only a master of hard-boiled revenge-cinema, but also of atmospheric occult Horror. All in all, \"The Sentinel\" is a creepy, intelligent, and amazingly bizarre occult chiller that is highly recommended to all Horror fans!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc6660b0ebae453d8377e3c9bda82b4e",
            "input": "Though I like E.E. \"Doc\" Smith's books and David A. Kyles books of Lensman, the anime, which is loosly based on the books, is quite a fun and somewhat innovative fair.Though the story may seem familiar to Sci-Fi/Fantasy buffs, such as some kid on an isolated planet inherits mystical powers and avenges the death of his family, it is quite an entertaining one nonetheless. Plus, Lensman was THE first Animated motion picture to use hand drawn and CG animation all at once. Sure, it may look a bit outdated now, but it is still an innovation. If it were not for Lensman, none of that would have ever happened (personally, I think Computer Graphics look better in animation that live action.)Too bad they only released it on DVD/VCD in a few countries in the worls (mostly on formats that are quite foreign and different). I just wish they release the Lensman movie and tv series on DVD/VCD in EVERY part of the world, not just certain parts.P.S. Worsel rules! I just think he is so amazing and neat looking as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-446c698c129f4666b2e012e79383ae6b",
            "input": "There are few movies that appear to provide enterntainment as well as realism. If you've ever wondered about the role of snipers in modern war, take a look at this one. I just loved the scene where hundred soldiers get shooting at the jungle, no-one quite sure where that shot came?And, they nicked one scene to Saving Private Ryan, so it has to have some merit in the scene.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e44c913debe74090b69f12930acee374",
            "input": "I disagree strongly with anyone who might dismiss this film as \"just\" entertainment. Set right after the carefree, roaring 20s, during the early days of the Great Depression, Dance, Fools, Dance is at its heart an earnest cautionary tale, with a clear message about how best to endure these hard times. Yet this fast-paced and tightly-plotted film is far from being a dreary morality tale.In the 30s, Hollywood had a knack for churning out one entertaining *and* enlightening audience-pleaser after another, all without wasting a frame of film. Dance, Fools, Dance -- one of *four* films that Harry Beaumont directed in 1931 -- is barely 80 minutes long, yet its characters are well developed, its story never seems rushed, and despite its many twists in plot, the audience is never left behind.With the lone exception of Lester Vail as flaccid love interest Bob Townsend, the supporting cast is uniformly strong. Worthy of note are William Bakewell as Crawford's brother, Cliff Edwards (best known as the voice of Jiminy Cricket) as reporter Bert Scranton, and Clark Gable in an early supporting role as gangster Jake Luva.But this is Joan Crawford's film, and she absolutely shines in it. Made when she was just 27, this lesser-known version of Crawford will probably be unrecognizable to those more familiar with her later work. However, here is proof that long before she took home an Oscar for Mildred Pierce, Crawford was a star in the true sense of the word, a terrific actress with the charisma to carry a picture all by herself.Score: EIGHT out of TEN",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c7614db4fbd4f8481c38c52677f31c6",
            "input": "About 4 years ago, I liked this movie. I would watch it over and over and over. But now... I don't. Actually, I think this movie would have been great for Mystery Science Theater 3000. It has a bunch of comment-heavy actors (Macaulay Culkin, Christopher Lloyd, Patrick Stewart, Whoopi Goldberg), and a pretty cheesy plot. My favorite part is when Culkin is riding his bike and he comes across a gang and a gang member says, \"Hey, Tyler! Where ya goin'? The MOON??\" Also look out for the classic line, \"Do you have feeling in your toes?\"On the other hand, it's better than \"The Good Son\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d269995824a54ddca335ac40ea83c0c5",
            "input": "This made for television version of the legendary stand against hopeless odds is more objective, more realistic than earlier filmed versions of the events, though the one movie made after this went perhaps too far in humanizing the figures of Sam Houston, Bowie, Travis and Crockett.The focus here is on Jim Bowie, played with sharp, cynical detachment by James Arness who is apparently still alive at age 85. Then 65, he made a comeback to acting after years away from the screen to do this part.Puerto Rican-born Raul Julia humanizes Gen. Santa Ana as no one since J. Carol Naish back in '54 had done. However, the Mexican dictator is portrayed as a lecherous, vainglorious popinjay--gaudier uniforms have never been seen before or since. He receives excellent advice from the European officers he has hired but, convinced of his own infallibility, he does not heed it.Alec Baldwin is the one actor whose age is appropriate to the character he plays: Col. William Travis. His portrayal is earnest. He is almost in awe of the older men who share command with him.The one jarring note was Brian Keith as Crockett. In a coonskin cap and carrying Ol' Betsy, he stumbles about as if he had wandered in from another movie. With no conviction in the portrayal, the character is reduced to a few stage conventions. The script reveals some historical facts overlooked or suppressed in earlier film versions. We learn that Jim Bowie was, in the person of Santa Ana, fighting his own brother-in-law. The Mexican soldiers performed poorly in part because they were armed with rifles left over from the Napoleonic Wars a generation earlier. \"Santa Ana likes a bargain.\" Bowie wryly explains. The whole project of defending the former Spanish mission as a fort was militarily ill- advised--a fact explored in greater depth in the 2004 film \"The Alamo\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8f46c539820403ea732b576a256ab70",
            "input": "I watched this....let me rephrase...suffered through this because I'm a fan of Eva's. I don't think this is a flick she'll put on the back of her head shot photos. I like gangsta flix but this wasn't even close. The budget couldn't have been more than a few hundred dollars, and that money was probably spent on the caterer.The premise was interesting, but the first victim died before you get the chance to care about her or not.I won't bother saying who did what and how, because it isn't worth the effort. I'm only glad that because of my monthly rental plan at the local video store that I didn't have to actually pay for this garbage.OH!! Before you flame on me, I love movies, I thought a lotta flix were good that some of you have jammed, so for me to jam this tells you all you need to know.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8a04671bedb453bb638122988f256c4",
            "input": "I so love this movie! The animation is great (for a pokémon movie), the cgi looks so awesome. I love the music in the movie. So great they kept the Japanese music.As for the story: its great. It has a great feeling of friendship. Celebi is a very cute and powerful pokémon. Ash is really great in this movie, and I like his friendship with Sam. The only thing I didn't like was Suicune's appearance, he just suddenly pops up, helps Ash & co a bit and leaves. They could have made his part in the movie a little bigger.But overall, awesome movie! Can't wait to own the USA version on dvd!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9dadf1bb089b49df9673cf62e3f5cd59",
            "input": "Some unsuspecting films carry a message that resonates in the hours and days after viewing. Such is the case for CAROL'S JOURNEY (EL VIAJE DE CAROL), a beautifully crafted 2002 film from Spain based on the novel 'A boca de noche' by Ángel García Roldán who also adapted the book as a screenplay. War and its consequences are not new subject matter for films, but when that war theme plays in the background as a subtle driving force to develop characters (especially children) who must face adult life influenced by the games of adults, the result is a different and more tender examination of the coming of age film genre.Carol (Clara Lago) is a 12-year-old Spanish American youngster from New York who with her critically ill mother Aurora (María Barranco) returns to her Aurora's home in 1938 at the height of the Spanish Civil War, a home that has been left deserted by her father Don Amalio (Álvaro de Luna) since his wife's death. Carol's father Robert (Ben Temple) is a fighter pilot who has sided with the Republicans against Franco and is rarely with his family. Aurora has a past: she left her lover Alfonso (Alberto Jiménez) to marry Robert, and Alfonso in turn married Aurora's cold sister Dolores (Lucina Gil). Carol is an independent girl who remains aloof to all but her grandfather Don Amalio until she meets others her age but not of her 'class': Tomiche (Juan José Ballesta) and his two friends at first resent Carol, but as events develop Carol and Tomiche are bonded by what feels like the first awakenings of love. When Aurora dies of her illness, Carol must live with Alfonso and Dolores and their daughter Blanca (Luna McGill), yet turns to her grandfather for support and to her mother's best friend and teacher Maruja (the always radiant Rosa Maria Sardà) to understand the disparity between classes and the senseless war that keeps her beloved father from her side. Through a series of incidents Carol and Tomiche learn the rigors of becoming adults, facing more traumas in a brief period of the war than most of us experience in a lifetime. The ending, though sad, is uplifting as Carol's journey to maturity is complete.The film is shot in Galicia and Portugal and contains some extraordinarily beautiful settings captured with gentle sensitive lighting by cinematographer Gonzalo F. Berridi and enhanced by the musical score by Bingen Mendizábal. Director Imanol Uribe understands the fine line separating pathos from bathos, and in electing to concentrate the story on the children involved, he makes an even stronger statement about the futility and cruelty of war. The cast is exceptional: the stars clearly are young Clara Lago and Juan José Ballesta, but they are supported by the fine veteran actors in the adult roles. This is a visually stunning work with a lasting message and should find a much larger audience than it has to this date. Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5eac1cb84614c82bd0081820b1fdd69",
            "input": "My favorite movie. What a great story this really was. I'd just like to be able to buy a copy of it but this does not seem possible.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec453da7f50b417fa4e5eaf469a3a0de",
            "input": "Two women, sick of their controlling husbands, taking a vacation in Italy for a month with two other very different women.They come back refreshed and energized in this wonderful little film by Merchant - Ivory.Great scenery and the location isn't bad either. Seriously, a very good period piece 7 of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7745b8072a04a9082a747373bd1457e",
            "input": "***1/2 Out of ***** While I am not concerned with the fact that this is an English dubbed version as some reviewers have mentioned, it should be noted, as it seems to reside in many Quebecois native hearts. However, this was a movie as a child that I was a fervent admirer of; keeping in mind now that it was made for children, I rate it on a relative basis. The story is of children on winter break building an awesome snow fort, and jostling back-'n-forth for control with weapons such as snowballs and other concoctions, as idle hands and free time equal winter break lessons. If I had children, this definitely is a film I would try and get them interested in, as the snow fort wowed me when I was young, and I think even children today would agree, albeit with Pixar and all the computer animation, maybe I am out of date and just don't realize it. In addition, the movie's message is wonderfully allegorical and a positive one at that, for children (and adults alike).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e385421ef7d423590dcdc76537b4aa2",
            "input": "A winters day, 28th December 1986, two bored 14 year olds hire a movie. \"Hmmmm, Police Story, looks interesting\", \"who is this Jackie Chan?\", \"never heard of him\". Two hours later after watching the film, in a daze, we wanted to know more. 16 years later (and severely out of pocket from collecting JC movies!) the film still grabs me like no other. Ok, maybe I have a soft spot for it as it was my \"first\" (Cannonball Run doesn't count!!) JC movie, but it is an excellent movie. It has all the classic JC elements, Action, Humour, Action, Heart and ACTION! Some comments say it's dated, it was made in 1985, of course it's dated! But then so must Jaws, Casablanca, Singin' in the Rain and The Godfather!!!!!! Without movies like Police Story where would Hollywood action be today? PS set standards, many a scene has been stolen for use in other movies. To really fully appreciate it you must see it in widescreen, you miss so much of the movie otherwise (yes, he really does fall off the bus going round the corner!). If you haven't already, SEE THIS MOVIE NOW!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0735fb2d9910470ab7e7193e6e6749d5",
            "input": "Imagine The Big Chill with a cast of twenty-somethings whose characters are all unlikable, and an iguana-like man-lizard chasing them around and you have an idea of the foolishness herein. On the positive side, the movie does not skimp on showing the monster. There's no peek-a-boo shots, or nighttime scenes where you have to imagine what he looks like; he's right out there folks. Unfortunately, the design and construction aren't that inspired. A little bit of mystery might have helped. Mind you, I've seen far worse, but if you're going to have him out on full display for a lot of the flick, your monster better look damn good. Spoiler Ahead!!!Oh, and there's a twist ending involving the supposedly dead brother that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. This came as no surprise given the shoddy writing of the script. As for the acting; well let's just say it wasn't painfully bad, but I don't expect we'll be seeing many of these kids in future cinematic outings.Gore quotient: 2 out of 5; Nudity quotient: 1 out of 5; Intelligence quotient: Negligible",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-485961c400484ef2bd193f0a98566d93",
            "input": "David Duchovny plays the lead role in this film.Now a lot of people upon finding that fact out wouldn't even bother watching it.Very unfair to say the least.David made his name on the x-files and is a decent actor. Dr Eugene Sands(Duchovny)is a drug addicted doctor struck off for malpractice.By sheer accident he becomes a private doctor for criminal millionaire Raymond Blossom.However the FBI take an interest in using Eugene to snare Blossom. Angelina Jolie is cast in the supporting role of clare-the gangsters moll.She puts in a solid performance. Timothy Hutton playing Blossom is superb and immersed himself deeply into his character. Duchovny himself isn't as bad as many people would think and in the end i would rate his performance his credible.His familiar monotonous tone and straight face is present but dosen't detract too much from the film",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52d451c6996f4c3e8a809ca495471908",
            "input": "For those of you who think anime is just about giant reptiles raping schoolgirls, think again. There is a totally different side to the Japanese animation. Yakitate! Japan is one of those shows. It is a sweet-natured tale of a young boy with the gift to make delicious bread. His universe is all about creating a Japanese bread that can match with the famous European breads. The show is as wacky as they come and I'm sure that non-Japanese viewers will miss a lot of the jokes. But it is still very nice to watch because of the complete innocent vibe of the show. In the world of Yakitate! it is not uncommon for people to look like they've just had an orgasm after eating bread. The bread is hallucinating and can give the consumer a wide array of super powers, from time-traveling to swimming like a fish. That weird aspect makes it into one of the least predictable and funny shows I've watched in a while.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb9fec18c1bd4169ad526aa18599ce28",
            "input": "Frank Tashlin's 'The Home Front' is one of the more lifeless Private Snafu shorts, a series of cartoons made as instructional films for the military. Rather than have Snafu take some inadvisable actions leading to disaster, 'The Home Front' instead focuses on his loved ones back home and how much they have to offer to the war effort too. Snafu realises he was wrong when he thought they had it easy. It's a concept with few possibilities for good gags and instead Tashlin plays the risqué card more heavily, extended jokes involving strippers and scantily clad dancing girls in place of much effective comic relief. The result is a well-meaning short which has little relevance or entertainment value today other than as an historical artefact.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99dc092d54a84f7db91b367a9cf1fa97",
            "input": "I doubt this will ever even be a cult film. I loved Gram Parsons to be sure and I did not expect much out of this film and got even less. What could have been clever and moving was campy. It was devoid of the music that made Gram and had more filler than cheap dog food. There was no background on Gram or the colorful people of that era. The characters shown were not familiar to me even as a fan of Gram's and all the versions of his \"afterlife adventures\" I have heard. Rock and roll is full of tales, good ones too but they should taken with a grain of salt. They can be great stories even though exaggerated. However, this movie took a good story and turned into tripe. Stealing any dead body and the ensuing implications should never be a dull tale but they made it dull, somehow. I am tempted to steal every copy of Grand Theft Parsons, head out to the desert and burn them all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34fa5eddb6f14477938e2b5ada07211f",
            "input": "i thought this movie was wonderfully plotted it made me confused and my cousin who watched it with me.to tell the truth i think that the younger kevin dillon was hot.hahahaha...but i also thought the girl was stupid to go along with the cop and that was wrong what he said to her before his death\"i was inside you\".i think that's what she gets for doing what she did with him and how is he going to tell her that she's too young when he never cared how old the other girls were.?now i don't think i myself could ever trust a cop like that.but to tell the truth it was pretty obvious it was him even if he was wanting to become a cop i would still be suspicious of him either way.and that was funny when she sprayed him in the eye in the store.hahahahaha.she was still stupid for going into the warehouse again by herself and so was the cop who died HELLO!! it's called back-up.sometimes these movies make me mad when people act stupid and do stupid things.but that's what i think an thought about the movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f3850d0331249e18ffbe58f3b300024",
            "input": "A friend and I went through a phase some (alot of) years ago of selecting the crappest horror films in the video shop for an evening's entertainment. For some reason, I ended up buying this one (probably v. v. cheap).The cheap synth soundtrack is a classic of its time and genre. There's also a few very amusing scenes. Among them is a scene where a man's being attacked and defends himself with a number of unlikely objects, it made me laugh at the time (doesn't seem quite so funny in retrospect but there you go).Apart from that it's total crap, mind you. But probably worth a watch if you like films like \"Chopping Mall\". Yes, I've seen that too.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c2436483a6e4f579d00ecc89e532b89",
            "input": "I love movies. I love independent efforts and major studio productions. I love films with stars and I love those featuring unknowns. I love dramas, comedies, action-adventures, science fiction, mysteries, westerns, any genre except horror. I love foreign films as well as those in English. I love good movies and I even love bad ones, because almost no film ever fails to entertain or amuse on some level. Except for \"Even Cowgirls Get the Blues.\"When I attended a late-night showing of \"Cowgirls,\" I joined an audience of around 10. Less than halfway into it, I alone remained. Soon not even I could tolerate the disturbing mess unfolding before my eyes, and I left as well. To this day \"Cowgirls\" remains the only movie I have ever walked out of.I don't quite know how to describe this incoherent, vacuous, trashy, meaningless film, or how to adequately convey its lack of redeeming value. Suffice to say that it ranks as one of the worst major films of all time, preposterous and inexcusable on every level. It tries to be clever, but its conception of feminism seems hopelessly anachronistic. It tries to be funny, but its humor is coarse and cringe-worthy. This is one of the few films which manages to profane its own ethos, by depicting protagonists in so off-putting a manner that you revolt against them and their values. If you want to watch a movie, watch \"Waterworld,\" \"Ishtar,\" anything but this. Except for the new \"Alexander.\" If you're choosing between that and this, read a book instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0991b3e414b4a1492b5312d781f64d8",
            "input": "I gave this a 1. There are so many plot twists that you can never be sure to root for. Total mayhem. Everyone gets killed or nearly so. I am tired of cross hairs and changing views. I cannot give the plot away. Convoluted and insane. If I had paid to see this I would demand my money back. I wish reviews were more honest.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d40bf6bb742e49d5b8ac265371c76997",
            "input": "I have just watched the movie for the first time. I wanted to watch it as I like Drew Barrymore and wanted to see one of her early movies. The movie is about a girl (played by young and beautiful Drew Barrymore), who moves from NYC to LA in order to get over her recently troubled loss. Short after moving to a guy who falls in love with her, it becomes obvious that she has an evil twin=doppelganger, who haunts her.The movie is quite poor and lousy. Both the dialogs and the acting make the film not really worth seeing it. Summing up it is just something for the fans of Drew Barrymore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-858c90d2b3374c3a998dc7fe6566c963",
            "input": "This is one of the best of the genre. I saw it twice about 25yrs ago and have not had another opportunity to see it again since then. It rivals the Zatoichi series (also starring Katsu) in exciting swordplay.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0e8c8870c7d44769a4d533b2e79a37a",
            "input": "Nell Shipman must have been paid a hefty sum of money to promote the Maxwell automobile's off-road capabilities. The plot of the movie is pretty simple, Nell plays a writer who has a bad case of writer's block, and needs inspiration, so she goes to visit Mexico to absorb the atmosphere. There she meets the hero (Bert Van Tuyle), a cowboy who chooses to drive a car rather than ride a horse. While Nell is visiting with her father's partner at his mining camp, a gang of local bandits kidnap her and bring her to their camp deep in the wilderness. The hero needs to get to her quickly, so he decides to drive there in his car. This is where the film takes a weird twist. Bert proceeds to drive over every terrain imaginable, huge rocks, small streams, heavy brush, scraggly tree stumps, steep inclines, etc etc, for the greater part of the film we get to see this car struggling to crawl over obstacles. Now mind you, this isn't a modern-day ATV, it's a 1920 Maxwell automobile, so it looks very out-of-place as an off-road vehicle. And it clearly has limitations for some of the terrain it encounters, we get to see it stuck more than once in this film. But the filmmakers made an effort to show it beating the odds and eventually passing all the obstacles. Once the hero gets to the hidden camp and rescues the girl, he jumps in the car with her and drives off with the bandits in hot pursuit (on horseback), and at this point it became hysterically funny to me. Watching this car slowly rolling over huge rocks, getting stuck in gravel and mountain brush, going forward and back to get momentum enough to pass over fallen tree limbs, the bandits should have had ample time to catch up. But they never do, even though we are to believe this wilderness chase goes on throughout the night. And in a silly climax, the car climbs a mountainside, and helps Nell and the hero push a huge boulder down the side to crush the pursuing bandits.After seeing this film you would think the army should invest in 1920 Maxwell automobiles because they clearly have better off-road capabilities than Hummers and Bradley tanks combined. Watch this film just for laughs, it's worth it just to see Nell cuddling up to the car grill and saying \"You did your best, brave little car\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62f5ab3992774bbe855804d874b9659a",
            "input": "I also saw this movie at a local screening about a year ago. First, I'm going to say that it looks great. Cassella is incredibly talented and a fantastic cinematographer. I just wish the movie had been as good as it looks. I would not call this a horror movie. Putting in a few shots of a decaying ghost does not make it a horror movie. There's no mystery, there's no suspense, you know who did it the entire time. It's a drama. You know what's going on with both sides the entire movie. The acting was okay, I guess, but nothing special.And the tagline, \"Revenge can be deadly\"....really?...they should have check how many hundreds of horror/thriller movies have that exact same tagline?It pains me to say some of this, but I know a lot of the people who worked on this movie, and I know they don't want people blowing smoke up their ass, so I give my honest opinion.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1aab7c98787d4151a02ee937291e404f",
            "input": "This movie had to be the worst horror movie I have ever seen. The acting was terrible, Horrible and cheesy and talk about a predictable plot! I will never watch this movie again nor will I recommend this movie to anyone. What a waste of time! First, as soon as the movie began I realized what I got myself into. All they did for this movie was copy scenes from many other horror movies out there and bunched them all into this one movie. The prank phone calls, halloween night, a psycho, and one knife! Its absolutely ridiculous. I was not scared at all during the movie, which I thought horror movies were supposed to do. As for the making of the movie, its pretty hilarious how they all talk about how this movie was so great and so scary. I mean how do you not realize that the movies is a cheap rip off of \"Scary Movie\" for example. At least get some good actors in there and then maybe it would have been pulled off as a good horror movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0d985501799468ebf0ab0a75031d8b5",
            "input": "This is by far the worst horror/thriller I've seen in my 29 years. If someone offers this to you for free tell them NO. This movie makes you a dumber person for knowing you watched it. The plot isn't even the worst part of this movie.....its the acting, camera work, lighting, and sound. there is absolutely nothing to like about this movie. whoever paid to have this film made is broke now. I hope the director never gets the greenlight for another movie. In its defense this movie was made quickly to try to capitalize on the actual BTK killer's capture but I've seen movie of the weeks that looked like Oscar winners compared to this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb4b76b71a1f4b5987c23ed802e5957f",
            "input": "Trash/bad movies usually ain't bad because I will find them enjoyable. This one is so bad that I am out of words to describe it - its below \"bad\". There is an instruction in the beginning of the film that tell you what to do during the movie. Needless to say, the instruction and a dozen of beer couldn't help me seat through the entire film. One tagliner compares this one to KILLBILL which is certainly unthinkable and an insult to our intelligent. Obviously. this tagliner had a plan to tempt you into buying this DVD.If you are considering renting this one, put it down! If you are thinking of buying, Dont think! If you unlucky to have this dvd, dont play it, throw it in trash bin immediately.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca9dfdcfecbe492daa4b20d0b07ff9be",
            "input": "A surprise thriller with more twists and double crosses than a doodle pad. A great cast mixing it up with an intriguing plot overseen by a Twin Peaks-ish influence in director Dahl. Nicholas Cage is a very underrated actor and shows a great portrayal of a man in a bind looking for the right thing to do. J.T. Walsh (RIP to a great actor) is always a wonderful villain, as is Dennis Hopper. It's such a shame he never made to a higher profile in the biz. I'm sure he has his followers, though. In all, this is a great film that shows you that you don't need big bangs or a commercial soundtrack to be an entertaining film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3815cb47f3fe4f9b904aa0dd8c8ff8c4",
            "input": "this isn't 'Bonnie and Clyde' or 'Thelma and Louise' but it is a fine road movie. it sets up its two main characters gently and easily. viewers learn the underlying tensions quickly, which is a tribute to the director. there is the young french (and English) speaking son who wants to do well in France, has a french girlfriend and who drinks alcohol, parties as young men do. And there is his moroccan arabic (and french) speaking father who devoutly follows his Muslim faith, with generosity and the wisdom of elders and who rejects the new culture surrounding him (like mobile phones). the film could explore very powerful politics - the odd couple drive thru the former Yugoslavia, thru Turkey and then thru the Middle East to get to Mecca. these are areas where the Muslim populations have been involved in wars, repression, ethnic cleansing; where dictators have pursued torture and summary executions to hold power and where religious communities are in constant deadly battle with each other. yet the film moves thru those places and possibilities with only hints of such agendas. the relationship between the two is key to this film, and faith, politics are the backdrop. it seems to be saying that we are all human, and need to understand and care for each other in order to manage well in this world. it certainly isn't 'Natural Born Killers' and is all the better for it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4dfb50b01149443389a4645acd016f70",
            "input": "I am a big fan of old horror movies, and since I am middle aged, old to me is a movie made before 1970 with most being made in the 1920's to 1960's period. I am not a big fan of more modern horror movies, with one exception being Creepshow 1, which I thought was great. I could reminisce about the stories there but I really really enjoyed the monster in the box story with Hal Holbrook, and also the one about the really clean guy was a great ending. All the stories were great though. So why did I like them so much? The characters had some decent development, the lines were very plain about who was good and who was bad, the horror bits were heightened with a close up of a face aghast with fear, and the funny bits were really funny! This sequel is either greatly lacking of these elements or they are totally absent! I am writing this only having watched it partially because the movie was a complete waste of time and I turned it off to do other things like write movie reviews on IMDb.com, lol. When George Kennedy and an old Dorothy Lamoure get top billing it's telling you something.....4 of 10. Also, Romero's expertise is hard to find here, they must had told him to tone it down to a PG standard (I don't know what this was rated at but it looks PG to me), and that's not a good thing for a movie with nothing else going on. It's shown on the Encore cable channel if your dieing (yuck yuck) to see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a978846313c40ccb53f51bbdff63727",
            "input": "Before this little black-and-whiter, the touchy topic of criminal rape never made it onto the American screen.There were lots of these topics that Hollywood and the Production Code kept hidden until the rebellious 1960's. So it's not surprising that it would take a little independent company like Ida Lupino's Filmmakers to raise the subject. The result is well-meaning but somewhat compromised, which is not surprising since director Lupino had to work with Code demands to get the movie released.Interestingly, Ann Walton's (Mala Powers) main problem following the assault is not how others might see her, but how she sees herself. And it's a heavy load she's carrying. Will she ever be able to relate to men again? Will they look at her as \"spoiled goods\" (after all, this is 1950)? Small wonder she runs away rather than face these anxieties at home and at work, even though family and friends are generally supportive. Overall, this first part is earnest and well-done. The chase is hyped to inject some action into the plot, but then this is a movie-- notice how the incurious neighbor fails to respond to the honking horn near chase's end. Had those been screams of alarm from Powers instead, the neighbor's lack of response would have raised an interesting albeit complicating issue.The second half is pretty much given over to the Production Code in the sentimentalized person of Rev. Ferguson (Tod Andrews). It's he (to quote a phrase) who \"gives her courage to face life again\". There's some effort at humanizing him-- is it Ann or her dilemma that he's most interested in. Still, his gentle and understanding presence comes across as a little too miraculous and a little too Hollywood. Fortunately, the ending avoids the usual Hollywood cop-out by emphasizing only the hope of a happy resolution for Ann rather than its certainty. Give Lupino a ton of credit for dealing with the topic in the first place. Given the overall results, I expect she dealt as honestly with the topic as she was allowed to. I also expect today's audiences find the treatment mildly interesting mainly because of Powers' excellent performance that brings out the purely human drama. However, the film works best now as a document of its time, and what the cultural watchdogs of that day thought was appropriate for adult viewing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5346ce5bd443408bb55507185e08ce2e",
            "input": "How the hell did they get this made?! Presenting itself as a caper comedy, the misbegotten \"$\" is essentially two hours of people mumbling sentence fragments. The usually dependable Warren Beatty looks drunk, and the usually hilarious Goldie Hawn acts like she's on depressants. As for Gert Frobe, his most famous role - Goldfinger - was infinitely more admirable than his character here. Not even the guy with the champagne bottle of LSD can save this litany of worthlessness.Am I comparing this movie to \"Plan 9 from Outer Space\"? I wouldn't do such a thing even if someone paid me. \"P9FOS\" was idiotically made but ended up hilarious; this was idiotically made and causes you to feel like your brain just melted out of your ears. Warren Beatty and Goldie Hawn made up for this when they co-starred in \"Shampoo\", but then they co-starred in the dreadful \"Town & Country\". Maybe they just shouldn't co-star in movies. All in all, I would rather have my skin torn off than have to watch this again. Awful.Maybe they should remake it with Jackie Chan. Then I would pay to see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92c111d864f14bd1a4b97a19a6ba17b9",
            "input": "The 3rd and in my view the best of the Blackadder series.The only downside is that there is no Lord Percy who was the funniest character from the previous series but Hugh Laurie's Prince Regent is suitably madcap laugh a line.As a package it's quality through and through with convincing regency sets, superb cutting sarcasm and little bits of the wacky, the 'macbeth' actors standing out and Prince Georges 'lucky us' chicken impression, and the missing words from Dr Johnson's dictionary.Few comedies have been quite as both clever as they are funny, okay the odd lame observation or line gets in but mostly it's a scream.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80ccd8600dd34ee5b5d26d29e582f18d",
            "input": "The spoiler warning is for those people who want to see for themselves what animals and landscapes pass before their eyes, although I don't mention it in great detail.\"Earth\" is an approx. 90 minute cinema version based on \"Planet earth\" which I watched all on BBC TV.The TV version was narrated by David Attenborough, a captivating commentator, who I had wished had also done it for \"Earth\" but it is Patrick Stewart, Star Trek's Captain Picard. There are regularly shots of the Earth from space so that's may be appropriate. In any case he has a nice enough and calm voice for it. There are 12 chapters in which we follow animal life on earth from North Pole to Antarctica. 3 animal families, polar bear, elephant and whale, appear in more than one of these parts. Each \"chapter\" starts with an indication how far from north pole or equator it is. We see something of each kind of animal, but only mammals and birds, and some fish, and some beautiful shots of vegetation, mountains, waterfalls, deserts and jungle, a near perfect presentation of the variety of life and landscapes and climates on earth. You get the impression that our planet is only inhabited by animals: people or villages or cities aren't in the film, so it's a typical nature documentary, but breathtakingly shot and accompanied by delightful music. When the film opened I already knew it would end far too soon for me. It is a family film, so no brutal killings of any animals. When one is caught by his hunter the shot ends and in other cases where we see the prey being caught it's shot in slow-motion which makes it less violent and watchable for young children (age limit 6 in The Netherlands). No blood is shed. Some scenes (newly born animals) are really cute and will be adored by kids. It looks like an ordinary nature film but when you know how many shooting days it took (4000) and how much money it has cost it becomes an even more astonishing piece of beauty. It had it's Dutch premiere yesterday, a month before the actual release, in a cinema of 500 seats, of which 15 were taken. True beauty is rarely interesting for cinema goers, it seems. As I knew the TV-series I was of course very curious if my favourite scenes would make it into this movie. Some didn't, but the most impressive shots (big waterfalls) did, luckily. It was the first time I ever cried in a nature film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0824cd0f07eb4b02b9ff6a3392a82d8d",
            "input": "An excellent film with great performances from Zack & Lochley. Much to their displeasure (& mine) Garibaldi arrived on station. (All due respect to Jerry Doyle but in Seasons 4 & 5 I lost sympathy for the character.) It doesn't take him long to start criticizing Zack (who I love best of all on the show)and taking charge. I'm sure Zack could have coped. The Soulhunter plot is fascinating, especially if you believe in heaven as Zack does. The humour supplements it nicely. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a9356cbad744e58b65a0e9356c75f86",
            "input": "This movie is another fine example of what Jerry Bruckheimer, since about 1997, seems to be best at--hyping up a movie a year before its release and not coming through with a quality movie. I'm no film critic, but this movie was as predictable as they come. Every attempt at a joke, every attempt at a touching moment, and the pitiful attempt at a love story, was exactly what I was predicting in my mind. Do yourself a favor and save your money on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3de70a141d90497fadaa564964a8b150",
            "input": "Never viewed this 1971 film and was greatly entertained by this great production created by the Walt Disney Studios and great animation creations. Angela Lansbury, (Eglantine Price) played an outstanding role as a woman who had taken a course in witch craft and was an apprentice who was beginning to fly on a broomstick and had quite a few difficulties taking off. Eglantine discovered many tricks and was able to make a bed travel to different parts of the world. However, Eglantine missed her final exams to becoming an accomplished witch. Mr. Emerlius Browne, (David Tomlinson) was the person who sold Eglantine this course in witchcraft and he tries to help her in every way possible to find her solution. Eglantine has a purpose to her madness and that is to stop the Nazi's from evading England. Great family entertainment and we need more films like this today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92edd1ee8b874e18b5835c4addbfe7d7",
            "input": "I really enjoyed this movie and it was a little difficult do that when your brother is making stupid comments in it ever 30 seconds. But this movie I enjoyed, mostly because I'm used to the usual HK action films. Most of the films like this are don't watch it for the story line, watch it for the mindless action. And mindless action is right. You get to see Jet Li Jump, spin, kick, punch, shoot, make impossible jumps and dodge countless bullets. It's true that this movie was released to a broader audience after Li was in Lethal Weapon 4. That is one of the reasons the ratings on this movie dropped. Most people were probably expecting to see a movie that was as polished as a North American film. But you need to remember most HK film budgets aren't nearly as high as a North American film, and the style in a HK action film is usually very different usually requiring in wire work in a lot of them. If you want to see a good action film you should see this just try to ignore the dubbing.My rating was an 8.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8cd27535f607486e980350b6aa503a15",
            "input": "Odd slasher movie from Producer Charles Band. In the days of Full Moon's greatest success Band said that he would never make \"real killer films\" because he felt that little puppets and big monsters added a fantasy element that made the films better - people killing each other is thus real and less fun. A nice philosophy and a true shame that Band, having destroyed the Full Moon studio through possible shoddy business dealings became so desperate for home cinema profits that he started making exactly what the likes of Blockbuster wanted and therefore sacrificed creativity and originality. The team behind this one also worked on 'Delta Delta Die!' and 'Birth Rite' - both equally bland by Full Moon standards. Debbie Rochon is on usual top form here as a newbie to a gang of dudes and dudettes who decide to make up a story about a 'murder club'. She - as one would obviously - does all she can to join and then panic sets in because it was not a true story and silly Ms Rochon believed it and now everybody will have to run around getting covered in blood and maybe killing each other or maybe not. The choice is there's and with regard to this movie its yours...not recommended but not entirely bad either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bb8fb206e9b4e96ad6e178ed80b988a",
            "input": "As a kid I remember being nine or ten and loving this movie. It was the all round Bollywood action/comedy movie. It is a imitation of Bad Boys obviously! The whole swapping identities but the arrival of two other twins throws everything out of the window and then the arrival of colourful villains who dance and sing! The action scenes in the film aren't revolutionary but still amazing scenes. The film is genuinely very funny and was the great comeback Amitabh Bachan needed. Govinda is a gem like always and this is probably his best work to date, he shines as the side kick nd delivers the best comedy scenes available in Indian cinema.The songs....The songs are both funny and catchy..............proving laughs when you least expect it...Amitabh Bachan surprisingly is very funny and will make you laugh as 'Bade Miah'....his accent...body language..... Brilliant...'Assi chutki naab re daal' is the best song..............Hilarious.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61d9eb7a10864a9bbdbdef3e8e449224",
            "input": "Because IT IS, that's why! This is the same jealous-daughter-kills-people flick we've seen a billion times. Rosanna Arquette makes anything worth watching, and Mandy Schaffer's brief nude scene (after teasing via scantily clad attire throughout the film) at the end almost make this trite blarney worthwhile, but not quite.* out of ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d10f2ce32784ded9677be64763a1ab4",
            "input": "Along with Fernando Fragata, João Mário Grilo, Abi Feijó, Leonel Vieira, étc...(other commercial directors), Diamantino Costa is one of the best Portuguese Directors; \"O Lampião da Estrela\" was his (Diamantino Costa) First movie, before he made several successful commercials. This title is starred by one of the best Portuguese comedians of all times, Herman José and José Pedro Gomes are great. Its a very funny movie!! (28/07/2000)BOA SORTE DIAMANTINO...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6e5ff7256b745d8aa75bf1315e9e640",
            "input": "\"The Lion King\" is without a doubt my favorite Disney movie of all time, so I figured maybe I should give the sequels a chance and I did. Lion King 1 1/2 was pretty good and had it's good laughs and fun with Timon and Pumba. Only problem, I feel sometimes no explanations are needed because they can create plot holes and just the feeling of wanting your own explanation. Well, I would highly recommend this movie for lion King fans or just a night with the family. It's a fun flick with the same laughs and lovable characters as the first. So, hopefully, I'll get the same with the third installment to the Lion King series. Sit back and just think Hakuna Matata! It means no worries! 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38179c34ed664a0fb1655322a16ca79e",
            "input": "This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I saw it at the premiere at SXSW and was extremely disappointed. The director knew little about John Lennon and even said as much at the premiere. This is a drama, but people were laughing throughout at how cheesy the film was. That's never a good sign. The only saving graces were Dominic Monaghan and Jason Leonard as Livien's roommates/bandmates. They were funny while the rest of the movie took itself waaay too seriously. The cheesy dropping of Beatles lyrics was just absurd. The soundtrack was excellent, however, and was probably the best part of the movie. Unless you're one of those crazy, rabid Dominic Monaghan fans, don't bother with this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4dda1ddf892a4237b08d853a352162df",
            "input": "Why? Why did they make this movie? If Timothy Olyphant wasn't shirtless in it several times, there would be ABSOLUTELY no reason to watch this movie, ever. Um...Plot? Nope. Well-defined characters? nope. The only time I laughed was when my boyfriend made fun of the whole she-bang. P.S. Andy Dick? Nope.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c039669b548438d867c3511031d0b7b",
            "input": "I never thought I see a movie worse than \"Lisa Picard Is Famous\", but this came pretty close. As repeated often throughout the comments, it was predictable; five minutes into the movie you know it will be a stranded at the alter outcome. This movie painfully references/rips off everything from \"Something about Mary\" to \"Revenge of the Pink Panther\". Writer Greg Glienna (Meet the Parents) needs some new material.The only twist is the deranged boyfriend/police officer pursued by internal affairs, but even that opportunity is wasted. Lots of setting shots of the Seattle Space Needle necessary to disguise the obvious Canadian shooting locale. Some of the worst driving in the car scenes with almost no effort to disguise the fact that the car is being pulled through town on a trailer. Geez, at least turn the wheel or put the brakes on once in a while. Selma Blair is inert and the short haircut a crime. $3M to Jason Lee, for what? Guess it beats skateboarding!So here's who should see this movie: Bee Gees fans who want to hear two actors sing 'Islands in the Stream' badly; People who can't get enough of Julia Stiles. 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e994682f65034b68b399d3c18e9fe0b5",
            "input": "WARNING!!! TONS OF DEAD GIVEAWAYS!!! DON'T READ IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THIS SERIES! OR YOU CAN, WHATEVER.They're are few words to describe a movie that claims to be the last and comes out with another; Liars, Cheats, maybe even some words that can't be uttered. But When Elm Street 6: Freddy's Dead shows everyone who thought the series got old, and wanted to stop seeing him, or people who wanted their hero (or Villian) just stops for his final breath, This film was it.This film starts with a parody of Wizard of Oz, Then you see a kid who is named only as John Doe, Who is the last child in Springwood, Ohio, leaves and gets out of Freddy territory. A woman who resides at a hospital/ place to get kids off their feet kind of place meets this boy, and at the same time, has a dream about a man, a water tower, and a promise of a secret floating in her mind, goes back to Springwood to figure out this frightening vision, and soon finds out that she is Freddy's child, And we soon find out that Freddy can only leave Springwood if his daughter can be a sort of host for him. And beyond that, fright ensues. This film seems to hit the nail on the head of everything you wanted to know.This film has tons of humor, and cameo appearences, like Rosanne Barr and Tom Arnold, Alice Cooper, Johnny Depp, and a very young Breckin Meyer playing a teenage stoner who sees psychadelic vision of flowers and Iron Butterfly's \"In-a-gadda-da-vida\", then gets stuck in a super Mario parody of sorts. This film will either make you hate this movie, or like Krueger even more. The best of the best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3bcb9399ef3642928d3ae603bacdc2f5",
            "input": "I can only echo the praise of the other reviews here. It's a delightful film with a feelgood factor that it achieves without crossing the line into soppy sentimentality. Naturally sweet - no added sugar.One small point: it seems to me that the mild objections raised about Ustinov's character Pendelton being able to walk in and defeat the system security ignore the fact that Pendelton is clearly a genius/savant at this sort of thing. Yes, the film was pretty computer illiterate, but it did show Pendelton 'studying computers' at his flat, and I believe the implication was supposed to be that his gifts allowed him to simply engulf the whole subject, practically overnight.There were a few odd moments when it appeared in some scenes that Gnatpole was trying to test Pendelton's knowledge and call his bluff. I'm not sure whether we were supposed to believe that Pendelton cunningly weaselled his way out of these situations, or whether he was actually knowledgeable enough to pass the tests - it was a little unclear.Certainly he had to know enough to set up the dummy accounts. Presumably Wallach and Ustinov were relying on their own rather foggy notion of how computers worked in those days, and in order to understand in detail what they were getting at, it's necessary to know quite what their concept was. They knew there was something about 'procedures' which was important; they thought that the 'smart light' could actually control security, rather than just indicate its state; they thought that the (dumb) user terminal's features would strongly influence what could be done on the mainframe itself - though apart from things like graphics feature I don't see it meself.Mostly, I think they tried to avoid the subject of actual computer operations as far as they could, and they did that rather well. Allowing them a bit of artistic license, I don't think their efforts had any flaws worthy of note.CD",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e1a6b8f279d450aaf0674bf4ff79ca9",
            "input": "I'm surprised how many people give this move less than 7 stars.But they just don't understand the movie.The story is about growing up in a difficult situation.There is a crazy grandmother who really wants the best for your grandchildren.And there's good reason why so many critics like this movie.And the reason is because they understand the movie.I feel sorry for the low scores given by some people.I wish I could just write a brief summary of a movie but IMDb requires you to write 10 lines.I frankly don't have anything else to say.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29c073fe76d84a638823330bf66d3447",
            "input": "The animation was good, the imagery was good, although not totally original, however, the story was too long, way too confusing, and over the top dramatic. After about an hour I couldn't wait to get it over with. With so many characters that have nothing to contribute and plot elements that either come from nowhere or go nowhere this movie really wasn't one movie at all and would have been better of as a short series or possibly two movies. If you like this kind of typical story maybe you will like it, but frankly, I've been spoiled by much more creative stories that actually have some sort message to tell. Go rent a Miyazaki film and watch it twice, you'll get way more out of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81db901adfbd422c9c39af2aea7e010e",
            "input": "I tried restarting the movie twice. I put it in three machines to see what was wrong. Did Steven Seagal's voice change? Did he die during filming and the studio have to dub the sound with someone who doesn't even resemble him? Or was the sound on the DVD destroyed? After about 10 minutes, you finally hear the actor's real voice. Though throughout most of the film, it sounds like the audio was recorded in a bathroom.I would be ashamed to donate a copy of this movie to Goodwill, if I owned a copy. I rented it, but I will never do that again. I will check this database before renting any more of his movies, all of which were (more or less) good movies. You usually knew what you were getting when you watched a Steven Seagal movie. I guess that is no more.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3de30afc3c394e3aa9e7c6076e34264b",
            "input": "The industry dropped the ball on this. The trailer does not do the movie justice and when this opened it was on a hand full of screens. Had people had an opportunity to see this, work of mouth would have made it very successful. The 2 lead actresses each give great emotional performances that really draw you in to the story and especially the characters. I checked this out based on the rave recommendation Richard Roeper or (Ebert and Roeper) in his book. An example of a great film that never got fully released except on a few screens. Which gave it no chance to be seen. Some movies go to video quickly because they aren't that good. This is Oscar worthy and it's a tragedy on many levels that most will never even hear of it. Maybe via word of mouth it will gain a following on DVD or cable. If you haven't see this movie you should. Great performances of the 2 lead actresses make this movie. It could have just been another formulaic teen movie after school special but instead it stands up well to other note worthy films. Girl Interrupted comes to mind. If you like that you will like this. Both girls are in one amazing emotional scene after another without coming off as melodramatic. Even though Alicia is angry and Deanna is crying through most of the movie it is done is such a real way that they do not come off as stereotypical characters or as melodramatic. The movie will move you in many scenes and if you are an aspiring actor use these real performances as your school. Erica is even better in this than in Traffic. I hope both of these actors get more roles that utilize their talents as well and let them shine. See this movie and if you like, recommend to friends so it doesn't get lost among all the blockbuster crap that comes out every year. This movie was buried while Spiderman 2 tops records. What kind of word are we living in? AGHhh. So to make the world right again see this and recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f98349cabd8147b0ae5ac7f5ba608d18",
            "input": "Yes it may be goofy and may not seem as funny as many high budget comedies out there, but this movie is truly hilarious if you really watch it. Tim Meadows has always struck me as being funny off of the Saturday Night Live show. Whenever he would do this character on the show I would crack up laughing. So after I saw this was going to be playing on Comedy Central one night I decided to check it out. All in all I was farily impressed with this movie, because it wasn't meant to win any Oscars or become comedy of the year, but it did entertain the Saturday Night Live fans that love the Ladies Man character. This movie is also packed with some highly quotable lines that can be recited for years to come.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cb9163bbc0940c98bfb7153e0880964",
            "input": "the only value in this movie is basically to laugh at how bad it really is. with a plot that makes your average middle-school writer look good, and acting which is almost as good, it gets my bottom score. one of tom hanks very early films where he obviously didn't have the pleasure to be real picky. the best special effect of the movie consists of a guy dressed up in an incredibly fake rubber monster consume.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f89317b0111649d3bd7e6597275e89dd",
            "input": "I found myself at sixes and sevens while watching this one. Altman's touch with zooms in and out were there, and I expected those devices to comment on characters and situations. Unfortunately, as far as I could see, they sometimes were gratuitous, sometimes witty, often barren for failing to point out some ironic or other connection. In particular, two zoom-outs from the gilt dome in savannah merely perplexed. To be fair, though, a few zooms (outs and ins) to Branagh heightened his character's increasing bewilderment, a la Pudgy McCabe's or Philip Marlow's. On the whole, the zooms were, well, inconsistent, and sometimes even trite.Other Almanesque devices, such as multiple panes of glass between camera and subject, succeeded in suggesting characters' sollipsism or narcissism or opaque states of knowledge. Car windshields, house windows, and other screens were used effectively and fairly consistently, I felt, harking back to THE PLAYER and even THE LONG GOODBYE. A few catchy jump-cuts, especially to a suggestive tv commercial, reminded me of such usage in SHORT CUTS, to sardonic effect.But finally, the mismatch between Altman's very personal style and the sheer weight of the Grisham-genre momentum, failed to excite me. This director's 1970s masterpieces revised and deconstructed various classic genres, including the chandler detective film which this resembled in some ways; this time around, the director seemed to have too few arrows in his analytic quiver to strike any meaningful blow to the soft underbelly of this beastly genre. Was he muzzled in by mammonist producers, perhaps? Or am I missing something, due to my feeble knowledge of the genre he takes on here?Nonetheless, the casting was excellent all around: Tom Berenger (for his terrifying ferality), Branagh for his (deflated) hubris, Robert Downey Jr's pheromonal haze, Robert Duvall's method of trash, and Davidtz's lurking femme-fatality were near perfect choices all. And except for a few slips out of Georgia into Chicago on the part of (brunette?) Daryl Hannah, accents were convincingly southern.Suspense and mood were engrossing, even if the story didn't quite rivet viewers. The moodiness of a coastal pre-hurricane barometric plunge was exquisitely, painstakingly rendered--I felt like yelling at the usher to turn on the swamp cooler pronto.Torn, in the end I judged it a 7.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a76b97ac0b4b4d28b23907f489a1518b",
            "input": "It was on at 7:30am, too close to school to see very often. The animation & computer graphics were spectacular for the time. The idea of cowboys & ordinary people casually throwing around space vehicles & robots was amazing. Maybe it inspired Treasure Planet.Unfortunately, it's really boring in the DVD format. The shows are all basically identical. When viewing non-sequential episodes on a DVD, you're stoned by disk #3. By today's standards, the animation is spotty. We don't notice the computer graphics anymore and focus on how corny the characters are instead.The bright spots are the heroine characters. They were a lot more believable, took themselves more seriously than modern heroines, and weren't corny. They actually saved men.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eeb674cd9da0441e835a44cb7496d4ed",
            "input": "Although this show has been off the air since 1973, after viewing a DVD set I borrowed at our library, I felt compelled to say a bit about it.I can remember when it was the only color show on television in the 1960s, and sometimes there would be a little \"Sunday Night Party\" with friends to watch this on NBC on one of the few color televisions.I really enjoy history not so much for the names and dates but how it influences us today and how so much can be so profound based on the most inconsequential actions of the time. Case in point: Virginia City, Nevada, which became one of the richest cities in the world because of the silver, got its name from a character named \"Old Virginny\", who, in the town's early days, stumbled out of a saloon, fell and broke his whiskey bottle.Old Virginny didn't want to waste the occasion so as the precious liquid was seeping into the dirt he decided to christen the town \"Virginia Town\". The area became known as the Comstock Lode because another character, Henry Comstock, had the reputation of trying to jump everyone's claim and the area became known as the Comstock Lode.I just watched an early episode that dealt with these 2 subjects. Other episodes dealt with Mark Twain's literary rise while a reporter for the Territorial Enterprise...It was wholesome (and frequently educational) family entertainment. As someone else remarked, each episode would really be considered a movie in its own right - rich scripts and characters. One thing it twisted the truth on was the proximity to Virginia City and the Ponderosa. In truth, to ride from the Ponderosa (all of Northern Lake Tahoe), one would have to ride his horse about 3,000 feet (1,000 meters) down the Spooner Summit to the high desert (3,000-4,000 feet) of the Carson Valley then another 30-40 miles to Virginia city.Needless to say the Cartwrights would have some sore rear ends doing this on a regular basis. But every writer should have some leeway with the truth.How I miss that show, even today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98911efd4f6c4a999e434afea66bbfae",
            "input": "I simply give this a three because it fulfilled what my buddies and I hoped it would do: entertain. I wasn't stupid enough to rent this thinking it would be a zombie film up there with the likes of Romero or Fulci, but what I rented it for was a laugh. If you are looking for a film for amusement, or a film to make you shake your head in embarrassment, go for it. This is perfect for junior- \"Mystery Science Theater\" fans, but the only downside is that it is so bad, it makes fun of itself. I, personally, think it is a shame to relate this to any other Hollywood title that we may know, because when a film sucks like this, it has its own genre.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2de46df066a94b8ebf0c3530a5666e97",
            "input": "Let's cut to the chase: If you're a baby-boomer, you inevitably spent some time wondering at the fact that, in 1976, McCartney had the gumption to drop in on John's city hermit life and spend the day with him. You also certainly wondered how things went. I heard the exact same reports that the writer of this film heard, from John's and Paul's perspective, and I admit that I reconstructed the meeting in pretty much the same way this film does. But none of my imaginings could have bought tears to my eyes the way this incredible piece of work and acting does. I found it amazingly lifelike, perfectly plausible and 100 % saccharin-free. Now, can anyone explain why I didn't hear of this masterpiece before it was shown by the CBC last night? I mean it's already three years old, for goodness sake! And yes, if you're a Beatles fan, this is a must-see performance! Even the subtle paraphrasing of Beatles' melodies in the background is inspired.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bb43affa3dc45c1a8f05872e993ee2a",
            "input": "*Contains some spoilers* This movie is cheesy 80s horror in all its awfulness. The plot takes way too long to get off the ground, never steadies itself, and then just plain crashes about 40 minutes into the film. There are a few gem moments for zombie fans, but not nearly enough zombies to create a real sense of terror.The zombies also take a long time to make their appearance. First, there's a whole half of a movie about mobs and prison gangs. The hero of the movie is an ex-Vietnam vet who gets caught up in the mob. The main mob boss sets him up and he goes to jail. In this jail, they are experimenting on the prisoners to find a way to cure them of homicidal tendencies and criminal behavior. But the badie psychotic head scientist/military guy has other plans in mind. He wants to use a slightly different version of the serum to make ....da da da.... super soldiers! After some infected prisoners kill a few guards and most of the prison has a round of infected communion wine, the military/crazy scientist guy goes \"hey this might be a problem\" and gives a call to the genius scientist turned investigative journalist hot babe ultra-empowered independent woman character, who of course invented the original serum. She goes to the prison to see what's going down, the military guy calls in a few SWAT teams from his secure position outside the prison, and the hero guy takes charge of the few prisoners with a heart of gold when a riot breaks out. The hero guy and the scientist/journalist lady team up to find a cure, save the warden's kids, and deal with some irate prisoners, both infected and not. Meanwhile, the mob boss guy has made a deal to get into the prison so that he can save his imprisoned brother. The military gets ready to blow the place up, and everyone inside scrambles to find a way out.There are a lot of gory scenes where people are killed by being pressed or pulled through prison bars. There's also a creepy decapitation scene and electrocution scene involving the same infected rasta prisoner. Still, the most disturbing scene is in the early part of the film, when a gross corrupt guard rapes a prisoner.The main highlight of this film is one scene towards the end. The hero, woman, and kids are trying to make their way to the only escape route. Their path leads them to a long hallway, on one side there is a wall and on the other are prison bars. Hundreds of bloody zombie hands reach through, gracing their hair and faces as they pass by. There's also a few good scenes of the classic \"couple of zombies munching on freshly dead bodies\" and \"many zombies ripping one guy to shreds\" bits.Overall, worth watching if you're researching the zombie genre as it has so many zombie clichés worth noting; it's practically an instruction manual on what not to do when making a zombie movie. But if you're new to zombie flicks and want a real scare, you should look elsewhere.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7b8106d0e674e20b264182a3714f86f",
            "input": "Modern, original, romantic story.Very good acting of both Nicole Kidman and Ben Chaplin.Miss Kidman does a nice job in imitating a Russian accent. Ben Chaplin is also good as the shy, dull clerk. For the men (and some women) : miss Kidman looks fantastic and is very sympathetic. I forgot what a gorgeous woman she is. It's not hard to imagine that John falls in love with her. Some unexpected turns in the story are good for the suspense. Although I hoped for a happy ending, the last part of the movie was quite a surprise for me. Conclusion : good movie. Les Pays-Bas : huit points.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da768e997bbe459f93427e58301fd53b",
            "input": "What a real treat and quite unexpected. This is what a real thriller movie is all about. I rushed into the video shop, grabbed a movie without reading the entire blurb on the back and hoped for the best. I was totally surprised and delighted. I really enjoyed the actors and their characters. I thought they all gave a great performance and made their characters realistic. The plot was well thought out,well written and directed. It kept you interested from start to finish and never got boring for a single minute.I highly recommend this movie for those that like thrillers, especially thrillers that are well paced and ones that keep your attention. Definitely a 10 out of 10 from me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da717d760e9a47a2a6a7cdaf6de90175",
            "input": "I chose to see this movie because it got a good score here on IMDb. But a lot of people either have really poor taste or someone's been fixing the score.Either way it was a real disappointment. The movie is exactly as stupid and far fetched as the title would suggest. There really is no reason to give a summary of the plot - but here goes: it felt like someone had been thinking: \"Wouldn't it be cool to make a movie where there were snakes on a plane? And then the snakes for some reason would go crazy and start biting and stuff?!?\" And that's about it! The plot is thin and unoriginal. The snakes are bad CGI (but it makes sense to cut corners on a movie that no one in their right mind will recommend to anyone!). The acting is poor, and all people are unbelievable stereo types.To sum it up: It's one of the worst movies I've ever seen - stay away!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f43cb8a47f94ae185eaa0474f487309",
            "input": "Here's one you can watch with a straight face, with a script so bad, even Will Ferrell wouldn't be in it.There are two laughs in HOT ROD.1. The Punch-Dance. Rod \"needs to go to his quiet place\" and before anyone can say Kevin Bacon, he is footloosing a passionate, overwrought bodyswerve to the strains of a band who wishes they had the big-hair faux-metal chops of Europe.2. John Farnham's You're The Voice. In one of those epic sequences where the star and his cohorts do The Slomo Walk down Main Street and the townfolk follow on their heels in support, the soundtrack is the gag. How did the film-makers even come across this Aussie recording artist? A major Australian vocalist (and a genuine talent) who shot to fame in the early '70s covering Raindrops Keep Fallin' On My Head, then disappeared until 1986 for The Big Comeback with You're The Voice, John Farnham's anthem is so bewitchingly cheesy, it leveled mountains in Switzerland.Besides these two high points in the film - both ruined anyway with the slipshod writing - the rest of the film is like choking on someone else's vomit.Andy Samberg is Rod, a failed stunt jumper who has never made a jump. Maybe it's got something to do with the fact he's driving a moped into the heart of darkness. Or his fake mustache. Yeh, someone actually thought that was funny.Without one jump under his starry belt, he plans for a 15-bus extravaganza - which would surely kill a lesser bad comedian, like Jason Biggs or Rob Schneider - to win the day and save his stepfather and simultaneously wipe out cancer and whatever... who watches these movies for plot anyway? Along the way (as usual for moronic leads in these comedies), he scores a salubrious chick (Isla Fisher), who must surely be retarded to consider swapping chromosomes with this loser.Sissy Spacek (CARRIE, 1976) has so little to do she almost phoned in her performance - then changed her mind and just hung up. Ian McShane must've lost a bet to be here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e14e1cb8327647b79a790c87cba8f4be",
            "input": "Another entertaining Travolta dance flick! GREAT MUSIC, mood, and scenes. Debra Winger is beautiful! Like \"Saturday Night Fever\", this macho film features extremely improbable scenes of beautiful women falling for Travolta and almost begging him to have sex with them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22d1dc65d70449a495040e1068f59d32",
            "input": "God, I was bored out of my head as I watched this pilot. I had been expecting a lot from it, as I'm a huge fan of James Cameron (and not just since \"Titanic\", I might add), and his name in the credits I thought would be a guarantee of quality (Then again, he also wrote the leaden Strange Days..). But the thing failed miserably at grabbing my attention at any point of its almost two hours of duration. In all that time, it barely went beyond its two line synopsis, and I would be very hard pressed to try to figure out any kind of coherent plot out of all the mess of strands that went nowhere. On top of that, I don't think the acrobatics outdid even those of any regular \"A-Team\" episode. As for Alba, yes, she is gorgeous, of course, but the fact that she only displays one single facial expression the entire movie (pouty and surly), makes me also get bored of her \"gal wit an attitude\" schtick pretty soon. You can count me out of this one, Mr. Cameron!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46f5ba0ac39343f1851f081e212eb16f",
            "input": "I wouldn't be so quick to look at all the good reviews and say this might be a good show..This show is only good if you don't know what \"talent\" is..I won't even say how offensive it is (I know it can be offensive to a lot of people) because thats not really what bothers me about the show.. What bothers me is that people watch this and think it's funny..It makes me feel like our generation is getting to stupid and I'm actually scared that it will one day be run by people who watch this garbage..Basically the plot is simple..it's about an offensive,self centered,spoiled women(Sarah Silvermen) getting through everyday life..Thats it..Like that hasn't been done a million times..In fact almost every joke either has been done or is racist..Sarah also likes to sing..I like her voice..thats it..not the lyrics..The lyrics are dreadful..which she likes to sing about a lot of things..If you like to see a hot women put everyone else down and make them feel like crap while at the same time farting and saying crap about every race then this show is for you..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9df9537237f642a3bc443a94d6d54ee3",
            "input": "This review applies for the cut of the film that's generally available as \"Fury of the Wolfman\". I understand there is an uncut version out there with additional footage, and I would hope that it contained at least eight or nine crucial scenes that seem to be missing from the cut known as \"Fury of the Wolfman\". In short, the movie makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It is utter nonsense, and incomprehensible nonsense at that.Waldemar Daninsky, that venerable lycanthropic antihero portrayed by Paul Naschy in a seemingly endless series of films, is apparently a normal guy who has just come back from a trip to Tibet, where he was attacked by a yeti. Somehow this has turned him into a werewolf. Daninsky is a doctor, a scientist, and an instructor at what appears to be a college. One of his female colleagues, Ilona Elmann, is involved in a vague form of hypnosis...\"Chematodes\", a nonsense word used to refer to a bunch of wires attached to a victim's head. Ellman feels this will enable her to \"change the direction of the human brain\", naturally enabling her to rule the world, provided she can get us all attached to those wires with no trouble.Elmann is also into werewolves, because she kidnaps Daninsky and takes him to her hidden laboratory. She has a bunch of other people trapped there as well. Some of them look like gypsies, and are chained up, being in varying states of lucidity. Others are clearly hippies. Elmann feels that one day she may be able to \"help them be human again\" (?), but in the meantime she controls them with her chematodes. Waldemar becomes her hairy hit man, wandering around like a werewolf zombie--that is until the filmmakers decide to use footage spliced in from another Naschy werewolf film, \"Frankenstein's Bloody Terror\" (don't ask), at which point Naschy's werewolf makeup changes considerably and he lurches around like an animal.Is this making any sense? No? Good. That's the film's saving grace. It doesn't try and engage you on any kind of intellectual level, it just goes full speed ahead with whatever nonsense dialogue or cheap horror movie sets it can muster up. \"Fury of the Wolfman\" may be the best Halloween party movie ever. You absolutely do not need to pay attention to it, and in fact if you do, you will be completely confused.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fab973c43e840e79c84eaec88f1aadf",
            "input": "I too have gone thru very painful personal loss (Twice) and this movie portrays the gut wrenching reality of that experience very well, Life out of balance, nothing makes sense, well meaning relatives, etc...It was nice to see Ally again. She is one of my all time favorite movie actors.I laughed and cried as the story unfolded. Great story and cast. Well done!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30c4ff779558435ba397a480e954f03d",
            "input": "Great cast. Great acting. Unpredictable story line for the first halfhour or so. I was really wanting to know what was going tohappen to each of these unredeeming characters, and how theirseemingly disparate lives would become intertwined. But whenthe writers took out the glue to start connecting the players, theymistakenly used super glue and brought the movie to a standstillfor the last two hours. I kept thinking it would get better, but it onlygot worse. Don't believe the reviews. This is a waste of time. Think about it -- Tom Cruise made ugly -- why? The gorgeoushunky bartender wearing braces -- why? I know it had to do withthe plot, but without them, at least there would have been oneattractive cast member to remember.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06bf8d8db02242a4ad9ab859623fc1e5",
            "input": "One of the most peculiar oft-used romance movie plots is this one: A seriously messed-up man falls in love with a terminally ill woman, who turns his life around before dying. Occasionally this story is done well and realistically (as in \"The Theory of Flight\", an excellent weepie), but more frequently it's done like it is here, where as usual the heroine dies of \"Old Movie Disease\". You know, the terminal illness that has no symptoms but one fainting spell and a need to lie down as you're telling your lover goodbye forever; and your looks aren't affected one bit (and since this is the 70's, neither is your sex life). This is one of the worst versions made of that particular story, where a very silly script puts two incompatible and unbelievable characters together, and they're played by actors who are completely at sea.This has got to be the worst performance of Al Pacino's career, and I say that after having seen \"The Devil's Advocate\" only two days ago! He plays a control-freak, emotionally constipated race-car driver, and plays an unlikeable character lifelessly. He seems to constantly be asking himself why he's staying around the grating Marthe Keller (so does the audience), and spends most of the movie just... standing there, usually with his mouth hanging open. The only time he shows any sign of life is towards the end, where his character proves that he's changed from uptight to liberated by doing a hilariously bad Mae West imitation. Hey, it *was* the seventies!Marthe Keller is equally terrible as the dying love interest; her character was conceived as bold and free and touching and uninhibited and full of life even though dying, and was probably meant to be played with an actress with the sensitivity of, say, Vanessa Redgrave or Julie Christie. Instead, they got the expressionless face and heavy German accent of Ms. Keller, who comes across as more of a scary Teutonic stereotype (\"You VILL eat ze omelet!\") than anything like lovable. She's supposed to be reforming Pacino and filling him with courage and spirit and all that, but it doesn't work that way, it's more like she's harping on his faults in the most obnoxious possible fashion. This makes for one of the least convincing romances in movie history, where you can't believe she'd be with someone she finds so worthless, and you can't believe he's with someone who gets on his nerves that much.Some bad-movie fans call this a cult classic, mostly because of Pacino's silly \"liberating\" Mae West imitation. The scene is a scream, especially in context, but not worth sitting through the rest of the film for. No, only see the film if you're a serious bad-movie aficionado who is especially interested in studying Extreme Lack of Chemistry between leading actors, or Very Bad Casting (not only are the leads terrible, but Pacino's other girlfriend is played by an actress who looks and sounds just likes Keller with shorter hair, I got them totally confused). This isn't one of those laugh-a-minute bad movies like \"The Conqueror\", it's just a really, really bad movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-417d9d9efcab402480a559f83c6a1619",
            "input": "I am extremely picky about the films I see. I'd heard about Moon Child completely by accident. I've been a fan of L'Arc En Ciel for some time and a fan of Gackt and Mizer only recently.I finally found out the film was being re-released and picked it up without a second thought.Being as critical as I am about films, I will admit, the action scenes can be somewhat hokey at times...but they're meant too be, as another user suggested, it's the quintessential calm before the storm, quoting Gary Oldman from Leon...without getting into the spoilers, the film hit me extremely hard, because you realize that the boundaries of friendship are limitless and as they often say, true friendship is loyalty and like marriage, it's until death do you part.Hyde and Gackt give performances that showcase why they are able to commit such depth to their song lyrics, their passion for music happens onto the big screen and in the process it creates an exemplary film that will reach into one's soul and evoke response emotionally.Upon seeing the film for the first time, I realized it will probably remain in heavy rotation as far as my collection goes. I want to encourage anyone reading this post to pick up the film if you want to get away from the current Hollywood trend in film...this takes an entirely new direction using classic Yakuza film elements and how can you go wrong with a cameo from Ryo Ishibashi of Takashi Miike's \"Audition\" and \"Suicide Club\" fame?Man..I just can't say enough about this film, but I'll stop here.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f709c7e5755348b0bc4ff1209c272c0b",
            "input": "I doubt Jigsaw was hip even at the time, the whole LSD theme married to a murder mystery being a patently obvious attempt to grab a young audience of the era without in the least truly showing any understanding of the sixties counterculture. The dated aspect aside, Jigsaw suffers from many problems, including overwrought acting, silly and stilted dialogue, LSD flashbacks that go on interminably long even after the point has been hammered home in the first 60 seconds, a failure to create any true suspense even though the actual plot is, on paper, a great vehicle to do just that, and an ending that is so trite and predictable (not to mention reminiscent of a lot of bad television shows) that the climax is actually an anti-climax. If it was a better movie, we might be able to suspend disbelief on a few things where it would help enjoyment, but the weaknesses are so glaring they only serve to highlight the improbabilities viewers might otherwise overlook. I saw Jigsaw on television and it is definitely late night TV fare meant to fill airspace and pass the time to kill somebody's insomnia rather than anything anybody ought to actively seek out. At very best, a three out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-407a13a7f6794b95a8dace50677df6b3",
            "input": "Creepy & lascivious wolf. The young \"Red\" is wearing full make-up, and extremely short shorts & robe. Got about 20 minutes through and realized it could be a pedophile's dream come true. The \"up-beat\" music sounds a lot like something I'd hear at a strip club. I actually think this movie is a sick joke - it's not a family movie. Gross, glad I was watching this with my daughter, I don't want her to think it's normal for families to view quasi kiddie porn together. Very bad, Very sad it's sold as a family film, Joey Fatone will probably be embarrassed he was in it. And what's with advertising it as a \"special effects spectacular\"??? The effects do look low budget, gawd awful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a962e04e29734504ab0b075221542163",
            "input": "Anyone who doesn't think Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey is one of the greatest movies of all time needs their head checked. It somehow manages to be both completely inane and no-brainer, but also terrifying knowing and clever at the same time. One of those rare films that actually improves upon it predecessor, Bogus Journey can be enjoyed again and again. Notable highlights include the duel with Death and the ending, which is highly \"emotional\". Keanu wants to forget all that Matrix rubbish and get down to doing what he does best, Ted Theodore Logan in Bill and Ted: The Return.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ba1f8c2b7584b78909d678db09bec4e",
            "input": "Mean-spirited, ugly, nasty retro-action thriller, about a bodyguard who is determined to find (and destroy!), the killers of the girl he was supposed to protect. This film is almost an anachronism in today's politically correct atmosphere. Director Scott doesn't have any desire to apologize for the inherently immorality behind the film's dramatic structure. Scott is either not aware or doesn't care for 30 years of social advances. I really don't think we will see a more violent film any time soon, so you better go and see this one while you can. Despite its relentless grimness, I think the movie is a powerful example of cinema at its most sinister, exploitative, and effective. Scott has a tough thing to sell, but I think I'm a buyer. The extraordinary technical aspects of this film are just too effective for me to ignore. Scott's directorial choices are simply astonishing, and he pulls a great performance out of Denzel Washington. Sensitive souls need to stay away from this one, but I recommended it to those viewers looking for a great, action-filled movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be8b3b4f62df48a99878bcbc1097d7a4",
            "input": "This was in short a terrible disappointment. By far the worst adaptation of one of my favourite novels. The dialogue was horribly clumsy; I could sense no feeling behind the words expressed by the characters. The lines were delivered too hastily and felt rather out of place. They could just as well have been cited by statues. The chemistry between George C. Scott and Susannah York was non-existent and watching an American Rochester felt strange. He could have at least tried to do a British accent. I like George C. Scott as an actor, but this simply did not work. I felt like I was watching highlights from Jane Eyre, where the main pieces of the story had been randomly put together with no regard to the flow of the story. The scenery and music were all very nice, but I could feel none of the passion and love that is supposed to be between Jane and Rochester and the movie left me totally unmoved.If you want to see a good version of Jane Eyre I suggest you watch the 1983 BBC version with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clarke or the 1997 version with Ciarán Hinds and Samantha Morton. Now these two are brilliant adaptations.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b266560481484d6eac37824b5db8c429",
            "input": "This was a superb episode, one of the best of both seasons. Down right horror for a change, with a story that is way way above the average MOH episodes, if there is such a thing. A man's wife is almost burned to death in a tragic car wreck, in which he was driving. His airbag worked, her's didn't. She is burned beyond recognition (great makeup btw), and not given much of a chance to live without a full skin graft. BUT, even in a coma, she keeps dying but brought back by modern technology, and when she does die for a few minutes, her ghost appears as a very vengeful spirit. Carnage of course ensues, and also some extremely gory killings, and also, some extremely sexy scenes. What more could you ask for, you might ask? Well, not much, because this baby has it all, and a very satirical ending, that should leave a smile on most viewers faces. I just loved Rob Schmidt's (Wrong Turn) direction too, he has a great knack for horror. Excellent episode, this is one I'm buying for sure.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8a3a1e2f531477aa827a9abeadad83d",
            "input": "You can give JMS and the boys a pass on this one because they were at the beginning of their series and on a small budget, but the movie is still sub-par. Dont get me wrong, B5 the series is by far the best TV series ever, but if i was an exec seeing this movie, i wouldnt have ordered the series. I dont like O'Hare as an actor, the costumes are silly, and there are tons of cliches. The same can be said for most of the first season (with the exception of Babylon Squared and Survivors); Bruce immediately put a fire into the series and it went on to be an amazing spectacle. If you are a B5 fan and havent seen this movie, see it. If you arent a B5 fan, dont...you wont want to watch the series.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7716398f084340919edff45557d914ec",
            "input": "Another small piece of the vast picture puzzle of the Holocaust is turned face up in this docudrama about the Rosenstrasse Protest in Berlin, an event I had not known of, that began in late February, 1943. The details are given in an addendum that follows this review.The film narrative sets the story of this protest within another, contemporary story that begins in New York City, in the present. Here a well off, non-observant Jewish woman, whose husband has just died, shocks her children and others by insisting on an extremely orthodox mourning ritual. She goes even further, demanding that her daughter's non-Jewish fiancé leave the house.The distressed daughter, Hannah (Maria Schrader) then learns for the first time from an older cousin that during WWII, in Berlin, her mother, then 8 years old, had been taken in and protected by an Aryan woman. Hannah drops everything, goes to Berlin, and finds this woman, Lena Fischer, now 90. Hannah easily persuades the woman to tell her story. It all seems rather too pat.The film thereafter improves, focusing through long flashbacks primarily on the events of 1943 that surrounded the protest, in which the fictitious central character is the same Mrs. Fischer at 33 (played magnificently by Katja Riemann), a Baroness and accomplished pianist who is married to Fabian (Martin Feifel), a Jewish concert violinist, one of the men detained at the Rosenstrasse site.The narrative does briefly weave back to the present from time to time and also ends in New York City once again. While scenes in the present are color saturated, the 1943 scenes are washed out, strong on blue-gray tones.The quality of acting is generally quite good, what we might expect given the deep reservoir of talent in Germany and the direction of Margarethe von Trotta, New German Cinema's most prominent female filmmaker, herself a former actress.The story of the protest is told simply. Only one feature is lacking that would have helped: still-text notes at the end indicating the eventual outcome for those people taken into custody at Rosenstrasse, an outcome that was, as the addendum below makes clear, incredibly positive.\"Rosenstrasse\" has not fared well in the opinions of most film critics. Overly long, needlessly layered, purveyor of gender stereotypes, manipulative with music: so go the usual raps. It is too long. But I found in this film an austere, powerful, spontaneous and entirely convincing voice of protest from the women who kept the vigil outside the place on Rosenstrasse where their Jewish relatives and others were detained. I found nothing flashy, contemporary or manipulative in this depiction.The very absence of extreme violence (no one is shot or otherwise physically brutalized) intensified my tension, which increased incrementally as the film progressed. You keep waiting for some vicious attack to begin any minute. The somberness of the film stayed with me afterward. I awoke often later in the night I saw the film, my mind filled with bleak, melancholic, chaotic images and feelings conjured by the film. For me, that happens rarely. (In German and English). My rating: 8/10 (B+). (Seen on 05/31/05). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites.Add: The Rosenstrasse Protest: Swept up from their forced labor jobs in what was meant to be the Final Roundup in the national capital, 1700 to 2000 Jews, mostly men married to non-Jewish women, were herded into Rosenstrasse 2-4, a welfare office for the Jewish community in central Berlin.Because these Jews had German relatives, many of them highly connected, Adolf Eichmann hoped that segregating them from other prisoners would convince family members that their loved ones were being sent to labor camps rather than to more ominous destinations in occupied Poland.Normally, those arrested remained in custody for only two days before being loaded onto trains bound for the East. But before deportation of prisoners could occur in this case, wives and other relatives got wind of what was happening and appeared at the Rosenstrasse address, first in ones and twos, and then in ever-growing numbers.Perhaps as many as six thousand participated in the protest, although not all at the same time. Women demanded back their husbands, day after day, for a week. Unarmed, unorganized, and leaderless, they faced down the most brutal forces at the disposal of the Third Reich.Joseph Goebbels, the Gauleiter (governor or district leader) of Berlin, anxious to have that city racially cleansed, was also in charge of the nation's public morale. On both counts he was worried about the possible repercussions of the women's actions. Rather than inviting more open dissent by shooting the women down in the streets and fearful of jeopardizing the secrecy of the \"Final Solution,\" Goebbels with Hitler's concurrence released the Rosenstrasse prisoners and even ordered the return of twenty-five of them who already had been sent to Auschwitz! To both Hitler and Goebbels, the decision was a mere postponement of the inevitable. But they were mistaken. Almost all of those released from Rosenstrasse survived the war. The women won an astonishing victory over the forces of destruction. (Adapted from an article posted at the University of South Florida website, \"A Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust.\")",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90e9cfb144bf4bdbaf8bde5a6f785141",
            "input": "Without a doubt one of the worst movies I've seen in recent years. The story focuses on four women driven to robbing banks who we are somehow supposed to sympathize with. It's tough to sympathize with characters who keep making such stupid decisions. Oh no, the cops are on to us, they know who we are, what do we do?...Let's rob one more bank then we're outta here! What!?! Every character is a stereotype and it's easy to tell who's gonna end up dead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bee5f34954644eef9da5b94d5ce49e54",
            "input": "I'm not going to bag this film for all the myriad technical f|u|c|k|u|p|s, it would take two days to outline how the whole thing isn't even remotely possible. Others have pointed out all the relevant stupidities already.Given all that, I still could have sort of enjoyed it, if only they hadn't included all the maudlin, nauseating, infuriating, Disneyesque sentimental crap, which is so out of place anywhere, but nowhere more than out in space, where the tiniest mistake can mean instant death.The \"crew\", as well as the \"real\" astronaut were equally guilty of putting all their fatuous nonsense ahead of everything else. It completely ruined any value the production may have had left.I'm surprised NASA let this garbage out so that so many people would get so much misinformation about something so important to them. If you haven't seen this yet, save yourself the irritation. Watch Apollo 13 again. At least that tried to be sort of real.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-989b51ba0a2144548f8c7c566c2a2381",
            "input": "I watched this movie 11 years ago in company with my best female friend. I got my judgment teeth pulled out so I didn't feel very good.I ended up liking it big time. It's a hard watch if you take in account that it deals with friendship, unwanted betrayal, power, money, drug traffic, and the extreme hard situation that deals with living in a foreign jail.The acting is on it's prime level. Two of the women that I lust the most star and that's a good thing. Claire Danes is as cute and charming as always while Kate Beckinsale is extremely hot and delivers a fine performance. Bill Pullman is also great and demonstrates his histrionic qualities.There are many plot twists to dig from and make it an interesting visual experience. Plus it shows the difficult times at Thailand.This is an underrated movie. Not many films like this one have come up in recent history. It should make you reflex about many things...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eadcc6a3d0b0442cbcb52a3779e9e94e",
            "input": "In over 70 years of watching movies,This has to be one of the very worst comedies ever made. Mel Brooks, Mike Meyers & a few other have made some very bad comedies, this however is the absolute bottom of the barrel.It is unfunny from the very opening,to the tacked on scene during the credits.Diane Keaton who I normally like must have needed her paycheck badly. She desperately needs to re-learn her craft.Dax Shepard (I do not know who he is),needs a better director,to show him how to act.Liv Tyler is also not up to her role.Mike White needs to find another character,he has done this same type person a few times too many.Ken Howard who started out years back as a first rate actor, also not as good as he used to be.There is nothing decent I can say on this attempt at movie comedy.Ratings: * (out of 4) points 25(out of 100) IMDb 1 (out of 10)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ddbb27db3d814654b6ff3f08bb8f6e95",
            "input": "After watching KHAKEE i felt i'll get to watch another good film but sadly The film is a joke and actually trying hard to introduce Aryeman Afterall his father Keshu is the producerRKS spoke so highly about the film during promotions, saying the film has meat unlike films released that time, I wonder which films was he talking aboutThe film is actually a typical Masala film with loads of comedy, romance, action everything jumbledThe ease at which the kids kidnap the family, is one of the funniest parts ever, Imagine kids kidnapping Dawood's familyThe end is a complete jumble mumble with sudden change of characterizationRKS gives his weakest film till date, except some Bachchan scenes the film is a boreMusic is boringAmitabh tries to give the role his all, he does his part well, though not his best though he contorts his face too much when pulling a trigger and does a weird look while smoking the cigar His dubbing too isn't matched properly at timesAkshay is there for some minutes and just repeats his act and hamsAryeman seems expressionless, tries too hard but overdoes it in some scenesBhumika emerges the best of the lotThe rest are okay",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0bbc636f7536464bb2c9d0488b24d23d",
            "input": "Some genre films need to be dressed up. This one was an exception. Taken on its own merit, it's a dressed down version of the horror genre film. With minimal special effects, it manages to be a psychological study of sorts, with a simple yet existential theme - who gets hit by the bus, and why her? It's not a great film, yet because there is little contrived about it, the story works. Subtle, and all about the interactions of the characters. Actually, there is one contrivance in the opening scenes, but it may have been placed there to simply set the tone for what's to come. I very much appreciate the balance of male and female energy, and would not recommend this story to anyone interested in more than people reacting to a physical and psychological challenge. You will enjoy the film if you have some empathy, value the need for a bit of adventure in your life, and wonder \"What would I do in this situation?\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7beefd1297cb47e896b1bacdc46e754f",
            "input": "This movie should not be viewed unless you are trying to kill yourself. I think this movie could actually cause severe brain damage. The main characters are the whiny non-hero Kevin, Amy, his bratty, ungodly conservative girlfriend, Kyle, a dork in red shorts who enjoys phone sex, Daphne, a scrawny, horny girl who is supposed to be \"cool\" and has no sense of how to dress, and her oversexed boyfriend Nick, an army recruit who can make an innuendo out of anything. No, I'm not a pervert, that's REALLY how the movie goes. The movie itself is an over-sexed rip-off of 1986's Gremlins, only you'll never find a trace of Gizmo anywhere. No, these Hobgoblins, unleashed by Wimpy Man (I'm sorry, Kevin), make someone's wildest dreams come true, and then kill the victims. Yes, you guessed it-Eventually, they wind up in a strip club, where the nerdy Amy's greatest dream is revealed-She wants to be a stripper! Look, I watched this flick via MST3K, and even with Mike Nelson, Tom Servo, and Crow T. Robot making a laughing-stock out of this cinematic trainwreck and it still made me bleed from both eyes. Not really, but I wish I had. I'm not giving you anymore plot, because reliving it gives me this great urge to drive a pitchfork through my brain. Besides, it's not like there's a plot worth mentioning. They should put a Surgeon's General Warning on this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9f1fd05f13045ac93b45c659a5c848c",
            "input": "Surprisingly well done for an independent film, An Insomniac's Nightmare paints a startling picture of what it would be like to suffer from insomnia. Wonderfully well written, and directed, it creates the atmosphere of a dream as the viewer is taken through one night in the life of an insomniac.Starring Dominic Monaghan as Jack, we get to see everything he sees as the long hours of a lonely night drag on. The narration is almost hypnotizing, and from the opening lines, it is impossible to turn away. Fascinating and slightly disturbing, it shows how someone copes with a lack of sleep, balancing on the brink between sanity and madness.With twists and turns around every corner, An Insomniac's Nightmare is provocative and engaging. It comes very highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01b418b7e8f24df2888c5aa067e02b7f",
            "input": "The Movie I thought was excellent it was suppose to be about romance with a little suspense in between.Rob Stewart is a wonderful actor I don't know why people keep giving him a bad rap. As for Mel Harris she is a great actress and for those who thinks she looks too old for Rob it's only by five years.Rob had a lead role in his own TV series as well as one on the Scifi channel. I'm sure you remember Topical Heat aka Sweating Bullets and PainKiller Jane.He also starred in a number of TV movies and is now making a TV Mini series.They need to give him more leading roles that is what he is best at.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cc8f793ab7a497d8b56bb0812000b0d",
            "input": "** WARNING - CONTAINS SPOILERS! **First of all, I would like to say that I really liked this game. I got it for Christmas after two months of dropping hints to my parents. I am glad that I did that.First off, I would like to say that the single player was very good. The first level is probably one of the best in the game, when you are at a party in London, and some evil guys ruin it by kidnapping the Prime minister's daughter. Of course you have to rescue her, and it is quite a big level, but should probably take you at least five minutes. The best part, and I think also the funniest part, is when you are in the jet-pack, and people are rappelling down Big Ben. Just equip the jet-pack's most trusty rocket launcher and blast the clock faces and the enemies down. Pure fun!The rest of the levels are very good, but pretty short. There are four mini-levels you can unlock, and that is one of the let downs, because only the first two of them are actually fun, and the last two to unlock are just 'kill 25 enemies' objectives, I mean, c'mon! We got loads of points to unlock these missions and the last two bonus missions are really bad!The multi player, me and some of my friends agree, is very good and challenging, even if there are no bots. Halo didn't have any bots but that is still some fine multi player games! You can be a load of bad guys, and you go against each other, and you can also set traps, which is the best way of killing people without going into view of their character.Gameplay - 8.5/10 (levels can be quite repetitive and bonus missions could be improved). Graphics - 9/10 (there is the odd bad graphic, but that isn't extremely often). Multiplayer - 10/10 (needs no comment, just great, you get to drive in jet-packs and vehicles). Sound - 8/10 Replay value - 7/10 (the only levels I go back on are the Loondon level and Istanbul Part 1).I give this game: 8.5/10Could have a bit of improvement, but it's still good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36b9308796534843b4e88e68d524f7a8",
            "input": "Claire Denis's movies seem to fall into one of two categories: the violent and bloody or the quiet and intimate. \"L'Intrus\" definitely falls into the first category, but it's not so awful as \"Trouble Every Day\" or \"J'ai pas sommeil.\"Now, ever since I saw \"Chocolat,\" I've made it a point to see every new movie Denis makes. And I have always been disappointed. \"L'Intrus\" was no exception. She has yet to make a movie as personal and as moving as her first one. You get a lot of the Denis regulars: an older but still magnificent Béatrice Dalle who seems to be in the movie only to show off her full lips, the gap between her teeth, her ample cleavage, and a couple of nice coats; the black guy from \"Trouble Every Day\" and \"J'ai pas sommeil,\" Grégoire Colin, and that Lithuanian or Russian girl. Michel Subor's character was interesting enough, but the camera lingered on him at such length that I got annoyed by that curly forelock of hair hanging over his forehead and was relieved when, somewhere in Korea, I think, he finally got it cut. There was certainly some action--gruesome murders, a man's search for a son--and there may even have been a plot, but one viewing wasn't enough to figure it out, and two viewings are, I fear, out of the question. For one thing, the score was jarring and obtrusive (as in \"Beau Travail\"). For another, the seasons changed too abruptly, leaving you even more confused about what was going on. Oh, there were a few pretty shots, and if you liked \"Friday Evening\" with its shots of the folds in heavy drapes and bedsheets, you might appreciate the aesthetics of \"L'Intrus.\" Otherwise, steer clear. I saw this movie in French and it's possible I missed something crucial. But the dialogue in a Denis movie rarely amounts to more than five pages, double spaced and with ample margins. In \"Chocolat\" the silence is sublime; in \"L'Intrus,\" it's just dull.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b627c2aa2c4f4b919cabce7090ab05d8",
            "input": "I thought it was a very funny movie. I love dog movies and comedy movies so combined they were twice as good. K-9, k-911, and k-9 PI are my favorite movies. Jim Belushi is hysterical and Jerry Lee is hilarious and adorable they make a great team. The only downside is that i really didn't understand how Dooley's wife died. She died before this movie but how? If they said it i must have missed it. Other than that I give it two thumbs/tails up! Those dogs (Jerry Lee and Zeus) must have had A lot of training. They were so funny and all the noises Jerry Lee would make when Dooley was talking to him was so funny. my favorite was when Jerry Lee sang and when he would bite peoples privates to get information very very funny lol",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-deff69eaa5cf461991215507cf6b453b",
            "input": "This was just horrible the plot was just OK, but the rest of the was was bad . I mean come on puppet and then they even tried to make the movie digital and that made it even worse! Normally I would like low-budget movie but this was just a waste of time and almost made me want to return the set that it came on. I have about ten low-budget movie set with like 6-8 movies on them and I would have to say this is the worse movie out of all of them. Also the wording is off and they use a fake plastic machetes that doesn't even look like a real one, they could of used one that looked even a little close to a real one so save your time and money and don't watch this horrorible movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8cacbf49a90544dea714bbc8306997c9",
            "input": "Sniper gives a true new meaning to war movies. I remember movies about Vietnam or WWII, lots of firing, everybody dies, bam bam. \"Sniper\" takes war to a new level or refinement. The movie certainly conveys all of the emotions it aims for - The helplessness of humans in the jungle, the hatred and eventual trust between Beckett and Miller, and the rush of the moment when they pull the trigger. A seemingly low-budget film makes up for every flaw with action, suspense, and thrill, because when it comes down to it, it's just one shot, one kill.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a750697c2ac4ee9ba220c0d351da4bf",
            "input": "I approach films about talking animals with care. For every wonderful one like Babe, you get an equally poor one like the dreadful remake of Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey. Or in the case of Cats & Dogs, you have a great idea for a film not living up to its potential. When I heard about Paulie, the premise of a wisecracking parrot didn't exactly fill me with confidence. But I found the film a pleasant surprise. And it manages to sneak its way into your heart without you realising.A Russian janitor, Misha Vilyenkov (Tony Shaloub) gets a job in a research laboratory. One day, he hears singing coming from the basement. And when he investigates, he finds a parrot in its cage singing its little heart out. Misha becomes fascinated with the bird, especially when it turns out the parrot can not only sing, it can talk. And not a few phrases either. Its a parrot you can actually make conversation with.The parrot is called Paulie (voiced by Jay Mohr), and recognises a fellow castaway in Misha. Wondering how this world to the wise bird ended up in a dusty basement, Misha convinces Paulie to tell him his life story. Which all began when he was a baby, and in the care of Marie, a five year old girl with a stutter. The two of them became birds of a feather (OK, bad pun!).When Marie's parents became concerned about her close friendship with a bird, they considered sending him away. And they finally did after Marie nearly injured herself in a fall after teaching Paulie to fly. Desperate to be reunited with her, Paulie begins a long journey across America, which includes a diverse number of new owners, flying great distances, and even ending up behind bars. Of a cage that is!Paulie was one of a number of talking animal films released by DreamWorks in the late 90s. And although it wasn't afforded the same recognition or box-office success of Babe, Paulie succeeds on quite a few levels, and is an occasional work of striking intelligence.Jay Mohr's stand-up style of acting is well suited to the part of Paulie. He never plays the part as too smug, even if he is a bit of a smart Aleck. Paulie's worldly, but he is also naive in his way.Because he's lived a rather sheltered life with Marie, when he's taken away, he has to fend for himself for the first time. And when he falls into the hands of different owners, they make promises to Paulie to reunite him with Marie, which he believes. Only for those promises to be broken time and again.Paulie is admittedly a little episodic. It follows the eclectic people Paulie ends up with, and how he slowly gets brought closer and closer to Marie. He first winds up in a pawn shop, where he is adopted by Ivy (Gena Rowlands), a kindly woman who teaches him the meaning of manners. She sympathises with Paulie's situation, and drives an RV across America to find Marie.Paulie is an occasionally very touching film. His scenes with Ivy are some of the best. Wonderful moments of Paulie perched on her shoulder singing Tom Jones numbers. The way she instills in him the need for hope is great, and some of the dialogue is quite well written and even thought-provoking: \"There are things in life you put off, because you think you're gonna do them later. But the real thing Ivy taught me is you gotta live like there may not be a later.\"The scene where Ivy passes away en route leaving Paulie all alone is a very heart-rending moment. And the sequence where he plucks up the courage to fly for the first time across the Grand Canyon, soaring majestically is such a beautifully composed scene it stays with you for hours after the film's over.Despite the occasional sad moment, there are plenty of laughs to be had. Paulie falls in with a group of performing parrots at a Spanish outdoor restaurant. The animatronic effects here are really excellent as four birds do a perfectly choreographed dance number. And Paulie even gets to have a romance. Which is dashed when he falls in with a petty thief (played by Mohr as well). That may be the only complaint I have. As soon as you get comfortable with one situation, the film then moves Paulie on to another.The scene where Paulie is taught to steal money from ATM machines is funny, but a little disturbing too. I'm amazed DreamWorks were granted the chance to include such a scene in a kids film. And Paulie's diamond robbery is very Mission Impossible. He's caught in the act, and shipped off to the lab for animal testing, where he's remained ever since.The story finally comes full circle at the lab, where Misha vows to help Paulie. Of course they do find Marie. But the final revelation is a scene of such shocking intensity, I was left numb for several minutes. Paulie may never get the longevity Babe has, but I believe its an equally brilliant film. The same laughs. The same flawless effects. And the same surprising intelligence.A minor gem.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6cd7a21cf32411aa6653163d1e3c3b7",
            "input": "As it is often the case, the impressive and explosive trailers of Asian films add up to nothing more than lackluster stories. Similar to Unleashed (which was great,) Dog Bite Dog tells a story where men are raised as ferocious savage dogs that carry out their master's bidding. The main characters, an emotionally undeveloped, amoral killer who is matched against an equally unstable police officer, are far from the common heroes and villains we often see. In fact, by the end, you lose track of who you're supposed to empathize with, failing to feel even the slightest emotion for either of the men – whether that was the failure of the director or perhaps the underlining message he was trying to tell is up to you to decide.Although the beginning of the film was filled with intrigue and unpredictability, by the half-way point it slopped down to a humdrum story of survival and revenge. The suspense which was evident at first soon disappeared because of a grossly mismatched music score which brought down the potentially effective story telling. And in the end, you were left feeling that all that detailed background information and introspection of the main characters was somehow very unnecessary.On the plus side, the transition in story from point a to point b was quite atypical compared to US movies – so those who aren't familiar with Asian films and are tired of Hollywood's predictability should check it out.The white balance seemed off throughout most of the film. It was like looking into a picture shot on fluorescent when it was supposed to be set on tungsten. Maybe I'm the only one, but it strained my eyes.The movie also enjoyed playing tricks on you – an interesting build-up gave me hope for the slow moving story until it was diverted to a low budget, low speed chase scene. And just when you think you were going to get an unanswered indie ending with a mix of Shakespearean tragedy, you realize that it's not an ending at all, but rather a transition into a wacky country-music montage about peace and serenity.Throw in some grisly from-behind choke scenes, a moment of redemption unexpectedly brought back into savagery and back again the other way, Asians' fascination with bodily fluids and a horrible music score that didn't match the film, and you get the average bland Asian thriller.I just don't get why every fight scene was overlaid with clips of roaring lions …I thought they were supposed to symbolize dogs? Ultimately, in the end, we are reminded about a true killer that still lurks amongst us – tetanus.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86a32e8fbbfb424189946f7bbb264530",
            "input": "I have seen this movie at the cinema many years ago, and one thing surprised me so negatively that I could not see any redeeming virtues in the movies: Dennis Quaid was cast as a policeman that never smiles or grin, while his smile and grin are two of his trademarks. Danny Glover was cast as the bad guy, but - again - most viewers' imagination could not go far enough as to believe him in that role. Also, Jared Leto was not believable as the former medicine student. The tension was just not there, since the killer was known very early. The finale was, again, neither dramatic nor tense: nobody around me cared about what was going to happen next. All we could wait for was the end of the movie. All in all, a disappointing evening spent at the cinema.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-159990ec216b4bceb7f9625fbe5f7b57",
            "input": "When this first came out, my dad brought it home- we were amazed by it- It was so different from anything we had seen before. I was looking for a specific movie last night, and I found 'The Mind's Eye' again. The box is falling apart, and I am surprised that the tape still works! Although it is not 'Finding Nemo' quality graphics, it is still very good. They should sell this again- it is a landmark for computer animation imagery. Highly recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16993be4d9e4461f88c3e97f680d4456",
            "input": "Trust me, this is one let down movie that you want to avoid and this comes from one huge Denzel Washington fan. The frustrating part is that it's 1/3 of a GREAT film. The first part of this movie does an exceptional job of setting up the characters and the new relationship between Creasy and the girl he's paid to protect. The trailers to this movie all mention that she is kidnapped. So, I'm giving nothing away when I say that the film degenerates into an almost unwatchable mess after she's kidnapped. Whatever the director was trying to accomplish, all he succeeds in doing is making the audience literally nauseous. Rapid, frantic and choppy cuts follow for the next half-hour as Creasy tracks down the perpetrators. These cuts are so unnatural and nauseating that all they do is to jolt you out of the story. I'm sure the director thought that this unsettling way to present the story signified a change in Creasy's character and signified that a different movie was to follow. Well, he was right. The movie that followed was complete and unsatisfying crap. The result of which is a depressing ending that ruins even the quality first forty minutes of the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3480539e56f242a3a170659943106229",
            "input": "As an impressionable 10 year old, I liked the \"love conquers all\" philosophy of the 70s sitcom \"Bridget Loves Bernie.\" I did understand the controversy, which was about the romantic complications between a Jewish cab driver (David Birney) and an Irish Catholic school teacher (Meredith Baxter) and both sets of parents (Harold J. Stone and Bibi Osterwald as Bernie's parents; Audra Lindley and David Doyle as Bridget's parents) who have issues with the young couple's interfaith marriage.Looking at the show now with years of personal life experiences, I am amazed that the show was even a success for one, albeit, highly-rated season. Created by veteran TV writer Bernard Slade, who a few years after the show's cancellation would write the successful play \"Same Time, Next Year\", \"Bridget Loves Bernie\" was a very light, superficial comedy that collapsed under its own airy weight.There was no denying the real-life chemistry between Birney and Baxter. But, in later years, both actors have shown that they are better actors in other projects (Birney in his short-lived role in \"St. Elsewhere\" and Baxter in \"Family\" and \"Family Ties\"). Here, they were trying to breathe life in a show that needed a much gritter comic edge, which might have given the complications more depth to a very controversial subject.The show aired Saturday nights between two CBS powerhouses: \"All in the Family\" and \"Mary Tyler Moore\". Both of those shows were smart, funny and had enough of an edge (more so on the former that the latter) that kept my interest in the situation and the characters. \"Bridget Loves Bernie\" was not very smart and only had some occasional chuckles.This was another example of a show that really was not as good as I remembered.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-761d84b577d4474187c3d4dc1d07f760",
            "input": "Robert Jannuci,Luca Venantini, Venantino Venantini, Alicia Moro (two stars are from CITY OF THE LIVING DEAD (I wonder what Luca is doing these days, probably a lawyer or something, like Bela Lugosi Jr. or David Hennessey there kid from dark shadows who wants to forget dark shadows existed). Anyway, in the Thorn EMI video there's no music over the opening credits . . . but the music is great once it comes in . . . with the Italian movies the films aren't as good as the music . . . my favorite scene is with the boy with the robot arm following loner-Alien through the desert. Alien says why are you following me. Tommy answers because i feel like it . . . Alien replies which way are you headed Tommy says West then Alien says well, I'm going east. So after a while of walking, the theme playing in the background Alien looks up and sees Tommy sitting on a rock petting a pet hamster . . . tommy looks up and says to Alien, what took you so long . . . I love this movie . . . It touches my heart. The boy with the robot arm needs a daddy and Alien is drafted in to being Tommy's daddy in the desert . . . oh yeah, they need water too . . . not THE ROAD WARRIOR (MAD MAX 2) by any means but a silly western/post nuke movie with a boy with a robot arm and Alien and Trash and a few other good guys with a mean chick with an iron claw and CRAZY BULL who looks like Wez in the Road warrior . . .on Sunday afternoons on channel 57 (philadelphia, PA) after church i'd come home and find this on . . . often . . . too often. Love it. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1471592ae934b709db97c258fd40010",
            "input": "When I was 17 my high school staged Bye Bye Birdie - which is no great surprise, since it is perfect high school material and reputed to be the most-staged musical in the world.I was a music student and retained strong memories of the production and its songs, as well as a lingering disregard for the Dick Van Dyke movie version which had (deliberately) obscured the Elvis references and camped it up for a swinging 60s audience.So, when the 1995 version starring Jason Alexander hit my cable TV screen, I was delighted with what I saw. Alexander turns in an exceptional performance as Albert, a performance in strong contrast to his better-known persona from a certain TV series. The remainder of the cast are entertaining and convincing in their roles (Chynna Phillips is perhaps the only one who does not look her part, supposedly a naive and innocent schoolgirl).But best of all, the musical numbers familiar from the stage show are all preserved in this movie and performed as stage musical songs should be (allowing for the absence of a stage).So, if you know the musical (and few do not), then check out this telemovie. It does the stage show justice in a way which can probably not be bettered, which is good enough for me. What is better than rendering a writer's work faithfully and with colour and style?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf7d5a4fdc8a4321b9111372122a96bd",
            "input": "Ironic that Dr. Seuss' fable emphasizing the non-commercialization of Christmas should be one of the most hyped, marketed, and successful blockbusters of the holiday season. The general gist of Ron Howard's adaptation is that the Grinch's bane against Christmas stems from an early childhood incident and that the Whos themselves are caught up in the materialism of the season save for Cindy Lou Who (played very well by Taylor Momsen). This movie makes an ardent, ambitious attempt to capture the wackiness and sentiment of Seuss' story, but the end result is a movie that lurches and never quite packs the emotional punch of Chuck Jones' animated version. Jim Carrey is noteworthy in his performance as the devilish Grinch, but whether it's the dialogue, the pacing, or extraneous storylines heaped upon the initial plot, the transformation from bitter miser to gleeful benefactor just does not ignite convincingly. There are some wonderful visuals and the make-up work is amazing, yet beyond the technical triumphs there's an element or two here that's missing.Succinctness?Soul?Or maybe Jones did the initial adaptation all too well in his 25-minute cartoon that Howard falls short of in a movie that feels three hours long. Howard, Carey, and crew are all very capable and talented, but what would seem a winning combination is just weak and plodding in its final product. If you must see the feature-length version, rent it on video with Jones' animated version and you can see how bigger and glitzier is not always better. I give this film three cans of Who-Hash out of five.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec15e15f1e494ed7835eb4990e4108be",
            "input": "There's something about every \"Hammer\" movie I see that really takes me into a new fantasy world. In the world of \"Hammer\" movies, anything can happen. \"Guardian of the Abyss\" is one of those types of movies. It adventures deep into the occult and hypnosis to bring a different type of horror fantasy. All in all, an unforgettable movie. 7.5/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bceeb65c2fc1498481cf4aa504094cbc",
            "input": "The zenith of two brilliant careers. David Lynch, better known for less accessible material, crafts a delicate and exquisite story around the most unlikely premise. A man travels to see his estranged brother. Having no other means of transportation, his journey takes him over six weeks on a lawn mower. Richard Farnsworth, in his last film, delivers a stunningly layered and nuanced performance in the starring role. Achingly beautiful in its exultation of small things, Straight Story is a classic cinema experience that must not be missed. Sissy Spacek is notable as Farnsworth's daughter, an impaired middle-aged woman living with the loss of her children.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-616a7de125c64a4ebba6c59d636ea8dc",
            "input": "I love this movie. I mean the story may not be the best, but the dancing most certainly makes up for it. You get to know a little bit about each character the way THEY want you to learn about them. I just think that you won't like this movie unless you're into Broadway...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d824d03b3c1e4f188f07481a42770996",
            "input": "Unless you are mentally ill or the most die hard segal fan you will tire of this horrendous excuse for a film in under 5 minutes.The Plot - Even for a Seagal film, the plot is just stupid. I mean its not just bad, its barely coherent.The Acting - Unbelievably wooden. Literally seen better acting in porno's. Ironically this film tries to cash in on this audience which a 'lesbian love scene' which is utterly cringe-worthy.Special Effects - wouldn't look out of place in a 60's sword and sorcery flick.Unless you suffer from insomnia and have exhausted all other cures, don't make the same mistake as i did and buy this DVD, as you will be asking for that hour and a half of your life back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ee5294c54cf4be98a3caaff74e933e6",
            "input": "'Capital City' fans rejoice! This first season of this series is now available from Network DVD and I've recently got my copy! Although very much an ensemble piece of key 'maverick' trading floor characters 'CAPITAL CITY' does present us with various moments through both its first and second season when each member of the team plays a significant part in a particular central or peripheral plot line. The cultural mix (English, Irish, American, German, Polish) of Head Trader Wendy Foley's (played by Joanna Phillips-Lane) group of staff is balanced with their own distinctive mannerisms, interests and personalities which helps to make the rather unfamiliar and, to most people, seemingly sterile subject of financial trading reasonably engaging through the engaging performances of the cast. In fact this seemingly dynamic young team of employees is in direct contrast to the rather staid and old-fashioned senior management of Shane Longman as represented by Lee Wolf (Richard Le Parmentier) and James Farrell (Denys Hawthorne). I suspect that such an unconventional way of working as employed by Wendy's team would not have become a reality had it not been for youthful reclusive 'free spirit' Peter Longman inheriting his thirty per cent stock in the company from his father and allowed a more trendy, relaxed modern way of business become a reality. To a certain degree Wendy's (I am led to believe) immediate supervisor Leonard Ansen (John Bowe) follows the establishment in the traditional manner of running the company however his fondness for Wendy rather sees him occupying the 'middle ground' on most occasions. The main interest in the series, I believe, stems from the simmering romantic attraction between Douglas Hodge's Declan and the cool self-assured blonde haired German trader Michelle Hauptmann (played by Trevyn McDowell) which had viewers continually wondering if the situation between these two colleagues would develop beyond the close friendship/fondness that they undoubted have.Looking forward to browsing through this title, and hopefully the second season of thirteen won't be too far away!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34990050d2fa4e388c3ddc11b3663800",
            "input": "This is the worst movie I have seen for years! It starts ridicoulus and continues in the same way. I thnik when is something going to happen in this film,,,, and the the acting is worse. The ending lifts it a bit and saves the movie from a total flop. Mark Wahlberg is a bad actor in a bad movie. Sorry Tim Burton Batman was good but this one sucks.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16161e4d79bd44279aa50073360b4d2f",
            "input": "Keenan Ivory Wayans is probably one of the worst directors, i swear he has no real knowledge on how to make films. he has made one brilliant film and that is scary movie. scary movie 2 was OK too but everything else Keenan has made are real disasters. avoid such titles like don't be a menace to south central while drinking your juice in the hood..... i know, what a title !!! obviously this film too, just anything that has Keenans name in the credits.it was an hour and a half on stupid nonsense that never made me laugh. just trust me on this, maybe women might like this film a little because of some of things that happen but on a whole this film will never be liked by anyone with a good taste in films........ 1/10.......j.d Seaton",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b67cc97f7194910b6d295db6be7d415",
            "input": "There are some really terrific ideas in this violent movie that, if executed clearly, could have elevated it from Spaghetti-western blandness into something special. Unfortunately, A TOWN CALLED HELL is one of the worst edited movies imaginable! Scenes start and end abruptly, characters leave for long stretches, the performances (and accents) of the actors are pretty inconsistent, etc.Robert Shaw is a Mexican(!) revolutionary who, after taking part in wiping out a village, stays on to become a priest(!)...ten years later the village is being run by \"mayor\" Telly Salavas. Stella Stevens arrives looking for revenge on the man who killed her husband. Colonel Martin Landau arrives looking for Shaw. They all yell at each other A LOT and they all shoot each other A LOT. Fernando Rey is in it too (as a blind man). The performances aren't bad, but they are mightily uneven. Savalas has an accent sometimes as does Landau (who is really grating here). Shaw and Rey prove that they are incapable of really embarrassing themselves and Stevens looks pretty foxy (if a bit out of place amongst the sweaty filth).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5de390a9fe7c4eff93b591c5db7688b9",
            "input": "Rated PG-13 for violence, brief sexual humor and drug content. Quebec Rating:13+(should be G) Canadian Home Video Rating:14AI have seen Police Story a couple of times now.In my opinion Police Story is Chan's best film from the 80's.He originally made it because he didn't like the other cop film he had to star in which was The Protector.I have not seen the protector so I cant compare.The acting isn't too bad and the plot is pretty good.I don't remember the plot well because I saw this film a while back but what I do remember is this film has lots of great action,stunts and comedy just what a good Chan film needs.If you can find Police Story and you are Chan fan then buy this film! Runtime:106min 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbd0f9012518459e85af35942baad929",
            "input": "Tobe Hooper is quite possibly the biggest fluke the horror genre has to offer. Like any other horror fan, I loved the Texas Chainsaw, but I think that in order to put your name in front on a movie title, you should have at least more than one hit movie. I can't really think of any other movie Hooper has done (on his own, don't count Poltergeist) that has really made an impact on the horror genre or film world. And this movie, Night Terrors, just backs up my point.Poor Robert Englund, I give him credit for at least doing a good job with the awful material he was given. He did what he could. As for the movie itself? Pure drudge. Unnecessary nude scenes every five minutes, a story that must have been penned in an our, and really just awful scenery, music, and cinematography. Nothing in this film is redeemable. Don't waste your time.Overall, 1 out of 10. I feel sorry for Hooper, his career seems like it was over before it really ever got started. I hope that he's able to pump out at least one more good flick, that way he can do his cult status some justice.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-684fed54b83f410baa4c4952886d0742",
            "input": "If you cannot enjoy a chick flick, stop right now. If, however, you enjoy films that illustrate complex characters and provide extraordinary acting, read on.Ann Grant Lord is dying. Her two daughters arrive to be at her bedside. Ann begins talking about people from her past of whom the daughters are unaware, and they question as to whether these lost acquaintances are real or imagined. They come to realize that these people from their mother's past are, indeed, real.The story shifts, basically, between 1953 and circa 2000 with a few glimpses at Ann's life between those years. It was in 1953 that Ann met the love of her life and experienced her life's greatest tragedy.One of Ann's two best friends from college, Lila, is being married. Ann's other best friend is Lila's brother, Buddy. Lila and Buddy are the children of a rich Newport family, whereas Ann is a cabaret singer living in Greenwich Village who wants to be a free spirit but is still bound by many of those 1950's conventions.Soon after Ann arrives to be maid of honor at Lila's wedding, she meets the person who will become the pivotal character in the lives of the three - Harris. He is the adult son of a former servant of the family who grew up with Lila and Buddy and has gone on to become a physician in a small New England town. Ann immediately becomes enamored of Harris which adds a complication to the fact that Lila has always been in love with Harris and continues to be. Buddy, also, is in love with Harris, but being 1953, he has redirected that homosexual desire for Harris to his good friend, Ann for he cannot admit to himself that he has a sexual craving for another man. Buddy exhibits his inner frustration outwardly by being the alcoholic, wise-cracking bad boy of the family - much to the chagrin of his very proper and uptight parents.Needless to say, all of these expressed and repressed emotions lead to tragedy - after all this is a chick flick.In the present time, Ann's daughters have become distant from their mother and are suffering their own life realizations and doubts. Constance is working to emotional exhaustion trying to keep up her roll as perfect mother and wife. Nina, having always felt inferior, cannot maintain a relationship.Stir all of these relationships into a span of fifty years, and you get an intriguing look at society, its values, and its effects upon the personalities and actions of the complex people involved.All of the acting in Evening is excellent, but there are some extraordinary performances and scenes - along with two unique family relationships - that make this film so very, very special.Claire Danes plays the 1950's Ann, and she does it in a style that clearly shows an intelligent woman of those times who is conflicted by what she is supposed to do as opposed to what she wants to do. Her performance is not easily forgettable.Vanessa Redgrave plays the dying Ann whose mind shifts from the present, to the past, to flights of fantasy, and of course, Redgrave pulls it all off with sterling style.Natasha Richardson - Redgrave's real daughter - plays Ann's daughter, Constance, in the film. The scenes between this real life mother and daughter playing fictional mother and daughter are an insightful treat to watch.Toni Collette plays Ann's other daughter, Nina. Nina spends a good deal of her time being depressed and feeling sorry for herself while shutting out a good man who loves her as well as her mother and sister. Collette is perfect for a part such as this, but I have never seen her give a bad or unbelievable performance no matter what part she plays.Mamie Gummer plays 1950's Lila and shows us a woman even more conflicted of her expected role in life than her good friend, Ann. She is very good.Meryl Streep - Gummer's mother - plays present day Lila. What is there to say about Meryl Streep other than she always gives an insightful and rewarding performance.Director Lajos Koltai states in the DVD extras that he sought out Glenn Close to play the relatively small part of Lila's mother because he felt she was the only actress he could think of to play one scene in the film. He certainly was right, and Close's performance in that one scene etches it in your mind. All the other scenes in which Close is Lila's very proper mother, and you get another performance to treasure.There are three other scenes in the film, combined with the one featuring Close described above, that make the whole movie worth watching. On Lila's wedding day, Ann comes into her room and crawls into to bed with her friend to discuss Lila's misforgivings about her upcoming wedding to a man she clearly does not love. This scene is repeated fifty years later when Lila comes and crawls into bed with her dying friend Ann to talk about the lives they have lived. In this latter scene, Streep and Redgrave are enthralling.The other memorable scene - at least to me - is when Buddy declares his love for Ann. Hugh Dancy as Buddy gives us a heartbreaking performance of a young man torn apart by his conflicting sexual feelings. His performance is superior.Chick flick? Yes. A very special film with unbelievable acting, directing, and scenery? Definitely. I cannot recommend Evening too much.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-012e0ab21c414cf2b00aaab5ef4a68f8",
            "input": "This film has some of the greatest comedic dialog and memorable quotes ever assembled in one film! The plot is somewhat lacking, but the delightful quips are enough to make up the difference. This is a timeless movie for all ages that is sure to please. As a cinematic art form it is highly entertaining; and with major stars like Cary Grant, Myrna Loy, and Melvyn Douglas... how could you go wrong? Comedic dialog and timeing such as this has long been undervalued, and is very difficult to imitate. A good example of this is seen in the 1986 knockoff of this film: The Money Pit, with Tom Hanks and Shelley Long. Despite the talent and physical comedy of these stars, the film dragged and received poor reviews and viewer comments. Achieving true comedic dialog is an art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f4042005f664b06ba019d071823f223",
            "input": "An enjoyable game, which offers fun and easy game play and fair replay ability. Staying true to the comic and providing a low learning curve gives this game something not seen in most action cartridges today. Also, the narration and animated scenes used (though lengthy animations are replaced by slide shows on the Nintendo 64 version) use full advantage of the platforms' capabilities.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b2460982195490fae35b123512a2bf1",
            "input": "Peaches is truly a marvelous film. I write this to refute a review from someone called 'Auscrit', that has appeared on this site. First of all the idea that either Monahans first film 'The Interview' is somehow TV is an extraordinary statement. Here is a film that has been significantly praised around the world as is simply one of the best Australian Films ever made. It fully deserved to win best picture. Peaches is a brave, bold and courageous departure. For me it works on every level and I have now seen it twice. Monahan is a filmmaker who is demonstrating great skill and incredible sensitivity. For 'Auscrit' to make the comment that it is another TV movie etc and that Hugo Weaving is no good simply does not 'get' the film. Or more particularly does not want to get it. Frankly it is the sort of comment that one expects from either another filmmaker who is jealous or bitter or both. Or someone from inside the industry either distribution, exhibition or bureaucracy. Your average punter, I have found just does not write comments like that. I have noticed other comments on the site and reference to the film Sommersault. One has to wonder what people think they are looking at. Unfortunately in Australia at the time SS was released the push was, if you did not like it then there was something wrong with you not the film. This manipulation of the media is pretty common down under. The reality is the only similarity between the two films are that they are rights of passage films. Unfortunately for me SS is a film about nothing, that could have been told in 15 minutes. I see it as a one dimensional film about anxiety. Peaches in comparison is a master piece. Personally I cannot wait to what Monahan does next as he is clearly way ahead of any of his contemporaries when it comes to cinema. In conclusion if the film does not win all at this years AFI's and IF awards, then it is a rigged game. As for Auscrit, please find something more constructive do with your time",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f8b58a587ac49ee8d816fae06c5ab1b",
            "input": "The John Goodman program was pretty awful, but this thing just plain stinks. The one and only thing in this mess that made me smile was recognizing the voice of Patrick Starfish as Frosty. The story is hopeless, written by somebody who has garbled memories of childhood rebelliousness but has never gained any adult sense of perspective in the intervening years. Paranoia rules the dark world that these characters inhabit. Everybody is unpleasant, and for no reason. The plot is predictable but the show lurches from one inexplicable, unconnected scene to another in such a pointless way there is no fun in watching it. The worst thing is nobody in the production crew seems to have ever seen snow!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0636ffc7c1e477d867453ffa2bf1916",
            "input": "\"Carriers\" follows the exploits of two guys and two gals in a stolen Mercedes with the words road warrior on the hood hightailing it down the highway for the beach with surfboards strapped to the top of their car. Brian (Chris Pine of \"Star Trek\") is driving and his girlfriend Bobby (Piper Perabo of \"Coyote Ugly\")has shotgun, while Brian's younger brother, Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci of \"Fanboys\") and his friend--not exactly girlfriend--Kate (Emily VanCamp of \"The Ring 2\") occupy the backseat. This quartet of twentysomething characters are living in a nightmare. Apparently, a viral pandemic--which co-directors & co-scenarists Alex Pastor and David Pastor tell us absolutely nothing about--has devastated America. Naturally, the lack of exposition shaves off at least fifteen minutes that would have slowed down this cynical melodrama about how humans degenerate in a crisis and become their own worst enemies.This lethal virus gives you the shingles and then you bleed and die. Most everybody runs around wearing those white masks strapped to their nose and mouth by a thin rubber band. Initially, this foursome encounters a desperate father, Frank (Christopher Meloni of \"Runaway Bride\"),and his cute little daughter Jodie (Kiernan Shipka of \"Land of the Lost\") blocking the highway with their SUV. Brian swerves around Frank when he tries to waylay them, but in the process, the oil pan in their Mercedes ruptures and they wind up on foot. Reluctantly, they hitch a ride with Frank after they seal Jodie up in the rear of the SUV. She wears a mask over her nose and mouth and it is speckled with blood. Frank has heard that doctors are curing ailing people at a hospital and they head to it. Sadly, somebody has lied to Frank. The hospital physician is giving the last couple of kids some Kool-Aid that will put them out of their misery. The cure did not improve their condition. Everybody else in town is dead. Kate tries without success to get a dial tone on every phone. Frank realizes that there is no hope for his daughter and he lets the heroic quartet appropriate his SUV and take off.Indeed, \"Carriers\" qualifies as a relentlessly depressing movie about the effects of a pandemic on four sympathetic people who degenerate into homicidal murderers to protect themselves. They reach a country club and frolic around on a golf course until another four show up in suits and masks with pump-action shotguns. Incredibly, our protagonists manage to escape without getting shot, but Brian has a scare when he almost falls into the water with a floating corpse. Eventually, they discover that one of them has become infected. Later, as they are about to run out of gas, Brian blocks the highway like Frank did at the outset. Danny tries to stop a pair of older Christian women driving the car. Danny lies that his pregnant wife is about to give birth and he needs their help. Brian throws caution to the wind and blasts away at the ladies with his automatic pistol when they refuse to help them. Brian catches a slug in the leg from the passenger, but he kills her. No,\"Carriers\" is not a beer & pizza movie that you can either laugh off or laugh with because the humor is virtually non-existent. By the end of this 84-minute movie, our heroes have turned into villains who only care only for themselves and their plight. Chris Pine makes quite an impression as fun-loving Brian and his energetic performance is the only reason to hang with this hokum, while the only other well-known actress, Piper Perabo, is relegated to an inconsequential girlfriend role. As Bobby, she makes tragic the mistake of showing compassion to a dying little girl and pays an awful price. It is a testament to Pine's performance that he can change his character to the point of putting himself before others. Essentially, Pine has the only role that gives him the ability to pull a one-eighty from happy-go-lucky guy to heartless guy. The two directors are Spanish brothers, and they never let the momentum flag. Since there is no relief in sight, \"Carriers\" sinks into predictability. \"Irréversible\" cinematographer Benoît Debie does a fantastic job with his widescreen lensing and as unsavory as this road trip becomes, Debie makes it look like a dynamic film. Aside from the lack of a happy ending or closure in any sense of the word, \"Carriers\" suffers because it is so horribly cynical. The scene when the German shepherd attacks Danny conjures up the most suspense, but even it could have been improved. Unfortunately, the Pastor brothers do not scare up either much tension or suspense. By fade-out, you really don't care what happens to anybody.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-544efb28d539465aaaeecbd8138126e3",
            "input": "Although the likeliness of someone focusing on THIS comment among the other 80+ for this movie is low, I feel that I have to say something about this one. I am not the kind of movie-watcher who pays attention to production value, thought-provoking dialog, or brilliant acting & directing. However, I claim that this movie sucks. I don't know why I don't like it... I mean it has almost everything i want out of a horror movie: blood, outrageousness, unintentional humor, etc. According to this evidence it should be my favorite. Still, Zombi 3 is a baaad movie.There are just too many things that compels you to yell at the screen. Like when the girl leaves the army guy when their car breaks down to find water (this spoils nothing so don't worry). She walks into what I see as an abandoned hotel or something. Did she not see that there was a friggin' lake in the middle of the building??? Yes she's looking for water and passes up a lake. Why? Cuz she wants to know why the people (who aren't there cuz the place is abandoned) won't answer her when she calls out: \"Is anybody there?\" Oh this is just a little, insignificant piece of the big picture I'm painting.There is a reason, though, why I gave this film more than 1 star. It's one of those movies where if you forget how bad it really is, like I have a few times, you'll want to watch it again because it's just so over-the-top in every aspect. I called it blood in the first paragraph, but this movie has no blood, it has an ocean of gore. Also, it has pretty weird creatures in it as well: a zombie-baby (with an adult-size hand???) and a magically flying head to name just two.You know when you try to think of the worst and cheesiest movies ever made and you come up with '50's sci-fi movies? I believe that Zombi 3 and movies like it should top those. It has all the elements: scientists arguing with the government, warnings of the apocalypse on the radio, armies battling monsters, and so on. This IS the Plan 9 of the '80's! While I won't say that this is a waste of money if you want to buy it, just expect the very worst. And when you find out that expecting the worst is underestimating Zombi 3, it won't be all that bad. You might actually like it, I'm not saying that's impossible.Don't think I hate this movie, I don't... really. Oh, P.S. Killing Birds (aka Zombie 5) rules! (did I just blow my credibility?)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aca60fbcc4aa4b81b3562fdcd337432d",
            "input": "Laputa: castle in the sky is the bomb. The message is as strong as his newer works and more pure, fantastic and flying pirates how could it be any better! The art is totally amazing and the soundtrack, which is reused many times after this, (im not sure if this was the first time i heard it) and evokes in me the most emotional sentimental response of any movie soundtrack. Sheeta, the female lead in this movie is totally awesome and the boy, Pazu is also a great role-model--he lives on his own! The plot is classic Miyazaki. I won't give it away, but the end is really great. I rank this as one of Miyazaki's three best with Nausicaa and Spirited Away. Also you may want to check out Howl's Moving Castle when it comes out (sometime next year i hope) If you like Miyazaki check this one out as it readily available in the USA. Enjoy, Piper A",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12e4324259cc4f95a5ad20378fce7bac",
            "input": "Two warring shop workers in a leather-goods store turn out to be secret sweethearts as they correspond under box-number aliases. Within this simple idea and an everyday setting, Lubitsch produces a rich tapestry of wit, drama, poignancy and irony that never lets up. Stewart and Sullavan are perfect as the average couple with real emotions and tensions, and the rest of the well-developed characters have their own sub-plots and in-jokes. Although wrongly eclipsed by Stewart's big films of 39/40 (Destry, Philadelphia Story, Mr Smith) this is easily on a par and we enjoy a whole range of acting subtlties unseen in the other films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93780b8469474528a1951827d1256126",
            "input": "I still don't know why I forced myself to sit through the whole thing. This \"film\" wasn't worth the Memorex DVD-R it was burned on; I thought I was watching the end result of a group of middle schoolers stealing their parents' camcorder. This is by far the worst movie ever made. I truly, from the bottom of my heart, want to sue Aaron Yamasato for the two hours he stole from my life.So apparently, it's supposed to be bad on purpose; However, if you should end up in Hell and are forced to watch this 90-minute coil of doo-doo, you'll see that Yamasato is really trying hard to make an awesome flick. The actors attempt dramatic kick-ass performances comparable to Crimson Tide but come closer to The Marine.The crap acting is just the tip of the iceberg. The camera angles are awful. The story is C-movie at best-- the plot isn't even good enough to be considered B-movie caliber. The dialogue attempts to be dynamic and witty, but is crap like everything else. Rumor has it that a hard copy of the screenplay actually attracts flies. Plus, the techno score is annoying... not because it's techno, but because it's NON-STOP. That's right, the music plays in the background THE WHOLE TIME, acting as a subliminal reminder of how bad this thing is. I don't care what the disclaimer claims, I don't buy it. BOTS was not made this bad on purpose, because it takes itself WAY too serious for what it was: a joke.This \"film\" was very low-budget. But that is no excuse for its record-setting suck factor. Great films are born of substance, not budget. BOTS had neither.Allow me to further articulate the overwhelming power of this 90-minute waste of time: if I were having a three-way with Jessica Alba and Jessica Biel in front of a TV and Blood of the Samurai came on, I'd be out of there quicker than Steven Seagal in Executive Decision.Undoubtedly, some people will try to defend the movie. Two, maybe three. They'll say, \"it's grindhouse chop-socky!\" or \"cheesy in a good way!\" or \"it's so bad, it's good!\" Those people are idiots. A movie is either good, or it's bad. There's no such thing as a good bad movie. But there ARE such things as idiots that like crappy movies. Don't get me wrong; there are lots of cornball not-to-be-taken-seriously movies out there that are enjoyable and entertaining. Slither is one. BOTS is not.This suckfest runs about an hour and a half, and in my humble opinion, it's 90 minutes too long. The best thing about this \"film\" is the DVD cover, so next time you're near the Wal-Mart DVD bargain bin, take a look at it-- DON'T TOUCH IT, just look-- and quietly walk away.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9563e5e056794c3da68b4c499a613163",
            "input": "I can't even believe that this show lasted as long as it did. I guess it's all part of the dumbing down of America. Personally, like David Spade said, I liked this show better when it went by its original title - \"Seinfeld\". What bothers me the most about this show, aside from the obvious, base sense of \"humor\", and general smuttiness, is the pretentious way the episodes are titled. Truly great shows are still funny after many, repeated viewings, like, \"the one where Rob gets accidentally hypnotized\", on the \"Dick Van Dyke Show\", or \"the one where Lucy and Ethel work at the candy factory.\" In other words, it's an honor bestowed upon great programs by the viewers. That the writers and producers of \"Friends\" would have the unmitigated hubris to actually title the episodes, themselves, in such a fashion, before anyone's even had a chance to even see it a second time, speaks to not only the mediocrity and lack of original thinking on the part of said writers, but, also, of the stultified minds of their viewers.You read the comments of some of these people and can only come to the conclusion that they live in a Hallmark Card-like Neverland, full of greeting card sentiment. The true meaning of friendship? I want to be a friend? I want to live in Manhattan? Wake Up. These people are supposed to be working in coffee shops and looking for work as actors, but they somehow manage to live in $4000/mo. apartments? Get real. All I have to say to those amongst us that want to move to Manhattan and live the idyllic New York life with your Rosses and Monicas, good luck with all of that. That New York doesn't exist for anyone making less than a serious six-figure income. But, good luck with all of that, anyway. Now, shut-up and pass the Soma.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81b614d9f83b4c86a7af0d55fde1759f",
            "input": "Now here's a film straight out of my childhood, my family used to taped; but it kind of got tapped over and losted over the years. Now I was fortunate to watch the whole film on youtube.com; I had love this wonderful film when I watched it as kid, and after watching again (online), I still do today. My favorite song from the movie is \"Candy Hearts and Paper Flowers\" (I will always remember that sweet song forever). I was surprised when I looked at the opening credits (on who animated who),that some of the animators date back to 1930s (WOW! that's like 47 years).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86a848f742e44f3699509093868bfaec",
            "input": "Debbie Reynolds toe-taps, tangos and, yes, tap-dances her way through this ordinary thriller which has a distinctly fabricated '30s atmosphere. Two ladies, brought together when their sons commit a murder, try starting their lives over by running a tap-dance school for tots in Hollywood. Trouble is, one of them is plagued by neuroses. Can you imagine this thing 10 years earlier with Robert Aldrich directing Bette Davis and Joan Crawford...? Nahh, Bette never would have allowed Joan so much screen-time to strut her stuff, and I can't imagine Bette Davis in the other role, tap-dancing her heart out. This is a purely bogus piece of macabre, written by a slumming Henry Farrell (whose idea of a good \"shock\" is to stage the mass-murder of a group of rabbits!). Not an ounce of honest fun in the whole tepid package. *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbd5f1b0a44c4fd1a236a0c81d170887",
            "input": "Illudere (to delude) comes from Latin verb 'ludere' (to play), so you're warned about the 'spy game' as a cruel and yet elaborate and intelligent (!) activity stemmin' from a complex and as it may appear absurd and vain personal history, whatever it may be; and yet I feel fascinated by the mechanism of treason and loyalty, the raw material of any relationship, from the personal to the social; after, many years ago, I was ABLE to finish the book it was a revelation! At the beginning I was so bored if not for the surprising style of the writing (I really started to LOVE Le Carre after that novel). The main character is not wavering at all: he has made a choice to redeem his weakness by following the path of faith to friendship and love, or is he not? After this novel you can clearly understand the darker version of Green's 'Our Man in Havana' wrote by LeCarre with 'The Tailor of Panama'; there is no game left, there it ends either in tragedy or in a grotesque comical way, or both. There is no Smiley here to upheld decent human qualities in 'the service', or at least there is no point to introduce him in this case. The BBC has done a superb work with these series from LeCarre's novels: the actors are excellent, as are the locations and sets; of course the script here is brilliantly adapted. Be warned though, even if someone may find it laughable, the after taste IS bitter.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4199140e42fc4e8f909e95727f10455a",
            "input": "The first half of this version was the best I've seen (and I think I've seen every version of Jane Eyre ever made). The development of Jane's childhood and character were exceptional. Then, it was as though someone said \"Uh oh, this is running too long,\" and hacked the rest of the story to shreds. The major scenes, when included at all, are glossed over, combined, and put out of order in such a way that they completely change the storyline. There was so little transition or even scene development that it would be difficult for anyone not familiar with the story even to follow. The big disappointment was that the beginning opened so much hope, and then the end dashed it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-980f74d126d04f44a925ee0cf2561b7c",
            "input": "Gene Kelly, Frank Sinatra, Kathryn Grayson, and Jose Iturbi star in \"Anchors Aweigh,\" directed by George Sidney.Kelly and Sinatra are Joe and Clarence, two navy guys on leave in Hollywood. They meet a little boy (Dean Stockwell) and on taking him home, they meet his aunt (Grayson). Clarence falls for her. She wants an audition for Jose Iturbi. They try to help, but there's a mix-up.This is a very energetic musical with great dancing and singing by Kelly and Sinatra. Kelly gets to dance with Jerry the Mouse in a delightful sequence. Grayson sings Jalousie and My Heart Sings. Not one of my favorite voices, but she does well. Iturbi's piano work is beautiful.Sinatra gets to show his versatility and why the girls swooned over him, with those big blue eyes and boyish face. For Kelly, this was a major break for him at MGM.Wonderful movie, very buoyant.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c66e858a799946b880e8aa1347d480bc",
            "input": "I must say I was impressed the cinematography was amazing, the frames close to perfection and the way he built up the tension around a subject that sound more like a dreadful bore is beyond be.The film is about two narrators, one seen, one unseen. They are both trying to explain the significant of a series of painting that caused a scandal a long time back. The film is all about theories and explanations of views but the conclusion is quite shocking I must say. Definitely a film that deserves more than it's 171 votes.With only 66 minutes to play out it's plot the film still felt like a complete work. Fantastic direction! I must say far better than Blood of the Poet which it for some strange reason remind me a bit of. I suppose you can call it by the slang word \"artsy\". It's pretty much just a lot of professional talk about various theories and stunning visual effects but the crew and Ruiz did pull it off. At least for me. An amazing film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f91baa34007e4382a836db211c24bf79",
            "input": "If I could give it a zero, I'd change my mind and give it a -10 instead. Absolutely horrible movie with no movie plot, doesn't make sense of what is happening. Just PLAIN BORING. Please don't waste your money on this one. Pleaseee!!! This movie could have done so well if it truly depicted the real zodiac killer's story, but nopes, I didn't feel anything but disgust while watching it. Do yourself a favor and rent some classic movies instead, its better to watch a movie you've already seen like 3-4 times than watch this crap! I don't understand why people even bother to make such movies when they know its not going to do well. Zodiac killer should be called 'Boriac killer' instead!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0162e2b8a71846a9943d04e063d9f77f",
            "input": "Have to admit, this version disgraces Shakespeare upfront! None can act except the nurse who was my fav! Juliet had good skills as a teen but she can't give emotional depth to her lines and we really can never connect to her. She's worse doing the scene when she is contemplating drinking the sleeping potion...god stop whining! I would have poured it in her mouth to shut her up! Anthony Andrews...yikes! Considering his other great movies (Brideshead Revisited, Ivanhoe, Scarlet Pimpernel), he's quite a shocker in this one. And don't get me started on Romeo...puhleasssssee! It's still good to see if you're on the hunt to see every Romeo and Juliet ever made in the history of film. Olivia and Leonard's version is still the best, followed by Leslie Howard's version and then the current Leo and Clare!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9affaa74b7841ffb269527034580aed",
            "input": "The Incredible Melting Man plays like an extended episode of The Six Million Dollar Man, but with violence and some nudity. I know this film is a bit crummy but I found it impossible not to kind of like it.The acting and script are not the best. But the effects are good for a 30 year old movie with a budget of $50 - the title character takes quite a while to actually melt but when he does it's reasonably impressive; we also have one inventive death scene involving electrocution. Of note too is the music, it's insane - a cheese-tastic medley of nonsense.Notable highlights: * Marvel at the slow-motion nurse who jumps through a pane of glass for absolutely no reason whatsoever.* Be amazed by a day in the life of a severed head.* Beware of the psychotic cannibalistic melting humanoid. Called Steve.* Be astonished when our hero takes a break from hunting the melting lunatic to have a bowl of soup and complain about insufficient crackers in the kitchen.This film is just too 70's for me to hate it. It's tacky and trashy but I thought it was a lot of fun. You could do a lot worse.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1976f9b6bccb4b0bb3fd2cd04205a6cb",
            "input": "The emotional impact of this movie defies words. It is elegant, subtle, beautiful, and tragic all rolled into two hours. This is Will Smith as he matures into his acting ability, the full range of it. Who knew? I saw The Pursuit of Happiness and thought, this must be a fluke for the blockbuster, over-the-top actor, Smith. His performances in both movies portray a whole other dimension to Smith, a refinement of talent, the selectivity of scripts, I'm not sure, but I view him differently now. Seven Pounds is one of those movies that in order to fully enjoy its essence you have to suspend your belief. Don't watch it for the plot, watch it for the fragile condition of the human heart, both literally and metaphorically. It is a story of human guilt, atonement, love, and sacrifice.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-336efc4cc5114efab4f56f98a8f1ce81",
            "input": "Joan Fontaine here is entirely convincing as an amoral beauty who is entirely incapable of feeling love for anyone but herself. Her husband (Richard Ney) has lost all his money through a combination of his foolhardiness and her extravagance, and they are reduced to living in a tiny room, with little or no prospects. They continue to put on the most amazing clothes and go out and socialize as if nothing were wrong. He is a charming, feckless, but wholly amiable fellow. However, Fontaine decides he has to go, as he has outlived his usefulness. So she resolves to poison him when she realizes he does not want to divorce her, so that she can move on. She has meanwhile had a lover (Patric Knowles) whom she decides to drop because he is not rich either. She meets the aging Herbert Marshall, who has a yacht with all the trimmings and more money than even Fontaine could figure out how to spend. She targets him and decides he will do nicely. He is all too eager to be eaten up by the young beauty. He certainly isn't very exciting, and has about as much sex appeal as yesterday's omelette. But Fontaine is one of those gals who has eyes only for money, and the man standing between her and it is transparent, so that she doesn't even notice or care what he looks like, she looks through him and sees what she really wants and goes for it. She proceeds to poison her husband, and dispatches him very neatly and satisfactorily, so that everything is going well. But as always happens in the movies, and sometimes even in life, some unexpected things begin to go wrong, and the tension rises appreciably, so that Fontaine begins to sweat. Fontaine is particularly good at looking wicked and terrified, and as the net begins to close in on her, her rising sense of desperation is palpable and has us on the edges of our seats. Hysteria and fear take over from cool calculation and cunning. But she finds a fall guy for her crime in the person of her cast off lover, who is an innocent victim of her scheme to set him up. He is condemned to death for murder, because the husband's death by poison came to light unexpectedly. But Sir Cedric Hardwicke, playing a grimly determined Scotland yard inspector, thinks there may be something amiss, and begins to doubt the story and suspect Fontaine. He closes in on her, and some of the scenes as this happens are inspired portrayals of the wildest panic. But will the innocent man's life be saved before he is executed? Will Fontaine worm her way out of this one? Will Herbert Marshall protect her to safeguard his infatuation? This film is expertly directed by Sam Wood, and the film is a really superb suspense thriller which I suppose qualifies very well for the description of a superior film noir.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7849e8679e464d8cbab747bf1f1ca543",
            "input": "This is a depressingly shallow, naive and mostly unfunny look at a wildly improbable relationship between Brooks' psychotic film editor and Harold, his vapid girlfriend. The two have ZERO chemistry together - primarily because Harold is incapable of doing anything besides looking pretty at this stage of her career; but also because Brooks' character is neither interesting nor likeable. There are 15 static, excruciating minutes at the beginning where Brooks, having just broke up with Harold, stumbles about his apartment in a depressed, drugged out state - unbearable.Sappily and unimaginatively bookended by Joe Cocker's \"You Are So Beautiful\", there simply is not enough material here for a feature film. There is hardly anything going on on the periphery of their relationship to give the appearance that these people exist in a real world. I'm sure Brooks' intention was to shine a white hot spotlight on the affair and, in a way, deconstruct it; but if you're going to do that the writing and acting needs to be far far better than what it is here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d42f7f07ef3642da974108cc79cdb9c6",
            "input": "What was Steven Seagal thinking? I mean firstly I love Seagal. I love all his movies up to the mid 2000s. His early stuff is some of the best in the genre. This however does not live up to its excellent name. Attack Force (with protagonist Marshall Lawson {Seagal}) would be expected to be a mindless action movie with Seagal in typical one-liner ass kicking form. However, what we get is a crime mystery, bordering on a political thriller with little or no action. Seagal is always in shadows because of his weight. I could not follow this story. There's people who mutate to superhumans when they take a drug. What happened in this movie. The dubbing of Seagal is a disgrace, a shambles and a shame. Why dub the man? The story is terrible. This got a 2/10 from me because of the scene where Seagal asks for backup despite having an army with him, and an hilarious fight scene where seagal swings his hands like a girl facing the camera! \"Revenge is a two way street\" seagal says in this movie...well forget revenge Steven, you need redemption!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6417eb5853504e60a01f9b9d5690bbb1",
            "input": "With all of the films of recent,dealing with the British Monarchy,is it really time for another? Answer:YOU BET! The Young Victoria is another contribution to the wave of cinema from Britain dealing with the Royal family. In this case,it deals with the early life of Princess Victoria,and events leading up to the Coronation of her becoming Queen of all England,as well as her romance & eventual wedding to Prince Albert. The film also deals with the tempestuous lives & careers of both England's Queen & Prince,as well as several other events that transpire (political turmoil,etc.). Emily Blunt plays a radiant Victoria in her youth,while Rupert Friend is her beloved & best friend,Prince Albert. The rest of the cast is rounded out with the likes of Miranda Richardson,as the Dutchess of Kent,and the always welcome on screen,Jim Broadbent as King William,as well as a cast of others that shine on screen. Jean Marc Vallee (C.R.A.Z.Y.,Loser Love),directs from a winning screenplay by Jullian Fellowes (Vanity Fair,Gosford Park,Separate Lies). I absolutely went out of my head over the film's visual look (by cinematographer Hagen Bogdansker),who gave each frame of film a painterly look (with the help of production designer,Patrice Vermette),as well as some tight editing (by Jill Bilcock & Matt Garner). What I also appreciated in Fellowes' script is the use of a game of Chess,as a metaphor for some of the film's political motivation (the characters in the film move about like the pieces on a Chess board). This is smart,well written,directed,filmed,edited & acted entertainment (and enlightenment)that makes for a well spent evening at the cinema. Rated PG by the MPAA for a few scenes of sensuality,some brief violence ( a little bloody,although nothing too gory),a rude outburst of language,and some on screen smoking",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4f530f1d0bf4aa5901ce0b0d7cada0f",
            "input": "I haven't seen this, & don't plan to see this movie or any other that includes Lindsay......unless & until \"poor little rich girl\" straightens out her life for a 2 year period beginning with her most recent arrest in July 2007.In fact, I don't know anyone that has gone to see ANY of Lindsay's recent movies. I rather imagine 2007 will be the high water mark in her movie making career, until she cleans up her act. All of the recent publicity has only hindered her movie making career, if she has any further aspirations to make any more movies Up to this time, movie producers have actively sought Lindsay for roles in their upcoming production. Now, Lindsay will probably have to go to auditions & actually compete for ANY role. Her reputation is currently \"poison\" & quite possible could have a negative effect on box office ticket sales on any movie she is in.Sooooo....now Lindsay is going to have to deal with \"not being wanted\".....is she going to be able to handle this?I wonder if even Jay Leno will want to have Lindsay back on his TV Show?All of the foregoing is merely my OPINION. I have no inside information.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d717c608926c4135a87e430765976cdf",
            "input": "Spoiler for anyone who is lucky enough to ever see this film (so not really spoiler after all). Saw this film when it was released and can still remember parts of it. It's all set in a small town in the west or what is left of that town. It more resembles a ghost town with few inhabitants. Among them a couple, where the wife is especially wicked. She lets her man die in the end of the film and leaves the town but has to cross the desert. We never know what happens to her next but just before she left her dying man shoots after her and deliberately does not hit her and instead the water supply. She is not aware of that soon she will be very thirsty. Mark Damon kills a couple of bad guys in a funny manor - but that's another story, which I don't remember too good. The remaining impression of the film was that it was one of the first times I saw a really wicked woman on film, who pretends to be anything but wicked - can't be compared with the witch in 'Snowwhite', who, in comparison is easy to find out. Very tight western with few main characters and still absorbing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20773f68c9e941e3838010e549999791",
            "input": "This is one of the great movies of the 80s in MY collection that I think about all the time. The Running Man is one of Arnold`s best and most different films even to this day and when I first saw The Running Man I was so excited to see a movie like this. I just adore all of the fights and this is truly a special movie. It also has Jesse Ventura, the legendary Professor Toru Tanaka, Sven-Ole Thorsen, the beautiful Maria Conchita Alonso, Yaphet Kotto, Kurt Fuller, Richard Dawson, and Thomas Rosales Jr. who seems to always like death in his movies because he has been killed in such films as Universal Solder, The Lost World, Robo Cop 2, Predator 2, and among others. All Arnold fans should love this film from the beginning to the end because its action packed, star filled, and its one its one of Arnold`s best to date!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0573de5d792646d59540055666301962",
            "input": "Semana Santa is jaw-droppingly bad. It's so wrong in so many ways I don't where to begin. So, let's see...Mira Sorvino, whose judge husband has been shot while protecting her, goes from Madrid to Seville for her cop job. During the holy week (Semana santa, see?...everybody begins to fall sleep..told u it was bad in so many points, even from the beginning), a killer executes his victims like bulls in a bullfighting arena. She teams up with male chauvinist pig Olivier Martinez and nice Feodor Atkine. Soon she discovers she'll be the next target of the killer (who wears a red robe). Why, oh but why?Why..;that's the questionthat has been in my head the whole movie.Q :Why did go to see that A : Because i love Mira Sorvino (i even excuse her for that AT FIRST SIGHT crap)Q : Why were we only 8 people in the theater this saturday on the first week end of release? A : ah-ah-ah. Spider-man got relaesed the same day. But also the fact that the movie has been blast with execrable reviews.Q : Why this movie has been made? A : Money I guess. But boy did Mira need the money.then...why???????????? first of all, there's always something wrong with european co-productions. here you got a french-english-german-italian-spanish-danish production. yi-ha.Then it wants to play on the same playgroung as US thrillers/slashers/whodunit/mysteries/whatever. Even VALENTINE, though unnecessary and badly scripted and shot, was much better in the suspense and the fun.Then , to give some credit to the story, the screenwriter wanted to add some political sight to the story. Wrong : done in flash-backs in a Traffic-like photography, it's certainly the most interesting thing i n the movie. Could have stick to it, it wouldn't have to sit through the whole movie. Better go straight to Guillermo del Tros's THE DEVIL'S BACKBONE (El espinazo del diablo)for some clever fun.Then the homophobia. Bullseye! The first victims are S&M drug addicted gay twins who got stabbed to death. The annoying olivier Martinez goes to a dating agency held by a badly shaved overweight transvestive with a blond platinum wig. Calls mira Sorvino's character a big dyke all the time. Do we need this kind of stuff? Nah. Just needless offensive remarks, just like ol'times.Then the suspense. Yipee. No apparent motive. The first murders are plain illusion as they're a representation of a famous painting. But no. And the revelation of the killer (a horrible fascist, of course) could have been done from the beginning as he appears at the end of the movie as, I guess, it was time for the director to say \"weel, time to finish that damn movie. let's reveal right now who the killer is and why he kills\".Then the director thinks he's a director. Wrong : no sense of suspense, no sense of directing the actors, no knowledge of change of pace. A Giant, mega-bore. The scenes of the holy week are needless (maybe a co-production rule saying : ok, shoot in Sevilla but show some creditsof this beautiful and historical town with the celebrations of Easter. There we are : a mystery movie for tourists!)Then the actors. All wrongs. Mira Sorvino bores herself to death : she does practicly nothing except getting stabbed in the right hand. Everything she did best (the Replacement Killers, Mighty Aphrodite...) were like they never existed. Olivier Martinez...hello, anybody here? When the producers will learn that he's not an actor but a mannequin with no ability of speech nor feelings? Feodor Atkine, bland and transparent. Only do we pay great respect to Alida Valli, one of the greatest actress this last century (and I hope for some more roles in this current one). She's tha main attraction here as she's the only one to give life to her poor lines. I won't mention the other actors as they're only one-sided characters, uninteresting and shallow.Incoherent direction, inconsistent actors, implausible plot. Idiocy incarnated.Superwonderscope says : 1",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f1e662b89a34bffa3407edbe7ab7401",
            "input": "This is so exciting! After I saw \"La Roue\" this afternoon, a short, light-hearted little movie, I consider this one a real treat! This is absolutely delightful and one of the most charming pictures I saw this year. It is the more amazing since it is an early talkie and puts some great pictures of the 30's to shame due to its innovative use of sound in cinema. It's simply filled with music and an adorable mood that's really upbeat and, bottom line, it made me happy! Obviously it wouldn't be so difficult to retrieve the lottery ticket the male lead was looking for, but the pace is so exhilarating and the movie is so spectacularly entertaining that I didn't even think of it twice. The comedy is many times hilarious and I think it is even superior to the Marx Brothers, possibly the biggest comedic force of the time. This is rather perfect.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f83f46e02e884d87b906e6f1b54d54ea",
            "input": "This 1984 version of the Dickens' classic `A Christmas Carol,' directed by Clive Donner, stars George C. Scott as Ebenezer Scrooge. By this time around, the challenge for the filmmaker was to take such familiar material and make it seem fresh and new again; and, happily to say, with this film Donner not only met the challenge but surpassed any expectations anyone might have had for it. He tells the story with precision and an eye to detail, and extracts performances from his actors that are nothing less than superlative, especially Scott. One could argue that the definitive portrayal of Scrooge-- one of the best known characters in literary fiction, ever-- was created by Alastair Sim in the 1951 film; but I think with his performance here, Scott has now achieved that distinction. There is such a purity and honesty in his Scrooge that it becomes difficult to even consider anyone else in the role once you've seen Scott do it; simply put, he IS Scrooge. And what a tribute it is to such a gifted actor; to be able to take such a well known figure and make it so uniquely his own is quite miraculous. It is truly a joy to see an actor ply his trade so well, to be able to make a character so real, from every word he utters down to the finest expression of his face, and to make it all ring so true. It's a study in perfection.The other members of the cast are splendid as well, but then again they have to be in order to maintain the integrity of Scott's performance; and they do. Frank Finlay is the Ghost of Jacob Marley; a notable turn, though not as memorable, perhaps, as the one by Alec Guinness (as Marley) in the film, `Scrooge.' Angela Pleasence is a welcome visage as the Spirit of Christmas Past; Edward Woodward, grand and boisterous, and altogether convincing as the Spirit of Christmas Present; and Michael Carter, grim and menacing as the Spirit of Christmas Yet To Come.David Warner hits just the right mark with his Bob Cratchit, bringing a sincerity to the role that measures up well to the standard of quality set by Scott's Scrooge, and Susannah York fares just as well as Mrs. Cratchit. The real gem to be found here, though, is the performance of young Anthony Walters as Tiny Tim; it's heartfelt without ever becoming maudlin, and simply one of the best interpretations-- and the most real-- ever presented on film.The excellent supporting cast includes Roger Rees (Fred Holywell, and also the narrator of the film), Caroline Langrishe (Janet Holywell), Lucy Gutteridge (Belle), Michael Gough (Mr. Poole) and Joanne Whalley (Fan). A flawless presentation, this version of `A Christmas Carol' sets the standard against which all others must be gauged; no matter how many versions you may have seen, watching this one is like seeing it for the first time ever. And forever after, whenever you think of Scrooge, the image your mind will conjure up will be that of George C. Scott. A thoroughly entertaining and satisfying experience, this film demands a place in the annual schedule of the holiday festivities of every home. I rate this one 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcb8080c4a8846d689aa57c35c09ce1a",
            "input": "Who is Bettie Page? I certainly didn't find out while watching this movie. From what I have gathered from other sources, Ms. Page was highly in demand in the post-world war II period as the queen of \"naughty\" pictures and that is exactly what this film depicts. I never did get to know Bettie, the woman, though. Her childhood in Tennessee was a combination of an Evangelical Christian upbringing and a sordid home life which is only hinted at. The film glosses over her personal life and gets right down to the purpose of the film, the \"naughty\" pictures. Characters are introduced and abandoned within a few frames but there is frame after frame of Bettie in her pointy bras, Bettie in her girdle and stockings, Bettie in bondage...etc. The movie slides from black and white to color every time Ms. Page visits Miami Beach. Then back to her shades of gray life in New York we go. Gretchen Mol portrays Bettie as one of the most dimwitted young ladies you could ever meet. When Bettie confides to a friend that she missed being her High School valedictorian by getting an A- rather than an A one can only assume that there were only two students in her Senior class. The most interesting part of this movie is how quaint Ms. Page's \"naughty\" photos seem in 2007. It is truly sad that seeing a woman trussed up like a pig on a spit wouldn't even get a hit on My Space or You Tube. I'm not sure if this movie was written poorly or if some crazed editor cut the thing to shreds. I would only recommend it as a source for persons studying the history of odd undergarments.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3047a8f359de45e89394dcfea71828f2",
            "input": "Lorne Michaels once again proves that he has absolutely no business producing movies.You'd think that after such dismal flicks \"Superstar\", \"Night at the Roxbury\", and \"Coneheads\", he'd start to get the notion that maybe he doesn't know what he's doing when it comes to movies (and many would argue that he doesn't know what he's doing when it comes to television, as well). Trying to make feature films out of skits that wore out their welcome the third time the were done on SNL makes no sense.I personally like Tim Meadows, and think that he would be great in the right movie. It's a shame to see a talented guy wasted in a film that features unfunny after unfunny situation, and caps it all with a dreadfully bad song and dance scene. Any laughs here will be because the movie is so bad, not because it's funny.Oh well, at least we can be thankful that there are many other tired SNL characters who will never have films done about them. It's just too bad that this one made it to the big screen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a42e3600df840209372930e707aaa5f",
            "input": "It has been so many years since I saw this but I do feel compelled to defend this gem against those who lambast it.It is interesting and unusual to observe the diversity of opinion here. That is what humour does I suppose. It is subjective. It either charges through your funny bone at 60,000 volts or it leaves you cold and wondering why you gave it the time.This show has some of Britain's best comic actors put together in a story that is silly and irreverent and the outcome is hilarious. The dialogue and visual comedy is beautifully delivered and the two leads (Cleese and Lowe) are superb together. This was made for them.I can't really say anymore other than to implore you to find this and watch it. You won't be disappointed and in a world devoid of genteel humour, this is a classic inane and harmless piece of comedic brilliance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a96699d02aa49a9a56f1cc73e7b0b11",
            "input": "Another movie to suffer without an adventure to run, no enigma to solve. Just an illness man, acting like an animal. No a good reason to take this journey. Pitt and Lewis are great actors; magnificent Michelle Forbes but a weak David Duchovny performance...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04a4523d26f54165b768b2f971c78e29",
            "input": "\"The Grudge\" is a remake of Shimizu's own series of popular Japanese horror films. Shimizu knows he is not dealing with anything new, so he does what any intelligent person would have done in his place: he forgets logic and concentrates in giving viewers a fun ride. He uses commonly known clichés associated with ghost stories but Shimizu plays with these elements in an imaginative manner. The nonlinear narrative is not a mere gimmick but an interesting way to present sequences from different perspectives. At the end, all I can say is that if the only purpose of a horror film is to scare the audience (the same way a comedy is to make people laugh), this movie succeeded with flying colors. I watched it in a theater with an audience and it was fun to see viewers go wild over this one. It probably doesn't play as well in your living room.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72e4c14f4b364b259508f6d2159c1b12",
            "input": "This movie seems on the surface to be a run of mill kids movie that parents can regretfully watch with their mostly entertained little kids. The movie seems and is mostly geared towards children yet it does not stop on this level. I watched this movie first as a young child and found it to be funny, entertaining,and heartwarming and did not see it again for several years. I watched it again recently at age 18 and found it to be almost as funny but just as heartwarming and entertaining. This movie is highly underrated and contains many messages of real life. This movie is an inspirational quest story that is made for kids yet epic in its own right. I recommend this movie to anyone of any age.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec85ab4fe43d4da1b1c5ed213004d3e6",
            "input": "Generally over rated movie which boasts a strong cast and some clever dialog and of course Dean Martin songs. Problem is Nicholas Cage, there is no chemistry between he and Cher and they are the central love story. Cher almost makes up for this with her reactions to Cage's shifting accent and out of control body language. Cage simply never settles into his role. He tries everything he can think of and comes across as an actor rather than real person and that's what's needed in a love story. Cage has had these same kind of performance problems in other roles that require more of a Jimmy Stewart type character. Cage keeps taking these roles, perhaps because he likes those kind of movies but his own energy as an actor doesn't lend itself to them, though he's gotten better at it with repeated attempts. He should leave these type of roles to less interesting actors who would fully commit to the film and spend his energy and considerable talent in more off beat roles and films where he can be his crazy interesting self.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b69238c2caf048c983a7f30821d5c06d",
            "input": "If in the 90's you're adapting a book written in the 50's, set the bloody thing in the 50's and not the '90's. See, 40 year old mores and values tend not to play as well, or ring as true, that far down the road. It's a simple rule that Hollywood habitually keeps violating. And that's the problem with this film. It should have been set in the era it was written in. You'd think that would be a no-brainer, but nooo. I'd elaborate, but bmacv's comment spells it out quite well. I'll limit my commentary to Rachel Ward. She looks like she dieted her ass completely out of existence for this role. As a result, she looks like a crack ho' on chemotherapy, and is about as sexy as a gay leather couch in drag. I found her \"I could die at any moment\" look quite disconcerting, and it greatly detracted from her supposed \"hotness\" and the \"sexual tension\" the film intended to create. Other than that, the film was quite good; a 7+ out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d0f3478b02b48f0a4968209903eee67",
            "input": "Enjoyed this 1936 film with plenty of veteran classic actors and especially, William Powell, (Dr. Lawrence Bradford), \"Mister Roberts\", who played the role as a doctor and detective. Dr. Bradford was once married to Jean Arthur, (Paula Bradford), \"Shane\", and got a divorce and still they managed to live with each other and also fight all the time. Paula wanted her husband to investigate a homicide and did everything she could to convince him it was very important. Jean Arthur plays a rather nutty type and there is plenty of 1936 Comedy and the method of murder is something you will never believe, especially with a jockey on a California Race Track. Robert Armstrong, (Nick Martel) \"King Kong\" gave a great supporting role as a bookie along with James Gleason, a detective who need the help of Dr. Bradford in order to solve this very strange murder mystery. If you see this film, just remember it was produced and directed in 1936 and the people in the audience in those days thought this was great entertainment and it really was in Those DAYS!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14474243604d478186e094c09ef762a3",
            "input": "I don't see what everyone liked about this movie. The set-up was too long and talky, and when it was done, the main character remained as flat and opaque as he had been in the first scene. After the film finally got Cusack into the eponymous hotel room, I had to wonder, well, what's going to happen here for the next hour or so to keep me engaged. The answer: not much, just John Cusack having a long, drawn-out, mental breakdown.Maybe if the Cusack character had more depth . . maybe if his freak-out were a more thorough reworking of his everyday life . . . maybe if the film had either better developed its half-baked themes about loss and faith or had not tacked them on in the first place . . . maybe if the film had made a choice to be either psychological horror or thrill-ride horror and had fully embraced one of these styles . . . I dunno. All I do know is that I saw this movie with two other horror buffs and none of us much liked it.Except for the disquieting episode on the hotel ledge, the alarming crazy lady with the hammer, and the so-stupid-it-was-fun crypt keeper in the air duct, all three of which account for no more than five minutes of screen time, this film was a bore.By the way, this story seems to steal ideas from The Shining and use them here to much less powerful effect. Is Stephen King now reduced to stealing ideas from himself?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5edc29d153fb48d7bcbe82d2ef93627b",
            "input": "\"Pandemonium\" is a horror movie spoof that comes off more stupid than funny. Believe me when I tell you, I love comedies. Especially comedy spoofs. \"Airplane\", \"The Naked Gun\" trilogy, \"Blazing Saddles\", \"High Anxiety\", and \"Spaceballs\" are some of my favorite comedies that spoof a particular genre. \"Pandemonium\" is not up there with those films. Most of the scenes in this movie had me sitting there in stunned silence because the movie wasn't all that funny. There are a few laughs in the film, but when you watch a comedy, you expect to laugh a lot more than a few times and that's all this film has going for it. Geez, \"Scream\" had more laughs than this film and that was more of a horror film. How bizarre is that?*1/2 (out of four)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98d737934f83424fb61721aec0f90aaf",
            "input": "This group of English pros are a pleasure to watch. The supporting cast could form a series of their own. It's a seen before love tiangle between the head of surgery, his wife, and a new pretty boy surgery resident. Only the superior acting skills of Francesca Annis, Michael Kitchen, and the sexy Robson Greene lift this from the trash category to a very enjoyable \"romp\". The only quibble is that it's hard to accept that the smoldering Francesca Annis would fall in love and actually marry Michael Kitchen, who like me, is hardly an international, or even a British sex symbol. You can readily understand why Robson Green would light her fire, with apologies to the \"Doors\". The guy who almost steals the show with a great \"laid back\" performance is Owen's father David Bradley. Watch him in \"The Way We Live Now\", in a completely different performance, to get an idea of his range. Daniela Nardini as Kitchen's secretary, sometime sex toy, is hard to forget as the spurned mistress who makes Kitchen sorry he ever looked at her great body. Conor Mullen, and Julian Rhind-Tutt, as Green's sidekick surgery buddies as I've said could have their own series. They are that good. The whole thing is a great deal of fun, and I heartily recommend it, and thank you imdbman for letting the paying customers have their say in this fascinating venue.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e32b59aea0c4f308bc0107ff92299ea",
            "input": "Why take a show that millions of us watched and loved as children and make a complete joke of it? They ask why Hollywood isn't making the money it used to. Because they put out garbage and pay actors huge amounts of money to be garbage men and ask us to pay $10 to see their garbage. The TV show was what it was, good people in bad situations where the good IL' boys come out on top. It wasn't Gone with the Wind but it was fun. This movie is garbage! Hollywood can't come up with anything original so they take something that was good and ruin it for some $$$$. I only hope that this movie makes 10x's less than it cost to make. The only one's to have any fun with this crap are the guys who got to drive the General Lee. The audience is the victim.Don't see it, watch the reruns of the TV show instead. They still hold up 20 years later.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ea90c4b12c54451a8f16af013566f48",
            "input": "Granted I had seen some \"Speed Racer\", but I never really watched it and I had also seen other shows some featuring these characters dressed as birds who flew a ship called the Phoenix and another revolving around a space ship that looked like a giant ocean vessel and it flew backwards at times for some reason and was really dark and hard to understand for someone who was maybe five. This one though I watched nearly every episode and the amazing to me at the time was that this show had some resolution to it. It actually ended, the bad guys done in unlike nearly every American cartoon where nothing really concludes such as the last episode of the generation one Transformers that ended with Galvatron and this new bad guy vowing to get the Autobots, Dungeons and Dragons with the kids never making it home, with GI Joe with Cobra still out there ready to try again and so on and so forth. This one did end and did feature a rather cool robot that got new weapons as the show progressed, it was a bit bland to begin with as it could not fly and had only a few really cool weapons. As it went on he got a cool shooting fist like the one Android 16 used against Cell in Dragonball Z, then that weapon evolved to include razors that shot out. Then the big robot even got wings so he could fly and even more weapons were incorporated into the wings. He would also get a couple of allies in a female robot and a rather funny one called Bobo in America. The villains not only consisted of Dr. Hell, but a really weird person that was half man half woman and a dude with a flying head. Interesting show and it was kind of nice seeing a conclusion.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61503414b21d49ce81379c9acdf7acab",
            "input": "Let's set one thing straight: this movie does not seek to redefine the genre, it's not Dr. Strangelove o Young Frankenstein. It's a silly flick, with three great female leads (can't remember any other comedy with similar characteristics), Rachel Dracht and Amy Poehler from SNL and indie queen Parker Posey, charming as ever. The story is basic: the three gals were \"losers\" in college, and are still after wards it. Poehler is a dog trainer (who can't even get a date with a blind guy), Posey is an assistant for a senator (who \"hasn't been touched by a man since Clinton was in office\"... i catched that one several minutes later... i'm a little slow, OK!), and Dracht has a gay fiancée (Seth Meyers from SNL, funny). They have to prevent the \"uncool\" daughter of the senator (the always cute Amber Tamblyn from the TV series \"Joan of Arcadia\") to embarrass her during spring break. So of course they have to go to watch over her, and some hilarity ensues. All in all, a light, simple comedy, quite short, and quite enjoyable",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df51976b29f346598a552fca0258112d",
            "input": "On paper this looked like a great concept: Average guy on the rebound dates up tight bookish museum curator, who is really a hot Superhero who saves the world on a regular basis. However, director Ivan Reitman and writer Don Payne (of the \"Simpson's\") almost fatally miscalculate in having their hero G-Girl (played by striking Uma Thurman) come off as a total nut job as both Superhero and secret identity persona Jenny Johnson. The movie even cops to this in a conversation between Jenny and Matt Saunders (Luke Wilson) following his rescue by G-Girl from the Statue of Liberty. Jenny curiously asks Matt what was G-Girl like. Matt replies, \"She's kind of nutty…\" I think the intent was to have Jenny (Thurman) be this lonely young woman, who has no one in her life, isolated by her great physical powers. Thurman does the best she can, but her Jenny is a terrifying mood swing in dire need of Prozac. Luke Wilson is way too breezy in the role reversal of boyfriend and superhero girl friend.\"My Super Ex-Girlfriend\" is also a victim of bad timing, coming on the tail end of \"Superman Returns\" which plays Superhero straight up, so to speak. With all its quirks and inconsistent writing I still thought \"My Super Ex-Girlfriend\" was funny and enjoyed the movie. Given that this is an Ivan Reitman movie, this could have been a lot better. Reitman starts with a great premise, and really squanders it. First off, we all love the hero. Here neither Jenny nor G-Girl is really all that likable. This is surprising for Uma Thurman, who is normally a charismatic and powerful presence. In the beginning her Jenny/ G-Girl is just plain weird. Shocking. Because if there is a woman who can play a Superhero, she is Thurman—she looks great. Only toward the end does her Jenny become more sympathetic, instead of caricature. Although \"My Super Ex\" is not a straight Superhero story, rather a romantic comedy of sorts, it does not provide what every Superhero mythology requires—a great super villain. Here we have Professor Bedlam aka Barry (Eddie Izzard) who really is evil lite. He is no Lex Luthor. No plans for Global domination. Bedlam rather Barry does hold a grudge against G-Girl, and expectedly it has to do with their shared past. What is bizarre you don't know who you would rather spend time with—Bedlam or G-Girl? Luke Wilson's Matt is just \"some dude\" who happens to hook up with the psycho superhero. One of the annoying things he does is that he confides in his repugnant loser friend Vaughn (Rainn Wilson doing a bad whacked out impersonation). Wilson sometimes plays it a little too dense, and this dilutes his likable charm. This does however work, in the comic sex scene with Jenny. Matt while dating Jenny/ G-Girl realizes that he is in love with his co-worker Hannah (perky Anna Faris). So how does Matt break up with G-Girl? Well, it's not pretty and for the most part hilarious.Dramatic Superhero movies work. Romantic comedies with chemistry work. What may be inherently difficult are Superhero satires disguised as romantic comedies. Everyone loves the hero. However, hero nut job? Maybe not. With all Uma Thurman's talent she is unable to accomplish this convincingly. And she does not get sufficient support from Reitman and Payne. Thurman and Wilson have enough charm and presence to survive their narrative failings. \"My Super Ex-Girlfriend\" is fun and funny. Though given all involved, the movie could have been super.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb1e87e285f247bdae0e7b99cee152f7",
            "input": "This delighted audiences at a number of film festivals, and it is not hard to see why. Director Yang Zhang, with the help of some very nice work by the three principle actors, Xu Zhu as the father, Master Liu; Quanxin Pu as the elder son, Da Ming; and especially Wu Jiang as the irrepressible and lovable younger son, Er Ming, spins a tale that will warm the coldest heart.The film starts with a man taking a shower in an automated booth in the middle of Beijing. He puts some money in a slot, opens the door, takes off his clothes and puts some of them on a conveyor belt to be cleaned, steps into the shower and gets cleaned with brushes and squirts of water and soap as though he's a car at the car wash. This is the future symbolically speaking, and the old bathhouse we will see in the next scene is the past. Agrarian China is giving way to industrial China.Pollution? Cultural revolution hang-over? Industrialization blues? No way. What we have here is a celebration of people and their kindness and love for one another, a celebration of goodness in the hearts of men. Yet I wonder how the Chinese government views this film. On the one hand, it clearly presents a pleasant view of China and its people. It is stringently nonpolitical without criticism of the present regime expressed or implied. Yet there is the slightest sense that the good old ways are going to be replaced by something that may not be as good. I think Yang Zhang had the wisdom to just let that be as it may. Tell a story about old men at the bathhouse where they get back rubs and massages, where they tell tall tales and reminisce about the good old days, where they can relax and play Chinese chess and stage cricket fights, where the Master is a spry and wise old guy and his assistant is his son, who may be retarded or autistic, but who does his job with glee and an infectious spirit of fun and good will.Enter back on the scene the older son, Da Ming, who is polished, well groomed and taciturn. He is uncomfortable with what he sees as the unsophisticated behavior of his father and brother. He represents modern China with his tie and his briefcase, his cell phone and his education. He has only returned because he thought his father was dying. When he sees that this is not true, he packs his bags and is set to return to his wife and his career. But then a crisis ensues and it is during this crisis that Da Ming sees the value of the natural, people-centered life that his father and his brother have been living.And so Yang Zhang reconciles the old and the new, and does so in such a charming manner that I will not object, especially since his style is so neat and so carefully expressed. One of the nice things he does that I miss in most movies is the way he dovetails the subplots within the larger story so that they are resolved before the picture ends. The bathhouse regular who sings \"O sole mio\" in the bathhouse as the water showers down upon him, much to the delight of Er Ming, finds that he can't sing in public because of stage fright. Near the end of the film he loses his stage fright and sings thanks to some inspired help from Er Ming. And the bathhouse regular who is losing his wife because...well, he tells a tale to Master Liu before he confesses the real reason. But Liu understands and again before the movie is over, husband and wife are reconciled.This kind of \"happy ending\" movie-making is unusual in today artistic and international films, or in almost any film directed at adults. Some happy endings are so contrived as to embarrass not only their contrivers but their audiences. And some are so blatantly condescending that the audience is offended. Here however the audience is delighted.See this especially for the comedic performance by Wu Jiang whose warm effervescence overcomes any handicap his character may have.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d41b6c161db44689187da8e1bdddd94",
            "input": "Its one of those stereotypical mtv generation dance movies, and I do not see where all this 'its not that bad' rubbish is coming from. The acting is terrible, it follows exactly the same storyline as all the other 'dancing' movies out there. Its terrible! The name should scream don't watch. 'How she move.' Since when can movie titles ignore grammar? At least some dance movies had half decent dance scenes, these ones don't even deserve a watch. I give it a 1 out of 10, just because there is no zero. I seriously implore anyone with an IQ of over 60 not to watch this, and not to waste your money. The 1.6/10 should tell it all. This movie should not have even be made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c047781819d44a369f7a5267b4855d56",
            "input": "I knew it wasn't gunna work out between me and D-wars from the moment we met. First its title was lazy. D war. Like writing out Dragon was too much for them. Also... you really can't be that blatant with your title unless your Blue Monkey. Blue Monkey can do whatever the hell it wants. The second sign of a rocky relationship between us was the story's insane progression. Here's the film, dreamy reporter guy reports on big snake tracks, flashes back to a time he and dad wandered into what must have been the competition for the store in gremlins and dreamy kid reporter finds a box that glows. Old shop keep reveals several terrible truths. That Bauraki a supposedly evil snake was cheated out of his chance to be a god. tells the kid that he's a reincarnated warrior and that somewhere in LA is his reincarnated lover and gives him a junk piece of jewelry. Shop keep also reveals that despite his obvious whiteness he's a 500 year old Asian. fifteen years later dreamy reporter remembers this perfectly and starts acting half crazy trying to find this random girl. cgi hijinks follow and in the last ten minutes my brain melts out of my nose. Why? Continue on dear reader if you have the Balls.so Sarah, the reincarnated lover, has her own flashbacks. I have the benefit of having an Asian best friend and in the scene where she starts to freak out and make a bunch of posters with Asian characters on them he tells me that whoever made this movie has no idea what their doing. Its a Korean legend and she's reincarnated from a Korean princess but everything is in Chinese. Later that night her dragon tat starts to hurt, she calls the police cause it looks like she's having a heart attack. See, in this mixed up crazy world they apparently handle heart attacks differently because the next time we see her she's locked in her room with a guard outside and a nurse claims she's crazy. I have a new phobia now, and its that if i'm ever in trouble the first responders will just assume i'm crazy. I have another point of contention with my harsh mistress, Dwar. There is a scene when Patrick Dempsey Jr (Dreamy Reporter) is in a café' with sassy black friend. In the scenes prior Miffed Near divinity Bauraki has killed an elephant, slithered through a suburb and killed one of Sarah's friends. See, people were afraid to come out after 9-11 happened but we must have all toughened up after that deciding coffee and pastries were worth risking our lives for. Business as usual, no way a giant snake will stop me from getting my caffeine on. If i stay inside and fear for my life the terrorists and serpentine divinities win. After being given a satisfying dragon on Helicopter battle my cruel lover Dwar treats me to a pi$$ and vinegar filled scene to end it all with. Bauraki has a fortress of his own and its right under LA i guess. They don't really say but Dreamy Reporter and Sarah get knocked out in a car crash that would kill lesser men and when they wake up, yep dragon palace. some retarded dialog later a good dragon snake god pops out of nowhere and the snakes wrestle/make love whatever. And i'm not kidding good snake out of nowhere. Maybe you think i'm blowing it out of proportion, i'm not there is no mention of this thing in the movie then suddenly... there! Few seconds later and good dragon becomes dragon god, sets Baurki on fire, Sarah turns into a ghost and goes with Dragon-god, dreamy reporter left in the middle of nowhere roll credits... thank godNow our relationship as rocky as it was had its good times. There was a guy that look like shredder from turtles and talked exactly like a tuskan raider from star wars. I'll call him Tuskan Shredder. He could do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted to it just could never be useful. He could walk through a wall in a scene where that wasn't helpful. He could go in your dreams when that wouldn't do any good and he could light ten random soldier guys on fire but not when it mattered. He was also allergic to touching that junk jewelry. I like him cause he was hit by a car twice in the same scene and made fantastic tuskan raider noises. The actors for the most part were great... if great somehow meant terrible. Jason Behr, whom i thought was awesome in Roswell i slowly find out can only act one way and that's pretentious, spacey and Patrick Dempsey\"ish\".The one thing i love about this filthy prostitute Dwars is its lead actor, Bauraki. That Giant snake acted his heart out. I'd dare to say that he was better at playing a cgi serpentine demi-god of evil then John Barrymore was at playing Richard the III or Hamlet. There was emotion in every scene, stealing the thunder from his lesser mortal supporting cast. When he ate an elephant i felt like no one past, present or future would ever eat an elephant with as much feeling. He was more then an actor, he was a force of nature and he put his heart and soul into every second of this cursed project. Yes damn it, my favorite actor in this film was a cgi snake. I've got the balls to admit that, do you?Here's to hoping Bauraki get's more work and isn't type cast, that Jason Behr finds a range of emotion other then dreamy stare, and that i never have to watch Blue Monkey again. So, D-War its over. I want my CDs back and let's just be friends",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab05a95f6e264303a8e3e30cf1365d84",
            "input": "As a South African, it's an insult to think that someone was actually paid to produce this nonsense!Despite the fact that the director was one of the writers for the original Shaka Zulu mini, this \"addition\" to the series is appalling! The original series was based on historical facts about a man who was a great strategist, leader and warrior. A man who played a large role in shaping the history of local tribes in South Africa.The plot of this film, however, is nothing but hogwash, scraped from the bottom of the barrel by a writer that has failed to impress since the mid-nineties.While Omar Sharif and Henry Cele are good actors, what is David Hasselhoff doing here, rescuing drowning slaves with his red buoy and bleached smile?I kept expecting blond, busty women to appear out of nowhere and run across the screen in their tiny red bathing suits, for no apparent reason. Not that this would've been any more bizarre than the fantastical plot line that was probably dreamed up after 10 pints of beer at a fancy dress party, where someone's caveman costume inspired the writer to return to an African theme for his next \"blockbuster\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a9b1092323a4c1fa71fc8d6d1fe00af",
            "input": "I really wanted to like this movie - the location shots were mostly filmed in Pittsburgh and the trailer had some wonderful photography. But, even for a filmed cartoon, it was a really badly-made movie. The continuity and pacing were both simply awful. The best bits in the movie are under the ending credits, so it's (almost) worth sticking it out to the end (though, oddly, it does pick up a little over the last half hour or so).When the best performance in a movie is by Andy Dick, you know there's got to be a problem...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5dd4b158e264239a58b9f9a31a4b22b",
            "input": "What's inexplicable? Firstly, the hatred towards this movie. It may not be the greatest movie of all time, but gimme a break, it got 11 oscars for a reason, it made EIGHTEEN HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS for a reason. It's a damn good movie. Which brings to the other inexplicable aspect of it. I have no idea whatsoever why this movie left such an impression on me when I saw it in theaters. I've rewatched it on TV and video, and it had none of the impact it had when I saw it on the big screen (twice, or maybe three times, actually). But that might be it, the appeal of it. It's a Movie, yes, capital M there, it's an Epic, it's a spectacle in the order of Gone With the Wind or Ben Hur. Now, Ben Hur and Gone With the Wind seem kinda hokey to me, with the hammy acting and excessive melodrama. Not that Titanic has none of that. Well, the acting was actually very good. The melodrama was quite heavy-handed at times.But the reason Titanic works is that it's such an emotional ride. I usually enjoy movies that stimulate the mind, or give me a visual thrill. This movie isn't exactly dumb, but it's not cerebral at all. The visual thrills are simply means to an end, to fuel the emotions of the audience. I didn't cry when Bambi's mom died, I don't react to tearjerkers. But this is a tearjerker to the power of ten million, an emotional rollercoaster that, if it were a regular one, would make Buzz Aldrin scream like a little girl. And I'm sure that if you see it on video and have decided that you hate it, and have a ready supply of cynicism, then you can thoroughly dislike this movie. But if you let that disbelief suspend just a bit, if you give this epic melodrama the benefit of the doubt, you'll enjoy it completely. And look at the top ten grossing films of all time. Is a single one of them bad? Is a single one of them worth a score of 1 out of 10? No, not even The Phantom Menace. And this movie made 1.8 BILLION DOLLARS worldwide. It can't be bad. Not possible. 10/10.p.s. how can anyone even consider comparing this to spiderman? spiderman was a fun movie, but it was a total 9/11 kneejerk that caused it to gross as much as it did. it simply wasn't anything all that special. no one will remember it in 50 years. but i'm pretty sure Titanic will be remembered.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c379e9426c314afeba8f6d577bc1bc37",
            "input": "The film is worth watching only if you stop it after half an hour. It starts of with funny conversations in a bar and makes one expect a good, funny story is to come. Well, I can tell you it will not come. It will deteriorate in minutes into a movie that challenges your patience as well as your feelings of shame for the actors to an extend you will probably not be pleased to witness. In an interview I heard that the director wanted to express in this film the feeling of a loss of identity that, according to him, the majority of the people in this globalizing world experience. I was amazed to hear that. Am I living in the same world he lives in? OK a lot of people do walk around in the same clothes as mine and listen to the same music and all, but that doesn't make me feel like I am losing my identity. What does Khrzhanosvky think, that we are not more than the clothes we wear and the movies we watch? Am I shortsighted or is he?Well my vote: the good start of the movie saves it from getting a 1, a decent 4 is my conclusion.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a45f4a0546c4796b04ac5f03f2e3c5b",
            "input": "It is not the same as the other films about dancing. A few normal people found themselves from dancing. Unlike the dancing films in Hollywood, the characters in this film are not handsome or hot young people. They are someone that you may see everyday in your offices. They are some depressed about their lives and finally find themselves and their dreams from dancing. This touches me very deeply.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e80c9b77f5ed4ce581ddf14706512e7b",
            "input": "I remember that i was a child when i first saw this movie, it was my first horror movie (maybe that's the reason why i can still remember some parts of it). I don't remember much about acting, nude scenes or other things but i do remember a male has head blown up with a grenade, a male dismembered over a tree and a male run down by truck and shot in head :) (Todd Schaefer, Kenny Johnson and Kevin McParland). I also remember the last scene when Jennifer McAllister riped of the killer stomach to get the keys of the truck. It's a movie that gives you the creep and it's worth a look. But where do i find it? How can i download it?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03695a0a0c6a492d916a8dccfd804964",
            "input": "I liked this movie a lot. It really intrigued me how Deanna and Alicia became friends over such a tragedy. Alicia was just a troubled soul and Deanna was so happy just to see someone after being shot. My only complaint was that in the beginning it was kind of slow and it took awhile to get to the basis of things. Other than that it was great.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c28f4a8a23814ed5b87b092ac3c1834d",
            "input": "Now either you like Mr Carrey's humour or you don't. Me, Myself and Irene had audiences both walking out in droves and, on the other hand, cheering and collapsing in puddles of mirth. Bruce Almighty is a bit more mainstream, but you have been warned.If you're not sure, watch the trailer. I saw the trailer three times and still laughed at the same gags when I saw the film. If you don't find the sight of a dog putting the seat down after using the loo funny, don't bother with the movie.Carrey, a reporter stuck in a rut covering 'lighter news' berates God when the whole of his life seems to be going to pot. God takes up the challenge and asks Carrey if he can do better. Carrey gets into the swing of having all of God's powers by making his girlfriend (Jennifer Aniston)'s breasts bigger, getting himself promoted, and answering everyone's prayers by single stroke computer commands.This is not a highbrow movie or even that memorable, but it is very well made within it's very limited intent, provides almost continuous laughs to Carrey fans, and even any religious cheesiness is likely to be inoffensive to all but the most narrow-minded god-squadders and anti-god-squadders.On the more thoughtful level, the film tempts us to speculate about Carrey's own career - stuck in his 'comedy' typecasting he has largely failed to make an impression as a serious actor even after winning two Golden Globes. His most accomplished 'straight' role, the Man on the Moon, is less well known that his comedy romps - or The Truman Show (on which the Academy heaped three nominations whilst bypassing Carrey).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9cb6d7c6ef54e629f8649de67c462e0",
            "input": "I just watched Holly along with another movie about trafficking and child sexual exploitation called Trade at Film by the Sea international film festival. I have to say that Holly blew Trade out of the water. Holly is a powerful and amazing film on many different levels. From purely an artistic and cinematic perspective, it is amazing. The sound-mixing, camera angles, directing and acting are all spot on. Additionally, the way it handles the subject matter is tasteful and non-exploitative. It presents the issue of child sexual exploitation in a way that is both educational and accurate. The filmmakers paid an exquisite amount of attention to detail, truly capturing the nuances of the epidemic of child sexual exploitation and trafficking. Too often when dealing with a subject matter of this kind, it is tempting to shock the audience with graphic scenes of rape, and violence. Holly is able to achieve all of this without falling into that typical Hollywood trend. I've had the pleasure of seeing Holly at two separate film festivals, once in the US and once in Netherlands. I can honestly say that I have never seen audiences more moved. Just listening to conversations after the screening, people are asking what they personally can do to fight child sexual exploitation. I highly recommend it to everyone, both for its cinematic value and its subject matter.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e124032156f49118d1a2e807693f6c3",
            "input": "There's never a dull moment in this movie. Wonderful visuals, good actors, and a classical story of the fight of good and evil. Mostly very funny, sometimes even scary. A true classic, a movie everybody should see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac577b13a00a4ffe983a7d7e52ffeb8b",
            "input": "It was in 1988, when I saw \"The Ronnie and Nancy Show\" for the first time (on Austrian television). At that time, I was already a very big fan of Spitting Image (since when it won the bronze rose of the Montreux Film Festival in 1986). Of course I recorded every show on tape and watched it again and again - especially \"The Ronnie and Nancy Show\". I remember that scene when Ronnie stood in front of a painting of Abraham Lincoln (thinking it was a mirror) and said to himself \"I need a shave\". Or most amusing of all, when he played ball with his dog - but vice-versa!It's such a shame, that Spitting Image seems to fall into oblivion; it was one of the most fantastic and most intelligent made TV-shows ever. Compared to other satirical broadcasts it was definitely the best of all. Well, almost 20 years have passed since then, and I wish I could see the show again. Is it possible to purchase it from someone... somewhere?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66349c4782b2424d80006dffd7348381",
            "input": "The first thing I have to say is that I own Jake Speed. I've seen it at least 10 times. This movie is one of the most fun movies ever made. The film begins with Margaret (Karen Kopins) trying to find her sister. Her sister was kidnapped in Paris and the family has heard nothing. Along comes Jake Speed (Wayne Crawford), telling her exactly where her sister is and making an offer to find her. Jake Speed is a hero. He doesn't work for money because he just wants to help and have a good adventure. His partner (Dennis Christopher) follows him around and writes their adventures into novels. This film is a great adventure. It's hilarious, it's action-packed, it's just great. I guess it's a cult film with a very small cult following. Crawford is perfect as Jake Speed and throws out some one-liners that you'll never forget. Kopins and Christopher are also good as the girl and the sidekick, respectively. John Hurt, the guy who's stomach blew up in Alien, plays the devilish, pervertish villian which just adds to the fun. In many ways, this film is similar to Indiana Jones, in some ways it's similar to James Bond films. Maybe it should have been called Indiana Bond but whatever it's title is, it's a very enjoyable film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcfda43ceed645b1a3c1684935c11f98",
            "input": "***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Packed with memorable moments (such as the quote above, immortalized by Primus), Deliverance tells the story of four guys who take a trip to the wild woods to go white water rafting and get away from the big city for a while only to find that their fun soon takes a bad turn. This is not a Hollywood film. There are virtually no special effects whatsoever, the setting is extremely realistic, and nothing at all is sugarcoated or made pretty. The city boys look like city boys, and even the tough guy Louis, portrayed with precision by Burt Reynolds, is clearly at the mercy of the wild on this trip. This is a perfect example of a what-if film. What if a few friends went river rafting in an area of the woods that none of them were familiar with, and ended up desperately trying to avoid being tried and convicted for murders that they were forced to commit to save their own lives?There is clearly a very strong element of the film that deals with societal and class structure and the relationship (or lack thereof) between rural and urban peoples. When the four guys arrive in the woods early in the film, they clearly do not quite know how to interact with the people who live out there, and they speak to them as though they are unsure whether they will understand or be able to communicate. This communication block is most memorably illustrated in the dueling banjoes scene, in which they are trying to gas up the car and truck and get someone to drive the vehicles downriver for them. While Drew and the obviously inbred and probably mentally deficient boy on the porch are dueling with their guitar and banjo (one of the best scenes in the film), Louis is having some difficulty buying the gas, and Bobby makes a comment about genetic deficiencies and how pathetic it all is. When the boy turns away from Drew, who had offered to shake his hand after their stupendous jam session, Bobby tells him to give the kid a couple bucks, knowing that none of them are quite sure how to react.This is the kind of thing that we see in Deliverance that sets up so much of the tension that is to follow. This great scene where a lot of fun was had (including the funniest 'redneck dancing' scene until O Brother, Where Art Thou?) ended with everyone awkwardly unsure what to do around each other. These people are apples and oranges, and they live by completely different rules of life. The people that Louis, Bobby, Drew and Ed encounter in the hills grew up separated from modern society and modern laws, and live by the rules of nature, which do not include thou shalt not kill. Confused by their awkward behavior, the four friends set out on the river, hoping for the weirdness to end and for the adventure to begin.(spoilers) When they are briefly separated from each other and Ed and Bobby run into the hillbillies beside the river who quickly turn unpleasant, the uncertainty about the way that these people live - which was established by the scene above - comes into play to create the most tension during the scene. I think that a good sign of a quality thriller like this is that the tragic element of the film, namely the assaults and actual murders, takes up a very small amount of screen time but remain some of the most memorable parts of the film. There is no gratuitous violence here, it's all there for an obvious purpose and it achieves a startlingly powerful effect.The move is about the violent clash of two very different kinds of people, and what can happen when they inadvertently find themselves at war with each other. The trip down the rest of the river after the assault, which takes up the majority of the film, delivers some spectacularly effective tension, and keeps you on the edge of your seat while not bombarding you with so much happening that you become numb. It is surprisingly effective when we find out that Ed may very well have killed the wrong man up there on the cliff, and the tension in the film doesn't even let up when the three surviving members of the team reach the bottom of the river, because they deliver a questionable explanation to the police about what happened up there on the river and why the deputy's brother-in-law is missing.This is a very disturbing film, which is a testament to its success, because it's pretty obvious that a film like this is meant to shake people up a little bit. The hillbillies are the human (i.e. more realistic) version of the sub-human rednecks seen in childish but fairly similar films like Gator Bait and Gator Bait 2, neither of which could possibly ever be compared to a timeless film like Deliverance. When we follow these four men through their fateful weekend in the woods, the natural element is so real and we get to know the men so well and in such a subtle fashion that it's almost like we, as individuals of the audience, are really a fifth member of the team. It's not often that a film is able to come across that way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31eb239cfe7d4cf3961fe13827f937da",
            "input": "\"A Town Called Hell\" (aka \"A Town Called Bastard\"), a British/Spanish co-production, was made on the heels of Clint Eastwood's success in the Italian made \"Man With No Name\" trilogy. The template used in most of these films was to hire recognizable American actors, whose careers were largely in decline and dub their voices. This film is no exception except for the fact that they used some British actors as well.It's difficult to summarize the plot, but here goes. The story opens with rebels or whatever, led by Robert Shaw and Marin Landau raiding a church and killing everyone inside, including the priest. Fast forward to the subject town a few years later where the Shaw character is masquerading as a priest. The mayor of the town (Telly Savalas) is a brutal leader who thinks nothing of meting out justice with his gun.Throw into the mix a grieving widow Alvira (Stella Stevens) who is searching for her husband's killer. Add to this the fact that she rides around in a hearse lying dead like in a coffin for God knows why. After the mayor is murdered by his henchman La Bomba (Al Lettieri) the town is invaded by a federale Colonel (Landau) in search of a rebel leader (I'm sorry but the name escapes me). The Colonel takes over the town and begins summarily executing the townsfolk to force them to reveal the identity of the leader.Even though they opened the film side by side, its difficult to tell from the dialog that the Landau and Shaw characters know each other. A blind man (Fernando Rey) claims he can identify the rebel leader by touching his face. He does so and..............................................I'm sure the principals regretted making this film. It's just plain awful and well deserving of my dreaded \"1\" rating. Shaw spends most of the film fixating his trademark stare at whomever is handy. Even Landau can't salvage this film. The beautiful Ms. Stevens is totally wasted here too. Having just made Peckinpah's \"The Ballad of Cable Hogue\" the previous year, I found it odd that she would appear in this mess of a movie. Savalas made several of these pictures, (\"Pancho Villa\" and \"Horror Express\" come to mind) during he pre-Kojak period.Michael Craig is also in it somewhere as a character called \"Paco\".Fernando Rey appeared in many of these \"westerns\" although he would emerge to play the villain in the two \"French Connection\" films. Al Lettieri would also emerge with a role in \"The Godfather\" (1972) and go on to other memorable roles before his untimely death in 1975.In all fairness, the version I watched ran only 88 minutes rather than the longer running times of 95 or 97 minutes listed on IMDb, however I can't see where an extra 7 or 8 minutes would make much difference.Avoid this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-510090395a784bd68257e3df8352ed52",
            "input": "This film is the worst film I have ever seen. The story line is weak - I couldn't even follow it. The acting is high-schoolish. The sound track is irritating. The attempts at humor are not. The editing is horrible. The credits are even slow - I would be embarrassed to have my name associated with this waste of film. Don't waste your time even thinking about this attempt at acting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12daf33e3fc149e89ce545d4562d8bfc",
            "input": "Let's begin with that theme song sung by Christopher Cross. The song is \"If you get caught between the moon and New York City.\" It's a great theme and song even after all these years, it never gets tiring. It really is a great song about New York City as well. Anyway, the great Dudley Moore CBE stars as a spoiled drunken millionaire who is engaged to Jill Eikenberry's character in the film. Jill would later star on LA Law. Anyway, he is served by his wonderful British butler, Sir John Gielgud OM who won an Academy Award for his performance in the film as Best Supporting Actor. Arthur falls in love with Liza Minnelli's character who is perfect in this film besides her performance in her Oscar winning role in Cabaret. No, Liza doesn't get to sing. She plays a diner waitress. Anyway I love Geraldine Fitzgerald as the Bach matriarch of the family who decides the family's fortune. Anyway, she is fabulous and should have gotten an academy award nomination herself for Best Supporting Actress. Barney Martin best known as Jerry's dad on Seinfeld plays Liza's dad. He's great too. The movie was well-written, acted, and delivered to the audience who wanted more of it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aad95f10f64a41728c2e0682b9ec56db",
            "input": "I attempted to watch this film without being able to really sit through it, for while it is suppose to have a \"good\" message; the problem is that it is obviously produced according to one particular interpretation of scripture. An interpretation, in my opinion, will mislead a lot of people. In addition, I am a movie maniac and the acting in this film was completely unacceptable. Never before had I wished for a negative score to rate a movie. So, if you wish to be preached to incessantly by those without authority, then by all means, get this film. This comment is also a warning to people who like or love scifi, because the title will deceive a lot of people as well. This was an unfortunate film, because the basic idea had possibilities and those possibilities were squandered. The film's only redeemable quality is that it did make me realize that the character in the \"Time Machine\" probably should have shown a little more moral outrage at the odd behavior by those in his future.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8343228cc5242ffb38da9857ad4168a",
            "input": "Cool idea... botched writing, botched directing, botched editing, botched acting. Sorta makes me wish I could play God and strike everyone involved in making this film with several bolts of lightning.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-305110ab86884010a6a142167b99f77f",
            "input": "Redline is a knockoff of Fast & Furious, without any of the redeeming qualities. It doesn't need to have a convoluted plot with multiple twists and surprises, but it needs SOMETHING! This is the equivalent of a porn film, where the storyline and dialogue consist of 60 seconds at the beginning and the same at the end. Except that this is worse, because you don't get your money's worth. Mind-numbingly boring, impossible race sequences, and a terrible waste of expensive beautiful cars, which almost acquire negative points for having appeared in this movie. Sure, she's hot, but who's that desperate for an on screen female? I feel like the director sat there with a hat full of dialogue and plot snippets, and shook an 8 ball every time they switched scenes. No serious person who races or knows anything about it would watch this movie and enjoy the race scenes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c435f1df4895470aae40581a363b0fd3",
            "input": "This movie is a half-documentary...and it is pretty interesting....This is a good movie...based on the true story of how a bunch of norwegian saboturs managed to stop the heavy water production in Rukjan, Norway and the deliverance of the rest of the heavy water to Germany.This movie isn't perfect and it could have been a bit better... the best part of the movie is that some of the saboturs are played by themselves!!!If you're interested in history of WWII and film this is a movie that's worth a look!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1490c09551d247dfa79a8d726a486e6f",
            "input": "How could 4 out of 16 prior voters give this movie a 10? How could more than half the prior voters give it a 7 or higher? Who is voting here? I can only assume it is primarily kids -- very young kids. The fact is that this is a bad movie in every way. The story is stupid; the acting is hard to even think of as acting; the characters are characterless; and the dialogue is terrible. I saw this one rainy afternoon on the Sci-Fi channel. In the sad event that it is ever rebroadcast, I suggest you read a book instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c229a5a44990411e9919c4cbf9a86d71",
            "input": "Wow, praise IMDb and Google, for I have been trying to remember the name of this f'ing awesome movie for over 15 years now. Slaughter High, man! Hells yeah!I'm not going to bore you with a plot summary, and actors, and yadda yadda yadda, 'cause you all know what's up. That's why you're here anyway. What I will do, however, is explain the fond memory I have of this quintessential 80's D-Movie slasher joint.In 1987, when I was around the age of 7, my father used to rent all these horror movies. Would he care that his kids were watching them with him? No. So, at that young age i saw Slaughter High. What I saw in that movie stuck with me big time. I haven't seen it since, but I remember to this day most of the ridiculous kills in the movie. For example, the post-sex scene (why is there a metal bed in a school?) gets electrocuted. Or, the guy being drowned in a cess pool. Come on! My personal favorite, though...the exploding stomach from the tainted beer. Amazing! How can you honestly hate on a movie where one of the characters finds a beer in an abandoned school, like, 10 or 15 years later and thinks it would be a good idea to drink it? Then his stomach explodes? What!? And that great line: Let's take my car...it always starts. Classic crap all the way. I mean, I look back now, almost 20 years later, and laugh at it. But when I was 7, I was scared sh!tless. That jester hat (or was it a mask?) that the killer rocks throughout freaked me the f*ck out!All in all, yes, a crappy movie. But for nostalgia purposes and for humor factor this movie gets a 9 out of 10 from me. Either stay up every night real late and hope to catch this on same Late Late Late Movie show, or hunt down a VHS copy and dust off your VCR.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c03c9d9036f9424b9d3b849539ee6cb0",
            "input": "I sat glued to the screen, riveted, yawning, yet keeping an attentive eye. I waited for the next awful special effect, or the next ridiculously clichéd plot item to show up full force, so I could learn how not to make a movie.It seems when they set out to make this movie, the crew watched every single other action/science-fiction/shoot-em-up/good vs. evil movie ever made, and saw cool things and said: \"Hey, we can do that.\" For example, the only car parked within a mile on what seems like a one way road with a shoulder not meant for parking, is the one car the protagonist, an attractive brunette born of bile, is thrown on to. The car blows to pieces before she even lands on it. The special effects were quite obviously my biggest beef with this movie. But what really put it in my bad books was the implausibility, and lack of reason for so many elements! For example, the antagonist, a flying demon with the ability to inflict harm in bizarre ways, happens upon a lone army truck transporting an important VIP. Nameless security guys with guns get out of the truck, you know they are already dead. Then the guy protecting the VIP says \"Under no circumstances do you leave this truck, do you understand me?\" He gets out to find the beast that killed his 3 buddies, he gets whacked in an almost comically cliché fashion. Then for no apparent reason, defying logic, convention, and common sense, the dumb ass VIP GETS OUT OF THE TRUCK!!! A lot of what happened along the course of the movie didn't make sense. Transparent acting distanced me from the movie, as well as bad camera-work, and things that just make you go: \"Wow, that's incredibly cheesy.\" Shiri Appleby saved the movie from a 1, because she gave the movie the one element that always makes viewers enjoy the experience, sex appeal.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58d12c08d580478d8d170212292b6a94",
            "input": "With a cast list like this one, I expected far better. Venessa Redgrave spent the majority of the movie lying in bed. The best actresses in the world cannot make anything very interesting when their acting is limited to lying down and falling asleep throughout the entire movie. The plot summary says that a secret is revealed to the daughters as their mother comes closer to death. The thing is, she never tells her daughters anything except cryptic advice to be happy. All the relationships in the movie are underdeveloped. I also felt that the back and forth between the past and present was unnecessary. It seemed as if the idea was stolen either from the book the Da Vinci Code in which the device was used to increase suspense, or from The Notebook in which they used the device to create the never ending romance of the story's main characters. Either way it was a cheap device in this movie because it didn't work to create anything. It was a way to attempt suspense in a movie that has none. I left wondering why good movies can't be written for women. It really was a disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29556b0ce8024675906e38d7957261b0",
            "input": "I believe that war films should try to convey the terror of war, avoid idealism and respect some rudimentary military principles. Zvezda barely does the first. Zvezda being a Russian war film, I was expecting patriotism, sentimentality, beautiful poetic pictures, a lush score, Slavic cheekbones and cruel Germans. What I didn't need was the naive love non-affair, the unrealistically silly war scenes and the abuse of the syrupy soundtrack in a film which avoided carefully all historical or political references (Stalinism, Nazism, Holocaust) only to end on a passing but nonetheless insulting to our sense of history endnote about \"liberating Poland\". A missed opportunity as a film but not as propaganda apparently.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f33040592b7747dfa789a005b3d36e34",
            "input": "I notice that most of the people who think this film speaks the truth were either not born before the moon landings (1969-1972), or not old enough to appreciate them. I think it is much easier to question an historic event if you did not live through it.I was a youngster at the time of Apollo, but I was old enough to understand what was going on. The entire world followed the moon landings. Our families gathered around the TV to watch the launch. Newspaper headlines screamed the latest goings-on each day, from launch to landing, from moonwalks to moon liftoff, all the way to splashdown, in a multitude of languages. In school, some classes were cancelled so we could watch the main events on TV. During Apollo 13 the world prayed and held its collective breath as the men limped home to an uncertain fate. You couldn't go anywhere without someone asking what the latest was. The world was truly one community. Now with a buffer of 30-odd years after the fact, it is easy to claim fraud because worldwide enthusiasm and interest has died down. We are left with our history books, and anybody can claim that history is wrong and attempt to \"prove\" it with a bunch of lies and made-up facts while completely ignoring the preponderance of evidence showing otherwise--not to mention the proof that dwells in the souls and memories of those who lived through these wonderfully heady and fantastic days.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a3cefd1cc5a4122ba88f59c1ec5ccbc",
            "input": "I admit the problem I have with the much-celebrated Ealing films I've seen so far could be mine. To my taste, either they are black and rippingly funny, or so light in tone to be unsatisfying as comedies or stories. That's a self-important way of saying I wanted to like \"The Man In The White Suit\" but found myself struggling to sit through its short run time.Textile worker Sidney Stratton (Alec Guinness) may be meek in manner, but he is doggedly committed to progress in the form of his attempts to invent a strand of fabric that can't be broken or made dirty. Using a factory lab for his latest experiment, he toils against limitations both material and human - the latter being the benighted mill bosses who don't understand what he is up to, then figure it out and become even more committed to stopping him.\"It's small minds like yours that stand in the way of progress,\" Sidney complains, practicing in the mirror what he struggles to say to the Man.One problem with \"Man In The White Suit\" is that Sidney's vision of progress is awfully small-minded, too, more so even than that of the bosses or the laborers who also resent his work. My problem is more elemental: For a comedy, \"White Suit\" is not funny. It's a rather earnest script which too often tries to mine its feeble attempts at humor from spit-takes, double-takes, triple-takes, and dizzy takes.The best joke is the sound of the machine Sidney toils at, going \"Bleep-Blop-Bleep-Bop\" endlessly and fetching queer looks from every visitor until Sidney either extracts his miracle from it or blows it up trying. Like every other bit of stray humor that functions decently in this film, it's leaned on too long.I've never seen Guinness less affecting in a movie, even though he looks impossibly young and earnest (though actually in his mid-30s). He seems so bloodless, even more so than the wax-faced general he played in \"Doctor Zhivago\" He's the same cold fish whether he's ignoring the sad affections of the affecting mill girl who offers to give him her life savings when he loses his job (pan-faced Vida Hope as Bertha) or the more sultry charms of young Daphne Birnley (Joan Greenwood), his one real ally in his fight against \"shabbiness and dirt\", as she puts it, making those words sound as impossibly sexy as only Greenwood could.Supporting players make \"White Suit\" work as well as it does. Ernest Thesinger of \"Bride Of Frankenstein\" fame plays a singularly nasty captain of industry who looks like Nosferatu and makes a laugh like a death rattle. Howard Marion-Crawford as another factory leader is as memorable here as he was playing a blinkered medical officer in \"Lawrence Of Arabia\". Then there's the undeniable charm of Mandy Miller as a little girl who steals her few moments on camera right from under everyone else.But most of the scenes are played so straight that one wouldn't think director Alexander Mackendrick had ever worked on a comedy before (his previous Ealing comedy \"Whisky Galore\" doesn't reverse that impression, alas). Roger MacDougall's play posits the notion of scientific progress as potential disaster, but fails to present dull Sidney in anything other than the most blandly pleasant of lights.Ealing comedies are remembered for capturing the human side of comedy. Yet the Ealings I've seen never seem to do this, working only when they play aggressively against our own sympathies. \"Kind Hearts And Coronets\" and \"The Ladykillers\" (Mackendrick again, go figure) are classics this way. \"White Suit\", on the other hand, is a pointless ramble that falls apart when it should cohere, just like that unfortunate suit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d50e46c13c6c47b4987ed0fb519e638e",
            "input": "In this glorious telling of a weekend shared among literary greats. Mary and Percy Shelly,Lord Byron and others created a entrancing group. Showing their quests for sexual enlightenment. Personal freedoms from political to moral. Liberal drug use for both stimulations and as addiction. Their creative views of life and writing. Describing without boring the viewer how each writer seeks to find their muse. Along with the distractions and affections each share. With breathtaking scenery that does not detract but very much enhances the story. Well created characters from grim to loving then angry to peaceful. With some of the most lovely and scene enhancing costuming to be had.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e01703e8377e406481a89bae8f2ac9ad",
            "input": "Spooks is enjoyable trash, featuring some well directed sequences, ridiculous plots and dialogue, and some third rate acting.Many have described this is a UK version of \"24\", and one can see the similarities. The American version shares the weak silly plots, but the execution is so much slicker, sexier and I suspect, expensive.Some people describe weak comedy as \"gentle comedy\". This is gentle spy story hour, the exact opposite of anything created by John Le Carre.Give me Smiley any day.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a6ec36785364b9e9bf2224ae5a14260",
            "input": "I had never heard of this film before a couple of weeks ago, but its concept interested me when I heard it: an American man meets a European woman on his last night in Europe and they spend the night together talking. It sparked my interest, but I never expected it to be this great. Before Sunrise is a masterpiece, and it's also one of the most romantic films on record. To my surprise, it completely lacked the cynicism of the 1990s. It's impossible to really talk too much about it, since there is no real plot, so to speak (although there are plenty of thoroughly interesting things you could talk about; it is sort of like My Dinner With Andre, where there is a conversation, but it's not JUST the conversation that matters), but let me just say, see it. SEE IT!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7549f2b311c4acfac440285e4f7582c",
            "input": "This is a modest, character driven comedy, filmed in Brazil on a low budget. The premise is familiar, the same as in the 1950's Danny Kaye movie **On the Double**: someone who, as a joke, does an impression of a Famous Person then is dragooned to impersonate the Person for real.The contrast between the two leads is highly effective. Raul Julia as the German-Paradorian secret policeman, is tall, cool, menacing and Latin. He sports a deliberately obvious blond dye job. Richard Dreyfus, animated, short, New York Jewish, is funny and sympathetic. There are many references and inside jokes about show business.The setting is clearly modeled on Paraguay. Paraguay was indeed ruled from the early fifties to the late eighties by Gen. Alfredo Stroessner, an unelected military dictator whose father had emigrated from Germany. But writer/director Mazurszky reveals his ignorance of local conditions when he paints Parador/Paraguay as a typical Latin American tyranny, with huge disparities in wealth and an active guerrilla insurgency. Further in this vein, Mazursky casts comic Jonathan Winters as an American retiree who in truth is C.I.A. station chief in Parador and a figure so powerful that he can give the president of the country a profanity-laced chewing out. In fact the U.S. has little influence in Paraguay, which is largely without the social and racial tensions seen elsewhere in the region. This is due to the country's having fought long and costly wars against much larger neighbors in the 19th and 20th centuries. The male population was nearly wiped out both times but the society that emerged was patriotic, racially homogeneous and strongly united. On yet another level, there is a bow to feminism in the form of the character Madonna. Played by Brazilian actress Sonia Braga, Madonna is a former nightclub dancer who is the body-stockinged presidential pleasure girl at the film's start but is seen on television as president herself at the end--now politically and cosmetically correct, no makeup, hair demurely pulled back, swept to office by a velvet revolution.The one time that such an event actually happened in Latin America, the administration of Argentina's Isabel Peron (not the beloved Evita, who never held office) lasted two years after the death of her husband, legendary **supremo** Juan Peron.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88526a59c59c4221905031bbcea1e3c5",
            "input": "A thin story with many fine shots. Eyecatchers here are the three ladies from the D.R.E.A.M. team. And, to a lesser extent, the guy accompanying them. Traci Lords convincingly acts out the female half of an evil business-couple intending to poison the world with antrax. Original in this movie is the bra-bomb, put on a captured member of the D.R.E.A.M.-team. Of course she is rescued by a co-member, three seconds before explosion. Although clearly lent from James Bond's 'Goldfinger' and 'You only live twice', such a climax always works well. All in all a nice watch, James Bond replaced here by three Charlie's Angels.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ec509061dce4834a98625ccb9c6671a",
            "input": "This dumb comedy really does a good job of wasting comedic talent. In particular, Dan Aykroyd and Howard Hesseman are misused badly here. I might have chuckled once or twice during this film, but in general, it's a boring movie, with a little bit of stupidity thrown in for good measure. The premise, although routine, still wasn't bad, but once the plot was set, the film went nowhere. Don't waste your time with this misfire.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a668133254cc4e05af34e7d73eb29add",
            "input": "Watching this last night it amazed me that Fox spent so much money on it and got so little back on their investment. It's the kind of disaster that has to be seen to be believed.I'm sure that the first morning of filming Raquel Welch dusted off the shelf over her fireplace to prepare a spot for the Academy Award she would surely win for this daringly original movie. Oops. That's not what happened.The infighting on the set was detailed in print by Rex Reed and this helped the movie attain a reputation before it was even released. When it was finally released there wasn't the usual three ring circus of publicity. If I remember correctly, in Houston it opened at drive-ins and neighborhood theatres and never played any of the big venues.I lay most of the blame on director Michael Sarne, who was hot after having directed (the not all that good) JOANNA, a film with music about young people in swinging mod London.If I recall correctly, Fox wound up firing him and piecing the film together the best they could. That's why scenes play out in no particular sequence and characters appear and then vanish. An impressive supporting cast (Kathleen Freeman, Jim Backus, John Carradine, Andy Devine and others) is wasted with nothing to do.To expand it to feature length there are numerous clips from Fox movies featuring stars like Carmen Miranda (in amazing footage from THE GANG'S ALL HERE) andLaurel and Hardy, who never dreamed they'd be playing in an X rated movie.The X rating is due to occasional language numerous sexual perversions; however, none of the characters seem to be having any fun. Maybe somebody involved with the film had a warped Puritan sensibility and figured that if they could make these things unappealing it wasn't bad to exploit them.This was one of the \"youth\" pictures that nearly bankrupted Hollywood in the 1970's. One writer joked that EASY RIDER (which was made for pocket change) was the most expensive movie ever made because so many films followed which tried and failed in the worst way to duplicate its success. Sixtyish, once honored directors like Stanley Kramer and Otto Preminger made movies like RPM and SKIDOO in an effort to attract a young audience. White directors and writers attempted to make films to attract a Black audience. Those movies are locked somewhere in a vault and the two named and many others from that genre have never, as best I know, been out on home video or cable. They're the studios' deep dark secret.Raquel Welch's performance in this is, all things considered, very good. With the right direction and script she could played the type of sassy liberated women Rosiland Russel and Barbara Stanwyck specialized in. She looks great and has awesome costumes. Mae West is the liveliest seventy-something actress I've ever seen. On the one hand it's kind of heartbreaking to watch her attempt to capture her glory from years gone by, but I'm sure she needed the money.If you want to see a big budget X-rated movie from this era check out BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (also from Fox) because it doesn't take itself seriously. It's crazy kids playing with the equipment at a major studio. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE tries to Say Something. There just wasn't anyone who wanted to listen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d67fbdb25cf0466daa23823118e85a66",
            "input": "It's interesting how the train of research can flow. I started out looking at an article about Cristo's \"The Gates\" in Central Park. The article stated that the Maysles had been Cristo's filmographers for years. Hmmm... Then I got to looking at their body of work. I believe one of them has passed on but the other is still filming Cristo and Jean Claude in their stages of creation. Grey Gardens sounded very interesting. Video Station, in Boulder CO, is the place to look for the obscure or offbeat and of course they had it in stock. DVD and VHS. Edith and Edie are women living in the past, and oh what a glorious past it was. Edith had been well off, born a Bouvier, married well, had several wonderful relationships and became a singer when she was in her forties. Her daughter Edie had been a débutante, a fashion model and had many beaus. She never married and at some point in her thirties had come home to recuperate. She seems to have a nervous disorder of some kind. Worrying too much about things. It is only a shadow of the world they live in though, because Jackie O. came and spruced up the place so her aunt and cousin would not be evicted. It is a 28 room mansion that is worn down and worn out. But, in the film you will notice fresh paint on the walls. If you look carefully at the newspaper clippings you see it was very much a dirty mess. The outfits Edie comes up with a very clever and creative. The viewer gets the impression that Edith likes to go nude, but she doesn't in the movie. Edith was really quite beautiful and you can see the shadow of her beauty still as she sings \"Tea for Two\". Edie too was a beauty in her day and quite attractive at 56. It was a good movie, though not for everyone. When the cat is urinating behind Edith's portait she states, \" at least someone is doing what they want\"!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04a0e4d9edc64dcb9750160ee58a8002",
            "input": "Superman and the Mole Men is quite possibly Superman's toughest adventures ever.Lois Lane and Clark Kent are sent to Silsby, home of the world's deepest oil well. While there, some radioactive mole men come up through the oil well and explore the town. Jeff Corey and many other townspeople try to dispose of the invading mole men. Can Superman change the people's ways in time to save the mole men? Can Superman warn the people in time about the radioactive danger the mole men bring?In my opinion, Superman and the Mole Men is a very intelligent, well-written and well-acted movie. Even though we only get to see Superman fly once briefly, It still makes a great Superman adventure. A must see for anyone.10/10 Stars",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9b9300d6c664c929138db621c633c8c",
            "input": "This anime is a must-see for fans of Evangelion. It's an earlier work of Anno Hideaki, but his unrestrained, dramatic style is quite in place. Also, those who didn't like Evangelion might find this release to bit slightly more palatable. Gunbuster is rather unique to sci-fi anime in that it's actually based on real science. In fact, the show has several little \"Science Lesson\" interludes explaining the physics behind some of the events in the movie. One of the big dramatic points in the film is the relative passage of time at speeds near that of light. The series does a wonderful job of dealing with the imaginably traumatic experience of leaving earth on a six month mission traveling near the speed of light and returning to an Earth where ten years have passed. The main character remains age 17 or 18 throughout the entire series while almost all of the other characters age considerably. Be warned, this show is heavy on the sap at times. It also has a couple of the most wholly unmerited breast shots that I have ever seen. I found it fairly easy to ignore the skimpy uniforms and boo-hoo scenes, because the series is otherwise very good, but viewers with a low sap tolerance might want to stay away from this one. On an interesting note, Gainax, as always, managed to run out of money in the last couple of episodes. However, they managed to use black and white film and still action sketches to produce a good resolution anyway. The ending is a bit silly, but it left me with such a good feeling in my gut I couldn't help but love it. Gunbuster is, in my opinion, one of the finest pieces of Anime around.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc02c762410045ee90e2565c758d0b45",
            "input": "This movie was on t.v the other day, and I didn't enjoy it at all. The first George of the jungle was a good comedy, but the sequel.... completely awful. The new actor and actress to play the lead roles weren't good at all, they should of had the original actor (Brendon Fraiser) and original actress (i forgot her name) so this movie gets the 0 out of ten rating, not a film that you can sit down and watch and enjoy, this is a film that you turn to another channel or take it back to the shop if hired or bought. It was good to see Ape the ape back, but wasn't as fun as the first, they should of had the new George as Georges son grown up, and still had Bredon and (whats her face) in the film, that would've been a bit better then it was.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9260c57362ab48e6873d683c479f746e",
            "input": "Before Stan Laurel became the smaller half of the all-time greatest comedy team, he laboured under contract to Broncho Billy Anderson in a series of cheapies, many of which were parodies of major Hollywood features. Following a dispute with Anderson, Laurel continued the informal series of parodies at Joe Rock's smaller (and more indigent) production company.Most of Laurel's parody films were only mildly funny at the time, and even less funny for modern audiences who haven't seen the original movie which Laurel is parodying. 'West of Hot Dog' is a fairly generic parody of cowboy shoot-'em-ups. It's marginally a specific parody of 'West of the Pecos', an oater released two years earlier with no major actors. Since 'West of the Pecos' was never a huge success, it's difficult to see why Stan's film unit chose this particular movie as a target for their lampoonery, much less why they waited so long after its release to parody it. And where did they get that title 'West of Hot Dog'? Possibly it's down to the fact that 'Hot dog!' was a sexual interjection favoured by American lechers in the 1920s. (As in the opening scene of the stage play 'Machinal'.) 'West of Hot Dog' was produced and co-directed by Joe Rock. Among his many other achievements, Rock introduced Laurel to Lois Neilson, and he was subsequently best man at their wedding. Full disclosure: In the last years of his life, I had the great privilege of befriending Joe Rock and interviewing him. Nearly ninety years old at the time, Rock's memory was impressively clear ... but he remembered nothing at all about 'West of Hot Dog', and I can't blame him. This movie is eminently forgettable.The leading lady's character is named Little Mustard: If that's meant to be a parody of something in 'West of the Pecos', I don't get it. There are a couple of 'impossible' gags here, including Laurel's method for mounting a horse. For just one moment in this movie, Stan Laurel reminded me of the great Buster Keaton when he suddenly broke into a run. 'West of Hot Dog' is vaguely similar in subject matter and tone to Keaton's short comedy 'The Frozen North', but Keaton's version is much funnier. The plot of this film somewhat anticipates a situation in Keaton's feature 'Our Hospitality' but (again) suffers by comparison: here, two tough varmint brothers expect to inherit the Last Chance Saloon, but the previous owner has bequeathed it to weakling tenderfoot Stan. However, the brothers will become the legal heirs if Stan dies. Hmmm...Seriously, though: is such a bequest legal? As soon as Stan takes possession of the property, surely any further questions of ownership or inheritance become his decision, not the previous owner's decision. I had plenty of time to consider such points of law while watching this dull comedy.At one point, a gag involves some crude animation drawn directly onto the film stock. It looks cheap and isn't funny.This 'Hot Dog' is no weiner, and no winner: it's just a whiner. My rating: one point out of 10. Hang on, Stan: in a few more years you'll be one-half of a comedy legend.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ac375f9048d4590b2034b64bebfa389",
            "input": "If this is supposed to be a portrayal of the American serial killer, it comes across as decidedly average.A journalist [Duchovny] travels across country to California to document America's most famous murderers, unaware that one of his white trailer trash travelling companions [Pitt] is a serial killer himself.Rather predictable throughout, this has its moments of action and Pitt and Lewis portray their roles well, but I'd not bother to see it again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a09e19661c74a26a0a78c6f8372f986",
            "input": "The 1986 TV movie of The Spirit was a pilot for a possible series. However, Spirit creator Will Eisner did not like the film and thus no series was produced. I thought it was a very entertaining film and captured the spirit (sorry) of the comic with a modern twist. I'm sorry it didn't materialize into a series. Sam (Flash Gordon) Jones was a perfect Spirit. Nana Visitor was a nice Ellen Dolan and of course would later go on to Star Trek:Deep Space Nine years later. Maybe with the release of Frank Miller's big-screen version of The Spirit, more people will be able to see this rare gem of Spirit history. It seems that when Hollywood makes a film from an already established character or idea, someone will inevitably seek out previous versions of the property and release it to video in order to make a few dollars. When Antonio Banderas donned the mask of Zorro, we were able to get earlier versions of the masked hero on DVD, such as the great Alain Delon version of the 1970s (although all copies I ever saw were badly edited). Heres hoping someone will release the TV adventure of The Spirit to DVD soon.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eceb71c11f8247ba8bc913605e994c67",
            "input": "My Take: A tired formula Christmas comedy. The laughs are tired and the talents behind it seem to be too.I love the holidays as much as the next guy (even if I often have a bad case of the holiday blues), but it seems it's just being a dumping ground for a bunch of Holiday comedies that would be bad movies on any day of the year, but that doesn't make them any less painful during the season. As if we already had enough SANTA CLAUSE movies (three and *gulp* still counting), who wants to see a movie about his brother? In a plot that would be at home with Disney's SANTA CLAUSE franchise (save the occasionally crude humor and Santa's \"Little\" Helper wearing a short skirt), FRED CLAUS is a one-joke premise that goes on for 116 minutes. Sure, Jolly Ol' Saint Nick has a brother, but where does it go from there? It's a shame really. FRED CLAUS is blessed with a cast that could have made it an enjoyable Christmastime comedy that will probably melt away along with the snow, but it would have been so much better than this. Vince Vaughn is your typical snob, but we are led to believe he's really the long lost brother of the never-aging Santa (Paul Giamatti), who invites his good ol' brother to visit. Mrs. Claus (Miranda Richardson) is reluctant, and worse, an efficiency expert (Kevin Spacey) has come to keep a watchful eye on Father Christmas, and his THIS close to being shut down. Hah! And guess who plays Santa's mother! Kathy Bates of course. Elizabeth Banks is Santa's Helper Charlene, John Michael Higgins is one of the elves, and Rachel Wiesz plays Fred's girlfriend! SI don't know if I'd praise the casting or to bash it. Here we have some familiar faces to add a touch of quality, but they're given way too little to work with.As for humor, the best that FRED CLAUS could possibly come up with is Santa's brother being his exact opposite and some joke about a DJ elf. I have to admit I had a few giggles involving Fred attending a group counseling for celebrity brothers (where he is joined by Stephen Baldwin, Roger Clinton and Frank Stallone), but the giggles begin and end there. Worse still, the movie even succumbs into sentimentality that's supposed to make us \"feel good\" and teach us a lesson about \"what Christmas really means\". Apparently, what Christmas means to Hollywood is getting as much of our leftover Christmas shopping money as they can.Rating: ** out of 5.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7182392b1ed04fce86e260c10dbd415a",
            "input": "One of the most timely and engrossing documentaries, you'll ever watch. While the story takes place in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas, it provides an intimate look into political dynamics, that prevail throughout the western Hemisphere. While essentially another chapter in the story of the \"U.S. backed, Latin American coup\", this film chronicles in real-time, what can happen when the poorest people, are armed with unity, political savvy, and courage! The political insights offered by this film are invaluable. One gets clear examples of the private media, as a formidable force for mass deception and propaganda. We see the poor people of Caracas grappling with the brutal realities of \"American politics\". One gets a clear sense of impending doom, if the people fail to address the blatant tyranny, which has been abruptly, and illegally, thrust upon them by the conspirators. We also see the arrogance and fascism, of the CIA backed, private media, plutocrats, and generals, who've conspired to bring Venezuela back under Washington's domination. Though ably led by President Hugo Chavez, the people of Caracas are forced to act without him, after Chavez was forcibly kidnapped by renegade generals. Their response is the highpoint of the film. If one seeks an excellent portrait of what the U.S. government, Hugo Chavez, and revolutionary Venezuela, are all about, this movie is it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-263ec82c157b44fe854d25a20f7c1a67",
            "input": "One of the most interesting movies to be classified as \"blaxploitation,\" Bakshi's \"Coonskin\" is a rich text full of wonderful insight. He wrote it in collaboration with Scat Man Crothers and Barry White, who appear in the film as well. The racist imagery can often be disturbing, but the message of the movie was so powerful that the NAACP gave it an endorsement (but only grudgingly).I highly recommend this movie to anyone who is interested in an examination of the pervading atmosphere of racism that Bakshi attempts to deconstruct. Wonderful stuff.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c218221a04d46f59cb52f388c652b07",
            "input": "Unfortunately the movie is more concerned with making lame social commentary on a real event, but doesnt have the balls to legitimately document what happened. The constant rhetoric of how violent video games are not to blame (I get the impression Ben Coccio is an avid gamer), or how media and music is completely devoid of influence is the obvious message (we even get a laughable scene of the two boys burning ALL their cd's, talk about subtlety!), but the movie only gets away with it because its 'fiction'. Nice try. Yes its a great idea to relieve media of influence, but how do we know the kids that have actually planned and executed a school shooting werent influenced by media? or video games? We dont, and we wont with this movie because once again these kids are smart enough to completely relinquish the media, yet dumb enough to scorch a nazi symbol on the ground? haha I somehow dont think so.The movie bats you over the head with its portrayal of the normalcy of the families, its almost doing a disservice to think that there wasn't a serious flaw in the family dynamic of kids that have actually gone out and shot their fellow schoolmates. Why is everyone so concerned with making killers seem \"normal\", when they are so obviously not? A completely false and phony depiction.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f59c6009cd94d53a644e7b668fe1342",
            "input": "One of the most common entries in the 'goofs' category is anachronism. Though I'm beginning to believe that anachronism and other goofs are more acceptable, even ignored, in very good films, but are found front and center in rotten films. KISS THEM FOR ME is a rotten film and reeks of anachronism, yet when watching it closely, I found almost nothing specifically anachronistic.The shots of aircraft which bookend the film are certainly out of place. The big 4 engine transport seen after the title \"Honolulu 1944\" appears to be the post war C-97 Stratofreighter (in MATS colors). The combat planes seen taking off from the carrier at the end are Douglas Skyraiders which entered service after WW2 and were made famous by their service in Vietnam.But excepting these two pieces of film and, of course, the hairstyles, everything else is very possibly period authentic. It just 'feels' so wrong. I'm an admirer of Stanley Donen, we share the same birthday. In his co directed ON THE TOWN (1949) there is a car chase at the end with the police driving 1949/50 Ford's yet there isn't the slightest feeling that this is out of place in a WW2 period film. In fact, as I reflected later, there isn't anything which says that this is supposed to be a WW2 period film. It just feels that way. Based on a wartime Broadway musical which was based on a ballet (Fancy Free) which may have been based on the work of artist Paul Cadmus (The Fleet's In! 1934) its a great film about sailors on a 24 hour pass in New York and, so heavy with wartime associations, its merely assumed it takes place during the war and yet these contemporary cars do nothing to break the spell.The first problem is old Cary Grant. Though far too old to represent a Navy SBD dive bomber pilot, it is a Hollywood tradition for stars like Grant, Gary Cooper (Lou Gehrig), Jimmy Stewart (Charles Lindbergh) to play younger. It was the role which he is miscast in, not his age. He plays an operator, as they used to call them. A guy who gets things done and breaks all the rules while doing it yet remains admired and loved for it. A hustler. A wheeler dealer. A de rigueur character in a service comedy. Grant is the comic center of what is after all supposed to be a service comedy which is contra to his comedy style.Thinking back on the great Grant comic performances like BRINGING UP BABY (1938) or ARSENIC AND OLD LACE (1944) and he is the great reactor whose comedy is to be reduced by his context from dignity to a befuddled puddle of inert jelly. IN KISS THEM he is expected to be the comic spark plug which just isn't him. People had already been exposed to the type, most recently to comic Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko on television. The role would be perfected later by James Garner but here Grant just isn't funny and appears to be a bully getting his way by aggressively pushing his Cary Grantness rather than cajoling and finessing.But the thing which really stinks the place up with anachronism is the lead women. There can be no more echt 50s women than Suzy Parker and Jayne Mansfield. They are unique to the decade. Marilyn Monroe can be placed in a continuum with Carole Lombard and Marie Wilson and any number of dumb blonds, and Grace Kelly was another high class dame (think of Mary Astor), but there never could have been an anatomically exaggerated woman in films like Mansfield. Sure there were the 'sweater girls' (e.g. Lana Turner) of WW2, but Mansfield was stretching the point. Suzy Parker was THE model who revolutionized the model business, who changed the mannequin like poses to become the first natural girl who moved and whose personality was captured by the camera (see FUNNY FACE (1957) also by Stanley Donen).Of course in high 50s style, there seems to be a lot of gender mixing at 'wild' parties but never even a hint of sex (think of the 50s TV shows Bachelor Father or The Bob Cummings Show where dinner jacketed men returned from 'dates' alone). The original book, which I haven't read, was published during the war and appeared as a play on Broadway at the end of the war and the nuances of the situation must have been inescapable for contemporary readers and audiences, but broken down, bowdlerized and reconstituted a dozen years later and fatally miscast, it remains a once forgotten stain on otherwise exemplary careers until the invention of the VCR and cable television resurrected this petrified turkey.So the lesson here is whatever the 'goof' it will be ignored in a great film like CITIZEN KANE (who actually hears Charles Foster Kane say 'Rosebud'?), and tolerated in fun dreck like WESTWORLD ( why were the robots given live ammunition in the first place?) but absolutely despised in a rotten film, even if the goofs are really non existent.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b3f2bc8f90b46cba5f1ec196bd71338",
            "input": "The third installment of the \"Carnosaur\" trilogy features a bunch of Keystone Kops-quality military commandos trying to kill two Velociraptors and a T-Rex. I give it a 4 out of sheer sympathy and my affinity for dinosaurs. The movie is definitely the worst of the trilogy, it really can't be taken seriously. More significantly, however, watching this movie I can't help but notice some interesting parallels between the \"Carnosaur\" and \"Xtro\" trilogies. The first installment in both franchises is a dark, disturbing film that has become a cult classic, the second is an \"Alien\" ripoff, and the third is a tongue-in-cheek, almost slapstick (whether intentional or not) movie that has you rolling on the floor laughing. Also, like the \"Xtro\" franchise, all the \"Carnosaur\" movies are completely unrelated to one another. They they only carry the franchise name to drum up interest in the \"sequels,\" I guess. Obviously \"Carnosaur\" and \"Xtro\" have two different production groups at work here, but if you've seen all three movies of both franchises you find yourself referring back and forth between the two.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c54594edf53145c787b5a31a85f4ce4c",
            "input": "I cannot say that Aag is the worst Bollywood film ever made, because I haven't seen every Bollywood film, but my imagination tells me that it could well be.This film seems like an attempt at artistic suicide on behalf of the director, and I for one be believe he has been successful in his mission. No A-list actor outside of this film would risk sharing the same billing as him for all the humiliation this film is bound to carry with it.But lets not just blame the director here, there is the cinematographer, who looks like he's rehearsing for the amateur home movie maker of the year award. There is the over dramatic score, that hopes to carry you to the next scene. The lighting man, who must have been holding a cigarette in one hand and light bulb on pole in the other, and hoping that the flame burning off the cigarette would add to that much needed light in every scene. And, of course the actors! Some of them are by no means newcomers, else all could be forgiven here. The ensemble of actors in Aag were put together to promote a new beginning and dimension to the re-make of India's most loved movie of all time, 'Sholay'. One must not forget that these actors were not forced in to this film, they are A-list and willing participants to something that, let's face it would surely have had high and eager public expectation??? So it begs the question, Amitabh aside (for now), did the other actors really believe their performances even attempted to better the original? Did Amitabh Bachchan read the script and believe that people would remember his dialogue in this farcical abomination of a film? Don't be stupid, of course he didn't, this was a demonstration to the public of how much money talks hence can make actors walk.I truly hope everyone involved is satisfied with what is truly a vulgar attempt to remake a classic film, which only succeeds in polluting everyone's mind when they watch the original.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e34e881d3b2e45819e77828c40764e10",
            "input": "I like end-of-days movies. I like B-movies. I was hoping I would like this movie.I could ignore the poor effects, the often atrocious music, the cringe-inducing lines. I could ignore the unexplained events, and the fact that the movie constantly relies on deus ex machina is excusable, given the subject matter. I could ignore the fact that the people who fight hunger and try to reach world peace are the bad guys. None of these things kill the movie. What kills this movie is that it's just plain and simple boring. Nothing actually happens; almost all scenes in the movie are designed to push the movie creators' morals on the viewers, at the cost of actually having a coherent story, or any kind of suspense.If you're looking for an entertaining B-movie, look elsewhere. This movie is just boring.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f349b0751349483788ca3f52d3283cd4",
            "input": "I realized a couple of days ago that the makers of this film put a play on words into its title. This movie is not primarily about the act of \"riding giants,\" but mostly about the people who are the giants of the sport, RIDING giants, to change the emphasis.In my teens I lived a block from the Wedge, one of the hardest-breaking and best bodysurfing spots in the world. I've been out in 15-to-18 foot surf, and have ridden and been hammered by 10 and 12-foot waves on many occasions. That experience is why I am in complete awe of the surfers in this film. The idea that Jeff Clark, to all appearances a normal mortal, could get away with riding Maverick's BY HIMSELF for over a decade is beyond my grasp. The first safety rule of any water sport is \"Never surf/dive/swim by yourself.\" He went where sane people would not, and lived to tell about it. I wouldn't go out there if the water were 75 degrees and the sharks all left. In the world of warm water: the first shot of the waves at Jaws always makes the skin tingle over my entire body. These are not just scary waves, these are uncontrolled-bowel-evacuation waves. When we see Laird Hamilton not only surviving 40-to-60 foot waves (I can hardly type those numbers), but actually working the faces like a fun day at Rincon, I'm blown away. There is a dedication and focus in big-wave riders which is comparable to that of anyone in the world. This a great film. I gave it a 9 instead of a 10 only because it neglects to mention that there are great big-wave riders in the world outside the Hamilton/Kalama crew, and I think they deserved mention. Splice in Ken Bradshaw at outside Log Cabins and a 10 it is!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11366bc55dd44c53a5c375a13c5f1d0f",
            "input": "*McCabe and Mrs. Miller* takes place in the turn-of-the-century Pacific Northwest. Into a soggy, muddy mining camp John McCabe (a hirsute Warren Beatty) comes barging, full of cigar smoke and big ideas about building a proper saloon/whorehouse for the town, replete with a trio of the sorriest whores in movie history. He also comes with an unearned reputation as a gunslinger: too shameful about this to blatantly advertise it, but not exactly afraid to use it in order to assert alpha-male credentials amongst the locals. And thus he wrangles the boys into building his saloon at the rate of 15 cents an hour.It looks to be a rather sorry operation until Mrs. Miller (Julie Christie) shows up on a startling contraption that's half-railroad car, half-automobile (where did Altman find that thing?). Mrs. Miller immediately takes on McCabe as a business partner, with the aim of classing up the new joint with proper whores and an insistence that all visitors take a bath before entering. Noting that McCabe doesn't know how to add, she also insists on handling the accounts. It's not clear what McCabe's function will be.The plot thickens when a pair of oily representatives from the mining company show up in town and offer McCabe to buy him out for five grand. McCabe tells them to buzz off -- he's holding out for fifteen thousand. The company finds negotiation distasteful, so they hire a trio of assassins to simply kill McCabe . . . though how they think they can get away with murdering a man in broad daylight in the center of town is as unclear as McCabe's function in the whorehouse partnership. (Excusing this whopping plot hole on the grounds that the locals would be too cowed to talk doesn't cut the mustard when one considers that any reward-money offered by the local Marshal would be pretty tempting.) *McCabe and Mrs. Miller*, purportedly \"classic Seventies cinema\", should be a lot better than it is. The movie tells a pretty good story; the main characters have the potential to be interesting. There are some striking scenes, especially one involving what looks to be a 14-year-old stone-cold killer. But it's really, really hard to enjoy a movie when you can hardly hear what anyone is saying and when you can hardly see what anyone is doing. Once again, this director hijacks his own movie with sheer barnyard laziness and sloppiness. According to the trivia-sheet here on IMDb, the movie's editor griped to Altman that the sound was muddy; Altman disagreed; and when everyone said the sound was muddy after the movie's release, Altman blamed the editor. (Nice.) Along with the bad sound, the movie has an atrocious look. Only Robert Altman can hire a world-class DP like Vilmos Zsigmond and make a movie that looks as if they sprayed the camera lenses with dirty dishwater. Reviewers here who praise the \"dark brown glow\" of this picture have GOT to be kidding me. The interiors are shot through what appears to be a dark scum. The exterior photography is even worse: it's as if Altman placed 500 fog machines behind the copious trees. During the climactic stretch, when Beatty is dodging the assassins while the local church is on fire, Altman insists on pretty much wholly obscuring the view with an animated snow-fall that reminds one of a Rankin-Bass Christmas special.Look -- I can't watch a movie under these conditions. Get back to me when you learn how to place boom mikes, when you remove all that annoying \"Altman-esque\" overlapping dialog, and when you wipe the lenses with some Windex, or something. 3 stars out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf6017abf5664c4db73fbe9472247547",
            "input": "Here's another film that doesn't really need much of a recommendation. It's a classic comedy, very funny and entertaining and which, of course, ultimately inspired a successful television series which many would say was even better (I enjoy both, personally). For some, it's hard to warm up to Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau as Felix Unger and Oscar Madison when they were were weaned on the TV show starring Tony Randall and Jack Klugman (or perhaps vice versa). But what we've got there in both cases are four good actors who in real life seemed so much like their film counterparts that they managed to make these characterizations their own. It's Neil Simon's humorous material that's key, and where the laughs really originate from.For those who have somehow never heard of THE ODD COUPLE, it's the story of a neurotic and fussy neat-freak (Lemmon) who is thrown out of a 12-year marriage by his long-suffering wife and takes up residence in the Manhattan apartment of his sloppy and totally irresponsible buddy (Matthau). Pitting these two unlikely roommates together within the same four walls makes for some hugely funny predicaments.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95ee0cd0a4694fef9b5dcba6aa5eb589",
            "input": "Legendary movie producer Walt Disney brought three of the world's greatest fairy tales to the screen. They remain among the most popular animated films of all time. The first was his groundbreaking classic \"Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs\" released in 1937. The last was the then-under appreciated \"Sleeping Beauty\" which made it's debut in 1959. In between these two was perhaps his most satisfying adaptation of a classic fairy tale: \"Cinderella\" (1950). Of the three films, \"Cinderella\" is the one most faithful to its origins. Ironically, unlike \"Snow White\", which for better or worse, became for many the definitive version of the story. \"Cinderella\" did not follow the same path. Although it was a hit and, like \"Snow White\", was responsible for restoring the dwindling Disney fortunes, it never achieved the same audience recognition which it certainly deserved. Disney, for once, did himself proud, electing not to tamper with a classic, instead elaborating and adding substance to the tale, rather than rewriting it for the screen. The result was enchanting. A combination of superb animation (in beautifully soft Technicolor) and the perfect voice talents brought the story to life with a radiance that endures to this day. Ilene Woods, who was a radio performer, recorded demonstration discs of the songs as a favor to the authors of the material, Al Hoffman, Mack David, and Jerry Livingston. When Disney heard them, he knew he had found his Cinderella. And indeed he had. Woods heartfelt renditions of \"A Dream Is A Wish Your Heart Makes\", \"So This Is Love\" and \"Oh Sing Sweet Nightingale\" are perfect. Eleanor Audley, who would go on to voice Maleficent in \"Sleeping Beauty\", masterfully captured the icy cruelty of the stepmother, while Rhoda Williams and Lucille Bliss were convincingly nasty stepsisters. Luis Van Rooten admirably performed as both the King and the Grand Duke, and James Macdonald was endearing as both Jaq and Gus, Cinderella's devoted mice. William Phipps has little dialog as the prince (future talk show host Mike Douglas provided his singing voice) but film (and Disney) veteran, Verna Felton was born to play the fairy godmother, and she made the best number, (the Oscar-nominated \"Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo\") her own show-stopper. Among the artists responsible for the \"look\" of the film, was Mary Blair, whose inspired use of color was greatly admired by Disney. Her elegant French-period backgrounds add tremendously to the quality of the movie. But, most important of all' are the believable characters--from Cinderella, right down to Lucifer, the stepmother's deliciously evil cat. They bring both life and vibrancy to the often told story, something very difficult to create in an animated film.In conjunction with the film's 55-year anniversary, (and, not so coincidentally, the coming holiday season) \"Cinderella\" has just been released on a special edition DVD. It simply has never looked better. The fully restored film must be seen to be appreciated--suffice it to say, it looks wonderful. An enhanced stereo soundtrack has been added, and serves the music well. The DVD extras, now a standard part of Disney Platinum Editions, are too numerous to list here, but as usual, some are directed towards children, some are slanted to adults, and the rest fall somewhere in between. But real fans will want to get the Deluxe Gift Set, because, along with an actual cell from the film and eight character sketches, it includes a 160-page hardback book, which not only incorporates most of the material found in the book with the 1995 special edition home video release, but much more as well. As usual for Disney, \"Cinderella\" will only be available for a limited time. So, if like me, you are a \"Cinderella\" lover, get it NOW! This edition is truly a \"Dream Come True.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e68e59978b5a4cce8144493ab5a46ad5",
            "input": "How Tasty Was My Little Frenchman tells a story that is alternately sad, scary and life-affirming. It ends with a brutal finale that you knew had to happen, even though you were hoping--maybe even beleiving--it wouldn't.Utlimately, this is the film's greatest strength: it expertly plays with your emotions and expectations, then drops a bomb on you.I saw this in a film theory class at USC back in the mid-'90s. It is not easy to find, but is definitely worth hunting for.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0439f78b357b46e7a1004aa74485975d",
            "input": "I caught this movie on Sci-Fi before heading into work. If you've any interest in seeing Dean Cain dive and avoid being enveloped in flames at least a dozen times, this movie is for you. If that doesn't peak your interest, well, I'm afraid you'll wish that YOU were the one about to be enveloped in flames, because this movie is pretty bad. The acting, to begin with, is awful, awful, awful. The characters are all completely obnoxious, and the dialogue is worse than your typical Z-grade, Sci-Fi movie. Towards the end, the movie began to remind me of 'Hollow Man' (complete with escape via elevator shaft), except with a Dragon, not a naked, invisible man. Unlike other similar flicks, however, this one wasn't even awesomely bad...it was just plain bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-287d2c60a0444ba4a2db300eb4d32ce6",
            "input": "I grew up watching this movie ,and I still love it just as much today as when i was a kid. Don't listen to the critic reviews. They are not accurate on this film.Eddie Murphy really shines in his roll.You can sit down with your whole family and everybody will enjoy it.I recommend this movie to everybody to see. It is a comedy with a touch of fantasy.With demons ,dragons,and a little bald kid with God like powers.This movie takes you from L.A. to Tibet , of into the amazing view of the wondrous temples of the mountains in Tibet.Just a beautiful view! So go do your self a favor and snatch this one up! You wont regret it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-398c9dc8c75e44f38db596f1f67abccd",
            "input": "These two men went thru hell and beyond and have produced the movie that conveys the terror that many did not survive. This is definitely a movie about survival, but not without it's touching moments.The finest piece of work I have seen documenting the 9/11/01 tragedy of New York City.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2136e71afc634646b1ccec1dca8d681e",
            "input": "To be clear from the get go, 'The Bagman' is very, very, very bad. It suffers terribly in almost every aspect except for one: the finished product is such an awful film that it's actually hysterically funny to watch. This is a very low-grade film. Budget constraints for the film should be obvious to anyone who watches even just the opening title sequence. I'm not sure if much of the humour in the film was intended or not. For example, the movie takes place in 'Doomsville.' Note to all prospective home buyers: if the town you're moving to is called 'Doomsville,' keep moving. Stephanie Beaton is quick to pull off her top for a pretty enthusiastic sex scene in the kitchen. I couldn't help but laugh because it has intentional humour (she turns on the gas stove ... get it? The sex is THAT hot? get it?) and unintentional humour. The unintentional in this case is the music. It's like the theme music for 'Chariots of Fire' goes Electronica. Break out the computer and the synthesizers! I realize that coming up with music for a small production like this is cost prohibitive. I really feel for them because the work here is so well-intentioned. The problem is that cheap music isn't necessarily good music. I haven't laughed so hard at sex on screen since 'Alone in the Dark' with that 'Seven Seconds' song (I guess they were implying that poor old Mr. Slater was a bit ... quick on the draw?). Even the end credits are hilarious. Intentional or not? You be the judge: a pet dog and cat are part of the credited cast -- and an animal wrangler was on set for them! -- The boom is credited to 'Mr B. Stick,' and the 3rd Unit's wardrobe (Yep, they had a third unit) is credited to K-mart. Maybe it's just me, but I think the hilarity of this more than saves the film. The movie is very, very bad, but the goals of Stephanie Beaton, her friends and family are so well-intentioned in 'The Bagman' that you can't help but like the movie they've produced. 'The Bagman' is bad but not dreadful. In its own sweet way, it even manages to be a bit endearing. It wears its flaws so honestly that you can't help but forgive them. \"Better\" films that try to hide the flaws are almost worse in a way. I guess this is just a film that knew who its audience was and was produced accordingly.Watch any number of movies and most of them will probably be a lot better than this. Some of them might look cheaper, or have worse acting, or sillier production value. They may not suffer terribly as 'The Bagman' does from awful editing, sound, and foley effects. Mr B. Stick didn't do a very good job. The special effects look to be where most of the money went. They tend to be more funny than gruesome, although when the 'Bagman' is finally unmasked at the end, the make-up job there is surprisingly well done.My 4 out of 10 is a little high but the humour helped a lot. This is an ideal movie to track down some night with a few friends and a few beers in hand. Great entertainment is to be had by anyone who seriously considers themselves B-movie or low budget film aficionados. All others should probably avoid with great prejudice.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2218328f47d441c7b1cab5fe70ba0249",
            "input": "What an insult to Olivia D'Abo who plays the film's heroine, Robin, to have Keanu Reeves appear so large on the box art of the film (and at least on recent reissues, to have only Reeves appear on the box), considering that she was the star. I realize that it is his name that will ultimately sell this long-forgotten After School Special, but at least give the woman some credit. Despite that, this has to be one of the worst teen sports-themed films that I have ever seen, and it strives very hard to add not only every teen and sports movie cliché from the class warfare between the feuding gymnasts to the teen romance. And, in striving to somehow deliver itself as an amateur alternative of Flashdance (with the music in one of the warehouse dance scenes is even quite close to Michael Sembello's notable 'Maniac' which was made famous by Flashdance, or was it the other way around?). It includes similar dance sequences and worse yet, even the 80s dance and sports traditions of corny dance-offs between the heroine and her antagonist(s), the one who doubts her successes and abilities on the team. We saw this in Trashin' (a vert ramp joust) and Rad (BMX dancing at the prom, although it wasn't much for competition, but rather for fun) for example. In fact, this movie is chock full of unrealistic corniness, such as the somewhat homo-erotic rolling in the clothes at the Salvation Army with Robin and her friend from the team.Nonetheless, the film is about a young girl who comes from a rather poor background. To top it off in a massive need to squeeze from audiences as much sympathy as possible, she lives with her ailing mother, her obnoxious sister, and her careless (and slightly abusive) stepfather. Needless to say, homelife is not so appealing. Add to the mix, a talent for gymnastics, but several obstacles to joining the team (including the nuisance of her arrogant, snobby teammates, and a coach who also eventually doubts her abilities to compete well). And, of course, we can't forget that she's got eyes for one of the pretty boy preppies who is dating one of the obnoxious teammates, nor that she doesn't have a steady boyfriend (although Keanu as Tommy later enters the picture). Could this kid be any more pathetic? And it seems that one mess after another comes along to embarrass herself in her painfully long, redundant, and clichéd quest to prove her worth to everyone.But, even the major moments of cheesiness which comprise most of the film, are hardly worth mentioning considering that the biggest distraction to this film is the horrible acting and dialog. (I like how the gym coach suddenly appears at the diner in the middle of the dance-off to scold the teammates). It makes episodes of 'Amazing Stories' look like Shakespeare.I imagine anyone able to locate this film and watch it these days is probably drawn to it mostly because of the nostalgic factor. For that you might be satisfied, but it is also an incredibly forced drama. So, Caveat Emptour.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aeb4143e0669460fa14eda03871277c2",
            "input": "The production quality, cast, premise, authentic New England (Waterbury, CT?) locale and lush John Williams score should have resulted in a 3-4 star collectors item. Unfortunately, all we got was a passable 2 star \"decent\" flick, mostly memorable for what it tried to do.........bring an art house style film mainstream. The small town locale and story of ordinary people is a genre to itself, and if well done, will satisfy most grownups. Jane Fonda was unable to hide her braininess enough to make her character believable. I wondered why she wasn't doing a post doctorate at Yale instead of working in a dead end factory job in Waterbury. Robert DiNiro's character was just a bit too contrived. An illiterate, nice guy loser who turns out to actually be, with a little help from Jane's character, a 1990 version of Henry Ford or Thomas Edison.This genre has been more successfully handled by \"Nobody's Fool\" in the mid 90s and this year's (2003) \"About Schmidt.\" I wish that the main stream studios would try more stuff for post adolescents and reserve a couple of screens at the multi cinema complexes for those efforts.I'll give it an \"A\" for effort.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f580b7fc3f44e14a34c21f542658c5f",
            "input": "Having heard so many people raving about this film I thought I'd give it a go. Apart from being incredibly slow, which I don't mind as long as the wait is worth it, but it just isn't. As many others have said there are so many inconsistencies and so much of this film just doesn't ring true. The reaction of the 4 men switches from shock, horror on finding the body to complete indifference whilst they fish. Surely if they were the type of men that would go on happily fishing, then they would have just reported the body and said they had only discovered it after their fishing trip....why on earth tie the body to a tree, go fishing and then tell everyone you found the body 2 days previously? Its so hard to watch a film knowing that the behaviour of the main characters is so inconsistent. As for the rest of the townsfolk, well you'd think at least one of them might show some curiosity about who actually killed the woman! The body itself, naked except for the knickers....what scenario leads to that? If she was raped then why still the knickers? If she was raped with the clothes on, then why remove them afterwards bar the knickers? If she wasn't raped, then why take all her clothes off bar the knickers....leaving yourself with evidence to dispose of? I truly cant think of any realistic scenario that would lead to that other than killing someone to steal their clothes so you can fill up your jumble sale stall! Oh well its watchable but only just and only because, despite the poor script, the acting is strong.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59ba8ad4a14f4b7e83f41009f5eb6d6e",
            "input": "I got this film about a month ago and I am now a fanatic fan of Drew Barrymore's. I love a happy ending and this film gives a brilliant one with the truths of Red Sox slotted in! It's about a maths teacher who takes some promising kids on a maths trip to a company where the successful Lindsey(Drew) shows them some information. This then leads in the Ben(teacher) and Lindsey dating. But it isn't all simple when he confesses he is a massive Red Sox fan. First of all things are fine but then his baseball gets in the way of Lindseys life. It's all fine in the end and It took one shot to get Drew running across the field!! I got it for two quid in Blockbusters so I was happy. If you like films like this I suggest you see some more of Drew's work like Charlie's Angels and 50 first dates or even her new film with Hugh Grant in called Music and Lyrics.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-322c9483a16045b483cb899f05ee5a67",
            "input": "Guys and Dolls is a movie itching for a remake. It was made forty-eight years ago. Its two main stars are either dead or 409 pounds. Although a remake, with big stars now, would be box-office success, it would not be able to capture the magic that went into this version. Its boundless energy can't be recaptured, nor can the pure joy you get when watching something like this: a huge, widescreen, big entertainment movie.Marlon Brando (who last clocked in at 409 lbs. last time I heard) plays Sky Masterson, one of the biggest gamblers in New York. Frank Sinatra is Nathan Detroit, whose as-often-as-he-can-find-a-speakeasy-for-it crap game is city-wide famous. However, when the one place he has left to hold it is charging $1,000, Detroit needs the money fast. He bets Masterson $1,000 that he can't take missionary Sarah Brown (Jean Simmons) to Havana with him the next day.Guys and Dolls is basically nothing more than unsavory types singing and dancing, which usually, as it does here, add up to fun. It's obvious to see how this was a Broadway musical: there weren't that many sets, and the scenes were long. If I was to complain about one thing, it's how uneven the songs were. At times, there were two songs in a scene; other times, thirty minutes went by without one. Guys and Dolls is never boring, just a great time.My rating: 8/10Not Rated.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74cee172babe4b3596ebdeac29301e0d",
            "input": "I should put out an alert all over saying that the movie shouldn't be watched. It fails to a fitting tribute in such a magnificent manner that it is almost an insult to the memory of those brave men. The special effect were horrible, I hadn't expected the total failure on the part of the director to appreciate military technology. How can a machine gun which normally fires at the rate of 600 rounds per minute fire at 1/10th the speed? How can soldiers fall forward when a grenade explodes in front of them? How can people survive when there are artillery shells falling as close as 20 feet away? How come the artillery shells fall only on either side of the road and not the road itself?Not only did this disrespect for the weaponry appall me, it was the cliched situations and the incongruity of the dialogues which had me screaming murder. There were the standard dialogues like Ye bhi kisi ka bhai hai, ise laath mat maro and Pakistan se jyaada musalmaan to Hindustaan me hai and LOC cross mat karo ye mera hukum hai. Stupid to say the least.What Shobha De had written is true. The director worked without a script and it shows. There is no flow to the movie. There is no gradual progression from one battle to another. It is just one gunfight after the next with no connection to the overall scheme of the war. The explanatory scenes are awful. The chief of army staff looks unconvincing. To make matters worse the theatre people had indiscriminately cut footage to fit the four hour long movie into 3 hours.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e618ca06736b4c2db8ea93503a035af0",
            "input": "The film did what it set out to do: show how a young girl copes with poverty and grows into her maturity. However, for most of us, this subject has been explored adequately and in most instances with more sophistication than done here. The movie fixated on breasts, which soon became boring and I lost interest. If this was on TV, I would've switched to the latest news on the Starr Report. That's how boring I found this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2913fddfa528417b92079f6633d361ef",
            "input": "*Warning - no plot spoilers ahead, but movie spoilers nonetheless...* My significant other rented this for me thinking it would be a terrific romance with an all-star cast. Wow - very, very wrong. This movie is an overdone, overwrought, and overly sentimental excuse to theatrically release a student film 15 years after it was shot! The copyright date on the box said 2005, yet during the very first flashback sequence I was looking at the clothes and hairdos that were supposed to be the early 1960s, and noticed that the girls especially were wearing late 80s/early 90s dresses and hairdos. It looked as if it had been shot a good 15 or 20 years before the rest of the film! I tried to convenience myself that it was a flashback, and therefore supposed to look old, but it looked WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY more 80s than 60s or even 21st century trying to be 60s... then an adult coworker of the lead character turns up, and he looks just like the boy featured in the flashback sequences (yet it's a different, much older character whose youth is featured in the flashbacks). I was completely confused until I saw in the special features the short film included - it was all the flashback sequences, shot in 1990 as a complete student film of the same title as this movie! It also features commentary that includes the little boy all grown up (and indeed acting the co-worker in the 2005 scenes). Thus, this movie is just a shell of story woven around an old, re-cut student film put together as an obvious excuse to get it up to theatrical running time. The shell story, shot in 2005, is mostly about a man who has lost his wife and finds healing and redemption at the dance class that he promises a dying man he will attend in his stead (something about a promise made by the dying man in the early 60's to his girl that they would meet on the \"fifth day of the fifth month of the fifth year of the new millennium - an excuse to shoot the segments around the old film in 2005?) These new scenes and plot might have been OK except the awful, overly sentimental score that repeats ad nauseum over almost every single new scene and the clichéd action that permeates the new movie. Don't bother. There's a reason why you've never heard of this movie even though it has a well-known cast - it's terrible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ccb4970ee2245e9804f514a027fc5f8",
            "input": "Stilted, stagy, strange and opaque, if visually striking ... a wannabe-erotic fantasy. Really boring, way too much male nudity (including father-son incest), and just a sort of shameless pointlessness. I will confess, however, that certain passages of dialogue, taken on their own terms, do have a lulling, haunting quality.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9f3536b608f485c9d322e549594373c",
            "input": "one of the best low budget movies from Germany! is this is the dark side of new age? if you believe in esoteric, please don't watch this movie! it blows all your positive fantasies away. this movie shows that beyond the peaceful façade of spiritual soul searching lies a world of extreme transgressions and terror. i hope there will be a 35 mm copy soon! Andreas Marschall's first film is just the beginning of a new area, making movies with a few euros! i'm waiting for the second hit!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6edbd534e78a493397d18bf6d289303d",
            "input": "This early John Wayne Lone Star western has a bit more going for it than the run-of-the-mill oaters Wayne had been making for Lone Star up until that time. For one, it has his old friend Paul Fix in it; Fix, being a much better actor then the standard Lone Star villain, brings a much needed professionalism to the surroundings instead of the usual hesitant line-readings often delivered in these oaters. The plot, about mistaken identity, payroll robbery and murder, is as trite and perfunctory as you'd expect it to be in a 1930s low-budget western, but Wayne's strapping good looks, easygoing charm and way with a line go a long way to making this more enjoyable. Plump, balding Eddy Chandler isn't quite believable as Wayne's womanizing \"partner\", and there's a running gag about something that happens whenever Chandler and Wayne are about to get into a fistfight that grows tiresome. On the other hand, Wayne's love interest is played by none other than Mary Kornman, the little \"Mary\" of the early \"Little Rascals\" fame. She is a grown-up 20-year-old now, blonde and cute as a button. Most of Wayne's leading ladies in these Lone Star/Monogram \"B's\" were fairly bland and colorless, but Mary is perky, cute and, yes, sexy. There's a scene in the general store, where she works, in which Wayne asks her to get him a bottle of \"nerve tonic\", which happens to be on the top shelf, so she has to get a ladder and climb up to the top shelf. Wayne's ogling her pert little backside as she ascends the steps, then again as she comes down, then again a few minuter later when he asks her to climb up and get him another bottle is surprisingly racy for a film made in 1935. Wayne makes no attempt to hide the fact that he is definitely checking out her butt. Anyway, it's an interesting little \"B\", not great, but not as choppy and random as many of his LoneStar productions of the time. The final gunfight isn't handled all that well, and Chandler gets somewhat irritating after a while, but all in all, it's worth a look, if only to see a cute and sexy Mary Kornman.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6023b2ece7da4218900b5b1995546c28",
            "input": "That's not just my considered verdict on this film, but also on the bulk of what has been written about it. Now don't get me wrong here either, I'm not a total philistine, I didn't hate the movie because it wasn't enough like 'police academy 9' or whatever, I enjoy more than my fair share of high brow or arty stuff, I swear.'Magnolia' is poor, and I am honestly mystified as to why it is seemingly so acclaimed. Long winded, self indulgent, rambling nonsense from start to finish, there is just so little that could credibly be what people so love about the movie. There's some high calibre actors fair enough, and none turns in an average or worse performance. Furthermore, my wife (a self confessed Tom Cruise hater) tells me it's his career best performance by far. But the plot is so completely unengaging, meandering between the stories of several loosely connected characters at such a snail's pace that even when significant life changing events are depicted they seem so pointless and uninteresting you find yourself crying out for someone to get blown up or something.It doesn't help that none of the characters are very easy to identify or empathise with (well I didn't think so, but I don't like most people admittedly). They all play out their rather unentertaining life stories at great length, demonstrating their character flaws and emotions in ever-so intricate detail and playing out their deep and meaningful relationships to the nth degree with many a waffling soliloquy en route. Yadda yadda yadda. The soundtrack's dire as well, with that marrow-suckingly irritating quality that I had hitherto thought unique to the music of Alanis Morisette.All in all, it was about as enjoyable a three hours as being forced to repeatedly watch an episode of 'Friends' whilst being intermittently poked in the ribs by a disgruntled nanny goat. The bit with the frogs is good though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-baa127b11e9141aa838667f41d5167e9",
            "input": "On paper, this movie would sound incredibly boring. The idea of a 75-year-old man traveling the country-side on a riding mower certainly doesn't have much appeal to it, but the real power behind the film is its charm and its intelligence. Writers will not find a better study of what makes a movie work than \"The Straight Story.\"The perfect example of this is a scene in which Alvin meets a runaway teenage girl. She's pregnant and afraid of what her parents would do if they found out. Alvin tells her a story about his own kids, long ago. He had them each take a stick and break it, which they could easily do. Then he had them bundle the sticks and try to break them. \"That bundle,\" he said, \"is family.\" So many other movies would feel compelled to continue and make sure we knew that an individual could be broken but together the members were stronger. \"The Straight Story\" realizes that we're smart enough to understand this and simply leaves us to contemplate the thought and draw our own conclusions.Alvin's journey across Iowa is full of such refreshingly un-Hollywood character interactions. Each interaction is full of warmth and humor, and Alvin is so cute riding his mower that we can't help but smile as he makes his way to Wisconsin to make peace with his brother, Lyle, who has suffered a stroke. And the simplicity of the final scene emphasizes that the real story here is not the destination but the journey. It's a journey in which Alvin shares his life with everyone he meets--to their benefit and ours. It's a slow, simple, relaxing ride meant to remind us of all that we've lost with the urbanization of America.\"The Straight Story\" is the rare live-action \"G\"-rated movie that truly should not be missed. Grade: A",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-458e7ebe3fbe49679bbccc6afd1adb4e",
            "input": "Obviously, there wasn't a huge budget for this film which definitely hindered the production. But the story and ending were so brutal that they made up for a lot. I mean brutal on the level of Ju Dou and other (great) Chinese films. I first saw this when I was 14 years old, I ran home and begged God to forgive me for everything...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a202a5d721c424e823a3ff7ece62dfc",
            "input": "\"Stella\", starring Bette Midler in the title role, is an unabashed tearjerker. Set in upstate New York, Stella Claire works nights as a bar maid, pouring and dancing in a workingman's saloon. One night, in comes a slumming medical intern, Stephen Dallas, who woos Stella, and in the course of their affair impregnates her. She spurns both his offers of marriage and abortion, sends him packing to a lucrative medical career, and raises her daughter herself in near-poverty. Flash-forward 16 years and the daughter has grown into a gorgeous, loving, young lady. Dr. Dallas is not out of the picture, still maintaining a tenuous, but caring relationship with his daughter and…..I'm rambling, and worse yet, making the movie sound somewhat interesting. The acting and screenwriting are so over-the-top you'll let out a groan in almost every scene. The chief offender is Bette Midler, but close behind is John Goodman as her alcoholic buddy. Each scene seems more contrived than the preceding right up to the finale, which is truly a hoot. Taken as a dramatic piece, this film rates no more than grade D, but as camp, it scores an unintended B+.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b8e9be28e2c4d6dafb29fb0f2bf0a5f",
            "input": "Hickory Dickory Dock was a good Poirot mystery. I confess I have not read the book, despite being an avid Agatha Christie fan. The adaptation isn't without its problems, there were times when the humour, and there were valiant attempts to get it right, was a little overdone, and the events leading up to the final solution were rather rushed. I also thought there were some slow moments so some of the mystery felt padded. However, I loved how Hickory Dickory Dock was filmed, it had a very similar visual style to the brilliant ABC Murders, and it really set the atmosphere, what with the dark camera work and dark lighting. The darker moments were somewhat creepy, this was helped by one of the most haunting music scores in a Poirot adaptation, maybe not as disturbing as the one in One Two Buckle My Shoe, which gave me nightmares. The plot is complex, with all the essential ingredients, though not as convoluted as Buckle My Shoe,and in some way that is a good thing. The acting was very good, David Suchet is impeccable(I know I can't use this word forever but I can't think of a better word to describe his performance in the series) as Poirot, and Phillip Jackson and Pauline Moran do justice to their integral characters brilliantly. And the students had great personalities and well developed on the whole, particularly Damian Lewis as Leonard. All in all, solid mystery but doesn't rank along the best. 7.5/10 Bethany Cox",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02bf7356e8b74344995888efacffeadc",
            "input": "I rented this movie today thinking it might be a good football movie, since I'm a big football fan. Boy, was I wrong. This movie is way too religious and preachy and is REALLY unrealistic. This movie pretty much says that if your a Christian you can get anything you want in life easily, like become a great football player! You don't become a great football player by becoming Christian and asking God, you do it through practice and hard work. All you gotta do is ask God and he'll give you anything....puh-lease. Thats not true at all, duh. I laughed several times because of this embarrassment. The only part that was funny was when they were being dumb (Shultz the cartoonist? no, the dude that flew over the Atlantic, etc etc..) but really this movie wasn't that great. I don't recommend it, especially if you aren't a Christian, lol.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f155c803e8d24a58b0ef786883d14620",
            "input": "Utterly predictable silly show about a man who has killed his wife by mowing her down when driving and claimed he had blacked out. Why was he still driving a car? Why did he still feel able to drive a car having killed his wife with one? This question has not occurred to the writers. The story then witters on about a psychologist and her failing marriage which is tied into the failing marriage of wife-killing blackout driver. An omniscient mother and one dimensional child are thrown in for good measure, and the whole builds up to a predictable denouement and crashing finale. Are police psychologists so easily taken in? Deadful writing that the actors do their best with, but they are doomed to failure. This is on a par with a Harlequin Romance. Don't waste your time watching this one unless that's what you are aiming for.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5ef7594038541a58cdd22eb58c049c8",
            "input": "Sandra Bernhard is quite a character, and certainly one of the funniest women on earth. She began as a stand-up comedienne in the 1970s, but her big break came in 1983 when she starred opposite Jerry Lewis and Robert De Niro in Scorsese's underrated masterpiece, \"The King of Comedy\". Her film career never quite took off, though. She did make a couple of odd but entertaining pictures, such as \"Dallas Doll\" (1994) or \"Dinner Rush\" (2000), but the most amazing parts were those she created for herself.\"Without You I'm Nothing\" is undoubtedly her best effort. It's an adaptation of her smash-hit off-Broadway show which made her a superstar – and Madonna's best friend for about four years. In ten perfectly choreographed and staged scenes, Sandra turns from Nina Simone to Diana Ross, talks about her childhood, Andy Warhol and San Francisco and performs songs made famous by Burt Bacharach, Prince, or Sylvester. Director John Boskovich got Sandra to do a 90-minute tour-de-force performance that's both sexy and uniquely funny. If you are a Bernhard fan, you can't miss out this film; it's a tribute as well to her (weird) beauty as to her extremely unconventional talent as a comedienne. And it has influenced filmmakers in their work – \"Hedwig and the Angry Inch\", for instance, would look a lot different if \"Without You I'm Nothing\" didn't exist.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b656bbbde13541f388c6a5c692bbf319",
            "input": "I don't see how you can say that Freddy's Nightmares is cheesy and a rip-off. You obviously don't know good TV when you see it. The episodes are packed with drama and blood. Freddy is creative in the way he kills people. I love Freddy's Nightmares and I hope to get all 44 episodes on DVD. The best episodes are: Saturday Night Special,School Daze, and Love Stinks. If you think this series sucked then you're entitled to your opinion but remember it's only your opinion and it means nothing. Freddy's Nightmares will always be one of the best series ever and you'll come to accept that fact soon enough. If you don't like it then don't watch it but don't deny it's brilliance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52be5b4b825c4235b66ef6838ba5ba3d",
            "input": "I'm not usually a fan of strictly romantic movies but heard this was good. I was stunned. Easily the most romantic thing I've ever seen in my life. Stunning. Brilliant, sweet, funny and full of heart. The chemistry is flawless as is the writing and directing.Ethan Hawke and Julie Delphy are so natural and sweet together you really think they're a couple. The movies grabs you right away and doesn't let go. You can't look away nor can you stop listening to them. Even the little moments just melt your heart. This has jumped into the ranks of one of my favourite ever. A masterpiece.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-15645b2ab03640d685474db6e986425a",
            "input": "Neither the total disaster the UK critics claimed nor the misunderstood masterpiece its few fanboys insist, Revolver is at the very least an admirable attempt by Guy Ritchie to add a little substance to his conman capers. But then, nothing is more despised than an ambitious film that bites off more than it can chew, especially one using the gangster/con-artist movie framework. As might be expected from Luc Besson's name on the credits as producer, there's a definite element of 'Cinema de look' about it: set in a kind of realistic fantasy world where America and Britain overlap, it looks great, has a couple of superbly edited and conceived action sequences and oozes style, all of which mark it up as a disposable entertainment. But Ritchie clearly wants to do more than simply rehash his own movies for a fast buck, and he's spent a lot of time thinking and reading about life, the universe and everything. If anything its problem is that he's trying to throw in too many influences (a bit of Machiavelli, a dash of Godard, a lot of the Principles of Chess), motifs and techniques, littering the screen with quotes: the film was originally intended to end with three minutes of epigrams over photos of corpses of mob victims, and at times it feels as if he never read a fortune cookie he didn't want to turn into a movie. Rather than a commercial for Kabbalism, it's really more a mixture of the overlapping principles of commerce, chess and confidence trickery that for the most part pulls off the difficult trick of making the theosophy accessible while hiding the film's central (somewhat metaphysical) con.The last third is where most of the problems can be found as Jason Statham takes on the enemy (literally) within with lots of ambitious but not always entirely successful crosscutting within the frame to contrast people's exterior bravado with their inner fear and anger, but it's got a lot going for it all the same. Not worth starting a new religion over, but I'm surprised it didn't get a US distributor. Maybe they found Ray Liotta's intentionally fake tan just too damn scary?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-691613bd45a345598377b52e27ccffa0",
            "input": "Probably my all-time favorite movie, a story of selflessness, sacrifice and dedication to a noble cause, but it's not preachy or boring. It just never gets old, despite my having seen it some 15 or more times in the last 25 years. Paul Lukas' performance brings tears to my eyes, and Bette Davis, in one of her very few truly sympathetic roles, is a delight. The kids are, as grandma says, more like \"dressed-up midgets\" than children, but that only makes them more fun to watch. And the mother's slow awakening to what's happening in the world and under her own roof is believable and startling. If I had a dozen thumbs, they'd all be \"up\" for this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b75dc4c607a472a82b2eb648b951d61",
            "input": "That is the only thing I can positive to say about this movie. Cleveland is the star, I've been there and never saw the city look this good. Beautiful river and cityscapes.This movie moves ahead at such a pace they hope you won't notice the lack of real world relevance. People running around and shooting guns without any consequence. For example, there is a shoot out at Rob Lowe's character's house- two cars are stolen, and yet the cops don't show up there till much later in the movie. Murder for hire never looked so implausible.Whoever wrote this movie should be on the receiving end of one the movies countless stray bullets. Many of the actors in this movie are so much better than this. I check the date of the movie just to make sure it wasn't written during the writers strike but alas this was not the case. This movie is currently in rotation on Universal's HD channel- unless you want to drool of over Lowe there is no reason to watch it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c7a7878e6cb4191ac8cec6d66879d94",
            "input": "This movie is like the thousand \"cat and mouse\" movies that preceded it. (The following may look like a spoiler, but it really just describes a large class of movies) There is the passionate, wise main character, his goofy but well-meaning sidekick with his ill-placed attempts at humorous comments, the initially-hostile but soon softened gorgeous lady who triggers the inevitable \"unlikely\" love story, the loved ones taken hostage, and of course the careless evil adversary with his brutal minions. Everybody has seen tons of these movies already, and \"National Treasure\" is like any one of them, with only a slightly modified wrapping. Every turn of the story was easily predicted (and I can assure you I am not the sharpest tool in the shed). I am quite tired of feeling tricked for money after exiting the theater from a Hollywood movie, and if you have ever felt that way too, heed my warning; stay miles away from this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70f81df1103f4714bdfd8e7a36a24556",
            "input": "A couple of farmers struggle in life in a small village in China. Wang Lung (Paul Muni) buys O-Lan, his future wife, who becomes his slave (Luis Rainer). American stars appear in the leading roles, talking with fake accents and emphasizing old stereotypes and patriarchal ideology. A good wife, many children and land are the best things for men to have. They are seen as property and investment. Because it is a big budget movie, in which many extras cooperate, big sets are built and special effects take place, the movie makers could not take the risk of hiring less popular actors. Luise Rainer won an Academy Award for this performance, which is definitely the worst in the movie. Her immutable face builds a barrier between her and the audience. O-Lan is supposed to be the heart of the family and the best character to sympathize with. On the other hand Paul Muni gives a better performance, showing his talent ones again. Another problem with the movie is the ending. It seems like Franklin did not know when to end the picture. This film could be dangerous if it is taken as a truly example of Chinese culture and traditions.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7282d4369cd148c9894ec80999a38454",
            "input": "A true anomaly in the French cinema ,this despairing work has no equivalent in the contemporary production.One would rather have to look on the side of Louis Malle's \"le feu follet\" (1963)(the fire within) to find something not completely unlike Harel's effort.Wry and cynical,having lost all his illusions,the hero ,a computer scientist,has got no more reason to live.Absolutely none.Estranged from the human race,he seems to live his life as some kind of entomologist,studying his colleagues.One of them catches his attention:Tisserand-José Garcia plays the most demeaning part of the decade-.Then Tisserand will become some kind of prey:all his pessimism will rub off on this poor man.The scene is the night-club climaxes the strange relationship:the hero tells his victim that his life will always be unfulfilled unless he.... Well now the movie takes a more conventional turn so to speak (Clouzot's misanthropy maybe)but just for a while.The form is weird beyond comment There are two voices-over,one for the narrator who always refers to the main character as \"our hero\",one for the aforementioned hero.The story takes place,now in Paris,now in Rouen ,Guy de Maupassant's town.In a scene with his shrink ,the hero says the writer's madness was only the expression of his disgust for Man and he draws a parallel between his despair and Maupassant's one.This depressing movie is only suitable for an informed audience.Not for the very short excerpts of X-rated movies,but because after watching it,you may be feeling down in the dumps.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9f651c3f4fb41eea6e9e3ddf8b443cb",
            "input": "I saw the omen when i was 11 on tv. I enjoyed the Trilogy. So when the chance to finally see one at the cinema came around i didnt pass it up. I went in to the cinema knowing that what i was about to see wasnt a cinema release but a made for TV film. However being a fan i couldnt resist. But this Omen movie which i saw at a midnight screening didnt bring chills it brought laughter. Risible Dialogue such as \"it is written that if a baby cries during baptism they reject there god\". What nonsense.No decent set pieces. Faye Grant so Good in V is wasted with this script from hell. No suprises and no fun. However i did laugh out loud several times at our bad it was.Truly Pathetic.1 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa1c968c629742baa4080b65aad5b0cf",
            "input": "I saw this movie by luck, just because I was going through a phase where I had a new found admiration for Bill Pullman and wanted to see all of his recent movies and thank God I did! This Movie has stuck with me ever since and remain one of my favorites! The story revolves around two girls who embark on a dramatic journey in a foreign country where they'll learn the true meaning of freedom.Alice and Darlene were just trying to spend a vacation together before going to college but their trip ended up a much more complicated story. The struggle they go through as they are arrested in Thailand and became prisoners is very moving and intense. The acting is amazing, the images extraordinary, the soundtrack is fantastic and so right for the movie and the message transmitted definitely powerful. I actually can't even find the right words to describe how this movie makes me feel every time I watch it. I know some people haven't appreciated as much as me by the rating the movie has but I swear, this one, you have to see!!! I promise it will stick with you!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fb7909a61c442fd9f3e90d7ca315146",
            "input": "This movie is pretty cheesy, but I do give it credit for at least trying to provide some characterization for it's principles. There are some great moments in the film and the dialogue has some great moments as well.The aerial assault sequence is perhaps the best part of the movie.I guess I really like the idea of what lengths a veteran will go for a fellow veteran. Sure it's not all that well done, but the premise is not at all bad.Tom",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90a2ea1f9c3e45b6a3b2aa9d6cc45279",
            "input": "I've never been a huge fan of Mormon films. Being a Mormon, I've always felt that the humor was too exclusive to the LDS community and made us seem like a bunch of obsessive wackos. I was hoping this would be the breath of fresh air, the Halestorm movie I could finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.Boy, was I wrong.I figured, since this had B-list talent like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, Andrew Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this would have to be at least a little funny. And besides, church basketball is ripe with potential for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I must say, throughout the entire movie, it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. Every joke fell flat, and every opportunity for a genuinely funny gag went ignored. The dialogue was bland, and the film had some of the worst character development I have ever seen. Every single character but Wilson's was less than one-dimensional. It's hard to believe that after nine re-writes the film was still as mind-numbingly stale as the train wreck I witnessed. I can't put into words the rage I felt sitting through this. My friends and I were extras in the final game scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington City, UT. Kurt Hale, the director, was there, and I must say, I avoided all contact with him after the show. He waited at the door, seemingly ready for feedback. I couldn't bring myself to tell him that his film not only ripped away a good hour and a half of my life, but it left a nasty, painful scar that I will never forget.Here are a few specific problems I had: There was a minor love story subplot between the janitor and the chubby piano player, but these two characters came out of nowhere, and were impossible to care about, so my friends and I were left constantly wondering why we were supposed to care about these two lame, uninteresting characters. There were many subplots that popped up every now and then, each promising the audience the chance for laughs, but each one came and went in a puff of smoke, ending before you could even start caring. This was pretty much how the whole movie felt.This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the first REAL funny Mormon movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66d328db1b2641688657e5f655b531f0",
            "input": "A phenomenal achievement in awfulness. It's actually hilariously awful.First off...Nicholas Cage must now have made it to the finals in the Over-Emoting Category in his acting class. Wearing new hair plugs and with a face that has been lifted so many times his pinned back ears seem to be straining to touch in the back he oozes not only a sick smarmiess but creates a \"hero\" character that you have no vested interest in.I don't know what it is with Neil Labute and female characters. He makes females out to be totally deviant and evil...and pays them back by having Cage punch several of them directly in the face and call them all \"b****es\" a few times too. I've enjoyed LaBute's early films and a few of his plays...but it's a strange fascination he has.I'd give this film a 2 out of 10 solely based on Ellen Burstyn's performance. By the time she finally makes her appearance (bravely soldiering through her scenes with her wig line clearly visible on her forehead) it seems like all hope may be lost. She deserves an Oscar right here and now for saying her lines with a straight face and when she appears wearing a white mumu and blue, white, and gold face paint booming about The Wicker Man you know that working with Scorcese and Friedkin really prepped her for this role dang well.This movie is so wrong-headed and cuckoo that is has to be seen to be believed.Highlights include: Nicholas Cage running away from a swarm of bees and then falling down a hill.Nicholas Cage stealing a bicycle and looking like Ms. Gulch from The Wizard of Oz riding around on it.Nicholas Cage running around the island kicking down doors looking for the missing girl.Leelee Sobieski PLUMMETING from a once-promising acting career in a \"brawl\" with Cage.Ellen Burstyn dancing around in a said while mumu.Nicholas Cage screaming \"Who burned it? Who burned it? Who burned it?Who burned it?Who burned it?Who burned it?\" for no reason.Nicholas Cage in a bear costume (I'm not kidding) running through the woods, taking off the costume (but leaving the bear feet on) and then doing some karate moves to some villains.And you haven't lived until you have seen the final 15 minutes of the movie and its dreadful epilogue that looked like it was shot yesterday in your cousin's basement.Needless to say, if you can make it through this film without laughing out loud then you deserve a medal. There was actually a point in the movie where I stopped snickering to wonder if maybe this wasn't an elaborate send-up of \"hysteria\" films...only to be reminded when Cage would scream/shout/whisper his dialogue that he really was taking himself quite seriously.I think this one is destined to be a cult film all over again...just because it's so dreadful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41ff11044c86436f8f520e96b0f68e44",
            "input": "Wow, i'm a huge Henry VIII/Tudor era fan and, well, this was .... interesting. The only one I watched was the Catherine of Aragon one. And wow...just wow. I've seen bad acting before, but this reached new heights. When the actress who played Catherine was umm.. crying? she wails and screams and i have to admit i rewinded many times... many, many times .... funny, funny stuff. The only person who even showed any slight sliver of talent was the actress playing Anne Boleyn (i might be prejudiced though, i do have a slight obsession with Anne Boleyn, she was a really facinating woman, read up on her, it's worth it!) Also, i have read a lot about the Tudor time period and i think that the characters weren't very acurately displayed, they were all very stereotypical. Only see this movie if you are prepared to see a very important time period, and the important lives of those involved turned into a laughing stock.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea3ea850e9a841009b723957ee8d418c",
            "input": "Both my friend and I thought this movie was well done. We expected a light hearted comedy but got a full blown action movie with comic thrusts. We both thought that this movie may have not done so well at the box office as the previews lead us to believe it was a comedy. I was impressed with the supporting actors and of course Dave Morse always puts in a terrific acting job. Most of the supporting cast are veterans not first timers and they were solid. We both felt that the writing and direction were first rate and made comments to each other about buying this movie. If you don't buy rent it for a good time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be56873d4eef4a75bd60febaab2667df",
            "input": "I have seen many a horror flick in my time, all of them absurdly bad, but none reach the depths that this piece of trash lowers itself to. This movie made me angrier and angrier as I watched it as I tried to wrap my head around exactly what this movie was about. Now, after I've seen it, I understand - sort of - what was going on and why, but the movie itself is just too confusing to be enjoyable when you're watching it. Yes, there are the customary scenes of gratuitious violence, one-liners that show the mind-blowing insightfulness of its characters (\"The highway belongs to me...ME!\"), and enough nudity to sufficiently distract us from the \"plot\", but still you'll leave this movie feeling alone and taken advantage of, like a puppy who isn't wanted anymore and is left in a box by the side of the road. Blech.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a935d6fde28146efa05772b877701a6b",
            "input": "Very outdated film with awful, cliché-ridden and mawkish dialog and a very poor construction. In addition, Cassavetes and Falk overact constantly. A pseudo \"good movie\". It takes no time to discover how catastrophic this intellectual turkey is. The first scene is a total bore, filled with histrionics and hysteric exchanges. The sound is horrible. Camera movements are without imagination as is the building of characters. No poetry, no subtle psychology, no interesting shots. The actors smoke constantly and we see ads for beer beverages. Very cheap, indeed. (one exception : Ned Beattie\"s nice and simple way of playing the hit man).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92cb52bba4f148488dfaad67f43931d0",
            "input": "I believe Shakespeare explained what I just read beautifully. Me thinks he (the lady) doth protest too much. The whole thing sounded to me as if the author was trying to convince himself! He sites profane literature (writings from the same time period but not connected with the bible) a number of times however I can think of at least three references off the top of my head which lend historical accuracy to events contained in the bible. Anyone can skew data & prove anything they like but it doesn't make it true. Customs change, word definitions change over time (look at English & German where it is very obviously a common root) nothing stays the same, it's always growing and changing. The bible has many different translations but the King James version is the one I've found to be the best when it comes to any kind of research. In the King James version you will notice there are certain words written in italics. These words have been added by the translators and can be dropped & the mean of the entire verse changes. Writings from around the time of Christ were written without spaces, without punctuation, without paragraphs & without numeric verses. These writings look like one long word & the translators added all of the above. For example how would you read this: GODISNOWHERE do you read it as God is nowhere or do you read it as God is now here? Same string of letters two entirely different meanings. This is why many biblical researchers use a 'Lexicon' to assist them in translation as it provides a word for word translation from the original Arabic, Greek or Hebrew depending on the language in which the scripture was originally written. It's also interesting to note that when translated into symbolic logic you can prove God exists but you can not prove He doesn't exist! In the end I just love listening to people who think they are so smart that they are qualified to judge the almighty. Talk about ego! Putting soapbox away, God Bless Maegi",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d40b6d1ca8c4da5b1920588fc06c8ec",
            "input": "This movie stinks. I don't think I have ever seen a movie so strung up on shock value. The plot was relatively interesting, but the dialog was super flat and the acting was bland. This could have been an a good movie. I think it just relied on it's grotesque visuals. I can usually handle graphic scenes and human taboos, but it felt like Miike shot it for the sake of shooting it. Just one poorly executed film. There just isn't anything to be entertained by watching this film unless you are fascinated by exhausting yourself with explicit scenes of incest, pedophilia, necrophilia, rape, self milking, parental and sibling abuse, and fecal dispersement. I think I just sold the film to many of you, but I meant it when i said this stinks. He has succeeded in other films, but I think you'd be better off watching someone pooping.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c844d921091e4d03b577971ed4de4907",
            "input": "It was pointed out in a now deleted post from another IMDb user that anyone who might see \"The Medusa Touch\" should be warned about a scene that's eerily reminiscent of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in NYC. But I hope anyone reading this will consider this warning. Despite an interesting pedigree (producer Elliott Kastner produced \"Harper\" and \"The Long Goodbye\"; co-producer Arnon Milchan co-produced the Oscar-nominated \"L.A. Confidential\" and screenwriter John Briley won an Oscar for \"Gandhi\") and an international cast, I found \"The Medusa Touch\" to be a heavy-handed, unintentional laugh riot. It was a poorly directed, horribly written and acted mess. It tried to capitalize on the 70s telekinetic thrillers genre. The movie fails on many counts. Please consider \"Carrie\" and the underrated \"The Fury\" (both directed by Brian DePalma). They were two entertaining and exciting thrillers that dealt with the same subject matter.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e9c6fbbe2ca4e4bb987279cbe5f76e2",
            "input": "This is an interesting idea gone bad. The hidden meanings in art left as clues by a serial killer sounds intriguing, but the execution in \"Anamorph\" is excruciatingly slow and without much interest. There is no other way to describe the film except boring. The death clues are the only interesting part of \"Anamorph\". Everything connecting them is tedious. Willem Dafoe gives a credible performance as the investigator, but he has little to do with a script that is stretched to the limit. Several supporting character actors are wasted , including Peter Stormare as the art expert, James Rebhorn as the police chief, Paul Lazar as the medical examiner, and most notably Deborah Harry, who is featured on the back of the DVD case, yet only has a couple lines spoken through a cracked door. Not recommended. - MERK",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f50c453a6e7a411491481c17d9fabecc",
            "input": "This docu-drama is what you would expect from Richard Attenborough, the man who gave us \"Gandhi\": beautifully photographed, compellingly casted, well written in the measured, literate manner that Hollywood discarded in the 30's, and scrupulously accurate. It stands out as a genre film, excelling in its portrayal of native American (or, more appropriately for its Canadian setting, \"First Nations\") culture and standing with \"Black Robe\" as a wonderfully photographed piece of Canoe Country and its culture (here, circa 1934). This idyllic portrait derives drama from its subject: Archie \"Grey Owl\" Belaney, a Scot raised in Hastings (England) by maiden aunts who became so obsessed with the \"red indian\" tales of his childhood that he went to Canada, disappeared into the woods, and became a trapper and adopted son of an Ojibway band. He was a vain man with a habit of marrying and abandoningIndian brides, none of whom seem to have thought less of him for it, for he was also an extraordinarily charming and picaresque character. One of his wives (one smarter than he, by most accounts) propelled him into fame as a writer and early advocate for protecting the wild country of the North, and this forms the focus of Attenborough's tale. The chemistry between Brosnan and Annie Galipeau (as Grey Owl's wife Pony) is engaging and, if not firey, is nonetheless quite touching. A good film when you need some time from the madding crowd.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea7b32557a734cc98689e21d03e6755c",
            "input": "After reading the first 5 reviews on IMDb I was very enthusiastic about this movie. But it's really an awful movie, the total time you see the alien is about 5 minutes (the rest of the movie is cheap suspense), the acting is over the top en the story, oh boy, which story?The story doesn't seem to go in a direction, first they capture the alien (after 7 years! they finally succeed), then they don't know what to do with it (after 7 years?) and even want to release it (why the hell did they capture it?). Then the girlfriend, who's acting is the most over the top, wants to walk away from this madness, then suddenly she doesn't, then again, she does and then she doesn't. Then they come to the conclusion that killing the alien will kill the whole human race (and remember, in all those years no other human have seen these permanently settled aliens) and what do they do? They torture it and blow a bunch of aliens to peaces.This is my first review on IMDb, I'm a very lazy person who doesn't write very soon, so listen to my warning: this move is not worth your time, don't watch this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45c4d11b9f254570a7b5907d511dbc5d",
            "input": "Oh dear, what a horrid movie.The production was so cheap and nasty... Remember the shot from \"the Natural\", where the lightning hits the tree (leaving a glowing stump) that Roy Hobbs makes a bat from?? Well the producers of this movie used that same scene to prefix a scene where a tree branch slammed into the house.I wonder if they paid to use the footage from The Natural, or did they just hope that no-one who would watch the film would pick it up ?Then at the end where they were getting trying to get away in the truck. Such over-acting in the cabin. A really bad film, a really bad film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f011b8409ea4f97b5879e099a6e6384",
            "input": "Coming shortly before the imposition of a morality code darkened the spirits of writers, directors and actors, the first film adaptation of W. Somerset Maugham's \"Of Human Bondage\" titillated countless moviegoers. It has no shock value today, just fine acting.While the cast is excellent, this is Bette Davis's first great role and one of Leslie Howard's best performances. Howard is English wannabe Parisian artist Philip Carey who is gently and firmly told that he lacks any talent and that his dedication is no substitute for true genius. Taking the lesson to heart he returns to London and enrolls in a medical college (one, by the way, that seems to have no female students-at that time there would have been at least a few. Perhaps author/physician Maugham didn't care for distaff medicos).Having tea one day Carey is entranced by a waitress, Mildred Rogers, Bette Davis in a role as a morally loose and basically wicked farrago. Her Cockney accent is as sharp as Eliza Doolittle's. His repeated attempts to date her are greeted with the less than enthusiastic reply, \"I don't mind,\" a sure sign for any man with his head screwed on straight that he's plumbing the depths. Maugham's Mildred supplemented her waitress tips with a bit of old fashioned street-walking, something not clearly brought out here.Carey's besotted prostration serves Rogers' avaricious need for support of the financial kind. He is desperately in love with her-she plays him as a Sunday church organist effortlessly plies her instrument. No sex here. Recognizing that he is getting nowhere, he begins a chaste relationship with Norah, a woman who adores him. Re-enter Mildred, replete with a baby, and in her usual need of being taken care of. Exit heartbroken Norah. Another separation from Mildred and Carey begins a long-term friendship with Sally, abetted enthusiastically by her dad who seems to view eventual marriage as both a good thing for the two young people and a chance to be relieved of one of his nine offspring.The movie reasonably but not entirely follows Maugham's excellent novel. Howard's Carey is naive and vulnerable and for much of the movie his sad eyes remind one of a doe facing a double-barreled shotgun. Mildred is unrestrainedly wicked, a user of the worst kind, her sole preoccupation with her own needs barely disguised when she tries to wheedle Carey with a thin patina of affectionate words (and offers-at one point she promises she'll do \"anything [he] wants,\" a daring statement for the times and one I'm sure audiences fully understood.Pre-Code it may be but Mildred's quick-march dissolution would have satisfied the League of Catholic Decency. The ending is conventional-sin loses, principled behavior triumphs.Director John Cromwell wrought excellent performances from his two main stars, one well-established, the other established largely because of this film. The atmosphere is 1930s London and the trip back in time is worth taking.Available on DVD.9/10 (for Davis's and Howard's performances)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70ef9a1f2470477a8254c325213e0ffd",
            "input": "An unqualified \"10.\" The level of writing and acting in this Australian movie is reminiscent of the very best of \"old\" Hollywood. Sam Neill and Meryl Streep are very good together. Neill matches Streep line for line, and take for take -- it is one of the best showcases yet of his prodigious acting talent and he is at his sexy and gorgeous best, notwithstanding the intensity of his role. This engrossing film is a treat for any movie fan who loves a gripping courtroom drama, portrayed in the most human but unsentimental terms. The movie -- which won several top awards in Australia -- boasts not only a superlative cast and director, but wonderful and authentic Australian locales. It proves that people are the same the world over. And, after all these years, people still delight in repeating the famous Streep line, accent and all: \"A dingo ate moy baby!\" Including that imp \"Elaine Benis\" on \"Seinfeld.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7eaf7ab61e4141a2be2da05d4020d87c",
            "input": "I wish I could give this movie a zero. Cheesy effects and acting. The only reason to see this movie is so you can see how bad it is. Lets start with the kid who plays Brian. What a geek! I couldn't believe the mullet! Then there was the talking to himself. I guess they couldn't just have the movie be silent, but still. Of course they had to have him skinny-dipping too, not something I wanted to see. But Jared gave a great performance, compared to the special effects department. Everything from the bear to the crash was something I could do myself, and better. I seriously doubt that Gary Paulsen had anything to do with the production, seeing as the movie was not even called Hatchet. Finally, I do not think the writer had ever read the book, seeing as nothing was the same. I think the book was great, but this movie stunk like a smelly goat!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50aa578fbae84e9b8c8945619faef9fe",
            "input": "Lock Up Your Daughters is one of the best high-spirited comedies I have ever seen.It is misunderstood since it lacks the \"social commentary\" values that many films of the day (1969) required to be successful.The characters are over-the-top satires of everyday people and played to that purpose by all of the actors.Christopher Plummer shines especially bright as Lord Foppington, a noble with hair too big to fit in the door.The plot involves the usual 18th century stuff; mistaken identities, thwarted romances, corrupt government officials, and jokes at every turn.It answers the questions: What happens when 4 rambunctious, eager to party sailors are on leave in a small British coastal town? And, who do they get involved with and how does it all turn out?Despite doing poorly at the box office, it has great costumes, excellent music(based on the Mermaid Theatre musical of the same name), great,lively acting and sets that are obviously authentic.That it has never been released on either VHS or DVD is truly a shame, since so many bad movies are released every day.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f90b05e82962482a926aad57014b0b2d",
            "input": "In 1990 Brad Pitt and Juiliette Lewis did a TV Too Young To Die where both played the almost the same kind of parts that they do in Kalifornia. I have no doubt that is what led to their casting in this big screen film.Kalifornia finds aspiring writer David Duchovny and his girl friend, art photographer Michelle Forbes on a rocky relationship of sorts due to Duchovny's obsession with writing a book and getting in the minds and souls of serial killers. In fact he's got a most unusual odyssey planned, he wants to go cross country and visit the sites of several famous serial killers. But he and Forbes are flat broke.Fate intervenes in more ways than financial with the arrival of Brad Pitt and Juliette Lewis a pair of strange southern types who agree to split the cost of gas on this cross country trip. It turns out Pitt is a serial killer himself and he decides to do a little research on his own, delving into the mind of someone who is fascinated with amorality.Kalifornia is not the type of film I usually go for, but in fact the acting ability and charisma of Brad Pitt make it work to a large degree. Pitt is the walking definition of an inbred Gothic refugee from Deliverance. But better than he is is Juliette Lewis who once again is playing these low self esteem types which she seems to do well. Watch her scene with Forbes as she does her hair and Lewis describes her sad and pathetic life. Lewis's dialog and Forbes's reactions ought to be shown in acting classes around the country.For those who like their slasher flicks, they don't come better than Kalifornia.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e30d6e0114354dcbbb598f454a6f4bea",
            "input": "As soon as I knew Keira Knighteley being in this flick, I said \"I have to watch this movie\". She's the undisputed main character, Domino, a bounty hunter. Her \"job\", as the \"no action\" scenes would teach us, reflects her rebel, violent attitude to life. I have to admit that it's the very first time that I watch an action movie whose most important scenes are the one in which the guns are far away from characters' hands. So, this stomped me a bit. Anyway, for all the John Woo's fans, there are helicopters falling down, explosions, gunfire as if it would rain, and a lovely Keira that shoots with two machine guns, one per hand. The cast is absolutely brilliant. Going beyond Keira, which in this movie is a real tomboy, pretty much different from the lovely action figure we're used to see, Mickey Rourke is back, with his usual slap-throwing face and his potent body. Christopher Walken makes his job pretty well, as a reality show producer.Let's go to the contents: this movie has a journalistic shape. The talk show scene is \"disgustingly\" real. Anyone that watched that load of . . . you-know-what, can tell that this is the air that you breath in those situations. As well as the producer, when Domino's mom says that the reality that should show Domino's life is \"trash; no offense\", he answers \"I don't take it like an offense\". This movie portrays a difficult life. Domino, coming from a world that didn't want her, Ed (Mickey Rourke), a bounty hunter \"not so bounty\", Choco (the third guy of the band), which family is (using Ed's words), \"the correctional institutes he's been\", and Alf, the driver/bomber coming from Afghanistan during the Russian occupation. This bunch of people represents in some way the humankind born \"without the shirt\"; unlucky, violent, and with nothing to lose, excepts their (as they would consider) miserable lives. The intro of the movie says that it is \"inspired by true story . . . more or less\", so I couldn't possibly tell you how much of this stuff is true. Anyway, going beyond explosions and dozens of weapons (which could have been \"added\" to make the film easier to see, and be classified as an action movie), the characters' story is too realistic to be \"edulcorated\". The interaction between the characters is various, well studied, and definitely not boring. What hasn't convinced me so much is the role of the psychiatrist (Lucy Liu, sober as never in her acting career). It represents only the reason by which Domino starts telling her story (and that's a story). Probably, the only \"con\", in a movie with a lot of \"pros\". All in all: This isn't \"SWAT\". The characters are crafted; they have an identity, a shape. They have a name and a surname (not just \"Gamble\" and \"Street\"). It's the case to say, it's the biography of a girl whose life went as fast as a bullet.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26a9713cb33448b5973d593091b6241d",
            "input": "I must tell you right up front, I am certainly NOT an authority on Bollywood films and have only seen a handful. However, if you've never seen one, DON'T start with this one! I have greatly enjoyed the ones I've seen up until this one, but I just couldn't stand this one. I also must tell you up front that I could not finish this film--it was that annoying. So why was it so annoying? 1. There is a character named 'Rambha' in the film. He is even more annoying than Jar-Jar Binks--which I never would have believed would have been possible. He is so #@^!# annoying!! He spoke in a falsetto voice and I think was meant to be comic relief. Instead, he just grated on my nerves and wanted him to die...slowly! His voice, his mannerisms and his obnoxiousness--he just didn't seem to shut up and dominated every scene he was in--and he needed to die! 2. The heroes had the amazing ability to dodge AK-47 bullets with ease. I kid you not--there was a scene where several unarmed guys took on a small army of guys with these assault rifles!! And, again and again, they avoided taking a single bullet AND beat up the ruffians!!! This made Stallone's actions in \"Rambo II\" look mundane!! 3. The film was so gosh-darn loud, in your face and intense--it practically made my brain bleed!! It was as if the film were made by people under the influence of meth!! Crazy camera angles, INTENSE music and action, action, action...this movie is clearly designed for someone who can't take a movie with plot and wants nearly 100% action.4. The two main characters and their actions and motivations made zero sense...none whatsoever! Perhaps if you are the most ardent action and Bollywood fan you can stand this film, but as for me I can see why it's on IMDb's infamous Bottom 100 list. Wow...this film is bad AND intensely bad!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34257b82e20140359f6ade99272f9043",
            "input": "Several years ago when I first watched \"Grey Gardens\" I remember laughing and finding it hilarious camp. Years later I still laugh out loud when I watch it, but after many viewings I've come to see the beauty in the strange, twisted relationship between the inseparable \"Big\" Edith Bouvier Beale and her daughter \"Little\" Edith Bouvier Beale.Mother and daughter living together in their decaying 28 room East Hampton mansion add a whole new meaning to the term \"Shabby Chic\". With innumerable cats, raccoons and opossums as roommates this Aunt and Niece of Jackie O. allowed filmmakers Albert and David Maysles into their mansion to film them living life day to day. The result is a hilarious, beautiful, sad and moving account of true love and anarchy rule.The relationship between Big and Little Edie is a testament to the unbreakable bonds of love. And their lives an example of drive, determination and free-will. This movie has more to recommend it than I can put down into words. It is a rare experience that you must see for yourself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c6d89b6d6c8411fa01ba3206a42e14d",
            "input": "I completely agree with the other comment someone should do a What's up tiger Lily with this film.It has to be one of the worst french films I've seen in a long time (actually along with Brotherwood of the Wolves, 2 horrendous films in a much too short period of time).It's really sad because the cast is really interesting and the original idea kind of fun. Antoine DeCaunes in particular and Jean Rochefort being among my darlings, I was bitterly disappointed to see them compromised in such a poor film.Lou Doyon is quite bad, as usual which goes to prove that a pretty face and famous parents can get you into the movies but they don't necessarily give you talent.avoid this film, if you want to laugh watch an Alain Chabat instead or some nice period piece full of fun like LA FILLE DE D'ARTAGNAN.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59ff492e1a6c4e35827c3eb2acae666f",
            "input": "This supernatural Peter Weir thriller is truly one of the most haunting and fascinating movies ever seen. Richard Chamberlain does his best performance here as the Australian lawyer who defends a group of young Aborigins accused of murder. As he gets closer on the case, he discovers more about the main defendant, Chris, and not least about himself. Chris tells him that he is a Mulkurul, which appear to be a race of supernatural beings that lived in Australia thousands of years ago. At the same time, extraordinary high rainfall seems to confirm the Aboriginal prophecy of the coming of the LAST WAVE, the one that will drown the world.The dream sequences and the supernatural effects enhance this movie and make it a spectacular experience. Olivia Hamnett and David Gulpilil are solid in the supporting roles, as well as the chap with the difficult name who plays Charlie, the old Aborigin who can turn into an owl. The climax and the ending don't disappoint, in contrast to many other supernatural thrillers who fall flat after a promising hour or so. However, this can not be called a pure thriller. It is a drama as well and talks about spirituality and spiritual identity in the modern world. A masterful work by Peter Weir, the master of visually stunning dramas.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-266615e047604b2ca377e8bad45b528e",
            "input": "This was an impulse pick up for me from the local video store. Don't make the same mistake I did. This movie is tedious, unconvincingly acted, and generally boring. The dialogue between the young priest and his uncle is particularly poorly written and delivered; I cringed at every scene they shared. Dennis Hopper makes a few sparse appearances and is his usual disjointed self; his role was clearly not a stretch for him. And although the movie is supposedly set in Puerto Rico, it feels a lot more like a Hollywood movie lot; all of the main characters are Caucasian and several tend to speak English with pseudo-Irish accents. Odd. Anyway, when you see this one on the shelf of your local video store, keep walking.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e67566fbc0ac442d89f83ad53100051d",
            "input": "One of my favorite movies I saw at preview in Seattle. Tom Hulce was amazing, with out words could convey his feelings/thoughts. I actually sent Mike Ferrell some donation money to help the film get distributed. It is good. System says I need more lines but do not want to give away plot stuff. I was in the audience in Seattle with Hulce and director , a writer I think and Mike Ferrell. They talked for about an hour afterwords. Not really a dry eye in the house. Why Hollywood continues to be stupid I do not know. ( actually I do know , it is our fault, look what we watch)Well you get what you pay for guys. Get this and see it with someone special. It is a gem.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d01ce70dc06040c29ad27d4bdc976d7e",
            "input": "From the decrepit ranks of the already over-saturated 'Hillybilly Horror' sub-genre comes this woeful tale of a vacationing family terrorized by inbred rednecks. Sound familiar? Well it most definitely should to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the horror genre. There is absolutely new here. The film seems content to recycle all thee old worn out clichés (deformed hicks, a peaceful family turned gun-toting killers when push comes to show, the rebellious daughter, the one 'freak' who's good at heart, etcetera...), but does even that half-heartedly enough to make this an utter waste of time. This is forgettable dreck, but humorously enough lead J.D. Hart once starred in a movie called \"Films that Suck\" earlier in his career, quite an ironic omen indeed.My Grade: D-",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bffbaa76d9d42ba9d019d987683a076",
            "input": "The Israeli/Palestinian conflict persists and while the world may be aware of the violence surrounding the division of the two countries, few have a clue to the other aspect of the division - the group of people who want peace and work toward eradicating the separation. Eytan Fox, in THE BUBBLE ('Ha-Buah'), has created a much needed alternative viewpoint of the schism, electing to tell a story that contains some fine humor, a lot of love, and a taste of brutal reality. It is a window into a situation that begs for understanding.In Tel Aviv three close friends are roommates: Lulu (Daniela Virtzer), a beautiful young woman with strong opinions; Yali (Alon Friedman), a very 'out' gay young man who works in a popular café; and Noam (Ohad Knoller), a handsome, somewhat shy fellow who, in addition to his day job in a music shop, is a member of the National Guard and therefore spends his free time serving as a guard at the city's checkpoints. It is during one of these guard duty weekends that he meets a young Palestinian named Ashraf (Yousef 'Joe' Sweid), and a mutual attraction occurs. The three friends decide to 'stowaway' the illegally present Ashraf (whom they nickname with an Israeli name) and while Ashraf and Noam settle into a love relationship, Yali hires Ashraf at his café, and Yali and Lulu both proceed to find love interests, too. All goes well until Ashraf must return home for his sister's wedding. Though in Tel Aviv Ashraf has been able to be openly gay with Noam, life is far different in Jerusalem: Ashraf is told he must marry his sister's groom-to-be sister. In an attempt to rescue Ashraf from his fate, Noam and Lulu disguise themselves as French reporters to gain access to Ashraf. In a moment of supposed seclusion, Noam and Ashraf are discovered kissing by the groom-to-be, and this act gives cause for blackmail in order for Ashraf to remain 'in the closet'.While the young people in Tel Aviv are dancing at an event to raise attention for peaceful coexistence, an attack occurs in Jerusalem - one that has grave consequences not only immediately, but also in the revenge mission Ashraf must now assume. The ending is tragic on many levels and it underlines just how serious the problem between these two countries is.The acting is so very natural that from both the comedic and the tragic aspects the audience completely believes in these beautiful young people. The story finds the right balance between the serious and the lighthearted and it is this balance than makes Eytan Fox such a fine writer/director. More people should watch this important and very fine film. In Hebrew, Arabic, and English with subtitles. Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e4f7ace76f14699a06fc43c8fea94ba",
            "input": "James Bishop (Matt Stasi) goes to a `mental illness facility' for a medical residence assignment with Dr. McCort (Bruce Paynes). There, he realizes that many interns are being killed by `The Ripper', who takes their souls to the devil, in a cult promoted by Dr. McCort. This story is so absurd and imbecile that it is impossible to write a summary. The dialogs are so ridiculous, specially when the character of Helen, the blonde fiancé of James Bishop arrives in the asylum, that it is almost unbelievable that a writer has had the courage to include them in a screenplay. And what about the return of James to the hospital to bring the files of the dead patients? And the cast, composed of ham actors and actresses? Honestly, I do not know what or who is the worst in this film: the screenplay, the director or the cast. The correct answer certainly is all of them. I saw this flick on cable television, and I am astonished how can a producer spend money in such a garbage. This horror movie becomes very funny considering the absurd of the plot. My vote is three.Title (Brazil): `Demônio' (`Devil')",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9aa1eb2f6f154c1988b7302e79b1e51e",
            "input": "It breaks my heart that this movie is not appreciated as it should be. its very underrated. people forgot what movies are really about, nowadays they only think about bum bum movies, which can be quite fun watching with popcorn and friends, like transformers, movies which are oriented, with hyper mega high budget like 300mln or even higher, on special effects only and which are dumb movies without storyline. Its the kind of a movie what i despite most. Of course it is fun watching greatly made CGIs, but we do not gain anything essential from that kind of movies.I honestly think that performance was excellent. Especially Busy Philipps, alongside with Erika Christensen and Victor Garber(whom i respect) made this movie an Oscar worth. Emotional performance by Busy Philipps was astonishing, its such a shame we wont see Oscar in her hands, which she deserves.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-607bbd195fae4ab58c89d4ba3310eff3",
            "input": "THE SOPRANOS (1999-2007)Number 1 - Television Show of all Time Everyone thought this would be a stupid thing that wouldn't go past a pilot episode. The Sopranos has become a cultural phenomenon and universally agreed as one of the greatest television shows of all time. James Gandolfini plays the enigmatic New Jersey crime boss, Tony Soprano, accompanied by a stellar cast. Edie Falco is superb as the worrying, loving upper-middle class mother; Tony Sirico is tremendous as a superstitious, greying consiglieri who is often very funny. While the show has often been criticised for the negative stereotype of Italian-Americans as mafiosi, and to an extent this is undeniable, I can see so many positives from the show. The portrayal of strong family values, friendships, love and compassion; could this be present in a coarse television show about gangsters? Yes. Furthermore, other burning issues are discussed such as terrorism, social inequality and injustice, homosexuality, drugs etc. This is no shallow, dull show about tough guys and violence. It has so much more. Many of the issues we see on the show are very real. The writing which has been pretty much great has infused so successfully current issues and managed to imbred them within the characters' lives, which makes the whole thing more interesting.Credit must go to David Chase who has created an excellent television treasure and to James Gandolfini, for envisioning, television's most complex and enigmatic character. Simply exceptional.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f5dc87586fb4511a6ff4ee2418f46d4",
            "input": "I don't know whether to recommend this movie to the fans of \" Tetsuo \" or not . Why \" Tetsuo \" ? Because you can easily label some things about this movie as a very obvious \" Tetsuo \" rip - off . The concept is similar , editing is equally frantic and fast - which is good because , aside from making the movie more dynamic , it obscures some flaws caused by low budget and other factors .There is lot more gore , less eroticism and , in the case of \" Meatball machine \" , the transformation of human being into a creature that's partially a machine( sounds familiar ? ) called \" Necroborg \" ( very original ) is caused by slimy little aliens .These slimy little scums from outer space actually use human beings as vessels for their gladiator games that they play with each other . They infest the body , somehow manage to put an insane amount of mechanical parts in it pulling them seemingly out of nowhere and turn it into a killing machine that targets other Necroborgs . Their aim is to defeat another alien who is in another Necroborg , rip it out of the corpse and eat it .All in all , the plot sounds somewhat silly and I didn't expect much , but at the end I actually enjoyed this film .As I said before , this is a low budget flick , but it's still relatively decent . Don't expect much from actors , they're mostly not very good , but it can be tolerated . I liked the atmosphere and gore , certain bizarre situations and the way the movie is directed and edited . Although the story is not too original , it possesses certain charm - to me at least .7 out of 10 .",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40138e4737814fc3970156f5b229891b",
            "input": "The Haunted World of Edward D. Wood, Jr. isn't a particularly good documentary. Aesthetically, it's lackluster and cheap looking, the people in it go off on tangents which make it very unfocused and in-cohesive, but this adds to it's charm. I say this because it's a documentary about an oddball that made oddball pictures and surrounded himself with fellow oddballs and, as such, there's really no other way to document the life and career of the man and his crew of misfits. There are some glimpses of insight into both the genius and the ineptness of Wood, and the portrayal of both qualities is a credit to the genuineness of the documentary. Overall, it's worth a watch for the Wood fan and those of cinema in general, but don't expect brilliance here. Expect a documentary made after Wood's own heart.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-053345f8c7c4477fa1763cee20f51fa2",
            "input": "Really the tale of two cocky brothers and their respective falls from grace (via drug addiction) and later redemption. One brother, a self-proclaimed genius played by James Franco is your typical sensitive but intelligent man-child. The other brother is a hard-working future doctor who becomes less judgmental as he himself falls prey to addiction while dealing with the stress of living up to his family's expectations for both children. Not too heavy handed as drug fables are want to be, and all in all a pretty realistic sketch of the family dynamics that drug problems bring about. I'd recommend it to anyone interested in such character studies and commend James Franco for his efforts in what was obviously a labor of love.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4d23f2f7ea8465d8d9d70704e9c00f3",
            "input": "First off, I must say that I made the mistake of watching the Election films out of sequence. I say unfortunately, because after seeing Election 2 first, Election seems a bit of a disappointment. Both films are gangster epics that are similar in form. And while Election is an enjoyable piece of cinema... it's just not nearly as good as it's sequel.In the first Election installment, we are shown the two competitors for Chairman; Big D and Lok. After a few scenes of discussion amongst the \"Uncle's\" as to who should have the Chairman title, they (almost unanimously) decide That Lok (Simon Yam) will helm the Triads. Suffice to say this doesn't go over very well with competitor Big D (Tony Leung Ka Fai) and in a bid to influence the takeover, Big D kidnaps two of the uncles in order to sway the election board to his side. This has disastrous results and heads the triads into an all out war. Lok is determined to become Chairman but won't become official until he can recover the \"Dragon Head Baton\", a material representation of the Chairman's power. The current Chairman, Whistle (Chung Wang) has hidden the baton somewhere in mainland China and the race is on to see who can recover it first.Much of the film is devoted to the recovery of the Baton. As both aspiring leaders search for it they must dodge cops and opposite sides, which leads into one of the stand out scenes in Election, which involves an underling named Jet (Nick Cheung), a machete, and lots of bad guys. Nick Cheung's presence is attention grabbing to say the least... I wonder if this influenced director Johhnie To in any way while making the second Election, as he does deliver more of Jet's character in the sequel.While Nick Cheung gives a scene stealing performance, I must not fail to give due to the rest of the film's actors. Election has a great ensemble cast with well thought out performances that are both subtle and impacting. Simon Yam is his usually glorious self and the film also benefits from heavyweight HK actors like Louis Koo, Tony Leung Ka Fai, and the under-appreciated Suet Lam. There really aren't any weak links in the acting and one could easily believe that they're watching real gangsters.Although the performances are great, one of the most impressive things about Election is Johnnie To's eye for the camera. There are some truly striking shots in the film and it goes without saying that To definitely knows how to frame his shots, as the viewer is treated to a series of innovative and quite brilliant camera placings and angles. All of which makes Election, above all, a great looking film.My issues with the film arises mostly out of the shear amount of characters involved in Election. It gets a bit hard to follow because the film is so full of characters that aren't integral to the plot. While the sequel opts to focus more on the two candidates, the first Election offers the election process as a whole with tons of Uncles, underlings, and police officers crowding the storyline. Maybe the film would have worked better if it would have been a bit longer with more time dedicated to the inner workings of the Triad, or if Director Johnnie To would have funneled down the necessary elements and expounded on them more. Bottom Line- All in all, this is a wonderfully brutal film with a great cast, excellent direction, and leisurely pacing that packs a punch. It's just a little more complicated than it needed to be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d181951062d4586a41407e5751dbad5",
            "input": "There's no way to confront 'Zabriskie Point' from a rational standpoint or attempt to describe it using words and conventions you'd use for other movies. This is because it isn't a movie. It's an idea and a feeling that the filmmakers have that somehow got turned into an object as mundane as a film. What we see are not the unfoldings of a plot, but rather a sequence of events that we don't see in films every day but only imagine happening as the background we ourselves will supply when we hear about some tragic event in the news of or from friends. We we see is our imagination of people that are abstractions to us- no one we know, but we've doubtless heard of them in a book or on TV or somewhere. So what do we see? Events. We see people arguing, driving, and inevitably, escaping. Only the escape is from something intangible- it is the collective situation and cruelty that the mass of a civilization has allowed to exist though laziness, or...human nature. Set in late 1960s Los Angeles, our players act against and in response to the self-inflicted miseries of modern existence. These creatures are effectively blank slates that can display any trait we can imagine if we desire. Although the actions taken might be seen as criminal or irresponsible, , the characters are not themselves criminals. They are human beings seeking a return to a familiar, non-manufactured existence that is beyond the normalcy they experience everyday. Not that they are ever happy or sad, but they achieve a type of self actualization when they move beyond and away from the suicide of modern living. They only achieve true life in the natural world, even though that is the next victim of modern existence. At the end, 'Zabriski Point' is a eulogy of humanities attachment to the natural world. As even the most desolate pieces of the earth succumb to our notions of progress, we lose our souls on the path to death of the human spirit.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-792da435fd2f45b0b0139c9d651717fa",
            "input": "I loved this movie, and I am one of the older people who is not supposed to enjoy it, or so it seems. No, this movie is not deep -- who cares? These kinds of movies never are. But strangely, there is a message in it. It's that we each have the potential to be whatever we want to be.Parker Posey is great in this movie. I've always thought that she bears some resemblance facially to Katharine Hepburn. So, it's great to see that both Hepburn and Posey made movies about librarians (Hepburn's is The Desk Set). All librarians, especially those with a sense of humor, should see Party Girl.I gave this movie an 8. It is not by any means a great film by cinematic standards, although there are some nice shots in it. But it is incredibly charming and entertaining.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34ba643afb6f4184ab57bfc5f75fe657",
            "input": "I am of \"the Christopher Reeve Generation\" it is fair to say that he was the best actor to play Superman yet, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying other actors in the role, and George Reeves makes a pretty good bid to knock Chris off the top, though he just barely falls short. That doesn't stop me from enjoying this film, it has a lot going for it. It has all that a movie needs, a plot with beginning, middle, and end, plus all those parts are intelligently written. The film is edgy both in acting and storyline, something a film-noir but with tights. The story is both exciting and meaningful, this is a movie with a message that isn't too preachy. I am still amazed this was shot over 12 days, oh the glory days of Hollywood, when we didn't have to wait 5 years just to see if the movie would fall into development hell... The film is polished and expertly made, directed by Lee \"Roll'em\" Sholem, best known for directing with both speed and efficiency. It never lets the constraints of technology slow it down, in fact there is some creative things done to create the effect of flight, including putting a camera on a boom on a truck and shooting high and traveling fast to make it look like we are seeing it from Superman's point of view, also a few closeups of George in process work, and a long shot of an animated Superman. This is now available on DVD as an extra feature on the first season of the George Reeves Television series. A DVD worth owning in its own right, the inclusion of the film as its original whole, is icing on the cake.Give Blood Today God Bless!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9e6b5598c814bc5b6f36ca81a1a8848",
            "input": "While William Shater can always make me smile in anything he appears in, (and I especially love him as Denny Crane in Boston Legal), well, this show is all about glitz and dancing girls and screaming and jumping up and down.It has none of the intelligence of Millionaire, none of the flair of Deal or No Deal.This show is all about dancing and stupid things to fill in the time.I watched it of course just to check it out. I did watch it for over 45 minutes, then I had to turn it off.The best part of it was William Shatner dancing on the stage. He is a hoot!!! unfortunately, this show WILL NOT MAKE IT.That's a given",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36a8feaf5ac2432fb23eeb4eafdc110d",
            "input": "This wasn't what i wanted to see. I bought this on DVD and under the movie i found myself irritated and turned off the movie for a moment.Heres what i didn't like:1 They were shooting at the father2 The tribes was really annoying3 the dinosaurs (mostly)looked to faked4 The bad scientist well he was annoying5 The picture quality on the DVD was really badWhat i DID like: 1 The music by Jerry Goldsmith. This music is really great. I have the bootleg soundtrack from this movie. Sadly the sound quality is not good, but its OK for its time.2 The first time we see the dinosaurs they inspire a sort of awe.3 Baby is kinda cute when he is in the water and is playing4 That funny scene with the tent. 5 The children who sees this film would hopefully learn that evil always loses.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9e881a53ead4083a7d5bfde7067c2e9",
            "input": "This movie promised bat people. It didn't deliver. There was a guy who got bit by a bat, but what was with the seizures? And the stupid transformation? Where was the plot? Where was the acting? Who came up with the idea to make this? Why was it allowed to be made? Why? Why? I guess we'll never know.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11f70016a4fc47c489abd8d40382ee7b",
            "input": "Errol Flynn is \"Gentleman Jim\" in this 1942 film about boxer Jim Corbett, known as the man who beat John L. Sullivan. Directed with a light hand by Flynn's good friend, Raoul Walsh, the film also stars Alexis Smith, Jack Carson, Alan Hale Sr., William Frawley and Ward Bond. Flynn plays an ambitious, egotistical young man who has a natural talent for boxing and is sponsored by the exclusive Olympic Club in San Francisco in the late 1800s. Though good-natured, the fact that he is a \"shanty Irishman\" and a social climber builds resentment in Olympic Club members; most of them can't wait to see him lose a fight, and they bet against him. Despite this, he rises to fame, even working as an actor. Finally he gets the chance he's been waiting for, a match with the world champion, John L. Sullivan (Ward Bond). Sullivan demands a $10,000 deposit to insure that Corbett will appear to fight for the $25,000 purse. Corbett and his manager (Frawley) despair of getting the money. However, help comes in the form of a very unlikely individual.This is a very entertaining film, and Jim Corbett is an excellent role for Flynn, who himself was a professional fighter at one time. He has the requisite charm, good looks and athleticism for the role. Alexis Smith plays Victoria Ware, his romantic interest who insists that she hates him. In real life, she doesn't seem to have existed; Corbett was married to Olive Lake Morris from 1886 to 1895.The focus of the film is on Corbett and his career rather than the history of boxing. Corbett used scientific techniques and innovation and is thought of as the man who made prizefighting an art form. In the film, Corbett is fleet of foot and avoids being hit by his opponents; it is believed that he wore down John L. Sullivan this way.Good film to catch Flynn at the height of his too-short time as a superstar.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1b5bf81315c4558ab6f348c8a9cf4d8",
            "input": "John Waters most accessible film to date is one of his better ones, considering it cut down on all of the campiness and outright vulgarity which seem to litter most of his previous work. Sure, the nudity and the sexual references are still there, at least it is presented in a fashionthat cannot be deemed too foul or disgusting. Due to some great casting choices, this film really brought out the silliness associated with modern art and the subjective nature of your modern artist. Funny and somewhat lighthearted (if that is possible for Waters), this is one of those films I would watch on a rainy day.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0b8a117fdb04050bf86eeed567f55f1",
            "input": "This is an \"odysessy through time\" via computer animation, supposedly th work of over 300 artists. Made in the late '80s and released in 1990, this was cutting edge stuff for the day. I thought it was good and quite interesting in spots.Most of the short scenes made no sense, just forms evolving into other forms, but that was fun to watch. This is all about visuals, not really about any kind of a story. There were some strange sequences in which odd-looking men- creatures would dance around with birds overheard. All of it is computer animated which was new back then. Even the term \"computer animated\" was not well-known.It's simply a chance to show off this new technology in short bits of cartoon-like happenings with beautiful colors and imaginative scenes. No words, just pictures with electronic music. Stoners must have really loved this.It's a nice, intriguing 40 minutes of \"eye candy\" and \"head candy.\" By today's CG effects this may have lost impact, but I think you'd still be entertained by this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58f58cdab0eb49d383f6e21066de1bdd",
            "input": "After having seen the Canadian/Icelandic/British 2004 production of \"Beowulf & Grendel,\" which I thought brilliant and stunning, I approached this--the first of 3 newer Beowulf movies due out this year--with trepidation. As soon as I heard \"Viking\" and saw the horned helmets, I groaned. These were Migration Era Swedes and Danes, not Vikings (they came later). And even the Vikings never wore horns on their helmets (horns make it easy for your enemy to knock your helmet off and then brain you). Then there's Hrolfgar's palace, which looks like a set for a movie about Greece or Rome, not 6th-century Denmark. The swords and armor look like props left over from earlier films set in various historic periods. I spotted weapons that might have been used by Crusaders in \"Kingdom of Heaven,\" and one character was even wielding a Windlass Steelcrafts reproduction movie sword from \"Beowulf & Grendel\"! Beyond the basic plot of the original epic poem, the writing was dismal and the acting totally wooden and unconvincing. The biggest yuk was a secret-weapon crossbow, complete with sighting scope and exploding projectiles, that looked like something bought from Iraqi insurgents. The special-effects monster and his mom were so on steroids that Beowulf could never have torn off an arm, as he did in the poem. Thank the gods for bazooka crossbows! I could go on, but I won't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f7781348eb54636a989a44dca032a23",
            "input": "Why was this film made? Even keeping in mind the generous tax concessions that Australian film investors were given, there can be no reasonable explanation for this film being given the go-ahead. For goodness sakes, the actors cast in this film are Aussie b-grade celebs (not actors, people like John Michael 'Hollywood' Howson, the original drummer from the band in Hey Hey Its Saturday, and the voice-over guy in Countdown. But in saying that, this is still very watchable as long as you give it the brain attention it deserves : none. The script is bad (even for a self-confessed b-grade horror) and the acting and film quality is worse. It often looks as though it is a home movie, but even a home movie has 'realism'. Anyone interested in Australian cinema, please, for the love of God, pretend this film was NEVER made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0628cd5982f44e6ca91312aac1bac2f5",
            "input": "First off, I would like to point out that the reason why I gave this movie 1 star out of 10 is because there is no option to give it NO stars! it really is that bad! I was never eager to see this film after I saw the ads for it, I ended up seeing it only by chance because some friends of mine had tickets and had one spare so I tagged along. Before seeing it I had a fairly good idea that it wouldn't be genius - the premise seemed far too silly and stupid for anything good to come out of it, but at the back of my mind I was thinking \"but there must be something good about it for UMA THURMAN and Luke Wilson do to the film...\" not that I think either of them are particularly terrific but they are big-named stars who would normally only do films that would enhance their reputations. However, about 10-20 minutes into the feature I realized that the movie was probably worse than I had at first anticipated. I was shocked at how terrible the script was. It really gave the actors NOTHING to work with, so much so that they really looked like they didn't know what they were doing (especially Luke Wilson). The story was completely predictable - if you've seen the ad then you've pretty much seen the movie! And there was nothing original about it - it pretty much borrows from every 'super-hero' story that has ever been which would be acceptable had the film been set up as a satire of that genre, but alas it wasn't. The direction seemed to be of realism. I got the feeling that the director wanted the film to feel completely realistic and not satire at all, and yet there were some moments in the film that were so unbelievably unrealistic that it would have worked if it were a satire. At one moment in the movie two of the characters seem to die and one of the surviving characters has a line like \"Oh well, she's dead...time to move on\" and he says it in such a droll voice that it completely didn't make any sense. I found myself checking my watch after about 40 minutes to see how much longer I would have to sit through it. And then it struck me...I began to think \"I wonder if the studio have made this picture as a test to see if they can make the worst possible movie ever made, and still pull a large audience...\" I couldn't think of any other reason why this film would be made. For movies to be made these days, the script goes to a massive screening process and very very few scripts actually make it to the production stage...I can't comprehend how this one got past the first draft stage... By the end, and exceedingly, dumb-founding-Ly stupid climax, I was laughing heartily - just not at what the film-makers wanted me to laugh at, but instead at how ridiculous and stupid the movie was. Thank God I didn't have to pay money to see it...because that would have really annoyed me!!! Oh, and could I just add, that of the two Wilson brothers, I have always preferred Luke because I think he is a better, more versatile actor...but if he wants to step even further into OWEN's shadow then this is exactly the way to do it...I doubt that he will get many more job offers after this crappy waste of 2 hours!!! and remember, it only got a generous 1/10 because I couldn't select 0!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec7f7395d62a469d9454b5cd8d0c754d",
            "input": "This is by far THE WORST movie i have ever watched. I've seen some pretty awful movies in my time but this ones takes the cake, no, wait, i mean the the whole damn bakery. It is so bad that i believe a word to describe the way you will feel after watching this atrocity has yet to be created. Please just do yourself a favor, if you ever get the urge to watch this and watch thirty minutes of that annoying purple dinosaur Barney, then multiply that thirty times fold and you would still only get a small fraction of the horror you would be in store for. In summation, i guess you really can call it a horror movie, but only if you're willing to be scared senseless by the worst acting in the business and utterly pointless story.Real Rating, -10 Disgusting",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a81084e5e5ba42039a7c2b2be3c35b31",
            "input": "The two things are are good about this film are it's two unknown celebrities.First, Daphne Zuniga, in her first appearance in a film, young and supple, with looks that still encompass her body today, steals the very beginning, which is all she is in, and that is that. She is obviously just starting out because her acting improved with her next projects.Second, the score by then known composer Christopher(Chris) Young is what keeps this stinker from getting a one star...yeah, I know one star more is not much, but in this movie's case, it is a lot.The rest is just stupid senseless horror of a couple a college students who try to clean out a dorm that is due for being torn down, getting offed one by one by an unsuspecting killer, blah, blah, blah...we all know where this is going.Watch the first eighteen minutes with Daphne Zuniga, then turn it off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c126ac7e68454b98b53d2b2b5215e12b",
            "input": "An excellent film depicting the cross currents in the lives of a multi-ethnic mix of not so ordinary people in the rural Pacific Northwest. Solid directing and writing along with fine acting, especially the performances by Kwami Taha and Dan Stowe. Interestingly, this film was made in the same year as the highly successful \"Crash,\" written and directed by Paul Haggis. The pace of the action may not be as frantic as that in urban Los Angeles, and the characters may seem to be better acquainted with each other in \"Apart From That,\" but the personal relationships of the characters are as flawed and troubled and their stories as resonant as any of those in \"Crash.\" For those viewers who appreciated \"Crash\" this is a must see film. Also, fans of Jim Jarmusch and John Cassavetes will like this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e6e050bdf0f4a99bf2a2141f813b6c8",
            "input": "Dr. K(David H Hickey)has been trying to master a formula that would end all disease and handicaps, but needs live donors to complete his work. His doctor brother Richard(Dennis O'Neill)has a son named Eddie(Derek Philips)who is accepted to medical school. Eddie has a girlfriend named Sarah(Lizabeth Cardenas)who is pre-law and plans to attend law school herself the coming fall. She and Eddie resume their relationship when Sarah calls things off with her current boyfriend who is also shagging the lady of Walt(Bill Sebastian;Eddie's best friend who recently paid for his cheating girlfriend's boob job). Eddie accidentally gets hit by a car and appears on the throes of death when Dr. K makes a suggestion to Richard..let him \"recuperate\" Eddie using his secret, illegal methods. When Dr. K applies his serum to Eddie horrifying results occur. Eddie's face bulges massive warts while he has also acquired a taste for human flesh. Many will die so that Eddie can feed this uncontrollable appetite he can't quench. Soon he may even pose a threat to his father and girlfriend..Eddie Monster must be stopped.Typically awful direct-to-video horror flick suffers from a severe lack of budget, acting, and overall talent. The premise, which seems like an interesting fright-fest, fails to deliver even as a zombie flick. The gore is limited with a few munching scenes but most of the violence occurs off-camera. The use of time to move the story along can really get annoying.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-233d1d1c14c74e9b83daa76ca122aa4d",
            "input": "In the tradition of G-Men, The House On 92nd Street, The Street With No Name, now comes The FBI Story one of those carefully supervised films that showed the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the best possible light. While it's 48 year director J. Edgar Hoover was alive, it would be showed in no other kind of light.The book by Don Whitehead that this film is based on is a straight forward history of the bureau from it's founding in 1907 until roughly the time the film The FBI Story came out. It's important sometimes to remember there WAS an FBI before J. Edgar Hoover headed it. Some of that time is covered in the film as well.But Warner Brothers was not making a documentary so to give the FBI flesh and blood the fictional character of John 'Chip' Hardesty was created. Hardesty as played by James Stewart is a career FBI man who graduated law school and rather than go in practice took a job with the bureau in the early twenties.In real life the Bureau was headed by William J. Burns of the Burns Private Detective Agency. It was in fact a grossly political operation then as is showed in the film. Burns was on the periphery of the scandals of the Harding administration. When Hoover was appointed in 1924 to bring professional law enforcement techniques and rigorous standards of competence in, he did just that. Through the Hardesty family which is Stewart and wife Vera Miles we see the history of the FBI unfold. In addition we see a lot of their personal family history which is completely integrated into the FBI's story itself. Stewart and Miles are most assuredly an all American couple. We follow the FBI through some of the cases Stewart is involved with, arresting Ku Klux Klan members, a plot to murder oil rich Indians, bringing down the notorious criminals of the thirties, their involvement with apprehending Nazi sympathizers in World War II and against Communist espionage in the Cold War.There is a kind of prologue portion where Stewart tells a class at the FBI Academy before going into the history of the bureau as it intertwines with his own. That involves a bomb placed on an airline by a son who purchased a lot of life insurance on his mother before the flight. Nick Adams will give you the creeps as the perpetrator and the story is sadly relevant today.Of course if The FBI Story were written and produced today it would reflect something different and not so all American. Still the FBI does have a story to tell and it is by no means a negative one.The FBI Story is not one of Jimmy Stewart's best films, but it's the first one I ever saw with my favorite actor in it so it has a special fondness for me. If the whole FBI were made up Jimmy Stewarts, I'd feel a lot better about it. There's also a good performance by Murray Hamilton as his friend and fellow agent who is killed in a shootout with Baby Face Nelson.Vera Miles didn't just marry Stewart, she in fact married the FBI as the film demonstrates. It's dated mostly, but still has a good and interesting story to tell.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9f65a4436fb4f2f8e5b9183ffe75184",
            "input": "The main question I pose concerning this film is, how do you film a cole porter musical and only use 3 of his 15 songs! merman and lahr played the lead roles on broadway, here they are replaced by the weaker red skelton and lucille ball. plot changes abound and the fun is lost.SKIP IT.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-650efc21a7d84fa8ae20ca2b89c8d994",
            "input": "The first ten minutes of \"Just Looking\" really dictates the direction most of this movie takes. Lenny (Ryan Merriman) is a 14 year old boy living in New York in the '50s. He has a burning desire to see two people have sex. Who are the best people he has in mind? Well, his own mom and stepfather of course! How pleasant. Unfortunately for Lenny, he is caught before he sees anything and is sent away for the summer to stay with his uncle and his uncle's wife.Lenny's next plan is to see his uncle and his wife have sex. However, the wife is quite pregnant and they aren't currently sleeping together. Then Lenny makes a new friend. Him and his buddy spend most of their free time hanging around a couple of girls. They have a little club where all they do is sit around and talk about sex. The problem is...it's not done in an innocent, charming 1950's sort of way. I am no prude by ANY means, but I found it rather disturbing listening to these kids talk about masturbation, blowjobs and anal sex. That kind of rawness may work in a movie like \"Kids\" (1995) but in this film it just seems perverted.Gretchen Mol is utterly wasted here as Hedy, a former bra model who becomes the object of Lenny's carnal desires. Jason Alexander needs to stay as far away from the director's chair as possible. \"For Better Or Worse\" (1996) was awful and now this. What a waste. 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f25d2374724481298566cb108a375e3",
            "input": "Excellent Warner Bros effort starring Errol Flynn in one of his best screen performances. It's often cited as his best, and I can't really judge fully until I have seen his \"Dawn Patrol\". However, his work in \"They Died With Their Boots On\" takes some beating. I'm a big Flynn fan (he's my favourite actor after James Mason--it also helps that he's an Aussie) and I think he's just marvellous, a great screen presence and also a great actor. He is the centrepiece of \"Gentleman Jim\" as the legendary boxer with the fancy footwork, but he is also backed up by a literate, warm and funny script, and Raoul Walsh's direction. Every Walsh film I have seen never loses a beat of it's pace, he truly was a born film-maker. Walsh directs the ring scenes beautifully, as he does with the lighter moments and that poignant, great final scene between Ward Bord and Flynn. Add to that great production values (the \"Gay Nineties\" never looked better!) and a lovely supporting cast and it's pretty much perfect entertainment. Alan Hale usually played Flynn's sidekick, but here is his father, and it still all works. Alexis Smith is Flynn's love interest. The pair are head over heels in love with fighting with each other.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c99e50c509fc48deabeec96e6793c7d9",
            "input": "I have never commented on IMDb before, but I feel I have to after watching The Batman animation. Its absolute rubbish! Warner Brothers had the perfect animation series in Batman in the early 90s so what the hell are they doing trying to mess with the winning formula? I feel like writing a complaint letter to WB. The original animation was dark and brooding, exactly the way Batman was intended to be. WB had to mess this up with some tripe Batman of the Future. Now they produce this drivel. The Joker doesn't remotely resemble the Joker from DC comics. DC should sue. I urge everyone who agrees with me to email or write to WB and use people power to get back the original formula",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-579fc11575294bcdbbb88618816c57a6",
            "input": "This is my all-time favorite Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers film. The dialogue between the two is so cute and funny and very clever. Not to mention this film contains some of the best songs recorded by the two; like I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket and Let's Face the Music and Dance. If I remember correctly, this was the film that introduced me to Fred Astaire so I suppose because of that it will always hold a special place in my heart (sorry for the sentimental cr*p but I'm woman so get over it)All in all this film gets an 8/10 from me. The choreography was superb and also the fact that Lucille Ball is in it makes it even more awesome.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27aedbd271af4d9093e414c952b29ec4",
            "input": "I'm sorry but this is just awful. I have told people about this film and some of the bad acting that is in it and they almost don't believe me. There is nothing wrong with the idea, modern day Japanese troops get pulled back in time to the days of Busido warriors and with their modern weapons are a match for almost everything. When the troops first realise something strange is happening does every single person in the back of the transport need to say \"Hey my watch has stopped\"? Imagine lines like that being repeated 15+ times before they say anything else and you have the movie's lack of greatness in a nutshell.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9ecd0a7c019463fb1c0fea83abb12ab",
            "input": "Yes, I call this a perfect movie. Not one boring second, a fantastic cast of mostly little known actresses and actors, a great array of characters who are all well defined and who all have understandable motives I could sympathize with, perfect lighting, crisp black and white photography, a fitting soundtrack, an intelligent and harmonious set design and a story that is engaging and works. It's one of those prime quality pictures on which all the pride of Hollywood should rest, the mark everyone should endeavor to reach.Barbara Stanwyck is simply stunning. There was nothing this actress couldn't do, and she always went easy on the melodramatic side. No hysterical outbursts with this lady - I always thought she was a better actress than screen goddesses like Bette Davis or Joan Crawford, and this movie confirmed my opinion. Always as tough as nails and at the same time conveying true sentiments. It is fair to add that she also got many good parts during her long career, and this one is by far the least interesting.The title fits this movie very well. It is about desires, human desires I think everyone can understand. Actually, no one seems to be scheming in this movie, all characters act on impulse, everybody wants to be happy without hurting anybody else. The sad fact that this more often than not leads to complications makes for the dramatic content into which I will not go here.I liked what this movie has to say about youth, about maturing and about the necessity to compromise. The movie I associate most with this one is Alfred Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt, it creates a similar atmosphere of idealized and at the same time caricatured Small Town America. The story has a certain similarity with Fritz Lang's considerably harsher movie Clash by Night, made one year earlier, where Stanywck stars in a similar part. I can also recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d4d94ef156440dd9ea437e93a36dbb6",
            "input": "I have to admit I've caught this one a few times on the USA Network. There's just something about the, well, sheer stupidity of this flick which makes me want to watch it whenever it's on. Yes, you're right about the sub-par acting, the plot which only an seven year old could like, etc. But I can't help feeling sympathetic toward some of the actors. Then again, a few of these actors signed up for the even more atrocious sequel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d56e612c2dc4334ad12674c6aca074b",
            "input": "I'm glad that this is available on DVD now. This film is an excellent example of the triumph of content & style over empty-headed flashing lights & constant loud noises.Essentially, if you have a short attention span or lack the wit & imagination to engage with literary narrative you won't like this film. The reasons for this are quite simple, but unfortunately rarely achieved: Matthew Jacobs has done a fantastic job of transposing the story of Catherine Storr's novel 'Marianne Dreams' successfully to a screenplay. An unenviable task as anyone who has seen a film of a book will undoubtedly know.The casting is excellent, allowing director Bernard Rose to use the actors in a way that is rarely seen now; they indulge in the craft of acting! I know, I know, actors doing their job & acting instead of resorting to mugging inanely at the camera lens whist a kaleidoscope of car chases, explosions & fire fights break out around them is a genuinely rare treat, but it does actually happen in this film.This brings me to the final reason that this is a film for the imaginative thinker & not the spoon-fed tabloid reader - Apart from a solid script, direction & acting, it relies on atmosphere, suspense & implied horror. If it is to be categorized as horror then the presentation of 'Paper House' is more in the vein of Sophocles than Tobe Hooper.In conclusion then, if you like lots of loud noises, explosions, constant cuts, & bright flashing colours you'd be better off watching 'Transformers', but if you like a suspenseful story which unfolds through a skillful & evocative use of narrative without insulting your intelligence by force feeding you cacophonous nonsense then this might just be your thing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc287d4e2cf54949ba844027fb33e1ed",
            "input": "How anyone can say this is bad is beyond me. I loved this show before I even saw it. For 3 reasons, 1. The Story intrigued me, 2. Jessica Alba and 3. James Cameron! Please ignore the bad comments and Please watch the whole first Season before you decide that it's bad because I know that if you watch the first Season you will LOVE it and go out and Buy Season 1 as well as Season 2 on DVD and then Join the campaign to get Season 3 Made!I Hate Fox and I'm sure a lot of you \"Dark Angel\" fans hate them too. They have a thing for Canning Good Shows! Don't you all agree?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8d20f97531d4d24b3ebfe51619a2eb8",
            "input": "Having read Diamond's book, I was slightly disappointed in the series, but all in all, it is quite informative. Reading the other comments, it is comforting to know that the 'culture warriors' are hard at work, seeing 'attacks' on 'Western Civilization' under every rug.Is Diamond a little preachy ? Sure. Like a lot of academics, he sees his theory as the most important thing ever. He uses the phrase 'guns, germs, and steel' at seemingly every opportunity during the series. We get it, after about the first 10 minutes.Is Diamond a little simplistic (in the series) ? Sure. The part about the Spaniards in South America is particularly amusing, condensing some very long, complicated history down to 'smallpox, swords, and horses', wrapping up the whole conquest of South America in about 15 minutes. But the point remains valid - these things did in fact contribute (but not totally define) the reasons for the Spaniard's success against the established cultures.Is he preaching *against* Western Civilization in any way ? Nope. Not a word. Not to my ear. All he says is that luck played a large part in determining which cultures advanced more quickly, *not* that luck is the only reason.In the end, if you're looking for something that validates your own sense of superiority, then this series is not for you. But if you are interested in all of the factors than influence how societies succeed or fail, this series presents a useful interpretation of the historical evidence.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-877dc4d3fc044fef99bbb09099c58c06",
            "input": "I think Lion King 1 1/2 is one of the best sequels ever as if not the best out of the three Lion King movies! In the movie Timon and Pumbaa tell us where they came from and having trouble fitting in with others such as Timon having trouble digging tunnels with other Meercats! Timon and Pumbaa journey off into finding their dream place and find it and soon find it and also Simba who they raise but soon they must choose between their dream place or helping Simba face his evil Uncle Scar and proclaim his right as the Lion King of Pride Rock! Filled with wonderful new characters like Timon's Ma(Julie Kavner) and Uncle Max (Jerry Stiller). I think my favorite character was Uncle Max because he was very funney and was voiced by a funney comedian Jerry Stiller the father of Ben Stiller. Disney was smart to cast Stiller in that role! Filled with wonderful characters, animation, and story and music Lion King 1 1/2 is in my opinion the best of any sequel and better than Simba's Pride even though I will admit I really did like that one too! Lion King 1 1/2 is a great Disney sequel the whole family can enjoy! It's got a good story and is very funney! 10 out of 10!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33711c04926549e5924fada366c75c3c",
            "input": "MAJOR LEAGUE: BACK TO THE MINORS (1998) ½* Starring: Scott Bakula, Eric Bruskotter, Corbin Bernsen, Dennis Haysbert, Jensen Daggett, Written and directed by John Warren 100 minutes Rated PG-13 (for language and some violence) By Blake French: \tBelieve it or not, in the new John Warren comedy \"MAJOR LEAGUE: BACK TO THE MINORS\" there is one funny scene. It consists of a sequence where an infuriated coach throws a baseball hard into the wall behind him only to have it hit the cement and bounce back and smash him in the face. It's not much, but with the exception of a few one-liners, it's all this film has to offer...enough said. This movie is not only structurally impaired, characteristically undeveloped, predictable and badly written, but also just plain bad. Even non-critical audience members will hate this movie with all that they got. It is so familiar it just isn't funny. How many times does the same movie about sports have to be made? Last years we saw this same material in \"Air Bud: Golden Receiver,\" and as bad as that film was, this is even worse. At least \"Air Bud\" was family oriented. \"Major League Back to the Minors\" is too vulgar for a wholesome family to view together on a Sunday afternoon. It is too childish for adults. So who is this film for? Teenagers? Elderly? People who are so desperate for entertainment they would rent something like this?\tThe film, like many others like this, has one basic point it tries to make: teamwork conquers all. Yes it does, and what a great moral to try to prove. Too bad we have already seen and excepted it so many times over and over have such little talent and intelligence that their cheerleaders are men in a ballerina costumes. Where the silly announcers form their own \"buddy comedy routine\" muttering one liners to themselves like \"They suck,\" \"This kids fast ball is timed with an hour glass,\" \"This guy dropped out of ball for a while to find something he lost--maybe it was his mind,\" \"Somebody needs a nap,\" and \"ever see a sunset as beautiful as that play.\" Where the characters have such little significance to each other that we never know them by name. And where the only heartfelt lecture scene about teamwork is so unknowledgeable that it is almost funny.\t\"Major League Back to the minors\" is so bad; it stalls its trite ending right in the middle of a good closing sequence. The good baseball team is on a comeback, they are about to win and--the power goes out. I was thinking for a minute that this piece of trash had come to a conclusion, but in reality, its false final scene exists only to add minutes to the running time. The movie basically consists of a series of unrelated sketches that throw in so many putrid jokes it is are not funny. There is another kind-of-funny line of dialogue that has a coach and a player talking to each other about why a long time outfielder is not wanted in that position any longer. The coach's answer: \"You're too old, too slow, and too fat.\" The player's reaction is to die for. But that scene certainly does not make this movie noteworthy of you time, and certainly is not worth a cent of your money. So here is another dreadful entrée into this genre of film, another that is doomed with its own script, which is failed before seen, and another which is so familiar it seems like deja vu all over again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0614a226153453faff146c777c8525f",
            "input": "I was speechless and devastated after my first viewing of this - many parts of GREY GARDENS are very funny and unbelievably surreal - documentary of not, this really gives Fellini or David Lynch a run for their money in the weirdsville sweepstakes. I kept focusing on how these women (who are clinically way beyond eccentric) reveal their own humanity in the most surprising of ways, and I wonder whether their retreat from the world was prompted by something beyond the stuffiness of life in the unreal blue-blood universe, perhaps some abuse, or perhaps simply a streak of defiance and rebellion that spiralled out of their control and took on a life of its' own. This might be one of the greatest ever films that comes dangerously close to exploitation, without going completely over the edge - as the Edies do their thing, I kept noting things like the empty gin bottles in the rubble-strewn bedroom, cats urinating on the bed, racoons emerging from holes in the walls, and the final scene seemed incredibly sad - like a child's birthday party gone seriously wrong. Very definitely worth seeing and seeking out - you'll never forget it, but very disturbing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e36608e9241e4db7aab25f9d441217cb",
            "input": "Composed, elegant Carol (marvelously played by the beautiful Rebecca Brooke), her nice husband Eddie (likable David Houseman), Carol's wacky, constantly eating best gal pal Anna (delightfully essayed with infectious comic zeal by the adorable Chris Jordan), and Anna's hunky, amorous husband Pete (a typically fine Eric Edwards) are a quartet of liberated swingers who enjoy having frequent group sex with each other. Their usual routine gets disrupted when Carol's lonely, repressed, but still alluring widow mother Jennifer (a superbly moving performance by the lovely Jennifer Welles) drops by for a visit. Pretty soon Jennifer loosens up and becomes a willing participant in the swingers' blithely pleasurable and uninhibited carnal lifestyle, with everyone except Carol eager to seduce her. Writer/director Joe Sarno concocts a sharp, engrossing and perceptive examination of suburban angst and the limitations of the whole wild'n'easy 70's sexual revolution; Sarno turns traditional middle class mores on their heads and further spices things up with a bold and provocative mother/daughter incest subplot. Moreover, Sarno elicits uniformly first-rate acting from the bang-up cast: Welles and Brooke are both exceptional, with excellent support from Edwards, Jordan, Houseman, Arlana Blue as flaky New Age sex therapist Shandara, and Erica Eaton as saucy neighbor Mrs. Fields. Better still, all the women are extremely hot and enticing; Welles in particular seriously steams up the screen with her exquisitely voluptuous figure and smoldering erotic presence. The sex scenes are really sizzling and fairly explicit, but never raunchy or tedious. Stephen Colwell's bright, polished cinematography and Jack Justis' bouncy, melodic acoustic folk score are both on the money solid and effective. Recommended viewing for Sarno fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4a376a269644818b704dfb777e43f8a",
            "input": "Monstrous mother-son-duo (Alice Krige and Brian Krause) sucks life-force of virgins, and their newest target is pretty but lonely Tanya (Madchen Amick). However, these monsters are allergic to cat's scratches... I have never been fan of sleazy, overrated bestsellerists like King, Koontz or Barker, but this B-movie, written by Mr Dung himself, is actually not near as bad than it could be. Yes, it is sometimes jaw-droppingly atrocious, but there is actually some surprisingly impressive touches: good old-fashioned graveyard, eerie soundtrack and candlelit-Gothic-house-scene, mirror showing the monstrous form of the villains, etc. Of course, the film is polluted by Mr Dung's potty-mouthed dialogue and all-tactics-of-toilet-seat obsession to vilify fat people, leading to totally pointless subplot of rapist teacher, but there is roses among manure.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7a32df6788b4c4db52403a7563f2973",
            "input": "The danish movie \"Slim Slam Slum\" surprised me to be the worst movie i have seen to this date. I didn't think that it was possible to top my list of bad bad b-movies but this one deserves the gold. It's not funny. It's bad acting, It's bad filmed and the storyline is bad. The only positive thing i can say about this movie is it has three girls in it. I truly believe this flick has the potential to knock of the other danish movie \"Stjerner uden hjerner\" as the badest danish film ever made! And that's truly something. Congratulations in advance!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-093603b124574fbb992471c6de4fb84e",
            "input": "Hard to believe that director Barbet Schroeder once did the majestic and very funny Maitresse (1976), and now only seems to do \"by the numbers\" Hollywood thrillers.This is very lightweight John Grisham material, crossed with the plot of a TV movie. Bullock is Cass Mayweather, a feisty and independent crime investigator specialising in serial killers. Ben Chaplin is her reserved police partner Sam Kennedy, and together they make an uncomfortable duo. Not good, when two unbalanced college maladriots (Gosling and Pitt) decide to send them on a wild goose chase - by planting very clever and misleading forensic evidence at a crime scene.Fair enough, but while Bullock and Chaplin fail to create any sparks, we also have to endure a several dull overly-melodramatic flashbacks illustrating an important event in Cass's history. Then of course there are the frequent shots of a cliff-side log cabin where there's absolutely no doubt the OTT ending will be set. Oooh... the atmosphere.Watch any episode of CSI instead. It's to the point and far more exciting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0428a239e15c40618112154b59c7a446",
            "input": "Return to the 36th Chamber is one of those classic Kung-Fu movies which Shaw produces back in the 70s and 80s, whose genre is equivalent to the spaghetti westerns of Hollywood, and the protagonist Gordon Liu, the counterpart to the western's Clint Eastwood. Digitally remastered and a new print made for the Fantastic Film Fest, this is \"Presented in Shaw Scope\", just like the good old days.This film is a simple story of good versus evil, told in 3 acts, which more or less sums up the narrative of martial arts films in that era.Act One sets up the premise. Workers in a dye-mill of a small village are unhappy with their lot, having their wages cut by 20% by incoming manchu gangsters. They can't do much about their exploitation because none of them are martial arts skilled to take on the gangsters, and their boss. At first they had a minor success in getting Liu to impersonate a highly skilled Shaolin monk (one of the best comedy sequences), but their rouse got exposed when they pushed the limit of credibility by impersonating one too many times.Act Two shows the protagonist wanting to get back at the mob. However, without real martial arts, he embarks on a journey to Shaolin Temple, to try and infiltrate and learn martial arts on the sly. After some slapstick moments, he finally gets accepted by the abbot (whom he impersonated!) but is disappointed at the teaching methods - kinda like Mr Miyagi's style in Karate Kid, but instead of painting fences, he gets to erect scaffoldings all around the temple. Nothing can keep a good man down, and he unwittingly builds strength, endurance and learns kung-fu the unorthodox way.Act Three is where the fight fest begins. With cheesy sound effects, each obvious non-contact on film is given the maximum impact treatment. But it is rather refreshing watching the fight scenes here, with its wide angled shots to highlight clarity and detail between the sparring partners, and the use of slow-motion only to showcase stunts in different angles. You may find the speed of fights a tad too slow, with some pause in between moves, but with Yuen Wo Ping and his style being used ad-nausem in Hollywood flicks, they sure don't make fight scenes like they used to! Return to the 36th chamber gets a repeat screening on Monday, so, if you're game for a nostalgic trip down memory lane, what are you waiting for?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6661bc9a01274d97904de2a10b20c28c",
            "input": "I saw this when I was 17 and haven't seen it since. The 'CBS Late Movie' used to show it on a regular basis at one point. I remember how sad and upsetting it was, it truly made me sick to my stomach. Effects then weren't what they are today, but nevertheless, it conveyed the feeling of being alone in the Amazon, after losing both parents and searching for a way out, very well. I remember the bugs and maggots the most, so realistic they were, eating her flesh. It's a dark film which was controversial subject matter at the time, even though likely it was strongly edited for TV. I wish I remembered more details, and if I ever get the chance to see it again, I can comment more. I have been looking for this for years. I believe it may have been shown on CBS under yet another title. I have no idea whether it was ever released on video.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-413faf538b6441ffa093181b5ec6c375",
            "input": "As far as HEIST movies go, this one is pretty weak. Continuity is pretty lousy, there isn't enough character continuity to really feel like you understand any of the characters. Peter Falk is great, and he is one of the reasons its worth watching. Falk has some great lines, like \"he'll be right back, he goin' buy to some saugages\" or something like that... there are a few nice scenes, although they are entirely due to the efforts of the actors. Direction, script, and editing is pretty lousy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fe021ac99c84ff899c6ac72be34dff6",
            "input": "Los Debutantes is the story of two orphaned brothers who have moved to Santiago from the South after their mother dies. The confident and streetwise Silvio, the elder brother, gets a job working for a sleazy strip club's owner after taking the naive Victor there for his 17th birthday.As Silvio blossoms under his boss's tutelage, both brothers get involved with the owner's sexy and manipulative mistress, Gracia. As the film unfolds, characters are redefined as we begin to see the subtle and overt ways that each one manipulates the next.The film is well made, with good cinematography and fast pacing. It's also pretty sexy, with a lot of nudity and some fairly explicit sex scenes. It uses the now-popular technique of layering different scenes from different points of view, out of chronological sequence. Many people hate movies like this because they don't understand what's going on - Memento, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and many other good films use this device. The plot itself is really nothing new, there are elements of Body Heat, Pulp Fiction, and many other good film noir.As the different layers are revealed, our understandings of the characters and their motivations evolve. While the plot may be somewhat cliché, it is also clever and entertaining.I would call it an enjoyable movie, worth watching, but nothing memorable. I haven't seen many films from Chile, and it's always interesting to see film noir from other countries. Other than that, rent it if it's available but don't lose any sleep if it isn't.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e36d76e881945c5af8750d89ade05a5",
            "input": "Most Stoogephiles consider this to be the best Stooges short bar none, and they're right. Curly is a scream dressed up in drag as \"Senorita Cucaracha\", and Moe and Larry are in top form as \"Senor Mucho\" and \"Senor Gusto\", respectively. Christine McIntyre's beautiful operatic voice is given full rein--she actually was a trained opera singer--and it's wonderful. The great Gino Corrado is hilarious as a pompous Italian singer terrorized by the Stooges at a society party. Some truly funny gags, good direction and very tight editing make this rise to the very top of the Stooges' prolific output. What's even more amazing is that Curly was having severe health problems at the time, and in several of the shorts he made during this period, you can see that he is obviously ill; his timing is way off, he speaks very slowly and haltingly, and has trouble getting around. Fortunately, his health was in an upswing when he made this film, and it shows. Classic Stooge comedy, and enjoyed by even non-Stooge fans (I had a girlfriend who couldn't stand the Stooges, but even she laughed at this one). A must-see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49298feb25bf446b9754e7c287505646",
            "input": "I don't think I could have enjoyed it more, though certain things were disturbing. I'm not going to say what, if you haven't seen it...you'll have to find out for yourself. At any rate, what movie can lack with Robert Downey Jr.'s puppy-dog eyes? All-in-all, the plot was developed sufficiently. Nothing seemed too rushed, as movies like this tend to be. The characters were like-able, and there were plenty of hilarious scenes in it. The idea over-all is that the story is very well tied together, even if certain aspects may be unsatisfactory...by matter of opinion. But like I said before, it's hard not to love any movie with Robert Downey Jr.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56eb54e6dd3543cb9d0135a92b79fd1f",
            "input": "\"A young woman suffers from the delusion that she is a werewolf, based upon a family legend of an ancestor accused of and killed for allegedly being one. Due to her past treatment by men, she travels the countryside seducing and killing the men she meets. Falling in love with a kind man, her life appears to take a turn for the better when she is raped and her lover is killed by a band of thugs. Traumatized again by these latest events, the woman returns to her violent ways and seeks revenge on the thugs,\" according to the DVD sleeve's synopsis.Rino Di Silvestro's \"La lupa mannara\" begins with full frontal, writhing, moaning dance by shapely blonde Annik Borel, who (as Daniella Neseri) mistakenly believes she is a werewolf. The hottest part is when the camera catches background fire between her legs. The opening \"flashback\" reveals her hairy ancestor was (probably) a lycanthropic creature. Ms. Borel is, unfortunately, not a werewolf; she is merely a very strong lunatic.As a film, \"Werewolf Woman\" (in English) would have been better if Borel's character really was a female werewolf; with her sexual victimization a great bit of characterization. But, as far as 1970s skin and blood flicks go, this one is hard to beat. Bouncy Borel is either nude or sexily clad throughout the film, which features a fair amount of gratuitous gore. Dazzling Dagmar Lassander (as Elena) and hunky Howard Ross (as Luca) are good supporting players.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b490e281fe604b85afa43d4491abb71d",
            "input": "I loved this movie for two reasons: 1) Jeff Combs is absolutely wonderful in it. Plays the role of the modern wizard to the hilt. (And is absolutely adorable.) 2) The movie helped to inspire a role-playing game I thoroughly enjoy, Mage: The Awakening. I've shown it at various LARP after-parties, and it's always a big hit.D&D love and Jeff-squeeing aside, it's not exactly a masterpiece, but it's well-done and thoroughly enjoyable. The plot is fast-moving and engaging in its simplicity, the special effects are pretty good for such a low budget, and the script, while nothing stellar, was not too badly done, and cheesy in all the right places. A good way to spend an evening.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c7f39a666ac4c8abf8fa19efe6073ee",
            "input": "I really liked ZB1. Really, I did. I have no problem with extremely low-budget movies, and I have enjoyed movies with worse production values than ZB3 (if you can imagine such a thing. check out 'wiseguys vs. zombies,' if you're interested). Indeed, I prefer lower budget zombie films, because I am suspicious that Hollywood directors do not understand what zombies are 'about.'But ZB3 was just so bad. It was retarded. I don't want to bother being dignified in my criticism. I want my 90 minutes back, etc. Except that it really only took ~80 minutes, because partway through I put it into 1.4X fast forward.Okay, here's some criticism.1. The pacing was TERRIBLE. Everyone talked in monologues. Even when someone just had a single line, the camera work and the editing and the insertion of a bunch of F-bombs into every sentence made the line FEEL like a monologue. At first I was excited about the 90 minute running time compared to ZB1's 70 minutes, but there were actually fewer 'events' in ZB3. It's all talking.2. The gore effects got stupider. Just glop rubbed around on people's tummies.3. Despite the epic exposition, there really wasn't a plot. And the exposition is indeed epic! I won't spoil it, if you're going to watch it. (Don't watch it.) But then, it's just a bunch of lame characters walking around and bickering for ~80 minutes. or fewer, if you so choose.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee44ad0d86644960949cf279f67e3381",
            "input": "\"Midnight Cowboy\" is one of those films thats been proclaimed a masterpiece with good reason - it really is one of the finest films ever made in America. Its both artistically valid yet entirely accessible and commercial. No wonder it was a huge success when initially released. But be warned, its also one of the most heartbreaking films ever made. The characters are memorable, well-developed, and ultimately tragic. The filmmakers should be applauded for not giving us the Hollywood ending, something which was basically mandatory by the 80s. Still, this is why I treasure the years of 1967 to 1977 for American film. Its a time when well-made, innovative, and most of all bleak films could be made with the big budgets that Hollywood could offer. All this was over by the time \"Star Wars\" was released.The direction by John Schlesinger makes the material work. It combines a simplistic style with some experimental editing. Unlike many other films featuring these psychedelic effects, \"Midnight Cowboy\" has aged quite well. Its still as powerful now as it was when initially released. The acting however is what makes this a masterpiece. The characters' backgrounds are never fully explained, but the performances make them completely developed. Both Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman are absolutely memorable and sympathetic (despite their sometimes reprehensible actions). Plus, being a fan of vintage exploitation films, I loved the scenes set on the infamously sleazy 42nd street. \"Midnight Cowboy\" is close to being perfect and one of the most powerful films ever made. (10/10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42df4ca9323b407fb1ed63e01bbb4981",
            "input": "We saw this at one of the local art movie theaters in the Montrose area of Houston, TX. It was a total surprise compared to the write-up in the theater's newsletter but we were both blown away by the artistry. It was beautifully done and (apparently) photographed in a schloss (German name for château) somewhere in the Munich area. It is a very explicit exploration of the sexual relationships of a group of twentyish men and women isolated from the day-to-day constraints. It is fantastic on more levels than I can remember. We came home after the movie and talked and talked until about 4 am the next morning.The version we saw was in English (mostly) so there must be at least two versions since the first reviewer saw the movie in (probably its original) German version. I searched and searched for a video tape version but never came up with anything. Would absolutely love to have a VHS or DVD version of this. It explores relationships at a fundamental level and is also a great tutorial on how to relate to your partner. If anyone knows the writer/director, please convince him to release again, preferably on DVD these days. I cannot even imagine getting tired of watching the candid performance of the actors who are now probably all in their forties. Please, please bring it back.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fac7d524372c43d986a70cb457cfa493",
            "input": "Oh dear, Oh dear. I started watching this not knowing what to expect. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. There were times when I thought it was a comedy. I loved how the government's plan to capture the terrorist leader is to air drop in one man, who is unarmed, and expect him to capture him and escape with a rocket pack. If only it were really that easy. I've finally found a movie worse than \"Plan 9 From Outer Space\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8914646062c2419399013c7edb10f54d",
            "input": "Pressburger and Powell's greatest movie. David Niven plays the RAF bomber pilot who misses his own death but is granted a second chance at life when heaven notices that he is AWOL and dispatches an angel to investigate. The scene when the young soldiers, men and women, black and white, all killed in action, arrive in heaven to be processed for eternal life is unbearably poignant. Watch out too for Roger Livesey, a deeply under appreciated actor, and Kim Hunter as the love interest (later, of course, Zira in Planet of the Apes). Incidentally, Steven Spielberg cast the actress who played the chief angel (Kathleen Byron) as the elderly wife of the eponymous private in Saving Private Ryan half a century later, an act that speaks volumes for his cinematic literacy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a4fd17fc80342bd9339b5c44bd371ae",
            "input": "I've never found Charley Chase very funny, even though his on-screen character sometimes reminds me of John Cleese, whom I find VERY funny. (Charley Chase also reminds me of gowky Hen Broon from Scotland's 'Sunday Post' comics page.) In Chase's best films, I tend to admire his professionalism rather than laughing at him. I'll give Chase credit that his very best films -- such as 'Mighty Like a Moose' and 'His Wooden Wedding' -- have inspired a fandom who are fiercely loyal to him ... but I'm positive that even the most die-hard Chase fan will agree that the very early and very crude 'Married to Order' just isn't funny at all.Chase -- eager, awkward, gormless, naff -- is a young swain hoping to court the fair Rose. Oliver Hardy gives the best performance in this film as her blowhard father, who disdains Chase as a 'mollycoddle'. Leo White, who did more notable work as a foil for Chaplin at Essanay, is on hand here as a rival.There's some action involving an Ingersoll watch. I was intrigued that the brand name is mentioned in the dialogue titles: is this an early example of product-placement? Sadly, a major flaw in 'Married to Order' is the casting of Rosemary Theby as Rose: she's meant to be a standard-issue ingenue, but Theby -- flat-chested, hawk-faced -- is physically wrong for the role. Theby (the wife of Harry Myers) had a successful career as a screen actress, but was never a believable ingenue. Film historian William K Everson dealt with her very dismissively in one of his film books.I'll rate 'Married to Order' just 3 out of 10, and I'm being charitable ... because I keep suspecting that Charley Chase has got something that everyone else gets but I keep missing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e52d662332a4771868de627fe609e5d",
            "input": "I, like many horror fans, have been force fed the same banal big budget Hollywood remakes and MTV high school slasher tripe for the last 20 years. Here, at last, is an original horror genre movie that ticks all the right boxes.You want a hot lead actress, you want vampires, you want cool weapons, you want cool vehicles and you want blood, lots of it, by the bucket load - you got it.With excellent fight choreography and a supporting role from the Hammer Horror scream queen herself Stephanie Beacham, this really is fantastic stuff.Despite it's low budget, by opting to use 35 mm stock and adding quality CG effects to the mix, director James Eaves has created something that feels much bigger.A must for old school horror fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-372943d96a5e417585b7705a00cfda63",
            "input": "There is a story (possibly apocryphal) about an exchange between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the start of Twelve Monkeys. Gilliam (allegedly) produced a long list (think about the aircraft one from the Fifth Element) and handed it to Butch Bruce. It was entitled \"Things Bruce Willis Does When He Acts\". It ended with a simple message saying: \"please don't do any of the above in my movie\".There is a fact about this movie (definitely true). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.I would contend that these two factors played a huge role in creating the extraordinary (if not commercial) success that is The Twelve Monkeys.Visually, the Twelve Monkeys is all that we have rightly come to expect from a Gilliam film. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and general (but magnificent) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his audience. Although the ending of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows heavily from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless movement of the characters towards their fate. It is this journey, and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all tend to suffer from the same weakness. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no denying that The Twelve Monkey's is a breath of fresh air in the tight-plotting department. Style, substance and form seem to merge in a way not usually seen from the ex-Python.Whatever the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam also manages to get a first rate (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is excellent in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a suitably bonkers - and very scary - Brad Pitt.It's been over a decade since this film was released. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered perspectives and the absurd one-way journey through time that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bef45c720b344890b171ecf6ddb5e3fe",
            "input": "Upon The Straight Story release in 1999, it was praised for being David Lynch's first film that ignored his regular themes of the macabre and the surreal. Based on a true story of one man and his journey to visit his estranged brother on a John Deere '66 mower, at first glance its an odd story for Lynch to direct. Yet as the story develops you can see some of Lynch's trademark motifs coming through.Lynch's focus on small town America and its inhabitants is still as prevalent as in his previous efforts such as Blue Velvet or Twin Peaks, but the most notable difference is that the weirdness is curbed down. The restrictions imposed means that the film has the notable accolade of being one of the few live action films that I can think of that features a G rating. Incredibly significant, this films stands as evidence that beautiful and significant family films can be produced.The Straight Story was the first feature which Lynch directed where he had no hand at writing. For many Lynch devotees this was a huge negative point. Almost universally acclaimed, the only overly negative review by James Brundage of filmcritic.com focused on this very criticism, that it wasn't a typical Lynch film. \"Lynch is struggling within the mold of a G-Rated story that isn't his own.\" Brundage claims, with his protagonist Alvin Straight \"quoting lines directly from Confucious.\" He argues that the story is weak and the dialogue even worse. Yet this is about the only criticism that many will read for the film. Whilst it is true that it is not Lynch in the sense of Eraserhead, Lost Highway or Mulholland Drive - all films which I also adore, The Straight Story features a different side of Lynch that is by no means terrible. If you are a Lynch fan, it is most important to separate that side of Lynch with this feature.The narrative is slow and thoughtful, which gives you a real sense of the protagonist's thoughts as he travels to his destination. Alvin constantly is reminded about his past and his relationships with his wife, children and his brother. Yet particularly significant is that there are no flashbacks, which only adds to the effect, which reminded me of my conversations with my grandparents. The conclusion arrives like watching a boat being carried down a slow meandering river and it is beautiful to watch. The natural landscapes of the US are accentuated and together with the beautiful soundtrack by Angelo Badalamenti, makes me yearn to go to America. The performances are also excellent with every actor believable in their roles and Richard Farnsworth is particularly excellent. His Oscar nomination was greatly deserved and it was a shame that he didn't win. Regardless, however it is probably the finest swan-song for any actor. So whilst The Straight Story features none of Lynch's complex narratives or trademark dialogue, the film is a fascinating character study about getting old and comes highly recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccd70ef297724e23b7bd23bbcc34cfa3",
            "input": "On the 26th of September 1983 a short dumpy 60 year old woman stood trial for the attempted murder of Leonie Haddad, a lady whose husband had recently died and had agreed to take in a lodger who came via a housing authority for the elderly. Haddad was not made aware that her new lodger had, in fact, come fresh from The Patton State Mental Hospital where she had been incarcerated for an inexplicable knife attack on a married couple three years previously. Haddad soon realised that something was 'rotten in Denmark' when the woman began to lock herself in the bathroom with a tape recorder reciting prophesies about' seven Gods'. Haddad's fears were confirmed one night when she awoke to find her lodger sitting astride her chest holding a bread knife announcing that \"God has inspired me to kill you\". Haddad managed to knock her assailant out with a telephone but not before she had lost a finger and suffered deep lacerations to her face and chest. It was a miracle she survived. The lodger was judged to be innocent by reason of insanity but sent, kicking and screaming, back to the laughing academy. Ten years later she was released and found that she was now a celebrity; but not for the brutal attacks on her innocent victims, but for her incarnation of 25 years earlier when she was known as the 'Queen of the Curve's, the 'Tennessee Tease' and 'Miss Pin Up Girl of the World' - the Notorious Bettie Page. Director Mary Harron, mainly known for 'American Psycho' takes us back to the glory days of a legendary cheesecake and bondage model (played solidly enough by Gretchen Mol) who inadvertently wrote the blue print for fetish iconography and whose influence can be detected in everything from comic books to catwalks. T.N.B.P is day-glo fun ride through an evocative depiction of the 1950's where Page, with the familial help of good intentioned boyfriends and photographers, becomes the number one star of pocket sized men's glossies with titles like Wink, Tab and Parade. Her real dream of movie stardom evades her and a brush with the authorities over obscenity charges in 1957 is the inciting incident which leads her to retire from modelling and give herself to God. The overall style of the film is light and frothy and only darkens momentarily with an allusion to her father's incestuous attentions and a sexual assault which inexplicably appears to have no discernible effect on her. Mol plays Page as she seems in her photographs, happy, carefree and fun - even the bondage shots betray little more than a good humoured incomprehensibility. The film ends on the upbeat with Page cheerfully handing out bibles in a park with no indication of the real life unhappy marriages, personal tragedy and decent into murderous insanity which lay before her; avoiding what I think is the essential core of Page's story - rebirth and resurrection. Having emerged from a decade of incarceration Page found that her cult had been in the ascendance since the mid 1980's and that she had become a huge underground icon, during which, many were asking \"whatever happened to Bettie Page\". Her 'mysterious' disappearance fed the fires of any number of conspiracy theories only adding to the allure of her legend. When the world's media finally caught up with her she gave no hint of her darker past and she was soon giving interviews for magazines, T.V and being photographed at Playboy parties with the likes of Pamela Anderson and the equally tragic Anna Nicole Smith. She found that she was now more famous than she ever was in her 'glory years' but in the glare of this 'resurrection' it was only a matter of time before the full story would come to light. The only notorious thing about The Notorious Bettie Page is they left out the part when she became truly notorious.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1aa1cd8e3874427485df58da96811aad",
            "input": "After being forced to sit through some real stinkers (Racing Stripes, Shark Boy and Lava Girl) -- I truly enjoyed watching \"Fried Worms\". For once, I did not guess the ending! It was funny and entertaining and didn't resort to a ton of gross-out humor, despite the title. My boys (6 and 10) both LOVED it too -- oh and my 45 year old \"boy\" had a smile on his face the whole time. This is a family movie that is not just tolerable for the parents. The relationship with the little brother is so close to real life. \"He is not stopping singing just to annoy me!!\" Also, the way the new kid tries to make friends and how those friendships actually form is right-on with the way kids behave. Of course the parents have to act a little goofy -- but my favorite scenes involved the Dad getting used to his new job. Have fun!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb4564c61ce9413dae4ced6698a53ee3",
            "input": "Just a dumb old movie. First Stanwyck's son gets his foot trapped in a really dumb way, and then her husband gets his foot trapped in another really dumb way. In an effort to save him, Stanwyck gets unlucky, yet again, and comes across an escaped convict. She has a chance to kill him but fails in a very dumb way. In the end her husband is saved, and Stanwyck tells us through narration what the dumb message of the movie is. All's well than ends dumb.I could never figure out how an unattractive woman like Stanwyck ever made it as a leading lady in Hollywood's glamour-oriented Golden Era; that nose is so beautiful… So photogenic… The film is mercifully short, running a little over an hour. It's as though the director sensed that he was making crap, so he thought it best to keep the crap short.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6d56829c13b462da6515a61bd81e003",
            "input": "I've now seen this film twice, and I must say I enjoyed it both times. It's fast paced and fun, but ultimately daft. Having said that it deserves to be trashed because of screwing up what could have been a good follow up to the seminal original. It is clear for those who have seen the awful 'Zombie Creeping Flesh' that the films massive shortcomings can be owed to Bruno Mattei, and that the little that is commendable about it can be owed to Fulci. This is not idle Fulci sycophancy, the directors styles are starkly contrasted throughout, and you can tell who directed what, particularly in Mattei's case.The film is centered around the outbreak of a virus (oddly referred to as 'top secret' by a scientist, it's secrecy apparently being more noteworthy than its potentially apocalyptic effect on mankind) somewhere in south east Asia. The virus causes zombie like behaviour in those affected, and the virus quickly spreads across a seemingly arbitrary area of land. Our protagonists unwittingly wander into the danger zone, and have to fight for their lives against hordes of infected Asians.The film seems to be stuck half way between being a zombie gore flick, and an out and out action adventure, and this confusion is captured most clearly by the zombies themselves. They do not appear to have a set of characteristics common to all. Some are of the regular soulless shuffling variety, so well rendered in the original, and probably Fulci's creation here. The other main group consist of those who in being infected with the virus lost all sense of themselves, but incurred a savage aggression and a desire to earn a black belt in ninjitsu: Indecisively leaping around unsure of whether to continue honing their upper roundhouse technique or engage with their brethren in what looks like a mass tickle fest on their hapless victims. Martial arts skills aren't their only talents either, they are well versed in guerilla tactics, hiding on rafters and under bales of hay, and sometimes inexplicably falling from nowhere but the heavens themselves. This is all definitely the work of Mattei.There is a third, more chatty, variety of zombie. This type apparently retain a sense of irony as well 'I'm really thirsty...FOR YOUR BLOOD'. The ridiculous twist at the end in which the DJ turns zombie but continues to preach ad libbed gibberish about the fate of mankind, only serves to enhance the WTF factor and obliterate any hope of a serious resolution.Then there's the infamous zombie head which slowly propels itself through the air, a jokerish skeletal grin wrought across its face, as if to say 'yeah we know how bad this looks'.The characters are all utterly one dimensional as you would expect. But its the pseudo comical dialogue and dubbing that really prevents us from taking their plight seriously. Having said that the first soldier to die does put up an impressively valiant display against an unstoppable zombie menace. Indeed this is the first and perhaps only time we hit real zombie agro, and one of the only effective scenes in the film.The guy who played the chief scientist has heart, but no talent, utilising pauses in his lines entirely at random, so he ends up sounding like a confused asthmatic. The scientists' on screen attempts at finding an antidote are totally unconvincing 'now lets put these two molecules together!' There are a few moments that stick out as genuinely effective however. In an early scene a female protagonist explores an abandoned garage. Upon entering a room we are confronted with a hazy view of a shifting figure in the corner and a squirming mass on the floor, all shot in an atmospheric diffused light. The silence is interrupted by the appearance of a speedy machete wielding zombie who trashes everything in his wake in his alarming desperation to have her. His sheer aggressiveness is one of the few moments of real horror in the film. The before and after theme conveyed through the hotel that plays host to the happenings of the earliest stage of the outbreak, and later as a refuge to our protagonists is imbued with an thick humid ambiance. There is a scene in which one of the soldiers cautiously approaches a boarded up room that clearly houses hordes of the undead, and this is quite tense. Things become more dramatic when they board themselves in the hotel unknowing to what lurks upstairs. But this is sloppily handled and not nearly as effective as it could have been.All in all I would say this film may just about deserve to be called a royal screw up of a potentially effective tropical zombie fest, rather than simply a through and through bad film. If nothing else it has plenty of the unintentional laughs that I've come to expect from just about anything Italian and gory from the eighties.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fff2b50480274b0a8b0616fac1dfd623",
            "input": "This is the least scary film i have ever seen. How the blob manages to eat anyone is the biggest mystery of the film. The blob moves so slowly that an o.a.p in a zimmerframe could escape it. The blob has a large slice of luck coming across a typical horror film woman who instead of running away stands still for half an hour so that she can be eaten. If you havent seen this film i recommend you do, its far too funny to be taken seriously.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99613cb476d54e869d1bf1b32639bf60",
            "input": "Simply one of the best ever! Richard Brooks' adaptation of Truman Capote's non-fiction novel is truly an artistic achievement. Stunning black and white cinematography (that should have won an Oscar), a haunting Quincy Jones score and tremendous performances by Robert Blake and Scott Wilson as the oddly-matched killers. This film was 0 for 4 at the Academy Awards and wasn't even nominated for Best Picture while Dr. Doolittle was. Go Figure! Although you don't get to know the Clutter family as well as you do in the book, it was a good decision to focus more on Perry and Dick and the pain-staking process of tracking these guys down. John Forsythe is also impressive as Alvin Dewey. There are simply no flaws in this one. 10 out of 10. Best performance = Scott Wilson with R. Blake a close second. Highly recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0fd439ee327462baaf3e1a6d0a09298",
            "input": "I happened across \"Bait\" on cable one night just as it started and thought, \"Eh, why not?\" I'm glad I gave it a chance. \"Bait\" ain't perfect. It suffers from unnecessarily flashy direction and occasional dumbness. But overall, this movie worked. All the elements aligned just right, and they pulled off what otherwise could have been a pretty ugly film. Most of that, I think, is due to Jamie Foxx. I don't know who tagged Foxx for the lead, but whoever it was did this movie a big favor. Believable and amazingly likeable, Foxx glides through the movie, smooth as butter and funnier than hell. You can tell he's working on instinct, and instinct doesn't fail him.The plot, while unimportant, actually ties together pretty well, and there's even a character arc through which Foxx's character grows as a person. Again, they could've slipped by without any of this, but it just makes things that much better.I'm surprised at the low rating for this. Maybe I just caught this move on the right night, or vice versa, but I'd give it a 7/10. Bravo, Mssr. Foxx.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ae1046753cf40d78afc34bed799e47f",
            "input": "Unbelievably bad acting, a no good, unclear story and flashy images and slow-motions where they are needed the least: Adrenaline is everything a movie should not be.Georgina Verbaan (a so-and-so dutch soap actress who hasn't attended her English classes) plays rich girl Freya, who has the habit of 'thrill-seeking'. Which basicly is doing dangerous stunts, break stuff and annoy people. And not in a fun Jackass way. Then there's Dracko (Rivas). He kinda leads the bunch but has other illegal activities on the side. Then there's Freya's dad (Lockyer), who plays a dubious role as well. And, in the end, we got Jason (debutant Fyall), the boyfriend of Freya.One day, Freya gets disappeared and everybody seems involved but we, the viewer really don't care as nobody of the cast is either likable or believable, and the story doesn't make any sense.Why was this even made? 2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60f19cd84231472c947cfb71be909c20",
            "input": "Handsome and dashing British airline pilot George Taylor (a solid portrayal by Guiseppe Pambieri) gets beat up by thugs after a wild night in Hong Kong. George meets and falls in love with the sweet and virginal Dr. Emy Wong (a fine and charming performance by the lovely Chai Lee). George regains his health and goes back to work. When Emy fails to hear from George for a lengthy amount of time, she succumbs to despair and becomes a prostitute. While director/co-writer Bitto Albertini does indeed deliver a satisfying amount of the expected tasty nudity and steamy soft-core sex, this film is anything but your routine wallow in leering sleaze. Instead it's a surprisingly thoughtful, touching and tragic love story between two well drawn and highly appealing characters (Chai as Emy Wong is especially radiant and endearing). The picture starts out bubbly and cheerful, but the tone radically shifts into a more grim and harsh mood about two thirds of the way through. Emy's descent into vice after she falsely assumes that George has abandoned her is bleak and upsetting; ditto the remarkably sad and heartbreaking surprise bummer ending. Granted, the narrative is certainly melodramatic, but never too silly or trashy. Moreover, the sex scenes are quite tasteful and even genuinely erotic. Notorious Italian porn star Ilona Staller has a nice sizable supporting part as George's jealous and uninhibited secretary Helen Miller. Guido Mancori's polished cinematography offers many strikingly gorgeous shots of the exotic locations. Nico Fidenco's funky, throbbing score hits the groovy spot. Worth a look for those seeking something different.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9b9201ec506464ba519f3ff28e2f742",
            "input": "Tom Wolfe's sprawling, brilliantly observed satiric novel of life among New York snobbery gets a glossy look here but is nevertheless not well served. The film suffers not merely from the miscasting of everyman Tom Hanks as an uncaring Yuppie, Kewpie-doll Melanie Griffith as a manipulative southern belle and Bruce Willis (?!) as the darling of New York's literati. The most serious miscasting was in the director's chair. Robert Altman might have breathed life into these unlikeable characters and made them interesting, but Brian De Palma, for all of his visual sophistication, has never had an eye for the nuances of the human experience. The resulting film looks good but seems blah toward its subject of dehumanization in favor of status. Honestly, if a satire does not make the viewer angry, what is the point?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e05b4a1007664d1898e83ff01ed012ed",
            "input": "I sat through this film and i have to say it only just managed to keep my attention. The film would have been a bit more bearable if i did not have to watch the awful CGI, for future reference to the industry if your going to use CGI watch this so you know what to avoid.Apparently this is supposed to be a graphic novel for the screen but all i saw was a bad movie which bears no resemblance to a graphic novel whatsoever.All in all, the story was not as bad as the CGI, i was quite impressed with the acting and thought the casting was good and little more character info would have been nice as it did get a little confusing for me on occasion but that's not surprising as like i said it only just kept my attention, but in all honestly i wish i had given this one a miss.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cdecee789b894e3eb994062651263cd2",
            "input": "That 70s Show is the best TV show ever, period. It's up there with the Andy Griffen Show, Saturday Night Live, and The Simpsons in my book. That 70s Show continued on for 8 seasons, all of which focus around a group of teenagers/young adults dealing with relationships, separating from their parents, and their overall futures.The two main characters, Eric and Donna, are two teenagers living next door to each other. They have been living next door to each other for most of their lives, and just begin to feel more feelings for each other at the beginning of the first season. A large amount of the show revolves around how their relationship is working.Two other characters, Red and Kitty, are Eric's parents. Red was in the service, so he really pushes Eric around. Kitty is just the opposite. Even though she drinks heavily, she treats Eric and his friends with a lot of care. Bob, their neighbor, is obviously Donna's Dad. Bob giggles around with several different women throughout the coarse of the show's story. Bob also annoys Red to his full extent.The remaining character, Hyde, Kelso, Fez, and Jackie, are Eric's friends. They also play a major role in the show's story.Well, the First Season is great. This is when the characters are beginning to feel new things for each other. The First Season is original, funny, and enjoyable.The Second Season is good, although it isn't as good as the first. It is a basic continuation of the First. Eric and Donna are together, and everything is working out great.The Third Season is my favorite. It went back and captured the First Season feel and humor. I also think that the character chemistry improved a bunch, making the show all that more fun to watch.The Fourth Season isn't near as good. Eric and Donna Arne't together in this one, making the show slightly less pleasurable. It is still funny, although I didn't enjoy it as much as the previous seasons.The Fifth Season is the last season I enjoyed all the way through. It is the gang's Senior Year, so that really helps with the story. The Fifth Season also had the best ending out of all the seasons.The Sixth Season is good for the most part. It is extremely funny, although it doesn't capture the feel that the other seasons did. The gang is out of High School, so I believe that it didn't hit the teen feel that the previous seasons did. I also didn't like the last three or four episodes considering that they had a major drama feel to them.The Seventh Season captures the same feel that the 5th season had in a way, although it didn't do it all the way. I enjoyed the Seventh Season as I did all the others, and the ending is great.The Last Season flat out sucked. Eric wasn't in it, which ruined it. Kelso wasn't in it for the most part either, which didn't help. I hated the Eighth Season up until the last episode. I thought that the last episode was really good, and a fitting ending to the series.So overall, if you enjoy comedy, give That 70s Show a try. They stopped making new episodes, but it is still on TV a bunch. I also recommend buying Seasons 1-7. It is up to you if you want to buy Season 8.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc2a300890244b6ba765d4e25d1891d7",
            "input": "I was really stunned how much a film, that's over 60 years old could impress me. It is nearly two hours long, there are absolutely no stars in it, there are subtitles but nevertheless it is interesting and exciting to watch. What impressed me mostly was the realism of the film. You could nearly feel the coldness of the ice, because you could see that the storms are real. This is a relief in a CGI-world like ourdays. I wondered how much work this must have been for van Dyke. I read somewhere that it took 17 months to film it. Now who wants to talk about 'Titanic' anymore? It's a great film with a great message and I would recommend it to future directors to see how great and realistic movies can be if they are only directed with realism instead of visual effects.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1de2cbeadcbf47dc9195f6e36b283b65",
            "input": "Okay, there are a ton of reviews here, what can I possibly add?I will try anyway. The reason this is my favorite Scrooge is because of EVERYthing. The sets, outdoor locations, costumes are so beautiful and authentic. The music is sweet. The supporting cast is very well done. One of my favorites is the narrator & nephew, played by Roger Rees. His understated sincerity is touching and his voice is the sound of Christmas to me. David Warner is also a totally believable Bob Cratchit. His is a difficult life, but he remains positive and dignified. The best part of course- is George C. Scott as Ebenezer Scrooge. Some have said his portrayal too gruff. I couldn't disagree more. His exchanges at the beginning while cold or harsh, weren't out of character. He is a terribly disillusioned man who's heart has been hardened by the vicissitudes of life and his own lust for wealth. During the flashbacks, it's obvious that he isn't all gruff. This is where we see that there is hope for him. If he was totally gone, his partner Marley would never have come for his sake in the first place. And after all, we are none of us past hoping. I think that is a HUGE part of what Dickens was trying to say. When Scrooge looks in on his dance at his employer's with Belle, you see him smile regretfully as he tells Belle in the flashback that he will go through life \"with a grin on my face.\" Clive Donner was smart enough as the director to allow these moments on film. Sometimes they get left on the editing room floor.And finally, his conversion is so absolutely full of joy that it makes me cry tears of joy EVERY time I see it. His apology to his nephew Fred, so sincere, so moving, it is the spirit not only of Christmas, but of humanity itself. The joy he brings to Fred, to his wife are so apparent. And the line that gets me every time, \"God forgive me for the time I've wasted.\" Bravi tutti!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7ea1a59ca264b2c985e5d23434f49f3",
            "input": "Bell, Book and Candle was one of the great pop culture phenomena of the mid-twentieth century, very similar to the phenoms we see today (back in the 70's - more than ten years later - there were still endless references to this film). It made Novak a huge star, put a nice item on Jack Lemon's resume, cast new light on Jimmy Stewart, and gave Lancaster and Gingold new avenues to explore in their careers (both went on to continue to play witches and other curious \"old bats\", in film and television).Along with the 40s movie I Married a Witch (which helped to make Veronica Lake an icon), Bell, Book and Candle inspired the grand film and TV fascination with all things witchy that began with Bewitched and has continued through Practical Magic, Worst Witch and Harry Potter.What I rarely see noted is that the movie is also a rather interesting alternative Xmas movie. The story takes place over the Christmas holidays, and, despite the fact that it is superficially about witchcraft, actually embodies a great deal of Xmas spirit (giving, love, family, self-sacrifice, etc).I will always watch this movie (have seen it several times since my first viewing in the early 90's) particularly if it is shown around or just after the holiday season. It has style, substance, a great cast, and terrific production values. And like Adam's Rib, it casually expresses ideas that were rather radical for its time, are radical even now (in both movies the female character is guileless and powerful), and so always seems ahead of the times.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-749e754a9cf5444a98835eabd4717487",
            "input": "Space Camp, which had the unfortunate luck to be planned around the time of the Challenger accident, deserves such luck. The \"stars\" make a mockery of acting, Lea Thomson actually being turned sideways, when asked for more than her usual wide-eyed innocent smile, presumably to mask her risible attempts. The movie is at times hilarious, when it begins to ask far too much of you. A small boy keeps a multi-million dollar robot in his closet which breaks when given too many commands by the hordes of cliched dorm-mates. This hackneyed and unlovable machine, \"Jinx\", is a major player in the ridiculous premise of the movie, which seems part Short Circuit, part 2001 by the Airplane team. I shan't bore you with this, suffice it to say you can only laugh when faced with it. Having said all of this, it is enjoyable to watch, in a SeaQuest, Saved by the Bell kind of way. The romance and technology, beware, are as unbelievable as each other. Also, if you're an eighties freak, its unmissable for the amusing performances of Kate Capshaw (Willie from Temple of Doom) and, obviously, Lea Thompson. Also, Joaquin Phoenix puts in a dodgy turn as a sort of wannabe Goonie who befriends Jinx. Do not go near this movie if you are not a fan of trash.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b347eb0c79ca40caa56307272f573a6c",
            "input": "After several extremely well ratings to the point of SUPERB, I was extremely pleased with the film. The film was dark, moving, the anger, the pain, the guilt and a very extremely convincing demon.I had initially expected to see many special effects, and like a lover's caress, it blew me away with the subtlety and the rightness of it. Brian, I am again blown away with your artistry with the telling of the story and your care of the special effects. You will go a long way, my friend. I will definitely be the president of your fan club.Eric Etebari, the best actor award, was the number one choice. You made Jr. Lopez look like a child compared to Kasadya. :) Overall, the acting, story line, the high quality filming and awesome effects, it was fantastic. I just wish it were longer. I am looking forward to The Dreamless with extremely high expectations.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6cc73e65cea048a29c453e195e1ad89c",
            "input": "For me too, this Christmas special is one that I remember very fondly. In 1989, I snatched up the 2 CDs I found of the soundtrack recording, giving one to my sister and keeping the other for myself. It's part of my family's Christmas tradition now, and I would love to be able to actually see the show again rather than just remember it as I listen.It has been noted elsewhere that John Denver made a number of appearances on the Muppet Show, and they did more than one special together. The good rapport between Denver and his fuzzy companions comes through clearly here, in a charming and fun show that is good for all ages.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-315b0223c63048dd83e55b1d640fdc6d",
            "input": "I remember the first time I saw this movie -- I was in the office working over the weekend & the TV was on for background noise. But I gradually found myself more & more engaged in this movie I'd never seen or heard of, until I was completely absorbed. A Matter of Life & Death (the British title -- Stairway to Heaven in the US) is delightful, compelling, whimsical, & moving, all in one superbly-written, well-acted, perfectly-directed package. It's a classic that really does rank right up there with Casablanca, It's a Wonderful Life, Gone With the Wind, Citizen Kane, & Chariots of Fire. WHY has it never received the same public notice & video-store prominence? Fortunately, SOME knowledgeable critics HAVE put it on their \"Top 100 of all time\" lists. There IS hope -- 1940's Fantasia wasn't a hit 'til the '60s, & the Wizard of Oz was a dud at the box office, but made a hit by TV. Buy it -- rent it -- watch it -- demand it! You WON'T be disappointed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2473a793d4ad462688a435b049eddee3",
            "input": "At first i thought that it was just about Eddie Murphy talking to some stupid animals. I was right. Some people called this movie Eddie Murphy's comeback! Who are these people? Jesus if this is the best he can come up with he can just stay away. What was the story again? I was so annoyed by all the lame jokes i forgot. I should have walked out on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e02d99e71214412b2e0143346387e52",
            "input": "**** = A masterpiece to be recorded in the books and never forgotten***1/2 = A classic in time; simply a must see*** = A solid, worth-while, very entertaining piece**1/2 = A good movie, but there are some uneven elements or noticeable flaws** = May still be considered good in areas, but this work has either serious issues or is restrained by inevitable elements deemed inescapable (e.g., genre)*1/2 = Mostly a heap of nothing sparked by mildly worthwhile momentsBOMB = Not of a viewable quality- Kalifornia = ***- Unrated (for strong violent material, considerable sexuality, and language)I rented this film expecting an in-your-face summer-Blockbuster-quality celebration of Brad Pitt's face, but was happily surprised and disappointed. This really is more of a drama, and very grim at that... I remember some emotionally intense Duchovny voice-overs.Pitt plays out his possibly un-sexiest film ever with startling talent. Who started out as a hopeless yet harmless \"white trash\" husband became realized as a violent, disturbing alcoholic with a messed mind. During some of the latter stages in the film, I found it hard to keep watching him - he was unpredictable and scary. This proves very good writing and acting.The whole movie is filled with bizarre, sensational scenes that made me hold my breath not fewer than once, and I don't mean action scenes. I mean dialogue scenes so brilliantly crafted I actually winced and gasped at what I was seeing. It was like watching a rhino and a lion put in a cage and watching as they gnawed each other to death. Again, I am very impressed with the screenwriter(s); whoever they are did the impossible: mixed oil and water.I also very much enjoyed Juliette Lewis's performance. It is so rare for this talented young actress to make an appearance these days that when she does it is such a joy. Some of her moments in this film brought me to tears. I mean that. The emotions this girl can arouse in your head are incredible, and I clearly remember getting blurry-eyed on a few occasions.I almost feel like I'm cheating the quality craftsmanship the film makers have displayed by only giving \"KALIFORNIA\" a *** rating. But the dark feelings that it stirs are too potent and depressing to raise it. I do believe that everyone should see this movie though. I truly do.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-055b9b75a472427598ff718d07b4607e",
            "input": "...intimate and specific. Yes, a bit of a cinderella story, but only after many convoluted turns, earning it's way deeper and deeper into Antwone's psyche. Only superficial viewing can condemn this film as superficial. This is the stuff that heals nations, this is one of our great national stories. Antwone's path to emotional health encompasses a whole breadth of family history, the history of slavery and its aftermath. In his first directorial effort, first of many I hope, Denzel Washington confirms once again, that he has a truly beautiful mind and soul.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fe4463d89774fd9bed9488bd72972c0",
            "input": "Perhaps the best Isabel Allende's book, House of the Spirits describes an alternative chilean history, this one full of magic, a mystic veil, plus some kind of omnipresent sadness. This movie gathers a great cast, plus a great art direction, with a script that cannot contain all this book's quality. It's unusual for a nearly unknown country like Chile to get so well represented as it is by this movie, whose perhaps only sin is to aim too high, and because of that left the illiterate public a little upset, mostly because they understood very little.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a45e5f599cc42e2bed6a1c7e462d646",
            "input": "This movie is like the material S.E. Hinton was writing in the 1970s and Copola was adapting to the screen in the early 80s, and, had Trueblood actually been a product of either, the results might've been much better (especially in the acting department). Instead, we get a rather so-bad-its-funny piece of mediocrity.Jeff Fahey plays Ray Trueblood, a former street rumbler, I suppose is the accurate description. This was in the days of action movies that used guys in their 40s and mid30s and dressed them up in greaser threads or some kind of more effeminate selection of gang garb and they fought to lousy 80s music. Nonetheless, Ray is the lone caretaker of his younger brother, Donny (Chad Lowe in a part where he screams a lot), who he is forced to leave behind inexplicably in a train station when, on the run from the cops, he is nabbed and forced to serve time in the Marines. Flash forward to present day and Ray is back in town and looking for his brother who has also become part of the street gangs, although in a gang that was Ray's adversary and now old scores must be violently settled (and again, cops must be dodged and this time, a lady's honor defended in the action film sense) before Ray can carry on life at normal pace with his brother, Donny.For the most part, the film is quite ridiculous. For me, most of this has to do with far too much overacting, although not by Fahey or Sherlyn Fenn who plays the waitress he befriends. The guys in the gang and Lowe himself seem to do quite a bit of needless exaggerated as New York street toughs. Although, the bigger hang up is recycled plot lines and perhaps a kind of movie that was well past its prime as a product of 1989.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c291a29f5dd4ffead5d33836c6fa7a2",
            "input": "Still the definitive program about the Second World War, The World At War isn't just long, but also very informative. The series contains 26 episodes (each episode lasts for about 45 min.), and includes the events leading up to and following in the wake of the war. Most episodes are about the war in Europe, and there are several episodes about the war in the Pacific. Other episodes include information about the wars in Africa, Burma, the Atlantic and the home fronts of Germany, Great Britain, United States and Soviet Union. There is one episode that's dedicated to the Holocaust. The series starts off with the episode A New Germany (1933-1939), and tells about the rise of the Nazis in Germany and German territorial gains prior to the outbreak of war. The series ends with the episode Remember; the war's influence in a post-war world. Remember is a fitting episode to end this great program. Every episode begins with a short introduction and then with opening credits. The credits are accompanied by a powerful music theme. There are many fitting music pieces throughout the series. Each episode is like a mini-film. The footage is fantastic, and so is the way it was put together. In addition, some of the footage is in color. The information included also makes the episodes memorable and entertaining.The series was produced by Jeremy Isaacs for Thames Television (UK). Commissioned in 1969, it took four years to produce, such was the depth of its research. The series was narrated by Laurence Olivier (one of the most famous and revered actors of the 20th century). The series interviewed leading members of the Allied and Axis campaigns, including eyewitness accounts by civilians, enlisted men, officers and politicians, amongst them Albert Speer, Karl Donitz, Jimmy Stewart, Bill Mauldin, Curtis LeMay, Lord Mountbatten, Alger Hiss, Toshikazu Kase, Arthur Harris, Charles Sweeney, Paul Tibbets, Traudl Junge and historian Stephen Ambrose. Jeremy Isaacs says in \"The Making of The World at War\" that he sought to interview, not necessarily the surviving big names, but their aides and assistants. The most difficult subject to locate and persuade to be interviewed, according to Isaacs, was Heinrich Himmler's adjutant, Karl Wolff. The latter admitted to witnessing a large-scale execution in Himmler's presence.The World At War is often considered to be the definitive television history of the Second World War. Some consider it the finest example of the documentary form. In a list of the 100 Greatest British Television Programmes drawn up by the British Film Institute in 2000, voted for by industry professionals, The World at War ranked 19th. The program has everything that the viewer needs to know about the war. After watching a few episodes I liked the series so much that I tried to watch the remaining episodes one after the other. I've seen some of them several times. There are two other great documentary series that I know of that may be of interest to the viewer. One is called The Great War (1964) that's about World War I. The other is called Cold War (1998) that's about the Cold War obviously.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcf0f1e97f084222bdffc05f446f11f3",
            "input": "I feel like I've just watched a snuff film....a beautifully acted, taut, engrossing and horrible thing! A two hour litany of perversion in the most basic and all inclusive sense of the word, sexual violence and torture, rape, decapitation, incest, corruption, live burial, and abuse, abuse, abuse. No redemption whatsoever. And I WAS entertained. I couldn't stop watching. What does this say about me, about the people who make and act in this sort of thing, and a world that has become so desensitized that eventually real snuff films will be the norm. And I'm neither puritanical nor humorless, I don't try to hide from the existence of darkness, and I definitely have not led a sheltered life, but I am ashamed of myself. AND I'm sorry to see my British cousins dragging the subject-matter sewers the way my own tribe does. It doesn't have to be cozy, but does it have to wallow in vicarious sadism?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9cf8e50da274b588aa9ea7f507037df",
            "input": "Carter Wong plays a noble hero on a quest for a book of healing which leads him seeking ultimate vengeance! The pacing is good in this film and there are a lot of fight scenes to keep the movie going. The flying guillotines look wicked and the main villain has no problems using them. Although the story isn't strong, the action is fun and draws you to the very end (which I felt could've had a sequel).Campy and dark, this is great ol skool kung fu!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28bb1194d00046b6ab806db50b1c349f",
            "input": "Very disappointing version of Lorna Doone. Too many missing characters, no romantic scenes, changes in story line, too short, appeared low budget. Hardly enough dialogue to understand the story if you're not familiar with the novel. In some scenes it looks like Lorna has a cold sore on her upper lip. I'm sure make-up did it's best to hide it. I guess they didn't want to halt filming until it healed up, pity. Most likely why this movie lacked kissing scenes. Only one disappointing kissing scene at the very end. Lorna Doone is a great epic tale and should be told true. The 2000 version of Lorna Doone is twice as long, more romantic, much more enjoyable and more true to the book.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c6b4a1db1384d7ea30d59a08903a4bd",
            "input": "I don't know if this is a sitcom or not, but I agree that this is one of the greatest television shows ever. It's great that this show still airs. And I love Michelle. It's cute on the episodes when she was a baby and she talked, and she sometimes said something funny. Aw.This show can relate to children and teens and.. well, families as they struggle through rough times and try to work it out as a family. I don't know who would ever turn down an opportunity to watch this show with someone. I love the episode when I think her name is DD.. the older girl accidentally stole a sweatshirt, and she learned a lesson about stealing. That was a great episode. An example that this TV show shows the family working things out as a family.I recommend this show for everyone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a37e9977edd400295fdb949fd05344a",
            "input": "I just watched this movie and I've gotta say that with such a great premise and great talent this turkey just lays there!!! A friend lent me this movie and I watched with an open mind mainly because he had such high praise for the story. Well, the movie started off with Kevin Costner as a fighter pilot retiring... why? Why did they make him a fighter pilot? He was supposedly going to be hired by Anthony Quinn's character to be his new pilot... well, we never see Costner go near a plane for the rest of the movie! Costner runs into a Texan (James Gammon) selling a horse to a big Mexican businessman and Costner tags along for a ride. Without knowing what happened, Gammon is beat to near death and Costner drives him to the meeting, which happens to be with an associate of Quinn! But, nothing comes of it... nada, zilcho! Why did they have Gammon's character? Why did they have the horse sale with the Quinn associate if nothing was to come of it? Also, after they leave Costner for dead, they make Madeline Stowe's character become a whore, then she attacks one of Quinn's men that was paying for a turn... she stabs him with his own knife, and the next thing she's been moved to a convent! No explanation as to why she was moved, or when it was done!Too much talent wasted on such a weak script and poor editing!! I only watched this because a friend owned it and let me watch it... I'm going to throw it at him for the 2 hours I wasted of my life watching the blasted thing!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed50f740028d4a36a6a0bbe23aaa2553",
            "input": "When you look back at another bad Nightmare sequel like Freddy's Revenge, you have to at least give it some credit for trying something new. And although The Dream Child is more enjoyable it offers absolutely nothing new to the series. Yes, there's the creative deaths as usual, like a kid becoming part of a comic book and facing \"Super Freddy\" but even scenes like that aren't used to their full potential and the parts without Freddy are just boring.This marked the official death of scariness to the series. Freddy seems to be the comedic relief now...but to what?My Rating: 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5b251ff3ebe48e5b330b3266b883f0d",
            "input": "Even if you're not a big Ramones fan, Rock 'N' Roll High School is *still* the greatest rock 'n' roll movie ever made. Why? Because under all the campiness, it treats with respect the contempt and loathing teens often feel (and justifiably so) for the boring, stupid, fascist, establishment world of adults. That final scene is one of the most glorious and uplifting final scenes to a movie I have ever seen. \"Mine eyes have seen the glory of the...\" Rock 'n' roll!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f537be2fcfce491fb39ab875b9d0fe46",
            "input": "The Danes character finally let's Buddy have the awful truth. \"\"Leave me alone, kiss men if you want to,\" she screams self-righteously in front of everyone, thus destroying the man who has been in love with her for so long. Nice girl. This might be the place to reconsider all of the giggly charm that Danes pours into this character. Great reason to feel sympathy for her lying in bed and dying, but hey, remember, there are no mistakes, except, maybe, seeing this film. Wait a minute. This irony is intended! This is actually a masterpiece of ironic wit, yes! But somehow I doubt that's what the creators of this film had in mind, sadly. Maybe there are a few mistakes, after all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e49b42a5fa54f5c987121023d1f246f",
            "input": "Based on an actual mining disaster, this early German talkie (with English subtitles) still remains one of the most effective docu-dramas ever filmed. Featuring many non-professional actors, \"Kameradschaft\" gives a chilling view of the friendship that binds the mine workers, regardless of which side of the French/German border they may be from. A deadly accident brings out the very best in everyone, nullifying any superiors' orders. A fellow miner in need will receive the help of his comrades, even at threat of great loss, including life.This film reminds of the self-sacrificing heroism shown by the NYFD following the 9/11 attacks. Putting aside any formal rules and regulations, these men and women in uniform knew only one cause: to save lives, and to find their fellow-fire fighters. -- More than 70 years later, \"Kameradschaft\" still has the strong and timeless message: A friend in need is a friend in deed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8c512959f3a4a489c4ee8cd8e5ac9d9",
            "input": "I know that some films (I mean: European films), that are very bad films, are being regarded as great cinema by certain \"critics\", only because they're non-American. I saw the 8.1 IMDB score for this film and noticed the fact that this was being selected for certain big festivals. Don't let this fool you! Unless you're one of those people that likes mind-numbing films like this, and call it great art afterwards, skip it! The film contains one hilarious scene after another (a similar, Italian, film popped into my mind, the terrible PREFERISCO IL RUMORE DEL MARE (I prefer the sound of the sea)). The problem with these films is that they're not only boring, like some other strangely praised films, but that they almost play like camp. I mean, let's face it, the acting is horrible (I mean: soap opera-level), the story has not one surprise (this has been done endless times before, connecting several storylines: SHORT CUTS, MAGNOLIA, PLAYING BY HEART, only much better), not one realistic character in it (some true freak-seeing along the way, notice the hilarious zombie-like daughter), and so on and so on.As if that's not enough, the film is 135 min. (count it!) long, and at the end the director opens his can of sentimentality. After a film with such hilariously bad dialogue and scenes that made the public at the preview screening laugh at so much incompetence, well... This is an insult to cinema, and only receives high ratings because it happens to be in \"another\" language, in this case Spanish. Strange world we live in...3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9001b768780b4113b166423cb343aca0",
            "input": "Okay, you have:Penelope Keith as Miss Herringbone-Tweed, B.B.E. (Backbone of England.) She's killed off in the first scene - that's right, folks; this show has no backbone!Peter O'Toole as Ol' Colonel Cricket from The First War and now the emblazered Lord of the Manor.Joanna Lumley as the ensweatered Lady of the Manor, 20 years younger than the colonel and 20 years past her own prime but still glamourous (Brit spelling, not mine) enough to have a toy-boy on the side. It's alright, they have Col. Cricket's full knowledge and consent (they guy even comes 'round for Christmas!) Still, she's considerate of the colonel enough to have said toy-boy her own age (what a gal!)David McCallum as said toy-boy, equally as pointlessly glamourous as his squeeze. Pilcher couldn't come up with any cover for him within the story, so she gave him a hush-hush job at the Circus.and finally:Susan Hampshire as Miss Polonia Teacups, Venerable Headmistress of the Venerable Girls' Boarding-School, serving tea in her office with a dash of deep, poignant advice for life in the outside world just before graduation. Her best bit of advice: \"I've only been to Nancherrow (the local Stately Home of England) once. I thought it was very beautiful but, somehow, not part of the real world.\" Well, we can't say they didn't warn us.Ah, Susan - time was, your character would have been running the whole show. They don't write 'em like that any more. Our loss, not yours.So - with a cast and setting like this, you have the re-makings of \"Brideshead Revisited,\" right?Wrong! They took these 1-dimensional supporting roles because they paid so well. After all, acting is one of the oldest temp-jobs there is (YOU name another!)First warning sign: lots and lots of backlighting. They get around it by shooting outdoors - \"hey, it's just the sunlight!\"Second warning sign: Leading Lady cries a lot. When not crying, her eyes are moist. That's the law of romance novels: Leading Lady is \"dewy-eyed.\"Henceforth, Leading Lady shall be known as L.L.Third warning sign: L.L. actually has stars in her eyes when she's in love. Still, I'll give Emily Mortimer an award just for having to act with that spotlight in her eyes (I wonder . did they use contacts?)And lastly, fourth warning sign: no on-screen female character is \"Mrs.\" She's either \"Miss\" or \"Lady.\"When all was said and done, I still couldn't tell you who was pursuing whom and why. I couldn't even tell you what was said and done.To sum up: they all live through World War II without anything happening to them at all.OK, at the end, L.L. finds she's lost her parents to the Japanese prison camps and baby sis comes home catatonic. Meanwhile (there's always a \"meanwhile,\") some young guy L.L. had a crush on (when, I don't know) comes home from some wartime tough spot and is found living on the street by Lady of the Manor (must be some street if SHE's going to find him there.) Both war casualties are whisked away to recover at Nancherrow (SOMEBODY has to be \"whisked away\" SOMEWHERE in these romance stories!)Great drama.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8aaf4cb8f27f4c7e913f56c47e2674a1",
            "input": "The original exploitation classic-though far from enjoyable on almost any level concerning some guys who turn cats into human flesh eating monsters because the cat food they make is made with people is remade with scifi elements added. The cats can't get enough and when the flesh tainted food runs out the cats turn on their owners. Poorly put together on almost every level this is an example of the absolute bottom of the barrel material that used to actually play movie theaters in the early 1970's updated with alien cat and dog races battling for supremacy. Director Ted Mikel is a hack, but is so lovable a person (I generally like the guy thanks to his smile inducing interviews and commentary tracks) that you can pretty much excuse the garbage he mostly turned out. Mikels wanted to make films and he didn't care how they turned out so long as he was producing something. More power to him, but I wish he wouldn't subject us to his home movies",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc34080ad010447385dd3f67edcd8e20",
            "input": "I truly wish I was not writing this review. I'm a Christian, so I waited anxiously to see this movie. It seemed great -- a Christian movie with some fairly famous stars and a plot that seemed intriguing (not that I buy the Bible Code itself -- you can make it say anything you want. I do, however believe everything inside the Bible). So I'm sitting on the edge of my seat enjoying the previews, when the movie comes on and manages to destroy my mood in a matter of minutes. I had to bite my lip to stop from commenting on the terrible writing and acting while I was in the theater (I would have been torn to pieces by the people cheering at the rather clumsy but basically uplifting scenes and gasping at the insanely obvious and predictable Tension Scenes, I'm sure). Once the final credits began to roll, however, I could reflect. There were many parts of the movie I liked -- some mostly unexpected plot twists, some effects that were indeed special (I'm not counting the Visions. Those were poorly done), and some interesting technical work -- fades, sets, that type of thing. Unfortunately, I got the distinct impression that if I read the book of Revelation to a monkey and set the monkey in front of a typewriter for an hour, I could've gotten a better script. And the music was beyond cheesy (even for a Bond fan who likes kinda cheesy music in scenes of action and intrigue). So I wish I could be like everyone else in the theater -- like the people who came out crying and breathless because of how incredible it was -- but I'm not someone who can be appeased by a writer who throws some words over a Biblical shell and slaps a Christian stamp on it. I need a good plot and believable dialogue before I can enjoy most movies, and this just didn't have either. I'm sorry, but I wouldn't recommend this film to anyone. And that's the tragedy. When will we see some intelligent Christian fiction? It has to be out there somewhere...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95f4eecaa2554e21b0f9cdb8bf6f1e6b",
            "input": "I can't believe this movie was made as recently as 1984. It's got some laughable acting, not to mention one of the stupidest plots ever. Who would ever ask fat Texas sheriff Joe Don Baker to escort an Italian he illegally arrested in Mexico back to Italy? Not to mention that the title of the movie tells you pretty much nothing about it - in fact, it's about as generic a title for a wannabe action/cop film as I can think of.I'm glad I only saw this on MST3K with Mike and the bots as a shield. They remark on the female lead's resemblance to Elaine from Seinfeld (\"None of them are spongeworthy\") and riff non-stop on Baker's weight. This movie probably isn't worse than \"Mitchell,\" but Baker's reputation definitely precedes him here: when his title comes up at the beginning of the film, Tom says, \"I wish I was illiterate so I wouldn't have to read that.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d95d3fee9f434379b00d216485fe79f7",
            "input": "The soul of an ancient mummy is transferred to one of his followers so that he might punish everyone involved in the desecration of his tomb. The soul transference makes the young man age at a tremendous pace until he himself resembles a mummy. One by one, the blood is drained from those involved in the dig.To be as brief as possible, Pharaoh's Curse is quite the lackluster affair. While the movie does present a few good, original ideas (blood sucking mummy's, soul transference, interesting make-up effects, the arm ripping scene, etc.) and a few atmospheric moments, the direction and pace are the very definition of plodding. To make matters even worse, the first 15 of the film's relatively short 66 minute runtime consist of nothing much more than padding. I usually go for these slow moving mummy movies, but Pharaoh's Curse tests even my patients. The cast helps very little. With only one exception (Ziva Rodann is the lone bright spot – wish the movie could have focused more on her mysterious character), the cast is as dull as the screenplay. Finally, I don't know whose idea it was to put the mummy-looking servant in what appears to be pajamas, but it's a laughable, ridiculous look for a creature that supposed to instill fear in the audience.Despite my mostly negative comments on the Pharaoh's Curse, I'm going to rate it a 4/10. Not a good rating to be sure, but generous given all the problems I have with the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd442aa455434c77bb282a95b7944e36",
            "input": "I watched this movie when Joe Bob Briggs hosted Monstervision on TNT. Even he couldn't make this movie enjoyable. The only reason I watched it until the end is because I teach video production and I wanted to make sure my students never made anything this bad ... but it took all my intestinal fortitude to sit through it though. It's like watching your great grandmother flirting with a 15 year old boy ... excruciatingly painful.If you took the actual film, dipped it in paint thinner, then watched it, it would be more entertaining. Seriously.If you see this movie in the bargin bin at S-Mart, back away from it as if it were a rattlesnake.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c59e461b2912462ca107c25a8a14a2bc",
            "input": "Yes, I sat through the whole thing, God knows why.It was a long afternoon, I had nothing to do, it was bitterly cold outside, okay, those are all lame excuses but they're the only ones I have.I gave The Darkling 4 stars out of a possible 10 - I have seen worse films, but this one definitely is right there in the old trash bin of bad filmdom--poor script, poor acting, bad lighting, and cheesy special effects.The storyline, which never completely makes sense, revolves around this simple little family, Daddy, Mommy, and little girl--that I assume the viewer is supposed to be \"identifying\" with, all three of them were tedious and annoying. You just want the dark side to get every one of them.Daddy is a cook whose hobby is cars. Daddy meets a rich man named Rubin who collects cars and who is also in possession of a being he purchased in the \"mysterious\" Orient. Rubin keeps it in a birdcage and refers to it as \"The Darkling\". During the course of the film, the Darkling is explained as being about 3 or 4 different things: a shadow without a person, the inner darkness that exists in all of us, and the Devil. So take your pick of whichever one of those explanations suits your fancy--because trust me, it doesn't really matter.The Darkling's main problem seems to be that it craves having a companion--it gets a human companion--and then eventually is dissatisfied with the human being. This, of course, leads to immense wealth, followed by disaster, for the human who hooks up with The Darkling.And for the rest of us -- it just leads to a very long, tedious movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-620ed8b42088494c80de79d409952189",
            "input": "It's not so much that SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION had little potential. Indeed the under-explored title phenomenon is quite intriguing and, for at least the opening half, this Tobe Hooper effort promises to entertain in a way only cheesy '90s horror can. But somewhere between Brad Dourif's on-again-off-again performance and the overly intricate plot, this would-be thriller loses its way.Dourif, featured here before his built-in horror fan base had accumulated, is average guy Sam. Of course average guys don't stay average for long in horror movies, so after a well-done origin outline, we see Sam's various body parts start to ignite. Soon he's igniting other people, too, much to the consternation of gal pal Lisa, played unmemorably by Cynthia Bain.While the title of the film implies a fire-happy monster on the loose, director Hooper opted to make Sam an unwilling killer. This approach gives the film an added human depth it would otherwise lack, but it also prevents us from truly fearing the human flamethrower. We're left wondering whether this would have worked better as a straight-up villain-versus-everyone effort ala NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET.SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION is a pretty nominal effort when all is said and done. It will carry added appeal for Dourif's fans and those who can't get enough 1990s horror, be it good, bad or in between, but only on a slow night.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3cb7e6e65e744ea9fef94cc6c702237",
            "input": "Beyond dirt cheap, this shot-on-video exercise in ineptitude was difficult to get through. It's got the typical gore that you'd expect in a zombie movie, but none of the required atmosphere to make it worth while.What's strange is that this is an amateur German video, and the version I saw is English-dubbed! The dubbers seem to be American fans (penpals of the Germans?!) who can't decide whether they want to play it straight or turn it into a comedy. One character (a white German, of course) is dubbed by a black guy apparently, who speaks with thick ebonics! 'Kno wahm sayin', Comrad?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef621b8540334307b24bfea98c55cd41",
            "input": "Homelessness (or Houselessness as George Carlin stated) has been an issue for years but never a plan to help those on the street that were once considered human who did everything from going to school, work, or vote for the matter. Most people think of the homeless as just a lost cause while worrying about things such as racism, the war on Iraq, pressuring kids to succeed, technology, the elections, inflation, or worrying if they'll be next to end up on the streets.But what if you were given a bet to live on the streets for a month without the luxuries you once had from a home, the entertainment sets, a bathroom, pictures on the wall, a computer, and everything you once treasure to see what it's like to be homeless? That is Goddard Bolt's lesson.Mel Brooks (who directs) who stars as Bolt plays a rich man who has everything in the world until deciding to make a bet with a sissy rival (Jeffery Tambor) to see if he can live in the streets for thirty days without the luxuries; if Bolt succeeds, he can do what he wants with a future project of making more buildings. The bet's on where Bolt is thrown on the street with a bracelet on his leg to monitor his every move where he can't step off the sidewalk. He's given the nickname Pepto by a vagrant after it's written on his forehead where Bolt meets other characters including a woman by the name of Molly (Lesley Ann Warren) an ex-dancer who got divorce before losing her home, and her pals Sailor (Howard Morris) and Fumes (Teddy Wilson) who are already used to the streets. They're survivors. Bolt isn't. He's not used to reaching mutual agreements like he once did when being rich where it's fight or flight, kill or be killed.While the love connection between Molly and Bolt wasn't necessary to plot, I found \"Life Stinks\" to be one of Mel Brooks' observant films where prior to being a comedy, it shows a tender side compared to his slapstick work such as Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, or Spaceballs for the matter, to show what it's like having something valuable before losing it the next day or on the other hand making a stupid bet like all rich people do when they don't know what to do with their money. Maybe they should give it to the homeless instead of using it like Monopoly money.Or maybe this film will inspire you to help others.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fe17435745e4ca598a434bc6520c8b0",
            "input": "An opium den, a dirty little boy (actually a midget), prostitutes galore, a violent fracas in a dive, a motel for sexual shenanigans, scantily clad babes with cleavage a lot, a boozer falling down the stairs, a racially mixed clientèle in a bar with Asians, Africans, and Anglos treated equally, does this sound like a film playing at the local shopping mall? Wrong. These are all scenes from a 1933 musical.The first half of \"Footlight Parade\" is preparation for a musical extravaganza which occupies the last half of the film. Chester Kent (Cagney) is about to lose his job and does lose his playgirl wife as a result of talking pictures squeezing out live stage musicals. His producers take him to see a popular talky of the day, John Wayne in \"The Big Trail.\" Before each showing of the flick, a dance number is presented as a prologue. Shorts, news reels, serials, and cartoons would later serve the purpose. Kent gets the idea that a prologue chain would be the road to salvation for the dwindling live musical business. Kent is basically an idea man along the lines of choreographer Busby Berkeley. Could it be that Cagney's character is patterned after Berkeley? Could be. In preparation for the prologues, Kent learns that his ideas are being stolen by a rival. He uncovers the traitor, fires him, then unbeknown to him a new leak is planted in the form a dazzling temptress. His assistant, Nan Prescott (Joan Blondell - soon to be Mrs. Dick Powell) has the hots for Kent and is determined to expose the wiles of the temptress. A new singer from Arkansas College shows up in the form of Scotty Blain (Dick Powell) who turns out to be a real find and is paired with Bea Thorn (Ruby Keeler). The resulting three prologue musicals, which couldn't possibly have been presented on any cinema stage of the day, are as fresh and enjoyable today as they were over seventy years ago, \"Honeymoon Hotel,\" \"By a Waterfall,\" and \"Shanghai Lil.\"Of special note is the song and dance of tough-guy James Cagney. Like Fred Astaire and Bill \"Bojangles\" Robinson, Cagney's dancing appeared natural and unrehearsed, although hours went into practice to get each step just right. Not as good a singer as Astaire, Cagney's singing, like Astaire's, sounded natural, unlike the crooning so popular at the time. It's amazing that one person could be so talented and so versatile as James Cagney.Most critics prefer the \"Shanghai Lil\" segment over the other two. Yet the kaleidoscopic choreography of \"By a Waterfall\" is astonishing. How Berkeley was able to film the underwater ballets and to create the human snake chain must have been difficult because it has never been repeated. The close up shots mixed brilliantly with distant angles is a must-see. The crisp black and white photography is much more artistic than it would have been if shot in color. Though not nearly as socially conscious as \"Gold Diggers of 1933,\" \"Footlight Parade\" stands on its own as one of the most amazing and outrageous musicals ever put on the big screen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bcb484ec491743d1b430d8a7fc7b2fc3",
            "input": "Ok, so it's not a masterpiece like the Godfather, but it doesn't have to be. The only purpose this movie has is to make the viewer laugh several times. If it can make the viewer laugh a bunch of times, it has accomplished its purpose. I laughed out loud and left with a smile. I feel like I got my money's worth.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb2695a2527b492f979e996c8f493be1",
            "input": "If you can imagine Mickey Mouse as a New York street pimp, or John Wayne as a Communist spy, then you might believe Pat Boone as a juvenile delinquent on his uncle's farm in Kentucky and you could conceivably enjoy this movie.This film is so stupid that it isn't even campy for a mid 1950s sexless love story. And the problem is that Hollywood made such a big deal about Pat Boone's refusal to kiss a woman not his wife on screen before its release that the audience knows he won't kiss Shirley Jones so you cannot build any anticipation for the \"screen consummation\" of their love. It's sort of like watching a western in which the cowboys don't have guns.The story is pointless. Even the title song is sung with pained enthusiasm.April Love belongs in the worst film bargain bin along with Ishtar and Plan 9 from Outer Space.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-323b6b2efd8b46838c77bda89f416eac",
            "input": "I grew up watching the original TV series in the sixties and one thing that I can tell you right away, there is NO comparison. This film was totally ridiculous with a flying suit that was alive. A martian that took different shapes. Special effects that looked like something that a little child would create. In contrast, in the original, characters were developed and the viewers developed a feeling for Tim and Uncle Martin. The only highlight in this film, yes, actually there was one, occurred when Ray Walston finally made an appearance at the end. He wore dark glasses and made references to living on this planet for 30 years as a sort of homage to the TV series. But even the real Uncle Martin could not save this turkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97b57c8b50854d2cabfb17b7d88cd3d1",
            "input": "I watched this as part of my course at Aberystwyth University and it baffles me how this does not have a distributor in the UK. Well actually, it doesn't, because this film is everything a Hollywood film isn't - original, creative, quirky and humorous. It seems that today no-one really wants to see this type of movie as, in the simplest terms, it doesn't conform to the generic conventions most young viewers look for in a film.I haven't written a review for the IMDb for ages but felt inclined to give this film a special mention, even if it is during my 30 minute break between classes! Essentially, it is about nothing, as the two main characters are plunged into their own world of nothingness through a hate of the world. The brilliance here is how the director sustains interest through the majority of the run time with only two characters and when the only mise-en-scene consists of half a house and a vast white, empty space. This is due in large part to the stellar performances of the actors, both of whom offer some great laughs while at the same time being able to add significant emotional depth to their roles.I'd love to write some more but am on quite a time limit. However I encourage anyone and everyone to give this film a try. A very unique concept is brought to the screen in a coherent and well-executed fashion, with the combination of good performances, a strong script, nice sound design and (fairly) impressive visuals creating a very entertaining movie.It's just a shame so few people know about Nothing....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7118ac59dca64cb7a18de43e704238ba",
            "input": "I first saw this movie on cable about 5 years ago and I could not stop laughing. Everything about this movie seemed to click, the storyline, the characters, the setting. As far as film is concerned I wouldn't call this a great movie but for what it is supposed to be it is fantastic. It gets it's meaning across. The cast is maybe as good as any ever put together in a comedy movie. Corben Berbson, Fred Gwynne, Ruben Blades, and Ed O'Neil are hilarious. For this who haven't seen it, I will give you a brief synopsis: Four Criminals meet up in a small town in Montana after receiving a letter from their friend about a bank heist. However when their friend is arrested by two cops who chased him from New Jersey, they try to figure out whats going on and all hell breaks loose. The film is truly a great bank caper comedy and is sort of like a poor mans version of Oceans Eleven, only with four criminals who can't stand each other, and in Montana rather than Las Vegas. All in all if like to laugh I would strongly encourage you to see this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a04c047a39949b182d8d2a738d4db8f",
            "input": "In Northeastern of Brazil, the father of the twelve years old illiterate Maria (Fernanda Carvalho) sells his daughter to the middle man of a prostitution organization, Tadeu (Chico Dias), to be employed as a housemaid and have a better life. However, the girl is resold to the farmer Lourenço (Otávio Augusto) that deflowers her, and he gives the abused girl to his teenager son to have his first sexual experience. Then she is sent to a brothel in a gold field in Amazonas and explored his owner, the despicable Saraiva (Antonio Calloni). When Maria escapes to Rio de Janeiro expecting a better life, she is explored by the cáften Vera (Darlene Glória).\"Anjos do Sol\" exposes the sad and shameful reality of child prostitution in Brazil through the fate of the girl Maria. Last year I saw \"Lilja 4-ever\" that tells an identical story in the former Soviet Union; therefore this problem does exist in Third World countries. Director and writer Rudi Lagemann presents a great movie exposing the reality but never showing nudity or explicit sexual scenes. It is the debut of the promising Fernanda Carvalho, who has an excellent performance in the role of a scared child fighting for survival. Most of the prostitutes are amateurs, and it is impossible to recognize the famous Darlene Glória so different she is after many plastic surgeries. The bitter and hopeless end of the story is also very realistic. My vote is ten.Title (Brazil): \"Anjos do Sol\" (\"Angels of the Sun\")",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-85d21212d6144a1f85dbd7faa8131c81",
            "input": "What a dreadful movie! For some reason, scientific laboratories and outposts always have a staff of grubby, dirty, mean-spirited, misanthropes living inside. These folks who presumably work together on complicated scientific projects cannot seem to agree on how to survive death at the hands of a CGI Dragon. Spoilers: An extra-nasty scientist whose main acting skill is \"leering\" and \"the sinister stare\" has cloned a Dragon. While the lab was supposed to work on this kind of thing, the other scientists are shocked, because apparently they were all way behind in their experiments and got caught with their pants down. The rest of the story is like THE THING, or Ten Little Indians, where the staff is hunted and killed off as they try to formulate a way to escape and/or defeat the \"Dragon.\" The CGI Dragon creature is dark gray, which seems to be the popular color for most of the cheap CGI special effects. It hardly looks better than a cartoon, and the dark gray tones make it difficult to see any interesting details in the body of the Dragon. All it looks like is a gray blob. The acting is less than horrible. These scientists act like a bunch of children who cannot agree on anything, and this makes it easier for the Dragon to kill them off in various attempts to escape, hide, etc. Dean Cain is hardly better than any of the cast of unknown actors in this movie. He seems to sink to the level of his supporting cast. This movie is really, really atrocious. The acting is bad. The story is dumb. The CGI is very very cheap and amateurish. There is nothing commendable about this movie, it is not even a good time-killer to glance at while doing chores or other work.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48149a235f4c46159fef80e7b7cef16d",
            "input": "Perhaps the most gripping and intelligent of crooked cop movies is Otto Preminger's 'Where the Sidewalks Ends,' from a really excellent script by Ben Hecht based on the novel 'Night Cry' by Frank Rosenberg...Dana Andrews is the honest, tough New York policeman, always in trouble with his superiors because he likes his own strong-arm methods as much as he detests crooks... When he hit someone, his knuckles hurt... And the man he wants to hit is a smooth villain (Gary Merrill) who points up the title. 'Why are you always trying to push me in the gutter?' he asks Andrews. 'I have as much right on the sidewalk as you.'Dana Andrew's obsession and neurosis are implanted in his hidden, painful discovery that he is the son of a thief... His deep hatred of criminals led him to use their own illegal methods to destroy them, and the pursuit of justice became spoiled in private vendetta...By a twist of irony unique to the film itself, Dana Andrews and Gene Tierney of 'Laura' are united once more, and Andrews now seems to be playing the same detective a few years later, but no longer the romantic, beaten down by his job, by the cheap crooks... This time, he goes too far, and accidentally kills a suspect... The killing is accidental, the victim worthless, yet it is a crime that he knows can break him or send him to jail...Using his knowledge of police procedure, he covers up his part in the crime, plants false clues, and tries to implicate a gang leader, but cannot avoid investigating the case himself... The double tension of following the larger case through to its conclusion without implicating himself in the murder, is beautifully maintained and the final solution is both logical, satisfying, and in no way a compromise...The film is one of the best detective films of the 50's, with curious moral values, also one of Preminger's best... Preminger uses a powerful storytelling technique, projecting pretentious camera angles and peculiar touches of the bizarre in order to externalize his suspense in realism...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8af9424461e40ac8365d64cab1c7b45",
            "input": "Perhaps the biggest waste of production time, money and the space on the video store shelf. If someone suggests you see this movie, run screaming in the other direction. Unless, of course, you're into self-abuse.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d83b585577fc42d99fbbb407e12071a8",
            "input": "I also just got back from an advanced screening of Redeye and I must say I haven't had so much fun at a movie in a long time. WES CRAVEN is at his best ever. He brings us an amazing end of summer thriller I was so desperately craving. This is THE thriller of the year..no doubt. All the actors are amazing and the action is realistic and fun. The F/X were great. It steadily built suspense. I was on the edge of my seat most of the movie. It's been a while since I heard an audience cheer and clap and get excited in a theater. If your looking for thrills,action and a GOOD plot this summer, REDEYE delivers. Go see it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f00bd21177a94983a59e10e14fd4048b",
            "input": "Bruce Almighty, one of Carrey's best pictures since... well... a long time. It contains one of the funniest scenes I have seen for a long time too... Morgan Freeman plays God well and even chips in a few jokes that are surprisingly funny. It contains one or two romantic moments that are a bit boring but over all a great movie with some funny scenes. The best scene in, it is where Jim is messing up the anchor man's voice.My rating: 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4697571d7ca94d11814aac47422c576b",
            "input": "Frustrating to watch because of one man's stubbornness to leave his native country for the dream land in Switzerland and what he does to achieve that creates heartache for all those involved. Along the journey he encounters scumbags who take advantage of other human suffering and desperation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-799ab17aac594d209976f304c0702b75",
            "input": "I'm going to have to disagree with the previous comment and side with Maltin on this one. This is a second rate, excessively vicious Western that creaks and groans trying to put across its central theme of the Wild West being tamed and kicked aside by the steady march of time. It would like to be in the tradition of \"Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid\", but lacks that film's poignancy and charm. Andrew McLaglen's direction is limp, and the final 30 minutes or so are a real botch, with some incomprehensible strategy on the part of heroes Charlton Heston and Chris Mitchum. (Someone give me a holler if you can explain to me why they set that hillside on fire.) There was something callous about the whole treatment of the rape scene, and the woman's reaction afterwards certainly did not ring true. Coburn is plenty nasty as the half breed escaped convict out for revenge, but all of his fellow escapees are underdeveloped (they're like bowling pins to be knocked down one by one as the story lurches forward). Michael Parks gives one of his typically shifty, lethargic, mumbling performances, but in this case it was appropriate as his modern style sheriff symbolizes the complacency that technological progress can bring about.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2088542de8f249cea67565317f2d1757",
            "input": "WHEN FRIENDSHIP KILLS, in my opinion, is a very touching and kind of heartbreaking drama about the consequences of being anorexic or bulimic. Anytime Lexi (Katie Wright) or Jennifer (Marley Shelton) threw up, I wanted to vomit myself. It's kind of hard to explain why. If you ask me, they should have been more cooperative about things. However, I did enjoy seeing them do things together as well as get lectured by their parents. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say, \"If you ask me, WHEN FRIENDSHIP KILLS does indeed show you how being anorexic or bulimic can affect a person's body. \" Now, in conclusion, I recommend this movie to everyone who hasn't seen it. You're in for some tears and a good time, so the next time it's on TV, kick back with a friend and watch it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b6f19ee11344cc99a2d12cd9e68cca4",
            "input": "This movie was very funny, I couldn't stop smiling when watching this and have already watched it twice in a period of 2 days! The movie is distinctively unique in it's humor and visuals, both are terrific and on par with Natali's other (more serious) movie gems Cube and Cypher. I have become a huge Vincenzo Natali fan ever since watching Cypher and everything he's made is very interesting.Very likable about this movie are the music and \"loser\" characters Dave and Andrew, portrayed by David Hewlett and Andrew Miller (co-writer of the story), actors I both like very much. Also cool are the X-Box Dead Or Alive fights (you even see Dave playing Halo at a point) and Andrew's amazing guitar solo, among many other things.All in all a great feel-good film about friendship. You have to see this!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7b6ffa676264cf1bb425b4481325bec",
            "input": "If Mr Cranky had rated this, I'd be tempted just to copy his review and paste it here. But as he hasn't, I'll have to give it a go myself.The only thing giving this movie a 1 instead of a 0 is that Malcolm McDowall's acting is excellent. However not even he can save this film from disaster. The director must have been really distracted when he worked on this one because it is just a conglomeration of scenes that were thrown together with very little continuity - reminiscent of bad '70's movies. Even worse, both the actors and director appeared to be making it up as they went along which probably showed how bad the original script was.It's not even worth discussing the story line although it revolves around a futuristic corporation called the Proxate Corporation who put together a crew of dispensable people to carry a dangerous cargo on an old container/slave ship to Nigeria. This ship's computer is a baby kept in a glass jar and wired into one of the crew via USB 12 or something. The company should have been called the Prostate Corporation as the entertainment value of this movie is on a par with an examination of the same name.I honestly can't find one scene that I could say was well made and made any real sense in the context of the movie. I only watched it to the end as I had a touch of the bird flu and this movie reminded me that there were people out there who were actually worse off than me - Malcolm McDowall in particular. I won't hold this against him as he's a great actor and every great actor is entitled to one bad movie in their career and this one is a doosie.So, unless this is the only movie your shop hires out or you're male and you're doctor isn't doing prostate examinations this week and you somehow feel this is a bad thing then give this one a really wide berth unless of course if you're really community minded, buy a copy to support Malcolm and then use it as a drink coaster.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aac2773ceec0401f96df6093fb9df03c",
            "input": "Only once in a while do we get an R-rated comedy that gets everyone's time and attention. It's an even rarer case when the critics will like it. I just came back from The 40 Year-Old Virgin and I can honestly say, it was one of the biggest laughs of my life. I went to a 10:35 showing and every row was filled. Not only that, everyone laughed their ass off the whole time through. It's two hours of non-stop laughing. I dare you to see this film and to not laugh.The plot is simple. A man is forty years old and he is a virgin. Yet, behind this simple, five second joke, we are given a deep, complex story that is not only one of the funniest you'll ever witness, but has genuine lessons behind it. Steve Carell stars as Andy Stitzer, The 40 Year-Old Virgin. We have known Steve Carell, as, in my opinion, one of the best scene thieves of all time. Stealing hilarious scenes from Bruce Almighty and especially Anchorman, Steve Carell has come a long way, as finally, and proudly, is given his moment to shine as the star. No one will forget his name once they witness this pervasively funny, gut-busting, roll-in-the-aisle hilarious comedy.The beauty about the film is it isn't 100% stupid. The brilliant writing of Judd Apatow and Steve Carell genuinely has purpose and it's not just one hell of a story to tell. Behind the crudeness and vulgar non-stop ride of the film comes an important lesson to be learned. Although not presented in the best way possible, the film gives us more than a purely enjoyable time. Its gut-busting attitude will have you laughing the whole time through, while we simultaneously see the real life struggles of people like Andy and his fellow co-workers. The end couldn't have been better. Not only does it deliver what we are promised but it gives one of the most memorable finishing numbers a comedy has ever seen. It would have been perfect if there was Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson in there cameoing somehow, but you can't win 'em all, now can you.Finally, I think as Roger Ebert put it, Catherine Keener gives an unexplainable perfect performance as Trish, the one woman Andy has his heart truly for. Not only does she also give us laughs but it is crazy to see how brightly she fuels the story. She was cast perfected in the role and her and Carell have terrific, not to mention, hilarious chemistry on screen.Canadian ratings-wise, once again, Ontario slips away with a 14A, while British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba all slapped The 40 Year-Old Virgin with an 18A. The same thing happened with Four Brothers, in my opinion, the second best film of the year, and I can honestly say that I love Ontario more and more so for that. To all you fellow teenagers out there in the States: Good luck sneaking in! Overall, Steve Carell gives one of the funniest performances I've ever seen and just about everyone in the cast distributes to the non-stop laughter. Everyone will love the 40 Year-Old Virgin this summer and I encourage everyone to see it as fast as humanly possible. It is the best comedy of the year, hands down. It beats all over The Longest Yard, The Wedding Crashers, and of course Apatow and Carell's last memorable comedy, Anchorman.It is a comic masterpiece and deserves the remarkable amount of praise from the critics who have been loving it. Every single one of my favourite critics loved it and it deserves a spot on the IMDb Top 250 right away. Steve Carell is a huge star. Watch one of the brightest ones of the summer right now.My Rating: 9/10 Objectively – 9/10 Subjectively – 10/10 Eliason A.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b34d51158322416bbc6aa7a738739f3f",
            "input": "by Dane Youssef \"Coonskin\" is film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satirical indictment of blaxploitation films and negative black stereotypes, as well as a look at life black in modern America (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount dropped it like a hot potato that just burst into flame.But this is a Bakshi film, controversial, thrilling, and a must-see almost by definition alone. Not just another random \"shock-jock\" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by Ralph Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, \"Coonskin\" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. \"Coonskin\" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but actually seems to show love, beauty and heart in the strangest places.\"Coonskin\" tells a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the \"Coonskin\" world alone makes it old-fashioned.One of the inmates tells a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means necessary. The Itallian mob is running all the real action.Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, hip, deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word \"sublety.\" This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs extremism. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.Bakshi is god-dammed merciless. Here, no member or minority of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.The characters here are \"animated\" to \"real\" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is black-face is gratuitously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's \"Bamboozled,\" he seems to be using it to try and really say something.Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter what f--king ear it is. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (junglebunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these \"dirty n-----s\" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.The promo line: WARNING: \"This film offends everybody!\" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.You have been warned...by Dane Youssef",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b412b289167448d884c61fabad6f855a",
            "input": "When this movie was first shown on television I had high hopes that we would finally have a decent movie about World War I as experienced by American soldiers. Unfortunately this is not it.It should have been a good movie about WWI. Even though it was made for television it is obvious that a real effort was made to use appropriate equipment and props. But the writing and directing are badly lacking, even though the makers of this movie obviously borrowed freely from quite a few well made war movies. War movie clichés abound such as the arrogant general who apparently does not care a flip about the lives of his men. When will Hollywood realize that, even though there have been plenty of bad generals, most combat unit generals have seen plenty of combat themselves and are not naive about what the average grunt experiences? The first part of this movie appeared to be \"Paths of Glory\" with American uniforms. Except that \"Paths of Glory\" was emotionally gripping. Later on there was Chamberlain's charge (except uphill) from \"Gettysburg\" and even the capture of the American soldier by a ring of enemy soldiers from \"The Thin Red Line\". But in \"The Thin Red Line\" the soldier was alone when captured. In this movie a ring forms around the new prisoner in the middle of a battle.If this movie used a military adviser they ignored him. Even though the actors (and I never could forget they were actors while watching) mouthed military tactics I didn't see very much of it. The American soldiers would stand up to be shot while the Germans attacked. And the infamous Storm Troopers, who were apparently blind, appeared to use no tactics whatsoever in their attack. In the real war, the tactics were what made storm troopers so effective. But the silliest scene was the attack of the German Flamethrowers. In this scene the German flamethrower operators walked in a broad line towards the defending Americans. If that had been real they would never have gotten close enough to use their flamethrowers before they had all been dropped by the defender's bullets.Okay, so most war movies are unrealistic when it comes to the tactics shown. But it is still disappointing. But what really turned me off to this flick was the typical anti-war anti-military angle that movie makers seem to think is important. True, war is hell. But most American soldiers, even though they grumble and gripe, tend to believe in what they are doing and can be rather gung-ho about it. My Grandfather served in World War I. And even though he died four years before I was born I have been told how proud he was of his service.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-413f4fc714324954b85c06229abc1554",
            "input": "Well-made but basically dreary low-life melodrama which, according to the accompanying interview with lead Isabelle Huppert, writer/director Pialat infused with a good deal of autobiographical detail; given the mainly unsympathetic characters involved, it doesn't do him any compliments - and he does seem to have been a troubled man, as Huppert also says that Pialat often disappeared for days on end during the shoot! The acting is uniformly excellent, however; despite their relatively young age, Huppert and co-star Gerard Depardieu (as the title character!) were already at the forefront of modern French stars - a status which, with varying degrees of success, they both still hold to this day.I have 3 more of Pialat's films in my \"VHS To Watch\" pile, albeit all in French without English Subtitles; due to this fact but also LOULOU'S oppressive realism - in spite of its undeniable artistic merit - I can't say that I'm in any particular hurry to check them out now...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4db3ba5ddfa848519d2276e73d96c53b",
            "input": "I have to be completely honest in saying first that I fell asleep somewhere in the middle, so I cannot give a full opinion about the film until I see it in full. Basically, a group of thieves, including Sid Carter (Sid James) and Ernie Bragg (Bernard Bresslaw), plan to make a fortune stealing a shipment of contraceptive pills from Finisham maternity hospital. This is where title character Matron (Hattie Jacques) works, along with staff members Sir Bernard Cutting (Kenneth Williams), Dr. Francis Goode (Charles Hawtrey), Dr. Prodd (Terry Scott) and Nurse Susan Ball (Barbara Windsor). Patients and their visitors are around too, including pregnant Mrs. Tidey (Joan Sims) and her nervous dad-to-be husband Mr. Tidey (Kenneth Connor). Also starring Bill Maynard as Freddy and EastEnders' Wendy Richard as Miss Willing. This plan by the way is not working out by the way, because all the staff are getting in the way. That's pretty much all can say about the film until I see it again in full. Okay!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27bab2ff783d43fa96d1e1482449d52f",
            "input": "I regret that I've seen this movie. Can't believe that the creator of Best Intentions and Pelle the Conqueror could make such a bleak and boring film. What a waste!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8de4f3e1f73f414ea729df65c3e87856",
            "input": "This miracle of a movie is one of those films that has a lasting, long term effect on you. I've read a review or two from angry people who I guess are either republicans or child beaters, and their extremist remarks speak of the films power to confront people with their own darkest secrets. No such piece of art has ever combined laughter and tears in me before and that is the miracle of the movie. The realism of the movie and it's performance by Bret Carr is not to be missed. The very nature of it's almost interactive effect, will cause people to leave the theater either liberated or questioning their very identity. Bravo on the next level of cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1ec2cd1fa414df3bc58cde9e5c61714",
            "input": "This is the third parody of the scary movies and hopefully the last. This time the spoof is mainly on The Ring, Signs and 8 Mile for some weird reason. In my opinion this movie was very pointless and unnecessary and not even funny. I laughed maybe three times and that is not enough for a comedy. I really enjoyed the first two but this one was just plain dumb. If your jokes consist of corpses getting beat up and people constantly throwing stuff at each other then this movie is for you. In my opinion, if your smart enough stay at home and save your money and please stop making these kind of movies, they just keep getting worse 3/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f539cb3172dd4eb996961a7da3dde83f",
            "input": "I'm a horror/gore movie freak and this flick was so bad, I felt embarrassed for not only the \"actors\", but also the director and the poor sap of a producer who actually put his money up for this schlock.From the title, you'd expect some great carnage, somewhat of a storyline and at LEAST some direction or dialog. Instead, you get what looks like a slightly more violent and sexual Three Stooges episode. At least I laugh at the Three Stooges. While watching this crap, I turned another TV on and started watching Howard Stern until something interesting happened.Needless to say, I kept watching Stern.Watching this \"film\" I realize that I could produce a film with three monkeys, 2 DV cameras, $50 dollars in loose change and a broken PC. This film is my inspiration to get into no-budget film making. Watch this movie if you dare, but be warned...there is a lot of nothing in here but a whole lot of talking and very little action. This makes \"KaZaam\" look like a Meryl Streep film.I'm sure Germany didn't ban it due to sex or violence. Other countries need to take heed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44698a9df43646539a2ef276aa9531f5",
            "input": "Yeah, the poster is quite a horrible piece of work.I thought the movie was OK...nothing really outstanding...I just was hoping that he would be a hardcore druggie and totally trash his life.Ahh, but that can't happen to rich kids now can it? Not to the son of a wealthy businessman who holds big ballroom parties and has a nice manicured lawn on the front of the mini mansion.No...the kid is too good to have his life totally trashed. After all, who will drive the brand new SUV and who will go to law school? Ah, the poor little rich kids...in their quaint pretty house, with their ivy league schools, ultra clean homes and socialite parties...what will the world do without them? I hope they all get addicted to drugs, pass-away their life and end up in jail...so maybe we can see movies that don't all revolve around the poor little rich boys and girls of the surreal world.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-397aec8e6135467ea1ce0cd52641cb2c",
            "input": "Brides are dying at the altar and their corpses are vanishing. No one knows why or who, but an investigative reporter (Luana Walters) notes that each bride was wearing a strange orchid and she goes to interview its creator, Dr. Lorenz (Bela Lugosi). Now Dr. Lorenz is a mad scientist with some strange habits, including sleeping in coffins and injecting his elderly wife (Elizabeth Russell) with the fluid of young brides to keep her young.The Corpse Vanishes has an interesting premise and a short enough run time that it shouldn't be able to get boring. Unfortunately, while it starts off quite well, it does start to drag before the halfway point and gets rather boring with its clichés and predictable plot.There are some good things about it-Bela Lugosi is charming and evil and performs brilliantly; Elizabeth Russell is also a beautiful, suave, aloof and very creepy countess; and I'm always a fan of Angelo Rossitto. Luana Walters is also convincing as the reporter here.It maintains a bit of a Gothic atmosphere and the sets are decent.But overall, it just didn't manage to hold my interest through the whole picture, and for that, I have to rate it poorly.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d31a610d1166402ab1ccc016427e4c60",
            "input": "There are so many puns to play on the title of the spectacularly bad Valentine that I don't know where to begin. I will say this though; here is a movie that makes me long for the complexity of the Valentine cards we used to give out in elementary school. You know, the ones with Batman exclaiming \"You're a super crime-fighting valentine!\"Valentine is a slasher movie without the slightest hint of irony, one of the few horror movies in recent years that ignores the influence of Scream. The villain is omniscient and nigh-invulnerable. The heroes are easily scared when people run around corners and grab them by the shoulders screaming \"HeyIjustleftmycoatbehind!\" The score is more overbearing than Norman Bates' mother.The flimsy plot follows several childhood friends, now grown up and extremely curvaceous. Since the film gives them nothing else to do, they stand around and wait until a masked stalker kills them one by one. This stalker appears to be former nerd Jeremy Melton, who was constantly rejected by women and beaten by men in high school. With Valentine's Day approaching, the women begin receiving scary cards foretelling their doom. Melton seems like the obvious suspect. Only problem is, as numerous characters warns, in thirteen years Melton could have changed his appearance to look buff and handsome. So (insert terrified gasp here) everyone is a suspect!Here's problem one. In order to have any sense of suspense while watching Valentine, you have to accept a reality in which a high school nerd is capable of becoming David Boreanaz. Nerds don't turn into Angel when they grown up, they turn into older, balder nerds. He's not a terrible actor, but the script, by no less than four writers, gives him and the rest of the cast nothing to do but scream and make out. Denise Richards (the bustiest actress in Hollywood never to star in Baywatch) is especially exploited; most shamefully in the blatant excuse to get her in a bathing suit just before a crucial suspense scene. Note to self: always bring a bathing suit to a Valentine's Day party. Just because it's February doesn't mean you might not feel like taking a little dip.The slasher in Valentine dresses in head-to-toe black with a Cherub's mask. Here's problem number two. The filmmakers clearly thought this would be a disturbing image to have on the head of someone who's whacking people in the face with hot irons. Plain and simple, it's not. Instead, it just made me wonder how a guy with a mask that covers his entire face, including his eyes and ears, can move so stealthily without bumping his shins on chairs or tables. Then again, given the things the Cupid Killer does, maybe he can teleport and his eyes are on his hands. Not only is the movie bad, it isn't even sure who the killer is; the final \"twist\" is more \"Huh?\" than \"Hah!\" When you're not scratching your head you're yawning, then groaning, then searching for the nearest exit. Do not watch this movie. Even if you're alone on Valentine's Day, find something, ANYTHING, else to do. You'll be glad you did.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10a40a337f8443b49a61827c6bcd94cd",
            "input": "This is a truly abysmal `LOCK STOCK' clone with a stellar cast and a terrible script. I have no idea why so many top British actors signed up to this junk, they must have been bribed. A miss match of a storyline goes on forever and ever and ever and if I hadn't have paid good money for it I'd have turned it off after 10 minutes. Not the worst film ive ever seen, that honour goes to the truly pathetic used bogroll of a ‘movie' (I use the term loosely) `GUMMO' (I feel like suing that so called `director' for the lost hour and a half of my life) but this trash is nearly right down there with it. Definitely one of the worst 5 films I have ever seen. Stuff like this reminds Hollywood that they don't have a monopoly on truly awful films.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e86fbed39c7429f8ff6c2bf652e7dd1",
            "input": "A real classic. A shipload of sailors trying to get to the towns daughters while their fathers go to extremes to deter the sailors attempts. A maidens cry for aid results in the dispatch of the \"Rape Squad\". A cult film waiting to happen!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a90da44c7cc4222bf917438b1303878",
            "input": "The subject notwithstanding, this is an amateur, exhibitionist movie--or an effort at one--which is about as interesting and daring as a moody high school student's composition book full of death \"poetry\". To be sure, it will disturb viewers who are hell-bent on being disturbed, but the success will be attributable to themselves, not to the director. To genuinely get under somebody's skin requires sensibility, discipline, technique, and talent, as well as an eye and an ear. The film does contain one evocative image, shown as a still (and also used on the video case), but with no development leading up to or away from it. If the director had had an eye, he would have seen it as a possible starting point for an interesting movie--that is, a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09b9e5f4810c4ef3a55d1d00fe47abe3",
            "input": "For movie fans who have never heard of the book (Shirley Jackson's \"The Haunting of Hill House\") and have never seen the 1963 Robert Wise production with Julie Harris, this remake will seem pretty darn bad.For those of us who have, it is just plain awful.Bad acting (what was Neeson thinking?), goofy computer enhancements, and a further move away from Jackson's story doom this remake.Do yourself a favor and rent the original movie. It still effectively scares without hokey special effects. The acting is professional and believable.For readers of the book, the from 1963 follows the it much closer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81408898b37c472883c47eed494e4eb6",
            "input": "Payback is the game being played in this drama and the revenge plot is undone by the absurd story line that sets the stage for the fireworks that come later. Why would a man become involved with the trophy wife of a ruthless mob boss in the gangster's own mansion with suspicious henchmen all around? Why would an unhappy wife encourage the attentions of a complete stranger and expect him to carry her away with him and leave her husband and boredom behind to live happily ever after with her new love? Surely the hero, here Kevin Costner, must have expected a reaction from the cuckold husband that gives the movie an excuse to indulge in senseless gore and violence. Anthony Quinn, great actor that he was, surely deserved better, and Madeleine Stowe is the tragic figure who suffers greatly as she latches on to her prince charming. Stowe is okay but her Spanish accent doesn't work. The cameos of the lesser players are good, especially Miguel Ferrer and John Leguizamo and Sally Kirkland is interesting as a fading rock star.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b267d718a1f04aa4b4d086d4c6940c41",
            "input": "you must be seeing my comments over many films under Evren Buyruk ..I am off to make another comment over a movie that is not even worth a minute of talking though..This film is basically two hours of Dafoe's character drinking himself - nearly literally - to death. The only surprise in this film is that you didn't have enough clues or character knowledge to be surprised. It was just a grim, sad waste of time.Willem Dafoe is excellent actor. Peter Stormare is an excellent actor. But this film just sucked. Slow doesn't make the movie bad, it was just bad. The sketchy plot mixed with artistic ramblings of anamorphic detail aren't cohesively drawn together in a meaningful way for a plot except to highlight some gore which is illustrated from several perspectives, finally at the end. I really appreciate the artistic vision, but as entertainment, it put me to sleep. (Seriously, I fell asleep and had to re-watch the film - which was even more disappointing.) I generally don't like to make negative comments or reviews on the works of others, even when they suck, but this film warranted one. It's just too bad that these great actors were shamed with this end result.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb02df8481184e539e059f94a4a89092",
            "input": "OssessioneLuchino Visconti's debut film, this Italian noir is generally credited with launching the Neorealist movement--well, it says so right on the back of the box--and is a sometimes penetrating, sometimes lugubrious portrait of lonesome individuals in moral flux. Set in Fascist Italy, an assortment of supporting characters--including an ingenuous drifter who espouses Communist virtues--embody the remote desperations of a country searching for its identity from without, drifting phantasms longing for a soul. Although Visconti's compassion for the disenfranchised and his ability to express their lamentable conditions was already well-developed, the spider web of deceit is tenuous--although a staple of noir is to posit a protagonist manipulated by fate and the femme fatale, Gino here is so unhinged to begin with that you fear he might deserve it--the cosmic irony too didactic, the illicit relationship strained with bathos. All the same, it's incisive and essential, although its actual impact on film history is certainly debatable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7018f5e5f509498298715b45fcd681dc",
            "input": "I just came back from a pre-release viewing of this excellent sci-fi film noire. It's style is definitively unique and very well made. It is filmed with actual actors, but transformed into a black and white comic-strip style you have never seen before. It goes one step further than Sin City, and it does it well. It's a successful combination of french comic and movie cultures. The story and mood remind of Blade Runner, and if you liked that one you will surely like this one, too. The storyline is intelligent, never boring and has some nice little twists. This film is a must-see for any cinephile except perhaps those who absolutely don't like sci-fi or b&w.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f637414a4ab345119c02d8b4c31ca006",
            "input": "I saw this film last night at a special movie theater showing in Nürnberg, and it was superb. I do have to admit that the original music composition of the cello player and percussion/xylophone player influenced the mood of the film, but the film itself also had force in its portrayal of the tragic Nibelungen saga.If you are interested in silent films or in the Nibelungenlied, I highly recommend this film. The costumes were fantastic and creative, the sets were opulent and exotic, and the acting was dramatic and breathtaking (as is typical of silent film \"tragedies\") Unfortunately, I have not seen the first part of this film duo that concerns Siegfried. The story of this second film begins after Siegfried's death, when Kremhild (Gudrun in the Norse versions of the story) begins to plan her revenge against her brothers.Also, I watched this film in German; I am a native English speaker and have a basic German knowledge. It was difficult to read the ?subtitles (what do you call that in silent films?) at first because of the old style German script, so I advise that if you watch it in German that you make sure you can differentiate your \"k's\", \"f's\", and \"s's\" in the old script. :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a733ada0647e4a488aaaddaf102fc81a",
            "input": "Having read some good reviews about this film I thought it was about time I go and see it. Well I don't know why I bothered. Basically this family is entrusted with a clue that leads to a whole big stash of ancient treasure, hidden by the Knights Templar during the War of Independence. Apparently it had to be kept out of the hands of the British at all costs. Firstly, why did said Knights move the treasure from Europe to America? How did Nic Cages character figure out that 'Charlotte' was in fact a ship? How do they figure out all the clues and riddles in about a minute? And how could two people suddenly become master thieves and steal what is probably the best guarded bit of paper in the world? These are just some of the plot holes in this inane bit of Hollywood action gone wrong. Cage has been in some great action movies - 'Face-Off' and 'The Rock' - so why has he lowered himself to this? Is he getting too old?! His character is pretty annoying really - Somehow this 'ordinary' guy steals the Declaration of Independancd, outruns thieves with guns, escapes from the FBI and generally seems invincible. The whole film doesn't really make any sense and all in all it was quite a disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2b94318570342609ff24af93df2d35a",
            "input": "I don't know what the previous reviewer was watching but I guess that's what reviews are, personal taste. Missed in this movie was the depth, a very deep film, many layers of emotion, affecting. Undercurrents of withheld love because of submission to societal beliefs, taboos of the times and classes, race relations not being in a very good state of equality, guilt, yearning, hate, confusion, very dark emotionally I thought, under the skin, you have to submit to the aire of it, a flowing movie, not slow as stated before, release yourself to the flow of the film, the emotions will show themselves, characters reveal their flaws, their nasty insides, excellent and actually very cruel!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e969c61d44f45328e5351bfe147093a",
            "input": "I'll give this movie two stars because it teems with beautiful photography. Otherwise, it teems mainly with clichés and stereotypes: mountain people are either dumb white trash of the fanatically religious or ragged racist kind, or wise white Indians. Indians are magical people who move around without a sound, can disappear in the blink of an eye, talk to animals, and read minds over large distances. And so on and so forth.Throughout the movie I kept wondering what the point of the film was (other than showing me pretty pictures of mountains, log cabins, woods, an assortment of animals, free-spirited mountain-dwellers and freaky people in church).The plot touched a whole range of issues but explored none of them in depth. This was neither a story about growing up during the depression, nor about about being an orphan, nor about a struggle for identity. It tried to be all of those things and more, which made it superficial and unsatisfactory.Although the movie was supposed to be about Little Tree's education, we learn almost nothing about it. He was given a brief summary of the history of his people (who were brave and stoic) and a distillery demonstration; tried his hand at chopping wood (at which he failed) and whiskey running (literally); learned how to read (and maybe to write) with the help of grandma and her dictionary - and that was it. Apparently he didn't learn much during his stint in boarding school because he was locked up in the attic.However, grandma and grandpa and Graham Greene's character made sure that in the end Little Tree became a very spiritual person whose main goal as an adult - after, and I'm paraphrasing here, \"riding with the Navajos\" and \"getting caught up in a couple of wars\" - was to \"catch up\" with grandma and grandpa and Graham Greene's character in heaven (instead of, say, dating girls, getting married, having children or other such nonsense).Last but not least I must say that I found grandpa's trade offensive. Why of all things did it have to be a whiskey still? To counteract the stereotype of the \"drunken Indian\"?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c023a7e2b30a4805b594e023fef3350a",
            "input": "I really don't get how people made this film and thought it was worth all the work they put into it. Even more puzzling are those who watched this film without feeling cheated out of 88 minutes of doing something valuable like cleaning under the couch or reading Leviticus. First of all, surely they could have 2 found real Irish people, and some good-looking women who could deliver their lines better than the washed up, haggard porn stars sprinkled throughout this film. Granted, the gore works- but strangely, it's not as troubling as you might think to see organs yanked out of the porn stars' hot (formerly) tight bodies left and right. Probably has something to do with the fact that after their horrific inhuman acting you just want them to die in pain.So, if you don't care at all about the following: - acting (seriously, everyone sucked. I've never witnessed this before. EVERYONE sucked).-plot (some crappy horror movies are remotely linear, or at the very least surprising. This movie doesn't make sense unless you're as trashed as the writers obviously were). - theme (Nothing to learn from this film. Nothing to be scared about in bed at night, nothing to contemplate or grasp, or explain to others). - soundtrack (Crap, crap, crap. Music as ordinary and dull as the script). - scenery (Could have been this film's saving grace, but no...nothing pleasing here. Even the rocks are fake).So, yeah. If you don't care about that, and you're just a horny teen with bad taste in music and \"women,\" this movie is for you. Positive comments: interesting cinematography at times, wasted on the other elements. Very realistic gore; again, wasted. But the intestines scene is classic. I agree with the mutant- disembowelment solves the fake accent problem.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f93f1c46e119439abf06b121b871b683",
            "input": "I remember this series so well. It was excellent - such strong and compelling characters, stylish and sexy ... and so different to everything else on offer at the time - and now ... I am sure that it inspired the also excellent Canadian drama \"Traders\". Both season 1 and season 2 are available on DVD region 2 in the UK. Its a treat to watch the series again.Season 1 is 13 episodes and season 2 seems to be 10 episodes.Unfortunately, it seems to have ended after 2 seasons.This series was a lot of fun.Sometimes you can get it on special at Amazon.co.uk",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b1198d8e33348bcb3459c0ebcb69c40",
            "input": "Born, raised, and educated in Scotland, I was appalled at this disgusting portrayal of a man who was no more nor less than a cattle rustler. Worse yet, the thread of the entire movie was sex in one form or another, by implication or verbally. To view it, one would think that 18th century Scotland was populated by a bunch of sex perverts and homosexuals. Lange was a joke acting as the \"young\" mother at age 49 but Liam Neeson was even worse! Taking a \"bath\" in a Scottish loch is NOT commonplace as they portrayed him - but, it did give them yet another opportunity to demonstrate how sexually driven we were. Save your money and watch Pinnochio.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f97d47cdb0be4fc0bf0a8daedc843183",
            "input": "In the ten years since Wildside aired, nothing has really come close to its quality in local production. This includes the two series of the enjoyable but overrated Underbelly, which have brought to life events in the recent criminal history of both Sydney and Melbourne. The miniseries Blue Murder (which also starred Tony Martin, but as someone on the other side of the law) may be the exception.Wildside is currently being repeated late at night on the ABC. Having not watched the show in quite a while, I'm still impressed by its uncompromising story lines and very human characters. The cast is excellent: Tony Martin as a detective haunted by the disappearance of his son, Rachael Blake (who later hooked up with Martin in real life) as a community worker struggling with alcoholism, and Alex Dimitriades as a young cop whose vice is gambling. Equally good support roles are provided by Aaron Pederson, Jessica Napier, Mary Coustas (yes, Effie herself), and a young Abbie Cornish.The ABC inexplicably released only the first three episodes on DVD a couple of years ago. The logic of this sort of marketing is beyond me, but I'm guessing it may have something to do with licensing disagreements with the original producers.A great series which has aged remarkably well. Here's hoping the ABC's DVD department gets its act together.(According to a moderator on an ABC message board, some sort of further DVD release is due in December 2009)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98aa9d1306694e2b93679c93883fa394",
            "input": "I had the privilege of watching \"Holly\" at the Edinburgh Film Festival last week. What a powerful and moving story! Holly is a 12 yr old Vietnamese girl who is sold into prostitution by her own family and living in a brothel in Cambodia. Patrick (an American) comes into Holly's life and decides he wants to help her. When Holly is sold again, Patrick desperately searches for her. We follow they're difficult journey through Cambodia and hope for their reunion.Holly is one of millions of children who are sold and trafficked every day. The movie portrays this difficult issue without crossing the line. I walked away wanting to know more about the issue of child trafficking and asking how can I help? This movie should be seen by everyone because it is a beautiful story and it exposes an issue that we should no longer ignore.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5848900f04c0421da168263f3e8030bd",
            "input": "After I watched this movie, I came to IMDb and read some of the reviews, which compared it to Lost In Translation LITE. When I read that I immediately could see the reviewers point.This movie was a poor attempt at a similar theme. Interestingly, the format of the movie is nearly identical, but the PACING is incredibly different. \"10 Items\" rushes the viewer through the 1-day time line of the movie, whereas the better-planned \"Lost In...\" seems to stretch out over a few long days.I'm sure some people will see this because it has Morgan Freeman, and will be disappointed. It seems his better roles now-a-days are supporting roles in big blockbusters, rather than leading roles in sub-$10mil limited release movies and indie films.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-479e9760eb1144fc895cc35eb36350fb",
            "input": "Drones, ethnic drumming, bad synthesizer piping, children singing. The most patronizing \"world music\" imaginable. This is a tourist film, and a lousy one. What really kills it is the incoherent sequences. India, Egypt, South America, Africa, etc, etc. No transitions, no visual explanation of why we're suddenly ten thousand miles away, no ideas expressed in images. Just a bunch of footage of third-worlders with \"baskets on their heads\" as another reviewer said. Walking along endlessly as if that had some deep meaning. If these guys wanted to make a 3rd World music video, all they had to do was head a few hundred miles south of where the best parts of Koya were shot, and film in Mexico. That would have been a much better setting for \"life in transformation.\"But no. What they decided on was a scrambled tourist itinerary covering half the globe and mind-deadeningly overcranked filter shots. The only thing to recommend this film is that it doesn't suck quite as much as Naqoyqatsi.RstJ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-886a002aa2f04f6797353e1cb7ed1f1a",
            "input": "When a movie of a book seems pointless and incomprehensible, the cause can invariably be found in the book: either it was pointless to start with, or the point is one not easily conveyed to film, or the movie missed the point, which is the most frequent of these results, and the easiest to happen, especially when the point is one not easily defined. The book \"Morvern Callar\" has a point; every reader of the book must have felt this, and felt as if he had gotten it; but I suspect most of them could not state it in words. I'm not sure I can, myself, but perhaps it comes to this, or something like it: Things come, things go, such is life, but we carry on; or at any rate some of us--people like Morvern--do. No doubt a more erudite critic could construct a more adequate definition. But the important fact is that there is a point--possibly the sum of the entire story is the point--and that this would have been the main thing to keep in view, and to carry over, in adapting the story to film. The maker of this film evidently missed the point, and doesn't substitute one of her own; and so the film is about nothing.This is not the usual complaint of a book-lover that his favorite text has been violated. The merit of the book is something I conceded grudgingly: in reading it I found it a bloody nuisance, and an occasion for kicking the author in the pants and getting him in to finish the job properly. The narrative is supposed to be the work of the half-educated Morvern, but that illusion is constantly dispelled by a dozen different types of literary effect, as if the author were poking at her with his pen; there are inconsistencies of style and tone, as if different sections had been composed at different times; and any conclusions I could reach about Morvern had to remain tentative because it was uncertain which implications the author intended and which he did not: for instance, despite Morvern's own self-characterization as a raver, am I wrong that in the end she remains essentially a working-class Scots girl, and beneath her wrapping of music downloads not so different from those of generations past? In any case, despite my irritation at the author, I couldn't deny that his book stuck with me; and what I couldn't get out of my head was his character's attitude, her angle on the world, which was almost as vivid as a Goya portrait. Morvern is the kind of person who's always encountering situations at once rather comic and rather horrible; occasionally she invites them but more often they land on her, like flies, so that much of her life consists of a kind of gauche but graceful slogging-through, unconsciously practical and unconsciously philosophical--and that doesn't begin to describe it idiosyncratically enough. The complex of incidents and of Morvern's responses to them are the substance of the book, and its achievement, in exposing a cross-section of existence it would be difficult to illuminate otherwise; for all my dislike of the book, I can see this.The Morvern just described is not the Morvern of the movie; or if it is, most of her is kept offscreen. An actress who might have been a good fit for the character, had she been the right age at the right time, is Angharad Rees, from the old TV series \"Poldark\". Samantha Morton, then, would seem like good casting: she's rather the same sort of actress, and in one of her earlier movies, \"Jesus' Son\", she played a girl who with a few adjustments could have been turned into this one. Unfortunately, as the film turned out, she doesn't have the character from the book to play. For one thing, the book is one that, if it is to be dramatized, virtually cries out for monologues by the main character to the audience; without her comments, her perspective, her voice, the story loses most of its meaning. It has lost more of it in that the adaptor has expurgated it of its comic and horrible elements: the most memorable incidents from the book are curtailed before they turn grotty, and so Morvern's responses (whether of amusement or distaste, depending on her mood) are missing too, and the incidents no longer have a reason for being in the story. In short, the filmmaker chose for some reason to turn a brisk, edgy serio-comic novel into a genteel art TV film, and chose as her typical image one of Ms. Morton languishing in a artistically shaded melancholy; as if the outing Morvern signs up for were a tour of the Stations of the Cross. This isn't at all what the book, or the Morvern of the book, was about. For another thing, the Morvern of the movie isn't Scottish (the actress said in an interview she hadn't had time to study up the accent), and she ought to be: it's important that she, her family, and her mates are all from a single place. And finally the film is missing the end of the story: Morvern's spending all she has and coming home to icy darkness: it's winter, the dam has frozen, the power has gone out, and the pub is dark. Minus this, and minus all of the rest, what's left is a failed art film, a dead film, about a subject whose strength lay precisely in her refusal, or native inability, ever to give in to being dead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfca5b05d79643d388d6679f0d27f919",
            "input": "Okay, I know I shouldn't like this movie but I do. From Pat Morita's loveable interpretation of a Japanese stereotype to Jay Leno's annoying yell, I laughed throughout this movie.As long as you take into account that this is not the best movie in the world, it's a good mvie.My favorite part is Morita talking to his boss in Tokyo with the drinking a close second.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b078a5b0d2b44acad32e71b445f3bb5",
            "input": "Ah, the best and funniest movie about female football fans, only slightly better than the 1982 saga of teenage delusion set in North London (qv). By the way, I just watched this on Film 4 [2008-12-21] and am ruing my inability to set the PVR).This is easily my second favourite football movie after \"Mike Bassett: England Manager\", but this time with the added twist of looking like a guerrilla piece of movie-making from a team who apparently keep making movies which are banned in the country in which they are made (just think about the bit where the girls are taken from the stadium just as the Sun is setting: fast reactions all round). It is rare for a movie to make me laugh out loud, but when the rural soldier escorted one of the girls into the lavvies while forcing her to wear an inpromptu mask made from a poster of Ali Daei, I couldn't stop waking the others in the house with my snorts, especially when the young soldier misunderstood the grandfather's calls for assistance... Speaking of the toilets, I just wish I could speak Farsi so that I could work out the writing on the toilet walls (yes, there were a few scribblings in Roman script, but they mostly referred to wanky American rock bands).Also, on the rural-and-Farsi theme, don't you reckon that Omid Djalili sounds like a yokel when he talks Farsi? Listen to the custody sergeant in this movie and then go \"Yup.\"I'm not going to bore on about the sexual politics of Iran, and I'm not going to bore on about the dubious acting; my love for this movie comes from the script and the editing: top notch stuff.Here's a list of my top favourite football movies: 1. Mike Bassett, England Manager 2. Offside 3. Those Glory Glory Days 4. A Shot at Glory 5. The Arsenal Stadium Mystery",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db5d8d6640254f3ea84ab80de1a85a0b",
            "input": "PROBLEM CHILD is one of the worst movies I have seen in the last decade! This is a bad movie about a savage boy adopted by two parents, but he gets into trouble later. That Junior can drive Grandpa's car. He can scare people with a bear. He can put a room on fire! It is a bad movie as much as BATTLEFIELD EARTH. A sequel is an even worse fate. Rent CHICKEN RUN instead.*1/2 out of **** I give it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-840ce57dfdca475387670ea5607d7920",
            "input": "I saw this movie today and I have to say, it was much much better than I expected it to be about couple of hours before going to see it. Personally I had some prejudice due to the language of it, but it did totally change my idea. The movie was in most cases surprisingly good with the great actor and actress performances. It was a story about a boy who had a dream and who did everything to reach it. This really touched me and as a film, which is based on a true story, it convinced me. A new school, psycho headmaster and a young boy who get known with a new teacher, a bit different one than the others and about fighting for the things even if they doesn't seem to work out. It showed how little things can make huge changes in many things, and how difference can sometimes cause difficult situations. Also I think the actor selections has succeeded perfectly. It really felt like you had been some person watching the episodes as an outsider when they happened. Before I spoil this movie with praises, I have to admit that there were some things and situations that didn't look and feel realistic..like the one where the headmaster of the school beat Frits aka. Martin in front of the class, at the end of the movie. He really got beaten badly, but the only thing that it caused to him, was some blood coming from the nose when comparing that to the first beating in the beginning, when Frits got some stitches..well I guess every movie has it own faults..have to say, that if I someday somewhere find this DVD from the store, it's sure thing, that I take it with me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-124fb684c4444b67a831e88b8570af4d",
            "input": "What was the purpose of this film? I suggest it was to make a handful of actors and their producers and director a big payday for doing nothing. Even my favorite actor, Bruce Dern, couldn't keep my interest in this boring movie. A braindead ex-pugilist falls in with a weird woman and her relatives. He starts out as a fix-it man for the woman, and winds up beating a man and getting caught up in a kidnapping scheme. It was so confusing I can't even write a decent critique. If you see this one, my sweet, make sure it is after dark so you can go right to sleep.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5b76de7ebae4e2db408c9cc92213685",
            "input": "OK, I love bad horror. I especially love horror bad enough to make fun of. Demonicus, or House of the Dead - those were bad enough to make fun of. Severed was not.It was worse.(spoilers - who cares?)My friend and I sat through the entire film, and I have a number of comments, both in the \"this sucks\" style and in the realm of actual critiques.Plot (sort of) - There's a guy in this city (which is possibly Seattle, see comment below) who is running around and cutting off heads. He's been doing this for over a year (I'm not going back to get exact numbers - thank you VERY much), possibly two or three years. One head a week. And the police are JUST NOW calling in a \"specialist\" (who ONCE refers to himself as a psychic, but that never comes up again).Schya right! Feds take over after, what, THREE connected homicides? After NEARLY A HUNDRED SIMILAR KILLINGS we'd be under freaking martial law!!!!!Anyway, this \"specialist\" consults the voodoo chick who the police have been ignoring the entire time, and the two of them come to the conclusion that it's Baron Samedi, a voodoo spirit, who is cutting off heads to gain enough power to make himself a body (and then presumably take over the world - or possibly just go to Disneyland).Um.Setting - where IS this happening? Well, if you're not from Seattle, you might not realize that at the bar/rave (occupied by about ten of the movie staff and their family members), there's a poster for a local radio station, and that in the highly-entertaining, \"Pulp Fiction\"esqe dialog (as IF) between the two cops (yes, the ones who get their heads cut off about 15 minutes into the flick) they discuss \"the new stadium\" which may still have been an issue when this movie was made.Being from Seattle, I apologize on the movie's behalf and hang my head in shame.OK, here's where it gets really critical - being a horror movie writer (not published, don't go looking for my name in the IMDb), I do research. Lots of research. And unlike the writers of this movie, I know that Baron Samedi - while a Voudon Loa (spirit) who guards the graveyards and has traditionally been associated (by various Christian oppressors) with \"Satan\" - is actually a \"Loki\"-like trickster god. In other words, he doesn't cut off heads.Besides, a major part of the Voudoun religion is that Baron Samedi can have a body whenever he wants. Their religious ceremonies center around the possession of various members of the congregation by the loa.Not to mention, if he's already possessed someone, why make a NEW body?Also, if Baron Samedi GOT a body, he wouldn't go around cutting off heads, he'd get some good rum and cigars and par-TAY!!!In summary, the only thing they did get (surprisingly) right is that in the completely unnecessary Tarot card reading (used only to show that the voodoo chick is \"spooky\") they didn't screw up the interpretations of the cards the way most movies do. Again, I've done research. (Anyone remember the old late-night ad for phone-in tarot readings - \"The lovers - you will soon fall madly in love...\" and all that nonsense?)If you made it this far through my comments, I congratulate you. And I'm sorry again. I'll be more sorry if you feel the need to watch the film on account of me, so please don't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5aa272720fdd4cf9bf85ff91b5169dea",
            "input": "Billy Chung Siu Hung's (the bloody swordplay film Assassin from 1993) film Love To Kill (Hong Kong, 1993) is among the strongest products of the Category III boom that inhabited the HK cinema in early nineties. It consisted of films with strong sex, nudity and violence, more or less gratuitous and shock valued only. Love To Kill definitely belongs to the \"more\" category with some unforgettable ideas and pieces of celluloid sickness.The HK psycho Anthony Wong (from the award winning The Untold Story by Herman Yau, from the same year) plays a business man and a husband who likes to torture, humiliate and rape his young wife (Elizabeth Lee Mei Fung) who for some reason doesn't leave him and save herself and their little son from the disturbed tormentor. A policeman (Danny Lee, the famous police character actor from films like Dr. Lamb (1992) by Billy Tang (and co-directed by Lee) and The Killer (1989) by John Woo to name just a few) however sees the problem and starts to protect the wife and the son but Anthony naturally doesn't like this at all, and leads it all into the typical ultra-mean spirited and graphic finale during a rain storm.The film is almost completely without any serious merits as it's just a piece of exploitation in order to cash in when these kind of films were so popular. The imagery and happenings are something never found in the Western cinema, at least in mainstream, and it all becomes even more mind-blowing when some/most taboos for Westerners, like violence and perversions witnessed by a child, are broken in these films so often that reading the plotlines alone would make most viewers feel sick, and that goes perfectly especially for this film too.The film still has a rather interesting and creepy soundtrack in the tradition of the mentioned Dr. Lamb which practically started the whole boom in 1992. Usually the music and soundtrack in HK films is interesting and adds to the imagery, especially in these terror films. Also the cinematography is worth mentioning as the film bathes, especially in the finale, in blue colors and camera lenses (as does Assassin, too), and the raging storm is captured nicely on the camera. Otherwise there's nothing that would rate the film any higher other than on the nastiness-meter.The actors and actresses are talented and professional and so don't make the film any worse with their acting. Still the film has the usual HK humor in it which makes the sick goings-on even sicker as some \"humor\" is thrown into the soup. That includes some jokes about Danny Lee's erection and so on..Something that could never be found in the Western \"serious\" films either. And that thing usually destroys mane otherwise noteworthy HK films as the humor is just so obvious way and attempt to entertain the audience and masses.The film has a very high outrageousness level as it has numerous scenes depicting the abuse of Wong's wife in various ways. She gets raped and molested, beaten and kicked by her husband. We also get to see some flashbacks from Wong's own childhood which turns out to be equally violent as his own father killed too and turned his young son into what he is now. These flashback scenes, mostly at the end of the film, include also some totally unexpected experiences as the imagery is speeded up (for example the hits of an axe) and that creates completely insane and mean spirited atmosphere to the scene. Again something that only HK exploitation makers seem to be able to come up with. The ending itself includes plenty of sudden and shocking gore as the madman wields his axe and meets also some nails, for example, on his furious way.The film is also genuinely pretty \"suspicious\" in my opinion as the violence and terror is realistically painful and deals with things that should NEVER be taken as entertainment, mostly I mean rape. The version I saw (I've seen two versions) includes a very long and completely nauseating rape scene that just tries to be as sadistic as possible. I'm not sure does the HK audience really like imagery like this but I think no one with some sense for morality in films/entertainment would never accept or make something like it. Women get brutalized and killed in the most sadistic and low ways so that the fates of the men seem almost tame when compared to the females.The other version I saw, the newly released DVD in HK (without subtitles) has this \"table brutality\" scene in a much longer form than the subtitled Taiwanese DVD which is otherwise identical to the HK version. I've also heard that the old HK Laserdisc is different from these two and since the end credits are filled with scenes and images not found in the actual film, it is impossible to say how \"uncut\" versions these that have been released or shown theatrically are. Obviously plenty of footage has been cut out, possibly even before the theatrical release.The film is written by Law Gam Fai and Lau Wing Kin, the former having written also films like Dr. Lamb, The Untold Story and Gunmen (Kirk Wong, 1988) but out of his other films that I've seen, Love to Kill is the most gratuitous. Dr. Lamb and The Untold Story both are very brutal and violent but have also some attempt to some criticism towards the authorities and men in general as how it is easy to turn into a beast when chasing or fighting one. The harrowing torture imagery of The Untold Story, the victim being the criminal, is very strong and definitely has its impact to change something that may be rotten in the society and among the police for example. But there's none of this in Love to Kill, it is just honest, calculated and fastly made exploitation which is, by the way, produced by a veteran director Kirk \"Organized Crime & Triad Bureau (1993), Crime Story (1993)\" Wong!Love to Kill earns no more than 2/10 from me as I don't have too high appreciation on films like this. (HK) Cinema is meant to be and can be more and films like Love to Kill are only commercial parasites living among the real pieces of the art.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5a640f1d41e49518114499e1ebf6eb1",
            "input": "I wasn't entirely sure what to expect from a Comedy, Drama, Fantasy, Sci-Fi genre, but, given the actors involved I thought I'd give it a spin. The tone of the film felt awkward, going through patches of each of the genres but never quite felt balanced, so eventually I gave up trying, and concentrated on the cinematography and individual performances, which I thought were good on the whole, considering each character had little depth because of the nature of the story (won't give anything away here). I have to say it felt a LOT longer than its 96 minute runtime, and not in a good way. In the end I was looking for closure, some measure of satisfaction but it didn't turn out to be the clever or ingenious piece I had hoped it would be. I think Tony mistakenly thought what he did do at the end of the film gave us that... but it was a tragic mistake to try and validate the previous 95 minutes with the ill-conceived conclusion. Ultimately I feel cheated. IMO it would have been better to let it stand without the \"ending\" as a piece of Art... just. Or... I may have missed the point completely :)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0129761614a4e74aa69a167ee2d5d45",
            "input": "The Thumb idea isn't such a winner the second time round. ThumbTanic wasn't as good as Thumb Wars for a number of reasons. Primarily, I think, Mr Oedekerk had far less to work with in the Titanic send-up. Unlike Star Wars, the movie Titanic hasn't (yet?) become a cultural myth and there are far fewer references to be made which will resonate with the audience.In ThumbTanic, the holes are filled by one-off jokes which don't really seem related to anything. For example, the hero's insinuation that the heroine isn't clean during the \"jump off end of ship\" scene - it's not funny. Rather, you just think to yourself, \"Did I miss something in the original movie?\". There were too many of these type of baseless jokes (cf. arachnid).By contrast, the send-up of the smarmy ship's designer had meaning and was funny. Also very funny was the send up of the bloke in the movie who wanted to go \"faster\" as a maniac running around demanding *everything* be \"faster\" including the sinking of the ship and himself being the first to die. These sort of jokes meant something in the Titanic context and lent meaningful humour to Thumbtanic.The thumb \"media\", the faces and the voices, are still amusing. The props and sets and the CG animation are worthy of appreciation. Overall, although ThumbTanic proves that quirkiness alone won't work, this filmette still keeps you amused and chuckling to the end.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a3054a0c2384c568b8edc1779714f91",
            "input": "This is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen, everything about it is weak and incoherent. The acting is absurd, the costumes even crummier and the story is non-existent. This 'poverty row' sword and adventure film was meant to capture some of the success that \"Beastmaster\" and \"Conan\" enjoyed but it doesn't give us any reason to follow along. The lead character is tepid and dull, he can't even fight with a sword and the sword is from the 16th Century. All the action sequences are like that, slow and unrealistic, not to mention the castle and the horribly dated music playing whenever they are riding a horse. Don't even bother with this crap.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c7e0f8de2bb407cae98611706c2f5d1",
            "input": "Watching TRUTH ABOUT LOVE (is this a double entendre about the star?) is like plugging in white noise or manufactured water sounds to help you sleep - you put it in the DVD slot because there is nothing else left on the store shelves and you are in need of distraction after a hectic day. And it works for that for that purpose: being a British romantic comedy it is a bit more.The story is a rather simple one about a wife Alice (Jennifer Love Hewitt) married to an increasingly distant husband Sam (Jimi Mistry) who has put their love life on hold due to the burdens of his busy law practice. His partner Archie (Dougray Scott) is fond of both Sam and Alice, but has a longtime attraction to Alice that goes beyond friendship. Alice pals with her sister Felicity (Kate Miles), a free love advocate, who encourages Alice to have affairs. On Valentine's Day, after a drinking binge with her sister, Alice mails a card to Sam signed 'Anonymous' as a test to see if Sam responds, testing his fidelity. At the same time Archie mails a radish seed packet to Alice on which he has inscribed a suggestive love not. Both have ex post facto regrets. Sam in fact is spending time with a lover Katya (Branka Katic) and is indeed cheating on Alice. Alice arranges assignations with Sam via email and phone calls and plans to meet Sam in disguise as 'Anonymous' to test his fidelity. The entire cast of characters gets caught up in the silly charade and the ending proves that real love must be based on truth - and how that results in the various pairings is the surprise (of sorts) of the fluffy script.British comedies work because of the quality of writing and the tight quality of acting. Perhaps had director John Hay elected to cast a British actress as Alice instead of pasting a phony accent on Jennifer Love Hewitt the result may have been improved. But in the end this story by Peter Bloore bounces between mildly humorous and pathetic in its messages. One terrible distraction is a musical score that is consistently so loud that it covers all the dialogue and is intrusive. There are some nice scenes of London and a few moments of passable humor, but in the end this little film is truly best utilized as background music/white noise. Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-671efd852daa45f8bb27b250b4db78c5",
            "input": "You talking' to Me? (1987) is a pretty bad movie starring some dude who I have never seen before or since starring as a guy from the neighborhood who tries to become an actor. He has a heavy jones for Taxi Driver as tries to use that shtick to make it big. When he learns the hard facts of life, he does what everyone else does, changes his image! He goes from good fella to a surf's up dude over night. His friend can't believe the change (but he scores with Faith Ford and get's a cool paying gig). Can this young punk keep his street cred whilst making it big?This is a real lame movie that tries too hard to incorporate too many things at once. An interesting idea that falls apart due to poor execution. Who knows, maybe somebody will pick up the ball and run because the film makers fumbled the ball this time.Don't waste your time with this movie. Unless you want to see a hot Faith Ford and a young Bubba from Forest Gump.xx",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b93cae936a2a4dc79369a6e8b1b3c8c8",
            "input": "I was 10 years old when this show was on TV. By far it was my favorite. The actors were very credible. Alexandra Bastedo was just gorgeous.... I just order the DVD (15 episodes). They didn't have super-powers. They just had superior human skills (strength, hearing, sight). The 3 actors were very good in their rolls, very believable. There was a good story in each episode. At the time, there were no special effects or explosions everywhere, so the script was suppose to be good, and the characters performs were great. There was no fancy stuff, like in other shows. They didn't try to make a joke every 2 minutes to make a light show. I highly recommend this TV show to anybody that like good stuff.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a97cfa4661bd47a9b929690355f50c12",
            "input": "Most italian horror lovers seem to hate this movie since because it has no connection to the first two Demons films. And with the \"Demons III\" in the title, one would assume it would. The problem is that this film was never intended to be part of the Demons series. The distributors only a \"Demons III\" above its original title \"The Ogre\" to cash in on the other films popularity. The new American DVD release of this picture has the title \"Demons III: The Ogre\" on the box art but the film itself only says \"The Ogre\". I don't know if past releases had the title \"Demons III\" on the actual film itself, but this new release just seems to be a little white lie. If you can get past the \"Demons III\" in the title, you might some enjoyment in \"The Ogre\". It starts out with a creep intro, and stays pretty creep throughout. There's no gore and the film movies slowly, but I still dug it. Just don't expect it to be like the other Demons films. I give \"The Ogre\" 7 out of 10. Italian fans should try it out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c5b8912c3964a9b9dc9eac38308cc56",
            "input": "I grew up watching Scooby and have been a fan forever. This cartoon moves away from the same old routine that can get boring to viewers. The Crooks in Mask routine gets old and This cartoon is a change from that. It's not meant to replace the Scooby gang it's just a break from the same old crime scene for both viewers and writers I'm sure. The cartoon's focus is on Scooby and Shaggy who inherits a large sum of money and use that money to thwart world conquest plans from a mad scientist and his goons. Small homages of the gang and the gang themselves are featured from time to time. If you are a fan of Scooby-Doo you can still appreciate the bond between a boy and his talking dog, along with the jokes that come with it. Just Enjoythe Cartoon and support the creators/writers and producers so that this won't be the last Scooby Cartoon.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d68fa2fee80451b853240acb8f965a8",
            "input": "French horror cinema has seen something of a revival over the last couple of years with great films such as Inside and Switchblade Romance bursting on to the scene. Maléfique preceded the revival just slightly, but stands head and shoulders over most modern horror titles and is surely one of the best French horror films ever made! Maléfique was obviously shot on a low budget, but this is made up for in far more ways than one by the originality of the film, and this in turn is complimented by the excellent writing and acting that ensure the film is a winner. The plot focuses on two main ideas; prison and black magic. The central character is a man named Carrère, sent to prison for fraud. He is put in a cell with three others; the quietly insane Lassalle, body building transvestite Marcus and his retarded boyfriend Daisy. After a short while in the cell together, they stumble upon a hiding place in the wall that contains an old journal. After translating part of it, they soon realise its magical powers and realise they may be able to use it to break through the prison walls.Black Magic is a very interesting topic, and I'm actually quite surprised that there aren't more films based on it as there's so much scope for things to do with it. It's fair to say that Maléfique makes the best of it's assets as despite it's restraints, the film never actually feels restrained and manages to flow well throughout. Director Eric Valette provides a great atmosphere for the film; the fact that most of it takes place inside the central prison cell ensures that the film feels very claustrophobic, and this immensely benefits the central idea of the prisoners wanting to use magic to break out of the cell - it's very easy to get behind them! It's often said that the unknown is the thing that really frightens people, and this film proves that as the director ensures that we can never really be sure of exactly what is round the corner, and this helps to ensure that Maléfique actually does manage to be quite frightening! The film is memorable for a lot of reasons outside the central plot; the characters are all very interesting in their own way and the fact that the book itself almost takes on its own character is very well done. Anyone worried that the film won't deliver by the end won't be disappointed either as the ending both makes sense and manages to be quite horrifying! Overall, Maléfique is a truly great horror film and one of the best of the decade - HIGHLY recommended viewing!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3f71378859d41b69dfec49f77384d2e",
            "input": "I am watching the series back to back as fast as possible. I am attempting to watch all things Star Trek. This is month 3 and I am now on Season 3 of TNG and I have already gone thru DS9 in its entirety. Star Trek is the greatest television phenomenon ever achieved.\"Shades of Grey\" is the first recap episode in the TNG series. Having just watched the shows, these clips were fresh in my mind, but I noticed how a couple of them were re-shot because the film looked better. Season 1 always seemed real dark and ugly to me - and the actors looked silly, like they didn't fit in their own skins.The show is essentially just made of up a greatest hits of the happiest and saddest moments in Riker's life on the Enterprise up until this point. The Data and Riker scene in the holo-deck is a classic moment of new friendship. My other favorite is when the 2nd officer on the Klingon ship challenges Riker's authority as first officer and Riker beat the living CRAP out of that Klingon. Then the admiral kicks his a$$ but good. This entire episode is a heck of a reminder that a LOT of crazy, great things have happened already in a mere 2 seasons with 5 more to go and a handful of movies! At this point in the series they are really starting to develop the emotions that tie Riker to Deanna Troi as Imzadi. Up until this point they have mentioned the fact, but they have yet to exploit it. Let the record show that the ST Wiki - Memory Alpha claims that Imzadi means \"first\" and denotes that she has had intimate relations with Riker and also remains deeply close on an emotional one. This episode further proves there will be a tense romantic interest in each other for a long time to come. By this point in the series, production value is up to speed and Star Trek TNG is settling into the sci-fi behemoth it was destined to become. Watching this again as an adult I see now what GREAT ACTORS the Star Trek Universe provides. They really need to make a new ST show set after all the current shows. A DS9 movie would have been nice too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80142f86cf51448fa1bcec20d0d5a024",
            "input": "An inventive, suspenseful exercise in claustrophobia. A Japanese thriller that sets itself a tough challenge by being entirely set in two rooms. Not completely successful, but taut, surprising and well-acted. One might find the film somewhat reminiscent of SAW – two men trapped in room and pitting against each other – but unlike that film it dares to stay with its premise and keep the hero locked in his cell throughout the film. It's like watching a lab experiment. Some might find the contained suspense tedious, but this reviewer found it enthralling. The sound and imagery of the film are stunningly well realized. This is a certainly a good film to use to show off a good home video system. Just right for a late night movie fest, when one is in the paranoid mood. It certainly kept me awake that night.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18e8c042fbd940fca367862ae7f15203",
            "input": "What can I add that the previous comments haven't already said. This is a great film and the Light Sabre duel Star Wars tribute has to be seen to be believed!! There are moments of genius throughout this movie, if you can, SEE IT NOW! Thanks again to Rick Baker who gave me this movie many years ago!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b98e866520ee4f66b42373a13fc34186",
            "input": "If you have seen the Sholay of 1975, Don't watch this movie. If you have NOT seen the Sholay of 1975, Go WATCH IT. But do not watch this movie. This movie has all the ingredients that could possibly have gone wrong with making a remake of Sholay. Amitabh 'Babban' Bachchan plays the role of a psycho villain to the best (Probably the only 40 mins of the reel that shouldn't be burnt). If you remove the rest of the movie and just watch amitabh play around with his character, it would still be worth a watch. But as Insp. Narsimha, Mohanlal doesn't do justice to his talent. Ajay Devgan(Heero) is extremely mundane and the only reason i think, they cast Prashant Raj in the role of Raj is because he has a striking resemblance to Amitabh of his young days. Sushmita Sen carries herself well, with grace and make-up. But the award for the \"WORST performance and any role till date\" must go to Nisha Kothari. She manages to degrade her acting to such levels that even high-school drama would would outshine her performance.If you have a mortal enemy, take him to this movie. :)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8fed007464a41caaceb092d8f39a8de",
            "input": "It takes patience to get through David Lynch's eccentric, but-- for a change-- life-affirming chronicle of Alvin Straight's journey, but stick with it. Though it moves as slow as Straight's John Deere, when he meets the kind strangers along his pilgrimage we learn much about the isolation of aging, the painful regrets and secrets, and ultimately the power of family and reconciliation. Richard Farnsworth caps his career with the year's most genuine performance, sad and poetic, flinty and caring. And Sissy Spacek matches him as his \"slow\" daughter Rose who pines over her own private loss while caring for dad. Rarely has a modern film preached so positively about family.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5af92f18e38438eb030adb4e3518d1e",
            "input": "Ursula Andress' naked body is one of those things that make you believe in God. The other two women (especially the one who plays the maid) have great bodies as well. Then why is the higher grade that I can give to a film with such quality and quantity of nudity only 3 out of 10? Because, to get to Ursula's unbelievable body, we have to sit through a movie that is otherwise unfunny and boring (keep in mind that I watched the full 101-minute version, not the 78-minute American one which probably cuts out a lot of the extraneous material). In typical Italian-comedy tradition, most of the characters are exaggerated caricatures (the army freak, the \"latin lover\", the constant drunk, the naive maid) that are not funny, simply overacted. Final word: watch this, but keep your finger on the fast-forward button, you're gonna need it. (*)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f64ecc40713b4eeab9fa46a9211eaec6",
            "input": "Sogo Ishii can be a skilled filmmaker under the right conditions, but Gojoe tells the story of a warrior monk and his only rival, a scion of the Genji clan. The film-making has the main hallmarks of a low-budget production, including blurry fight scenes and clumsy montages (the kind you might find in an under-produced dorama). The monk Benkei informs his spiritual teacher that his destiny lies in defeating the mysterious spirit that guards Gojoe bridge at night, but he doesn't realize that this decision will bring him squarely into conflict with nearly every element of society at that time - but which could earn him enlightenment. There's no absence of ambitiousness, however, in its depiction of the conflict between the holy and the worldly. Artsy flourishes in some of the photography and editing help to compensate for the loose film-making style. A disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb631b22e0d54e37af22d78824164080",
            "input": "OK, aside from the psychedelic background imagery, the info presented here was good. The music I could have done without (not that it was bad music, just that it didn't fit this film at all).As for the content of the film, the director brings up the often-lacking Pagan perspective on Christ's existence and a startling comparison of the deeds and events of Christ's life vs. the lives of mythological figures/deities such as Mithra and Dionyses. Then he brings up the chronology of Christianity's origins and presents an 'ok' case, but not one that blew me away.If the director had stuck with the facts and continued on with them, this film would have been good. However, at this point in the film, it disintegrates into a group of personally-gratifying attacks on Mel Gibson's \"Passion of the Christ\" and a Christian private school which the director attended in his youth. During an interview with his old principal, (which during the course of, it comes to light that the director set up under false pretenses) I felt that the director was acting sort of childish. He was asking good questions but, like the film itself, the interview crumbled into an attack on this particular private school's rules, not Christianity.All in all, if you're just interested in some info, watch the first 30 minutes or so and then shut it off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f40f8be686464f47bfbd95016a24c551",
            "input": "Despite the rave reviews this flick has garnered in New Zealand, any hype surrounding the production is sadly undeserved. Apart from a clichés-only plot, the movie is let down by some weak acting, accents, and overall lack of tension.Whilst having the overall look of a big budget (for NZ), the feel is decidedly small-town Kiwi...Has anyone not seen The Brothers ?? Those who have will pick the similarities straightaway....I've heard comments that scenes like the boys playing basketball etc were shot to poke fun at the clichéd \"boys talking crap\", but it comes across as forced...I believe Oscar Keightley sees himself as deeply ironic, but again his delivery always seems merely vaguely self conscious.Those who have any doubts left at all that Samoans-living-in-NZ culture has been deeply , hopefully not permanently ,affected by American speech , culture, and everything inbetween will certainly have their minds made up at the end of this movie.Robbie magasiva always looks good on screen , but is let down by the script..It always rubs me up the wrong way when a \"comedy\" has scenes that are set up in such an obvious way, you are left feeling like having a good groan at the clichéd punchline - see the wanna be white boy...I know someone who found this movie hilarious -however, that person has the brains of a tadpole, and would struggle to spell her name if offered a million dollars....That kinda sums up the mentality of this flick , OK but not great , fun but not funny.....Wake up NZ - this is NOT a 5 star movie despite all the glowing (middle class white guilt ?? :-) ) reviews....My advice ? if you watch it, get drunk first!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8beb1be31274aa0bbf47befdfb75b89",
            "input": "Revolt of the Zombies is BAD. There is nothing remotely entertaining about the movie. It is dull, lifeless, poorly acted, and poorly scripted. I've often complained that the original Dracula is a little slow for my taste, well this movie makes Dracula look like a roller coaster ride. The 65 minute running time seemed like 165 minutes.The story: An expedition is sent to Cambodia to find the secrets of mind control through \"zombification\". One man finds the secret and uses it to make the woman he loves marry him. Once this happens, he releases the zombies under his control to horrific consequences. That's it. That's the whole story.For most of the movie, I was trying to figure out where I had seen the male lead. He looked so familiar. I had plenty of time to think this over. Nothing was happening in the movie. Just before the \"zombies revolted\", it hit me. It was Dean Jagger. I had seen him recently as the General in White Christmas. This is how I \"entertained\" myself throughout most of the movie.I'm just glad I didn't buy the DVD for this movie. King of the Zombies is on the other side and it's a masterpiece of film making compared with this movie. For what it's worth, I'll give it a 2/10. (I won't go to 1/10 because, believe it or not, I've seen worse.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d7d3860000c472580f6e0e4e68bac22",
            "input": "My wife and I watch a film every night with no distractions, and mostly artsy films that require thought. I have tons of patience for films that are slow to blossom. My wife has double the attention span that I do. All that being said-- this film is just plain empty and BORING! It went nowhere. Never blossomed. It started fairly strong with a promising plot...then she bakes cookies...goes to Spain....she sulks, she stares....the credits roll. Uneven, full of holes, false starts & dead ends. We FF'd through several extended sequences of her just staring off into space. Artificial depth was implied when she played with the mud and cried. Zzzz...... It's like a beautifully shot chick-flick that's pretending to be deep or artsy. You never get to know nor understand Morvern at all. About halfway through you just don't care anymore. We just wanted to see at least one of the plot lines develop. Don't waste your time on this. I'm shocked it scores so high.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d293d536665849b0b5643c396df11dbb",
            "input": "The Bible teaches us that the love of money is the root of all evil. The love of money leads to greed which can lead to pride and eventually to destruction. Two brothers, Andy and Hank, will discover how far the love of money will cost them and those they love the most.Andy Hanson (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and his younger brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) couldn't be more different. Andy is seemingly enjoying the success of working in New York's real estate market and is married to his beautiful wife Gina (Marisa Tomei) who is the idea of a trophy wife if one ever existed. Hank, however, is divorcée who finds himself at the mercy of his ex-wife, his daughter's expensive school bills, and endless amount of child support payments. A man who means well and has good intentions, Hank none the less cannot escape the water that his slowly raising above his head no matter how hard he swims to stay above it.However, Andy has his own problems with the only difference between him and his brother being that he hides them better. He has committed fraud against his company and is heavily involved in drug use in order to escape his fears. The pressure of his life, and the lies he needs to keep his appearances up, have now caused him to think about fleeing the country with Gina in order to start over again. Of course, like Hank, he needs money to do this and believes he knows how to get it. How? By robbing the jewelery store that their parents own and run. This act of betrayal is where the Hanson brothers, their families, and several other lives, will be destroyed because of greed, pride, and fear. The uniqueness of Before The Devil Knows You're Dead is the manner in which the story is told. After the robbery goes wrong, and Nanette Hanson (Rosemary Harris) who is the mother of both Andy and Hank is killed, the story is told from a variety of different points of view from various days before and after the robbery attempt. We learn more about the motivations of not only Andy and Hank but also the reaction to their father Charles (Albert Finney) to the death of his wife. The relationship between Charles and his two sons, especially to Andy, is also explored and another possible motivation of sorts is discovered after it is revealed that there is little love between the two men. Nanette may have been dearly loved by her sons but their father is a different story.Philip Seymour Hoffman proves once more why he is one of the most impressive actors in Hollywood today by portraying Andy as not only a greedy criminal with lack of morality but also, in contradictory way, as a man we can sympathize with. Ethan Hawke also brings Hank alive not just as a loser but really as a man just desperate to hang on to what little he has left. Andy and Hank are thus brought to life in such a realistic way that it is easy to think of them as not just characters but the very real images of lost and confused men who now find themselves facing the consequence of their actions.Before The Devil Knows You're Dead is a moral tale about how our actions lead to consequences that we otherwise might not expect to face. More than that, our choices also can affect those around us in ways we never expected. In what should have been best picture of the year, we see how lives are easily broken when the love of money becomes the ultimate pursuit in order to ease our troubled lives. In other words, there are no easy fixes or answers to our problems and trying to find them can only make things worse.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18f039d5f04b4e259c9f0f8b71e96e1b",
            "input": "A very young Ginger Rogers trades quick quips and one liners with rival newspaper reporter Lyle Talbot in this 1933 murder mystery from Poverty Row film maker Allied Productions. The movie opens with a wealthy businessman taking a header from the roof garden of a high rise apartment house, or was it from a lover's apartment? Rogers actually has two identities at the film's outset, that of Miss Terry, the dead victim's secretary, along with her newspaper byline of Pat Morgan. Mistakenly phoning her story directly to Ted Rand (Talbot) instead of her paper's rewrite desk, she gets fired for her efforts when her boss learns he's been out scooped.Here's a puzzle - it's revealed during Police Inspector Russell's (Purnell Pratt) investigation of Harker's death that Terry/Morgan had been employed as his secretary for three weeks. Why exactly was that? After the fact it would make sense that she was there for a newspaper story, but before? Clues are dropped regarding Harker's association with a known mobster conveniently living in the same apartment building, but again, that association isn't relevant until it's all linked up to janitor Peterson (Harvey Clark). And who's making up all the calling cards with the serpent effecting a HSSS, with the words \"You will hear it\" cut and pasted beneath? Apparently, the hissing sound of a snake was the sound made by the apartment house's radiator system, which Peterson used to transmit a poisonous gas into the rooms of potential victims, such as Mrs. Coby in the apartment below Harker. But in answer to a question posed to Inspector Russell about Mrs. Coby's death, he replied \"apparently\" to the cause of strangulation.It's these rather conflicting plot points that made the movie somewhat unsatisfying for me. The revelation of janitor Peterson as the bad guy of this piece comes under somewhat gruesome circumstances as we see him stuff the unconscious body of Miss Morgan in the building's incinerator furnace! However, and score another point against continuity, we see Miss Morgan in a huge basement room as Peterson ignites the furnace; she made her getaway, but how? And still pretty as a picture. And who gets to make the collar off screen if none other than milquetoast police assistant Wilfred (Arthur Hoyt), who in an opening scene fell over his own feet entering a room.Sorry, but for all those reviewers who found \"A Shriek in the Night\" to be a satisfying whodunit, I feel that any Charlie Chan film of the same era is a veritable \"The Usual Suspects\" by comparison. If you need a reason to see the film, it would be Ginger Rogers, but be advised, she doesn't dance.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f08474655ca49b692b428ed34148848",
            "input": "I drove from Sacramento to San Francisco (and back) to see this movie premiere--and really glad I did. As a big movie fan and a life-long Northern Californian, I was surprised how many Oscar-winning films have been made in the Bay Area. As a fashion designer who really wants to stay in the Bay Area as opposed to going to LA, George Lucas' comments about persistence, community and having a vision really resonated with me. Hey, if he and all the other filmmakers can make it in SF, so can other artists. Would recommend this film",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-522528554e3141b49def9f83b4e27353",
            "input": "\"Sundown:The Vampire in Retreat\" is a rubbish.The acting is terrible,the atmosphere is non-existent and the characters are uninteresting.The only scary thing about this piece of scum is that majority of the IMDb users gave it a 10.This is really horrifying.No gore,no suspense,no violence,nothing.Bruce Cambell(\"The Evil Dead\",\"Intruder\")is completely wasted,the supporting cast is also terrible.Yes,some people may like this picture,especially a mainstream society but hard-core horror fans or gore-hounds won't enjoy this piece of crap.Personally I hate horror comedies,I prefer watching serious horror movies like \"Cannibal Holocaust\" or \"Last House on the Left\".In my opinion,a real horror movie is supposed to be scary,excessively bloody and disturbing,without stupid humour,which usually ruins the whole concept.This one isn't scary,isn't gory,isn't even funny as a comedy,so don't waste your precious time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcf260aafa4e460cbf77ab8f2cacab5b",
            "input": "While this movie isn't a classic by any stretch, it is very entertaining as I remember it. I saw it about 15 years ago on HBO and loved the movie. It was written by the same guy that wrote and directed \"Arthur\" and though it isn't as funny as that movie, it does show the potential that Steve Gordon reached with \"Arthur\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8f20da6c6e847e496065bb99ff550a3",
            "input": "I've read a number of reviews on this film and I have to say \"What is wrong with you people?!?!\" This was an excellent film! I thought this film was superb from start to finish and the story was extremely well told. I'm convinced that the people that didn't like this film weren't paying very good attention to the film. There are a number of very important scenes that if you aren't paying attention you will be confused and the following scenes may not make sense. I urge anyone who didn't like this film to watch it again and watch it alone so that you can truly pay attention. The story made perfect sense to me and as I said, was very well told. Every scene in the film has a point and everything fits together at the end of the film.All the actors did a fantastic job! Sean Connery was very good in his role as always. Laurence Fishburne was superb as Tanny Brown, playing a very interesting character. Kate Capshaw was a nice touch as well, and looks fantastic. Blair Underwood was a pleasant surprise, I didn't really expect anything great from him, but he pulled off a great performance. Ed Harris was the real gem in the film. He plays a truly sick individual and really makes you see how disturbed his character is. Watch his eyes in his scenes, just superb!!! Also, there is a very young Scarlett Johansson (as Kate) in one of her first roles...not a bad place to start. Excellent cast in this film!I would strongly recommend this film to anyone that likes any of the cast members or just likes thrillers. This is a great film and should be seen. Don't listen all these other people's opinions, go see the movie and come to your own conclusions. I hope that you will see the film, and I hope that you enjoy it as much as I do. Thanks for reading,-Chris",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26df2a925c19403a8358fd7586fb18c2",
            "input": "This is an Arnold movie. Now that you know that, I've saved a lot of you the time it would have taken to read this review. If you don't like Arnold, then you wont like this movie. If the case is the other, then you will very probably like it. It's as simple as that.Now, if you're still reading this I expect you like Arnold. Good for you! He is quite good isn't he. The Running Man is a very typical Arnold feature. It's got the usual retro-future we know so well from 80's B-Sci Fi, it's got a bunch of terrible one-liners, lots of violence and explosions, and a good-looking heroine and a happy ending.In this case, the evil opponent is the all-controlling 1984ish government, which uses television as an effective crowd-control with gladiator-type game shows. Arnold, of course, ends up in one of these shows and turns it all up-side-down, with a little help from his two confederates and the good-looking Amber.It's not a big budget movie, but it still managed to create a pretty good atmosphere of the future, with some nice matte paintings and sets to help it. It's hopelessly 80's, but I find that charming. Acting is varying, Arnold doing his usual grunt and shout thing, with a helping of stone-faced one-liners. Heroine Amber is, to put it lightly, a bit stereotypical, and the subtly named Damen Killian is a typical evil TV man.In spite of all it's flaws, the movie shows its message very clearly; television is an opiate of the masses, a good way to control people. It also features some at the time futuristic digital video editing, allowing the bad guys to change faces in a video to fool their audience. This does not seem futuristic at all today, which is a bit alarming.If you've seen Arnold movies before then you know when to watch this one. Enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-768c290673b940e39806f2f24c831909",
            "input": "One of the things about the film that warmed my heart strings was that dry fly fishing was a major part of the scene. I have occasionally carried out my times of dry fly fishing, having tied my own flies, and being accompanied by my brother and my father we spend a day on one river or another seeking to tempt the ever elusive Brown Trout to rise and take the fly that has been offered to them.When we had occasions like this any differences between us disappeared and any of the pressures of the world melted away to be replaced by the glory of being absorbed in the activity and the surroundings of the place we were in.This was one of the amazing things that was portrayed to me in the film as the minister and his two sons, Norman and Pauly carried out the ritual. For there is something ritualistic about fly fishing as there is something ritualistic about so many pastimes. You can't just start casting your fishing line and hope for the best. You have to attune yourself to the place you are in, you have to scan the surface of the water considering how it is flowing and where the best point might be to place your fly and, depending on your skill level, you might even get your fly to land there long enough for a fish to take note of it and strike. The 'Art of Fly-fishing' was directed and represented so well that they themselves can be classified as artists.The title for the film could not be more aptly chosen, for the river did in fact run through the life of father and two sons. This film however spreads itself broader than the family and community in Montana, by the the Blackfoot river, where the film is played out. It has the capacity to draw you in, to enthrall you, to capture you, as the history of the family, community and period is unfolded. The Story told is not just a family history, but a history of Life. What may be classified as a 'River of Life'",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ef13a9d99304141808f2367a95413e0",
            "input": "this movie wasn't absolutely atrocious, but it was pretty bad. the acting ACTUALLY was pretty good! jeffrey combs did a pretty darn good job as the mad scientist, which is sort of his specialty if you don't know such things :D. bill forsythe .. well, i'm not EXACTLY sure why he was in this film. he's way too good for this kinda stuff, and his role wasn't exactly demanding. I rented this on the strength of those two leads, and I wasn't really disappointed. I mean, heck, it's a movie about a half man/half shark. It ain't Shakespeare folks. Other than the plot, which is full of holes, and the poor dialogue, I would like to note that the cinematography also left many things to be desired. there were shots were they were trying to look \"cool\", but it ended up obscuring the scene or just coming off plain cheezy. they also blew it many times when they had decent dialogue and cut away prematurely before the person could even deliver the line. it was pretty bad. but if you are a jeffrey combs fan, this one is worth checking out. he gives a great performance and does what he can with the character. forsythe ain't bad either, and either is the female lead. heck if i can remember her name though. bottom line, i wouldn't otherwise waste your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f650394a10c4e299cef2514e3459910",
            "input": "The world is made up two different types of moviegoers... There are the \"English Patient\" types, who can't be bothered to enjoy anything that isn't high-brow enough to be shown on PBS, and there are the \"Happy Gilmore\" types, for whom an hour and a half of genitalia puns are definitely worth the $7.Certainly, there's a ton of gray area, but you know to which side you're leaning. If you're an English Patient person, save your time, save your money, and save us all your \"Oh, this movie is so childish and stupid\" comments. I know, you thoroughly enjoy belittling every movie you don't like, and every person that likes them, but maybe you could hold off just this once.But if you're a Happy Gilmore type... go see this one... You'll find it hilarious. Tim Meadows has created a hilarious character, and Will Farrell continues to be hilarious in just about everything he does. Go check it out. You'll be glad you did. And that's OK.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90bc57a62cb746b4a7e39e9d955213a3",
            "input": "This is a film that the mainstream market will probably never be able to access as it doesn't exactly give the viewer easy watching. The story about troubled Spike and his friend Heaton is not exactly a Friday night film yet it has its own unique edge and I found that it was entertaining. There are moments of brilliance given that the film was shot on such a low budget, such as when Spike inhales the aerosol. However I did not really understand the relationship between Spike and Heaton and to be honest it made me spend most of the film trying to work it out. And also I did not like the fact that most of the film is spent with the two friends talking and not really much \"action\". It is a small film that is complex to watch and that is what makes it appealing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0529218a0ee4ac2bf3bd9013ed1ff4a",
            "input": "This is the story of Australian commandos who are captured out of uniform after a raid. Since they are out of uniform, they are, justly, treated as spies. As such, they are tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. The Japanese court-martial, out of admiration for their heroism, authorizes that they be given a warrior's death. Of course, under the code of Bushido, this means that they are to be beheaded. A fate for which, as westerners, they are unprepared.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-468c9641444049d9b911439137b0666e",
            "input": "This is one of those Film's/pilot that if you knew BattleStar Galactica it helps, but isn't necessary. What makes this even more believable of a story than BSG is that this isn't something so far away in the future. This has such a depth to it that it is quite astonishing it was not released theatrically. The leads could not have been chosen better in such experienced & quite talented actors. Eric Stoltz is superb as the father who will do anything to be re-united w/his daughter however real or not she is & he'll do it no matter the cost. Paula Malcomson of \"Deadwood\" fame is terrific as his wife as well. You are not sure completely of his motives whether it's love or money or both, but that is what makes this pilot even more intriguing. I see a star in the making of Zoe played by the relative unknown Alessandra Torresani & her performance. Esai Morales is terrific in his desire to see his loved one again & just how wrong to be even considering what he wants more than his moral objections. I didn't think this would be a good idea when it was announced but from the pilot alone I am thrilled to see how we got to the BSG stage story. It's great to see Adama as a child already being affected & influenced by the different sorts of Robots starting to permeate life at this stage. I just hope that they can keep up the stories so we can figure out even more how they got the the Humanoid typed robots. This is an almost perfect pilot & I hope they can keep up the fantastic storytelling. Even the Visual effects are better than most of the garbage you see on the big screen. If you haven't gotten into BSG, @ least try this & I'll bet you become a fan & will want to see how the BSG story came to be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df756a070d594afe9ed6acc1539dc8ec",
            "input": "I saw this movie only after hearing raves about it for years. Needless to say, the actual experience proved a bit anticlimactic. But still, Alec Guiness energetically leads a wonderful cast in a jolly, if formulaic, romp through industrial post-WWII England.This is the familiar tale of the woes of inventing the perfect everyday product. Remember the car that runs on water? Remember the promise of nuclear energy? In this case, it's a fabric that doesn't wear out, wrinkle, or even get dirty! Of course, fabric manufacturers and their workers are horrified at the prospect of being put out of business, and so the plot gets a bit thick.Guiness makes the whole enterprise worthwhile, and watching him blow up a factory research lab over and over again is quite a blast! (Those Brits ... always the stiff upper lip when under fire.) The film might chug along exactly like Guiness's goofy invention, but it's a good ride all the same.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d64d5ca273f48468128028a336c94e6",
            "input": "The films of UPA are surprisingly well rated on IMDb despite the fact that the animation quality is light-years behind that of Looney Toons, Disney and MGM at their prime. Sadly, due to rising costs in making pretty cartoons with high frame-rates and lovely backgrounds, the UPA style (which debuted about 1950) began to dominate in the late 50s and 60s. After all, the films were dirt cheap to make and they'd received several Oscars to \"prove\" that the cartoons were now mainstream. So as a result, lousy animation was becoming the norm and this trend wasn't reversed until the 1980s.This UPA film is one of the early ones. The characters are very simply drawn (any simpler and they would have used stick figures) and the backgrounds were ugly--simple line drawings with colors added in a very slap-dash manner (often with a sponge and rarely completely filling the items).As for the story, it's a jive story with a strong jazz style attitude. Some will love this, others will just find it very, very loud. It's the traditional \"Frankie and Johnny\" story and because of the shootings and all, it's probably not a great film for the kids. Heck, because of the animation and jazz, it's not a particularly good film for me, either! Some will read my review and no doubt think I am a crank (which I am, to a degree). However, I love animated films and a little of this minimalistic UPA style goes a very, very long way and you can't seriously consider them great works of art--just very, very quickly made cartoons. Ignore the Oscars and try watching some classic cartoons or something--anything else!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d32a1e5bb33a41ccbfb34a4a9a7fab33",
            "input": "Okay, this film is about Bedknobs and Broomsticks, it's one of the most charming, delightful movies you'll ever see as a kid. It's the unforgettable movie about two adults and two spunky kids on an adventure for fun. It may be a little deniable to watch, but try it, I neither my mother didn't think it was bad, I was very enthused with the movie and the animation, they were all quite good.It is a delightfully wondrous comedy for the whole family to enjoy; even the kids. Ages 7 years and up will enjoy this wonderful, musical comedy with you and your family especially the animation. The animation movements and layouts are really nice and deserve a thumbs up. It's a terrifically good musical for the whole family so what are you waiting for? Go to the video store and rent Bedknobs and Broomsticks NOW.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc32a90eed434de3bd96c7565f269dd1",
            "input": "I've just lost 2 hours of my life watching this mindless plot. I could make a better movie with my cellphone camera. How do they manage to get actors to play in those movies?? Porn movies have better scenarios and effects... I wish I had those 2 hours back...The only good thing about this movie is the cast. Even though, their acting skills in this one could not lift this movie to passable, the rest was just WAY too bad! It's the type of movie that I'd recommend using to torture prisoners into scaring them straight.Even worse, I saw a translated version of this flick...Imagine, a bad movie...with an even worst translation...Yikes!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32401c3008064bada030acb17b5931e0",
            "input": "SCARECROWS seems to be a botched horror meets supernatural film. A group of thugs pull off a paramilitary-like robbery of the payroll at Camp Pendleton in California. They high-jack a cargo plane kidnapping the pilot and his daughter with demands to be flown to Mexico. Along the way one greedy robber decides to bailout with the money landing in a cornfield monitored by strange looking scarecrows. These aren't just any run-of-the-mill scarecrows...they can kill. The acting is no better than the horrible dialog. And the attempts at humor are not funny. Very low budget and shot entirely in the dark.The cast includes: Ted Vernon, Michael David Simms, Kristina Sanborn, B.J. Turner, Phil Zenderland and Victoria Christian.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62a3f03e790c40d790ba9cb0bb094e03",
            "input": "Painfully bad Christmas film that has an equally painfully bad performance by Vince Vaughn, who is paying his usual frat boy self but this time for a children's movie but with out the wit or charm that is in his R rated films. Vaughn seems like he's on autopilot though most of the film and he keeps running into walls with his lackluster performance. After 30 minutes into the film, you would be in touch your inner scourge and say \"Bahumbag\" at how unfunny this film is and after another 30 minutes, you will want to walk out over how unbearable the film has gotten during that point. Out of all the actors involved in this mess, only Paul Giamatti and Rachel Weisz brings some life to there perspective paper thin roles and that's manly because they are both way too good of actors to be in this film. Paul Giamatti brings some depth and warmth to the character of Saint Nick himself but he's forced to Vaughn's level of juvenile behavior when they are doing their sad sibling infighting. You can see in Giamatti face that he's not having fun with his role and it painfully shows in certain parts of the film. Rachel Weisz brings a sense of fun and spirit to her role but she really does not have much of a character to work with and you can see in her face that she's well aware of that, so much so that she seems irritated in certain parts of the film. Fortunately for her, she's not in the film much at all and is able to save some face, unlike Giamatti, who looks like he's about to fire his agent by the end of the movie. The direction also feels uninspiring, like there is no feeling or flow to be had and this is a supposed to be a holiday movie but it ends up feeling like you are just staring at a fancy widow display that is being torn down.I don't know what went wrong here but with only two actors involved (Giamatti and Weisz) trying their best to at least bring something to the table with a unfunny script they had to work with, spotty direction with no feeling for the subject at hand ( and this is a Christmas movie of all things) and a actor who just does not care about his performance (Vaughn), you have a very unevenly bad film that is very painful to watch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81ae6f48a41742fbbb8fbab7710d9569",
            "input": "R Balki tries to tell you a story that had been earlier told by Ram Gopal Verma in Nishabd in a sensuous way. This time it is mixed with mature humors.Amitabh Bachchan is a Chef and owns an Indian Cuisine in London. He is very dominating and arrogant and respects his job just like any other job. According to him, Cooking is an art. Still cannot make Hyderabadi Biryani properly.Enter Tabu who sends her the proper Hyderabadi Biryani made by her and they soon starts meeting up and finally falls in love with each other… Amitabh is 65 and Tabu is 35…. No probs! But one Hitch! Tabu's father Paresh Rawal!! The couples decide to meet the father for the approval of their marriage. But Amitabh realizes that Tabu's father is much younger to him. And the complications begin… Performance wise all three actors are brilliant. The script of the film is very tight and interesting. The dialogues of the film are catchy. But somewhere you feel that your stomach is not properly filled. The comedy is sometimes not properly understood. The film also tries to go lengthy at some parts.Musically nothing much to sing about except the Title Track. The camera-work is good. Director R Balki could have given much better from this script. But in the second half he himself looks confused. The \"Satyagrah\" scene of the father looked irritating. But the lines spoken by Amitabh Bachchan during that scene are clap worthy.On the whole, Cheeni Kum needed to have more sugar!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d627b181152d4654b66ddd475880f3d0",
            "input": "While it's early to say how the series will evolve, I can say that the pilot was less than I thought it would be. There is still potential for the series, however. Of course when I first saw Voyager I thought it had potential, too - but was sorely disappointed. My gut tells me Enterprise won't be as bad as Voyager, however.As for the impressions of the pilot...The pilot had some good ideas and good themes. I liked the introduction. The show's opening credits were interesting, with the progress of exploration and a fitting theme song. Scott Bakula is excellent in the role of captain.Where it fell short for me was largely that the story lacked the \"feel\" of setting out on a grand adventure. The plot of the episode itself was more a \"generic\" Trek story with the themes of \"exploration\" and \"first step towards space\" merely subplot and subtext. Were you to edit out the references to this being the first deep space mission, the plot would be hard to differentiate between the eras of Enterprise, TOS or TNG. The central plot didn't reflect or do justice to the grand theme of the series. The plot of launching the first mission would have been grand enough without the \"action\". Instead of isolated references to the newness of exploration, they could have been the story. Get a little more nostalgic and philosophical about it (oh, for a TV show that once again would make us THINK). Make us feel the excitement of \"the wind\" and being on \"the sea\" instead of distracting us with a rescue and a plethora of gunplay. There was WAY too much gunplay.We had the feeling more that humans were the \"freshmen\" in an established school. New kids on the block, as opposed to venturing into a largely unknown universe. Sadly, the Klingons landed on our doorstep instead of us finding them. That meeting could have been far more historic and far more sociological. Just how DO two such different societies interact? Don't just hint about it, SHOW it!I had to think of it more as `Trek with an akward crew and limited technology' as opposed to `the first brave steps into the unknown'. I wanted to see something newer and fresher. The series promises to have a new concept but so far I haven't seen this new, great concept.I will conclude with reiterating the sentiment that the series has potential. There are some interesting characters. Bakula is wonderful. Blalock has potential. The overall theme is the most interesting since we first saw Kirk in a world before Apollo 11. If only future episodes can do justice to this grand and wonderful theme, we will have a show which will create new legends.You shoot an arrow into the air... Good luck Capt. Archer.To the producers: TAKE MORE RISKS AND MAKE US *THINK*! :-)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d43476d805c4bbb98a0221f4a9f7ab8",
            "input": "Unspeakably discombobulated turkey, a mix of anti-Nazi musical (!!), pre-war Americana and Agatha Christie whodunit spoof with one big, big problem: it's deadly unfunny. Besides the single-digit I.Q. plot and dialog, the most amazing aspect of \"Lady...\" is the berserk casting. Gene Wilder (star AND co-writer) tries hard at it all: he plays a romantic lead (with his looks!! and his age!! he and Woody Allen should start a club for clueless, mirrorless ageing comedians), and he tries to be moving and funny and poignant and smart, and tries to sing and dance, and succeeds in NONE!! A looong shot from his good old days with Mel Brooks.For a while I thought I was having a myopia fit, because everybody in the movie keeps saying Cherry Jones is this pretty hot chick, and that Michael Cumpsty is this impossibly handsome stallion!! The guy who plays Claire Bloom's male secretary is a bespectacled balding thin actor as sexy as a chair and is the object of passion of the two leading ladies!! Mike Starr's over-the-top acting as the most incompetent, phoniest cop you EVER saw deserves to rank among the 10 most abhorrent performances in recent film history. The saddest note is to see wonderful Claire Bloom and Barbara Sukowa completely miscast and offensively wasted. At least I hope both stars payed their bills back home (and subsequently fired their agents) with this flop. No wonder acting prodigy Sukowa returned to Germany after she saw what Hollywood had in store for her!!If you want to see how to accomplish a really bad film out of a really bad script with a berserk casting director, study this one - otherwise stay away!!! - 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d347590fbb594376acd5c8a241d1a6ab",
            "input": "This comedy with much underlying pain and sadness succeeds where most others fail. There have been many films of this genre with more notable actors attempting to achieve this elusive mixture which haven't come anywhere near the depth and deftness of this one. This is surely because the exceptional cast with outstanding performances by Reg Rogers and Ally Sheedy seem so spontaneous that the reality of their characters rapidly grip your interest and emotions and hold them throughout the film. At first, the action seems rather off-the-wall and harebrained but one gradually learns that these two rather pathetic damaged people are desperately and unwillingly trying to heal themselves, even if grudgingly, through each other. Rogers' heartrending facial expressions of numb hurt and Sheedy's angry outbursts are so eloquent that one feels them as one observes them. You will care about these two likable but deeply suffering people and hope that they will succeed because it's in doubt and all hangs on a tenuous emotional thread. Hopefully audiences will get to see more of Reg Rogers and Ally Sheedy as this film proves their merit as very accomplished actors beyond doubt.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ee08764920348fca2a955edcf478786",
            "input": "Even though I'm quite young, The Beatles are my ABSOLUTELY FAVOURITE band! I never had the chance to hear their music as it was releases but have loved them since I can remember.It's the sort of film that is worth trying the once. I can see why it wasn't released in the cinema but it is certainly a great film to put on the TV. I was flicking through my TV guide and happened to see this film, it didn't much details except something like, 'John Lennon and Paul McCartney meet after The Beatles have broken up, Jared Harris Stars'. I'd never heard of him (he played John) or Aiden Quinn who played Paul. However they are certainly underestimated actors!The film had a slow start but as it developed, I could see how well Quinn but especially Harris played their characters. As a huge fan, I sort of know what the real Lennon and McCartney are like. The script was brilliant and Harris got Lennon's accent, personality and mannerisms spot on! Quinn played McCartney quite well but sometimes went into his Irish accent. THe make-up artists made them look excellent.THIS PARAGRAPH MAY BE COUNTED AS A *SPOILER*:As I mentioned before, it got off to a slow start but soon developed and became quite an emotional film. I found the bit in the park a total waste of time and quite out of character for both of the musicians. As for Lennon's rude line in the Italian restaurant, totally unnecessary. The ending was very poignant and brings a tear to my eye whenever I watch it.It is quite different from the other biographical films I've seen where it's about how The Beatles got together and became famous, and those never really did the characters that well. E.g. 'Backbeat'.In conclusion, I would say, if you're a Beatles or John Lennon or Paul McCartney fan, give it a chance you may have pleasent surprise. At only about 95 minutes long, it's worth waiting for the film to develop.If anyone does know whether the meeting of 1976 really did happen please send it to the 'comments page' for this film, I'd be very interested.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40f169afad1444e89930951b222598cb",
            "input": "I occasionally see some of this show because my wife watches it sometimes. I try to enjoy it for it's basic idea which is helping a needy family, but several factors get in the way for me. Every episode follows the same format where many parts seem totally scripted (which they are) and tears flow seemingly on cue. The attempt to manipulate the viewer with a mixture of emotional breakdowns and sad music is a real turn off for me. The fact that everyone who donates something to the house, be it Sears or whoever, has to plug themselves for being generous is also annoying. Probably the biggest problem I have with it all is that what must be huge amounts of money and a small army of workers are combined to build an amazingly over the top home for a single family. Now I know that this amount of money is nothing but a drop in the bucket for Disney/ABC but how much more could be done for more people with the amount they are putting on one house? Instead of focusing on one family and getting them all to cry during the episode why not help 10 families and show highlights? Isn't life difficult enough for the average person? Why do I need help finding things to feel sad about, why not show something truly inspiring without being manipulative? I know what is being done for these families is good, but they are also being used for ratings. You can't tell me they aren't being coached sometimes on the crying. I guess when I see these people moving into a home that most hard working people in the U.S. could not afford for their children it really bothers me. I can't help but think of what could really be done with a small portion of Disney's money. Instead of giving each member of the family a flat screen TV and or personal shower that tells you the water temperature and shoots out of the ceiling why not help more people afford food, clothes, education and medical insurance? I know so we can be entertained and have a good cry. In terms of money, I feel the same about Oprah. I don't think anyone can actually conceive the amount of money she possesses. Yes her recent reality show did good things, but when she gave $30,000 to each losing \"contestant\" I'm sitting here thinking...that's a years salary for many, many people...if they're lucky. Don't get me started on game shows. So I realize that Extreme Makeover Home Edition is \"doing good\", but forgive me if I see it as more self serving than giving of itself. Is there anyone out there that feels similar?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb35ccec2d904b4da8774e065f849956",
            "input": "i must say this movie is truly amazing and heartwarming. Reese Witherspoon is so charming and Jason London's not so bad either! it is so sweet watching Dani fall in love and it breaks my heart and yet warms my heart at the same time watching Court fall in love with Maureen. however it is even sweeter watching how much he cares for Dani. I must admit though i did kind of want him to fall for Dani in the end. it is just so cute watching her fall for him i did not want her to get her heart broken so badly. but the biggest tragedy i have ever seen occurred in this movie. watching him die made me cry for a whole day. i just could not believe it. however never a more loving relationship has been shown in a movie then Maureen and Dani. they really can make it through anything. i am giving this movie a 9 because i didn't want Court to die but it was still one of the most amazing movies i have ever seen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa4568bda09d4344a00a747d6ee86c20",
            "input": "Really, truly, abysmally, garishly, awful. But actor Clayton Moore (the movie Lone Ranger) acquits himself competently as an actor. He's the only one.A rare treat, for five minutes, if you want to plumb the depths of grotesquely transparent special effects, southern California as \"the moon\" (again and again and again), and acting so woodenly inept that it may be a spoof . . . except that it's clear that it isn't--no humor here, except unintentionally.The dialogue may be worse than any of these other aspects, and the costumes . . . well, enough said. Plot? What plot? Bad guy (well, head bad guy) and his henchmen, including his earthly agent called Krog (listen carefully or you'll suspect it's a spoof on the name of McDonald's founder Ray Kroc)and his unbelievably inept gunsels (who, however, have handguns that never need reloading; as does Commando Cody, so there are numerous firefight standoffs).Enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a2ff24a9f0d4a4fb6408e4f1354f528",
            "input": "After losing his cattle herd to a dishonest lawman, a trail boss winds up in the Yukon gold fields with a bad reputation and small chances of being able to return to the states. While there his fortunes take a turn for the best until a bad luck specter from the past comes calling. Good western with many favorite old faces in the lineup.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1eeac7c4bd5149b1a98b46f48982963e",
            "input": "I wish \"that '70s show\" would come back on television. It was the greatest show ever!!! They should make episodes between the other episodes but of course that would be confusing. But I wish it would come back and make more episodes. Please come back... The show was absolutely hilarious. You couldn't laugh without seeing an episode. There is a really funny part in every episode and plus the show was so much better when Hyde and Jackie were going out with each other. Those were the best episodes. \"That '70s show is the best\".... It will be and always will be the best show ever. It was really sad when the show ended. They should make new episodes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5512dd751f694a0596c403dd8df18180",
            "input": "Interesting to read comments by viewers regarding Omega Code... many of the overwhelmingly positive comments were lifted almost word for word from TBN broadcasts... the movie looks as if it were made to go directly to video, to be stocked besides the three-part rapture series that was done by some other religious group in the 70s.. dont remember it? You wont remember this one either in a year or two. This is the first movie I have ever seen where it was implied that it was your religious duty to go to it and buy as many tickets as possible to save souls... very shameful... this just goes to show that if you are a televangelist's son, you too can play high-roller Hollywood producer with lil ole ladies tithe money...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba3bc8e226e24331aae95da549c8bf4c",
            "input": "The film is bad. There is no other way to say it. The story is weak and outdated, especially for this country. I don't think most people know what a \"walker\" is or will really care. I felt as if I was watching a movie from the 70's. The subject was just not believable for the year 2007, even being set in DC. I think this rang true for everyone else who watched it too as the applause were low and quick at the end. Most didn't stay for the Q&A either.I don't think Schrader really thought the film out ahead of time. Many of the scenes seemed to be cut short as if they were never finished or he just didn't know how to finish them. He jumped from one scene to the next and you had to try and figure out or guess what was going on. I really didn't get Woody's (Carter) private life or boyfriend either. What were all the \"artistic\" male bondage and torture pictures (from Iraq prisons) about? What was he thinking? I think it was his very poor attempt at trying to create this dark private subculture life for Woody's character (Car). It didn't work. It didn't even seem to make sense really.The only good thing about this film was Woody Harrelson. He played his character (Car) flawlessly. You really did get a great sense of what a \"walker\" may have been like (say twenty years ago). He was great and most likely will never get recognized for it. As for Lauren, Lily and Kristin... Boring.Don't see it! It is painful! Unless you are a true Harrelson fan.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20cdc9e61ff94dc39819a6356804a565",
            "input": "Wow. I read about this movie and it sounded so awful that I had to see it, and my gosh, I can smell it in St Louis. Where do I start? National Lampoons was trying to follow up 5 years later on the success of Animal House, but they completely missed the mark. I'll go chronologically with these short flicks.Short Film #1 Poor Peter Riegert (Boon from Animal House). Apparently, he wasn't working back then, so the boys at National Lampoons probably called and said \"hey, we're making a c**ppy movie, wanna be in it?\" Peter was like \"well, I'm not doing much these days, why not?\" He was a great side character in Animal House, but he couldn't carry this sorry short flop for 5 minutes.POSSIBLE SPOILER The premise is funny enough, with Jason Cooper (Riegert) telling his wife to leave him, she needs to find herself. It's too weird that they're actually in a happy marriage. So he chases her off, there she goes, and Cooper is in charge of the kids. This, off course, leads to him burning the house down, losing several of the kids, and sleeping with an assortment of New York bimbos (including an ever so young Diane Lane). Then the wife comes back, wants the kids, and the film ends with a coin flip that'll decide the fate of the children. The idea was actually somewhat clever, but the director stunk. The characters all seem like they're falling asleep, they HAD to be doped up. Sorry Boon, your legacy was tarnished with this flop.Short Film #2 MORE SPOILERS Enter Dominique Corsaire. Pretty girl, recently finished college, not sure what to do with her life. So she becomes a slut, starts sleeping around with some mega rich guys, takes their money when they die, and she doesn't stop until she beds the most powerful man in the world, Fred Willard (Ooops, I mean the president of the United States). Once again, it could have been funny, and though I was happy that Corsaire (Ann Dusenberry in real life) wasn't afraid to bare all, her acting was horrible. What a waste of time.Short Film #3 I can't believe I made it this far. Here's the rookie cop Brent Falcone (Robby Benson) with veteran Stan Nagurski (Richard Widmark). Falcone is young, naive, thinks he can really help people, though he becomes cynical after being shot several thousand times. Nagurski, really, has just given up caring. He watches muggings, assaults, you name it, and never intervenes. He figures the world is lawless and he'll probably get sued if he does anything. Even Christopher Lloyd (at the end of Taxi's run) gets in on the action, getting the police called on him, committing a crime, but having his lawyer there to protect him. God bless America!!Once again, could have been funny, the performances were intentionally campy, but goodness, no energy whatsoever. Henry Jaglom and Bob Giraldi should be ashamed of having their names on this schlock. I think the writing wasn't bad, the ideas were there, but the execution was pulled off as well as the rescue attempt in the Iranian hostage crisis. If I had been a part of this film, I would want my name removed, it's horrible. Then again, that's why I watched it.The only good thing about this garbage is that Dr John did the film score (repeating \"Going to the Movies\" over and over again) and the film isn't much longer than an hour and a half. Show this one in film classes with the heading \"what you should NEVER do in film-making.\" This script should have been left on the shelf because yep, it's that bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1537aeaa89da4ee4861be4079c153ec2",
            "input": "I'm a huge fan of war movies, and, as a Vietnam combat vet, have some experience with the technical details. I worked with the bomb guys more than once and have nothing but respect for them. Other vets, and Iraq vets in particular, have summarized the inaccuracies in this movie very well. Poetic license is one thing, but this movie is a complete fantasy, and fails badly because of it. No bomb disposal unit, or any unit, would ever have tolerated this rogue operator for more than 5 minutes. Military units prize conformity and discipline for a reason;it saves lives. The opening scene particularly annoyed me. The guy with the cell phone would have been shot immediately. Yelling, \"Stop dialing\" is not an effective deterrent. It got worse from there. The scenes with the sniper were particularly egregious. As others have noted, your average EOD guy doesn't know jack about being a sniper, and to think any Arab sniper is that good really stretches the imagination. Kidnapping an Arab businessman for some form of personal revenge just wouldn't happen. Somebody might shoot him, but this kind of risk-taking is limited to the movies. I could go on, but, as I said, others have pointed these things out in detail. This is not a good movie, and if it wins any awards at all, it's a further reflection of why \"La La land\" is so named.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e63205028a0c489cacf0cd2b08187553",
            "input": "I have seen Dolemite and also (Avenging) Disco Godfather, two other fine works of the blaxploitation canon from our friend Rudy Ray Moore. But this film, The Human Tornado (aka Dolemite 2) will always hold a special place in my heart. For sheer goofiness, lack of skill in film production, and absolute enthusiasm (frankly a little too much), The Human Tornado cannot be topped.The opening scene sets the tone. Our old pal Dolemite is shacking up with a white woman, when some racist local cops raid the house for no good reason, and wouldn't you know it! The woman in bed with ol' Dole is none other than the sheriff's wife. Her cry when she sees him: \"He made me do it!\" Dolemite's cry: \"&$*@$ are you for real???\" Subtlety was never his strong point.Highlights? The cameo by a very young Ernie Hudson (of Ghostbusters fame), the continuity errors (characters looking one way in one shot, and another in the next, Dolemite's suit changing colors in every single shot of his nightclub act), and Queen Bee's demonic eyes in her first scene.But the real joy here is Rudy Ray Moore himself. Did the man really think he looked cool in this movie? I certainly don't know why, but you have to admire the sheer enthusiasm he has. Whether it be jumping totally naked off a cliff, or barking orders to his gang in rhyme (e.g: Quick! Into the cave! I have a plan to let that mother $*@(%& dig his own grave!) the man commits totally. Certainly he goes overboard, nevermore so than any time he's doing kung fu. The climactic battle is filmed at high speed, but occassionaly slows down to let Rudy pose and grits his teeth. I'm not sure if they wanted it too look like they sped up the film as an effect or if they really wanted us to believe he was that fast. In any event, \"The Matrix\" it is not.Human Tornado, much like the original Dolemite, is an incompetent film of enormous proportions. But at least it's fun, and certainly you have to give credit to these people for the effort. Just not that much. Enjoy with my hearty recommendations.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b2cb046c6984ed8be7598bc1c642204",
            "input": "Bad movie. It´s too complicated for young children and too childish for grown-ups. I just saw it because I´m a Robin Williams fan and I was very disappointed.(",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36d6bed6a4dc4e5c9978d876bb54b026",
            "input": "Goodnight Mister Tom is so beautifully filmed and beautifully realised. It isn't completely faithful to the book, but does it have to be? No, not at all. John Thaw is mesmerising as Tom Oakley. His transformation from gruff to caring was so well realised, making it more believable than Scrooge in Christmas Carol. After Inspector Morse, this is Thaw's finest hour. He was matched earnestly by a young Nick Robinson, who gave a thoroughly convincing portrayal of an evacuee traumatised by the abusive relationship with his mother. The script and music made it worth the buy, and you also see Thaw playing the organ. Amazing! The most moving scene, was Willie finding out about Zak's death, and then Tom telling him about his deceased family who died of scarlatina. Buy this, you'll love it! 10/10 Bethany Cox",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8a8eee93e5c4b60b1f08f73395718ec",
            "input": "It's refreshing to see a movie that you think will end happily just like almost every other American movie, and then be surprised when that doesn't happen. I like a happy ending as much as the next guy, but sometimes it's better to portray things in a more realistic manner, and I thought Brokedown Palace did this very well.The ending, with one friend basically sacrificing herself for the other, thus redeeming her earlier poor behavior which got them into the situation in the first place, was very moving. I almost rather would have done without the last line, which proved that she didn't actually do the deed she confessed to, because that would have made the movie more about the friendship between the two girls, and less about the crime. Whether she did it or not wasn't that important.The story itself bordered on the cliché, but the actresses kept my attention with their excellent performances. Very realistic, very captivating.7 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97dc2d67cc2743609b36727b1ecc20a9",
            "input": "0.5/10. This movie has absolutely nothing good about it. The acting is among the worst I have ever seen, what is really amazing is that EVERYONE is awful, not just a few here and there, everyone. The direction is a joke, the low budget is hopelessly evident, the score is awful, I wouldn't say the movie was edited, brutally chopped would be a more appropriate phrase. It combines serial killings, voodoo and tarot cards. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. It is not scary at all, the special effects are hopelessly lame. laughably bad throughout. The writing was appallingly bad. The cinematography is real cheap looking, and very grainy sometimes, and the camera-work is dreadful. Again, what really does the movie in is how badly all the actors are. Cheesy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6ad85e534c349b98e070b3249f3cfb7",
            "input": "What a wonderful, fanciful movie \"Stardust\" is.I could easily end it with that one statement and suffice to say, one could take it as a very strong recommendation to go see it.At a time when Hollywood seems bent on forcing remakes and sequels down our throats, \"Stardust\" makes us remember why we go to the movies in the first place - to escape reality for a couple of hours and explore other lives, other times, or other planets. Ironically, \"Stardust\" takes us to all three places effortlessly and with a childlike glee we all long for.\"Stardust\" is full of all the characters we remember as children: princes, witches, pirates, ghosts and scoundrels. It has the damsel in distress, the hero, the rogues, the obstacles, spells, antidotes, charms, and even a touch of light-speed to make it quasi modern.\"Stardust\" is about a man from the town of Wall, which is conveniently situated next to a wall that separates their town from a magical kingdom. The only way past the wall is through a breech that is diligently guarded by a scruffy old codger (played wonderfully by David Kelly). One day a young man from Wall named Ben Barnes out maneuvers the old guard and escapes through the breech. He happens upon an enchanted kingdom called Stormhold where he meets a chained (and very sexy) young lady named Una. She is held captive by a witch and leashed by an unbreakable chain. While the witch is away, Una seduces Ben and sends him on his way. Ben returns to Wall without incident and continues his life. But nine months later he is summoned to the wall breech where the old guard hands him what you might expect - a baby boy.The boy, named Tristan grows up to be a rather hapless young man (Charlie Cox) who is smitten with a girl way out of his league and also betrothed to another. Nevertheless, the young lady (named Victoria and played Sienna Miller) goes out once with Tristain and he confesses his love to her. After they espy a falling star, she tells him he can have her if he retrieves the star and brings it back to her. He agrees and sets out on his quest, which will take him to the other side of the wall.Meanwhile in the kingdom of Stormhold, the old king (perfectly played by Peter O'Toole) is dying. He calls his remaining living sons to tell them who shall succeed him to the throne. His sons' names are Primus, Secondus, Sextmus, and Septimus. The other sons where killed by the other brothers in a humorous competition to see who lives to get the throne.Anyway, he tosses his ruby charm to the sky and Voila, that what brings the star to earth.The star crashes in the form of a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Clare Danes) and she, of course, is wearing the charm. But little does she know she is now being persuaded by Tristain, the Princes, and also an aging witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wants to cut out the stars heart to regain her own youth.Complicated? Yes. But it all comes together as the adventure unfolds.Tristain is the first to find Yvaine but is so blinded by his devotion to Victoria he doesn't recognize the growing bond between he and Yvaine. His initial interest lie only in returning Yvaine to Victoria as proof of his love. But he must get past the princes and Lamia first. The princes aren't that big an issue as they are constantly trying to kill each other - and just as in \"Pirates of the Caribbean\" - never has death been so funny. But Tristain also encounters the witch who enslaved his mother (though he doesn't know it's his mother) and a band of flying pirates led by Robert DeNiro.His is the most important character in the movie and DeNiro plays it to a tee. He steals the movie with his toughness and soon we learn an undercover secret that will leave audiences on the floor with laughter. Though his role is small in length, DeNiro is extraordinary!Michelle Pfeiffer is wonderful as Lamia - a sexy evil witch. Claire Danes is most appropriate as the confused and distressed Yvaine. She makes a perfect damsel. Jason Flemyng, Adam Buston, Rupert Everett, and Mark Strong add the perfect dose of levity as the fighting princes whom, as they die return as ghosts ala \"Blithe Spirit\" and \"High Spirits\".Moreover director Matthew Vaughn, whose only other directing experience was \"Layer Cake\", weaves an enchanting tale that everyone will enjoy.\"Stardust\" may be too complex for young children, but anyone over the age of 13 will want to see this movie multiple times. It's that good. \"Stardust\" is what movies are supposed to be. Perfectly written, perfectly cast, perfectly directed, and perfectly acted. In other words...perfect.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8ded0fda35b4e2e8551a9047217f148",
            "input": "Being that this movie has a lot of fine entertainment qualities I think it should some more credit than it has been given on imdb.It's your basic 'who done it?' thriller with sex and murder but it keeps you guessing right to the end. I like these kinds of movies and I certainly think this one meets the standard.To me it was worth watching more than once so I'll give it an 8 on imdb.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0df60cfd8af442793aa312a650b3ea8",
            "input": "Still being of school age, and having to learn Shakespeare almost constantly for the last four years (which is very off-putting of any writer, no matter how good), I didn't really expect to enjoy this film when my English teacher put it on; I thought it'd be the typical English lesson movie: bad acting, awfully shot, badly edited and the dreaded awful old dialog, so, as you can tell, I was all but ready to go into a coma from the go. However, I watched and, much to my disturbance, found myself not only paying attention, but actually enjoying the movie too. This production of Hamlet is possibly one of the best drama movies I have seen in a long time- and it really brings to life what I expect Shakespeare wanted his plays to be like (well, with the difference that this is cinema) much better than my English teacher harking over the text ever possibly could. The story is good, the dialog seems to flow with an unexpected grace that is far from boring (though a little hard to keep up with if you aren't used to Shakespeare's language) and even the smallest parts are performed with a skill you wouldn't expect; mainly, perhaps, due to the staggering number of cameos this movie has. Brian Blessed and Charlton Heston are as great as you'd expect these two veterans to be, even in such small parts, but it is Robin Williams as Osric and Billy Crystal as the Gravedigger who really stand out, giving such minor parts an unexpected zest, as well as offering some comic relief amidst the tragedy.The main stars, of course, are also wonderful. Kenneth Branagh excels as Hamlet, bringing not only the confusion and pain required to the roll, but also a sort of sardonic air which plays beautifully in the comic scenes, making the movie as a whole much more watchable. The other major players are also good, but it is Kenneth Branagh who stands head and shoulders above the rest in the title role.The set pieces, too, are often quite stunning, giving a refreshing change to the danky old castle corridors we're used to seeing in Shakespeare productions, as well as a real sense of the country around them.Of course, the movie, taken as a movie in its own right, is not without faults, but no major ones (the pacing is the only real problem I can think of offhand, as well as the prose for anyone not used to, as I said, Shakesperean language) and, especially when compared to the sort of Shakespeare productions I'm used to seeing in class, it really is quite brilliant. It's even made me rethink my previous typical teenager stance on Shakespeare, that his plays are boring (I came to the conclusion it's not the plays that are boring, merely the teachers who recite them in class). If only they made all of his plays into movies such as this one, English students in schools everywhere might have a higher opinion of the Bard.Overall 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89db3caf53e449a19aabbc3f9c262a58",
            "input": "Ah, the sex-and-gore movie. It's too bad they don't make these anymore (unless you live in Japan). But if they all turned out like this, that is not a bad thing.The movie basically consists of the two lovely vampires picking up \"johns\" along a country road, taking them home to their castle, having crazy sex with them, and then eating them (except the first victim, who they keep around for no particular reason). Things are complicated when a woman camping with her husband becomes too curious about these mysterious women she keeps seeing. It gets real ugly from here. By the end, the two vamps are in such a bloodlust that they're eating everything in sight, and manage to let their captive victim escape. Oops, so much for that secret existence.The fact that the two vampyres don't mind taking their clothes off and fooling around with each other is the only thing this movie has going for it. Otherwise, it's a bloody, confusing mess (why is their tomb so far away from their castle?), watchable only for the scant few minutes of vampyre playtime. The only thing I got out of this movie was these two valuable bits of advice: shooting lesbians will not kill them; it will only turn them into vampires, and, don't pick up hookers along a country road; they are probably vampires. Other than that, it really wasn't worth my time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be0401498c7d4a6b9589465da5c0111f",
            "input": "This could have been a rather entertaining film, but instead it ranks with other duds like Leeches and Rest In Pieces at the bottom of the cinematic food chain. Had they played this flick tongue-in-cheek, it could have been a very entertaining film, like Re-Animator or Dead ALive, but Juan Piquor Simon plays it tongue-in-cheek in spots but straight more often.The premise of this film is a small community that is besieged by mutated slugs. There is an abandoned toxic waste dump near a sewer line that mutates the slugs into aggressive, meat-eating monsters - albeit monsters that move slowly and can be squished under your boot. Health Inspector Michael Garfiled and two accomplices are the only people that seem willing to fight the slugs while the sheriff and mayor think they are crazy. The climax is a laugh riot - unintentional at that - which makes you scratch your head as to how stupid (actors and screenwriter) the scenario of destroying the slugs is.STORY: $$ (No new ground charted here. Simon seems to play the gore elements tongue-in-cheek but the dialogue is straight. Had Simon worked with a clever script - one with plenty of one-liners and eccentric characters, this could have been a cult film).VIOLENCE: $$$ (You won't be letdown here. We get plenty of exploding chest cavity scenes as well as a grand head explosion in the middle of a fine Italian restaurant. The blood and guts, that many horror film watchers enjoy, is in full swing here. You also get corpses of people who have been picked clean by the slugs and plenty of slug smashing scenes).ACTING: $ (Wow! Michael Garfield seems to know that this script is a stinker and he delivers his lines with a facial expression that suggests he knows how preposterous this film-making endeavor is. Kim Terry, as his wife, does an adequate job even though she does little beyond the hold-your-face-while-you-scream bit. The \"teenagers\" were all horrible actors - no exceptions. Man, this film could have used Bruce Dern or Jeffrey Combs!) NUDITY: $$ (Two teens get naughty in bed before they get dispatched - in a poorly done scene - by a horde of slugs that crawled into the girl's bedroom. Both male and female nudity here).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f8d61ac8ea04cc8b4310a4f63fe170d",
            "input": "William Wyler was to have directed this adaptation of Moss Hart's hit Broadway play with music/ recruiting poster-vivant, but his own military commitments intervened and it went to a most unlikely helmsman: George Cukor. The \"women's director\" has a sure touch on the many documentary-like sequences of Air Corps training, and he invests it with more unhackneyed humanity than the genre generally allowed, particularly in wartime. Sure, the gee-whiz (and entirely white, save for one unbilled Chinese-American recruit) bunch of newbies are nicer and more wholesome than in real life, and the speechifying about home and Mom and the wife and kid gets pretty thick, but it's efficient propaganda and undeniably stirring. Notable, too, for the all-military male cast, several of whom didn't reemerge for years: Lon McAllister, Edmond O'Brien, Martin Ritt, Red Buttons (in drag, as an Andrews Sister), Peter Lind Hayes, Karl Malden, Kevin McCarthy, Gary Merrill, Lee J. Cobb, and Don Taylor. Also for a very early glimpse of Judy Holliday, who doesn't show up till an hour and a half into the picture but has some good little sequences as O'Brien's worried-sick Brooklyn spouse. Too bad its rights are in a tangle and the only print anyone knows of is 16mm; evidently, after Twentieth Century Fox released it (to considerable success), the rights reverted to the Army, and if there's a good 35mm print out there, it probably lies somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. It's disingenuous and corny in spots, but it also captures the rigors of military training and the terrors of war vividly, and it deserves to be more widely seen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5501eb5947774dceb16ffcaed4a65476",
            "input": "Is this your typical women in chains navy transport love story? Maybe, hell, you know how the formula works by now, pretty woman is introduced in to a picture, someone has to fall in love with her.I think this film does follow some typical story lines, but that doesn't say anything about the content. There are great scenes with Crispen Glover, Dennis Hopper, and Gary Busey, although short. Some things didn't make sense, such as the need to get in to random fights, but it is entertaining to watch, the fights were actually well done.This is definitely a comedy foremost, but it does have a lot of good feel to it. The humor is well balanced, you won't hurt your stomach on this, but you will keep a smile.There is a little bit of steamy action, so not one for the kids.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0d416919ef04de481733e9feb7da54d",
            "input": "I was looking through the movie listings in my area on yahoo and seen a movie that had not been advertised. I looked closer and noticed that Peter Falk and Paul Reiser were in it. Having watched \"Mad about you\", once, I was not a fan of Paul Reiser. However, I am a big fan of Peter Falk. So the spouse and I took a chance. We were both swept into this story. The beautiful scenery, the heartfelt acting and the sense of family and moral values that are seldom seen in movies and the world today. Not that sappy emoted junk, but real life situations from real life-like people. I even have to say, Paul Reiser was excellent, although, I still won't watch \"Mad about you\". I don't know where this movie has gone. I heard it was put out in limited release. It should be shared with the world. It is one of the finest movies I have seen. M.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-faf782330e484c03b3363856581b6476",
            "input": "The first part of Grease with John Travolta and Olivia Newton John is one of the best movie for teens, This one is a very bad copy. The change is only in the sex. In the first one the good one was Sandy, here it's Michael. I prefer to watch the first Grease.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5be207d7172d4a7cb801f3b2e58d63ba",
            "input": "While browsing the internet for previous sale prices, I ran across these comments. Why are they all so serious? It's just a movie and it's not pornographic. I acquired this short film from my parents 30 years ago and have always been totally delighted with it. I've shown it to many of my friends & they all loved it too. I feel privileged to own this original 1932 8mm black and white silent film of Shirley before she became popular or well known. After reading the other comments, I agree that the film is \"racy\". Big deal! I only wish it was longer. It seems that I must be the only person who owns one of these originals, for sale at least, so I wonder how much it's worth?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6daea7c29f9c421fab91e30e5cab978f",
            "input": "THIS IS NOT A CHILDREN'S MOVIE!!!This movie is like a \"bad acid trip\" for kids under the age of 5. For a month my 4 year old from time-to-time would ask me \"Why was that rabbit bleeding from its mouth\" or \"Why did the bulldozer bury all the rabbits?\". (And that wasn't the worst of it). We stopped it about a 1/2 hour in but the damage had been done. Intensely morbid, oppressive, violent. Fortunately he's finally forgotten about the whole wretched thing. Whomever decided this movie should be marketed to children should be brought up on charges. ... (Go ahead censure me, my conscience is clear.).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0670235cfe1940b3a53d2f205c9f958d",
            "input": "I remember watching American Gothic when it first aired, it came into my mind recently, all I could remember was the same guy appeared in Midnight Caller, which is Gary Cole, I don't watch much TV, but I watched American Gothic, I purchased the Complete Series on DVD this week,& it's still as good as ever, This is one of the best TV series ever, the reason I don't watch much TV is because it's just rubbish that's on, except for Derren Brown, it's all Reality TV or Soaps, such as Grease, Big Brother etc, i'm fed up with it, I got the Complete Series of American Gothic for £16.97 form the Asda website, that's the cheapest I can find it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2125b7971d9941efb633998f0a24329f",
            "input": "Here's why the Jane Show won't work. Once again Canadian bonehead producers and writers can't create a sitcom without putting some kind of different spin on it. I guess these people don't watch a lot of T.V. from the U.S. which has the sitcom model down pat. No, here we have to do something different, we have to make the A story absolutely absurd and then have a meaningful B story to try to make up for it. The characters are two dimensional and the story lines are way over the top: Forklift races??? give me freaking break. Here's a little advice for the writers of the show, Don't write funny situations, find the funny in situations. And remember, you have to be born with a sense of humor to write truly funny stuff, not just be an improv monkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-003847e2f29540b1bf1703e7de002dcd",
            "input": "Some 25 year olds behave like teenagers, coping with the death of a high-school mate, trying to find their purpose in live and love. The script is so lame that I had to force myself to even finish this movie. Stay away from it. 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce597c59e31b4ba8be5bad9c8f603f41",
            "input": "This is why i so love this website ! I saw this film in the 1980's on British television. Over the years it is one i have wished i knew more about as it has stayed with me as one of the single most extraordinary things i have ever seen in my life. With barely a few key words to remember it by, i traced the film here, and much information, including the fact it's about to become an off-Broadway musical !Interestingly, unlike the previous comment maker, i do not remember finding this film sad, or exploitative. On the contrary, the extraordinary relationship between the mother and daughter stuck in the mind as a testimony of great strength, honour and dignity. Ironic you may think, considering the squalor of their lives. Maybe it's because i live in Britain, where fading grandeur has an established language in the lives of old money, where squalor is often tolerated as evidence of good breeding; I saw it as a rare and unique portrayal of enormous spirit, deep and profound humour, whose utterly fragile and delicately balanced fabric gave it poise and respect. In a way i was sorry to see it being discussed as a 'cult'. Over the years, as it faded in my mind, it shone the brightest, above all others as a one off brilliant & outstanding televisual experience. It was such a deeply private expose, it seems odd to think of it becoming so public as to be a New York musical. But perhaps somewhere, the daughter will be amused by such an outcome. It is she who will have the last laugh maybe..(They made a musical out of her before you Jackie O' )",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b97ea32ca6649ce94638647210b6f38",
            "input": "This movie is just like every other dutch movie, so if you enjoy movies such as turks fruit and de kleine blonde dood. then you might be okay with this one (even though those two have much better stories and actors) Zomerhitte starts strong enough, but even that one good scene ends up having nothing to do with the storyline. There's a lot of nudity (but me and others just could not find that girl attractive), the dialog is laughable (as we did a lot to the annoyance of other movie watchers), and some of the scenes are so completely random that this is more of an unintentional comedy than anything else (like a random scene in which an owl rips somebody's eye out...it has nothing to do with anything and is only referenced once later in a sentence saying \"did you hear what happened...I was there\"). the only reason I gave it a 2 is because some of the places they are at look nice...that's it. And the reason I saw it was because we went to the sneak preview (here in Holland we have a strange system regarding sneak previews, you pay less money then for a regular movie and you don't know what movie it is that you will be watching. All you know is that it's a new movie that's not yet in the theaters). My advice is to stay far away from this film, if you really want to see a good dutch movie watch temmink or zwartboek.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b997deb70c64112a2b304f64b01871d",
            "input": "American playwright Howard W. Campbell, Jr. (played with a musty obsolescence by Nick Nolte) lives happily in Germany with his actress wife, Helga Noth (Sheryl Lee) before the beginning of World War II. At the peak of his life, Howard is drafted by an American agent (John Goodman) to become a spy on behalf of the Allies; forewarned of the risks the job holds, Howard has everything to lose, but finds the offer irresistible. Following the death of his wife and the end of the war, Campbell camouflages himself with the anonymity of a solitary life in New York City, which muddies his neuroses even further. The central question (indeed, a question that has frustrated many critics) of the movie and Kurt Vonnegut's source novel is, \"is Campbell a hero or a traitor?\" Director Keith Gordon and screenwriter Robert B. Weide offer us clues, but no answer, and this ambiguity–this NOT knowing–is what keeps \"Mother Night\" fresh and interesting throughout. At the beginning of the film, Nolte portrays Campbell as intelligent and confident; by the end, he's either scared and uncertain, or scared and COMPLETELY certain of his contribution/debt to humanity for the role he played in the war. Gordon applies a certain icy sheen to the images of the film's first half, which complement his portrait of the Nazi bourgeoisie and captures Vonnegut's dramatic side. On the flip side, when Campbell is confined to his lonely New York apartment (which he affectionately calls \"purgatory\") only to be discovered by a group of Nazis, the humor produced also is purely distinctive of the author, and provides a temporary respite from the dramatic tension that unfolds. The moral (even spiritual) paradox \"Mother Night\" presents doesn't lend itself to simple resolution, and to a degree, should be left ambiguous–the black-and-white scenes of Campbell staring wearily into space as he is imprisoned in Israel suggest an unspoken contemplation we are not made privy to–as Campbell is a character whose inner workings we wind up knowing very little about; the war changes him, coming back to America changes him, and meeting up with the Nazis in New York compels him to prolong the facade of his \"act\" even further, to the point where he can only stare wearily at an image of himself projected on a wall, spewing anti-Semitic bile. Perhaps that's the best reaction we could hope for.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1a081749db6489eac685a2f7abc4173",
            "input": "The master of movie spectacle Cecil B. De Mille goes West. Using three legends of the old west as its protagonists (they probably never met),Gary Cooper is portraying Wild Bill Hickock,James Ellison as Buffalo Bill and Jean Arthur does make a nice Calamity Jane. The story serves only for De Mille to hang some marvelous action sequences on, like the big Indian attack.Scenes like that are extremely well done.If you don't mind the somewhat over-the-top performances of the cast this is an very entertaining western.Look out for a very young Anthony Quinn essaying the role of an Indian brave who participated at the battle of Little Big Horn.This part got him at least noticed in Hollywood.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b5e6fe3d6a0452f912d93063d3b9131",
            "input": "In my opinion, October Sky is one of the best movies of 1999...It totally has everything an emotional drama movie would need, like, wonderful story and good character interactions. October Sky will remain in heart for as long as I can remember, and I just have to say a very special thanks to those who have created this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aef6e45ceacd4b59b3d2e6c82ba71f0f",
            "input": "This is absurd - aside from the fellow Australian who has reviewed this flick, I can't help but think that everyone else who has submitted a review so far was some way involved in the production of Elektra, considering how generous they were with their praise.Admittedly I'm not really a fan of comic-book-to-movie conversions so I didn't go in with many expectations, yet still I found Elektra to be incredibly underwhelming. The thing that irked me the most was the fact that there was SO MUCH in this film which went by unexplained, that left you thinking \"huh, what relevance does that have to the plot?\" or \"so how did that aspect of the character come about?\" I can only hope that these are things which are perhaps explained somewhat in Daredevil, which I have no intention of seeing.Furthermore, the behaviour of the characters in this film appear to do an about-face at random moments to suit the storyline, and don't even get me started about the utterly pointless romantic sub-plot. I'm also (still) scratching my head over the fate of Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa's character, which seems to have gone by unexplained.If I can give kudos to this movie for anything it would have to be the fantastic locations in which it was shot, but otherwise I gained little enjoyment from Elektra. I know we're supposed to suspend our disbelief for fantasy/action films, but almost everything in this film was so improbable or confusing (even by action film standards) that it simply frustrated me.Well, hell, at least Jennifer Garner looks damn good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5332046d7e94e288275fbcedaf06e9a",
            "input": "My teacher taped this and showed it to us in Child Care to demonstrate how teen pregnancy affects people. It just demonstrated how teen pregnancy affects a childish jock not properly educated on how sex works and a whiny, unloved girl who throws fruit when angry and couldn't tell she was with the wrong man even if he wore a sign stating he was such. I wouldn't be surprised if the father of the baby had about eight girlfriends in the first edition of the script. Stacy's (the carrier of the baby) mother is a riot. She is oblivious to the fact her daughter is past the age of four and is seemingly unshaken when people spy on her through her dining room window. Bobby's (the father) best friend's name is Dewey, and is an obvious rip off of Sean Penn's character in Fast Times at Ridgemont High. This movie is horrid, simply because none of the characters are believable. Thank goodness it's only made for TV, limiting the public's chances of viewing it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d155500dbd4743058d3cbf5288f58b3e",
            "input": "The people who are praising this film are the real disappointments -- I am hoping at least that Leonard will see some good $$ out of this, as his life savings were embezzled away by a manager a couple of years ago and he's over 70 now. But this film is simply terrible. At the beginning Leonard himself says he is not sentimental about his past, and then for the next hour and a half the film emphasizes all the worst sentimental elements of Leonard's songs. It is so bloody PRECIOUS with its endless close-ups of over emoting singers. Cohen's interview is all done in lo-fi video closeups and I so wanted to see a medium or a long shot of his whole body! I couldn't care less about the comments of the performers, especially those overblown ego boys Edge and Bono. None of the performers in this film have done even one song as good as Leonard's own music and if you are thinking about seeing this and you have any doubts at all, heed them. This would be an acceptable PBS special, maybe, for a one time showing. But I will even hesitate at getting a DVD of this. When the film finally shows Leonard semi-performing \"Tower of Song\" it's ruined by Bono taking a verse. Even the occasional good performances (Antony, Rufus' first number, Martha's The Traitor) are spoiled by the context of the rest of this turgid blabla. Forget this one, and go buy Leonard's most recent album if you want to pay tribute to him.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c1808dc896543bcaca2b6e8c7eb0359",
            "input": "Astronaut Steve West (Alex Rebar) and his comrades undertake a space mission that sees them flying through the rings of Saturn. His comrades are killed instantly, but it would seem that they are in fact the lucky ones. Steve returns to Earth a constantly oozing mass of humanoid pulp; as he turns into a savage killer, melting every step of the way, he is tracked by his friend, Dr. Ted Nelson (Burr DeBenning).This is often so uproariously funny - with enough absurd lines and situations to go around - that it's hard for me to believe that the laughs are all unintentional. It seems to me to be kind of a goof on low-budget genre efforts from the '50's and 60's, and as such, it's a marvelously entertaining movie. That sequence with the nurse is simply hilarious. We're even treated to a split screen sequence that doesn't really add anything, but is still a gas to watch.Writer / director William Sachs deserves credit for coming up with this ingenious idea; his ultra-slimy character is a memorable one indeed. I think his pacing is a little off; some scenes (like the one with the elderly couple) go on a little long, but ultimately he delivers solid, schlocky, B-movie goods with a degree of panache. The climax is especially fun.Arlon Obers' music is enjoyably shuddery (yet also amusingly silly during some moments), and Willy Curtis's cinematography creates some really great shots at times. That brings me to Rick Bakers' fantastic and convincing makeup effects, which form a highly respectable centerpiece for the movie, right down to the ultimate final melt.Rebar is under the heavy makeup for almost the entire movie (Sachs also gets my praise for having the movie hit the ground running) and does what he has to do well enough. DeBenning makes for a rather oafish and silly hero, and Ann Sweeney isn't so hot either as his wife, but Myron Healey, Michael Alldredge, and Lisle Wilson are fine in support. It's also worth it to see folk like Cheryl \"Rainbeaux\" Smith (doing an appreciable topless shot), Janus Blythe (of Tobe Hoopers' \"Eaten Alive\" and Wes Cravens' \"The Hills Have Eyes\"), and even director Jonathan Demme in a bit part.This is a highly entertaining midnight movie with enough gore, chills, and laughs to rate it as worth catching for lovers of low-grade sci-fi / horror everywhere.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4564c2906443481082126a9d2155801b",
            "input": "If you're a fan of the late Gram Parsons then this movie is definitely going to divide you! Part comedy, part road movie, but mostly a bad fictionalization of one of rock history's oddest tales.SPOILERS-- Basically the story concerns a well-known roadie named Phil Kaufman (played by Johnny Knoxville) who \"supposedly\" made a pact with cult rock/country/folk music hero Gram Parsons that stated when one of them died first (it didn't matter which one it was) that the other living one was to take the deceased out to the desert, Joshua Tree National Park in California to be exact, and set the body ablaze...so as to free the spirit and become one with the earth, and so on! Sure to keep his word the barely sober Kaufman, with the assistance of a self-hating, pot-headed buddy, jacks the body of the late Parsons -whom had fatally overdosed from a drug and booze bender a day prior- from the airport. And shortly after that what ensues is a cringe-worthy combination of fiction and truth where the late Parsons girlfriend, Kaufman's girlfriend, Parsons stone-faced father, and a gaggle of police officers and other pointless idiotic characters all try to beat the clock (so to speak) in trying to catch Kaufman and his pal before they get the chance to torch Parsons body! The film's incompetent direction, bad acting, and lame offbeat tone in general all sink this movie faster than the Titanic. And not to mention the huge fact that this movie is not even halfway telling the truth of the actual events that took place. The accuracies that should have replaced the inaccuracies, as far as I've heard them, include: number 1., Parsons was married at the time of his death and even had a child, so what the hell was that all about with the girlfriend's and the chasing and whatnot?, number 2., Kaufman's drugged-out buddy was a known willing participant (unlike what the movie attempts to portray) in the disposing of Parson's body, and finally number 3., Gram Parsons real-life father died when he was just a boy, and so it was Parson's step-father (who could have honestly cared less about Gram Parsons when he was still alive) in real-life that took care of the body after it was torched! Altogether though, what probably disturbs me the most about this movie is that the real Phil Kaufman was actually on set to help assist with the facts of the story. And yet still, the movie ended up becoming so untrue and so bad that it really boggles my mind, frankly! Also as the mediocre aforementioned acting in the film is concerned it's lead character, played by the ultra-grating Johnny Knoxville (Phil Kaufman), is not only a bad actor but it actually seems as if he were asleep throughout most of the movie, and the rest of the pathetic cast are for the most part either hysterical, brain-dead, or seem utterly clueless as to what they're actually doing there in the first place! Overall, if you like Johnny Knoxville and or really dig the so-bad-they're-not-even-good buddy flicks then I suppose you just might get a kick out of this movie! But, if you're like me and are a fan of the late Gram Parsons, enjoy films that attempt to tell the truth as much as they can especially if they're based on an actual real-life story, and or you just like good films, be-them road movies, or fictional slice-of-life stuff, you will truly loathe this film and advise others to do likewise. I obviously hated this movie and wished it had never been made in the first place, but since it was made I would have preferred it to have turned out differently than what it did, unfortunately! Maybe some day the real facts of the story will come through and be made into a really great biopic on all of Gram Parsons life...not just what happened to his body after his spirit left it. But, until that time comes all we as an audience, and or fans of the late performer get is this sad waste of film and an all-around terrible memorial (of sorts) to the musical legacy that Gram Parsons was known to have left behind. It should also be noted that they did actually use Parsons music, and a few others as well in the flick, but not surprisingly though, you never get to hear enough of it to really enjoy it even in the slightest bit. (Turkey-Zero Stars)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-908a5e49b7744edba50db770a3504c28",
            "input": "The special effects of this movie are, especially for its time, laughable and used in such an over-emphasized way that you can't deny their terrible existance.The acting redefines the term \"terrible overacting\" at the hands of Meg Foster and Richard Joseph Paul, where julie Newman and Andrew Divoff just redefine \"bad\".***spoilers***The charm in this movie can be found in two things: First is the excellent casting of Carel \"Lurch\" Struycken as the mysterious psychic Gaunt, who can sense where and when people will die and is always there.The second are original finds, the combination SF-Western is obviously original, if terrible, but other finds are more original, like the gunman Zack Stone being able to sense the pain of the people he shoots (though his acting falls short here).Overal...don't see this movie, except if you love that ol' hunk-o-brutal Carel Struycken, as any self-respecting Dutchman should.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af420f7be8e14c6fac6944e275b04c09",
            "input": "It is considered fashion to highlight every social evil as a result of patriarchy and male dominance, however moronic this illogical 'logic' may be. However within the story and theme of the film, there is no grey area and the woman who should be called the film's antagonist, is the ''villain of the story''. Under no circumstances can what she did be justified. Sexuality of women is just hype in this case and has nothing to do with the actuality. It is betrayal of the ultimate sort. The man ended up spending his resources and time in the wasteful raising of another man's offspring. To top it all, the most feeble of arguments raised by the 3 'liberated' female characters in the climax is pathetic. A woman's sexual needs are no excuse for her to commit adultery and continually betray her husband and worse, there are no other children. So in essence his life has been wasted. In some societies where justice still prevails, such situations result in the execution of the unjust.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e69f817d0d84728af934055fd57a6b9",
            "input": "I absolutely LOVE this movie and would really like to have it someday. It's just a fascinating legend about an eagle who wears a Turquoise necklace, I loved it and would like to see it again! I don't remember too much about it, but that a Native American boy lives in a nice village with his family, and I don't remember what happens, but he is supposed to go out to the wilderness alone. His sister packs him some food and he goes. While he's out there, some other Indian boys come running out and put some feathers on him, and he turns into an eagle. The legend says that if you ever see an eagle wearing a Turquoise necklace, it is the boy. I was always fascinated with legends, particularly Native American legends and I would love to see this released someday to a DVD, PLEASE RELEASE IT, whoever's concerned!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b5949a0b005441eb40f0bcbe6149bc1",
            "input": "An interesting animation about the fate of a giant tiger, a sloth, and a mammoth, who saved a baby, who was close to be killed by a group of tigers during the ice age. The morale of the film shows that good behavior with the others may bring benefits at the end. One of the tigers in the group got an order to finally capture the baby, who was hardly saved by his mother when the tigers attacked her community. The baby was then rescued by the sloth and the mammoth, but the tiger joined them with the objective of finally taken away the baby. They went through very troublesome paths with plenty of danger, and at once the tiger was to fall down and saved by the mammoth. At the end the group of tigers tried to capture the baby but the mammoth helped incredibly by his tiger colleague was able to overcome this attack and to give the baby back to his father and the community to which he belongs.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-800f1d3711094994b941cf81dc1621c5",
            "input": "This absolute trash is based so closely on the Friday the 13th series that is practically a carbon copy, accept for it being an Australian film with people who can't act.Once upon a time a young boy got burnt up accidentally during the filming of a music video at Lake Eildon. Now, a number of years later, the boy is all grown up and taking revenge on anybody who comes to the lake to film a music video. It is cliche-ridden and a waste of time and money, see it only out of curiosity, or if you're an aspiring actor trying to learn how NOT to (not be able to) act. Lead role Alan Dale used to star in the television soap opera Neighbours, but ended up in The X Files - how did THAT happen?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a2d672a4c88a4ff08edcef59830ac4fa",
            "input": "IT IS So Sad. Even though this was shot with film i think it stinks a little bit more than flicks like Blood Lake, There's Nothing Out There & . The music they play in this is the funniest stuff i've ever heard. i like the brother and sister in this movie. They both don't try very hard to sound sarcastic when they're saying stuff like \"My friends are going to be so jealous!\" Hey, whats with the killer only wearing his mask in the beginning? Thats retarded! I practically ignored the second half of this. My favorite part about this movie is the sound effect they use when the killer is using the axe. The same exact sound for every chop!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64b0b4d0ca354a2689f9aae478c01ab0",
            "input": "The film is exceptional in it's gay iconography and extends this beyond the asthetics to the music and cast. Throughout the whole film exists a childlike wonder as seen through the eyes of the main character. Her lighthearted take on the world around us is comical and beautiful. In a way it's a slacker movie for girls. Watch this is you fancy a relaxing entertaining mid-night movie. Buy this if you like diferent takes on the world of media and love combined (?).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e232d6bcd03248389893107a4a258647",
            "input": "As a lifelong fan of Dickens, I have invariably been disappointed by adaptations of his novels.Although his works presented an extremely accurate re-telling of human life at every level in Victorian Britain, throughout them all was a pervasive thread of humour that could be both playful or sarcastic as the narrative dictated. In a way, he was a literary caricaturist and cartoonist. He could be serious and hilarious in the same sentence. He pricked pride, lampooned arrogance, celebrated modesty, and empathised with loneliness and poverty. It may be a cliché, but he was a people's writer.And it is the comedy that is so often missing from his interpretations. At the time of writing, Oliver Twist is being dramatised in serial form on BBC television. All of the misery and cruelty is their, but non of the humour, irony, and savage lampoonery. The result is just a dark, dismal experience: the story penned by a journalist rather than a novelist. It's not really Dickens at all.'Oliver!', on the other hand, is much closer to the mark. The mockery of officialdom is perfectly interpreted, from the blustering beadle to the drunken magistrate. The classic stand-off between the beadle and Mr Brownlow, in which the law is described as 'a ass, a idiot' couldn't have been better done. Harry Secombe is an ideal choice.But the blinding cruelty is also there, the callous indifference of the state, the cold, hunger, poverty and loneliness are all presented just as surely as The Master would have wished.And then there is crime. Ron Moody is a treasure as the sleazy Jewish fence, whilst Oliver Reid has Bill Sykes to perfection.Perhaps not surprisingly, Lionel Bart - himself a Jew from London's east-end - takes a liberty with Fagin by re-interpreting him as a much more benign fellow than was Dicken's original. In the novel, he was utterly ruthless, sending some of his own boys to the gallows in order to protect himself (though he was also caught and hanged). Whereas in the movie, he is presented as something of a wayward father-figure, a sort of charitable thief rather than a corrupter of children, the latter being a long-standing anti-semitic sentiment. Otherwise, very few liberties are taken with Dickens's original. All of the most memorable elements are included. Just enough menace and violence is retained to ensure narrative fidelity whilst at the same time allowing for children' sensibilities. Nancy is still beaten to death, Bullseye narrowly escapes drowning, and Bill Sykes gets a faithfully graphic come-uppance.Every song is excellent, though they do incline towards schmaltz. Mark Lester mimes his wonderfully. Both his and my favourite scene is the one in which the world comes alive to 'who will buy'. It's schmaltzy, but it's Dickens through and through.I could go on. I could commend the wonderful set-pieces, the contrast of the rich and poor. There is top-quality acting from more British regulars than you could shake a stick at.I ought to give it 10 points, but I'm feeling more like Scrooge today. Soak it up with your Christmas dinner. No original has been better realised.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80129c0e36b34da6b63d6b9d333c4a6d",
            "input": "Polish film maker Walerian Borowczyk's La Bête (French, 1975, aka The Beast) is among the most controversial and brave films ever made and a very excellent one too. This film tells everything that's generally been hidden and denied about our nature and our sexual nature in particular with the symbolism and silence of its images. The images may look wild, perverse, \"sick\" or exciting, but they are all in relation with the lastly mentioned. Sex, desire and death are very strong and primary things and dominate all the flesh that has a human soul inside it. They interest and temptate us so powerfully (and by our nature) that they are considered scary, unacceptable and something too wild to be true. A sophisticated young woman travels with her mother to a French countryside to meet her soon-to-become husband whom with she has had a letter affair of some kind. All are very exciting and each others' parents and relatives wait impatiently to see the new people arriving to their families. The innocence of the young bride shines through and no one knows what can happen and wake up inside the walls of the big and beautiful French mansion, with all its humans and animals, and a mysterious \"la bête\" that turns out to be something that the characters, nor most of the film's audience, could have never imagined to be real and (in front of) them.The film is about the same theme as Canadian David Cronenberg's debyt feature Shivers (1975), which happens inside a huge luxury building in which destructive and gory parasites spread from human to human by sexual contact and make people act furiously and violently in their lust for pleasure and fulfilment of instincts. Human has instincts that can be and are stronger than his will and that is why those instincts can be as dangerous and powerful as the instincts of some other animal, a beast, be it a lust for blood, revenge or sex and carnal pleasure. Humans are only animals that have intelligence and tools to convey it but because we are also animals, that intelligence is not always used too much as can be seen anywhere around us. The film opens greatly, and very shockingly for most hypocritic attitudes, showing a horny male horse raging in fury as he waits to get inside the mare and continue the race, but the rage and visible lust we see from his eyes and violent movements are the key elements of that beginning and why it is there, not the close-ups of organs as could be so easily claimed. The horse is a beast that battles in an almost unbearable heat, in heat that's much stronger than his will as he doesn't have any control at that point anymore. The power of the instinct makes an animal a beast.After the memorable beginning, the characters get introduced, and the film fantastically has all the necessary age groups inside it from the little innocent children waiting to grow up and develop to their blossom, to the adults and elders that all represent their own part of the lifespan, creating the face of human life on screen. A film doesn't necessarily need more characters this way as all the important ones are already there and represent the whole race, including the urban and countryside inhabitants, and both sexes. The mansion makes the protagonist girl's sexuality wake as she saws the horses coupling and acting like she obviously has never thought of. For the first time she sees something unique and something that excites and feels almost vital for her and her body, like getting water when you're very thirsty. The transformation of the girl is a very important element in the film as she has lived unaware of these things inside her, with his mother and camera and a letter-boyfriend, even though the things have just waited for the moment to burst out. Flesh desires flesh and that belongs to being a humanimal, but still those things are not so easily admitted everywhere and films like these trying to depict it get banned for decades? Man's stupidity and unwillingness to interpret images must not be an argument for a film being banned or otherwise violated.The film's last 30 minutes are also as important as the beginning, and once again show how powerful cinema is without needless words and talk. As the girl and audience realizes what her body starts to feel and desire, she starts to have dreams about the mysterious beast that turns out to be none other than the undressed form of ourselves, having lived in the woods without other people/beasts near him. The dream sequence is the one that causes and caused most of the controversy alongside the film's overall straight and honest attitude, and the images are so easy to be judged as \"perverse\" and \"pornographic\", without a courage to go deeper into them, character reactions and thoughts behind what we see. The images are exciting in her dream and also eventually inside the dream for the dream's (more) human character, and Borowczyk forces us to admit it with the images that are so close to a \"normal\" sexual act between a man and a female, which is a beautiful thing and expression of love, another human need. Also the numerous, and cleverly blackly humorous love making scenes inside the mansion, between the young mother and the black servant, get interrupted many times as someone screams for the servant, for example, and there's no doubt that the sensual image of two young human bodies being together and being interrupted with an angry shout at least doesn't become any more pleasant by the interruption. Borowczyk has managed to paint his images so beautiful and \"sensitive\" that his message is almost impossible to be misunderstood, but nothing seems to be impossible for our cultures and minds that criticize art. He uses dialogue only when it's necessary, otherwise the images do the job and make the film powerful.Death is also there, as flesh dies sooner or later, after years of life and instincts, it dies. The ending is inevitable but the meaning of the dream sequence could have also been as powerful without the kind of dramatic and \"revealing\" ending too. Another blackly humorous element comes when we see the shocked city women running out of the place in which they saw a little more than they were looking for! They visited the mansion of truth about flesh, us and them. The film reminds me of French writer Georges Bataille's Story of the Eye with its same themes about eroticism, death and how they both are always connected to the nature of our flesh. The book is well written and fantastic as well as this film, and naturally both have been blamed for their \"too explicit\" content and other equally noteworthy shallow comments.Borowczyk's film is also very beautiful visually alongside its raw honesty, and the nature and forest have rarely looked so bright and shining as they do in this film. The sun shines through the trees, and to everyplace where humans live, and the beauty of it is always there, but so is the ugliness that originates by the inhabitants of the world. To every innocent white sheep there's a selfish, evil and horrible beast in our world and that is why the intelligence we have been given never fully seems to overcome the power of our bad instincts and the other side of the sheep, present inside every human soul. It is about how many manages to keep the dark side passive and not active. The fulfilment of some of our instincts is not a bad thing, and by using this intelligence and seeing which of the instincts are good and which bad, they can be satisfied without exploitation, violence and the lethal and destructive circle created by it. Human is not more than an animal with intelligence, intelligence that is so easy to be forgotten and eaten to the background by things that feel better and more satisfying at each and perhaps sudden moment. Borowczyk's film is a masterpiece, unforgettable and clever piece of magical cinema with ageless theme and also an example of how much can be achieved, expressed and given by a film maker, who is also only a human.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adfd4f9a57ca442abb54cd98bc84fb8d",
            "input": "If movies like Ghoulies rip off Gremlins, then Hobgoblins sinks to the new low of ripping off garbage like Ghoulies. These barely-animated furbies have some kind of scheme to fulfill fantasies (which involve basically groteque characters' sex dreams - oh joy), but what that has to do with anything is anybody's guess, except to let the director indulge his kinky penchant for erotica. They show this down in the 8th circle of Hell, one suspects. There's no real plot - just \"goblins - kill!\" and feeble attempts at humor and a mild attempt to arouse the viewing audience.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22838660bb024c5d95520831bca985a9",
            "input": "As a former Kalamazoo resident with a fondness for the town I was looking forward to seeing this movie. But, what a disappointment! Although the acting and the production values aren't bad, the script is awful, the plot is unrealistic, and the theme is disturbing.The main message of this film is that Women are nothing without husbands and children. I can hardly believe how regressive it is in it's view of women. Has the writer been living under a rock? Although I enjoyed seeing my beloved city on the big screen, I wouldn't suggest this movie to anyone. It's terrible. It's an embarrassment to the city it's named after.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26f1530c11a542478d5ce7eef5e06f2e",
            "input": "While a 9 might seem like an unusually high score for such a slight film, however, compared to the hundreds and hundreds of series detective films from the 1930s and 40s, this is among the very best and also compares very favorably to Powell's later \"Thin Man\" films. Now this does NOT mean that the film is that similar to the Thin Man movies, as THE KENNEL MURDER CASE is not a comedy but more a traditional mystery-detective film. Now you'd think that not having Nora Charles or Asta or a traditional comic sidekick (something found in practically all series detective films) along for fun would be a detriment, but I didn't miss them at all because this was such an exceptionally well-written film--having a genuinely interesting case as well as uniformly excellent performances by all.The film begins at the dog show and is called The KENNEL Murder Case, though this Philo Vance film actually spends little of the time at the dog show and dogs are not a super-important part of the film. Instead, a thoroughly hated man is killed and left in a completely sealed room--an idea repeated in quite a few other detective films (such as CRIME DOCTOR'S STRANGEST CASE). However, how all this is explained seems pretty credible and fit together very well--keeping my interest throughout. I sure wish other detective films of the day had as intelligently written plots and exceptional acting as this one. This one is definitely a keeper.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7cb46c6ed9c43dab7d415f851c26625",
            "input": "One would expect a movie with a famous comedian in the lead role, to be a funny movie. This is not the case here. I laughed out loud once throughout the whole movie, and that wasn't even during the final comedy-scene (which one would also expect to be the funniest). This is one you can watch when it comes to TV, don't spend any other money renting it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-133a0cabb12147dcaf39e7818d52f988",
            "input": "`The United States of Kiss My Ass'House of Games is the directional debut from playwright David Mamet and it is an effective and at times surprising psychological thriller. It stars Lindsay Crouse as best-selling psychiatrist, Margaret Ford, who decides to confront the gambler who has driven one of her patients to contemplate suicide. In doing so she leaves the safety and comfort of her somewhat ordinary life behind and travels `downtown' to visit the lowlife place, House of Games.The gambler Mike (played excellently by Joe Mantegna) turns out to be somewhat sharp and shifty. He offers Crouse's character a deal, if she is willing to sit with him at a game, a big money game in the backroom, he'll cancel the patients debts. The card game ensues and soon the psychiatrist and the gambler are seen to be in a familiar line of work (gaining the trust of others) and a fascinating relationship begins. What makes House of Games interesting and an essential view for any film fan is the constant guessing of who is in control, is it the psychiatrist or the con-man or is it the well-known man of great bluffs David Mamet.In House of Games the direction is dull and most of the times flat and uninspiring, however in every David Mamet film it is the story which is central to the whole proceedings, not the direction. In House of Games this shines through in part thanks to the superb performances from the two leads (showy and distracting) but mainly as is the case with much of Mamet's work, it is the dialogue, which grips you and slowly draws you into the film. No one in the House of Games says what they mean and conversations become battlegrounds and war of words. Everyone bluffs and double bluffs, which is reminiscent of a poker games natural order. This is a running theme throughout the film and is used to great effect at the right moments to create vast amounts of tension. House of Games can also be viewed as a `class-war' division movie. With Lindsay Crouse we have the middle-class, well-to-do educated psychiatrist and Joe Mantegna is the complete opposite, the working class of America earning a living by `honest' crime.The film seduces the viewer much like Crouse is seduced by Mantegna and the end result is ultimately a very satisfying piece of American cinema. And the final of the film is definitely something for all to see and watch out for, it's stunning.An extremely enjoyable film experience that is worth repeated viewings. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d9c288ce7ce424eb26a166f9c0e7886",
            "input": "It was hard for me to believe all of the negative comments regarding this all-star flick. I laughed through the entire picture, as did my entire family. The movie clearly defined itself as an old time gangster comedy--the players were hysterical--I'll bet they had a good old time while making it. Of course Goldblum and Dreyfuss were great--and how about those Everly sisters, each of the two Falco's, and the divine music throughout. Rob Reiner made a great laughing limo driver, and Gabriel Byrne a laughable neurotic. Not to mention Gregory Hines, Burt Reynolds, the Sleepy Joe character and the whole mortuary and grave digger references. Paul Anka was his usual entertaining self, with the added attraction of running scared after Byrne decided to make a duet of his \"My Way\" welcome home to Vick performance.I am of the opinion that this movie was a comical tribute to Frank Sinatra and friends; Dreyfuss imitated him well. I am also of the opinion that no one, of any age, would even think of imitating the actions which occurred in this movie--it's a joke--not a terrifying \"gangsta\" film. The cars and clothing were impressive, as was the decorative, \"Vic's Place.\"Truly, I think of \"Mad Dog Time\" as a musical comedy, less harmful than many cartoons, TV crime dramas, and talk shows. I would recommend the video for an evening of family entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d62a88529b2b46199e7b0d89e377fc92",
            "input": "I hated this crap, every Friday as part of tgif it was on, and consistently sucked big time with stupidity each and every week. If you want to see something funny go watch \"No On Would Tell\" Starring Candice Cameron and Fred Savage, it really is hilarious, shows exactly why no one ever goes on to a good film career after doing a terrible TV show. This show really makes me sick, I hate those kids, and bob saget needs to go jump off a bridge for ever making this crapfest. I've seen funner stuff everywhere else but here. I AHet writing 10 lines! Watch 'full house' to see the least humanity has to offer in the way of arts and entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-617c68d5d8c140f6a51b995421dc8fa9",
            "input": "A series of vignettes, most of them spoofing television of the 1970's, but also with some digs at the government and corporate America. One of the longest segments, \"The Dealers\" is not that funny to me and I don't know what it is parodying. Some of the others, though, are absolutely side-splitting. I particularly enjoy the cooking show segment. Most of the foul words I know are used in the movie, and, if you object to full frontal nudity, stay away.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33d6f7eb1c2b450290d757e3e9bab7c3",
            "input": "Walter Pidgeon is Braley Mason, a civil attorney who takes on a criminal case in \"The Unknown Man,\" a 1951 film also starring Ann Harding, Barry Sullivan, Keefe Braselle, and Richard Anderson. A great believer in justice, Pidgeon accepts a pro bono case defending a young man, Rudi Walchek (Braselle) accused of murder and gets him acquitted. Shortly afterward, he realizes that the man is guilty and was extorting protection money from his victim as well as other shopkeepers in the neighborhood. He is advised by the DA (Sullivan) that Rudi is small change, that to wipe out the organized crime, one has to find the top man. Mason finds the top man, and is faced with a dilemma.\"The Unknown Man\" is a small, black and white film that manages to hold the viewer's interest with its various plot twists, though the plot is somewhat contrived. It's really the story of a good man seeking his god, justice, and what he is willing to do in order to attain it. And that's the most contrived part of all. I suppose there was a time before O.J., the Menendez Brothers, etc., etc., when people believed in justice and the integrity of attorneys. For this viewer anyway, those days are long over.Walter Pidgeon does an excellent job -- his handsome, elegant demeanor and declamatory voice show us a successful, confident man but also a deeply caring one. Pidgeon had a magnificent career spanning 60 years but never really rose to superstardom. He was a solid actor who could play just about anything and did. It may be because by the time he was getting leads, he was well into his thirties and missed being a matinée idol; or it could be he lacked that certain something; or that he was typed early on as second lead to a big female star like Greer Garson. Hard to say. He gives an honest and touching performance here.Very good movie with good performances.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e326f4d28c0a4e8c9109da353e787ada",
            "input": "I've just visited Russian forum of our TV-channel that had showed this film. Well... 99 per cent of active Russian audience is disappointed. We wanted to see more true facts of our space achievements in this film. But authors had in mind something else... :( We are big and beautiful country with intelligent people living here. We are proud of all our space dreams, real achievements on the one hand in this field and in science on the other hand. So I'd like to ask authors: Where is our LUNOHOD? And where, the Hell our MIR station? Ah? I'm quite sure, that LUNOHOD events took place much earlier Armstrong's \"walk on Moon\". And to comment numerous technical and science mistakes - I really have no time and enough space here! Se our constructive critics in Russian forum on www.1tv.ru",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf5ed1472617425a9e483b045cb13bad",
            "input": "What an unusual movie.Absolutely no concessions are made to \"Hollywood special effects\" or entertainment. There is no background music, not special effects or enhanced sound.Facial expressions are usually covered by thick beards and the Spanish language is a strange monotonic lilt that sounds the same whether in the midst of a battle or talking around a campfire.I sort of viewed these movies (parts 1 and 2) as an educational experience, not really something to go and get entertained by. Its quite long and in places dull.But I suspect that given the lack of any plot development, I don't think its very educational either.Its also difficult to perceive any story from the movie dialogue - it would be a good idea to read up a little on the history so that you can understand the context of what is happening, since for some reason the director didn't see fit to inform the audience why Che's band was moving around the way they did - as a result there seem to be groups skulking around the woodland for no particular reason and getting shot at.I would have loved to give this movie more stars for somehow generating more empathy with me and developing depth of character, but somehow all of the characters were still strangers to me at the end. The stars it gets are for realism and showing the hardships of guerrilla warfare.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e119af9e9652497bacd49a099305c827",
            "input": "this movie has a great message,a impressive cast, ellen burstyn, samantha mathis, jodelle ferland( was 4 years old when she made this movie) ellen burstyn and jodelle ferland have both been nominated for best actress in a tv drama at the up-coming emmy awards in new york, peter masterson-director- has been nominated best director tv drama at the emmy awards also. april 1, 2001, jodelle ferland 'Won', best actress in a tv drama, at the young artist awards, in studio city, ca. i can see why they have 3 nominations. mermaid is a true story, during the cridits they have the real family on the set, something you don't see often. you can find mermaid at all blockbuster video stores. do watch it,you'll be glad you did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-822710746e804bbebead73a8566622f6",
            "input": "Someone release this movie on DVD so it can take its hallowed place as on of the greatest films of all time in ten to twenty years when critics and film historians look back on the so-called films of the 1990's and see how vapid they were for the most part, and how Lars Von Trier tried to revolutionize and revitalize the international film world with this masterpiece. As it stands, \"Zentropa\" (or \"Europa\" as it is referred to outside the US) is one of the most fascinating and artistic views of the bleakness and almost psychotic uncertainty that oozed out of post WWII Europe, namely the decimated German landscape, whose physical horrors were matched only by the damage to the psyche of its people. Von Trier brilliantly paints his vision on screen. You will feel like you are watching some lost espionage noir classic from the late 1940's with the perfectly lighted black and white scenes, while at the same time feel you are on the brink of something beyond the cutting edge, especially in scenes like the assassination aboard the train. Literally, when you see this movie, you are witnessing the evolution of an art form. For some reason, Von Trier got caught up in his own Dogma movement shortly after this. And while his \"Breaking the Waves\" and \"Dancer in the Dark\" are classics in their own right, it is with \"Zentropa\" that he truly lifted the art of film making to new and exciting heights. 10/10, ages like a fine wine, and begs for a DVD release.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3b9df2346664d2e945b48ce89139ffd",
            "input": "Today, I visited an Athenean Cinema with my two kids (6 & 8 years old), payed 3 x 12 euros (about 45 US $ total) not to mention gas, popcorn & soda, was asked to return my 3d special glasses after leaving the theater and was \"forced\" to watch what could have been a great 3d movie masterpiece but only proved to be a sick \"cold war like\" propaganda movie, like none I have seen during the last 20 years... AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A MOVIE FOR CHILDREN... IN HEAVEN'S NAME! PS 1: The average working Greek makes no more than 850 Euros a month (approxiamtely 1050 US $) PS 2 My kids liked it... but then again they are no more than babies >in Greek: mora, morons > like the one who wrote the script & the others who made this \"3d disgrace\" happen.PS 3 3D animation is fantastic but who gives a ....!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8434491c95d42aebf69ff62c44130cc",
            "input": "I would just like to state that this may be biased, as I am a producer on the film. However, I will maintain some sense of dignity.The star of the film, Oscar Ovies, gives a stellar performance as Jeff Grinderlin, a nebbish hypochondriac who spends more time worrying than living. He brings a certain touch to his character that really allows the audience to connect with him, by stating his mind often and with a sense of harsh comedy. His mother, played by Christine Haber, is the constant support beam, that without, he would crumble upon himself. His friends also lend a hand in Jeff's life, often making choices for him rather than letting him use his free will... which often times he neglects is there anyway. The writing is superb, and the conversations flow like scenes from a Kevin Smith movie, with half as much Ben Affleck boo-hoo fests.The camera work is a little shoddy at some points, and the sound could also use a boost, however the performances out shine the minor details. It is also backed by a beautiful soundtrack with local talents and an exceptional composer.All in all, this was a treat. A rare gem, among many jewels.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6a1e38022764993aebf71fec7af702e",
            "input": "I saw this film in its entirety in the 1960s & 70s, yes it IS gruesome, and could be the progenitor of the \"Faces of Death\" series popular in the 80s & 90s. Considering the state of so-called \"driver education\" these days, this one should be required viewing for everyone preparing to learn to drive. When you see violent death in all its gore & horror, you certainly (if you have any sensibility at all) get a truer perspective on the responsibilities required to drive safely, what one instant of thoughtlessness or inattentiveness at the wheel can do. I worked for Bell Telephone in the 70s & 80s, and at one point was assigned to conduct a safety class. I found this film in the company library, showed it at the session, a number of people got physically sick and had to leave the room! Incredibly, most of them later said \"I never knew a car accident could be so terrible!\" This film, and another, \"RED ASPHALT\", is certainly reality in its most graphic form. I'll never forget it, I only wish I could have found a copy when my children were attending \"driver's ed\" in high school!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a30aabdad21d45c7bf93c7aca662b1ea",
            "input": "I like Chris Rock, but I feel he is wasted in this film. The idea of remaking Heaven Can Wait is fine, but the filmmakers followed the plot of that turkey too closely. When Eddie Murphy remade Dr. Doolittle and The Nutty Professor, he re-did them totally -- so they became Murphy films/vehicles, not just tepid remakes. That's why they were successful. If Chris had done the same, this could have been a much better film. The few laughs that come are when he is doing his standup routine -- so he might as well have done a concert film. It also would have been much funnier if the white man whose body he inhabits was a truck driver or hillbilly. So why does Hollywood keep making junk like this? Because people go to see it -- because they like Chris Rock. So give Chris a decent script and give us better movies! Don't remake films that weren't that good in the first place!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-432bdf89bad44c95b48172c8b874489f",
            "input": "A hard to find film which coasts on the still pervasive mythology of Senator Joe McCarthy as a political demon king. Boyle (as Joe) gives a compelling but historically inaccurate portrayal of the Wisconsin Senator, the caricature McCarthy many take as the real one. Meredith, as wily Army lawyer Joseph Welch, who outsmarted McCarthy at the Army hearings in 1954, is very good, as always.In fact, McCarthy and Cohn were quite right in worrying about the appalling security situation in the Army, and the 1954 Army hearings became enmeshed in the smokescreen used by the Army to deflect the investigation away from their security failings, which the committee were investigating, by counter-charging that McCarthy and Cohn were trying to get favours for their staffer, David Schine, whilst in the service.The film is self satisfied agenda driven polemic, based in the pervasive myths which have passed for the truth with many people for decades-that the \"red scare\" was essentially phony and McCarthy, HUAC etc were always blasting away at the wrong targets, being no more than lying, career ruining publicity hounds, who were trampling over the constitutional rights of startled innocent liberals, who were accused of being security risks/communists.People who know little about the matter still feel confident in repeating misinformation on McCarthy and the \"red scare\" to this day-Clooney's Murrow hagiography is an example. The misinformation is pervasive, no wonder people have swallowed it. A recent obit of Budd Schulberg in the serious left wing UK newspaper \"The Guardian\" headlined that the Hollywood writer \"named names\" \"to McCarthy\"- perpetuating the lie that McCarthy \"investigated\" Hollywood as head of HUAC-the truth being that McCarthy was never even a member of HUAC and he had little interest in the politics of Hollywood types-his investigations were confined almost exclusively to arms of the US government.The mythology about the \"red scare\" being baseless is now completely exploded by recently opened Soviet and US government documents, if anything McCarthy and co underestimated the sheer scale of Soviet and fellow traveller infiltration in the US, but decades of public misinformation about this period will be hard to correct.One day maybe some really brave Hollywood soul will make a movie telling the truth about how many American men and women clandestinely aided the mass murderer Stalin, and worked to impose his vicious system of government on the western world, giving an accurate account maybe of Joe McCarthy's career-but I won't hold my breath. Till then, we have this mythical, drunken lying scoundrel of popular imagination so familiar in the media....\"Tail gunner Joe\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-009161c4c5aa40c3afd6fa2b5fa93658",
            "input": "How can you resist watching a film with some swing? It's a delightful little film full of wonderful actors and a wonderful story line. Too bad they don't tour out here...I'd go see them. See it if for no other reason than to hear some good music.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ded15afe1310492e8aa821ce321b3722",
            "input": "Being born in the 1960's I grew up watching the TV \"Movies of the Week\" in the early 70's and loved the creepy movies that were routinely shown including \"Crowhaven Farm\", \"Bad Ronald\", \"Satan's School for Girls\", \"Kolchak the Night Stalker\", etc, but this one is just plain dumb.This is obviously the writer's trying to capitalize on the horrific Manson murders from a few years earlier. The movie stars Dennis Weaver of \"McCloud\" and \"Duel\" fame as a father who takes his family camping on a beach. The family encounters some hippies who for some reason decide to terrorize the family. The reason for this is never explained, and Weaver's pacifistic stance is hard to swallow. For God's sake, call the police, beat the hell of them or something, just don't sit there and whine about it. The acting is pretty lame, the story unbelievable, etc. Susan Dey looks cute in a bikini but that's about it. Ignore this if it ever airs on TV.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29472ef0ca77471f87f687f72f5279e5",
            "input": "I went into a Video Store and looked around to find some Horror Movies, after about 30 minutes I just rushed and picked out a few. I stumbled upon \"Masters of Horror\" which contained \"Pro-Life\" and \"Right to Die\". They seemed OK, same-old cheesy Horror crap, but I was interested for some reason. It said about Pro-Life on the case about being a classic, a return to form for John Carpenter (I loved his \"The Thing\", so I thought this would be good) and all that. So I turned it on thinking it would be something great and interesting, I was very wrong... It started off casual, just a girl running through a Forest, scared of something. A car stops and picks her up (just so being the people she needed to see, amazing?) They take her back to some Clinic and examine her, at the sametime all this is happening her Father appears at the gates and they don't allow him in, he isn't aloud near the area. Most likely from something he would of done in the past, but you don't know of any of this at the moment. He really does not want his Daughter in this place, an Abortion center. He is very strongly against such acts, believing it's sickening and not what \"God\" would want. He \"supports\" what I heard is called \"Pro-Life\". Acting against Abortions and going to extremes to allow the Babies to be born, they are sick. They don't like the Life of an unborn being taken, yet they've killed Humans in the past to allow the Birth? Justice is only a figment of the mind. Anyway, back on track, after the girl is examined they find out shes pregnant, but far ahead than what she should be. She is only a few weeks pregnant, but is months ahead. She keeps telling them they wont understand her, and that she wants an Abortion and all, but finally tells the truth that she was raped by a Demon from Hell, and that her Father wants this baby (but believes \"God\" wants this baby, not who truly does). He gets his 3 Sons (they arm themselves with Pistols and Shotguns), and begin to make they're way into the Clinic (shooting down anyone who won't co-operate). The head of the Clinic, who must of had trouble with them in the past, is well prepared this time. Ends up killing one the Fathers Sons, but in the end gets shot a few times (wearing a bullet proof jacket). The Father then performs what he believes is done to the Women. He cuts a hole, where the Vagina would be if he we're a Female, and sticks some sort of sucking thing up there and sucks out all this blood. Whilst all this is happening, the girl gives birth to some Demonic baby with many legs, and some Demon raises from beneath the Earth (not in the same room) and starts looking for its child. The Father sees this later on, and starts questioning why this happened, he did what he was told to do, and doesn't understand why it's like this. The Demon had killed both of his Sons earlier, and now goes for Father... Whilst the girl kills the baby, and the Demon carries it away (not in the same scene).Yeah, it probably sounds pretty cool, and a thrilling Horror Movie, but it isn't. The acting is horrible and lacks enthusiasm, the script is boring and not even creative, they choose the wrong characters and don't even build on them; just everything put together, all the small parts, don't even add up to something great, a waste of time. I wouldn't classify this as a Horror, though it has elements of Horror, they ultimately fail at what they try to succeed. It felt more like a \"Beginners\" Short-Movie, than by John Carpenter.Sorry for my lack of information, and detailed review, I just didn't have the time to waste to write something exciting. Also sorry if my spelling and details are incorrect, I couldn't really be bothered to research anything.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50412ea404784a66bbe182880d099b17",
            "input": "The movie is actually too slow. There are some nice images but it cannot outweigh the fact that the movie is in fact boring. You see a sexual intercourse a lot of watermelons and a sexual intercourse while eating a melon and maybe a little bit more. It may sound even interesting to someone but believe me to watch it for 2 hours isn't fun at all. Though you laugh several times but it's really not enough and it may be more out of despair and disbelieve than out of fun. To disturb the boredom director tries to put few movie video-clips into the movie. They are really colorful clips of absurd songs maybe from the 50's but it's hard to say exactly and they are trying to be funny so hard that it's really sad. Several times you have a feeling that the plot could evolve into something, that a powerful scene is being created but at the end it just somehow evaporates and that's it. Beside the clips there are hardly any dialogs let alone music. The director is trying to be original and artistic at all cost. Personally I cannot recommend the movie. I believe that art is something that shouldn't be boring. During the projection there was yawning all around the cinema which just corroborates my short review.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08b91b202f8e4bd9a533a78ca7ef16c7",
            "input": "this movie is, despite its \"independent\" status, a stupid hollywood version of a nauseating mother-daughter relationship. it wasnt that bad at first, but somewhere during the course of the movie--around the time that the daughter goes out with that guy, i think--it turns into a cheesey mother-daughter bonding movie. im sorry, but i dont know of any mothers who have that kind of relationship with their daughter...its probably better that way, though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a3c7d6e18544e8b9fb9b8d062118288",
            "input": "The third Fred MacMurray/Carole Lombard film is a bit more serious than Hands Across the Table and The Princess Comes Across. It's yet another adaption of the play Burlesque which apparently was popular back in the day.The original play Burlesque ran on Broadway in the 1927-1928 season for 372 performances and it's the role that Carole Lombard plays that Barbara Stanwyck originated on Broadway that brought her to Hollywood. A version starred Nancy Carroll in the early days of talkies and later on Betty Grable and Dan Dailey did still another version of it in When My Baby Smiles At Me.In fact I have a vinyl album of a radio version that Al Jolson and Ruby Keeler did for the Lux Radio Theater. That's an interesting work, believe me.Anyway MacMurray and Lombard do fine by the old chestnut, the story is now set in a nightclub where Lombard is a singer and MacMurray is a jazz trumpeter. Note a nice performance by Dorothy Lamour as the Latin vixen who gets between Fred and Carole. Also Anthony Quinn is in one of his earliest films as a wolf on the make for Lombard.Swing High, Swing Low holds up real nice today and I wouldn't be surprised if we see yet another version of Burlesque for the Twenty First Century.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b8dd13aab074f90b27a526d18dd8ee1",
            "input": "How can anyone not love this movie ? I think it's a hilarious spoof of all the old gangster movies; if you've never seen them, watch this instead. Michael Keaton has a ball in this role as anything goes. One guy mangles the English language everytime he talks and Griffin Dunn plays a clueless D.A., but my favorite role has got to be Joe Piscopo. He has all the best lines. Danny DeVito, Alan Hale, Ray Walston are in this star-studded movie that lampoons gangsters a lot funnier than \"Mafia\" did for the criminal underground.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee8d8946ef484fab8d28b213229222a0",
            "input": "I saw this film a while back and it's still at the top of my 'favorite movies' list. It is amazingly put together and what really makes the film are the detailed tid bits (such as the 'Cafe Bustelo' coffee crate being reused as a cup to wash her grandsons hair) that people aren't seeing because YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND THIS MOVIE UNLESS YOU ARE HISPANIC. This is just one of those films that is very culturally specific and particular. Please do not bash this film if you have no prior knowledge of what foundation it's being built upon. I completely see what the writer/director was going for, and he hit the target perfectly! This film is highly deserving of a better rating.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b37bc64f0010488d9fd0ca504f08e30c",
            "input": "This is probably the best horror film made since Ed Wood died. I can't spoil the ending, because I have absolutely no idea what happened. I'll try my best, though. There are some kind of lesbian vampires, but they keep swapping bodies, so any character might or might not be the character you're supposed to think it is, or it might be a lesbian vampire. Sound confusing? It's not as confusing as you might think, since none of the characters make any sense to begin with. There's no plot, no character development, and random people show up, speak a few lines, and then disappear, never to be heard from again. There are also zombies, who are *possibly* the enemies of the vampires, but there's also a dream-within-a-dream kind of sequence in a mental hospital, so maybe none of this actually happened, and it's all the main character's hallucination. The upside? Both of the lead girls take their shirts off briefly. The special effects are simply mind-boggling (I particularly liked the incredibly slow, awkward fight sequences). Everyone has a really silly Canadian accent, which adds to the general level of hilarity. Well worth the price of rental. We laughed until we cried.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5d272068ba240d79b05920b976cd204",
            "input": "I've watched this documentary twice - and although I'm an major movie buff, most documentaries don't hold my attention. This film however was mesmerizing. Almost every shot is perfect - saying so much more than an audio commentary (which this documentary does not have).The concept of this film is amazing, I can't praise it enough. Mardi Gras beads - who would have thought?? Amazing and excellent choices of interviews - film footage of a factory in China - the film makes you feel like you are actually there.I'm political aware - and I've read several books on globalization so there wasn't anything in this film that was a surprise to me. However, it's made me think so much. I wish so much too, that this world was a better place.A million kudos to the filmmaker - and thanks for making this film too.I wish everyone could see it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bad175615ad2448a9738f5f7718d7d16",
            "input": "One of the best if not the best rock'n'roll movies ever. And it's not just mindless fun. There really were a lot of clever jokes in it. Of course I love the Ramones. But with all the \"anarchy\" and the \"I hate high school\" themes, the film doesn't at all take itself too seriously,which is what's great about it.I first saw the movie in the Spring of 1980, and I saw it again recently. Since I went to high school in the late 1970's, it made me kind of nostalgic. Like I said, this film doesn't take itself that seriously and isn't pretentious like so much other teen fare of the seventies, eighties, and nineties. And to speak of, it's not really dirty or disgusting either. Only PG rated. That's rare for a movie in this category. A great cult classic and a truly incredible time capsule.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5c1acc705704584b7f1a301914f93af",
            "input": "So, Fox pulled the plug midway through a drama/mystery...How lame is that? Do they expect us to invest our time in their new shows when there is a realistic risk of never finding out what happens? Why weren't the remaining, already filmed episodes aired in the US? They were broadcast elsewhere.Hey, Fox! Are you listening? This was a great show, but you left us hanging. If you're going to introduce new drama/mysteries, at least air a conclusion before abruptly ending mid-theme. Every time something like this happens (and it seems to happen a lot with you - i.e., Fox), there are more of those who will \"wait and see\" before investing their time. This means you will see an artificially low interest share, and are more likely to end the series. See? It is a vicious cycle. Don't let us down again...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b45bc2af57b841ff988261d9ae9f7f8f",
            "input": "\"If I wanted to dribble, I'd call a nurse.\" \"Haven't you had enough?\" ...\"More than enough.\"\"You got me a choo-choo.\"\"If I begin to die, please remove (the cowboy hat) from my head. That is not the way I wish to be remembered.\" Some of the wonderfully humorous, and often insightful, quotations from this charming and often insightful film. Dudley Moore is charming, lovable and rich. Sir John Gielgud is aristocratic, charming and loving...and poor. The two have a non-father/father and son relationship which defines the man whom Arthur is to become. Will he follow his heart and soul, or just his wealth? Over twenty-five years, I've returned to this movie, with glee and amusement and joy. It is a movie to return to, time and time again, and remember what is important in life, as short as it is. Judge Miller",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03e0ce46484d4fd49803cc696fc10768",
            "input": "Anyone who has experienced the terrors of divorce will empathize with this indie film's protagonist, a scared little boy who believes a zombie is hiding in his closet. Is Jake (a mesmerizing Anthony DeMarco) simply \"transferring\" the trauma of two bickering parents to an understandable image? Or could the creature be real? Writer/director Shelli Ryan neatly balances both possibilities and keeps the audience guessing. Her choice of using one setting - a suburban house - adds to the feeling of desperation and claustrophobia.Brooke Bloom and Peter Sean Bridgers are highly convincing as the angry, but loving parents. However it is the creepy minor characters, Mrs. Bender(Barbara Gruen), an unhinged babysitter and Sam Stone (Ben Bode), a sleazy Real estate agent that linger in the mind. Jake's Closet is a darkly inspired portrait of childhood as a special kind of Hell.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3f5ba780bf14cbeb04b3d9dc363bad6",
            "input": "When I was flicking through the TV Guide, and came across \"Twisted Desire\" on the movie section, I read it's description. Three words caught my eye \"Melissa Joan Hart\" ...I find her role in \"Sabrina: The Teenage Witch\" absolutely vile, I hate those kind of programs, so I was just thinking that it was going to be a boring old, love story starring her...Little did I know.It finally started on the television, I had my bucket ready in case I were to puke over it's cheesiness or soppiness, you know what I mean. At first, you think she's just a nice, ordinary girl who's in love, but has mean parents. Then when you find out she's manipulated her boyfriend into killing her parents, so she could be with her TRUE love, you're like \"Whoa\". You just don't expect this sort of role for that sort of actress. She played her role very well in my opinion, I never expected her to be able to act like such a bitch, and voilà, she did it perfectly! Congrats to her, the movie was very good, I'd definitely watch it again and recommend it to others.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e035b6d579dc4c3f88c3b5c66abb71dd",
            "input": "Greetings again from the darkness. This one will be compared to \"The Princess Bride\" and although it doesn't measure up to that classic, it is extremely entertaining and well made in its own right. The story line is a bit odd and the whole wall thing is never really explained, but the execution is fine, even building up strong suspense.Charlie Cox plays Tristan, who falls for the wrong girl (Sienna Miller), and agrees to fetch her a fallen star ... who happens to be played by the stunning Claire Danes. Not much suspense on what happens with these two, but the suspenseful part comes in with the wicked witch played by Michelle Pfeiffer and the prince son of King Peter O'Toole looking to reclaim the ruby necklace our \"star\" is wearing. Lots of bad chasing the good.Along the way, an encounter with the strangest pirate you will see (including any from the Carribbean). Robert Deniro plays Captain Shakespeare - tough on the inside, and shall we say in touch with his feminine side. Another encounter involves the brilliant Ricky Gervais as a fast talking trader and that is good for a couple of laughs.Not your typical chase, coming of age, or fantasy film, but director Matthew Vaughn's (\"Layer Cake\") effort deserves an audience. Sadly the poor marketing campaign will probably prevent it from making any money. My guess it will find big success on video.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f181391ab1e42f7b390bcf39061b542",
            "input": "Brokedown Palace is truly a one of a kind. It's an amazing story, showing two girl's plight for freedom against the Thailand justice system. They soon find themselves placing faith into a system they know nothing about.Alice Morano (Claire Danes) and Darlene Davis (Kate Beckinsale), are two best friends, strait out of high school. They suddenly change their vacation plans from Hawaii to Thailand, and are immediately captivated by a young man, Nick Parks. He flirts with them both, and suggests that the three of them go to Hong Kong for the weekend.When the two arrive at the airport, they are immediately searched for drugs. Someone tipped off customs, and in an instant, their life is changed forever. In the mix of the confusion of settling into their new life, they learn about a highly respected lawyer, named Hank Green (Bill Pullman).An American who knows the Thai justice system, he fights for the girl to be free. But they soon find out, when they leave or go is all up to them.If you're looking for a great movie that'll stay with you for years - Brokedown Palace is definitely the way to go.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08a66324e6714d5794b40e65c9a9d3ce",
            "input": "I saw this movie a few days ago and gamely jumped during the scary parts. I must admit, I found it pretty decent...until I started to THINK about what the characters were saying. Logical problems:1. Her boyfriend, who seems to be a pretty fit dude, makes no sound while being killed. Don't you think that he might have at least tried to take the killer? 2. When the remark is made that the gym teacher is \"SOOOO in love with Lisa,\" I almost screamed at the screen. When your best friend's family HAS BEEN KILLED BY A TEACHER WHO WAS IN LOVE WITH HER, you don't make comments like that if you have half of a heart.3. As soon as Nash asks the uncle how many exits they have in the house and the uncle catches on that there may be danger ahead, wouldn't the smart thing to do be to get Donna, boyfriend, aunt, and uncle into a car and drive far, far away, then bait the house with the HRT and police force so that the killer has no way to get out?I could go on. And on. And on. Basically, the plot was decent, the characters weren't profiled enough for you to actually feel any empathy when they were slaughtered and there were way too many errors.HOWEVER.This movie might be good for teenagers, or young couples just looking for a fun night out. If you don't consider all the goofs, it's a mediocre film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0116e74b6ae480485c9ef73db362372",
            "input": "I've almost forever been against the inclusion of songs in a movie. My belief was that the quality of the film would automatically be improved if only those extremely annoying songs would be axed. However, things have quickly changed after watching that horrible Black (no songs) & this movie, Page 3 (plenty of songs). While Black was weak to an extreme, Page 3 delivers a gripping story with some strong acting & good direction. The songs were almost incidental & blended in almost seamlessly with the film. There certainly weren't any women getting sprayed with water for no apparent reason from mysterious water sources while gyrating wildly on the streets at night.I was pleasantly surprised with the bold and unabashed approach used by the director. There was no glossing over of anything and almost every scene was completely believable.I'd recommend this films for Hindi-speaking people with at least a slight understanding of Mumbai life. The former because the English subtitling was below par and contained many errors which, at times, completely reversed the meaning of the actual statement. The latter because you'll definitely appreciate the accuracy of the depiction once you've lived it yourself.I'd definitely rank this as a work worthy of international recognition. The scenes with the gossiping drivers was a nice touch and it served simultaneously as a source of genuine humour as well as another perspective on the whole mishmash. The movie does fall short in a few places though, where the characters sometimes say the most inexplicable things which detract from the overall direction of the film.I also thought that a couple of the sadder scenes were not done very well. It was a touch amusing to watch, rather than arouse any feelings of sadness & the whole scene tended to come across as a bit foolish. These are minor issues though, because the film, on the whole, is truly a rare treat to watch.Overall, it's a cynical, pessimistic outlook and a refreshing one at that! Actors, not 'heroes' - that's the key. A chance to glimpse believable human beings in an extraordinary setting - everyday life. A behind-the-scenes look at the extent of the depravity and a rare ray of hope for Indian cinema.8/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6aa1b55287c0479184bb70ba183fe8f4",
            "input": "Comes this heartwarming tale of hope. Hope that you'll never have to endure anything this awful again. *cough* Razzie award *cough*I disliked this movie because it was unfunny, predictable and inane. While watching I felt like I was in a psychology experiment to determine how low movie standards could get before people complained. When I requested my money back at the end of the movie I was informed that because I watched the whole thing 'I wasn't entitled to reimbursement'. I was told by the assistant manager that several people had complained and gotten refunds already though.The movie summary is pretty basic. The midget thief steals a diamond and the poses as a baby to elude police. Underneath this clever outline however, lies a repertoire of original, fresh and hilarious skits. Or not.Ask yourself the following: Do you like to see people getting hit by pans? Do you like fart jokes? Do you like to see midgets posing as babies threatened with a thermometer in the anus? Do you like tired racial jokes? Do you think babies say 'goo goo goo goo goo gaa gaa'? Do you drool?If you answered 'yes' to any of the above then this movie is definitely for you. Although it has been billed in some places as 'The Worst Movie of the Decade', there is probably a movie or 2 that are worse...somewhere. I can't say for sure. I gave this movie 2 stars because we all know a review with only one star would indicate bias on the part of the reviewer and then the review wouldn't be taken seriously. This lowbrow comedy is intended for a less intelligent audience and I cannot in good conscience recommend it to anyone. Save your money for something funny.Respect",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ecaafbf3bc348228cc9d05f2539f211",
            "input": "There is no denying that Ealing comedies are good, but for me this film stands out as one of the best.The basic premise of the film is that a small part of Pimlico in London is discovered to be part of Burgundy, not the UK. We then follow the lives of the residents in their battle to keep the treasure found after the bomb explodes, and keep out the black market traders who soon realise that being exempt from UK law, rationing does not exist. When they become prisoners in their own street because the government has decided to close the boarder we see them fight back against the system.They are forced to ration water and food in their stand for what is right. In fact becoming worse off than they were before it all started, that's where the moral comes in. It's when they loose all the food that they think they are beaten and call for a surrender, only to have the whole of London respond to their plight by sending food, lot's of it. Thus enabling them to continue their struggle.This film hit's the right note throughout, the acting is superb, with Stanley Holloway, Margaret Rutherford, Hermione Baddeley and Betty Warren standing out. It's pitched just right, not too sentimental and the moral of the story not forced down your throat. Well worth a viewing",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6d84e38c8f442288bd001b6d19d54ee",
            "input": "Just another film that exploits gratuitous frontal male nudity; awful acting, plus, the lovemaking scenes are the most un-sexy I've ever seen (and this is not about me not linking the idea of two young men making love, since I'm gay).Again, as in Mil nubes de paz, Julian Hernandez directed an incredibly pretentious film with a story that makes enough argument for a short film of about five minutes but manages to make a 2 hour film with it... And this time, there isn't even the issue of racism and commodification in the Mexican gay community to talk about! God gracious have mercy on us!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3e1f9a8f2974c93b67e02670bb18812",
            "input": "'The second beginning' as it's title explains, shows us the beginning of the end for the human race. Set long before the matrix existed, this short anime written by the Wachowski's shows us the world that could lay infront of us in the not to distant future, set at the turn of the 21st century, the second renaissance delves into issues common with human behaviour; greed, power, control, vanity etc.The use of robots or artificial intellegence as slaves or servents is common among science fiction/fantasy stories. The second renaissance is no exeption to this concept, however instead of a simple man vs. machine layout, this story explains the struggle that the machines put up with, the struggle for acceptance in a world ruled by humans. Where the matrix films show us the human perspective, these short animations tell both sides of the story.The second renaissance part 1 + 2, answer many questions brought up by the original Matrix film, such as how the war broke out, how the sky was blackend, what led to the use of humans as batteries and it also introduces us to the machine city called 01, which may have relevance to the upcoming Matrix Revolutions film.I won't give away too much of the story, as I do not want to ruin the experience for perspective viewers, however, I will recommend it to anybody interested in the world of the matrix or simply anybody interested in Japanese animation (anime).9/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e13075d3863404cb1ecb1e59ca29f56",
            "input": "There are few uplifting things to say about this, but I can mention Matt Dillon doing his best to make something out of nothing and the many split screens and graphics that are worthwhile. As most race movies suffer from the premise that car lovers are not that intelligent, we end up with movies like this.Lindsay Lohan who surprised so much in Mean Girls has to make better decisions which roles to take. Here she can only fail.Children will only be mildly entertained because it tries to appeal more to adults than children (although still pretty dumb). The ones in the theater I saw it with showed no real interest after a couple of minutes. And as a family sports movie this is horrible. The better moments are in the beginning at the scrapyard creating some sentiment and later in the car-bash fest creating some tension. If you develop a car as a central character you have to develop it better than here. After a few obligatory race scenes you are in for the best part: being able to leave the multiplex in your own car.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f143bdc8e4e4793bd8d92fa89e6b0b5",
            "input": "Ahh, Talespin! What can I say that hasn't already been said about this great show? Nothing! This is without a doubt one of the most well-written shows I've ever encountered, live-action or animation. The newer stuff is way too dumbed down for my tastes, and some of the \"mature\" stuff I have to shoo kids out of the room for. But not Talespin.The stories are engaging and very plausible. Some of them could even be stretched out to an hour or two for a movie. Episodes like Stormy Weather and Her Chance to Dream are very dramatic while still being enjoyable for kids and adults alike. Then there are the pure comedy episodes such as the Bluest of the Baloo Bloods and Stuck on you, where the emphasis is on hilarity. I can laugh myself to tears in a few choice ones.The drama aspect is very lacking in most shows nowadays(at least, those which aren't specifically geared toward it), especially in cartoons. In the episode Stormy Weather for instance, Kit Cloudkicker decides that he's going to join an air circus, but Baloo believes that it would be too dangerous. In the biggest fight of the episode, Baloo yells at Kit to stay away from Daring Dan, to which Kit screams \"NO! You can't tell me what to do! YOUR'RE *NOT* *MY* *DAD*!\" and buries his face in his pillow. The next day he leaves for the air circus. This kind of drama is a rarity in a cartoon, and would be most welcome in the ones created nowadays.The Characters have a lot of depth to them. Baloo is pretty much the way he is in The Jungle Book, plus or minus a few degrees of laziness. Rebecca is a cunning business woman whose ideas on getting money, while good in theory, are seldom good in practice. Molly is a cute little girl, but you can't let that deceive you. She can be a real hellion sometimes. Kit Cloudkicker is a darker character than the rest. He doesn't trust adults much unless they appeal to him, and he has a tendency to break off relationships. Watch his expression in Plunder and Lightning when he grabs the grappling hook: he looks as though he's prepared to put it right through a pirate.In the end, it's the drama combined with the very real chemistry between the characters that makes this show #1 in my book. The relationship between Baloo and Kit is very real, almost father and son. This is demonstrated well in All's Whale That Ends Whale when Baloo takes Kit's word for it that Seymour is abusing the animals in his aquarium instead of siding with the other adults. Baloo and Becky's relationship is also realistic, due to Baloo's motivation for working comes from wanting to buy back the ol' Sea Duck, not necessarily a desire to help Rebecca. But something tells me that if he did get the Duck back he'd still do jobs for Rebecca.The Sea Duck, not to mention all the other planes in the series, is pretty realistically designed. The plane's functions don't change once throughout the series(continuity like that is hard to come by also), and unlike most other \"super-planes\" of other cartoons, it doesn't have one single weapon on board(unless you count mangoes!), and relies instead on it's cunning pilot's great skill to get out of trouble. It's hard to think of a hero vehicle that doesn't have some sort of gun turret, laser cannon, or even a handgun somewhere on board. And the fact that they use their heads to get out of trouble is so hard to find in a cartoon nowadays. Plus it's just such a darn cool design!This is definitely the best cartoon. Ever. Period. Definitely worth all ten stars!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6da993ad0a8a4eb397a1ae84596ab2ad",
            "input": "\"Moonstruck\" is one of the best films ever. I own that film on DVD! The movie deals with a New York widow (Cher) who falls in love with her boyfriend's (Danny Aiello) angry brother (Nicholas Cage) who works at a bakery. I'm glad Cher won an Oscar for that movie. Nicholas Cage and Danny Aiello are great, too. The direction from Norman Jewison (who directed \"Fiddler On The Roof\") is fantastic. \"Moonstruck\" is an excellent movie for everyone to see and laugh. A must-see!10/10 stars!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23a5c17ee0b14c44949aa9c461804929",
            "input": "After Racism, Rural exodus -also known as migration from the country side- is another socio-political issue of the 1960s. WestSide Story had dealt with Racism by a love feast in an artistic view. Now, Midnight Cowboy deals with rural exodus by a friendship tragedy in a psychological view. It has a deeply grievous ending that we witness one of the two companions of fate passing away.Director John Schlesinger skillfully deliver us the deepest secret thoughts, dreams, fantasies, fears and evaluations of two New York City scums. While the handsome Joe Buck(Voight) dreams of all the beautiful women of the world begging him to share a wild love fantasy, the poor Ratso Rizzo(Hoffman) dreams of a better and healthier life in clean and sunny Florida. Accordingly, Joe becomes a hustler to turn his fantasies into reality; and Ratso becomes a snatcher to collect enough money to migrate into Florida. Besides Ratso helps Joe to find his way to do whatever he can. They begin sharing everything in life. They share food, they share medicine, they share an uninhabited home, they share their earnings and thus they share a destiny. Regrettably as the story progresses, Joe realizes that being handsome is not the only thing to make all the beautiful women begging him to have fun; and moreover Ratso cannot see Florida since his heart fails defeated to his disease whilst he was on the bus taking him there.The Might is always right, and the Feeble has no right in the daylight. Thence, \"Midnight\" gives the factual sight.Despite the tragedy, there is no melodrama in Midnight Cowboy. Every aspect of each character is the reality of the poor who bear their inevitable fate. Thanks to this, Midnight Cowboy is a provocative view of a socio-political issue, the rural exodus.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1166804707254ceb86272edfe12a11ec",
            "input": "This is definitely the worst bigfoot movie I've ever seen and quite possibly the overall worst movie I've ever seen in my life. The actors and actresses were horrible and it seemed like they were trying way too hard to play their roles as dorks, tough guys, jerks, know it alls, etc. And the bigfoot itself was terrible. It appeared to be some kind of computer generated image from the days of Atari & Intellivision. At one point near the end of the movie as an army of sasquatches were chasing after the remaining survivors, one gets shot and as it's running it looked like a poor man's version of donkey kong himself! And one gets hit by a bullet and the blood that comes out of it was just awful animation. Another thing that was annoying was the music. Way way way too much music (classical score or whatever you call it) throughout the entire film. It was never ending. Oh yeah, the movie is boring too. Absolutely one of the worst films I've ever seen. I highly recommend taking your $3 or whatever they charge to rent this movie and spending it on a gallon of gas or a value menu somewhere. TRULY AWFUL!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f666c85ead8e4587a644ca694b2936fd",
            "input": "In my case I liked this movie because when I saw it I found more than I expected. I mean, this is one of the few animated movies that made me think about its themes even long after I finished. It talks about death, vengeance and hell in such a way that it gets to you like a punch in your face, even reaching to suffer with the dream sequence in the mid-point of the film. That's what makes this movie so good: the ability, unique in Don Bluth (director), to play with the people's feelings and make them love or hate a character in no time. That, and the fact that it has so many good characters like Charlie and Ann-Marie, that in the sad but happy ending you have to say \"I have something in my eye\" to hide the others that you cried. All I've said are just only some of the good points of this movie. As for the rest, you have to see them for yourself in a film extremely honest. Don Bluth, thank you.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d1507c5f6794ce4aebc36cd5d0d62f0",
            "input": "Old Jane's mannered tale seems very popular these days. I have lost count of the number of versions going around. Probably the reason is that her \"ruts\" are our \"ruts\" even at this late date. This TV mini-series gives it a mannered telling suitable to the novel. Headstrong, opinionated Emma is a pretty \"modern\" girl when you think about it, even though the ambience of Jane Austen's world may seem a tad artificial to us today. If you haven't seem EMMA, I'll only say that self-sufficient Emma does get her comeuppance. It's worth watching to find out how. The acting honours here go to the ladies: Kate, Prunella, Lucy and Samantha. They could almost have had a psychic connection to old Jane!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-85e49ea8102847d797e709967ace1548",
            "input": "THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE (2006) ***1/2 Gretchen Mol, Lilli Taylor, Chris Bauer, Jared Harris, Sarah Paulson, David Strathairn, Austin Pendleton, Norman Reedus, Dallas Roberts. Mol shines as legendary pin-up queen Bettie Page in a fine biopic.Gretchen Mol is probably best known for being tauted as The Next-It-Girl a few years ago when no one knew who she was despite an infamous cover story by Vanity Fair among other media dubbings but despite a few co-starring roles here and there her predicted stardom seemed to twinkle less brightly until now. Here as the famous pin-up queen Bettie Page, Gretchen Mol is indeed a shining star on the rise.Bettie Page was Tennessee born raised as a God-fearing and family oriented proper girl who seemed to find herself the unwarranted object of lust and affection, as she grew older. A gang-rape that is flashbacked is wisely not graphically depicted nor is the subtle showing of her own father having less- than-decent designs for his own kin which is important to understand how Page managed to escape the possible nightmarish life for a career as an actress by heading to New York City in the 1950s when in fact that was the time and place to be to catch lighting in a bottle. What Page didn't realize is that in fact she would be just that when she arrived.A beautiful raven haired sweetheart with a divine figure, Page is spotted on Coney Island one summer day by a black policeman asking to take her photograph which leads to her posing in his basement and eventually to the studios of Irving Klaw (Bauer) and his sister Paula (Taylor) who cater their kitschy but considered pornographic stills to a unique clientele: fetish types.Although Page is rather naïve she is undeniably smart and knows that her body is not a sin and can see the forest for the trees in the sense that she is in control - or at least abides in what is offered her as work in that it is not indecent and she is having fun in her increasingly less-clothed portraits - until a Congressional witch-hunt seeks out a few scapegoats to make pornographic images a crime. Talented filmmaker Mary Harron and her screen writing partner Guinevere Turner (\"An American Psycho\" and \"I Shot Andy Warhol\") streamline the biopic trappings rather neatly and maybe a bit too hasty in getting at who really was Bettie Page although they do justice in depicting an era of uptightness at its zenith. Large thanks to gifted cinematographer Mott Hopfel for his languorously gorgeous black and white images and also the sprinkled color segments that recall Douglas Sirk films of the era for its melodramatic kindlings. Part feminist treaty and part American dream fulfilled the story chugs along nicely with fine performances by its ensemble including the comical Bauer and Taylor as siblings in smut and Harris having a field day as a fellow fotog with a taste for wine and chatter. It's amusing to see Strathairn in a bit of stunt casting as a senator on a campaign for righteousness after portraying news bulldog Edward R. Murrow in his last outing, \"Good Night, and Good Luck\" as an opposite the table role.But hats off to the truly fine talents of Mol as the uninhibited yet deeply morale and most importantly intelligent Bettie Page who lets her child-like innocence beam through her bold nudity and now-considered-tame-and-quaint-borderline- kitschy poses that caught the male fancy for decades and is still a bookmark for human sexuality in this country and perhaps the world overall. Mol is perfect and uncannily resembles her portrait's subject down to her knowing-teasing smile. The real Bettie Page was reportedly not involved with the project but apparently gave her blessing and continues to live a somewhat secluded life that is alluded to in the final moments as to having found Jesus and shirking her 'notorious' image once and for all. A shame since this film oddly embraces the resounding decency imbued within its subject, radiating for all to see in its naked splendor.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-337b58fb438543f9989280f03c27003b",
            "input": "This movie was crap with a capital \"C.\" The opening scene showed promise. But that \"promise\" was broken shortly after the viewer learns where the plot is going.And the wooden statue, Morty, who was rather creepy in the original film, looks plain goofy in this one. It was so obviously just a guy in a cheap plastic costume. (And by the way, who else thinks \"Morty\" is one of the most un-scary names on planet earth? It ranks right up there with \"Jimmy\" or \"Fred\" when it comes to horror value. Or why not just name the wooden statute Henry-freakin'-Kissinger. \"Run, it's Dr. Kissinger!\" That'd be about as scary as \"Morty.)And then there's a scene where the \"hero\" hits his father's tombstone with---\"a sledgehammer?\" you might guess--\"a two-by-four?\" someone might venture. No, he angrily beats his father's tombstone with a twig---a freakin' twig. But worse than that, once the characters walk away, the tombstone actually, and inexplicably, bleeds. Oh brother!There's also a Native American guy who lives with the main character's grandparents, but apparently, does nothing except Morty-maintenance. He perpetuates creepy Morty-legends, warns those who scoff, and even fixes Morty's arm when it becomes damaged during a childish prank. But for all his respect for and tenderness toward Morty, does Morty give a rat's hairy behind? No.The movie drags on, and eventually several people die in ways that correspond to their worst fears (sort of). This film is a real yawner. Don't rent it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa0926b3a938422dbb4c14abd4c4bc83",
            "input": "\"Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make steel and invent complex machines\". --- It is obvious that the person who wrote this comment hasn't understood the reasoning behind this documentary or the original book. Please don't ruin this great piece by your simple mindedness. The reasons are far more complex than the single thing you mentioned. Please read the book as is it a great source of information. I enjoyed it a lot. This book is even a taught as a text book at some universities.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e3cdce02b1645ebabaf4a7ebac3aebd",
            "input": "Blood Surf AKA Krocodylus is a fair film that has an okay cast which includes Dax Miller, Taryn Reif, Kate Fischer, Duncan Regehr, Joel West, Matt Borlenghi, Maureen Larrazabal, Cris Vertido, Susan Africa, Archie Adamos, Rolando Santo Domingo, and Malecio Amayao. The acting by the actors is fairly good. The thrills are fairly good and some of it is surprising. The movie is filmed fairly good as well. Same thing goes for the music The film is fairly interesting and the movie does keeps you going until the end. This is a fairly thrilling film. If you the the cast in the film, Monsters, Giant Animal films, Horror, Thrillers, Mystery, and interesting films then I recommend you to see this film today!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4507d641808d45a0a5be5a94ea0a54a8",
            "input": "Hi, Everyone, If you saw \"Singing in the Rain,\" you remember the scene of Gene Kelly dancing in the rain. You also remember the dance number of Donald O'Connor, \"Make 'em Laugh.\" If you saw \"Royal Wedding,\" you will remember Fred Astaire dancing on the ceiling. If you saw \"Jailhouse Rock,\" you will even remember the title dance number choreographed by The King himself.That is what is missing here. There could have been some blockbuster dance numbers in this presentation. The closest was Chuck McGowan's \"I Can Do That.\" the mere fact that you have some talented people on stage moving together does not make a great dance film. Richard Attenborough was to blame for this failure. He pointed the camera at the stage and thought that would be a good thing.Yelling at people auditioning for a part in a Broadway production is not entertainment. Michael Douglas would be just as badly cast if he were in a Western or a comedy. He is OK when he is in a Michael Douglas movie where we see him yelling at someone we would like to yell at. It does not work here.The cast was good except for Michael, of course. A good movie could have been made even using the songs that were in the stage production, but someone should have thought about how to film it.Next time they do one of these I hope they call me first.Tom Willett",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36818d9694df4278addaa986e99b293a",
            "input": "First off, the title character is not even the main character of the movie. He is the sidekick of the cult leader. The actor who portrays Igor believed that screaming loud, laughing hysterically, and having a crooked smile while bugging out your eyes would be an excellent way to scare people. Igor also had the annoying habit of yelling (because he never actually just spoke) in a high pitched voice. He would also say idiotic one-liners. For example when the cult leader murders one of his followers with a buzz saw, Igor upon seeing this, yells out \"Paul! No Paul! Why'd you do it? I could have cut her clean! So clean!\" In another scene Igor tells a victim that she would have to 'get her own tools for surgery because right now, it was his time to operate.' Aside from the bad acting, the ending did not make sense because while the story builds up what little steam it has towards the climax, which is Igor getting a crossbow arrow to the head and the rest of his lunatic buddies being killed, he shows up again two more times to kill the remaining 'good guys'. The movie offers no explanation of this, only telling the viewer that Igor escaped from the mental hospital. What??? Bottom line is do not waste your time watching this movie. I wish I could get back the moments I lost watching this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b02bbdb3467045408b6c9ed2a7437f1e",
            "input": "If you want to see a retarded homosexual Karate expert beat up a bunch of try hard wannabe Mexican gangsters repeatedly for an hr, then this is the film for you. if not then choose another DVD from the 20c bin which is the only place this film belongs. the acting was so horrible that i had to force myself to watch it to the end. The cover makes it look so cool but its just another cheap, b grade gangster film along the lines of 2 g's and a key, bloody streetz and menace. I would not buy or rent this film unless you are planing to get stoned and plot , editing and acting really don't matter to you. it is truly the worst film in the history of humanity!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b8cd8670f0b49488de1d4924b4e81ed",
            "input": "I think this is one of the weakest of the Kenneth Branagh Shakespearian works. After such great efforts as Much Ado About Nothing, etc. I thought this was poor. The cast was weaker (Alicia Silverstone, Nivoli, McElhone???) but my biggest gripe was that they messed with the Bard's work and cut out some of the play to put in the musical/dance sequences.You just don't do Shakespeare and then mess with the play. Sorry, but that is just wrong. I love some Cole Porter just like the next person, but jeez, don't mess with the Shakespeare. Skip this and watch \"Prospero's Books\" if you want to see a brilliant Shakespearean adaptation of the Tempest.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5415425dec2a429e88f5a7174a879f87",
            "input": "Even though this movie came out a year before I was born, it is definetely one of my favorite comedies. It stars Redd Foxx as a father who tries to understand his son's homosexuality. Like most parents, he doesn't know a thing about what it means to be gay and has all of these stereotypical notions of what gay people are like. His son, Norman, is now grown up and living on his own. When his father, Ben, finds out that his son is gay, he pays his son a visit in hopes of changing him. The title comes from one of the funniest lines in the movie--when Ben gets to Norman's apartments he runs into a female prostitute and thinks it's his son in drag (\"Norman... Is that you?\"). The movie had me laughing from start to finish. Redd Foxx is great. Although a lot of the content is stereotypical, I didn't find anything offensive about the way the material was handled, and it even has a good ending. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a86b579747348f882fca2fa391c061d",
            "input": "In 1987, John Hughes wrote and directed 'Planes, Trains and Automobiles', which was a hilarious and poignant comedy – the best thing he's ever done. Ten years on he's reduced to again recycling the plot of 'Home Alone' in this second sequel, which is not connected to the other films but is equally uninspired and sadistic. The four crooks – that's right, four! And one of them is a girl! Congratulations, Hughes, for introducing this revolutionary change to the series! – are electrocuted with metal chairs, brained with barbells and blinded with paint, ha ha ha haaaaaaaa ha, while the new kid is even less charming than Culkin. You'd think that the departure of almost all the key players from the first two films would stop Hughes from fossilising the same old routines, but the only surprise is that not even he turned up for 'Home Alone 4'.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2261a2e498a746b89aa231d847923d40",
            "input": "I was fully amped up to see this film. I had been waiting a year for it to be cleared down here in New Zealand. I shouldn't have built myself up so much because it was so disappointing and is without a doubt Clark's worst film There is so much wrong with this film. First off, some of the acting is great, in particular Nick Stahl as 'The Bully', and the girl with the curly brown hair (I can't recall her name), but most of it was so out of touch and incredibly unbelievable, especially Leo Fitzpatrick. He's a veteran of Clark's films now and he was so brilliant in 'Kids', but in 'Bully' he invests his lines with such solemnity as to turn his scenes into a parody virtually. The screenplay felt like it had been written by a first year film student. No sorry, a high school student...one who has never seen a movie before. And I couldn't fathom Clark's intentions. Was he trying to point out the meaningless of these kids' existence? It sure as hell didn't stop him getting in a damn good perv. I'm no prude but I didn't need to see teenage breasts and buttocks every 5 minutes. I still maintain that Clark's best film is 'Another Day in Paradise'. It's fantastic and I don't think he'll ever top it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35c51e33d6d5469e818158eab6da3a7c",
            "input": "What surprised me most about this film was the sheer audience it attracted. Similar films such as Anita and Me have never caused as much hype as this film has, though I think that's probably because of the mention of 'Beckham' in the title more than anything else.It's a brilliant film putting across a brilliant message - you can do anything if you're determined enough, and put your mind to it, which is such a positive message to anyone watching this film.I think this is one of Keira Knightley's better films, and I think she's a brilliant actress, and was excellent for the role. Parminder Nagra was brilliant too. Sadly, I can't say this for Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, because I don't think that he was that much of a good actor, and to be honest, his eyes were a little scary.All in all, a brilliant film, and a brilliant story",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5006d50fc07a4c36b538530e4ab17848",
            "input": "An unusually straight-faced actioner played by a cast and filmed by a director who obviously took the material seriously. Imperfect, as is to be expected from a film clearly shot on a tight budget, but the drama is involving-- it's one of those films that when it gets repeated ad nauseum on Cinemax 2 or More Max or whatever they call it, you end up watching 40 minute blocks when you're supposed to be going to work. Along W/ \"Deathstalker 2\", \"Chopping Mall\", and \"The Assault\", a reminder that Wynorski is a much more talented director than many of his fellow low-budget brethern, who has a real ability to pace a genre film, when he actually's interested in the material (i.e., don't bother watching any of his Shannon Tweed flicks with a 3 or a 4 after the title!) Actors who've had too little to do recently (Mancuso, Ford, even Gary Sandy for chrissakes) really put their all into some of their best roles in years -- as for Grieco, he has the right look, although his acting is a bit one-note -- it's clear his character is supposed to be self-destructing throughout the film, but Grieco doesn't quite convey it. I checked IMDB and I see the writer also wrote \"Sorority House Massacre 2\" & \"Dinosaur Island\" for the director -- both minor classics in their own rights, but obviously \"silly\" Roger Cormon-like Cinema -- this one's more like some of the better Jonathan Demme and Jonathan Kaplan B-pictures of the 70's -- giving you the exploitation element but offering involving drama at the same time -- a real step forward. Not \"Citizen Kane,\" and the comic final moments are a bit disruptive, but a well-written, character-driven above-average straight-to-video actioner. Small achievements like this should not be overlooked when they come along, which is rare enough (as I was reminded as I tried to sit through an Albert Pyun monstrosity called \"Heatseeker\" the other night -- this low-budget stuff isn't as easy as it looks -- but that's another story!)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ab7027022cb4f5e9d86f5c5900b43ea",
            "input": "It's a real challenge to make a movie about a baby being devoured by wild canines and the mother being wrongly accused of murder funny but against all odds this one succeeds. Meryl Streep gives the performance of her life, melodramatic, overwrought but with that comic genius that keeps you laughing even as a mother struggles with the ultimate horror.If comedies about the infants being eaten by dogs are not your cup of tea you might be uncomfortable watching this and, yes, it is an odd choice of topic for a farce but really very little of the movie has anything to do with that as it focuses on giving Streep a showcase for her Aussie accent and facial contortions. Throwing in a slam at media bias and sensationalism and disregard for either the truth or ethics gives the movie the chance to make the daring point that those things are bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d155c6eb5dbd485c9b5efa729e2c7be6",
            "input": "This film is a great example of fine storytelling. The acting is superb. The story is inspiring without being overly manipulative or fake. There were a couple points where they probably made people a tad more good or bad than they really were, but considering it is a Hollywood movie, they showed amazing restraint. There wasn't a single explosion shown in the movie, even though they had one opportunity to. The film, while having suspenseful parts, was not made into an action movie. The story is thus made to focus on an extraordinary man in unfortunately ordinary times. Well done!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9077f0775f3e4646af362761915714ca",
            "input": "This is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the scariest and most intriguing episodes of Doctor Who. This is a thrilling psychological ride and you will probably find your own beliefs being thrown into question. Riddled with spine-chilling moments, this is an episode no \"Who\" fan can afford to miss.Starting from when the pit was opened after the events in \"The Impossible Planet\", the Doctor and Ida are trapped and are running out of air. With no other alternatives, they decide to find what lies at the bottom of the pit, an event which surpasses even The Doctor's expectations. Whilst there, the Doctor is forced to make what he considers to be the ultimate sacrifice...Meanwhile, Rose and the other members of the Planet try to find a way to fend off the Ood, whose minds have been poisoned by the Beast. Also, is Toby Zed truly cured of his possession by the Beast?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a4c1cd43f8d4e74b8dec305c1467ceb",
            "input": "I saw this film at SXSW with the director in attendance. Quite a few people walked out, and the audience could barely muster even polite applause at the end. Of the 60 or 70 films I've seen at this festival, Frownland is among the worst.At 106 minutes, it is at least 95 minutes too long. You get to watch the main character's failed and drawn out attempts to communicate, in extended real time. The same grimaces, hand over mouth motions, kinetic and frantically repeated words and syllables over and over and over again - WE GET THE POINT.One site actually compares this work to early Mike Leigh. What drugs would you have to be on to make that statement? Given that Frownland is a Captain Beefheart song, maybe you'd have to be able to enjoy Trout Mask Replica on heavy rotation to appreciate this film. Unbelievably, this won a jury award at the festival. You can bet it did not win an audience award.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0d6397e693b4caba37a77583fac0e6f",
            "input": "This movie is probably the worst I have seen. Bad acting, bad script, bad everything. Comparing it to mainly two other movies in the same genre and from approximately the same time is interesting. Both Cyborg (Van Damme, 1989) and Nemesis (Olivier Gruner, 1993) are much better and seems more robust in both story and directing and still it's Albert Pyun who has directed these two as well!The story is not original. The world has become a terrible place, possibly due to an environmental disaster or a nuclear war, and people live under medieval circumstances. A special breed of robots (cyborgs) live on human blood and there's the story... The cyborgs need to get a lot of humans to fulfill there \"prophecy\" and the humans need someone to stop them. One girl together with a robot (Kris Kristofferson) built by the creator of the cyborgs has been appointed by destiny to save mankind.In this movie the director tries some Hong-Kong stylish fighting scenes with the participants flying high and leaping far. The movie fails miserably in this attempt.I recommend this film with the only reason that most people will get a new \"worst ever\" movie to relate to. And to fans of the genre I recommend \"Cyborg\" since I think it's a very underestimated movie with quite a high entertaining factor. And if you can't stand Van Damme then check out \"Nemesis\".I rated this movie 1/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4aa9f7143fa84a2cb633c259b5ad3874",
            "input": "I never trust the opinions of anyone regarding a film. That goes for critics as well. Sure, if it gets positive reviews that's OK and a plus, but most films that get critical rave I hate. I enjoyed this film for what it was, an entertaining film. It takes you out of your life for a couple hours and into a fictional character...that being Catherine Trammell. Sharon Stone is awesome in this role, just like she was in the first one. Anyone who says she is horrible in this film must have felt the same in the first one b/c she is back acting the same way she did in Basic Instinct 1. Catherine is hers and she plays her to perfection. Her one liners are great, much like in the first one. Who can forget in the first film when she tells the cops, \"If you're gonna arrest me do it...otherwise get the f**k out of here!\" Great scene, and believe me, she does it again in this one. I was captivated by her. Her outfits, the way she smoked her cigarettes, believe me, its worth the price just to see Stone's performance. I cannot wait for this film to be released on DVD, uncut, because I can only imagine how much better it is going to be. And yes, there are lots of twists, as in the first one, including the ending!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80102d42ac1e478f91c63d6e5a8fa711",
            "input": "I'm a pretty old dude, old enough to remember the taste of Oreos and Coke as they were 50-55 years ago, when every taste for a kid was fresh. I wish I have somehow set some aside then is some magical suspended locker, so that I could taste those things today. This magical locker might even have adjusted the fabric of the food to account for how I've drifted, physically and otherwise, a sort of dynamic chemistry of expectations. Over the half century, they would have had to adjust quite a bit, because you see I would have known that I set them aside. Eating one now would be a celebration of self and past, and story, and sense that would almost make the intervening years an anticipated reward.I didn't have enough sense to do that with original Coke. And I couldn't have invented one of those magical psychic lockers — not then. But I did something almost as good. In the seventies, I really tuned into Roman Polanski. He was a strange and exotic pleasure — you know, movies smuggled out of the Soviet block. Movies so sensitive to beauty that you cry for weeks afterward. Movies that make you want to live with Polish women, one, and then deciding that they would be the last to get it.Here's what I did. I took what I knew would be my favorite Polanski movie and set it aside. I did not watch it. I deferred until I thought I would be big enough to deserve it. Over the years, I would test myself, my ability to surround beauty and delineate it without occupying it. There probably are few Poles who have worked at this, practicing to deserve Chopin. Working to deserve womanness when I see it. Trying to get the inners from the edges.Recently, I achieved something like assurance that it was time to pull this out. I already knew that I was already past the time when this would work optimally, because I had already seen and understood \"9th Gate.\"If you do not know this, it is about a man who innocently rents a room in which the previous tenant (about whom the story is named) jumped out the window, to die later after this man (played by Polanski) visits. What happens is that time folds and he becomes this woman. We are fooled into believing that he is merely mad. But the way we follow him, he is not. He merely has flashes that the world is normal, and that the surrounding people are not part of a coven warping his reality.The story hardly matters. What matters is how Polanksi shapes this thing, both in the way he inhabits the eye that only makes edges and in inhabiting the body that only consists of confused flesh. The two never meet. There is a dissonance that may haunt me for the next 30 years. Its the idea about and inside and an outside with no edges at all — at all except a redhead wig.I know of no one else that could do this, this sketch that remains a sketch, this horror that remains natural.To understand the genius of this, you have to know one of the greatest films ever made; \"Rear Window.\" The genius of that film is the post-noir notion that the camera shapes the world; that the viewer creates the story. What Roman does is take this movie and turn it inside out. In Rear Window, the idea was that the on-screen viewer (Jimmy Stewart) was the anchor and everything else was fiction, woven as we watched. Here, the on screen apartment dweller is the filmmaker. We know this. We know that everything we see is true because he is the narrator. We know it is true that bodies shift identity, that times shift, that causality is plastic. We know that the narrator will kill us. We know that the narrator will leave us in a perpetual horror, on that edge that he imputes but never shows us and lets us imagine. Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e18019f327464795a9e55036b75be011",
            "input": "I had a recent spectator experience with The Perfect Witness (2007) because the NetFlix computer recommendation engine suggested I watch this film. Apparently, at some point, I told it how much I liked Michael Haneke's, Benny's Video. I don't know about you, but this parallel being drawn provoked in me a maelstrom of emotion and excitement over Thomas C. Dunn's film and made the allocation of my time toward it virtually impossible to refuse. Just this kind of recommendation from the NetFlix computer intelligence, for me, had the aesthetic/moral movie bar set to level so high that, upon reflection, it represented something pretty much unaccomplished in every film produced in the year 2007.Having prefaced my response to the film that way, I'm going to proceed in knocking this picture down as poorly executed and banal; and I really hate to do that because I think our boy, Wes Bentley, happens to be not only one of the most interesting young faces in contemporary cinema, but also one its most overlooked and underrated screenacting talents in the US. I'm more than moderately concerned that the poor guy's going to miss the fame ship if he keeps fiddling around with first time movie directors like this.The Perfect Witness is about Micky (Wes Bentley), who, about thirty, still lives with Mom (\"You're not drinkin' again area ya's?\"), but he's a \"filmmaker\" or at the very least some kind of street-level voyeur with a pension for shooting would-be Johns in the seedy back alleys of Philadelphia with his DVX 100B. Out there, doing his private investigator-like drills, Micky \"inadvertently\" video-tapes a brutal murder on a hapless early-twenty-ish coed with his hand held camcorder. Baring the notion in mind that snuff and movies as cultural currency can be his equated with his ticket out of the white urban ghetto (and not to the debts of his unwitting friends and relatives who put up the money for his atrocious films), Micky approaches the assailant, James LeMac (Mark Borkowski: also takes a writing credit) or \"Mac the Knife\" –whichever- and blackmails the killer into making a documentary about his murder impulses, holding this found footage over the attacker with threats of the police.The problem with this movie is not that no interesting ideas exist because they do. While both the writing and direction are amateurish, that alone doesn't make a film bad. It's that these guys commit a rather poor assumption that what they are presenting is shocking in the context of a culture in which just about any person in the free world with access to a private computer can log-on to the web and catch the veracity of the action of a beheading on their little Mac or PC. No film relies on shock value alone any more (unless of course, ironically, it's a film about torture on animals) and therefore cinematic images of violence (real or fake) have less and less cultural capital with each year that passes. Also, we've got this astounding actor-talent in the lead all styled-up, real hip guy: his two inch beard and skull cap with the little bill on it, backwards, just like the dork from high school who craved after the potential services of my primary love interest –same guy who just now calls himself a \"poet.\"Spare me. \"I'm an artist,\" \"I'm a filmmaker.\" Okay. Please do, carry on with that shtick, Cronnie. Seems to have bought you a lot of expensive 35mm stock. And go ahead, you can wear all the accrutements of a \"creative\" but don't expect us top respond to you, to follow your below average character through your two hour movie while you take down Wes Bentley's career. Why don't we just let history speak to the merits of what you do, filmmaker guy. My guess is history will eventually have say something about that –like, probably that's in not is good as you think it is. And yeah, odds are you'll be laying the blame on your dear ole ma, end up like our man Micky here in The Perfect Witness; hooked on smack and covered in your buddy's blood with a video camera in your hand. Great.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f309cc7731e426284cd0bceb21b93c7",
            "input": "A film about the Harlem Renaissance and one author in particular. It contrasts it with a modern day story about a young, gay, black artist.If that sounds vague it's because the movie itself is. It's well-directed, fairly well-written and (for the most part) well-acted. Also the scenes in the past are shot in moody black & white. Also this is one of the few film dealing with gay men that does NOT shy away from sex scenes (not that explicit and no frontal). Still, I mostly hated this.The film meanders all over the place, is full of unlikable characters (including the main protagonist) and (this is the killer) moves at a snails pace. Three times I considered leaving the theatre because I was so utterly bored. But the director WAS there so I stayed. His talk afterwords shows this was a labor of love and took 6 years to complete. I really wish I could like this more (there are VERY few films dealing honestly with gay blacks) but I can't. Unless you're very interested in the Harlem Renaissance there's no reason to see this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c26ea240c4a40ea89d06620b8d73ae8",
            "input": "Early film directed by D.W. Griffith; it features a gloriously happy King (Arthur V. Johnson) and his Queen (Marion Leonard) - but, wait! When the King leaves the scene, his Queen makes music with the palace's Minstrel (Henry B. Walthall). When the King discovers the lovers, he decides to enact a horrific Edgar Allen Poe-type revenge. It's difficult to believe the lovers can't hear those plotting against them; although the actors are trying to look alternately noisy (the lovers) and quiet (the cement mixers). The sets make \"The Sealed Room\" look very staged. The performances are okay, and the story is easy to follow. *** The Sealed Room (9/2/09) D.W. Griffith ~ Arthur V. Johnson, Henry B. Walthall, Marion Leonard",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a862e20b59b545daaf6190af59b55259",
            "input": "If you are planning to rent or buy this movie don't. It's the worst thing I have ever seen. I would comment on it more but It has been 10 years since I saw it and have blanked all of it from my mind. Save yourself some time money and well being and stay far far away.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41a65ffb5a91464c8532aae5a96b67d0",
            "input": "Allow me to start this review by saying this: I love vampire movies. They can suck (har har pun intended), and I'll still love them because vampires are just cool in movies. Van Helsing, considered by many to be a steaming pile of crap, was enjoyable to me because of the fact that there were vampires. You may ask: \"What does that have to do with this movie?\" The answer is that I intend to inform you of how horrible this movie truly is, that even a sucker (harharhar) for vampire movies like me can despise a movie like this so much.The movie stars Van Helsing, a college professor guy who isn't at all convincing. He's a terrible actor, like everyone else in this movie, and he wrote it, to add salt to the wound. I honestly to not mean to offend him, and I'm sure everyone had fun making this movie, but watching it was actually painful. I'm not sure why I watched the whole thing; perhaps it was a morbid fascination, like watching an impending train crash: it's horrible, but you can't manage to force yourself to look away. Its main fault is that it's just so ****ing boring, and its plot is so damn ridiculous, even for a science fiction horror movie.But, I digress. By the way, Van Helsing has sex with his mom. Of course, he doesn't know it's her at the time; he just thinks it's one of his students (which is still illegal and all, but not as disgusting and creepy).If I were Van Helsing, I would at least pull an Oedipus myself when I found out I had done something so gross. It would've made for one entertaining thing if he just made some comment on it, but no. The point isn't even brought up at all, by any of the characters. It's as if the writer didn't even think of it. I would've at least had another character laugh at him and say \"Ha ha, you had sex with your mom,\" which would be mildly humorous (although blatantly immature). I'm probably running out of room, so a few more words to dissuade you from ever seeing this film: there's a vampire ninja fight with an old man. It would be funny, but the filmmakers expect us to take it seriously. It's not even worth watching the movie to see how bad it is. Stay far, far away from it if you value your time at all.I will say one thing positive about the movie: the guy who plays Van Helsing is pretty slick with that knife of his. There's like, a minute long segment where he swings around his knife and actually does some pretty nifty tricks. It would be boring in any other movie, but here, sadly, it was the highlight.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cb4efe9f21e436f9654114ad90fdc5e",
            "input": "I am marking this as a \"spoiler\" only because of some of my comments of the show's content, not to the content itself.As I read the comments it is apparent that those Republicans somehow tolerate the show, but disdain it, while the Democrats seems to relish in its so called truthfulness. One reader even (so it seems) actually indicates that he believes these events did or could have happened when Bush was in grade school.But as to the content as I see it, trying to be neutral, is that the group that made this series must actually be really Bush haters. In the Episode that I saw last, s02e03, it showed that the program must have been put together long before McCain became the front runner for the nomination; because, the other former front runners are all featured.Another thing that caught my attention, was the use of add in closets. I thought that the series must have been made in Europe of for sure not in the U.S.A., because I know of no home the U.S.A. that does not have built in closets, and most likely in the homes of the artists.As I watch the show, yes I do get caught up in it, I am amazed to see what must be a terrific desire of the writers to do what they can to embarrass our President. Sure there are problems as most American will agree, but that is no reason to be so hateful in public displays seen around the world. Perhaps the trend has now been set by this show and network, so that IF Obama or Hillary got in, would they continue to produce and air the same sort of \"humor\" about them?Just one more comment on a commentator's remarks. IF there had been some sort of change in the election back in 2000, according to that writer, he was so sure that there would be a completely different acceptable president. Wow, wishful thinking on his part. As far as 911 events, I do believe that it was set in motion back when Clinton was president, and I can't see how if Gore was president anything would be much different.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-114ae7dc48d24251a3f45cd92f0bc601",
            "input": "This was one of the highlights of ST:TNG's semi-forgettable second season, before they 'grew up' or grew into their own in the third season and beyond. This was not only a showcase for up-and-comers like Bill Campbell and Teri Hatcher, but was also the continuation of Data's search for his 'humanity', this time through the concept of comedy. Still one of my favorite episodes.On a side-note, I'm still disappointed that there is no credit for the actress with whose character Okona was about to have a tryst(after Teri Hatcher's character) before being rudely interrupted by Lt Worf. I remember watching this episode 'first-run' at my friends comic shop back in the day and we all thought she would've been a perfect Jean Grey/Marvel Girl.It would be nice to know who this pretty lady actually is...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b6308dc6a4d4bebbfbfc164a2c941f2",
            "input": "Kalifornia is a movie about lost ideals. A journey on the darkest road ever. The road of no return. The plot is about a couple that set out to find a better life in California. The man (David Duchovny in his best role up to now) wants to write a book about the famous crimes that have happened in America and his girl - who is a photographer - is going to take the pictures. So they set out on a trail of famous murders not knowing what awaits them on the way. To share the journey expenses they decide to find another couple and they put an ad. But the couple that answers it is not just ANY couple. It is one of the strangest couples ever. The girl is a naive, frail creature that dreams a lot and loves cactuses. The man is exactly the opposite. A cruel ruthless murderer. We learn that early in the film and we follow him along the journey to Kalifornia (not with C as usual, but with K, presumably symbolizing the word killer), along his journey of betrayal, murder and finally defeat. All the leads, Duchovny, Pitt, Lewis and Forbes give really good performances and you have to take into consideration that when this movie was filmed not even one of them was a star. The photography is amazing, with darkness covering the greatest parts of the movie, and the music suits the dark character of the film. On the whole this is a really good movie. Don't miss it. You'll think again before taking some stranger in your car to share the gas with!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25593071b6db4d0d807421375162beaf",
            "input": "A great idea: 11 stories about 11 September. 11 directors from different countries with different results. Ken Loach talking about an immigrant (as usual) is just brilliant (as usual). The Frenchman does a very good job also, while the Burkina Faso film was a nice surprise. However, the Israel film was a bit boring, and the Mexican guy, well, he should quit directing and work in a Mexican restaurant. 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92164ba887484dc3825cba465fbafb19",
            "input": "I mean seriously what group would sing about a crazy car? So what if their ten, It's way too immature for a little kid to sing about \"being my women\" I mean seriously! The name is pretty corny too, naked brothers? just because they take off their pants??? HOW CREATIVE.I don't get why they need a TV show I mean most artist don't really need a TV show about themselves, especially the naked brothers band. Heck how many of them are in the freaking group. And seriously whats with the movie? Jeez Nick use to be the hightlight of my years growing up but seriously The naked brother band? SO many parents would not let their kids watch this especially with the name the Naked Brother's band, its a stupid, uncreative show that should not be aired onto TV.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae3d74f656da4604baa1da1d849d4f22",
            "input": "I don't know who could find fault with a simply human and funny film like this with lots of delights for your heart. I enjoyed each minute of it and guessed the ending half way through the movie -- but that did not disappoint me at all. It will not only touch your heart but it's such a good family friendly film--we need many more like these!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c5b5e97afa04059b9a0281cb7dfde26",
            "input": "I got this movie out of Blockbuster in one of those racks were you can get like 5 movies for 20 bucks. I'd have to say I got my money's worth on this one. I had expected horrible dialogue, crappy monsters, and shaky cameras. Well, as Meatloaf said, two outta three ain't bad.The acting is bad, though not as bad as some movies I've seen. Or maybe I've watched so many low budget movies recently I've lost perspective. There are some bits were the acting is downright terrible, but for the most part it's of at least High School Play level.The CG for the Sasquatch in this movie is probably the second-worst part. The first thing I thought when I saw it (and I noticed another reviewer agreed with me) was that a man in an ape suit would have been better. Clunky stop-motion animation would have looked better.So you may be asking why I call the CG the second-worst part. That's because the very worst part of the movie is the sound effects. They are loud, annoying, and constant. I've been camping, I know what insects sound like in the woods at night, and while they can be loud, they're not deafening like the cacophony in this movie. Usually when the \"background\" sounds drown out the movie's dialogue, it's a bad thing, but from what I caught of the dialogue of this film, I wasn't missing much.The action was infrequent and boring. The tension was non-existent, as was any sense of empathy with the characters. Speaking of the characters, they were all cookie-cutter and bland. The only mildly engaging byplay was between...actually, I can't think of anything. There was a line or two that made me crack a wan smile, but that was about it.The cinematography was decent, a step or two above what you'd normally see in a movie like this. However, it still had that \"home movie\" quality to it that you get with movies made on pocket change and a prayer. If you're like me and get a kick out of shoestring budget genre flicks, and you see this one in the dollar bin, think about grabbing it. Otherwise, stay away at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb5692d159834749beaaa7e0402f3980",
            "input": "I was hoping that this film was going to be at least watchable. The plot was weak to say the least. I was expecting a lot more considering the cast line up (I wonder if any of them will include this on their CVs?). At least I didn't pay to rent it. The best part of the film is definitely Dani Behr, but the rest of the film is complete and utter PANTS.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7271662ab10450a881c615f8a0b1b39",
            "input": "Man, I really find it hard to believe that the wonderful Alan Ball had anything to do with this mess. Having seen the first two episodes thus far, I think I can safely say this show isn't going to be on my must see list. It's just got so many things working against it.None of the actors cast are particularly good. Anna Paquin as the lead character Sookie, is just awful. I remember her being better in a lot of other things I've seen her in so maybe it's just the writing. She's not really much fun to look at either, there are moments where to be honest she looks downright ugly. The actor who plays Bill is marginally better, if only because his character is supposed to be sort of wooden and aloof. The other actors do their best but with the cliché characters with difficult to perform accents they are given it's a tough job. Tara is an absolute misery to watch, Rutina Wesley absolutely murders the accent. It's like nails on a chalkboard bad. Almost as awful is Nelsan Ellis, it's difficult to understand what he's even saying sometimes. Both his character as well as Tara's also seem a bit racist to me. I don't know, having a character say 'whycome' on an HBO show that isn't The Wire just seems a bit odd. Rounding out the cast so far are Sookie's doddering grandmother, her sex addict brother, and the only bit of genius casting I've seen in William Sanderson as the sheriff.The story seems to be meandering towards it's destination at this point, with no real worry about keeping the viewer interested. The romance stuff is very Dark Shadow-sy. Although this show ups the camp factor from something like those old Dark Shadows episodes times about ten. At times it seemed so campy to me, that I just have to assume it was intended to be. But unlike a show such as Buffy, that pulled camp off masterfully, this show does not. Out of place with the campiness is the extreme gore and graphic sex of the show. I'm not averse to either of these when they are done well, as they have in many other HBO shows but here at least they prolonged rough sex scenes involving Jason Stackhouse seem a bit over the top and pointless.About the only nice thing I can really think to say about this mess is that I liked the opening title sequence. HBO has had a string of bad luck with their shows lately, I hope they cancel this after the first season and try to get something better on the air.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a01d931241e426b8f9640b7d35353f7",
            "input": "ANCHORS AWEIGH sees two eager young sailors, Joe Brady (Gene Kelly) and Clarence Doolittle/Brooklyn (Frank Sinatra), get a special four-day shore leave. Eager to get to the girls, particularly Joe's Lola, neither Joe nor Brooklyn figure on the interruption of little Navy-mad Donald (Dean Stockwell) and his Aunt Susie (Kathryn Grayson). Unexperienced in the ways of females and courting, Brooklyn quickly enlists Joe to help him win Aunt Susie over. Along the way, however, Joe finds himself falling for the gal he thinks belongs to his best friend. How is Brooklyn going to take this betrayal? And does Joe end up with Susie, who loves him too?The first and second times I saw ANCHORS AWEIGH, I also saw it at the same time as I did ON THE TOWN, the Kelly/Sinatra collaboration from 1949. Both times I felt that ANCHORS AWEIGH was the better film in terms of plotting and structure--all the dances and songs fit the moment in the plot, and they develop the characters and story rather than hamper them. Yet, both times I came away feeling that ON THE TOWN is the better film overall. Having now seen both films a third time, I still stand by that judgement. Somehow ON THE TOWN, as a film and a piece of entertainment, is just lighter, gayer, purely and simply *happier*. The numbers are more outrageous and less integral to the plot, and yet somehow it works better than all the dances and singing in ANCHORS AWEIGH. I'm not quite sure why this is. The typical argument is that the latter film is over-long: at almost two and a half hours, this is certainly a valid criticism to make. I certainly felt the length the first two times I saw it! However, it's also a film that grows on you--the more you see it, the shorter it feels and the more you appreciate the technical mastery involved in its making. And yet, something just doesn't hang together quite right. It feels almost as if the script was pored over, and *every* single moment when Kelly could break into dance or Sinatra into song was noted, and that's exactly what happened. No opportunity to shoehorn a musical number in was given up... and that's probably the film's biggest weakness. It has 16 numbers (give or take a few), and no matter how big a fan you are of Kelly or Sinatra, this really starts to turn one numb after a while. (Contrast this, for example, with the ten numbers in ON THE TOWN.) You might well feel that each song, each dance, can't be taken out of the film without leaving it lacking... and that's true. But that's also because the writers weren't more restrained in adding them in in the first place.All this long preamble doesn't mean there's nothing good about ANCHORS AWEIGH. The musical *is* splashy with great songs bursting out all over, like the duets between Kelly and Sinatra ('We Hate To Leave', 'I Begged Her' and 'If You Knew Susie'), the singing of Sinatra ('What Makes The Sunset', 'The Charm Of You', and the best of all, 'I Fall In Love Too Easily'), and without a doubt the always inventive, always breathtaking dancing of Kelly. It's also hard to miss with a cast of this calibre. Grayson is sweet and seems to improve on each viewing (her voice becoming stunning rather than frightening); Jose Iturbi's role is written sympathetically and he does a great job with it; even Clarence's own Brooklyn, Pamela Britton, is cute and charming... as close as one could get to Betty Garrett without being Garrett herself! Sinatra is adorable with those blue eyes and curls of his, and plays the innocent boy-man wonderfully (a role he reprises in ON THE TOWN). His singing is, as usual, simply faultless from enunciation through to timing and phrasing. His solo numbers might seem to drag a little, but when you've got the voice of a century, showcasing it is probably as good a reason as any to slow up the rest of the film!Gene Kelly's sheer genius in this film is worthy of its own paragraph. Third in the billing behind Sinatra and Grayson respectively, ANCHORS AWEIGH really is Kelly's film. His Joe Brady is a believable, real character--he's tough on the outside, glib and willing to lie when necessary to win a gal, but he's actually the biggest softy on the inside. Kelly makes this charming rather than cloying, but also gives Joe a real edge that you see in the scene when Joe chases Brooklyn around the room with a genuinely murderous look on his face and his breakfast tray in his hands. And the *dancing*--again, the film suffers from the 'too much of a good thing spoils the effect' syndrome, as it does with Sinatra's singing. But once again, if it's Gene Kelly doing the softshoe, or tapping across the screen in a sailor's outfit or dressed up as a bandit chief... might as well err on the side of overdoing it! All of Kelly's dances are breathtaking, be it the pared-down simplicity of his tap number with Sinatra to 'I Begged Her', his 'Mexican Hat Dance' with the sweet wide-eyed little girl, or his lavish Spanish-influenced dance 'La Cumparsita'. Of course, the classic image left in audiences' minds for all time would be Kelly in his red, white and blue sailor suit, dancing with Jerry Mouse of 'Tom & Jerry' fame. A well-deserved golden film memory, to be sure--it's not often that one can say you're impressed by the special effects in a film made in 1945, given the saturation of CGI in the contemporary film market. But Gene and Jerry still look great, with Kelly always hitting his spots and looking exactly where he needs to look. It *would* turn out that just about the only people who could really keep up with Gene Kelly would be Kelly himself (in COVER GIRL) and a cartoon animation. It's doubtless that this first daring, inventive Kelly dance with Jerry has reserved a place for ANCHORS AWEIGH in film history and the hearts of classic film buffs. But it's also notable for being the first of three Kelly/Sinatra film collaborations, and though rather too drawn-out, still a great couple of hours of entertainment. Watch it first, then again and maybe again--it'll grow on you before you realise it! 7.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-24dcd51ff89b45619ba7071ed1ba1f95",
            "input": "I tried to finish this film three times, but it's god awful. Case in point: mom and daughter drive up to the bed and breakfast,mom stops for gas, crazy gas station weirdos mad at her hubby whose running the B&B try to rape her. She escapes, heads to B&B and instead of hubby going ballistic and she wanting to call the cops, story just continues with lukewarm behavior on both their parts. Wow.Other action logic deficits abound. Acting is also lukewarm, and the next door neighbor's warning is delivered in a really corny, badly acted moment.Moments of intense gore/death unevenly interwoven with lukewarm scenes of time-filler interplay between characters.Less focus on gore, more focus on mood and story would have been appreciated.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21ffb456f36f43e68fa13f9a386b5772",
            "input": "Not to be confused with the Madonna film \"The Next Best Thing\", \"The Last Big Thing\" is a silly, campy, off-the-wall comedy about a man who yearns to start a magazine called \"The Next Big Thing\" which reviews a variety of up and coming artists. This low budget indie makes \"Chuck and Buck\" look like a masterpiece. Fraught with lousy acting, poor sets and costuming, etc., \"...Thing\" has earned some awful reviews and to date has only been nominated for one fringe award. Pass on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3531af2d35ce4b97a2362bf6c5c20b37",
            "input": "A very interesting entertainment, with the charm of the old movies. Tarzan faces the greatest perils without hesitation if the moment requires it, and we all enjoy with him his success.The most insteresting for me is a man without special powers facing the problems and beating them just with human skills (he was a great swimmer and had a great shout)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7e33edbc46d431595e26ee9ffff1fb7",
            "input": "It's always tough having a sibling doing better in their life than you, always a struggle to get out from under that shadow and not let bitterness keep you away from your family. So, imagine that your older brother is Santa and then imagine how tough that must be. That's the premise here.Vince Vaughn plays the titular Fred, an embittered loser who spends a lot of his energy making sure that people don't go around expecting good things to happen to them or giving his brother, Santa (played by Paul Giamatti), too much praise for simply being the limelight-hogging, fame-hungry, slightly creepy guy that Fred would want to portray him as. Then, wouldn't you know it, Fred needs a financial favour and so has to make up for it by helping his brother on the run up to Christmas. And hilarity and life lessons ensue.Well, that's what should happen. The reality is that we get a Christmas movie featuring a few good moments of Vaughn's patented fast-talking, a ridiculously out-of-nowhere music video moment, Kevin Spacey playing an auditor out to close down Santa's operation (and he's one of the weakest baddies I have seen in some time), not enough of the gorgeous Elizabeth Banks in a lush Christmas outfit, too much of John Michael Higgins in his elf outfit (to be fair, he's a highlight though) and a movie that's too swimming in bitterness to feel like good seasonal fare yet too schmaltzy in it's latter half to feel like a fun poke at all the bad things about the commercialism of the time.Rachel Weisz is along for the ride too, as is Kathy Bates, but it's really nothing more than a movie for Vaughn and if you like his style you will find something to enjoy here. Unfortunately, there's very little else to recommend this seasonal stinker. Outside of Vaughn's rantings the script barely throws up anything decent with the exception of one particularly good scene involving a hilarious support group dealing with a very specific problem.David Dobkin's direction is as mediocre and staid as the 20p Christmas card that you send the auntie you haven't seen in 10 years and he seems to think that simply putting the ingredients together without a good mix or decent care taken will guarantee a delicious Christmas pudding. Nope, we get a burnt, bland lump with too much sugar on top. Forget this and stick the hilarious Elf on again if you want a great, modern Christmas comedy.See this if you like: The Santa Clause 2, Santa Baby, The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de9e2d0b492748fea0000324aae30312",
            "input": "This movie starred a totally forgotten star from the 1930s, Jack Pearl (radio's \"Baron Munchausen\") as well as Jimmy Durante. However, 7-1/2 decades later, it's being billed as a Three Stooges film because they are the only ones in the film who the average person would recognize today. Film fanatics will also recognize the wonderful Edna May Oliver as well as Zazu Pitts.As for the Stooges, this is a film from there very early days--before MGM had any idea what to do with the team. At this point, they were known as \"Ted Healy and his Stooges\" as Healy was the front man. Fortunately for the Stooges, they soon left this nasty and rather untalented man (read up on him--you'll see what I mean) and the rest is history. Within a year, they were making very successful shorts for Columbia and executives at MGM were soon kicking themselves for losing the team. This sort of thing was a common occurrence at MGM, a great studio which had no idea what to do with comedy (such as the films of Buster Keaton, Laurel and Hardy, Abbott and Costello and others). In fact, up until they left for Columbia, MGM put them in a wide variety of odd film roles--including acting with Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in DANCING LADY. And, oddly, in this film they didn't act as a team--they just did various supporting roles, such as Larry playing the piano!This particular film begins with Pearl and Durante lost in the African jungle. When they are rescued and brought home, all sense of structure to the film falls apart and the film becomes almost like a variety show--punctuated by scenes with the leads here and there. As for Pearl, I could really see why he never made a successful transition to films, as he has the personality of a slug (but slightly less welcome). As for Durante, I never knew what the public saw in him--as least as far as his films are concerned--he was loud and...loud! He apparently took time off from helping MGM to ruin Buster Keaton's career to make this film. Together, Pearl and Durante rely on lots of verbal humor(?) and Vaudeville-style routines that tend to fall rather flat.In this film, the Stooges they didn't yet have the right chemistry. Seeing Healy doing the job that Moe did in their later films is odd. What they did in the film was pretty good, but because all the segments were short, they came on and off camera too quickly to allow them to really get into their routines. Stooges fans might be very frustrated at this, though die-hard fans may want to see this so that they can complete their life-long goal of seeing everything Stooge--even the rotten Joe DeRita and Joe Besser films (oh, and did they got bad after the deaths of Shemp and Curly).Overall, the film is rather dull and disappointing. However, there are a couple interesting things to look for in the mess. At about the 13 minute mark, you will see a brief scene where a tour guide on a bus is singing. Look carefully, as this is Walter Brennan in a role you'd certainly never expect! Another unusual thing to look for in the film is the \"Clean as a Whistle\" song starting at about 22 minutes into the film. This song and dance number is clearly an example of a so-called \"Pre-Code\" scene that never would have been allowed in films after 1934 (when the Production Code was strengthened). Despite the word \"Clean\" in the title, it's a very titillating number with naked women showing lots of flesh--enough to stimulate but not enough to really show anything! It's quite shocking when seen today, though such excesses were pretty common in the early 1930s. Finally, at the 63 minute mark, see Jimmy Durante set race relations back a few decades. See the film, you'll see that I mean!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f91f362d4ea435b89adcbb7ac2dcaec",
            "input": "I really enjoyed this movie. Most of the reviews have been bad, but most critics think a movie should be like an idea drama. This movie has a little bit of drama, but the rest is just clean fun and very entertaining. Forget about Julia Roberts being a Pretty Woman, Emma Roberts is a beautiful young lady and there is more to her than just that. Emma was so much fun to watch in the role of Nancy Drew. It is good to see a new face. I believe she will go far.Nancy Drew may not be based upon the books, but the story is still good. There is also a good blend of other character actors and supporting actors like Pat Carroll, Barry Bostwick, Rachel Leigh Cook and Chris Kattan - not credited. I'm surprised Disney did not release this movie. Some people may not like this movie because it does not contain sex, violence, and cursing. This is a good family film which is rare in this day in time. So take your family, see this movie and judge for your self how good it is. I can't wait for the sequel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08c89413d07b451487de6ac3778015ef",
            "input": "Horrible acting, Bad story line, cheesy makeup, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. I have never seen a worse movie in my life, 5 minutes in I decided to fast forward to see if anything redeeming would happen... It didn't. (Aside from a nice breast shot) The movie apparently was filmed in some furniture warehouse, and the same warehouse was used for at least 90% of the sets. You even see this same red chair in several different \"locations\" If you are going to make a film at least rent an office building and an apartment, not some warehouse which will echo all your actor's dialog.. (Note to producers) Renting a small office space and an apartment for a month is much cheaper than an entire warehouse, and both are quite a bit more versatile and believable) If you spend your money to rent this people I hope you got it with a return guarantee... You will be demanding your money back... I only spent $2.99 to rent this tonight and I feel ripped off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5463cc4e35d24af89e400d888a58d25b",
            "input": "Not a bad word to say about this film really. I wasn't initially impressed by it but it grew on me quickly. I like it a lot and I think its a shame that many people can't see past the fact that it was banned in some territories, mine being one of them. The film delivers in the shock, gore and atmosphere department. The score is a beautiful piece of suspense delivering apparatus. It only seems fair that Chris Young went on to be one of the best composers in the business. The acting in this film is of a somewhat high standard, if a little wooden in some spots, and the effects are very real and gritty. All of this is high praise for a good slasher film in my book. I've noted in some reviews that the film has gotten serious flack having the famous killer's P.O.V shot. And I ask: WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT??? It is a classic shot that evokes dread into any good fan of the genre and is a great to keep the killer's identity a secret. The only thing that stops this film getting top marks in my book is that the surprise twist(killer revealed) is not handled with more care, I mean it just happens kind of quickly, though the great performances make it just about credible. Aside from that PRANKS is a great movie (though I prefer the original title) and its a shame that so many people knock it off as just a cheap piece of crap. Its more than that, but only few know that as it seems to have gotten lost in the haze of early 80s slasher. What a shame.... Its a really good movie people! Believe me!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2bd5cc4bab0649e18eb4045a6ed9caae",
            "input": "The Ruth Snyder - Judd Gray murder in 1927 inspired Ogden Nash to write a Broadway play called Machinal. More famously, it inspired James M. Cain to write two short novels which anyone who has actually reached the point where they are reading this review would be familiar with - Double Indemnity and The Postman Always Rings Twice. Both became film noir classics of the 1940's, Double Indemnity being arguably the most perfect noir ever made. Some of the real-life elements of the Snyder-Gray story were captured by Cain - the old age and indifference of Albert Gray, Ruth's high sex drive, Ruth and Judd's passionate affair and complicity in the murder and that famous double indemnity insurance clause. Missing elements included the fact that the actual setting was a very urban Manhattan - Albert Snyder being a respected newspaper editor. The numerous incompetent and failed attempts were also ignored in order to cut to the chase.Cain's Double Indemnity was filmed perfectly by Billy Wilder - let's ignore Stanwyck's ridiculous wig as one of those interesting accidents of film lore! The Postman Always Rings Twice, however, was filmed thrice and Ossessione, an Italian version and Luchino Visconti's first film, was the first of three versions. Before commenting on it, I'll recommend the Lana Turner - John Garfield version of 1946 in its entirety and five minutes of the 1981 Jack Nicholson - Jessica Lange version for the great sex scene on the dining table.Ossessione is not as noirish as The Postman Always Rings Twice. It has a strong neo-realist look which makes it a great movie, but a lot of the essential noir elements are missing. It does not have low-key lighting and unconventional camera angles. The dialog is not hard-boiled and instead the film concentrates more on characterization. This is the longest version of the story and goes deeply into characterization. Its also a lot more sexual than the Lana Turner version. We have a very obvious adulterous relationship and Giovanna is very obviously a nymphomaniac. A new character is introduced into the story - La Spagnola - with very obvious homosexual overtones. There is also a small, but very well-played role for a dancer who moonlights as a prostitute.This is a far greater study of the working class than of crime. The audience really gets the feeling of poverty and grime. The drifter is a complete tramp, the wife is no Lana Turner and may even have been a prostitute before marriage. Her husband is an obscene capitalist - obese, rude and arrogant. I think the casting was brilliant for this film. My only beef is with the overlong running time. Everything is drawn out too long and it would have been more effective if it had been more economical. Nevertheless, fans of noir and realism will definitely like Ossessione, as I did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6fd6da4829a04dbea71c5cd92c982a5f",
            "input": "\"Match Point\" and now \"Scoop\" have both convinced me that not only is Woody Allen doing a neat job making movies in England (and that Scarlett Johansson is the right cast member), but corroborated what I have known for years: he shouldn't focus on neurotic rich New Yorkers. In this case, Johansson plays journalism student Sondra Pransky, whom magician Sid Waterman (Allen) puts in his disappearing box, where she meets the ghost of murdered reporter Joe Strombel (Ian McShane), who tells her that the serial killings that have plagued London were committed by millionaire Peter Lyman (Hugh Jackman). So, she gets to know him, and...well, I don't know how much I can tell you without giving it away. But I can say that this is probably Allen's funniest movie in years. There's his ubiquitous unique style of humor (especially the line about his religion).So, you're sure to like this movie. If nothing else, it'll make you fall in love with London. But mostly, it's just so damn hilarious. Even if you don't like Woody Allen, you gotta love this one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-615930364bc74a2daec4c74d6363794a",
            "input": "I haven't been able to decide if this movie is so bad it's good, or, to quote Enid Coleslaw, \"so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again.\" No matter, it forced me look much the same way a pile of weird coloured vomit might, and it offers up a number of scenes that you won't forget even if you want to. There's a sneering young Ray Liotta telling a pigtailed Pia that her creative writing trophy looks like a penis. A bit later, there's Ray again, molesting Pia, not with the appropriately shaped trophy but a garden hose. There's a firm chinned Pia telling her domineering Mom that she wants to go to bed with Ray's geezer father, Walter. There's the actress in the graveyard scene yowling the best line ever written by Pia or anyone else: \"WWWWHHHYYYYYYY!\" There's that garden hose again, as Walter waves it Pia's face and roars \"Is this more to your liking!?\" There's Pia and her date so turned on by closeups of each other masticating salad that they start tearing each other's clothes off. There's Pia showering but forgetting to remove her dress. Perhaps best of all, there's Pia's typewriter, but instead of keys there are the miniature talking heads of those who have tormented her the most (afterwards, I was afraid to open my laptop). And finally there's Pia at \"The Awards\" exposing Hollywood for the cesspool it is, spitting out the second best line ever, \"I guess I'm not the only one who has ever had to **** her way to the top.\" I see I have already spent more time commenting on \"The Lonely Lady\" than I have on far better pictures, so I'll quit. Be forewarned, though, that once you start watching you probably won't be able to take your eyes off the screen until two hours of your life have vanished forever.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6475aa8388f4f60be17d234f054889b",
            "input": "This is one of the weakest soft porn film around. I can't believe somebody wrote this stupid story before making some changes. The guy Mike is a major wimp and moron I can't believe he didn't want to take a shower with his bride-to-be Toni and be in a threesome with the french photographer Jan. He does do a threesome with Toni and Kristi but that was short I hate that every time in Soft Core Porn Films threesomes between a woman, a man, and a woman is short but a girl-girl thing is about an hour. To the makers of these films have the threesomes alot longer this film should've have two threesome scenes not one but two.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfa15cd419a242468efdb89ca6bf2b95",
            "input": "From start to finish, I laughed real hard throughout the whole movie. It's amazing that \"The Groove Tube\" is possibly the granddaddy, yet raunchiest, of all comedic skit movies.This is the way I enjoy watching TV without being bored at flipping channels only to suffer from insomnia! For 73 minutes, the weird, strange humor never stops! Just think of how all this nonsense laughing can help you enjoy life easier! It's way, WAY better than Comedy Central or any prime time show! Do yourself a favor and trash all those soft, lame romantic comedy movies into the wastebasket! Better yet, tell your box office manager you want \"The Groove Tube\" back on the big screen!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e448eb7b862e48fdaa62aadbfb2a71c3",
            "input": "just below the surface lies what? a simply awful movie is what.as other viewers have justifiably commented, the storm sequences are just plain ridiculous. chopping already sodden firewood in the pouring rain? now that's smart. menace? foreboding? sexual tension? for those read dull & contrived, dull & contrived and dull & overly contrived.i want to say thank god for mia sara's shower scene but in retrospect i think the producers of the film, having seen the completed mess realised that they had to put something in to make it half way worthwhile at all. so it just becomes yet another contrivance. do yourself a favour and give this a miss.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b45f5d302c924fa393cb970b6bdcddc8",
            "input": "\"True\" story of three girls who go into the wilds of Connecticut and end up hunted by a maniac in the woods. This is the sort of film that would have played in the drive ins across America thirty years ago to mixed acclaim. Not particularly much of anything the film works with its low budget to mixed results. The film is watchable but isn't at all scary (blame how some of the attack scenes for that). Its the sort of film that you'll probably forget about once you're done with it. Odds are that you're never going to think to see this unless its handed to you by someone and told, \"here watch this\", which is what happened to me. If you're handed a copy give it back, the film isn't worth the effort to see it even if it is watchable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-586de20a3cb64003a0e6f46465973f05",
            "input": "At first glance, it would seem natural to compare Where the Sidewalk Ends with Laura. Both have noirish qualities, both were directed by Otto Preminger, and both star Dana Andrews and Gene Tierney. But that's where most of the comparisons end. Laura dealt with posh, sophisticated people with means who just happen to find themselves mixed-up in a murder. Where the Sidewalk Ends is set in a completely different strata. These are people with barely two nickels to rub together who are more accustomed to seeing the underbelly of society than going to fancy dress parties. Where the Sidewalk ends is a gritty film filled with desperate people who solve their problems with their fists or some other weapon. Small-time hoods are a dime-a-dozen and cops routinely beat confessions out of the crooks. Getting caught-up in a murder investigation seems as natural as breathing.While I haven't seen his entire body of work, based on what I have seen, Dana Andrews gives one of his best performances as the beat-down cop, Det. Sgt. Mark Dixon. He's the kind of cop who is used to roughing up the local hoods if it gets him information or a confession. One night, he goes too far and accidentally kills a man. He does his best to cover it up. But things get complicated when he falls for the dead man's wife, Morgan Taylor (Tierney), whose father becomes suspect number one in the murder case. As Morgan's father means the world to her, Dixon's got to do what he can to clear the old man without implicating himself.Technically, Where the Sidewalk Ends is outstanding. Besides the terrific performance from Andrews, the movie features the always delightful Tierney. She has a quality that can make even the bleakest of moments seem brighter. The rest of the cast is just as solid with Tom Tully as the wrongly accused father being a real standout. Beyond the acting, the direction, sets, lighting, and cinematography are all top-notch. Overall, it's an amazingly well made film.If I have one complaint (and admittedly it's a very, very minor quibble) it's that Tierney is almost too perfect for the role and her surroundings. It's a little difficult to believe that a woman like that could find herself mixed-up with some of these unsavory characters. It's not really her fault, it's just the way Tierney comes across. She seems a little too beautiful, polished, and delicate for the part. But, her gentle, kind, trusting nature add a sense of needed realism to her portrayal.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8afb9817ee44c37b7cc47b95518e181",
            "input": "I work at a Blockbuster store and every week we have movies that come in with just a few copies, these are the kind of movies that the Sci-Fi channel shows. The kind of movie that nobody ever wants, and only that idiots rent, when they bring it back I ask them \"was it any good?\", they say \"no we turned it off after 15 minutes!\" Movies with terrible computer generated, super imposed monsters and such like, very unappealing.This is the same type of movie that Grendel is, and absolute waste of time, if you want a reasonably (and only reasonably) good Beowulf based movie then try Beowulf & Grendel , starring Gerard Butler, who is also starring in the eagerly anticipated 300, as King Leonidas of Sparta.Plus, later this year we have another Beowulf movie, with a star studded cast ranging from Anthony Hopkins and Brendan Gleeson, to Angelina Jolie and John Malkovich.But don't let that get your hopes up like we all did with Eragon, or we are all in for another big disappointment.And regarding rentals, here is my rule of thumb: If there is only one or two copies, don't rent it because its a load of crap.( This is true 99.9% of the time, usually not true if the title is foreign, or a documentary.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3512b47ce3a4d78914586af51a50365",
            "input": "I had the privilege of watching Scarface on the big screen with its beautifully restored 35mm print in honor of the 20th anniversary of the films release. It was great to see this on the big screen as so much of it is lost on television sets and the overall largesse of this project cannot be emphasized enough. Scarface is the remake of a classic rags to riches to the depths of hell story featuring Al Pacino as Cuban drug lord Tony Montana. In this version, Tony comes to America during the Cuban boat people immigration wave in the late 1970s, early 1980s. Tony and his cohorts quickly get green cards by offing a political figure in Tent City and after a brief stay at a Cuban restaurant; Tony is launched on his horrific path to towards total destruction. Many of the characters in this movie a played in such skilled manner that is so enjoyable to watch I have forgot little of this film over the last twenty years. Robert Loggia as Tony's patron, Frank Lopez is wonderful. His character is flawed by being too trusting, and as Tony quickly figures out, soft. Lopez's right hand, Omar Suarez is portrayed by one of our greatest actors, F. Murray Abraham (Amadeus.) Suarez is the ultimate toady and will do anything for Frank; it is like he does not have a mind of his own. Tony quickly sees this and he constantly battles with Suarez, but really only sees him as a minor problem to get through on his way to the top. The character that always comes back to me as being played so perfectly is Mel Bernstein, the audaciously corrupt Miami Narcotics detective played by Harris Yulin (Training Day.) Mel, without guilt extorts great sums of money form all sides of the drug industry. He plays Tony off of Frank until it catches up with him in a scene that marks the exit from the film of both Frank and Mel. It is priceless to hear Frank asking for Mel to intercede, as Tony is about to kill him only to hear Mel reply, `It's your tree Frank, you're sitting in it.' This is from the man who Frank had been paying for protection!Tony's rise is meteoric and is only matched in speed and intensity by his quick crash and burn. After offing Frank and taking his wife and business Tony's greed takes over and he never can seem to get enough. As Tony plunges deeper into the world of drugs, greed and the inability to trust he eventually kills his best friend and his sister who had fallen in love and married. This all sets up the ending in which Tony's compound is stormed by an army from his supplier who feels betrayed because Tony would not go through with a political assassination that was ordered. This all stems form a compassionate moment when Tony refused to be an accomplice in a murder that would have involved the victim's wife and children.All in all this is a great depiction of 1980s excess and cocaine culture. DePalma does a nice job of holding it all together in one of the fastest moving three hour movies around. The violence is extremely graphic and contains a few scenes that will be forever etched on any viewers mind, particularly the gruesome chainsaw seen, the two point blank shots to the head and the entire bloody melee that ends the movie. This is a highly recommended stylistically done film that is not for the squeamish, or for those who need upbeat endings and potential sequels; DePalma let it all fly right here.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87061dff513c41a695a0021d69a8bf49",
            "input": "Samuel Fuller's Pickup on South Street is anomalous: A \"Red Scare\" movie devoid of hysteria, in which the Communist threat is nothing more than the McGuffin that ignites the plot. Pickpocket Richard Widmark relieves loose woman Jean Peters of her wallet containing a strip of microfilm; unbeknownst to either of them, it harbors secrets vital to the Cold War. Peters, as it happens, was under surveillance by FBI agents who are as nonplussed by the theft as the man who's running her, cowardly comsymp Richard Kiley. In trying to retrieve the precious film, both sides enlist the help of Thelma Ritter, a streetwise old jane who's always on the earie and willing to sell what she hears.Fuller draws from an opulent palette of tempos and tonalities in telling the story, which becomes a race against the clock of escalating brutality. From the subways to the waterfront, his midsummer Manhattan takes on a sweaty sheen that's almost pungent. The love scenes between Peters and Widmark become an unstable mixture of the tumultuous and the tender, and they're scored to \"Again,\" a song introduced by Ida Lupino in Road House, also starring Widmark. The pace slackens for Ritter's beautifully written and played death scene -- among the most poignant vignettes in all noir, and a kind of mirage-oasis in a film parched of sentimentality. This is writer/director Fuller's only work in the strictest confines of the noir cycle; his later explorations of American pathology (The Crimson Kimono, The Naked Kiss, Underworld U.S.A.) never resulted in a synthesis as satisfying as Pickup on South Street.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74c983af3b2540958ebdad0a48dd119a",
            "input": "What on earth has become of our dear Ramu? Is this the same man who made Sarkar, Satya, and Comapny? I refuse to believe so. If AAG was Ramu's most ambitious project, he has clearly jumped off the high cliff he has ascended by giving the industry some of the greatest works of all times. This movie is made to fall like a brick. I was cringing to leave the theater, but I was forced to sit because I wouldn't have been able to take my car out of the parking lot before others also left. Else, nothing would have made me sit beyond interval.This movie is nowhere close to Sholay. It doesn't even come near it within a mile. I believe Ramu surely loves The Godfather more than Sholay, since Sarkar was a classic piece of work. I read Ramu's interview a couple of days back, in which the interviewer said that Ramu doesn't sleep for more than 4 hours a day, that too not at a stretch. I completely agree with this now, as his lack of sleep has probably taken its toll on the movie.There is no power in the performance. Amitabh Bachchan doesn't even look scary. He looked more terrifying in the few posters and wallpapers I saw earlier. Ramu's favorite Nisha Kothari did a fantastic job in Sarkar because she didn't have many dialogs (in fact none if I remember clearly). She opened her mouth in this movie, and has found a place in history. The new guy playing Jai's role seems to have that brash look, but didn't manage Jai's role at all. I cant go on... Im sorry... my pain is too big for me to manage right now.I promised myself throughout the movie that I will watch the original Sholay once more just to see that it is still there.Bottom Line: Horrible movie. The media and critics are going to cook Ramu's goose. And just to remind all readers once more, I am one of the biggest Ramu fans, and even I cant spare him for this act.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2e745eb082a4b22a49b4a92bd1620fd",
            "input": "This movie is a rather odd mix of musical, romance, drama and crime with a sniff of film-noir to it. It's basically one messy heap of different genres, of which none really works out like it was supposed to.This movie is an attempt by Mickey Rooney to be taken more serious as an actor. He's a former child-star who always used to star in in happy comical- and musical productions at the start of his career. In this movie he picks a different approach (although the musical aspects are still present in the movie). But his role is actually quite laughable within the movie. I mean Mickey Rooney as a tough player? He's an extremely small boyish looking man. He actually was in his 30's already at the time of this movie but he seriously looks more like a 16 year old. Hearing him say babe to women and hearing talking tough to gangsters who are about 3 times bigger than he is just doesn't look and feel right. He simply isn't convincing in his role.Because the movie mixes so many different genres, the story also really feels as a messy one. Somewhere in it there is a crime plot and somewhere in it is a romantic plot-line and one about living your dream but none of it works out really due to the messy approach and handling of it all. It just isn't an interesting or compelling movie to watch. László Kardos is also a director who has done only 10 movies in his lifetime, despite the fact that his career span from 1935 till 1957. He must have been a struggling director who had a hard time getting work into the industry and instead once in a while was given a lesser script to work with. His movies are all unknown ones and normally also not of too high quality.Let's also not forget that this is a '50's movie but yet it more feels like a '40's one or perhaps even as one from the '30's. This is of course mostly due to the fact that this movie got shot in black & white. Generally speaking black & white movies from the '50's often have a cheap looking feeling over it and this movie forms no exception.It's a rather strange sight seeing Mickey Rooney and Louis Armstrong and his band as themselves performing together in a sequence. It wasn't the only movie Armstrong appeared in though and he would often pop up in these type of movies, often simply as himself. I guess jazz lovers can still somewhat enjoy watching this movie due to its music, since there is quite an amount of it present in this movie. The movie actually received an Oscar nomination for best original song.An awkward little movie and outing from Mickey Rooney.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfdfbdc658a648b0adaf83f0bbcf1972",
            "input": "I have seen this movie and the other one. Trinity is my name and i find that this one is worse then the first one. I have no idea why they even made another movie it was stupid and pointless sorry to say that i have all of them. I have sat through them number of times and it still drives me to turn it off 5 minutes into the movie. I like Terence Hill movies and i like Bud Spencer but this movie just drove me up the wall. If it had a different story line or at least more of a plot and more comedy it might have been funner and worth the 5 dollars i spent buying all the movies. But you make mistakes so i would say save your money and don't bye this movie or any of the ones that go with it trust me on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0652822397c1483daa862832815a2311",
            "input": "\"Erendira\" is a film from Mexico that is rarely talked about. The film only exists in a low quality VHS format. It's a shame this film hasn't been given a DVD release. \"Erendira\" is stunning and gorgeous with its magic-realist images. \"Erendira\" is based on a short story from the novel \"100 Years of Solitude\". Erendira is constantly daydreaming and accidentally burns down her grandma's house. Her evil grandma, played by Irene Papas, forces her into prostitution to pay for the damages. The whole town gets a piece of Erendira, so to speak. Although the subject matter sounds harsh, the film doesn't exploit sexuality. It's done in a mature artistic manner. The film also has some amazing costumes. Some of the more surreal aspects of the film that stand out the most, are the origami birds that morph into real birds, and a golden orange with a diamond in the center. Erendira is an amazing film, that even manages to throw in humor. This is definitely a film that deserves a special DVD release. As they'd say in espanol, \"Es muy muy bien !!! Excellente!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfe6a5aa8b6140d485a887b580071553",
            "input": "It's amazing that from a good, though not wonderful, film made back in the early Nineties, a whole franchise can grow. 'Stargate; SG1' is, without a doubt, a worthy addition to the science fiction genre and has the right to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with 'Star Trek' as the kings of sci-fi.Following on from the 1994 feature film 'Stargate', this series sees Stargate command (a military/science organisation) figuring out that the stargate system can be used to travel to various planets across the galaxy and beyond and the military sets up a number of teams to explore. SG1 is one such team, headed by military veteran Colonel Jack O'Neill, and includes archaeologist Doctor Daniel Jackson, military scientist Captain Samantha Carter and alien Teal'c, who has betrayed his overlord leaders in the hopes of one day freeing his people. Earth quickly makes an enemy of the Goa'uld, a parasitic race who use humans as hosts and think themselves equal to gods.The top-notch cast have much to be congratulated for in bringing this show to life. Richard Dean Anderson is perfect as the cynical and sarcastic O'Neill, who can shift from boyish to deadly in the blink of an eye. Michael Shanks, as Daniel, brings heart and an will of steel to the character, who has grown from wide-eyed innocence to darker and more hard-bitten as the show has progressed. Amanda Tapping, as Carter, has perfected the balance between depicting her character's femininity without comprising the fact she is a strong, intelligent military scientist. Christopher Judge is excellent as the aloof Teal'c, who is able to depict the character's emotions with subtlety. And Don S Davis is perfect as the esteemed General Hammond who leads with a good balance of fairness and firmness.Almost all the episodes are are involving and portrayed with intelligence, reflecting on moral dilemmas as well as the friction between military interests and civilian beliefs (often shown through arguments between O'Neill and Jackson). Guest characters are solidly depicted and story arcs are handled in a manner that doesn't bore viewers. SG1 also excels in humour, from O'Neill's wisecracks to episodes that are just wacky and odd! SG1 has everything from action to drama to romance to suspense to the heartbreaking scenes of death. It isn't just an excellent sci-fi show but is an excellent show, overall.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7c6bbf47a844730bc99638464189090",
            "input": "There is a bit of trivia which should be pointed out about a scene early in the movie where Homer watches the attempt of December 6, 1957 (at least that was the video used on the TV he was watching) which showed the Vangard launch attempt, which failed.He is next shown reading or dictating a letter to Dr. Von Braun offering condolences about the failure.Von Braun was at Marshall space flight center in Huntsville working for the Army. The Vanguard project was by the early Nasa team which was at what soon became Goddard Space flight center.The army rushed the Jupiter-C, which was essentially a US made V2 technology, but worked to launch a satellite in response to Russia's success with Sputnik.This error may have actually been made by Homer, because of the notoriety of Von Braun, but his team didn't have their attempt fail. In fact the underlying Redstone was flying from 52 and was the first US man rated booster, used for Shepard's sub orbital flight, as well as Grissom's.This is why this sort of movie is so good, as it hopefully will inspire people to read up and spot these bits of trivia, and in the process see what has been done, and be inspired to do more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e737af35de94bef8ea833e979342a00",
            "input": "Even if you know absolutely nothing about Ireland, you have to love \"My Left Foot\" (and especially Daniel Day-Lewis' performance in it). He plays cerebral palsy-afflicted Christy Brown. Due to this, he has spent most of his life ostracized. Even when trying to warn people about something, they just laugh at him. The light in the darkness for him is that he has control over one body part: his left foot. He uses that appendage to paint and write poetry, bringing him to prominence.Daniel Day-Lewis and director Jim Sheridan did very well on this collaboration, and also on a later collaboration: \"In the Name of the Father\" (but \"The Boxer\" was unnecessary). \"My Left Foot\" can make you feel many ways: sad, hopeful, or something else. But in any case, Daniel Day-Lewis gave the performance of a lifetime here. A great movie in every sense.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ff1b0e2b7b5473ab0f70e0368dc75e9",
            "input": "\"Flavia, la monaca muslmana\" aka. \"Flavia the Heretic\" of 1974 is a truly disturbing and uncompromising piece of Italian Exploitation cinema that, to a certain extent, follows a somewhat feminist premise (though the level of sleaze and brutality would probably disgust the majority of feminists). Set mostly in a convent, and with a nun as the eponymous central protagonist (great performance by the wonderful Florinda Bolkan), \"Flavia the Heretic\" may be referred to as a 'Nunsploitation' film. However, this film differs quite drastically from the typical Nunsploitation flicks from the time, as it doesn't so much focus on the nunsploitation elements such as lesbianism, sadistic lesbian punishments, etc. Personally, I saw more similarities to the Hexploitation flicks of the time, such as \"Mark of The Devil\", (even though this one doesn't treat the topic of witch-hunts), which focus on the brutal execution of Christian fundamentalism in the middle ages and early modern period.Italy around 1600: After witnessing her despotic father behead a wounded Muslim soldier, young Flavia is forced to become a nun in a convent. When her father condemns a fellow nun to a torturous death for a small misdemeanor years later, Falvia's disgust with male violence against women turns into hatred against the despotic church, and she joins a band of Arabic scavengers...One thing is for sure, \"Flavia the Heretic\" is not for the faint-hearted, and neither is it for those who want happy endings. Director Gianfranco Mingozzi obviously tried to make his film as realistic and disturbing as possible, especially in its nasty scenes. The many torture- and execution-scenes are extremely disturbing, with skinnings, spikings and other gruesome scenes in explicit detail, the most shocking scene probably being the torture of the young nun quite in the beginning of the film. The violence here is never superfluous, however. After all, this gruesome methods actually were reality in the time the film is set in. The film is very well-made, with realistic costumes, fantastic settings an elegant cinematography and a great score by Nicola Piovani. The stunningly beautiful and great Florinda Bolkan has proved her talent in many great Italian cult-productions (including Lucio Fulci's Giallo-masterpiece \"Non Si Sevizia Un Paperino\" of 1972). She delivers another great, charismatic performance here, and I couldn't imagine another actress fitting as well in the role as she does. The film has some minor inconsistencies (E.g. why does the rigid church let bizarre cult-followers into convents in the first place). However, it is overall amazing how realistic this film is. \"Flavia the Heretic\" should definitely not be missed by my fellow fans of Italian Exploitation Cinema. This is a great Exploitation flick overall, though it definitely is a deeply depressing one and therefore should be watched in the right mood. Highly recommended to fans of disturbing exploitation cinema. 7.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6992cb11a3eb42cda260519084d60709",
            "input": "Samuel Fuller brings his customary playful and stylish direction to this seedy, pulpy story and manages to create one of the undiscovered gems of 1950s cinema.Richard Widmark plays a petty thief tough guy (a role he perfected over the course of many movies), who snatches a young lady's (Jean Peters) wallet on a New York subway and with it a piece of much-wanted microfilm. This is 1953, so of course the microfilm is property of Commie spies who will stop at nothing to get it back. When the girl shows up at Widmark's waterfront shack, sent by an abusive boyfriend to reclaim the film, Widmark senses the opportunity to shake her and her \"comrades\" down for big money. The plot thickens, people start dying, and Widmark and Peters fall in love.Fuller handles the love story clumsily, but more from a sense of indifference than bad writing or direction. It's as if he included a love story under duress, and so made it intentionally unbelievable, as love stories so frequently were and still are in Hollywood films. Peters gives a remarkable performance as a tough New Yawk cookie, part gangster moll and part damsel in distress. When violence occurs against her, we genuinely care about her well being, and it's typical of Fuller's renegade, ahead-of-his-time style that a happy ending is not necessarily a foregone conclusion.But the ultimate success of \"Pickup on South Street\" rests squarely on the world-weary shoulders of Thelma Ritter, who plays Moe, a feisty lady who makes money any way she can, whether that be selling neckties or acting as a police informant. Ritter gives the performance of her career; in a breathtaking monologue, she conveys without ever directly addressing it the entire sad trajectory of her character's life, and the hopelessness she feels waking up every morning to a world of struggle, crime and hardship. It's as if every character Ritter ever played converges for one brief instant to give vent to all of the emotions they weren't given a chance to vent in those other movies. The scene is the highlight of Fuller's film, and a highlight of 50s cinema, period.Grade: A+",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21e5a3b53bee4b1f951acc33c7fe7075",
            "input": "As hard as it is for me to believe, with all of the awful reality shows out there over the past few years, this one has to take over the top spot for worst one yet. I am still wondering if this was actually just a spoof done by the SCTV gang. If Andy Kaufmann were still alive I'd be sure he was behind this. Can a rock band stoop any lower than has INXS to do such a shameful thing as this? The premise is simple and moronic. Audition a bunch of karaoke rejects to become the new lead singer of INXS, to take the place of Michael Hutchence (who committed suicide in 1997). Eight years and no hits later, the band commit the ultimate act of patheticness by subjecting themselves to auditioning a bunch of talentless wannabes to be the new lead singer of a band that is 20 years past its prime. So they trot all of these awful singers (I thought American Idol had its share of doozies) who do atrocious renditions of just about every classic (and predictable) rock song imaginable. And then they cut to the INXS band members who are seriously discussing the merits of each of these candidates. You could see better (and more original) rock performers at just about any night club in any city in the world.It has all the usual uncreative elements of every other reality show. Lame reality participants, lame interviews, lame host/emcee, lame \"judging\" of performances, and the lame booting of one participant at the end of each show. Can these shows get any more predictable? It's clearly a publicity stunt on the part of the band; a last gasp of hope at rekindling their lost stardom before they are finally buried into oblivion. Michael Hutchence, if he had any shred of dignity when alive, has to be rolling over in his grave. Not that INXS were ever a great band, but I had no idea they were this pathetic. If INXS are at all representative of what rock and roll has become, this show would be the final proof that rock and roll is once and for all, dead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-776fe9174e62430188cb56c2b00384a2",
            "input": "NOTHING in this movie is funny. I thought the premise, giving a human the libido of a randy ram, was interesting and should provide for some laughs. WRONG! There is simply nothing funny about the movie. For example, the main character making a pass at a goat in heat in the middle of a farmer's yard is not funny, it borders on obscenity. They are toying around with bestiality in this film on one level, and it just aint funny.We all know that dogs will eat anything, anywhere, anytime. The main character doing this with everything, everywhere, everytime is also not funny. It becomes a cliche.Rob Schneider is, I guess, acceptable in the role. By this, I mean that he's not a bad actor, but with rotten material it's difficult to comment on quality. However, Coleen Haskell, the other half of the HUMAN-romantic leads (does one count the number of animals that the main character has interest in as romantic leads too?), seems embarrassed by the whole thing, as well she should be. She seems to be acting in some kind of vacuum, detached from all the other actors in the movie. See this film only if you wish to be bored by tasteless, dull, repetitive material.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-684fe362681246769b04b695bf8ad70f",
            "input": "John Carradine, John Ireland, and Faith Domergue who as players all saw better days in better films got together for this Grade G horror film about life imitating art in a mysterious mansion.For Carradine it was in those last two decades of his career that he appeared in anything on the theory it was better to keep working no matter what you did and get those paychecks coming in. With that magnificent sonorous voice of his, Carradine was always in great demand for horror pictures and the man did not discriminate in the least in what he appeared in.He plays the caretaker of an old Gothic mansion who movie director John Ireland has rented for his latest low budget slasher film. It's even got a graveyard, but with a missing occupant. Faith Domergue is Ireland's aging star and Carole Wells is the young ingenue.In the last twenty minutes or so most of the cast winds up dead that aren't dead already. The script is so incoherent I'm still trying to figure out the point. I won't waste any more gray matter on it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64b046254d2249b3a6d463327a6f2b62",
            "input": "Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnn! :=8OZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........... <=8.Oh, um excuse me, sorry, fell asleep there for a mooment. Now where was I? Oh yes, \"The Projected Man\", yes... ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........... <=8.Ooops, sorry. Yes, \"The Projected Man\". Well, it's a British sci-fi yawnfest about nothing. Some orange-headed guy projects himself on a laser, gets the touch of death. At last he vanishes, the end. Actually, the film's not even that interesting. Dull, droning, starchy, stiff, and back-breakingly boring, \"The Projected Man\" is 77 solid minutes of nothing, starring nobody. Dull as dishwater. Dull as doorknob dust. Dull as Ethan Hawke - we're talking really DULL here, people! But wait, in respect to our dull cousins from across the puddle, the MooCow will now do a proper review for \"The Projected Man\":ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.............. <=8.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4fb6794db63419aae7af664c93922ef",
            "input": "Harold Pinter rewrites Anthony Schaeffer's classic play about a man going to visit the husband of his lover and having it all go sideways. The original film starred Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine. Caine has the Olivier role in this version and he's paired with Jude Law. Here the film is directed by Kenneth Branaugh.The acting is spectacular. Both Caine and Law are gangbusters in their respective roles. I really like the chemistry and the clashing of personalities. It's wonderful and enough of a reason to watch when the script's direction goes haywire.Harold Pinter's dialog is crisp and sharp and often very witty and I understand why he was chosen to rewrite the play (which is updated to make use of surveillance cameras and the like).The problem is that how the script moves the characters around is awful. Michale Caine walks Law through his odd modern house with sliding doors and panels for no really good reason. Conversations happen repeatedly in different locations. I know Pinter has done that in his plays, but in this case it becomes tedious. Why do we need to have the pair go over and over and over the fact that Law is sleeping with Caine's wife? It would be okay if at some point Law said enough we've done this, but he doesn't he acts as if each time is the first time. The script also doesn't move Caine through his manipulation of Law all that well. To begin with he's blindly angry to start so he has no chance to turn around and scare us.(Never mind a late in the game revelation that makes you wonder why he bothered) In the original we never suspected what was up. here we do and while it gives an edge it also somehow feels false since its so clear we are forced to wonder why Law's Milo doesn't see he's being set up. There are a few other instances but to say more would give away too much.Thinking about the film in retrospect I think its a film of missed opportunities and missteps. The opportunities squandered are the chance to have better fireworks between Caine and Law. Missteps in that the choice of a garish setting and odd shifts in plot take away from the creation of a tension and a believable thriller. Instead we get some smart dialog and great performances in a film that doesn't let them be real.despite some great performances and witty dialog this is only a 4 out of 10 because the rest of the script just doesn't work",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0fa39dc7fee4cffa71d21d22ec3eac7",
            "input": "I sat through this turkey because I hadn't seen it before, and because the premise sounded like it had potential. It was mildly entertaining until the hurricane sequence. At the height of the storm, the wind is strong enough to blow windows out of the house, yet the trees in the background are perfectly upright and not a leaf is moving! In fact, when the characters move outside the house, bright sunlight is visible illuminating the treetops. At that point, whatever credence the filmmakers had developed evaporated faster than the highly localized rain in their film. Too bad all hurricanes aren't like this one, it would surely help our homeowners insurance rates here in the Sunshine State.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a0d042a5ccd4703818c7df0e5b58d88",
            "input": "A couple(Janet and Richard) go camping out in the woods near a giant swamp. After camping and enjoying nature, the couple takes shelter in what they think is an abandoned farm house. Soon, a pair of escaped convicts show up and, after much delaying of the inevitable, they proceed to rape Janet and lock Richard in a birdcage.This LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT-like film has to be one of the most underrated horror films ever made. It's one of the more sick and twisted early 70s shockers. Moreover, I found this to be quite enchanting and beautiful in it's perverse tone. I love CAGED TERROR. The music definitely helps lend a sense of personality to the film as well as a lot of beauty. I found the film to be quite creepy.The flaws mainly have to do with the pacing of the film, which is to say that the film is rather slow and meandering. While I didn't mind the pacing due to the beauty and suspense of the film in question, I do think that it will both most people. The acting isn't too good nor is the dialogue, at least in the early scenes. This film takes a little more patience than usual, and it's really not for everyone.In short, this was a good film. Not the greatest horror film I've ever seen, but it is certainly a lot of fun. It's not exactly the easiest film to find. It's possible to find it in the USED section of a lot of stores if you look hard enough. It's not for everyone, but if you're a fan of trash cinema then it's definitely worth checking out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27058fbefa3a4ff1ad0e90fe56df7ff5",
            "input": "Wow. I don't even really remember that much about this movie, except that it stunk.The plot's basically; a girl's parents neglect her, so this sicko PokeMon pretends to be her dad. Am I the only one disturbed by that? Then, this weirdo PokeMon kidnaps Ash's mom to pretend to be the girl's. I don't care if he was trying to make the girl happy, that's just gross.There was no real plot. The girl was just a whiny brat who wanted things her own way. She played with Unowns, was the \"daughter\" of Entei and apparently could grow and shrink in age on a whim with the help of her \"dad\".That's pretty much all I can remember, but I think you can take it as a hint, and not see it. (Or if you do see it, don't expect much.) 1 out of 10.Seriously. If you want a PokeMon movie, rent \"PokeMon; the First Movie\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f56b0bbabfc242dda2c4d11782f7cd7e",
            "input": "\"The Notorious Bettie Page\" is about a woman who always wanted to be an actress but instead became one of the most famous pin up girls in the history of America. Bettie Page played by Gretchen Mol was one of the first sex icons in America. The type of modeling Bettie Page took part in included nudity and bondage which lead to a U.S Senate investigation in the 1950s.Walking out of the film, all I could think about was how far we have come in terms of pornography since the 1950s. You can go on the internet now and find some of most disturbing and shocking images ever shot, that the footage questioned in \"The Notorious Bettie Page\" seems almost childlike and innocent. Most of the footage including the bondage did not feature nudity when Bettie Page was involved yet today we have sick images where we can see women having sex with animals. I find that maybe the envelope has been pushed a little too far since the 1950s because looking at this movie in terms of today's pornography, it was very tastefully done.To be honest, I was pretty impressed with \"The Notorious Bettie Page,\" I found the film to be very well done and interesting. The movie is exactly what the trailer leads you to believe it will be and is a very interesting look at one of the first female sex icons in America. Gretchen Mol looks just like Bettie Page and gives a very fine performance. I also thought that since the movie was shot in black and white it made the film seem realistic because it made the audience believe they were watching a film created in the late 1950s.My only complaint about the film was the running time, there seemed to be a few scenes that were cut and seemed to be a little shorter than they should have been. I looked this up and it seems that 10 minutes was cut from the film since its original showing at the Toronto Film Festival. Also the ending was pretty tame and I was expecting a little more from it or maybe some paragraphs to come on the screen to tell the audience more about Bettie Page's life where the film left off. Those are my only two complaints about the film other than that the directing was solid, the acting was great especially Gretchen, and the writing was good.Mary Harron, who directed \"American Psycho\", which is one of my favorite films, is the director and writer of \"The Notorious Bettie Page.\" I feel that Mary is a very talented director who knows how to create a setting and create great movies based on characters because like \"Psycho\", Bettie Page is a character study and a fine one at that. Harron captures the 40s and 50s with ease as well as all the characters. She is a very talented director who I hope will be around for many years to come.Bottom Line: \"The Notorious Bettie Page\" is definitely worth a look. It's a very interesting story that shows how far America, as well as the world, has come in terms of pornography. The film also provides a fine performance by Gretchen Mol who literally nails the role of Bettie Page on the head. And top it off with a talented director who was able to capture the look and feel of a previous era and you have a good movie on your hands. Sadly, this film is probably going to flop since not many besides people who grew up in this era will show interest in the film but I think it's worth checking out.MovieManMenzel's final rating for \"The Notorious Bettie Page\" is a 8/10. It's an interesting character study about one of the most famous pin up girls and sex icons in American history.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db479d50f7854f608382709d176de590",
            "input": "There are just so many things wrong with this movie.To begin with, the first twenty minutes of the film could have been compressed into just five or maybe ten. The overall movie is (mercifully) short already, but this could have been made up for by giving a little more attention to the Mean Lion (how did the miss a reference to \"The Wiz\" on that one?) and working his subplot a little more closely into the main plot. In short, the script had the seed of a good idea, but needed quite a bit of reworking.Second, it could have done without the crude humor. The original also had some that it could have done without, but at least there it was almost an afterthought -- here, flatulence and urination abound.Third, the show is a little too self-aware. The original series had that well enough, as did the first movie, but here it's just way, way too much. The Brendan Fraser in-jokes were just a bit over the top (and why no mention of the \"new Ursula\"?). Other gags with the Narrator, especially a couple of interactions near the end, also exceed good sense.Fourth, a bit more attention could have been given to the CGI work. In the first it was hard to tell that Shemp wasn't a real elephant (except by behavior, of course), but here the CGI stands out like a sore thumb. Ideally special effects should merely tell the story whether they're good or bad, and they at least do succeed on that count, so it's a relatively small problem, but it's still there.All that said, Christopher Showerman's performance as George is decent enough. It lacks Brendan Fraser's charm, but Christopher only really fails in that specific comparison -- he even managed to give George a bit of personal depth, which should have been a major foul in a Jay Ward-inspired movie but wasn't here. Julie Benz as the new Ursula surprised me as being even better than Leslie Mann in the original.Most other performances were pretty standard, not standing out in my mind as either good or bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-025def256e7e4135b7296b9d18a58324",
            "input": "Trudy Lintz (Rene Russo) was one very fortunate lady many years ago. She was the wife of a wealthy doctor and had lots of extracurricular money. Her passion was animals and she devoted herself to providing a sanctuary for the furry ones on her property grounds. Trudy also raised two chimps in her home to be more like children. They dressed in clothes and had many amenities. One day, she learns of an abandoned baby gorilla. Knowing nothing about the large apes, she relies on her husband's medical abilities and expert advice to save the gorilla's life. Once out of danger, Trudy decides she will raise the gorilla, also, as one of her children. This works well for years and Buddy, the gorilla, is truly a remarkably intelligent addition to her home. But, Buddy is also a gorilla and his strength and curiosity become quite enormous. Will Trudy be able to keep Buddy under control? For those who love animals, Buddy is a must-see movie. Based on a true story, Trudy and her ape develop a relationship that is unique in the annals of animal history and lore. Of course, Buddy is not a real gorilla but a mechanical one, in the film, but he is very close to seeming totally real. Russo gives a nice performance as a lady ahead of her time and the supporting players are also quite nice. The costumes are exemplary, as befitting the earlier era of the story, and the settings and production values outstanding. But, most importantly, animals are here in abundance, not only Buddy, but the adorable chimps, the ducks, the rabbits, and so forth. For those who want to watch a film and be transported to animal heaven, here on earth, this is a great movie choice. All animal lovers, and even those who just want to watch a great family film, will go \"ape\" over Buddy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b3ff23ab7394fe08f0b7088f0001cce",
            "input": "be warned: this movie tells lots of love stories without any coherence.The only intention of this movie seems to be showing love in many different ways.Each story has only a few minutes, so there is no development of characters and nearly no plot. Just an sketchy idea of a plot. The writer tried to build in turning points that aimed to surprise the viewer. However, that just didn't work out because you didn't get to know the characters in before or these \"jokes\" were just silly.This is a movie about love that fails to reach your heart. A dozen times. Or even more, I don't know and I don't care.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4d45d33573049f29b292254cd481818",
            "input": "I second the motion to make this into a movie, it would be great!! I was also amazed at the storyline and character build in this game. I have played it again and again (over 20 times) just to try something different and it gets more interesting every time. Final Fantasy eat your heart out!! THIS SHOULD BE MADE INTO A MOVIE!!!!! If anyone out there wants some help to start a petition to have this made into a movie, please contact me. I would love to help with that project any day. The graphics are great for PS1 and even make you forget it is PS1 most of the time. The multitude of side quests makes it different every time you play.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f2067377ef749a196cadf60552831c2",
            "input": "Normally when I go on a raid of the local Hollywood Video I head towards the B-Horror movies. To me the basic principals behind a B-Horror movie is it's camp value, Heavy Gore, Lots of needless Nudity, and special effects that anyone can put together with a pack of corn syrup and latex. I rented Cradle of Fear strictly because I've been a fan of the band since they released they're first Demo in 1995. The movie started off on an interesting note and then when I saw Dani Filth stomp on an extremely obvious latex mask I LAUGHED. When I saw the Lesbian sex scene for the sake of a Lesbian sex scene I LAUGHED EVEN HARDER. I spent pretty much the entire movie laughing and when I wasn't laughing I was shaking my head thinking about how a multi-million dollar rock star would want to make a movie that seemed like it was on a budget of multi-hundreds of dollars. The whole point of this movie to me seemed to attract the \"Hardcore Goth kids who think death, destruction, sex, blood, and Satan are the greatest things invented since Lava Lamps. That was really it. To me this movie seemed like 80.5% of the things that happened in this movie just happened for the sake of being Satanic. This movie had a lot of potential and really could have been a real good movie but in the end this \"Movie\" really is just an extended Cradle of Filth Video.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4ba6283a47b484cbd2a33b4bbb94cbf",
            "input": "This 1973 remake of the classic 1944 Billy Wilder film, \"Double Indemnity,\" is a textbook example of how to destroy a great script. This grade-B TV fodder also illustrates the folly of remakes in general. While Hollywood has gone after greedy executives that colorize black-and-white films and sought disclaimers on wide-screen movies that are shown in pan-and-scan versions, the industry has ignored the hacks that insist on taking a classic film and diminishing it with a shoddy remake.The first step in producing a bowdlerized version of a classic is to edit the script. The Billy-Wilder-Raymond-Chandler work was cut by a half hour to fit the finished film into a specified time-slot with room for commercials. Then update the production with bland, color photography, smart, upscale sets, and TV-familiar actors. Thus, the brand-new \"Double Indemnity\" eliminates the atmospheric black-and-white film-noir cinematography that enhanced the mood and characterizations of the original. Gone are the dusty, shadowy, claustrophobic sets that explained the protagonists' desires to escape their situations at whatever cost. Gone are the close bond between Keyes and Neff and the erotic attraction between Neff and Phyllis.The look of Jack Smight's take on \"Double Indemnity\" is more \"Dynasty\" than film noir. Phyllis Dietrickson has a designer home to die for, and Neff's comfy pad would be hard to afford on an insurance salesman's salary, not to mention the sporty Mercedes convertible that he drives. Neither character has any apparent motive to murder for a paltry $200,000. If not money, then perhaps murder for love or lust? Not in this version. Richard Crenna shows little interest in Samantha Eggar, and their kisses are about as lusty as those between a brother and a sister. Crenna fails to capture the cynicism of Neff, and his attempts at double-entendre and sexual suggestiveness fall horribly flat. Eggar is little better and lacks sensuality and the depth to suggest the inner workings of a supposedly devious and manipulative mind. Only Lee J. Cobb manages a creditable performance as Keyes. Director Jack Smight and his three principals have all done much better work.There was no conceivable reason to produce this wretched remake except to fill time in a broadcast schedule. There was no conceivable reason to resurrect this dud on DVD and package it with the original film except to fill out a double-disc package. The only lesson that can be learned from this misfire is that even a great script and great dialog can be ruined with poor casting, lackluster direction, and TV grade production values. The 1973 \"Double Indemnity\" should be titled \"10% Indemnity,\" because viewing it only underscores the 100% perfection of the original movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-071fe66a29734a1584b0bd9f59456ddb",
            "input": "Here's yet another blasphemous European story in which they blast the religion of their country. (These atheist filmmakers are relentless.) Here we see a brutal blasting of Catholics and/or the Catholic clergy (and I am not Catholic).This won actually won an Academy Award for bes foreign film. That's probably because the story made Catholics and religious belief in general look extremely weak. One of the main characters is a priest and he cares more about food than anything else. He's portrayed as nothing but an idiot. No wonder the secular- dominated Academy loved this movie.Also, there is some overacting fool who plays a guy who renounces his religion so he can marry one of the four daughters featured in the story. The daughters take turns seducing the \"seminary\" student (who states he studied for six years but says he's an agnostic!). I mean, how blasphemous IS this film??!!!This is a disgrace and another excellent example of the secular-progressive bigotry of the film business, worldwide (not just Hollywood).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9365682d80e447b8f64b97f36299de7",
            "input": "The author of \"Nekromantik\", Jörg Buttgereit's second feature film, \"Der Todesking\" is a powerful masterpiece. Centered around a chain letter originating from a group called \"The Brotherhood of the 7th Day\", the movie shows 7 episodes, each consisting of one day during one week, where suicide is approached using different characters and situations all the while the letter is making it's rounds. Do not touch this one if you like Hollywood movies or musicals, enjoy happy or even remotely \"normal\" movies or expect a movie to be good only, if it is focused on stage acting.The nihilistic, avant-garde approach of Der Todesking well explains, why Buttgereit's movies in general were banned in Germany, their native country of origin, during the 80's and most of the 90's. Der Todesking is not really focused on the characters appearing on-screen, but the meaningless apathy or depression most people's lives consist of in general. Buttgereit does not find reasons to go on living, only reasons to stop, and in choosing how and when you die, you can also be the king of death, Der Todesking.Buttgereit's movies are generally difficult to categorize and Der Todesking is no exception. Featuring the same crew and almost the same cast as all other of his movies, \"art film\" would probably be the closest description every time. Der Todesking features an original method to shoot, create the mood and handle the central object in almost every scene. During one scene, the camera slowly, continuously pans in 360 degree circle, while a person lives in a small one-room apartment for a day. During another, Buttgereit uses sound and film corruption to depict the collapsing mental state of a man, while he dwells in his desperation. During a third, seemingly pleasant scene names, ages and occupations of actual people to have committed suicide are shown on-screen, supposedly warranting the ban in Germany for this particular movie.Episode movies (and especially this one, as the scenes are only vaguely connected) generally suffer from incoherence, and Der Todesking is no exception. While all episodes have the same focus of inflicted death and it's consequences or subsequences in all it's variations, there are very powerful episodes, yet an episode or two might even seem like filler material, partly draining the overall power of the movie - still, the the jaw-dropping, immensely powerful intermissions depicting a decomposing body manage to keep the movie together and cleanse it from it's more vague moments back to the status of greatness. The general atmosphere is baffling, awe-inspiring, highly depressing and sometimes even disgusting - so much so that dozens of people left in the middle of the movie during a theater showing in a film festival I took part of.This is one movie that does leave a lasting impression and I strongly recommend it for anyone looking for a special experience and something they will definitely remember in years to come. Not recommended for the faint of heart or show time fans, this is a small, different movie that truly raises feelings in the audience. Whether it be confusion, amazement or even hate, you aren't likely to be left cold by this, in my opinion the best, achievement of this small indie crew.The main theme of the movie, \"Die Fahrt ins Reich der Menschentrümmer part I-III\" was released in a limited 666-piece 8\" vinyl edition, which is now much sought after. You still can get the classical masterpiece by getting \"The Nekromantik\" soundtrack CD, which I highly recommend. The Lo-Fi synthesizer music in the movie is dark and quirky, almost illbient-like, makes an essential part of the movie's atmosphere, and is something you would very, very rarely hear otherwise. Much recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1441357aad784c068b6d65ec6f0997f0",
            "input": "This is the one movie to see if you are to wed or are a married couple. The movie portrais a couple in Italy and deals with such difficult topics as abortion, infidelity, juggling work and family.The so called \"culture of death\" that we are experiencing nowadays in the world is terrible and this movie will surely make you think.A must see. I hope it gets distributed as it should.Congratulations on the cast and director.Two thumbs up and a 10 star evaluation from me!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa4847d81fad4a528a9c2592c3d0b619",
            "input": "Many of the lead characters in Hideo Gosha's 1969 film \"Hitokiri\" (manslayer; aka \"Tenchu\" -- heaven's punishment) were actual historical figures (in \"western\" name-order format): Ryoma Sakamoto, Hampeita Takechi, Shimbei Tanaka, Izo Okada, ____ Anenokoji. The name \"Hitokiri,\" a historical term, refers to a group of four super-swordsmen who carried out numerous assassinations of key figures in the ruling Tokugawa Shogunate in the mid-1800s under the orders of Takechi, the leader of the \"Loyalist\" (i.e. ultra-nationalist, pro-Emperor) faction of the Tosa clan. What was this struggle about? Sad to say, you won't find out in this film. \"Brilliant History Lesson\" indeed!No, Gosha is much more interested in showing you the usual bloody slicing and dicing and (at absurd length) the inner torment of the not-very-bright killer Izo Okada than in revealing actual history. Sakamoto, for example, was someone of historical significance, considered to be the father of the Imperial Japanese Navy. The closest Gosha comes to providing a history lesson is the scene in which Sakamoto, whom Takechi considers a traitor to the Loyalist cause, comes to Takechi's mansion to try to sway him ideologically. He begins by talking about the international political situation, with foreign warships in Japan's ports and a Japan that is too weak militarily to defend against them. Want to know more? Sorry. Gosha cuts off this potentially fascinating lecture in mid sentence(!). So much for informing his audience about a turning point in Japanese history.The film left me in utter confusion about the aims of the two sides in this struggle. For the two and a half centuries that the Shogunate held central power in Japan, it was an institution dedicated to preventing social change, to preserving the feudal relations of society. It was fearful of outside contamination, both ideological and technological. In keeping with this spirit, it outlawed firearms, those instruments of \"leveling\" in Europe and the Americas, with which a peasant could have stood up to a samurai. Throughout this period, the Emperor was nothing more than a spiritual figurehead.But, in the towns, which stood in neutral zones between the feudal fiefdoms, a new class of merchants, landlords and craftsmen was developing -- the class known in Europe by its French name, the bourgeoisie. Inevitably, as this new class gained strength, it chafed against the many confines of feudal society. As in Europe, the king (Emperor) became the central figure in the bourgeoisie's struggle for power against the feudal aristocracy. But a political leadership does not always fully understand the interests of the class it serves. When the outside world arrived with a bang in 1853, in the form of U.S. Admiral Perry's \"Black Ships,\" the ruling elite of Japan was thrown into a crisis. Their military was no match for these foreigners. Also, they had heard about the havoc the British and French imperialists were wreaking in China. What should Japan do to save itself from the fate of its weak neighbor? Surprisingly, some elements within the usually isolationist Shogunate were inclined to open trade with the foreigners in order to obtain some of their advanced technology. This is the point of view represented (just barely) in the film by Sakamoto. On the other hand, the Emperor-loyal ultra-nationalists, represented by Takechi, believed they could keep out the foreigners by force, if only they could prevent the other faction from \"selling out the country.\" (Sound familiar?) Thus, the assassination of key Shogunate figures is in order -- and away we go.Takechi's motivations were, for me, the film's biggest puzzle. Gosha suggests that he is fighting mainly for his personal advancement rather than for the Loyalist cause. Can we take this to represent the tenor of the Loyalists as a whole? (Do you care?)Several reviewers have compared this film favorably with \"Goyokin,\" which Gosha made in the same year. But, where \"Goyokin\" is a crackling, suspenseful, adventure yarn, with a hero worthy of sympathy, \"Hitokiri\" is plodding, nowhere near as compelling and lacks such a hero. Sakamoto could have been this film's hero but we are not allowed to know him -- nor what he stands for -- well enough for him to achieve that status.In view of his wonderful scores for five previous Kurosawa films, Masaru Sato's score here was very disappointing, sounding like something rejected from a \"Bonanza\" episode.Barry Freed",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f6ce2057cdf4c879ea135e3dd28e0c6",
            "input": "This movie was directed by Victor Nunez who also wrote the screenplay (Ulee's Gold). Nice and straightforward writing, that was nominated for the Independent Spirit Award, looking at Ruby's day to day life. What we see is a slice in the life of the young woman Ruby. Ashley Judd (Sisters) won the Independent Spirit Award Best Female Lead for this role. Ruby is starting to live on her own and establishing her own identity. She explores jobs, friendships, boy friends, sex, a typical young adult search. The movie won Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival. As an independent film enthusiast I picked the movie because of Sundance. I appreciate this type of movie, because it does not carry the Hollywood baggage.Although the stories are completely different this reminded me of Nobody's Fool, staring Paul Newman. The later movie is a slice of the daily life of a common man. I like that. The story is very nicely told, and all we had to do was sit and enjoy the story. The only thing I am not sure about is the title. I am sure that there are not that many bugs, and flies in paradise as there are in Florida. As I am allergic to mosquitos, Florida is no paradise to me, I itch all over thinking about Florida. I turn into a complete red boil. I recommend this movie! Favorite scenes: Ruby and her friend Rochelle Bridges, played by Allison Dean walking at the beach of Panama City, Florida. Indeed the sand is very white. I have been there. Favorite Quotes: \"Necessity has always been a good excuse.\" \"All that fuss over finding a man is not at all different now, who is going to be and when and why.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8aba9970079c4301ae0e6044870b0778",
            "input": "I am surprised that everyone (even the critics) seems to think this was a good movie. It was the most clichéd thriller ever made that I have seen. We have the 'bad guy' who wants to force the 'good guy' (or girls in this case) to do something or face the consequence. The 'good girl' in this movie must use her smarts and skills to defeat the 'bad guy' and save the day and her loved ones. Using charisma, bravery, and even luck to save the day. Where to begin? Well, a young woman by the name of Lisa Reisert meets a young man by the name of Jackson Rippner (nice name) at an airport. One coincidence leads to another and soon it seems as if fate is bringing these two together. Sharing drinks, sitting next to each other, seemingly getting along in every way... Is there more to this strangeness? Could these two be meant for each other? Does 'fate' have a reason for their strange and random encounter? Well, as it turns out, unfortunately yes. Jackson needs to Lisa to help him assassinate the Director of Homeland Security by moving him from one room to another so that his men can launch an attack on him. Oh, if she doesn't do this then her father is dead. Though we never learn the exact reasons why and who is really behind this madness, Jackson more then explains how this is going to happen and why its in Lisa's best interest to help him.Of course, Lisa defeats his evil plans with her smarts and in the process stabs him in the neck, makes him trip over chairs, and hitting him with a field hockey stick. Oh, and before that, she leads him on wild chase through Miami airport where she gets passed post 9 11 security and steals a car that she later uses to run over the man who was ordered to kill her father. Yeah, right.First of all, I find it strange that a man like Jackson who can get his hands on high tech weaponry needs the help of a hotel manager. Couldn't he just sneak a bomb into the building? Wouldn't that make it safer for him and his team by leaving out any third parties? And why do characters like Jackson also explain everything they are going to do to someone they are threatening? Doesn't that make it easier to stop them by the same people? The actors did their best considering the movie they were given. Racheal McAdams and Cillian Murphy are still actors to look out for. Also, I believe that Jayma Mays (who played the 'loveable' Cynthia) will be someone we will see more of. It's just too bad they all were stuck with this.2 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a1057126b474a31bfafa7495e5d9bac",
            "input": "Road to Perdition, a movie undeservedly overlooked at that year Oscars is the second work of Sam Mendes (and in my opinion his best work), a director who three years before won Oscar for his widely acclaimed but controversial American Beauty. This is a terrific movie, and at the same time ultimately poignant and sad.It's a story of a relatively wealthy and happy family from outward appearance during difficult times of Depression when the, Michael Sullivan, a father of two children, played by great Tom Hanks (I'm not his admirer but ought to say that) is a hit-man for local mafia boss, played by Paul Newman. His eldest son, a thirteen years boy Michael Sullivan Jr., perfectly played by young Tyler Hoechlin, after years of blissful ignorance finds out what is his father job and on what money their family live. Prompted by his curiosity and his aspiration to know truth he accidentally becomes a witness of a murder, committed by John Rooney, son of his father boss. Such discovery strikes an innocent soul and it caused numerous events that changed his life forever. The atmosphere of the period, all the backgrounds and decorations are perfectly created, editing and cinematography are almost flawless while the story is well written. But the main line of the movie, the most important moments and points of the movie and the key factor of the movie success are difficult father-son relations in bad times. They are shown so deeply, strong and believable. Tom Hanks does excellent and has one of the best performances of his career in a quite unusual role for him and all acting across the board is superb. Finally worth to mention a very nice score by Paul Newman and in the result we get an outstanding work of all people involved in making this beautiful (but one more time sad) masterpiece. I believe Road to Perdition belongs to greatest achievements of film-making of this decade and undoubtedly one of the best films of the year.My grade 10 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4dfeea4f4c94b5cbf47616f7fe1a8e0",
            "input": "I was very displeased with this move. Everything was terrible from the start. The comedy was unhumorous, the action overdone, the songs unmelodious. Even the storyline was weightless. From a writer who has written successful scripts like Guru and Dhoom, I had high expectations. The actors worked way too hard and did not help the film at all. Of course, Kareena rocked the screen in a bikini but for two seconds. I think Hindi stunt directors should research how action movies are done. They tend to exaggerate way too much. In Chinese films, this style works because that is their signature piece. But, Hindi cinema's signature are the songs. A good action movie should last no more than two hours and cannot look unrealistic. But, in the future, I'm sure these action movies will get much sharper. Also to be noted: Comedy and action films do not mix unless done properly. Good Luck next time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6145cfa99e434b7083ead82ff3109d98",
            "input": "This movie is just plain bad. It isn't even worth watching to make fun of it. The lunatic professor is just plain annoying. Even suspending disbelief to allow for invisibility (which I glady do for the sake of good bad movies) and allowing for exceedingly stupid victims in a horror movie, this movie asks for even more than that. If you are looking for women's locker room shower scenes, and random sexual encounters, get a porn, if you are looking for a good-bad movie, get something else. If you want to simply waste your time on an annoying bad movie, rent this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29aa7bdbdae8450ea3839cf1364459ac",
            "input": "This movie grabbed me with the incredible opening sequence which tricked me into a complete reversal of perspective, so I was hooked by the time the title came on. The theme of this movie is that everyone is acting, trying to re-invent themselves, but not in a tricky way like Identity or the Usual Suspects, but in the way we all try to make whatever banal life we find ourselves in a little more interesting. The scenes in the chicken warehouses are spectacular. At one point Jorgen (who owns the chicken farm) attends a seminar in laughing, where he's the worst student. His discomfort at this lets you see the depth of his yearning to change himself. The movie made me wonder about the hidden mysteries that lie behind the surface of the most commonplace people I see every day. There's not a lot of plot here. Guessing the old man's secret is pretty easy, but the fascination lies in trying to guess what all the other characters will do when they figure it out. This movie appealed to me in the same way that Sideways did, although the characters couldn't be more dissimilar.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9dee9cabcd864f0c92868df780497056",
            "input": "Yes, I know I'm one of the few people longing to trample this movie into the dust of oblivion.So let me me tell you why I feel this way. In truth,had it been advertized as a Zombie film or the like,I might have enjoyed it.But right now,I'm totally speechless.*SPOILER...Though I'm not sure what's to spoil* Let's start with the first HUGE flaw. If I did not know that the movie is called \"Darkness - The VAMPIRE Version\" and had I not seen some sequences where some individuals seem to be sucking blood, I would not have seen the connection with Vampires. I mean, FANGLESS???? Give me a break!!!Second bad point: what's with the Metal? It appears that all young people, but mainly those so-called \"vampires\", are into various kinds of Metal,judging mainly by their shirts! Don't get me wrong, I've been into the more extreme forms of music for almost 15 years, but nobody 's going to scare me by showing me some ridiculous teenagers in Iron Maiden (of all bands!!!) T-shirts running around,pretending to be Vampires! \"Pathetic\" is the only only word that I could use here.Third weakness: the actors. Wait a minute. WHAT actors?! You mean the director's wooden friends! Words would be a waste here.Yes, alright, the movie is very gory, but what difference does that make? It WOULD have been a strong point and something to enjoy if the \"briliant\" director had not chosen to create an ARTIFICIAL vampire topic in this movie. I wanted to see Vampires,but was treated to some stupid looking kids I would have loved to use my baseball bat on. The Film-makers should simply have advertized the movie saying \"cheap B-grade horror with no plot but a lot of gore\" !!!This movie is blasphemy against the whole concept of Vampirism. And it makes me sick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48330d4e599d40c0999c6c050a5b3e41",
            "input": "This was a blind buy used DVD. It totally killed a nice buzz I had going when I hit play.It's bubble-headed comedy, but it's um. squalid. The plot is ZANY!, but the characters do things to each other that are so petty and disturbed and conveniently contrived I ultimately found it depressing to watch.Maybe the box lead me to expect something more than an uneven, goofy caper film. (I know, I know, the quotes on the box & the Academy Award nomination mean nothing.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ca851c1a175412f8fd53217348792d2",
            "input": "Faith and Mortality... viewed through the lens of an elderly Ashkenazi Jewish-American gentleman and a younger, African-American Jewish gentleman who waver between being at odds with each other and having frank talks about how their lives have unfolded over the years..Mostel's character is a tailor with chronic back problems, and a terminally ill wife; Belafonte's character is a career hustler, never settling on a regular job, and a fatal car accident leaves him in an odd Purgatory-- he must convince Mostel to renew his faith, as it has been failing along with his wife's health (and his own).. but Belafonte's Levine has his own problems, still pining for the girlfriend he left behind..Belafonte's character leaves the film before he seemingly should, and so the the ending is cryptic, and the film suffers somewhat from its ambiguous ending..This is not a 'typical' Hollywood movie on ethnic relations or about a person's crisis of faith.. it is worth watching more than once and appreciating the excellent performances of the principal actors..",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6c09facb5464e338e08c481e04a8fd2",
            "input": "Curiously, Season 6 of the Columbo series contained only three episodes and there is very little evidence of quality in at least two of the scripts, based on this outing for the \"man-in-the-mac\" and also \"Fade into Murder\".Furthermore, it is not a coincidence that Peter S. Feibleman penned both the aforementioned scripts (incidentally he plays the part of the murdered security guard here).This adventure is very rarely compelling and many of the performers just look disinterested with the material. The story is rather weakly developed with some protracted periods of boring conversation.Columbo is also shadowed by a colleague here(similar to \"Last Salute to the Commodore\") but the entertainment value is minimal. To add to this, Celeste's Holm characterisation, which is intended to provide comedy, induces embarrassment rather than laughs.The script wavers off to deal with the family history and the murderess does enough to gift Columbo the case, though there is never a credible discussion relating to the motives of her crime.Ironically, what turns out to be, arguably, Columbo's worst adventure produces the funniest moment in the series. He quizzes a male hairdresser and has a haircut/manicure at the same time. The next 5 minutes are hilarious - it's just that Columbo's hair is so perfectly groomed, then he can't afford to pay the bill and then, when he makes enquiries at a jewellers he keeps glancing in the mirror to admire his hairstyle!Sadly, this is the only decent moment from a script that looks like it has been cobbled together in ten minutes. For Columbo completionists only.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16e61f6a5821402690227c1a40ec5e2c",
            "input": "\"Nat\" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend \"IQ\" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry \"Scooter\" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.The first thing you notice is the animation of the film. I found it done very well done. The scenery had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good either. There were many times I focused more on my computer than the story. The writing was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was completely ignored, as the main focus was the flies. I also hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and explained that the stories about the flies in the film was a work of fiction, and no flies were on Apollo 11. I did like how he thanked the men and women who sacrificed their lives for space exploration though.If you are an adult, this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is certainly just for kids. But, save this one for a rainy day.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce58db906c7540a28e904078ea555d7f",
            "input": "It's great to see Jorja Fox in a role where she gets to smile a lot. Also loved hearing her sing. Nice change to see her out of her CSI/West Wing/ER roles. The movie itself was entertaining, but it seemed skip some explanation in a lot of parts. Several of the characters seemed to be miserable one minute and happy the next and it was left up to your imagination to figure out why. Each character was quirky though and in some cases, I couldn't wait to see what they would do next or hear what they would say next. This movie wasn't full of squeaky clean people, but rather complicated realistic people who could make mistakes, feel bad about them and then find a way to fix them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5fd5f6c2c7584e39923436b1af301d9e",
            "input": "end of the world looks like a good movie on the box cover but be warned its bad.being a big fan of mega star actor Christopher lee i was fooled. like tentacles(77)a good cast does not mean it'll be a good film.the beginning looks promising then it turns to tedium,many parts of the movie are too dark to see whats going on.the rest of the cast is shown briefly like;Lew ayres,dean Jagger,and MacDonald Carey as a security guard.i would expect better from Charles band who made good fun movies like the re-animater and dolls.i heard Christopher lee was tricked into making this film.he was told his co stars were going to be Jose ferrer,john carridine,and dean Jagger.well dean Jagger is there but the other two never made it(lucky them)if you make a movie about the end of the world use a bigger budget and better storyline.dean Jagger went on to do two good movies afterwards;alligator(80)and game of death(79) sue Lyon(Lolita)is also in the movie minus her lollipop.if you are a glutton for punishment then watch end of the world i dare you to say awake during the whole movie.1 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c30611db4a74bdcbd27bf905c84790f",
            "input": "I sat through almost one episode of this series and just couldn't take anymore. It felt as though I'd watched dozens of episodes already, and then it hit me.....There's nothing new here! I've heard that joke on Seinfeld, I saw someone fall like that on friends, an episode of Happy Days had almost the same storyline, ect. None of the actors are interesting here either! Some were good on other shows (not here), and others are new to a profession they should have never entered. Avoid this stinker!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ab4693a0eed4a8a80feb5e7c3a0f199",
            "input": "\"Don't Drink the Water\" is an unbelievably bad film. It's based on a 1966 Broadway play by Woody Allen. It stars Jackie Gleason, the comic genius behind \"The Honeymooners\". The director, Howard Morris, has appeared in several Mel Brooks comedies (Life Stinks, High Anxiety, Silent Movie)and has made a mark in animation (characters he has voiced include Gopher from \"Pooh\", Jughead (Archie)and Beetle Bailey) What went wrong?I think the problem is that the premise is played out too seriously to work effectively. Allen's original play was tongue-in-cheek, which is why it worked on Broadway and in Allen's 1994 remake. The screenplay by R.S. Allen and Harvey Bullock beats the premise to death and makes too many changes from the original play. Making Gleason's wife an airhead in this version when she was a headstrong woman in the original is just one example of why this doesn't work.The acting isn't much better. Gleason does the best he can with the material, but he can't save this. Gleason was a comic genius , but also a fine actor as he demonstrated in \"The Hustler\" and \"Soldier in the Rain\". His abrasive personality could have worked here, but the lousy script doesn't even give him a chance. Too bad. Estelle Parsons' airhead wife will drive you nuts after 20 minutes. See how soon it'll take for YOU to want to strangle her. That is also a shame because she is also a fine actress, having turned in two exceptional performances in \"Bonnie and Clyde\" and \"Rachel, Rachel\" None of the other actors do particularly well either.Woody Allen hated this film so much that he remade the film in 1994 with himself and Julie Kavner (Marge Simpson) in the leads. They manage to hit all the right notes and the film itself is a comic masterpiece. It's finally on video after a long battle over rights. Do go out and find that version. All the 1969 original is good for is clearing out unwanted guests who overstay their welcome.1/2* out of 4 stars",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f2ede3cc1b6421eb3a03b1b7b29f747",
            "input": "What a piece of junk this movie was. The premise was okay, but even in the beginning with crappy effects to blend in a giant with normal sized people (even the effects in Hercules was better) I knew this would be bad. But the really awful part of the movie is the dialogs. It's completely incoherent, silly and stupid. I felt like it had been written by some 9th grader in creative class and gotten a D-. I want to slap Casper van Diem and the other actors for following this movie through.I've had my share of cheesy and bad movies (I love the tremors series), but this... I do not recommend it at all. It's silly and the totally flabbergastingly bad dialogs will make you cringe.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d18cc432e24d4534892b3037530b127e",
            "input": "Somebody could probably make a great documentary about the Jerry Springer Show, but this fictionalized version merely succeeds in draining anything authentic and interesting out of the trash-TV phenomenon. There are dozens of famously bad movies (e.g. \"Manos: The Hands of Fate\") that show more creativity and spirit than this dreary, witless waste of film.Seriously, why not a documentary about the Jerry Springer Show, that would begin to answer some of the real questions like: Who are these people? What happens to their lives after they appear on this show? How did the mayor of Cincinatti find himself here?One good line: During an \"orientation\" session for guests: \"People, I can't emphasize this enough: NO WEAPONS!\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b3d4521c94f41d9a9ca21a94369629a",
            "input": "I read nothing but good things about this movie and finally had a chance to watch it late last night and it was everything I expected it to be and more.This is the way a proper horror movie should be.I think the reason it was so scary was because it was so realistic. The spooky sounding score was perfect for setting a dark mood.I liked the dramatic opening scene and enjoyed how the rest of the movie played out.It was very easy to follow and understand unlike some movies which are way too complicated.The special effects were very good.I would love to see more horror movies like this one.This is easily one of my favorite's.A realistic thunder and lightning storm would have set a nice atmosphere for this movie.Other then that it had all the elements a good horror movie needs.I highly recommend this movie to anyone who can appreciate a good scary movie that pulls no punches.I will be adding it to my collection.The DVD has some interesting special features.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b31547562d6443998e65dde12ad2f7c",
            "input": "This is probably the worst movie I have ever seen, (yes it's even worse than Dungeons and Dragons and any film starring Kevin Costner.)Chris Rock looked very uncomfortable throughout this whole film, and his supporting actors didn't even look like they were trying to act. Chris Rock is a wonderful stand-up comedian, but he just can't transfer his talent to this film, which probably only has two strained laughs in the whole picture.If you haven't watched this film yet, avoid it like the plague. Go do something constructive and more interesting like watching the weather channel or watching paint dry on a brick wall.For Chris' efforts I give it a 2/10!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5a7767c890e4228a3424faa232a88eb",
            "input": "\"Girlfight\" is much more of a coming-of-age-story than it is a fight flick. And what a relief to have one in an urban school, with naturalistic, realistic Latinos and believable use of Brooklyn project settings. It made me realize that virtually all Hollywood high school movies are set in luxurious suburbia or small towns. (Even the somewhat comparable \"Love and Basketball\" which focused on teen African-Americans was set in suburbia.) While these kids share some of the same peer problems, those issues shrink compared to the other struggles of these kids, where high school graduation could be the major accomplishment of their lives.The feminist element here is riveting in its originality, as you hold your breath to see if she can have a relationship--and a victory-- on her terms. A lots of audience sympathy goes to the guy who is challenged to rise to a gender-bending-expectations situation.The movie does drag a bit here and there, but this is no cheap thrills \"Rocky\" fight movie, as the practices and fights have complex outcomes, and all the relationships--especially with fathers and father-figures-- take more center stage than the center ring. There were lots of interesting music credits listed at the end, but I hadn't really noticed the songs.(originally written 10/7/2000)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1300e1252b9a45f6b56f0e600d5076b8",
            "input": "As soon as I began to see posters and hear talk about this movie, I was immediately excited. The Matrix was an incredible to behold and I couldn't wait to see the second one, especially after beginning to see the trailers for it at other movies. However, when I saw it, I left the theater extremely disappointed, as did many other movie-goers at the theater with me. While the action scenes in the movie were amazing as always, there simply were too few of them. In the first movie, there was constant fighting going on it seemed, but the second took a much more (and much unfortunate) preachy point of view. To sum up the plot, there wasn't much to it that wasn't expected. The machines were digging toward Zion with intent of destroying it (that's not a spoiler, everyone saw it in the commercials). The dialogue of the movie was absolutely horrendous. Unless you're a psychology major, you most likely will not understand most of what is said in the movie, and because of that simply won't care. It became somewhat of a romantic movie with the showing of events happening in the lives and relationship of Neo and Trinity. Agent Smith, for as bad-ass as he was in the first movie, seemed to get all religious and preachy. Personally, I don't need to hear about that or pay money to listen to it. The movie was a serious waste of my time, and I don't think I can watch the first one anymore. The dialogue and the constant boring and dry monologues from basically every character made me lose interest in the film quickly, and the small amount of good fighting scenes pushed me nearer the edge, and the ending of the movie shoved me right off. What movie ends with \"To Be Concluded\"? How original is that folks. I wonder if the Wachowski brothers had to burn the midnight oil to come up with that one. In conclusion, the movie was bad and that's the end of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c00c44dd5f48427ea31a5192ac6e86f8",
            "input": "Creative use of modern and mystical elements: 1956 Cadillac convertible to transport evil stepmother Kathleen Turner (John Waters' \"Serial Mom\") and the 2 twisted sisters; Queen Mab as the faerie godmother; David Warner (Evil in \"Time Bandits\") in redcoat at court; Cinderella (she's a babe) shovelling coal into an insatiable furnace; Cinderella and her prince charming both look like (and act like) rock stars. Isle of Man locations.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a04ae57088d54c8995f16af0ccad0d5a",
            "input": "\"Welcome to Collingwood\" offers some of the most hilarious dialog in recent memory. Watching this comedy directed by the brothers Anthony and Joe Russo reminded us of maybe another film we had seen in the past, but since we missed the opening credits, we had to wait until the end to discover that what we were reminded of, was the 1958 Italian film \"Big Deal on Madonna Street\", directed by Mario Monicelli.The Russo brothers put together a magnificent cast to portray all the characters in the film. Anything with William H. Macy, Luis Guzman, Sam Rockwell, Patricia Clarkson, the late Michael Jeter, in it, can't be bad. Since this is an ensemble piece all characters get an opportunity in which to shine.The film presents us a group of inane would-be safe crackers from hell. No one could think these men could carry on a job like the one they undertake. Whatever could go wrong, and more, is what they succeed in doing. George Clooney makes a small appearance as the master safe cracker who is also seen impersonating a rabbi, only to be confused with a priest by the gang members coming out of Cossimo's funeral.The best way to enjoy the movie is to sit back and relax, and let all these small time crooks do their thing. Let their funny lines make you laugh, as anyone can see this gang is doomed from beginning to end!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4d9c8d5a8ce48c5b91788eb263f1cd6",
            "input": "I felt obliged to watch this movie all the way through, since I had found it in a bargain bin and bought it for my own, but I came close many times to turning it off and just writing off the money I had paid for it. If you are a fan of gore and sadism, this movie is OK. If there is one thing that the makers of this film know, it is the creative use of fake blood and body parts for a sickening effect. If that doesn't thrill you, then stay away.This movie is shot on a home video camera, with grade school props and terrible actors. It's dubbed from German, but even allowing for that, the sound is awful. This film is about as budget as budget gets, except for the aforementioned special effects. If they had spent a little more money on actors and a real script instead of blood and guts, the film might have been a little more enjoyable.The story is about three men that land on an island inhabited by an army of tin-masked sadists. They are captured, and the rest of the movie is about their attempt to escape. I call this a story in the loosest sense, since it is really a series of scenes of torture and combat strung together by inane obscenity-filled dialog.There is nothing whatsoever redeeming about this movie, unless you like mindless gore. Consider yourself warned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d68626f5ac14d26bb79d09ecef1f5bd",
            "input": "An American In Paris is an integrated musical, meaning that the songs and dances blend perfectly with the story. The film was inspired by the 1928 orchestral composition by George Gershwin. The story of the film is interspersed with show-stopping dance numbers choreographed by Gene Kelly and set to popular Gershwin tunes. Songs and music include \"I Got Rhythm,\" \"'S Wonderful,\" and \"Our Love is Here to Stay\". It set a new standard for the subgenre known as the \"songbook\" musical with dozens of Gershwin tunes buried in the underscore. The climax is \"The American in Paris\" ballet, an 18 minute dance featuring Kelly and Caron set to Gershwin's An American in Paris, featuring an Impressionistic period daydream in the style of various painters, is one of the longest uninterrupted dance sequences of any Hollywood film. The ballet alone cost more than half a million dollars, a staggering sum at the time.It's funny to think of such a work of art being born over a pool game between film producer Arthur Freed (SINGIN' IN THE RAIN, WIZARD OF OZ, ON THE TOWN, MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS and THE BAND WAGON) and Ira Gershwin. It was Freed's idea to buy the title so he could use if in a film about Paris and Gershwin's idea that it would only use Gershwin music.Original cast was to have Cyd Charisse but she discovered she was pregnant before shooting began. A major reason Gene Kelly suggested Leslie Caron as the female lead was because he felt this movie needed a \"real\" French girl playing Lise, not just an American actress playing one. Gene Kelly discovered Leslie Caron while vacationing in Paris where he saw her perform in a ballet. When she got the call to audition, she said, \"Who's Gene Kelly?\" According to Leslie Caron, her introductory dance sequence, which included a seductive dance with a chair, was considered too suggestive by some censors. Gene Kelly directed the brief fantasy dance sequences shown as Lise is introduced.Vincente Minnelli first wanted Maurice Chevalier in the Georges Guétary part, and 'Celeste Holm' in the 'Nina Foch' part.Minnelli was a groundbreaking director of musicals with Meet Me in St. Louis (1944), An American in Paris, and The Band Wagon (1953). He used color and songs in ways they hadn't been used before. He used space and time imaginatively. Best of all, though, he allowed himself to cut loose for the long ballet sequences that end all his movies. The ballet in An American in Paris may be his best work.Even though Vincente Minnelli is credited as the sole director, he was sometimes tied up with his divorce from Judy Garland and other directing projects, leaving Gene Kelly to take over the directing duties.Other highlights include Guetary's rendition of \"Stairway to Paradise\"; Oscar Levant's fantasy of conducting and performing Gershwin's \"Concerto in F\" (see why it was Oscar Levant's favorite.)The ballet sequence, now that we know it was successful everybody now wants to take credit for it, Freed, Minnelli, Kelly… but before the film was completed the New York office of MGM said no to spending a half million dollars on a ballet. So Freed went to studio head Louis B. Mayer himself and got him to agree, New York said no. Finally Gene Kelly showed the New York office how a British film, THE RED SHOES used a long ballet sequence and that film became a world wide hit – and is still considered today the premium example of a successful art film. Well the financial guys finally gave in and signed the checks.There was a break in production after 1 November 1950, at which point Gene Kelly began rehearsing the ballet choreography. By the time production for that final sequence resumed on 6 December, Vincente Minnelli had finished directing another film - Father's Little Dividend (1951).Irene Sharaff designed a style for each of the ballet sequence sets, reflecting various French impressionist painters: 'Raoul Dufy' (the Place de la Concorde), Edouard Manet (the flower market), Maurice Utrillo (a Paris street), Henri Rousseau (the fair), 'Vincent Van Gogh' (the Place de l'Opera), and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec (the Moulin Rouge). The backgrounds took six weeks to build, with 30 painters working nonstop.Roger Ebert said after viewing the recent restoration, \"An American in Paris has many qualities, not least its famous ballet production number, with Kelly and Leslie Caron symbolizing the entire story of their courtship in dance.\" An American In Paris is often compared to SINGIN' IN THE RAIN as to which it the greatest musical ever made, and one critic put it best when he said, \"SINGIN' IN THE RAIN makes me happy and An American In Paris makes me feel good.\" The ballet represents Kelly's fantasies as depicted by the great French artists (Renoir, Rousseau, Lautrec, Dufy) he admires. Arranging a screening for the then ailing Raoul Dufy, the actor and producer ducked out until the end credits. There, relieved, they found the artist, moved to tears, requesting a second helping of the sumptuous finale.The film was also the first to win a Golden Globe award for Best Motion Picture (comedy or musical.)Gene Kelly received an honorary Academy Award that year for \"his versatility as an actor, singer, director and dancer, and specifically for his brilliant achievements in the art of choreography on film.\" It was his only Oscar.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-965925fd1a094624a47b068d11ff09bc",
            "input": "I've been using IMDb for a few years now, but have never written any reviews before. However, this movie so disappointed me (even with a modest score of 6.4 at the time of writing) that I couldn't keep quiet anymore.Noise is the story of a New Yorker (Tim Robbins)who is so perturbed by noise pollution that he takes on an alter-ego as a as a vigilante, \"The Rectifier\", and vandalizes any cars he finds with a car-alarm sounding.I take the name of the movie to be somewhat of a misnomer. Although there are one or two instances of other sources of noise being addressed or mentioned, the only true focus of our protagonist is car alarms. Car alarms, car alarms, car alarms. There is really no other focus. When the movie tries to tie other examples of noise pollution to the problem of car alarms, it seems to be just thrown in to give merit to the actions of Robbins' character. Yes, we're all annoyed by noise. Nobody likes the sound of car alarms. Of course we all have that internal urge to take a baseball bat to a shrieking vehicle, and this movie uses that fact, and pretty much that fact alone, to sell this movie. I say 'pretty much' because there is also a blatantly contrived sexual relationship (including a completely needless threesome) which is obviously thrown in for those movie-goers who need such things thrown in in order to enjoy a movie. Honestly, it's eye-rolling.Robbin's character, very shortly into the movie, becomes completely unrelatable. It seems less that he decides not to put up with the noise anymore, and more that by focusing so much on the noise he has begun to lose his sanity. The first half of the movie is essentially the story of how he turns from just an angry, car-bashing dude into this hero of the little guy, The Rectifier. However... the transformation doesn't take place. He just renames himself.I could go on for a while. Annoying generalized social commentary comes in every now and then to add to the pretentiousness of the movie, and the self-satisfied smirk which never quite leaves Robbins face doesn't help either. Overall, I think it's very obvious what this movie is trying to be, as it's pretty much shoved down your throat, but in my opinion, it fails in a big way. Just one guy's opinion, cheers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-592a855b65b347b2b8475926a22dda04",
            "input": "The name of Nick Stahl, the young cast and the attractive cover of the VHS made me buy and watch this flick, expecting to see a good teen slash movie. What a crap! The full of clichés screenplay, the dialogs and the performances are awful, dreadful, very bad, terrible, horrendous – summarizing, a complete waste of time. There is no horror, black humor, only an absolutely boring story, with shameful plot points. The film begins with six characters, indeed three couples, together like a group of friends, but indeed very nasty persons that seems to be enemies, playing a ridiculous senseless game called \"Taboo\", and with each one of them writing yes or no for certain taboo issues. That is it: no previous development of the characters, the viewer does not know who they are, their motives and relationship. Then, there is an ellipsis to one year later, and the same group is gathered together in a New Years Eve party, insulting each other in a very sordid way. But the plot and the twists are so ridiculous, predictable, mediocre and unbelievable that do not deserve any additional line in my review. One advice only: do not waste your time or money on this garbage, you will certainly regret. My vote is one (awful).Title (Brazil): \"Taboo – Jogando Com o Assassino\" (\"Taboo – Playing With the Killer\")",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e3523566672490dbc4cc462b6176852",
            "input": "I saw \"Shiner\" on DVD. While I was watching it, I thought, \"This is a really bad porn flick without the porn.\" I also thought, \"Whoever wrote this has some real issues.\" Then I watched the director/writer Carlson explain his process as a special feature. Yeah, it was real special.The emphasis of the film is placed on two alcoholic losers who hit each other to get off. They are marginally attractive. There is frontal and full nudity. These factors probably account for the film being seen at all.The most upsetting element of the film is the gay bashing and the subsequent further gay bashing of the same victim who tries ineptly to exact revenge from his assailants, the two drunken losers. Not only is the subject handled absurdly and badly from a technical point of view, but the acting is horrendously bad.Then there's the boxer-stalker theme. This is really insane, not just absurd. This hunky boxer is somehow traumatized by the persistent attentions of a fleshy momma's boy who works at his gym's parking lot. This is in LA, mind you. The boxer is so traumatized that he turns up at the stalker's house, strips in front of him and gets excited in the process.Well, all I can say is, why would a boxer who is at heart an exhibitionist be so traumatized by the attention of a stalker? It simply makes no sense. And, I'm afraid, some psycho-dynamics actually do make sense, if you take the time to read about them. However, bad scripts seldom make sense at all.The director/writer seems to have thought that this film represents a considerable minority within the gay community. Well, he may be correct, I suppose. We may never know, since that minority would be so dysfunctional they would hardly be able to get organized enough to ever get to an obscure gay film festival or DVD store, the only two places they could possibly find this turkey. Thank goodness for that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d28910cc1bc4cddb8716f9cf4ee0f62",
            "input": "The monster from Enemy Mine somehow made his way into a small mountain community, where he has taken up residence. He's being hunted by a female doctor-turned-vigilante who is out to exterminate him. This female assassin, who looks like a refugee from a Motley Crue video, rides around on a motorcycle and tries to save a bunch of kids who have chosen to have a Big Chill weekend right smack dab in the middle of the monster's turf. Decapitations and lots of blood are primarily in place to draw attention away from the story which limps along like a bad version of the Island of Dr. Moreau (and yes, it's worse than the one with Val Kilmer).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df63002de27d40458beeded721cd1368",
            "input": "An end of an era was released here in the States in Spring 2002 with \"The Rookie,\" a Disney live action film that seemed to be the \"best for last!!!!!\" It took place right here in Texas! Actually, the story began in West Texas, as evidenced by an area code found on a sign over there. It was about a high school coach who was so convinced by his high class baseball team that he decided to go professional!!!!!What I liked about this movie: It was sooo nice!!!!! It was a very good sports movie, ala \"The Mighty Ducks\" trilogy. It had also taken moviegoers across Texas, from somewhere between the Panhandle and El Paso all the way to the Metroplex (where I live). I can tell because I recognize that ballpark (was \"The Ballpark in Arlington;\" now it's \"Ameriquest Field\")! It was nice to see Disney's \"Golden Age\" end here in my area!!!!!R.I.P.Golden Age of Disney1920s-Spring 2002\"It all started with a mouse...and it ended with baseball.\" (sobs)10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6cecb7aae8b544e898367590e11ca507",
            "input": "Ben Thomas (Smith) plays an IRS Agent who practically gives the store away to everyone's surprise. What kind of IRS Agent is this?Most of us have all heard the line by an IRS Agent, \"Hello, I'm from the IRS. I'm here to help.\" Our smile then spreads into a chuckle that says, \"Yeah, right.\"As you get further and further into this story, you cannot figure this guy out. He goes easy on those who are being audited. What is his motive? Is he from another planet, an angel, a rich guy who wants to do good? He helps so much we want him to be our auditor should we get audited, of course. Hey, IRS, are you listening? (kidding, just kidding)The pace of the movie is perfect and so much so that clues were ignored that would have told me what was really going on. Intense, repeat intense, focus was on Ben and stays there. The whole movie only works because of Ben as we try to figure him out and I didn't see any clues (what clues you talking about, Willis?). Not reading the box before watching the DVD movie was the better way to go here. By the end of the movie I finally put it all together. Well, it was obvious by then. And, yes, it's over the top, but still a great story, mostly because of Will Smith. Will Smith should have been nominated for a Best Actor Award. The rest of the cast were very good as well. Yes, it's over the top and despite the great acting and when you finally get all the answers you must realize that the message of the movie is all wrong. What's the message? Believe me, you will won't need too many clues to figure it out. I didn't. Violence: No. Sex: Yes, but nothing to get excited about. Bland. Nudity: No. Language: No.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a8320675f5346c88f44326ce0f69063",
            "input": "Pleasant story of the community of Pimlico in London who, after an unexploded WW2 bomb explodes, find a Royal Charter stating that the area they live in forms part of Burgundy.This movie works because it appeals to the fantasy a lot of us have about making up our own rules and not having to listen to THEM. A solid cast of British stalwarts, especially Stanley Holloway, makes this more believable.There are some very nice moments in the film, such as when the people have ran out of supplies and other Londoners on the other side of the barricade start throwing food and other things over to them.Even though you always knew Pimlico would become part of the UK again, the people of PImlico and as a consequence the viewer doesn't mind when this happens, leaving a nice happy feeling.It's amazing to think that these low budget movies from a small studio in London still remain so popular over fifty years later. The producers must have got something right.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-866dbfbf78cf405a997463020373889e",
            "input": "\"Xizao\", is the tale about the clash of modern life and ancient traditions, and its effects on a family in China. Da Ming (Quanxiu Pu), is a businessman who returns home when a letter sent by his brother Er Ming (Wu Jiang) makes him believe that his father Liu (Xu Zhu), has died. He founds that his father is still alive, as well as his old neighborhood and his father old business, the public bathroom.The movie centers around Da Ming's family, and how he has to learn the importance of his father's job, something he always had considered an old tradition that had to die soon. Also, the movie explores his relationship with Er Ming, who is mentally challenged, and the problems of the small community and how the bathroom is a place that purifies not only their bodies, but also their souls.The two main themes of the movie, the family and the problems of progress, are incredibly well handled, and the movie never loses the point it is trying to make, both themes are very good developed and we get a glimpse of Chinese society and customs.The director, Yang Zhang, tells his tale in a simple way, letting the characters characters do the job. It is a very simple approach, but it fits the movie perfectly, and I highly doubt that another style would fit the movie this good. Zhang has enormous potential, as he can tell a story without the aid of visual flare or camera tricks.The acting is outstanding in its naturalistic approach, everyone acts in a very natural way and it almost looks as if they were real persons being filmed. The three lead characters give remarkable performances, and Wu Jiang as Er Ming surely steals the show.Even when the movie could had sticked to a patronizing \"old days were much better\" message, instead it takes an attitude of equilibrium, like saying that progress is good, and we must move on, but we must not forget where we came from, and keep an equilibrium between modern life and the traditions of old.An awesome, and touching film. 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12b3da668934462da9d307af3747f096",
            "input": "Prison is not often brought up during conversations about the best eighties horror films, and there's a good reason for that because it's not one of the best...but as you delve past the classic films that the decade had to offer, this is certainly among the best of the lesser known/smaller films. The film does have some connection to blockbusters; for a start it's an early directorial effort for Renny Harlin; the capable director behind a number of action films including Die Hard 2, Cliffhanger and Deep Blue Sea; and secondly we have an early role for Lord of the Rings star Viggo Mortensen. The film is not exactly original but the plot line is interesting. We focus on a prison that has been reopened after a number of years. This was the prison where a man named Charles Forsyth was sent to the electric chair after being framed by the prison's governor. Naturally, the spirit of the dead man is not resting in peace; and when the old execution room is reopened, the spirit of the dead convict escapes for vengeance.The film is not exactly The Shawshank Redemption, but it does take care to build up its various characters and while the main point of the film is always the horror, the prison drama behind it all does make for an interesting base. This is a good job too because other than the basic premise, the film doesn't really have a 'plot' to go from and we solely rely on the interaction between the characters to keep things interesting. The horror featured in the film is at times grotesque but it's never over the top, which might actually be the reason why this film is seldom remembered, being released in a decade of excess. The murders themselves are rather good and imaginative, however, and provide some major highlights. As the film goes on, we start to delve more into the back-story of the vengeful convict's ghost and while it's fairly interesting, some things about it don't make sense and it drags the film down a little. Still, everything boils down to an exciting climax and overall I have to say that Prison is a film well worth tracking down.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c8608db998b4cabb241560869526b4c",
            "input": "What starts out as a very predictable and somewhat drab affair is in the end quite hilarious and entertaining. \"Right to Die\" is not very suspenseful but it more than makes up for that with some outlandish set pieces and over the top gore.Spoilers here: Top credits also go to the dead-on performance from Martin Donovan as one of the most despicable characters ever to grace the screen. Playing the character in a great \"aloof\" fashion, you nearly feel bad for the guy in the end when his grand plan ultimately fails. Corbin Bernsen also chews up the scenery playing a not-so-good-guy who gets his just desserts.End of Spoiler.As a revenge-from-the-dead flick, \"Right to Die\" benefits heavily from it's performers and is more than an OK way to spend less than an hour.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-caad0d65539a415a8525eb1705d60396",
            "input": "My father, Dr. Gordon Warner (ret. Major, US Marine Corps), was in Guadalcanal and lost his leg to the Japanese, and also received the Navy Cross. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that my father was the technical adviser of this film and I am hoping that he had an impact on the film in making it resemble how it really was back then, as I read in various comments written by the viewers of this film that it seemed like real-life. My father is a fanatic of facts and figures, and always wanted things to be seen as they were so I would like to believe he had something to do with that.He currently lives in Okinawa, Japan, married to my mother for over 40 years (ironically, she's Japanese), and a few years ago was awarded one of the highest commendations from the Emperor of Japan for his contribution and activities of bringing back Kendo and Iaido to Japan since McArthur banned them after WWII.My father was once a marine but I know that once you are a marine, you're always a marine. And that is exactly what he is and I love and respect him very much.I would love to be able to watch this film if anyone will have a copy of it. And I'd love to give it to my father for his 94th birthday this year!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c165b155369465b8b73ed9ed3c98266",
            "input": "It's kind of fascinating to me that so many reviewers consider this a masterpiece. I am not a dullard as far as quality films go, and I will agree that from a technical filming standpoint, as well as for several of the characters portrayed, the film is in an award-worthy class. But there is no sense (for me) of this film actually going anywhere; I mean, taking the viewer anywhere. It is a series of mood scenes, perhaps remarkable as such, but I want more from a film. I look for story and movement and a fulfillment of arrival, none of which did I find in this film. Yes, it might be considered poetry on film . . . but there is much poetry that I cannot live with for the same reason: that it paints pictures without going anywhere.One thing further to be said is that it documents a mid-century English childhood, which is necessarily limited in its universality. I was personally appalled at what a young British boy had to live through, in that time and place. Having grown up in America just a decade earlier, I can authoritatively say that the contrast is immense. I cannot help wondering if this contrast has had some effect on those reviewing the film so favorably. In other words, could there be a tendency to judge the film entirely on its 'filmic magic' (which I acknowledge is there) and completely ignore its lack of relevance to the nature of one's actual recalled experience?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7635c6c92d54097bd7cc03762618552",
            "input": "I finally sat down and saw this film the whole way through, and I must say, I was very impressed. Michelle Rodriguez is probably one of my new favorite actresses---it's not only the fact that she *can* act, but that she chooses the roles best suited to her that are more meaningful and important than what would first seem. I've read a few comments expressing their relief that this was not some awful feminist thing as they thought beforehand, but I certainly disagree. Diana is a feminist. She follows her dreams and believes in herself contrary to what practically everyone around her thinks (with the exception of her caring brother Tiny and her trainer and manager, Hector, who proves to be more a father figure than her real parent), which is what the word \"Feminism\" is all about. It's good to see films like this showcasing the true side of feminism--that they're not a bunch of manhating losers--but that they have dreams and can do anything. Diana is true to herself while still falling prey to love, and she and Adrian have a more realistic, complicated relationship rather than just something that magically works out. Girlfight is a true taste of reality and it put some faith back into my perception of people. Thanks, Michelle.8/10 - A very important movie that's relatable to not just young women, but everyone wanting to go far in their lives.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3836aa8495e64e5fa84602901ebc5e87",
            "input": "How can the viewer rating for this movie be just 5.4?! Just the lovely young Alisan Porter should automatically start you at 6 when you decide your rating. James Belushi is good in this too, his first good serious role, I hadn't liked him in anything but About Last Night until this. He was pretty good in Gang Related with Tupac also. Kelly Lynch, you gotta love her. Well, I do. I'm only wondering what happened to Miss Porter?i gave Curly Sue a 7",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2da656a6665c481e854e6cb30c55633c",
            "input": "OK, it was a good American Pie. Erick Stifler goes off to college with his buddy Cooze. During their arrival they meet up with Eric's cousin Dwight. The two pledge to become Betas and along the way they get involved with a whole lot of sex, tits, and some hot girls along the way. In a few words there is a lot more sex, nudity and alcohol. It is a good movie for those who want to enjoy an American Pie movie, granted it isn't as great as the first three is is a good movie. If you enjoy hot girls with really nice tits, get this movie. If you enjoy seeing a bunch of dudes making assholes of themselves, go to this movie. If you want to see the full thing, get the unrated addition. One last thing this is a better attempt than the last two American Pies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-432e5a9954214b569b1334c780bd19e1",
            "input": "Here we go with other slasher movie, Good looking people and Acting from everyone was really good!Few kids playing pranks phones calls and there parents are killed by the killer in front of the kids! 20 Years after they are still friends, They go to huge house, have fun, Drugs and Sex (no nudity) for least half a hour of the movie! Again they start making pranks phone call all over again! and then killer comes back kills them off one by one and killer is in BIG BLACK COAT with axe just like Urban Legend movie,Deaths scene really weird, really odd times too.Nice slasher movie at this part would gave 7/10 but the twist at the end of the movie made the whole movie kinda of pointlessThe twist killed the movie for me so I going to give it 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5c61265954b4d7eb58b74d103241615",
            "input": "I suppose the ultimate curse of attending the Toronto Film Festival is your release date time table get messed up. Quite frankly, I'm just happy Fido got picked up for US distribution. In any case...Ever seen Shaun of the Dead? Good. How about Lassie? Able to reconcile the two? Well, if you can your name might be Andrew Currie, Canadian helmer of the first ever family themed zombie comedy, or zomedy. (Seriously, that's what the press book in Toronto called it.) Though not as violent, dry, or British as Shaun of the Dead, Fido remains true to its roots: a devotion to old 50s black and white television including both Lassie and the infamous sci-fi pulp that was being pumped out during the period.Fido's talented headliners (Carrie Anne Moss, Billy Connelly, Dylan Baker, and Tim Blake Nelson) stand as a testament to the brilliance of the script. The film explores all the implications of its premise: a world where zombies have been converted to servants because of the sheer number of them due to a strange accident. What would you use your new undead servant for? A butler? Manual labor? A pet? Unspeakable acts? Fido tackles all these possibilities in a sweet and surprisingly classy way, with much thanks to the work of Connelly (as one of said zombies) and young TV actor K'Sun Ray, who seems at times to be a better young Elijah Wood than the young Elijah Wood was.If you're expecting another Shaun of the Dead, don't waste your time. There's not nearly enough gore and pokes at the genre to satisfy you and you'll just leave the theater bitter and depressed. But if you're willing to take a look at what happens to Shaun of the Dead when it jumps across the lake, you're in for a treat. Think of Fido as the sensitive, more often beaten up little brother to Shaun of the Dead's rebellious loser, and you're starting to get the drift. If you like (or at least tolerate) zombies, small children, and loads of deadpan satire, Fido's the film for you. If that's not the case....well, you know the drill. Just hit 'em square between the eyes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1733cf996fe24490a2465e30ace17114",
            "input": "I was all ready to pan this episode, seeing that this 'Master' really doesn't have any horror films under his belt.. but this is easily the best episode of the season.The acting was good!! I don't know how he wrangled it, but we've got some real talent in this episode! And while you could see things coming from a mile away plot wise, at least it was entertaining and managed to keep me engaged for the full 56 mins, something that has been lacking up to this point in the series.I especially liked the bit at the end, not a twist per say, but just a funny little bit where he becomes, as ever, the hen-pecked hubby.Really good effort. Like I've said in other reviews- these are not true masters doing a lot of these episodes.. but they may someday end up being masters in the future.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a021a76a79a54bc0af68c316195f4d9c",
            "input": "It is a great movie if you have ever named your cars or are really into old, fast, or exotic cars. It has a plot and a lot of action. The car scenes are great except for the totally fake car jump scene. All of the other scenes are great. I really enjoyed it and I hope everyone else does as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec4fa94021d84640afb65ef9cfc89e48",
            "input": "From beginning to end, this is the most emotionally overwrought movie about NOTHING I have ever seen. The characterizations and interactions between the title character and Marthe Kller's character are pure torture. The racetrack as metaphor gimmick is so overplayed that it borders on cliche, yet director Pollack treats every hairpin turn as if it were something profoundly important.Maybe there's some value for a MSFT3000 re-playing of some of the scenes, such as Pacino getting in touch with his inner female, for goof value. But, even such accidental humor is hard to find in this total turkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86c6e1c0a37b43e3846694ea137095b4",
            "input": "Murder in Mesopotamia, I have always considered one of the better Poirot books, as it is very creepy and has an ingenious ending. There is no doubt that the TV adaptation is visually striking, with some lovely photography and a very haunting music score. As always David Suchet is impeccable as Hercule Poirot, the comedic highlight of the episode being Poirot's battle with a mosquito in the middle of the night, and Hugh Fraser is good as the rather naive Captain Hastings. The remainder of the cast turn in decent performances, but are careful not to overshadow the two leads, a danger in some Christie adaptations. Some of the episode was quite creepy, a juxtaposition of an episode as tragic as Five Little Pigs, an episode that I enjoyed a lot more than this one. What made it creepy in particular, putting aside the music was when Louise Leidner sees the ghostly face through the window. About the adaptation, it was fairly faithful to the book, but I will say that there were three things I didn't like. The main problem was the pacing, it is rather slow, and there are some scenes where very little happens. I didn't like the fact also that they made Joseph Mercado a murderer. In the book, I see him as a rather nervous character, but the intervention of the idea of making him a murderer, and under-developing that, made him a less appealing character, though I am glad they didn't miss his drug addiction. (I also noticed that the writers left out the fact that Mrs Mercado in the book falls into hysteria when she believes she is the murderer's next victim.) The other thing that wasn't so impressive was that I felt that it may have been more effective if the adaptation had been in the viewpoint of Amy Leatheran, like it was in the book, Amy somehow seemed less sensitive in the adaptation. On the whole, despite some misjudgements on the writers' behalf, I liked Murder in Mesopotamia. 7/10 Bethany Cox.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f69f520a65548248bd80ada225a595d",
            "input": "This film captured my heart from the very beginning, when hearing Quincy Jones' first notes or seeing the wonderful color of purple of the flowers in the meadows. This is truly a film to cry and die for...! The whole cast gives the best performance in a film I've seen in years and Spielberg has really outdone himself! Whoppi Goldberg, Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey(oh lord!), Danny Glover, and the others, all give us their best and you can feel it - almost touch it! Goldberg IS Celie, she gives her that insecurity and feeling of inferiority that is needed for the character, and we grow with her, we grow strong together with her, throughout the movie, and we triumph with her. Margaret Avery is wonderful as Shug Avery, even when she's at her most arrogant, and shows us that \"sinners\", indeed, \"have souls too\". The always sympathetic, charming Danny Glover makes a marvellous job at making people hate him and the magnificent music of(I'd say sir)Quincy Jones adds even more beauty to this splendid film! The photography, the music, the director and the music makes this beautiful, soulful movie into an experience of life. You don't want to miss it! \"Sista'...remember my name...\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d62ee28a17644c6ab49f6c9bbeba673",
            "input": "I sort of accidentally ended up watching this movie. I'm still not sure if I regret it or not. I felt like I was watching the film made by that group of film school students that didn't quite make the cut. It plays up every Hollywood cliché imaginable, all the while flogging us with the 'corporations are the ultimate evil' message. Subtlety this movie does not know. As far as that goes, it even manages to provide it's own spoilers.The story appears to be a computer nerd's fantasy world come true. The lead character is an attractive teenage boy with a girlfriend, yet is a programming genius and apparent hacker (I think), among many other nerd-fantasy-come-true elements that you'll have to see for yourself.As well, I should've known it would be a z-movie when I saw Ned Bellamy... he tends to be a good tip-off.Can't recommend this one, I'm afraid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e518e7ca4514c38bd2c9fbb10d56c8c",
            "input": "Robert Urich was a fine actor, and he makes this TV movie believable. I remember watching this film when I was 15, and when seeing it a second time my opinion stays the same. People lose who they were when enter this exclusive club, in a computer rich Californian town. Urich try's to figure out what is wrong with his family, and I love the Halloween space suit idea, brilliant. This film is about the battle of one's sprit. TV quality, that exceeds, the big budget, Gangs of New York. I wonder if Robert Urich was the compassionate man he portrayed in many of his movie? I hope so! 6 or 7 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b230327d18446db8cda091abb187332",
            "input": "After seeing 'Break a Leg' in Vancouver at the release party I thought it was a very enjoyable film.I had a few outright belly laughs and some of the cameos (Eric Roberts in particular) were a scream. I haven't heard word about actual release date although I've heard it's close.The story is simple but is mainly a vehicle for the characters and situations. The script is smooth and seamless, the plot develops effortlessly and the acting is comfortable yet fresh. This film has won at least one award from EACH of the film festivals it's been in, which is around 10 - 15 or so.I highly recommend 'Break a Leg'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56625c6ec20e491eb81052b76d909b23",
            "input": "Bill Paxton stars in and directs this highly original film. Having watched the first time I was by how good it was. The reviews I had heard were OK . As a result I was expecting an average thriller at most .However because of Paxtons excellent directing and acting the film is well worth watching , especially if you are a horror film fanatic.The film is also helped by the plot twists which keep coming until the closing credits . The films strongest point is the storyline which I have to say is highly original and is like I have ever seen before. Well done also to the 2 young leads which perfectly convey the emotions if these confused boys. I give this film 9/10 and I highly recommend that everyone catches it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c8ff899cf9a4fd989d24afebc4e8e73",
            "input": "THE CRIMSON RIVERS is one of the most over-directed, over-the-top, over-everything mess I've ever seen come out of France. There's nothing worse than a French production trying to out-do films made in Hollywood and CR is a perfect example of such a wannabe horror/action/buddy flick. I almost stopped it halfway through because I knew it wouldn't amount to anything but French guys trying to show-off.The film starts off promisingly, like some sort of expansive horror film, but it quickly shifts genres, from horror to action to x-files type to buddy flick, that in the end, CR is all of it and also none of it. It's so full of clichés that at one point I thought the whole thing was a comedy. The painful dialogue and those silent pauses, with fades outs and fades ins just at the right expositionary moments, made me groan. I thought only films made in Hollywood used this hackneyed technique.The chase scene, with Vincent Cassel running after the killer, is so over-directed and over-done that it's almost a thing of beauty. The climax on top of the mountain, with the stupid revelation about the killer(s) with Cassel and Reno playing \"buddies\" like Nolte and Murphy in 48 HRS, completely derailed what little credibility the film had by then.It's difficult to believe that the director of THE CRIMSON RIVERS also directed GOTHIKA, which though had its share of problems, doesn't even come close to the awfulness of this overbaked, confused film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce6944a4ee47444aa099c6846a30f7ef",
            "input": "Tim Krabbe is the praised author of 'Het Gouden Ei', a novel that was put on the screen twice ('Spoorloos' and 'The Vanishing'). One of the Dutch writer's more recent works is 'De Grot', a psychological thriller about two totally different men, Egon and Axel, who meet at a youth camp and, surprising enough, become friends for dear life. Egon is a quiet, somewhat dull person, who spends his time studying and writing geography books. Axel, on the other hand, is a charismatic 'party-animal', a heavy drinking criminal whose everyday's concern is to get a woman into his bedroom. From the moment they meet, Axel has a strong influence on Egon, while the latter envies him because he has a good life without really doing anything (such as reading thick books like Egon); ultimately, Egon is even dragged by Egon into illegal practices himself, which leads to a fatal drug transport in a distant Asian country.After having read the book last year, I was surprised the critics were quite positive about it. In my opinion, the book suffers especially from the complex structure. While Krabbe presents the story as an absorbing portrait of an uncommon relationship between two people, the plot becomes more of a puzzle: the many episodes are not presented chronologically, so that two successive scenes are seldom in the same episode. Because of this, the story feels surprisingly remote: you often need to know a character's background to really care for him or her. Another complaint was the fact that the main characters, Egon and Axel, are a little stereotypical. Egon IS 'the' dull intellectual, while Axel IS his exact opposite. In real life, such one-dimensional people rarely exist; in books and films, they always seem to be there, taking away a lot of credibility.Despite all this, the film was a pleasant surprise, being much better than the book. The adaptation excels in its beautiful cinematography, humour and acting: Fedja van Huet (Egon) is one of the few Dutch actors who can make you forget he IS acting (which is, in my opinion, the highest an actor can achieve). The drawbacks of the film, however, are the same as the book's: mainly because the characters are one-dimensional, they are so predictable that it becomes annoying. Guess who wrote the script? Indeed, Krabbe himself. It is obvious that this talented director (that's what the movie makes clear anyway) is hampered by a deficient screenplay. Perhaps Koolhoven should just have chosen a better book.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94de7d5e3d954820a81be214283e5658",
            "input": "This show was appreciated by critics and those who realized that any similarities between \"Pushing Daisies\" style and anyone else's was not a steal. (Yes, I've seen \"Amelie.\" \"Pushing Daisies\" is somewhat similar but still different enough to be original.) Rather, there are too few shows on TV that have this kind of quirky charm. The greatest similarity is to \"Dead Like Me\" but \"P.D\" comes by that similarity honestly: Bryan Fuller created both shows. (Both shows involve an \"undead\" young woman, For example.) This show never stopped being funny and charming, and it was always odd, yet was consistently humane.I must say a word about the conventions of on-going story lines. some people have complained that this show lacked a moral center because in the first (and several subsequent) episodes Ned seems to get away with causing the death of Chuck's father without consequences of any kind. First of all, this must be a new definition of \"without consequences of any kind\" because, in spite of the fact that Ned was only a boy and did not realize that he had caused the death of Chuck's father, he nevertheless felt guilty from the moment he realized what he had done. Further, about a dozen episodes into the series, Ned finally did confess to Chuck that he had caused her father's death with his gift. Now, there are no police to charge people with magically causing one person's death by bringing another person back to life, so the questions of absolution and restitution have to be taken up without societal guidance. In other words, it's between Ned and Chuck, who was not inclined to forgive Ned anytime soon.But this does point out a problem with continuing story lines in network dramas. I remember when David Caruso's character on \"NYPD Blue\" did something wrong and it seemed he got away with it--for a whole year--then he got caught and was forced to resign from the job (and left the show). The point is, viewers should learn by now and not assume that just because a regular character does something wrong in a single episode, and is not caught in that episode, that he has gotten away with it. There is always next week--and maybe even next year.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efc7f64b2d01452a8d4f0703e1336c12",
            "input": "By the end of the first hour my jaw was nestled comfortably between my feet. The movie never, and I do mean never, lets up in action. It may be mild action but it's action. Once again every member of the cast fits perfectly. The explosions were realistic, the chase scenes were feasible, and the fighting was incredible. Matt Damon will forever be Jason Bourne.All I really have to say is that every Bourne movie gets better and this is no exception. The action, the stakes, the plot. How they do it I will never know. I applaud the man who wrote the screen plays to every one of these movies. Because if he hadn't done such a great job with the first movie, we wouldn't have this one to talk about.So don't go see it in theaters, go experience it in theaters if it's still out where you live, but if not December 11th Bourne comes home to you!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-069d5905e7fc437891c7f6b82fef9918",
            "input": "I had never read Gary Paulsen's novel, Hatchet, for which 'A Cry in the Wild' is the adaptation of, so I can't make any comparisons to the book. I will, however, say that as a film on its own, adaptation or no adaptation, it was an underdeveloped adventure that provides no major explanation of its few characters.Think of 'A Cry in the Wild' as a less luxurious, teenage mountaineer (was Quincy, California the only place this was filmed?) version of 'Cast Away.' Jared Rushton is 13-year-old Brian Roebson, a kid headed on a small plane to visit his father, until the craft crashes over some deserted mountain terrain, leaving the kid stranded for quite a while and having to defend himself.There are basically three parts to the film. The obvious being the ten or fifteen minute introduction of the characters, namely Brian and his mom. The next third of the movie (which really consumes nearly all of the film) is that of Brian \"roughing it.\" These scenes contain no particularly amazing action, nothing spectacular other than lots of beautiful cinematography of a beautiful Yukon landscape. Nothing to put you on edge, no real encounters (except a brisk confrontation with a cub), and no major dilemmas to initiate some sort of enjoyment or connection with the character on the screen. You might even feel briefly bored with the passage of time as we witness Brian dealing with his situation through first, primitive means, and then more improved ones (using tools, etc) for his survival. It is more like the ordinary time that passes if you were actually stuck in the situation, and that is pretty much about it. In other words, they put no meat on the Paulsen's words when they translated them into a visual media.And, of course, the third part of the movie is his rescue.There is a subplot that continuously seeks to make itself known during this time, however. Some conflict between Brian and his parents that created a rocky, awkward relationship between them. However, for the most part, it is only explained in brief, intermittent, minimal dialog flashbacks that look more like a back story for a music video. Any minute, the singer from Jefferson Starship, should chime in an start singing 'Sara.' Other than what the viewer can draw from the implications, or guess for his own need to fill the gaps in the narrative, we get a very underdeveloped back story which was probably necessary to enjoy at least part of this film and create a connection to the characters, whether or not it really had anything to do with Brian's survival adventure in the third part of the movie. These are the flaws in the narrative that through the viewer into a stupor as he struggles to find out what the heck those people there on the screen are doing and, for me, almost done to the point of screaming at the television to say something and tell me more! It certainly was not, for me, a good adventure tale. But, for fans of Jared Rushton, it was one of the last few movies he made. So, watch it purely for nostalgia, if nothing else.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54c0360593c44eb4b8075075fceb822f",
            "input": "Beginning with its long opening shot of seemingly endless rows of assembly line workers in a Chinese factory, Manufactured Landscapes attempts to show the devastating impact of industrialization on the natural environment and traditional societies. Its droning narrative assumes that industrial development in China and elsewhere is entirely unprecedented, as if there had never been an industrial revolution in Europe and America and Karl Marx had never visited the British Museum. That there might be a connection between the present-day Asian drive for industrialization and wealth and earlier experiences of starvation and terror is never mentioned.At the same time, there's an effort to present Edward Burtynsky's photographs of industrial waste as somehow \"beautiful\". Much of the film is a slide show of these images. They are well produced, of museum size, and have apparently appeared in several exhibitions. To me, however, they only demonstrate that almost any photograph can be made to appear beautiful if well presented. Industrial waste is still industrial waste. The relationship, if any, between the photographs and the film's spoken message remains unclear.I don't mean to imply that there aren't real and sometimes desperate problems when countries rush to industrialize. Manufactured Landscapes, however, offers only strange and bitter hopelessness. It's like a two-hour lecture by Noam Chomsky. Maybe it has some value as a demonstration of what's wrong with the American (and Canadian) Left.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0b9c82d8a8946a1b9d2c9f45c9a9560",
            "input": "Firstly, I am not easily scared by... Anything except for my few phobias, but this movie is absolutely horrific. This is not appropriate for children at all! I had my mouth open the whole time it just shocked me I. Couldn't believe how gory it was for a children's movie, bunnies being brutally murdered! It's just unnecessary to be so horrifying and be rated G. I recommend being over 8 to see this. But don't get me wrong, it was probably a good movie if I wasn't scarred mentally as a child. I cannot believe a parent would allow a, let's say, 4 year old child to watch this. It's just to intense and complicated, not to forget gory, for young kids. I'm wayy over 4 and I was shocked by the violence. I don't recommend",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1bd42f7c232444c1bc74afe6df2dd87e",
            "input": "The arrival of an world famous conductor sets of unexpected events and feelings in the small village. Some people are threatened by the way he handles the church choir, and how people in it gradually change. This movie is heartwarming and makes you leave the cinema with both a smile on your lips and tears in your eyes. It'a about bringing out the best in people and Kay Pollak has written an excellent script based on the ideas he has become so famous for. The actors are outstanding, Michael Nyqvist we know before but Frida Hallgren was an new, and charming acquaintances to me. She has a most vivid face that leaves no one untouched. Per Moberg does his part as Gabriella's husband almost too well, he is awful too see. One only wish the at he would be casted to play a nice guy one day so we can see if he masters that character as well.This is a movie that will not leave you untouched. If you haven't already seen it, do it today!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f807ed782da441a88bca58957cc9399",
            "input": "I'm not a follower of a certain movie genre. I classify movies only as industrial or non-industrial. Valentine is the second industrial movie of the director Jamie Blanks, after his Urban Legends. Unlike Urban Legends the screenplay and the story line is very weak. Yet again unlike Urban Legends the basic elements of the movie is so dashing and iconic, and that is what makes Valentine the best. As the first basic and iconic element, the growing hatred of the serial killer is so down-to-earth. Since his secondary school years, he has grown up with his wounds he had accumulated in his soul against his classmate girlfriends, who have made fun of him. When you concentrate enough on this first element while watching the movie, you will come to see this point of view of Humanism: \"Noone is entirely good or evil. In fact, somebody known as evil can be secretly kind hearted.\" Just because the story line and the direction is very weak, we are not as satisfied as we deserved. The second iconic element is, of course, the magnificent togetherness of the late 90s' super starlets: My favourite is Jessica Cauffiel who is killed within the coolest way to be killed. An arrow shot from a bow broaches her tummy and stays stuck in, while she was playing hide-and-seek with her blind date, never able to met with. Katherine Heigl is the first starlet getting killed in a biology laboratory while trying to hide under human body models lying on the surgical operation tables. Denise Richards is killed third, while she just found a Valentines' Day gift for her at a whirlpool bath. Jessica Capshaw is killed last in a confidential and unseen way, then she is calumniated to be as the serial killer. Marley Shelton is the unluckiest one with a vicissitude of fortune that she is going to be killed within the most confidential way that we will never know, 'cause the movie is coming to an end before she is getting killed. Finally, Benita Ha is the luckiest one since she was not a classmate of the serial killer, David Boreanaz.The third and the last iconic element is the soundtrack from the blind date labyrinth scene, the Valentines' Day celebration at Dorothy's house scenes and ultimately the killing themes. Everybody has loved the soundtrack as far as I know. Hard Rock never suits better within a serial killer-mystery movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4cf79985559442279d680964b9828f06",
            "input": "This is certainly one of my all time fav episodes of Trek. There is just so much going on in this one film that its crazy cool. First the guys beam down to an alien planet thats about to explode. They meet a freaky librarian type dude (very well played). Then Kirk manages to get himself transported back to what is very much like 16th century earth. McCoy and Spock try to follow but instead nearly freeze to death on the frozen version of the alien world 100,000 years in the past. Kirk manages to get himself locked up and charged with witchcraft while Spock enjoys some amok time with a sexy cavegirl who was vanquished to the this frozen, awful world by some bad guy.Spock decides hes happy where hes at and gives McCoy a royal assestment whuppin' when the doc suggests they need to look for a way out. Anyhow,they all finally escape, leaving the poor cavegirl behind. It takes a ton of convincing before Spock finally gives in and leaves. You can literally taste the sadness at the end. Leaving the cavegirl all alone in her frozen wasteland just seems cruel and is really touching. Spock must have been out of his vulkin' mind to leave behind his greatest hope for love and being human. Albeit, in a not so nice neighborhood!Anyway, you just get so much bang for your buck with this episode....A love story, the Salem witch trials, Spock as a human, the desperation of being left in total isolation...abandoned, and three entirely different settings on the alien planet. Its amazing they managed to jam all this into one fifty minute film. This one is a classic, don't miss it....I want it on DVD fer shure vulcans!!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37340ca8435648cabc83b56d641bc177",
            "input": "Eleven different Film Makers from different parts of the world are assembled in this film to present their views and ideas about the WTC attack. This is one of the best effort you will see in any Film. Films like this are rarely made and appreciated. This film tries to touch every possible core of WTC. Here are some of the most important stories from the film that makes this film so unique.There is the story from Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) where somewhere in Iran people are preparing for the attacks from America. There a teacher is trying to educate her students by informing them about Innocent People being killed in WTC massacre. Then comes a story from Youssef Chahine (Egypt) where a Film Maker comes across face-to-face conversation with a Dead Soldier in the WTC attack and a Dead Hard Core Terrorist who was involved in WTC attack. Then we see a story from Idrissa Ouedraogo (Burkina Faso) where a group of Five Innocent children's sees Osama Bin Laden and plans to kidnap him and win the reward money from America. Then we see the story from Alejandro Gozalez Inarritu (Mexico) where you see a Black Screen and slowly you see the real footage of WTC buildings coming down. And the people who are stuck in the building are jumping out of it to save their lives. The other most important story is from Mira Nair (India) where a mother is struggling to get respect for her Dead Son whose name is falsely trapped in WTC massacre! After September 11 attack, Our heart beat automatically starts pumping if we hear two names anywhere in the world.. First is World Trade Centre and the second is Osama! This film totally changes our perception and makes a strong point by claiming something more to it.I will definitely recommend this movie to everyone who loves to have such kinds of Home DVD Collection. Definitely worth every penny you spend. But please don't expect anything more apart from Films in this DVD. There is of course Filmographies of the Film Makers but No Extra Features.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6416a4852914520982e249fc089ac18",
            "input": "I have to agree with some of the other comments and even go a step further. Nothing about this film worked, absolutely nothing. Delmar our central character makes the decision to become a surrogate mother in order to earn enough money to buy a restaurant but along the way fall for a wise ex-jailbird. At the same time her friend Hortense is trying to get her lawyer boyfriend to finally marry her. She also happens to be sleeping with Marlon who is desperately in love with her. Then there's Delmar's brother Jethro who gets involved with a former coke addict, Missy who reveals she was sexually abused by her adopted father. On the sidelines we also have the eccentricmother who has an assortment of equally odd friends, one of whom dies on the couch at the beginning of the film. So far so good but after introducing these characters and story lines addressing life, death, grief and love in the first half, the film simply loses direction. If the writer had only selected one or two characters and allowed us to follow their stories maybe things would have been fine but equal screen time is given to all with the result that no one story or character is fully developed. For instance, why does Delmar think she will be able to hand over her child in exchange for money, especially when the prospective parents are a creepy bigoted lawyer and his semi alcoholic and depressed wife? Why is Hortense so desperate to marry a man who is a jerk and clearly doesn't love her? How is it Missy manages to kick her coke habit overnight? Is Jethro regularly drawn to women with overwhelming problems, or is Missy the exception? Has Delmar and Jethro's mother always been on the eccentric side, or is it a more recent development? Why is Jethro so keen on Cadillacs that he has one in the middle of his living room? Why did Moses spend years in prison for stealing a car, a relatively minor crime? How does Delmar manage to end up giving birth to Moses' baby when there is no suggestion that they ever had sex? These questions are posed in the screenplay but sadly are never answered. I can only assume they were answered in the original novel and that is why the writer felt the need to include it all in the script. Big mistake. Losing several subplots especially the Hortense and Marlon story, which adds nothing to the overall film, would have tightened things considerably and allowed more time to develop the Delmar, Jethro and Moses characters who are clearly more central to the plot and underlying themes than anyone else. Add to that the most pedestrian directing style seen outside of the average soap opera and the result is a huge missed opportunity for all, including Jorja Fox who does her best to rise above the material. I'm not surprised that this appears to have been the director's last film as this effort shows no evidence of a visual style or ability to tell a moving and intelligent story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa913e35164f49f2bad3ca2961717fad",
            "input": "I have seen this film on countless occasions, and thoroughly enjoyed it each time. This is mostly due to the lovely Erika Eleniak- a great actress with incredible looks. Plus, any film starring Tom Berenger and Dennis Hopper is bound to be entertaining.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aaad54ebba7e427095076cb5638394eb",
            "input": "If you liked the first two films, then I'm sorry to say you're not going to like this one. This is the really rubbish and unnecessary straight to video, probably TV made sequel. The still idiotic but nice scientist Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) is still living with his family and he has his own company, Szalinski Inc. Unfortunately his wife wants to get rid of a statue, Wayne is so stupid he shrinks his statue and himself with his brother. Then he shrinks his wife and sister-in-law too. Now the adults have to find a way to get the kids of the house to get them bigger. Pretty much a repeat of the other two with only one or two new things, e.g. a toy car roller coaster, swimming in dip, etc. Pretty poor!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-481b21e0e6fb4fe89df76a347f89e934",
            "input": "Opening the film with a Bach Toccata is an aural hint of what is to unfold in this intense drama. All the compositional devices Bach perfected to keep his listener (and the performer) intrigued and entertained applies to this film. There isn't a mutual tenderness between the two lead characters and the lead female in the final scene I feel is justified in stating she was raped even though her victimizer feels she was forewarned that he was a cad. Mamet compellingly explores the emotional chasm and differences between the genders but I feel he is clueless about how they actually compliment one another given a healthy sense of humor. If Mamet ever developed a healthy humorous take on the interaction between the genders I wonder how this work would have ended? As it exists it is very somber and mean spirited.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0584597f3074758a0326d44724c21ae",
            "input": "This film had so much promise. I was very excited about this film. In the end, it was laughable at best, painful at worst. The acting styles ran the gamut from really, really, flat (the angels, the wife and daughter) to over-animated (Casper's character). I felt that the dialogue was just an attempt to transfer information to the audience instead of real people trying to talk to each other. Pay special attention to the scene regarding \"the bug\". It's pretty much an insult to the audience's ability to figure things out. In defense of that scene, though, it got the biggest laugh of the whole movie. I had read that they spent alot of money traveling to various overseas locations. Too bad they didn't make use of it. I didn't feel like I was transported to exotic locations. Anybody could insert stock footage of the Coliseum in Rome. However, to end on a positive note, I thought the sets were pretty good. I really liked the graphics that were displayed on the decoding computers. It is my opinion(and that's all it is) that if the SCHMALTZ factor would have been much much lower and the ACTION factor would have been greatly increased, this film would have been good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee4af2375fd24c9e9310619538516c12",
            "input": "If you would like to see a film of different kind, if you feel the Love in your heart, even if you miss the Lord, this film makes you think. Although Georges is mentally handicapped, you can see the ultimate intelligence at the end, when love gives you directions not the brain. I am not emotional, but this film makes you feel the human being. The film is as good as Forrest Gump in my belief. The foreign movies are sometimes more interesting, yet there is not enough advertisement to make them popular. \"Rang-e khoda\" (The Color of The God) by Majid Majidi is another example of such foreign movies, almost with similar taste.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a011d77b5fc042bd85b18ba6b2f22477",
            "input": "I saw this movie the other night. I can't even begin to express how much this movie sucked. The writing, the voice acting, even the claymation. Terrible, Terrible, Terrible. It's like watching 24 hours of C-Span for the sake of comedy. It just doesn't work. It literally falls flat at about every spot possible.Also, the movie's animation is very poor quality. I know that this is an movie made by one person, but to think that he could make 97 minutes worth of crap, maybe he could at least make 1 second worth of funny.This show may take the cake for being the worst film of all time. Yikes. It really was that bad. If you're looking for a movie that will make you laugh, steer clear from this abomination. My advice: Don't even buy it, or look it up for that matter. Your brain will than you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a95994cdbd14af7be207740101e213f",
            "input": "Contrary to some people's summaries, the women depicted in the film are not geisha. They are oiran (prostitutes) living outside the most famous pleasure districts, and their lives and experiences represent the lives of a great number of Tokugawa era women. I can't say the stories were particularly enlightening, but their charm lies in just how typical they are. The themes are universal and everyday: love, friendship, and sacrifice.I did greatly enjoy the art direction and the acting. I felt like I was getting a glimpse of a time and place I can never otherwise glimpse. The actors, especially the 4 women who played the main oiran, were a thrill to watch. I'd only recommend this movie to people who want a taste of Japanese culture, or to those who enjoy quiet and emotional stories. It's a great example of both.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9f32139dd0e4aa0ac448a8bebec87a1",
            "input": "I stopped watching lost at this episode because I thought Ana-Lucia and Libby's deaths were unnecessary and really depressing. Then I found out that they kept Libby around just to die in the next episode! Gah! I can't handle it.I liked this show for the first season, but it definitely declined in the second season, I found Jack and Locke's little religious feud to be annoying. The deaths of Rodriguez & Watros' characters was the final straw! I give this episode a 4/10, for being the end to my viewing of this formerly great series created by Alias legend J.J. Abrams. I hope his series in the future will improve on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef13c47adcff4ce0b3e3b71cd6b1608b",
            "input": "PROM NIGHT (2008)directed by: Nelson McCormickstarring: Brittany Snow, Scott Porter, Jessica Stroup, and Dana Davisplot: Three years ago, Donna (Brittany Snow) witnessed the death of her entire family at the hands of her teacher (Jonathan Schaech) who has a bit of a crush on her. Now, she is preparing for her senior prom with her stupid annoying friends. Once there, they start dying one by one because the killer escaped from prison and no one bothered to warn Donna because apparently her prom is too important to interrupt. pros: I got a few good laughs out of the film due to the terrible dialog and the dumb character moves.An example:Everyone decides not to tell Donna that the man who is oddly obsessed with her (she doesn't seem that great) has escaped from prison. Their reason: They don't want to embarrass her in front of all her friends. LOLcons: Let me start off by saying I'm a huge slasher fan. Usually I can have fun with even the bad ones. I even like some PG-13 horror films. TOURIST TRAP (1979), one of my favorites, was originally rated PG. I also enjoy POLTERGEIST (1982) and THE GRUDGE (2004). So the fact that this is a dumb slasher film that is rated PG-13 does not have anything to do with me not enjoying the movie.First of all, I had a big problem with the story. I like slasher films that don't even have stories. At least they can be entertaining. This is about a teacher who falls in love with his student, so he kills her entire family. A few years later, he tries to make it up to her by ruining her prom and killing all of her friends ...? Then there were subplots that I doubt anyone cared about. Claire (Jessica Stroup) is fighting with her boyfriend, she has cramps, and I couldn't care less. This should have been a Lifetime feature, not a remake of PROM NIGHT. And then ... this is a slasher film with terrible death scenes. I don't even care that it's not that gory, some of my favorite slashers (HALLOWEEN, CURTAINS, the original PROM NIGHT) were not that gory but they still had effective murders. Here, we have half the characters dying in the same hotel room off screen, a woman being stabbed several times with no stab wounds, and a closeup on a bad actor's face as he screams in agony. I'm sure that 10 year-old girls were terrified, but not me.I also hated the characters. There was Donna's unrealistically sensitive boyfriend Bobby (Scott Porter) and I can almost guarantee you will never meet a boyfriend that sensitive in your life, unless you are a gay male. Then we had Donna's annoying friends Claire (Stroup) and Lisa (Dana Davis), and the token mean girl Chrissy (Brianne Davis). If you thought the characters in DEATH PROOF were annoying, try watching this movie. And don't get me started on Ronnie (Collins Pennie) and the DJ (Jay Phillips) who gave me flashbacks to Usher's performance in SHE'S ALL THAT.Add to all that predictable plot turns, a terrible soundtrack and a big lack of respect to the original material, and you have quite a stinker.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ca7f6d815df4fefaeb832a7d0e7464f",
            "input": "I'm trying to picture the pitch for Dark Angel. \"I'm thinking Matrix, I'm thinking Bladerunner, I'm thinking that chick that plays Faith in Angel, wearing shiny black leather - or some chick just like her, leave that one with us. Only - get this! - we'll do it without any plot, dialogue, character, decent action or budget, just some loud bangs and a hot chick in shiny black leather straddling a big throbbing bike. Fanboys dig loud bangs and hot chicks in shiny black leather straddling big throbbing bikes, right?\"Flashy, shallow, dreary, formulaic, passionless, tedious, dull, dumb, humourless, desultory, barely competent. Live action anime without any action, or indeed any life. SF just the way Joe Fanboy likes it, in fact. :(",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd94f56b2ca745159e6fb67f1d072614",
            "input": "This was a favorite of my childhood - I can remember seeing it on television and thrilling to it each time. Now that I'm grown up and have a kid of my own, I wanted to introduce him to this classic movie. We watched it last Friday, and he liked it. During Abu's fight with the giant spider, my son's hand crept over and took hold of mine - he was genuinely scared. \"Is he gonna beat the spider, Poppa?\" Just watch, you'll see. He has no historical frame of reference to speak of (eight years old), so Bagdad under the grandson of Haroun al-Raschid might as well be Oz under Ozma.I think he especially liked how much of the heroics and derring-do were perpetrated by the boy-thief, and not the grown-up king. In fact, if you deconstruct the film's narrative a bit, the king is the thief's sidekick, not the hero at all - which must be very satisfying to imaginative, adventurous young boys. It's definitely a period piece - I suspect that by the time he's eleven or twelve, my son will find it 'corny' or whatever word the next generation will be using by then. The love story is barely one-dimensional - as a cynical friend commented, \"Why does Ahmad love the Princess? Because the narrative demands it.\" The willingness of Abu to put himself in jeopardy (repeatedly) for the clueless, love-struck deposed king is equally improbable. But to quibble about such things while accepting flying mechanical horses, fifty-foot genies and the Temple of the All-Seeing Eye would be fatuous in the extreme. The satisfaction of seeing the prophecy fulfilled at the movie's climax is tremendous, as is the final shot of Abu triumphantly flying away on his (stolen) magic carpet, seeking \"some fun, and adventure at last!\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c15375cbc09465cbd6824f70023d3b0",
            "input": "I thought Hugh O'Conor was astounding as the young Christy Brown, and really deserved greater recognition for his role. I couldn't believe how well he played the part. Of course, Daniel Day-Lewis was brilliant too. My favourite scene is where the boys are playing football and Christy uses his head to stop the goals and then kicks the penalty! Amazing performances by the two Christys (and other also).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e4c2680ddb047d5a2f6ed9166009697",
            "input": "This show has a great storyline! It's very believable! A mans wife dies and he cant take care of his children alone so he calls on his brother in law his best friend and many others come later on in the show. Such as Rebeecca Donaldson, ,the lovable yet strong dog Comet , Nikki and Alex who you can find out for yourself (I don't want to spoil it for you) and of coerce Kimmy Gibler! (The sidekick of DJ) but the kids are wonderful too. This is Mary Kate and Ashley first took off! And also you may know Candace Cameron Bure from shows like St.Elsewere Punky Brewster and that's so raven! Jodie Sweetin plays Steph the love able middle child who feels left out. Really this is a very good show!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c62f384d83974b36bfc611228e4b85a6",
            "input": "I have just read the lead comment for this film that is on the front page with the voting results and cast run down.Why is it that some people can not take a film for what it is supposed to be.This film is supposed to be a light hearted, tonge in cheek, family comedy, things to make the kids laugh and things for the adults, and that is exactly what this film does.I laughed my nuts off at this film, I thought Carey put in a great performance and the whole film (if watched at Christmas) really give you a bit of festive cheerSo to all of you film reviewers stop trying to sound like film students and knock every film because it is not \"Taxi Driver\" or \"The Godfather\" and take films for what they are supposed to be, entertainment!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5cb539f57f94993b1cdb7c0eea4c187",
            "input": "Let me start by stating that I usually do like Renny Harlin's directing style, for the most part, and that the cinematographer should be commended for some the shots. Unlike Harlin's \"Elm Street 4\", and \"Die Hard 2\" which I really liked, there is something that is missing from this movie. That, my friends, is a script. The dialogue in movies like this is always pretty awful, but this one takes the gold medal for stupidity. There are so many awful lines in this movie, I don't even want to have to remember any of them. Not just that but the execution of the lines is pathetic and seems more suited toward a bad porn movie than an action adventure. It's almost like Harlin thought that if they slowed down the words being said, they could improve the script. Wrong again.The sad part is that there is some talented actors thrown into bad roles with worse dialogue. Stallone has never been a favorite of mine, but when he is acting circles around Lithgow, Turner, and the worst of the bunch Rooker, there is something wrong with this picture. Lithgow played one of the best villains in \"Ricochet\", yet comes across as someone who can't act to save his life here. How is that possible? I've always been a huge fan of his and he gets schooled in acting by Stallone, who himself still phoned-in his performance. Turner's part is so small and pointless, but she still manages to appear lost on screen. Michael Rooker CAN act. I know this because I have witnessed it in \"Days of Thunder\", but he seems like he is READING his lines from cue cards. Has it come to this? When Rooker and Lithgow have scenes together where they are speaking, I just wanted the movie to end right there, or have them both amazingly find their acting ability. Unfortunately, neither of those things occurred.Which brings me back to Harlin, who can be the only one to really blame for this mess other than the screenwriters. It's his fault that I was never drawn into this movie at all, because he should have made the people actually act. The script is not very good, but still the actors' performances are what destroys this movie and that has to lie with the director. I don't care how much was paid for the special effects, which for the most part are good, you still can't just sacrifice the movie with terrible acting. Plus, the pacing of this movie seems to be off. The opening sequence was good and the plane scene was very well done, but how are you supposed to care about the outcome of the heist at all. I mean I understand that they were trying to create tension with all of the bells and whistles of the plane scene, but I really didn't care if they got the money or not in that scene. If the bad guy's would have won early, maybe I wouldn't have had to witness one of the worst movies ever!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5082505b107b4dbda99c4d34efe3f4fb",
            "input": "Ouch! This one was a bit painful to sit through. It has a cute and amusing premise, but it all goes to hell from there. Matthew Modine is almost always pedestrian and annoying, and he does not disappoint in this one. Deborah Kara Unger and John Neville turned in surprisingly decent performances. Alan Bates and Jennifer Tilly, among others, played it way over the top. I know that's the way the parts were written, and it's hard to blame actors, when the script and director have them do such schlock. If you're going to have outrageous characters, that's OK, but you gotta have good material to make it work. It didn't here. Run away screaming from this movie if at all possible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2f51176e6a545abbb59da56432ad715",
            "input": "Where to start. The film started out pretty well, but after the 30 min mark i caught myself watching the clock. The horror at the start of the film was good but then the story kicked in. It just got stupider and stupider as time ticked by.The actors gave an average performance in this movie however, i got a bit bored of Vinny Jones constant scowling in the film.As the film dragged on, and take my word for it, it dragged on, it just got more and more far fetched.*** SPOILER ALERT *** SPOILER ALERT *** SPOILER ALERT *** Just when i thought the film could not get any worse, towards the end loads if skeleton looking monsters turned up, just to eat the dead people which made no sense at all. It turned out to be some sort of flesh eating cult and the good guys die at the end. The ending in fact just made me laugh at how bad it was. Once the lead role disposes of Vinny Jones, he becomes the new killer.In closing, this film made Creep look like the best horror film ever made. I gave it 1 star because the female lead did a pretty good job but even she could not save this train wreck of a movie!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7f81bf7636a408aa8a927832e5ceefb",
            "input": "Many people have commented that this movie was nowhere near as good as the first. Well, maybe it isn't - to you. However, how does your child react to it? Well, mine loved it more than the first.Disney movies of the past can sometimes be a little harsh for little kids. (For example - Bambi's mother getting shot.) This movie was really great for my sensitive little girl who likes humor and happy endings.If you want to be snobby about what should be Disney's standards based on the past - skip this movie. If you have a sweet little girl or soft-hearted little boy you really want to please, buy this movie and treat your small children. This film is great as a bedtime movie for happy dreams instead of nightmares. I'm happy with a movie that pleases my kid & doesn't need to impress the parents all the time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6209c9109aa4925b3b791b2cceacbcd",
            "input": "I saw most of the episodes of RMFTM as a teenager on \"Cliffhanger Theater\" running after midnight on a local station some years ago, and then again when Mystery Science Theatre riffed on it in the early 90's. Time has not been kind to it. I can certainly make allowances for the special effects, which were quite impressive for a low budget 50's serial (IMO Commando Cody's flying scenes were better than George Reeves/Superman's in his TV show). And I can also make allowances for the ahem, \"acting\", and fight choreography -. except for the guy who plays the ruler of the Moon Men. He is incredibly miscast. He looks and acts like the fellow who comes to fix your plumbing, not the despotic ruler of an alien race. Even the corny dialog works all right - everyone rattles off their lines like strings of firecrackers, with no wasted time or pauses for things like \"thought\" or \"introspection\". Since everyone does this, the viewer finds it immersive after awhile, and even to my modern sensibilities, it doesn't bother much. What really irritates me is the writing and the plotting. I'm not talking about the sunny weather on the moon, or baking soda powered rocket ships, or a flying suit that has controls labeled \"up/down\" and \"fast/slow\". I'm not even bothered by the cheesiness of the resolutions to the cliffhangers that end each chapter. I'm talking about the fact that our supposed heroes are dumber than fence posts and have no cumulative memory. And by the fact that although that the dialog clips along like an express train, the plot goes through the same motions again and again. Dig it: Commando Cody and his pal are the spearhead of a top secret hi tech science lab charged with protecting Earth (or at least the USA) against an insidious alien invasion. But his office has no guards or security checkpoints. They don't even have locks on the front doors. So the bad guys walk RIGHT IN and beat the crap out of the Cody and his staff ...not once (perhaps understandable) but SEVERAL times. They even kidnap his female assistant on the second try. And they never get any smarter. To further prove my point, allow me to point out the way that Cody jumps in his flying suit and flies around getting into trouble and never actually seems to succeed in catching anyone. He does this over and over and over. Cody also flies his ship to the Moon (the woman assistant comes along to cook), stays for about 30 seconds and immediately turns around and comes back. Cody captures one of the Atomic Ray guns...and immediately loses it again to the bad guys because he couldn't be bothered to lock it up. And so on.And you would think that if Cody's efforts were so vital to saving the USA from the Moon Men, that he might ask for a few soldiers with carbines, a few helicopters and a tank or two to back him up, instead of just working with the local police all the time. This was supposed to be a military operation, but they act like it's another episode of \"Gangbusters\". It's all rather hard to stomach. I appreciate that the creators were severely limited in the scope of their story by budget and time constraints...and I appreciate that Cody is actually a reasonably tough hombre (even though he loses half of his fistfights). But I just can't help yelling \"DOOR! LOCK THE DOOOOR!!\" when the gangsters simply walk into his lab, or try to blow up the ship and there are NO security measures at the landing site in place...not even a fence (!). Still, it's OK. Of the three Republic serials I've watched, \"Phantom Creeps\" had a better plot, and \"Undersea Kingdom\" had more atmosphere (hah!) and a better hero than \"Radar Men\", but it's an OK time-waster. BTW...why \"Radar\" men? They didn't use radar, they used Atomic Ray Guns. Shouldn't the title have been \"Atomic Ray Gun Men From The Moon?\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f823b4700dde48d49cc7f468b0113638",
            "input": "Delightful film directed by some of the best directors in the industry today. The film is also casting some of the great actors of our time, not just from France but from everywhere.My favorite segments:14th arrondissement: Carol (Margo Martindale), from Denver, comes to Paris to learn French and also to make a sense of her life.Montmartre: there was probably not a better way to start this movie than with this segment on romantic Paris.Loin du 16ème: an image of Paris that we are better aware of since the riots in the Cités. Ana (Catalina Sandino Moreno) spends more time taking care of somebody else's kid (she's a nanny) than of her own.Quartier Latin: so much fun to see Gérard Depardieu as the \"tenancier de bar\" with Gena Rowlands and Ben Gazzara discussing their divorce.Tour Eiffel: don't tell me you didn't like those mimes!Tuileries: such a treat to see Steve Buscemi as the tourist who's making high-contact (a no- no) with a girl in the Metro.Parc Monceau: Nick Nolte is great. Ludivine Sagnier also.I've spend 3 days in Paris in 2004 and this movie makes me want to go back!Seen in Barcelona (another great city), at the Verdi, on March 18th, 2007.84/100 (***)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db0d92f4e66f40e3b50aff900f9d5861",
            "input": "This is a sublime piece of film-making. It flows at just the right pace throughout. The accompanying music fits perfectly and is very pleasant to the ear. The humorous parts are hilarious and made even more so by the largely depressingly tragic nature of the film.However, despite much comment about the inherent tragedy of the storyline it was anything but depressing for me to watch. I thoroughly enjoyed it in a way that I haven't experienced for a long time. That is to say, it is superb and yet without all the common trappings of modern films such as; sex, violence and unnecessary special effects. 'Dan In Real Life' lacks nothing for being without the regular vices. It has a fully matured plot that just doesn't require, and indeed would be ruined by, any further embellishment. At the same time, the theme is entirely adult. It's a piece of art in and of itself that encapsulates you entirely and you want for nothing more than it already offers.There are some scenes that feel a bit 'Waltons' but these actually make perfect sense in the long run as they contrast the more dysfunctional moments. The rosier makes way for the tragic which then gives over to the idyllic which turns to the darker etc. This undulating landscape of emotional cinematography creates a perfect balance and keeps the viewer in a state of lithium-like stability. The peaks and troughs are gentle but more than adequate in the pleasure they instill.I highly recommend watching this film regardless of what genre you normally enjoy. Put aside any prejudices because this is a must see!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78da1dea3dc24cbcb675379f988345f5",
            "input": "This film may seem dated today, but remember that it was made in 1974 -- before Saturday Night Live, before Howard Stern, back when George Carlin was just getting beyond the Hippie Dippie Weatherman and into heavy satiric humor. This film is the granddaddy of them all. Enjoy it for its historical significance, as well as for its strong entertainment value.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a97f2cc48d4a4c5aa23989badde2afa0",
            "input": "This movie was highly entertaining. The soundtrack (Bian Adams) is simply beautiful and inspiring. Even more impressive is Brian Adams doing all the songs in French as well. The score is also uplifting and dramatic.The movie is made from a mix of traditional animation, combined with computer generated images. The result is truly stunning. I watch this film at least once a week with my kids and we never tire of it. The story is compelling and well narrated.I don't understand anyone who would rank this movie less than a 7. Definately a keeper in my household.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8bd53259ff494d38bae54287b8d44176",
            "input": "This movie is Damian Szifrón's second immersion in movies after his excellent character study in \"El Fondo del Mar\". With \"Tiempo De Valientes\" he creates extremely well done characters, far away from prototypes and with an unprecedented chemistry between them. I've seen Szifron's talent to present every character in a lighthearted way but just enough to involve us emotionally with them. His control over them is magnificent, so he restores on the movie a great direction and an overall brilliantly polished script, the characters laugh and cry with real sentiment and invite the viewer to join them in their emotions and their evolution on screen.The Spanish takes over the English, the Buenos Aires urban landscape at night replaces Hollywood sets and the premise is just as interesting as any other, so we have a film daring to compete over Hollywood's Machinery.But I want you to see the movie mainly because I've never dealt with such endearing characters, all of them. It seems the script suits perfectly to the actors and vice versa. I really believe with a film making like this Argentina is really up to the Competition.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab0075ecf02f46449fcb1905ae532034",
            "input": "This film is one of those that has a resounding familiarity to it. It is earthy, grounded and a film that will make you think...and smile. Paul Reiser and Peter Falk take you on a journey that you will not forget. The soundtrack is beautifully varied and fitting; and the film itself is like a breath of fresh air. This surely deserves recognition for both the film and the actors! Finally, a piece of art that departs from the obvious love story and the frequent special affects that are seen today. Never have I walked out from a movie with such deep warmth and feeling of thoughtfulness in my heart; for it felt as if someone had just wrapped it in a fluffy fleece blanket. To see this film is to find a real treasure and delight in it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a877166f22764229b0aa44b1578c79f8",
            "input": "Without a doubt, this is one of the worst pictures I ever actually paid money to see - the kind of flick you choose out of desperation at the mall cinema during a Christmas holiday when you have missed the start times for anything good but still are dead set on seeing a movie! And that is exactly how I came to see this stink bomb...At the distance of the better part of three decades I can still smell the rotting fish that constitute this story line. Unbelievable plot - that a killer whale carries a grudge against an individual not of the sea - is laughable. And that's about all, except for a completely out-of-place \"love theme\" that plays over the finish of a film devoid of a love story. At least Charlotte Rampling is lovely (in a two dimensional role) but Richard Harris just chews up the scenery. He was no Captain Quint (Robert Shaw) and this is no \"Jaws\". Mercifully, I have put most of it out of mind and when I run across it on television air casts I move on immediately. \"Danger, Will Robinson!\" See the current t.v. commercial showing a husband and wife whale-watching (\"Orca - I love Orca...\") - at least it is over in sixty seconds. This flick represents 92 minutes of my life that I will never get back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-868a60fecdc346ca804c2f2caaab0ce1",
            "input": "this film tries to be immensely clever, and Tarantino-like before you try that though, you need solid filmic fundamentals. these include good sound, editing, set design etc...lets talk about the sound in this movie. absolutely atrocious. i have never been more distracted by a sound track, everand before we talk about low budget, film made in Chile etc.. lets bear in mind that desent sound these days is far more achievable than it ever has been. anywhere. and more info on technique is available then ever beforethe sound in this movie is plain bad. the foley in particular is out of place and inappropriate throughout, the atmos is equally terrible. i heard at least four loud clicks during the movie, which are the result of poor sound editing. the sound inside cars is awful, the sound of car doors closing is awful. the sound of the lady singing is wrong. foley is either overboard, or simply not there like the sound person just got bored and gave up. the spaces are wrong. everything about it is wrong and yet, not letting limitations of creativity get in the way, at the same time the movie tries boldly to be clever. for example the sound of the aquarium is used in the following street scene. we hear sound when we're not supposed to. sound edits precede visual cuts. every trick in the book is used, and yet the foundations are just not thereediting-wise we have scenes using heavy jump cuts, we have tinkering around with the time line etc etc etc, yawn. all of these techniques are imitated to a splendidly low standard overall the mix is crap, the sound is crap. and so, the film is crap. how can a movie with so many fundamental flaws be considered for awards and high praise? Chile's cinematic new wave? the best creative output that Chile has to offer? i hope not, and i think not.my theory is that Chile's more selective and better talent avoided this film like the plague maybe due to its risqué content. equally, the film has likely received so much unwarranted critical acclaim from so called 'world-cinema' enthusiasts for the same grubby reasons. they likely revel in it's trashiness. of course film critics rarely pay attention to technical details and quality this film is rubbish. it's all mouth and no trousers and is never deserving of a 6.8 rating. the film has all the production quality of a cheap Tarantino, new wave inspired porno!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c30c4307ef85429fbe93e82de43d67d7",
            "input": "Did anyone edit this film? Or was it only the DVD release that had huge thirty second gaps between scenes? It's OK though, I fell asleep watching it the first time. Then I fell asleep the second time and the third time. The plot is actually not the worst I've seen, but it's close. The acting is not the worst I've seen either...but it's close. The production .... well, I can honestly say that it was the worst I had ever seen in my life! Not trying to be spiteful, but Unhinged could have used some more production.Please don't think I'm a hater of horror films, or even that I didn't enjoy this film. I just felt I was laughing at the film much more than I felt I was laughing along with it. The gruesome moments were not too poorly done, but could have been done better even with a shoestring budget.Characters seemed awkwardly developed, or ignored all together, twist ending was pretty bad, and the exposition took forever without exposing much.I'd recommend avoiding this movie.1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e3fe8b2fa4648e8aea03bca56c8759e",
            "input": "I happened to see this movie twice or more and found it well made! WWII had freshly ended and the so-called \"Cold War\" was about to begin. This movie could, therefore, be defined as one of the best \"propaganda\", patriotic movies preparing Americans and, secondly, people from the still to be formed \"Western NATO block\" of countries to face the next coming menace. The movie celebrates the might of the US, through the centuries, while projecting itself onwards to the then present war, which had just ended. Nice and funny is the way of describing the discovering of the American Continent by Columbus and pretty the \"espisode\" of New Amsterdam and the purchasing of Manhattan from a drunk local Indian .. Must see it (at least once, for curiosity of fashion of propaganda through time)! :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0440f0932374d08a82c13853f623a2d",
            "input": "The problem with family dramas is that, outside of TV movies on channels like Lifetime, most people don't want to watch them. And the ones that do get watched tend to be sensationalized and about current or topical problems or issues in the news (or recent news). Movies that explain or explore the human condition aren't popular. Particularly with the young crowd that would be Miss Lohan's fan base or the younger crowd that tends to make movies not simply popular but financially successful for studios.The specific problems I had with this movie is the cartoonishness of some of the characterizations. It was a bit much to blame all of the Lohan's character's acting-out (wrecking the car, drug use, etc.) on what her step-father did to her. While not improbable,it's just a bit much to expect the audience to swallow. Additionally, other aspects, such as her giving the young Morman boy, oral sex, or that she would actually make a good assistant to the vet, who coincidentally happens to have a thing for her mother, etc., all these elements just did not really help this movie along. It placed it more in the element of a situation comedy trying one of their \"special dramatic episodes\" then it did for a fully realized, well-written feature film.When you watch the DVD and listen to the commentary, particularly for the various alternate endings, you can really see all of this is sharp focus.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-deca741fb756467cb3eb8d806c3f5924",
            "input": "\"Father of the Pride \" was another of those good shows that unfortunately don't have a very long life . And that is pretty sad ,specially if you consider that almost all the time the worst shows are still on air ( think in \"The Simple life \") I admit that are many similarities with this show and \"The Simpsons\" ,but despite the similarities ,the show have it own merits . The animation is just adequate ,not incredible ,but is good .The best are the characters . All the animals are very likable and funny , and even Sigfried and Roy had their moments . The music was good ,I liked many of the songs .Even if the show isn't very original ,I think that this had lots of potential .Like \"Mission Hill \" a show that isn't very famous but I liked a lot , this didn't have the appreciation that it deserved . What a shame .",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-790482b1b5284ff3af0b8802fe8b37c3",
            "input": "What a shame that Alan Clarke has to be associated with this tripe. That doesn't rule it out however; get a group of lads and some Stellas together and have a whale of a time running this one again and again and rolling around on the floor in tears of laughter. Great wasted night stuff. Al Hunter homes in on a well publicised theme of the late 80s- that hooligans were well organised and not really interested in the football itself- often with respectable jobs (estate agent???). But how Clarke can convince us that any of the two-bit actors straying from other TV productions of low quality (Grange Hill) or soon to go on to poor quality drama (Eastenders) can for a nanosecond make us believe that they are tough football thugs is laughable. Are we really to believe that the ICF (on whom of course the drama is based) would EVER go to another town to fight with just SIX blokes?The ICF would crowd out tube stations and the like with HUNDREDS. Andy Nicholls' Scally needs to be read before even contemplating a story of this nature. The acting is appalling and provides most of the laughs- Oldman is so camp it is unbelievable. Most of them look as though they should be in a bubble of bath of Mr Matey. A true inspiration to anyone with a digital video camera who thinks they can make a flick- go for it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61a41e35e1994193b42f6b6938a50f19",
            "input": "Now, many would think to stay away from this movie just because of the title. If you do not have the stomach for gory movies, then what are you doing reading this review? Anyhow, I borrowed the video from a friend of mine and fell in love with this movie immediately. This movie is chock full of wonderful gore, plus the usual other ingredients that make up a b-movie add up to one hell of a viewing experience! If you're a lover of good quality experiences, then by all means, watch this great flick!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac173d7056e94f4d96cb74b945f1b7e0",
            "input": "A wonderful film, filled with great understated performance and sharp, intelligent dialogue. What really distinguishes the film, however, is that undercurrent of sadness throughout. The story is underscored by affairs, loneliness, suicide, disappointment, the fear of losing ones job in a world where that had disastrous consequences. Most of all it was set in a world that no longer existed, having been ripped apart by the beginning of World War II. In fact, the film is barely a comedy at all if you compare the percentage of serious scenes to the comic scenes. Yet funny it is--listen to Margaret Sullivan's harsh dismissal of Jimmy Stewart and watch his pained expression as he replies that her comments were a remarkable blend \"of poetry and meanness\". It's funny, pointed, and sad all at once. A remarkable achievement and one of the ten greatest screen comedies ever made.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-027d3c774c874ad8b9e56fa9af695d4c",
            "input": "Shinjuku Triad Society, albeit from perfect, is a fiercely compelling film for what it tries to depict in its uber-conventional realm. It's a yakuza/triad picture, involving cops versus Japanese &/or Chinese gangsters (mostly Chinese, as the title suggests), but already even in his first technical 'debut', Takashi Miike is already establishing many aspects to films that he would make from here-on in. Social issues like black market trading of precious goods, in this case human organs usually from children; nostalgia for childhood and one's roots, which was especially prevalent in Dead or Alive 2; thumbing-of-the-nose at taboos like gay sex and (satirical) rape/violence towards women; blood-curdling violence. It's certainly not as surreal as some of Miike's most recent films, but this is expected as he's trying out things that he's just starting to learn, following a track record of straight to video programmers. It's got all of those qualities, and it's also, like the films that would follow from it, equally savage and heartfelt, crazy (in spots) and sardonic in its drama, and solid for genre fans.The story concerns two brothers, one a Chinese orphan raised in Japan, Tatsuhito Kiriya (Kippei Shiina, pretty decent as a Eastwood-esquire anti-hero/hero), who's become a detective, and another, who's become a gangster, or a would-be one. The main arch likely takeover gang comes from Wang (a definite pun on what the gang represents during its spare-time, played by Tomorowo Taguchi as a typical wacko with real terror in his eyes), and his partner Karino (Takeshi Caesar, who's threatening even when just repeating a commandment over and over to a woman who's just had her eye plugged out following a sour deal), who are the ruthless kind to pop up almost organically in a Miike movie. There's some intrigue involving the organ-trading scheme with the gangsters, which Kiriya almost becomes a victim of, and the gang's penchant for gay sex- at least with one little puppet of sorts who does whatever the main gangsters want. It all leads up to vengeance and redemption, qualities that Miike and his writer are trying to emulate from Shakespeare (hence the Macbeth bit with Wang washing his bloody hangs over and over after some gay sex saying \"it won't come off\").If it doesn't add up to the same emotional level of impact that a great Shakespeare play would have, it's par for the course of a film like this. Miike's goals are met, though just met, in his low-scale ambitions: a gangster picture with some added levels of harsh familial trouble (the main tension between the brothers comes out of profession and duty to parents), notes on the crueler aspects of underworld crime, and what the realm of unrepentant sex, with both sexes, brings out psychologically in the characters. At the same time, Shinjuku Triad Society also contains more than a few moments of classic biting black-comedy from the Miike oeuvre. Some of it just has to be taken with a grain of salt for what the director does in his outrageousness, like the bit at the beginning with the chair smashing over the face, or the randomness of the \"interrogation\" as it goes into a very twisted area. There's even a laugh-out-loud line from the young sex-slave after finishing an act on one of the bosses: \"Thank you, Mr. Weeny-Burger.\" Miike and his writer don't have enough here to make the film a full-on dark comedy like Ichi or, of course, Visitor Q, but there's enough to bring some appropriate levity to the darker aspects to the story and characters.As the first entry of the \"Black Society\" trilogy, as it's called, I was quite impressed, and it's a fine quasi-calling card from one of the craziest new artists in contemporary cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d665c5ecbbbd4e89b4c25fa2f1f6a5b0",
            "input": "I researched this film a little and discovered a web site that claims it was actually an inside joke about the Post WWII Greenwich Village world of gays and lesbians. With the exception of Stewart and Novak, the warlocks and witches represented that alternative lifestyle. John Van Druten who wrote the stage play was apparently gay and very familiar with this Greenwich Village. I thought this was ironic because I first saw Bell, Book and Candle in the theater when I was in 5th or 6th grade just because my parents took me. It was hard to get me to a movie that didn't include horses, machine guns, or alien monsters and I planned on being bored. But, I remember the moment when Jimmy Stewart embraced Kim Novak on the top of the Flatiron building and flung his hat away while the camera followed it fluttering to the ground. As the glorious George Duning love theme soared, I suddenly got a sense of what it felt like to fall in love. The first stirrings of romantic/sexual love left me dazed as I left the theater. I am sure I'm not the only pre-adolescent boy who was seduced by Kim Novak's startling, direct gaze. It's ironic that a gay parable was able to jump-start heterosexual puberty in so many of us. I am in my late 50's now and re-watched the film yesterday evening and those same feelings stirred as I watched that hat touch down fifty years later . . .",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f969f5a814fc46c8a5c9dd26acd9552d",
            "input": "George and Kim are traveling with their young son Miles to a remote cabin in upstate New York when their car hits a deer and swerves into a ditch.But what seems to be a mere occurrence of misfortune marks the beginning of a terrifying journey,where myth becomes reality and a flesh-eating spirit,half animal and half man Wendigo,haunts a small town...\"Wendigo\" by Larry Fessenden is a thought-provoking horror film that often tenderfoot's into a somber family drama.The acting is great,the characters are well-developed and there are some bone-chilling moments.The subtle glimpses of Wendigo are handled effectively and it's never clear what is real and what is imagined,or even if the story is taking place entirely in Miles' head.Overall,\"Wendigo\" is my first contact with Larry Fessenden's work and surely won't be the last.Give this film a chance,if you don't mind watching something unconventional.8 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4722042087f444d8cada1e94aa05ff6",
            "input": "First off, I agree with quite a bit that escapes Mr. Chomsky's mouth. His matter-of-fact delivery of interesting counterpoint is what makes the man a hit on the university campus circus. He comes across likable, unassuming, pragmatic. He doesn't cater to the current political style (obnoxious bi-partisanship) and he sets his sights on the far left as well as the far right, chastising both, and for good reason.Unfortunately, the film itself is a dud. In fact, I would not even call this a documentary but rather just a collection of speeches. Watching \"Rebel Without a Pause\" is no different from watching a speaker on a 3am taped segment on CSPAN. There are no camera movements, no edits, no stylistic touches. There is no story, no narrative.Technically speaking, the production is strictly amateurish. Audio is terrible and inconsistent; sometimes we cannot hear Noam speak, other times we cannot hear the questions that are being posited by those in attendance. When Noam is speaking rarely are we allowed to see the reactions of the audience except when we are given a quick shot of his wife who apparently attends every one of his speeches and beams with pride every time we see her.I cannot recommend this film and would say that you're probably better off checking out his taped speeches on cassette or CD to listen to in the car.4 out of 10 stars...and I'm in a generous mood today.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8d2051ae5254be3a89e08a9d2b305ce",
            "input": "This timeless proverb reverberates in this movie and in my heart. So many years have I waited to see this eternal story! I was not ready, perhaps. It is possible that my sensibilities would not have appreciated its power. So I now gratefully welcome it into my soul with gladness.My respect and admiration for PAUL MUNI has been long. His is now a legendary luminescence. But now I have finally discovered the priceless gifts of LUISE RAINER's splendid talents. Oh, how many faces can speak as did hers? Some have said that it was wrought from her silent years, and this well might have been but her speech, is eloquent enough when it is given a chance. She amply deserved her Oscar.This movie is in an epic in the most classical proportions. All parts equal, necessary and perfect. Naysayers may walk away if they wish, but they would be shunning a storytelling which stays with one a lifetime.THE GOOD EARTH enriches one in ways that one does not expect. But all will not come from it with the joy that I did. But I can only hope that this film will be remembered for many years.Do not prod me with mere technicalities regarding the race of the principal players. These are expectations of modern times when we are obsessed with utter perfection. But I dare a million score of newer films to tell PEARL BUCK's story with such poignancy, power, conviction and grace.If any modern artist would dare to re-film this masterpiece, I warn them that they will never come close to the aromatic fragrance which still emanates from the core of this telling. Time will not diminish this effort nor will progress improve upon its greatness.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ebd73f2a6904f7e8c863ca310057e1e",
            "input": "Darkly comic serendipity about a cosmetics saleswoman, with odd ties to Elvis Presley, running into a sea of Elvis impersonators while speaking at conventions in Nevada...and accidentally killing each one of them through little fault of her own. Kim Basinger, a still-attractive actress of considerable merit, likes to pick quirky movies to play in, but this dreadful screenplay (by Mitchell Ganem and Adam-Michael Garber) hasn't an iota of good humor. The stereotypes and low-ball gags are not meant to be the stuff of classic comedy, but even on a shambling, shameful level, the picture is crude and sloppy. If you do watch, see if you can count how much extraneous shots there are of Basinger behind the wheel of her pink Cadillac, hands always in the same position and a non-plussed look on her face. Hopefully both she and Elvis were well paid. NO STARS from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e7d7e526a194161b3587a7e33a9128c",
            "input": "The plot is plausible but banal, i.e., beautiful and neglected wife of wealthy and powerful man has a fling with a psychotic hunk, then tries to cover it up as the psycho stalks and blackmails her. But, what develops from there is stupefyingly illogical. Despite the resources that are available to the usual couple who has money and influence, our privileged hero and heroine appear to have only one domestic, their attorney and local police (who say they can do nothing) at their disposal while they grapple with suspense and terror. They have no private security staff (only a fancy security system that they mishandle), household or grounds staff, chauffeurs, etc. Not even, apparently, the funds to hire private round-the-clock nurses to care for the hero when he suffers life-threatening injuries, leaving man and wife alone and vulnerable in their mansion. Our heroine is portrayed as having the brains of a doorknob and our hero, a tycoon, behaves in the most unlikely and irrational manner. The production is an insult to viewers who wasted their time with this drivel and a crime for having wasted the talents of veteran actors Oliva Hussey and Don Murray (what were they thinking?). And, shame on Lifetime TV for insulting the intelligence of its audience for this insipid offering.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61e68e61996d4409becddc87e913459a",
            "input": "Okay this is stupid,they say their not making another Nightmare film,that this is the \"last\" one...And what do they do?They go on making another one,not that the next one (part7) was BAD,but why do they play us. Anyway this movie made no sense what-so ever,it was extremelly dull,the characters were highly one dimensional,Freddy was another joker,which is very stupid for such a good series.The plot is very,very bad,and this is even worse than part 2 and 5. I didnt get the movie,its a stupid tale in 3-d,pointless!Id say. I hated this film so much i still rmember all the parts i didnt like which was basically the whole film.This is SO different than the prequels,it tries,and tries,but this one tried the hardest,and got slapped back on the face.Again there were hadly any death scenes,although they were different,they sucked bigtime. How can they have gone this far?Didnt they see they made the biggest mistakes at parts 2 and 5?Yet they make this?Its all bout the money,DO NOT SEE THIS SAD EXCUSE FOR A NIGHTMARE SERIES.I GAVE A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET SIX (6) 3 out of 10.GOOD POINTS OF MOVIE: Had potential with plot.BAD POINTS OF FILM: Terrible acting/lack of deaths/Too funny to be classified as horror/very confusing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ef52ebd0285470686e3e9f57604b71c",
            "input": "You got to go and dig those holes. Holes only leaves troble, which makes a movie so good. Disney has done it again.Shia LaBeouf should be nominated for Best Actor for his performance as Stanley Yelnats. He has alredy won the Daytime Emmy for Best Actor in a Comedy Series (Even Stevens). Holes is one of the best movies in 2003.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35f201a3a4084265b755bede4a2ce816",
            "input": "Final Score...who cares - it's a reality show. It has no love for it's audience, it panders to lazy TV viewers, puts nothing in and gets nothing out.\"Joe Millionaire\", the most blatantly phony reality show of them all, is a television disaster of epic proportions. It's a watershed, rock bottom moment, not only for Fox, but for the American viewing public who actually watch, like and talked about this crap the next day. You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Because as much as Fox promotes this junk it won't make any money unless it's watch by people (and boy was it, the finale got nearly Super Bowl numbers!?). It doesn't bother you people that there are many quality shows written, directed, acted and generally have effort put into them that are being cancelled while you sit back and lap up this effortless, cold game show?I used to be a staunch supporter of Fox. It's those of us like me who like and seek out quality TV that helped build Fox back in the days of Married...with Children and The Simpsons. Conveniently enough, now neither of those shows would make it 6 weeks with the current management. The Gail Berman \"reign of terror\" as it's often called. The network has waged war on scripted TV AND, strangely enough, it's fans. The very people who helped build them in the beginning. Now, not only do we have to fight for good shows, but we have to fight against their own network. It boggles the mind. Nothing Fox, has done in the past 3 years makes any sense. From canceling hits like \"Titus\", \"Futurama\" and \"John Doe\" (NBC can renew \"Boomtown\", but Fox can't lift it's pitiful head to give the only decent show they had this season another shot?). And the reason they can do all this: the success of junk like \"Joe Millionaire\". They can now say \"We don't need you TV fans, we have reality shows\". They apparently seem to have no idea that the big audience the draw with this junk is fickle and WILL abandon them the second the next fad comes along. To alienate their base like this will eventually kill the network the way it has set back ABC.The show itself is a joke. Here we have a premise, in the now classic Fox gimmick, that promises us something different and edgy, but then delivers something not in any way different from \"The Bachelor\" or anything on the big 3. Fox has gone mainstream. The finale and \"twist\" (quote/unquote) showed they have no ideas up their sleeve. Now we know that all these shows, no matter how different they look, will all end up the same cornball, fairy tale ending. We got to see a bunch of lame aspiring actors that the network picked out of millions of head-shots to fit their demographics parade around like high school bimbos pretending they liked this Evan Marriott because...well because it was a competition and that's what you're supposed to do. Marriott himself is like a hideously disfigured Chro-magnum man who struggles to put together the simplest sentences. But, how can the women (all average to ugly looking by the way - an important minus is a guilty pleasure show like this) not fall for \"Joe\" with such charming lines like \"Look, you're not stupid\".I used to think that people who watched these reality/dating/game shows were just to lazy to change the channel, but after \"Joe Millionaire\" I think they must be genuinely mentally deficient. Come on people, have a little more pride in yourselves. Demand a little bit more from your entertainment then THIS.Boycott FOX.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afaf91c44c584f7c8ff7252822635016",
            "input": "The script for this TV soap opera is so bad that even A. Hopkins at some point had to play like an undergrad drama-student so as to bring some life in his script-dead character. I do not know whether this was the purpose of the director, but Hopkins' Ciano reeked nothing but vanity, fear and lack of self-esteem. The real Ciano possibly was all that but then, why make a movie about him? Mussolini was a bit more convincing, and his long way down was as if closer to the truth. Edda Mussolini was plain ridiculous (not because of Sarandon, but because of the impotent script), while she had to be the central character of this alleged familial drama. Watch it only if you enjoy Venezuelan soap opera.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84ef3728aa4c4080ab7208a2d93c5f26",
            "input": "There are several things wrong with this movie- Brenda Song's character being one of them. I do not believe that the girl is a lousy actor- I honestly don't. I believe she is given poor lines. She is just supposed to be, \"that vain, rich girl\", and while it is funny in the TV shows she plays in, it can't even get a dry laugh from me here.Either way, I really should have known what to expect when I sat down to watch this film.The movie was not that terrible...initially. Wendy's reaction to Shen was completely natural. I mean, how would you feel if a man, claiming to be a reincarnated monk, chased you around commanding you to wear a medallion and insisting that you were needed to fight \"the great evil\" and save the world? Which brings me to another point. I know this movie is entirely fiction, but it is still has a founding in Chinese culture. It seems like all of the \"warriors\" in Wendy's family line were women. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that the monks would've just been okay with that. Sure, maybe they could've worked it in somehow, but they offered no explanation whatsoever. By doing so, they just contributed to the many cheesy attempts at female empowerment made by Hollywood and the media.Nevermind that, however- let us continue.Wendy's character becomes more unbearable as the film go on. Yes, she is a teenager, and it is near homecoming- I mean, who wants to fight evil during homecoming? The problem is, when \"the evil\" starts to manifest himself, Wendy does not seem as freaked out as she should be. She is extremely careless- even for someone like her. She continues not to care about her training. I will use this conversation as an example, Shen: \"If you do not win this battle, evil will take over, and everything good will be gone.\" Wendy: \"Whoa, talk about pressure. Well...let's talk about something else.\" Yes, let's Wendy. Let's also go dancing when you should rightfully be training. Of course Shen lets her, but his character has an excuse. Better that he cooperate with her, than that he not, and she not train at all, and get them both killed.Oh, speaking of which. Shen also told Wendy that it was his destiny for him to die for her in battle, as he had for her great-grandmother (I am assuming that part).This makes Wendy's actions more unforgivable.As the script-writer would have it, Wendy's homecoming and this \"great battle\" are on exactly the same day. Do you know what Wendy does? Do you even have to guess? Yes, she does end up going to the battle, for when she tries to leave for homecoming, the monks, (who Shen had trapped in the body of her coach and teachers because she \"felt weird fighting an old man\") inform her that Shen has gone to battle alone, so she goes to save him.We initially see some half-decent fighting, that is actually entertaining. Until finally, the great evil comes out of Wendy's rival-for-homecoming's body, and creates the actual embodiment of himself out of the broken pieces of the bodies of his ancient warriors.Don't ask.Anyway, Wendy gets all \"panicky.\" Then Shen goes and defends her from this guy- forgive me for forgetting his long Chinese name- and manages to get himself killed.Wendy catches Shen as he makes his long descent from being thrust uncomfortably high into the air.She screams title of said article out.Now...it was bad enough that Wendy became powerful far, far too fast. No, I will not let it be excused because it was her \"destiny\" and she had \"the power within\" her.Since when, though, did she learn healing? No, worst...since when could she resurrect people? So Shen is raised from the dead. Then, Wendy and he fight the guy.He loses way to easily. The worst part, is when they jump together, and kick him at the same time, and he is banished forever. Then the monks commend Wendy on her sacrifice.Two things, #1: Don't the script writer and director know a battle needs a little more \"finesse\" to it? #2: What sacrifice? The fact that she didn't go to homecoming? Because the girl did not break a sweat, or even bleed. I mean, come on now, this movie was TV PG, I wanted to see somebody get hurt.Ah-hem...moving on.I know it sounds like maybe I should have given the movie a one, based on my comments. Part of critique, you must know, though, is breaking a thing down. You don't necessarily try to look for the bad, but if it's there, you bring attention to it. This movie has a lot of bad, but something funny happens when you never really expect something to be all too great in the first place.So, I suppose it was all right. Not that me not saying it wasn't all right would've stopped anybody from watching it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b279e349f2a843c2961e23dd473da818",
            "input": "Mary Pickford (\"Born on the Fourth of July\" as Angela Moore) is \"The Little American\" (of French heritage); she falls in love with Jack Holt (as Karl Von Austreim), who had moved to America with his German father and American mother. French-American Raymond Hatton (as Count Jules de Destin of the \"Fighting Destins\") has fallen in love with Ms. Pickford. The love triangled threesome eventually wind up in France, with the Great War (World War I, in hindsight) complicating their lives considerably.A mostly entertaining, if propagandistically flawed, Cecil B. DeMille film. The torpedoing, and sinking, of a ship carrying Pickford is \"Titanic\"-like. The war intrigue gets dramatic as Pickford slowly becomes an undercover spy for France, while the Germans occupy her ancestral home. Of course, German lover Holt arrives. It was difficult to believe they took so long to recognize each other as he moved in for the rape, but it was dark; and, prior events had them believe each other dead. The film goes WAY over-the-top in its symbolism. Pickford was, by the way, Canadian - though, few could deny she wasn't a \"Little American\", for all intents and purposes.FUN to spot \"extras\" who later became major stars include Wallace Beery, Colleen Moore, and Ramon Novarro - especially, watch for Mr. Novarro exhibiting \"star\" quality during one of the film's more memorable sequences: Pickford and the wounded soldier saluting each other as he is taken by her on a stretcher. Novarro even gets Mary Pickford to write a letter for him; obviously, he's got a future in pictures. Also future-bound is Ben Alexander, who plays the boy \"Bobby\"; he becomes a dependable child actor, and grows up to become a Jack Webb partner on \"Dragnet\". ******* The Little American (7/12/17) Cecil B. DeMille ~ Mary Pickford, Jack Holt, Raymond Hatton",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efb3606c7f2b4ac1b18f183b860611d1",
            "input": "\"Chinese Ghost Story\" is one of the most amazing Hong Kong films I have ever seen.It's a brilliant mix of fantasy,comedy,romance,horror and martial arts.The film has some wonderful visuals and amazing fights.I love especially the fight scene between Wu Ma and the tree demon tongue.Truly original and refreshing film and another Embalmer's fine recommendation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ed7c97d5b1f4b01b9968c1a5d42d41e",
            "input": "Seven Pounds, this was the movie where I was just convinced Will Smith is really going for the \"I'm going to make you cry\" films. One thing I can give him a ton of credit for, the man can cry. My only thing is, as moving as the story is, Will Smith has proved time and time again that he can act, so why is he taking this extremely depressing story? But nevertheless it's still a good movie. I do have to admit it made me cry, but I felt that the stand out performance was Rosario Dawson, I absolutely love this girl, ever since I saw her in 25th Hour with Ed Norton, I knew this girl was going to go far. She's beautiful, charming, funny and talented, can't wait to see how much further her career is going to go. But her and Will Smith, not so sure if they had the great chemistry that the film needed that would've made this into a great film.Two years ago Tim Thomas was in a car crash, which was caused by him using his mobile phone; seven people died: six strangers and his fiancée. A year after the crash, and having quit his job as an aeronautical engineer, Tim donates a lung lobe to his brother, Ben, an IRS employee. Six months later he donates part of his liver to a child services worker named Holly. After that he begins searching for more candidates to receive donations. He finds George, a junior hockey coach, and donates a kidney to him, and then donates bone marrow to a young boy named Nicholas. Two weeks before he dies he contacts Holly and asks if she knows anyone who deserves help. She suggests Connie Tepos, who lives with an abusive boyfriend. Tim moves out of his house and into a local motel taking with him his pet box jellyfish. One night, after being beaten, Connie contacts Tim and he gives her the keys and deed to his beach house. She takes her two children and moves in to their new home. Having stolen his brother's credentials, and making himself known by his brother's name Ben, he checks out candidates for his two final donations. The first is Ezra Turner, a blind vegetarian meat salesman who plays the piano. Tim calls Ezra Turner and harasses him at work to check if he is quick to anger. Ezra remains calm and Tim decides he is worthy. He then contacts Emily Posa, a self-employed greeting card printer who has a heart condition and a rare blood type. He spends time with her, weeding her garden and fixing her rare Heidelberg printer. He begins to fall in love with her and decides that as her condition has worsened he needs to make his donation.Seven Pounds is a good film and no doubt worth a look, I would just recommend going for the rental vs. the theater. Will Smith pulls in a good performance, but not his best, just most of the film required him crying in every scene, but the last one with him is a doozy. But I loved the ending, it was beautiful and really made you appreciate life and to not take it for granted. There is still good people in this world and Ben's character reminds you to value life and to give to those who are in desperate need. Although he went a little far, but it was still a beautiful story.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ecfeac366a448feaff13ad2af3a96c5",
            "input": "I've seen a great many films, but 'In Cold Blood' stands alone in a class by itself. It excels in every department. The fact that it contained few big stars helps push it over the top as you pay closer attention to the characters and their story, rather than the name on the marquee. Blake and Wilson turn in stellar performances of the killer duo. The fact that much of the films is filmed in the actual locations where the crime took place, even inside the very house, add additional chills. The black/white photography darkens the mood and the photography is magnificent. There are many outstanding cinematic works out there, but if I could only vote for one to top the list, it would most probably be \"In Cold Blood\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-15ccfd80f15e4f5da42937d689fd789b",
            "input": "I am quite a fan of novelist/screenwriter Michael Chabon. His novel \"Wonder Boys\" became a fantastic movie by Curtis Hanson. His masterful novel \"The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay\" won the Pulitzer Prize a few years back, and he had a hand in the script of \"Spider Man 2\", arguably the greatest comic book movie of all time.Director Rawson Marshall Thurber has also directed wonderful comedic pieces, such as the gut-busting \"Dodgeball\" and the genius short film series \"Terry Tate: Office Linebacker\". And with a cast including Peter Saarsgard, Sienna Miller, Nick Nolte and Mena Suvari, this seems like a no-brainer.It is. Literally.Jon Foster stars as Art Bechstein, the son of a mobster (Nolte) who recently graduated with a degree in Economics. Jon is in a state of arrested development: he works a minimum wage job at Book Barn, has a vapid relationship with his girlfriend/boss, Phlox (Suvari), which amounts to little more than copious amounts of sex, with no plans other than to chip away at a career for which he has zero passion.One night at a party, an ex-roommate introduces Jon to Jane (Miller), a beautiful, smart violinist. Later that night they go out for pie, and she asks Jon a question that begins to shake him from his catatonic state of existence, \"I want you to tell me something that you have never told a single soul. If you do, it will make this night indelible.\" Jon then tells her a reoccurring dream of his in which he wanders about town looking at the faces of strangers passing him by, yet none of them look him in the eye. \"I imagine it must be what death feels like,\" he says.The next day Jane's wild boyfriend Cleveland (Saarsgard) kidnaps Jon from work and takes him out to a hulking abandoned steel mill, and soon Jon, Cleveland and Jane are spending every waking moment together going to punk rock concerts, doing drugs and drinking lots of alcohol. This doesn't sit well with Phlox, who pushes Jon for a more personal relationship, namely letting her meet his new friends and his father. The film then attempts to take us on Jon's journey as he shakes off the shackles imposed on him by his father, Phlox and his dead-end job as he finds freedom and expression through his relationships with Cleveland and Jane.There is a problem having us follow Jon throughout the film: he's completely uninteresting. He has no ambitions, passions or goals. He walks through life like the invisible wraith he described to Jane the night they met. At the outset this isn't a problem. But he never gets any more interesting. He's a completely passive character. He simply follows along the bohemian Cleveland and Jane, but he never once gives us any inkling as to what he cares about or wants to to do with himself.Consequently, the film and its supporting characters have nowhere to go and little to do other than party, have sex and get in arguments. In other words, much ado about nothing. What we have here is the shallow skin of a good movie without anything on the inside. Sweeping cinematography, ponderous voice-over with characters staring off into the distance, lots of sex scenes both straight and gay, big arguments, more angry sex, a chase scene and a tragic death... but it doesn't seem to matter. Ironically, at one point Jane, confused at a number of Jon's aimless actions, asks him, \"What's going on, Jon? What is this all about?\" Yes, Jon, do tell. We in the audience are dying to know, too.The title \"The Mysteries of Pittsburgh\" must refer to the characters themselves, because that's what they are. They are all facades, one-dimensional stand-ins for actual people. The film never lets us in. We never know what makes any of them tick. We see them do lots of things, but we don't know why. And the absence of \"why\" is one of the worst things a movie can have.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98fea92b9fe24e8d8d865701612d51c0",
            "input": "My comments on this movie have been deleted twice, which i find pretty offending, since i am making an effort to judge this movie for other people. Please be tolerant of other people's opinion. Obviously writing in the spirit of Nietzsches works is not understood, so ill change my comment completely.I think this is a really bad movie for several reasons.Subject: one should be very careful in making a movie about a philosopher that is even today not understood by the masses and amongst peers brings out passionate discussions. One thing philosophers do agree on is that Nietzsche was a great thinker. So making a movie about his life, which obviously includes his 'ideas' is a thing one should be extremely careful with, or preferably, don't do at all. Wisdom starts with knowing what you don't know. One might think this is not a review of the movie itself, but the movie is not about an imaginary character, it is about the life of someone who actually lived and had/has great influence on the world of yesterday, today and tomorrow. If someone tells a story about a tomato, i can express my thoughts about the story itself, but also about the chosen subject, the tomato. There is a responsibility for producers when they make a movie about actual facts. Specially in a case like this and this responsibility was not taken.Screenplay: One of the first things i noticed were the ridiculous accents. Why? It distracts from what it should be about; Nietzsche and the truths he found. It doesn't help putting things in a right geographical perspective or time! Come on, make it proper English or better yet; German! Even Mel Gibson got that part right... letting his characters speak some gibberish Aramaic in the Passion.Secondly, it is well over-acted.3d, Assante is not an actor to depict Nietzsche. Bad casting.4th, facts are way off.And so on. Its a waste of celluloid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f24eedd9f204c70bc2b7c68e6dcc0c2",
            "input": "How can someone NOT like this movie??? This movie is so good, that the first week I saw it on the shelf at the video store it was stolen....BEST Horror Movie Ever!!!....I mean he took the Carrot and he...well you know HAHAHA..How is that NOT funny? The only movie that comes close to touching this is Bride of Chucky and that was just great!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-669679ad0e6c41d1b28125e1ed617753",
            "input": "Ah yes, the VS series, MVC2 being the pinnacle. It's been said before, this is what you get when half of the crew fell asleep on the job, unfortunately the gameplay half did. Don't get me wrong, this is fun, but you get tired of mashing buttons. As for the plot summary, AHAHAHAHAHAAAAA... There is no plot. Beat that guy at the end and win! Eh, who plays this by their self anyway?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12be5f2000e641a2ba3208dc3dd3e2a7",
            "input": "OK here is how I do this. I grade movies on 10 components. Each component will inherently start with 5 points. It can then lose or gain 5 points for a possible 10 or 0.Mood: Action, Romance, Comedy, Drama, Suspense - I give this component 10 points. It had a perfect balance of all five aspects. The Action was fun and exiting. The Romance was not overdone, but still very emotional and moving. I laughed hard and long throughout the movie and still I was captivated by the fantastic drama, and riveting suspense.Plot - I give this component 10 points. I thought all the good fairy tales had already been told. I found my self, sitting in the theatre, returned to my childhood, and in that instant I again believed in unicorns, wicked witches, and falling stars that make dreams come true.Cinema Photography - I give this component 8 points. While the movie captured the story very well in the majority of the angles, I found my self more than once trying to figure out what happened just off camera.FX - I give this component 10 points. I love that they used C.G.I. sparingly. The epic scenes were believable. The magical powers were frighteningly realistic. All in all less is more, and this had it ALL! Cast - I give this component 10 points. No names and seasoned actors alike, the cast was amazing! Michelle Pfeiffer was wonderfully wicked, Charlie Cox made Tristan come to life, Claire Danes gave emotion to the stars, and I will never look and Robert De Niro the same again.Acting - I give this component 10 points. Even the newbie actors played their rolls to perfection. Once again, I will NEVER look and Robert De Niro the same again.Character development - I give this component 9 points. This felt a little rushed and I think if the movie had been a bit longer they could have done the characters a little better justice.Dialogue - I give this component 10 points. The dialogue was smart, witty, fun… even the mush had good dialogue.Score - I give this component 7 points. I can honestly remember only one small piece of music from the entire movie. I am not complaining beyond the fact that the music could be more memorable.Ending - I give this component 9 points. Almost perfect ending! I feel that certain aspects of the ending should have been more pronounced, while others could have been more subdued, but no threads were left untied.Total: 93% Buy the DVD? HEL YES! See it in the Theatre? Most definitely! Bottom Line: Excellent movie for everyone! EPIC! I strongly recommend seeing it in the theatre, I know I'll be going back for seconds!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b37a6218cd794c7bae9ff20783a4a8e5",
            "input": "My introduction into Yoji Yamada's cinematic world is through his famed and recent Samurai Trilogy with The Twilight Samurai, The Hidden Blade and Love and Honor. I had enjoyed all three films, and looking at the prolific, veteran director's filmography, I think it'll take me a very long while to watch all his films, especially the Tora-san series. Needless to say when Kabei Our Mother has finally reached our shores, I jumped at the chance to watch what would be an ode to Mothers everywhere, celebrating their innate love for their children.Based on the autobiography of Teruyo Nogami, Kabei - Our Mother tells of a close knit family of four – Mother Kayo \"Kabei\" (Sayuri Yoshinaga), Father Shigeru \"Tobei\" (Mitsugoro Bando), eldest daughter Hatsu (Mirai Shida) and youngest child Teru (Miku Sato). From the get go their lives would be changed forever, when Shigeru gets arrested under the Peace Preservation Law for his morally controversial writings against the nation, set in the late 30s where Japan had begun their \"crusade\" in China, and thereafter their participation in WWII.So begins Kabei's struggle to hold down jobs to feed her family, and the frequent, difficult meetings with her husband behind bars. Help comes from relatives, especially on Shigeru's side, since Kabei's own dad had adopted an \"I told you so\" attitude with her choice of spouse. Shigeru's one time student Yama (arthouse buffs should recognize Tadanobu Asano here) provides laughter as a bumbling man who slowly becomes confidante and surrogate guardian to the children, and Kabei's sister in law Hisako (Rei Dan) from Hiroshima, which I believe would have sounded some hindsight alarm bells as to her unfortunate fate as the film progresses through its timeline.While the film centers primarily on how the kids are growing up under the presence of their mom, and in a distant relationship with their dad, what I enjoyed is how the microscopic family events unfold under the macroscopic worldwide events that have impacted on the common folk in Japan. It's against the historical backdrop of Japan's push to regional dominance, and there are characters here that don't mask those ambitions, even discussing what the country would eventually do should it be successful in holding onto conquered lands. This is something I rarely see in Japanese films, being that frank in their discussion of that era, and also to get a glimpse of how the common man have to struggle against domestic issues made all the more difficult with resources channeled toward the war effort.The actresses casted here are pitch perfect in their delivery and roles, be they the veterans or the child actors. Actress Sayuri Yoshinaga deserves special mention for her role as the motherly figure who has to dig deep and find that inner strength to carry the household through under trying circumstances, while Mirai Shida and Miku Sato are lovable as the understanding children who have to learn to make do and compromise. Each scene with the three of them together just makes it heart wrenching when the going gets tough, or fill your heart with Joy should they be celebrating. Before long you'll soon find yourself being attracted to want to be part of this family, thanks to the primary cast's powerful performances, with Yoji Yamada coaxing some really natural performances from the kids.Kabei - Our Mother boasts some stunningly beautiful art direction, and is classy in its delivery of both happy and sad moments without going over the top, or relying on cheap melodrama to cheapen the emotions it seeks from the audience. There are plenty of little things here done right which makes it pitch perfect, with every scene not being wasted, and with every nuance very meaningful in conveying its message across, be it compassion or love.Aside from the very abrupt ending (I had hoped that it could have continued for a lot more, despite its more than 2 hours runtime), Kabei Our Mother comes highly recommended, and you'll find it difficult to be holding back either your tears, or that thought about your own mom and her sacrifices she makes for you on an everyday basis. Just what those sacrifices are should you need another reminder, then the scene during the end credits roll will remind you of the stuff that you'd probably have taken for granted.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87ad447594134b8f829b958ef270bdc8",
            "input": "Of all the versions of the Odyssey (or of any Greek mythological story for that matter), this in my opinion is the best of them all. Almost true to the original storyline - with some minor deviations and omissions, e.g. the absence of Scylla & Charybdis and the fact that Eumaeus the swineherd recognizes Odysseus in disguise in his hut - realistic acting and authentic scenery and costumes all contribute to make this a truly memorable masterpiece,not some Hollywoodish sword-and-sandal B-flick. Notwithstanding the fact that the dialogue and subtitles are completely in Italian, if one is familiar with the storyline, he can still make heads and tails of what is going on and what the actors are saying (provided you have a good handy text of the Odyssey at hand). At least I did, and so much so that it has inspired me to study the Italian language to better appreciate the movie even more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81ec9b5918604cbbbc2f1b121f700548",
            "input": "I began riding horses fairly recently, and, as anyone who has ever ridden should know, I fell in love with horses and their world. I rented Spirit on a whim, just trying to pack my life full of as much horse related material as I could, and I was surprised by the results.What I expected was a feel-good Disneyesque movie with talking animals and stereotypes every five minutes.What I got was an amazing film, filled with beautiful scenery and animation, and an amazing storyline that has the great potential to warm one's heart.Spirit is a wild mustang in the Old West, whose entire world is brought crumbling down around him when he discovers the humans slowly taking over his homeland. The story unfolds with a wide array of characters, some human, some animals, all are well written and most are pleasant to watch on screen.I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys a good story, and who has an appreciation for history and animals.One thing I forgot to mention, but that I feel is important, is that the animals in this film do not talk. This was a really nice vacation from the Lady And The Tramp animated movies that everyone today is used to.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62ea64b6e98d4a70a34eb2aaf2aac52e",
            "input": "Now I love American Pie 1 and 2 while 3 was great just for Seann William Scott's performance as Stifler but after that the quality has dropped. Band Camp kept the standard reasonably high with characters you actually cared about but Naked Mile was the same joke and plot- lines recycled (Erik Stifler's sex problem is like Jim's). It had some amusing moments like the Football game against the midgets and the 'punishment' of Coozeman but on the whole it lacked originality and the 'Mile' was just stupid and moronic. Not to mention the irritating girlfriend who doesn't want to have sex. Anyway enough about the Naked Mile. I watched Beta House with apprehension as I thought it could take the series to a new low but I was pleasantly surprised. To be honest there is no real plot but it's filled with hot girls (Ashley is incredible) and sex jokes aplenty. Yes it is formulaic and the jokes are old but Dwight Stifler (Steve Talley) raises the bar with an exuberant performance. The Greek Olympiad is entertaining especially the penultimate and final events while Christopher McDonald's cameo is hilarious. There are weak points though. Coozeman is as irritating as he was in the first, I'm still baffled to as how he ever got a part. While Coozeman is bad Erik Stifler is worse. John White made Naked Mile a pain to watch but in Beta House he takes his performance to a whole new low. First and foremost he lacks charisma, a Stifler prerequisite. You really can't care less about him. The only reason I was bothered about his relationship was so Ashley could be on screen! She shines above him as does the rest of the cast. Seriously John White is the ultimate in bad acting and has about as much charisma as a dead fish. Saying that the film does entertain and Coozeman's fear that his girl is not exactly a girl is brilliantly funny. Overall this film is worth renting, get a few of your mates in and have a laugh at the vomit-fest event and vent your anger at Erik 'loser' Stifler.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5257a981ce9a4a968e94c061fef59103",
            "input": "WARNING SPOILERS***** A really stupid movie about a group of young excursionists in Italy that find an armor of mythical warrior with a demonic souls. One of them wears it and becomes possessed by the spirit of a demon. It's killing time and several of his friends die under his blade to revive the demon corpse.A waste of time for the viewers, as the fine young ladies in the movie leave their clothes on, the gore is ludicrous at best, and the acting is terrible, perfect pairing for such a bad script",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82b63ac7708545f28f84e9d2758a7d5b",
            "input": "Yes, I loved this movie when I was a kid. When I was growing up I saw this movie so many times that my dad had to buy another VHS copy because the old copy had worn out.My family received a VHS copy of this movie when we purchased a new VHS system. At first, my mom wasn't sure that this was an appropriate movie for a 10 year old but because we had just bought a new VHS system she let me watch it.Like I said, this movie is every little boys dream… The movie contains a terrific setting, big muscled barbarians, beautiful topless women, big bad monsters and jokes you'll only get when you get older. So, a couple of days ago I inserted the video and watched the movie again after a long time. At first, I was bored, then started thinking about how much I loved this movie when I was kid, and continued watching. Yeah, the experience wasn't as great as I remembered… The acting is pretty bad, the storyline is pretty bad, the jokes weren't funny anymore, but the women were still pretty. Yes, I've grown up. Even though the movie experience has changed for me, I still think it's worth 7 stars. For the good old times you know…",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efce2bac11534db7ad39947742dc97ef",
            "input": "An OK flick, set in Mexico, about a hit-man (Scott Glenn) who hitches a ride with struggling American writer and his Mexican girlfriend after a hit. He pays them to take him to the border – but things get out of hand.It starts well enough, but quickly struggles and dies.**SPOILER**The eventual relationship twist is badly set up and difficult to believe. An absence of passion, and essentially no reasoning behind her leaving one man for the other, made it ridiculous - and the ending was predictable and dull.**END SPOILER**Harvey Keitel is the US agent on the hit-man's trail, but he seems a little confused as to how boring and slow the script is...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cff38a21a57411999752383e1c627dd",
            "input": "At first I was weirded out that a TV show's main character could bring the dead back to life, but then I thought I'd give it a shot. Guess what? I love \"Pushing Daisies\" and look forward to Wednesday nights just to watch it, then for the next week I watch it a few more times on my DVR. The colorful characters, witty banter, fast-paced dialogue, and new unique situations draws me in and captivates from beginning to end. Ned and Chuck Charles' relationship is interesting to watch as they work their romance around the fact that they cannot have physical contact. Even Detective Emerson Cod's character has continued to grow in complexity. And Olive Snook! Jiminy Crispies! She cracks me up! The narrator's voice is fun to listen to and the cinematography gives me the impression that I am watching a movie instead of a TV show. I have recommended my family and friends to turn on \"Pushing Daisies\" and they are hooked too!!! The show is well worth waiting a week for a new episode and if you have not seen \"P.D.\", I highly recommend watching it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92d48e1b14454f0387cd2043b8a70d97",
            "input": "This movie was just down right bad. I love war movies and can normally come away from most movies and find something that I liked,but this was not one of them. This movie lacked substance and intensity.OK I get it, the Finns put up one hell of a fight and thats great, but the story is poorly told. You don't have any real connection with any of the characters and there's no real story line to follow. You just go from one random scene to another, nothing flows to form the story that is trying to be conveyed. If you want a war movie that will keep you riveted, and amazingly enough without battles scenes, then I would suggest \"Downfall\" (WWII German film). Or if you prefer a great story line and a lot of action then I would suggest \"Brotherhood of War\" (Korean war/Korean film). These two movies will not let you down as Winter War will.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6eb9bbfd5794502bb4fce9e572cac32",
            "input": "Who could possibly have wished for a sequel to Bert I. Gordon's legendary bad trash-film \"Food of the Gods\"? Nobody, of course, but director Damien Lee thought it was a good idea, anyway, and he put together a belated sequel that stands as one of the most redundant movies in horror history. \"Gnaw\" is a sequel in name only, as the setting moved to a typical late 80's location (a university campus) and also the cheap & cheesy gore effects perfectly illustrates the 80's. This script hangs together by clichés, awfully written dialogs and plot situations that are not so subtly stolen from other (and more successful) horror classics. Neil Hamilton is a goody two shoes scientist who performs growing-experiments on ordinary rodents in order to do a fellow scientist a favor. Due to some incredibly stupid animal rights activists, the huge and ravenous rats escape and devour pretty much everyone on campus. Following the good old tradition that Spielberg's \"Jaws\" started, there's an obnoxious Dean who refuses to admit the problem even though severely mutilated corpses are turning up everywhere. During a hysterically grotesque climax, the rats invade the opening ceremony of the campus' new sport complex! \"Gnaw: Food of the Gods 2\" is terribly bad and therefore a lot of fun to watch! The characters do and say unimaginably stupid stuff (like descending into the sewers unarmed while they KNOW it's infested with rats), the acting is atrocious and there's a genuinely bizarre sequence involving the hero having sex under the influence of growth-serum! I wonder what Freud's theory would be on that! There's a satisfying amount of gore and sleaze and – it has to be said – the music is surprisingly atmospheric. In case you just can't get enough of this junk, there are quite a lot of creature-features revolving on mutated rats, like the Italian schlock film \"Rats: Night of Terror\", the modest 70's cult film \"Willard\" and its lame sequel \"Ben\", the 2003 \"Willard\" remake starring Crispin Glover and the surprisingly good recent rat-movies by once-famous directors Tibor Ticaks (\"Rats\") and John Lafia (\"The Rats\"). Go nuts!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d0c9786e0894e22ad155d81273fff0a",
            "input": "The film maybe goes a little far, but if you love the show it's what you expect. It's not a bad movie; it's actually pretty good. If you don't like the show, don't see the movie. It starts off a little slow maybe, but then picks up and turns out to be pretty funny. There are even a few \"heart-wrenching\" scenes toward the end. After all the protagonists have gone through these scences do get to you. Also Jerry throws in his opinion why his show upsets people and justifies his show's existience. He's got a pretty good point. We care so much about the private details of celebrities lives, so why is it wrong that these people tell their private lives on national TV, too. If they were celebrities we wouldn't mind at all, we'd eat it up. Do we not like his guest doing this just because they're poor white trash and it reminds us that there really is poverty in this world and not just rich glamous movie stars living in a \"Leave it to Beaver\" world?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c85748edf5e6440f803b08473cb7dc30",
            "input": "An absolutely brilliant show. The second season began where the first ended, with much mystery. Suspense in most, if not all episodes and mystery everywhere. One that made me think and think again. It's truly amazing how the writer can come out with all the connections and link all the characters together and combine all these elements to make the lives of the characters in the show so meaningful. Never fail to excites and I am looking forward to the new season. Hopefully more secrets will be reveal and at the same time, more mystery to be solved. Good selection of cast too for this show, fit the characters perfectly. Really can't wait to finally discover the secret. Hopefully all the hype won't spoil the ending.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bf3dc85cd944321a253421dddfaa2d0",
            "input": "Why do I like DISORGANIZED CRIME so much? Why do I chuckle or laugh out loud any time I think of a dozen or more scenes from this movie? It's kind of hard to explain, but I'll give it a try. First of all, it's very funny indeed - in contrast to what lots of \"official\" reviews want you to believe. But then again, that depends entirely on your sense of humour, so there is no sense in arguing about that. Often the humour is in the dialogue, and often it is situational comedy. There is for instance this very hilarious scene in which the 4 gang members have been given a lift in the back of a truck. When the farmer drops them, they just stand there by the road, covered all over with cow s*** or whatever. They are totally unnerved; then, realizing the humour of the scene, they one by one start laughing about themselves, and Ruben Blades (as Carlos), looking (and certainly smelling) terrible, nonchalantly takes out some mouth spray to at least do something about his breath (simply describing the scene here makes me chuckle again!). Which leads to the second point: the acting. Fred Gwynne, Lou Diamond Phillips, William Russ, Ruben Blades and Corbin Bernsen (okay, the latter overdoes it a bit at times) all fit and play their parts beautifully - in fact, you get the feeling they must have been enjoying themselves too when shooting the film. Thirdly, there is the plot . Jim Kouf, the director and screenwriter, is very laid-back; he takes his time to let the plot unfold and have the individual characters establish themselves. More often than not, there is no real action, and yet you enjoy these 4 very different people - who attempt to rob a bank although their boss (Bernsen) does not seem to turn up - grumble about each other and even-tually, grudgingly, like each other. The movie is a fantastic parody of the typical bank robbery plot - totally impossible with all its twists and coincidences, yet utterly convincing in its love for ironic details. Incidentally, the title of the film is one of the best I have ever come across, because it per-fectly summarizes the plot in a very ironic way. Therefore, take my advice: watch this film, but if you don't chuckle, grin or smile during the first 10 minutes, forget it - it's not your type of film. PS. The only negative thing about this movie is that there seems to be no way to get hold of the screenplay - if you happen to know how, do tell me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ed28c18fce24420ad4f4877512b3f22",
            "input": "Very slow-paced, but intricately structured and ultimately very touching. A nice, very true-to-life look at a small Florida beach town in the dead of winter -- I've been there, and this is absolutely accurate.It's also the debut feature of actress Ashley Judd, and she makes a big impression here. It's hard to believe this film is 12 years old -- I remember seeing it in theaters, and I recently rented \"Ruby\" again. Except for the 80's looking clothes, it has held up very nicely. Ashely is so radiant and touching here, that it's hard to think of her subsequent career without wincing. Boy, talk about failing to fulfill your early promise! Anyone seeing Ashley here in \"Ruby In Paradise\" would assume this elegant, natural beauty went on to all kinds of interesting art films and serious acting -- instead she has become the \"go to\" girl for dumb action films and slasher movies! Very disappointing, but at least we have this lovely performance preserved to showcase her early promise.As some other commenter's say, this is not for everyone as it's very slow paced. This is not an action film, nor is it really a romance. The director (Victor Nunez, \"Ulees Gold\", another excellent character study) treats this ordinary young woman's life with deep respect, allowing her story to build slowly and with a lot of detail. In that way, I think this is one of the most moving and respectful coming-of-age stories about young women that I can recall -- it's not about Ruby's sexual awakening or \"how she lost her virginity\", but about her life choices and her growing maturity.A lovely film, if you take the time to watch it...I think it would be a really excellent film to show teens and young girls (or boys for that matter) and give them a chance to think about and discuss it.Particular kudos to director Nunez, who also wrote the script, which is so realistic and nicely detailed that I assumed all through the movie that it was based on a female-written novel or memoir, but in fact it's Mr. Nunez's original work. Rated 8 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3f13a1ce741449d8fd1b34b73c5dc7f",
            "input": "MINOR SPOILERS!Well i just sat up late and watched this film, mainly because i enjoyed and rated some of Singleton's earlier work like \"Boyz n the hood\". However, i have to say this was a major disappointment and is everything i hate about contrived, clichéd, so-called \"message\" movies. The acting is mainly poor,(pop stars and models do NOT necessarily make good actors...take note), the situations hard to swallow, (rape victim becomes overnight lesbian?...please!), but worst of all it reinforces every screwed up stereotype you can think of. By the second half of the film it has become cartoon like in its characterisation, making you lose any shred of empathy you may have had for its one-dimensional players.Not once is any valid point made about the inherent causes of racism and cultural, sexual and political ignorance. As a result it merely ends up sensationalising the results of these problems. It's message is contradictory, resulting in a sense of confusion and a general lack of plot cohesion. As for the films conclusion i found it predictable, embarrassing, exploitative and mildly offensive. For a film called \"Higher Learning\" i have to say all i learned is to avoid seeing this ever again.If you want a true comment on some of the themes that this film completely fails to elaborate upon then go hire \"American History X\"....unless you were just watching it for Tyra Banks then go hire a life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87d8d62cc80c4e9487e4cef14f997423",
            "input": "Let me start by saying at the young age of 34 I was suddenly widowed. I was devastated as he was NOT sick--- he died unexpectedly basically of a coronary--- his carotids blew out-- he died behind our house. There was a lot of speculation from police, cause he fell on something and it bashed his head in. I was a suspect for murder until the autopsy came back. My children were as traumatized as I was, so in love with a good father figure as he. I had three small children, no education, no financial support. I took it very, very hard. Within two years my in-laws attacked me verbally, physically, emotionally and spiritually demanding I grieve not in front of the children, and put on masks and showed people what they wanted to see, not show them my pain during holidays... Nobody stood up for me and my choice to sit out one holiday, except of course, the grief therapist I was seeing that had advised me to follow my heart and soul. My in-laws didn't get it! It changed FOREVER my relationship with them, and I have never been back for a holiday. This is only one example of how my grief was disrespected! My own (new) husband has seen me fall apart talking about the trauma when I shared from my soul. I collapse, can not breathe, hyperventilate, and generally am defunct for a few days if I even try to convey the hidden pain. Now about this movie...Today, my soul was stirred, my heart broken. My fears and pain re-surfaced from the real demons this movie presents; how one grieves compared to how others expect us too and the demons within. Adam Sandler portrayed perfectly the horrendous agony you face, overcome and most of all, work through on your own time! This movie dredged up all the pain that I have tried over the years to deal with. You see, when something harms your soul so profoundly, so deep that utterances are all that come from your mouth in moments of thinking, you can not deal with it without wishing you were dead and walking through life, in a dead state. The bible has a scripture, Romans 8:26 that I have clung to, that when my mouth and soul know not what to pray for, that God's Holy Spirit carries that agony to the feet of God-- I need not speak. Sandler portrayed that to perfection! There is a scene where he has been hauled into a court hearing, for mental health commitment purposes, and he goes back in to face his in-laws--- (familiar to me)--- and he tells them the stunning truths that he has been possessed by, per Se, that he can't get over. It's a profoundly strong, and mighty performance. I started bawling and had a hard time after wards getting up to walk out from the theater feeling my legs too weak to do so. My son was with me and saw it first hand, my precise motions while trying to hold it all together; a lesson for him, my youngest who barely remembers his daddy. It's been 13 years for me but this movie brought me back to the moment of losing my in-laws forever when they demanded a mask on my emotions and my surrendering to their desires, instead of respect to my own. I write this, so that if you are a griever, you are prepared for this movie, but recommend it highly in the 1000 star performance Sandler gave. If you are not yet a griever, please take a lesson from his movie and just listen and accept people's choices in their grief, letting them find peace in their own time! Sometimes, the soul can not utter the words to convey our pain. Go see this movie with tissues and not without preparing to take it in... to your soul!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43be8b8d9676430d8c824474826f135b",
            "input": "Fully deserving its prestigious Hollywood award nomination, this is an entertaining little gem with lots of pizazz and some delightful surprises. Outstandingly funny scenes include an hilarious shoot (and re-shoot) of a WW1 trench scene with Australian comedian Clyde Cook as an optimistic non-com and the hapless McDoakes as a Boyer/Colman messenger — all under the beady eye of Ralph Sanford's delightfully irascible Anguish; a lost McDoakes guided and re-guided by equally perplexed Jack Carson; assistant director Chandler rejoicing in a McDoakes-sent opportunity: \"I'm going to be a director!\" Ace comic O'Hanlon has a dual role, playing both McDoakes and himself playing McDoakes! Oddly, Richard L. Bare who does play himself in one or more other entries in the series, has turned down that opportunity here. In real life, Bare's a youngish, six-foot Rock Hudson lookalike, but here he's impersonated by veteran actor (over 500 movies!), Jack Mower.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7928ee11e701464d82afb6c13a326ed1",
            "input": "Universal's answer to \"The Exorcist\" isn't a very good one. Unfortunately, the film offers bland, unimaginative direction from Michael Winner who wastes an outstanding cast with a screenplay massing crater-sized plot-holes. Not to mention, it's unbearably silly never explaining certain key elements within the story.Model Cristina Raines moves into a high-rise owned by the Catholic Church with a creepy, blind priest John Carradine, who holes up in there always at the window. She begins to suffer faint spells and nausea. What's worse is tenants she meets in the building such as Burgess Meredith(with a cat and a canary!)and a young Beverly D'Angelo as a lesbian. Ava Gardner(looking great at 55)is the Realtor who showed Raines the place. Cristina's lover is Chris Sarandon, whose wife \"committed suicide\" after finding out they were having an affair. José Ferrer has a small role as the \"Priest of the Brotherhood\" who informs Monsignor Arthur Kennedy to be careful as he heads to the very high-rise not only housing Carradine but Raines as well. Sarandon sends a hired-hand up to the high-rise one night to check out a certain room above Cristina's apartment where she heard metallic clanging and other loud racket. He winds up dead the very same night Cristina \"kills\" her DEAD father in a nightmare. Screaming mad on the street, Cristina does indeed have blood on her which leads police detective Eli Wallach and partner Christopher Walken to investigate them with sure certainty that it all somehow leads back to Sarandon who is a hot-shot lawyer who once beat the cop in court regarding the whole wife's suicide. That case is really a motivating factor is Wallach's dogged approach to finding out whose blood was really on Cristina and if Sarandon has anything to do with it. You also have Martin Balsam as a professor who understands this type of Latin Cristina mysteriously understands and unbilled actors such as Jeff Goldblum as a fashion photographer and Tom Berenger as a man interested in this certain room that has become available in the very room(now renovated)that Cristina once stayed in! What bothers me more than anything is lack of explanation. Towards the end of the film Wallach and Walken are forgotten and we are left wondering why they just up and quit investigating. Their characters are just left on the back-burner. How the priests know that \"now is the time\" when a certain man will die and must be replaced to guard a certain gate in that high-rise and why Cristina suffers through the trauma she does isn't adequately explained. How certain ghosts just appear to Cristina and disappear when she tries to show Gardner the rooms they occupied during a cat's birthday(see for yourself)isn't adequately explained. Not to mention Gardner's role in the grand scheme of things..she brings people to that high-rise, but what is really her reasons in the film? It seems like this film should've been longer and cleared things up left lost to a rushed conclusion that is just laughable when it should be scary.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94078bf1eb8f42b983a5f25c1784640b",
            "input": "I wish I had my rental money back from this piece of trash so I could donate it to the Home for Aged Actors. Total rubbish!! Five people watched this movie at the same time and there wasn't one single laugh to be heard, lots of yawning though. Paltrow's a beautiful woman and she was the best thing to look at in the entire so-called comedic movie..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7df50f294a674bb08c26508f99af0768",
            "input": "They're not jawing journalists Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell from \"His Girl Friday\" or witty detective William Powell and sassy lady Myrna Loy from Thin Man, but Woody Allen and Scarlett Johansson are surprisingly charming as amateur sleuths in Scoop. Their screwball repartee is more postmodern than post Depression, Allen's writing filled with ironic self deprecation and plain old New York angst. Shades of the old wit occur rarely, such as when he, as Sid, the Great Splendini magician, responds about his background: \"I was born into the Hebrew persuasion, but when I got older I converted to narcissism.\" Johansson, fresh from Allen's Match Point as a bad girl, here gets to be a relatively good, sometimes ditsy journalism student caught in a murder mystery suitable for London: a serial killer. The plot is a reworking of his recent London-based thriller Match Point, right down to the upper-class sins and the \"American Tragedy\"/Place in the Sun boating \"accident.\" As a matter of fact, Allen is reworking Manhattan Murder Mystery and Purple Rose of Cairo to name just a couple of other examples. I care not if he reworks; I would like the new material to be at least the equal of the originals, and, alas, it is just a reflection of his younger greatness.Allen as director and actor can't hide his love for the actress, as he couldn't for Diane Keaton, and therefore takes a middling comedy into an appropriate place down the Allen canon, not great but amusing, at times brilliantly satirical: About the suspected upper-class murderer, Sid (Allen) quips, \"I'd be very surprised if he killed one person.\" This is vintage Allen humor. While there are barely any bright literary allusions as in most of his film, he lards Scoop with music from Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Strauss to let us know the Woodman has not lost his touch of class.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d636d44a9054d8ca7c4481e52f22898",
            "input": "Legend of Zu is possibly the most exciting movie ive seen in recent years. It transcends all expectations and is truly a work of art. With unmatched visual sceneries and story of divine proportions, Legend of Zu proceeds to blow over its viewers with its majesty. This movie is wonderously crafted through the use of high tech cgi which allows fans of the fantasy genre to see their visions come to life. The acting is perfect for this type of movie; if you were an immortal with supernatural powers I would think you'd keep more to yourself.Unlike the comments of many, the plot is actually quite EASY to follow while maintaining a quick pace that adds a sense of urgency. Anyone that cannot keep track of the different characters simply must not be paying attention since or are used to such levels of sophistication as the titanic. The plot is engaging and layered with themes so epic that they will leave you gasping for air. Legend of Zu is on a level of greatness so high that perhaps many people are put off by its grandeur. Allow yourself to be completely engulfed within its fantastical vision and you will grow to love this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-741addae4e6d41898fa7e3670b16c95f",
            "input": "This is one of the worse cases of film drivel I have seen in a long while. It is so awful, that I am not sure where to begin, or even if it is worth it. The plot is the real problem, and I feel sorry for 'Sly' as he puts in a decent performance for his part. But that plot ... Oh dear oh dear. I particularly love the way near the end he manages to pop from the foot of a mountain to the top, whilst the helicopter is on the way. A climb of a day or two takes him all of five minutes! I could go on: but it isn't worth it. Apart from the grim opening (which even a five year old would be able to predict the outcome of) the rest is drivel. Sorry folks, but this is about as bad as film making gets.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f974df234454875a31db85cb555cf4e",
            "input": "I know, I know, \"Plan 9 from Outer Space\" is the worst movie, or maybe \"Manos, the Hands of Fate.\" But I can't get worked up over those sock-monkey movies. Of *course* they're bad. How could they be any good? But if you're talking about movies with respectable production values and bankable talent, the T. rex of all turkeys has to be \"Yentl.\" All the treacly phoniness, all the self-absorbed asininity, that stains everything Barbra Streisand has done since 1964, reaches its culmination in this movie. From its lonely summit of awfulness, \"Yentl\" looks back to \"A Star is Born\" and forward to \"The Mirror Has Two Faces.\" There is nothing else quite like it. What emotional undertow dragged Streisand out to make this movie I would rather not speculate, and what audience she was playing to I cannot possibly imagine, although I'll bet there's a nine in ten chance you aren't a member of it.Nobel Prize-winner and saintly guardian of Yiddish literature Isaac Bashevis Singer was so outraged by what Streisand did to his story that he blasted her in public for it. It is a tribute to Streisand's impenetrable vulgarity that she not only didn't commit suicide, but went on to make more awful movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6513b0d978441fa87e5447851b94323",
            "input": "This movie is gorgeous. It's real and down to heart, but at the same time totally crazy. The characters are easy to fall in love with, because they have so many different minds, but each of us could refer to at least on. In Canada, we don't have many movies from Eastern Europe, and for the few I have seen, Loners is one of the best. It's very funny, and magic. If you want to see something new and refreshing, go see Loners.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ce58e6df0584b19a40a8c4e03d517ab",
            "input": "Yes, this production is long (good news for Bronte fans!) and it has a somewhat dated feel, but both the casting and acting are so brilliant that you won't want to watch any other versions!Timothy Dalton IS Edward Rochester... it's that simple. I don't care that other reviewers claim he's too handsome. Dalton is attractive, certainly, but no pretty-boy. In fact he possesses a craggy, angular dark charm that, in my mind, is quite in keeping with the mysterious, very masculine Mr R. And he takes on Rochester's sad, tortured persona so poignantly. He portrays ferocity when the scene calls for it, but also displays Rochester's tender, passionate, emotional side as well. (IMO the newer A&E production suffers in that Ciaran Hinds - whom I normally adore - seems to bluster and bully his way throughout. I've read the book many times and I never felt that Rochester was meant to be perceived as a nonstop snarling beast.)When I reread the novel, I always see Zelah Clarke as Jane. Ms. Clarke, to me, resembles Jane as she describes herself (and is described by others). Small, childlike, fairy... though it's true the actress doesn't look 18, she portrays Jane's attributes so well. While other reviews have claimed that her acting is wooden or unemotional, one must remember that the character spent 8 years at Lowood being trained to hold her emotions and \"passionate nature\" in check. Her main inspiration was her childhood friend Helen, who was the picture of demure submission. Although her true nature was dissimilar, Jane learned to master her temper and appear docile, in keeping with the school's aims for its charity students who would go into 'service'. Jane becomes a governess in the household of the rich Mr. Rochester. She would certainly *not* speak to him as an equal. Even later on when she gave as well as she got, she would always be sure to remember that her station was well below that of her employer. Nevertheless, if you read the book - to which this production stays amazingly close - you can clearly see the small struggles Zelah-as-Jane endures as she subdues her emotions in order to remain mild and even-tempered.The chemistry between Dalton and Clarke is just right, I think. No, it does not in the least resemble Hollywood (thank God! It's not a Hollywood sort of book) but theirs is a romance which is true, devoted and loyal. And for a woman like Jane, who never presumed to have *any* love come her way, it is a minor miracle.The rest of the casting is terrific, and I love the fact that nearly every character from the book is present here. So, too, is much of the rich, poetic original dialogue. This version is the only one that I know of to include the lovely, infamous 'gypsy scene' and in general, features more humor than other versions I've seen. In particular, the mutual teasing between the lead characters comes straight from the book and is so delightful!Jane Eyre was, in many ways, one of the first novelized feminists. She finally accepted love on her own terms and independently, and, at last, as Rochester's true equal. Just beautiful!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d55d44ad1f254d27b47e05f5d2c775ed",
            "input": "In light of the recent and quite good Batman the Brave and the Bold, now is the time to bear a fatal blow to that mistake in the life of Batman. Being a huge fan since the first revival by Tim Burton 20 years ago, I have been able to accept different tonalities in the character, dark or campy. This one is just not credible : too many effects, poor intrigues and so few questions. What is great about Batman is the diversity of his skills and aspects of his personality : detective, crime-fighter, playboy, philanthropist etc. The Batman shows him only in his karate days. And by the way, how come the Penguin is capable of such virtuosity when jumping in the air regardless of his portly corpulence ? And look at the Joker, a mixture of Blanka in Street Fighter 2 and a stereotypical reggae man, what Batman fan could accept such a treason ? Not me anyway. Batman is much better without \"The\" article in front of his name.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6878ad3591741b886046f7768302cbd",
            "input": "Hoo boy, this was a real trial to get through. The DVD case has Tom Hanks' mug plastered on it and that is the only reason that anybody would buy it. He looks about forty on the box, however, the movie was made in 1982, so he still has his Bosom Buddies 'do and of course is about forty pounds lighter. The plot concerns a Dungeons and Dragons like game that Hanks and his three friends play and Hanks ends up thinking the whole thing is real. Chris Makepeace is a boy genius named Jay Jay and the best thing about the movie is that he wears a succession of funny hats. Ooh,look, he has a yellow hardhat on with a tuxedo! Now he's dressed like a WWI pilot! This was a truly awful movie but in a bad way. A bunch of vets pop up mostly as parents of the kids. There's Anne (I'm Honey West, dammit!) Francis and Louise Sorel, who actually looks kind of hot. Murray Hamilton, the Mayor from Jaws, has a thankless roll as a cop. Wendy Crewson, is the love interest for Hanks and some blonde guy I have never seen before or since. There is some syrupy music here and there and absolutely no tension or sense of danger or excitement. There is a monster that only Hanks can see because he's, you know, nuts. The monster is played by the late, great Kevin Peter Hall, he of Predator fame. A friend of mine got this out of the ol' discount bin at MallWart and advised me to chuck it in the trash without even looking at it, so naturally I had to see if it was as bad as all that. It was. The night before, I watched Apollo 13, so after that, this movie was a bit of a shock. Do yourself a favor and leave it in the bin. Oh yeah, after Hanks almost jumps from one of the World Trade Center towers because of his delusions, he goes home to recuperate and is visited by his friends. Hanks mother, a drunken Vera Miles, says he is coming along nicely now but when they walk down to the lake to visit him in his tennis outfit, he is crazier than ever. The End",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b1c9b355b2b4c19b4357d282b7599d0",
            "input": "This is a very moving picture about 3 forty-something best friends in a small england town. One finds a passionate loves and a new beginning with a younger piano instructor, When tragedy strikes and hearts are changed forever. Definitely a film to have a box of tissues with you! A powerful piece of work. This is definitely one of my favorite films of all time.*SPOILER!!! SPOILER ALERT!! SPOILER!!*The main character is taken by her young, handsome piano instructor and a passionate romance blossoms. Her two jealous \"friends\" play an immature prank which quickly leads to tragedy. She loses her love and her friends in one foul swoop. In the end a unexpected surprise pulls them back together.(in my opinion her forgiveness is not warranted)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bd29a671ec047da818276796731b10e",
            "input": "We've all seen this story a hundred times. You can see each plot turn coming a mile away. The relationship between the mother and daughter is way too sweet and understanding to pass for realistic. Janet Mcteer's performance is stock southern hot- ticket mother in vintage clothes. Should have been made for the Lifetime Channel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8df53880899d4814b41cc39cbc65354d",
            "input": "Dominion Tank Police is without a shell of a doubt, one of the most amazing shows ever produced, but not just in the field of animation. While the first part (Acts 1 and 2) mostly consists of action and fun, the second part is more serious and one should not treat the second part in the exact same way as first part. The subtleties are truly out of this world and the characterization is beyond brilliant. You must have an extra degree of intelligence to appreciate the intricacies of the second Part (Acts-3 and 4). I do have some complaints though. In the first part, the Tank Bonaparte quite literally jumps over a tank shell and it did not make any sense at all. One might also question the plausibility of Bonaparte jumping on the wing of Helicopter Gunship even though it was cool. Buaku rules.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5ddac625f13445b9a6de18197df1714",
            "input": "This film had such promise!! What a great idea, an underdog paintball team struggling for recognition and personal glory, only to lose it's speed due to bad dialoge, poor editing and a half-written story. The characters in the beginning were interesting, only to lose steam half way through to become one dimensional people sputtering out tired one-liners.Maybe if they spent some more time on the story and dialoge it would have been a great movie, instead of a almost afterthought effort.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb940f9c59674da8adf590152b55077e",
            "input": "This, along with \"Hare Tonic,\" ranks as one of the best Bugs cartoons, indeed one of the best Bugs, ever. There are some comments about how Bugs in these cartoons is \"basic,\" meaning, I guess, that he is as yet not fully developed. I actually prefer this \"basic\" version from the mid-40s (Chuck Jones' was the best version) who is actually more rabbit-sized and far more amusing than the eventual long-legged version who towered over Yosemite Sam and Daffy Duck. The latter-day Bugs came to be too suave and sophisticated for my liking. Also check out \"Hair Raising Hare\" (1946) and \"Rabbit Punch\" (1948) for great examples of classic Bugs and classic Chuck Jones.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8966302d2cc4780b7e32b23c8f60558",
            "input": "I am one of the biggest fans of silent comedians and have probably reviewed more Buster Keaton films for IMDb than any other person. Every film he made from the beginning of his career to the early 30s with only two exceptions have I reviewed, so you can tell I am a major fan. It's because of this that I found this episode so painful and hard to watch. I loved this man's films and kept thinking \"Buster, how could you?!\". Well, now that I think about it, I guess I can see why Buster Keaton starred in this god-awful episode of THE TWILIGHT ZONE. He'd lost much of his fortune after a messy divorce in the early 1930s and his film career as a leading man was long passed as well. Now, in the 1960s, Keaton needed the money and loved his resurgence in popularity so he whored himself out to anyone willing to pay--appearing in Beach films and this mess of an episode of a great series.The biggest problem with the episode is that it is just terribly written and Buster deserved much better. The show is supposed to be funny but isn't and instead of a homage to silent films is just painful to watch--particularly with Keaton putting that stupid time travel helmet on as well as all the poorly executed slapstick. Do yourself a favor, SKIP THIS ONE--it's a pale imitation of the greatness that once was Keaton's career!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09098bca0f69414083076a933ec94f96",
            "input": "I will probably always go to see a Woody Alleb movie, as one never knows when he just might make a real return to his past greatness. Just one or two great moments or lines could make it worthwhile. sadly however this film just does'nt make it on any score. Saying thar actually makes me sad and even a little guilty. I'm sure my reaction is much like a lot of other fans of Woody, but what can one say? It's probably time for him to concentrate on his Clarinett, which in my opinion, he is rather quite good. Saying all of this, I'll still probably go to any new film Woody may come out with in the future. There's always hope and I'll continue to love and respect The WOODY!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ffc7a965e1144e69cffef492c3264f5",
            "input": "Errol Flynn's greatest movie, not just a sports movie with a wonder last 5 minutes where Ward Bond shines. Don't miss it just because you think its an old movie. Its a classic that could be easily missed. Do yourself a favour and don't.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e143d49de84e446791022e7a3f418883",
            "input": "They constructed this one as a kind of fantasy Man From Snowy River meets Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid, and just for a romantic touch Ned and Joe get to play away with high class talent, the bored young wives of wealthy older men. OK, there are lots of myths about Ned Kelly, but there are also a lot of well documented facts, still leaving space for artistic creativity in producing a good historical dramaticisation. I mean, this is not the Robin Hood story, not the Arthurian legends, not Beowulf, not someone whose life is so shrouded in the mists of many many centuries past that any recreation of their life and times is 99% guesswork. It's only a couple of lifetimes ago. My own grandparents were already of school age when Ned was hanged. So it's silly me for fancifully imagining this movie was a serious attempt to tell the Kelly story. Having recently read Peter Carey's excellent novel \"The True History of the Kelly Gang\" I had eagerly anticipated that this would be in similar vein. But no, the fact is that Mick Jagger's much derided 1970 Kelly was probably far closer to reality, and a better movie overall, which isn't saying a whole lot for it.Glad it only cost me two bucks to hire the DVD! I'll give it 3/10, and that's only because some of the nice shots of the Australian bush make me feel generous.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7a72ab640824b4e8950bd4ca92e5016",
            "input": "I found it very very difficulty to watch this after the initial 5 minutes of the film. I managed to stomach 45-50 minutes before switching it off in disgust and watching Monster House instead (which, by the way, is great fun).The story has massive holes in it. The plot line is hugely over stated and dull, the acting is awful, especially from Justin TImberlake who should really stick to what he is good at (looking daft and singing like a castrato). Morgan Freeman looked incredibly uncomfortable, especially when made to dance around to rock music for no apparent reason half way through the film after him and Timberlake meet. Freeman and Timberlake's characters seem to be supposed to have some sort of father/son relationship of sorts or something, which simply isn't evident at all apart from the fact that; though Freeman's character seems to have nothing but contempt for the ignorant and rather stupid character of Timberlake, he never the less pulls out all the stops to help him uncover a completely ridiculous cover up.It would take some incredible suspension of disbelief to give any credit to the story line, which is simply absurd and blown out of all proportion.Don't watch this film, it is a pure waste of time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-800f8c2f6b7c4432ba41d17e6708a9a8",
            "input": "I was duped into seeing this movie after reading a positive review from another website and man was I p.o'd!!! it took me at least 15 minutes to pick it up off the shelf b/c I didn't want anyone to see me. then another 10 minutes to build the courage to take it to the counter and actually use real money to rent it. I thought that all my stress would pay off by the time I got home to and watching the movie b/c the review I read said the movie was a pleasant surprise; what a joke! if you can make it through the first hour of the movie then your in luck! b/c it's not until then the movie turn's into a horror. don't bother with this one folks, your better off watching \"dankness falls\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d8156633364447692deec4324ac85ea",
            "input": "Few movies have dashed expectations and upset me as much as Fire has. The movie is pretentious garbage. It does not achieve anything at an artistic level. The only thing it managed to receive is a ban in India. If only it was because of the poor quality of film making rather than the topical controversy, the ban would have been more justifiable.Now that I've got my distress out of my system, I am more able to analyse the movie: * From the onset the movie feels unreal especially when the protagonists start conversing in English. The director, of course, did not make the movie for an Indian audience; however it underestimated its international audiences by over simplifying it. Watching the character of the domestic help conversing in perfect English is too unreal to be true.* Next we get regular glimpses into Radha's dreams. These scenes are not very effective. They coming up as jarring and obstruct the flow of the movie. I'm still wondering how that philosophical dialogue connected to the story. I felt that the surrealism was lost.* The love scenes felt voyeuristic and are probably meant for audience titillation rather than being a powerful statement. In any case, they do not achieve either of the two.* The names chosen for the women, Radha and Sita, are names of Hindu deities and hence been selected to shock the audiences. However, since the film wasn't meant for Indian audiences in the first place, the shock-through-name-selection is not meant to achieve its goal, which is absurd.* The quality of direction is very poor and some key and delicate scenes have been poorly handled. A better director could have made a powerful emotional drama out of the subject.* The acting felt wooden although Nandita Das brought some life into the role, the others were wasted. I always thought that Shabana Azmi was a good actress but her talent is not evident in this film. The male leads were outright rubbish.In case you are a fan of Earth and wish to see more of the director, stay away from this one. Please.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc29b76dbe73400b9fcb2ac4349f20a4",
            "input": "Those French and those Germans sure have a long history of not liking each other. It is interesting to note that Kamerdaschaft or Comradeship in translation takes place in 1931. Only a few years later, Hitler would siege Germany and begin his plans to take over the world, France being a casualty of his ambitions. But these are times of sereneness compared to the future. A group of miners at the border try to cross over to France to get work. They are spurned back and later at a nightclub by their French neighbors. Then a disaster happens in the mines of the French and a well-crafted and written scene, a troupe of German miners decide to come to the rescue. A simple story is it not? Pabst was a poet of silent cinema and I am not sure if this is his first sound movie or not, but his poetry is there to be discovered. He isn't fussy but brings a rugged realism to the ordeal. Ther is even a flashback to a WWII event that beckons the point of this story. Supposedly based on a real event, the movie does the events proudly with directness and terseness. Smetimes, that's what a movie needs to be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56d7701f9f554836a9c39e942117d206",
            "input": "Make no mistake, Maureen O'Sullivan is easily the most gorgeous Jane ever, and there will never be one more gorgeous. She is visually stunning. That aside, it takes more than a beautiful woman to make a good film. This is a great film. It not only has the classic Tarzan aura, but also the feel of the continuing saga. We become involved with the two white hunters who search for ivory, one of them in love with Jane, the other, a roguish catalyst whose character may be one of the best defined and best examined in movie history.And these characterizations are what make this great action flick stand out as a classic. There is the uncomfortable racism which is depicted. However, the Africans are depicted as individuals, and at the end, two even become more heroic than the white hunters, and stand out as such. In fact, the one not named evokes probably more sympathy from the audience than any other characters. The finale, also, is one of the reasons to enjoy this movie. The great lion attack has never been duplicated, and the horror is well implied with character reactions more so than a modern gore movie would do with graphic depiction. If I left anything out, it is because I do not want to soil the picture for those who haven't seen it. But it is everything you could want in a movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98d311324269461090eabcbb82fde518",
            "input": "i was given the book version of Kazaam for my 8th birthday, and people always say the book versions are always better than the movie, but this time they were wrong. At least with the movie it's over soon.The acting in this is terrible, which i expected from a film with Shaq who plays a magical rapping genie that comes out of an old ghetto blaster (which there was probably a good reason he was trapped in there). The kid in the film that plays Max is whiny and a terrible actor. He's bullied by neighborhood kids, which i don't blame them because he's a little douche bag.The story is just plain stupid and extremely cliché. About a boy who's father is always working and never around who finds a new friend who makes his life better and eventually helps him reconnect with his father.Even at 8 years old i thought this was a stupid idea. It's a surprise any of the people whom worked on this film had careers after wards because it's an embarrassment and should have never been made. i could ramble on even more about how this movie sucks, but you should already know just by reading the plot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5099e7e8df6c4bbbbdfafc62d7b69845",
            "input": "It's a strange feeling to sit alone in a theater occupied by parents and their rollicking kids. I felt like instead of a movie ticket, I should have been given a NAMBLA membership.Based upon Thomas Rockwell's respected Book, How To Eat Fried Worms starts like any children's story: moving to a new town. The new kid, fifth grader Billy Forrester was once popular, but has to start anew. Making friends is never easy, especially when the only prospect is Poindexter Adam. Or Erica, who at 4 1/2 feet, is a giant.Further complicating things is Joe the bully. His freckled face and sleeveless shirts are daunting. He antagonizes kids with the Death Ring: a Crackerjack ring that is rumored to kill you if you're punched with it. But not immediately. No, the death ring unleashes a poison that kills you in the eight grade.Joe and his axis of evil welcome Billy by smuggling a handful of slimy worms into his thermos. Once discovered, Billy plays it cool, swearing that he eats worms all the time. Then he throws them at Joe's face. Ewww! To win them over, Billy reluctantly bets that he can eat 10 worms. Fried, boiled, marinated in hot sauce, squashed and spread on a peanut butter sandwich. Each meal is dubbed an exotic name like the \"Radioactive Slime Delight,\" in which the kids finally live out their dream of microwaving a living organism.If you've ever met me, you'll know that I have an uncontrollably hearty laugh. I felt like a creep erupting at a toddler whining that his \"dilly dick\" hurts. But Fried Worms is wonderfully disgusting. Like a G-rated Farrelly brothers film, it is both vomitous and delightful.Writer/director Bob Dolman is also a savvy storyteller. To raise the stakes the worms must be consumed by 7 pm. In addition Billy holds a dark secret: he has an ultra-sensitive stomach.Dolman also has a keen sense of perspective. With such accuracy, he draws on children's insecurities and tendency to exaggerate mundane dilemmas.If you were to hyperbolize this movie the way kids do their quandaries, you will see that it is essentially about war. Freedom-fighter and freedom-hater use pubescent boys as pawns in proxy wars, only to learn a valuable lesson in unity. International leaders can learn a thing or two about global peacekeeping from Fried Worms.At the end of the film, I was comforted when two chaperoning mothers behind me, looked at each other with befuddlement and agreed, \"That was a great movie.\" Great, now I won't have to register myself in any lawful databases.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-91ddefda4b284b12885b7897d3a78312",
            "input": "\"Pandora's Clock\" is a gripping suspense/thriller that's a cross between a virus movie and a disaster film. This movie, which aired in two parts on NBC in its debut showing in 1996, is about an airplane flight that becomes infected with a virus when one of the passengers just happens to be carrying this disease. The U.S. Government debates on whether the plane should be destroyed or not, while the pilot (Richard Dean Anderson) and a virus expert (Daphne Zuniga) try to figure something out to avoid disaster. I'm not really a big fan of TV movies and miniseries, but I liked \"Pandora's Clock\". It's one heck of a thrill ride. Jane Leeves (TV's \"Frasier\"), Robert Loggia, and Edward Herrmann (as the President) also star.*** (out of four)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09070903a37841ada776153c18354e93",
            "input": "This show is painful to watch ...It is obvious that the creators had no clue what to do with this show, from the ever changing \"jobs\", boyfriends, and cast. It appears that they wanted to cast Amanda Bynes in something ... but had no idea what, and came up with this crappy show. They cast her as a teen, surrounded by twenty and thirty somethings, and put her in mostly adult situations at repeatedly failed attempts at comedy. Soon, they realize that she needs a \"clique\" and cast people in their late 20s to try to pass as teenagers.How this show survived 4 seasons is beyond me. Somehow, ABC has now decided that it is a \"family\" show, and thrown it into it's afternoon lineup on ABC Family.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb9cec9c61814a4084dfc38b975632f4",
            "input": "I tend to like character-driven films. I also think Hope Davis turns in consistently good work, so I had high hopes for this movie. Those hopes were soon dashed.The main flaw with this movie is the direction. There are a lot of scenes that are daydream sequences. The movie makes frequent use of the Denis Leary character as the alter ego of the Campbell Scott character. It doesn't work for me at all. This would have worked better as a play than a movie.There are problems with the plot as well. It is important that the characters in a movie take a journey and end up in a place different from where they started. I didn't feel that the characters grew in the experiences portrayed in the movie.Finally, the editing wasn't well done, either. There was a very big sag in the middle of the movie that was exceptionally boring.Except for acting, which I felt was consistently strong, this movie failed in almost every aspect of cinema.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd602cef4f274fa4b6a9d5341c64d549",
            "input": "But I got over it. To me, it seemed that even the Author of the book favored Caroline. I felt so sorry for the character Louise, and she was constantly compared with Esau who was evil, I just felt the comparison was a bit harsh and un-realistic. Really though, the movie was bad. I wouldn't really see it unless you're ready for a big let down.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4284cd6f2b324abab010ade47dc64256",
            "input": "HOLLOW MAN is one of the better horror films of the past decade. The sub-plot is original and the main plot is even better. The special effects are brilliant and possibly the best I have ever seen in a horror film. Kevin Bacon proves again that he can handle any role that comes his way.Claude Rains shocked the world with THE INVISIBLE MAN in 1933, well now, Kevin Bacon has shocked *us* with HOLLOW MAN. One of the most thrilling horror films ever. The action is intense and the chills are true. You may actually find yourself jumping if you are watching it in the dark on a stormy night. The supporting cast includes Elizabeth Shue, Josh Brolin, Kim Dickens, Joey Slotnick, Greg Grunberg, and Mary Randle. All of whom do an exceptional job. ---SPOILERS---Dr. Sebastian Caine (Kevin Bacon) and his team have discovered the secret to making someone invisible. After animal testings, they move on to human testing. But someone has to be the subject. Volenteering, Caine is turned invisible. But when his team is unable to bring back into visibility, Caine is driven mad by his condition as he seeks his revenge...*end spoilers*The film has created memorable shock sequences and is destined to become a classic well into the next century. Becoming the basis for a spoof joke in SCARY MOVIE 2, this film grabs you by the throat and never lets go. The first 45 minutes or so are slow, developing the characters and showing how their experiments work. The second half is exciting and appealing to most action and horror fans. Think of DEEP BLUE SEA. Then change the sharks into an crazy invisible man. And then change the water into fire and explosions. A rehashing of a killer shark movie. Interesting... HOLLOW MAN gets 5/5.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-915ac081772b4e3495278e562c40d21a",
            "input": "Wow...I picked this up at the local Wal-Mart after reading online that it had been released early. I've been following this online for some time, and just had to buy the film.Wow...I guess the thing that really struck me was the editing, or lack thereof. Time and again, characters (usually The Narrator and whoever he is with) are shown walking...and walking...and walking. I am not an editor, but I do know that you can cut between someone leaving point A to show them arriving at point B. There is no need to show almost the entire journey! Wow...I actually ended up feeling somewhat sorry for the actors involved in this. They seem to have been given no direction as to what to do during scenes other than to look scared or look happy, depending on what action was to be added at a later date.Wow...Why it was decided to do almost all the effects using CG is beyond me. Even ILM still employs miniatures sometimes. One of the most distracting uses of green screen in this film is the constant rushing about of (according to the end credits) the same group of people representing the citizenry of different towns and cities, including London. At times these folk are coming and going with no regard as to the angle of the shot or the distance they are from the camera. In one shot in London, there appear to be at least two men over six feet tall walking just behind the narrator's brother (played by star Anthony Piana without his distracting mustache). Not since GETTYSBURG have I seen such a fake piece of facial hair.Wow...Why Timothy Hines talked up this film the way he did is beyond me. It is a turkey, plain and simple. On the plus side (at least for me) it has provided some of the most genuine laugh-out-loud bits of hilarity I have seen in quite a while.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-120c3888225a4af1ba3465169d51005a",
            "input": "If you want a serious laugh pain, watch this movie, and the things Bruce inflicts on his fellow newscaster. The deleted scenes are priceless. I don't know why they didn't include them in the original movie. It can't be because of time, since the movie is only 101 minutes long. Morgan Freeman is a brilliant actor, who has been overlooked for too long. Jim Carrey needs meds!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1cc6ad1c3e794fa19ab735fc53cc82c7",
            "input": "It's like this ... you put in the DVD and the most professional-looking thing you see over the next ninety minutes is the logo of the distribution company. And at this point, you know you've just been jerked around.People are generally trusting enough to assume that if something has been put on DVD, it's going to be of a certain level -- at least financially if not creatively. But sadly this isn't the case. Distribution companies are perfectly happy to throw together DVDs of amateur movies and ship them right out into the stores to await the unsuspecting buyer who is drawn in by the well-designed DVD cover. The weight behind this particular project is most likely independent horror movie pioneer Kevin J Lindenmuth, whose name may be known amongst genre fans since he's responsible for various other low-budget werewolf movies -- \"Rage of the Werewolf\", \"Werewolf Tales\" and so on.\"Blood of the Werewolf\" is made up of three short independent werewolf stories with no real connection other than the fact that they deal with hereditary shapeshifters. The first segment, \"Blood Reunion\", pretty much sets the tone for the whole thing ... a man returns to his home town to look up a girl who had a crush on, only to find that her domineering grandmother refuses to let her have relationships with men, and for reasons which are somehow related to a dark family secret. This instalment is poorly directed, poorly directed, and basically nothing superior to what you could throw together yourself with a few friends and a home video camera.The second story, \"Old Blood\", is probably the strongest out of the three and is directed by Lindenmuth himself. It tells the story of a lesbian couple, one of whom is a shapeshifter and the other wishes to be given this power. Her wish is granted, but she doesn't become the creature that she envisioned. This short movie shows that Lindemuth has more talent and experience than the other filmmakers who worked on this project, but still not enough to raise it above the level of an amateur movie.And finally we have \"Manbeast\", in which some army guy runs through the woods while being chased by two other fellas. They wish to kill him as he has been bitten by the beast and is believed to be dangerous, but all might not be as it seems. This one has an interesting concept, but it's stretched out to be far too long, and if you don't guess what the \"twist\" is in the first ten minutes then you probably ain't too bright. This pretty much sums up the problem with this whole DVD ... a few good ideas just aren't enough to justify spending money on something like this. After all, would you pay for a picture you could have painted yourself?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd3d9731be9e418485a4a3260c2ce2a4",
            "input": "Have to be honest and say that I haven't seen many independent films, but I thought this one was very well done. The direction and cinematography were engaging without becoming a distraction. The angles, settings, and lighting used successfully created the nightmarish world in which the main character was trapped. Many haunting and memorable images from the film stick in your mind long after it's over (always a sign of a good director).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d7becca9dc64800972c2767948be41a",
            "input": "I just watched I. Q. again tonight and had forgotten how much I love this movie. It is wonderfully entertaining and leaves you feeling that all is right with the world. I love the allusions to Mozart all throughout from the opening with \"Einstein\" playing \"Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star\" on the violin to him humming Eine Kleine Nachtmusik during the IQ testing of the Ed Walters. I love that a woman is portrayed as intelligent and encouraged to have a career, an especially unique situation for the 1950's, the time in which this movie is set. (I myself have been a teacher but stayed at home to raise my children, so please don't think I am some staunch women's libber.) It's wonderful how a man who is \"only a grease monkey\" is finally seen to be just as important and worthy as Catherine's fiance, a clinical behavioral researcher. The message to me is that we are not what we do, but who we are is defined by so much more - no labels. There are so many little gags and one-liners that are almost throwaways if you don't watch and listen carefully.I did catch a few things in the movie that are not listed on the goofs page. In the scene when Ed Walters is to speak at symposium, there are 3 instruments (protractor, ruler, etc.) hanging on the right from the chalk ledge. In the next camera shot, there only 2. In the credits on our video, it lists Tony Shaloub's character as Bob Watters, not Bob Rosetti as he introduces himself in the movie and is listed here on Imdb.I highly recommend this movie. It may be a piece of fluff in some estimations, but has lots more substance than many give it credit for. Not only that, what a great cast is assembled here. Watch it and enjoy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ecd39779cd54a65b5dced0d7d7e18e2",
            "input": "Roman Polanski has made many, many movies that are unexceptional. His fame bewilders me. Nothing stands out as a high point except Chinatown (I haven't seen 'Knife in the Water' or 'Tess'). Any contribution he's made to film concluded more than twenty years ago; his work is just embarrassing, safe and/or dull (The Pianist, Frantic, Oliver Twist, The Ninth Gate, Pirates).R's Baby must have signified the end of the establishment at the time it came out. It's lux-produced and fairly high concept for a 1968 'horror' movie (never show the baby). But this is just misconceived horror sap. Everything is arty to the point that the plot line becomes hopelessly clear very early (Um, thanks for that finale-destroying title), and on a clear day you can see the twist ending coming for days. It did not sustain my interest. I find that whatever this movie might have been, it is utterly derailed by the 1960's version of what femininity was. Farrow is such a chronic distracted, helpless waif/housewife. Her frailty is oversold... she's irritating in the extreme. There's no real ideas in it... nothing to consider except being the mother of the devil.The Dakota is barely exploited for it eerie potential.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7258106464dd45e38d84899dccb62c82",
            "input": "I have always been a huge James Bond fanatic! I have seen almost all of the films except for Die Another Day, and The World Is Not Enough. The graphic's for Everything Or Nothing are breathtaking! The voice talents......... WOW! I LOVE PIERCE BROSNAN! He is finally Bond in a video game! HE IS BOND! I enjoyed the past Bond games: Goldeneye, The World Is Not Enough, Agent Under Fire, and Nightfire. This one is definitely the best! Finally, Mr. Brosnan, (may I call him Mr. Brosnan as a sign of respect? Yes I can!) He was phenomenally exciting to hear in a video game....... AT LONG LAST! DUH! I've seen him perform with Robin Williams, and let me tell you, they make a great team. Pierce Brosnan is funny, wickedly handsome ( I mean to say wickedly in a good way,) and just one of those actor's who you would want to walk up to and wrap your arms around and hug, saying: \"Pierce Brosnan, thank you for being James Bond,\" \"If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't know who James Bond is.\" He's a great actor! I am a huge fan of Willem Dafoe even though I've seen him in a couple of movies. His role as Nikolai Diavalo was brilliant. (Did I spell the character's name right?) LOL!!!! He does a great job with an accent. Sometimes I can't even hear an accent. I have seen Willem, I mean Mr. Dafoe, perform in two movies: Finding Nemo, and Spider-Man with my favorite actress: KIRSTEN DUNST! SHE ROCKS! Anyway, He never ceases to amaze. And Richard Kiel, wow, he's definitely got the part of Jaw's nailed. I've seen him in the movie's and he's awesome! As a matter of fact, my Grandparent's have met Mr. Kiel, and I was jealous when they told me. But, Kirsten Dunst is at the top of my list of Celebritie's that I want to meet. John Cleese was breathtaking. I have never seen a better person play as the wisecracking, and gadget creating Q! Mr. Cleese was hilarious! I've seen him work with Pierce Brosnan in Goldeneye and Tommorow Never Dies. He's awesome! John Cleese's most recent project is Shrek 2 starring Mike Myer's, Cameron Diaz, Julie Andrew's and Eddie Murphy. ( Shrek 2 is now in theatre's!) GOOD LUCK 007! Oh, yeah, and as Q alway's says: \"Grow up 007!\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd17163835f848f3991eb8a127fa2182",
            "input": "Alan Curtis has a loud, violent sounding argument with his wife, slams out of his apartment, has a night of drinking with a mysterious lady with a large hat in a bar (run by Andrew Tombes, in a nice villainous part for a change), and returns to find his wife dead and the police, led by Thomas Gomez waiting for him. His attempts to prove his alibi - that he was with that mysterious lady - fall because everyone that he can think of (Tombes, Elisha Cook) claims there was never any such person. He ends up with no alibi, although his secretary (who secretly loves him) Ellen Raines believes him. Convicted after a trial, he is awaiting his death sentence. Raines starts going out after the truth, discovering that Gomez has some doubts of his own. She also finds an ally in a friend of Curtis, Franchot Tone, who was apparently out of town the night of the crime. Will she clear Curtis in time? THE PHANTOM LADY is based on a novel by William Irish (the great noir writer Cornell Woolrich). As movie fans know from other works by Woolrich (LEOPARD MAN, THE NIGHT HAS A THOUSAND EYES, REAR WINDOW, NO MAN OF HER OWN) one cannot assume what is true on the surface anywhere. The missing wife of a salesman may not actually be upstate, sending him messages that she arrived, if he still has her jewelry. The mentalist may really be able to predict tragedy - or was he plotting the murder of his old partner, now an oil millionaire? Did a leopard kill the young women, or is the wealthy recluse in town actually hiding some guilty knowledge? Is the young woman, claiming to be the wife of a brother killed in a train wreck, actually an impostor? Here it is Raines and Gomez (with an assist by Tone) trying to prove Curtis did see a woman nobody will admit seeing - and if he did see her, why is nobody else able to recall seeing her? The problem with the story really is Curtis's personality - he gives in too easily when found guilty of the crime he did not commit. In reality anyone who is innocent would be screaming it to the moment they are executed. However, in defense of Curtis's collapse, it also happens to other people in various films: Gary Cooper, in MR. DEEDS GOES TO TOWN, gets so disgusted about the framing he gets as delusional and mad by Douglas Dumbrille and his minions that he does not defend himself at first, until the people who would depend on his help cry out their fears in the courtroom and reawaken his sense of responsibility. But Curtis just seems to give up. In normal circumstances Raines, Gomez, and everyone else would not care if Curtis didn't.But the film survives this weakness. The slow unraveling of lies by witnesses bribed by the real killer allows two set pieces for Raines with Tombes on a deserted elevated platform and Elisha Cook at a jazz session. Gomez turns out to be more perceptive than the villain expects in double checking his alibi again. And the villain manages to keep slightly ahead of Raines and Gomez until the concluding minutes of the film. If it is not as great a film as DOUBLE INDEMNITY or THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE or THE MALTESE FALCON, it holds up pretty well until the moment Curtis and Raines are reunited at the end.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-836aab5ca1bc4030aa1473aba9a98f7f",
            "input": "Evidently when you offer a actor enough money they will do anything. I am not sure how much John Rys-Daves got, but most of the money he made should go to his fans as an apology for even being associated with such a ROTTEN movie. The special effects were worse then effects from the 1950's B movies and the acting of the rest of the cast was even worse. As to how bad the acting was a child gave the second best performance in my opinion. The English was terribly accented and I think no one could really even speak English they just memorized how the words should sound instead of memorizing the script and trying to make their character both \"life-like\" and real.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-607931ce8ba2402480fad26291c1f9c6",
            "input": "Do not bother to waste your money on this movie. Do not even go into your car and think that you might see this movie if any others do not appeal to you. If you must see a movie this weekend, go see Batman again.The script was horrible. Perfectly written from the random horror movie format. Given: a place in confined spaces, a madman with various weapons, a curious man who manages to uncover all of the clues that honest police officers cannot put together, and an innocent and overly curious, yet beautiful and strong woman with whom many in the audience would love to be able to call their girlfriend. Mix together, add much poorly executed gore, and what the hell, let's put some freaks in there for a little \"spin\" to the plot.The acting was horrible, and the characters unbelievable - Borat was more believable than this.***Spoiler***and can someone please tell me how a butcher's vest can make a bullet ricochet from the person after being shot without even making the person who was shot flinch??? I'm in the army. We need that kind of stuff for ourselves.1 out of 10, and I would place it in the decimals of that rounded up to give it the lowest possible score I can.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfb31618bdc34acda948472e679007a2",
            "input": "American boy Jesse took the train to Vienna in order to take the plane for USA. On the train he met a French girl Celine. Although they met the first time, they talked like good friends. When the train stopped at Vienna, Jesse begged Celine to accompany him to have a tour on Vienna. Then the romantic story unfolded.At first they were cautious. The funniest scene was their listening to CD in music store. They peeked at each other, though their eyes did not contact. After in-depth conversation, they relationship became close. Then I saw the most romantic scene that they pretended to call their respective friend. Their deep love for each other was expressed completely by words.Love is a strange thing. When you really want it, it will not come as you wished. Love needs mutual understanding. Without it, love will not last long. Spiritual harmony is the most important for love.Excellent screenplay and performance resulted in huge success of the movie.One of the best romance movies. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e3696be1bfd4a28be826bbcf4e48303",
            "input": "1933 seemed to be a great year for satires (\"Duck Soup\" for instance) and this one fits in well even though it is about the obsession with contract bridge. The tone is like a humorous piece from The New Yorker, appropriate, since the film begins with the \"Goings On About Town\" page of that magazine. The only thing odd is the casting. Made a few years later William Powell and Myrna Loy would have been perfect. However, after 1934, you wouldn't have had adultery handled in such a sophisticated fashion, the young and beautiful Loretta Young in some shear and slinky outfits, or a group of prostitutes listening to a bridge contest on radio. Even if you know nothing about bridge, you may still want to check out a rare example of Hollywood satire.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a48c451a64c446ea997e1a6bb9eff0cf",
            "input": "Without being one of my favorites, this is good for being a change of pace... even if only for a few minutes.It all starts with a big fight between Tom, Jerry and Spike (who is renamed \"Butch\" here). They're all beating each other, but suddenly Spike makes a heroic and admirable decision: he stops the fight and suggests that they all should be friends. So, all of them sign a peace treaty and become friends... which isn't going to last for long.Meanwhile, the three become affectionate, patient and kind to each other. They even save each other when one of them is in danger of life. The relationship goes nothing but excellent, until a very big steak appears and they all become greedy. The three are guilty to return to their usual fights and rivalries.But still... to see Tom, Jerry and Spike as friends is truly a delightful and grateful experience, even if only for a while.Oh, by the way, as a curious fact, two songs from \"The Wizard of Oz\" are played here in instrumental versions: \"We're off to see the Wizard\" and \"Somewhere over the rainbow\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-285cc5d07cb245f4824ca56b1e8f8949",
            "input": "I have seen over 1000 movies and this one stands out as one of the worst movies that I have ever seen. It is a shame that they had to associate this garbage to The Angels 1963 song \"My Boyfriend's Back.\" If you have to make a choice between watching this movie and painful dental work, I would suggest the dental work.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f08a7811a0ec4529acfdd2a2ed551f8c",
            "input": "This film takes you to another time when there was a different pace to everyday life. We get an idea how families had to deal with the war and how quickly we sent young men off to fight. A very touching look at the past and a reminder that casualties of war don't just happen on the front.Luckily many of us have never had to go through what our great-grandparents, grandparents or parents went through during a war. This film, I think, is a small thank you. Peter Outerbridge looks amazingly like a young Peter O'Toole and Russell Crowe is absolutely charming and as Australian as he can be. It's definitely worth listening to him recite \"High Flight\" and makes me wonder what he might accomplish with Shakespeare.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47966fc1aa334e05830eadb4373e7506",
            "input": "Mark Frechette stars as Mark, a college radical leftist. Mark is accused of killing a cop during a campus riot, and he flees all the way to the desert. He does so by stealing a small plane at the local airport, and flies it himself. Once out flying over the desert, Mark spots a car from the air. A young woman named Daria steps out, and sees Mark circling in the plane. Mark swoops the plane very low several times, causing Daria to duck or get hit. When he lands, he becomes acquainted with Daria, who is strangely charmed by Mark's aerial highjinks. After engaging in soulful conversation for hours, Mark and Daria get naked, and make love in the sand. But with Mark evading the law, they realize that he needs to keep running. So Mark and Daria's brief tryst is quite poignant, because it doesn't get to develop into a full-blown romance.Zabriski Point was the Eraserhead of the early 70s. Both films have a rambling, vague quality, along with complicated meanings and characters. Frechette was as reckless in person, as his character was in this film. A few years after making Zabriski Point, Frechette robbed a bank in real life. While serving his prison sentence, Mark died an ignoble death. He was killed by a 150 lb. weight, which fell on him when he was weightlifting. The best thing about this movie was the splendid cinematography, and special visual effects. The incredible, slow-motion scenes of debris floating in the air after an explosion, were a stroke of genius. Although not as ground-breaking a film as Easy Rider was, Zabriski Point still resonated with the early 70s counterculture. I recommend it, for those who like avant-guard films which showcase the upheaval, of the youth rebellion during the early 70s.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-663b559d80c94bca8aca16e80670cff0",
            "input": "Stan & Ollie become SAPS AT SEA when their wayward little boat is commandeered by a vicious murderer.The Boys are wonderful in this feature, which starts out with one of their most hilarious set pieces, the horn factory. Always a few steps out of sync with the rest of Creation, Laurel & Hardy inhabit a world where icy radios & bedded billy goats are the rule, not the exception. With its brief length, the film is more in style with their classic short subjects, which explains its episodic nature.Only the Boys get screen credit, but movie mavens will recognize other familiar faces: James Finlayson appears as a loony doctor, Richard Cramer does full justice to his bad guy role, sweet Mary Gordon plays the Boys' perplexed neighbor. That's Charlie Hall as the apartment house desk clerk and silent screen comic Ben Turpin portrays a most peculiar plumber.One of the film's script writers was silent comedian Harry Langdon.Stan & Ollie are the main focus, however. Watching Hardy go berserk at the sound of a horn, or Laurel's antics with bananas, for instance, reminds the viewer why these fellows remain absolute cinematic giants.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc0bb5ce89db4664aee7afa29393a7f6",
            "input": "I doubt much of this film is based on a true story. At the beginning it says based on a true story, sort of. I bet the only truth to it was there was an ex-model turned bounty hunter possibly named Domino.Anyways, it begins with Domino talking to Lucy Liu, who works for the FBI. Domino is being interrogated about what she knows about a theft of 10 million dollars. Through flashbacks, we see Domino as a child, then as a model, and how she became interested in being a bounty hunter. She basically tells 2 other bounty hunters off, Ed and Choco. They let her join the group. She's tough, can use any kind of weapon, and will use her good looks if needed.They get involved with a scam that Clarmont, a bailsman, has going. Along the way, the group starts a reality TV show, and that's where Ian Zering and Brian Austin Green become involved. They are sort of like hosts and must have been really desperate to appear in this.I thought the story was entertaining and it had some laughs. The editing didn't bother me. There's also a lot of violence, mainly using guns, and blood. It could have been a little shorter.FINAL VERDICT: Good enough to watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d87aa3250d947b4ba478b8bba02815a",
            "input": "Kudos to the patience of Paul Muni, who spent hours and hours in the makeup room each day to look the part of Zola. Muni was the one of the biggest stars in the 1930s and I wonder how many people today -other than classic movie buffs - know anything about it. He was a giant in the business for at least a decade. He could have won the Academy Award for this performance, which would have given him two in a row, as he won it for playing Louis Pasteur the year before. My own opinion is that while he tended to overact a bit, I still think he was one of the great actors of the \"Golden Age.\" Whatever part he played; you were riveted to the screen watching him.Unlike the Pasteur role, I thought this story smacked of a little too much of what we've seen in the last 60 years: going overboard to make a Liberal hero. Even in 1937, Hollywood couldn't suppress its disdain for police or for the military, here making it a point to tell us how \"corrupt\" those organizations are. Filmmakers just love it when authority is challenged and defeated. In that regard, this film is way ahead of its day since we've seen this big-time since the 1960s.However, it must be noted the facts support this story. It also does not in any way diminish Zola's accomplishments as a social reformer, getting rid of certain evils. Good for him! I wish they had spent more time showing that, than concentrating on one trial.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56eacfc249744f39850480dca64df824",
            "input": "I had no idea what this movie was until I read about it in the L.A. Weekly. I generally agree with the reviews in the LA Weekly and decided to get a ticket for this film. the film stars molly parker (from my favorite television show Deadwood) and Lukas haas -- who I suspect we will be seeing more of in the very near future. The film is funny, heartwarming, features great acting, and beautiful photography. i don't know if the film has distribution, but I hope it does - or will - soon. this is destined to be a real indie gem. it even has music by my favorite band the silver jews! the only disappointment was that molly parker wasn't there at the screening. even without her there... this was hands down the best film i saw at the festival.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bcc8ab5913f74c859e9fa1f559485417",
            "input": "An attempt at crossover to appeal to those who don't appreciate opera, exploiting the fame of one of the greatest opera singers of all time, it fails badly. All that is desirable in this movie is the opera, and one can best find a recording of Pavarotti doing what he does best. The plot revolves around a romance with a doctor who heals his throat which has suddenly become troublesome. Only because it came out so long ago is it largely forgotten. Like most opera stars, Pavarotti is a decent actor and has stage presence aside from his singing talent, and nothing that he does in this movie negates that opinion. His culpability lies in not rejecting the horrid script. Perhaps because great operas can have silly stories he tolerated this one.Who knows, except those involved? Do we need to know? The plot is weak and trite. This movie is like trudging through cold mud to pick off a few juicy tidbits (the opera music) hanging above the mud. We have other ways in which to appreciate the great Pavarotti, and this one isn't one of them. Just get one of his many superb opera or vocal-concert recordings and recognize the master tenor where he is most suited.It would be one of IMDb's 100 Worst Films if more people remembered it and gave it some votes; it would fit neatly in a list including several efforts of singers, actors, models, and athletes to exploit their popularity through film. Very often it all goes badly wrong due to incompetent acting or a horrible script. Pavarotti would have been a decent actor had he not shown such a superb voice. However effective he is as an actor (opera requires it), not even Jimmy Stewart could have rescued this turkey of a script.I give it a polite 3 of 10 because someone may have become a fan of Pavarotti's singing and of opera because of this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b6b421ed9ea4c59883a547883f0fcb8",
            "input": "I went looking for this movie in typical fan obsession. I just wanted to check it out. I was not expecting much of anything. After all, a musician, an actor and a screenplay writer? Not possible for so much talent to reside in one person. Right?? Wrong!! Obsession aside, it quickly became one of my favorites! The story line and characters are not lost in the typical hyped up Hollywood special effects. The story plucks at your emotions and pulls you along. As the credits roll by, you suddenly realize you were glued until the end.At times, the acting seems a little over the top. I do, however, believe it's done with comedic intent and very fitting of the character. Otherwise, I wouldn't have expected the level of acting witnessed.It's worth seeing more than once. I find myself laughing hysterically or gasping unexpectedly over something I either missed or forgot about the first time or two around.I completely recommend this movie. Feel free to go in with your doubts, but I'm sure it will find a place on your shelf.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf7fc0c644ac4df2b44abd12252a3142",
            "input": "Typically, \"kids\" films have some annoying quality to it that makes it way too sappy and unbearable for someone over 13. But then again, that's before Holes hit the scene. Sure, it has the very same moments that often times give a kids movie its aforementioned quality, but this film does a good job of staying away from such conventions. The acting was decent, and the uneasy dynamics that Stanley had with some of the other campers was more realistic than what most movies seek to portray. What I especially liked about this movie was the fact that this film didn't try to break your heart or make you cry. The emotional power was a little more natural than most would imagine, kind of like The Shawshank Redemption in many ways (which Holes also has a similar, redemptive ending to it). The only down side? The hokey looking lizards. Overall, however, an 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63632ce22a7040d4bbb2f27e9082dde5",
            "input": "If you read my review of SyFy's \"Dinoshark\", you know that I can appreciate the low-budget schlock that these made-for-television movies can provide. They're stupid...they're silly...but they're still pretty fun in a \"so bad, it's good\" kind of way. So, still smacking with guilt for liking (and recommending) the undeniably hokey \"Dinoshark\", I sat down to watch \"Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy\", a SyFy Original Movie about a half-man, half-hammerhead monster terrorizing people on an island. With the SyFy Channel's sure-fire recipe for creating B-movie creature features and a cast that includes William Forsythe and Hunter Tylo, how could it possibly go wrong? Well, to my surprise, it actually misses the mark...not by much, but enough to make me not recommend it. Why? Well, first of all, its titular monster, the dreaded hammerhead-human hybrid, takes a backseat to a bunch of faux-military thugs who really become the movie's primary villain. Though the hammerhead does rack up the body count, he (or it or whatever you call the thing) only arrives just before someone is going to be munched upon and leaves directly after. The rest of the movie is filler, pitting our heroes against the aforementioned soldiers. That, to me, is just not as compelling as watching a walking hammerhead eat people! Please Read The Full Review On My Blog: www.horrormoviejournal.blogspot.com",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-219084a4c00948a3a3fbf59353d521dd",
            "input": "Can we say retarded? This girl has no talent what so ever, nothing but complete garbage. You people are just marking 10 stars because you know most people hate this pathetic woman, if its such a \"great\" show then why did it get canceled after 6 measly episodes? exactly. People that support her, please seek help you do NOT know what is funny. Her stand up comedy is just so stupid, seriously how do you find this trash funny? The show tries to poke fun at stereo types and other things that are not funny at all. Carlos Mencia is funny and to that stupid poster, he actually has fans and his show is on the air so I'm sorry your a redneck who doesen't get his jokes. Please give me my 20 minutes of my life back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8793a457ee9e4e819cd854ba906ad3ca",
            "input": "Here's an interesting little movie that strictly gives the phrase \"low budget\" a horrible name. Our physics teacher who has about nine kids creates a strange serum that causes \"molecular reorganization\". Students are hopelessly killed from fake coincidences of submarine sandwiches and flying school supplies. Sounds like a resurrection of classic B-movies from the 50s, right? Nope! It's not an example of high camp fun, which is way, WAY off the mark. A glamorous showcase of breasts and butts ensues our desire for pleasure, opposing the horror that should have had 99.44% more in the first place. Bottom-of-the-barrel entertainment at its best, aided by pints of red blood and dead student bodies. Atrocious movies like this would make the ultimately catastrophic GURU THE MAD MONK (1970) the work of an intelligent genius who has a Master's degree in film production! It's an automatic \"F\", so rest easy!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9a0a4e1712a4b8bbb0829510636e70e",
            "input": "I only know of one other movie that could possibly compete with Opening Night and that's Bergman';s Persona. Both movies are simply amazing, they have a richness of ideas hard to grasp at first sight. We have a profound meditation on the relation of art and life as one actress, Myrtle Gordon (Gena Rowlands), finds herself more in touch with the character she is playing on stage than she would want to. The accidental death of one of her fans, a young girl that declares her love for Myrtle and she is then hit by a car, leaves a deep mark in the actress. She starts asking herself question related to her aging that starts to affect her until the only solution becomes alcohol. But that doesn't help to much and Myrtle is one step away from complete madness. The scene where she kill the imaginary (or not) spirit of the dead girl is one of the most thrilling scenes I found in a Cassavets film. The movie ends with a display of genius on behalf of the director as he films a theater scene where he himself and Gena Rowlands improvise a scene, since Myrtle comes too drunk to the opening night to perform her part accurately. This scene was filmed spontaneously, with a live audience, the laughter is genuine, the chemistry between Casavates and Rowlands absolutely amazing. If you liked Persona or are interested in a movie that offers substantial ideas alongside great entertainment this movie will suit you just fine.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4480097b2dc74f339f618ba3d5fe72c4",
            "input": "My flatmate rented out this film the other night, so we watched it together.The first impression is actually a positive one, because the whole movie is shot in this colorful, grainy, post-MTV texture. Fast sequences, cool angles, sweeping camera moves - for the moment there you feel like you about to watch another \"Snatch\", for the moment....When the plot actually starts unfolding, one starts to feel as if one over-dosed amphetamine. things just don't make sense anymore. i would hate to spoil the fun of watching it by giving out certain scenes, but then again, the film is so bad that you are actually better off NOT watching it.First you think it is a crime story recounted in a conversation between Keira Knightley and Lucy Liu. WRONG. This conversation provides no coherent narrative whatsoever. Rather on the contrary, Domino's lesbian come on on Lucy Liu's character during the second part of the movie just throws the audience into further confusion.Then i thought that maybe it is a movie about a girl from affluent but dysfunctional background who grew to be a tough bounty hunter. In any case, that is the message conveyed by the opening scenes. But after that the question of Domino's character is entirely lost to the criminal plot. So in short, NO this is NOT a movie about Domino's character.Then i thought, it's probably a story of one robbery. A pretty bloody robbery. 10 millions went missing, bounty hunters are chasing around suspected robbers, mafia kids are executed, hands are removed, Domino tries to crack why this time they get no bounty certificates, etc. But soon this impression is dispelled by another U-turn of the plot.This time we are confronted with a sad story of an obese Afro-American woman, who fakes driver's licenses at the local MVD and at the age of 28 happens to be a youngest grandmother. Lateesha stars on Jerry Springer show, tries to publicize some new, wacky racial theory, and at the same time struggles to find money for her sick granddaughter.What does this have to do with the main plot? URgh, well, nobody knows. Except that director had to explain the audiences where will bounty hunters put their collectors' fee of 300,000.Then at some point you start to think: \"Oh, it is about our society and the way media distorts things\". There is reality TV crew driving around with the bounty hunters and doing some violent footage. The bounty hunters are also stuck with a bunch of Hollywood actors, who just whine all the time about having their noses broken and themselves dragged around too many crime scenes. But NO, this is not a movie about media, they just appear sporadically throughout the movie.Plus there are numerous other sub-plots: the crazy Afghani guy bent on liberating Afghanistan, the love story between Domino and Chocco, the mescaline episode, the FBI surveillance operation...Can all of the things mentioned above be packed into 2 hrs movie? Judge for yourself, but my conclusion is clear - it is a veritable mess!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-785dac2bec2e49689113b196ee538ba0",
            "input": "I just recently watched this on the Sundance channel. The idea for the film was to bring many filmmakers, illustrious in their own country, to make short films, eleven of them, all in one film, concentrating on just one subject: September 11.From wacthing this movie I could tell why these filmmakers were great in their country because it had all elements of a great film.The movie starts off with a film from Iran in which a teacher struggles to teach the students about what had happened with September 11 which they fail to realize until later.The Second Film from France involves a deaf women who writes a letter to her lover angrily while she is unaware of what is going as the T.V plays.The next film from Egypt involves the filmmaker himself talking with a dead soldier about recent events not only about terrorists of 9/11 but bombings in other places.The next comes from Bolivia in which a girl learns about the events of September 11 and believes they must march for them.The next from a country in Africa in which a group of boys follow a man whom they believe to be Bin Ladin.The next comes from Mexico in which nothing is shown but the sounds of that day.The next from Israel involving a reporter at the scene of a bomb trying to get a report but is frequently told about the attacks.There are other films that I can't remember at the moment but all of them are powerful. It will bring back your emotions from that day.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73b0941b98334bc5b55e10ebe4cccfbd",
            "input": "Val Kilmer, solid performance. Dylan McDermott, solid performance. Josh Lucas, solid performance. Three very engaging actors giving decent performances. The problem is, who cares about the plot? John Holmes. Infamous for his well-endowments, a drug addict, and a guy who, despite contracting AIDS, continued to make adult films, just does not make an intriguing character.The story surrounds the events leading up to and the aftermath of a vicious mass murder that occurred in the late 80's in Los Angelos to which Holmes was linked, arrested and charged with murder, and who ultimately was acquitted. Just like in the case of O.J., the guilt factor, regardless of the outcome, ranged quite high in the \"He did it\" zone.There is no one to sympathize with in this film, as everyone is a self-serving criminal. There is just nothing remotely interesting here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f309327929f4499c9092396b81fcc2b7",
            "input": "I do see what my forebears saw in the youthful Bette Davis. She's splendid throughout this almost-madcap political comedy which actually stars Warren Williams as the political operative constantly behind on his alimony. Vivienne Osborne is brilliant as his ex, and I found myself rooting for her throughout. The Williams character is not at all sympathetic, and he's not even a decent op.Guy Kibbee is one of the best at what he does. As a candidate dragged out of his sleep at a political convention and nominated to be governor in order to prevent a rival candidate from being nominated, so this whole mess is borne of internecine political warfare in a party called the \"Progressive Party.\" If you're of a political mind, you will probably see a party other than the one with which you are affiliated reflected in the fictional \"Progressive Party\" of Williams and Kibbee. I could draw exact parallels, but we're not here for that.This is a good movie for those of us who love these old comedies. If you've ever watched any of the old Wheeler & Woolsey titles (HALF SHOT AT SUNRISE, THE RAINMAKERS), you'll find Frank McHugh, as Williams's right arm, looking and behaving a lot like Bert Wheeler. He had me fooled.Yes, both my wife and I recommend this one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-537bbc55c8774fd69840a24bc5e900bf",
            "input": "I would have rated this film a minus 10 but sadly it is not offered.Why I didn't walk out in the first five minutes of this movie I cannot say. I should have gone with my instinct and left immediately!! Several people in our theater did and sadly I didn't follow them out.The story lacked all criteria for a movie. NO plot. Awful acting! Even Robin Williams was so disappointing that I may never see another film he is in. Not a single relationship in the story went beyond parlor talk. I did like the tazer scene. Too bad it didn't shock some meat into the senselessness of the plot. Someone needs to tazer the writer and director of this film!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3540f6831a5a42309b76f7a6769a94fb",
            "input": "Ascension is actually a step up in terms of what the original movie was in story and in special effects. Jason Scott Lee Is good as a vampire hunter looking for the count himself (if you remember him, he was from the movie Dragon, The Bruce Lee Story.') Jason London is funny as Luke, the kid who helps the woman he loves from a far steal Dracula's body from the slab. Diane Neal Is good as the woman who steals Dracula's body in order to finds a cure for her dying boyfriend, And Stephen Billington is great as Dracula himself. Giving a better performance than Gerard Butler did the count in the original film. Roy Scheider rounds out the rest of the cast in this movie, and he does a decent job as the mentor of Jason Scott Lee's character. This is the second sequel in the trilogy, and they are off to a good start. It's up in the air whether the last film will close the series out on a good note.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00dc2f89b7b448f6869e5d2d4cd95a51",
            "input": "This movie (and yes, it's a movie - it was shot as a two-parter, but the two parts together come down to slightly more than 2 hours) is one of the unsung masterpieces of world cinema. A very well-mannered, and yet at the same time absolutely savage denunciation of the Soviet regime and the type of person who flourished under it, the film is a faithful adaptation of the long-banned eponymous book by Mikhail Bulgakov. The sets are flawless, and the director made the brilliant decision to film in monochrome sepia, adding a feel of authenticity where a late-80s washed-out color incarnation would have all but ruined the film. I won't say much about the plot, which deserves to be discovered by the viewer himself, but the performances are true Oscar material; special mentions go out to E. Evstigneev, who plays the old professor with such presence, gravitas and kind wisdom that with barely a word or a gesture, he ends up stealing every scene he's in. The second, of course, is Creature/Sharikov, who, played to horrifying perfection by V. Tolokonnikov, is by far more frightening a character than Hannibal Lecter, because not only does he exist in real life - entire countries have been ran by men like him throughout history, with all that ensues.While it's a socio political allegory, it is worth mentioning that the movie is also brimming with humor, albeit dark - there are many outright comedies which haven't made me laugh as much as this film. What's more, when laughing at this movie, the feeling is not only one of hilarity but of understanding and agreement, which is always a plus.There is hardly a complaint I have with this movie - the only slight flaw is the tone of intellectual/bourgeois snobbery I caught at times from the \"enlightened\" characters. But that's a minor quibble.Sadly, this film appears to have been bypassed by Western licensing companies. It's a crying shame that one of the all-round best movies out there is languishing unrestored and untranslated (which shouldn't be incredibly hard - though all the cultural references and the revolutionary terminology will necessarily fade in translation, the film's main themes should be accessible to all). While we're waiting with our fingers crossed for the Criterion edition, I'm considering creating English subtitles myself. Will see how that works out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49d80c4f68cf495580683960cda4d159",
            "input": "This is the worst ripoff of Home Alone movies that I have EVER seen! Watch part 1 and two, but don't let anyone say that this is BETTER than the first two! I mean, really, you don't make a movie, then make a sequel with the same characters and actors, and then make another sequel with DIFFERENT characters and actors! I mean, it would have been OK if this wan't a \"Home Alone\" movie, but they DID make it a Home Alone movie. Culkin is too old now, so you're suppose to STOP making sequels! Goodness, this movie makes me SICK! Buy part 1 and 2.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6290be1415234b06b9d39fb64b02da45",
            "input": "I'd waited for some years before this movie finally got released in England, but was in many ways very pleased when I finally saw it. There are a lot of great things to the film, for a start the acting. Its not something I have all that much need for in a horror picture but the people in this film all put in fine work. This and the constantly gripping and interesting script, with a nice sorta Lovecraftian feel to it, give the film a real solid backbone. Add to this the doses of surreal nightmare imagery and occasional gruesome gore and the films a winner. It has my favorite kind of gore too, supernatural and splattery. Also, the characters of Marcus, the angry bodybuilding transsexual and Daisy, his mentally retarded lover/plaything are genuinely freakish and unnerving at times, and give a far out, anything goes sense of morbid grown up craziness which works well with the frequent Freudian overtones. This is one of the most impressive recent horror movies, far more shocking or out there than anything Hollywood can produce. My only gripe was that I wanted the ending to be darker in tone, but it still works, so on the whole I'd really recommend this to serious horror buffs.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9eb7cbebaa334a3ea57f56ad8fed7546",
            "input": "Men of Honor stars Cuba Gooding Jr., as real life Navy Diver Carl Brashear who defied a man's Navy to become the first African American Navy Diver. Sometimes by his side and sometimes his adversary there was one man who Carl Brashear really admired. His name was Master Chief Billy Sunday (Robert DeNiro). Sunday in a lot of ways pushed, aggravated and helped Carl become the man he wanted to be. I loved Cuba in this film. His portrayal here is as liberating and as powerful as Denzel Washington was in The Hurricane. Through every scene we can see his passion, motivation and stubbornness to achieve his dream. We can see the struggle within in him as he embarks to make his father proud. I also loved how the director created and brought forth a lot of tension in some of the key diving scenes. Brashear's encounter with a submarine during a salvage mission is heart-stopping and brilliant. The only fault I could see would have to lie in the supporting cast. Cuba and DeNiro's characters are very intricate and exciting to watch. Which does make you a little sad when they have to butt heads with such two-dimensional supporting characters. The evil Lt. Cmdr. Hanks, Sunday's wife (Charlize Theron), the eccentric diving school colonel (Hal Holbrook) and Cuba's love interest are the characters I found to not have very much depth. What could have made these characters more substantial and more effective was a little more time to develop them. Why was that colonel always in his tower? How come Sunday's wife was so bitter and always drunk?Another curious question has to be this. What happened to Carl Brashear's wedding? I mean if this film is chronicling this man's life wouldn't his wedding be an important event? Maybe it's just me. Men of Honor, however, is a perfect example of the triumph and faith that the human spirit envelops. This film will inspire and make you feel for this man's struggle. Which I do believe was the reason this powerful story was told. My hat goes off to you Carl Brashear. I really admire your strength.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58f8ba31c0ce48c0a0be22891346089f",
            "input": "Well, I'd heard from somewhere that Ossessione is a precursor to the Italian film genre, and particular favourite of mine, the 'Giallo'...but actually, aside from the fact that this is a thriller that was made in Italy; the two have pretty much no relation. In the sixties and seventies, Italian film-makers would get themselves a reputation for ripping off just about every successful American film released. They've not done that here, but Ossessione does follow almost the exact same story as the later American film 'The Postman Always Rings Twice', without giving the book's author, James M. Cain, so much as a credit! Anyway, the plot focuses on Gino Costa, a handsome drifter who, by chance, stumbles upon a café where a woman named Giovanna Bragana works. He soon learns that she's married to Giuseppe; a big fat annoying man, whom Giovanna can't stand to have even touching her. He wants the pair of them to run away together, but she's not so keen on the idea. However, fate ends up intervening and her plan to have her husband murdered is successful...Despite the fact that the film loses some credibility for not crediting the author whose story it's based on, it has to be said that director Luchino Visconti implements the film noir style well, and in a way I even prefer the atmosphere of this film to some of the bigger American noir classics. The story is, as you would expect, extremely strong and the Visconti manages to pull good performances out of his cast. Visconti drags the film out a little bit too much, however, and with a running time of almost 135 minutes, I felt that the story was too thin to warrant this kind of length. I almost feel guilty for levelling all this criticism at Ossessione as it IS a good film, but it's not a 'great' film. The relationship between the two central characters is never really explored properly, and it seems like the film is keener to distract us from it rather than let us into the characters' heads. There's not much mystery to the plot as we pretty much always know what's going on, and by not always focusing on the characters themselves; the film is not as interesting as it could have been. Still, it makes for an interesting viewing and comes recommended for that reason...although it's not as good as the 1946 version of the same James M. Cain classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99b439cd5a68494fb68a565f1c396130",
            "input": "This beautifully filmed and scripted episode was let down for two reasons. 1) Perhaps it was the morality of the 1950s talking, but no man left alone on an asteroid for years would react with such hysterical negativity to the gift of a female android. 2) It wasn't an android at all, but a woman, the beautiful Jean Marsh.The popularity of the sex doll industry in the coming decades could have traced its origins back to this episode if they'd done it properly. In fact, the modernization of sex-bots are in the news as I speak.Robots were not new to movies or television when this episode was made, so they could have at least had her act like one. Her fleshiness would then have added a creepy element. Instead, it becomes a nice little love story about two humans on faraway star.The Twilight Zone always stretched the imagination and credulity. Normally no one cared. But this episode seemed hamstrung by a Calvinist morality eschewing what would have amounted to masturbation with a machine, or downright carelessness.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44026aefbc9f4503b302040407d39f3f",
            "input": "Given the history of the director of this movie, it is hard to believe that this was such a painfully bad movie to sit through. I was at the European premiere last night and one of the Executive Producers was there. He was yet to see the movie and, boy, was he in for a surprise. I have not read the book that this is based upon, nor do I know if it highly rated or appreciated, but I have read \"Captain Correlli's Mandolin\" and given how poorly that was adapted for screen and how bad this movie was, I can only presume that something similar has happened here. The acting wasn't bad albeit that there were a couple-too-many raised eyebrows from Farrell. Honestly, I can't believed how little I cared for any character in this movie. Situations play out on the screen in an empty sequence of nothingness. Donald Sutherland's part comprises a few scenes where he opens a door, says something and closes it again. I kept looking at my watch when I wasn't cringing at the dialogue on the screen. I have never walked out on a movie but I was tempted to start during this. I gave this movie a score of '2' for reasons which seem horrendously shallow to me but these are the best things that I can say about this movie. The first is that I really enjoyed the all-too-short earthquake scene and the second is that Salma Hayek got naked and looked beautiful. I can say little else positive about this movie. Don't ask the dust anything, it can't talk!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2c3ae029e7144f697eac7a70344df0a",
            "input": "As good an advert for republicanism as you're ever likely to see,\"Mayerling\"is an everyday story of royal folk in late nineteenth century Austria.Set during one of Europe's seemingly incessant internal turmoils it concerns itself with the Emperor Franz Joseph (Mr James Mason),his rebellious son,the Crown Prince Rudolf (Mr Omar Sharif)the Empress(Miss Ava Gardner) and various mistresses,secret policemen,spies,extravagantly-uniformed popinjays,gypsies,dancers,wives, soldiers,swans,horses and the bizarre inbred web of European royalty at the time of Franz Joseph's Austro-Hungarian Empire. Filmed in what the old movie posters used to call \"A Riot of Color\" it resembles nothing more than an expensively-dressed but intellectually-challenged production of \"The Student Prince\" .Mr James Mason,wearing a very natty little white number,utilises his all-purpose mittel-European accent whenever he remembers.I am a great admirer of his and I sincerely hope the remuneration was comensurate with the distaste he clearly felt for the character he was playing. Mr Omar Sharif,who built a career largely founded on looking directly at the camera with his big brown eyes and looking soulful,gives a stupefyingly monotonous performance as his son the Crown Prince.He is utterly unconvincing as a man who -in the movie at least-cut a swathe through the distaff side of the Austrian aristocracy.With his well-buttered locks firmly in place he preens and poses in ever more unlikely uniforms.As a rebel he talks the talk but conspicuously fails to walk the walk,leaving a bottom button undone on one of his tunics is about as far as his defiance goes.Unhappily married,he falls in love with a commoner.\"Forbidden Love\" is one of the movie's come-ons.As she is played by the most uncommon Miss Catherine Deneuve he is scarcely pushing the envelope there.Miss Deneuve has a profile to die for and we see rather a lot of it,particularly in the sequence set at the ballet. Now I love ballet as much as the next man,but this sequence does seem to go on for an excessive amount of time,a more cynical critic might consider it to be \"padding\". Rudolf's mother,the Empress is played by Miss Ava Gardner.She gives the part some good old American oooomph,making her a bit like \"Auntie Mame\",but it's done with undeniable style.Rudolf is certainly very fond of his mother - I'll put it no more strongly than that. The only performance worth watching is that of Mr James Robertson Justice as Sir Lancelot Spratt - sorry,Edward,Prince of Wales.He is so wonderfully unconcerned about everything going on around him it's a joy to behold.I waited vainly for him to ask Rudolf the immortal question \"What's the bleeding time?\". I am not qualified to dispute \"Mayerling\" 's historical accuracy,but,in my opinion,everything else about it is risible. It is a Ruritanian Opera Buffa without the tunes to send you home from the theatre whistling.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71ef41a9968a4460a12ff93f5b734ff4",
            "input": "Back in 1994, I had a really lengthy vacation around the Fourth of July - something like 17 days off in a row what with two weeks paid vacation, weekends and the holiday itself. I stayed in town during that time, hanging out at my parents' house a lot.I didn't have a TV in my apartment so I used to watch my parents' tube. I had just finished watching a segment of the X Files when a program came on called Personal FX. I was hooked instantly. I had always been fascinated with items in our home that had come from my parents' family homes and through inheritances from relatives' estates, and often wondered about their history, value, etc.After my long vacation, I used to go to my folks' house on my lunch-hours just to catch Personal FX.I can remember one episode during which co-host Claire Carter announced that the New York apartment in which the series was filmed was being renovated and that once said renovations were complete that Personl FX would return to the air.It never did! Personal FX was the first -and best - of the collectible shows. And it vanished from the air! Almost fifteen years later, I'm still sore.Way to go, FX.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4bb7e80cc2b244c7a7bf49ce3dd6a053",
            "input": "One of the worst movies I've seen shoddy camera work, crappy filter usage, film was grainy, script was terrible, i mean come on, how predictable was the big battle at the end.....some of the fight scenes were okay i guess....some scenes were so bad it was comical ...like Sorbo getting the horse and riding at the end...LOL i mean really ..a horse? Oh cant forget how the bad assassins roll around in the same vehicle throughout the entire movie..one would think that after killling key witness and federal agents, they woulda been tracked down..ETC, ETC really don't bother watching it...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ba6e4c83cf74037a1e417a9ac82f72d",
            "input": "Those who are not familiar with Cassandra Peterson's alter-ego Elvira, then this is a good place to start.\"Elvira, Mistress of the Dark\" starts off with our heroine with the gravity defying boobs receiving a message. It seems that a great aunt of hers has died and that she needs to be present for the reading of the will. Anxious to raise money for a show she wants to open in Las Vegas, she decides to go in hopes of getting lots and lots of money.Unfortunately, the place she has to go is the town of Fallwell, Massachusetts. Having to stay a spell due to her car breaking down, she finds out that her great aunt left her 3 things: a house, a dog and a cookbook. The town residents have mixed reactions:the teens like her, the women hate her, and the men lust after her (Although trying to remain moral pillars of the community). Her worst problem turns out to be her great uncle Vincent (W. Morgan Sheppard), because he wants her cookbook. Seems that the cookbook is a book of spells that will make him a more powerful warlock.The film is actually pretty funny, with Peterson a.k.a. Elvira using her \"endowments\" and sexiness as a joke (\"And don't forget, tomorrow we're showing the head with two things... I mean the thing with two heads\"). Especially funny as Edie McClurg as Chastity Pariah, the woman that works her hardest to keep the town in line, but ends up looking ridiculous (The picnic scene is the perfect example). Deserves a peek (The film, not her boobs, of course).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2da6d27fbc254e68a1ec4ae5cd6aaba8",
            "input": "Because 'cruel' would be the only word in existence to describe the intentions of these film makers. Where do you even begin? In a spout of b*tchiness, I'm going to start with the awful acting of nearly everybody in this movie. Scratch that. Nearly does not belong in that sentence. I can't think of even one character who was portrayed well. Although, in all fairness, it would be nearly impossible to portray these zero dimensional characters in a successful way. Still, the girl who played Katherine (whose name I purposefully don't include - I'm pretending she doesn't exist) remains one of the worst actors I've ever seen, only eclipsed by the guy who played Sebastian. The story was God awful. It attempted to mirror the brilliance that was the first one but failed in so many ways. Pretty much every part of it was pointless - though I will admit (grudgingly) that the plot twist was quite good it its surprise. And the ending was at least slightly humorous. But this film is up there with the worst I've seen. Don't watch it. Just don't. There is absolutely no value in watching it. None. It only takes away the enjoyment of the first.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc880a32308d418793d24125abfce841",
            "input": "I bought this movie from Gamestop's discount used movie bin and the cover caused me to laugh uncontrollably so I bought it for 99cents. The movie itself is retarded and they use like ten different monkeys throughout the whole film that hardly look alike. Not to mention they use a stunt double who is just a short guy in costume making a desperate attempt to impersonate a monkey.The director more than likely committed a murder-suicide with the chimpanzees after the movie debuted in a preview for some other low rent Warner Bros. film and he ended up owing money to the studio. It also doesn't help that he wasn't even infamous for the terrible job he did, he wasn't even known for producing a poop-chute film.Why was this movie ever made?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7463b7fb26e41439cec29c424a92237",
            "input": "As I saw the movie I was really shocked to see what the 60's was about. I know I may be wrong about some things, but it seemed like the 60's really had an effect on people of the time. Some people said they would want to go back to the 60's. From what I saw I would say yes for the excitement and no for the outcome. But that's my opinion.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-667aa5c6157045fab4e0db36bfafa538",
            "input": "Of course, the original is better, but this isn't as bad as everyone says! Yes, it is made up into 3 stories, but hey, so what?! I thought it was quite good to be honest. I actually liked how Anastasia changed a little when she fell in love, it shows what love can do. The stories were not so bad either.I liked Cinderella's voice better in this too. I have nothing against her voice in the original, but I just think it sounds better here, more nicer. I liked her personality in this too, she had more of a backbone, yet she was still kind.So, I'll give Cinderella II:Dreams Come True a 7/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ec491c783be4bcaadacda06309bebc4",
            "input": "If Saura hadn't done anything like this before, Iberia would be a milestone. Now it still deserves inclusion to honor a great director and a great cinematic conservator of Spanish culture, but he has done a lot like this before, and though we can applaud the riches he has given us, we have to pick and choose favorites and high points among similar films which include Blood Wedding (1981), Carmen (1983), El Amore Brujo (1986), Sevillanas (1992), Salomé (2002) and Tango (1998). I would choose Saura's 1995 Flamenco as his most unique and potent cultural document, next to which Iberia pales.Iberia is conceived as a series of interpretations of the music of Isaac Manuel Francisco Albéniz (1860-1909) and in particular his \"Iberia\" suite for piano. Isaac Albéniz was a great contributor to the externalization of Spanish musical culture -- its re-formatting for a non-Spanish audience. He moved to France in his early thirties and was influenced by French composers. His \"Iberia\" suite is an imaginative synthesis of Spanish folk music with the styles of Liszt, Dukas and d'Indy. He traveled around performing his compositions, which are a kind of beautiful standardization of Spanish rhythms and melodies, not as homogenized as Ravel's Bolero but moving in that direction. Naturally, the Spanish have repossessed Albéniz, and in Iberia, the performers reinterpret his compositions in terms of various more ethnic and regional dances and styles. But the source is a tamed and diluted form of Spanish musical and dance culture compared to the echt Spanishness of pure flamenco. Flamenco, coming out of the region of Andalusia, is a deeply felt amalgam of gitane, Hispano-Arabic, and Jewish cultures. Iberia simply is the peninsula comprising Spain, Portugal, Andorra and Gibraltar; the very concept is more diluted. Saura's Flamenco is an unstoppably intense ethnic mix of music, singing, dancing and that peacock manner of noble preening that is the essence of Spanish style, the way a man and a woman carries himself or herself with pride verging on arrogance and elegance and panache -- even bullfights and the moves of the torero are full of it -- in a series of electric sequences without introduction or conclusion; they just are. Saura always emphasized the staginess of his collaborations with choreographer Antonio Gades and other artists. In his 1995 Flamenco he dropped any pretense of a story and simply has singers, musicians, and dancers move on and off a big sound stage with nice lighting and screens, flats, and mirrors arranged by cinematographer Vittorio Storaro, another of the Spanish filmmaker's important collaborators. The beginnings and endings of sequences in Flamenco are often rough, but atmospheric, marked only by the rumble and rustle of shuffling feet and a mixture of voices. Sometimes the film keeps feeding when a performance is over and you see the dancer bend over, sigh, or laugh; or somebody just unexpectedly says something. In Flamenco more than any of Saura's other musical films it's the rapt, intense interaction of singers and dancers and rhythmically clapping participant observers shouting impulsive olé's that is the \"story\" and creates the magic. Because Saura has truly made magic, and perhaps best so when he dropped any sort of conventional story.Iberia is in a similar style to some of Saura's purest musical films: no narration, no dialogue, only brief titles to indicate the type of song or the region, beginning with a pianist playing Albeniz's music and gradually moving to a series of dance sequences and a little singing. In flamenco music, the fundamental element is the unaccompanied voice, and that voice is the most unmistakable and unique contribution to world music. It relates to other songs in other ethnicities, but nothing quite equals its raw raucous unique ugly-beautiful cry that defies you to do anything but listen to it with the closest attention. Then comes the clapping and the foot stomping, and then the dancing, combined with the other elements. There is only one flamenco song in Iberia. If you love Saura's Flamenco, you'll want to see Iberia, but you'll be a bit disappointed. The style is there; some of the great voices and dancing and music are there. But Iberia's source and conception doom it to a lesser degree of power and make it a less rich and intense cultural experience.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4bbd1cfef2a4b5abde229cb962517ad",
            "input": "There is certainly emotion between the two main characters as they explore their relationship--one based primarily on physical attraction from the beginning. And there is also emotion in the inner-workings of Mathieu's family dealing w/ his mother's problems--and how that comes to bear on their relationship. But the problem is it leaves a lot of things unanswered (unless I'm just too dumb to pick up on them). Why is Mathieu in a mental hospital? What led to the boys' break-up? And the flashing back between present and past is a little hard to follow at first. It seems like the main reason to rent this movie is to enjoy some homoerotic vicarious thrills, or some male nudity. But as a love story or character study it is lacking and unsatisfying.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e916eb742fb4941a20ba37d138dc6bd",
            "input": "Peter O'Toole is a treat to watch in roles where the lines he speaks are good and offer a chance for him to swagger in drunken stupor. The lovely Susannah York provides a good foil for O'Toole's dramatic presence.The film alludes to incest--without a single explicit scene--but it is able to entertain the viewer in its raucous social commentary. Though this is not major film by any reckoning, it will be remembered for its entertaining performances. Even York, signing the papers at the end, is a treat to watch, exuding tragedy silently. The possible weakness here is Thompson's laid-back direction. But the film floats because of the actors and the script.I saw the film twice over a period of 20 years--on both occasions with the name \"Brotherly love\". \"Country dance\" is a rather farcical and inappropriate title for this movie, wherever it was released as such.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f36add6aaa3e4797b7d3c3ba5aec4d08",
            "input": "OK, so I am an original Wicker Man fan and I usually don't like British films remade by Americans, so why oh why did I put myself through the most painful cinema experiences ever? I am not a Nicolas Cage fan and I had some kind of moment of madness perhaps? The film was appalling! The bit at the beginning with the crash/fire had no relevance to the film at all and the female cop knew where Edward was going, so the bit at the end with the two girls visiting the mainland, well it wouldn't have happened as the whole thing would have been investigated. The history behind the wicker man wasn't really explored - and I guess being set in America didn't really help the whole pagan theme. This film was slow and contained no atmosphere or suspense. I must say that the best bit was right at the end, when Nicolas Cage goes up in flames! I am in such desperate need to see the original again now, in order to cleanse my disappointed soul. I really can't stress how disappointing this film is, please don't see it if you:A) Don't like American re-makes of British Films B) Are a fan of the original C) Hate Nicolas Cage",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2090d78e56f4443b8cd60b65ea6970b2",
            "input": "EPSILON, a.k.a. ALIEN VISITOR, is not what I expected. This is a no-budget Australian film with no special effects other than speeded-up film and quick scene cuts. The female alien (who comes over immediately able to speak perfectly accented Australian) can \"blip\" from place to place or time to time and alter her perception of the flow of time to match the \"faster\" humans.An elderly grandmother tells her two granddaughters about a story a wandering man told her 40 years before, when an unnamed \"She\" came to the planet naked and completely disoriented, unable to recognize which star in the sky she came from...She meets a man alone camping in the Australian Outback, apparently bewildering him. She is here by \"mistake\", and gets angry when she is told she is on Earth. The Earthlings are known as consummate despoilers of the environment and a metaphor for the most insulting thing imaginable to the rest of the universe: those who \"breathe the foul air\" but do nothing about it, sticking their heads under the sand like an ostrich. In another amusing metaphor, Earthlings are \"frogs\".From there, it is entirely a film about dialogue, as the perplexed man tries to understand She's peculiar psychology and viewpoints, even as She calls him unintelligent and \"quaint\". The man begins to realize maybe it's humans who are irrational and not thinking straight. Yet, while waiting to be \"beamed up\" back home, She sees that this human is not entirely faulty in his thinking and even falls in love with him.The dialogue about perspectives is in spots interesting, but it is all layered with a heavy-handed environmental message and a low-budget feel (there are only two main actors, who blip around various deserted scenes, and the evil despoiling humans on the planet are never seen at all). The environmental message offers no solutions, but paints one or two dire metaphors about what will happen to nature and man if something isn't done. The logic also doesn't hang together: the rest of the universe has \"given up\" on Earth, yet one space woman caught on Earth by mistake manages to effect some positive change by the conclusion of the movie. What would a battalion of aliens deliberately sent here manage to achieve against pollution and waste?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcd65d7fdcef40ad96ebd079e355e08b",
            "input": "It's pretty bad when the generic movie synopsis has more information than the film itself. The paragraph-long \"plot summary\" written on the movie page has details I could not glean from watching the actual movie. I found myself constantly backing it up to see what details I had just missed which could tell me what the (bleep) was going on. Alas, to no avail--this movie leaves out monstrous pieces of the story, if you could call it a story. It's like they were trying to fool us into thinking that there was some kind of movie here, filming just enough so that there was the resemblance of a story and leaving the rest to our imaginations. Newsflash to the the creators: I paid to watch you MAKE a movie. I can sit home and imagine plots and story lines for free. And Rosario Dawson? This is somebody I've never paid enough attention to to be able to put the name to the face, and I can see why. She had one of the most artificial performances I have ever seen for a leading character in any movie, A or B. I figured okay, maybe she didn't really want the role, just got a hefty offer for a movie she wasn't into? Wrong. She was listed as one of the producers. Next time you produce something, don't book yourself as the lead if you can't act. If you really can, then create a decent character for you to become. Also, somebody here mentioned the white/latino issue--yes, I hate to say it, but this movie does come across as an act of vengeance against white college-age males who wear baseball hats. That's what happens when there is nothing in the movie to endear the watcher to latino characters. The Adrian character seems like a cocky jerk who is no better than the story's antagonist. As for the Maya character, she didn't seem like a real person. Anyway I'm ashamed for Hollywood that this movie was even made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57613ef33956435cb9aff1c410cc1ee9",
            "input": "One of the last great musicals of the 60s. I was 7 years old the first time I saw this movie, and it's always been a favorite since then. The musical numbers are all memorable. In the 60s the people who were cast in musicals actually had musical talent (unlike a CERTAIN Academy Award nominated current musical based in a large midwestern city). All of the main roles were beautifully cast...Ron Moody shines as Fagin, as does Shani Wallis as Nancy. Oliver Reed was a menacing Bill Sikes (who thankfully has no musical numbers, lol), and Mark Lester as Oliver and Jack Wild as the Dodger were great too. Mark Lester comes across as an innocent waif, which was what Dickens intended when he wrote the book! Then, of course there are the dozens of dancers who perform in \"consider yourself,\" \"I'd Do Anything\" \"Who Will Buy\" and \"be Back Soon,\" many who were children! This is a great show for the whole family.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ee101a106ba4444ac298d8ab87aada0",
            "input": "I have a deep liking for this film despite it appearing deliberately less 'polished' than the other Fred and Ginger films, not to mention the slightly problematic casting of Harriet Hillard in the lead romantic role. Once again with these films, the plot is of a minor consequence - Astaire plays a rather unlikely sailor (who happens to be a brilliant former hoofer (of course!)) and Rogers an aspiring performer in a seedy dime-a-dance music hall. Although their relationship is bright and fun to watch, they are bogged down by an un-involving main story of Hilliard and Randolph Scott not succeeding in finding any chemistry between them. Although it was a last minute decision, Hilliard was rather miscast in this as she doesn't have the screen presence to give this film what it needs despite being sweet and likable throughout. The film may have benefited in promoting Lucille Ball's wise-cracking worldy brassy character to a larger role as she simply shined in every small scene, and would have made a great Helen Broderick-type side-kick to Rogers in this kind of bright film (See 'Stage Door', made the following year, for an example of wonderful scenes between these two fantastic actresses). That Scott's one-dimensional Neanderthal character eventually falls in love with Hilliard's is even harder to believe than Astaire being in the Navy! Now onto the important part, the singing and dancing: Nothing more can be said about \"Let's Face the Music and Dance\" other than it is brilliant and moving and perfectly executed and I often finish watching that scene with tears in my eyes. However other songs in the film deserve some recognition as well; \"I'm putting all my Eggs in One Basket\" is a lovely example of the comedic instincts of Astaire and Rogers, and almost pokes fun at their reputation of bursting into spontaneous, perfectly synchronized dancing. Other highlights are \"I'd Rather Lead the Band\" and \"Let Yourself Go\" which show how these two talents could perform as brilliantly alone as together. I nearly forgot to mention that this is one of the few (if not the only) time we see Astaire brilliantly play on the piano; It seems this man's talents were endless!Overall, I actually prefer this to 'Top Hat' and 'Swing Time' (although only just), as it is more earthy and performed so enthusiastically by all involved, it is hard to dislike the fun factor.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1814e222ca114f86b94e88ea142636fa",
            "input": "Christopher Lee is one of my favorite actors! I'm trying to view all of his work. He has been known to single-handedly save movies with his presence. Unfortunately, this is not one of them. This movie suffers from a low budget and it's production values are disturbing. Please...for the love of Christopher....avoid this film!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2098962dd55a41a3ae587b7c5525e8ed",
            "input": "This was another World War II message to the soldiers and to the Allies to be careful about spreading rumors. These were called \"instructional\" cartoons because it was a mixture of serious messages along with a funny-looking main character called \"Pvt. Snafu.\"All of us have imaginations, along with fears and what-have-you, and that's what happens here as Pvt. Snafu incorrectly adds two and two to something he hears and comes up with \"five.\" You can start panics and all kinds of disasters if you spread enough rumors and enough people believe them. That includes losing confidence in your country and your cause, as pointed out here in this cartoon. A good way to lose a war is demoralize the enemy. That's still being done today. \"We lost the war,\" declares one big baloney near the end of this cartoon. Amazing how some Americans still haven't learned. This cartoon may be 65 years old but it sure has relevance today. As I write this, there were two terrorist bombings in Europe today and some people still think the \"War On Terror\" is just a bumper sticker slogan. Amazing.The writer, the famous \"Dr. Suess,\" uses analogies of \"hot air balloon juice\" here to present the above message. With Theodore Geisel (his real name) you know the rhymes will be clever.Nothing hilarious here, but it wasn't meant to be. You have to understand the climate of 1943 and the justified paranoia that was out there during World War II. People forget that war could have easily wound up with the other side winning. It was a tense time",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9099a61c0a443119dc99bf952f0f507",
            "input": "\" Now in India's sunny 'clime, where I use to spend my time as a soldier in the service of her Majesty the queen . . . \" so goes the famous poem penned by Rudyard Kipling. This is the literal foundation upon which the movie \"Gunga Din\" is based. If you are fortunate enough to watch this legendary Classic, you will enjoy films the way they use to make them; for the sheer pleasure. Taken from the script of the established novelist and poet, this is a story of a humble Indian native named Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe) who works as 'a regimental beasty' during the British occupation of India during the 18th century. His greatest wish is to become a soldier. The water boy is part of a British Calvary contingent threatened with death by a notorious blood cult of Kali called the 'Thuggee.' Three particular soldiers stand out in this company who are noted for their bravery and comradeship. First is handsome and debonair, Cary Grant playing Sgt. Archibald Cutter. Next is Victor McLaglen as courageous Sgt. MacChesney and finally there's flamboyant Douglas Fairbanks Jr. as Sgt. Thomas Ballantine. All three and their fellow soldiers are surrounded by a hoard of mountain stranglers led by their fanatical leader called the 'Guru' (Eduardo Ciannelli). Amid the Chaos of war, is the brave water-boy who hopes to earn a place in the army by playing a bugle he found. A solid story for an old black and white film which needs little fanfare for anyone looking to enjoy a classic. ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ab842759f2549e1aa826440fea9a5c2",
            "input": "Halfway through Lajos Koltai's \"Evening,\" a woman on her deathbed asks a figure appearing in her hallucination: \"Can you tell me where my life went?\" The line could be embarrassingly theatrical, but the woman speaking it is Vanessa Redgrave, delivering it with utter simplicity, and the question tears your heart out.Time and again, the film based on Susan Minot's novel skirts sentimentality and ordinariness, it holds attention, offers admirable performances, and engenders emotional involvement as few recent movies have. With only six months of the year gone, there are now two memorable, meaningful, worthwhile films in theaters, the other, of course, being Sara Polley's \"Away from Her.\" Hollywood might have turned \"Evening\" into a slick celebrity vehicle with its two pairs of real-life mothers and daughters - Vanessa Redgrave and Natasha Richardson, and Meryl Streep and Mamie Gummer. Richardson is Redgrave's daughter in the film (with a sister played by Tony Collette), and Gummer plays Streep's younger self, while Redgrave's youthful incarnation is Claire Danes.Add Glenn Close, Eileen Atkins, Hugh Dancy, Patrick Wilson, and a large cast - yes, it could have turned into a multiple star platform. Instead, Koltai - the brilliant Hungarian cinematographer of \"Mephisto,\" and director of \"Fateless\" - created a subtle ensemble work with a \"Continental feel,\" the story taking place in a high-society Newport environment, in the days leading up to a wedding that is fraught with trouble.Missed connections, wrong choices, and dutiful compliance with social and family pressures present quite a soap opera, but the quality of the writing, Koltai's direction, and selfless acting raise \"Evening\" way above that level, into the the rarified air of English, French (and a few American) family sagas from a century before its contemporary setting.Complex relationships between mothers and daughters, between friends and lovers, with the addition of a difficult triangle all come across clearly, understandably, captivatingly. Individual tunes are woven into a symphony.And yet, with the all the foregoing emphasis on ensemble and selfless performances, the stars of \"Evening\" still shine through, Redgrave, Richardson, Gummer (an exciting new discovery, looking vaguely like her mother, but a very different actress), Danes carrying most of the load - until Streep shows up in the final moments and, of course, steals the show. Dancy and Wilson are well worth the price of admission too.As with \"Away from Her,\" \"Evening\" stays with you at length, inviting a re-thinking its story and characters, and re-experiencing the emotions it raises. At two hours, the film runs a bit long, but the way it stays with you thereafter is welcome among the many movies that go cold long before your popcorn.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-826b473ee2584eadb1096e6b231d19ef",
            "input": "People tried to make me believe that the premise of this rubbishy supernatural horror/thriller was inspired by the actual last words spoken by an authentic serial killer (whose name escapes me at the moment). Whilst awaiting his execution in the electric chair, he claimed that his soul would return to life and continue to go on a never-ending murder spree. It's not a highly original idea to revolve a horror film on, by the way. Other low-budget turkeys implemented the exact same basic premise, like \"House 3\", \"Shocker\" and \"Ghost in the Machine\". Anyway, \"The First Power\" (a.k.a \"Pentagram\") isn't a completely terrible effort, but the script overly reverts to clichés and lacks genuine thrills. The film starts off as an okay, albeit mundane serial killer flick in which obsessive cop-hero Lou Diamond Philips pursues a maniac who carves bloody pentagrams into the chests of his victims. He receives unexpected help from a spiritual medium, played by the gorgeous and underrated Tracy Griffith. She leads him to the killer but also begs not to execute him, as that would result in an even bigger catastrophe! Thanks to Tess' helpful hints, Detective Logan quickly captures the killer and celebrates his death penalty, but Patrick Channing made a pact with Satan Himself and returns to the rotten streets of California to do some more killing. \"The First Power\" gets pretty bad once the murderer reincarnates as a vengeful spirit. Instead of using his newly gained satanic powers to wipe out the entire world (that's what I would do in his position), Channing simply prefers to play cat and mouse games with his nemesis the copper. He annoyingly calls him \"Buddy-Boy\" all the time and possesses the bodies of Logan's friends and colleagues in order to trick him. Even though never really boring or poorly realized, it's a very weak film to endure, mostly because you constantly get the feeling of déjà-vu. Writer/director Robert Resnikoff shamelessly uses every dreadful cliché (the killer got sexually abused as a child) and even the players' lines can easily be predicted. As soon as Griffith explains she's able to predict the future, you just know that, somewhere at some point in the film, she's going to say the ridiculously overused line \"I tell people who to live their lives, but my own life is a mess\". Yawn. Lou Diamond Philips' performance is adequate enough, but it's rather difficult to take that youthful rebel of \"La Bamba\" and \"Stand And Deliver\" serious as a tough copper. There also are decent supportive roles for Mykelti Williamson (\"Forrest Gump\"), Carmen Argenziano (\"When a Stranger Calls\") and B-movie horror legend David Gale (\"Re-Animator\") appears in a minuscule cameo at the very beginning of the film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cab454634ee429bb4ec8163dc7640e5",
            "input": "I was not impressed about this film especially for the fact that I went to the cinema with my family in good faith to see a film which was certificate rated 12A here in the UK. To my dismay, this film was full of embarrassing sexual jokes. (Which is not a problem to me as an adult, but not good for watching with children). This film at times was very crude at times with fart jokes, getting hit in the groin etc... and for the most part of the film not very funny.The premise of the film is that Calvin Sims who is a 2inch midget, gets out of jail and steals a giant sized diamond but is then forced to put it in a womens handbag. So the rest of the movie sees him passing himself off as an abandoned baby, getting into this womens house so he can get this diamond back.Up until now, I have enjoyed most of the output from the Wayans Brothers - but this film is certainly taking the biscuit.A Bit of good advice - wait till it comes on TV or Cable",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93c8f12331594aef8620fb3e1f22ad33",
            "input": "I really thought they did an *excellent* job, there was nothing wrong with it at all, I don't know how the first commenter could have said it was terrible, it moved me to tears (I guess it moved about everyone to tears) but I try not to cry in a movie because it's embarrassing but this one got me. It was SOOO good! I hope they release it on DVD because I will definitely buy a copy! I feel like it renewed my faith and gave me a hope that I can't explain, it made me want to strive to be a better person, they went through so much and we kind of take that for granted, I guess. Compared to that, I feel like our own trials are nothing. Well, not nothing, but they hardly match what they had to go through. I loved it. Who played Emma?!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d4f6ef3b3684c0ebed23b1eacfeee22",
            "input": "The fully rounded character of the principal role of this movie, that of the cop torn up by his past and on a path of self-destruction so clear to the viewer, is unique for its time, 1950. Along with the haunting music and the well written plot, the film is a prime example of film noir at its best. Close-ups of Dana's eyes reveal the anguish within, Karl Malden excels as his boss, who brooks no nonsense but also has compassion for those under his command in the precinct. Otto Preminger made this type of movie just about his own. If there is any fault it would be with the breath taking beauty of Gene Tierney who seems oddly out of place with the hardened cop. Their scenes in the cafe, however, are wonderful and ring true. Tom Tully, in the bit part of her father is perfect as is Gary Merrill as the hood. Great lighting and mood setting. The building where the deadly deeds take place highly atmospheric, I love the old woman in the basement. 8 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa107216fd3b4be7bfd55929a76c2db8",
            "input": "This movie is best described or compare to \"Big Fish\" (the movie by Tim Burton). But it's a less glamorous and more in you face tale. And of course here it's not the father, but his grandfather who tells the stories.The movie's narrative also moves back and forth (so the story outline here at IMDb, might tell you more than you would like to read, before watching the movie). It's funny and engaging enough, even though you get from one story to another and have some dramatic moments too. It also surprises you here and there, with things you wouldn't expect. A nice little movie then, that deserves your attention, especially if you like movies like that! :o)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1da811e0bfc4411b0c60cb5eb60aa43",
            "input": "Please humour me if you will, for a minute while I read you the back of the ALLEY CAT VHS box. It says that:In this part of the city every street is a dead end- on every corner something to buy- in every alley another way to die- To survive you're got to be the best- just like the Alley Cat. Alley Cat- this lady owns the night. On the streets where even the predators become victims she knows how to survive- Cross her and you've run out of luck. Alley Cat- This animal is aroused.Now isn't that one of the most pathetic blurbs you've ever heard in your life? Whoever wrote that must be insane if they thought such a awful description could tempt us into viewing the video. Yet unfortunately, whichever faceless individual was responsible for that tragic use of English was doing their job only too well.. the movie contained within the little plastic case IS as bad as it sounds, and then some.Karin Mani plays the title role, and the script basically tells her during every given scene to either a) Pout like a goldfish b) Kick male butt or c) Show off her feminine 'attributes'. No complaints about the latter, but in terms of the other two.. let's just say she isn't much of an actress, and is even less convincing as a martial arts expert. But even Meryl Streep with Cynthia Rothrock's body (what a scary thought) would fail to save this movie. The unfolding of the plot is boring beyond belief, as we get one ineptly directed fight sequence after enough, pausing only for hysterical courtroom shenanigans and the occasional gag-inducing love scene with the interestingly named Robert Torti. The camera-work also follows a similar path of shame, with far too many unneeded close-ups and continuity errors abound.The part that I think really sums this scum-bucket of a movie up is where our heroine is sexually assaulted, and finds herself testifying in front of a corrupt judge while her rich-kid rapist leers at her from the box. Not only does he get off scot-free despite the overwhelming evidence against him, but she herself is then jailed for daring to protest about the verdict in front of his Honour. Behind bars, she then has a group shower, a lesbian crush, a couple of cat-fights and a nice, sweaty game of volleyball before being released on bail to continue her battle. This ten-minute section has nothing to do with the rest of the movie, and the screenplay grinds to a halt to encompass it. I can only imagine the producers wanted to add a bit more T&A to the mix, and came up with this needless sub-plot as a means to achieving that end.Which kinds of begs the question, is this an exploitation film, or a serious drama? Neither, is my response to that.. it isn't sleazy or camp enough to appeal to fans of Troma-style cinema, and it certainly doesn't make the grade as an exploration of one woman's fight against the system.. purely because it is so appallingly made. So who on earth would want to see it? Lunatics, I guess.. or IMDb reviewers who stay up till 3pm and watch any old rubbish on the box while trying to get to sleep. Sadly on this occasional I failed, and the horrors will stay with me for quite some time. Don't make the same mistake I did. Have a hot milk, or something.. 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6b27e3ed34d476d876ff3bafb2374d9",
            "input": "If you see this turkey listed in your TV guide, AVOID IT LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!A steaming great pile of fetid dingoes kidneys doesn't begin to describe how bad this movie is! There is only one funny scene (the memory eraser scene) but even that rates only .001 on the laughometer (out of 1000). Whoever wrote this turkey should be banned from writing another movie for their entire lives.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c658a6a6c6848ac9e14b2195667db25",
            "input": "NO SPOILERS.I love horror movies, but this has got to be the poorest attempt to make one ever. Calling it \"a movie\" is also a stretch. This \"random-clips-of-obviously-fake-and-tacky-violence-and-an-ugly- woman-trying-to-act-sexy-edited-poorly-together\" is not worth watching.Watching this is about as interesting watching as some random family's holiday pictures, and it has about the same quality you would expect when you send your ten year old son into the woods with your new vid-cam, and tell him to make a movie.Terrible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcd1799eb21d4569b62960f97e36adaa",
            "input": "This film was probably inspired by Godard's Masculin, féminin and I urge you to see that film instead.The film has two strong elements and those are, (1) the realistic acting (2) the impressive, undeservedly good, photo. Apart from that, what strikes me most is the endless stream of silliness. Lena Nyman has to be most annoying actress in the world. She acts so stupid and with all the nudity in this film,...it's unattractive. Comparing to Godard's film, intellectuality has been replaced with stupidity. Without going too far on this subject, I would say that follows from the difference in ideals between the French and the Swedish society.A movie of its time, and place. 2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5464e10f430415cbbcd9a39528c43aa",
            "input": "I have to say, I loved Vanishing Point. I've seen the original, and this is a pretty good remake of it. Even though it didn't follow the original storyline (that's why I gave it 8 out of 10), it was still pretty good and this is probably a better storyline.As for the car, well the DJ's comment at the end about the Challenger going 185 mph into the bulldozers is pretty improbable (And if you look, the speedometer needle was wobbling at 145-150), but even though I didn't see one on the engine in one of the beginning scenes where they show the engine, the original storyline had a supercharged Hemi, so it's possible. For those of you who say aerodynamics wouldn't allow it, the normally aspirated Chrysler 300C of today can go 168 mph, and if you look at that thing, going on a highway with it it's like pushing a brick wall through the wind at 70 mph. Plus, in a wind tunnel test if you put an air dam on the Challenger it would probably be more aerodynamic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a04a31ba4574cd78ae5972523107709",
            "input": "If you like the standard Sly flicks that involve over the top action, unbelievable stunts (unbelievable is not intended to be complimentary here), and retarded dialogue; you will love this steaming pile of mountain goat dung. I had high hopes based on the trailer. I thought that Stalone was going to be forced in his \"has-been\" days to yield to smarter people and make an action film that would place a credible hero in a credible situation where the story, setting, and (believable) action would prevail. I crave action that is at least close enough to reality that you can imagine the fear and excitement that would come from such an event. My limited knowledge of hypothermia and its effects rendered at least one scene laughably ridiculous. Judge Dredd is only better because you know going into the theater that you are going to see a comic book made into a movie. The character, setting and everything else are beyond comparison to anything we might encounter ourselves. Cliffhanger on the other hand turns a mountain climbing guide into Rambo before you can say \"yo, Adrian!\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfb55fa4a18e4d50a471ec545c90bdcd",
            "input": "I took a chance on \"Hardcastle and McCormick\" by purchasing the first season's worth (Canadian release) from Amazon. When I got it, I started with the pilot, and I was instantly hooked after that. I rated it 5 stars on Amazon, and I am rating it 10 stars here. It is just that good. What I liked about it were the opening and closing themes, and of course Stephen J. Cannell's logo at the end of each episode, but most of all, the relationship between the Judge and Mark as they worked together to crack each case. I was so hooked that I also purchased the second season as a companion, and I enjoyed it equally. If you do not have this excellent series on disc, I believe that you should purchase it and put it in your collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82c6b5bd58d54a558d5663a628d6dbaf",
            "input": "I can only assume that the other reviewers of this \"film\" are stockholders in the production company, as this was quite possibly the worst movie I've seen in the last five years. From the opening shot of a Rabbi laughing uncontrollably for no apparent reason, it was clear that the actors in this film would kill to be considered \"B-Level.\" Both my wife and I were in a great mood before starting this film, and we were genuinely looking forward to a funny popcorn movie. We knew we hadn't rented Citizen Kane, and we weren't expecting to see the most amazing movie ever. However, after 40 minutes of enduring the most painfully unfunny bit of garbage I've ever seen, we shut it off instead of wasting another minutes of our lives.If a \"comedy\" with no laughs, terrible acting, thin plot and annoying characters are your thing, then this film is for you. Honestly, Troll 2 is better--at least I laughed at the popcorn sex scene.I cannot justify writing a longer review of this picture because I've already wasted almost an hour trying to find one joke.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad5bed88c0974307b0a87b9dd8f83253",
            "input": "The main reason I wanted to see this movie was because of the wonderful cast. A ton of my favorite actors in one movie equals amazing with out actually seeing it. But this movie caught me off guard. It wasn't what I was expecting at all. It's been a while since I've seen it but I do remember I could not stop laughing!!! And it wasn't just the cast that did it for me. The script was amazingly written. Every time you were expecting something to happen it didn't happen. There were so many twists and turns but it fit with the whole tone of the movie instead of coming off as pretentious. The cinematography, along with the set, was absolutely beautiful as well. I really can't say anything bad about this movie! Expcept, I would have Andrew Davoli a little more screen time!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ceaced97517c45e8bd2deadaceb60f3b",
            "input": "Even if one didn't realize that Sellers was in poor health at the time of filming and passed away before the film's release, THE FIENDISH PLOT OF DR. FU MANCHU would be painful viewing. It is supposedly a lampoon of Sax Rohmer's famous Oriental villain but it lacks any focus. The potential for satirical commentary on the anti-Oriental overtones of Rohmer's concept are ignored. Indeed, the movie employs racist insults. There are hardly any actual jokes or gags, just mostly actors behaving idiotically and spouting dreary lines. It is especially distressing to see Sid Caesar forced to spout curses and racial slurs for attempted laughs. Most of the other actors embarrass themselves as well.And then there's Peter Sellers. He plays the dual roles of the sinister Fu Manchu, who is trying to concoct a formula to regain his youth and his stalwart British foe Nayland Smith. Sellers isn't one hundred per cent bad; he conveys a quirky warmth as Smith when he discusses his fetishistic attachment to his lawn mower and he's oddly moving as Manchu when he expresses his love for English music hall entertainment. But most of the time, he plays both roles with a weary grimness, thus further sabotaging any comical possibilities. Sellers' routines where he revitalizes his fading strength with electric shocks are particularly excruciating; he seems too convincingly agonized to be funny. A few genuinely witty lines, an apt slapstick bit by Burt Kwouk (Cato in the PINK PANTHER films) as one of Manchu's minions, and Helen Mirren's amusing musical numbers cannot salvage this mess. If anyone wants to understand why Peter Sellers is considered a comedic genius, they won't learn anything from THE FIENDISH PLOT OF DR. FU MANCHU.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1975b9441484d3992cca1470624d682",
            "input": "Evil Aliens owes a huge debt to Peter Jacksons early films Bad Taste and Braindead.I must confess to never enjoying those films particularly and i say the same about this.Jake West is a director who clearly lacks inspiration of his own and chooses to steal from those whom he looks up to.I lost count of the amount of times a major Hollywood film was quoted most notably James Camerons Aliens.The amount of blood and gore on show here isn't funny either,the latter end of the film becomes tired and dragged out.Maybe it would have worked better as a short film.The actors a poor,the direction is weak and the plot is non existent.I can see what the director was trying to do,the homage he was trying to pay,but others have done the same thing a lot better than presented here. 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8417ec764c6247fdbcd589e52cfe8c0d",
            "input": "I initially bought this DVD because it had SRK and Aishwarya Rai on the cover and I thought, hey! another film starring Aishu and Shah Rukh, little did I know that Aishwarya would only appear in an item number in the last quarter of the film in a song which she shares with SRK and helps introduce his character who is in the film for about just 15 minutes. Shakti is a film about a mother's love and endurance. It's a film about transformations, ignorance, coming of age, stepping into the know and embracing the harsh realities of life. The item number in which SRK and Aishu appear in has nothing to do with the movie. It's actually a dream sequence that occurs while SRK's drunken character is knocked unconscious by booze. He dreams that Aishwarya Rai is this sexy street girl who shows up at his favourite hangout spot one day, dressed scantily and begins to seduce him. The title of the song is 'Ishq Kamina' (loosely translated as \"Love's a bitch!\") and it is just plain smoking hot! Don't miss it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ff7a07ac6534bd1ba6ccc8977ae24c0",
            "input": "Going into see Seven Pounds i wasn't clearly sure what to think because the previews left to much open to grasp what the movie was really about. So within the first 20 min or so you are completely lost in the plot, have no idea what is going on and you think Tim, who claims to be Ben, is just a big asshole. All of this comes to an end when the \"twist\",so to speak, is unraveled at the very last minute of the movie. Basically Tim (will smith) was troubled and haunted by a big accident he made causing the end of seven peoples lives. By this he decides to scope out seven new people who are in need of help badly who he in turns gives his life to.The acting of this film is great, as i feel will smith no matter what part he seems to impress. Rosario Dawson, to me, this is one of her better movies, aside from eagle eye which i think is up there to. She has been in some bad some good but she does deliver in this film. Other actors, such as woody Harrelson, have very small roles and not a big enough role to grasp the character. Although the casting of the film was still good.This movie was definitely not what i expected and certainly a lot slower pace in which i hoped. The movie, however, was still pretty good. Nothing is revealed until the last 5 min of the movie and everything falls into place. Up until then it just seems like a pointless love story. Final thought seven pounds=seven Stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff0a9d6803af43039e8a302366b6a576",
            "input": "It does touch a few interesting points.. But! - It fails to show evidence of all the 'exclusive' studies shown. Who are the 'friends' and 'small groups of scientists' that gathered this data? - What's up with all the Al Gore biography going on there? Like how he liked playing with the cows on the ranch or that his kid got hit by a car.. too bad but.. what does that have to do with the ozone layer?I've seen MUCH better stuff, in much less time, on Discovery Channel.. I really don't understand why this has such a high score on IMDb. Unless you've been living under a rock, this 'documentary' shouldn't be any news to you... all this is old news... And all Al Gore is trying to do is get some popularity points. P.S. i'm not American so don't even try saying that i'm a bush fan :p",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7eded00a261741c79d0aeb71d82d3052",
            "input": "As with most of Eleanor Powell's films, this one plays out along the flimsiest of plots. For some reason -- oh it is explained! -- she's selected to transport a magnetic mine to Cuba. Good guys and bad guys compete for the mine and who is who gets confusing. But, as always, Powell's dancing is superb and worth the price of admission. And in this one Lahr plays his cowardly lion, evoking warm memories of that Technicolor film of 1939. A fringe benefit is hearing a young Frank, with that wonderful voice and skinny vulnerability that he abandoned for his wise-guy persona later on. In addition, the great drummer, Buddy Rich, has a wonderful time displaying his virtuosity. Watch particularly for his unique duet with Dorsey's trumpet man, Ziggy Elman. I say \"unique\" perhaps in ignorance, but I know of no other drum/trumpet sequence like this one on film or records. This film is fun. Even Skelton's goofy persona is relatively restrained. Powell shows again that she is the greatest film dancer ever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-beee81e15b614efca56459e67fad575e",
            "input": "Finally, the uncut version of \"Baby Face\" surfaces and from what source? The Library of Congress. The restored four minutes, snippets here and there, make for a much better film. We now know that Baby Face was pimped by her old man from the time she was at least fourteen years of age. Another reason d'tat for her behavior and cold, calculating exterior.Barbara Stanwyck is indeed amazing in the role of Lily Powers (notice the moniker), a part that called for just the right amount of sexuality coated with power, cunning, and revenge, yet tinged with virginal pretense when called for, a very difficult portrayal to make convincing. Barbara Stanwyck conveys the necessary nuances to show that though she sleeps her way to the top (literally), she still has good in her heart--note the way she treats those few who have been kind to her such as Chico (the marvelous actress Theresa Harris) and the old philosopher. And though she exploits her sexuality to make mush of men who are rich and powerful, those same men are attempting to exploit her for their carnal desires with no intention of permanent ties until they fall in love with her.Lily Powers fails to understand, at first, that emotions are difficult to ride, that it's easy to lose control. One possible result is death. Hitching a wagon to a star of course materialism can take one to a destination where nothing else exists but the ephemeral, and it's a cold lonely location.A word should be said about the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche whose will to power is stressed in \"Baby Face\" by the elderly philosopher who befriends Lilly when she is still turning tricks for her old man. \"Baby Face\" was released the same year Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany. Though it's highly unlikely that the semi-literate Hitler understood much about Nietzsche, he considered himself a Nietzschean to the nth degree and touted it along side his other rantings. \"Baby Face\" serves as an indictment of the popular interpretation of Nietzsche's will to power concept, especially in the final scenes.Although \"You've got the cutest little baby face.\" is apropos as a theme for \"Baby Face,\" an even more telling and applicable melody is W. C. Handy's \"St. Louis Blues\" played throughout the film, especially at times when the camera has to drift away from what would otherwise be sexually explicit scenes. \"St. Louis Blues\" is also used wisely toward the end as Lily begins to see beyond materialism to eternal values. Chico is singing a raw, salacious version of \"St. Louis Blues\" when Lily, now disagreeing with the lyrics, orders her to stop.The restored version of \"Baby Face\" makes the film more modern in its approach and attitude toward sex as power than many a new Hollywood release. By all means watch this gem from the distant past and enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dbbdc14650e496c8a4882c341a1d1c5",
            "input": "My one line summary should explain it all, but I'll have a go at it.From the get-go, this movie seemed like an overdone soap opera, and that's about all I can comment on. There were a few interesting scenes, such as the \"Big one\" that hit during the middle of the movie, but, wait, what's that? The earthquake *gasp*, wait a minute! That's Dante's Peak! Well, parts of it butchered and slapped in. I can't believe how poorly this movie was done, \"borrowing\" scenes from other, much better films. One wonders what director thought that viewers are dumb enough to believe large wooded mountain-esque backdrops exist in downtown LA, ala Dante's Peak.My advise, forget the Bond Wanna-be, Nash, in this film and go for the real thing (again, someone from Dante's Peak coincidentally.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54c06bb176604371a15272817b236a32",
            "input": "This 1996 movie was the first adaptation of Jane Eyre that I ever watched and when I did so I was appalled by it. So much of the novel had been left out and I considered William Hurt to be terribly miscast as Rochester. Since then I have watched all the other noteworthy adaptations of the novel, the three short versions of '44, '70 and '97 and the three mini series of '73, '83 and 2006, and I have noticed that there are worse adaptations and worse Rochesters.This is without doubt the most exquisite Jane Eyre adaptation as far as cinematography is concerned. Director Franco Zerifferelli revels in beautiful long shots of snow falling from a winter sky, of lonely Rochester standing on a rock, and of Jane looking out of the window - but he is less good at telling a story and bringing characters to life. In addition, his script merely scratches the surface of the novel by leaving out many important scenes. As a consequence the film does not show the depth and complexity of the relationship between Jane and Rochester, and sadly it does also not include the humorous side of their intercourse. There are a number of short conversations between Rochester and Jane, each of them beautifully staged, but the couple of sentences they exchange do not suffice to show the audience that they are drawn to each other. We know that they are supposed to fall in love, but we never see it actually happen. The scene in which Rochester wants to find out Jane's reaction to his dilemma by putting his case in hypothetical form before her after the wounded Mason has left the house is completely missing, and the farewell scene, the most important scene - the climax - of the novel is reduced to four sentences. Zerifferelli does not make the mistake other scriptwriters have made in substituting their own poor writing for Brontë's superb lines, neither are crucial scenes completely changed and rewritten, but he makes the less offensive but in the end similarly great mistake of simply leaving many important scenes out. What remains is just a glimpse of the novel, which does no justice to Charlotte Brontë's masterpiece.The cast is a mixed bag: While Fiona Shaw is an excellent Mrs Reed, Anna Paquin's young Jane is more an ill-mannered, pout Lolita than a lonely little girl, longing for love. The ever-reliable Joan Plowright makes a very likable, but far too shrewd Mrs Fairfaix, and one cannot help feeling that Billie Whitelaw is supposed to play the village witch instead of plain-looking, hard-working Grace Poole. Charlotte Gainsbourgh as the grown-up heroine, however, is physically a perfect choice for playing Jane Eyre. Looking every bit like 18, thin and frail, with irregular, strong features, she comes closest to my inner vision of Jane than any other actress in that role. And during the first 15 minutes of her screen time I was enchanted by her performance. Gainsbourgh manages well to let the audience guess at the inner fire and the strong will which are hidden behind the stoic mask. But unfortunately the script never allows her to expand the more passionate and lively side of Jane's character any further. As a result of leaving out so many scenes and shortening so much of the dialogues, Gainsbourgh's portrayal of Jane must necessarily remain incomplete and therefore ultimately unsatisfactory. This is a pity, as with a better script Charlotte Gainsbourgh might have been as good a Jane as Zelah Clarke in the '83 version.But while it is still obvious that Gainsbourgh is trying to play Jane, there is no trace whatsoever of Rochester in the character that William Hurt portrays. Hurt, who has proved himself to be a fine actor in many good movies, must have been aware that he was physically and type-wise so miscast that he did not even attempt at playing the Rochester of the novel. His Rochester, besides being blond and blue-eyed, is a soft-spoken, well-mannered nobleman, shy and quiet, slightly queer and eccentric, but basically good-natured and mild. He is so far from being irascible, moody and grim that lines referring to these traits of his character sound absolutely ridiculous. Additionally, during many moments of the movie, Hurt's facial expression leaves one wondering if he is fighting against acute attacks of the sleeping sickness. Particularly in the proposal scene he grimaces like a patient rallying from a general anaesthetic and is hardly able to keep his eyes open. If you compare his Rochester to the strong-willed and charming protagonist of the novel, simply bursting with energy and temperament, it is no wonder that many viewers are disappointed in Hurt's performance. Still, he offends me less than the Rochesters in the '70, '97 and 2006 versions and I would in general rank this Jane Eyre higher than these three other ones. Hurt obviously had the wits to recognise that he could not be the Rochester of the novel and therefore did not try to do so, whereas George C. Scott, Ciaràn Hinds and Toby Stephens thought they could, but failed miserably, and I'd rather watch a character other than Rochester than a Rochester who is badly played. And I'd rather watch a Jane Eyre movie which leaves out many lines of the novel but does not invent new ones than a version which uses modernised dialogues which sound as if they could be uttered by a today's couple in a Starbucks café. Of course this Jane Eyre is a failure, but at least it is an inoffensive one, which is more than one can say of the '97 and 2006 adaptations. I would therefore not desist anyone from watching this adaptation: You will not find Jane Eyre, but at least you will find a beautifully made movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c93a336f68ab49a28c17670513fe8bf5",
            "input": "The film had some likable aspects. Perhaps too many for my taste. It felt as though the writer/director was desperately trying to get us to feel the inner conflict of ALL of its characters. Not once, a few times...but all of the time. This is the job of television, not cinema. The location of the train station was well chosen and I enjoyed Sascha Horler's performance as the pregnant friend. I felt as though Justine Clarke's performance was wan. Her reactions to things felt forced, as though the director were trying to vocalise the themes of the film through her protagonist's expressions. I also can't believe that a director can make the wonderful Daniela Farinacci into an unbelievable presence. I cannot understand the choice of pop music slapped over entire sequences. This is a lazy device, especially where the pop music comes from no place diagetic to the film and/or where the lyrics of the song feel embarrassingly earnest. That said, there is a breezy quality about the film that evokes the Australian heat and local attitude with originality. It does create an atmosphere of heat and sunshine. Especially with the usage of wonderful animation sequences that rescue the film from complete mediocrity, infusing it with passion and hand-crafted charm. I am curious why the dialogue feels so overworked. \"Who knows if there's a god? Like some guy sitting there up in the sky telling us what to do\" or whatever the line was. Perhaps one of the more embarrassing moments was the friend returning home from cricket with a bunch of flowers to declare to his wife \"I'm giving up smoking.\" An anti-smoking commercial? A TAC ad with some tasteful animation? I had to leave the cinema at the 50 minute mark -- it was all too much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c66b656a639472fb3fabc7d9271b4e7",
            "input": "The beginning of this film is a little clunky and also confusing , but sit tight, because you are in for the ride of your life. The concept is compelling, with interesting devices utilized to tell the overall story. There are fine performances all around, with Phillip Seymour Hoffman's being the best of the cast-no surprise there. Ethan Hawke also deserves credit for a very strong performance as well. The Direction by Mr. Lumet is outstanding. The film has a Seventies feel in the respect that risks are taken in the telling of this story, but unlike the majority of trite films that populate the landscape today, this is a thriller that is sincerely based upon relationships rather than special effects or product plugs. You will be greatly rewarded for the time invested in this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d13c9c5932f49878acb1be6574e5454",
            "input": "Like many people here, I started out finding my patience being tried by this film. By the end, I actually shed a few tears.It seems to be in the nature of most old films to drag for 7/8th length and then catch fire right at the end. Older film-goers learned to bide their time patiently through the slow parts, calm in the knowledge that the big payoff is on the way. But that isn't quite accurate. You see, to earlier audiences, what are to us the \"slow parts\" were the main body of the story. They watched and found anecdotal and thematic interest there. Modern audiences, post-Spielberg, are in a constant state of waiting to be hit with a small climax every two minutes when they see older films. It's the inflation problem of modern movies. Well, that isn't going to happen. It is not necessary to apologize for these films; it is simply that you have to adjust your expectations and personal rhythm when you watch them. At this point, the difference between Avatar and The Informer is like the difference between Euripides and a traveling production of Rent. Think about it for a minute or two. Not to strain at the obvious, but Euripides still deserves a hearing.The \"exciting part\", for most modern viewers, begins with the IRA tribunal scene and escalates to the final couple of minutes, which, if you are at all on board or even paying attention by that time, will tear your heart out. It's not some high-tone universal abstract plea for forgiveness; it's a plea from one dimwit, and those who feel sorry for the big lummox, for a little mercy. It's that personal, and that embarrassingly naked an appeal. For after being mad at Gypo, irritated at him, thinking this is the dumbest character of all time, you finally find yourself won over by the scene of Gypo's erstwhile girlfriend pleading to another woman to talk her man into going easy him. The film may be sentimental, but the sentimentality is not cheap as some here have charged. There's a matter of life and death that plays out here, and as long as you take the proposition of one life to a customer seriously, it's sentimentality wrung out of the most serious stuff.8 of 10. And the fault for it not being 10 of 10 is my own and in some measure yours, if you are reading this. We have all asked for more, ever more, faster, ever faster until we cannot put ourselves in 1935 -- just yesterday, really -- as easily as we should be able.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0c24c1e24d843ec876efd53505a6be1",
            "input": "Lorna Green(Janine Reynaud)is a performance artist for wealthy intellectuals at a local club. She falls prey to her fantasies as the promise of romantic interludes turn into murder as she kills those who believe that sex is on the horizon. It's quite possible that, through a form of hypnotic suggestion, someone(..a possible task master pulling her strings like a puppet)is guiding Lorna into killing those she comes across in secluded places just when it appears that love-making is about to begin. After the murders within her fantasies are committed, Lorna awakens bewildered, often clueless as to if what she was privy to within her dreams ever took place in reality.If someone asked me how to describe this particular work from Franco, I'd say it's elegant & difficult. By now, you've probably read other user comments befuddled by what this film is about, since a large portion of it takes place within the surreal atmosphere of a dream. Franco mentioned in an interview that he was heavily influenced by Godard early in his career, as far as film-making style, and so deciding to abandon a clear narrative structure in favor of trying to create a whole different type of viewing experience. And, as you read from the reaction of the user comments here..some like this decision, others find the style labouring, dull, and bewildering. I'll be the first to admit that the film is over my head, but even Franco himself, when quizzed by critics who watched \"Succubus\", admitted that he didn't even understand the film and he directed it! Some might say that \"Succubus\" was merely a precursor to his more admired work, \"Venus in Furs\", considered his masterwork by Franco-faithful, because it also adopts the surreal, dreamlike structure where the protagonist doesn't truly know whether he/she is experiencing something real or imagined. In a sense, like the protagonist, we are experiencing the same type of confusion..certainly, \"Succubus\" is unconventional film-making where we aren't given the keys to what is exactly going on. And, a great deal of the elusive dialogue doesn't help matters. \"Succubus\" is also populated by beatnik types and \"poet-speak\", Corman's film, \"A Bucket of Blood\" poked fun at. My personal favorite scene teases at a possible lesbian interlude between Lorna and a woman she meets at a posh party..quite a bizarre fantasy sequence where mannequins are used rather unusually. Great locations and jazz score..I liked this film myself, although I can understand why it does receive a negative reaction. Loved that one scene at the posh party with Lorna, a wee bit drunk, writhing on the floor in a gorgeous evening gown as others attending the shindig(..equally wasted)rush her in an embrace of kisses.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b06eaf42f79a4840b1cc8ec3cdf002c6",
            "input": "Perhaps I couldn't find the DVD menu selection for PLOT: ON OFF. Clearly, the default is OFF. When the end credits began to roll, I couldn't believe that was it. Like our poor, but beautiful protagonist, I felt used, dirty, cheap....The characters were drawn in very broad strokes and the writer's disdain for wealthy Thatcherites was all to apparent. I consider myself a \"Roosevelt Democrat\", but would appreciate a bit more subtlety.Of course, the problem could be with me. I see that many others seem to find some meaning or message in this picture. Alas, not I. The only thing that kept me from giving this a \"1\" was the nice scenery, human and plant.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea41f481eebc44858ca10f28e7fdcbb3",
            "input": "A young American woman visits her Irish roots and fends off a druid witch who is out to possess her. Sounds intriguing but after an interesting start, I got lost and spent most of the time wondering where it was going. The movie seems to be dithering in two directions -- are we watching the travails of the Irish-American woman battling her alcohol problem or are we watching a straight off horror flick about an evil witch that returns from the past? The director can't seem to decide. The two doesn't seem to gel and in the end you get nowhere. This could be so much better done and the story seemed to drag towards the end. This was most boring and disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f539f91def44b0ab3e6855875b9820c",
            "input": "Cosimo (Luis Guzman) ends up in prison for car burglary and there he's given the plan for the perfect heist from a lifer in prison; so he has to get out of jail, fast. He tells his girlfriend Rosalind (Patricia Clarkson) to find a man who will do his time in prison for some money. But no one wants to do the time for Cosimo's crime and yet everybody seems to know a guy who will do that. Soon bad boxer Pero Mahalovic (Sam Rockwell) founds out the details of this so called \"perfect job\".First of all, I think this movie was very funny and from my point of view I would recommend it to everyone. This movie is remake of Italian comedy \"I Soliti Ignoti\". I didn't watch the Italian original so I cannot judge or compare those two movies. But \"Welcome to Collinwood\" is great comedy for itself, about four people trying to rob the money from the vault in one house. Everyone gave their part of brilliance from this movie cast. Really excellent movie for these actors: Sam Rockwell, William H. Macy (great), Isaiah Washington, Michael Jeter (great), Luis Guzmán, Patricia Clarkson, Jennifer Esposito and finally George Clooney gave their share in this project. Maybe to say that this movie is only comedy, isn't fair. This is more then that. Because of one difference. All of thieves in this movie have very small wishes when they are asked: what will they do with their money? It is mostly securing their future in very humble way. This fact goes beyond comedy into the soul of that criminals. And not only them but also cop Babitch, who is presented like corrupted one; so here directors Russo presents us fact that criminals and cop are the same. Actually all in Collinwood are; and not only in Collinwood, cause all people chase money, on legal or illegal way. I don't like all movies were audience eventually likes and cheers for thieves. But, this one is exception. You have to love them all. Riley with his little baby and wife in jail. Toto with his pants. Cosimo with his line: \"Your mother's a whore!\" and all others. They are just like characters in my favorite comic, Alan Ford. They all trying to make some money, but simply they are out of luck. But they all did one good deed: they gave money to Riley, so he can get his wife out of prison. They are all heroes in my eyes, cause lots of \"honest\" people wouldn't do that.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95e19e46be2a4563b240f50f38b1eb7c",
            "input": "**Warning! Mild Spoilers Ahead!**(Yes, I realize it's tough to spoil an historical documentary, but I do reveal some of the backstory and methods.)This is an exceptional documentary not just because of the remarkable footage, but also due to the story behind it. Because the Naudets did not set out to tell the story of 9/11, but rather that of a rookie firefighter, the men's emotions and the viewer's connection with them are more real and powerful than they would be in a standard retrospective. In a filmmaking sense, \"9/11\" is textbook. If the events were an actual script, they would be superb, as the characters are established, then thrown a curve to which they must react. This is all the more amazing considering the pain and emotion of the raw footage that the directors had to wade through to piece this story together. The first portion of the film provides a glimpse of life inside a fire station; specifically, how a rookie assimilates himself into a crew of veterans. That part alone is quite good, and had the documentary been allowed to run its intended course, it probably would have been solid. The brothers appear to realistically portray the process of becoming a NYC firefighter. Then of course, all hell breaks loose. The chaos following the WTC attacks is vividly seen, as various characters that we have gotten to know are thrust into terrifying situations. Seeing not only the attacks, but also the first-hand reactions is a very moving picture of extreme human emotion. The aftermath, in which firefighters are discovered to be lost and found, is human drama at its peak. Life and death hang in the balance. Unlike many movies, the viewer not only doesn't know who will live and die, but genuinely cares about them. The only negative thing I have to say about this is that the Robert DeNiro (whom I like) blurbs were uninformative, unnecessary, and didn't advance the story at all. They were probably added just to attract more television viewers.Bottom Line: The best documentary I've ever seen. Nonpareil portrayals of raw human emotion and drama. 9.5 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b867f635295243949703a47211f2af87",
            "input": "In Mexico this movie was aired only in PayTV. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's life, is a true example about a good German and specially, about a good man. The conversations between Tukur's character and the Nazi prosecutor are specially interesting. A true ideas' war: two different Germans, both with faith in there believes. Bonhoeffer was a very complex person: man, freedom fighter, boyfriend, churchman and a great intellectual; Ulrich Tukur is outstanding as Bonhoeffer. I recommended this film a lot, specially in this difficult times for the planet. In Mexico we don't know a lot about Pastor Bonhoeffer life and legacy, this is a great work for rescue a forgotten hero.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb61fd642ce94810be83d164884db124",
            "input": "OK, don't let my summary fool you. This movie SUCKS HARD. But the worst movie ever? This movie was terrible in ways people shouldn't have to rack their brains to describe. But it is in no way worse than Manos: the hands of fate, hobgobblins, horrors of spider island, or a small handful of movies. As a review the movie sucks, it's terrible. Don't see it with out MST or you may develop health problems. But there are worse movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-634e0e4157794e2382ce11fb9be4099d",
            "input": "First of all I am a butch, straight white male. But even with that handicap I love this movie. It's about real people. A real time and place. And of course New York City in the 80's. I had many gay friends growing up in New York in the eighties and the one thing about them i always admired was their courage to live their lives the way they wanted to live them. No matter what the consequences. That's courageous. You have to admire that. This is a great film, watch it and take in what it was like to be a flamboyant African American or Hispanic Gay man in the New York of the eighties. It's real life. Bottom line it's real life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1648b36cee4d465cb7e9eea565c13634",
            "input": "I saw this film at the Chicago Reeling film festival. To pick up on the previous reviewer's remarks, the claustrophobic feel and off colors of the film is I sense quite intentional and conveys the sense of limited space, drab architecture, overall drabness that constitutes the urban environment of most people in Eastern and Central Europe. A bit shabby housing project style is how I'd describe it, and this is how many people live on the outskirts of larger cities. I can't say that I'm familiar with Bucharest, Romania where the action unfolded, but I have visited and lived in Eastern Europe for six months. When I visited Russia as a student for a semester, my entire group had to drag their luggage seven stories up the staircase of a shabby student dorm building, just as the heroine does when moving in with a woman, because the elevators weren't working. But, I do concur with the reviewer, that the claustrophobia and muted colors, it's overdone, for there are, to be sure, beautiful historic buildings, parks, squares you can find in Bucharest or in any historic city center of Eastern Europe, and Bucharest's didn't get much of any footage in this film. For me watching this film conveys well the claustrophobia that I would feel during my half-year stay there, feeling trapped and limited. (It makes you see why someone would want to immigrate and find a better life, just as people if hope to escape from a United States urban ghetto.) Also, given the climate of homophobia, say, circa, US in the 1980s, the two young women who fall in love with one another are forced to keep their love a very private matter; hence, the focus on their interaction in the apartment.It's remarkable and commendable in my view that this queer themed film was even made in Romania, and I find the complaint of the previous reviewer about the poor film quality quite uninformed and patronizing. It's unlikely that the director and producer drummed up much government support and funding for their film, and they did the best they could with their likely limited resources. The actors were fairly good and believable; the dialog was overall well done, and I could identity with these women.The film offers an added twist to that of forbidden love between two young women, Kiki, an energetic, fun-loving free spirit with a dark, troubling secret (her admiration and love for an abusive, incestuous brother, Sandu) falls in love with Alexandra, a bright, bookish, idealistic young woman who moves to Bucharest to begin her college studies. Opposites attract, and their personalities seem to complement one another, though there is some tension between the ambitious, studious, intellectual Alexandra and Kiki, who seems to be attending college to please her parents. Keeping their love hidden from their parents seems manageable, though we don't get any sense of the tension it requires, nor do we ever see or meet any other students--hard to believe--and the tension keeping their love secret would have entailed. The chief threat to their love is Kiki's brother and her difficulty in trying to severe her relation to him. But Kiki's love for Alexandra seems to give her the strength she needs to finally severe this bond, or does it? That's what the suspense of the film focuses on as the narrative develops, and I won't say how it concludes.Ironically, Kiki's love \"sickness\" isn't love for another woman, but her illicit, incestuous love for her brother. Thus, loving a woman offers the potential cure to the sickness of loving a sibling. Though this feel of this film is stifling and claustrophobic, overly confined to interactions between Kiki and Alexandra, it was still engaging and moving to watch, so I'll give it a 7.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ead7c3caa774d12a6c3830885e9305f",
            "input": "(contains slight spoilers)It's interesting how Anthony Mann uses James Stewart here. Stewart is, of course, remembered by many as George Bailey from Frank Capra's \"It's a Wonderful Life\", so it's easy to find parallels between the two films. In \"It's a Wonderful Life\", Bailey gets to see the world as it would have been if he had never been born. In \"The Far Country\", Stewart's Jeff Webster, by not getting involved to help anyone else (except himself), gets to see essentially the same thing: A world in which he (for all practical matters) doesn't exist.By not getting involved (and by attempting not to care about anyone), Webster is forced to see those for whom he can't help but care get hurt, pushed around, and even killed while he stands by and does nothing. This reminds the viewer of George Bailey watching a world that has turned upside-down because he has also decided not to get involved by not ever having been born. Both movies end with the same image - a close-up of a ringing bell. Stewart, by turning around his philosophy of non-involvement, has, it would seem, earned his \"wings\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fd027331347419abe6efc84d32f47b9",
            "input": "I foolishly read the back of the DVD cover of this movie in Best Buy about a year ago, and said to myself, \"Seems funny, plus it has Michael Clarke Duncan, how can I lose!\" I proceeded to pay $15.99 plus tax for it. I took it over to a friends house and we both stood aghast at how poorly it was written and acted. Wooden performances abound. All the \"hilarious\" and \"outstanding\" performances promised never seemed to arrive. After 90 minutes I hung my head in shame, knowing that I could never get that 90 minutes or $15.99 back. I literally almost cried as well, because if that was what could be considered \"comedy\" I didn't want to believe in movies anymore. My friend and I constantly informed a friend of ours of the horror of this movie to the point that he needed to see it just to understand how bad it was. Over the holiday season this year I watched it with him because he didn't want to watch it alone. This was my next horrible mistake, because as I watched I just became angry. I began to yell at the movie, and I'm not one to talk to movies period. Everyone I know that has even glimpsed this movie has agreed its the worst they've ever seen. My sense of humor is sick and twisted and often offends my friends, but that could not save this movie even. The fact that this movie is not on the bottom 100 list on IMDb is astounding. The fact that its rating (at the time of this writing) is 3.6 is a crime against humanity.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34a45faeb486410e9d956c7b368fb145",
            "input": "In his brief 40 years on Earth, author Jack London managed to cram as much adventure and incident as would seem possible. This 90-minute film, purportedly a biography of the man's life but patently fictionalized, doesn't even scratch the surface, and remains a story very ripe for a modern-day retelling. Here, Michael O'Shea, in one of his first roles, portrays London, and his performance is both rugged and sympathetic. He is not the problem here. Nor is a young and very beautiful Susan Hayward, playing his future wife, Charmian, whose biography on London is the \"basis\" for this film. London's life has here been broken down into a series of episodes, which the film skips lightly through. So we have brief incidents with London as an oyster pirate, a sealer in the Bering Sea, a gold prospector in the Yukon and a correspondent during the Russo-Japanese War...colorful events, for sure, but hardly given anything like in-depth treatment. And Alfred Santell's direction (he also directed one of Susan's first films, \"Our Leading Citizen,\" in 1939) is lackadaisical at best. Making things rougher here is a very poor-quality DVD, with a crummy-looking print source and hissy sound. Perhaps the best thing about this movie rental, for me, was one of the DVD's extras: a catalog of all the Alpha Video films, featuring hundreds and hundreds of full-color movie posters. Let's just hope that these films are in better shape than \"Jack London\"!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45b2470702d24a339cfb651e390e9a6b",
            "input": "Let's face it-- if you rented a STDVD sequel of a forgotten 80's gem, and expected it to be better than the aforementioned, then you are an idiot. Wargames: The Dead Code joins the long running list of unnecessary sequels that the DVD market has filled so easily. Movies like this don't need spoilers, because YOU already know them.The \"plot\" for this \"film\", is as follows: Nerd meets girl; girl likes nerd; nerd likes girl; nerd gets accidentally involved with Top Secret Government computer; nerd and girl go to another country; nerd and girl end up being persecuted by Government suits in the other country; nerd and girl meet some important old guy that dies at key point in the \"film\"; nerd and girl are captured; the Top Secret Government computer gets crazy; nerd is hired to beat Top Secret Government Computer; nerd beats Top Secret Computer by using the same old Top Secret Computer from the first Wargames \"film\"; nerd saves the day; nerd gets laid. The end.The acting, script, effects, score, and cinematography are what you would expect-- B-grade. Some familiar faces are in here, and unless you are a mega fan of Colm Feore, then you should avoid this one. Granted, the movie won't make you insane enough to eat your own toes by seeing it, so if you like cheap looking STDVD sequels, then you are right at home.Sadly, Mathew Broderick was too involved with some \"masterpiece\", that he couldn't even do a five second cameo in this one. But can you blame him?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5eefd5c496744a7e9ca8d4db622e4043",
            "input": "This is definitely one of the weirder 70's movies out there, and it's most notable for kicking off a decade of Bigfoot hysteria. It is also notable for the little touches of insanity throughout the movie, especially when the dark, moody first half is replaced by a MUSICAL INTERLUDE of all things (as another user pointed out, one of the songs is dedicated to a character, Travis Crabtree, who paddles around in a canoe for a while, then... leaves, never to be seen again). Although it's painfully dated now, i's still a fun scary movie to show to kids, and anyone who enjoys either Bigfoot lore or 70's hillbilly culture is bound to get a kick out of this. My favorite part: a guy gets so scared that he jumps headfirst through a door (!?) and the narrator explains he went unconscious from \"shock.\" Uh, I'd say breaking a door with his head is more likely why he went unconscious, but whatever.4/10 stars, or 7/10 if you like bad Americana.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b1c651611e2429891621475906d2086",
            "input": "First of all, when people hear 'GUY RITCHIE', they immediately think of SNATCH. Yes, Snatch was a good movie, but the problem is that everyone associates Guy Ritchie to Snatch. They don't expect him to explore new frontiers. This movie REVOLVER is different than snatch; it's much darker and is very complex. The reason I gave a rating of 10 is because I've had to watch Revolver 3 times to understand everything. So this movie toys with your head. It's very cleverly written.This movie is different than Snatch. It was done wonderfully, the cinematography is beautiful, and you can recognize Guy Ritchie's personal touch (style of directing) in it.What won me over was the complexity of the protagonist and how we are left with more questions than answers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eabf03b126524e7fa6959971d67ef8bb",
            "input": "In the year 1985 (my birth year) Steven Spielberg directed an emotionally strong and unforgettable story of a young African-American girl Celie (Debut role for Whoopi Goldberg) whose life is followed through rough times. The story begins from the year 1909 when Celie is only 14 years old. She has given birth two children for her father. Celie has a younger sister Nettie with whom she is inseparable. A widower lays his eyes on Nettie but their father gives Celie to him. It is the beginning of an era of horrible abuse and constant controlling. Women are inferior of men and especially being an African-American woman their rights are less than a zero. Celie's story is a true survival story.\"The Color Purple\" is a master-piece and underestimated film of Spielberg. He should make more drama which \"The Color Purple\" and \"Schindler's List\" are good notion.The cast is amazing. Whoopi Goldberg is known better as a ravingly funny comedienne but the introducing role as Celie is a remarkable word that she really can pull of heavy drama. Danny Glover was surprisingly nasty \"Mister\". I have never seen him in a such an evil role. The talk-show icon Oprah Winfrey is brilliant as a strong-willed Sofia.Warning! Prepare to have a number of tissues with you when watching this film. You can really connect to the story of the strong sisterhood. Especially if you have as close relationship with your siblings like I have with my sister.Big applauds to Mr. Spielberg!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df353d2a5dbc4d7a9c8bed437b1dff6b",
            "input": "This film is fun, if your a person who likes a good campy feature film every now and then. By no means is this movie fine cinema, but if you dont take things too seriously, and can laugh at yourself once in a while, Elvira is a good frownbuster.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25dcca21d1304b8cb06130de6eee3c49",
            "input": "Although I recently put this on my 10 worst films list, I have to say it's probably no worse than Burt Reynolds in \"The Maddening\" or any of the \"Look Who's Talking\" sequels. Still, it's pretty nauseating, even with sexy Drew Barrymore playing something of a horror-movie answer to Holly Golightly, relocating from New York City to Los Angeles but finding out she's being stalked by a murderous look-alike. Poor Sally Kellerman, a quirky actress of great acclaim in the '70s, is reduced here to a paltry supporting role, and Barrymore's leading man George Newbern is the worst type of sitcom actor, always pausing for a laugh after every line. The picture is swill, but Drew's bloody shower scene boasts showmanship, and the identity of the psycho (although right out of a \"Scooby Doo\" episode) is interesting. But as for the finale...get real! Who had to clean up THAT mess? * from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53caec8c8114415da231ce59a586b154",
            "input": "I think this show is definitely the greatest show. Jessica Alba does such a great job in it. Michael Weatherly also does an awesome job, as well as the rest of the cast. The show is very intriguing and they have wonderful storylines and their stunts are amazing. It's like watching a 1-hour movie. It's definitely worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8e4d0d3339b44c09314cd089e5489ce",
            "input": "This movie was terrible. Throughout the whole movie, I was puzzled and did not see any point to it. I had to go to this site and read the review to finally understand what it was about. This movie is not worth watching at all. Not only is it sick and revolting but totally STUPID! Please don't watch unless you are one of those that likes to watch bad movies. If this movie questions Japanese society and their values and roles, than this is a country that i would not like to visit or bother to know. This is a totally sick movie!!!!!!!! I did not enjoy it because it made no sense. My boyfriend and I sat there waiting to see if it was a horror because that is what it was listed under. It was total disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-319a6650c1314c96939723ec1960c0e0",
            "input": "The question of whether or not one likes this film version of \"The Ghost Train\" invariably depends on one thing and one thing alone: your reaction to the performance of Arthur Askey.He tends to steal almost every scene he's in, and not always in a good way. Sometimes you wish he'd settle down or back off just a little, to allow the plot's many characters to feature and develop (which they do to some extent). But somehow everything keeps pointing back to Askey's Tommy Gander character.Personally I like the film, and even like Askey to an extent. I always seem to plonk it into the vcr at those odd hours of the early morning when I can't sleep and really can't find the energy to watch anything else. There is something about watching old b/w movies in the quiet dark of pre-dawn that I find appealing....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12bbcc6d0b46450eb7d8b9195de4e4f8",
            "input": "The first collaboration between Schoedsack & Cooper is a compelling documentary on the migration of the Bakhtiari tribe of Persia. Twice a year, more than 50,000 people and half a million animals cross rivers and mountains to get to pasture. You'll feel like a pampered weakling after watching these people herd their animals through ice cold water and walk barefoot through the snow to cross the mountains while trying to get their animals to walk along steep and narrow mountain paths.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6cfc0ebd19546a68bcc38a53476bada",
            "input": "A bad rip-off attempt on \"Seven\", complete with sub-second-grade acting, awful camera work, half-baked story and strong aftertaste of lame propaganda. Yeah, them \"sex offenders\", they live next door and you're gonna get raped, really.No surprises from the vice-terminatrix woman, she acts as always -- as convincingly as a piece of wood. Richard Gere keeps on sliding lower and lower -- and is about as low here as a late Steven Seagal.The singer woman with the crazy eyes is best when she's dead in bed; and even the wolf was sub-par (although she was the best performer in the movie) -- maybe they fed her before the shots, or something.Unlike \"Seven\", which had a (made up, but interesting) story, to which one could relate more or less regardless of the country, this movie seems to focus on a US-only obsession. If one doesn't care much about \"sex offenders\" -- and the statistics are that lack of exercise and bad diet cause more pain, suffering and death -- there is little reason to see it, or to be afraid.There are some body part fetishes and some snuff, but the gore is less then mediocre, and fails both as artistic device (because it is pointless) and as gore, because it is not gory enough.Don't waste time on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-484eaaa6c4684b3f90a9d7ca88089743",
            "input": "I think that this film was one of Kurt Russels good movies. Kurt russel is my favorite actor so I think that he is a good actor in any role he plays. But this movie had a lot of action in it and I know that it should have more then a 5.6 out of 10 on the meter but many people did not like this movie. Oh well I thought it was good so I think that every one should see this movie. If you see this movie and like it I think that you should see Back Draft also with Kurt Russel. I give Soldier *** 1/2 out of *****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fc5c89755af4003957877c1aff53772",
            "input": "I have only had the luxury of seeing this movie once when I was rather young so much of the movie is blurred in trying to remember it. However, I can say it was not as funny as a movie called killer tomatoes should have been and the most memorable things from this movie are the song and the scene with the elderly couple talking about poor Timmy. Other than that the movie is really just scenes of little tomatoes and big tomatoes rolling around and people acting scared and overacting as people should do in a movie of this type. However, just having a very silly premise and a catchy theme song do not a good comedy make. Granted this movie is supposed to be a B movie, nothing to be taken seriously, however, you should still make jokes that are funny and not try to extend a mildly amusing premise into a full fledged movie. Perhaps a short would have been fine as the trailer showing the elderly couple mentioned above and a man desperately trying to gun down a larger tomato was actually pretty good. The trailer itself looked like a mock trailer, but no they indeed made a full movie, and a rather weak one at that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fbde73e61b2740e996e5b4ff5dbddcd1",
            "input": "Like so many media experiments, this amateurish effort contains seeds of a very interesting social commentary. In the 5+ years since it was released, the premise has been made less outrageous by real world events in software development, and I found it less boring than the previous commentator for that reason, I imagine... The director clearly is a fan of Hitchcock, and it's too bad that the film was not better executed, but in fact, it is nearly a parody of pulp fiction, including the soundtrack screeching at us when we are supposed to pay attention. One can almost see the exclamation points and capital letters on a yellowing page.I have to admit I found it rather entertaining for all these reasons and more. Sometimes the slick has less to offer us, and I would recommend it to anyone interested in deconstructing it for education purposes. Oh yes--and even though the seams showed and it creaked a lot, my heart rate went up, and I was reluctant to get up and take a break.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a95681d40914518a33a4141a52dd628",
            "input": "Pakeezah is in my mind the greatest achievement of Indian cinema. The film is visually overwhelming but also emotionally breathtaking. The music, the songs, the sets, the costumes, the cinematography, in fact every creative element is worthy of superlatives.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18e571f46cea4b0b856aff62379e5955",
            "input": "One of my best films ever, maybe because i was well into the punk scene in the late 70s and went to many of hazels concerts, but the film was a good story line and very good acting by hazel and a up and coming Phil Daniels not sure about his latest project Eastenders !! excellent performance by lots of unknown actors who if you keep your eyes peeled will see them in many of the UK soaps today exp: Carver out of the Bill, the more i watch it the more of them i spot, well if you have not seen it yet have a night in with the video, don't forget to dig out the safety pin for your nose and heavy black eye makeup and shave your head Mochanian style....Enjoy",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4702287412a4404fb02cb68e7d4cc610",
            "input": "I'm sure that the folks on the Texas/Louisiana border must have had a a good laugh or two when Paramount's B picture unit inflicted this one on the war time public. Very simply the area along the Sabine River where the film opens is cotton country just like the rest of the Deep South or at least the Deep South was post Civl War. No big cattle empires there, they're much farther west in Texas, farther than Richard Dix and Preston Foster could ride to set up their empire.The film begins with the two of them partners in a riverboat and when Leo Carrillo tries a theft of their services by not paying them for hauling his cattle, they keep the cattle. And that's the beginning of the big Ponderosa like ranch they start.Along the way Foster marries Dix's sister played by Frances Gifford and feuds with his much smaller neighbors. They also have some further run ins with Leo Carrillo.Anyway, us easterners who like westerns usually don't bother with geographical trifles and it's still a good western from the production mill of Harry Sherman who produced all those Hopalong Cassidy westerns for Paramount. The climax is a blazing, and I mean that literally, gun battle that should have maybe been used on an A production.But I wouldn't have any but western fans look at it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-995026fcaf084d6baf2ce751dfbede2d",
            "input": "Effort aside (This isn't a review about good intentions, its about the final product), this film is poorly written, overacted, and poorly directed. The story obviously had potential, but that story is nowhere present in this film.Clara Barton was a human being. She had passions, desires, love, pain, embarrassment, weakness, and self doubt just like the rest of us. You would never know that from this film of the lead actress's performance. In fact apply that to every character in the film, but in Barton's case: Every sentence is a speech. An epic over the top speech as though from an inhuman robot. In fact the only scene that plays well in one in the board meeting, and I realized thats because she's making a speech! Every idea she has is unbelievable in its context and she comes up with ideas that sound like they take a lifetime of soul searching right on the spot. For example, when she sees a wounded man, she'll start pontificating about the needs of the battlefield and to protect soldiers and putting up white flags, etc. As played in the film, there's no WAY she could come up with such a detailed well thought out idea in seconds.IN conclusion, this film robs Clara Barton of her struggles. It robs her of her humanity, and it inherently cheapens all she did because the script is written in clichés. The writer doesn't know Clara Barton, and seems to have based his script on an encyclopedia Britannica article. (yes they had those back then) But hey, nice Technicolor! (who cares)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4f52b6f144b42e485d991abb93df1be",
            "input": "This was one film i wanted to watch always when it released The promos were eye catching and Govinda in a negative role was a surpriseBut the film isn't that goodIt has lot of flawsThe start is good and till the murder everything goes well but the film falls flat when the romance track starts between Govinda and Karisma and the songs that followThen the twist about Govinda and Tabu being in love leaves more doubts and flaws and then How come Govinda turns into a rich criminal from a poor villager?The last flashback too is prolonged and also the entire clash between Govinda-Karisma and TabuN Chandra disappoints Music is okay, Bahot Khoobsurat stands outGovinda tries a negative role and does very well in it though he overdoes it too much at times Karisma is good but irritates at times with her cries Tabu is okay Nirmal Pandey still doesn't know the difference between loud screaming and acting rest are okay",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e9fe39c0d2d47dcb56bce5bd6a8843b",
            "input": "THHE remake was a superior movie remake in every way. Most remakes end up being total garbage but under the very talented direction of Alexandre Aja became one of the best ever made in terms of remakes and also as far as the mutant inbreed human sub-genre of horror is concerned. In steps part 2 directed by another individual Martin Weisz and written by the father and son combo of Jonathan and Wes \"I cannot make a good horror movie to save my life anymore\" Craven and if this is any indication of Weisz directing skills and young Craven's writing skills we are all in for a painful future as THHE 2 not only fails to be as good as the first but also fails to entertain on ANY level.We start off with a fairly graphic mutant baby birth which though is rather cool will not prepare you for the utter garbage that is to come, only hint to what could have been in this film. We then get to see a crew of scientists who all to briefly are introduced and dispatched by our radiated rejects. In steps our main cast of army reservist to save the day, this is where the major problems begin.From very sub par acting (yes even for this kind of movie) to the horrible characters to the lack of true carnage for most of its running time THHE 2 becomes a labor to watch as a lot of nothing happens as idiotic soldiers make mistake after mistake only to meet there demise not by the mutants but themselves. Think the Marines in Aliens only the exact opposite and you have the idea of how well these soldiers are trained. This is the true shame of the film as most of the Hills occupants do not get the kills you would like to see, like in the first film, in fact if this did not have THHE 2 attachment in the beginning and the brief overview in the beginning tying this loosely to the first this could have nearly been a Sci-Fi Channel original.The Mutant Mountainbillies as well are not as amusing this time around in fact in a lot of way they are far inferior to our prior batch as they all come off as being rather under designed and uninteresting. Also the one that took the cake was the Sloth-like Mutant (you know Sloth from the Goonies) who helps them out in the 3rd act. I was waiting for him to ask for a Baby Ruth or start going on about Rocky Road Ice Cream. Truly disappointing and shameful is the only way to describe most of the goings on here.The gore is in the film but not nearly as visceral as the original in fact it seemed toned down for the most part as other than the mutant baby birth scene there really isn't anything that stood out like in the first. Another major strike against this movie. So what did work here, the answer is nothing at all. This felt like a sequel designed specifically to make money off the success of the first and not to make an actually \"good\" film.I can go on about the crappy Drill SGT., the radio man that has a speech impediment (that's right, he is the kind of guy I want radioing in for help in a real crisis) or the pacifist fighter that resembles the exact same character mold as our \"hero\" in the first film but I believe you get the point. This movie is not even in the same league or even the same planet as the first. It should have been given another title and been added to the Saturday Night Line up on The Sci-Fi Channel. A true shame as a solid sequel could have been made but alas it looks like another horror movie that drops the ball on nearly every level and will get one of my lowest scores as I give THHE 2 the same score as its part: 2/10 Dreadful: Words cannot describe how bad this movie is a total polar opposite of its predecessor in every way, uninspired and down-right unnecessary. Next time guys if your going to make a sequel this bad...don't even bother. Please don't go support this garbage at the theaters, save your money and thank me later!!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b7fe0b45a6c49dfacf632412488aeae",
            "input": "how can a director that makes such great films as poltergeist and the texas chainsaw massacre make such rubbish as this? i got this film off a friend and he didnt want it back its so bad. how this can be classed as horror i will never know.2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e19a2291a05435dbfe0b49e5162c13c",
            "input": "Stephen King movies are a funny thing with me. I either really love them or I loathe them. Some of the fancier productions (such as Desperation and Storm of the Century) I didn't enjoy. Some of the smaller ones, I really loved. Sleepwalkers is one that I really do enjoy and watch it regularly.The story revolves around Charles Brady and his mother Mary. They are Sleepwalkers, shape shifting creatures who although human like in appearance shift into a feline like creature. They are immune to the scratch of cats and whenever they move to a new town, lay out traps to catch and kill the animals. When they move to their latest town, they need to seek out a virgin and when Charles finds one, he actually falls for her,but his mother needs to feed from her to keep up her strength. The story revolves around what will happen with the girl. Will Charles spare her or use her to save his mother.Although this story has overtones of incest which some may find unappealing it does actually play a part in the story and is therefore not just plonked in the movie for scandal's sake. Like most Stephen King stories it's based in a small town with lots of interesting characters. The acting isn't the best, nor are the special effects, however, somehow, the whole thing tends to 'gel' and is very watchable and enjoyable adaption.For UK readers: This production has most recently been shown on BBC1, Sci-Fi and Sky Thriller/Horror channels.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54b98147e88443abb9188b82f1c79f20",
            "input": "I love Jane Austen's stories. I've only read two of them (P&P and S&S), but after having seen this adaption, I'm reaching for \"Persuasion\" from my bookcase just to make sense out of the story, and also, because I refusing to believe Jane Austen could have written such nonsense. For me, I thought that if you base a film on a Jane Austen novel, you can't really go wrong. It will turn out great pretty much by default. I was wrong.First of all, where are the characters that you sympathise with and like? You have to have at least one likable character to get the audience to invest their emotions in them, and this did not deliver. Sure, I wanted Anne and Wentworth to get together, but only because that's what you know the purpose of the story is, them getting together. Instead, I had to resist urges to throw my teacup at the TV and to continue watching it to the end.Anne was utterly annoying throughout, and in the end, I really have no idea why Wentworth was so smitten by her, as there seemed to be nothing there for him to be attracted to. She was meek, bland, dull, socially inadequate and came across like a sheep following everyone else's instructions rather than having a mind of her own. This can still work for a lead character, if you do it well. This wasn't done well.The other characters were just displaying various degrees of narcissism, of which Mary was the worst, with a full-blown narcissistic personality disorder. Where Mrs. Bennet in P&P had similar flaws, she was still endearing, whereas Mary was more of a freak-show. More loathsome than funny.Wentworth was very handsome and seemed like a decent kind of guy. For the most part of the story, I was just wondering what kind of person he was and why he's in love with Anne, as surely, he's the kind of guy who would want a person who is a little bit more... alive? Acting-wise, not too much to say, as I reacted more to the characters being portrayed rather than how good/bad the people acting were. Anthony Head was excellent, but as soon as I saw he was in it, I expected no less.Also found the story very confusing. It wasn't until the end of the movie where it seemed as if Elizabeth was not Anne's stepmother, but in fact a sister (I'm still not 100% on that). The whole Anne/Wentworth back story was also a bit fuzzy. They had been together but then broke up and they're both bitter about it? How come? I was wondering this for quite some time, and the explanation seemed to be she dumped him because she was persuaded to do so by someone? But it was said in a kind of \"by the by\" way that it was almost missed, as if it was somehow unimportant. How can it be unimportant when it's the very core of the story?? There was also a lot of name-dropping, but no real feel for who the characters were. This Louisa person for instance, who was she? A friend? Family? What? It wasn't made very clear who the different characters are and their relationship with one another. Lady Russell was there a lot, but why? Mrs. Croft and Wentworth were brother and sister, which felt very unrealistic as Mrs. Croft looked old enough to be his mother.The final kiss, yes it was a bit strange them kissing in the street, but I didn't really think about it, because I was too busy yelling \"GET ON WITH IT ALREADY!!\" at the TV, because Anne's lips trembled and trembled and trembled for what felt like ages before they actually met Wentworth's. Have SOME hesitation there, but only for a couple of seconds or so, not half a minute.Then there's the issue of camera work. As a regular movie watcher, you don't pay attention to angles and such unless you decide to look out for it. I didn't decide to do so here, but I still noticed them. To me, that means the filmmakers are not doing a good job. A lot of conversations were with extreme facial closeups, something that should only be used when there's a really important point to be made. In this adaption, it was over-used and therefore lacked meaning. The hand-held feeling on occasion also didn't really work in a period drama. The camera work in the running scene in the end also felt too contemporary. (Not to mention the running itself.) This was the only Austen adaption I caught in ITV's Austen season. Makes me wonder if it's worth watching \"Northanger Abbey\" and \"Mansfield Park\" or if I should just read the books and leave it at that. I'm sad to say, this is a Jane Austen adaption I did not enjoy. Maybe I'll watch the 1995 version instead. The BBC are renowned for having done beautiful Austen adaptations before, after all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-718b71427b5e4814be53a2df3d3f8eff",
            "input": "i should qualify that title, now that i think about it. Checkout is not entirely worthless. i've had the opportunity to see it twice, and on the second time i did get a great laugh at the movie's expense. so i guess it's worth something for that. and also it's worthwhile for the excruciating pain it caused me on my first viewing. as another reviewer pointed out, this film is hackneyed in every sense of the word. not a single original thought went into this movie (which makes the comment below about the originality of the premise entirely baffling to me). the film is nothing but a long line of cliches which are strung together and paraded around as a movie. it is definitely not the next Clerks, it is definitely not original, and it is absolutely not \"good, clean fun.\" the film is absolute agony to the uninitiated (after seeing it a first time, the second time can be quite funny, in an insulting sort of way). as i looked around the theater, it was obvious that nearly everyone, barring perhaps the elderly, were completely bored or pained by this movie. during some of the particularly emotional scenes, like where Nick chews out his mother, the audience was actually cringing because it was so poorly done. i even heard someone *groan* in the theater, something i had heretofore never witnessed. i don't care where you have the chance to see this movie, be it at a film festival, or in a indie theater, or wherever. do yourself a favor, skip this movie with a vengeance. unless you're like me and just can't resist the opportunity to see what may truly be the worst movie ever made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14e2c2ba23894d998a9964c5b6236aa0",
            "input": "At the height of the 'Celebrity Big Brother' racism row in 2007 ( involving Shilpa Shetty and the late Jade Goody ), I condemned on an internet forum those 'C.B.B.' fans who praised the show, after years of bashing 'racist' '70's sitcoms such as 'Curry & Chips' & 'Love Thy Neighbour'. I thought they were being hypocritical, and said so. 'It Ain't Half Hot Mum' was then thrown into the argument, with some pointing out it had starred an English actor blacked-up. Well, yes, but Michael Bates had lived in India as a boy, and spoke Urdu fluently. The show's detractors overlook the reality he brought to his performance as bearer 'Rangi Ram'. The noted Indian character actor, Renu Setna, said in a 1995 documentary 'Perry & Croft: The Sitcoms' that he was upset when he heard Bates had landed the role, but added: \"No Indian actor could have played that role as well as Bates.\". Indeed.'Mum' was Perry and Croft's companion show to 'Dad's Army'; also set in wartime, the sedate English town of Walmington-On-Sea had been replaced by the hot, steamy jungles of India, in particularly a place called Deolali, where an army concert party puts on shows for the troops, among them Bombadier Solomons ( George Layton, his first sitcom role since 'Doctor In Charge' ), camp Gunner 'Gloria' Beaumont ( Melvyn Hayes ), diminutive Gunner 'Lofty' Sugden, 'Lah de-dah' Gunner Graham ( John Clegg ), and Gunner Parkins ( the late Christopher Mitchell ). Presiding over this gang of misfits was the bellicose Sergeant-Major Williams ( the brilliant Windsor Davies ), who regarded them all as 'poofs'. His frustration at not being able to lead his men up the jungle to engage the enemy in combat made him bitter and bullying ( though he was nice to Parkins, whom he thought was his illegitimate son! ). Then there was ever-so English Colonel Reynolds ( Donald Hewlett ) and dimwitted Captain Ashwood ( Michael Knowles ). Rangi was like a wise old sage, beginning each show by talking to the camera and closing them by quoting obscure Hindu proverbs. He loved being bearer so much he came to regard himself as practically British. His friends were the tea-making Char Wallah ( the late Dino Shafeek, who went on to 'Mind Your Language' ) and the rope pulling Punka Wallah ( Babar Bhatti ). So real Indians featured in the show - another point its detractors ignore. Shafeek also provided what was described on the credits as 'vocal interruptions' ( similar to the '40's songs used as incidental music on 'Dad's Army' ). Each edition closed with him warbling 'Land Of Hope & Glory' only to be silenced by a 'Shut Up!' from Williams. The excellent opening theme was penned by Jimmy Perry and Derek Taverner.Though never quite equalling 'Dad's Army' in the public's affections, 'Mum' nevertheless was popular enough to run for a total of eight seasons. In 1975, Davies and Estelle topped the charts with a cover version of that old chestnut 'Whispering Grass'. They then recorded an entire album of old chestnuts, entitled ( what else? ) 'Sing Lofty!'.The show hit crisis point three years later when Bates died of cancer. Rather than recast the role of 'Rangi', the writers just let him be quietly forgotten. When George Layton left, the character of 'Gloria' took his place as 'Bombadier', providing another source of comedy.The last edition in 1981 saw the soldiers leave India by boat for Blighty, the Char Wallah watching them go with great sadness ( as did viewers ).Repeats have been few and far between ( mainly on U.K. Gold ) all because of its so-called 'dodgy' reputation. This is strange. For one thing, the show was not specifically about racism. If a white man blacked-up is so wrong, why does David Lean's 1984 film 'A Passage to India' still get shown on television? ( it featured Alec Guinness as an Indian, and won two Oscars! ). It was derived from Jimmy Perry's own experiences. Some characters were based on real people ( the Sergeant-Major really did refer to his men as 'poofs' ). I take the view that if you are going to put history on television, get it right. Sanitizing the past, no matter how unsavoury it might seem to modern audiences, is fundamentally dishonest. 'Mum' was both funny and truthful, and viewers saw this. Thank heavens for D.V.D.'s I say. Time to stop this review. As Williams would say: \"I'll have no gossiping in this jungle!\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ea08040b9d0408dafee7172e58b2458",
            "input": "This movie was so predictable. Its a complete rip off of those, \"I was abused by daddy I'm gonna kill women\" movies. Stupid scenes, bad acting, unoriginal storyline, really low budget piece of crap film.Don't waste your time people. Trust me.My rating: 0/5.0",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a785cb7b6a54a40b1fbc125689fdeea",
            "input": "The past creeps up on a rehab-addict when he reconnects with his ill brother and a former girlfriend after what he hopes was his last stint in detox. \"Life's dramas\", presented here in the most simplistic way imaginable (not even the writing has any bite or wit). The cast is made up of attractive looking actors smiling glumly at one another, and the music and photography are lugubrious (a couple of the visual effects are laughable, indie-cliché touches that reek of a puny budget). Although written and directed by a man, this was produced by a woman, and I'm not sure but I think this may be a distinct reason why this picture about two men, estranged brothers growing closer, never quite gels, never feels natural or seems lived in. It's an attempt to get inside a male relationship, but the careful, sterile presentation is a cheat. No one's heart is in this, living, breathing, or bleeding this material. \"The Perfect Son\" is quickly diffused by too many cooks in the kitchen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b7f86912313412ca1ac7247f9bc54dc",
            "input": "I almost didn't rent this because of all the bad comments but did anyways.I thought it was similar to darkness falls which i also liked. The only part i hated about the tooth ferry was the 2 red neck brothers at the gas station.They were funny and the dialog made me laugh but this was not a comedy. It ruined the movie a bit for me because it was unnecessary.The rest of the movie was the way a horror or suspense film should be. The make-up was good and I have seen way worse movies then this one. It was a simple story with believable acting.It's not the scariest or goriest movie, but I wasn't ticked off or wanting a refund after watching it. On the DVD there was previews of other movies that all look good and i'm gonna check them out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee0812a7f0714c8abba095ce4d5fb1ad",
            "input": "This is a movie about how men think women think about love. No woman describes a one-night sexual encounter and declares it a love story.Of the ten monologues I felt only three really had any kind of truth ring through them. I kept waiting for the film to get better, and it did a bit, but never better enough.This is an interesting concept, and I kept wanting it to be good, but it never succeeded. Maybe if they actually WERE love stories it would have worked.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c834f4fe4c6459cb45d87711a8fc173",
            "input": "College student Alex Gardner (Nicholas Celozzi) is plagued by nightmares of a cellar-dwelling ghoul at Alcatraz. He dreams of cutting off his own hand, spitting up a worm, a ghoul ripping open his chest and being roasted over an open fire. After his friends see him levitating \"6 feet\" over his bed, a helpful, occult-obsessed teacher (Donna Denton) suggests that they sneak into Alcatraz to face his fears. Of course they go in the middle of the night when no one is around to help when things get out of hand!The group become stranded, Alex's brother Richard (Tom Reilly) becomes possessed and starts killing everyone. Toni Basil of \"Mickey\" fame shows up as the helpful ghost of Sammy Mitchell, lead singer of the group \"Bodybag\". She teaches Alex how to levitate out of his body and does a rock music dance intercut with repeat nightmare footage to pad out the running time. All of the victims show up as wisecracking ghosts a la the Griffin Dunne character in AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON. The script is full of plot holes, cheesy dialogue and lame attempts at comedy. Good FX work and cool opening credits (both by Ernest D. Farino) are the only things gaining any merit. Basil and Devo (\"Whip It\") do some songs on the soundtrack.Score: 2 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4d79057465d448c9fd4551ac8544025",
            "input": "I just saw this movie, and I have to say that it was a big waste of time. The girl who played Eva (Ellen Fjaestad) can't act at all. She read her lines very un-naturally, and she had a very un-natural facial expression through the entire movie. Rosanna Munter who played Petra on the other hand, is a natural. She played her part with great perfection.SPOILERS! The story was simple - we've seen it many, many times before. She breaks up, he finds another, she get jealous, he breaks up with the other girl and they end up back together in the end. There were no surprises at all, one knew that Eva would break up, and that Adam would \"hook up\" with Petra. The only thing that nobody saw coming was that Petra told Adam to go after Eva at the party. She became all serious, which is a side of Petra the viewers hadn't seen earlier in the movie, and told him to win Eva's heart back, which was really cute.Besides Rosanna Munter, there isn't a single actor who gives a memorable performance.This is a mediocre movie with mediocre actors, so I don't recommend it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64abff2680fd42beab0e517967bb78a8",
            "input": "I find it so amazing that even after all these years, we are STILL talking about this movie! Obviously this movie wasn't THAT bad or else people wouldn't even BOTHER to talk about it. I personally enjoyed this film immensly, and still do! I guess this film isn't for everyone, but it certainly did touch the hearts of many. As for those that think that this film is \"overrated\" or \"over-hyped\"...well, we only have the movie-going public to thank for that! lol* You see, it's not CRITICS/article writers that make a film \"HUGE\" or a \"HIT\" with the general movie-going public. PEOPLE make the film a huge success. With Titanic, everyone was in awe. Let's face it, a film like this had never been made before. At least not with the type of special effects needed to really capture the essence of the ship actually sinking. This film is so accurate that even James Cameron timed the actual sinking of the ship in the film with the REAL sinking that fateful day in April 1912. Even the silverware for goodness sakes matched! Give this movie a break you guys! The critics thought this movie would sink BIG time! When this movie actually came out and people started hearing by WORD OF MOUTH (which is the BEST form of advertisement mind you) that this was a good/decent/movie worth seeing, then everyone started flocking to the theaters in droves to see this movie...not once, not twice, but maybe 3 times and more! So, I really wouldn't say that this movie was \"overhyped\"...at least not like the buildup for the MATRIX reloaded or the HULK is being \"overhyped\". ha! Critics didn't even think that Titanic would make enough money to cover Cameron's gigantic film budget that it took to make this mammoth of a film. However, the films money took care of that 200 million budget and MUCH more! Personally, I LOVE this film. However, this film might not be for everyone. DOn't say that this film sucks just because of romance though! THat is the most sexist thing I've ever heard! Disliking a movie just because it has romance in it! The story was sweet. The dialogue could have been better, but let's face it...the REAL star of the movie wasn't Leo or Kate...it was that GIGANTIC Ship! I think all of the actors including DiCaprio and Winslet did a fine job. It's not thier best work (I've seen much BETTER work from both of them) but it wasn't the WORST I've seen on screen before. Give them a break!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c6fdc6c79cb40c2842e7dcca3769f4e",
            "input": "I had never heard of Larry Fessenden before but judging by this effort into writing and directing, he should keep his day job as a journeyman actor. Like many others on here, I don't know how to categorize this film, it wasn't scary or spooky so can't be called a horror, the plot was so wafer thin it can't be a drama, there was no suspense so it can't be a thriller, its just a bad film that you should only see if you were a fan of the Blair witch project. People who liked this film used words, like \"ambiguity\" and complex and subtle but they were reading into something that wasn't there. Like the Blair witch, people got scared because people assumed they should be scared and bought into some guff that it was terrifying. This movie actually started off well with the family \"meeting\" the locals after hitting a deer. It looked like being a modern day deliverance but then for the next 45 minutes, (well over half the film), nothing happened, the family potted about their holiday home which was all very nice and dandy but not the slightest bit entertaining. It was obvious the locals would be involved in some way at some stage but Essendon clearly has no idea how to build suspense in a movie. Finally, when something does happen, its not even clear how the father was shot, how he dies, (the nurse said his liver was only grazed), and all the time this wendigo spirit apparently tracks down the apparent shooter in a very clumsy way with 3rd grade special effects. The film is called Wendigo but no attempt is made to explain it in any clear way, the film ends all muddled and leaves you very unsatisfied, i would have bailed out with 15 minutes to go but I wanted to see if this movie could redeem itself. It didn't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2917e6b7ad244ab4952f54e6f99a6220",
            "input": "It seemed as though the year 1984 was anything but the Orwellian nightmare it was calculated to be with George Orwell's science fiction novel!! 1984 turned out to be one of the happiest times in American history!! The upsurge in the economy, and a reemergence in basic American values, cultivated an idealistic aura of resumed innocence which was viewed by the American people with a very auspicious disposition!! There have been many ersatz renditions of classic movies in the past, but, the originals are almost always considered superior!! \"Purple Rain\" is such a movie in this category!! Made in 1984, \"Purple Rain\" provided a doggerel of eighties, happy-go-lucky quality music, which they incorporated into the making of this excellent film!! Certain artifacts indicative of the eighties are indeed classics!! Screwball comedies, neon accented clothing, and of course, the music!! Eighties music is considered by experts to be the best decade for music in American history!! Set in Minneapolis, \"Purple Rain\" accommodated the use of naive entertainment with the changing times of the city. When I was a little kid, I lived in Minneapolis for about eight months, back then, the non-white population was under 3%!! By 1984, African Americans had made some in roads into Minneapolis, and, thus, they established a firmly embedded culture of their own as well!! The movie \"Purple Rain\" evokes an eighties style clothing, and music ensemble, which effortlessly captivated the movie audience!! I loved the music to \"Purple Rain\", and, the innovative approach this film takes to confrontational success, is indeed, brilliant!! See this movie if you have not seen it already!! Prince became an eighties icon with this masterpiece!! For a short time, he dated Kim Bassinger, he must be doing something right!! \"Purple Rain\" put Prince on the map!! This film gets my emphatically assertive verdict of THUMBS UP!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-561e1bb986c24723880f609cf3f1b8fb",
            "input": "I wasted my time and gave this show a chance. This has to be one of the worst new shows. If they gave an award to shows that suck THIS one should sweep the category. The acting is poor and the story line is contrived. Now Dinosaurs was a bit strange but at least it was entertaining. That show lasted three seasons and was finally scraped. This new show, based on an insurance companies commercials, is not funny and really has nothing going for it. Possibly the original commercials and the amount of times they were, and still are, repeated is what is wrong with this show. It just came to TV and already we are tired of seeing the \"caveman\" characters.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c5a7b7fe174450398be760c66309cfa",
            "input": "It is a Frank Zappa axiom that \"music journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read.\" If you ever needed proof that musicians can't talk, this is the film for you. Repeated attempts at profundity stumble over themselves to end up in monosyllabic comments delivered in awestruck voices: \"Wow.\" (Thank you, Idris Muhammed.) This film is pretentious but, while much of the pontificating from Youssou N'Dour and his gang of merry men (and one token woman) grates, the music saves the day.The main idea behind the film (what I take to be the main idea, dredged out of the inarticulate commentary) is interesting. To gather a group of musicians from America and Europe and take them on a journey through the different styles of music that grew up in and out of slavery, back to their roots in the music of West Africa, and a concert in the old slave fort of Gorée off the coast of Senegal. We are treated to gospel, blues, jazz and variations of these, including some fantastic drumming both in New Orleans and Senegal. There's also a good deal of N'Dour's own compositions.Sadly, that's another weakness. It's never entirely clear what N'Dour himself wants to achieve. To some degree, the film appears to be an exercise in self-promotion on N'Dour's part. He wants to play his own music, jazzed up to some degree and performed in the company of a bunch of musicians he admires. He's clearly a little embarrassed by this and early in the film obtains the blessings of the Curator of the Gorée museum.The clash between the different agendas shows through in several other places. For example, somebody obviously felt that it was not possible to tell the story of black music without involving a gospel choir, but N'Dour and most of his mates are Moslems (a point made repeatedly throughout the film). The whole early sequence involving the black Christians is uncomfortable and then they disappear from the story until the close harmony group (the only black Christians who can hold a tone?) turn up in Dakar at the end of the film. (To be fair, they turn up triumphantly and perform the best piece in the film.) If the story of black music needs to nod in the direction of gospel, why not also in the direction of Latin America? Where are the black musical influences from the Caribbean and Brazil? Samba? Reggae? Then there's Europe. Here the black diaspora doesn't seem to have produced any musicians of calibre, since N'Dour chooses to draft in Austrian guitarist and a trumpet player from Luxemburg. Are they in the team just because N'Dour has played with him before? What I personally found most irritating, though, was the long sequence which tried to recreate a kind of 60s beatnik/black power/Nation of Islam cultural happening in the New York home of Amir Baraka (a.k.a. Leroi Jones). Hearing people talk about the importance of \"knowing your history\", and then in the next breath perpetuating ignorance. Why do so many African-Americans believe that taking an Arabic name is an assertion of their African roots? And why do they think Arabic Islam is so much more admirable than European Christianity? Who do they think established the trade in African slaves in the first place? The film doesn't have much to say about the situation in West Africa today beyond the platitude that \"present conditions\" are a consequence of all the brightest and best having been shipped away for 300 years. The Senegalese appear to be a poor but happy, musical gifted folk, friendly and welcoming, respectful of their elders (and not above fleecing the visiting Americans in the fish market). Is this ethnic stereotyping or just my imagination? There is no comment on the armed guard that N'Dour and the camera crew seem to need in the opening sequence as they walk through the streets of Dakar.There is also a strong implication in the film that the slaves who were taken from Dakar came from Dakar. The similarity between the folk drumming style of New Orleans and the folk drumming style of Senegal is cited in evidence. The last thing the slaves heard before they were shipped away was the drumming of their homeland, bidding them farewell. Except, of course, that by and large, the slaves shipped from Dakar did not come from Dakar. They were captured or traded from the interior by the coastal Senegalese and sold to merchants of whichever European power currently held the Gorée slave fort. The people of Dakar are not the descendents of Africans who escaped the slave trade, they are just as likely – more likely – to be descendents of the people who sold their black brethren into slavery and exile.The two agenda's clash again in the final part of the film. There are two separate endings. On the one hand, the concert which N'Dour and Co have been rehearsing and preparing along the way and which they deliver in the courtyard of the Gorée slave fort. The other end comes when the Harmony Harmoneers sing the spiritual \"Return to Glory\", in the seaward doorway of the slave fort. This is deeply moving, even if it is hard to believe the performance is quite as spontaneous as it appears.This is a film that is flawed. Unclear of the story it is trying to tell and tugged in different directions. Irritating, confusing, beautiful and emotional by turns. Watch it (listen to it) for the music and the feeling, but don't expect enlightenment or intellectual rigour.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d5380aca5bb42a3b17615d6db69c2e6",
            "input": "Honestly, this is the best reality show anyone has ever come up with. In order to win the money you have to actually be INTELLIGENT. Not only that you've got to be brave, athletic, cunning, etc. It actually requires skill. Not like some lame-ass shows that are on these days. And yet, they only have two seasons of it! Bull..they need to bring this show back!! Although, they'll have a hard time pulling Anderson Cooper away from CNN. He was great.But seriously, it was an amazing show. You never knew who would be going when. And it was so much fun trying to figure out the mole yourself! It was a show you could actually play yourself if you wanted to!BRING BACK THE MOLE!!!! BRING BACK THE MOLE!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4638620edfd94cd7ae86e9bc34050d48",
            "input": "There is no doubt that this film has an impressive cast but unfortunately this doesn't help with the major downsides to the movie. I never understand why directors ask actors/actresses to use accents not their own when it is obvious to everyone they can't convince. Fiennes just can't do Irish and Fitzgerald isn't much better at Russian. When the voice is wrong then no matter how good the acting the character will never be convincing. As the for the major problem....the plot....was there one? I guess there was some sort of storyline involved but it was so full of holes that I just couldn't wait for the film to end...it was ridiculous. Save 90 minutes of your life and don't watch this movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2d491fc933546158498e9035314e498",
            "input": "**Possible Spoilers Ahead**\tJason (a.k.a. Herb) Evers is a brilliant brain surgeon who, along with wife Virginia Leith, is involved in the most lackluster onscreen car crash ever. Leith is decapitated and the doctor takes her severed noggin back to his mansion and rejuvenates the head in his lab. The mansion's exterior was allegedly filmed at Tarrytown's Lyndhurst estate; the lab scenes were apparently shot in somebody's basement. The bandaged head is kept alive on \"lab equipment\" that's almost cheap-looking enough for Ed Wood. Some of the library music–the movie's high point–later turned up in Andy Milligan's THE BODY BENEATH. Leith's head has some heavy metaphysical discourses with another of Ever's misfires, a mutant chained in the closet. Meanwhile, the good doc prowls strip joints looking for a body worthy of his wife's gabby noodle. The ending, in uncut prints, features some ahead-of-its-time splatter and dismemberment when the zucchini-headed monster comes out of the closet to bring the movie to a welcome close. This thing took three years to be released and then, audiences gave it the bad reception it richly deserved. Between this, PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and a few others, 1959 should have been declared The Year Of The Turkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7cf1012f9397495aa19a150f2b819981",
            "input": "I really like 101 Dalmations when it came out in 1996, now 5 years later i went to see 102 dalmations in 2001, i thought it was fantastic but i think 101 is better because i think it's more funnier, more humor, and also that movie was based on the same story as the cartoon version (one hundred and one dalmations (1961) i wonder if there are plans for 103 Dalmations. I hope there is, maybe yes, maybe no, all of us dalmation fans will have to find out if there is going to be 103 dalmations in the future.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d194085c62d40fe899a8a12885f405e",
            "input": "Angels who got a little icky were banned from heaven and now reside in a British forest where they seduce and chop up teens. Talk about high concept. On the plus side this little mother gives us Tom Savini, but since his acting range is limited to two minutes screen-time, his five minute presence seems a tad long. The angels run around the forest naked for the most part of the movie, but though they might have the body of an angel, their faces sure look like Joan Rivers on a bad day. Mediocre acting and amateurish gore-effects don't help and the night scenes fatally recall Paris Hilton's most famous movie. So bad that it is REALLY bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d3333d0afb1422fb5035cdf5adeee19",
            "input": "Simply put: the movie is boring. Cliché upon cliché is confirmed and story lines never come together. It seems as if the director was unsure whether to make a movie or a documentary. The main plot is very thin (a CIA agent is ordered to kill an oil prince, gets caught and then warns the prince (why?)) and therefore some elements were added to make the movie more interesting. So, a kid dies, which results in the \"natural\" response of the father: freely advising the person indirectly responsible for his son's death. The lawyer has a drunk \"friend\" and keeps him around, why, no one knows. Some kids become suicide terrorists and blow up a ship.All in all, this is one of the worst movies I have seen in quite a while. I was neither entertained nor intellectually challenged. I neither laughed nor cried, I did not gain an understanding nor was I compelled to learn more or take up a cause. It meant nothing to me, which in my eyes is the worst one can say about a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0cbc1e007a6042d3bf3d7fc6eb29e59a",
            "input": "I first saw this back in the early 90s on UK TV, i did like it then but i missed the chance to tape it, many years passed but the film always stuck with me and i lost hope of seeing it TV again, the main thing that stuck with me was the end, the hole castle part really touched me, its easy to watch, has a great story, great music, the list goes on and on, its OK me saying how good it is but everyone will take there own best bits away with them once they have seen it, yes the animation is top notch and beautiful to watch, it does show its age in a very few parts but that has now become part of it beauty, i am so glad it has came out on DVD as it is one of my top 10 films of all time. Buy it or rent it just see it, best viewing is at night alone with drink and food in reach so you don't have to stop the film.Enjoy",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd29045e1356445f95f456db39a13421",
            "input": "Intergalactic criminal Kol (Ross Hagen) has been sentenced to death and awaits execution on a spaceship designed for just such a purpose. But tonight there's going to be a jailbreak, and Kol flees on a conveniently-placed escape pod and flies towards Earth (which apparently is nearby). There he confronts a group of \"teenagers\" (who look thirty) and a game warden (John Phillip Law), who help protect him from his worst nightmare... the bounty hunter and executioner android (or more properly \"gynoid\") the Alienator.From the cover of the box, I was confident this was going to be an awful movie. But, as awful as it turned out to be, it was a ton of fun as well (probably at least partially because I was watching it with someone who happens to be intensely awesome). The director (Fred Olen Ray), who has specialized in making over one hundred low-grade films (most notably \"Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers\"), does what he does best and throws together a plot that only half makes sense and gives us rudimentary special effects. Bonus: P.J. Soles appears (as \"Tara\"), obviously at a low point in her career.Sure, there's plot holes. Why are there hillbilly rednecks in California (allegedly Los Angeles County if I understood the warden correctly). What's up with the space woman's tacky blouse? Why is there a subplot about the ship captain forcefully trying to win her heart when this story goes nowhere? What the heck is \"Quadrant 5\"? How does chicken wire create an electromagnetic field that will short-circuit an android, yet land mines do virtually nothing? Why does Kol look like a drunk, Native American football player with emphysema? And the Lund guy (Robert Clarke)... does his character even have a point? Does the game he plays with the captain have a point? Does this movie have a point? But the biggest mystery is the android (or gynoid) the Alienator, played by Teagan Clive. What is an \"alienator\"? Why does it look like Daryl Hannah from \"Blade Runner\", only much larger? Because, see, if something is a cyborg, it's part human. But if it's an android, it's all machine. This was an android, so there was no reason to make it look human. It could have looked like anything. Yet, the person who designed her made her the size of a linebacker, with David Bowie's hair and a leotard that shows me just a little too much. If you're going to make a female android, wouldn't the purpose be to have her be seductive and lure enemies in? Mission not accomplished. They say beauty comes in all shapes and sizes, but I think I found a huge exception.If \"Mystery Science Theater 3000\" were still around today, this film would be on a very short list of movies that need to get harangued.Beyond the butt-nasty Alienator (sorry, Teagan, female weight lifters are gross) the film is alright. Maybe there's not much of a story and maybe the characters aren't really very interesting. And maybe the scene with the deer is incredibly adorable for no particular reason -- what use does a killer robot have with a deer? But overall, I actually liked the movie. I won't be pimping it out to my friends or running out to my local video store to pick up the latest DVD copy (which I'm sure is just packed with amazing special features -- not). But I consider seeing this movie time well spent and look forward to similar adventures in the future.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e0ae00b61cc49979686ad318c216d23",
            "input": "\"Igor and the Lunatics\" is a totally inept and amateurish attempt at a crazy-hippie-cult-killing-spree horror movie. Apparently even nearly twenty years later, Charles Manson was still inspiring overenthusiastic but incompetent trash-filmmakers. This is a typical Troma production, meaning in other words, there's a lot of boring and totally irrelevant padding footage to accompany the nonsensical plot. There's a bit of random gore and gratuitous nudity on display – which isn't bad – but it's all so very pointless and ugly that it becomes frustrating to look at. \"Igor and the Lunatics\" is so desperate that it's even using a lot of the footage twice, like the circle saw killing for example. The incoherent plot tries to tell the story of a hippie cult run by the drug-addicted and Charlie Manson wannabe Paul. One of Paul's lower ranked disciples, named Igor, becomes a little bit too obsessed with the Bible stories and drug orgies and gradually causes the entire cult to descent further into criminal insanity. Just to illustrate through a little example exactly how crazy Igor is: he tears the heart straight out of the chest of a really sexy black hitch-hiker girl! There's an annoying synthesizer soundtrack and some truly embarrassingly lame pseudo-artistic camera tricks, like slow-motion footage and lurid dream sequences. Maybe there's one sequence that more or less qualifies as worthwhile for trash fanatics and that' is when a poor girl is cut in half with a machete. For no particular reason, the camera holds the shot of the blade in the bloodied stomach for fifteen whole seconds.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68b8686e47604d8ca74dda4ca7bb294f",
            "input": "Though I liked On the Town better I really liked it. I'm a new comer when it comes to Frank Sinatra and Gene Kelly. Though I had heard of them I had never seen anything with them in it until recently. The first one I saw was Singin in the Rain that made me a fan of Gene's. I think that is better too. But I thought that this movie was good and like all movies there are some parts that are better than others but in my book it's an awesome movie and I love it. Frank and Gene make a good team. I have yet to see them together in Take me out to the Ballgame. But I'm sticking to my guns bu saying that I really enjoyed it, and that I love it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fb4a069571f40e59e67feacc47e896d",
            "input": "Loved the movie. I even liked most of the actors in it. But, for me Ms. Davis' very poor attempt at an accent, and her stiff acting really makes an otherwise compelling movie very hard to watch. Seriously if any other modern actor played the same role with the same style as Ms. Davis they would be laughed off the screen.I really think she 'phoned this one in'. Now if it had Myrna Loy or Ingrid Bergman playing the part of the wife I would have enjoyed it much more.I guess I just don't 'get' Bette Davis. I've always thought of her as an actor that 'plays herself' no matter what role she's in. The possible exception is Now Voyager.I'm sure many of the other reviewers will explain in careful (and I hope civil) detail how I am totally wrong on this. But, I'll continue to watch the movies she's in because I like the stories/writing/supporting casts, but, I'll always be thinking, of different actresses that could have done a better job.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adf18452c13b41e4a34dab125bd1ddb6",
            "input": "Do we really need any more narcissistic garbage on the Baby Boomer generation? Technically, I am a Boomer, though at the time when all the \"idealistic youths\" of the '60s were reading Marx, burning their draft cards, and generally prolonging a war which destroyed tens of thousands of lives; I was still in grade school. But I remember them well, and 9 out of 10 were just moronic fools, who would believe anything as long as it was destructive.This is just another excercise in self-importance from the kids who never really grew up.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-042ed4bd61ba493da1c39f1387875494",
            "input": "This movie strikes me as one of the most successful attempts ever at coming up with plausible answers for some of the nagging questions that have cropped up in recent scholarship concerning the \"Passion\" (suffering and death of Christ) accounts in the New Testament. (What motivated Judas if money was not the issue? What could bring the Sanhedrin to meet on a high holy day? Why did Pilate waffle?) It is a movie for the serious, thinking Christian: fans of \"The Passion of the Christ\" will no doubt be disappointed by the lack of gory spectacle and arch characterization. As for myself, I find the portrait painted here--of the willingness of ordinary people to so blithely sacrifice common decency when their own self-interest is at stake--far more realistic and deeply unsettling. (The disinterested, \"just doing my job\" look on the face of the man who drives the first nail in Christ's wrist is as chilling as any moment in film.) The film makes no claim to \"authenticity\", but the settings and costuming invariably feel more \"right\" than many more highly acclaimed efforts. It is a slow film but, if you accept its self-imposed limits (it is, after all, \"The Death\"--not the Life--\"of Christ\"), ultimately a very rewarding one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-85717b815e0f4a75bddaa4c7821a8f55",
            "input": "Let's start by the simple lines. From the viewer's side, there a couple of good \"director details\", some points of view at the movie scenes that are nice. The special effects are good enough, a good acting/good scenery also. But the story is way too simple. It shows how a elite Army bomb squad unit lives, acts and sometimes dies. It shows the drama of living in war. In my movie experience as a serious action movie \"addicted\" guy, I missed that click that gets my eyes and mind stuck on the screen. One of the things that need to be present in a movie in order to I consider it a good one is the ability of immerse the viewer in the movie reality and time. It didn't happened to me. I stayed \"conscious\", for the entire movie.Honestly speaking, I think that this movie gained its place in fame based on the \"subconscious\" appeal of American patriotism, a healthy and genuine feeling, but not the adequate use as a movie fame generator. More than a movie about war, it grows its popularity based on that.A simple thought: if this was a world war II or I movie, only changing time, with everything remained the same, would it be this awarded? Sure not. Why? Because there are great ones that elevate the bar way to high.Compared against its rivals in the Oscars, I don't think that all of the prizes it won are correctly awarded.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c352e7ae21cc48549b41872ef4e0a70d",
            "input": "\"COSBY,\" in my opinion, is a must-see CBS hit! I'm not sure if I've never seen every episode, but I still enjoyed it. It's hard to say which one is my favorite. Also, I really loved the theme song. If you ask me, even though I liked everyone, it would have been nice if Madeline Kahn hadn't passed away during the show's run. Since that happened, I've always wondered what the show would have been like. Everyone always gave a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though it can be seen on TBS now, I strongly recommend you catch it just in case it goes off the air for good",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c927581d809c479b860d300fbd647654",
            "input": "Ritchie's first two films were snappy, stylish entertainment. Here, he raids two recent classics – 'The Usual Suspects' and 'Fight Club' – and still comes out empty-handed.Despite parading itself as a con-mystery (with the sub-'Usual Suspects' twaddle \"the greatest con he ever pulled was convincing you that he was you\" or whatever it was...) and attempting a 'Fight-Club' twist about which characters are real and which are internal manifestations, the film struggles to maintain interest in its second half. By the last third, you know you're being lead down a blind alley, and tediously slowly at that.Cons, chess and game theory are all great subjects, but Ritchie delves into them too superficially and too repetitively to make much use of the material.The only thing that keeps the movie (almost) watchable is Ritchie's bold way with with a scene and Maurice-Jones's dynamic camera. If Ritchie stuck to a more satisfying plot, and succumbed to tighter editing, there's no reason why he couldn't have made another enjoyable gangster caper.As it is, Revolver is a waste of your time. Incomprehensibility does not equal profundity. If you want to see a great film that doesn't make logical sense but makes a virtue of it (and, incidentally, which also involves an inexplicable escape from solitary confinement) watch 'Lost Highway'.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8c5cd63d92d4e0fbb3ec83d3207f2a0",
            "input": "An unmarried, twenty-something hick (played by John Travolta) leaves the farm and goes to Houston, where he learns about life and love in a Texas honky-tonk. At face value, it's a modern love story ... Texas style. There's gobs of cowboy hats, pickup trucks, neon beer signs, and references to big belt-buckles and rodeos. The music, if not Texas native, is Texas adapted, courtesy of the talents of Mickey Gilley, Johnny Lee, and the Charlie Daniels Band. And that Texas twang ... \"y'all\".The story and the characters are about as subtle as the taste of Texas five-alarm chili made with Jalapeno peppers. It's enough to make civilized viewers abort the film in favor of a genteel classic, one starring Laurence Olivier or Ingrid Bergman, maybe. \"Hamlet\" it's not. But \"Urban Cowboy\" is spicy and explicit, and I kinda like it.Technically, the film is generally good. The dialogue, the production design, and the costumes are all realistic; the editing is skillful. And both the casting and the acting are commendable, if not Oscar worthy. I would not have cast Travolta in the role he plays, but he does a fine job ... ditto Debra Winger. Barry Corbin and Brooke Alderson, among others, are good too, in support roles. But, the cinematography seemed weak. The film copy I watched was grainy, and at times suffered from a reddish/orange tint, a visual trait I have noticed in other films from the same time period.At first glance, the film does not seem to offer any social or political \"message\". But I would argue that when \"Urban Cowboy\" was released twenty-five years ago, it had rather prophetic implications. In 1980 the U.S. had all kinds of problems, not the least being American hostages held by Iran. In the minds of a lot of folks back then, the U.S. was being pushed around, bullied.This film, along with others of its time, offered something that Americans wanted to see in their political leaders ... toughness. \"Urban Cowboy\" is a very physical film. The characters in it may not be the brightest people on Earth. But, they're tough!Everything about \"Urban Cowboy\" is anti-intellectual. As a vehicle for cultural expression then, this 1980 film was one of several that augured a new get-tough era for the U.S. It started in 1980 with the election of Reagan. And that era continues to this day, with a President who probably will not be remembered for his intellect, but will be remembered for his toughness and aggression, traits that Americans seem to gravitate to as surely as Texans to five-alarm chili.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0118587b75074031bddf05cd78a110b7",
            "input": "Barbara Streisand directs and stars in this very Jewish story.To have a chance at obtaining an education, Babs enthusiastically disguises herself as a boy which isn't the most difficult thing to do since she already looks like a boy, anyway. At her new school she meets many male classmates who have no trouble at all in believing she's a guy.Don't miss the best of many moments of unintentional humor when Babs' male friend thinks she's a man, but pins 'him' to the ground, sits on top of 'him', and looks affectionately into 'his' eyes.... *snicker*.Mediocre film; splashy story about nothing particularly interesting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d86dfd1815c145ab9e818fa98d07b655",
            "input": "oh my god, i give this film three stars out of ten for the following reasons. the final sequence is once again quite effectively handled and it was absolutely hilarious. that is what it gets those three points for. other than that, it was atrocious. it wasnt meant to be this funny, that much is obvious, but the dubbing, the acting of the dubbed voices, the dialogue they said, where often hilarious. the actions performed, and/or not performed also lead to much hilarity and/or throwing things at the screen. such as when the whole town is being slaughtered and one small group of people stand on a balcony looking on as if they were watching a cooking glass, or the \"attempted\" escapes from the church in which they hole up.evil mayor: i think something is going on outside so you should go upstairs and look out the window.hero: ok.evil mayor: now is my chance to make some idiot go outside and flail around with fire being totally ineffective and getting hacked up.insert sequence in which this occurs.evil mayor: damn, wait, i will get this small child and she will walk outside and cry pappa seemingly obvlious to the fact that those rotten corpses are not just spooky strangers but are actually zombies with no flesh or skin or anything and she will lead them away and i will flee! insert sequence in which this occurs.hero (upstairs): he is trying to escape again, fool, and he has left the door open, he is silly, this is a nice view.woman: where is my daughter?hero (downstairs now): i dont know, i cannot see her anyway and she was not outside because i could not see her despite her being out there and me having a view of the entire neighbourhood and she is standing right outside, where on earth could she be?needless to say, anybody would be throwing things at the screen after 10 minutes of this. so, watch the first film with a couple of friends, having a few drinks, and make sure by the time you get to watching this one, you are absolutely blindly drunk and can just giggle at the stupidity of it all. and there wasnt even any decent gore, such a shame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0fdad987a294cf4a539324c789ecc0e",
            "input": "An annoying experience. Improvised dialogue, handheld cameras for no effect, directionless plot, contrived romance, ick! to the whole mess. Ron Silver was the only real actor. Gretta Sacchi was TERRIBLE! Henry Jaglom did better with Eating which suited his style much more.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53d75231f263499e82e057e8a5f0b767",
            "input": "... but watch Mary McDonnell's performance closely. Her body language. Her fine body movements. Her subtle, but powerfully effective, reactions. This is an accomplished artist at the top of her craft. And the rest of the cast were pretty damned good, too! ;o)This is perhaps the 3rd or 4th viewing for me, and I see more in it each time. What /IS/ this world coming to, anyway? -R.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92ade006eb5d44b48e57be26243e1699",
            "input": "I don't agree with one of the reviewers who compared this film to the American International Pictures. Basil Deardon has directed a brutally realistic film with an honest attempt to portray the rise of juvenile delinquency in post war England (but without the sentimentality of \"Blackboard Jungle\"). The cinematography was excellent as it really captured the scariness and isolation of the huge housing estate. The estate looked like an old prison. Stanley Baker was excellent as the hardened detective, reassigned to the juvenile division - \"Urgent, urgent - Larceny - five iced lollies\"!!!! He finds he is the butt of many jokes. David McCallum showed that he was one of Britain's top young talents of the fifties. (He had a very different role in another Stanley Baker film \"Hell Drivers\"). His portrayal of Johnny and the fanatical following he inspired was very frightening. Ann Heywood was also very good as the cynical Cathie. I wouldn't say there was a romantic subplot in it.Detective Jack Truman is investigating a string of arson attacks by someone labeled the \"Firefly\". Just as he finds evidence which could lead to a breakthrough, he is assigned to the Juvenile Division - he is pretty disgusted at what he feels is not proper police work. Amid all the heckling he gets his first call out - the 6 year old Murphy twins are working a scam at the local lolly shops!!!Taking the twins home he meets their brother, the charismatic Johnny, and their embittered sister Cathie. He starts to appreciate how life on the ghastly housing estates can turn young kids into criminals. As he gets more involved with the family, he realises there is a strong link between the fires, Johnny and a frightened Chinese youth who works for a laundry. The local priest (Peter Cushing in an unusual role, away from the Hammer horrors) explains that when Johnny was younger he had rescued some people from a burning building and had been hailed a hero. He wanted to recapture the feeling of importance and being useful and felt he could by lighting fires. The school siege was filmed in a very real way and the viewer felt the children's fear - the teacher (thinking only of her own safety) runs off and locks them in the room with the frightened gunman!!!!I thought it was a really excellent film that tried to show some of the social problems Britain experienced after the war.Highly Recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4dcf8e94172747c588fc6c323f1bc805",
            "input": "The year 1995, when so many people talked about the great premiere of BRAVEHEART by Mel Gibson, also saw another very fine, yet underrated movie on Scottish history, ROB ROY. Although it is a very different film, especially due to the historical period the story is set in, ROB ROY has much in common not only with marvelous BRAVEHEART but also with the very spirit of epic movies.It is a film that discusses similar themes, like fight for dignity, courage, honor, revenge, family being a key to happiness. It also leads us to the very bliss of Scottish highlands where the human soul finds its rest being surrounded by all grandeur of nature. Robert Roy MacGregor (Liam Neeson), the main character is a true hero (so universal in epics), sort of \"Scottish Robin Hood\" who struggles to lead his people out of oppression imposed by cold hearted lords. Although he worsens his situation through the acts, has to suffer a lot, two things stay in his mind undeniably: HONOR that he is given by himself and LOVE to his woman, Mary MacGregor (Jessica Lange). That leads him to unexpected events...Except for the interesting content and quite vivid action, the movie is filled with truly stunning visuals. This factor has to do both with the sets and locations of the film as well as the wardrobe. Many memorable moments stay in the mind of any viewer who can allow themselves an insight into artistic images. For me, the most splendid scene was in the Highlands when Rob Roy tells his boys what honor really means. Then, he sends them away and beautifully makes love to his woman. The scene he escapes Marguis of Montrose (John Hurt) to the waterfall is also worth a look as a stunning visual. Of course, there is some graphic violence, like in the duel for instance, but I don't think that this violence would be as harmful as in many other modern films. Its justification is like any other epic's: bloodshed and cruelty of those times were really serious and there would be no point in hiding it. The most disturbing scene, for me, was the rape done on Rob Roy's wife by the villain of the story: Archibald Cunningham (Tim Roth). It's truly disgusting and kids should definitely stay away. However, all the rest is O.K. Yet, there is one aspect that made me really love this movie, the performances.All the cast do perfect jobs, from the leading Lian Neeson who fits very well to the role of tall, brave, strong Scottish man to the supporting cast of Brian Cox who portrays wicked Killearn, a silent witness of terrible acts who feels comfortable with the evil of war. Jessica Lange is very fine as Mary MacGregor and has some of the most beautiful moments in the film. There is chemistry between Ms Lange and Mr Neeson in many of their scenes. John Hurt, one of the best British actors, does a terrific job as Marguis of Montrose, a corrupted man for whom money is the aim in itself achieved by any means. I like that calmness of his portrayal. But the real villain is played by Tim Roth who truly depicts wretched side of his character, Archibald - a man who mocks love, who loves war and who finds true lust in rape and slaughter. But, like in any good epic, this exceptional evil must find its end...And one more aspect: the musical score: such memorable and sentimental tunes that are bound to sound in the ears for long. The final moment touched me to tears not only because of the beauty it conveys but because I deeply combined these blissful tunes with the grandeur of locations. Scotland remains in the heart of its visitor and this movie reminded me of that permanent effect. It was, as if, my second journey to Scotland.ROB ROY is a very nice movie, very well directed, photographed and acted. It perhaps does not equal BRAVEHEART with its spectacular sets and crowds of extras in battle scenes, but it is a fairly long film with much attention placed on one very significant feature a cinema should have: stunning entertainment combined with heartfelt education. I really enjoyed that film, do not hesitate to call it metaphorically \"highlands of entertainment\" and rate it 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-417c4dc0903142ab9d524fde8fed1ce6",
            "input": "I watched this film last night with anticipation, but really wasn't very impressed.With the exception of 'Combo', I thought the acting was poor and the narrative was limited. It came across like a 'made for TV' drama.I felt that the film was very contrived. The whole set up of hammering in the context at the start (yes, we get that this is 80s Britain - you can stop now) was tiresome, and gave a very one-sided view of what life was like in 80s Britain - poverty, war juxtaposed with royalty, Margaret Thatcher, yet nothing in between? There were actually middle-classes who existed back then - just ordinary working people, with a decent wage and a mortgage. The Falklands clips also seemed to be added randomly towards the end, for 'dramatic effect', I presume.The sequence of events felt a tad disjointed, as the characters moved one one action to the next without us seeing how their mindset could've changed so quickly.The relationship between 'Shaun' and 'Smell' was toe-curling. I couldn't even look during the snogging scene. I find it very hard to believe that she would've been attracted to a boy who was not only so much younger, but also looked so much younger. I know there were only four years between them, but four years is nothing once you reach your twenties, yet it's a huge difference in your teens! In my experience, that kind of teen age difference only occurs when the girl is the younger one, since girls mature so much quicker, and are more on the wavelength of boys a few years older. Sorry, but I didn't buy it - an unnecessary plot point created for shock value.The ending was somewhat abrupt and, again, contrived. If the flag throwing incident was supposed to be iconic, then it fell somewhat short in my eyes.It bugs me that British films only concern themselves with either the upper classes or the poverty-stricken. Don't get me wrong, I love Trainspotting, and Four Weddings has its charms, but can't we Brits come up with anything different? Why are our films always so hung up on the class system? I was born in 1973, so wasn't much different in age to 'Shaun' would've been in 1983. I grew up in a single parent family on a fairly down-trodden council estate in a city in England. However, my childhood experiences were vastly different to those portrayed in the film - I don't even remember racism being an issue (although i'm not saying it didn't exist). 'This is England'? Not in my experience.The bottom line is that I felt this film lacked substance, and I was completely bored and unimpressed throughout.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6296385141cb4efeb7b86dd339490ec5",
            "input": "My discovery of the cinema of Jan Svankmajer opened My eyes to a whole tradition of Czech animation, of which Jirí Trnka was a pioneer. His Ruka is one of the finest, most technically-impressive animated movies I've ever seen.A potter wakes up and waters his plant. Then he goes about making a pot. But in comes the huge hand which crashes the pot and demands that the potter make a statue of itself. He casts the hand out, but soon it returns and imprisons him in a bird cage where he's forced to sculpt a stone hand. He sets about it, fainting from exhaustion, but eventually completes the task.In a marvellous sequence of metacinema, the potter uses a candle to burn his visible puppet strings, which keep him in thrall, and he escapes back home. He shuts himself in and is accidentally killed by his own beloved plant when it falls on his head.This movie doesn't hide the fact it's pure animation, unlike modern movies that strive to be realistic (why?). The hand, for instance, is clearly someone's hand in a glove. Everything else is clay. Strings are visible and are part of the narrative, making it a precursor of the movie Strings. The atmosphere is eerie: that hand going after the little potter managed to instill more dread in me than many horror movies combined.The movie is obvious but it avoids being totally manipulative for its simplicity. it's a fable about artistic freedom and tyranny which can't help winning the heart and mind of anyone who holds freedom as a natural right.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-777edaa8c2c0484ab860c43acb93d867",
            "input": "As I mentioned previously, John Carpenter's 1978 classic is one of the first two movies I can remember seeing and being heavily influenced by (the other being the classic Conan the Barbarian). It so truly scared me that the only monster under my bed was Michael Meyers, whom I eventually befriended (imaginary friend) to keep him from killing me in my sleep. Now that is terror for a 10 year old.It is a horror classic and I am sure my modest review will not do it the justice it deserves. The most surprising thing of all is that the movie still works, perhaps not in the guttural reaction but more of a cognitive possibility or immediate subconscious. This all could happen. It isn't in the realm of impossibility or located in a foreign country (as most modern horror is, i.e. Hostel, Touristas, Cry Wolf, Saw,etc). At times it is graphic while the rest is relegated to our imaginations. I believe it is this element that keeps people terrified or at the very least wary of going outside at night with the signature soundtrack still vivid in their head. It still works because we can substitute implied or tertiary killing with anything more terrifying that our mind can create. So we ourselves are contributing to our own fears and anxiety.Carpenter weaves a simple story about an everyday, middle class, suburban and relatively benign child who snaps on Halloween and kills his sister. He then spends the next 15 years in an institution (which we thankfully do not experience) only to escape and return to his hometown, the infamous Haddonfield. On his way he kills and kills. The child's name is Michael Meyers, though he is not a person. John Carpenter uses Michael Meyers as a metaphor against the implied safety of middle class suburbia. In the bastion of American safety and security, chaos can still strike.Michael ceased to be a person once he killed. He is not a serial killer, human being or psychopath. He is as unstoppable force. The generic overalls, bleached-white Shatner mask, and lack of any dialog other then some breathing, helps to dehumanize and complete Michael's generification. This is the source of all his power. He is faceless, speechless and unremarkable in any way other than as a source of unrelenting chaos. This is helped by the cinematography (post card effect), a lack of information/motivation/explanation and the veteran narrative experience of Donald Pleasence (Dr. Loomis). His over the top performance and uneasiness sells \"the Shape\". This is also the first film performance by Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode, the innocent girl who deters chaos in the face of overwhelming odds (at least for a little bit). Though this isn't the first movie of this new niche of horror films (Black Christmas came out 4 years earlier), it is the most successful and does not diminish upon reviewing. If you haven't been scared by horror movies in a long time (like me), this will probably make the hairs on the back of your head tingle at the first chords of the signature soundtrack. I highly recommend this movie as a must see horror movie and as one of the pinnacles of John Carpenter's career.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9aa1317a683b44b98b2657c911ac469d",
            "input": "\"Attack of the Killer Tomatoes\" consists mostly of rambling, poorly assembled footage in search of a movie. The plot makes no sense, and the various characters drop in and out of the picture with no explanation at all. Watching this silly spoof, you get the feeling than so many other comments have captured so accurately: that it's easy to make a cheap, low-quality film and then use the \"parody\" angle as an excuse for its cheapness and low quality (in one scene, female swimmers are terrified of tomatoes that are floating near them; how far can \"suspension of disbelief\" go - even in a parody?). The title song is great, though. (*1/2)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90b0165f56e84b1bbfc5816957eedf76",
            "input": "I am definitely a Burt Reynolds fan, but sorry, this one really stinks. Most of the dialogue is laughable and the only interesting plot twist is in the last five minutes of the movie. I can't believe he even made this one. Is he actually that hard up for money?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-524f715ac6e042bbaf6acaa19815b09d",
            "input": "This movie is a bad memory from my childhood. This is one of those movies that they show kids on a rainy day at school when you can't go out for recess, and you'd rather be watching anything, ANYTHING else. At least that's what it was like when I was in elementary school. I just remember HATING this movie. Granted, I haven't seen it in 15 years or so, and they probably don't use it on rainy days anymore but I just want to warn everyone: You'd be better off using this to put your kids to sleep than entertaining them. Trust me, pick anything else. Even though the topic is kind of controversial, the plot is so tame and slow that I can't remember anything about it except that I disliked it so strongly that here, 15 years later, I felt the need to warn all of you against it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c9b96cad4eb48ddbe2884d688438f74",
            "input": "One of those beautifully intense movies that draws us so intimately far in, it ends much to soon! Than were left looking at the screen like, \"No they didn't!\", lol. Good performances all around! The acting is marvelous with Emily Blunt simply outstanding! I knew she would give a solid, convincing performance catching young Victoria's regality, temper, and vulnerability through out the entire movie. Also, the production is outstanding in every way: style, substance and sensitivity. A remarkable glimpse at a remarkable time in Britian's history told via a very personal and touching biography of the school age princess until her reign as Queen, later marrying Prince Albert, than ending with the birth of their first of nine children. It had a well written screenplay and flawless editing. Rupert Friend as the ever so patient and compassionate young Prince Albert vying to win the young Queen's attention, than securing her love, before Lord Melbourne(Paul Bettany), was engrossing to watch. Just as engrossing was the relationship between the teenage Victoria and her mother, which was fury at times, as with her mother and King William (whom also disliked her mother). The acting and scenes were captivating, highly emotional. I would recommend this to anyone interested in the historical and political situation existing in that era, and indeed, anyone who loves a compelling true romance story",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee13b0b241cf4582811dabb33df096d2",
            "input": "The words \"Swedish\" and \"Action movie\" do not mix. That becomes more and more obvious with every attempt made in the genre. This is yet another failed attempt.Lasse Brunell (Shanti Roney) works at a military air base with top secret computer systems. One day foreign criminals threaten to hurt his family if he doesn't do what they tell him. They want the secret equipment and will do anything to get it.This movie has it's ups and downs. And usually in Swedish action movies there are no \"ups\", just \"downs\". So i guess something in this movie showed some quality. To begin with the positive remarks i can mention that the movie is technically well made. The footage of planes and helicopters flying are well shot and look very nice. The acting is of very varying quality. Shanti Roney makes a decent performance while Maria Bonnevie is stiff and unnatural as usual (i wonder how long Swedish directors are going to keep using her even though she has the acting skills of a wooden plank?). Stefan Sauk is laughable as the \"cool\" special forces man who comes to the base to investigate.And what about the action scenes? Well as i said above the scenes of planes and helicopters flying are nice. But aside from that there is not much action to talk about. And that is a common problem with Swedish action films. There is just not enough action going on. Maybe it's a budget problem, maybe it's film-making culture. I don't know, but it negatively affects the experience. Because quite frankly, the story and acting is not good enough for this movie to rely just on that.I rate this 4/10 for effort.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d50b70642bcc48caa20a97e8e8d6cb20",
            "input": "For people interested in business and the corporate world, this show is simply the best of the best. As one of the former contestants of the show wrote in his blog about this innovative show: People in business finally had an audience. The whole idea is perfect; having a group of businesspeople competing against each other in business-related tasks, set in the best place in the world, New York City. Donald Trump is perfect as the boss, even though his ego is bigger than the whole universe times infinity. He also makes a lot of questionable decisions about whom to fire, which is one of the negatives about the show.Season 1: Great season overall, the best season of the \"normal\" ones. This season was the one that was most about actual business skills. Later on the series almost drowned in marketing related tasks with way too many product placements. Great and interesting contestants overall, with the most likable character ever in this series: Troy. I know I'm not the only person who suspect that the Trump World Tower-episode where he got fired was rigged to have Amy and Nick win this particular task.Season 2: Also a great season. The tasks were still pretty much OK, and it had many interesting contestants. Jen M was terrible and should never had made it to the final, IMO. Also, this season had the worst firing ever (Pamela).Season 3: Terrible. Actually, I liked the concept of book smarts vs. street smarts, but the cast was so utterly terrible (it turned out that Trump hated the cast as well) that the whole season was a total disaster. Best moments was the second episode (motel renovation), with PM Brian fired, a guy who added nothing but huge amounts of comedy value.Season 4: An excellent season, much because of the interesting and entertaining contestants this season (especially Randall, Alla, Marcus and the total disaster whose name was Toral). The \"Take me out to the Boardroom\" episode is one of the absolute classics of this show, ending with the well-remembered quadruple firing. Sadly, I think we got robbed for the Randall vs. Alla final. I think Trump was afraid that she could have won, and prevented that from happening.Season 5: A boring season with really no special things to it. Brent was just an embarrassment and obviously only there to create drama. The tasks were terrible overall (how has creating a jingle anything to do with business at all?). I guess the best man won, but personally I couldn't care less.Season 6: I can see why they wanted to try out L.A. as a new location for the show, but looking back it was a mistake. New York will always be the place for this. This season added so many new things, most of them terrible (like losing team having to sleep outside in tents, winning PM continues to be PM ,for example). The tasks were terrible and Trump also chose the wrong winner. James deserved it, no doubt.Season 7: Celebrity edition. Best season ever. Totally different rules (like the use of rolodexes), but all fun and entertainment. The biggest problem was that many of the contestants were not real celebrities at all, especially the women where everyone were unknown to me except for Omarosa, who is a total disgrace to everything she takes part in. This looked to be Gene Simmon's season, but after he made a complete fool of himself during the Kodak task , another man emerged from the shadows: Piers Morgan. Never has anyone dominated a season like he did. He crushed his opponents and also came across as a guy with a great sense of humor (although some uptight Americans (not all Americans, of course, don't take me wrong) sadly didn't have the social skills to understand it). WAY TO GO PIERS!!For fans of this i highly recommend the UK version starring Sir Alan Sugar as the boss. In fact, the British version is way better, and that says something since the American (and original) truly is a great show. One thing about the UK version is that the contestants normally tend to behave like decent human beings in the boardroom, unlike the constant yelling and rude behavior that takes place in the US version.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3afe79dc3ffb4ce6b8f050d99578213f",
            "input": "I don't know if the problem I had with this movie is that I was not able to capture the way movies were done in the past but I believe that this one did not miss to make use of any of the the fashionable conventions available in the 40s to make a film. If you don't have anything better to do my advise is not to watch this movie but to read a book or to go out for a walk.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0af2145681f42fca120db673295b735",
            "input": "I wonder who was responsible for this mess. The jokes wouldn't have worked for gilligan's island. If this had gone to series, would there have been jokes about Auschwitz, or would Eva have to replace her oven, only to have Adolf suggest the kind that seats 50?? Another post compared this show to I love Lucy. The problem with this is that Lucille Ball was a genius at physical comedy and bizarre situations, and this mess was just plain badly done and an insult to my intelligence. After the damage the Nazi's did to England and the number of people they killed, I would think the very concept of a comedy about Hitler would seem repugnant and most normal people would have killed this concept before any episodes were produced.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03a790c8bc0c477eada8f74cebfb18b4",
            "input": "Unreal \"movie\", what were these people on?? A mix of French Upstairs Downstairs, mating horses,porn (not suggested, its pretty full on for a film) & bestiality with a bit of Benny Hill music & chase scenes thrown in, its sounds crazy & its even more so to watch. **spoiler** It plods along in a tedious fashion for quite a while,.... then a Lamb does a runner, prompting woman in period dress to run off after it, she goes into the woods where she is set upon by an erect \"penis\" attached to a man in a bear/rat manky suit, I put it like that as its obvious the \"penis\" is in charge & gets way too much screen time, ejaculating for the most of it, anyway, in a nutshell, it turns out she liked a bit of bear/rat tadger & thats about it, the rest is just padding. **end spoiler** A film made to shock & offend, thus getting talked about, any publicity is good publicity I suppose,a waste of time really, but the \"main event\" has to be seen to be believed, its hard to imagine that anyone thought it was a good idea as they filmed it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f516850a40a34750a28cfa8bad4ae22f",
            "input": "This movie is one of the most Underrated movie of its time. When watching this movie , your filled with action, and when somethings not really happing , the humour is un matched. Brilliant writing for a movie that was made to give us a bloody mix , of a game show where criminals are the contestants, and a near future where the general public all have a thirst for blood.Also Arnold Doesn't let us down with some of his best one liners.I don't want to spoil anything for you ,but i will tell you when Arnold gives his \"I'll be back line\" He gets the best response of them all in this movie. Hope you enjoy this gem as much as i did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-591f4b21e9494e44a061fe672ed5bb9b",
            "input": "Before the regular comments, my main curiosity about THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is that while there's a running time listed on IMDb of 94 minutes, the DVD from Wellspring Media in the United States runs 88 minutes. Any input on this is appreciated!Two friends with very rough lives take on the road for an adventure. What they wind up in is just that, with one accidentally shooting a girl and the two escaping by foot into the countryside. Rather than just a big chase, the film is complicated by the the daft and rather childlike Spike behaving inappropriately, and clutching his boom box like a teddy bear. Some viewers may dislike the story based solely upon the character Spike, but without a bit of frustration added to the story, the film would have been too easy. You'll notice the way the more stable character Heaton refers to Spike as \"big man\" in contrast to Spike's \"kid out of control\" attitude and behavior. Frankly, I too was aggravated by Spike's ridiculous actions, especially the spray can sniffing, but in a desperate situation it's apparent someone of his mentality would choose an temporary escape. But, Heaton was there to keep things in check up until things get way over his head as well.Kenny Glenaan as Heaton is a marvel, and after a while I quit wondering why in the heck he would want to pick Spike up from prison and continue a friendship, due to Glenaan's great performance. After all, there are many many reasons during their run that would be a good idea for Heaton to just ditch Spike and try to save himself. I suppose Heaton felt like a protective older brother to Spike, and the loyalty between the two is hard to break -- until things get too desperate.While some of the cinematography is indeed artsy, it does offer more flavor to story instead of just shots of the men running through the wilderness. The beautiful landscapes, rain, and vast gray skies offer a somber tone that increases the feel of the tragic circumstances. The score is unusual as well, and the use of Public Image Ltd.'s song \"This Is Not A Love Song\" and as the title of the film is quite smart.Overall, it's understandable if you don't care for THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG as it's focused on two contrasting personalities escaping from another man determined to hunt them down (played by a cool, quiet David Bradley). It's not big-budget action entertainment. For the rest of us that enjoy seeking out something minimal and dramatic, it's time worthwhile spent, and it DOES offer some extremely tense moments that have you holding your breath a bit.I'm really enjoying the films coming out of Scotland recently, with the likes of this one, Dog Soldiers, and The Devil's Tattoo. I'm also a bit thankful for the subtitles offered on this DVD, as the accents are sometimes lightning fast and difficult for some viewers like me to understand. Frustrating, dark, and often tense, THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is very tragic yet engrossing storytelling.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8d6e04d9e094113980ca3e60a674072",
            "input": "I am a huge fan of the comic book series, but this movie fell way below my expectations. I expected a Heavy Metal 2000 kinda feel to it.....slow moving, bad dialogue, lots o' blood.....but this was worse than anything I could have imagined. The plot line is almost the same as the comic, but the good points pretty much stop there. The characters don't have the energy or spirit that drew my attention in the comic series. The movie only covers a small portion of the comic, and the portion used is more slow and boring than later parts. The focus in the movie is on the insignificant events instead of the more interesting overall plot of the comic book.With the right people working on this project, it could have been amazing. Sadly, it wasn't that way, so now there is yet another terrible movie that few will see and even fewer will love. My copy will surely collect dust for years until I finally throw it out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2847a65c11645afbd7583b8a3e8d5cc",
            "input": "I liked the initial premise to this film which is what led me to hunt it out but the problem I quickly found is that one pretty much knows what's going to happen within the first 20-30 minutes ( the doubles will come from behind the mirror and take over everybody).There is no real twist (which is fine) , but the final reveal doesn't make a great deal of sense either (how can she be racked with uncertainty and fear for the whole film, if she's an evil id from beyond the mirror?).Admittedly the scenes 'beyond the mirror' were chilling when they first appeared and the blonde's murder is also effectively creepy, but ultimately alas this seems to be a film in search of a story or a more engaging script, piling atmosphere upon atmosphere and over the top scary sound design for 80-90 minutes does not really cut it, in fact it gets quite dull.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b911108d4eff4333920dcc1060e65648",
            "input": "This so called remake is terrible. I went to see this tonight.. on the first day as the anticipation and hype was too much for me to handle. But within the first half an hour, we knew that this is a disaster. It not only does not match the hype created but also insults the original blockbuster. The script had loopholes, the editing was untidy quite a few times. Mohanlal who is an excellent actor did an okay job. Amitabh was alright.. the director wanted to portray how evil his character is but he went a bit overboard which resulted in it being forceful. Ajay who is especially smooth in these kind of roles was also a disappointment. Lets not even get started about the new guy Prashant.. one wouldn't be proud to start off a career with something like this. Rajpal Yadav who was thrown in for a few laughs couldn't even get a smile out of anyone because of his forceful humor and the shrill voice. Nisha Kothari proved that she is one of the worst actresses we have today. All in all, RGV who I thought was one of the most talented and gifted directors India has had.. failed miserably. He took up such a huge challenge and responsibility to remake what is known as the best Hindi movie ever and made a mess out of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-932481bfd088491aae57cba8ae1e06d6",
            "input": "This movie was an attempt to go into places most don't and perhaps shouldn't venture into. It was a similar trial at the bizarre, head-case perspective given to us in The Cell, although not near as in-depth and well portrayed. The plot is constructed simply with an initial campy feel to it. Then, as the movie takes its supposed \"dramatic\" turn, the plot falls apart on what few legs it had to stand on in the first place. Basically the idea is that of a kid (Chris McKenna) who needs money. He takes on the role of a hit man, killing a city accountant. Then he doesn't get paid for his work but instead gets tortured for several days because he dreamed up the \"brilliant\" idea of trying to use a backup file he had as leverage for payment. This idiotic move at trying to force them to pay him backfires as he is horribly and endlessly abused. He begins to go crazy (some very disturbing scenes). Then, thinking he has paid for his sins and can start over, he visits the wife (Kari Wuhrer) of the man who he killed and wins her affections. Soon after she discovers who he is, tragedy strikes, and revenge sweeps through the air as the boy goes after his torturers (Daniel Baldwin, George Wendt, Vernon Wells) for their previous \"kindness\".I got to ask though, what is it with Kari Wuhrer and horror/gore type films?It seems everything she has put out lately has been in this genre. Granted, I liked her in \"Eight-Legged Freaks\" and she was okay in \"Anaconda\". But despite all her obvious cuteness and allure (wow, she's hot!), she can act much better and chose better roles. Or maybe, I'm wrong and that is just a misconception. For all you guys out there, you get to see the \"fully monty\" of her in this film, although it's rather bizarre and short-lived. I almost felt like she did some soft-porn after watching this film (something not foreign to Kari's career). The sex-simulation is such that it has to make you wonder what things really go on during filming. Anyway, I will say there is some good acting. Just don't expect much of it from Daniel Balwin, whose career seems forever destined to second his brother Alex's. The film did bring out a few old greats though, George Wendt (Norm from Cheers) and Vernon Wells (Commando, Weird Science). Above all, Chris McKenna does the best job in playing the main character, Sean Crawley. His little acting experience and yet his believable nature as a naive youth, bring some elements of substance to the film. I wouldn't go out of my way for this one. If you're bored and are tired of the same old episodes of \"The Hitchhiker\", then I might advise watching this.And Kari, please start acting in some better films!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-baeff58483a24d77a897760b08eca4da",
            "input": "My personal favorite horror film. From the lengthy first tracking shot to the final story twist, this is Carpenter's masterpiece.Halloween night 1963, little Michael Meyers murders his older sister. All-hallows-eve 1978, Michael escapes from Smith's Grove sanitarium. Halloween night, Michael has come home to murder again.The story is perfectly simple, Michael stalks and kills babysitters. No bells or whistles, just the basics. It's Carpenter's almost over-powering atmosphere of dread that generates the tension. Like any great horror film, events are telegraphed long in advance, yet they still seem to occur at random, never allowing the audience to the chance to second guess the film.The dark lighting, the long steady-cam shots, and (most importantly) that damn eerie music create the most claustrophobic and uncomfortable scenes I have yet to see in film. There is a body count, but compared to the slew of slashers after this it's fairly small. That and most of the murders are nearly bloodless. The fear is not in death, but in not knowing.The acting is roundelay good. PJ Soles provides much of the films limited humor (and one of the best deaths), Nancy Loomis turns in a decent performance and then there is the young (at the time) Jamie Leigh-Curtis. Her performance at first seems shy and un-assured, yet you quickly realize that it is perfect for the character, who is herself shy and un-assured and not at all prepared for what she is to face. And of course there is the perfectly cast Donald Pleasence as the determined (perhaps a little unstable) Dr. Sam Loomis. Rest in peace Mr. Pleasence.If the film has a detrimental flaw, it would be the passage of time. Since the release of this film so many years ago nearly countless clones, copies, rip-offs, and imitators have come along and stolen (usually badly) the films best bits until nearly everything about it has become familiar. Combined with the changes for audience expectations and appetites, one finds much of the films raw power diluted. To truly appreciate it in this day and age, it must be viewed as it once was, as something unique.Never the less, I have no reservation with highly recommending this film to anyone looking for a good, scary time. Highest Reguards.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecc825b6e9684b41bc853e19116def1f",
            "input": "Most people, especially young people, may not understand this film. It looks like a story of loss, when it is actually a story about being alone. Some people may never feel loneliness at this level.Cheadles character Johnson reflected the total opposite of Sandlers character Fineman. Where Johnson felt trapped by his blessings, Fineman was trying to forget his life in the same perspective. Jada is a wonderful additive to the cast and Sandler pulls tears. Cheadle had the comic role and was a great supporter for Sandler.I see Oscars somewhere here. A very fine film. If you have ever lost and felt alone, this film will assure you that you're not alone.Jerry",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f63ff43469e14a3299fb3e80be19adae",
            "input": "- Contains miner spoilers - I have seen a number of decent Indie horror films such as The Hamiltons, The Boys Love Mandy Lane and Cabin Fever; unfortunately I felt Five Across the Eyes does not fall into this category. From start to finish the film is plagued with amateurish acting resonating from a very poor script, god only knows why the writer(s) thought dialogue such as \"No don't go out there; don't go out there she'll get you: if she gets you she'll kill you and if she kills you you're dead\" is of movie quality.This film displays very little character development and to be honest I couldn't care less about what pain and torture was inflicted upon them as they are just a group of ditsy college girls who show almost no redeeming qualities'. All they do is cry and whinge throughout the entire movie and if the girls aren't crying their arguing; when they do converse the topics are completely random: about dating boys or how one of the girls father was recently cremated (appropriate subjects when you're being chased by a psychotic killer).The soundtrack is also abysmal exhibiting corny techno music during both the start and end credits (although hearing the credit music knowing the end was nearing seemed like heaven).The camera-work is appalling and at times makes the film unwatchable. I'm guessing due to having little or no budget the director was limited to just one digital camera which resides in the girls' car almost the entire movie. I think this was an effort to stick the audience as close to the action as possible: to feel and experience what the girls are going through. But due to a very shaky camera, grainy picture and being too close to the action it can be hard to tell what is going on during action scenes and is simply chaotic. It's one thing to make a film subjective but it's another to have action on the screen that an audience can't decipher because of the poor cinematography.I understand that Five Across the Eyes is a low budget indie film but that does not excuse the extremely poor quality. There are no redeeming factors to this film: bad acting, poor scripting, shoddy camera-work and no story. In light off all this I decided to give the film 1 out of 10 as it left me very disappointed; wanting a meteor to hit the earth bringing me sweet relief. Its 94 minutes off stupid college girls crying, arguing, aimlessly running and having random inappropriate conversations. However, how many times do you get to see girls defecating into their hands and throwing the crap onto the windscreen of a chasing car.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6eddd6227ad243a68569d0ce308c02cc",
            "input": "I purchased this movie at a car boot sale, so I was not expecting it to be a horror movie on the same level as A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) or The Hills Have Eyes (1977) but I thought that it would still be fairly enjoyable to watch. However, it proved to be not at all enjoyable, but instead the acting and the general movie was mock-able, such as the ways the the 'unsees killer' murders his victims and how all of the people killed just happen to be young blonde women. It was a stereotypical horror film. I say this because of the following reasons:1) Three blonde women in danger, the majority get killed. 2) One survives by crawling around in the dark while being chased by the killer. 3) Surprise surprise, help arrives in the form of a shotgun!By using three simple points, I have saved you two odd hours by summarising this poor excuse of a horror movie, so you are now lucky enough to not have to watch it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fdcb92a4ab3a488a9e0e0c1ab4e9fa7e",
            "input": "This movie was in a sci-fi 50-pack a friend of mine got me for Christmas. It is very similar to the first Gozilla movie, and like that movie, has scenes with American actors inserted for no real reason. One interesting thing about the inserted scenes is that there's a Cold War tension portrayed between America and Russia. Like in Godzilla, Gamera is awakened by an atomic explosion and rampages across the world, paying close attention to Tokyo because no big monster movie is complete unless Tokyo bites it. All in all, this is an okay movie. Some of the scenes involving Gamera, particularly the scenes in Toly, are quite spectacular and have special effects that were pretty decent at the time. If you like Japanese giant monster movies, you'll really get a kick out of this one. I give it a 4 out of 10. Had this been the unedited Japanese version that I watched, it probably would've gotten a 5.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e82bac21c3a43fdaa5d062d701ef2aa",
            "input": "Don't let my constructive criticism stop you from buying and watching this Romy Schneider classic. This movie was shot in a lower budget ,probably against the will of Ernest Marishka, so he had to make due.For example england is portrayed as bordering on Germany.BY a will of the wisp Victoria and her mom are taking a vacation to Germany by buggy ride alone.They arrived their too quick. This probably could not be helped but the castle they rented, for the movie, was Austrian. When she's told that she's queen she goes to the royal room where the members of the court bow to her, where are the British citizens out side from the castle cheering for their new queen? Why ISBN't she showing her self up to the balcony to greet her subjects ?Low budget!Where the audience back then aware of these imperfection? I wonder how the critics felt?Durring the inn scene she meets prince Albert but ISBN't excited about it. Durring the meeting in the eating side of the inn your hear music from famous old American civil war songs like \" My old Kentucky home\" , and \"Old black Joe\". What? civil war songs in the 1830's? Is Romy Schneider being portrayed as Scarlet?Where's Mammy? Is Magna Shnieder playing her too? Is Adrian Hoven Rhett or Ashley? What was in Marishka mind?Well this add to the camp.It's unintentionally satirizing Queen Victoria'a story. This is the only reason you should collect it or see it 03 11 09 correction Germany and england are connected",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-119422dfbf19494d97c1700360438115",
            "input": "Definitely a very good idea,screenplay was just OK.Could have been better,The positives are that it doesn't bore you if you're an adventure lover,A new idea about the lost world of Atlantis.Negatives are that I personally feel that this idea had so much more potential than this.They should've ended up with a better adventure than this.It wasn't bad at all but it would have been much better with some more runtime.Enjoyed it a lot though,Cant say that it was boring or wasn't good..A good one for the people who like adventure animations like Sindbad,like The road to el Dorado.This movie is also recommended for people looking for a nice little adventure with a very nice happy ending.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe9daadc46cc463e9ada7eb5bdd497d6",
            "input": "i almost did not go see this movie because i remember march of the penguin was not that much exciting. I went mainly because Disney promised to plant a tree if i go see it on the opening weekend, but after i did go see it, it was simply amazing; the fact that the photographers can capture impossible images are simply worth your money. You also get to see different habitats, different vegetation, animals, and natural phenomenons that will not only shock you - simply because you would never expect nature to be so magical and dynamic - but also touch your souls and raise the question of humanity versus the world, of how our lives have deviated from nature to such a degree that we take for granted of the natural beauty and miracles that are quintessential to our biosphere. You don't have to be an earth lover or a tree-hugging environmentalist to appreciate the mere awesomeness of this documentary. You simply have to be a curious soul who questions the value and miracle of living. Enjoy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1db83346a2a74119a484ac67f22e7be3",
            "input": "Fire And Ice is an animated film set in a fantasy world. The film is about a village that is destroyed by a giant glacier which is the home of the evil ice lord named Nekron. The only survivor of the village is a young man named Larn who sets out to avenge those who were killed by the glacier. The ice glacier moves through the land of fire and the princess of the land named Teegra is kidnapped by evil creatures. Larn sets out to find her and also sets out to find and kill Nekron. Fire And Ice is directed by Ralph Bakshi who is one of my favourite adult animators. He has brought us such animated masterpieces as the film version of Fritz The Cat and some films he has written himself, like the great film Heavy Traffic. I didn't like Fire And Ice nearly as much as I have Ralph Bakshi's other work, but I still found the film to be enjoyable. It had some very nice animation in parts and the story was entertaining enough. The only basic complaints I have is that I wish that there was more of a story to the film because the story it uses is very thin and there is not a lot to it. I also wish the film was a bit longer because it is under 80 minutes in running time. Still it's an entertaining action adventure films that unlike Fritz The Cat or Heavy Traffic is appropriate for kids 8 and older. I only wish that there was a more developed story and it went on a bit longer than it did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-162f92c70c4246b692c654ab4ed3892a",
            "input": "This scared the hell out of me when i was a teenager. Now I find it more amusing than scary, but with some pretty unsettling moments and with a kind of sleazy quality to it that I like. And, come to think of it, the plot is rather disgusting actually...but handled with some kind of taste. If there is a problem with this movie, it is that there are HUGE gaps where nothing exciting or interesting happens. Also, the ending goes on forever, making a potentially tense climax seem silly after a while with Barbara Bach screaming and screaming. The \"monster\", after it is exposed, isn't very scary either unfortunately. The somewhat drab look of the movie also works against it, making it appear as a TV-movie more than something made for theaters. But it is an example of films that are rarely made nowadays so I urge horror fans to watch it and feel a bit nostalgic...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d5b52628dfb4da080d1886ab914b47f",
            "input": "Not even worth watching this tacky spoiler ruins everything about 'Annie'. The characters seem almost cheapened by the poorly written storyline and they low quality feeling to the production. It was very clearly made for TV, yet if I found it on my television, I would flick it straight over. The children in the film do an alright job, yet the adults acting is unbelievable and so the movie fails to really draw you in. This film lacked the music/dance numbers thats made the original brilliant and truly does take the shine of the Annie we all love. Johnson, as Annie is at times annoying and over acted..you cannot convince yourself that she truly is Annie. The differences in character appearance continued to irritate me throughout the duration of the film. Sad to say this sequel was a total flop.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-102a8d9a8b4248ea8cc8043066a0299d",
            "input": "I wouldn't normally write a comment on-line, but this is the worst movie I've ever seen. Not only that it's filmed just like a soap series (\"The young and the restless\" is really filmed by professionals compared to this), but it also has awful cuts. It has no action. It is full of useless garbage.Here's an example: a guy wants to kill the main character as he got fired because of him. So (after loads of crap) here they are: the guy puts a knife at his throat and says something like \"You're dead now\". Then the main character says: \"If you kill me you're dead. I've told the police you're threatening me\". So the (killer) guy goes like (just about to cry): \"Oh no... the cops are following me!?!! Oh... my God\".Remember: this is just an example. I really cannot believe this movie actually exists. So: IF you want to see the WORST movie ever... go ahead, I recommend it :)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebff567fde594bafbcacb1cd417cd5f6",
            "input": "Half a dozen short stories of varying interest enlighten us about life in Finland. These stories are interwoven and each contains a scene in which a sonic boom is heard. This indicates that the events depicted happen at the same time.The film begins with a bungy jump which promises some excitement but the early stories are quite low key. The film improves so stick with it. Two broken marriages in stories that follow provide plenty of drama while a scene in a hospital gives us a terminally ill patient begging for pain relief. The last moments with his wife are both convincing and moving.While the various scenes of family life take place in Finland, the themes are of a general nature wherever you happen to live.Collections of short stories are rarely as satisfying as a good tense 90-minute drama.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee29ef29aa4542a8b2748e56f220cdee",
            "input": "I read Schneebaum's book (same title as this film) when it was first published and was deeply moved by his ability to see through the many ways of \"otherness\" (his own and the people of the Amazon with whom he lived and loved) to a way of living a decent life. His subsequent books were not as powerful, but showed his continuing quest. His description of his sexual relations with the men of the tribe was way ahead of its time in the early 60's, but his honesty and openness about it were welcome. This movie beautifully conveys both the quirkiness and generosity of the man, but also provides a glimpse into the inevitable destruction of innocence (which is not a morally positive term, in this case) that occurs when \"civilized\" men intrude on traditional societies. Even so, Schneebaum himself has moved into a kind of higher innocence that suggests the possibility of saving humanity from its own destructiveness.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f8c605cca44439a9b1bd6520457c4fe",
            "input": "While thinking of \"The Great Escape\" I allowed my mind to wander back to this little gem of a movie from my childhood. I had read and re-read the autobiographical novel from 1949 which inspired it, and when it came to the only cinema (we never used that word then , actually) in town that showed \"foreign\" films, I was first in line to buy my ticket.As someone brought up on wartime newsreels and propaganda films during WWII, I had an avid interest in exploring the realities of that conflict as reflected in the memoirs and stories of men who were there in person. That extended later to a keen willingness over the years to buy any book on the subject, and eventually to read the equally compelling novels of Hans Helmut Kirst and Erich Maria Remarque, which provided an even deeper sensibility. The movie versions, however, were unlike this one in that they rarely delivered the goods.The medium of black-and-white film has never been served so well as it was in those years. I have never seen any technicolor version of war that seems as authentic as do the deep chiaroscuros of films like \"The Wooden Horse.\" If it is true that we are destined always to be captive to the images of our childhood, then I confess it freely.And there will never be another the likes of Leo Genn as the emblematic British war hero on film. Not even Sir Alec.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fdbb824ec5e4ac88a89c76d0c12effd",
            "input": "The one sheets and newspaper campaign suggested (as often they did) a far more lurid and violent piece than showed up on the drive-in screens. Claude Brook is actually an Americanization of Claudio Brook, who worked in films for years. This one's quite hard to find anymore; I'd love to see it again to compare it to other international horrors of the day, but don't remember particularly impressed way back when. Chances are it was a chopped up version that made it to U.S. theatres and video. But oh, that one sheet...still a gem of my later horror collection.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e9635417a4c4de5a56cc7ae0dbc1347",
            "input": "Except for an awkward scene, this refreshing fairy tale fantasy has a fun and delightful undercurrent of adult cynical wit that charms its way into the audience as well as a soundtrack that powerfully moves this fairy epic along. Except for one of the Robert DeNiro scenes that doesn't come across smooth and appears out of sync with the tone of the rest of the movie, this luscious romantic fairy tail has a great storytelling feel and the strong magic and the fine balance between serious adventure scenes and the lighter spiritual humor is well done. In the updated tradition of THE PRINCESS BRIDE this contemporary presentation of magic and love is captivating. Eight out of Ten Stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42a1982a39c14ee5b7e51c551bcc0892",
            "input": "Take \"Rambo,\" mix in some \"Miami Vice,\" slice the budget about 80%, and you've got something that a few ten-year-old boys could come up with if they have a big enough backyard & too much access to \"Penthouse.\" Cop and ex-commando McBain (Busey, and with a name like McBain, you know he's as gritty as they come) is recruited to retrieve an American supertank that has been stolen & hidden in Mexico. Captured with the tank were hardbitten Sgt. Major O'Rourke (Jones) & McBain's former love Devon (Fluegel), the officer in command & now meat for the depraved terrorists/spies/drug peddlers, who have no sense of decency, blah, blah, blah. For an action movie with depraved sex, there's a dearth of action and not much sex. The running joke is that McBain gets shot all the time & survives, keeping the bullets as souvenirs. Apparently the writers didn't see \"The Magnificent Seven\" (\"The man for us is the one who GAVE him that face\"), nor thought to give McBain even a pretense of intelligence. Even for a budget actioner, the production values are poor, with distant shots during dialog and very little movement. The main prop, the tank, is silly enough for an Ed Wood production. Fluegel, who might have been a blonde Julia Roberts (she had a far bigger role in \"Crime Story\" than Julia!) has to go from simpering to frightened to butt-kicking & back again on an instant's notice. Jones, who's been in an amazing array of films, pretty much hits bottom right here. Both he & Busey were probably just out for some easy money & a couple of laughs. Look for talented, future character actor Danny Trejo (\"Heat,\" \"Once Upon a Time in Mexico\") in a stereotyped, menacing bit part. Much too dull even for a guilty pleasure, \"Bulletproof\" is still noisy enough to play when you leave your house but want people to think there's someone home.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fab90e79685c41bc9bb14cf4299e0aa9",
            "input": "I was talked into watching this movie by a friend who blubbered on about what a cute story this was.Yuck.I want my two hours back, as I could have done SO many more productive things with my time...like, for instance, twiddling my thumbs. I see nothing redeeming about this film at all, save for the eye-candy aspect of it...3/10 (and that's being generous)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d481ade5d9cc43df8e699df07b830034",
            "input": "I also saw this amazingly bad piece of \"anime\" at the London Sci-Fi Festival. If you HAVE to watch this thing, do so with a large audience preferably after a few beers, you may then glean some enjoyment from it. I found the dialogue hilarious, lodged in my mind is the introduction of Cremator. The animation is awful. It is badly designed and badly executed. It may have been a good idea for the producers to have hired at least one person who was not colour blind.There's nothing else to say really, this film is a failure on every level.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a2336119aac845ada4704c5b3cca3959",
            "input": "A wonderful and gritty war film that focuses on the inner torment of blinded marine Al Schmid. Although it is tough and unpleasant it IS in the end heroic - Schmid's triumph over disability and depression. The battle scene was superb. But one bone to pick. No matter how many .50 bullets they fired I never saw any water or dirt being kicked up by the impacts! It hurt the realism, but I can live with it. Fine performance by Eleanor Parker, again, as his girl friend.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7556da71d25240d997f91f10ed8087c1",
            "input": "This movie start quite gruesomely with a female being bound and psychologically tortured. There's male full frontal nudity, dead animal parts, dogs licking nipples, the female loosing control of her bladder. All shot in a gray cold color. Effective, but a little too much. We then move on to seeing the BTK killer's youth as well as the present and his history of crimes. The tension is entirely psychological and the scenes of the killer entering the homes of his victims and talking to them lasts for quite a long time and it's creepy. Here we don't see fancy or good imagery, it looks as if shot with your home camera. It doesn't look horrifying, but in a way seeing a criminal engage his victims for quite some time before killing them is quite unusual and chilling. What this movie doesn't have is any drama, really. There are some cop scenes every once in a while, but there's no excitement in terms of them finding the killer. There isn't much of an arc to this story. This could have been an effective psychological thriller, a study of madness. Unfortunately, the movie is filled with real slaughterhouse footage. It's dispersed throughout the movie and comes on suddenly again and again. Sometimes you don't know it's coming and don't have enough time to look away. And that I have to reject. I'm all for low budget horror movies but I don't tolerate animal suffering. It was unnecessary, excessive, and comes without warning. I'm glad that Lionsgate releases stuff that no one else does, but they should have passed on this movie or edited out the animal gore. Stay away from this garbage.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c0c15bb3427413c89e4634636a89146",
            "input": "This movie is goofy as hell! I think it was written as a serious film, but then when it came time to film, Michael Cooney said \"Hey, let's throw in some humor and spice it up!\" The characters are actually slightly developed, too. Oh, and the death sequences are the best. One thing I hate, though, was the hairdryer-weapons. What was that all about?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-703fc6f66357459094b9276f79b33ec2",
            "input": "This movie starts slow, then tapers off. After watching for about an hour, and seeing absolutely nothing happen, I walked out. I mean, nothing happened. Zero. Zip. Nada. There is no story. The characters are vague representations of the most boring people any of us know. The producers of this film could be sued in a court of law if they try to sell it as a \"motion\" picture. There is no motion. I could have told the same \"story\" with a couple still pictures with captions. The script is a joke. It's just awful. I doubt that any script doctor in the world could save it. My biggest regret is not that I wasted 60 minutes of my life watching \"Love In the Time of Money\", but that I missed a great opportunity to be a leader. I could have been the first to walk out, but I waited a bit too long. Instead, I watched about 20 people walk out before me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-edb2d0ad3d9749c5a4fc2fcac5dae614",
            "input": "Imagine a woman alone in a house for forty five minutes in which absolutely nothing happens. Then this goes on twice more. The writing is flat and lifeless, and jokes unfunny, and the bad acting keeps you from caring about any of the characters, even when they battle wolf packs and get beaten up by fraternity goons. Anyone that ranked this movie higher than a two is not fully sane.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de19cd4ae077441182aec2660ed51b7a",
            "input": "Those who only remember the late Sir Peter Ustinov as Hercule Poirot or a professional raconteur would do well to seek out this charming piece of late '60s satire. Ustinov stars as a convicted embezzler (we first see him during his last day in gaol where he is preparing the prison governor's tax return) who, sensing that the future is in computers, poses (by means of a deft piece of identity theft) as a computer expert and sets out to infiltrate an American multinational.Ustinov (who co-wrote the script) is on top form, as is the delightful Maggie Smith, here unusually cast as an accident-prone cockney-sparrow dolly bird. Bob Newhart also puts in an amusing performance as a suspicious executive who has designs on Maggie Smith. In addition, Karl Malden is satisfyingly sleazy as Ustinov and Newhart's womanising boss.What do I particularly like about this film? Not only is it a well-thought-out 'caper movie' but it's also a touching little love story; Ustinov and Smith are very convincing as the two misfits stumbling into love (the whole scene involving the deck of cards is particularly effective.)So, what is there not to like? Well, the script is no more computer-literate than most films (that is, hardly at all) even though it captures the feel of late '60s 'big iron' business computing quite well. Also there are a couple of small plot glitches that you're not likely to notice until the second or third viewing, but I consider these to be minor niggles.As I said, this is a film which is well worth seeking out, and after you've seen it once you'll want to see it again at regular intervals.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d97f0fc8fc9b4cceb717c4ff0a86242e",
            "input": "We've been served - a terrible film.Okay, I'll admit that since I'm white and have had no practical experience in the \"competitive world of step-dancing,\" I might not exactly be an authority on this type of film. On the other hand, I do know a bad motion picture when I see it.And, boy, have I just seen it.Filmed in Low-Budget-Vision and directed by Ian Iqubal Rashid, (\"A Touch of Pink\"), \"How She Move\" tells the tale of how important it is to follow one's dreams - even if those dreams include bopping around to loud, irritating hip-hop music and speaking dialogue the average person would not understand if he or she had an international translator.I'll try to give a small synopsis of the \"plot.\" First of all there are two actors that look like LL Cool J who work in an auto shop in Toronto (the Mecca of racial diversity), but still have time to practice dancing for eight hours a day. There are a few other guys in this \"crew,\" including a token white dude and a guy that looks like Denzel Washington in \"Malcolm X.\" There are also two women in the movie - one resembles Serena Williams and the other looks like Geraldine from the old \"Flip Wilson Show.\" One of these ladies was kicked out of a private college because her parents spent all of her tuition on a drug-addicted sibling. The other girl, a member of Salt N Pepa, no doubt, is just plain no good.There's another guy who looks like Eddie Murphy's Buckwheat, while still another actor who's a Huggy Bear knock-off. These guys are rival step dancers. Evidently, this activity is very hard-core in the 'hood, and they are all practicing for the big \"Step Monster\" jam in Detroit.Since I was unable to understand 90 percent of the dialogue (perhaps some subtitles would have been useful, as in a Bergman film or that one music video by Snow), it's hard to explain what happens, other than there's a lot of arguing, the Serena Williams girl (who never smiles, by the way) becomes a freelance stepper (moving from group to group), there's some step-dancing and a lot of irritating hip-hop music.It's a typical rags-to-riches story; sort of like \"Rocky\" with a really bad soundtrack, \"Rudy\" with annoying rap music in the background, \"Cry Freedom\" without the laughs. But why does a film - which could have made a big impact on black audiences - have to contain drug addiction, bad parents and a title that sounds like a first-grader saying the phrase, \"How she moves\"?I was \"moved\" by this movie, however. Moved to leave the theater as quickly as possible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5b5af56756c42b2afaf9fe30e54e75e",
            "input": "Ah, Channel 5 of local Mexican t.v. Everyday, at 2:00 a.m. they air Horror movies from the 70's to early 2000's. It was \"Return To Cabin By The Lake\" the movie that aired yesterday. I regret for watching it.The original \"Cabin By The Lake\" was a regularly popular low budgeter and it was good accepted. The problem is that this sequel is horrible, not even unintentionally funny and tries to imitate the original. Ugh. The plot is really stupid in all the sense of the word.The movie at some points looks like a soap-opera because of it's absurd dialogs, cinematography, and direction.My advice is : avoid this one at all costs. It's a movie that it shouldn't be watched by anyone. Not even for lovers of mediocre film-making.You have been warned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ffdd9d4f43ad45948a1acabc8b013dc4",
            "input": "1.) This movie was amazing! I watched it while I was in the town next to the one where he grew up! I went and saw the buildings that the story took place in. Overall, I loved this movie, One of Jake Gyllenhaal's best!! Also- my favorite parts were the science fair, and all the times with his father. They were so sad, it seemed. Homer wanted to follow his dream and his dad didn't seem to care one way or another. That tag line is true. \"Sometimes One Dream is bright enough to light up the sky.\" 2.) The way this movie was shot was impeccable, it was all so believable that it could have been recorded during the 1950's. Dress was accurate and they had their slang down too. Definitely recommend this movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b0f02e599654ce9b52a05d621532852",
            "input": "Hamlet is by far my favorite of all of Shakespeare's works. Branaugh is one heck of an actor. His portrayal of this was just amazing. His soliloquies were breathtaking. For as long as it was it is rare for a film to hold my interest, however I was engrossed in this particular piece. I recommend this to anyone both fan of Shakespeare and those not so much. This has everything the modern world looks for in its films: murder, betrayal, and deceit. Not to knock Mel Gibson's version, but Branaughs touches the whole work. This leaves no stone unturned. When you finish the film it will feel as if you read the play yourself. Um how you say \"two thumbs up\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-deb62a702455452585b80697fab25922",
            "input": "The Five Deadly Venoms is a great kung-fu action movie wrapped in a whodunnit mystery. There are all the usual telltale signs of a kung-fu flick: great choreography, awful dubbing, different \"styles\" of fighting, and a wide range of greatly exaggerated, often cheesey human emotions. However the plot certainly is better than average. It's interesting and holds your attention throughout the non-fight scenes. Occasionally it's even able to fire up the audience, such as when X character receives horrible injustice.Another thing I love about the Five Deadly Venoms is the beautiful simplicity of the movie's morals and themes. Just about everyone gets what's coming to them. The cowardly, greedy, and corrupt lose out. The bad guys, consumed by selfish greed are ultimately destroyed by their own treachery and backstabbing. The good guys use teamwork, planning, and integrity to overcome the odds and come out on top. Poison Clan rocks!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88b13cbaae7b43e9867ad67aaacae0b7",
            "input": "I really enjoyed this movie. The acting by the adult actors was great, although I did find the main kid a little stiff. But he carried himself very well for being a new talent. The humor is very sublime and not in your face like most Hollywood comedy junk. I.e. The Nutty Professor. If you have a short attention span and are used to the typical Hollywood stuff you probably wouldn't like this as it is a bit slower paced. I picked it up on Blu-ray and I have to say the image quality is top notch. Probably one of the better looking Blu-rays I've seen so far. The extras were cool too. They deleted quite a bit, but that's probably a good thing as most of the deleted scenes didn't really add anything.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9009e23e9253426f97b895f03d14667e",
            "input": "Let me start out by saying I can enjoy just about any bad Italian horror movie or jungle exploitation flick from the 1970's. Seriously. This one was downright awful.There are way too many elements that Martino tries to inject and none of them work (except for the croc-gone-wild thing) very well at all. There are some ignorant Westerners, of course, who set up a resort in the jungle somewhere. I don't even remember where it takes place...how sad is that... Basically, people come to the resort to see this native tribe and its' ceremonies but eventually they upset the 'Alligator God' of the river who then proceeds to go on a rampage, killing said vacationers and some tribesmen as well. Sounds good, yeah? Well, don't get your hopes up. There is minimal violence until the end, the special effects are so bad it was like a kindergarten class performed them and the love story thrown in is laughable.There is seriously a few scenes where it appears they set up a camera underwater in a pool and threw a toy alligator, like a dart, into the water and that is supposed to be the gator attacking. I'm not kidding. In another wonderfully crafted special effect, a Matchbox van is targeted by the incredible sinking plastic gator, who all of a sudden is five times the size of a van. (A few minutes ago, he was only big enough to eat a human, but now he dwarfs a full-size cargo van...) It is really pathetic. The only other flick I can think of where the effects were so bad I was pulled out of the story was Bruno Mattei's masterpiece, \"Rats,\" what with the plastic rats on the conveyor belt and all who COULDN'T be terrified.Normally I'd say anything Sergio Martino was a solid must-see but this one is a must-pass. Waste of time and definitely not worth buying for the $15+ sticker price from No Shame. This one is a SHAME.2 out of 10, kids.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b77bc8df7ac14575b0cbabb27aec44c8",
            "input": "\"Witchery\" might just be the most incoherent and lamentably scripted horror movie of the 80's but, luckily enough, it has a few compensating qualities like fantastic gore effects, an exhilarating musical score and some terrific casting choices. Honestly the screenplay doesn't make one iota of sense, but who cares when Linda Blair (with an exploded hairstyle) portrays yet another girl possessed by evil powers and David Hasselhof depicts a hunky photographer (who can't seem to get laid) in a movie that constantly features bloody voodoo, sewn-shut lips, upside down crucifixions, vicious burnings and an overused but genuinely creepy tune. Eight random people are gathered together on an abandoned vacation resort island off the coast of Massachusetts. The young couple is there to investigate the place's dark history; the dysfunctional family (with a pregnant Linda Blair even though nobody seems to bother about who the father is and what his whereabouts are) considers re-opening the hotel and the yummy female architect simply tagged along for casual sex. They're forced to stay the night in the ramshackle hotel and then suddenly the previous landlady – an aging actress or something who always dresses in black – starts taking them out in various engrossing ways. Everything is somehow related to the intro sequence showing a woman accused of witchery jump out of a window. Anyway, the plot is definitely of minor importance in an Italian horror franchise that started as an unofficial spin-off of \"The Evil Dead\". The atmosphere is occasionally unsettling and the make-up effects are undoubtedly the most superior element of the entire film. There's something supremely morbid and unsettling about staring at a defenseless woman hanging upside down a chimney and waiting to get fried.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea2ec419162240388e6fcb274d6e3443",
            "input": "The first of the official Ghibli films, Laputa is most similar to its predecessor Nausicaa, but whereas Nausicaa was a SF epic, this is more of an action comedy-adventure with a fairly weak SF premise.For the first half hour of the movie I thought I was going to love it. Once again you find yourself in awe of Miyazaki's attention to detail, and his ability to conjure up an imaginary world in meticulous, beautiful perfection. The animation, though still not in the league of the later Ghibli films, is a little better than in Nausicaa.I mentioned in my review of Nausicaa that one character is drawn in a more 'Lupinesque' anime style. Here there are a whole bunch of them: the pirates. They provide the comic element in the film, though quite why it needs a comic element I'm not sure. There was nothing funny about Nausicaa, and I think it was better off for it. Still. having said that, Dola, the pirate leader, is easily the most memorable character in the film (even if she's basically a female Long John Silver. Don't be surprised if you're reminded of 'Treasure Planet' at times) and is well voiced by Cloris Leachman in the American dub.The English voice cast acquit themselves well for the most part, actually. However something started going pear-shaped for me about this movie by about the halfway mark. I think the best way that I could describe it is that the characters get swallowed up by the vast scope of the story. I'll come back to that later.There is so much to admire about Laputa, and so many people obviously love it, that I almost feel mean for only giving it 8 out of 10, but for me the operative word here is 'admire'. It was more impressive than personally affecting, and at over two hours it just started to drag.The crucial thing for me was this: I really found that I didn't care much about any of the characters. Disney would have taken the care to develop the characters, make you really fall for them, rather than leave them as relatively two-dimensional pieces to be moved around while you gawked at the amazing vistas in the movie. Even that would have been tolerable if there was some hard SF in the story to make up for it, but it was basically a lot of gobledegook about Princesses and magic crystals. That's where Laputa falls down as far as I'm concerned, and that's what holds it back from being a potential 10 out of 10 movie. Having said that, it must be admitted that Miyazaki was leagues ahead of Disney in general in 1986, when you consider that their movie of the same year was the pretty dire 'Great Mouse Detective'.Laputa is a good film in some ways an amazing film, and you should definitely see it, but I do feel it's over-rated. I definitely prefer the earlier 'Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind'.BTW, if you manage to watch them in chronological order, watch for the fox-squirrel from Nausicaa popping up briefly in Laputa.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dac29ad6d9154f2692839e7f5668f75d",
            "input": "The film was shot at Movie Flats, just off route 395, near Lone Pine, California, north of the road to Whitney Portals. You can still find splashes of cement and iron joists plastered across the rocks where the sets were built. And you'll recognize the area from any Randolph Scott movie.I won't bother with the plot, since I'm sure it's covered elsewhere. The movie stars three athletes -- Fairbanks fils, who must have learned a good deal from his Dad -- Grant, an acrobat in his youth -- and MacLaughlin, a professional boxer from South Africa. Their physical skills are all on display.Not a moment of this movie is to be taken seriously. It's about Thugees, a sect in India, whence our English word \"thug.\" I can't go through all the felicities of this movie but probably ought to point out that the director, George Stevens, was a polymath with a background in Laurel and Hardy movies -- see his choreography of the fight scenes -- and went on to the infinitely long dissolves of Shane and The Diary of Anne Frank. Dynasties rose and fell. Geological epochs came and went, while Liz Taylor and Monty Clift kissed in \"A Place in the Sun.\" Here, in his comic mode, he excels.This is a story of male bonding and it would be easy -- too easy -- to read homoeroticism into it, as many people do with Howard Hawks. Or hatred of women. But it isn't that at all. Sometimes things portrayed on screen don't deserve too much in the way of heuristic attention. Men WILL form bonds by working together in a way that women do not. (Women share secrets.) Read Deborah Tannen, nobody's idea of an anti-feminist. Well, when you think about it, that's what evolution should have produced. For most of human history -- about nine tenths of it -- hominids have been hunters and gatherers, and the men tend to hunt and the women to gather. Hunting is more effective as a team enterprise. Men who were not very good at bonding were Darwinianed out, leaving men who have a lot of team spirit. And Grant, Fairbanks, and MacLaughlin have got it in spades.Sorry to ramble on about evolution but I'm an anthropologist and it is an occupational disease. Did I ever tell you about the horse in Vaitongi, Samoa, that slipped on the cement and fell in the bathtub with me? You've got to watch the hooves.Joan Fontaine is lovely, really. Only got to know her in her later years and wondered why she was in so many movies. I lived in Saratoga, California, where her sister, Olivia DeHavilland, grew up and went to a convent school. Pretty place.If you miss this adventurous lively farraginous chronicle of the British Empahh at its height, you should never forgive yourself. It's so famous that it's parodied in the Peter Sellers movie, \"The Party.\" Yes -- the colonel's got to know.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a70afc2ef21141da83d6d7bc9458fdfe",
            "input": "Cash (Now played by Khrystyne Haje in for Angelina Jolie) has wandered to a post apocalypse wasteland (after her protector has died from old age, said protector was played by Elias Koteas, an actual decent actor) and now she finds that people wander through the rubble looking for cyborgs to trade for scrap metal and cash. She leads a group of burned out cyborgs (That includes William Katt, Evan Lurie and a human scientist played by Zach Galligan) against bounty hunter Richard Lynch. Malcolm McDowell has two minutes of screen time as Lynch's employer. Cyborg 3 does manage to be better than the other two entries but it still is a largely dull feature. The problem this time is that the ideas with potential are never used well, the action sequences are routine and the name cast such as McDowell, Katt and Galligan are given little to do. Haje is indeed a whiny heroine and Lynch is too over the top(as usual) and the film lacks the inspiration or ambition to be as fun-bad as it's hilarious predecessor. (The one with Van Damme, the second one is just dull.) Also disappointing is the science fiction angle which almost aggressively resists any good idea it has. As an action flick this is routine and by the numbers B-movie stuff and it is competently made, that's the only thing positive I can say about it.*1/2 out of 4-(Poor)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a5d549951c549d2a57186c407e28519",
            "input": "Why is it that any film about Cleopatra, the last phaoroh brings out the worst in movie making? Whatever attraction the woman had for the greatest Roman of them all, Julius Ceasar, and his successor, Mark Anthony, never seems to come across on the screen as other than the antics of over sexed high school seniors. Despite lavish sets and costumes, this movie is as bad as any Italian \"sandals and toga\" extravaganza of the 50's. Admittedly, this kind of spectacular belongs on the big screen, which is why \"Gladiator\" went over well, but \"Gladiator\" did not have all the romance novel sex.Miss Varela has as little acting talent as Elizabeth Taylor, but Timothy Dalton has talent to spare. Pity some of it didn't wash off on the others.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c72b34f77fdc4560af8311e46e321f10",
            "input": "I believe they were telling the truth the whole time..U cant trust anything in the wild... They family went through hell.Those poor boys too young to understand what was going on around them. But still having to deal with the rumours. As well as dealing with the lose of their little sister. I cant believe this case went on for so long.seems like the jury couldn't see the truth, even if it bit them on the ass.I feel for this family, and if i could let them know i hate what has happened to them, i would.I have no idea what they went through, i cant even imagine it. After watching this movie, i was in tears, and had to check on my little girl in bed...I think everyone should watch this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1dcd35665df46e7b488861837497616",
            "input": "This movie is a perfect portrayal of The Nutcracker; the dancing is wonderful, the scenery in the background was excellent, and I LOVED THAT FLOATING BED.Oh, and the costumes... I particularly loved Marzipan's, the tutu was adorable. The special effects were very well done (e.g. the tree, the bed, etc.), and I quite enjoyed the rats. I love how they didn't make them scary, but cute and huggable. Except for the king, I suppose.If you're a thoroughly masculine person, you won't enjoy this, but this is a very good movie that's good for all ages - just not all levels of testosterone.But I have a few complaints.Firstly, why did they have to put the Sugar Plum Fairy's partner in those terrible tights? It would barely make a difference if he was butt naked! And secondly.. why on EARTH did they have to make Culkin's outfit PINK?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cdb780908462432abe600c2f30f2d4ed",
            "input": "Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy are the most famous comedy duo in history, and deservedly so, so I am happy to see any of their films. Professor Noodle (Lucien Littlefield) is nearing the completion of his rejuvenation formula, with the ability to reverse ageing, after twenty years. Ollie and Stan are the chimney sweeps that arrive to do their job, and very quickly Ollie wants to get away from Stan making mistakes. Ollie goes to the roof to help with the other end of the brush at the top of the chimney, but Stan in the living room ends up pushing the him back in the attic. After breaking an extension, Stan gets a replacement, a loaded gun, from off the wall, and of course it fires the brush off. Stan goes up to have a look, and Ollie, standing on the attic door of the roof, falls into the greenhouse. Stan asks if he was hurt, and Ollie only answers with \"I have nothing to say.\" Ollie gets back on the roof, and he and Stan end up in a tug and pull squabble which ends up in Ollie falling down and destroying the chimney. Ollie, hatless, in the fireplace is hit on the head by many bricks coming down, and the butler Jessup (Sam Adams) is covered in chimney ash smoke, oh, and Ollie still has nothing to say to Stan. The boys decide to clean up the mess, and when Stan tears the carpet with the shovel, Ollie asks \"Can't you do anything right\", and Stan replies \"I have nothing to say\", getting the shovel bashed on his head. As Ollie holds a bag for Stan to shovel in the ashes, they get distracted by a painting on the wall, and the ashes end up down Ollie's trousers, so Stan gets another shovel bashed on the head. Professor Noodle finishes his formula, and does a final test on a duck, with a drop in a tank of water, changing it into a duckling. He also shows the boys his success, turning the duckling into an egg, and he next proposes to use a human subject, i.e. his butler. While he's gone, the boys decide to test the formula for themselves, but Ollie ends up being knocked by Stan into the water tank with all the formula. In the end, what was once Ollie comes out, an ape, and when Stan asks him to speak, all Ollie ape says is \"I have nothing to say\", and Stan whimpers. Filled with wonderful slapstick and all classic comedy you could want from a black and white film, it is an enjoyable film. Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy were number 7 on The Comedians' Comedian. Very good!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ffe60aa7676f4d2881371472843b7791",
            "input": "I gave this movie a very fair chance, and it betrayed me. This is very little more than a black and white excuse to bore the hell out of the audience even as the egotist Bogdanavich (who did way better with TARGETS) gets \"great performances\" out of a ton of hams in their debuts. Lots of teenage sex clichés come out of this movie, such as Doing the Teacher's Wife, Impotence, Doing the Ugly Prostitute(which is very awkwardly shot and grinds things to a complete halt, not that things were really going anywhere anyway) and skinny dipping.I suppose this movie is supposed to be funny because of all the sex nonsense, to me, it was just annoying. I was seriously much more entertained by cleaning my finger nails than watching this mess.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e619747e58f4d50b3ce2a4121291352",
            "input": "If this series supposed to be an improvement over Batman - The Animated Series, I, for one, think it failed terribly. The character drawing is lousy... (Catwoman, for instance, looks awful...) But what really annoyed me is that it made Batman look like a sort of wimp who just can't take care of himself in a battle, without the help of two, even three sidekicks. I mean, he's Batman, for God's sake! I know the comic books, I know that Nightwing and Batgirl are supposed to be Batman's allies, besides Robin, but still... making Batman say that he needs help from them... What, he can't handle a few punches? In BTAS, he could face a dozen adversaries without any problem... He's getting old? Come on...And another thing: I really don't think that Batman would allow a kid like Tim Drake to go into battle that soon, without years of hard training. One, it's irresponsible (and Batman is everything, but irresponsible), and two, it's not what happened in the comics, if we are to remain faithful to them.Batman - The Animated Series made history, with its animation, its stories and its characters... That really was a legend of Batman. The New Adventures series turned the legend into just another Batman flick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba0e4bd41ede4f32acc5c9b7b6951514",
            "input": "I realize that living in the Western Plains of Wyoming during the 1900s was brutal, in fact, it probably is still brutal today, but was it monumental enough to transform into a seemingly \"made-for-TV\" movie? Also, women's rights were still budding in this nation during this time, so to find an independent woman determined to start fresh in this harsh territory, and still show the realism of the era … would it make for good viewing? Honestly, I don't know. I have thought about this film for the past two days, and I still can't seem to muster the strength to say that it was a horrible film, yet I can truthfully tell you that it wasn't the greatest I have ever seen. From several hodgepodge styles of acting, to two mismatched actors playing devoid of emotion character, to some of the most gruesome PG rated scenes to ever come out of late 70s cinema, it is hard to fully get a good grasp on Heartland. Was it good? Was it bad? That may be up for you to view and decide yourself, but until then, here are moments I enjoyed and desperately hated! This film continues to be a struggle in my mind because there were some very interesting scenes. Scenes where I wasn't sure what the director was doing or which direction he was headed, but somehow still seemed to work well as a whole. I thought the story as a whole was a very interesting, historical tale. I do not know much about living in Wyoming, especially during the early 1900s, so this film captured that image in my mind. The thought of very cold winters, no neighbors for miles upon miles, and this Polaroid-esquire view untouched by corporate America. It was refreshing to witness and sheer breathtaking to experience (though the television). There were scenes that really stood out in my mind, like the cattle-branding scene, the pig slaughtering scene, and the saddening homesteader that didn't survive their journey, that just brought a true sense of realism to this story. Director Richard Pearce did a great job of bringing the view of Wyoming to the viewers, but I am not sure he brought decent players to accompany the view.While I will constantly compliment the scenery of this film, I had trouble coping with the actors that seemingly walked on the set and read their lines from cards on the side. Rip Torn seemed out of place in his role as Clyde Stewart, a loner that somehow finds a connection with Conchata Ferrell's Elinore Randall. The two as actors have no chemistry at all. Their scenes that they share together are pointless and honestly void of any emotion. The pregnancy scene nearly had me in stitches because of the way these two \"veteran\" actors portrayed it. The brave Elinore does what she has to do to get the child out of her, while Clyde gives an approving nod when she is done. This is love? Was it supposed to be love? I don't know, I think with stronger characters we would have seen a stronger bond, but with Torn and Ferrell, it felt like two actors just playing their parts. Other scenes that just seemed to struggle in my mind were ones like when the frozen horse \"knocks\" on the door for food or shelter, the constantly fading and growing compassion that Clyde had for Elinore's daughter (I just didn't believe it), the lack of true winter struggle, and the entire land scene. The land scene especially because I needed more explanation on what Elinore was doing, why she was doing it, and why Clyde would build her a house if they were married! It was these simple events that if taken the time to explore, would have made for a stronger film.Overall, I will go middle of the road with this feature. There were definitely elements that should have been explored deeper, such as the relationship between these two strangers and the ultimate homesteading goals of Elinore, but they were countered with some beautiful scenes of our nation. These panoramic scenes which, in the span of 100 years, have changes from vast mountains to enormous skyscrapers. While there were some brilliant scenes of realism (starring cattle and pigs), I just felt as if we needed more. Depth was a key element lacking in this film, which was overshadowed by marginal acting and a diminishing story. Pearce could have dove deeper into this untapped world, but instead left open loopholes and clichéd Western characters. Ferrell carried her own, but Torn was completely miscast. Decent for a viewing, but will not be picked up again by me.Grade: ** out of *****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b7f24abb6e04dbea46b3d91599703c4",
            "input": "Now, I have seen a lot of movies in my day, but out of every single one there have been a very select few that have been really good to me. And I'm a 19 year old man which is impressed by this movie directed towards a younger audience. This is a very underrated gem for those who watch foreign movies. Almost all the acting is believable, the graphics are decent (for which you won't even be caring about as you watch the movie. Trust me, bitching about the graphics would be a stupid thing to do), the story is well written and it's a movie that everyone can enjoy not just the kids.Here's basically what this movie made me to. It one, made me laugh...a lot, two, made me feel for the characters like you're suppose to, and three, it's a very uplifting story. By the end of this movie you will feel good. Sure, what anime out there hasn't featured some young kid turning into a great warrior and whatever to defeat some great evil. It's a formula that is used a lot. But, in this case it is forgivable because even though they use puppets for some characters and some average graphics you'd see 5 years ago, the appearance of it is not to be judged. It's very touching, the ending is original, and it keeps you into the movie like it is suppose to. If you however try comparing this to other movies like \"The Never-ending Story\" or whatever it will diverse your opinion. Watch it as it is and you will enjoy it.It has been a good long while since I've been impressed like this. The only other movie where I have gotten this feeling is when I saw TMNT way back when it came out. There is something about this movie I felt about TMNT that really made me love it. So don't over-analyze or take this movie too seriously, just enjoy it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8842417f4be441d3a09f8f4272ce2b33",
            "input": "This movie deserves credit for its original approach. It combines elements of theater, film, and epic storytelling. Unfortunately, it falls flat on all levels. The films biggest weakness is it's unwillingness to commit to anything; it has camp, moralistic, and epic elements without ever committing to any of them. As for the story itself, Chretien de Troyes is spinning in his grave at this horrible adaptation which turns the lovable, unbearably innocent Percival into a most ungallant and rude churl.Most likely two types of people will see this, francophiles or Arthuriophiles. Speaking as one of the latter, I found the movie unwatchable and an incredibly shabby, disrespectful treatment of a beautiful story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d96dd8df803b40199ae4068bfbb2ecbc",
            "input": "This is another typical unbelievable and non-sensical piece of Hollywood dreck.Kurt Russell, as Snake Pliskin in a business suit, convinces me he was a better 2nd baseman. Ray Liotta as the psychotic cop is totally predictable and absurd. Madeline Stowe is her usual cardboard self, and does little to be a convincing victim.Every scene in this persiflage is absolutely predictable all the way to the end when Kurt clouts Ray with a vase or something, knocking him down and out. Kurt and Madeline then do their obligatory end-of-the-movie embrace, and EVERYBODY--- except Russell and Stowe, KNOWS Liotta is going to get back up and menace the couple again.He does, of course, and Russell drills him 10 times with his 9mm, which was ENTIRELY unnecessary. This movie could just as well ended with the bludgeoning scene--- EXCEPT Hollywood dotes on unnecessary violence, and the more they can add, or \"enhance\", the more slobbery they get.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-413d9a7bd1ed490f82519a7ff8845747",
            "input": "This one is considered a key Pre-Code film – from the director who later made the musical biopic THE JOLSON STORY (1946), but also the paranoid sci-fi INVASION U.S.A. (1952)! – and features one of Barbara Stanwyck's best early roles.She's supported by a fine cast which includes popular actors and valued character performers of the day – George Brent, Douglass Dumbrille, Edward van Sloan, Nat Pendleton and John Wayne (at one point addressing Stanwyck with the titular nickname, derived from a popular song which is heard constantly throughout) in the former category and, in the latter, Robert Barrat (as Stanwyck's father), Donald Cook (as her most tragic conquest), Alphonse Ethier (as her elderly mentor – more on this later), Arthur Hohl (as a lecherous politician) and Henry Kolker (as Cook's boss and father-in-law, whom Stanwyck also seduces). Curiously, scenes in which Walter Brennan appeared were subsequently deleted at his own request when the film ran into trouble with the censors!Abetted by crackling i.e. typically hard-boiled dialogue and realistic Anton Grot sets, the narrative contains unexpected overtones of Nietzschean philosophy fed to our small-town heroine by the intellectual Ethier (Stanwyck complains to him early on that she's no \"ball of fire\" which, of course, contradicts her later comedy – directed by Howard Hawks and co-starring Gary Cooper – of that name!). Under Ethier's auspices, she quickly blooms into an essentially heartless character determined that nothing shall stand in her path to success; the symbolic depiction of her rise in stature at the New York firm she's eventually employed with is reminiscent of a similarly sardonic one – relating to an ambitious statesman's lust for power – in Sergei Eisenstein's October (1927)! Sociologically, it's also interesting that Stanwyck is constantly seen sticking her neck out for her black maid/companion.The first two-thirds of the film are simply terrific; at first, I found the latter stages somewhat disappointing – because I was expecting to see Stanwyck get her comeuppance by falling for the belatedly-introduced George Brent character while he ignores her…but, just like the others, he's soon under her spell! On second viewing, however, this aspect felt less jarring – as it's evident that Stanwyck has been affected by the two deaths her selfish behavior has caused, and that her tenure in Paris has softened her (even if she tries to cling to her hard-earned wealth for as long as it's possible).Released on DVD by Warners as part of their FORBIDDEN Hollywood VOLUME 1 COLLECTION, the film is presented in two strikingly different edits – a recently unearthed Pre-Release version and the tamer Theatrical Release print. Among the considerable footage cut from the latter is dialogue pertaining to Stanwyck's life as a tramp from the age of 14 (though it's heard in the accompanying trailer!), while many other scenes have been shortened (i.e. censored for content): the violent fisticuff which develops between Stanwyck and Hohl after she resists his advances; the seduction at the railroad car; the scene in which Dumbrille is surprised with Stanwyck by Cook; the shooting, followed by a suicide (only shots are heard in the shorter version); Stanwyck thinking about her conquests while the phonograph is playing (again, only Brent appears in the version released to theaters), etc. Tha latter, then, utilizes alternate takes for some scenes – and includes an establishing shot of the city which is missing from the longer version; however, we also get an obviously tacked-on happy ending (the Pre-Release version concludes abruptly on a very effective open-ended note) and an equally unconvincing cautionary letter sent by Ethier to Stanwyck in New York which, basically, has the function of substituting all references to Nietzsche!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7804b58ac90d407d96160ec5b8e67f76",
            "input": "Love hurts. That, I think, is the main message Mike Binder's newest film Reign Over Me brings across. Whether that love has caused your relationship to become stagnant, or has brought anger from the one you love cheating for years, or has broken your heart to the point of being unable to open yourself up to the world, love hurts. The great thing about this film, however, is not in its portrayal of these lost souls trying to let their past heartbreaks go, but in the eventual restart of new bonds for the future. No one in this drama is perfect; they are all at some degree trapped emotionally in relationships that they can't free themselves from alone. There is some heavy subject material here and I credit Binder for never making the story turn into a political diatribe, but instead infusing the serious moments with some real nice comedic bits allowing the tale to stay character-based and small in scale compared to the epic event that looms overhead. What could have become a trite vehicle for opinions on how 9-11 effected us all, ends up being a story about two men and a connection they share that is the only thing which can save their lives from a life of depression and regret.This is a new career performance for Adam Sandler. I like to think that my favorite director Paul Thomas Anderson was the first to see the childish, pent-up anger in his stupid comedies as something to use dramatically. The juvenility of a character like Billy Madison allows for laughs and potty humor, but also can be used to show a repressed man, shy and shutout to the world around him—a man with no confidence that needs an event of compassion to break him from his shell. Anderson let Sandler do just that in his masterpiece Punch-Drunk Love and Mike Binder has taken it one step further. Sandler plays former dentist Charlie Fineman whose wife and three kids were killed in one of the planes that took down the World Trade Center on 9-11. That one moment crushed any life that he had and as a result, he became reclusive and started to believe he couldn't remember anything that happened before that day. He really delivers a moving portrait of a man trying to keep up the charade in his head while those around him, those that love him, try and open him up to the reality of what happened and what the future holds. Always on edge and ready to snap at any moment when something is mentioned to spark the memory of his perished family, he goes through life with his iPod and headphones, shutting out everything so as not to be tempted remember.Reign Over Me is not about Charlie Fineman though, it is about dentist and family man Alan Johnson. A man that has trapped himself into a marriage and dental practice that both have stagnated into monotony, Johnson needs as much help in his life as his old college roommate Charlie does. Played perfectly by the always brilliant Don Cheadle, Johnson has lost his backbone to try and change his life. He has no friends and when he sees Charlie, by chance, one day, his life evolves into something he hasn't felt in 15 years. He revels in the chance to go out with an old friend no matter how much he has changed from the death of his family. Cheadle's character wants to revert back to the college days of hanging out and Sandler's doesn't mind because all that was before he met his wife. The two men get what they want and allow themselves to grow close despite the years of solitude that used to rule their lives. Once they begin opening up though, it is inevitable that the subject of the tragedy will creep up and test the façade they have created for themselves.The supporting cast does an amazing job helping keep up appearances for the two leads. Jada Pinkett Smith has never been an actress that impressed me and throughout the film played the tough as nails wife nicely, but it is her final scene on the phone with Cheadle that really showed me something different and true. Liv Tyler is a bit out of her element as a psychiatrist, but the movie calls her on this fact and makes the miscasting, perfect casting. The many small cameos are also effective, even writer/director Mike Binder's role as Sandler's old best friend and accountant, (my only gripe here is why he feels the need to put his name in the opening credits as an actor when it is everywhere, considering it is his film). Last but not least is the beautiful Saffron Burrows. She is a great actress and plays the love- crushed divorcée trying to put her life back together wonderfully. A role that seems comic relief at first, but ends up being an integral aspect for what is to come.Binder has crafted one of the best dramatic character studies I have seen in a long time. The direction is almost flawless, (the blurring between cuts and characters in the fore/ background really annoyed me in the beginning), the acting superb, and the story true to itself, never taking the easy way out or wrapping itself up with a neatly tied bow at the conclusion. Even the music was fantastic and used to enhance, not to lead us emotionally, (why after two great uses of the titular song by The Who did Binder feel the need to use the inferior Eddie Veddar remake for the end, I don't know, but it did unfortunately stick out for me). Reign Over Me is a film about love and how although it can cause the worst pain imaginable, it can also save us from regret and allow us to once again see the world as a place of beauty and hope.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a54c7357791d4721992121484da33ec8",
            "input": "Another comment about this film made it sound lousy. Given talking pictures were so new - I think the script and acting were good. Davis was so young and fresh. She had not yet found her own style that we had grown to expect. Yet it is great to see her this way - still learning the craft.So many clichés came from this film and it seems, this film blazed some trails for the next 70 years. My vote is see it and remember how young this type of film was. Keep and open mind and you maybe shocked at how troubled the characters were in this picture, for being 1934 and how we view the early part of last century as uptight.. I love it and hope you make up your own mind about it not influenced by others negative and one note comments.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c2e343fdf094540a5ce4603fb1c5803",
            "input": "I have never seen a Barbara Steele movie that I haven't liked, and have always been a sucker for a good haunted-house story (especially for such wonderful pictures as \"The Legend of Hell House\" and the original versions of \"The Haunting\" and \"House on Haunted Hill\"), so I had a feeling that \"Castle of Blood\" would be right up my alley. And boy, was it ever! This French-Italian coproduction, while perhaps not the classic that Steele's first horror film, \"Black Sunday,\" remains to this day, is nevertheless an extremely atmospheric, chilling entry in the spook genre. Filmed in black and white, it manages to convey a genuinely creepy miasma. The film concerns a journalist who bets one Lord Blackwood and an author named Edgar Allen Poe that he can spend the night in Blackwood's castle on the night of All Saints Day, when the spirits of those killed in the castle reenact their fate. The viewer gets to see these deaths, and they ARE pretty horrible, for the most part. The film does indeed send shivers up the viewer's spine, and in the uncut DVD that I just watched--thanks to the fine folks at Synapse--even features a surprising topless scene and some mild lesbianism! And Barbara is wonderful in this movie; her otherworldly beauty is put to good advantage playing a sympathetic spectre. Her mere presence turns a creepy ghost story into something truly memorable. Not for nothing has she been called \"The Queen of Horror.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be1c5ea1b7f84a4284f9a3bb2c94ebe2",
            "input": "Two films are useful for scaring people to God, this and 'Event Horizon'. One has a significant and poignant message, the other is as one-dimensional as a religious movie can get. Too bad Paul Anderson went on to the accursed Resident Evil movies, he really had something going.Thief in the Night is hampered by many obvious independent film attributes (acting, storytelling, dialog, and persuasion) and it's obvious what the film's intentions are from the start. The Christian film industry hasn't learned from the failures of this, so we are stuck with The Omega Code, Left Behind, and the other Tribulation movies. Their underlying element is that they are so concerned with selling their message: \"Get saved, folks!\" that everything else becomes second to whacking the audience over the head with a Bible.Overall, I can't believe I'm even writing this much about a movie this ineffective. Skip it entirely and go back to Sam Neil gouging out his eyeballs. 1 out of 5.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fadfd5f348fb4c8c833e39702003542b",
            "input": "I missed almost all of the first season, but when the other shows went to reruns, I started watching. I ended up buying the entire first season off iTunes. This is now one of my favorite comedy shows. Patrick Warburton is the key. His dry sense of humor has me rolling all the time. David Spade is funny, but sometimes a little Russell goes a long way. I enjoy the other cast members more (but not saying he doesn't add to the show).Do yourself a favor. If you haven't checked this one out, give it a try. If you can catch the episode where \"Jeff\" goes to the sperm bank, you will see how good this show is.I hope this series has a long run.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9f6c3e9960e4dd5a1c6a7a2ab7ef242",
            "input": "It was obvious that this movie is designed to appeal to the Chick Flick audience, to which i have sat through quite a few and enjoyed most. However, this was a very irritating attempt by Heather Graham to become the next Meg Ryan ( who became annoying as hell in her own right ). Her acting was overdone and it appeared that she was overanxious compared to her colleagues who were relaxed in their roles. This film might have been more, as there was suitable budget for settings, actors and a decent story line. My wife and I both agreed that this was 'Muck' at the end, as the film ended on a painful embarrassing high! Better luck next time, hope Miss Graham sticks to the type of films that she belongs in like From Hell.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cd9ef38ccbe4865afd39da474c27b3a",
            "input": "\"The Second Coming Of Suzanne\" is yet another one of those surrealistic films that tries to come across as extremely sophisticated, yet all it does is put the viewer to sleep. Like other movies of this type, there is limited dialogue. Everyone is much more interested in the visual aesthetic of the shot. However, the cinematography stinks so there is nothing at all to keep your attention.The video box states that this film is \"one of the most exciting visual adventures ever seen on film.\" Yeah...sure. It's right up there with watching such stimulating events as a bucket of ice melting or a turtle walking for a mile. 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f423b2c16af43799c3a048116433fcc",
            "input": "I didn't know what to expect from 'Ned Kelly', but absolutely loved it. It was dark, dramatic and gripping. It also felt very authentic, I felt that I had been transported back to the 1800's. I've never been much of a Heath Ledger fan, having only seen him in teen type movies, however he is quite compelling in this role. Ledger plays Ned Kelly with dignity and intensity, showing us how an highly spirited boy became Australia's most notorious killer. Naomi Watts is great in a supporting role as Kelly's society lover. Highly recommended - and that's from an Aussie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a42730226e6474ca9390ce044bea64d",
            "input": "One of those classics, held up next to \"Deep Throat\" and \"Behind the Green Door.\"Sure, it was clever, but the female lead isn't that attractive and sex isn't that hot. But if not for this film, porn would not have blossomed into what it is today.Harry Reems was the Ron Jeremy of his day. Worth a look if you're a Fan.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ed510fb457148ceae4eab2e832874d1",
            "input": "I was very excited about seeing this film, anticipating a visual excursus on the relation of artistic beauty and nature, containing the kinds of wisdom the likes of \"Rivers and Tides.\" However, that's not what I received. Instead, I get a fairly uninspired film about how human industry is bad for nature. Which is clearly a quite unorthodox claim.The photographer seems conflicted about the aesthetic qualities of his images and the supposed \"ethical\" duty he has to the workers occasionally peopling the images, along the periphery. And frankly, the images were not generally that impressive. And according to this \"artist,\" scale is the basis for what makes something beautiful.In all respects, a stupid film. For people who'd like to feel better about their environmental consciousness ... but not for any one who would like to think about the complexities of the issues surrounding it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-906a789fe1374c6e95de189cb84bcd3d",
            "input": "As I am no fan of almost any post-\"Desperate Living\" John Waters films, I warmed to \"Pecker\". After he emerged from the underground, Waters produced trash-lite versions of his earlier works (\"Cry Baby\", \"Polyester\", Hairspray\") that to die-hard fans looked and tasted like watered down liqueur. \"Pecker\", which doesn't attempt to regurgitate early successes, is a slight, quiet, humble commentary on the vagaries of celebrity and the pretentiousness of the art world. Waters clearly knows this subject well because he has also exhibited and sold (at ridiculous prices) some of the most amateurish pop art ever created that you couldn't imagine anyone being able to give away if it wasn't emblazoned with the Waters \"name\". Edward Furlong is fine as \"Pecker\" and Waters' non-histrionic style is at ease with the subject.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b1a7c1680e142d39d296aac3e6fe1d7",
            "input": "I have always had the philosophy that every single human being has different tastes, i found this movie to be awesome and i think every college student out there might agree with me. Notwithstanding this is not a \"movie with a plot\", its about real guys and some of the \"problems\" that they face. I found the movie hilarious(especially the parts that they played the practical jokes on each other). Simply put, if you are in the same \"wave-length\" as these people, you will find this movie amazing. I don't think that this is going win any Golden Globes or Oscars, or that the people in this movie will become future Hollywood stars, but its a kind of \"cult-classic\" among young people who could relate to their experience. For me the guy that stands out the most is Hans: the Scandinavian guy,who ,according to him \"isnt a looker\", but gets all(or some) of the chicks. The \"little-people\" also play a big part in the movie, especially when they are drunk. If i keep going, i might provide a spoiler and i don't want to do that, just go and get the movie and you will not regret. I give it a 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a13308f0aeeb41f08484ee99d2c9f03c",
            "input": "My children watch the show everyday that its on. Its a great program for younger children. However they need to stop showing re-runs and do some more actual shows and get rid of Rooney's and Deedee's YELLOW TEETH. Moe is the only Doodle bop with clean white pearlie teeth and the children notice these things and ask if the 2 don't ever brush their teeth? Does the show ever make its way to the United States and if so where can we find its schedule at. And one other thing if we might be able to add. Moe you need to stop hiding so much. Sometimes when you pop up out of no where you scare the younger children and whats with the pulling of the rope? What does that signify? other then getting wet all the time. They need to add newer things to their show instead of the same ole same ole. Kids loose interest that way.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5e0975b19ae4f02afc702c1301a01bc",
            "input": "I saw this movie when I was in Israel for the summer. my Hebrew is not fluent, so the subtitles were very useful, I didn't feel lost at any point in the movie. You tend to get used to subtitles after about 5 minutes.This movie blew me away!!!!!! It depicts two of the most prominent taboos in the middle east today: A homosexual relationship between an Israeli and a Palestinian. It allows a person to enter both realms of the conflict simultaneously. The dilemma, the emotions entailed. The movie climaxes in tragedy when anger and rage drive one of the lovers to one extremist side! an absolute must see!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5fe4937a906e46ad864e4a702871a640",
            "input": "As it is in Heaven {SPOILER WARNING)This was a great human drama that stimulated my emotions and my imagination. This is a parable revisiting the life and death of Christ. Daniel is a superior gifted musician ,who is physically and mentally exhausted by his career , and has to give it up. When he joins a church choir as its cantor, he brings about a transformation in the lives of the choristers , just as Jesus did to the society in first century Palestine. They laugh, they begin to speak openly and truthfully to each other , their faults are exposed,they accept each other, come to love each other, become a vital community.They include the mentally disabled young man (?Tore), such is their inclusiveness.The pastor, Stig enjoyed authority through imposing a stifling morality on the congregation, and that is gradually rejected by the choristers . When Stig dismisses Daniel , there is a revolt, and Stig is crushed. Stig represents the Jewish authorities of Jesus' day, whose insistence on obedience to the Jewish law,provided a stark contrast to the new life by \"the golden rule\" brought by Jesus.In one dramatic scene, someone declares \"the church invented sin\". All through the film, there is this contrast between moral-ism and vital living (being).True to the Christ story, Daniel is killed by Conny , when he beats him up, leaves him to drown in the river. Next scene , we can hardly believe it when Daniel's (resurrected!) body is dragged into his room (the tomb) draped in a white linen sheet (the shroud!), by three women (three women kept vigil at the foot of the cross in the gospel).Daniel is drawn closely to Lena, a warm beautiful young woman who has been betrayed by a man she loved, and who is now promiscuous (Jesus developed a close relationship with Mary Magdalene- Lena- who was probably a high class courtesan/prostitute). Through Lena, Daniel learns to love , something he has longed for, and now finds fulfillment .The solo sung by Gabriella , composed by Daniel, is all about living a full life , in contrast to moral correctness that leads to concern about sin , and what's right and wrong. The final scene shows the choir all singing/humming in harmony , like a mantra, drawing in the large audience, exemplifying the harmony and inter-connectedness that is our true human destiny.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b60c549f49f42fba625f52a631516c7",
            "input": "... It even beats the nasty \"raw\". Almost twenty years old is this show and still I laughed VERY MUCH when I was watching it last night. It shows Eddie Murphy dressed in tight red clothes(Old School)and he jokes with everything from celebertis to his family. He was only 22-years old then and this is a must-see!8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fc3d12c341f4b5aa37a250ec0d6ba17",
            "input": "I thoroughly enjoyed this movie because there was a genuine sincerity in the acting. The writing was top-notch. James Arness is a great actor and he showed it here. Brian Keith was too old to be Davy Crockett, and can anyone really play Davy but Fess Parker?Another great actor in this move was Raul Julia, who gave depth to Santa Anna, a vain and complex person who led Mexico through turbulent times.While some may think the movie was slow-paced, it captured the battle as it unfolded, lots of tedium followed by a couple hours of horrific terror.What impressed me most about this movie is that it made you think about a cause and how some people are willing to die for what they believe in. In this day and age when nobody stands for anything, I found it refreshing to think that there was a time when people died for freedom, no matter how you may feel about the politics of the time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14689b7d97ac4c50a2c6f0571ac92e01",
            "input": "What a snore-fest.Of all the bits of nostalgia that Hollywood has decided to remake and update, this is by far one of the most pointless. This was a totally pointless show in the first place, and we REALLY don't need a 'modern' update.Never mind the bigotry and sexism inherent in the system from the beginning, so many advances have been made, socially, since the show ran that the entire point of the show (if it ever had one) has been lost.Also, what is the point of having a character named Boss Hogg if he's NOT overweight?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9974f7ccf40406a84bde54b15b347ee",
            "input": "Lipstick is another glossy movie failure.I am trying to think of one good thing that I could say about the movie, and I am having trouble coming up with something.I guess the red dress that Margaux Hemingway was wearing in the end of the movie was the best part.The writing and the script was not the worst that I have ever encountered,but it could have been a lot better. Lipstick was very pleasing to the eye to view.The sets were very glossy and nice to look at.The cast was okay. I felt like Anne Bancroft's character was the only feasible character in the entire movie.It was sad to see Chris Sarandon waste his time on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bddc808a815f4ad1918cf031a675db02",
            "input": "Who in their right mind plays a lyrical song at the same time they are portraying an emotional scene between two people? When Flipper confronts his wronged wife in the dressing room, the song sung with lyrical content is as loud as the dialog, so one can hear neither, diluting any emotional impact the scene may have had. The scenes of Annabella getting beaten by her father with his fists, a lamp and then a belt was so cartoonish as to be absurd. This entire movie is a cartoon, the rampant prejudice against whites is literally astounding. The discussion by the black women after flipper's wife finds out he has cheated on her with a white woman - as if it were a discussion by an oxford debating team, is ridiculous. The rampant racism might be possible to endure, but the soundtrack and the sound mixing during this 'movie' is too much. It was a technically poorly made movie. There is no understanding of the basic craft of movie making, the sound track, the editing and the desperate attempt of great actors trying to keep this movie afloat. I actually felt sorry for Anthony Quinn, wondering why he had accepted a role in this flick - his appearance in this is painful. This is the first movie I have seen by this director and it will be my last.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01793ab2616e41898eb73e44774256ff",
            "input": "I have always like this great baseball movie! It has a good cast including two tremendous actors and two of My favorites Danny Glover and Christopher Lloyd! Also in this movie is Ben Johnson, Brenda Fricker, Big Tony Longo, Tony Danza, and Matthew McConaughey! Also Jay O. Sanders and Dermot Mulroney! The film has great special effects and acting from all of the film's actors! The baseball scenes are all realistic! The music by composer Randy Edelman is very good and it fits the film very well! Some of the actors who reminded Me the actual baseball personalities. Stoney Jackson's Ray Mitchell character reminded Me Royce Clayton, McConaughey's character reminded Me of Steve Finley, and Jay O. Sanders's commentator in My opinion resembled how Al Hrabosky looks today. This is a fantastic movie for non and Baseball fans and I strongly recommend this film!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49e7173058594a66bf6beab08115c97c",
            "input": "What an incredible fall for Sean Ellis.You gather a bunch of your friends at home, all hyped about the follow up work of Sean Ellis. You have an vague idea of the plot, no spoilers that could kill the fun, very high expectations.It is late at night, perfect atmosphere for a movie of this type.15minutes passes and you start telling yourself it is bound to pick up, at 25mins you start wondering if you should just go to sleep and save this for another time when you can fully appreciate the expected not existent subtle touches. Over the half hour mark you realize half of your your hyped up audience is already asleep and call it a day.A few days later when you exhaust all other material to watch you go back to this, in the middle of the day this time, hoping your mood will keep you awake this time. 10 minutes later you find yourself fastforwarding the unbelievably and needlessly long intermediate transitions and images. Any other stuff I would have given up already but there is cashback and its legacy. But that legacy can only carry you so long, this is a new level of boring movie-making, imagine a short story extended to a novel with just descriptions, this is what it is.Decent cast is wasted, there is no cinematography that leaves you in awe like cashback either. There are films that annoy you, there are films that lack certain aspects, or just cheesy, unfortunately this is just a waste of time.Final words, stay away.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23ffde8419bf4d14ac89702306aed71b",
            "input": "Okay, sorry, but I loved this movie. I just love the whole 80's genre of these kind of movies, because you don't see many like this one anymore! I want to ask all of you people who say this movie is just a rip-off, or a cheesy imitation, what is it imitating? I've never seen another movie like this one, well, not horror anyway.Basically its about the popular group in school, who like to make everyones lives living hell, so they decided to pick on this nerdy boy named Marty. It turns fatal when he really gets hurt from one of their little pranks.So, its like 10 years later, and the group of friends who hurt Marty start getting High School reunion letters. But...they are the only ones receiving them! So they return back to the old school, and one by one get knocked off by.......Yeah you probably know what happens!The only part that disappointed me was the very end. It could have been left off, or thought out better.I think you should give it a try, and try not to be to critical!~*~CupidGrl~*~",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8828cfd9b25241f6b03e25e0493c99eb",
            "input": "This is a superb movie, suitable for all but the very youngest, though accessibility for younger people was marred (at least in the print which I saw) by the use of some unfortunate choice of English sub-titling! For much of the film it is almost impossible to guess in which time-period it is set - there is no modern technology shown, not even the ubiquitous Chinese bicycle, just a drab, almost monochrome, everyday life, against which is contrasted the dazzling display of the Sezuan Opera and of celebratory fireworks. Even when a group of soldiers refer to their imminent departure for a theatre of war, this could still be any time in the past 150 years.But then we briefly see a motor car - late 30s, early 40s style - and we realise that we are watching a China on the verge of huge upheavals, and that much of the world we are seeing is about to be swept away in the cataclysm of World War 2 and the Communist revolution.Which makes the central character's desire to adhere to old customs and traditions all the more poignant.But the film also raises issues which are of vital importance even today, both within China and in other parts of the world: the inequality between boys and girls, men and women; the trade, for various purposes, in young children; corruption in society; injustice; the importance of friendship.Maybe I'm reading too much into this film; but I don't think so! I also think that it is a scandal that films of this calibre are often not shown in the United Kingdom, whilst dross is passed off as quality material.But don't get me started on that...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f436add1941d43668d5b59b696a567fe",
            "input": "This movie was made-for-TV, so taking that into account, I'm not going to rip into it as hard as I would a feature film. The script is sub-par, but it does succeed in being mildly humorous in spots, whether it means to be or not. The acting is mostly over-the-top, but that is true for many lower-budget movies.The aspect of this movie that I really hated, though, was that 90-95% of it is shot on film, but in random places, there will be 5-10 seconds where the footage is shot on video. You can tell because there is less contrast, the colors are less vivid, and the footage is clearly 30 frames per second instead of film's 24 frames per second. I'm not sure if maybe these scenes had to be shot later and at that time they didn't have the money to shoot on film (I assume this is why, anyway), but it is disorienting and really makes the film look shoddier than it had to look.Anyway, I've definitely seen worse movies, but I definitely wouldn't say that I enjoyed this movie and I can't recommend that anyone see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0999ab75afe240baaf85be42c68d9249",
            "input": "This is an absurdist dark comedy from Belgium. Shot perfectly in crisp black and white, Benoît Poelvoorde (Man Bites Dog) is on fine form as Roger, the angry, obsessive father of a family in a small, sullen Belgian mining town. Roger is a photographer who, along with his young daughter Luise, visits road accidents to take photos. He is also obsessed with winning a car by entering a competition where the contestant has to break a record - and he decides that his son, Michel, must attempt to break the record of perpetually walking through a door - he even hires an overweight coach to train him. Michel dresses as Elvis and has a spot on a radio show called 'Cinema Lies', where he describes mistakes in films. Luise is friendly with near neighbour Felix, a pigeon fancier. Roger is a callous figure as he pushes Michel right over the limit during the record attempt, which almost results in his death. Interspersed throughout the film are Magritte-like surreal images. It's undeniably charming and well worth your time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f932b990a1143ada5aa7e54136f1788",
            "input": "This 1970 hit film has not aged well, but frankly, it was not that good when it was released. Yet, it was a hugely popular success perhaps because the idea of fatalistic young love must have appealed to audiences saturated by constant TV coverage of the Vietnam War. The plot is pure drivel as it concerns Oliver Barrett IV, a privileged Harvard hockey player, who meets and falls in love with Jenny Cavelleri, an antagonistic Vassar music student proud of her working class background. His old-school father naturally disapproves of Jenny, and in a typical act of rebellion, that means the young couple gets married in one of those hippie-era, extemporaneous ceremonies. He lands his dream job in New York, but she gets unexpectedly ill and dies of her terminal disease. There is a veneer of then-contemporary film-making techniques displayed by director Arthur Hiller, but none of that can hide the old-fashioned, cliché-ridden story at its core. The inevitable ending left me particularly unmoved.Both Ryan O'Neal and Ali MacGraw became stars with this movie as Oliver and Jenny but inexplicably so since neither seems able to convey the depth or complexity required to make their characters compelling. At least the boyish O'Neal is sincere in his weakly defiant approach, but MacGraw is so wooden and smirky in behavior that it's hard to see what Oliver sees in Jenny beyond her sarcastic façade. John Marley (two years before finding the decapitated racehorse in his bed in \"The Godfather\") does better as Jenny's plainspoken baker father Phil, as does Ray Milland as the seemingly insensitive Barrett paterfamilias. The overly familiar Frances Lai music has almost become parody in itself over the years. The print quality on the DVD is good, though the only extra is a rather effusive commentary track by Hiller. The most interesting bit of trivia is that author Erich Segal (upon whose book this movie is based) conceived Oliver as a mix between two Harvard roommates he knew – Vice President Al Gore and actor Tommy Lee Jones, who happens to have a bit part in the movie as one of Oliver's roommates.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12892cde482d4e9c89f3ce8a6ad56e88",
            "input": "I read the back of the box and it talked about Mary Shelley and Percy Shelley and Lord Byron. I thought, \"wonderful! This will be great!\" I was so wrong. The story was all screwed up. In fact I still don't get it. It just seems to me that all the characters did was drink, smoke (opium?) and have sex. Not that those aren't good movie qualities, but please! Where was the story? I made myself finish the movie, and yes, it did pick up towards the end, but by then the movie was almost over. Rent it if you really want to. Just don't trust the back of the box.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fdf1096eb55848cb8a898ee00195761d",
            "input": "Some of these viewer comments are just ridiculous. Not painful to watch with your significant other? I was apologizing to my boyfriend the entire movie. It was so slow and awfully strange. Both Redgraves,Vanessa and Natasha were unfit for this, especially with Vanessa doing that ridiculous brash American accent. Claire Danes was the same wiggly-lipped awkward girl that she was in My So-Called Life. She has yet to push herself in any way. Girl, find a new way to pretend to cry! Meryl Streep was one of the only redeeming part of this movie, she was on screen for five minutes, and I swear to God, she reached out of the movie screen and slapped me awake. Oh! And Hugh Dancy, who gets better every time I see him. Glenn Close and Eileen Atkins were also great in their two and a half scenes. I mean, this was a well-shot movie, it was very pretty, the settings were interestingly dressed, providing relief for the intense boredom I was feeling. I don't know, It's just pretty pathetic when a movie that boasts a cast comprised of \"The greatest actresses of our time\" sucks so much. It sure had more than a few noticeable editing errors, and the main character (Ann) was a huge jerk. I was glad she died. But that's because I felt bad for Lila, Ann's friend -- mostly because these two ladies were better actors and made me feel a little empathy. Ugh. BAD job, Evening the film. You weren't entertaining and you weren't even thought-provoking. I sure hope the book was better, so it didn't waste even more of people's time. 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-118f32db27f146a5b9f4f5df57b20c70",
            "input": "Hey,If your going to make a documentary about Leonard Cohen try making it about Leonard Cohen! This is filled with only enough Leonard to anger the viewer who will be left wondering why they are listening to all these other singers (some of them questionable) talk about themselves. Puleeze....sounds like them reliving their diary entries in junior high - who cares about you, what about Leonard? Guess what people, if you \"do something\" worthy maybe someone will make a documentary about you. I found particularly insulting the parading of U2's members as if that would add credibility to this movie - NOT. Leonard doesn't need Bono or the Edge talking about his spirituality. What would have been nice would have been for the filmmakers to embody some piece of his spirituality through the film. Gee, what a concept! I will give props to Rufus Wainwright and Jarvis Cocker for their covers of Cohen tunes - the rest of the performances were a bore and some were unbearable.Cohen fans, don't say I didn't warn you!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a736d20ae8bf4e2782980e0d2fefc6fe",
            "input": "Using tons of stock footage, not only from Trader Horn but also the first two films in the series (for example the alligator fight was used last time out) this is one of the weakest films in the MGM series. Its a huge let down after the classic Tarzan and His Mate which is possibly the best film in the series.The plot has Jane's cousins coming into the jungle to tell her that she has inherited a fortune if she'll come back to claim it. They are kind of in the bind since the relative that left her the money cut them out of the will.Hiring a great white hunter, who secretly wishes to capture Tarzan and sell him, the pair heads into the jungle where they run into the usual jungle troubles (more so because of the stock footage). After lots of talk Jane decides to go back to civilization and we get long sequences of Tarzan and Jame making kissy face. Finally into the last half hour the plot to capture Tarzan is put in motion and things at last become interesting as plans go awry and things look very grim for all concerned..Painfully dull film is clear evidence of a troubled production. the film seems to have been assembled from several different films with the first half hour playing as an almost exact repeats of the previous film. The middle third shows signs of having to stretch things out and having plot lines that ultimately went nowhere. The last third where Tarzan is captured and the party is put into peril is the point that the film finally comes to life (it also shows signs of the graphic violence that caused much of the need to re-shoot the film). To me its a great wonder how the series managed to continue on from here since this film isn't very good (except at the end).I would be hard pressed to explain it except I would have to say that it was the relationship between Weissmuller and O'Sullivan as Tarzan and Jane which kept people coming back. Its a beautifully acted pairing and really is one of the screens great couples.(I should probably also mention that this is the point that the film became less real and more fantastical with the appearance of the Tarzan tree house.) I really dislike the first hour or so of this film a great deal and find it a great waste of time and energy. If you can come in towards the end I would recommend giving the film a try. Otherwise I would just skip the whole film and move on to the next film in the series.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc9a6230dd114cd7a80f5656650a12fb",
            "input": "THIS POST MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS :Although it was 5 years after the series ended and WB was currently working on Justice League, this animated movie is a welcome addition to the video library. Why? Well, if Mask of the Phantasm compliments the first 70 episodes of Batman: The Animated Series and SubZero compliments the 15 episodes of the Adventures of Batman and Robin, then Mystery of the Batwoman compliments the final 24 episodes of the Gotham Knights version of Batman. Kevin Conroy once again delivers a voice over performance that is nothing short of excellence and perfection. I admit I was a bit leery when I heard about Batwoman and all I could think about were the old 50's comics of Batman. But I was blown away by the Batwoman character, her look, her costume (which I assumed inspired Bruce Wayne to create the costume on Batman Beyond)and the fact that this movie keeps you guessing who Batwoman is all the way through. If you want to know who Batwoman is, then buy or rent the DVD. Barbara Gordon makes a cameo appearance and I think the writers were trying to hint that Bruce and Barbara had something going on between them like they did in Batman Beyond. Tim Drake appears as Robin, but his role is a small one and sadly, there is no sign of or mention of Dick Grayson alias Nightwing, which leads me to believe he has established himself in Bludhaven (his city in the comics).Of the three suspects for Batwoman, my favorite is Kathy Duquesne, who looks an awful lot like Halle Berry. Kelly Ripa did a great job as one of the other suspects. When it comes to the villains, I'm glad the Penguin was one of them, but I did not like the fact that they replaced Paul Williams with David Ogden Stiers. Pengy just didn't sound right. Same thing goes for Robin. The new guy did okay, but just as I was starting to get used to Matt Valencia, they replaced him. It's interesting to note that Kevin Michael Richardson, who voices Carlton Duquesne is now the voice of the Joker in \"The Batman\" series. And we finally see what Rupert Thorne looks like revamped since he didn't show up in the Gotham Knights episodes. The late John Vernon will be missed. Although I enjoyed Henry Silva as the voice of Bane, if he had to be replaced, they got the right man in the form of Hector Elizondo. I only wish they could have used Two Face, Riddler, or the scary new version of the Scarecrow.The musical score and especially the soft sounding intro were superb. I wish that was on a soundtrack and I especially enjoyed the beautiful and talented Cherie in the Iceberg Lounge along with her song, Betcha Neva. While some feel that this movie is weaker than the Mask of the Phantasm and Subzero, I find it just as strong and enjoyable as the rest, plus like I said earlier, it's a full length movie based off the Gotham Knights version of Batman, which I think gives a good balance. I would at least recommend renting this DVD first before buying it for those who might be leery of this movie, but personally, it's well worth the purchase. I give Mystery of the Batwoman a 9.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68a3a15fdfad4b21b68174acbf67763a",
            "input": "this movie, i won't call it a \"film,\" was basically about nothing and functioned mostly for the popular acts of the time. yeah the war was on full swing (pun intended), and this movie gave the troops and our audiences a treat.but let's have something with a bit more substance.loved seeing a young Buddy Rich on the drums. the music was good throughout.but one cameo after another gets old fast.i didn't even recognize Zero Mostel! so if you're one from the \"greatest generation,\" as they say, you'll definitely enjoy this...movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-757a9a0a81b644178c9a534ddfcc4289",
            "input": "I thought this was a very good movie. It would have been nice to have seen a little more into the movie about the 2 sisters knowing about each liking the same boy before he was killed off. I'm sure if the movie had been done this way there would have been a very different ending, that's why this made this move such a good movie. It shows that no matter what happens in your life with your siblings that you can always get thru it and that if it's 2 sisters dealing with a boy, (the same boy) that working thru the pain and hurt makes things to seem better and easier to work out between the 2 of them. It's nice to see love stories that have a terrible thing to happen in someone's life that you can still get thru it become even closer after its over. I really enjoyed watching this movie, and I still do now when it comes on. I seem to find myself watching it every time it comes on. It would have been nice if there would have been a part 2 for this movie, maybe having the older sister to come up and have his baby, this would really have made a great finish to the story since he died, this way it would keep him alive even though he's dead.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d6c4fbe04634b59be6c538ad76f6063",
            "input": "I just read the plot summary and it is the worst one I have ever read. It does not do justice to this incredible movie. For an example of a good summary, read the listing at \"Turner Classic Movies\". Anyway, this was one of my favorite movies as a young child. My sister and I couldn't wait until every April when we could see it on T.V. It is one of the best horse movies of it's time. It is one of those great classics that the whole family can watch. The romance is clean and endearing. The story line is interesting and the songs are great. They don't make movies like this anymore. Good acting and not over the top. Pat Boone and Shirley Jones are at their best, along with many other great character actors.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93738be6f57a4486b68cc557eca9b2c1",
            "input": "Director/star Clint Eastwood's \"Sudden Impact\" is an intriguing addition to the \"Dirty Harry\" series - a combination of crude film-making and genius. It's mediocre and silly in parts, brilliant and classic in others, with compelling, gripping pacing. There are numerous echoes of the first film here - the shoot 'em up \"Make my day\" scene recalls the \"Do you feel lucky\" one, one of the villains is as viscerally repugnant as the first film's Scorpio, an actor who played a minor baddie in the first one returns here as Harry's partner - just to name a few.Harry Callahan is still at odds with the higher-ups in the department, still mean, still tough, but now he's older and wearier. His constant conflicts with his superiors are a metaphor for his inner conflict - a respect and reverence for the law versus a desire to serve the pure spirit of justice, the two things not always being compatible. This \"incompatibility\" is the underlying theme of the series. The first film posed a simple question, \"What about the victim's rights?\" - (do they outweigh those of the criminal? Vice versa? Depends?). That film's answer was controversial, prompting a sequel (the highly enjoyable \"Magnum Force\") which set out to draw the line between Harry's brand of justice and pure, heartless vigilantism. Dirty Harry, like many of Clint's other roles, is the personification of vengeance, the protector of the the defenseless. This movie however brings it back to the victim, in this case Jennifer (portrayed by Sondra Locke), who decides to avenge the rape of herself and her now-incapacitated sister by ruthlessly hunting down and ritualistically executing the men (and one woman) who committed the crime.Without going into a play-by-play of the whole movie, I will say this - I mentioned earlier that \"Sudden Impact\" echoes the first film - it actually also sprinkles in little references and in-jokes from the whole series (the confusion concerning the captain's last name is an example - an intentional prank, I believe). The relationship between Callahan and Jennifer is neat - has our rogue cop hero found a soul-mate in this lady vigilante? And is she a vigilante or a victim justifiably standing up for her and her sister's tarnished rights? The exchange between these two at the very end of the film is a poetic denouement of the series, one which I personally (as a fan) found quite moving. That last scene alone makes Sudden Impact the legitimate climax to the \"Dirty Harry\" collection, the perfect answer to the conflict posed in the first film. (Not to knock \"The Dead Pool\" - that excellent movie was a relatively light-hearted suspenseful yet comic thriller featuring Harry Callahan, rather than a character-defining film like this one).This movie did well in the theaters - audiences in the Reagan Era found Harry and his ilk quite appealing, and the President himself frequently quoted \"Go ahead, make my day.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ace94d729ee4e17b986ef7eed1cf8b3",
            "input": "If Edward Woodward was the the flicks watching this film then that's what he would scream out in horror. I'm sorry folks but enough's enough. We had Get Carter, The Italian Job, Alfie and now this. What's the similarities? No. It's not exactly a coincidence that three of the originals star Maurice Micklewhite and the other stars another great British actor. The main common ingredient in those originals IS the britishness of the films. They weren't made to impress Hollywood. They were quirky English films with a unique charm/atmosphere that just cannot be replicated in the USA. The word is CULT and what better way to destroy a cult film than to bastardise it with a remake or even a sequel. Wicker 06 had a tough task before it even hit the road. Wicker 73 is even more enigmatic that other said cult films; it defies genre, intelligent scripts, A-grade actors, the music score, set-pieces that defy description and all the stories surrounding the film.So here comes a remake. Don't worry. No originals were harmed in the making of this remake. Some major aspects of the story needed to be reworked for the modern USA - communications, paganism, virgins. But that's just about the whole premise. So we give the cop a Nam style trauma past complete with shock music flashbacks for the cheap scares. Then with no mobile phone mast on the island that sorts the communication out - but in the real world this wouldn't happen. Cops just don't go missing. Give him a blood link for motivation rather than the clash of beliefs and you have the remake. Wafer thin though, isn't it?It's just that it was all laid on with a trowel. The name alterations were simply hammy, almost Carry On, there was no sense of community on the island, no centre of town to catch your bearings, just a few houses dotted about a forest and that was it. Willow was just annoying by not giving out any info at all and Cage was useless to let her get away with it. When he went into the well you just knew he would get locked it. The screenplay was signposted all the way to the end - and you just wanted it to hurry up and end. The epilogue was absolutely hilarious and didn't know when to stop. That ending is probably the best way to summarise the difference between the two. One ends in the most beautiful sunset after the most horrific day. The other ends with a post-production explain-it-all-to-the-thickies type conclusion.I loved the original but went to the cinema with an open mind and was excited to see the film. I left thankful in the knowledge that this film will probably end up beneath a highway somewhere only this time mercifully forgotten forever.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e717124f1d2c4802995f9fa34bc6ba4d",
            "input": "I find it heart-warming and inspiring that the writing team behind such hopelessly mainstream Hollywood movies like INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM, American Graffiti and HOWARD THE DUCK would begin their career with a low-budget exploitation horror film like this. Perhaps as a testament to the talent that would earn Willard Hyuck and Gloria Katz an Oscar nomination later in their respective careers, Messiah of Evil has potential, but sadly becomes frustrating exactly because it can't muster the film-making prowess to pull it off.The premise involves a young girl who travels to a small coastal town in search for her painter father who went missing a while back. It doesn't take long for the fragmented narrative to abandon all hope and dive headlong in disjointed absurdity - and for a while it works admirably well to the point where you begin thinking that maybe Messiah of Evil needs to be reclaimed from the schlocky gutter of 70's exploitation as an example of artful mystery horror.The surreal non-sequiturs keep piling on as the daughter stumbles upon a young couple in a seedy hotel room who are in town to conduct a research on the local legend of the 'blood moon', a scruffy and half-mad alcoholic (played by the great Elisha Cook Jr. in perhaps the best scene of the movie) who warns her about her father only to be reportedly found dead in an alley 'eaten by dogs' a little later, the blind old lady that owns the local art gallery and who has inexplicably removed all of her father's paintings from the shop and last but not least a retarded, murderous, squirrel-eating albino.Part of the movie's charm is precisely this brand of bargain-basement artsy surrealism that defies logic and genre conventions every step of the way. Whereas with Lynch it is obviously the mark of a talented creator, with Messiah of Evil the boundaries between the 'intentional', the 'unintentional' and the 'didn't really expect it to come out this way but it's good enough - WRAP SCENE' blur hopelessly.Take for example the double narration that flows in and out of the picture in a drug-addled, feverish, stream-of-consciousness way, one coming from the daughter as she wanders from place to place in search for her father, and the other narrated by her father's voice as she reads his diary. While we're still talking about a 'living dead' picture, Messiah of Evil is different and only loosely one - at least with current preconceptions of what a zombie movie is supposed to be. The origin of the living dead here is a 100 year old curse, bestowed upon the town by a mysterious 'Dark Stranger' who came from the woods one day. In the meantime Hyuck finds time for snippets of mass-consumption criticism in a flesh-eating supermarket scene that predates DAWN OF THE DEAD by a good number of years (you can hear the MST3K line already: 'man is dead, only his capitalist food tins remain') and a nicely thought but poorly executed similar scene in a movie theater.I generally think that the surreal works in careful, well measured doses - how is the absurd to work if it's not hidden within the perfectly normal? Hyuck seems to just smear it all over the picture and by doing so dangerously overplays his hand. When the albino for example picks up a girl hitching her way to town and eats a squirrel in front of her, you can almost imagine the director winking meaningfully at the audience, amused and satisfied with his own hijinks. The general film-making level is also pretty low - after the half-way mark, the pace becomes muddled and the story tiresome and evidently going nowhere and not particularly fast either. Add to that the choppy editing, average acting and Hyuck's general inability to capture true atmosphere - the empty streets of coastal town are criminally misused - and I'd file Messiah under 'missed opportunity' but still grindhouse afficionados will find enough to appreciate - even though it's not particularly gory, trashy or sleazy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59eb72ceb5034d40868685a6bf234778",
            "input": "I watched this movie last night and already I am struggling to recollect very much about it. The story is about a group of criminals who escape from a space penal colony. They fly to the Moon in a space-age dustbin carrier; when there, they terrorise the dustbin men who work on the Moonbase.It strikes me that rubbish low-budget sci-fi films often involve either desert planets or, like this movie, criminals escaping from penal colonies. Why this is I have no idea. But I can say with some certainty that such films are always diabolical. This one is really no exception. It begins reasonably well with a decent credit sequence and a half-way alright dance music soundtrack. It then degenerates into a boring sci-fi thriller. So little of consequence actually happens in this movie that I am literally struggling to write a helpful review, so if you're reading this I apologise for not being able to enlighten you to the film's subtleties and nuances. For the record, I recall a tedious bunch of baddies, a tedious bunch of goodies, some nuclear warheads and a hologram of a naked woman. Other than that, I'm struggling.If you feel you could be interested in the activities of lunar dustbin men then I would not hesitate to recommend this film. I would also recommend it to those of you who wish to send their friends to sleep and steal their wallets.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-403093a100a24f48ab8fde769730663f",
            "input": "'Soapdish' is one of the best, yet least well remembered comedies of the 1990's. The film revolves around the various off-camera drama's that occur behind the scenes of a cheaply produced Daytime Soap Opera. The first of the film's various impressive strengths is it's fantastic A-List cast. 'Soapdish' features some of the greatest actors and actresses of it's era.The film is superbly led by Sally Field, as the neurotic ageing actress Celeste Talbert (She famously throws a tantrum when put in a costume that makes her look like \"Gloria F*CKING Swanson!\"). Her supporting cast reads like a who's-who of 90's Movie Greats! Whoopi Goldberg, Robert Downey Jr, Teri Hatcher, Kevin Kline and Kathy Najimy all elevate the film greatly. Goldberg is predictably excellent, whilst Downey Jr.'s and Hatcher's performances hint at the comedic excellence they would later achieve.In terms of writing, the film is outstanding. There is a really modern edge to the script, which strays into the wonderfully bizarre on several occasions. There also several visual gags that are quite ahead of their time. In some ways, the film is reminiscent of Mel Brooks at his best and frequently reminded this reviewer of 'High Anxiety' (1977). Much of the film's humour hinges on it's often scathing, but pretty accurate, representations of daytime television and of neurotic and pretentious actors. For example, The extras casting session featuring the exploitative executive played by Carrie Fisher, is both hilarious and honest.'Soapdish' is, for my money, one of the very best comedies Hollywood produced during the 1990's. It's excellent script and A-Class cast make it a must-see. It's hard not to love this film after it's kept you laughing for 90 minutes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00629d50a89f45d185235346a5f553f9",
            "input": "SPOILERS AHEADThis is one of the worst movies ever made - it's that simple. There is not one redeeming quality about this movie. The first 10 minutes are quite tricky - they actually lead you to believe that this film will be shocking and will have you on the edge of your seat. Instead, you will spend 83 minutes punching yourself while watching stolen and poorly made scenes run without any organization. The lake was ridiculous, looked like an aquarium, and had the same plant in different parts of the lake bed. Characters show their advanced teleportation powers, for example Alex Thomas who falls into the lake (drunk), and then ends up on his boat in an impossible position. Angie Harmon put up a pitiful performance as Kate, made worse by the space-time continuum rupturing dialog that appears to have been written at the last minute by a fifth grader. An example of this would be when she said, \"Flashlight!\" in such a stupid manner that it shows the threshold of how much a human body can cringe before it snaps in half. Finally, the editing of this movie was by far the most bizarre and horrific that I have ever seen. It was like the cameramen were a bunch of chimps who had been given camcorders by scientists. An example of this would be when we suddenly get a closeup of the headlight on Alex's car. I would bet that there was little to no time spent editing this movie. The ending was absolutely pathetic. The writers were obviously trying to create some sort of mysterious plot line that made the viewer say, \"oh yeah!\" Instead, we're left to view some dumb painting of a spider that somehow fits into the story line. Unfortunately, there is not one perspective in the millions out there that could save this movie from being a festering piece of crap.I give this a .5 out of 10, the .5 being from the fact that this movie was recorded on film instead of becoming a picture book.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f601b28fb9649a890b45e5acde1f894",
            "input": "I loved this mini series. Tara Fitzgerald did an incredible job portraying Helen Graham, a beautiful young woman hiding, along with her young son, from a mysterious past. As an anglophile who loves romances... this movie was just my cup of tea and I would recommend it to anyone looking to escape for a few hours into the England of the 1800's. I also must mention that Toby Stephens who portrays the very magnetic Gilbert Markham is reason enough to watch this wonderful production.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8bcc499dd21a44a596a5de1ffc8e95c8",
            "input": "The movie within the movie - a concept done many times in the history of cinema. It is accomplished here as well as in any.If you love Carmen, you'll love this version.If you love flamenco, you'll love this version.The plot of the classic opera is played out in the actual rehearsal of the opera by a flamenco troupe. The music is authentic. The direction wonderful.If you like dancing, you'll love this version.There is tragedy. There is passion. There is intrigue.There is...Carmen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-849e86302f254bbb981c3a7318089c9a",
            "input": "It happened with Assault on Prescient 13 in 2005, it happened with The Lost Boys in 2008 and now it's happened with another classic from the 80's Wargames... :( Why, oh why, oh why won't Hollywood ever learn? Leave them alone...! They can't be remade...! They suck....! We all hate them....!.Those of you who haven't seen the original 1983 version with Matthew Broderick & Ally Sheedy, go rent/buy it now....!! The hardware may look dated, the special effects are not new millennium but it still beats this rubbish hands down....For those of us who lived through the 80's when hacking was sexy, the Internet was something mysterious and your disks came as a 8\" floppy variety, well we now possess the wisdom to avoid this film like a Thermonuclear War! Never before has \"a nice game of chess\" seemed the better option....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98994846c8be484ab5365890818d7b6e",
            "input": "I've been a fan of Xu Ke (Hark Tsui) for many year since school. This film is the best fantasy movie in years. I dont think \"action\" is the right genre, though there're lot of action and KongFu scenese. Wait, did I mentioned this is an ORIENTAL fantasy moive? please, keep in mind that DO NOT use hollywood formula to rate this film. And for the guy who \"poo\" around, I don't blame you, 'cause you still young and need to know more about \"culture\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9acbd56eb2f84aff9a38b85d1ace0f61",
            "input": "let me say that i love Adam Sandler, watching reign over me i was paying close attention to his actingwhen he raises his voice, i cant help but think of happy gilmore yelling at a golf ball, then i snap back as Adam Sandler sucks me inReign over Me is a great film, a film that comes off slow at first with you expecting emotion in every sceneDon Cheadle always does a great job and is no exception here with some truly great lines and is worthy of an Oscar in any movie he doesadam sandler was amazing in so many ways not only was this his most dramatic/best acted film of his career. but i can recall laughing out loud at many parts of this filmThe supporting cast was great also with Saffron Burroughs and Jada Pinkett SmithI would highly recommend this movie its got tremendous acting beautiful shots of NYC great comedy great drama And a new found respect for Adam sandler if you ever doubted him or a reassurance at how great Don Cheadle is",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0194aa309364249ab9c307abd979104",
            "input": "Smallville episode Justice is the best episode of Smallville ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! It's my favorite episode of Smallville! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-813156b68d7740cd926e6c27172320da",
            "input": "Many things become clear when watching this film: 1) the acting is terrible. Tom Hanks and Wendy Crewson are so-so, but the parent-child conflict borders soap opera-ish. The other two boys: an overly pouty child prodigy and your stereotypical I'm-a-babe-but-I'm-really-sensitive-inside blonde dreamboat; 2) the film as a whole is depressing and disappointing; 3) Robbie's dreams and episodes are disturbing (acted by Tom Hanks); 4) the inclusion of the beginning love ballads is an odd choice (\"we are all special friends\"); 5) the weird lines and side plots are not made any better by the terrible acting; and 5) this is a really bad movie. Expect to be disappointed--and probably disturbed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f79fc2a10dc4d489c87e63a9a31a882",
            "input": "I haven't seen this in over 20yrs but I still remember things about it.This film could NOT have been made in color. The stark grays are what make it, and was life really that simple in the 1950's?? What stands out the most in my memory is Perry Smith going to the gallows. His breathing under the hood just before they sprung the trap. I don't think I could watch that again.....once is plenty. It's like that unnamed guy at the beginning of \"Papillon\" who is dragged out in terror to the guillotine. The guy that said watch this on a double bill with \"Dead Man Walking\" should have added the last 10 minutes of \"I Want To Live\" as well.Some of my ancestors being \"aristos\" went to the guillotine in 1794-95 so my feelings on the death penalty are rather intense.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09000924a8d44900afdcba9364e13e26",
            "input": "Allen goes to the country (somewhere he hates going in real life) and has a weekend with his friends - which are the usual successful white middle-class bellyaching types that feature in many of his films.I usually find something to amuse in Woody Allen comedies, but here he really falls totally flat on his face. Even the one-liners seem to have deserted him. The really is no plot (bar bits and pieces of cod Shakespeare) - but Allen seems to use the location to allow a semi-mystical air, which just makes the thing even more witless and half-baked.It just doesn't work at any level and is just a giant bore. The best thing about this film (apart from the end credits coming up) is that the bad reviews seem to get him to wake up and realise that simply throwing together a slapdash script and casting your mates in it doesn't make for entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a240fda4fd444e6bc6a72758748a864",
            "input": "There have been plenty of unknown movies or movies given bad reviews that I really liked. This was not one of them.It was overacted and used camera techniques that made me feel like I was watching a soap opera. It was ludicrously predictable and took most of the movie to get going then left you asking \"that's it?\". Once I decided not to take the movie too seriously and watch it from a purely corny point of view it became more enjoyable. This is one movie that would have wound up on MST3000 if it was still on.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c752a84a57eb4176b21660f4aabb2921",
            "input": "Just saw this movie, and what a waste of time. The movie was predictable and slow. It's basically the Mormon bad news bears that play church sanctioned basketball. Rather than watching this movie, I should have had a root canal. The cameo performances were obviously driven by sponsorship / funding. This movie had potential due to the outrageous behavior that is exhibited by Mormons when they play church sanctioned basketball, however because it's rated PG, the true nature of the spectacle could not be transfered to film. The acting is horrible with the exception of Clint Howard and Fred Willard. Thurl Bailey's appearance in the film was completely unnecessary.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e30a7be06164d8197fbb5f388e57713",
            "input": "This is a thoroughly diabolical tale of just how bad things can go wrong. A simple robbery. Pick up some serious change. Get our finances together and everything will be hunky-dory. But—mom and pop's jewelry store? No problem. Insurance pays for it all. No guns. Nobody gets hurt. Easy money.Older, more successful (it would appear) brother Andy (Philip Seymour Hoffman) has a few minor problems. Heroin addiction, cocaine habituation. A wife (Marisa Tomei) that…well, he can't seem to perform for. His flat belly days long gone. Younger, sweet, slightly dim-witted younger brother, Hank (Ethan Hawke) with a few dinero problems of his own. Behind in child support payments for his daughter, in debt to friends and relatives, not exactly wowing them in the work of work, etc.Sydney Lumet, in this performance at the age of 82 (!), directs and gets it 99.99 percent right, which is hard to do in a thriller. I have seen more thrillers than I can remember and most of the time the director gets the movie printed and lives with the plot holes, the improbabilities, the cheesy scenes, and the hurry-up ending. Here Lumet makes a thriller like it's a work of art. Every detail is perfect. The acting is superb. The plot has no holes. The story rings true and clear and represents a tale about human frailty that would honor the greatest filmmakers and even the Bard himself.Hoffman of course is excellent. When you don't have marquee, leading man presence, you have to get by on talent, workmanship and pure concentration. Ethan Hawke, who is no stranger to the sweet, little guy role, adds a layer of desperation and all too human incompetence to the part so that we don't know whether to pity him or trash him. Albert Finney plays the father of the wayward sons with a kind of steely intensity that belies his age. And Marisa Tomei, who has magical qualities of sexiness to go along with her unique creativity, manages to be both vulnerable and hard as nails as Andy's two timing wife. (But who could blame her?) It's almost a movie reviewer's sacrilege to give a commercial thriller five or ten stars, but if you study this film, as all aspiring film makers would be well advised to do, you will notice the kind of excessive (according to most Hollywood producers) attention to detail that makes for real art--the sort of thing that only great artists can do, and indeed cannot help but do. (By the way, I think there were twenty producers on this film—well, maybe a dozen; check the credits.) All I can say in summation is, Way to go Sydney Lumet, author of a slew of excellent films, and to show such fidelity to your craft and your art at such an advanced age—kudos. May we all do half so well.Okay, the 00.01 percent. It was unlikely that the father (Albert Finney) could have followed the cabs that Andy took around New York without somehow losing the tail. This is minor, and I wish all thrillers could have so small a blip. Also one wonders why Lumet decided not to tell us about the fate of Hank at the end. We can guess and guess. Perhaps his fate fell onto the cutting room floor. Perhaps Lumet was not satisfied with what was filmed and time ran out, and he just said, \"Leave it like that. It really doesn't matter.\" And I think it doesn't. What happens to Hank is not going to be good. He isn't the kind of guy who manages to run off to Mexico and is able to start a new life. He is the kind of guy who gets a \"light\" sentence of 10 to 20 and serves it and comes out a kind of shrunken human being who knows he wasn't really a man when he should have been.See this for Sidney Lumet, one of Hollywood's best, director of The Pawnbroker (1964), The Group (1966), Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976), and many more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b89cbbbae012460a8112b07b73b6b18b",
            "input": "The story idea behind THE LOST MISSILE isn't bad at all, but unfortunately the story does get a bit dull towards the middle and the overuse of stock footage as well as poor special effects sink this film to the sub-par level.The film begins with a missile heading towards the Earth. In a panic because it's about to strike the Earth, the Soviets manage to deflect the object. This isn't necessarily good, however, as this seemingly unmanned craft has a vapor trail that destroys everything in its path AND the ship is now in a low orbit over the planet. In other words, with each pass it makes, a swath of death follows--one that could potentially kill us all!! So, it's up to the good scientists of the US (led by a very young and hardly recognizable Robert Loggia) to formulate and plan to save us--and especially save New York that is in its immediate flight path! Unfortunately, they aren't able to save Ottawa (I've never been there, so I can't say whether or not this is a big loss) but thanks to good old American know-how, they are able to eventually destroy this harbinger of destruction!! So, as you can see, the story idea isn't bad and rather original. But, so many old clips of fighter planes and guys manning radar scopes gets a bit old and it seemed like padding. Overall, a decent but hardly inspired film that extreme fans of the genre may like--all others, see it at your own risk.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09ce6ade3b4744f1a872090f785f5447",
            "input": "Passport to Pimlico is a real treat for all fans of British cinema. Not only is it an enjoyable and thoroughly entertaining comedy, but it is a cinematic flashback to a bygone age, with attitudes and scenarios sadly now only a memory in British life.Stanley Holloway plays Pimlico resident Arthur Pemberton, who after the accidental detonation of an unexploded bomb, discovers a wealth of medieval treasure belonging to the 14th Century Duke of Burgundy that has been buried deep underneath their little suburban street these last 600 years.Accompanying the treasure is an ancient legal decree signed by King Edward IV of England (which has never been officially rescinded) to state that that particular London street had been declared Burgandian soil, which means that in the eyes of international law, Pemberton and the other local residents are no longer British subjects but natives of Burgundy and their tiny street an independent country in it's own right and a law unto itself.This sets the war-battered and impoverished residents up in good stead as they believe themselves to be outside of English law and jurisdiction, so in an act of drunken defiance they burn their ration books, destroy and ignore their clothing coupons, flagrantly disregard British licencing laws etc, declaring themselves fully independent from Britain.However, what then happens is ever spiv, black marketeer and dishonest crook follows suit and crosses the 'border' into Burgundy as a refuge from the law and post-war restrictions to sell their dodgy goods, and half of London's consumers follow them in order to dodge the ration, making their quiet happy little haven, a den of thieves and a rather crowded one at that.Appealing to Whitehall for assistance, they are told that due to developments this is \"now a matter of foreign policy, which His Majesty's Government is reluctant to become involved\" which leaves the residents high and dry. They do however declare the area a legal frontier and as such set up a fully equipped customs office at the end of the road, mainly to monitor smuggling than to ensure any safety for the residents of Pimlico.Eventually the border is closed altogether starting a major siege, with the Bugundian residents slowly running out of water and food, but never the less fighting on in true British style. As one Bugundian resident quotes, \"we're English and we always were English, and it's just because we are English, we are fighting so hard to be Bugundians\" A sentiment that is soon echoed throughout the capital as when the rest of London learn of the poor Bugundians plight they all feel compelled to chip in and help them, by throwing food and supplies over the barbed wire blockades.Will Whitehall, who has fought off so may invaders throughout the centuries finally be brought to it's knees by this new batch of foreigners, especially as these ones are English!!!! Great tale, and great fun throughout. Not to be missed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c58337d92c124df9b296aceab22f7c44",
            "input": "I am stunned to discover the amount of fans this show has. Haven't said that Friends was, at best an 'average' sitcom, and not as great as others have made out. Let's face it, if it wasn't for the casting of Courtney Cox Arquette, David Schwimmer, Matthew Perry, Lisa Kudrow, Jennifer Aniston and Matt Le Blanc, then who knows whether this show would've lasted as long as it has done. I very much doubt that. Although as the series progressed, Friends got more progressively predictable, lame and boring that I couldn't care less about the characters- of whom are the most overrated in TV history- or of their plight, nor of who was sleeping with whom. And it went from being funny in the first four seasons to occasionally funny. And even when it had all these A-list Hollywood actors from the movie world, I still didn't bother to tune in. The writing in Friends became stale that I lost interest in this show from the sixth season onwards and as for the ending, well it was predictable to say the least.What was annoying though was that this lasted for ten seasons, whilst some of my favourite shows lasted for only three, four seasons for instance and were eventually cancelled and taken off the air for good. The show should've came to an immediate halt by the time the cast wanted bigger salaries. In truth, as much as the series waned, it was the show that was bigger than the actors themselves, not the other way round. When it ended in 2004, I was so relieved to see the back of this sitcom. Now, there is talk of a friends reunion show coming to our TV screens very soon. And yet, I for one will not be looking forward to it whatsoever.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b871b090e12949bfb32416897036c051",
            "input": "Dudley Moore is fantastic in this largley unknown classic. This film is very witty film that relies hugely on the actors talent. Without Dudley Moore, John Gielgud, Liza Minnelli, and a few others, this film could have been a disaster. It is not always well shot and at times has some very corny music that tries to force a mood (the \"psycho\"-like music at the wedding fight), but the acting overcomes it. The character Arthur is hilarious, with his drunken comments. But he develops well into a more mature, well rounded character as he learns to live by his own free will. The end is fairly corny, though. I wont give it away, but it could be improved. Worth seeing many times.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44205090e9ca4afe9787bfa7c1a0ee63",
            "input": "Call me adolescent but I really do think that this is a great series. If you haven't had a chance to experience a few episodes of the latest Star Trek series, you should definitely watch this one. Perhaps more compelling than that of Voyager's Caretaker, which launched the series with Cpt. Janeway, Archer's adventures are completely different, yet strangely familiar...The music is catchy too. No true Sci-fi fan can go without seeing at least one Star Trek episode--and these installments make the wait worthwhile.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94588b9947a04ca4bf7a95bcf9c11058",
            "input": "For those looking for a sequel for the fine South African miniseries of the 1980s, this isn't it. Nor is it a historical drama. Rather, it is a dreary little fantasy which has nothing to do with the historical Shaka, but merely uses his name to give a certain cachet to Sinclair's idiotic story about an African superhero who is a combination of Jesus, Lincoln, Superman, and Nelson Mandela.On the other hand, there are a few laugh-out-loud moments, as when Shaka breaks the cross to which he is chained and kicks some serious slaver butt. You know, like Jesus would have done if he hadn't been such a wimp.True, I saw only the 98-minute version, but I can't imagine that twice as much of this crap would have been better.And what kind of a name is Mungo?!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9b68e546ccf4880af819241d6d4c875",
            "input": "((NB: Spoiler warning, such as it is!))First off, this is a teen slasher flick -- the Spam-In-A-Cabin genre, as Joe Bob Briggs piquantly put it. If you're looking for Roshambo, this isn't it and wasn't going to BE it. I'm desperately unimpressed by stabs at its cinematography, directing or acting performances.Secondly, this wasn't Zuniga's first horror flick, it was her first screen appearance period, cinema, TV, whatever. For what it is worth; neither is Daphne Zuniga Susan Sarandon or Katherine Hepburn.Thirdly, you have to give even a lame slasher flick props. Sure, it follows the deeply insulting formulaic message of its genre: any young woman having or showing interest in sex is beef on the hoof, and the harvest time is now.Except this one gives the chop to the sweet, virginal protagonist as well! Now THERE is a mediocre teen death film that has the courage of its convictions! Interesting that this was said ingenue's only film role. Another One Hit Wonder, except that term gives the lass too much credit.(Then again, this film probably has one of the highest percentage of one-movie actors in history. Of the nineteen credited actors, a whopping thirteen never appeared in any other film. Three appeared in one other movie by the same producers. Only one other besides Zuniga has as many as six screen credits. What was this, the Has Been And Never Were Mutual Aid Society?)Granted, I saw this a long time ago on late night cable when I was bored and never anticipate being that bored in my life again, but I see no reason to hunt down everyone involved and toss them in the incinerator with Joanne.2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37daadcfa31f4b8fac83011e55937656",
            "input": "It's a bad movie, it seems like there is only 5 police in HK, they were not using there gun and this makes me feel like a Jacky Chan's movie. All the time they were using their gun to point at the suspect only. When they finally use their gun is when they kill each other, what a funny movie. In The movie, it's like all the good guys died without a reason.They story line of the movie also sucks, the story jump here and there and bored people. But if you wanted to see a bloody movie, I think this is only a OK type of movie, I think U.S. made zombie movie is more bloodier than this one",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c3a35b74594421cb9bcfdb6a43fa0ce",
            "input": "The film \"Cross Eyed\" by Adam Jones propels the viewer on a ride of redemption as the main character takes back control of the wheel and sets his life in order. Adam Jones has found an imaginative and refreshing way to empower his character and actualize what matters most. These truths become apparent to both the characters and viewers as you laugh and gag to the credits with them. The simple yet attractive settings\\costumes keep you guessing about what you will see next. You can't help but smile and laugh at the antics that take place in this movie. I can't wait for his sophomore effort. It is only a matter of time before Jones strikes again. Bravo!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a55f981d157b4717bb4ae183cd9d2487",
            "input": "This movie is so bad, it's comical. In fact, Mystery Science Theatre 3000, the television show in which three characters watch and parody bad movies, used this very film to mock. I suggest watching it (maybe on YouTube) instead of actually seeing this movie.Please, do not see Hobgoblins if you're not prepared to stop within the first scene. Actually, do not see this movie, period. Please. At least not seriously. Its jokes are not funny (to say the least), and you'll have much more fun parodying or watching a parody of it then viewing the movie.You may feel yourself becoming sick upon watching, so spare yourself. Read a book. Do the laundry. Anything is more fun than watching Hobgoblins.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc301de9dbe6472f96add99def1cdeeb",
            "input": "Hey guys, i have been looking every where to find these two movies and i can't find them anywhere in my local area. (I am Australian). Could You please help me and tell me where i can buy it from. In General Home Ward Bound 1 and 2 are the best movies i have ever seen and are good for people of all ages. It was my favourite movie wen i was 5 and it still is even now when i am a teenager. It is a great movie for the whole family. My entire family loves this movie except for my younger sister because i have watched it that many times that she is sick of it. I love this movie and i cant wait till i can buy it again on DVD.Sally",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bbb8d07799d4f9ab7a85921f862b5e1",
            "input": "It's curious that the two stars of Meet The People were a pair of movie stars who went into the new medium of television and became even bigger successes and who both went into the production end of things and enjoyed tycoon status on the small screen. Lucille Ball however was not a major star, that would come with television. As for Dick Powell he desperately wanted to get out of doing films like Meet The People and his career salvation would be coming in his next film.I think the only reason that Dick Powell did the film was because a young player from MGM was cast in a specialty number and he was seeing her at the time. His private time with June Allyson was far better than what we see on the screen. Powell looks crashingly bored and can't summon up any kind of emotion at all.He was probably tired of doing these musicals with silly plots, the kind he ran from Warner Brothers from. The original show Meet The People was not a book show, it was a revue and it ran in the 1940-41 season on Broadway for 160 performances. When MGM bought it, they scrapped everything but the title and the title song. The rest of the score was patched together from various and sundry songwriters, none of the songs is memorable. Odd when you consider some of the source material is from Burton Lane, E.Y. Harburg, Harold Arlen, and Rodgers&Hart. These guys just must have emptied the trunk for material.The plot is sillier than even most of the musical propaganda pieces of the time. Powell is the writer of a revue called Meet The People and he's a shipyard worker who wins a lottery date with movie star Lucille Ball. She's interested, he's interested, they're both interested in the revue, but creative differences keep them apart of course until the finale. That's the film in a nutshell.MGM did give Powell and Ball some good musical acts which are the main reason for watching Meet The People. The big bands of Vaughn Monroe and Spike Jones are here and the highlight of the film for me is Bert Lahr dressed in a commodore's suit like Lou Costello had in the dream sequence in In The Navy. The song Heave Ho is written by Arlen and Harburg who wrote for Lahr, the Courage number from The Wizard Of Oz. And as just about everyone in the world has seen that film, you have an idea of Heave Ho is like.Dick Powell's next film was Murder My Sweet in which he finally bid a not so fond adieu to musicals. And Lucy would have to wait for television before the world got to see what she really could do.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8359133ad23497fa715caa4b12fc56b",
            "input": "We all have seen some unending epics in our times, but this one really tops them all! The movie is so long and so slow, that, just to put things in perspective, i felt a lot older when i left movie hall, than I entered it. At almost 4 hours length, it could have rather been made into a tele-serial.What starts as a promising comedy slowly loses its pace. Nikhil advani has woven the plot around 6 love stories and he cant make justice to any one of them... There is no interconnection between them to start with, and links shown in last 20 minutes just seem to be forced to connect the story.Situation is made worse by Silly dialogues (most of them repeated in Hindi cinema over years)and stupid cinematography.Priyanka doesn't realise that she actually needs to play her role rather than just looking glam on screen... An utter waste of beauty without acting skills.And then there is loud-is-humorous Govinda & my-face-twists-better-than-jim-carrey Akshay Khanna who keep belching at the top of their lungs to irritate already tired viewers.Only good part in movie is John & Vidya's love story & nice acting/comedy by sohail & Isha. But they are so good at their roles that just these two couples could have justified the movie without jumbling it with other bunch of characters. Their brilliance gets lost in the midst of other substandard plot lines.My guess - Director was making two separate movies(may be more!) and some beginner assistant mixed up all the records, beyond a point of sorting them out, so director was left with no choice to show it all as a single movie...Watch it only if you want to test your patience!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6c2ac1bf8454cd582f5d60df684a4dc",
            "input": "Wonderland is the fascinating film chronicling the x-rated film star John C. Holmes involvement in the brutal Wonderland murders.The movie's promotion misleads one into thinking this a romanticized portrayal of the porn industry in the vein of Boogie Nights and that is not the case here.In fact,except for a few references made by newscasters that John Holmes is a porn star and a brief montage of real-life footage of John Holmes this film is strictly drama about a fallen celebrity's involvement with murder and how it happened.Despite being mislead the film is actually engaging.The acting from all the cast is excellent and I'd like to say that Val Kilmer is amazing in his ability to get down all the mannerisms of John Holmes.I was completely convinced that I was watching what John C. Holmes probably looked and acted like in real life.If you are a John C. Holmes fan or like stories about Hollywood then I think you will enjoy watching Wonderland.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7856c87d245748e385307e869d76cf24",
            "input": "The first of two films by Johnny To, this film won many awards, but none so prestigious as a Cannes Golden Palm nomination.The Triad elects their leader, but it is far from democratic with the behind the scenes machinations.Tony Leung Ka Fai (Zhou Yu's Train, Ashes of Time Redux) is Big D, who plans to take the baton no matter what it takes, even if it means a war. Well, war is not going to happen as that is bad for business. Big D will change his tune or...Good performances by Simon Yam, Louis Koo and Ka Tung Lam (Infernal Affairs I & III), along with Tony Leung Ka Fai.Whether Masons, made men in the Mafia, or members of the Wo Sing Society, the ceremonies are the same; fascinating to watch.To be continued...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36eb42d8c3cd4b5aa1421dcaea105a50",
            "input": "I hated this show when I was a kid. That was back in the day when kids show characters actually had accents, not just the bland, generic, General American Dialect we're used to. Jack Wild had a British accent and Pufnstuf's was southern. Like one of the others mentioned, though, I never quite understood what the deal was with the witch wanting the flute. That always seemed odd to me, probably because the flute just annoyed me and I wouldn't have gone to any trouble to take it away!Just a comment on the similarity of Pufnstuf to early 70s McDonalds commercials that others have mentioned: Pufnstuf ripped off McDonalds. At the height of McDonalds popularity, the TV show (or rather, their creators) sought to license McDonalds characters for their show, but when McDonalds declined the TV show changed the characters slightly and passed it as their own. They even hired former employees of McDonalds ad agency and the voice actors to make the TV shows. McDonalds sued and won. Search for Pufnstuf McDonaldland lawsuit and you'll find plenty of articles about it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b60fe5a38b044604a3e53e8c46cda79c",
            "input": "After Dark, My Sweet is a great, modern noir, filled with seedy characters, dirt roads, and, of course, sweaty characters. It seems that most of the truly great noirs of the last two or three decades have taken place in the South, where the men glisten and the ladies, um, glisten too. Why? Because it's hooooottttttttttt. And because everyone looks better wet (at least the men do - sweaty women leave me clammy). Anyway - there might be some spoilers in here. This film is a wonderful example of everything a noir should be - steady pacing (though some with attention disorders refer to it as 'slow'), clearly and broadly drawn (though not simple) characters, and tons of atmosphere. Noir, if anything, is about moods and attitudes. That's why the great ones are not marked by your traditional definitions of 'great' acting (look at Bogart, Mitchum, Hurt, and Nicholson - they (and their characters) were anything but real - but they had style and sass and in a crime movie that's exactly what you want). or quickly paced adventures (again all great noirs seem to be on slow burn like a cigarette). Great noirs create an environment and you just inhabit it with the characters for a couple hours. After Dark My Sweet let's you do that - and it let's you enjoy the company of some very interesting and complex characters. Uncle Bud and Collie are intriguing - never allowing the audience to know what really makes them tick - and Patric and Dern (I love Bruce Dern, by the way) are pitch perfect, Dern especially (see previous comment). They take the basic outlines of a character and give them depth and elicit our sympathies. The story itself is also interesting. There're better plots in the world of noir (hardly any mystery here - mostly it's suspense), but this one is solid. If anything, the simply 'okay' plot has more to do with Jim Thompson's writing than anything else. With Thompson, plots are almost secondary; he eschewed the labyrinthine tales of Hammett and Chandler for simpler stories with stronger, more confusing characters. Look at a novel like The Killer Inside Me and and you'll see right away (from the title) what it's all about. When it comes to Thompson, it's not what it's about, it's how it's about it (to quote Roger Ebert). So, really, the relatively simple plot of a kidnapping is not the point and, if you don't like it, well the jokes on you. Why this is an 8star movie rather than a 10star one is because of the female lead. She's not bad, per se, but she's not Angelica Huston or Anette benning (see the adaptation of Jim Thompson's The Grifters if you don't know what I'm talking about - besides it's a better movie and you should start there for contemporary noir - it's the best of the 1990s and challenges Blood Simple for the title of best since Chinatown). She simply doesn't have the chops (or the looks for that matter) and though she and Patric have some chemistry, I don't have it with her. So there.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b818dc3d07bd4625b78790449fdc1c85",
            "input": "This was truly dreadful! It had a terrible storyline, was poorly acted, and was like an amateur remake of evil dead but not nearly as good.It took all my tenacity to make it through this one, it's a good job I didn't have to visit the toilet else I doubt I would have come back! This one makes Hammer House of Horror look like a big screen Hollywood epic. The only value to this movie was the never ending supply of beautiful women. Not a bad one among them! If you want to letch with your friends after a night on the beer then this one's for you ... else avoid it like the plague!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-845616eced2445c6bd590bc6d182c864",
            "input": "This mini-series is actually more entertaining than some others with much bigger budgets and grander aspirations. SOTD falls somewhere between \"Kung-Fu\" and \"H R Pufnstuff\" on the entertainment spectrum. If it weren't so long (nearly 3 hours) I think that kids would like it quite a bit. It's got adventure, action, \"cliffhanger scenes\", and not too much romance or other \"icky\" stuff. When you're young, you're not too critical of flexing rubber swords, campy acting, and scenes that are repeated. (At least two scenes are repeated identically in the movie, just as was done in old-time serials in order to bring the audience up to speed.) Finally, kids are usually more accepting of American English dialogue coming out of the mouths of Asian actors. (Not to mention the fact that several of the leading roles are played by non-Asian actors.) I was going to give this movie three stars, but I felt like the director, producers, and cast deserved some extra credit for at least carrying through on the project. This movie is not art, but, like painting your house, it actually took some time, effort, and discipline to get it made.Overall, not a recommended use for your time, but it might keep the kids entertained while traveling in the mini-van.Oh, yeah...hey, IMDb! \"Dialogue\" is the preferred and traditional spelling. Your spell-checking seems to think that \"dialog\" is the proper spelling. While \"dialog\" is acceptable, both Webster's and the OED consider it an alternative form.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41df35f6e9ef4de7ab9582c81da2f4d1",
            "input": "The coming attractions to \"The Order\" make it seem like a decent horror mystery/thriller, but what we get is a plot that has potential to be excellent all thrown together to form a pile of garbage.First off the whole movie consists of terrible dialogue and god awful special affects. The acting was also nothing to be proud of, but Keath Ledger (I think I spelled that right.) saved the movie in this category.For heaven's sake: DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9af0364838a043a6a95523cb25afd376",
            "input": "This movie is probably for you. It had an overall meditative quality from the music, to the beautiful photography, and listening to the often cliché things about life that Andy Goldsworthy would say as he worked or in between shots. If you're familiar with Buddhism- that is the sort of the sense I got out of this film. The impermanence of life, the beauty of nature, the interconnectedness of all things, etc. However, what I did not understand, confused, and ultimately forced me to leave without finishing (I saw over an hour of it) was the redundancy of the whole thing. You only find out bits and pieces of why he's commissioned, and how he can even afford to live off of this kind of work. The art work comes alive but all his talking with no conclusions leads to dead ends.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31f0c05639d8487aa9dc81b3bc29db52",
            "input": "\"Fido\" is to be commended for taking a tired genre, zombies, and turning it into a most original film experience. The early 50s atmosphere is stunning, the acting terrific, and the entire production shows a lot of careful planning. Suddenly the viewer is immersed in a world of beautiful classic cars, \"Eisenhower era\" dress, art deco furniture, and zombie servants. It would be very easy to dismiss \"Fido\" as cartoon-like fluff, similar to \"Tank Girl\", but the two movies are vastly different. \"Fido has structure, a script that tells a story, and acting that is superior. Make no mistake, this is a daring black comedy that succeeds where so many others have failed. Highly recommended. - MERK",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4b0958ce46d48a9a39db5ce33ad7fc1",
            "input": "The concept of having Laurel & Hardy this time in the role of chimney sweepers works out surprisingly hilarious. It guarantees some funny situations and silly antics, from especially Stan Laurel of course as usual.The movie also has a subplot with a nutty professor who is working on a rejuvenation formula. It doesn't really sound like a logical mix of story lines and incoherent but both plot lines blend in perfectly toward the memorable ending. It's still a bit weird but its funny nevertheless, so it works for the movie.The supporting cast of the movie is surprising good. Sam Adams is great as the stereotypical butler and Lucien Littlefield goes deliciously over-the-top as the nutty professor.The movie is filled with some excellent timed and hilarious constructed sequences, which are all quite predictable but become hilarious to watch nevertheless thanks to the way they are all executed. It all helps to make \"Dirty Work\" to be one of the better Laurel & Hardy shorts.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-526fd440ecec4937962a8e86c9fac024",
            "input": "What's not to like about this movie? Every year you know that you're going to get one or two yule tide movies during Christmas time and most of them are going to be terrible. This movie is definitely a fresh new idea that was pulled off pretty well. A very funny take on a rich young guy paying a family to simulate a real Christmas for him. What is the good of having money like that if you can't do fun things with it. It was a win-win situation. A regular family gets six figures and a rich guy gets to experience Christmas like he imagined. Only if.Drew Latham (Ben Affleck) was incredibly difficult to deal with and it was just a riot to see the family reluctantly comply with his absurd demands. It was a fun and funny movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6949c737c0ba4b919c7971f4c73e998a",
            "input": "The movie starts with a pair of campers, a man and a woman presumably together, hiking alone in the vast wilderness. Sure enough the man hears something and it pangs him so much he goes to investigate it. Our killer greets him with a stab to the stomach. He then chases the girl and slashes her throat. The camera during the opening scene is from the point of view as the killer.We next meet our four main characters, two couples, one in which is on the rocks. The men joke about how the woman would never be able to handle camping alone at a double date, sparking the token blonde's ambition to leave a week early. Unexpectedly, the men leave the same day and their car breaks down.. They end up arriving in the evening. When the men arrive, they are warned about people disappearing in the forest by a crazy Ralph doppleganger. They ignore the warning and venture into the blackening night and an eighties song plays in the background with lyrics about being murdered in the dark forest. The men get lost.In the next scene we realize that this isn't just another The Burning clone, but a ghost story! The women, scared and lonely are huddling together by the fire. Two children appear in the shadows and decide to play peeping Tom. Well they are obviously ghosts by the way their voices echo! Their mother appears with blood dripping from a hole in her forehead and asks the two ladies if they've seen her children, before disappearing of course. The children run home to papa and tell him about the two beautiful ladies by the river. This causes quite a stir and he gets up, grabbing his knife from atop the fireplace. \"Daddy's going hunting,\" The little girl, exclaims with bad acting. It is apparent here, that the dad isn't a ghost like his children.Freaked out by something in the woods, the token blonde splits, running blindly into the night, carrying a knife. She encounters the father who explains he's starving and it will be quick. This doesn't make sense because of the panther growls we heard earlier (Maybe he's allergic! Are panthers honestly even in California?) She ends up wounding him slightly before getting stabbed in the head. A thunderstorm erupts and the men seek shelter, which turns out to be where papa resides. Clearly someone lives here because there's a fire and something weird is roasting over it. The children appear and warn them of papa, who shows up moments later. They disappear as soon as he arrives.For whatever reason, our killer only goes after females. He invites the men to have something to eat and tells us the story about his ex wife. We are given a flashback of his wife getting caught cheating. The old man doesn't tell them however that he kills her and her lover afterwards, but daydreams about it. We aren't given the reason for the children's demise. The men go to sleep and are left unharmed. The next morning the men discover the empty campground of their wives. After a brief discussion they split up. One is to stay at the campsite, while the other goes and gets help. The one that is going back to his car breaks his leg. We are then reunited with the children as they explain to the surviving woman that they are ghosts who killed themselves from being sad about their mother. They agree to help the woman reunite with her friendsThe following scene defies the logic of the movie when papa kills the guy waiting at the campsite. He was also dating or married to the blonde. Somehow the children realize he is murdered and tell the woman about it. She decides to see it for herself and obviously runs into the killer. Luckily the children make him stop by threatening to leave him forever. You know where this is going.Overall the movie deserves four stars out of ten, and that's being generous. For all its misgivings, the musical score is well done. It's still watchable too. There are some camera angles that look professional, and some of the sets are done well. The plot is unbelievable. There is such a thing as willing suspension of disbelief, but with the toad 6 miles away; I can't imagine the token blonde would take off like that in the middle of the night. I mean, come on!- Alan \"Skip\" Bannacheck",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7b766dddd344ded8052e6859e29905d",
            "input": "First of all, I'd like to tell you that I'm into comics, anime, animation and such stuff. It is true that everyone has his own preferences, but you can trust me on this movie. I'll be objective. To begin with the story - it's OK. Follows the story line of the comic books as far as I'm familiar with them. But the animation... Well, it's not actually terrible, but it's definitely cheap and mediocre. It would be a lot better if they didn't try to imitate the anime style and sticked to the original comic book style drawings. If we pretend not to see the rare sloppy effects like fire and lightnings you could tell that the movie is made about 10 years ago and even more. Looks a little bit like the original Vampire Hunter D from 1985. Take a look at Heavy Metal FAKK 2000 for instance - 4 years ago they made a movie that looks a hell lot better! In addition to this the voice talents do nothing remarkable, the music is nothing special. So all in all - it lacks atmosphere. I watched it, but I cannot tell I really enjoyed it. It just does not capture you. There's plenty of blood and violence, but that does not impress me at all. May be it will be shocking for someone who was never watched more mature oriented animations and sees animated blood for the first time (is there anyone around?), but I don't think this is the audience for this movie. So they could add a little nudity and spice to it. The chicks around Lucifer were quite tasty, and hell, we have Lady Death herself! There are few sexy looks, but that's not enough. Instead of Bill Brown's music I think it would look better on a hard rock / heavy metal soundtrack. All in all - the movie isn't that bad, but if you want something better take the original Heavy Metal, Heavy Metal FAKK 2000, Ralph Bakshi's Fire and Ice or Wizards maybe. And of course - Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-816c2684b3494839b0745ace3f8545d7",
            "input": "Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and reproduce themselves. So far for the horror-elements this movie has. All the rest of MUNCHIES plays out like a really retarded comedy that's so stupid you won't find it funny anymore after about 15 minutes. I can imagine little kids cheering for these little boogers, but adults will be left with only those supposedly \"smart\" references translating to on-screen stuff like Capt. Kirk's log entries from STAR TREK, the most well-known scene from E.T., a blatant statement from the filmmakers going \"Look! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' success here!\" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint Eastwood telling us... what about his western movies exactly? That last one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves seems to be a bad thing. Don't know where they got that idea from.Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable film to sit through, for that matter. It's just really, really dumb. And if you manage to crack a smile while watching it, you'll probably feel as dumb yourself for having done that after the film's finished.Good Badness? Yes, but only if \"dumb\", \"retarded\" & \"ridiculous\" are criteria you're looking for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2085fae878754d0eb4e54d1f881eea5f",
            "input": "Aside from the great movie METROPOLIS, this is about the oldest pure sci-fi movie. While at times the film is a bit preachy and the acting can be a bit broad, it is a great film for two reasons. First, it is extremely original in both style and content. Even in the 21st century, there are no films I can think of that are anything like it. Second, for its time, the special effects were absolutely incredible--using matte paintings, models and huge casts to create amazing scenes of both a post-apocalyptic world and a vast city of tomorrow. Sure, you could sit back and knock the film because, by today's standards, the effects are only so-so. But, you must appreciate that this was state of the art when the film came out in 1936 and it must have really amazed audiences. In many ways, the sets look highly reminiscent of the \"modern cities\" featured at the 1939 WORLD'S FAIR.I think the movie is also interesting because it seems torn by the question \"are people really THAT stupid or are we destined for greatness?\" The end result seems to be a little of both! How true!A final note: I saw this twice on TV and just a short time ago on video. All three times the sound and print quality stank--particularly the sound. If this is available on a DVD, hopefully it is a lot cleaner and will provide optional captioning. As the sound on the video kept cutting out, I really would have appreciated this!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40f023a922264cc99e685c9840026559",
            "input": "Ah, noir. My favourite genre. Otto Preminger's follow-up to \"Laura\" is a film noir set in a postwar New York, where corruption and violence run rampant. It stars Dana Andrews as Sergeant Mark Dixon, a detective whose brutal tactics have landed him in hot water with his superiors. When he accidentally kills a murder suspect, Dixon tries to pin the blame on crime boss Tommy Scalese. Dixon is close to achieving his goal when he becomes involved with the dead man's wife, the beautiful Morgan Taylor. Of course, in typical noir fashion, things quickly go down hill.While the film does nothing interesting camera or narrative wise, it does have a constant tone of dread and gloom. Like most great noirs, it is also wonderfully paced, sucking the viewer in right from the start.Still, like most of Preminger's workmanlike films, it's not something I'd watch again. It lacks the verbal wit of Wilder, the visual flamboyance of Hitchcock or the spatial experimentation of Welles. Like Lang's later work, \"Sidewalk\" feels very much a \"clone\" of what a noir should be, instead of something really artistically genuine. Thematically the film is nothing special. It's about a cop who finds himself slowly becoming a criminal. In one scene Dixon explains that his father himself was a small time crook, the film flirting with the notion of predestination, but this one scene is as far as Otto goes, or dares to take his ideas.The camera work is likewise disappointing. There's no intelligence in Otto's camera. No effort is made to assign the camera to anything. It doesn't play with space or architecture or empahsise the step-by-step police procedural. It's just tripod set ups with the occasional dolly in and out. Meaningless, though most people don't care about these things. There is, however, one good shot where our hero is trapped in a car full of gangsters (noir cage) which itself enters a vehicle-lift (another cage) and is taken up into the chief gangster's lair. Like Lynch's \"Blue Velvet\", Otto retopologizes the film, constantly likens \"upstairs\" to hell. This works well, but the set design fails to reinforce it. 7/10 - Otto seems content to follow the Hawksian mould of what a noir is, rather than toy with the possibilities of where noir can go. Like \"Detour\", \"Night in the City\", \"Scarlet Street\", \"In A Lonely Place\", \"Act of Violence\", \"Bomberang\" and \"Johnny Eager\", \"Where the Sidewalk Ends\" is one of those well made second tier film noirs. It's competent and engaging, but lacks that extra special magic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e7462a8b03c42eda5b671af74b99861",
            "input": "This Santa movie starts off strange and I think Santa might be a pedo. Instead of the usual elf toy makers, this Santa has apparently kidnapped kids from all across the globe and makes them sing a bit like characters from \"It's a Small World\"! I guess there are no child labor laws on the weird astral plane on which he lives (it's apparently NOT the North Pole and not on Earth)!! None of these kids seem very happy and I kept wanting to see commandos break in and rescue the tykes, though I guess for some of the third world kids, these working conditions were perhaps an improvement over local sweatshops. I sure hope that all they do is sing and make toys.Then, the scene abruptly changes to Hell where lots and lots of demons dance about like they are in a Busby Berkeley musical. This fun in put to a stop by Satan who orders one of them, Pitch, to go to Earth to ruin Christmas!! Personally, I thought this movie already did that! The Devil and his imps are actually kind of cute--like Hot Stuff from the Harvey Comics but with cool evil goatees! Or, if you are Puerto Rican, like a vejigante mask with a goatee! Somehow a poverty-stricken Mexican kid named Lupita, a group of jerky kids who want to mug Santa and some rich kid are key battlegrounds for the Devil and Santa!! So, if the Prince of Darkness (not Donald Trump, it's the OTHER Prince of Darkness) can somehow make her steal and be bad, he'll 'win'--what, we don't really know! In fact, as they root her on, you get the impression that the film makers intend Santa to be Jesus--as he has all these great powers AND fights the Devil over kids' souls! Later, Santa meets with his friend, Merlin. He asks him to make him a special powder that makes people dream nice dreams. Considering how much Santa laughs in the film (like a demented chipmunk), I assume he must use this drug A LOT! He immediately goes to see a blacksmith who makes him a magic key that opens ALL doors. Considering he keeps kids as his personal 'assistants', this magic key thing worries me immensely! During Santa's Christmas Eve ride, you see Lupita behave like a little angel--one problem down. Santa then takes time out now to take care of the rich kid whose parents are selfish jerks. He gives them some sort of crazy cocktail which magically solves their problems--two problems solved. This is a rare case where alcohol/drugs HELP kids and solves problems! And as for the little muggers, he gives them coal! Frustrated with his losses to Santa, Pitch then tries to steal the sleigh (which is pulled by creepy animatronic deer). When this fails, he destroys Santa's stash of 'magic powder'! As a result, Santa can't become invisible to avoid dogs and gets treed. Uh, oh...how can Santa take a detour to the Betty Ford Clinic if he's stuck up a tree?! Will St. Nick get down from the tree and get the monkey off his back or will the devils win? If you care, tune in and see. However, be warned that the film is bat-crap crazy! Technically speaking, the film is yecchy. While it is in color, it's really gaudy. The music is mostly done on an organ--which, along with bad singing from the kids, produces perhaps the worst soundtrack I've heard in recent memory. And the story is just incomprehensible and very, very, very creepy. Devils and a Santa that kidnaps kids is just plain creep-tastic. It's a film you should NEVER show to kids but makes a great film to watch with friends so you can laugh at it from start to finish!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a96c8feffc24db990b50fadae493bb7",
            "input": "Well I guess it supposedly not a classic because there are only a few easily recognizable faces, but I personally think it is... It's a very beautiful sweet movie, Henry Winkler did a GREAT job with his character and it really impressed me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2b96a9717a145c9bd68d8f82b6684b6",
            "input": "I have to say, Seventeen & Missing is much better than I expected. The perception I took from the previews was that it would be just humdrum but I was pleasantly surprised with this impressive mystery.Dedee Pfeiffer is Emilie, a mom who insists her daughter, Lori (Tegan Moss), not attend a so-called graduation party one weeknight, but Lori ignores her mother's wishes and takes off for the party anyway. When Lori does not come home, Emilie knows something is wrong and she begins to have visions of her daughter and the events that led to her disappearance.Seventeen & Missing is better than so many other TV movies of this type, as it is not so predictable. Pfeiffer is the reason to see this movie, and most of it comes off as believable. This LMN Original Movie premiered last night. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97338e3e5d59477a978da743eaa04d1b",
            "input": "Horror spoofs are not just a thing of the 21st century. Way before the 'Scary Movie' series there were a few examples of this genre, mostly in the 80s. But like said franchise most of these films are hit or miss. Some like 'Elvira, Mistress of the Dark' mostly rise above that, but other like 'Saturday the 14th' and it's sequel fail to deliver the laughs. But out of all these types of films there is one particularly big offender and that's 'Transylvania 6-5000,' a major waste of time for many reasons.Pros: A great cast that does it's best. Some of the dopey humor is amusing. A corny, but catch theme song. Some good Transylvanian locations.Cons: Threadbare plot. Mostly tedious pacing. Most of the humor just doesn't cut it. The monsters are given little to do and little screen time. I thought this was supposed to be a spoof of monster movies? Lame ending that will likely make viewers angry.Final thoughts: This is a comedy? If it is then why are the really funny bits so few and far in between? Comedies are supposed to make us roll on the floor, not roll our eyes and yawn, aching for it to be over. I can't believe Anchor Bay released this tired junk. I'll admit it's not one of the worst films ever made, but it's not worth anyone's time or money even if you're a fan of any of the actors. See 'Transylvania Twist' instead.My rating: 2/5",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4aa9293bc064edab937186e98c835c0",
            "input": "Lorenzo Lamas stars as some type of CIA agent, who captures some exotic beauty named Alexa, kidnaps her daughter and forces her to fight her former employers. O.J Simpson is also on board to provide a dash of acting credibility for the not so talented ensemble. I must admit i'm not a fan of Lorenzo Lamas, or his movies. He stinks. However when compared to O.J Simpson and Lamas' comatose wife Kinmont, Lamas seems like ah, Jean-Claude Van Damme. I only saw CIA because of the renewed interest around the O.J Simpson trial, you see because if your parents had cable and the extra channels, you couldn't escape this movie. in 1994 you could go to an Amish community and some moron would have this playing in their portable TV. The movie itself is a collection of lame action sequences and would be intrigue although the shock value of O.J Simpson jumping after fireballs and exchanging would be one liners do provide some unintentional humor. Also where was Bobby Knight and Kobe Bryant to make this a complete camp classic? * out of 4-(Bad)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f8e14bbacbe4bfc9aea0bcbe7ac1485",
            "input": "I did not expect much from this film, but boy-o-boy, I did not expect the movie to be this bad. Chris Rock is not showing a good act here, you can't get the feeling that his caracter is real, I think the movie would have been a bit better if it's drama or romantic scenes would have been a less part of the movie and more/better humor was involved. The movie is like the film makers were having a bad hangover making it. In the \"making of\" they don't show a single smile. This is a very bad film! I gave it three out of ten because of few smiles it gave me, but I did never laugh!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab519d988bf8428b99deebdd26ab1a35",
            "input": "What can you say when you see a good French movie which tries to draw a suspenseful story in line with the social background of the characters? The major point is we believe in those characters and once they've met each other we want them to stay together. It's simple and really efficient. The background story is less important. Why does the screenplay go on the side of a half-developed thriller? It helps not to get stuck in those social demonstrations most French film-jerkers like to make. Not too much ambition, right: Sur mes lèvres is only an entertaining French film with good characterization.For all the clever noir points in the screenplay the end is by far too easy. It goes quite as easy as in Rear Window (an obvious reference and definitely not a noir film) but with a less compelling context. Where I am amazed it's to see that the character of the probation officer has not been erased. He brings very little to the story; when he appears alone we wonder if we've not missed a part before. Jacques Audiard is not a new-comer yet. Strange and weird.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14b6638b9f5645d2a2eec458f18e14ec",
            "input": "What seemed at first just another introverted French flick offering no more than baleful sentiment became for me, on second viewing, a genuinely insightful and quite satisfying presentation.Spoiler of sorts follows.Poor Cedric; he apparently didn't know what hit him. Poor audience; we were at first caught up in what seemed a really beautiful and romantic story only to be led back and forth into the dark reality of mismatch. These two guys just didn't belong together from their first ambiguous encounter. As much as Mathieu and Cedric were sexually attracted to each other, the absence of a deeper emotional tie made it impossible for Mathieu, an intellectual being, to find fulfillment in sharing life with someone whose sensibilities were more attuned to carnival festivities and romps on the beach.On a purely technical note, I loved the camera action in this film. Subtitles were totally unnecessary, even though my French is \"presque rien.\" I could watch it again without the annoying English translation and enjoy it even more. This was a polished, very professionally made motion picture. Though many scenes seem superfluous, I rate it nine out of ten.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0703034993594bce8ca327c32a3f0b1b",
            "input": "This is a must see for independant movie fans, but it also holds up well against mainstream movies. I think we have the makings of the next Woody Allen orTrentin Tarrentino here.The budget is painfully low. No special effects whatsoever, and they seemingly used ambient lighting (shot in digital video.) -And yet this movie grabs hold of you and never lets go. The screenplay is somewhat bizarre, yet the actors and director pull it off with complete realism. It has humor, it has intrigue, and it has pathos, and it all works together.No point in describing the details. If you want to see an independantmasterpiece, a virtual lesson in how to make a low budget flick that really works, see this one.-Oh yeah, it's also REALLY entertaining.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ffc22550be0473d8eba919ad6934c61",
            "input": "David Zucker has directed one of the most enjoyable comedies of the year with this goofy farce. Yes, it's a matter of acquired taste and depends upon a wealth of sophomoric gags, but it is consistently funny throughout unlike some recent comedic efforts. The film is loaded with all kinds of jokes ranging from the blatantly obvious to the more subtler kind that you must pay attention to everything in the frame or you'll likely miss them. Like his previous efforts which include \"Airplane!\", \"Top Secret!\", and \"Naked Gun,\" the humor flies out almost every second. There are so many moments that work, it's easy to overlook the few that fall flat. What sets this movie apart from other pale imitations in the spoof genre is that it has an actual story line. While others have depended upon making fun of too many famous scenes in almost random movies (take \"Mafia!\", please), this film tells a new story with likable characters. It touches upon sports films in general as well as satirizing the real sports industry instead of lampooning any specific movies. Even for people who don't care for \"South Park,\" its creators, Matt Stone and Trey Parker, make a good pair of leading actors with natural chemistry. The film also makes extremely effective use of cameos of athletes, sports announcers, and other celebrities, especially a hilarious bit with Robert Stack of \"Unsolved Mysteries.\" By the way, stay through the credits for a final joke with Bob Costas and Al Michaels. All in all, Zucker has achieved, in words perhaps applying to the movie's mix of sports, a home dunk.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a295aa539e8431bb649e6b68eca919b",
            "input": "If you have any sort of appreciation for character and dialogue, and any sense of American cultural history, you will find a lot of very absorbing material in this film. It probably was originally a play, and that's why it's dialogue heavy, but I can't stress enough how these icons that we only have a shallow understand of are made into truly complex and wonderful characters.This film is better than any college course for telling you how to create a character-driven story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ad65e2757fe4f5aaea7c994779a8ca3",
            "input": "This movie commits what I would call an emotional rape on the viewer. The movie supposedly caused quite a stir among the critics in Cannes, but for me the final scene was just a pathetic attempt for a newbie director to get himself noticed. Hardly a voice in the discussion on the issue of violence, drug abuse or juvenile delinquency (or any other issue, for that matter).The main character's metamorphosis from good, but troubled boy to the vicious rapist is virtually nonexistent, whereas the rape scene (being an over-dragged, exaggerated version of the rape scene from \"A clockwork orange\") is unbearable and I refuse to comment on its aesthetic values. There are some things an artist should not do to try and achieve his/her goal. At least in my opinion.To wrap it up: shockingly brutal, revolting and NOT WORTH YOUR TIME. See \"A clockwork orange\" or \"Le pianiste\" instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0527f738af5479397aff5c43a4c8409",
            "input": "Not many reviews, hence thought i would add one.DO NOT GO BY THE OTHER REVIEWS! This was a excellent movie.RKS is one of the very few Indian directors that can actually put together a really good movie.AB and Akshay given yet another example of great acting, as does bhoomika too, which was a little unexpected, but great to watch.Am surprised there has not been much hype around release.Or filmfare/other awards nominations, considering how good the movie was.Better then Khakee i thought and i thought Khakkee too was good movie.Is a fairly long movie, but definitely worth it and while watching it, definitely does seem long.Cant wait for RKS next movie and the next AB, Akshay movie they always seem to do well together... e.g. waqt.Bhoomika too has acted really well in the movie and should do really well if she continue in the same fashion in the future.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3cfcd7928fd84fdaabdf73aa2d55a48f",
            "input": "I just rented Creep and was not at all impressed. I didn't feel anything in this film. I felt sick because the gore alone was shocking.I walked out of my living room several times in desperation that something would happen with this film. Haven't we seen this all before? I didn't like any of the characters barr the guy in the sewer cage. I felt bad for him. But then again I couldn't think as to why he was still alive and not murdered by the Creep? So many questions need to be answered.Someone mentioned references to the PS2 game Silent Hill and I can see similarities vaguely.Not a bad film, not a good one. judge for yourself.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1219bd91ca9f40f589857e6fa4e98561",
            "input": "A sweet-natured young mountain man with a sad past (Henry Thomas) comes upon an abandoned baby girl in the woods and instantly falls in love with her. The town elders generally support him in keeping the child, though a local temptress (Cara Seymour) thinks little of the new family. A determined little girl on a long walk and a sinister travelling salesman (David Strathairn at his creepiest) have parallel stories which converge in a fateful way. This is a charming slice-of-life in the Ozarks in the same vein as \"Where The Lillies Bloom\" & \"The Dollmaker\". All three were shot on location in those beautiful hills and cover the lives of simple-living -- but not simple-minded -- American folk. A minimum of strong language and brief but pointed violence make this fairly-safe family viewing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5be988a63774cef96c8bbca5dbd2105",
            "input": "\"Bullfighter\" was made in 2000 but it is being released on video 5 years later for some reason. I wonder why? Could it be: The confusing storyline, the incomprehensible dialogue said by Oliver Martinez, and the annoying editing? It's got to be. I think the plot was Mary (Michelle Forbes) and Jacque (Oliver Martinez) go on a mystical road trip. They meet a lot of wacky characters and avoid some evil ones too. The movie looks great and there is a lot of style, but there is no substance. Most movies, when trying to subtle, don't call attention to themselves with unanswered plot developments, and weak special effects.Don't be fooled by the cover: Willem Dafoe is in it for 2 minutes at most.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a3e038d9ae94b368404541440bf732b",
            "input": "TV pilots, don't you love them? Quinn Martin tried this one out after being successful in a bunch of other TV detective movies, but this one goes nowhere except in the realm of MST where it belongs. Roy Thinnes is Diamond Head who takes orders from Aunt Mary to find super spy Lovejoy, I mean Tree. Zulu and Tso-Tsing are there for ethnic comic relief and not much else. Tree sucks as a bad guy despite all his disguises that makes him look exactly the same as he normally does. There's more unnatural clothing fiber here than you can ever imagine (required in the 1970's)and the show itself is so anti-climatic. Why did it not go to series? You figure it out, it's quite blatant. Again it's fun for MST, but not a lot else!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ca2b9f5c471403f9474ccd1c54c5dc3",
            "input": "From the critical acclaim, I expected more from this movie and from Tamara Jenkins. The story just meandered along and didn't seem to have a point or a plot. And I find it hard to believe that a 14 year old girl (mature for her age or no) would be so blase about getting the loss of her virginity \"over with.\" Maybe I am too young to relate (I was four years old in 1976), but I didn't have any problems connecting with the stories of Shakespeare in Love or Life is Beautiful and I wasn't alive for either of those settings. The cast is very good but unfortunately for them the script did not alow them to engage the audience. Overall, Slums had its moments but unless you are yearning to reminisce over halter tops and tube socks, I would say skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-670d0744fae54f95965af2bfc215b3a2",
            "input": "Uneducated & defiant, beautiful TESS OF THE STORM COUNTRY is the daughter of a fisherman squatting on a rich man's land. Spirited & bold, she captures the heart of the millionaire's son, but violence, terror & sudden death are what will haunt her immediate future before she can claim the sweet peace of happiness.Mary Pickford is utterly charming in this splendid, heart-wrenching film. She considered Tess to be her favorite role and she fills it with all the spunky joy & enthusiasm which made her for years the world's most popular movie star. The story has all the essential elements for a modern fairy tale, with Mary the lovely, distressed heroine beset by all manner of dangerous, stressful situations. The atmospherics are first-rate, with the outdoor fishing village sets being particularly well-conceived.In the supporting cast, Jean Hersholt stands out as the vile villain who tries forcing Pickford to marry him. Hersholt, a very gentle soul off screen, manages brilliantly to depict his character's complete moral corruption.This was actually the second time Pickford filmed TESS. A 1914 version had been one of her first important films, but its production values were a bit antiquated by the standards of the 1920's (no close-ups, for instance) and Mary, producing her own films & powerful enough by 1922 to make whatever film she wanted, decided for the only time in her career to remake a film. The end result certainly lived up to her expectations. Both films were very popular at the box office.A fascinating study for some future film researcher would be the influence of Christianity in Mary Pickford's life; it certainly runs like a golden thread through the silent movies she produced. Although the romanticism inherent in the very nature of silent cinema might cause these spiritual sentiments to appear somewhat awkward today, we are compelled to accept them as sincere reflections, by their very repetition, of Mary's heartfelt beliefs. In TESS, one beautiful scene in particular stands out in this regard: Pickford is teaching herself to read using a Bible. She indicates to Lloyd Hughes (who plays her sweetheart) a word from near the back of the Book that she does not understand. He mimes it for her (the word is obviously `crucified') and, eyes turned Heavenward as the full meaning of the Sacrifice dawns upon her, Mary's face becomes positively beatific.A splendid new orchestral score for TESS has been supplied by Jeffrey Mark Silverman which perfectly underscores the beauty & pathos of this wonderful film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f02916c10ae445eb69bff796b0ec60d",
            "input": "This movie is one of my favorites because it makes me think of all the choices I have made and how my life would change if my choices had been different. It plays right into the \" Multiple Universe \" theory.The only thing that doesn't ring true is how Larry Burrows ( James Belushi)has such a hard time understanding what is going on, that everything has changed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-15675b5abdae4d288a15bb2ab0d7b6e4",
            "input": "After 'Aakrosh' , this was the second film for Govind Nihalani as a director.Till this movie was made there was no audience for documentaries in India.This movie proved a point that a documentary can fulfil the requirements of a commercial film without diluting its essence. It was one of the successful movies in the year in which it was released. This movie contested against the big banners of the bollywood like'COOLIE', 'BETAAB','HERO' in 1983.SmithaPatel, in this movie acted more like a conscience of the hero whenever he drifted away or lost his composure she was there to remind him. She was not like an usual heroine to do the usual stuff of running around the trees and shrubs.At one time,she even gave up her love when the hero's ruthlessness touched the roof top.There was another character in this movie, which was played by Om Puri contemporary, Naseeruddin Shah.He played as an inspector-turned-alcoholic character.The role conveyed the message of the end result of a honest cop who rubbed the wrong side of the system which also gave the viewers a chance to forecast the hero's ending.In his debut film,Sadashiv Amrapurkar captivated the audience with his cameo role which ultimately won him the best supporting actor by the filmfare.The cop in the movie was not a complete straight forward personality he was able to adjust to the system to an extent. The anger which left half handedly continued in Govind Nihalani's other film \"Drohkaal\". Even after two decades, this movie is remembered just because of the director and the entire crew. Each one played their part par excellence.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da5d27e9703e4211b8d812442f666d9d",
            "input": "It's 1978, and yes obviously there are too many black players on the teams as well! Fans will be upset and certainly the 75,000 seats will be full, only less happy there are so many black players on the field! This made for TV Super Bowl movie is watchable. It's not much more, but it's really surprising the cast of talented actors that make an appearance (for the time), probably most notably Tom Selleck. Unfortunately any goodness Selleck brings to the screen, is quickly trumped by \"actors\" like Dick Butkus.It's a silly story about super bowl betting. PJ Jackson is charged by \"New York\" (read mafia) for ensuring the game ends for their favor, in this case a $10,000,000 bet. PJ is innocent enough, and seems to have a loose grasp by buying off a few people here and there. But things seem to fall apart for him. Another person, the unsuspected Lainie, takes charge. For a while, the mystery of murders isn't known for certain, but is revealed rather plainly at the final murder that Lainie is the new antagonist.It's a bad movie, but is watchable. The acting is decent, and the filming is OK. At least there weren't any silly typical 70s car chases (they have their place just not here). Just keep an open mind about past stereotyping and the cocaine era and you'll survive.2/10 (maybe a 2.5)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f3c692e91ee4a7fa0286cbcbafd913a",
            "input": "One of the five worst movies I have ever watched. And I'm not exaggerating. In fact, I recommend watching it so you can get the same feeling of incredulity as you might by watching Showgirls.Out of 400 votes, the movie gets a user rating of 5.3/10. But there is a disproportionate number of voters who gave it a 10/10, probably due to the message of the movie - nuclear weapons are the bane of mankind. Chuck Murdock is an all-star little league pitcher who gives up baseball because there are nuclear weapons. Soon \"Amazing Grace\" Smith is an all-star Boston Celtic who is inspired by Chuck's story and gives up basketball. Soon all sports leagues from the professional level to college to high school to little league dismantle in a world-wide protest. Later all the children of the world go on a silence strike. This inspires the President of the United States to meet with the Soviet Premier, who in time agree to eliminate all nuclear weapons in time for the start of the next Little League season. The movie ends with Chuck about to throw out the first pitch, with the President telling his new best friend Chuck not to worry about striking out every batter, as he hasn't thrown a baseball in a year.Somewhere along the line a nefarious underworld boss kills Amazing Grace. When the President finds out he is told that the FBI can verify the killer but will never be able to prove it. So the President calls the underworld boss (\"But it's one a.m.\" \"I don't care, get him on the line\") and tell him that he is to resign from all company boards that he sits on and sell all stocks that he has. And to not get out of line again.Honestly, this movie was so crappy that I couldn't turn it off. It was on television from 2:30 am to 4:00 am, and I watched it all. I wasn't turned off by the anti-nuclear weapons propaganda. I was turned off by the implausible break down of all organized sports. I don't even understand why \"Amazing Grace\" Smith was killed. And with all these famous athletes becoming Chuck's friends, why the father was constantly upset with his son taking a principled stand. And there was the cliché moment near the end when dad tells Chuck, \"I never told you this, but I'm proud of you.\" Cue hug.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93a4c15544d540e5b287ad7d62ecb5eb",
            "input": "Holly addresses the issue of child sexploitation that is rampant all over the world (some 2 million children are trafficked every year) and does so sensitively and without manipulation--a tall order that the team at Priority Films does with great success. American actor Ron Livington stars in the film alongside newcomer Thuy Nguyen, a Vietnamese actress who plays Holly, and together they bring to screen what is commonplace to the people at the notorious k11 redlight district in Cambodia. Although it tackles a heavy topic, the film holds on to moments of laughter and hope as we get to know the characters up close, keeping the two-hour film from being one that is too difficult to watch. I am glad a film like this is bringing the world's attention to the problem. Child prostitution needs to be stopped and this is a very good first step. It's GREAT and a film EVERYONE must see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98919f36c77f4365bd177225b0704782",
            "input": "Beaudray Demerille(a weak Peter Fonda, who also directed), an aging gambler, wins young teen Wanda \"Nevada\"(pretty, but not talented Brooke Shields) in a poker game. Together the unlikely pair(of course)embark on a search for Indian gold in the Grand Canyon.That's the story and there really is no need to search for a deeper meaning in it. It just isn't there. The acting is very weak too, which was quite a surprise given the fact that Peter Fonda was in the lead.If you're looking for something interesting in this film, take a look at the nice scenery and some good looks of a young Brooke Shields. Her character however is so irritating(especially at the beginning)and dumb, that she never quite comes off as sexy or appealing. Too bad, but, given the story, I doubt anything more could be made of this. I wonder why Peter Fonda directed and starred in this film. He must have even talked his father(Henry Fonda)into a (useless) cameo in this ridiculous mess. Unfortunately, this was their only film together. Couldn't Henry be in EASY RIDER for example? 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a006f3fce0514f39a3e24c7b55236776",
            "input": "Esther Williams gets her first post MGM starring role and gets offto a good start. This film is a well acted entertaining suspensewith a mature theme that would be repeated a million times morein the future - innocent girl stalked creepy woman hater. Estherlooks great and if she wanted to, probably could have gone on todo more and better films but according to her autobiography, pretty much gave up working for marriage. Either way she is solikable and engaging that its fun to see her in a totally different roleoutside of the 'swimming musical'. Universal was fabulous formaking films with former MGM stars after that studio begandropping its biggest names as it began to slide down hill. Starslike Lana Turner, June Allyson and others got to make quality firstrate films at Universal as they obviously still had drawing power atthe box office. I wish Esther had made more but since she didnt, itmakes this one all the more special.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b0078c88f1043a5ad701f04c4177d10",
            "input": "Awlright, damn it, the MooCow will grudgingly admit the truth: I kinda' like this cheap, cheesy 70's parody. The idea that vast hordes of killer tomatoes are destroying the US is a great idea, and in spite of itself, the moovie does provide some decent chuckles, moostly the sight of terrified extras running away from large, obviously fake tomatoes. This film, along with The Kentucky Fried Moovie, is one of the earlier attempts at spoofs, which became so popular in the 80's & 90's, thanks largely to Airplane!. This one, like moost spoofs, is pretty poor. Many attempts at humor are dismal failures, and will induce much groaning. But thanks to the ravenous tomatoes hordes, the obnoxious \"Puberty Love\" song, and the awesome helicopter crash scene, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes does provide some goods, though largely for the wrong reasons. There are sooooo many things wrong with this film...and so right, it's hard to explain. Enough people must also have enjoyed it as the Tomatoes made a comeback in 2 moore films, and a cartoon series!! Large chunks of time spent away from the tomatoes are pretty dull. And dig those 70's clothes, dude!! ;=8) This tomato is seedy and cheesy, but worth a chuckle or two; the MooCow says grab a pizza and pop in the Tomatoes!! :",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-abb46340b4504538a86140f3bf820b00",
            "input": "I have no idea how a Texan (the director, Douglas McGrath) and the American actress Gwyneth Paltrow ever pulled this off but seeing this again will remind you what all the fuss about Ms. Paltrow was in the first place! I had long since gone off the woman and still feel she is rather dull in her Oscar-winning \"Shakespeare In Love\" performance but she gets all the beats right here--she is nigh on perfect as Emma Woodhouse. She may have won her Oscar for Shakespeare but she should be remembered for this.Of course, she's surrounded by a great supporting cast including Toni Collette, Greta Scacchi, Juliette Stevenson et al...Jeremy Northam is very appealing as the love interest, even if the script wallows a bit in his declaration of love to Paltrow (in the process, allowing all of the tension to drain out of their relationship); several years on, Ewan's hair is a little easier to take than it was in '96 and, personally, I find puckish Alan Cumming a grating presence in anything nowadays. But the standout is, without a doubt, Sophie Thompson (sister of Emma Thompson, daughter of Phyllida Law) as Miss Bates; what this version needs is a scene where Emma reconciles with Miss Bates, as she is the character to whose fate we are drawn. The film is worth watching (again even) for her performance alone.All in all, this has aged wonderfully with charm to spare and more than enough subtlety to sort out the British class system. Well worth a rental (because its unlikely that Paltrow will ever be this good again--but we'll always have Emma).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3548f9682834460ea768f99e8c2fb708",
            "input": "Okay. This Movie is a Pure Pleasure. It has the Ever so Violent Horror Mixed with a Little Suspense and a Lot of Black Comedy. The Dentist Really Starts to loose His Mind and It's Enjoyable to Watch him do so. This Movie is for Certain People, Though. Either you'll Completely Love it or You Will Totally Hate It. A Good Movie to Rent and Watch When you don't Got Anything else to do. Also Recommended: Psycho III",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f0832dc65ad4de19255abc87879f7c0",
            "input": "It's a funny business, reviewing movies. These days when \"internalized emotions\" and \"emotional detachment\" are favored over straightforward sentimentality, it must be hard to stay faithful to your true feelings.Soon after completing jury duties at the 58th Berlinale, I managed to catch Yoji Yamada's Kabei.After the screening, I watched folks dreamily amble out of the theatre hall, watery-eyed, men, women, and reviewers alike. Even the director of the Berlinale, obviously a hardened viewer of cinema, confessed to having been caught unawares and found himself crying three quarter's way into this unashamedly sentimental experience.But what really surprised me were the reviews that came after. Despite being ineffably moved by the film, many reviewers chose to be tepid and emotionally non-committal in their writing. Apparently, post weeping, they had put on their \"thinking cap\", and consequently, missed out on what I felt was the genius about Kabei.Allow me to explain.Set in pre-war Japan, the story of Kabei revolves around one writer's family, and their fate therein, after he is held in jail for what was described as \"thought crimes\" against the Imperial will. Through a series of protracted emotional scenes, Yamada gets us familiar with the man, his loyal wife and two daughters, as well as three side characters—the man's pretty young sister, a bumbling ex-student, and a cad of an uncle – all come to help the family cope with their plight, in the absence of the man of the house.The story moves along at a slow albeit steady pace, and heartbreaks occur at precisely the moments everyone is able to predict. This of course makes it near impossible for anyone in the audience to get too emotionally distraught by any dramatic event.In other words, although you learn to love the family and their helpers, and sympathize with their unfortunate situation, you get so lulled by the certainty of the plot that you find yourself expecting a particular kind of ending.However, two hours into the film (don't worry, Yamada provides the viewer with sufficient moments of gravity and levity to tide you along), he slaps you with what I can only describe as \"the sting\". All that you have assumed to be what the story was about—an innocent man wrenched from his faithful wife and daughters – now suddenly points to one of the family helpers. Someone you have hitherto taken for granted is now thrown into an unexpected twist of fate.At this point, something curious happened in the theatre I was in. Everyone started sobbing with little or no inhibition.\"My word!\" I muttered under my breath. It struck me then that \"Kabei\", in the final analysis, was more than a film about a family torn apart by an empire on the verge of war. It was, in fact, a cunning examination of one common human foible: How little we cared about the secret feelings of people who are closest to us.Now, the most common criticism made about the film was that it was technically solid, but lacked innovation. That's what happens when reviewers put on their proverbial thinking cap, I guess. With Kabei, I believe Yoji Yamada knew exactly what trick he was going to employ to touch on one unique aspect of humanity. A wicked old trick he so seamlessly applied in the Tora-san series, and later, in Tasogare Sebei.After lulling the audience into a sort of narrative comfort zone, he throws us into a realm of emotions rarely explored in cinema.This, to me, is the most effective cinematic tool of all. One which avoids detection, but affects you deeply. And proof of its effectiveness was a thousand wet pieces of Kleenex, thrown into a litter bin just outside of that thousand-seater cinema hall.Now if only some reviewers would resist being so caught up with being smart that they forget what cinema is really about. Human emotions. Pure and simple.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e83a574ab465480ca7114b43005a0f0a",
            "input": "The plot was dull, the girls were sickening and the supposed Italian male lead had clearly never heard an Italian accent.Someone said the boys were cute in this film but it just seemed to be filled with mediocre people. There were literally no redeeming features about this film.I think this is a graveyard for actors that will never work again, with the unfortunate exception of the Olsen twins who seem to fascinate people for no discernible reason.I hope the Olsen twins find something out of the limelight to keep them away from the entertainment business. They have no place in it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8c41b515a554711b06049c4dcabe8a2",
            "input": "A true hero of modern times , Chuck Norris has left TV \"Walker , Rexas Ranger \", and is looking new steps for his artistic career. The President´s man is the second movie of a future TV series , with Norris in the title role, and with young actors like Jennifer Tung or Judson Mills ( one of the young rangers of \"Walker \" ) . The old master teachs to young aspirant . It´s one of the most powerful themes of \"The president´s man \". In this tima, \"A line in the sand \" has reached world surprise for his tratment of terrorism in USA , months before the tragic September 11. Eric Norris, son of Chuck is the director . The movie is amusing, a good action work , plenty of fights and heroism . Chuck Norris have many plans for the future . Bells of innocence , his next picture, will be the following.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cbedc7389f9488db49e86727fadcc47",
            "input": "I think the show had a pretty good concept to work with. But the execution was poor. The script is poor and acting is bad. There were many issues that could have been portrayed in a better way, like the protest against gay marriage or finding the graveyard. The show can't be properly termed as comedy show as it lacks humor miserably. I should say this show was barely successful in putting the life of Muslim community to some extent.Till now second season is worse than the first one. I had my hopes high regarding this show, but I was kind of disappointed. Still I appreciate CBC for putting up such concept in front of the viewers. Anyway I wish best of luck for the future.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a7b0b5b4b5d44f693e648a8817852e4",
            "input": "This happens to be one of my favorite horror films. It's a rich, classy production boasting an excellent cast of ensemble actors, beautiful on-location cinematography, a haunting musical score, an intelligent and novel plot theme, and an atmosphere of dread and menace. It's reminiscent of such classic films as ROSEMARY'S BABY and THE SHINING, wherein young, vulnerable women find themselves victimized by supernatural forces in old, creepy buildings with a macabre past. Here, CRISTINA RAINES plays a top New York City fashion model named Alison Parker. Her happy, outgoing exterior masks a deeply conflicted and troubled soul. This is evidenced by the revelation that in her past, she attempted suicide twice- once as a teenage girl after walking in on her degenerate father cavorting in bed with two women and having him rip a silver crucifix from her neck and toss it on the floor, and the second time, after her married lawyer-boyfriend's wife supposedly committed suicide over learning of their affair. Telling her beau(played by a suitably slimy CHRIS SARANDON) that she needs to live on her own for a year or so, she answers a newspaper ad for a fully-furnished, spacious one-bedroom apartment in an old Brooklyn Heights brownstone. This building actually exists and is located at 10 Montague Terrace right by the Brooklyn Heights Promenade off Remsen Street. The producers actually filmed inside the building and its apartments, paying the residents for their inconvenience, of course. The real estate agent, a Miss Logan(AVA GARDNER), seems to be very interested in having Alison take the apartment- an interest that cannot be solely explained by the 6% commission she would earn. Especially when she quickly drops the rental price from $500.00 a month to $400.00. Alison agrees and upon leaving the building with Miss Logan, notices an elderly man sitting and apparently staring at her from the top-floor window. Miss Logan identifies the man to her as Father Halliran and tells Alison that he's blind. Alison's response is very logical- \"Blind? Then what does he look at?\" After moving in, Alison meets some of the other residents in the building, including a lesbian couple played by SYLVIA MILES and BEVERLY D'ANGELO, who provide Alison with an uncomfortable welcome to the building. Alison's mental health and physical well-being soon start to deteriorate and she is plagued by splitting headaches and fainting spells. When she relays her concerns to Miss Logan about her sleep being disturbed on a nightly basis by clanging metal and loud footsteps coming from the apartment directly over her, she is dumbstruck to learn that apart from the blind priest and now herself, no one has lived in that building for the last three years. Summoning the courage one night to confront her nocturnal tormentor, she arms herself with a butcher knife and a flashlight and enters the apartment upstairs. She is confronted by the cancer-riddled specter of her dead father and uses the knife on him in self-defense when he comes after her. The police investigate and find no sign of violence in that apartment- no corpse, no blood, nothing. Yet Alison fled the building and collapsed in the street, covered in blood- her own, as it turns out. But there's nary a mark on her. What Alison doesn't realize until the film's denouement is that her being in that brownstone has a purpose. She was put there for a reason- a reason whose origin dates back to the Biblical story of the Garden of Eden and of the angel Uriel who was posted at its entrance to guard it from the Devil. She is being unknowingly primed and prepped by the Catholic Church to assume a most important role- one that will guarantee that her soul, which is damned for her two suicide attempts, can be saved. At the same time, the \"invisible\" neighbors, who turn out to be more than just quirky oddballs, have a different agenda in mind for her. This is a competent and intelligently done film and one that surprisingly portrays the Church and its representatives in a mostly sympathetic light.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f0d6d3525704c388cfdbaf504d79041",
            "input": "This film seems to be well remembered as the time Tom & Jerry signed a peace treaty. Things are idyllic for a time but, predictably, it goes sour. Probably the most memorable moment was the endless fight involving a pipe, a frying pan, and a baseball bat that the two plus Butch the dog engage in at the beginning and end of the short. I enjoyed one a bunch and you should try to catch it on Cartoon Network.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57a12d65d9014bafb3b12138d6c9b050",
            "input": "Sholay: Considered to be one of the greatest films. I always wondered if they would ever remake being the classic it is. That was the time RGV announced this movie and I was somewhat excited to see it. I always thought that maybe this will be a good movie, but every week we would here RGV change something. And the movie is a very B-Grade movie, something that I had not hoped.I really tried looking for positives, but I promised to keep Sholay out of my mind. The cinematography is awesome. The movie tries to be its own. But that is the up side. The action sequences are weak. The screenplay had potential. The biggest flaw is editing. None of the scenes excite you. For example, the comedy sequences felt very out of place and forced. Ironic because comedy was just as entertaining in the original. And none of the characters are developed. And no scenes will linger until the end. And the ending was very disappointing.The biggest question is acting. Amitabh Bachchan was good as Gabbar Singh, nothing great. It seemed as if they concentrated too much on his look, that the character only looks menacing, but you don't get creeped out. Mohanlal is barely in the movie, but he impresses in his few scenes. Ajay Devgan was decent. It wasn't so much the performance, he gave it his all, it was the weak script. Prashant Raj is very confident, and has potential to make it far with better movies.I had most expectations for Sushmita Sen, who was probably the best of the lot. She was expressive, but this still was not enough. Nisha Kothari surprised me. She seemed disinterested for the most part, but her emotional scene after her friend's death was quite good. Seems as if she needs to find a director who will help her talent, not her cute looks. But what disappointed me most was chemistry. Ajay Devgan and Prashant Raj didn't look like friends. Ajay-Nisha were not a strong couple. No passion was to be found between Sushmita and Prashant. And Amitabh and Mohanlal did not the hateful passion they needed.As for songs, they pretty much suck. Urmila's Mehbooba was too overblown and I pretty much slept through it. It was however nicely danced. The Holi number was enjoyable, but not memorable. Same went for the other songs. For someone who looked forward to this movie, I was heavily disappointed. I had high hopes for RGV because of his Jungle, but seems as if he lost his talent during the shooting of this movie. But hopefully he regains his talent for Sarkar Raj. But this movie is best forgotten. All the positives still do not make up for the boring movie it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-121933ef61194b8f91094f0b810588cd",
            "input": "Diego Armando Maradona had been sixteen years of age in 1978 when Argentina won the World Cup at home. He was already the biggest star, and the greatest player in a country obsessed with football. Everybody had begged Cesar Luis Menotti to play the boy genius, but the manager thought that he was not yet ready.History records that Argentina won the 1978 World Cup fairly convincingly - they hadn't really needed Maradona. The same was not true in 1982. Spain was a catalogue of disaster for Argentina. Menotti - still chain smoking - played Diego this time, but the occasion was too much for such a temperamental boy. Maradona had signed for Barcelona on June 4 1982 for around $7 million - nine days later he played his first game at the Camp Nou and Belgium beat Argentina one-nil. It was not an auspicious debut, and even though he scored twice against Hungary in the next match, Maradona will remember the mundial as the site of his nadir - a crude, petulant foul on Brazil's Batista in the Second Round that abruptly ended his tournament and Argentina's reign as world champions.But now that was all behind him. Maradona had muddled his way through some crazy times at Barca, and left in 1984 to join Napoli. It was as if he was finally home. The Neapolitan tifosi had done everything to entice Maradona to poor, underachieving Napoli. Gifts from old women and pocket money from young boys nestled uncomfortably with the Camorra's millions as part of the transfer fee, and the city was determined to make him feel at home. So, for the time being at least, Maradona was El Rey - he brought his Argentine side to Mexico as one of the favourites, and with a new manager - Carlos Bilardo replacing Menotti.Maradona is the hero of this story, a one-man World Cup winning machine. In 1982, hundreds of young men had died in a pointless battle for the Falkland Isles; now the British press yearned for a rematch (with the same result) in Mexico City. Maradona was still regarded with distinction in England, remembered more for a superb performance in Britain during a 1980 tour than for Spain. But he was still an Argie: the enemy.England actually started well, and Lineker could have scored after only twelve minutes. A key event happened on 8 minutes. Fenwick, the big and limited English defender, was booked - he was now terrified of making any challenges around the penalty area.After a tense first 45 minutes, the second half started with a bang. Maradona danced forward after 50 minutes, but could find no way through. Similarly Valdano's attempt hit only white shirts. Then the moment of infamy that serves as Diego's epitaph. Hodge bizarrely hooked the ball back into his own penalty area, Shilton hurriedly jumped to claim - but there was Maradona, somehow rising above the English goalkeeper to thrust the ball into the net. How had he done it? Simple: handball.The most famous foul in football history passed in near slow motion. Every spectator waited for Mr Al-Sharif of Syria to blow for the foul (he didn't). Shilton looked and appealed to the linesman - he ran back to the centre circle. Unless he assassinates the Pope, or becomes the first man to step foot on Mars, when the great man dies this moment will be shown first - in long, lingering, slow motion, followed by the look of glee on his face. The next image will be his next gift to the world - the World Cup's finest goal.Burruchaga stroked the ball to Maradona who was ambling around on the right hand side of his own half. He span, and accelerated away from Beardsley and Reid. This was the real Diego - he burst through Butcher and attacked Fenwick. Fenwick now had the opportunity to stop the attack. Normally, he would have aimed his boot somewhere near Maradona's thigh - sure he would have picked up a red card, but who cares? Then Fenwick had a brainwave - he hesitated, and decided to run at Maradona waving his arms - perhaps he was trying to put him off? Diego shot into the box as Fenwick fell over. Butcher had been running alongside the genius as if he was offering encouragement. Shilton charged out in panic, and Maradona twisted around him and prepared to score. Now Butcher remembered his role and tried to cripple the Argentinean - instead he gave extra impetus to the shot, which smashed into the goal. England were coming home.During this magical Mexican summer, the world had found a successor for Pele. In fact the greatest ever footballer had been surpassed - Pele had been superb in 1958 and 1970, but had had great players all around him. Maradona did not. 1986 was his World Cup.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb72d653661b4e439c32cb322183a045",
            "input": "Shame Shame Shame on UA/DW for what you do! I was appalled. Do NOT take kids to see this movie. The humor is totally inappropriate for children - plus they'll be bored and disappointed. Certainly *we all* have read Theo's wonderful children book and certainly we have expectations...but this is pure trash. Dr. Seuss would be ashamed and certainly would've never given his \"thumbs up\" at such a dastardly attempt to capitalize on a classic.What a pity. Spend your money on the book. If you own a copy, then buy the book and donate it to a Toys for Tots program. This movie is NOT worth a \"free\" ticket viewing.Stick with the book. The tv cartoon version works well if you want a visual portrayal - save your money...seriously. SAVE your money - it will be on cable by saint patty's day.Shame shame shame on what they do!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99c3dbf7c5e44925acdb46d2aeb8157b",
            "input": "What the F*@# was this I just watched? Steven STOP!! Please! This movie is insatiably bad and silly. In a bizarre departure from action and adventure, Mr. Seagal is now fighting (obviously) wish-they-were-vampire 'like' creatures with super human strength.? OK? Oh, and their eyes blink sideways in an inhuman way? Wow! Even still in this movie however, to quell Seagals have-to-have-the-last-punch-and-no-one-can-kick-my-a$$ ego, HE is somehow stronger than they are. However all of the average humans are getting crushed all around him. Come on, I can understand the big mouth neighborhood bully or drug dealer, but these are super human strength people. Oh and get this, Seagal goes through a brief sting of identity issues, because apparently he and his cohorts in the film think he is Wolverine! Oh My GO... And worst than all of that! Yes, there is a worse than that. He has a voice over even changing voice in mid sentence while we are looking at his face. They obviously sound nothing like him and I believe it may be one of the other actors in the film. It was pure madness. Although I wanted to turn it off I always watch a movie to he end. This is an all time low even for your direct to video movies Steven. Awful! Awful! Awful! Two thumbs down! Redemeption qualities? Well I guess so, I will be fair in that aspect. At least some of the special effects were OK, and I like the choice of wardrobe for the actors and actresses. The women all were quite attractive IMO. Still, and I said STILL, it does not make up for the blatant X-Men, Underworld, (insert your favorite zombie, vampire movie here) rip off! The director, writer, producer, ALL should be bansihed & exile from the movie business. I think I feel the way that most people feel about Blood Rayne (and just about all other Uwe Boll pictures) about this film. That's my whole $1.00 on this film. View if you dare.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e55b15b70b284da096878ee34dffa7e5",
            "input": "I remember seeing this in a the Salem movie theater (where I used to attend \"Kiddie Matinée\"s almost every Saturday) in Dayton, Ohio when I was a young boy and have never forgotten it. It simply amazed me and my friends. I do wish there were some way I could see it again! I have tried to find some compilation of shorts or something like that to no avail. I only recently discovered that it was a Cousteau film and that blew my mind even more. How the heck he accomplished this is beyond my understanding. The fish is ACTUALLY IN THE CAT'S MOUTH at one point, if I remember correctly! If anyone could help me find a way to see it again I would be extremely grateful!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8de6916cfda4401e97ad9886aebc9c87",
            "input": "There's really no way to beat around the bush in saying this, Lady Death: The Motion Picture just plain sucks. Aside from the fact that the main character is a well endowed blonde running around Hell in a leather bikini with occasional spurts of graphic violence, the movie seems to have been made with the mentality of a 1980's cartoon based on a line of action figures. The bad guy himself even talks like a Skeletor wannabe, has the obligatory inept henchman, and lives in a lair that looks to have been patterned after the domain of the villain from the old Saturday morning Blackstar cartoon. Just don't expect any humor other than the sometimes howlingly bad dialogue. At other times it feels like the kind of anime tale better suited to hentai, yet there is no sex, no tentacle rape (Thank goodness!) and very little sex appeal, this despite the physical appearance of the title character. There is simply no adult edge to this material, unless you count the half-naked heroine and bloody deaths. Essentially, what we have here is a feature length episode of She-Ra, Princess of Power, but with skimpier clothes and more gore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cde2f080b5be4574a8e6918ef443df9a",
            "input": "This film is terrible. I was really looking forward to it, as I thought \"Lantana\" was great.The following review may contain *spoilers******First, the good things: it looks great, some of the performances are OK. The bad things are everything else about it. The story, as you possibly know, is about some blokes who go fishing and discover a body, with the twist that they find it on Friday but continue fishing and finally report it on Sunday when they get back into mobile (cell phone) range. However the film takes it's time (boy does it take its time) getting to this central event.Of the ensemble of characters (about a dozen), not one seems to like another one (which is, I suppose, consistent, because they are all unlikable). I was extremely frustrated by the failure to adequately explain how the characters are related, and it was not until near the end of the movie that I could vaguely construct the family tree. It's hard to think of a film us unrelentingly grim, which is a failure in the structure of the story, as the character's lives seem just as bad before the fishing trip as after. Once you've set the bar so high, it's hard to up-it short of everyone committing suicide.There are silly lapses in logic. The killer dumps the body in the lake, and then it somehow drifts miles upstream into the mountains. The fishermen walk out Sunday morning, but for some reason Byrne gets home late at night after his wife has gone to bed. Then first thing the next morning the cops bang on the door to get him to come down to the station. Um, they haven't heard of the telephone? Down at the station, the media know the whole story, less than 24 hours after they reported the body?Totally missing from the story is the debate the blokes surely had after they find the body. This is a mystery - everyone asks them \"how could you do that?\" and the audience is asking the same question. (The debate about what to do with the body is the key scene in \"Deliverance\"). I know exactly what I'd do in their situation. Someone needs to walk out to the car, drive to mobile range, call the cops, wait, and them guide them back to the location. If the others wait at camp and fish, who cares?A lot of all this just seems false. The only thing that rung true was that, as the girl was black, the local aboriginals seized on the fishermen's actions as racist - \"wouldn't have done it if it was a white girl.\" Throughout there is a curious indifference to who might have killed the girl (I think the subject is mentioned once), and there is no mystery, as the audience sees the killer in the opening scene.So I'm sitting there simultaneously bored and confused, when there's a twist - not in the plot, but the theme. Suddenly it becomes about the quiet dignity of the bereaved aboriginals leading to a ludicrous ending with some incoherent stuff about black-white reconciliation. Huh?This is Australian film \"at its finest\", according to The Age.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4778544d08cc40679e5dc11bb7528dcc",
            "input": "This is a very good movie. Do you want to know the real reasons why so many here are knocking this movie? I will tell you. In this movie, you have a black criminal who outwits a white professor. A black cop who tells the white professor he is wrong for defending the black criminal and the black cop turns out to be right, thus. …making the white professor look stupid. It always comes down to race. This is an excellent movie. Pay no attention to the racist. If you can get over that there are characters who are played by blacks in this movie who outsmart the white characters, then you shouldn't have any problems enjoying this movie. I recommended everyone to go see this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d0196df3a184a90afd5f4c1b1b0795f",
            "input": "I've seen (far too) many flicks from this company - this one is about middle of the pack. One the good side, its a bit more stylized and under control than some of their fare - less of the sophomoric attempts at humor and more adherence to story (for what its worth). Many of their titles, like Sexy Sixth Sense, are buried by baaaad performances and an amateurish sensibility. On the other side, I found the simulated sex scenes not as hot as some of their other flicks (like Vampire Vixens, Gladiator Eroticus, Spiderbabe or Mistress Frankenstein).Misty Mundae is always a 10 on the peter meter, as is Darian Caine. I found Barbara Joyce hot in a school-marm kinda way, and Ruby LaRocca a sexy little hottie.Watch this with the remote firmly in your (free) hand, on a night when you need a break from porn. Don't waste your time wanting to check the story - you've got better things to do w/ your life. It is not a movie, it's pure T&A, but not bad by that standard.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-055d2a5ee27647aa8db82ef96a1a2cb9",
            "input": "I viewed the movie together with a homophobic friend, my wife and her female friend. So I had views from all kinds of directions. Mainly, the film made me laugh, the sexual tension was not really there and the only noticeable actors were Tudor Chirila and Maria Popistasu. Yes, I do think she played her role well, even if the script was not appropriate. There were good Romanian actors around, they just didn't have complex roles. I applaud Puya's entering the movie business. I don't know why, but I think he's a good guy, I just hope he'll be a good actor.The wife loved the movie, though, and I think there might have been chords being played and to which I had no ear for. If the film tried to present uncommon sexual behaviors and their consequences in todays Romania, then it failed miserably. There were no consequences. Just imagine that the girls are actually a boy and a girl, and the same story becomes just a boring, uninteresting plot.I have no idea why it got all those BAFTA awards. In my book, it should have gotten the \"Better luck next time\" award. (bafta=good luck in Romanian).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-620e12514be546c68bebf58fec03178d",
            "input": "Just finished watching, can't say I was impressed.It starts of quite good, the visual and the atmosphere gives a creepy feeling as this type of movie should. But it all ends when the first lordi monster appears. Not only do you recognize them from the band lordi, but they are seriously malplaced in the movie. Doomsday monsters with leather jackets and piercings are so 80's.As for the storyline, it starts of as similar horror movies, people trapped inside a hell hole. But there is no clear story on why and what is happening. The viewer is thrown some lines on possible reasons, but the lines never meet and end up to anything but a mess.With all the money spent on this film, with an intriguing start and some good effects, I had thought someone would have taken better care of the product. I wonder if lordi made this movie just to prove that their show costumes could be scary (except they aren't).So the movie gets cred for the visuals, i guess the money had to go somewhere. But the rest is an embarrassing attempt from a rock band to make their on-stage monster aliases scarier.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a4afb34d37544cab3d52fc039f81192",
            "input": "This was the first \"Walking Tall\" movie I saw, I think in a $2 movie theater along Hollywood Blvd. , so I didn't have any reference to the first installment done by Joe Don Baker. I remember being shocked at the corrupted system of McNairy County and the brutality of the \"redneck gangs\". I was also amazed at the fact that one man decided he's not going to let it slide, and went out to do something about it. Courageous ? I thought so - to a point where it sent shivers up my spine.I think this movie is a great story about American courage to stand up and do something about a system that's only serving its own interest. I was pretty blown away about it, and think this is still one of the best movie of the hero/anti-hero genre, which one might laugh but includes recent movies like the \"The Punisher\", but even more so because it's a true story. The recent remake starring the \"Rock\" just doesn't do any justice to the real fire in the story of Buford Pusser.A \"classic\" that I'm sure will resurface again in the future.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9244bc8ba5c14ad1986850cc5fcabb37",
            "input": "Basically, \"Caprica\" is the Cylon origin story. The premise of the show is interesting. However, the writers follow so many story lines and clog it with too many POV characters that it bogs down the storytelling. The plot creeps at glacial speeds dissipating what tension it might have had. In any given episode, little or nothing happens.Daniel Graystone (Eric Stolz) is a military contractor working on a robotic soldier using a stolen chip. Unfortunately, his only working prototype is driven by the AI version of his dead daughter Zoe, who died in a suicide bombing caused by Soldiers of the One (STO), an underground monotheist extremist group.Meanwhile, Joseph Adama (father of \"Battlestar Galactica\"'s Commander Adama) is struggling to hold his family together while searching for the AI version of his daughter (who also died in the bombing) in a Machiavellian virtual version of Caprica (which strongly resembles 1930s Chicago). In addition to the vapid writing, Caprica suffers from a similar problem as many origin stories. We already know how it ends (i.e. the Cylons develop their own civilization and rebel against humanity).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60e4ad508f394223861b47cb2a0b3c9b",
            "input": "I am a huge John Denver fan. I have a large collection of his music on vinyl. I saw this Christmas special when it was originally on TV and loved it. I have the original vinyl album and CD. I have the original CD and later release. The later release is missing several songs though. I see that it has been released this year with all original songs. To my surprise I found the original CD for sale at $75.00. WOW - to think that a Christmas Cd would be worth that much. To me no amount is worth selling this treasure. It is my favorite Christmas CD. I have never been able to find it on VHS or DVD. I would love to have either version. If anyone has one available please let me know. Thanks",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b42ecaf9371641d185e9d09f0877503a",
            "input": "This TV-made thriller is all talk, little action. It works hard to set up its convoluted plot, yet the writing is so muddled the exposition is still cloudy at best. By the end, I knew no more about these characters than I did at the beginning. It has a quasi-\"Ten Little Indians\" scenario, but ditches it mid-way through in favor of spotlighting Sally Field and her uncovering of a killer. Field overacts here with a gracelessness I've seldom seen from her. The early introductions are good, but the writing quickly strays off-course and eventually goes over the top. Lots of hysteria, and constant thunder and lightning effects (which adds nothing). A curious failure from producers Aaron Spelling & Leonard Goldberg. With all this talent, couldn't they give us something more than a script full of red herrings and Sally Field hiding in a closet?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e73bf1928fa74bf29343e7afb290410b",
            "input": "I have been a huge Lynn Peterson fan ever since her breakthrough role in the 1988 blockbuster movie \"Far North\", and even though I loved her in her one other film \"Slow\" (2004) where she plays \"Francis\", this is by far and away her strongest role.Lynn, as I'm sure you all know (or should), plays the critical role of \"Driver\".Unfortunately, other than Lynn's amazing performance, I'm afraid this movie doesn't really have much going for it.Oh wait - there was one other thing - the amazing creativity of the editing to remove profanity for TV viewers. Memorable lines like: \"You son-of-a-gun!\", \"You son-of-a-witch!\", \"Shoot!\", and \"Well, Forget You!\"O.K. Bye.P.S.: Does anyone know where I can get another Lynn Peterson poster?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcc2e9211030438cbb6f29142b4daa2f",
            "input": "We fans of Ed Wood tend to be an obsessive bunch in the first place, but this movie in particular has driven me to a level of fan-dom that I have never before approached! One of the most intense thrills of non-mainstream movie adulation - at least as far as I am concerned - is the pleasure of unearthing the obscure. I remember how, as a teenager, I longed to see Eddie's \"Revenge of the Dead\" (a.k.a. \"Night of the Ghouls\"), which at that time had been vaulted for a couple of decades. Likewise such arcane masterpieces of low budget filmmaking as Doris Wishman's \"A Night to Dismember\" or half the works of Jesus Franco! However, recent years have seen video and DVD rendering these once unfindable treasures almost TOO accessible - even for those of us on the 'wrong' (!) side of the Atlantic....And then, behold, there was \"I Woke Up Early the Day I Died\" - a movie that SHOULD have been so 'big', yet which disappeared into the ether even before Fangoria printed the first fairly lengthy article on it that first whetted my appetite. The 1990s NEEDED a hard-to-find movie though which would REALLY be worth hunting out: and this, to be sure is it.... I don't especially wish to add too much of a commentary on all those marvellous aspects of the film - its classy-yet-kitsch cast, its haunting yet often hallucinogenic visuals, its wondrous moments of \"pure cinema\" (in the sense of the 1920s French cineastes) and surrealism, or even its resoundingly memorable soundtrack - since this has all been described most eloquently by other users here.What I DO wish to mention, briefly, is the pleasure that I have received also from hunting down certain obscure artefacts relating to this almost-lost-to-us-but-thankfully-not-quite movie! I think the German video, which I picked up while in Cologne on a cold crisp winter's day, is fairly well-known to Ed Wood's followers now. It is also quite common knowledge that a promotional poster for the film was released. However, there is thankfully more to be found!!! Firstly, there are a number of reviews available from the film's German THEATRICAL release - I have used several of these in my translation classes in an attempt to \"Woodify\" my students..... some of these reviews are positive eulogies to the film's artistry and entertainment value - and most interesting of all is that most critics placed it squarely within both the American trash AND European arthouse traditions. Secondly, there is the score by Larry Groupe', which can be acquired from the man himself - many of the tracks exert a truly emotional pull on the listener, particularly if you are contemplating the film's currently \"vaulted\" status and growing a little melancholy at the same time. Finally - for now - I wish to mention the promo SOUNDTRACK that Cinequanon put out in extremely limited numbers. BEG, BORROW, STEAL, KILL or do whatever it takes if you get the chance to acquire one of these!!!!!! It features 14 tracks from the film, including Eartha Kitt's ballad, the late Darcy Clay's \"Jesus I Was Evil\" (two versions of which are also available on CD from New Zealand, although that is another story again!), the cool radio music to which Christina Ricci dances, and also those amazing techno drops by Minty and ZHV (the latter being Billy Z's very own techno band).....Become obsessed - let Ed Wood rule your life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8610642e8144429a9ca13d480e39f18a",
            "input": "1st watched 8/3/2003 - 2 out of 10(Dir-Brad Sykes): Mindless 3-D movie about flesh-eating zombies in a 3 story within a movie chronicle. And yes, we get to see zombies eating human flesh parts in 3D!! Wow, not!! That has been done time and time again in 2D in a zombie movie but what usually makes a zombie movie better is the underlying story not the actual flesh-eating. That's what made the original zombie classics good. The flesh-eating was just thrown in as an extra. We're actually bored throughout most of this 3-part chronicle because of the lame(twilight-zone like) easily understood and slow-pacingly revealed finale's. The last story is actually the story the movie started with(having a reporter investigating a so-called ghost town) and of course we get to see flesh eating zombie's in that one as well. Well, I think I've said enough. Watch the classics, not this 3D bore-feast.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5ff4f772eee41368a87508538f063b1",
            "input": "This unpretentious Horror film is probably destined to become a cult classic. Much much better than 90% of the Scream rip-offs out there! I even hope they come up with a sequel!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e53c9b7ca8b45079446c8b12c5d5ed9",
            "input": "This show comes up with interesting locations as fast as the travel channel. It is billed as reality but in actuality it is pure prime time soap opera. It's tries to use exotic locales as a facade to bring people into a phony contest & then proceeds to hook viewers on the contestants soap opera style.It also borrows from an early CBS game show pioneer- Beat The Clock- by inventing situations for its contestants to try & overcome. Then it rewards the winner money. If they can spice it up with a little interaction between the characters, even better. While the game format is in slow motion versus Beat The Clock- the real accomplishment of this series is to escape reality. This show has elements of several types of successful past programs. Reality television, hardly, but if your hooked on the contestants, locale or contest, this is your cup of tea. If your not, this entire series is as I say, drivel dripping with gravy. It is another show hiding behind the reality label which is the trend it started in 2000.It is slick & well produced, so it might last a while yet. After all, so do re-runs of Gilligan's Island, Green Acres, The Beverly Hillbillies & The Brady Bunch. This just doesn't employ professional actors. The intelligence level is about the same.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-225433a46f404887882f71ccbcc9b2b9",
            "input": "\"Holly\" is an issue-driven film, but it is neither manipulative nor overly sentimental. At its heart is it is a character-driven film, which wouldn't be nearly so successful without the fleshed-out portrayals of Patrick (Ron Livingston), the lost soul with the gradually awakening conscience, and Holly (Thuy Nguyen), the strong-willed but ultimately over-matched young Vietnamese girl. From the vibrant locations and photography to the effective editing, everything is forthright and well-done. The contemporary classical score may put some off at first, but it is top-notch composition and underscores the admirable restraint which is evident throughout. This film, which raises many issues but provides few clear-cut answers, ultimately succeeds in raising awareness of and compassion for Holly and the many who share her plight. Kudos to those who managed to get it made.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-387b639a7ac743b3ab123656dfd02384",
            "input": "This is one of the worst action films I have ever seen. This is particularly due to much of the factual implausibility (like an obvious agent posing as a bank loan officer while making obvious that he is speaking to someone through a wire or the scene where the scientists assume it is safe to enter a room in which a virus has been released even though 'it has not found a viable host' does not mean that it will never find one), the cheap sets (the bank looks like it was poorly constructed to resemble a dungeon), and the bad acting. It is the story of an organized crime group that has successfully stolen a capsule of the lethal virus. However, the head honcho who decides to remove it from a bank security deposit box, does so at the same time a bank heist is going down, at the same FBI agents have been informed of this, and at the same time a terrible earthquake erupts. Needless to say, the aftermath of the quake is messy in more ways than one. However, the results do not make for an enticing action film, but instead, one that has been obviously z-grade junk from the beginning of the film. (Perhaps this is why some of the screen captures on the packaging look to be created with computer graphics rather than being actual screen captures from various sequences of the film). What the hell Ron Perlman was doing in this, I have no idea. I wonder if he was as embarrassed to be in it as I was to have watched it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-484052cc117849f982b89644f1b38a4d",
            "input": "I thought this was a quiet good movie. It was fun to watch it. What I liked best where the 'Outtakes' at the end of the movie. They were GREAT.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86659c91f9f4489d9183653c7e8a0465",
            "input": "Thank God this wasn't based on a true story, because what a story it is. Populated by despicable characters whose depravity knows no bounds, Before The Devil is a mesmerizing, jaw-dropping excursion into perversion which would be laughable (and sometimes is, even with - or perhaps because of - the sickeningly tragic undercurrent of human dysfunction throughout) if it weren't carried out with such magnificent, overwhelming conviction by its stars. The excellent script by Kelly Masterson and superb direction by none other than Sidney Lumet doesn't hurt either.The main dysfunction here is of a family nature, with the two majorly screwed up brothers (brilliant portrayals from Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke) deciding to rob their own parents' jewelry store, an attempt that goes pathetically awry.The story is told with time-shifts (which are noted on screen, such as: \"Charlie: Two Days Before The Robbery\", so no one should be confused); some people have said they didn't like this device but I thought it worked perfectly, adding to the skeweredness of the whole affair, considering that the two brothers in question are hardly playing with full decks - between them you couldn't make a decent poker hand to save your life. Throw in these cheesy extra tidbits: one of the brothers is a drug addict, married to Gina (Marisa Tomei, also excellent), who is having an affair with the other brother, toss in some monumental sibling rivalry, along with the fact that said drug addict brother hates his father (a wrenching performance from Albert Finney), who has apparently caused him serious past pain, and you've got a Shakespearean/Greek tragedy on your hands. Proceed with caution.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7e5425a930a4eb1a678c164dcd20359",
            "input": "I'm never much for classic films. Movies like Patton, Going My Way, How Green was My Valley, The Godfather, Casablanca, Annie Hall, Gone with the Wind, Lawrence of Arabia, and Citizen Kane bore me. However, I would much rather watch any one of those films 3,469 times while being tied up on a chair than watch An American in Paris once in the most luxurious suite ever. If I did the latter, I'd probably be sleeping the entire time.The color art direction and the music didn't interest me, Gershwin or non-Gershwin. The dancing and the singing could help an insomniac fall to sleep. The dialogue doesn't match up to Singin' in the Rain. Basically, this movie is boring. The only other film that I fell asleep while watching was Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. But you can't blame me. I only slept 5 minutes the night before.1 star/10 (Too bad we can't give zeroes.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f76cb69e6ac472d96538415af4223f7",
            "input": "\"Kings and Queen\" is a bloated French drama that rambles on for an interminable two hours and thirty-two minutes to no discernible point or purpose.The film features two stories that seem unrelated at first but which eventually connect with one another about halfway through the movie. The first centers around Nora and her struggles with various men in her life, including an elderly father who discovers he has only a few days left to live. The other story involves a young man named Ismael, a violinist who finds himself placed - unfairly, he believes - in a mental institution through the machinations of an unknown third party. After traveling along on separate tracks for awhile, these two narrative strands eventually come together when we learn that Ismael is a former lover of Nora's and the man she has chosen to adopt her son from an earlier, tragic relationship.With a bit more focus and a considerable amount of streamlining, \"Kings and Queen\" might have been a potent, engrossing drama about modern day relationships. It certainly has moments of tremendous insight and emotional power, and the performances are, for the most part, complex and touching. But, taken as a whole, the film meanders and maunders to such an extent that, quite frankly, it begins to wreak havoc on our patience and to wear out its welcome early on. Even more distressing is the fact that, even though we spend what seems like a mild eternity in the company of these people, we really don't know quite what to make of any of them when the show is finally over. For instance, Nora's father, on his deathbed, writes a withering diatribe against his daughter's character that simply doesn't gibe with the woman we've been looking at for well over two hours. Nora is admittedly no Mother Theresa (then, again, who is?), but she certainly doesn't deserve the invective thrown at her by her very own father. Nora could be accused of being confused, indecisive, a bit self-absorbed at times, but evil enough to have her father wishing he could give her his cancer and make her die in his place? I don't think so.Perhaps this film is simply operating at a level of depth that I was unable to fathom. But my suspicion is that even writer Roger Bohbot and co-writer/director Arnaud Desplechin would have trouble fully explaining their purpose here. This is a well acted, pretentious bore of a film that takes the viewer on a long, rambling voyage through a sea of personal crises, a journey that leaves him no wiser or more enlightened at the end than he was at the beginning.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb873af5e29e40d28567c052d6238a70",
            "input": "This version of the Charles Dickens novel features George C Scott as the Scrooge. Fine casting, especially the choice of Scott, who plays the role to the hilt..a fine cast supports him in the very good adaption. A Modern day holiday classic on a scale of one to ten..9",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-deddf6464f41419a87fc6da7b0934edf",
            "input": "This film is worth seeing alone for Jared Harris' outstanding portrayal of John Lennon. It doesn't matter that Harris doesn't exactly resemble Lennon; his mannerisms, expressions, posture, accent and attitude are pure Lennon. Best scene: Lennon in a local cafe verbally sparring with a stuttering fan as to whether Paul McCartney & Wings' \"Silly Love Songs\" is worthy of #1 status in America.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30b8327aebd140f1be2c1a164d44a0b3",
            "input": "The title creatures wreak havoc at a peaceful little desert town. That's basically the whole plot for this film, and while the scenes devoted to the Munchies themselves are somewhat fun (in a lowbrow kind of way), all the rest is just filler, and bad filler at that. From the \"hero\", who is a painful Woody Allen wannabe, to the ultra-dumb town cop, it's hard to pick the most irritating character in the film. There were some times when almost all of them were on the screen together and I was thinking, \"OK, at least the girlfriend is cute, but why do we have to put up with the rest of those morons?\". The film is also filled with pop references (from Ozzy Osbourne to Linda Blair), which probably made it already dated by the early 90's. (*1/2)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c10de703e3549eeb8645204c84a9892",
            "input": "Probably the worst Dolph film ever. There's nothing you'd want or expect here. Don't waste your time. Dolph plays a miserable cop with no interests in life. His brother gets killed and Dolph tries to figure things out. The character is just plain stupid and stumbles around aimlessly. Pointless.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21296bd9715a475e92bb30382f1506cb",
            "input": "I guess you have to give some points for the sheer courage of writing a musical around a history lesson but how about some decent music? Is the cartoonish acting of Howard DeSilva meant to pique the interest of otherwise jaded children? Is William Daniels' campy contemporary (for the time) acting style meant to appeal to a 1960s/70s demographic? Do we need all the \"in-jokes\" about NY & NJ? (I can hear the blue-haired Broadway audience guffawing on cue.) Sorry, I find the whole piece dated, boring & the acting far too strident for the screen",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3dd75ffc81442769dd18c8b9eb1ee84",
            "input": "This is not a boring movie, the audience might stay on its chair fascinated by this selfish character, Miles Berkowitz, both film-maker and actor here. The storyline is simple : after a divorce and ten years of a hollywoodian non-career, the author plays is quest for love in front of the camera. The first question is about how true is all that : what is written, what came by chance ? Both answers, \"yes\" or \"no\" portrays M.Berkowitz as a low average human beeing. If you look for a self-fiction about love like this one, I recommand you to read some independant comic books : Chester Brown, Joe Matt...Beside of this, I felt quite disappointed to hear so much against my country, France. I know american people usually say that the french are arrogant (that might be true then), etc., and for sure the french (and the whole world) have lots of griefs against america, but why so much hate ? Don't think I couldn't like this movie only because of that anyhow.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-853b563f1ed64d57bce1f4499bccca1d",
            "input": "Some time in the late 19th century, somewhere in the American West, several cowboys in need of money go on a buffalo hunt. The group's leader believes that buffaloes are too numerous for the hunting to have any impact, but the more experienced hunter has seen how quickly the population can collapse, and he isn't so sure. Featuring buffalo herds living in South Dakota and showing film of actual hunting (the movie's introduction explains it as necessary thinning of the herd), the movie does an excellent job of presenting us with the plight of the buffalo and its effect on Native Americans without ever getting preachy about it.The real story, however, is about the dysfunctional family which is created by the small group formed to do the hunting. The father figure is Charlie, a violent man with a short fuse. Sandy, his \"brother\", is the experienced hunter who is tired of killing but needs the job after losing his cattle. A half-Indian boy, who hates the fact that he looks entirely Caucasian, takes the role of adopted son. The grandfather (and moral compass) is an alcoholic buffalo skinner; Charlie's \"wife\" is an Indian woman whose companions he killed after they stole his horses.Charlie is clearly the most interesting figure. He is mean and insulting towards everyone around him, yet at the same time he knows that they are the only family and friends that he has. He expects the abducted Indian women to hate him, then accept him, but he doesn't know how to react when she refuses to do either. He's the one who put the family together in the first place, but he's also the one who is fated to ultimately destroy it.This is all very similar to the classic \"Red River\", which also features a family of sorts being torn apart by the increasingly violent and alienated father figure. As one might expect, this movie suffers by comparison. The plot is not as focused on developing the characters and family dynamics, and the direction fails to keep all of the scenes working towards this common goal. Charlie is so thoroughly unlikable from the very beginning that we never have any reason to care about what happens to him or his family. On the positive side, however, the message surrounding the buffalo slaughter adds an extra dimension to the film and its conclusion is far superior to the Hollywood ending which was tacked on to the end of \"Red River\". As a result, \"The Last Hunt\" is an interesting and entertaining film, very well made, but falling short of what would be needed to consider it a classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-071ae2d02e474d15b611db490613eabe",
            "input": "How did this become a blockbuster? Dear God I don't know where to start why this movie sucked too much. The movie was predictable & there was no originality. The only thing I can admire is the acting of some characters. The movie was too bright, they should have done something with the lighting, eg. making the environment more darker. The make up on certain dead characters made this movie look like a 1970 horror flick. This is 2006! People don't get scared by other people wearing heavy make up. Most of the horror scenes we're taken from other Hollywood or Asian horror movies. Total rip off! This is why I don't watch tagalog movies. The only reason why so many people \"screamed\" while watching this movie is because of conformity. How many times do we have to copy scenes from The Ring and improvise it that instead of the girl coming out of the TV, its now coming from the window next door? No matter how you put it, ITS STILL A RIP OFF. If you want a good horror movie, go watch the 50 best horror movie listed on this website.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd1d0d2ed28b4db9b3bee5db71cc211c",
            "input": "When this initially aired in 1984, my wife and I taped it on our very first VHS recorder. I still have that aging tape, which I try to watch annually. It was the year my first child was born, and seeing A Christmas Carol in this incarnation brings back fond memories of happy times -- many hours of which were spent with this film playing in the background. I finally broke down this year and ordered a DVD, which prompted me to take a moment to write this brief reaction to the movie. Charles Dickens' story is captured in outstanding fashion here. George C. Scott is absolutely amazing and totally believable as Scrooge. The supporting cast is equally spectacular. This is, to my mind, a flawless production. Little details add much to the enjoyment. The game \"similes\" Scrooge's nephew and wife play with their party guests is a neat item. (I've since re-created it with my high school English students as a brief respite from class work!) Honestly, I can think of few ways to entertain myself over the holidays I enjoy more than indulging in this CBS production, which was originally sponsored by IBM. (Incidentally, it's fun to watch the old tape with the original IBM commercials ... which show just how much computers have evolved in 21 years. Amazing how things have changed!) Bottom line: A Christmas Carol is a timeless story, and this rendition is a timeless classic. Enjoy ... and God Bless Us, Every One!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cae98b19c1db4b449ecb166bb5f602e2",
            "input": "The best Treasure Island ever made. They just don't make filmslike this anymore, or ever. No one makes films like this. Morethan a novelty, this film is funny, frank and fascinating, yet moody,mysterious and morose. This is one of my favorite pictures. Thedirector must have had some idea what it is all about, but hecertainly leaves room for your own impressions and interpretations, while leaving little left to the imagination. Why hehas not made more films like this, I have no idea. Whilereminding me of some of the best noir, it is one of a kind. But thisis not for the lazy or simple.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fdddaf029eff474084519fdf8f067ec1",
            "input": "\"Serum\" starts out with credits that are quite reminiscent of the \"Re-animator\" movies, and it owes a lot to them. The story is very similar; a mad doctor develops a serum that he believes will alleviate pain, sickness and death, but he's apparently not a big believer in clinical trials and so winds up with a brain-eating zombie on his hands in the person of his nephew. The zombie even looks like one of those from \"Re-animator,\" and in fact some of the make-up effects in \"Serum\" aren't bad. Unfortunately, the script is pretty slow and unbelievable in quite a few places, resulting in a soap opera feel for most of the first 3/4 of the movie. For some reason, the director feels compelled to tell us the time of day every few minutes by flashing it in big white letters across the screen. I can't see why this was important, other than being an attempt to provide viewers with a sense of time passing; sometimes, that wouldn't be present otherwise as the plot plods along.There are a number of moments that just don't add up here. For instance, one victim is bludgeoned with a sledge hammer, but when we see the victim's head up close, there's no sign of that trauma. In another scene, a character runs down a fully lit hospital corridor (we can see the circles of light on the floor, in fact) with a flashlight in hand, looking for all the world like he's walking in the dark... but a moment later a second character walks down the same fully-lit corridor without one. These are just a couple of examples; moments of what look like directorial or editorial sloppiness crop up quite frequently throughout the movie.\"Serum\" is better in some ways than much of what goes straight-to-video as independent horror lately. In terms of technical items — sound and photography, for example — it's got a more polished look than a lot of what lands on a DVD. On the other hand, there's still a good deal of wooden acting (particularly by one of the lead characters, the mad scientist himself!) and nonsensical moments that have nothing to do with suspension of disbelief and everything to do with writing and continuity. Maybe these are things that the people involved with making this film will eventually get more experience with, though. One of the problems with low-budget independent horror lately is that the filmmakers often set out to remake more popular movies that had bigger budgets, and that almost never works out. It didn't in the case of \"Serum,\" anyhow.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab38129e60694af4a4977650afdcc699",
            "input": "This movie is the worst movie i have ever seen... it is humorous how bad it is.. the entire time i was watching it i half expected music to start and the doctor starts dancing..(i've seen porno's with a better plot) When the raptor was trying to get in the door i think someone was throwing a plastic doll against the door from about 2 feet away. But as i said it is so bad you need to watch it so that you can see just how bad it is me explaining it isn't going to do anything compared to if you watch it .. i don't recommend renting it but if it comes on TV watch it for about 30min just to see what i mean. I couldn't watch more than 30min but if you can sit through the whole thing then you have some good willpower",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cb1df583ff845d18e47708ff84182ba",
            "input": "The most important thing about this movie is the brilliant performance by Daniel Day-Lewis and Hugh O'Conor as Christy Brown, guineas artist and fighter who despite of her physical condition overcame all the odds. As a person who did work with patients with cerebral palsy, I can assure you that their performance were shockingly convincing. The enormous support that Christy got form his family, low-income, working class Dubliners, encouraged him to do the impossible and this picture depicted this support brilliantly have not read the book, but the dialogs were written wisely to capture Christy Brown's witty arrogant personality. I do recommend this movie to everyone, especially to classic movie-lovers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8cf0cf06e8454280a5b2575c0f68af6f",
            "input": "Starlift is a pleasant and interesting throwback to those all star musical pictures that every studio was putting out during the World War II years. When you've got such stars as Gary Cooper, James Cagney, Doris Day, Gordon MacRae, and Randolph Scott, etc., in the film and with such people as the Gershwin Brothers, Cole Porter, Jule Styne and Sammy Cahn supplying the music, it's an easy to take film. And the plot isn't even in the way.What plot there is involves two Air Force enlisted men, Dick Wesson and Ron Hagerthy, trying to meet Warner Brothers starlet Janice Rule using as a gimmick the fact that both come from Youngstown, Ohio and Hagerthy's father was Rule's dentist as well as half of the town's. The scheme works too well as Louella Parsons is soon putting them as an item in her column. Yes, Louella's in the film as well. She must have liked Warner Brothers or Jack Warner catered to her more than the other studio bosses because she also used this studio to publicize her Hollywood Hotel radio program back in the day.But the rest of the plot also touched on the real life efforts of Ruth Roman also playing herself to get her studio and others to do shows at the Air Force bases for the servicemen and women going to Korea. Some of the names I've mentioned and others sing and perform in a show at Travis Air Force Base where a lot of this film was shot.One specialty number was shot for the talents of Phil Harris who sing/narrates a ballad Look Out Stranger, I'm A Texas Ranger aided and assisted by Virginia Gibson, Frank Lovejoy and Gary Cooper. Yup, Cooper looked like he was having a great old time kidding his image.This is the oldest of clichés when you say they don't make them like this any more, but they really don't because you don't have a studio system that has all this talent under contract. That's one thing about the demise of the old studio system we can mourn.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c7d0d41dd5e4306923d2212a72befba",
            "input": "I am a big fan of the original book and this adaption is simply bad. First of all, it had trouble deciding if it is a kiddie toon or an adult one, that caused a strange mix of an adult story and some pretty violent scenes with a silly little duck that keeps giving \"funny\" moments in the beginning.But that's hardly important, the film is simply boring, unmoving and not true to the original story. It simply fails to transfer to the picture all the points Orwell tried to make to his book.{SPOILER}Second revolution?!! Haven't they guys learned anything?? Who be the next Napoleon then? Benjamin?!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4525154072394d1fbd2191579b42c7eb",
            "input": "Having not seen all the films released in 2002, I can't say that this is the best film of the year. I can say that it is the best film I have seen all year. Most American films featuring black people either obsess over the American preoccupation with \"race relations\", or fall into the cliches of the inner city ghetto, with every sterotype imaginable spouting ebonic-phrased slang. Antwone Fisher stands proudly alone in this regard: race is irrelevant, save for one fight that may, or may not, have been provoked by a racial slur.Antwone Fisher's story is one that should find resonance with any empathic individual. He is understatedly, and thoughtfully, portrayed by Derek Luke. Denzel Washington, while obviously using his star power to have the film made, sticks to the background for the most part, and allows the film to be the Antwone Fisher story. At a time when BET, and popular culture in general want to maintain the ghetoization of a large number of Americans (and Canadians too, you know), this is a film that speaks to the humanity in all of us. I just hope that the non-Black audience will go see this film for that humanity, rather than avoiding it because they feel that there are no characters or actors in the movie whom they can identify with. That would be a sad commentary on race-relations in North America in and of itself. ",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-922c0f6903444b29a6c1836ec690c4e4",
            "input": "Bela made 9 pics for Monogram, but it was only at THIS one, the 4TH, that things started to come together. All the rest in the series would use this one as the essential template for production, writing and character development. From here on, better or worse, the series would also deal with one essential theme: a scientist (usually Bela) makes experiments in the basement or the old house (sometimes IN the basement in the old house) that causes things to go blooey. This was also the first time that Art Director Dave Milton got a chance to spread his wings. He came on board for BLACK DRAGONS, the flick before, but THIS one is where he gets to make his craft start to click. Lewis made great atmosphere for next to nothing, and was around for all the rest of the Monograms. Casting is key in these, and it's a pretty good one B movie wise, here. You get Barclay and Harlen (also from BLACK DRAGONS),along with Russell, who would star in Lewtons' CAT PEOPLE movies..and Rosetto, from SPOOKS RUN WILD...a nice slice of Poverty Row talent. If you have limited time and budget, start with this one...it sums up everything they had learned up to this point, and gives you something to compare the rest to. The plot? Bela steals gland juice to keep his nasty wife young. They both like to sleep in coffins. If you can read that and smile, the rest will be easy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b391f39d4c364919aad7e22e6006ef5b",
            "input": "It is a pity that you cannot vote zero stars on IMDb, because I would not have hesitated! In fact I would go so far as to say that this film was in the negative stars. I, like many others, bought this film thinking that because it has Michael Madsen in it, it could be good... No chance! This film was shocking! Imagine a movie length 'The Bold and the Beautiful', well, Primal Instinct did not even come close to that good, and I had previously thought that there would be nothing worse than a movie length 'The Bold and the Beautiful'. Michael Madsen, how could you do this to us? The worst part is, I didn't fast forward a bit, I was hoping that at the end they would reveal that it was all some sort of sick joke, that they thought it would be funny to make us watch such a horribly bad film.Where do I start...? Directing - Zero Stars, Screenplay - Zero Stars, Acting - Zero Stars, Cinematography - Zero Stars, Digital Effects - Zero Stars, Production Design - Zero Stars, Make-up - Zero Stars, Casting - Zero Stars, Editing - Zero Stars, Trailer - Half a Star, Graphic Design - Half a Star, DVD Menu - Half a Star.However I think that it is very important to have seen bad films just so that you know what a really bad film is, so for that reason I am happy that I saw this film, just so that I have a bad film to put at the bottom of my list.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8fca6d62cda4d9095a23202764dac7b",
            "input": "POPEYE AND BIG FOOT **; POPEYE'S ENGINE COMPANY **; GETTING POPEYE'S GOAT **1/2I used to lap these up as a kid but, catching an episode of the series comprising three cartoons back-to-back now i.e. several years later (they preceded the theatrical screening of the pirate yarn RAIDERS OF THE SEVEN SEAS [1953]), I can see how they don't hold up all that well! The character of Popeye isn't exactly sympathetic to begin with, Olive Oyl distinctly overbearing and Bluto's antics failed to elicit much interest either – in short, the scripts were alarmingly thin, fairly awful and generally unfunny to boot. They're strictly juvenile fare, yet I doubt today's kids would even have the patience to stick with them!; furthermore, the animation style is unattractive.Taking each short per se, I guess they improved from one to the other: after the initial shock, one adapted to its mediocre quality as it were, so that the third cartoon easily results in being the most enjoyable of the lot – Popeye is entrusted with a mascot army goat whose immense appetite causes him no end of mischief (hardly original, I know, but always an amusing ploy). One interesting element here was that the shorts were bookended with Popeye delivering moralistic bits of wisdom to the kids in the audience.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e04369f7ea714fcebd399e70cfaaa653",
            "input": "I have seen this movie plenty of times and I gotta tell ya, I've enjoyed it every single time. This is Belushi's pinnacle movie in my opinion. Belushi and Lovitz are so likable and identifiable with the common man that you can't help but get involved once you start watching. The movie has a wonderful cast of stars, some already were big, and others were just getting started. It's billed as a feel good movie, and that's exactly what it is. This movie teaches you that life isn't always so bad after all. Sometimes you've just gotta look at stuff in a different perspective to fully appreciate what you already have. When you're done watching, you'll appreciate the things you have a lot more and you'll also be smiling. You can't ask for much more from a movie in my opinion, not to mention it's a hilarious movie and you'll never lose interest. Very Very underrated movie here folks.Rating from me: 10 I am out!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fc1441990c443678e65ed4fd540bd77",
            "input": "'One-Round' Jack Sander is called that because he's a carnival boxer who fights any man in the audience. If they can last one round, they win a prize--a popular way to draw customers into traveling shows long ago. Jack is in love with the ticket girl, Mabel, though her head is quickly turned when Bob Corby enters the ring to try his chances with Jack. What no one at the fight knows is that Bob is the champ, so he's able to beat Jack--though it takes him some work. As a result, Bob asks Jack to become his sparring partner and give up the carnival circuit. Later, Jack improves so much that he, too, becomes a legitimate boxer. Slowly, he works his way up the rankings until he's nearly ready to take on the Champ.In the meantime, the Champ and Mabel start running around behind Jack's back--even though by now Mabel has married Jack. So, when the final fight occurs between Jack and Bob, it's very personal and Jack is ready to kill him. Is he good enough? Will rise justifiable rage against Bob help or hinder his performance? Tune in and see.This film was directed by Alfred Hitchcock and while today this sort of film seems strange for a director known for mystery-suspense films, back in the 1920s, Hitchcock had no fixed genre which he directed or wrote (he did both for this film). In fact, in many ways this film is more indicative of Hitchcock's silent style, as a somewhat similar plot came up in one of his next silents, THE MANXMAN (also starring Carl Brisson as the wronged husband). So, while this seems a lot like a standard boxing film of the day, it was not a radical departure for this great director--even with its rather formulaic ending.Overall, while a bit predictable and having Ian Hunter playing a boxing champ seems silly, the film works well. While far from a perfect silent, it's well worth seeing and packs a nice punch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5c0e0ebe78f4fcebaa23d4a47b97eb9",
            "input": ". . . is just as good as the original. Very nearly achieves greatness because of Cundieff's remarkable ear for music and dialogue. Skewers the self-important swagger of the hip-hop poseurs. The group \"Niggaz with Hats\" (NWH) are every rap group you ever heard and utterly self-parodic. Wardrobe is unbelievable. Buy the OOP soundtrack if you can.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d0d6f894db040f19721fb5438434998",
            "input": "This film is one of the more risqué black and white films of this time in the early 1930's before the Hoyts Code was enforced. It's the story of a young beautiful woman moving to New York and making her way to the top of the business by using her body as a tool to get there.Barbara Stanwyck plays the young and beautiful Lily Powers who indeed does a fairly well job with her performance. Lily moves to New York and makes her way up the business place by sleeping with all the men. Stanwyck does an outstanding performance as being a strong woman who uses men as one time deals, hardly any emotion towards them playing them as if they were pawns. Lily Powers is a woman who doesn't have love on her mind just power and money.I thought this movie to be a little bit different then other films I have seen because there is hardly any background music heard. I believe it is only because this is when people were first introduced to live sound and dialogue between the people of the film. The few times the music is heard is during the beginning as we are shown how she makes her way up the chain. The filming and different scenes were something fantastic! The director of this film did all the right angles and all the right tricks, making this film full of realism.This film was all together an alright movie.The ending to this movie wasn't as good as it should have been, but it didn't entirely ruin it. Baby Face had its slow moving scenes throughout the movie, and perhaps a few predictable parts such as who she will sleep with next. But this is a lovable movie that can be watched more then once, and suggested to some people and friends.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-279a3dc954144fe28786ccee95a61b9c",
            "input": "I didn't mind all the walking. People really did walk places back then. It loaned an air of authenticity to this period piece and some perspective on the technology of the Martians. I too was disappointed by the effects, in particular the \"Thunderchild\" scene, which I regard as one of the most exciting in the book. But I can't praise this film enough, for its faithfulness to Wells's story! It's about time. The actors are likable and the performances are charming. Also this film is very much worth seeing just to hear Jamie Hall's truly great musical score. It was interesting to see the same actor play both the writer and his brother in London.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b406eefb06ba454eb30e0c3c1ec3fd2b",
            "input": "No, this wasn't one of the ten worst films of the 1980's, but it certainly skirts the bottom 100 somewhere. This movie looks like it was put on the shelf for two or three years and then released in 1981. How else would you explain special effects pre-dating \"An American Werewolf in London,\" disco still being considered cool, and Ronald Reagan not being the 40th President of the United States? While we're at it, let's not overlook those 1970's hairstyles in the 1950's and '60's. I've seen more of that here than in \"Happy Days\" & \"Laverne & Shirley\" combined.The one woman who elevates this movie to the \"so bad, it's good\" category was the late, great Elizabeth Hartman, but just barely. Biff plays as Miss Montgomery, the mousey high school teacher who becomes a sexpot, a stereotype that's been done to death and is still being churned out by Hollywood today, but even as a \"hot chick\" she retains her mousey qualities. Her call for help is evidence of this. She also looks much better as Miss Wimp. \"Seven bucks at the beauty parlor, shot to hell.\" She wasn't kidding.This isn't to say that there aren't any good parts elsewhere, they're just few and far between, and I'm not just saying that because I like Hartman. Incidentally, \"Teen Wolf\" was better than this. \"Teen Wolf Too\" was better than this, and that wasn't even so good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4cb60229f284c298c99a6a94e0cf4a3",
            "input": "According to the book The Last of the Cowboy Heroes which is about Joel McCrea, Audie Murphy, and Randolph Scott, the author says that Albuquerque was the only film he personally did not review because he claimed it was lost. Hadn't been seen in years.Good thing for western fans somebody was doing some spring cleaning at Paramount because a print was apparently found and now it's out on the open market. Albuquerque is a pretty good western too with Scott involved in a family feud with Uncle George Cleveland.George Cleveland sends for his nephew Randolph Scott with the intention of making him part of his freighting business, headquartered in the fast growing settlement of Albuquerque. Cleveland is more than just a business owner, he's the town boss which he runs from a wheelchair. He even has the sheriff in his pocket. Randolph Scott is not a cowboy hero for nothing. That includes not backing relatives up when they're villains. He goes to work for a rival outfit headed by brother and sister Russell Hayden and Catherine Craig.Cleveland is full of all kinds of tricks and he even sends for a western Mata Hari in the person of Barbara Britton to worm her way into the confidence of his rivals. Barbara's great as the homespun vixen who develops her own agenda.Randolph Scott's original home studio was Paramount, it was where his first studio contract was with. Albuquerque marked the last film he ever did for Paramount and they gave him a good one.Note also Lon Chaney, Jr., who is George Cleveland's chief henchman, a rather loathsome bully of a man and Gabby Hayes, who is just Gabby Hayes.Albuquerque must have been loved by Republicans across the nation in 1948 with its chief villain as a town boss who rules from a wheelchair. A certain Democrat from a wheelchair had made hash of them for four straight presidential elections and he was gone. They had high hopes of winning the White House that year too, but things went awry and they had to settle for an ersatz boss getting his comeuppance in Albuquerque. I'm not sure why Cleveland was in a wheelchair since nothing was really made of it in the plot. My guess is he was injured and played the part that way because he had to.Still Albuquerque must have had great appeal to the GOP market.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5bca7572157c4283986252c078adefcc",
            "input": "My guess is that this director/writer had something to say. Let's see, what it could have been... a. Frog storms would be creepy? b. can I get someone like Tom Cruise to say the \"C\" word many times and look like a bad Patrick Rafter? c. Cast my wife and get her to say the \"F\" word every 2 seconds. This aside I really liked the beginning and the frog storm. The rest was a relentless, over-long (under-edited), over-indulgent failure. Glad so many of you enjoyed it! ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9aa23ceafa5480bafec508e2800da74",
            "input": "I've read comments that you shouldn't watch this film if you're looking for stirring Shakespearian dialogue. This is true, unfortunately, because all the stirring dialogue, this wonderful play contains, has been cut, and replaced with songs. I've read this play, and recently was lucky enough to see it performed, at it remains one of my favourite Shakespearian Comedies, but this movie seems to take all that I like about it away. The Princess, though no doubt doing what she was directed to do, had no regal bearing, and all the girls seemed to lose the cleverness of their characters - also affected by unwise cuts, which not only took away the female characters already sparse dialogue, but took comments out of context - it was a little unnerving to hear the Princess proclaim; \"We are wise girls to mock our lovers so!\", when mocking had not taken place at all. The news reels throughout the film also disrupted the flow, and took away many excellent scenes, as they showed the information in the scenes after them, and were in modern phrasing. In conclusion, an excellent play, ruined by an odd concept, and unwise cuts. Kenneth, I usually love what you do. What were you thinking?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-463865d003564acb82cef89674a45821",
            "input": "En route to a small town that lays way off the beaten track (but which looks suspiciously close to a freeway), a female reporter runs into a strange hitch-hiker who agrees to help direct her to her destination. The strange man then recounts a pair of gruesome tales connected to the area: in the first story, an adulterous couple plot to kill the woman's husband, but eventually suffer a far worse fate themselves when they are attacked by a zombie; and in the second story, a group of campers have their vacation cut short when an undead outlaw takes umbrage at having his grave peed on.The Zombie Chronicles is an attempt by writer Garrett Clancy and director Brad Sykes at making a zombie themed anthology—a nice idea, but with only two stories, it falls woefully short. And that's not the only way in which this low budget gore flick fails to deliver: the acting is lousy (with Joe Haggerty, as the tale-telling Ebenezer Jackson, giving one of the strangest performances I have ever seen); the locations are uninspired; the script is dreary; there's a sex scene with zero nudity; and the ending.... well, that beggars belief.To be fair, some of Sykes' creative camera-work is effective (although the gimmicky technique employed as characters run through the woods is a tad overused) and Joe Castro's cheapo gore is enthusiastic: an ear is bitten off, eyeballs are plucked out, a face is removed, brains are squished, and there is a messy decapitation. These positives just about make the film bearable, but be warned, The Zombie Chronicles ain't a stroll in the park, even for seasoned viewers of z-grade trash.I give The Zombie Chronicles 2/10, but generously raise my rating to 3 since I didn't get to view the film with the benefit of 3D (although I have a sneaking suspicion that an extra dimension wouldn't have made that much of a difference).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cdfc8dd707724cbd8dd90b5676c68c85",
            "input": "This is the worst movie I have ever seen. I was going to get up and leave at Tape 4 but I stuck it out. I now consider myself a Masochist! Afghanistan? Come on guys! Who's the idiot who forgot to hide the Sanskrit billboards? I thought the lead actor(George Calil) was particularly inept. Apart from the bad acting and over zealous camera shake, I thought using the events of 9/11 as a reason to make \"Larson the Lunatic Implodes, all over a screen near you\" disgraceful and irreverent to the victims of 9/11. Using a phone call from Larson's wife, Sarah, supposedly from one of the terrorist held planes on that day, was appalling. The camera shake didn't make me feel sick, that cold hearted stunt did.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09eabc59dbcf414db70e875ed206d65a",
            "input": "I have NOT seen this movie, but I must. Having read all three of Thor Heyerdahl's books (Kon Tiki, Ra and Aku Aku) I am actively looking for a copy of this movie.The thesis that Peruvians migrated to Polynesia is alive and well. Considering that this crew had NO GPS, and only an old fashioned valve (tube) radio with a 6-watt output, their voyage was heroic to say the least.Please reply to this message if you can tell me the location of a copy of this video.I would be interested in buying it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d24fa106123418b865e5509d5127f77",
            "input": "How they got Al Pacino to play in this movie is beyond me. This movie is absolutely terrible. I discovered, after reading some of the other reviews, that a couple of people actually enjoyed this film, which deeply puzzles me, because I do not see how anyone in their right mind could possibly enjoy a movie as awful as Revolution. It's not just that it's a bad movie, with a lame plot and overall strangeness that is extremely unpleasant, but it seems as if the filmmakers were either mentally retarded (which is a very possible explanation as to why this movie sucks like it does, though it probably still sucks even compared to other films made by retards) or deliberately made every illogical decision to make this movie suck as much as possible. For example, we see Donald Sutherland running around with a huge, fat ugly mole on his face. He does not normally have a mole. The mole does not add to his character. It is extremely ugly and distracting. It's not like Robert De Niro's mole; it's much worse. Why the hell has he got that mole? It's as if the filmmakers just said, \"Let's see, how could we make this movie even worse than it already is? I know, let's give Mr. Sutherland a giant, ugly-ass mole right on his face.\"Another example of the filmmakers' stupidity is the character Ned. We see, for the first three-quarters of the movie, young Ned. At one point, \"six months later\" appears on the screen. We see Ned again, and it is, of course, the same actor playing the boy. Five minutes later, \"three weeks later\" appears on the screen, and all of a sudden we've got a different actor playing as the now older Ned. What, do they think we're idiots? Good God! Again, it's like the filmmakers are saying, \"How can we possibly make it any worse? I don't think we can...Oh wait! I just had a terrible idea!\" I know a kid doesn't grow much in half a year, which is fine, but he at least grows more than he does in three weeks. Just don't get another actor to play Ned, or at least get him to play the five minutes when he's three weeks younger. Furthermore, the kid who plays the \"older\" Ned does not look any older than \"young\" Ned. As a matter of fact, he just looks completely different, much skinnier, and no taller or older than the original actor, which is very confusing, as I, like any rational human being, thought at first that it was a new and different character.What, did the first kid die while they were filming the movie? Because he was in it for the first hour and a half, and then all of a sudden, three weeks later, the guy from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is playing Ned for the last five minutes of the movie. And even if the original actor did die, the filmmakers should have at least gotten an actor who looks like him to play the remainder of his role, and re-shoot the measly five minutes of \"six months later\" scenes. Better yet, just scrap the movie completely, never finish it and never release, never even tell anybody about it, because by that point they should have realized that their movie sucks and in finishing it they would only waste more money and time and succeed in making one of the worst movies of all time.I'm not saying that this movie is so bad you shouldn't watch it; it's so bad that you SHOULD watch it, just to see how badly it sucks. It's terrible, terrible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb8ae131cc5b4456993019611701da6b",
            "input": "Wow, here it finally is; the action \"movie\" without action. In a real low-budget setting (don't miss the hilarious flying saucers flying by a few times) of a future Seattle we find a no-brain hardbody seeking to avenge her childhood.There is nothing even remotely original or interesting about the plot and the actors' performance is only rivalled in stupidity by the attempts to steal from other movies, mainly \"Matrix\" without having the money to do it right. Yes, we do get to see some running on walls and slow motion shoot-outs (45 secs approx.) but these scenes are about as cool as the stupid hardbody's attempts at making jokes about male incompetence now and then.And, yes, we are also served a number of leads that lead absolutely nowhere, as if the script was thought-out by the previously unseen cast while shooting the scenes.Believe me, it is as bad as it possibly can get. In fact, it doesn't deserve to be taken seriously, but perhaps I can make some of you not rent it and save your money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-502b29a448cc4b74bd43ba861b09ee7d",
            "input": "It is very rare for a film to appeal to viewers of all ages--to children for a fine narrative and a wonderful, colorful production, and, to adults, for a literate script, fine production values, good casting/acting, all bound together with a fine Rozsa score. Two roughly contemporary films accomplish this--\"Thief of Baghdad\" (1940) and \"The Adventures of Robin Hood\" (1938). Some of the back story on this production is fascinating. This production, commenced in England in the summer of 1939, moved to Hollywood, and proved a cover for British intelligence efforts! The producer, Alexander Korda, was subsequently knighted in 1942. Here is a unique case of the intersection of art, commerce, and politics! By all means, secure a good CD of this film for your library!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99d9704d701a42d9b59ff4c3e087b305",
            "input": "Hello, I was alanrickmaniac. I'm a Still Crazy-holic. It was just another movie I watched partly on TV. Then I had to get the video tape to finally find out how it ends. Then I wanted the DVD, because the tape showed first signs of decay after a few weeks. After the DVD I had to lay my hands on the soundtrack. Then on several film posters and the film script. Right now it has become that worse that I try to push other people into addiction with my website and Still Crazy parties. How could that happen? What drove me into addiction? OK, it's one of those funny but somehow sad and melancholic intelligent comedies like only the British can produce. Alright, the movie is worlds apart from stuff like ''This Is Spinal Tap'', because of the characters, that aren't childish or ultra cool, but real. This is a story about men getting older, too. A story about men getting along with each other. Or don't. It contains some of the best actors possible. Tim Spall. Stephen Rea. Bruce Robinson. Jimmy Nail. And Bill Nighy. Bill Nighy who puts on one of the best performances I've ever seen in a film.Good, the soundtrack is unbelievable. Foreigner's Mick Jones has written the songs for the imaginary band Strange Fruit. Jimmy Nail who plays bass-man Les Wickes and Bill Nighy portraying the egocentric but awkward singer Ray Simms are really singing. We know that about Jimmy Nail, but if you've only heard Bill Nighy's singing in \"Love Actually\", you have no idea how great and powerful his voice is. Well, you'll fever for every scene to come for the x-th time, especially those concert scenes. You'd die to be able to really stand in the dancing crowd when Strange Fruit is doing \"All Over The World\", singing on the top of your lungs. You long to cry and celebrate with thousands of people the rebirth of the real Strange Fruit at Wisbech's festival stage. It's hard but... I'm addicted to this film. I'm addicted to Strange Fruit. If there's a world where this band really exists I'd like to move there. Got Still Crazy... anyone?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-522e59be44b346cf8077781d927b31b9",
            "input": "The deceptive cover, title and very small hidden print of Power of Prayer tricked me into renting this movie.It started out really well and pulled me in. I REALLY liked it. Between 1/3 and 3/4's of it, the film started throwing in things that were not set up and made no sense. My first thought was, \"This is not written by someone who knows how to tell a story.\" I ended up re-watching parts of the movie, thinking I had missed something.By the time I reached the last 1/5 of the movie, it was all BORING, ANNOYING, RELIGION THUMPING DIALOG that made no sense, said nothing, and was annoying to listen to; I turned off the sound and did a fast forward to the end.Don't waste your time with this flick.Beware of DVDs labeled Whitlow Films and Level Path Productions.And I'm a practicing Catholic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d33901d594549fa82df75cf235af7e9",
            "input": "There's some very clever humour in this film, which is both a parody of and a tribute to actors. However, after a while it just seems an exercise in style (notwithstanding great gags such as Balasko continuing the part of Dussolier, and very good acting by all involved) and I was wondering why Blier made this film. All is revealed in the ending, when Blier, directing Claude Brasseur, gets a phone call from his dad (Bernard Blier) - from heaven, and gets the chance to say how much he misses him. An effective emotional capper and obviously heartfelt. But there isn't really sufficient dramatic tension or emotional involvement to keep the rest of the film interesting throughout it's entire running time. Some really nice scenes and sequences, however, and anyone who likes these 'mosntres sacrés' of the French cinema should get a fair amount of enjoyment out of this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a939b2d45ce4c828295caf06bc63041",
            "input": "To the small minority seen here praising this film GET SERIOUS. I know it's down to peoples personal opinion at the end of the day, but anyone with more than a couple of brain cells can surely see that this is total rubbish. So bad it does not deserve to be part of this franchise. I can only assume those saying how great this is are friends with somebody involved in the film and are trying to give their career a push. Poor in every way, don't con people by saying otherwise. Storyline is a weak rehash of the previous entries, script is likewise. Attempts to hide the lack of originality by using a girl instead (WOW!) don't disguise the film-makers lack of ideas,and there is sadly a complete lack of any scares. Absolutely no redeeming qualities, utter utter turd. I've awarded this pair of chancers one mark simply for having had the nous to get someone to fund this piece of crap. They must have put more effort into that than they did into actually making the film. Shame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f05c69e7b35467e849ced52656bbb75",
            "input": "This is definitely one of Jet's best efforts. Few actors are able to play the stoic as Jet Li can. The action is rapid-fire, and special-effects boosted for intensity purposes. As a result, it may take Americans a little off-guard. A little suspension of disbelief goes a long way in a Jet Li film. I feel that it is an excellent introduction to Jet's work and look forward to further masterpieces (especially Fist of Legend) making it into the US market. A nice mixture of gunplay and physical conflict will satisfy most action flick enthusiasts.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee1a6803d4144d3cb312b39f2eb0235a",
            "input": "The author of numerous novels, plays, and short stories, W. Somerset Maugham (1874-1965) was considered among the world's great authors during his lifetime, and although his reputation has faded over the years his work continues to command critical respect and a large reading public. Published in 1944, THE RAZOR'S EDGE is the tale of a World War I veteran whose search for spiritual enlightenment flies in the face of shallow western values. It was Maugham's last major novel--and it was immensely popular. Given that the novel's conflicts are internalized spiritual and philosophical issues, it was also an extremely odd choice for a film version--but Darryl F. Zannuck of 20th Century Fox fell in love with the book and snapped up the screen rights shortly after publication.According to film lore, THE RAZOR'S EDGE was to be directed by the legendary George Cukor from a screenplay by Maugham himself--and it does seem that Maugham wrote an adaptation. When the film went into production, however, Cukor was replaced by Edmund Goulding, a director less known for artistic touch than a workman-like manner, and the Maugham script was replaced with one by Lamar Trotti, the author of such memorable screenplays as THE OXBOW INCIDENT. Tyrone Power, recently returned from military service during World War II, was cast as the spiritually conflicted Larry Darrell; Gene Tierney, one of the great beauties of her era, was cast as socialite Isabell Bradley. The supporting cast was particularly notable, including Herbert Marshall, Anne Baxter, Clifton Webb, Lucille Watson, and Elsa Lanchester. Both budget and shooting schedule were lavish, and when the film debuted in 1946 it was greatly admired by public and critics alike.But time has a way of putting things into perspective. Seen today, THE RAZOR'S EDGE is indeed a beautifully produced film--but that aside the absolute best one can say for it is that it achieves a fairly consistent mediocrity. As in most cases, the major problem is the script. Although it is reasonably close to Maugham's novel in terms of plot, it is noticeably off the mark in terms of character and it completely fails to capture the fundamental issues that drive the story. We are told that Larry is in search of enlightenment; we are told that he receives it; we are told he acts on it--but in spite of the occasional and largely superficial comment we are never really told anything about the spiritual, artistic, philosophical, and intellectual processes behind any of it. We are most particularly never told anything significant about the nature of the enlightenment itself. It has the effect of cutting off the story at its knees.We are left with the shell of Maugham's plot, which centers on the relationship between Larry and Isabell, a woman Larry loves but leaves due to the growing ideological riff that opens up between them. Tyrone Power and Gene Tierney were more noted for physical beauty than talent, but both could turn in good performances when they received solid directorial and script support. Unfortunately, that does not happen here; they are extremely one-note and Power is greatly miscast to boot. Fortunately, the supporting cast is quite good, with Herbert Marshall, Clifton Webb, and Lucille Watson particularly so; the then-famous performance by Anne Baxter, however, has not worn as well as one would hope.With a running time of just under two and a half hours, the film also feels unnecessarily long. There is seemingly endless cocktail party-type banter, and indeed the entire India sequence (which reads as faintly hilarious) would have been better cut entirely--an odd situation, for this is the very sequence intended as the crux of the entire film. Regardless of the specific scene, it all just seems to go on and on to no actual point.As for the DVD itself, the film has not been remastered, but the print is extremely good, and while the bonus package isn't particularly memorable neither is noticeably poor. When all is said and done, I give THE RAZOR'S EDGE four stars for production values and everyone's willingness to take on the material--but frankly, this a film best left Power and Tierney fans, who will enjoy it for the sake of the stars, and those whose ideas about spiritual enlightenment are as vague as the film itself.GFT, Amazon Reviewer",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e9c2864371e4ae3adf60549f5eb0bab",
            "input": "One of the less widely lauded of recent Asian period action affairs Gojoe is an at first slow and often curious but overall pretty terrific offering, exciting, layered and beautiful. I'm sad to say I know virtually nothing of the Buddhist philosophy or Japanese history and legend that surrounds this film so its deeper meanings are lost on me, but even without contextual knowledge this is still rich fare, taking a traditional fantasy structure into a, impactful higher plane. The story is of Benkei, a warrior monk and perhaps demon who seeks enlightenment by destroying the demon of Gojoe Bridge: Prince Shanao, himself a mortal seeker after his own higher plane but this time the power of demons. Thus the film becomes a matter of illusions and in Benkei's case, indecision, a conflict in which the real goal is self knowledge, for Benkei to come to terms with his true nature and for Prince Shanao to come face to face with the nature of what he seeks to become. Benkei is even more hampered here by the fact that his dark nature makes him fundamentally at odds with the world, even when not in open conflict he is never at ease. Director Sogo Ishii handles this one as an epic, with measured pace, camera work always stylish and often frenzied, without neglecting the need for more sedate moments to let the location sink in, there is also great use of lighting and fog to give an ethereal atmosphere, there is an air of fantasy to much of the film but outside of the overtly supernatural moments it is a down and dirty fantasy with more period fell than flights of fancy. The cinematography of Makoto Watanbe is important here, vivid and detailed, a richly evocative affair. Actingwise Daisuke Ryu is dignified and powerful with a mysterious savagery as Benkei, while Tadanobu Asano has a driven, cold arrogance as Prince Shanao. Of the leads Masatoshi Nagase rounds things out as an ordinary man, smart and cynical but still unaware of just exactly what the stakes are. The film all fits together well, it is however a touch flabby at times, it begins slowly, some shots are a little drawn out and the epic fight scenes at times go on longer than strictly necessary. As for the fighting it is filmed frenetic rather than for actual moves, it has artistic impact but may disappoint regular action fans, often obscured by objects, flashing blades and fast moving individuals, whirling with deadly force through their adversaries are the order of the day, it is invigorating to watch but in the end I could have done with a little more traditionalism. There is some unfortunate cgi bloodshed as well, it somewhat works in the context but is still distracting. Overall though I found this to be a pretty great film, its not one for regular action fans or swordplay enthusiasts seeking another Azumi, rather a deeper and more mystical beast, its ending in particular will not go down well with fans of the more generic wing of such fare. But as for myself it really hit the spot and for those more adventurously inclined it might do so too. Well recommended at any rate.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe07abbab8104302b37a9df9e49f0786",
            "input": "This game was really great and quite a challenge. It has a great, spooky story line and the graphics are also very good. I would recommend this game to all Horror fans and is very gripping from start to finish. The only problem with this game is that i would have liked more weapons but thats just me. A truly great game for RPG and Shoot'em'up fans.>",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-555d23291a5345c9934baaad6e3882cf",
            "input": "If one sits down to watch Unhinged, it is probably because its advertisements, video boxes, whatever, scream that it was banned in the UK for over 20 years (as virtually every video nasty does). It's true; exploitation and taboo excites people and draws them in with their promise of controversy. Being an exploitation fan, however, none of this was new to me. The advertisements that scream that the film was banned in the UK don't necessarily make me want to watch it; in fact, the first thing that usually pops into my head is how disgustingly paranoid British censors are. How I came to viewing this then is simple: it promised gore and it was only $6.99. The price alone alerted me not to have any hopes of this being the next Halloween, but a cheap padding of your DVD collection never hurts. I did force myself, however, to watch it all in one sitting, because I find that deciding to save the rest for another day makes you even less inspired to finish it. So anyway, after 90 minutes of Unhinged, I found that I had come across the cheapest sleeping aid in existence. I think the distributors could make a fortune if they simply changed their marketing technique.The layout of Unhinged is of any common slasher from the 80s. There's unnecessary shower scenes and exploitative gore. That's about it. Anyway, it starts with a group of three attractive co-eds crashing their car on the way to a concert. Though two of them (Terry and Nancy) are okay, one (Gloria) is severely injured and is out of commission for the rest of the movie. They are rescued and receive shelter at a mansion (that happens to have no phone, of course) with rather strange occupants: Marion is a middle-aged woman with a man-hating mother who constantly accuses Marion of sneaking men into the house in order to sleep with them (echoes of Psycho?). She also happens to have a crazy brother Carl who lives in the woods, because her mother's hatred for men is so intense that she refuses to let him stay in the house. After hanging with Marion for awhile, Terry (our \"hero\") and Nancy decide they must contact their parents. Despite everyone's warnings, Nancy braves the dangerous woods to make it to a phone (her fate is not hard to predict). After that, we see Gloria again, who is then promptly butchered with an ax. When Terry discovers that Gloria has disappeared from her room, she decides something isn't right with this picture and sets out to find her missing friends. That may be easier said than done, however, with crazy Carl lurking around… After viewing Unhinged, I read an overwhelming number of reviews declaring that Unhinged worked perfectly because it took its time to build its subject matter that created real tension by the time the moment of truth comes at the end. Normally, I do not drag other people's opinions into my reviews (especially when they contradict my views), but in this case, I was so puzzled by their reactions that I thought it would be relevant to mention. This is because in actuality, the film crawls. Normally for the slow-building tactic to work, the audience must have a strong sense that the characters are in danger. Oh sure, we see two of them get murdered, but between that are endless scenes of conversation and boredom. We are aware that there's a killer on the loose, but this is only focused on three times in the film; that means there's no reason to fear for the victims. Instead, the film's events are explained not by the actions of the characters, but are drawn out for us by perpetual talking. If there's one thing I can assure you from watching this, it's that scenes of characters merely conversing with each other for 75 minutes are very tedious. None of this is helped by the atrocious acting. It seems that this was another case of the director needing actors and decided to gather his friends around instead of finding anyone with experience.Of course, I'd be a liar if I said there wasn't one part of the movie that I enjoyed. Specifically, the ending was one of the best I've ever seen in a slasher film; you just do not expect that to happen. Just knowing that the director had the balls to do something like that is spectacular. Ah, I won't spoil it for you, nor will I say that the ending completely makes up for the rest of the slow-moving film, but it definitely will get your attention. Other than that, the other two murder scenes bring at least some faster paced material, but it's not like you couldn't tell exactly who was going to die fifteen minutes into the film. Anyone looking for a bloodbath will be disappointed, however; those are the only scenes of gore present. That and, of course, no one scene can save an entire movie. I normally preach the doctrine that as long as there's action, the worse a movie is, the better it gets. Unhinged only grasps one part of this concept. The whole film just feels Luke-warm; there's potential alright, but the director either wasn't experienced enough to make it work or just didn't know what the hell he was doing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2842270df2c4cd08c1312dd2d511b3b",
            "input": "A series of painfully unfunny skits that seem to go on forever and a day. Not as mind-numbingly awful as say \"Freddy Got Fingered\" or \"Lost Reality\", but that in NO way is an endorsement in ANY way, sense or form. Features the worst rhyming clown ever. Any most if it isn't offensive to anybody but the most prudish or politically correct. It also has the worst song parody EVER put on film, the WORST Arnold impersonation EVER (not just the worst put on film, literally the worst EVER). I have NO clue why Karen Black, Micheal Clarke Duncan, or Slash would star in this (the reasons I watched this in the first place) The only thing mildly amusing was Dickman. In conclusion I would't recommend this film to ANYONE, but the people who are making it their mission in life to get this in the Bottom 250 on this site are pathetic. Do something notable with you lives people. Plus if it's true the Church of Scientalogy hates him, he can't be ALL bad.My Grade: D",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31a3e5f9048b44ae9b74c6e024a03062",
            "input": "Guinea Pig: The Devil's Experiment is without a doubt ***** stars on first view, its a raw realistic creepy and disturbing look into the dark side of human nature. This movie gets right to the point, you may be thinking what point? The point is to satisfy fan's of just extreme violence and gore. This movie has some gore, more or less just torturing a women violently. There are really only 3 scene's that could be considered gore. I'll tell you one thing though Guinea Pig: The Devil's Experiment makes Hostile look like Sesame Street. If you thought Hostile was a crazy brutal disturbing torture flick then you ain't seen the half of it until you've seen Guinea Pig: The Devil's Experiment.Movie Rating 0-5, Gore 0-10Guinea Pig: The Devil's Experiment (Uncut) ***** (7)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88472327f13b487284373778c5bb4386",
            "input": "This su*k! Why do they have to make movies that they must know su*k from the beginning? I mean, look at Alien from 1977. If the movie you´r about to make is not better than anything made billions of years before, why make it? I had problems with the plot and who the main character was. That's not good either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67579706c01f4dd59076e3ce8f4d3128",
            "input": "From reading all of the comments posted here on IMDb, this movie seems to get ragged on a lot, but I didn't think it was THAT bad. I've seen much worse, actually.\"The House Where Evil Dwells\" is a ghost story about a husband and his wife, Ted and Laura Fletcher, and their daughter, Amy, who move into an old house in Japan. Little do they know, a Japanese ninja brutally murdered his wife and her lover, and then killed himself 100 years earlier with a samurai sword. As strange things happen in the house, the ghosts of the previous residents begin to possess the bodies of the living, and plan on re-enacting the bloody murder that took place 100 years back.I saw this movie and decided to give it a chance, from the cover it looked like a decent ghost story. It was routine, and it was corny, but I've seen worse in my day. The ghost sequences were a little over-done, we get to see the translucent blue-tinted figures randomly pop up randomly around the family, and take over their bodies. To be honest, the ghosts in this movie kind of reminded me of the ghosts in the Haunted Mansion ride at Disneyland. I may be mistaken, but after watching this, it seemed to me that the Japanese horror film \"Ju-On: The Grudge\" and the American remake of that film ripped this off a little. The old Japanese home where a brutal murder took place, ghostly activity, curses put on the home, etc. But I may be wrong.To sum it up, this is a pretty corny ghost story. Don't go out of your way to see it, but if you like this kind of thing and it happens to come on TV you can give it a shot. 4/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4c9126fa93b4edaab7f5d745008d3e7",
            "input": "Because others have gone to the trouble of summarizing the plot, I'd like to mention a few points about this film. There may be spoilers here; I don't care enough to filter them out.- Given the film's low budget, the creature design was quite good. It's actually nice to see a direct-to-video horror film that's not slathered with awful CGI. Unfortunately the digital film quality's quite grainy in places, and it's most noticeable in the well-lit white halls of the asylum.- Ridiculous lighting design plagues parts of this film, to say nothing of the variations in the passage of time. I understand the director might have been trying to simulate dementia, but in order for this to be effective consistent time flow needed to be established. As-is, it merely seems amateurish.- Plot twists were numerous but consistently predictable. I neither had a doubt in my mind of the identity of the robed cultists, nor of the fact that some kind of lame evil-trumps-good development would surface at the end.- This may seem like quibbling, but characters in this film reliably fail to employ any kind of common sense. First of all, regulatory commissions would be all over a mental health center that unilaterally declared all patient and employee deaths cardiac arrest-induced. Why would the head psychiatrist also be capable of performing autopsies? Why wasn't a plot point made of these impressive qualifications, or of his introduction to his odd choice of religion? What's the background? What's supposed to make us care about anyone in this? And just as importantly, who in their right mind would go through the introduction to the place, see everything that was so frighteningly wrong with it, and then conclude that it was still a fine place to pursue a residency? This film didn't even respect its characters enough to give their intelligence the benefit of the doubt.Bottom line: See The Wicker Man instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-361d27bfc8b9458a9c00ca90efb78c1c",
            "input": "I got this movie from Netflix after a long waiting time, so I was anticipating it greatly when it arrived. My worst fears were that it would be plodding, as well as... well, you know what all the screaming fan girls were babbling about? GACKTnHYDE=hawt yaoi love? That sort of thing? Dreading it. I was very, very pleasantly surprised. The movie was surprisingly watchable, even if the filming and music did make it feel like someone was going to bust out a pair of nun-chucks every two scenes, and the acting on Gackt's part was quite good. Hyde, being, um, Hyde, acted as a quasi-romantic friend/gang member character that anyone who saw him on stage would hardly be surprised by. He's one of my two major beefs with the film itself. But the rest of the cast (including the child actors in the opening scene) were very good at doing what they did- which was, mostly, get shot at and yelled at. But my second problem was very minor, having to do with the goriness. It seemed way too suspense-horror to me- like every scene where someone is shot they either slump over, really most sincerely dead, or lay there burbling for a rather long time. But Sho just... takes the shots, repeatedly, keels over, bubbles a LOT while he talks, and makes Hyde cry. All in all, if you're a fan of any of the actors or just a j-film fan, it's definitely worth a watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b51af3b1adfe4ecaa1583ad6b338e083",
            "input": "Lately I have been watching a lot of Tom Hanks films and old Chaplin films and even some of Rowan Atkinson's early Bean performances, and it seems that all of them have their own unique charm that permeates throughout their work, something that allows them to identify with audience members of all ages, in a way that just makes you feel good. A Bug's Life has that same charm, it has a connection with real life that allows us to easily suspend disbelief and accept a lot of talking insects, because even though they talk, they still ACT just like real bugs. It's like the team that made the movie found a way to bring us into the mind of a child and allow us to think like them, to imagine bugs the way a young mind does.Honey, I Shrunk The Kids was one of my favorite films when I was younger, and to me, A Bug's Life is like a more realistic version of that movie, if only because the animation is so breathtaking and this style of story-telling just opens up so many more narrative possibilities. I try not to compare it to something like Toy Story (which I still maintain is the best computer animated film ever made), because the story of A Bug's Life is not quite as good as Toy Story's, but then again, almost nothing is. The important thing is that it is still wonderful fun. The story concerns a colony of hard working bugs who have an impressively developed society, mostly geared around building a harvest of food, most of which will go to the tyrannical grasshoppers, vastly superior in strength and general meanness, and hopefully still leave enough left over for the bugs to make it through the winter. We are treated to some visits from the grasshoppers, who make it clear that if the bugs provide an unsatisfactory quantity of food, the consequences will be dire. And incidentally, the similarities between this crippling level of food extraction is strikingly similar to Mao Tse-tung's vicious forcing of food from his own people during the \"Great Leap Forward…\"The fun and excitement begins when Flik, the main character, sets off on a quest to find a gang of appropriate warrior bugs to come back and help defend the colony against the grasshoppers. You see, he spilled all of the amassed food and placed everyone in great danger, so he feels it's his responsibility, but he inadvertently ends up hiring a struggling group of insect circus performers. Great for the audience, not so great for the safety of the clan. The movie was released back in the late 90s, when so many films seemed to have been coming out in twos, like Armageddon and Deep Impact, Independence Day and The Arrival, A Bug's Life and Antz, etc. Comparisons between A Bug's Life and Antz are inevitable, although it seems clear to me that A Bug's Life is by far the superior film, and not only because it doesn't star Woody Allen stuttering and whining through the lead role. This is great family fun!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d7a7558aa9345868f37686ed2fa631c",
            "input": "Okay, I've tried and I've tried, but I STILL DON'T GET this Guy Maddin thing. Tales From the Gimli Hospital left me cold, that movie about the Austrian villagers and the one about the Ice Nymph were pretty to look but lacking in the story department...and this nudie movie about abortion and hockey is just boring. I'm glad Maddin has an appreciation for silent film, but I dislike his films for the same reason I dislike the films of Quentin Tarantino: they're empty homages to better, more imaginative films--films that advanced the art form or broke new ground--and are all style and no substance. No amount of jump cuts and odd camera angles can disguise the fact that Maddin is an unoriginal David Lynch wannabe, though he DOES have one advantage over Tarantino: he generally doesn't write embarrassing dialogue, because most of his films rely on intertitles. The bottom line is, Maddin's schtick is clever clever film-making for aspiring film majors.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d720f7f06f3e413086b9afcc579c2f59",
            "input": "I loved this movie! It was all I could do not to break down into tears while watching it, but it is really very uplifting. I was struck by the performance of Ray Liotta, but especially the talent of Tom Hulce portraying Ray's twin brother who is mentally slow due to a tragic and terrible childhood event. But Tom's character, though heartbreaking, knows no self pity and is so full of hope and life. This is a great movie, don't miss it!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fbbb90001ec49c59ce9eedf1115a3b7",
            "input": "he was my hero for all time until he went along with {if you can call it a movie} I went to the show to watch it and come out and not just asking for me money back but asked for double the money thats how bad my hero's acting and the hole thing was.............I can't believe that Steven Segal's career has hit so low that he has been reduced to making 4th rate films with 5th rate secondary actors. I watched this moving expecting to see him beet the crap out of some people the way he usually does. When he is reduced to using a single judo chop between the shoulder blades to take out an opponent and the guy falls like a ton of bricks something is wrong.The plot is unbelievable as a movie, and even if you excuse the visuals, and had read this story as a novel, you'd be left wondering why you had even picked up the book.Steven Segal goes through the motions and seems as if he is only doing this because he is under obligation. He shows no effort and no enthusiasm, and in some scenes he doesn't show up at all.I hate to repeat other peoples comments, but the use of stock footage for cut scenes and for visuals of the aircrafts in flight is pathetic. The condition of those scenes chopped in, is shaky and scenes themselves seemed to have deteriorated over time. The zappruder film showing President John F Kennedy being assassinated is steadier and cleaner.My honest opinion is to tell you not to waste your time seeing this movie, it is not up to the standards of his work in the glimmer man or exit wounds. I read one review that said the movie had a 12 million dollar budget (Segal being paid 5 of that) and that the movie still came in under budget. I must concur.It is no wonder that this is a direct to DVD movie, as no conscientious theater owner would play this movie .",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06c35a81a6ce49b4b299fddfbc29b989",
            "input": "Don't understand how these animated movies keep coming out, and no matter how good (or bad) it is people love it.I saw this movie with my two kids (5,7). They like pretty much anything animated (like most people who rated this film). The theater was almost full, and I looked forward to seeing the movie with its superb cast. To tell the truth I was bored silly. It was unbelievably predictable and just plain unfunny. There were a couple chuckles throughout the film and that was it. Of course they tried time and time again to get the cheap laugh, but just didn't work. My son almost always says to me that he wants the DVD after we see an animated movie, but not on this one. My daughter fell asleep half way through. Also, the kids thought the character animation looked weird. I haven't heard that from them since seeing The Polar Express, which gave my daughter nightmares.Trust me, I'm not the type who looks for the negative in everything. But quality is quality, and like so many animated movies they throw out there, it has very little.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c28eb61876ea43bdad7b6f5a5ee6b4d2",
            "input": "Meryl Streep is excellent in her nuanced and stoic performance as the infamous Lindy Chamberlain who was accused and tried for allegedly killing her own baby Azaria Chamberlain and using her alibi of ravenous dingoes as her defense. Based on the book \"Evil Angels\" and titled so in its Australian release, A CRY IN THE DARK is an ugly film to watch. It presents a scenario that's all too real for us in America: the witch-hunt against a person deemed an easy target.Lindy Chamberlain was this woman. Being someone who spoke her mind, someone who didn't play the sympathy card, and someone who was just tough enough to move on with her life despite her horrific ordeal, she was labeled as suspect and hated beyond comprehension even when it was clear she didn't kill her own child. The media began a tightening noose and a progressive invasion of privacy that soon had the entire nation glued to their sets as they eviscerated this family piece by piece. And through it all, Lindy remained as stoic as ever, even when her husband Michael was falling apart.This stance, of course, is the power of strength, as unsympathetic as it may look like, and people happen to react strongly to that. They want to see a distressed mother cry and weep and occasionally faint at every turn, not sit there and look blank. People don't understand that not everyone grieves the same way and when someone decides to stand strong they begin speculations. Meryl Streep embodies this tainted woman to the hilt and in doing so creates a cold, but not unfeeling woman, one that stood by her convictions even if they cost her liberty. Because of her, Sam Neill is allowed to have his character slowly dissolve into despair -- someone has to, or the Chamberlains would be too detached, and no one wants to see that. Except the monster that has at the time of this writing become the news-media. They'll always eat train wrecks up and feed the mangled manure to the uninformed public.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-add92a5c347d4885ab295a0002d6906b",
            "input": "basically, i like Verhoeven film because in his film, i enjoy a brilliant pscychosexual story that i have seen before in \"Basic Instinct\".it is really a wonderful thriller i enjoyed very much.so it is obviously for me to watch this another Verhoeven movie.well, it is his previous direction before his block buster hit \"Basic Instinct\" and for that i was very much curious to watch that movie and yeah, the movie has fulfilled my hope and expectation.this movie \"The Fourth Man\" is a brilliant pscychosexual drama which is a lit bit complex for some audiences. the story of this movie is about a gay writer named \"Reve\"(Krabbe), an alcoholic person who is lives by his own moral values and sees many visions that may warn him from a future accident.after the end of his lecture, he introduce a seductive woman named \"Christine\", who has a mysterious past she doesn't want to reveal.Reve do sex with her at her house as she is a boy.next morning, he watch her sexy, macho boyfriend's picture on her table, the person he met at the station.he is curious to meet him and tell Christine to invite him to her house.that's it. i don't want to reveal the entire story because it is a Verhoeven movie and the end of the film is really surprising!especially, i like the character \"Reve\" which is brilliantly played by \"Krabbe\".i basically like his acting because as a gay person i am purely identified with his character and yeah i like his charming face.i would like thanks Mr.Verhoeven to make such a black comedy.i rate this movie: 10 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09d3a4eb9bd94875a24b9f87e6f5f5ab",
            "input": "I was watching this when my wife called to inquire from the other room as to my choice of fare. My comment? \"I am watching my Life!\"Though younger, but only by 5 years or so, than the \"Rocket Boys\" I remember the absolute urgency with which Sputnick was greeted by our administrators of education and how the whole Science Fair thing gained momentum and took me and others into the competitive whirlwind. My own tornado landed me in my own State's Science Fair, in Physics by '62, though our group was less successful in gaining the support of, for example, firefighters we approached for guidance and counsel until after a tragic event, our city went so far as to allow us to tour the Nike missile site on Chicago's lakeshore.This movie brought it all back for me and I will bet that it brought it all back for a bunch of us \"UberNerds\" of the late '50s and early 60's.We are in a similar science brain drainage period now and really need this movie as a country. See It!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bfe7ebccc1cb41e29c46bbb61a9ba0a3",
            "input": "Its spelled S-L-A-S-H-E-R-S. I was happy when the main character flashed her boobs. That was pretty tight. Before and after that the movie pretty much blows. The acting is like E-list and it's shown well in the movie. Not to mention it is so low budget that Preacherman and Chainsaw Charlie are played by the same person. The whole movie looks like it was shot with a camcorder instead of half way decent film. The only other reason I liked the movie was because Chainsaw Charlie and Doctor Ripper were funny. They said many stupid things that made me laugh. Other than that if you see this movie at Blockbuster do everyone a favor hide it behind Lawnmowerman 2. Anybody that thinks this movie is good should be mentally evaluated.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0898aed78cc94f3983a4c89d4556302f",
            "input": "I saw this in the theater during it's initial release and it was disturbing then as I'm sure it would still be. It was the first part of '68 and this was still making the rounds in towns across America and there had recently been a mass-murder in my hometown where I saw this where a man went on a shooting rampage. The freshness of that close-to-home event combined with this dramatized true story made for a very disturbing theatrical experience. It really brought to life the excellent acting of Robert Blake and Scott Wilson. I was familiar with the novel based on the true event by Truman Capote and the screenplay and direction by Richard Brooks wove the event and Truman's interpretation into compelling gritty cinematic adaptation. Music from Quincy Jones effectively scores it's story. I've only seen this a couple times since. It was too real. Almost like being a witness to the crime itself and riding along with the killers. I would give this a 9.0 of a possible 10. Society is so desensitized to violence and crime today that this probably seems slow and tame and could be viewed with less effect but to anyone over 50 this will be a hallmark into the examination of the criminal psyche.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8583d29bfb24b5daafff537fd97f660",
            "input": "I thought this was a splendid showcase for Mandy's bodacious bod. If you don't expect anything else, such as clever plot twists and believable character development, you won't be disappointed. Consider this a Sports Illustrated shoot whose character goes around killing people, especially those who threaten to come between her and her 'Mommy' (Suzanna Arquette, who obviously doesn't want to play the sex kitten - she leaves that up to her daughter).Mandy's face is a little too perfect, but her body is a complete 5-alarm fire, up there in the ranks of Sophia Loren when it comes to natural bustiness, a perfect 7-to-10 ratio of waist to hips, and splendidly configured legs, right down to her feet. (There has to be some ideal configuration of thighs to knees to calves to ankles that is altogether pleasing to the eye; Mandy certainly is the model for this idealized ratio).And no flat butt to boot, which seems to be the undoing of many a busty babe with curves everywhere except in the 'nether hemispheres'. Mandy might have used a body double in the rear shot of her losing her towel as she descended into the candle-lit hot tub with her blindfolded German-Guy Victim No. 2, but from all I could see from her bikini shots, she had the butt for it and didn't need a double to prove it.Mandy's acting abilities had little to do with her impression of a psychotic 'Mommy's Girl', with the obvious erotic lesbian overtones. Her bisexual nature (allowing herself to be boinked in the hot tub after a long flirtation with German Guy No. 2, who also happened to be her mother's lover) added an additional dimension to an otherwise one-dimensional caricature of adolescent female horniness conflicted with pathological murderous impulses (always by water with the men - the ultimate fate of the Latina housekeeper was edited out in the televised version for some obscure reason).Mandy's Uber-Nordic facial features coupled with her Uber-Voluptuous body could either be a blessing or a curse. If Mandy really wants to further her career as an actress, I'd advise her to immerse herself fully in the Romance Languages, especially Italian and Spanish - and maybe French, although I don't know if they would go for her type. But this would enable her to reconcile her Bo Derek face with her Vida Guerra body - but maybe her face is just a little too Nordic, and she has shown off too much of her extraordinary body in a cheesy movie to enable her to advance to any more fame that was enjoyed by Michelle Johnson of the 1980's whose early fame in Blame it on Rio was followed by a series of skin flicks that failed to make it off the ground.Vambo Drule.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd866e9cd4064fb58683d6d7c8e1bf8a",
            "input": "It is rare that one comes across a movie as flawless as this. It's truly one of the best acted, most tightly structured films I've ever seen. Every line of dialogue can be interpreted in several ways, relating to each of the three main characters differently. The film weaves an intrinsic web of motivations and double crosses that snare you and refuse to let go. Add to this that the slow-burning romance between Kevin and Faye is as moving as anything that's ever been committed to celluloid and you have the ingredients for a perfect film. It exposes the romance of movies such as \"Titanic\" as the trite cliches they are. If you're looking for a movie to watch while you fold laundry, this isn't it. You have to commit yourself to this film. You can't have a conversation while running in and out of the room. This movie demands your attention. Treat it with the respect you deserve and you'll get a lot out of it. Unless you think \"Titanic\" is the greatest film ever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35cfee0609744a31970267d5cd7a6c6f",
            "input": "This movie had what sounded like a good premise: 9 people facing their fears to win one million dollars. Unfortunately, it did not turn out to be a good movie. There are several scenes that are way too long and really pointless like the dancing scene. A few scenes are just an excuse to point the camera at female body parts. The acting is bad, but some of the lines are amusing in their awfulness. What's really strange is that towards the end of the movie it turns into like a 5 minute western, and at the end, the twists, of which their were several, don't make sense with the rest of the movie. It seemed as though the director just added stuff on because he thought it would look cool, while conveniently ignoring the plot of the movie up to that point. It just didn't make a lot of sense. The only creepy thing was the old people dancing down the hall, but that doesn't even come close to making up for the rest of this mess.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81a547504ba94347a383cc7bd953c41b",
            "input": "His first movie after longtime friend John Belushi's death, Aykroyd shows much fatigue trying to pull off a character that would have been a snap for Belushi.Instead, \"Doctor Detroit\" gives us bookish professor Aykroyd masquerading as a weird, violent pimp to ward off a rival known only as Mom. That's bad enough, but he also has classes to teach, a school dinner to host, four ladies of the evening to protect and a Pimp's Dinner (or something like that) to attend. No wonder Aykroyd seems stupefied most of the time. Why should the viewer be alone?It was on this film that Aykroyd met future wife Donna Dixon. At least some good came out of this chaotic mess.One and a half stars. You want good Aykroyd, see \"The Blues Brothers\". You want bad, see \"Doctor Detroit\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9b8c16be5c641bba57c6c83cd293761",
            "input": "I just came back from the Late-night cinema and it was indeed a silent way out as most of the audience pondered though the real-life black & white images of the partition,the freedom movement,etc which was very much reminiscent of the lives' our forefathers faced! Amidst this backdrop,mind you,there was no tel/fax/internet in those times but for the very voice of Truth & Non-violence, the cinematography infused some spirit of stark reality of adversity amidst the strict Raj.Gandhi shown as a hardworking Attorney in South Africa,who stood for his basic ideologies and gave every degree of conviction to spread awareness of the same with humility and sainthood which to the uttered speech of general Smut was shown as a nice farewell on screen.It had the best drafted speech with a subtle humour & a veiled threat to the British raj in India!There was a nice remark when he said we pray in silence to the British in India now that Gandhi,the politician is set for India(towards sainthood).The very backdrop of a big family with many kids needs the mention of an obvious divided attention and love which had to cast it's spell on the unfortunate kid's psyche who was left alone to aspire for unrealistic ambitions.Little did Harilal knew about his aptitude and he gets emotionally carried away with small pleasures in life and fails in front of the huge idol of his father.He tries to do away from mentor-ship which is the basis of any success which had to be seen by those fortunate neighbours in the streets of Gandhi's residence when Harilal vents out his frustration in open.This means he becomes mentally weak and gets psychologically deranged to an extent that he is forced into religious conversions and alcoholism ,with debt and dis-obedience fuelling his negative thoughts.He still had shown the sincere love for his mother through touchy scenes and even Gandhi's humble expressions form Harilal to forgive him didn't meet any conclusions in his mind as he always feared the Father,Gandhi.he couldn't digest the fact that Gandhi couldn't share his love with him as he expected & was driven to rebellion when he couldn't understand the equal-merit based delivery of scholarship money by his father to his cousin where he saw a failed opportunity to study for barrister in england.This had to take it's toll in him thrown to the streets as a beggar when the whole of India was celebrating the Indepedence!The life of a destitute never changes come what may but the manner in which the sad death of Kasturba & Gandhi himself is shown brings in an emotional silence.Finally the last turbulent thoughts of the dying Harilal is shown as a flashback to keep the audience gripping and wondering where did the father of the nation go wrong? was he clever enough to be mentally strong to lead an-one man army & use his brave soldier-son as a weapon to show to the British & rival forces that when it comes to the interest of the nation,nothing comes in between.Sadly though that to read a Mahatma's heart one has to live outside his family and see which the emotionally naive harilal couldn't see living inside....A pity that such naive harilal's are still ruining the efforts of many Mahatma-like fathers in many families in todays' life and have taken to drugs,alcoholism and God knows what thoughts!!Here's a message to all those brave sainik(soldier)-sons please respect the father of the nation!Please Obey and happiness shall be bestowed or else it's a disaster in waiting,isn't it?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d96797d11124419ba09feea8219add06",
            "input": "The John Van Druten Broadway hit is brought to the screen with a maximum of star power in this romantic fantasy about a modern-day witch who beguiles a successful Manhattan publisher. James Stewart may get top billing, but it is Kim Novak who steals the show as one of the most alluring witches ever to cast a spell on the movie screen. The lead pairing is, in fact, one of the movie's few weaknesses: the gray-haired Stewart seems a bit old for the role, and while it is easy to see why he falls hard for Novak, it's a little harder to understand what she finds attractive about him, as they seem mismatched in temperment and outlook. (It is one of the story's amusing conceits that witches and warlocks are portrayed as Greenwich Village beatniks and bohemians.) Curiously, the Stewart-Novak pairing would generate a lot more heat in \"Vertigo\", released the same year as this film, but then \"Vertigo\" had a compelling suspense story, and the benefit of Alfred Hitchcock's direction.The film's comic moments are mostly provided by the stellar supporting cast, including a young Jack Lemmon (as Kim's warlock brother), Elsa Lanchester (their ditzy aunt), and Ernie Kovacs (!) as a befuddled writer. Hermione Gingold even shows up in a hilarious cameo as a sort of Grand Witch. There's lots to like in this movie--wit, romance, and a great cast--that is, if you can possibly take your eyes off the enchanting Miss Novak. I have seen the movie a half a dozen times, and I never can.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbfec7b0909a43fdacb1dfd77ac6527a",
            "input": "'The Vampire Bat' is definitely of interest, being one of the early genre-setting horror films of the 1930's, but taken in isolation everything is a bit too creaky for any genuine praise.The film is set in a European village sometime in the 19th Century, where a series of murders are being attributed to vampirism by the suspicious locals. There is a very similar feel to James Whale's 'Frankenstein' and this is compounded by the introduction of Lionel Atwill's Dr Niemann character, complete with his misguided ideas for scientific advancement.The vampire theme is arbitrary and only used as a red-herring by having suspicion fall on bat-loving village simpleton Herman (Dwight Frye), thus providing the excuse for a torch-wielding mob to go on the rampage - as if they needed one.This is one of a trio of early horror films in which Lional Atwill and Fay Wray co-starred (also 'Doctor X' and 'The Mystery of the Wax Museum') and like their other collaborations the film suffers from ill-advised comic relief and a tendency to stray from horror to mainstream thriller elements. Taken in context though, 'The Vampire Bat' is still weak and derivative.All we are left with is a poor-quality Frankenstein imitation, with the vampire elements purely a device to hoodwink Dracula fans. But for the title the film would struggle to even be considered as a horror and it is worth noting that director Frank Strayer was doing the 'Blondie' films a few years later.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4965cb3a6dee4fe3b58d7fa493f5387f",
            "input": "John Water's (\"Pink Flamingos\"...) \"Pecker\" is the best movie I've seen in a while. It gives the viewer a surreal image of life in Baltimore (I live in nearby Washington, DC), with a Warhol-like use of color, exaggerated motions and emotions. Pecker becomes larger than his town can handle, and he is separated from his loved-ones (including a sexy Ricci) by his man-loving art manager. The picture left a refreshing taste in my mouth--kind of like a fresh strawberry ice cream on a hot summer day--and though this taste was rather flat and simplistic, it only made the whole thing more profound and critical. It is a celebration of life, liberty, and the right to bear arms...and everything else this country stands for. -Juan Pieczanski (jpieczanski@sidwell.edu)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c84130f3b6294a6597b4fe4c0fc81a71",
            "input": "About the only thing I liked about this film is that there was JUST enough in it to keep me in my seat to the end... I kept thinking that maybe in the NEXT scene things would gel... Alas...Those who like Gus Van Sant's films - especially his later ones - will probably like this. Personally, I find van Sant's films to be dull, pretentious and facile. Well, he was an executive producer for this film, so it is no surprise that the film could almost have been made by him - although personally I actually liked this better than van Sant's latest efforts (e.g. Elephant).Contrary to many here, I did not think the film was difficult to understand or disjointed, I thought that above all it is a film that wishes to portray a certain mood - the mood of an adolescent moving slowly into the adult world - but so slowly that the changes are barely visible if at all. But I feel that the problem with the film is that \"mood\" is not enough... and not only that, but that the mood painted here is, to my mind, incorrectly chosen for the story that is supposedly happening. The dream-like quality, so closely linked to nature, is beautifully captured here, but it is a mood which belongs much more to a much younger child, one who really still does get totally caught up in watching nature unfold (waves on a beach, grasses and flowers, spiders etc). The rhythm of the film reminds me of my summers when I was about eight or nine. There is a LANGUOR to the film that is in opposition to what SHOULD be a very tense time in an adolescent life. When you are caught up in a crush on someone - or being the object of bullying at school - you are anything BUT languorous! There are only two moments that truly worked for me in the film...SPOILERS HERE - first when Logan drops the groceries and his mother throws a bit of a fit. The frustrations of an adult dealing with a klutzy kid - especially with no father present - seemed real to me.The second, and ONLY part of the film with any tension to it, were the scenes where \"Leah\" (Logan's re-creation of himself) phones Rodeo and tries to seduce him into phone-sex. The first reason I liked it is because the person who did the voice-over of \"Leah\" was the most convincing actor in the entire film. (It made me think of Claire Danes from My So-Called Life ...the voice even sounded like Claire.) She and Rodeo had the only scenes that seemed totally believable between the kids. And what I especially liked was the fact that Rodeo only pretended to play along... it was perhaps the best moment in the film as - finally! - we got some character development.All in all, a somewhat misplaced effort... we will have to see what he does in his next film before we can really say much about the director's possible talents. In the meantime, if he can get away from van Sant's influence, it might do him a world of good. Who is this director anyhow - one of van Sant's boy toys?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3afc8957c2ca4052860a1ff3cda086e9",
            "input": "Very different topic treated in this film. A straightforward and simple description of local Chinese customs, by looking at the daily operation of a public bath, run by the old owner and his retarded son, when older son returns home, wrongly believing his father has died. How every man in town makes his daily visit to chat, play games, discuss personal matters and get honest advice, besides the usual spa-like therapies. When old man dies, strong and loyal family ties make older son take charge, so public bath operation is not disrupted. And finally, the arrival of modernization to end this way of spending relaxed hours and getting along. The public bath has to be demolished, making place for a commercial complex to be constructed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12b55975ee1c41ecbfc8703131b10af1",
            "input": "In 1692 Salem, a devious child's lies about a slave's involvement in witchcraft sends an entire community into an uproar. Costume drama starring Claudette Colbert and Fred MacMurray isn't stuffy, though neither is it a vivid depiction of contagious hysteria. Worked on by three writers (Walter Ferris, Durward Grimstead, and Bradley King), the story elements are rather interesting (especially coming out of Hollywood in 1937), though to anyone who has since read Arthur Miller's \"The Crucible\", the hoked-up melodrama on display here won't be tolerated for very long. Biggest problem with the picture may lie in the casting: Colbert and MacMurray are an ill-matched pair of lovers hindered by the witch-hunt, MacMurray being far too contemporary a presence for these surroundings. *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e7e5b12fe144f8694687948c8aaa936",
            "input": "The Return is one of those movies for that niche group of people who like movies that bore and confuse them at the same time. Sarah Michelle Gellar plays a lame buisnesswoman who does not kill vampires or get naked at all throughout the movie. I was willing to put up with this, however I was not willing to put up with the worst editing ever combined with pointless flashbacks. At the end it turns out she crashes her car into herself when she was young. Or maybe I'm wrong and that was just a flashback. With this movie it's impossible to tell. Can you believe the same dude who made Army of Darkness produced this crap? A much better idea is to stay at home and watch Army of Darkness on Sci Fi channel. That movie had it all: sluts, zombies and a dude with a chainsaw for an arm. The Forgotten didn't even have one of these things.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-602534ed70db4c38b9aaf5127631019c",
            "input": "Walter Matthau and George Burns just work so well together. The acidity of Willy with the perplexed amnesic Al is a mixture made in heaven. The scene when they meet again in Willy's flat is a gem and the final scene rounds up the film to perfection. Walter Matthau gives a superb performance as the irascible semi-retired comedian as only he can, the intonation in the voice and the exaggerated dramatics coupled with his general misunderstanding of what is going on form a great characterization. George Burns timing is legendary and nowhere was it better than in this film, his calm aplomb with desert dry replies are memorable. Watch for the scene near the end when Al and his daughter ask something of the Spanish caretaker, and Al's reaction - priceless.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a06354ff18d64efebc3ffd92e283d2b2",
            "input": "We have to remember that the 50's were practically a blank slate when it came to movies. Hollywood was in transition from patriotic war movies, noir, two reel oaters, etc to movies with a message. We had Blackboard Jungle, On the Waterfront and so on. Some folks might think that was an improvement. I don't. Who was the mogul who said: If you want to send a message, call Western Union? He was right. These psychological thrillers are less entertainment than some kind of remote therapy.This one is a pip. It's about three sisters trying to wrest control of their dead father's estate. One of them, maybe the only one worth redemption enlists the aid of the company pilot to help her keep the rest of the family at bay. He's initially in it for the bucks, but eventually falls for her. Meanwhile the rest of the family schemes to sabotage the romance. The results are predictable. You get a little bit of everything in this movie. Sexual tension between the sisters. A little subtle masochism. Hereditary insanity - if there is such a thing. We never get to meet the parents, but they must really have been screwed up The cast is practically unknown. One or two of the actors sound vaguely familiar. The acting is so bad it's hard to believe. It was released under the United Artists umbrella by a company called Bel-Air Productions. It was shot in and around LA mostly at night and probably without permits. The end was so bizarre that I thought it was a joke. It was as if they ran out of money and the producer decided to wrap it up in the middle of a scene.I can't explain it - not even to myself - but I gave this pile of trash an 8/10. I'm familiar with the term \"It's so bad it's good\", but I don't think I ever ran into the phenomenon before. Well, maybe \"Hot Rods to Hell\", but this one certainly fits. You might want to try this if you love movies that seem like they were made in somebody's basement.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9f38c2d82444fb7b0eadc1f6367dbe2",
            "input": "Dumbland is not for all. In fact Dumbland maybe in for nobody except Lynch and that's what make it funny and a collective cartoon. Violent? Yes. Profanity? Yes. Absurd? Yes. A piece of garbage? Never. Dumbland is a wonderful picture of some Americans that don't have brains and hit wife and kids for fun. From México I can say I love it! My favorite episodes are: 1- My teeths are bleeding, all the noise around and violence make me wanna scream and put me behind my bed. 2- Get the stick! Yeah baby get it and learn a lesson: some people never be thankful for your actions. 3- Ants. The more Lynch episode of all, music, surrealism and a very sweet revenge...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fbb881e9eb2481a859c3aa6112cf958",
            "input": "There are really two sections of this film. Firstly there's the laughable prologue to the film which is so hysterical and cornball that it would almost feel appropriate that the 'The Simpsons' Troy McClure should be doing the narration.Then the rest of the film begins (starting off with a title song which really doesn't fit in with the rest of the film) which, while technically OK, is killed by a vague, inconsistent and unconvincing plot and not just uninteresting characters, but characters that make no sense.This is especially so with Mickey Rooney's Spiventa, who was supposedly in on the plot and part of the 'organisation' the whole time yet what would have happened had Hackman made the seemingly arbitrary decision to take him along when breaking out? In that case he would've been a totally superfluous and unnecessary character, which in the end he still is.The overall problem of the film is that it's totally unwilling to put any detail on who or what is behind this conspiracy. It's as if the filmmakers didn't have the courage to imply that a particular section of society would be capable of creating such an organisation and instead settled on the hope that a lack of explanation would suffice and the audience would form their own conclusions.Put simply, the film fails on all levels.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72213574aa1a42528f9cef6c4e34a528",
            "input": "I absolutely love this game to death. Ever since I was 9 years old (I am now 15). It has great graphics, characters, magic, weapons, additions, and don't forget the ultimately awesome dragoon forms! I am still waiting for a remake, prequel, or a sequel to this spectacular video game. You play as Dart, a young swordsman who has the potential to be quite the hero. On this adventure you encounter wondrous creatures and boss fights. You also encounter some friends on the way who have their own special element. Such as Fire, Darkness, Water/Ice, Thunder/Lightning, Earth, Light, and Wind. There are also items known as dragoon spirits, which allow you to transform into magical creatures of legend. Dragons, wizards, creatures called winglies and evil creatures you'll have to face on this adventure of action-packed thrills and excitement. One of my all time favorite games, The Legend of Dragoon!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0bdfa51cf2a54dd4b75694b6b0239a5c",
            "input": "A fabulous book about a fox and his family who does what foxs do. that being stealing from farms and killing prey. until a trio of farmers decide they've had enough of this fox and try in various ways to have the problem \"solved\". They are of course \"out foxed\" at every turn and while the trio are camped out at the fox hole the family perform raids against the three farmers land.The\"film\" version ,and I use the term film very loosely, is more of a god awful pastiche of American heist movies particularly the Oceans movies. They they even have George clooney as Mr fox to to add to the insult and manage to miss the point of the story quite completely. So kudos to them .They'll make lots of money and destroy another classic Roald Dahl children book.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97481a691b504c8bad238a7f7f1e369b",
            "input": "First, I should mention that I really enjoyed ISHII Katsuhito's previous film \"Samehada Otoko to Momojiri Onna\" (\"Shark Skin Man and Peach Hip Girl\"). Although it owed a debt to Tarentino's \"Pulp Fiction\", Ishii's cast was up to the task of carrying the story, and the entire film crackled with energy. The scenes between ASANO Tadanobu and GASHUIN Tatsuya were particularly engaging. There was action, intrigue, bizarre characterizations, enough sex to keep things interesting, and an utterly unpredictable story line.So it was with a certain amount of anticipation and optimism that I began to watch \"Party 7\". And my enthusiasm was certainly piqued with the opening credits, which left my wife and I actually stunned by how dynamic and exciting they were; the mix of anime and live-action work was brilliant! Then, the actual movie started. Actually, it didn't so much \"start\" as sort of shuffle in the side door and stand there, fumbling through its pockets, looking uncomfortable.The entire film takes place in three rooms. One is a futuristic voyeur's paradise (borrowed a bit from \"Shark Skin Man...\"), another is a travel agent's office, and the third (and far the most used) is a seedy hotel room. In that room, a cast of seven characters meets and...does approximately nothing. Really. I'm no stranger to \"talking\" films. One of my all-time favorites is \"My Dinner with Andre\", the talkiest of all talking films. \"My Dinner with Andre\" is far more exciting, and it just has two middle-aged men discussing their lives over dinner. The key is that Andre Gregory and Wallace Shawn tell interesting stories. The cast of \"Party 7\" literally just whine at each other for the entire film. \"No, you don't!\" \"Yes, I do!\" \"No, you really don't!\" \"Yes, I really do!\" \"No, you really, really don't!\" Yes, I really...\" you get the idea, I hope. I wish the directer had.\"Party 7 is an unbelievably unengaging film. There is only the flimsiest of plots (money stolen from the Yakuza, just like in \"Shark Skin Man...\"), accompanied by almost no action. There is no interesting dialog. The characters are largely uninteresting. It was as if Ishii took the throwaway conversational moments from Tarentino's films and built an entire film around them. But Tarentino's conversations always have their own internal logic and wit (\"They call it a 'Royale, with cheese'\"). Not so with the dialog here, which is duller than you can imagine. If it weren't for the brief, hilarious cameo from Gashuin (who is always marvelous) and a low-key performance from the awesome ASANO Tadanobu, I would've given \"Party 7\" a single star. It really was chore to make it all the way through.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef1488b902164d0a9cf7d37d52ee3769",
            "input": "I cant believe some people actually like this. Yet still call themselves Batman fans. Even going as far as to say it's better than BTAS. Which it's not. It should be plagiarism for them to use Batman's name for this piece of crap. It's not Batman.The whole premise of the show is ''if you cant defeat someone get a bigger weapon to help you'' Batman isn't all about weapons. He uses his batarang and grappling hook and Batmobile, thats it. He doesn't come up with some new ingenious tech every time he cant beat someone. I don't know where the hell they got the idea for a Batbot. or whatever. They have ruined all the villains. Mr. Freeze has gone from a sympathetic scientist to a petty criminal who fell in some cryofreezing thing. Catwoman is now a 40 or 50 year old woman with a dumb costume. Penguin is now a ninja with a 50 ft. tall top hat. The Ventriloquist is now called Scarface making the Dummy the whole centerpiece for the character. They even got a dumb idea to make him a giant! wtf? and the two worst character changes are that of The Joker and Riddler. they have changed Riddler to a Gothic/retro teenage freak. and The Joker to an acrobat with dreads. He looks like a bob Marley wannabe. they have completely and utterly ruined batman even moreso than B&R did! i wish i could meet the creators and or writers and animators of this show so i could whack them in the head with a metal baseball bat.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f6dac15431d4f74a528a67f4487ceaf",
            "input": "If I could go back, even as an adult and relive the days of my Summer's spent at camp...I would be there so fast. The Camps I went to weren't even this great. They were in Texas where the mosquitoes actually carry people off but we had horses and fishing. The movie cinematography was astounding, the characters funny and believable especially Perkins, Pollack and Arkin. Sam Raimi's character and sub-antics were priceless. So who ever thought this movie was lame...I have deep pity for because they can't suspend their disbelief long enough to imagine camp life again as an adult or they never went as kids. The whole point was that these people had an opportunity to regress and become juvenile again and so they did at every opportunity. I wish I could. It was funny, intelligent, beautifully scripted, brilliantly cast and the artistry takes me back so I want to watch it over and over just for the scenery even. Sorta like Dances with Wolves and LadyHawk...good movies but the wilderness becomes a character as much as the actors. Rent it, see it, buy it and watch it over and over and over...never gets old. ;0)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc1795c32ac643e5bbef7314559d3c66",
            "input": "Of course I was watching BG. I loved S1, I liked season 2, season 3 was OK, and loved the final one. Yay, there is a spin-off show! I didn't know about this at all, one of my friends told me about this. I was really excited.I watched the first 3 episodes... What a piece of rubbish! Teenage girl drama fest. There is no science fiction... well, hardly any. At the end of every episode we can catch a glimpse of a Cylon. That's all. Who cares this? Did they decide that the next show's target audience will be females under 18? Boring religious nonsense talking, moaning, bitching... and some more.It is just sad that there is nothing out there at the moment to watch. Stargate ruined, BG over...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f99404aaa3a47f884f6a38738a8195f",
            "input": "George Cukor directs a brooding and cynical classic. The distinctive Ronald Coleman is at his best in this piece of Noir about an actor who loses himself in his roles. The acclaimed Anthony John(Colman)has driven his wife Brita(Signe Hasso)away with his highly fueled temper and erratic behavior. But the two manage to continue working together to please their audiences. Things begin to change as John is becoming bored with his career; he reluctantly agrees to play Othello. He gets deep into character as a jealous and murderous man. He begins walking a thin line between illusion and reality and ends up confusing his role with his own life and eventually kills his mistress(Shelley Winters),but has no memory of the dastardly deed.Colman seems faultless in this role. Winters is very impressive as the young woman determined to get away from her squalid life. Also in the cast: Edmond O'Brien, Ray Collins, Joe Sawyer and Whit Bissell.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8cac952b600748df937403dda1ac8d5d",
            "input": "talk about your waste of money.. im just wondering why Michael would star in such a turkey of a movie..Michael is a Great actor especially in the movie where he plays a man dying of cancer.. that was wonderful. as he tapes himself for his son to see it once he grows up .. Michael is such a talented actor.. so what made him do this one??? i watched it and thought it was really dumb.. i guess at one time in their career they have the crappy movies .. especially \"The Squeeze\" i didnt understand that one At all, and i feel his best performance was in \"Pacific Heights\" , his character really creeped me out.. and i really enjoyed \"Multiplicity\". .that one was so Hilarious !!! and he was just Perfect for the role of \"Batman\" .. and i kind of liked \"Night Shift\" and i love \"Johnny Dangerously\" too .. just too bad some of them end up doing lousy movies .. like this one was...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e764173d2d84fe1a304d87d27896e89",
            "input": "This was what black society was like before the crack epidemics, gangsta rap, and AIDS that beset the ghettos in the eighties. Decent, hardworking families that struggled to get by and all the traumas and tribulations they faced. Black America was a different group of people in the seventies. Still full of hope and flying high on the civil rights movements of the sixties, times were hard but still worth fighting for. Keepin' your head above water, making a wave when you can, this show showed how black society struggled to work together as people and families, before they started to prey on each other and everyone else in order to survive the horrors of the ghettos. It is heart-breaking to see what the black ghettos were like then and what they have become now.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29e4e7314b984ee0a7d15196d0792194",
            "input": "The movie's premise is spooky: a woman gets pregnant when kissed by a stranger in a bar.But as soon as the movie begins, a horrible opening scene establishes that this is a C type Sci-Fi TV movie. It's a big Star Trek and a bit X-files, but more than anything else it's boring.When the movie kicks into action everything is predictable and cliche. It looked more like a 2 parter in a bad Sci-Fi TV series. No suspense and no thrills, but not for a lack of trying. Just a lot of predictable dramatic conflicts between the main characters.Don't waste your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e49152578e244253a38ae8dcd80d4a77",
            "input": "fascinating look at fascist italy and the people who carved out a life under mussolini. street scenes and lifestyle glimpses alone are worth watching. combine this with a masterful plot and premier acting and you get a film that you will want to watch again . .. and maybe again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7c15d3b05874af2b691bf10ef97ea9f",
            "input": "Robert Colomb has two full-time jobs. He's known throughout the world as a globetrotting TV reporter. Less well-known but equally effortful are his exploits as a full-time philanderer.I saw `Vivre pour Vivre' dubbed in English with the title 'Live for Life.' Some life! Robert seems to always have at least three women in his life: one mistress on her way out, one on her way in, and the cheated wife at home. It helps that Robert is a glib liar. Among his most useful lies are `I'll call you tomorrow' and `My work took longer than planned.' He spends a lot of time and money on planes, trains and hotel rooms for his succession of liaisons. You wonder when this guy will get caught with his pants down.Some may find his life exciting, but I thought it to be tedious. His companions, including his wife, Catherine, are all attractive and desirable women. But his lifestyle is so hectic and he is so deceitful, you wonder if he's enjoying all this.Adding to the tedium is considerable footage that doesn't further the plot. There are extended sections with no dialogue or French-only dialogue. We see documentaries of wars, torture, and troop training interspersed with the live action. When Robert's flight returns from Africa, we wait and wait for the plane to land and taxi to the airport terminal.Annie Girardot is the standout performer in this film. Hers was the most interesting character and she played it to perfection. It was also nice to see Candice Bergen at the beginning of her career. I can't find fault with Yves Montand's performance of what was basically an amoral bum.I enjoyed some of Claude Lelouch's novel techniques. In a hotel room scene, the camera pans around the room as Robert and his mistress argue. We catch sight of them briefly during each pass around the room. In another scene set on a sleeping car of a train, Robert is lying on the upper bunk while his wife is on the lower. Robert is giving his wife some important but distressing news, but we hear only parts of it because of the clatter of the train. I sensed that his wife was also unable to absorb every word due to the shocking nature of the news. I also liked the exciting safari scenes in Africa. The cinematography of those scenes and of those in Amsterdam was superb.I reviewed this movie as part of a project at the Library of Congress. I've named the project FIFTY: 50 Notable Films Forgotten Within 50 Years. As best I can determine, this film, like the other forty-nine I've identified, has not been on video, telecast, or distributed in the U.S. since its original release. In my opinion, it is worthy of being made available again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8baea61d8b074c81a502f6cac0d1ab55",
            "input": "`Castle of Blood' (aka `Castle of Terror') is a well-crafted, surprisingly spooky entry from Italian director Anthony Dawson. Exquisite black and white cinematography, flawless dubbing, superb casting, fairly logical scripting, deliberate pacing and a surprise (though totally appropriate) ending set this one apart. Only the films sometimes hokey music and the rather abrupt `love at first sight' between Elizabeth (Barbara Steele) and Alan (Georges Rivière) mar an otherwise surprisingly entertaining movie.While visiting England, Edgar Allan Poe sits in a pub, telling one of his ghostly stories to Count Blackwood. Recognizing the great writer, Alan, a young news reporter, requests an interview with Poe. During the course of the conversation, Poe reveals that all of his stories are true. Incredulous, Alan expresses his skepticism about life after death. Count Blackwood offers to bet Alan 100 pounds that he cannot survive this night in Blackwood's castle, a night following Halloween when the dead walk. Alan cannot afford the bet, so he bets his life for a 10 pound wager.Unlike Mario Bava's overpraised `Black Sunday,' (aka `The Mask of Satan'), `Castle of Blood' is fairly restrained, making the few moments of violence even more dreadful, especially surprising from a director usually associated with those terrible Italian space movies from the 60s.It's a pity the only version of this film I've found is badly deteriorated (and recorded) pan and scan version. Even so, it is well worth seeing, and cries out for a modern remake, perhaps with Christina Ricci or Jennifer Love Hewitt in the role of Elizabeth. Watch it and enjoy a film that compares well with Robert Wise's `The Haunting'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36000468c5a24d97bb6e20996c094116",
            "input": "Cusack does his best David Niven in this one, although I don't know if anyone besides me noticed it.When seen with this in mind, its a deliciously over saturated 'wants to be taken more seriously than Austin powers but still be pretty d*mn funny' reworking of an under-appreciated comedy classic.Hillary Duff does an over sexualized Britney spears lap dance version of Mata Bond. The writers built a little reverse Oedipus twist into the plot - interesting choice.I never knew how soothing Montel's voice was until this movie... I think he has found a new calling doing nav system voice overs!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21d85796795541f9a05a491403b47430",
            "input": "Sly Stallone is hardly the finest actor in the world but compared to his brother, Frank...well, roll out those awards now! Mullet haired, muppet Frank seems to think that every part he plays, calls for him doing the role as an American/Italian Wise-guy refugee from the 'Godfather.' Please, somebody make him an acting offer 'he can refuse!' This film just stinks the place out, even by the terrible overacting in this, Frank still steals the acting dishonours. All the people compensate for their lack of talent by shouting their lines and throwing their arms about, gesticulating wildly in a style that went out of fashion back with silent films.The plot, what there, is, makes no sense as a meteor lands and turns all the women into sex-crazed nymphets but as this is 15 certificate film, that just means they strip to their underwear and make moaning sounds like dogs on heat. What happens in the end, I'm not quite sure as I was losing the will to live long before the film finished.Avoid this like the plague and watch 'Deep Impact' for a reasonable film about a meteor about to hit the earth.N.B. Point of order: when one of the female leads strips down to her underwear, she has her knickers/panties under her suspenders/garter belt, it's knickers over the suspenders to allow women to go to the toilet with less fuss. A trivial point, perhaps, but shows how dumb this film is when they can't even get this right!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2885f4fb6f1b4db1b34fd25bb48c920b",
            "input": "This God forsaken film is about three dumb millionaires who gather a bunch of people to play a deadly game, and the winner gets a million dollars. First of all, the acting is terrible, and the movie makes absolutely no sense at all. It is not scary in the least bit, it is so stupid that it made me laugh, which is why it earned that 1 star.The movie is not violent at all, but is pretty sleazy and focuses mostly on the women's breasts the whole time, and some of the characters are very annoying and whiny. Plus, the monsters in this movie are so cheesy and fake and not scary that it just makes you want to throw something at the screen. Last, but not least the ending is terrible. I don't want to give it away, in case you actually are strange enough to see this piece of junk. AVOID AT ALL COSTS!!!!!Not Rated (But should be R) for Nudity, Profanity, and Mild Gore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8cd885c90ddf498ea22b9e06f65bda9b",
            "input": "Excellent movie, albeit slightly predictable. I have to comment on Nicole Kidmans acting in this movie. Some of her other works haven't shown the amazing talent this woman has, but Birthday Girl doesn't suffer from this in the slightest. Even without words Kidmans acting shines through.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0819407023b142c492966104bb687624",
            "input": "The message of this movie is \"personality is more important than beauty\". Jeanine Garofalo is supposed to be the \"ugly duckling\", but the funny thing is that she's not at all ugly (actually she's a lot more attractive than Uma Thurman, the friend who looks like a model).Now, would this movie work if the \"ugly duckling\" was really unattractive? When will Hollywood stop with this hypocrisy?In my opinion, despite the message that it wants to convey, this movie is simply ridiculous.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f882ce248c347bab9ac89f034f5cf0b",
            "input": "I saw this movie on a westbound American Airlines flight. It was so bad it actually made the flight seem longer. The plot had potential (who wouldn't love a movie about a woman who accidentally kills every Elvis impersonator she meets?) but it got screwed up a million different times by really poor writing. Towards the end is an embarrassingly bad scene where a gang of Elvis impersonators is on the roof of a casino reshipping the sky thinking he's going to return, then a group of stars moves together to form an \"Elvis\" constellation, which promptly shoots a bolt of lightning at the impersonators, sending them crashing through the roof. Bad...REALLY bad. Which is the theme for the whole movie. I'd avoid this one at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3be697159e1942a8ad2662b5d18710ed",
            "input": "A single mother(Diane Keaton) finds herself working several minimum-wage jobs. When she gets fired, she finds that she is unable to support her sons(Michael Seater and Colin Roberts), the latter of whom has asthma. Then she goes to her friend and starts selling drugs. Soon enough, she gets addicted to the drugs that she is selling. Her life comes crashing down, especially when her kids, namely her oldest son, find out the truth and threaten to leave her. Then, she struggles to redeem herself with the help of her kids but can she protect her family from the drug lords who she worked for? Wow! This lifetime movie has some of the best acting I have ever seen! Diane Keaton overacts a lot, and her character comes off as crazy but she was extremely convincing. She is much better suited to drama than to comedy. However, the best performance in the movie comes from Michael Seater, who plays her oldest son. He is perfect as the responsible son who is still young but trying to be the adult in the family. His acting was especially great in the scenes where he confronts his mom about the drugs. Colin Roberts, who plays the younger son, also does a great job.A movie well worth watching, especially because of the acting from Michael Seater and Diane Keaton!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca84dcd46dac46c28a5397fe54e707e1",
            "input": "\"Going Berserk\" is actually one of the funniest Candy films I have ever seen, period. Sure, it's kinda low budget, but it's a non-stop comedic tour de force. There are tons of memorable quotes. For instance, when his soon-to-be father-in-law asks him how much he earns, Candy says \"Oh, I pull down anywhere between thirty and...eleven thousand dollars a year, sir.\" Oh course, it is Candy's delivery that sells it. Just classic stuff. Eugene Levy also turns in a hilarious performance as a sleazy filmmaker. A clip of his horrible low budget movie \"Kung Fu U\" will have you rolling.So if you are a Candy fan and want to rediscover a forgotten gem, I can't recommend this movie enough.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee11a64b533942d9896f76e200308599",
            "input": "This movie was awful in the worst way: you just didn't care. You didn't care what happened in the plot; you didn't care about the characters. Everyone was devoid of heart. I ended up walking out about an 45 minutes into it because I simply didn't want to subject my mind to it any more. There is far too much sex in the film. Sex can be okay; it can even make the movie (hence Karma Sutra) but the intercourse here was not beautiful or sexy. It was just ugly. Don't see this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b860fc38dc043e18887828a51743cd2",
            "input": "The minute the forward started, I knew we were in for trouble! The premise is laughable at best. The story line was even worse, if that is possible.The acting was stiff and the actors gave off a sense of inexperience. You expect more from the likes of Slater, Reid and Dorff. Lines were delivered as if from a robot. And I'm sorry, I like Reid but she was VERY unbelievable as an archaeologist. Slater and Dorff picked a lousy film to try and stage their comebacks. The continuity was off through out the entire film. The creatures weren't bad, but they really weren't good either. Bottom line, I want that ninety minutes of my life back. They can keep the money, but give me the time! What a waste.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbe304db0c9d44669b24e74749f750ec",
            "input": "Although in my opinion this is one of the lesser musicals of stars Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly, Kathryn Grayson and director George Sidney, a lesser musical featuring anyone from that line-up is nothing to sneeze at, and in conjunction, the line-up makes Anchors Aweigh a pretty good film despite its flaws.Sinatra and Kelly are Clarence Doolittle and Joseph Brady, respectively, two Navy men. As the film begins, they're just pulling in to the Los Angeles area for some much needed leave. Brady plans on visiting a girlfriend named Lola. Doolittle is still a bit wet behind the ears, appropriately enough, and seeks advice on women from Brady in private (publicly, scriptwriter Isobel Lennart and Sidney have all of the Navy men comically exaggerating their finesse with women to each other). Brady promises to help get Doolittle hooked up, but primarily because Doolittle won't leave him alone otherwise. A kink is put into their plans when local police basically force them to assist with a young boy who is obsessed with the Navy. He won't give the police any information about who he is or where he lives. Brady helps and he and Doolittle end up taking the boy back home. When the boy's guardian, Susan Abbott (Grayson), finally shows up, Doolittle goes gaga for her. Brady tries to convince him to forget about her; Brady just wants to get back to Lola. But they keep getting coaxed back to Abbott's home, and eventually something of a love triangle forms. Things become more complicated when Brady lies about Doolittle knowing a famous musician, Jose Iturbi, who is in residence at a film studio, and claims that Doolittle has set up an audition for Abbott, who is a singer and actress, in front of Iturbi.Because of the story, the music is a strange combination of militaristic music--because of the Navy premise, obviously, Broadway pop--what the stars tend to sing in more informal settings, opera--what Abbott's character excels at, Liberace-like popular classical--what Iturbi did, and Mexican music--because Abbott frequents a Mexican restaurant in a Mexican section of L.A. The combination doesn't work as well as it could. Plenty of the songs are good, and everyone involved is certainly talented as a singer or musician, but the genre hopping tends to lose coherence. Worse, there are a couple showcases for Iturbi, who was apparently a big star at the time, that effectively bring the plot to a halt and that seem more than a bit hokey at this point in time. I just watched another film that happened to have outstanding music, Robert Altman's Kansas City (1996), but that misguidedly stopped the plot to periodically turn into a concert film. Anchors Aweigh takes a similar tactic. Yes, this is a musical, but there's a difference between songs that propel and are integral to the plot and concert showcases that seem like contractual obligation material.There are also some plot problems. It's not very well established why Brady is so against Doolittle's pursuit of Abbott. We can guess that Brady thinks Doolittle shouldn't become involved with someone who has to take care of a kid, and who seems relatively \"proper\" and traditional, but on the other hand, Brady can tell that Doolittle doesn't have the same womanizing disposition that Brady admits of himself. Abbott seems like a good fit for Doolittle, and furthermore, Lennart works hard to establish that Brady just wants to get Doolittle out of his hair and get on with meeting Lola--it seems that Brady's character should be quickly pawning Doolittle off on any candidate, whether she's a good fit or not. This might seem like a minor detail, but it's actually the hinge for about a third to half of the plot. The story also seems a bit drawn out. Length is a problem. Anchors Aweigh, clocking in at roughly two hours and twenty minutes, should have been cut down by at least a half-hour.The above surely sounds like I'm complaining about the film too much to justify an 8. I just wanted to stress what I see as flaws, because the conventional wisdom on Anchors Aweigh is much closer to the idea that it has no flaws.Sinatra, Kelly and Grayson are certainly charismatic, separately and together. They turn in good, interesting performances. Sinatra looks and acts much younger than his actual age of 29 – 30 while shooting. He plays an unusually naïve, virginal character--completely different than most of the roles he would take later, and different than his public image as a crooner. For Kelly, this was his breakthrough film, and rightfully so. His choreography is varied and impressive, as is his acting. Grayson is charming, her performance is sophisticatedly understated, and she's simply gorgeous. All of this helps override the flaws with the script and the drawn out pacing.And there's even a very interesting element that probably only arises because Sidney was allowed to sprawl over a large variety of moods--the infamous Kelly dance with Jerry the Mouse (of \"Tom and Jerry\" fame) in an extended fantasy sequence. This is one of the earliest examples of combining live action and animation, and it is extremely well done and enjoyable as long as you're a fan of fantasy. The fantasy sequences tend to be the best of the film. Matched in excellence to the dance with Jerry the Mouse is a long song and dance number featuring Kelly and Grayson, where Brady is imagining Abbott in a scene from a period film while he woos her, having to resort to acrobatic stunts to reach her physically as she stands on a high balcony.As uneven and flawed as the film is, it is largely successful and entertaining to watch. Fans of classic musicals certainly shouldn't miss Anchors Aweigh, and neither should Sinatra fans, who'll get quite a kick out of his character.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccbd6ca7b7d14dffbe72bdbccde1ded1",
            "input": "This is one of the best made movies from 2002. Maybe it is not the best movie, but it looks the best, has great acting and is directed perfectly by Sam Mendes, who debuted with 'American Beauty'.It tells the story of a gangster named Michael Sullivan (Tom Hanks) who is seen by his son (Tyler Hoechlin) on one of his jobs. Michael's boss, John Rooney (Paul Newman), thinks things will be okay but his jealous son Connor Rooney (Daniel Craig) sets both his father and Michael up, leading to the death of Michael's wife (Jennifer Jason Leigh) and second son. Michael thinks Rooney is responsible and Rooney has to choose for himself and sends a hit-man Harlen Maguire (Jude Law) to finish the job. Since Michael is a respected man within the organization he tries to win some friends who can help him including mob boss Frank Nitti (Stanley Tucci).In a way 'Road to Perdition' is a standard gangster movie but it is so well made you almost can not see that. This movie is good in its production design, art direction, sound, music and most of all in its cinematography. All these elements are able to surprise and create suspense although the outcome is pretty certain. That Hoechlin is not a annoying kid and Hanks, Law and Newman know how to act helps, of course.Based on a comic this movie is so much better than you would expect and although it has it flaws it belongs to the better movies in the genre. Sometimes there are events where you realize you have seen it so many times before, but for some reason it also feels fresh at the same time. The scenes between the adult Hanks and the child Hoechlin help in that area. See this movie that will look familiar at times but is totally new on a lot of areas.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab97cbbb3f71402597ab805b8bb2a0bb",
            "input": "This is a great example of a good, dumb movie. No, it is not high art by any means. Nor is the script anywhere close to a Woody Allen or Mel Brooks. BUT SO WHAT! The Killer Tomatoes series (four movies and a cartoon series) are basically good-natured romps gleefully trampling on the kind of territory the Zuckers ruled before they switched to making serious flicks.As the title suggests, this fourth installment of the Killer Tomatoes trilogy deals with the Killer Tomatoes plot against France. In this case, Professor Gangrene (John Astin's 3rd time in the role) has a plan to rule France through an ancient prophecy about the return of the rightful King of France. Steve Lundquist returns as Igor, a humanoid tomato who wants to be a sportscaster and who just happens to be a dead ringer for the long-lost true King of France. Obviously he also plays the aforementioned l-l t K of F, happily skewering the French language.Opposing them is the fearless Fuzzy Tomato (like the others, FT was introduced in the second film and would be a main character in the cartoon) and his human allies. Mark Price, recently unemployed as a result of the conclusion of the FAMILY TIES series, plays a thinly disguised version of himself, passing himself as \"Michael J Fox\" as a way to win the girl of his dreams. And Angela Visser is a dream as Marie, gleefully bouncing between unabashed virginal sexuality and borderline psychosis. Oh that the former Miss Netherlands had had more of a film career! Another returning member of the Killer Tomatoes stock company is Rick Rockwell (now best known as the hapless title subject of \"Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?\"). Like co-creator John De Bello, Rockwell works both in front of and behind the camera in this series.What can you say about Jon De Bello? Not much, really, except that he had a singular vision and managed to pull it off and, having done that, has apparently dropped into obscurity. John, if you ever see this, thanks for giving us the Killer Tomatoes.The script is heavily but not obnoxiously aware that this is just a movie. Like RETURN OF THE KILLER TOMATOES, the action occasionally veers off the set and into the middle of the film crew. And Mark Price has a funny forum to complain about his own lack of success compared to his former costar Michael J Fox. This is the biggest budgeted of all the Killer Tomatoes flicks and is a nice send-off to the series. Okay, the show then moved to Fox Kids as a cartoon series (which was also quite clever), but cartoons just aren't the same.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68341b0f18844e43890b5602c91b271a",
            "input": "666: The Child starts as a plane crashes, the only survivor of flight 666 was a young boy named Donald (Boo Boo Stewart) who is adopted by news reporter Erika (Sarah Lieving) & her cameraman husband Scott Lawson (Adam Vincent) after they covered the incident for Channel 6 news. At first Donald seems like any normal kid but death seems to follow him around, after warnings from a Nun & Vicar Scott begins to believe that Donald is evil & the cause of all the deaths...This straight-to-DVD horror flick was directed by Jake Perez under the pseudonym Jake Jackson & one has to say 666: The Child is really rather poor. Whenever I see The Asylum is responsible for a film I get worried, I get very worried since their track record is awful. They seem to specialise in making &/or distributing low budget horror films which are usually rip-offs of some recent successful big budget horror film & in the case of 666: The Child you don't need a degree in rocket science to realise that it's a complete rip-off to cash in on the recent The Omen (2006) which was released the same year. The script by Benjamin Henry & Austin Laurel is terrible & simply can't match the ambitions of the the Hollywood equivalent, I mean just what exactly does Donald the Antichrist expect to achieve from a middle class family in a small town? It's hardly a great starting point to bring about the destruction of thew world is it? Every character in 666: The Child is some form of the main character's from The Omen, the adopted parents, the Priest who tries to warn them & the sinister babysitter. There's a real lack of incident, there's barely any gore & the plot is poor. I mean Donald killing a dentist because they were trying to fix his teeth is just so random & needless, what were all the disgusting pictures Donald drew all about, where did the babysitter come from & there's just nothing that ties everything together & it's just a disjointed mess that just becomes very boring very quickly. The references to the number 6 also becomes annoying & are very unsubtle.Director Perez does alright I suppose, it's competent if nothing else. There's virtually no blood or gore, there's a few sprays of blood, a cut off hand & someone gets a circular saw stuck in their face but it sounds a lot better than it looks on screen. It's certainly not scary, there's no atmosphere thanks to a throughly bland contemporary setting in a suburban house & there's no tension because we never really know what Donald is trying to do & there fore there's no threat from him.Technically the film is alright, it's reasonably well made but since the actual film is so poor it makes little difference. The acting isn't that great but at the same time I've seen worse.666: The Child is a poor mans The Omen rip-off, I'd sooner watch either the original or the remake over this any day of the week. Not good & definitely not recommended. Followed by the sequel 666: The Beast (2007) which also went straight-to-DVD.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52b1940eac8b41c5ba01dfdb8e53446b",
            "input": "Savage Island's raw savagery will scare the hell out of you! Trust me.When the boy of the estranged Savage Family is run over by some city slicker tourists, Pa Savage wants revenge, and he'll stop at nothing until he gets it.This is a real horror film with some truly wonderful horror moments.Also, the negative review clearly comes from someone who lacks proper knowledge of film. The filmmakers chose the lighting and camera-work in order to reflect the dark, murky, and egdy mood of the story; in other words, to obtain a certain aesthetic. In fact, the film has won SEVERAL horror film festival awards.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f10037183dd74d87b92db1ae8d67351a",
            "input": "The proverb \"Never judge a book by it's cover\", was coined as a warning to those who fail to look beneath the surface. As I viewed the artwork to,\"King of the Ants\" I instantly thought HORROR! The arcane imagery proudly displayed on the cover & back spoke of a dark vision, the synopsis promised a story of murder, betrayal, & retribution. Instead what I discovered beneath that surface, was less interesting than what you can find under your average rock.\"King of the Ants\" features Chris L. McKenna as Sean Crawley, an average guy ready to make a name for himself in this world, even if it means murder. Except Sean Crawley is someone you don't care about, never once did I feel any compassion or sympathy for this character. In fact he's downright unlikable, but not as much as Daniel Baldwin (Ray Mathews)who turns in an uninspired performance as a made all the worst by the utterly laughable dialogue he is forced to recite. Throw in Kari Wuhrer as a grieving widow who apparently has unconditional trust (esp. in the homeless), and little to no common sense, and George Wendt as Duke, which is basically a sober Norm from Cheers but MEAN!Now there are a couple of interesting \"hallucination\" sequences in this film (the source of the cover images) but this film never delves further into that world. It prefers to bombard you with unmotivated characters, bad dialogue, and unlikely event after unlikely event. Oh the Horror!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-978d014d012741a09246e24426e4690a",
            "input": "Ron Howard directed this? The 1966 cartoon is charming, teaching a simple lesson to children using a simple plot. In this movie, Howard gives us a Whoville filled with greedy, manipulative, self-centered Whos. Jim Carrey is terrible, but I'm sure it's not his fault; I imagine the script called for the nastiest person imaginable, so Carrey channeled Tom Green and the result is movie magic. Much like Danny Devito's Penguin in Batman Returns, Carrey's Grinch is so thoroughly unlikeable that any degree of comedy that might be mined from his character simply evaporates. Where the 1966 cartoon featured a Grinch that we could all identify with, Carrey's Grinch is that angry, soulless old man that we've all seen at one time or another, sitting in a parked car muttering to himself or tripping toddlers at the supermarket with his cane. This Grinch is thoroughly bereft of any degree of humanity, humor, or insight whatsoever, and his redemption at the end of the movie rings false. The whole movie rings false: there is some stupid Christmas lighting competition, a failed attempt at explaining why the Grinch is such a jerk by digging into his childhood, and an indecipherable mystery as to why some of the Whos have that weird lip extension and some of them don't. Contrary to the 1966 cartoon, I would imagine children would find this movie tiresome, irritating, and filled with contradictory messages. Did we really need to see Slutty Smurf, aka Christine Baranski as Martha May Whovier? In addition, Ron Howard filled the cast with his untalented relatives. Throw in the requisite butt jokes, fart jokes, sex jokes, and other obligatory Carreyesque low-brow humor, and you have a movie that is about as far from the 1966 cartoon (or book that inspired it) as George W. Bush is from rational, lucid thought. Thumbs down on this big fat turkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f8342d5606249c4baf1e8e5a05102ec",
            "input": "\"The Domino Principle\" is, without question, one of the worst thrillers ever made. Hardly any sense can be made of the convoluted plot and by the halfway point you'll want to throw your arms up in frustration and scream \"I give up!!!\"How Gene Hackman and director Stanley Kramer ever got involved in this mess must only be summed up by their paychecks.I hope they spent their money well.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bee7a2c588a047ee9b0af7788a619066",
            "input": "I recently started watching this show, and I have to say that it really made me laugh. You have to appreciate the unrealistic aspects of it, along with everything else. Some other people said this show should have more realistic reactions of the dead, among other things. If you are going accept that Ned can bring the dead back to life, you have to accept that the other completely crazy bits of the show. I couldn't help smiling after every episode I watched. I really think it's great there is a show out there that can take a very strange subject and really make it great to watch. I absolutely love the narration, I think it adds that extra bit of wonder to the whole show. You can't always compare old shows by a writer to his new ones, you have to take everything as it's own entity. Definitely give it a chance, and just enjoy the ridiculous parts as they are.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73ab20527c3d4a5c97f640f08e46755b",
            "input": "If you've seen other movies like this, they're probably better. The Omega Man comes to mind. To the studio's credit, they avoided the sprawling, unnecessary, big budget technofest that typifies movies of this ilk. Additionally, the set-up and premise were excellent: four people whose past is virtually irrelevant to us are trying to get away from an overwhelming infectious fatal disease. What's bad is EVERYTHING else! I get tired of endlessly stupid, careless, wimpy, ineffective, arrogant characters in a movie. That pretty much describes everyone in the movie at some point. I rented it, and found myself yelling at the TV repeatedly, \"no, don't do that!\", \"why are you so stupid\", \"look out!\", etcetera. A true lack of character development is evident about halfway in. A movie SHOULD give you a strong personal connection with at least some of the characters so that you actually care what happens to them. This one does not. Also,there should have been a longer, more involving end to the movie as well.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-243202eddb3040aeb8bf35e3b057589e",
            "input": "It's a strange, yet somehow impressive story, about love. Personnaly, I never run over such a twist-off story in real life. But, I can image there is.It's a story that promises to be \"sick\" from the title. But, after I watch it, I didn't get this feeling of \"sickness\" which I would surely have regarding society rules. It's something beautiful in this movie... something impressive...which I cannot contradict using any moral or society rules.The movie focuses mostly on relation between Kiki and Alex. You can see how this relation starts, evolves and finally ends. You feel the moment when this love blossoms, the first whispers, touchings. You feel the connection. And no moment I though this is immoral. You even hope it will not break in the end....it cannot break...it's not right. You feel the pain of being hart broken in the end...But,I need also to add a negative spin to this comment...I don't know if the story is not somehow *showed* to give the feeling that these relations are sick only in form, but not in content. You don't have the total story, but only fragments. When movie has started, the relation between Kiki and Sandu was already in place. So, no clue about the nature of the relation. You feel only a tension between them...a fight between the need for love and desire to break this relation. I think this line of Kiki to Sandu says all: \"I want to stop...and if you love me, you will do as I ask you\".This movie will probably stir some questions about what is love and what is to be moral...and where's the limit between them. I don't know if the idea of this movie is \"love conquers all...even social and moral standards\" or \"love is beautiful...no matter how or where\". But in my opinion, this movie is already a success for the simple reason that it makes you think...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4462fbcccbca4292b8731988161352c8",
            "input": "Serious HOME ALONE/KARATE KID knock off with enough bad character stereotypes to have the writer sued and then shot. You could see blatant stunt man usage in almost every scene. Oh, and the acting sucks too. Although I must say that the line: \"Sorry, dude, I have to take a major dump big time\" made me laugh my ass off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cebc08ba269743ea83a6423df01a46ed",
            "input": "I didn't know it was possible to release a movie this bad. The labeling sounded so promising, but you would think that with a cast of 20, at least one of them would be able to act. My wife left me and went to bed after the first 20 minutes. She made a wise decision.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33b3743ec9b24d4f9c156236b78959c5",
            "input": "\"Panic\" is a captivating, blurred-genre film about a brooding and conflicted middle aged hitman's reconciliation of infatuation with a younger uninhibited hairstylist, his love of wife and son, his duty to his employer/father with his own identity. Although the film has a nebulous purpose and an ambiguous ending, it is a superb production in almost all aspects. The characters' clarity and sincerity in such an improbable story may both fascinate and annoy audiences.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-046ac812a1a1498c94889539bbfb18b6",
            "input": "Steven Vasquez directed and co-wrote with James Townsend, the star, this strange little drama cum horror flick with evidently very good ideas and intentions: make a gay film that takes a different storyline than the usual fare and make a drama that wants to be judged on its merits as a thriller. So why doesn't it work? For starters the film loses direction from the opening frame and wanders rather aimlessly throughout the film, dead set on making a suspense thriller but getting sidetracked into satisfying an audience who wants to see nude encounters. Not that that is a bad thing: it can certainly enhance some films that have been Hollywood successes. The film also tries to talk about coming out experiences in young men and women, relationships, disturbed parenting, the club scene with all the wild antics that accompany such events - and murder. It is all a bit much to cram into a 96-minute film.Devon (James Townsend) by all appearances is a successful kid with a kind girlfriend Jenna (Sarah Kelly) but he has an eye for boys and visits a bar where he meets Brian (Alex Wilson) who has been down the same path and can offer Devon assistance on every level. They bond, Devon comes out, and the mysteries begin: boys are missing in the neighborhood, Devon's stepfather psychologist Dr. Kirk Tyler (Dan Swett) is not at all what he appears to be and despite Devon's consoling mother Donna (Sonja Fisher) Devon is cast into the streets because of his new relationship. It seems Dr Tyler is in a dark business with hunky Detective Cunningham (Earl McDougle) who apparently is investigating the missing boys... Devon gathers his resources from his understanding girlfriend Jenna and her cronies and together the group unveils the dark doings of Dr. Tyler and his detective sidekick. And through it all Donna radiates warmth and understanding as the perfect mother of a gay boy, etc.Some of the actors are pleasing to the eye (and there is very little the eye doesn't examine frequently!) but the degree of acting is at an all time low. The only thing that makes us forgive that (and in some cases it is just too poor to forgive) is the feeling of commitment on the part of everyone involved. Yes, this is a low budget movie and yes, the director needs time to learn his trade. But in the end there is something to be said for the involved people to try to take a gay film to a different level. Maybe their next one will be more polished. Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ada5c56759948228adc3220aebf34c3",
            "input": "Eddie Murphy Delirious is undoubtedly the funniest thing I have ever seen in my life. When I saw it for the first time about 2 years ago I was in stitches for weeks after it. To date I have seen it a further 17 times and i still laugh my ass off each time. For those who dont know Eddie Murphy was a brilliant stand up comedian before he was a Hollywood superstar. There is not one dull spot in this piece of genius unlike Eddie Murphy Raw which was released in 1987 which goes flat during the middle. If you are not the sort of person who can't stand swearing then I wouldn't advise you to see it as you will probably hear swearing of some form every 5-10 seconds. I gave this a 10 out of 10 because it displays the greatest comic genius of them all at his best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a708104f73d4227b3296f4593582f09",
            "input": "One of my favorite shows back in the '70s. As I recall it went to air on Friday (or possibly Saturday)night on the Nine Network (?) here in Australia. Darren McGavin and Simon Oakland were great together.Each episode usually reached a climax with Kolchack having to engage in hand to hand combat with some sort of supernatural opponent. To their credit, the writers made a concerted effort to get away from the usual round of vampires and ghosts as much as possible.I remember one episode in which the adversary was the spirit of an ancient Indian Chief which/who 'came back' as a massive electrical current which started to kill people in a city hospital. The final showdown saw Kolchack trying to short circuit the 'power beast' amidst an explosion of sparks and billowing flames. Oh well .... you had to be there at the time but it was an interesting idea.McGavin always packed a lot of energy and enthusiasm into his roles and this was one of his best.Definitely deserves a place in TV's \"Hall of Fame\". To quote Tony Vincenzo .... 'Kolchack you are ON IT '... Or, in the case of the Hall of Fame,'IN it' !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66cc5c48718e4713b14494a8c5643629",
            "input": "A wonderful film by Powell and Pressburger, whose work I now want to explore more. The film is about what we perceive as real and what is real, and how the two can be so difficult to distinguish from one another. Beautifully shot and acted, although David Niven doesn't seem to be 27 years old, as his character claims to be. Fun to see a very young Richard Attenborough. This film made me think, while I was watching it, and afterwards.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a0b258549574e8484fcd68577d86c52",
            "input": "Henri Verneuil's film may be not so famous as Parallax View, 3 Days of the Condor or JFK but it is certainly not worse and sometimes even better than these classic representatives of the genre. Action takes place in fictional western state where fictional president has been killed. After several years of investigation, special government commission decides that president was killed by a lone gunman. But one man - prosecutor Volney, played by Yves Montand - thinks there's something more to be investigated and so the film starts. This movie doesn't deal with some exact theories, but it embraces the whole structure of relationship between government and society in today's world. Such film could be made only in the 1970-ies but it will never lose it's actuality. Furthermore, it's even a bit frightful how precise are it's oracles. 10 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2cf4141401042edb1f7d6e7481a9431",
            "input": "One of the great classic comedies. Not a slapstick comedy, not a heavy drama. A fun, satirical film, a buyers beware guide to a new home.Filled with great characters all of whom, Cary Grant is convinced, are out to fleece him in the building of a dream home.A great look at life in the late 40's.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a24fe44ce3af4fcb80034007f94ca685",
            "input": "Apparently most viewer knows nothing about the history of Europe, including Germany, Hungary and the whole Central and Eastern Europe as well as the Hitler and Stalin Era. Nuremberg (and a lot of forgotten trials all over Europe) was a revenge and injustice of the winners. What do you think, why were not any American, British, French or Soviet defendants after the WWII? There were no American, British etc. war crimes? There were no Hiroshima, no Nagasaki, no Tokyo, no Dresden, no Hamburg, no Berlin, no Katyn and so on? The Germans had war crimes too, but in Nuremberg the justice was not a real consideration. The main point was: Vae victis! Germany must perish! (That was also a book title in America, 1941.)This film is an awful, ignoble American brainwashing instrument, full of error, lie, propaganda, prejudice and injustice. And first of all: full of hypocrisy. But not surprisingly... Why wasn't enough the Nuremberg process itself? This film is a nightmare. Total darkness after 60 years! This darkness (and hate and narcissism and lack of self-criticism) is the real cause of the massacres in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Serbia, Iraq and so forth. And there are no American war criminals... Bravo, America! Very clever. Even Stalin would become envious of it...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed7ee29023384241a6dd2aa5ba02f4b3",
            "input": "This was an absolutely terrible movie. Don't be lured in by Christopher Walken or Michael Ironside. Both are great actors, but this must simply be their worst role in history. Even their great acting could not redeem this movie's ridiculous storyline. This movie is an early nineties US propaganda piece. The most pathetic scenes were those when the Columbian rebels were making their cases for revolutions. Maria Conchita Alonso appeared phony, and her pseudo-love affair with Walken was nothing but a pathetic emotional plug in a movie that was devoid of any real meaning. I am disappointed that there are movies like this, ruining actor's like Christopher Walken's good name. I could barely sit through it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d570685945349ad95f23a2082f25c87",
            "input": "It's not easy making a movie with 18 different stories in it. Although 18 different international directors took the challenge, not everyone of them is good, some of them even boring. But in his entity, \"Paris, je t'aime\" is breathtaking, showing that, as \"Love Actually\" put it, 'love is all around', especially in the city of love. Here's a resumé (I'll try to make at as spoiler-free as possible) of the 18 different stories.MONTMARTRE - kind of a dull opening sequence, nothing really special about it. A man finds a parking spot, and sees a lot of odd couples walking by, wondering why he can't find a girl. And than, suddenly, a woman faints next to his car...QUAIS DE SEINE - another dull sequence, about three teenage boys who are searching for some 'piece of ass', when suddenly a Muslim girl trips right in front of them, receiving help from one of the boys. Really basic, but with a sweet heart to it.LES MARAIS - this was a huge disappointment! Although a love story between two boys with an artsy background could have been interesting by the great Van Sant. Eventually, everything that comes AFTER the monologue by Ulliel is good, everything before it is just annoying.TUILERIES - an entertaining sequence by the Coen brothers. Buscemi - without even saying one word - is mesmerizing and the whole sequence is just hilarious. This one kept me hooked until the very end, and this one also gets you truly hooked to the movie.LOIN DU 16IEME - a beautiful story too, even if the execution is poor, the heart is there. It's the story of an Hispanic woman who drops her child off, early in the morning, to take care of another suburban baby. Beautiful.PORTE DE CHOISY - this segment has got to be the strangest and weirdest from the whole movie. Some kind of shampoo salesman arrives in a Chinatown-lookalike place in Paris. If I understood it correctly, the story is about inner beauty, but I think I'm wrong.BASTILLE - a truly wonderful sequence. A man meets with his wife at a restaurant, to break up with her, so that he can run off with his mistress. But the wife has some devastating news. Pretty basic, but truly sad and beautiful! PLACE DES VICTOIRES - a sad sequence as well. Juliette Binoche plays a grieving mother. One night, she wakes up hearing her dead child. When she arrives at the location, a cowboy tells her she can give one last good-bye to her child. One of the best segments! TOUR EIFFEL - two mimes who fall in love could have been great, but, even though it has some nice cinematic tricks, the story isn't intriguing and not funny at all.PARC MONCEAU - a truly original and great sequence, one of the best of the movie! A young girl and an older man discuss their future and her fear for a certain man... Cuaron does a great directing job, and the actors are amazing! QUARTIER DES ENFANTS ROUGES - an American actress (Gyllenhaal) falls in love with her drug dealer. a beautiful segment again, with a very sad ending PLACE DES FETES - a woman comes to a homeless man, he starts talking romantic to her... because she is the love of his life. Beautiful, sad, shocking, romantic,... Place des Fêtes will make everyone cry.PIGALLE - a boring sequence between Ardant and Hoskins, who are looking for new thrills in their relationship... very unfunny and unromantic, Pigalle is a let-down.QUARTIER DE LA MADELEINE - bringing some diversity in the movie, QdlM is a relief. A young guy (Wood) finds a vampire killing a victim... The tourist and the vampire... fall in love! Dark, scary and oddly romantic, Madeleine is superb.PERE-LACHAISE - another let-down segment. Directed by Wes Craven and with stars as Mortimer and Sewell, it could have been great, but Père-Lachaise is just ordinary, not original at all.FAUBOURG SAINT-DENIS - the rumors are TRUE, Twyker's short film is beautiful, stunning and well done. A blind man picks up the phone, and hears from his girlfriend (Portman - truly stunning) that she breaks up with him. He reflects on their relationship.QUARTIER Latin - even though this segment has been co-directed by Depardieu and has such stars as Rowlands, Gazzara and Depardieu, this segment is a let-down too. Nothing happens, lack of chemistry between the actors.14TH ARRONDISSEMENT - the last sequence is hilarious and sad at the same time. An American tells in her French class about her trip to Paris. Her French is truly terrible, but at the end of the segment, she realizes that Paris is so much more than meets the eye.With Feist on the background, \"Paris, je t'aime\" ends in a sweet tone, not letting me down at all, even though some segments bored the hell out of me, the entity of the movie is great! A true cinematic experience for young and old. Paris, je t'aime vraiment!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23601f71bc1b48c19ec028fa541579e2",
            "input": "This is a decent endeavor but the guy who wrote the screenplay seems to be a bit in the dark as to what exactly makes a zombie movie cool. No, it isn't CGI bugs and software companies. Actually I'm not sure whether it was a software company - I saw it without subtitles so I had to guess what they're talking about. Anyway my point was - instead of wasting your time animating some dumb-ass bug, why not throw in more zombies and more action. 2/3 of the 20 minutes consist of news bulletins, bugs, some guys yelling about something. And to makes matters worse (more boring) most of the deaths occur off-screen. I realize that's all too common for no-budget movies, but then there were some very impressive effects (well, kind-a of) which left me wondering why did the director (or screenwriter, whatever) chose to focus on how the epidemic started - it's a short, nobody's gonna care anyway.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46bedf53ddb147e086c8d95f6caa961c",
            "input": "Having decided some time ago to collect the films of Billy Bob Thornton (on the strength of class movies like \"Sling Blade\", \"A Simple Plan\" and \"The Man Who Wasn't There\" amongst others), it was inevitable that there would be the odd turkey in there. What I didn't realise however, was that there could be one THIS bad. I'll give you an idea how incredibly poor this film is - the funniest dialogue in it goes like this: \"Knock Knock\", \"Who's there?\", \"The big stinking man\", \"The big stinking man who?\", \"The big stinking man - is YOU!\". Yes folks, it really is that bad. Billy Bob is only in it for about two minutes (I guess he needed the work at that time in his career), and the rest of the movie is painful. For some reason though, although it's undeniably awful, I don't hate it. That's probably because I save my ire for any high budget, special effects laden junk like \"The Fast and the Furious\" and not a \"no-budget\" flick like this one. 2/10 at a push.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6cc8749d133c4fdaba0ebdb4b2f07358",
            "input": "Anna (Charlotte Burke) develops a strange fever that causes her to pass out and drift off into a world of her own creation. A bleak world she drew with a sad little boy as the inhabitant of an old dumpy house in the middle of a lonely field. Lacking in detail, much like any child drawing the house and it's inhabitant Marc (who can't walk because Anna didn't draw him any legs) are inhabitants of this purgatory/limbo world. Anna begins visiting the boy and the house more frequently trying to figure what's what and in the process tries to help save the boy, but her fever is making it harder for her to wake up each time and may not only kill her, but trap her and Marc there forever.Wow! Is a good word to sum up Bernard Rose's brilliantly haunting and poetic Paperhouse. A film that is so simple that it's damn near impossible to explain and impossible to forget. While you may find this puppy in your horror section it's anything but. It's more of a serious fantasy, expertly directed, and exceptionally well acted by it's cast, in particular Charlotte Burke and Elliot Speirs (Marc). And yet, it's not a children's movie either, but meant to make us remember those carefree days of old that are now just dark memories. Rose creates a rich tapestry of moody ambiance that creates a thrilling backdrop for the brilliant story and great actors to play with. Paperhouse stays away from trying to explain it's more dreamy qualities and leaves most things to the viewers imagination. There's much symbolism and ambiguity here to sink your teeth into. Paperhouse enjoys playing games with the viewers mind, engrossing you with it's very own sense of reasoning. As the story unfolded I was again and again impressed at just how powerful the film managed to be up to the finale which left me with a smile on my face and a tear in my eye.Bernard Rose's visuals are brilliant here. He's able to create an unnervingly bleak atmosphere that appears simple on the surface, but as a whole is much greater than the sum of it's parts. The acting is of young Charlotte Burke in this, her feature debut, is a truly impressing as well. Unfortunately she's not graced the screen since. A much deserved Burnout Central award only seems proper for that performance. Toward the end the movie lags a bit here and there, but I was easily able to overlook it. I wished they had took a darker turn creating a far more powerful finale that would have proved to be all the more unnerving and truly riveting in retrospect. The movie as is, is still one for the books and deserves to be seen by any serious film lover. It's a poetic ride told through the innocent eyes of a child, a powerful film in which much is left to be pondered and far more to be praised.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82b74169de334d9889e16af3c12fd119",
            "input": "This movie maybe really bad, but it is alot of fun. The bad acting and poor direction enhance the film's hystericalness. The twins are very funny in their Conanesque roles. If you go into this film expecting the first Conan or Excalibur, than you will hate it. If you watch it while in a good mood and accept it as good, dumb fun you will have a good time. Watch for the scene where they try to hang the brothers, its funniest scene in the film. I wish Mystery Science Theatre 3000 would have done this!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99f4fdf55d8047f2b0a4769952db0346",
            "input": "Four words account for why this film was made - \"She Done Him Wrong\". The huge commercial success of that Mae West vehicle convinced the studio brass that Gay '90s melodramas were a viable proposition. Here we are rewarded with a fast moving, well written romp which neatly targets the personalities of its stars.Wallace Beery and George Raft are excellent as friendly rivals; Jackie Cooper is a little harder to take, but it is Fay Wray who steals the film with her stock-in-trade damsel in distress. With a strong director - as Walsh proves himself to be - Wray could carry a lot of punch, and she is utterly believable as the object of both Raft and Beery's affection.Lots of atmosphere, beautifully designed, this is a forgotten film worthy of revival.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-632b60f9268046c1be3ad4bce67a78fa",
            "input": "I don't know why people except a lot from low budget indie films but I enjoyed this one as I'm a fan of urban horror. There's not too many urban horror movies out there so when I saw this one on the shelf, just the title alone peaked my curiosity. So I decided to check it out and I was surprised...it's not too often you run into a low budget indie horror film with GREAT acting and a good story. Is it low budget? yes. Can you tell that it's low budget? Yes...but once you start watching the movie you become so wrapped up in the story that it doesn't matter. I like hip hop music too and the soundtrack is nice! I don't know what's up with all these bad reviews for this film. All I hear is \"worst movie ever\". Have these idiots seen EVERY movie out there? There's thousands of movies out there, how can you categorize one as the \"worst\" ever? A video not \"movie\" like \"zombiez\" may be the worst film I ever SEEN but I can't say that it's the worst movie EVER since I haven't seen every movie out there. Bottom line these people who gave this movie bad reviews are probably from the suburbs. Listen, if you don't like minority based, urban films, the ghetto films, hip hop,etc then WHY WATCH THESE TYPES OF MOVIES???!!! knowing that you don't like this type of stuff? Sure, this is a horror film but it's not just a horror film but it's an URBAN horror film with a multi-cultural based cast. I don't like TV shows like Dawson's Creek or the O.C., THEY SUCK to me. Films like \"Garden State\", \"Wedding Crashers\" and \"I heart huckabees\" SUCK to me. I'm a guy from New Jersey and these shows and movies suck to me. Why? Because I can't relate to them. They don't peak my interest. Just common sense. Believe me, I will never watch GARDEN STATE 2: GARDEN SALAD, WEDDING CRASHERS 2: Here's a sequel to torture you again since the first sucked so bad and I HEART HUCKABORING. Now back to this movie, in regards to saint405's comment above, I don't know if this guy was smoking crack or got knocked \"stupid\" by his drunken dad before he watched the movie but to me, everyone did a great job. The actor who played Ricky (I forgot his name) did a VERY good job. I'm an aspiring actor myself taking theater at my school and I had to do a play where I had to cry and it's not easy to be emotional in a scene so I give props to actors who have to do an emotional scene and can pull it off. Anywho, I liked this movie and never heard of these actors and directors before but you bet I'll be looking out for their stuff for now on and if they are reading this, BRING ON THE SEQUEL!!! I'm out. Jerzee Representin'!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6018a808954643a98ebd671c3ce402ef",
            "input": "This is your standard musical comedy from the '30's, with a big plus that it features some well known '30's actors in small fun cameo's.There is not much to the story and basically the movie is all about its fun and 'no-worries' overall kind of atmosphere, with a typical Hal Roach comedy touch to it. Appereantly it's a 'Cinderella story' but I most certainly didn't thought of it that way while watching the movie. The story gets very muddled in into the storytelling, that features many different characters and also many small cameo appearance, when the main characters hit the Hollywood studios.Of course the highlight of the movie is when Laurel & Hardy make their appearance and show some of their routines. It's like watching a movie and getting a Laurel & Hardy short with it for free. Also Laurel & Hardy regular Walter Long makes an appearance in the routine and James Finlayson (without a mustache this time) as the director of the short.It's certainly true that all of the cameo's and subplots distract from the main plot line and character but in this case that is no problem, since its all way more fun and interesting to watch than the main plot line and the shallow typical main character.The movie is most certainly not any worse than any of its other genre movies from the same time period, though the rating on here would suggest otherwise.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc695a4203714ea19cb920f389a83332",
            "input": "I can enjoy a guilty pleasure vigilante flick, but this is just bad. And not bad in a way you might enjoy seeing MST3K make fun of it. It's just nauseatingly bad like you can't find anything to enjoy about this no matter how hard you try. I truly regret wasting 2 hours of precious life on this crap. You can tell by watching it that no one was asked to act and everyone in it knew this film would only bury their careers. Apparently \"Walking Tall\" has garnered enough income that someone decided they could make a buck off their investment. If it's not the worst film I've seen, it's so bad that it's blotted the worse films from my memory.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-481479811de2452e8ffa90a12b8ab056",
            "input": "It's rare that I feel a need to write a review on this site, but this film is very deserving because of how poorly it was created, and how bias its product was.I felt a distinct attempt on the part of the film-makers to display the Palestinian family as boorish and untrustworthy. We hear them discuss the sadness that they feel from oppression, yet the film is shot and arranged in a way that we feel the politically oppressed population is the Jewish Israeli population. We see no evidence that parallels the position of the Palestinian teenager. We only hear from other Palestinians in prison. I understand restrictions are in place, but the political nature of the restrictions are designed to prevent peace.I came out of the film feeling that the mother of the victim was selfish in her mourning and completely closed minded due to her side of the fence, so to speak. She continued to be unwilling to see the hurt of the bomber's parents, and her angry and closed-minded words caused the final meeting to spiral out of control. It is more realistic, in my mind, to see the Israeli mindset to be a root of the problem; ignored pleas for understanding and freedom, ignored requests for acknowledgment for the process by which the Jewish population acquired the land.I have given this a two because of these selfish weaknesses of the mother, which normally would be admirable in a documentary, however in the light of the lack of impartiality, it all seems exploitative. Also for the poor edits, lack of background in the actual instance, and finally the lack of proper representation of the Palestinian side. Ultimately, it is a poor documentary and a poor film. I acknowledge this is partially the result of the political situation, but am obliged to note the flaws in direction regardless of the heart-wrenching and sad subject matter.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a64728566034f52812f352fa433d0cc",
            "input": "I instantly fell in love with \"Pushing Daisies\". This show manages to put a smile on my face with it's great storytelling, witty dialog and great acting. But that's not all: It also manages to keep you until the end. The basic idea behind the show - Bringing people back to life with one touch, ending the undead status with a second - is interesting and could still be in later seasons. But the suspenseful murder cases, the unique look of the show and the highly proficient narrator add to the experience. But \"Pushing Daisies\" is more than it's parts. It has a certain charm that I really enjoy and I'm looking forward to enter the world of Ned and Chuck for a second season.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50e17e75d99e45c489ac92943ddcc06d",
            "input": "When this movie was released, it spawned one of the all-time great capsule movie reviews: Sphinx Stinks. It does, but in a mesmerizing sort of way. The casting is silly, starting at the top: Frank Langella and Sir John Gielgud as Egyptians? Not enough makeup in Cairo for that, at least not while this film was being made. But it's rather amusing to see them try. The performances run the gamut from mummy-like (sorry, the obvious observation) to over-the-top, with very few stops in between. The Lesley-Anne Down character seems as though she couldn't find Egypt on a map, much less expound upon its archaeological treasures. That's due at least in part to some really bad writing, one of the curses that will be visited upon every viewer of this movie. It's my opinion that movies involving a curse or that draw their basis from a subject that is somewhat esoteric, such as Egyptology, are ripe for silly, overwritten dialogue. It doesn't disappoint, and the convergence proves a double-whammy. The plot has one driving source of dramatic tension: Can this get dumber and less believable? The answer is, usually, YES. The location shots are beautiful, and the set design is generally very good, the only consistent reminders that this wasn't some low-budget production. That and the fact that there are so many well-known faces doing service in such an unintentional laugher. Cheap, no; cheesy, yes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d581e67e362144c9b899af9f7a6c3686",
            "input": "An utterly beautiful film, one of a handful of I saw when young that entranced me then and still do, in Thief's case the impression actually seems to get better with the passing of time. By the '90's my daughter and I had seen it many times on TV but still went to the pictures when it came to the local art-house cinema – when it had finished we came out starry eyed with heads full of poetry and Miklos Rozsa's stirring music wishing it could have lasted a couple of hours longer and thinking what a beautiful world it suddenly was again.Idealistic Prince Ahmad wants to slum it amongst his people for a while to check things out, but evil Vizier Jaffar takes his chance to imprison him and seize the throne. After escaping with a little thief played by Sabu, Ahmad spots a Princess and they fall blindingly in love – along the way they have many adventures (although apparently not enough for Sabu!) and Love not only conquers but annihilates everything. The special effects must have been mesmerising in 1940, but Time has taken its toll and lessened their impact especially since digital cartoonery has taken over even live action – but they still hold up well compared against films like Superman from 40 years later. Anyway, if I'm requested to suspend disbelief in gargantuan guffawing genies, flying horses and carpets I also suspend disbelief in perfect special effects! Favourite bits: the dreamy scene in the sunlit garden when Ahmad reveals himself and Adelaide Hall's suitably romantic song; the stunning colours in the tent in the Land Of Legend – in fact, the stunning colours throughout; Sabu and Rozsa's triumphant but still wistful finale. Conrad Veidt played the baddie in two of the most incredible movie romances ever, this and Casablanca, and then died. John Justin and June Duprez were great in the leading roles of lovers, both of them slightly and refreshingly stilted, but the parts didn't call for a huge range of emotions: only pure love mattered.There's a couple of mildly violent images in it, but rest assured this is a glorious feelgood experience with a 100% positive message, it's only a pity that nowadays little kids don't watch this instead of the porn they prefer. One of my Top 10 film favourites, I can't recommend this too much – may it be shown to the end of Time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c673995ec9f43c593131e5ad8daa1cf",
            "input": "To grasp where this 1976 version of A STAR IS BORN is coming from consider this: Its final number is sung by Barbra Streisand in a seven minute and forty second close-up, followed by another two-and-half-minute freeze frame of Ms. Streisand -- striking a Christ-like pose -- behind the closing credits. Over ten uninterrupted minutes of Barbra's distinctive visage dead center, filling the big screen with uncompromising ego. That just might be some sort of cinematic record.Or think about this: The plot of this musical revolves around a love affair between two musical superstars, yet, while Streisand's songs are performed in their entirety -- including the interminable finale -- her costar Kris Kristofferson isn't allowed to complete even one single song he performs. Nor, though she does allow him to contribute a little back up to a couple of her ditties, do they actually sing a duet.Or consider this: Streisand's name appears in the credits at least six times, including taking credit for \"musical concepts\" and her wardrobe (from her closet) -- and she also allegedly wanted, but failed to get co-directing credit as well. One of her credits was as executive producer, with a producer credit going to her then-boyfriend and former hairdresser, Jon Peters. As such, Streisand controlled the final cut of the film, which explains why it is so obsessed with skewing the film in her direction. What it doesn't explain is how come, given every opportunity to make The Great Diva look good, their efforts only make Streisand look bad. Even though this was one of Streisand's greatest box office hits, it is arguably her worst film and contains her worst performance.Anyway, moving the melodrama from Hollywood to the world of sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll, Streisand plays Esther Hoffman, a pop singer on the road to stardom, who shares the fast lane for a while with Kristofferson's John Norman Howard, a hard rocker heading for the off ramp to Has-beenville. In the previous incarnations of the story, \"Norman Maine\" sacrifices his leading man career to help newcomer \"Vicky Lester\" achieve her success. In the feminist seventies, Streisand & Co. want to make it clear that their heroine owes nothing to a man, so the trajectory is skewed; she'll succeed with or without him and he is pretty much near bottom from scene one; he's a burden she must endure in the name of love. As such, there is an obvious effort to make the leading lady not just tougher, but almost ruthless, while her paramour comes off as a henpecked twit.Kristofferson schleps through the film with a credible indifference to the material; making little attempt to give much of a performance, and oddly it serves his aimless, listless character well. Streisand, on the other hand, exhibits not one moment of honesty in her entire time on screen. Everything she does seems, if not too rehearsed, at least too controlled. Even her apparent ad libs seem awkwardly premeditated and her moments of supposed hysteria coldly mechanical. The two have no chemistry, making the central love affair totally unbelievable. You might presume that his character sees in her a symbol of his fading youth and innocence, though at age 34, Streisand doesn't seem particularly young or naive. The only conceivable attraction he might offer to her is that she can exploit him as a faster route to stardom. And, indeed, had the film had the guts to actually play the material that way, to make Streisand's character openly play an exploitive villain, the film might have had a spark and maybe a reason to exist.But I guess the filmmakers actually see Esther as a sympathetic victim; they don't seem to be aware just how cold-blooded and self absorbed she is. But sensitivity is not one of the film's strong points: note the petty joke of giving Barbra two African American back up singers just so the film can indulge in the lame racism of calling the trio The Oreos. And the film makes a big deal of pointing out that Esther retains her ethnic identity by using her given name of Hoffman, yet the filmmakers have changed the character's name of the previous films from \"Esther Blodgett\" so that Streisand won't be burdened with a name that is too Jewish or too unattractive. So much for ethnic pride.The backstage back stabbing and backbiting that proceeded the film's release is near legendary, so the fact that the film ended up looking so polished is remarkable. Nominal director Frank Pierson seems to have delivered the raw material for a good movie, with considerable help from ace cinematographer Robert Surtees. And the film did serve its purpose, producing a soundtrack album of decent pop tunes (including the Oscar-winning \"Evergreen\" by Paul Williams and Streisand). But overall the film turned out to be the one thing Streisand reportedly claimed she didn't want it to be, a vanity project.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d050328ece2e40a4a536cb7efb5c566c",
            "input": "I really loved it although while reading the reviews it was quite disturbing to me..But as an anime art fan i can totally understand this perfect art work even though some of it was against my cultures and believes..But hey,it's the world of art..!! the beginning of the film is very strong,strange and confusing.it's hard to understand the contents which make me respect the one who made it.only someone who is extremely opened can do such daring film..it's absolutely not for kids..even though the characters are cute and adorable but they go through some disturbing adventures that cannot be erased(sorry if the spelling is wrong)from ones memory..",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e887cf03f7c44ce182e5ac5aa885cc0c",
            "input": "Brides are dying at the altar, and their corpses are disappearing. Everybody is concerned, but nobody seems to be able to figure out why and how this is happening, nor can they prevent it from happening. Bear with me. Bela Lugosi is responsible for this, as he is extracting spinal fluid from these young women to transfuse his ancient wife and keep her alive. Continue to bear with me. Finally, the authorities figure out that somebody must be engineering the deaths and disappearances, but of course, they can't figure out the improbable motive. Let's just ignore the ludicrous pseudoscience and move on... If you can get through the first twenty minutes of this mess, you will be treated to Lugosi whipping his lab assistant for disrespecting one of the brides he has murdered, explaining that he finds sleeping in a coffin much more comfortable than a bed, and other vague parodies of real horror films (the kind with budgets and plots). Anyhoo - a female journalist follows her nose to the culprit (and remarkably the inept police are nowhere to be seen!), and then the fun really starts.The cinematography and acting are OK. There are a lot of well dressed, very good looking people in this film. The directing is fair, and the script is a little better than the material deserved. Nevertheless, this film fails to sustain the interest of all but the most hardened b-film fan. The best thing about it.... It does eventually end, but not soon enough.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25b29a07c4954bfe9b17b4cf8aafc108",
            "input": "This, \"Prodigal Son\" and \"Eastern Condors\" are my favourite Sammo Hung films. The Fat Dragon is fatter in this outing than he was in \"Condors\", but he's no less sure-footed as director or actor. He is, in fact, at the top of his form and delivers a devastating, brutal actioner that boasts half a dozen amazing sequences and manages to tell a compassionate, sweet love story also. Love and romance are not the director's priorities here, but they serve as curious adjuncts to the action, and insure that viewers don't hit the fast-forward button between the physical clashes.The opening scene, which features a funny light sabre duel, sets a solid but deceptive tone. A sequence in which Sammo's pedicab is chased by a car is beautifully staged and sweetened with a sharp, comic tone. The fast and furious stick fight between Sammo and Lau Kar Leung is a model of dazzling choreography and sharp, superb direction, and easily one of the best ever of its type. The film's violence escalates slowly until, finally, when the climactic showdown comes, we are subjected to some of the most brutal altercations ever seen in a Sammo production. The director/actor's assault on Billy Chow and a house filled with angry, menacing opponents is a bone-cracking, physically punishing delight.Terrific on every level and one of the best martial arts movies ever made.Great score, too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f9836c7857d49a587b5dec87713b80a",
            "input": "This is not a very good movie, but it's not a stinker either. It is very confusing and unnecessarily long so rent it at your own risk.My GF and I have figured this movie out (we think) so here it is:***MAJOR SPOILERS BELOW***Firstly, this movie is actually quite simple after you remove all of the confusing unconscious-dream-state junk (95% of the movie.)Ignoring the junk, what REALLY happened is this: A group of school friends go to a rave one night. They leave and get into a car accident where everyone but Cassie and Sean die. That's the simple cut down version. (That's right, I said Sean, bear with me)Right after the accident, Cassie lays in the hospital stuck in between life & death right up until the very end of the movie. This is where the dream part starts.The movie is called SOUL Survivors, right? Cassie's mind and soul carries on after the accident interacting with the other souls (Annie, Matt, Raven, the 2 weirdos and Jude) along with images conjured up by her mind (Sean, school and everything else around her). The souls continue doing what they were defined as: Annie the rave-going chick, the 2 weirdo-killers (from opening scene), Father Jude still helping people etc.We are then taken on a very long ride, shown lots of images (many of which my GF and I still can't tie in) but it all boils down to it not being Cassie's time to die.At the end, Cassie wakes up in the hospital after being \"dead\" for a while. Her family and Sean are there. This is reality again. She's OK.Then the director adds a little extra spice by trying to confuse us again by showing a little dream snippet of her in the wheelchair being strangled. But this part is really just a nightmare, and she wakes up beside Sean, obviously still dealing with her traumatic experience.Due to space restrictions, we didn't cover every little thing, but feel free to drop us an e-mail if you want to.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a5cb061e1ce4c4bb9dc0038d0842176",
            "input": "Pretty bad movie offers nothing new. The usual creaks and moans attempt to make-up for a muddled, but thin story. Acting is barely above pathetic. Why Liam Neeson signed on for this is anyone's guess. Owen Wilson truly turns in one of the worst performances in recent horror-movie history. Catherine Zeta Jones is fun to look at and not much else although Lili Tayor did an above-average job. The special effects were fairly memorable and the house itself was breathtaking and hauntingly gorgeous. However they can't makeup for the poor acting and the storyline which appears to have been thrown together at the last minute. Don't bother.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-115f7c0f243c4769a988bd21c08f7136",
            "input": "North Africa in the 1930's. To a small Arab town on the edge of the Sahara comes a beautiful woman looking for meaning to her life & a handsome Trappist monk fleeing from his crisis of faith. They will meet and passions will be stirred, but not even the Sand Diviner knows if they will find happiness or sorrow, here, in THE GARDEN OF ALLAH.The plot is pure hokum, but the film is still great fun & beautiful to look at. Marlene Dietrich & Charles Boyer are a superb screen couple. She is, to put it simply, gorgeous, and Boyer gives a most effective, understated performance, letting his sensitive face do much of his acting for him. The supporting cast is excellent: Basil Rathbone, in a sympathetic role as a Count who loves the desert; Joseph Schildkraut as a friendly, talkative guide (all the \"Arabic\" he & others speak in the film is pure gibberish); Lucile Watson as a gentle Mother Superior; Alan Marshal as an honorable young French officer; Tilly Losch as a dangerous dancer; Henry Brandon as a comic porter; John Carradine as the mysterious Sand Diviner; and magnificent Sir C. Aubrey Smith as a wise old priest.Movie mavens will recognize Helen Jerome Eddy as a nun; Marcia Mae Jones & Bonita Granville (peeking over the nun's shoulder) as convent girls; gaunt Nigel De Brulier as a monastery lector; and Ferdinand Gottschalk as a hotel clerk, all uncredited.Color films of the 1930's are both rare & lovely to look at, and this movie is no exception - the cinematography is as colorful as the desert itself. THE GARDEN OF ALLAH was the first Technicolor film to be shot on location. Yuma, Arizona gave the film makers all the sand dunes they could desire, but contaminated drinking water & 135 degree heat soon had the company in revolt. When the daily rushes showed Boyer's face had burned a bright tomato red, producer David O. Selznick finally gave in. The remainder of the film was shot on a Hollywood sound stage.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51dd4fb5f1eb42dbbac2fba335bf784a",
            "input": "Disney, the film name that once stood for all things innocent and suitable for all ages, has finally started to realise that to survive it needs to become more diverse. Such diversity has been very apparent in the last couple of years. Films like \"Tarzan\" and \"The Emperor's New Groove\" have made an attempt to move away from the traditional song-driven routine of Disney's past and into new, uncharted territory. \"Atlantis\" is the boldest step yet, but we have to remember: This is STILL Disney. The first ever serious film to come out of Disney's animation studio is a major achievement for them - in fact it's so serious it makes it into PG territory. Perhaps why a lot of families were scared off from seeing it this past summer.But despite the more mature subject matter, this is still a film that Disney wanted to draw in the families with, not just mature audiences, so the plot had to be kept simple enough for children to understand, but interesting enough to take it away from the realms of \"The Little Mermaid\" et al.So what we get is actually a potentially detailed plot, unfortunately suffering the blow of being condensed into a 96-minute movie. Ultimately, this is an action film about Atlantis, not about the exposition preceding it, so we are whisked through the first half hour with as many sequences bombarding the screen as is possible without losing coherency. Suspend your disbelief of how the characters get from point A to point B so quickly, you're unlikely to find an animated film that detailed coming out of Hollywood! If you want epic levels of detail in the plot, turn to James Cameron's \"Titanic\". Both films feature a boat in some manner.And let's talk about love, shall we? Yes, as with a lot of films, the lead male (one Milo Thatch, a bumbling archaeologist) and lead female (Kida, the clichéd Atlantian princess) are set to fall in love with each other. But what I found was not as clichéd as I was expecting. By film's end, for once, the characters touching/feeling/kissing sequence was far more subdued. There's various points in the film where the attraction grows, but it's just not in the ballpark of, say, \"The Little Mermaid\" (A good thing).You may have grasped that this is a rather clichéd film. Correct. You have your leading hero and heroine, backed up by more than half a dozen crew members who go on the expedition, all being given their moments during the film. Numerous other characters appear, take up the few minutes of screentime, then disappear. It doesn't take a genius to do the maths – a 96-minute film with a focus on action and visuals, and with a considerable cast, has very little time to expand the characters to any major extent. So what does it rely on? Clichés, and lots of them. Every character emulates something that has been done a thousand times before. You have the bumbling scientist, the attractive princess, the square-jawed colonel, the rich eccentric, the maniacal sleazebag, the Russian femme fatale – need I go on?I don't know why this got to anyone – I found the tongue-in-cheek nature of this film quite amusing. Alright, this is meant to be a serious flick, but do you really expect Disney to give up every single trait of their history? At least the writers have tried to come up with consistently witty dialogue, and sometimes it even is a little inspired.But in the end it's those big stunning visuals that put the icing on this cake. The CGI animation is truly amazing in places, and doesn't dwarf the characters, which was a flaw that let the recent \"Titan A.E.\" down. Speaking of characters, Disney hired an outside comics industry artist to create the designs, bringing an anime style to the film. Infact the visual presentation of the film as a whole owes a lot to anime, much more so than any previous Disney outing. This resulted in a conflict with fans of the Japanese anime, \"Nadia\", for the film's overall similarities with said cartoon series. Having not seen this anime, I can't comment.With picture, there is sound. Gary Rydstrom heads up the sound team, and what a soundtrack! From the opening shot the sound stage is alive and is a treat. James Newton Howard treats us to a dynamic musical score, which compliments the film in every way, never sounding out of place and always helping to build the tension or subdue it.Perhaps I missed the point of what the creators intended. To me, the film conveys that it's an adventure thrill ride, albeit with a more serious tone than any Disney film before it. If you don't like the clichéd tongue-in-cheek attitude, then perhaps the effort that has been poured into the visuals will delight. Heck, at least the mythology is far more correct than can be said about other Disney efforts (*cough*Hercules*cough*).This is a positive, 10 out of 10 review, from someone who was blown away by this film. I always suspend my disbelief with any animated film – after all, the laws of the real world are more than frequently broken in the cartoon medium. So sit back, enjoy the ride, and perhaps everyone can find something to enjoy about this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64551a12013d4f22a247f04e7d23e747",
            "input": "This movie is phoniness incarnate, a straight 11 / 10 on the phoniness scale. The fakeness of the accents as well as the tightness of the cardigan spandex pants are just staggering. Yanks, although the real Scotland may be just as colourful, if you ever go there don't expect to be given much of a the chance to \"dance out\" controversies with the locals. Also, don't attempt to sway local opinion through the otherwise fine art of tapdancing.There are a couple of infectious singing-and-dancing scenes, but the plot is far too cheesy and linear, and the dialogue is often too weak. I also doubt whether anyone would want to be stuck in a timewarped 18.th-century Scottish village in the boondocks rather than gay New York City. Maybe it wasn't such a big sacrifice for that priest to have left Brigadoon, maybe he was just trying to get the hell out of that dump.Watch it for the fine alternative-reality view of what a Christopher Streed Day-parade in Scotland would look like on LSD. Other than that I'd only recommend it to Hollywood muscial completists.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebfd4b184aa24ab5bf822aa54b0f55eb",
            "input": "Gurinda Chada's semi-autobiographical film (2002) is a gentle, poignant comedy set in the ethnically diverse community near Heahthrow Airport in West London.Like the airliners which constantly arrive and depart from overhead, we follow the ups and downs of the two main characters Jess Bhamra (Parminder Nagra) and Jules Paxton (Keira Knightley) as they strike up an unlikely friendship which centres around their mutual passion for soccer and their technical infatuation with David Beckham.Much of the comedy grows out of the misunderstandings of the families of these two talented girls as they break all the expectations and conventions of their very different family backgrounds.Somewhere in the middle, as broker, peacemaker and blighted athlete, Joe (Jonathan Reece-Myers) - team coach for the Hounslow Harriers - intercedes in times of crisis, while at the same time remaining the main object of affection of both the main characters.Eventually, and not without many obstacles and triumphs on the way, we finally see our dedicated and beloved soccer heroines soaring away to realise their dreams.With great performances from Bollywood veteran Anupam Kher (Mr Bhamra), Shaheen Khan (Mrs Bhamra), Juliet Stevenson (Mrs Paxton) and Frank Harper (Mr Paxton) this really is a film that captures the urgent passion of adolescence and crosses all ethnic frontiers.Pinky Bamrha (Archie Panjabi) and (Taz) Trey Farley are struggling their own struggles, but nevertheless contribute greatly to our understanding of the main characters in the film.In it's own special way, this film tells an important story that in quite incidental the football. It celebrates the evolution in the understanding of ordinary people in ordinary families and the innate ability of the young to teach the old.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35434b48e7c9409db33c9a55c3a2c28f",
            "input": "This is one of those movies that you keep thinking about when you wake up the next morning. It will give you that warm, fuzzy feeling and leave you with a smile on your face.Sure, we get fed the typical stereotype characters and stories, but it does do the trick: Entertain.Being from Sweden and living in the US for quite sometime, it is funny how we react. \"The deadbeat husband is going to kill him\", \"She (Gabriella) is going to die and then there will be a heartbreaking larger-than-life ending\". We know how these things work, everything comes together at the end. And it did. The characters were somewhat simple, they were so elaborate that you didn't really think twice about it, nothing was really left for your own imagination. The closest would probably be Siv, she makes you ask yourself if she indeed was in love with Daniel, but that's about it.But the movie is beautiful, set in rural Norrland, the music is absolutely amazing and the characters are lovable. Michael Nyqvist is truly genius, with his crazy unique look and Frida Hallberg is charming and approachable. Maybe a little too nice.But most of all this movie makes you feel, and that is the most important thing. You cry, you laugh, you hate and you identify. I don't know about you guys, but that does not happen that often.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df98925d0d7f4fd9bcf360a666dcf6a9",
            "input": "This film was horrible. The script is COMPLETELY unrealistic yet it is written to take place in the real-world, the editing and lighting effects are worse than most first projects in film school.I do not recommend this film to anyone who: A) knows any detail about the world of police or covert operations. B) knows any detail about film making or appreciation.I do recommend this film to the average or below-average mind, I think it would be enjoyable if I was a dumber. If you must watch this film on a full mind, I highly recommend some kind of inebriationIt is a total waste of what little production value it has.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67a295c189bf418681d246eae1dd4bec",
            "input": "Greetings again from the darkness. Insight into the mind and motivation of a wonderful artist. How strange for most of us to see someone who MUST work... no matter the conditions, else his reason for living ceases. To see Goldsworthy's sculptures come alive and to see his reaction to each is extremely voyeuristic. This artist creates because he must - not for money or fame. It is his lifeforce. When you see his failures, energy seems to expel from his body like a burst hot air balloon. It is not the dread of beginning again, it is that he takes his energy from his work. Watching him create just to have nature takeover and recall his work is somewhat painful, but nonetheless, breathtaking. He discusses flow and time in the minimal dialog and there appears to be little doubt that the artist and the earth are one in the same. When he says he needs the earth, but it does not need him ... I beg to differ. Only complaint is the musical score seems to slow down further a pace that is relaxing at best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e84a45797e7840cebc2962606f4a5d6e",
            "input": "It's interesting to see what shape Pierce Brosnan's career was in before Bond arrived on the scene. In this \"tense\" thriller, Pierce Brosnan plays the gentle Patrick, who works leading ghetto kids on \"confidence courses\". He romances a woman, who has a bog-standard mop-top mid-90s kid called Eric. The woman's drunken ex-husband soon arrives on the scene and begins to mess with Pierce.At one stage Pierce is innocently making \"vegeburgers\". The husband enters. Pierce resumes making vegeburgers. The husband then assaults Pierce. Little chunks of half-eaten vegeburger call fall from Pierce's mouth. The fight abruptly ends without showing the outcome. This is as good as the film gets.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5c60e3b0512438997767ee961d32ed1",
            "input": "I had heard (and read) so many good things about Weeds that I was looking forward to getting hooked on another great cable Series (like Entourage, Sopranos or Mad Men) but that slowly eroded away with each episode I watched from Season One. (didn't make it past the first six episodes) The writing was unoriginal, contrived and the portrayal of Blacks embarrassing. The dialog felt forced, like the writers are trying way too hard to be clever and hip . It was a rare moment when I actually emitted an audible laugh.The characters never developed enough for me to care about them, they were selfish and unappealing. I absolutely HATED the addition of the Brother-in-law (who should have been hauled away on To Catch A Predator) and the removal of the Hodes' daughter Quinn from the cast by sending her to boarding school in Mexico was so unoriginal and cliché, I had to conclude the writers were testing the viewer's loyalty.Episode after episode I liked the characters less and couldn't get past many of the technical flaws in the story line.Add to that I heard that Season Two wasn't as good, so I lost all motivation to continue to watch this play out.If you're a fan of good casting and writing, I suspect this show will be a challenge for you to like, unless of course you're stoned and then all bets are off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb1f31f37fae493dbd2afd7d525484db",
            "input": "This film was more effective in persuading me of a Zionist conspiracy than a Muslim one. And I'm Jewish.Anbody go to journalism school? Read an editorial? Freshman year rhetoric? These alarmist assertions, presented in a palatable way, might prove persuasive. But by offering no acknowledgment of possible opposing arguments, nor viable (or any at all) solutions, few sources and each of dubious origin, makes the argument an ineffectual diatribe.And thank goodness for that -- I wouldn't want anyone to leave the theatre BELIEVING any of this racist claptrap.A good lesson for me -- and hopefully a cautionary tale for you -- to actually read about a film before seeing it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5460f4c5aa24935b262fbc8725604bc",
            "input": "Seriously. I just wrapped up my first viewing of Demonicus and words have failed me.I remember a time when I would see Charles Band's name on a film and my heart would race. He was never a Wes Craven or a John Carpenter. He was a bastion of hope for the little man. The guy whose movies arrived at the video store instead of the multiplex, but they still rocked harder than most of the trendy junk we otherwise had to endure.And now... this.A painfully-obvious Californian walking trail doubles for \"the Alps\" and an abandoned train tunnel is actually supposed to be \"an ancient cave\". I mean, they didn't even try to dress the thing up with moss or film it in a way that might suggest it was anything other than an old train tunnel! Ugh! Instead of a creepy demon gladiator, as the cover implies, we're treated to a dude wearing the latest in Wal-Mart Halloween apparel. There's a pretty cool looking corpse, who occasionally comes to life to belch and wiggle his fingers, but he doesn't even learn to stand until the final five minutes. Why couldn't he be the villain? Instead, we've got frat boy Joe with a plastic sword. Ouch.Charles Band... you should be ashamed that your name is attached to such tripe. I love movies that are so bad, they're good. Hell, I occasionally enjoy a flick thats so bad, its just bad. This one, however, is just unwatchable. A perfect example of making a buck, rather than making a quality film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc8f0da316e0417395f74b295e9ab32c",
            "input": "I thought this was a great idea but, boy, was it poorly executed. We do get a broad sense of how complex and challenging the backstage operations of a show are, but virtually no specifics about any of it works. The producers don't seem to have found any way to tell a story or give the viewer a \"through-line.\" (Which is not to say they didn't try, but having the stagehands relate a synopsis of the Ring cycle as the program's narrative does nothing to tell us about the job of physically mounting an opera.)We see lots of things happening, but are told little about what it is that the people are doing and why. There's little sense of who is who, or how the various production departments fit and work together. For instance, several times we hear about a problem of some sort -- one expects then to see the problem and its consequences and/or how it gets resolved. But instead the filmmakers generally just cut to something else (generally, pretty generic footage of people pushing stuff or talking into headsets.) Overall the film ends up feeling more like a pastiche of images that you'd see run under the closing credits of a show, rather than anything worth watching for its own merit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0464f64628b4a54b6a8c8c3961abfcc",
            "input": "When I saw this movie first, it was long ago on VHS-Video. I did like this movie, because it was funny and excitingly. Some years ago I saw another movie, called: *Andy Colby's Incredible Adventure* In this movie were parts of *Wizards of the lost kingdom* used in. They called this movie \"KOR the conquerer\". I began to search for the \"KOR\"-Movie many years, because I wanted to see the complete movie, not only the parts which were used in the *Andy Colby*-Movie. No shop had this Kor-Movie to rent and no shop did know this movie. Many years I watched my old VHS-tapes I had at home, and what a wonder... I had this movie since many years still at home, but the movie had a different title, because in Germany it has 3 or 4 titles. So I was happy to find this tape at home and this time I had much more time in watching *KOR the Conquerer again. The music is great during the hole movie, but the best part of filming in combination with the music is this moment, when KOR is walking drunken through the green forrest. The music in the background had some kind of magic. I like Bo Svenson, and also the boy, who played Simon in the movie. Both of them did their job very good. Manfred Kraatz, Germany, 26.10.2004. Thanks to all for reading my comment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-148b3717072a4064b977adf983a1b02f",
            "input": "If you are uninitiated to the Gundam world, this is a good place to start. If you are burned out on Star Wars or Star Trek, here is a compelling, realistic sci-fi series you can become immersed in. Not the simplistic boy-saves-world-in-giant robot story you might have expected, but rather a complex, emotionally compelling space war drama where the line between the \"good\" and \"bad\" guys is decidedly less than distinct.Gundam 0080 focuses on the story of Al Izuruha, a young, naive boy living in a neutral space colony. He spends his days daydreaming about Mobile Suits and playing war with his friends. During the course of this series, Al befriends an \"enemy\" soldier, Bernie Wiseman. By the end, little Al learns some hard lessons about the reality of war and the requisite suffering and sacrifice.I loved this OAV series, with its cool mecha designs, involving story, and likeable characters. I recommend this series to anyone who likes realistic SF anime, or to those who think anime is just silly or sexy entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-188b9c174c2647ecbd4049513e1295ed",
            "input": "I wanted to like Magnolia. The plot reminded me of Grand Canyon (which I liked). 4 different lives/stories that come together at the end but Magnolia took a wrong turn halfway through the movie and I was lost. I almost turned it off right then and there but I felt I should hang in there until the end, little did I know it would be another torturous 1 1/2 hours. Thank god I rented instead of seeing it in the theatre. I almost screamed out in frustration after 2 hours. The biggest kick in the pants was the ending frog scene. My DVD player still hasn't forgiven me and I don't blame it one bit. It was a unique movie, but a bad, boring, and pointless movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e994b01c3ead47cca29b0dc3525ce470",
            "input": "This is the worst adaption of a classic story I have ever seen. They needlessly modernize it and some points are actually just sick.The songs rarely move along the story. They seem to be thrown in at random. The flying scene with Marley is pointless and ludicrous.It's not only one of the worst movies I've seen, but it is definitely the worst musical I've ever seen.It's probably only considered a classic because \"A Christmas Carol\" is such a classic story. Just because the original story was a classic doesn't mean that some cheap adaption is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7707534bd7494735854742ee4485898a",
            "input": "this independent film was one of the best films at the tall grass film festival that i have ever seen there i loved it there are so many things that was great about the film on top of all that the cast and crew that i had the opportunity to meet were absolutely phenomenal.I thought that Avi did a great job in his role. and Ricky Ullman was absolutely true to his role for a Disney actor i was amazed at his talent to be able to go from cheesy teen comedy to such an adult role with no problems the talent in the film was just amazing the cinematography was just great if you want to see an independent film this is one really that you should see.I think that Mr Gruver would have been so proud to have such a submission in his festival and his parents loved the movie so much when it won the audience favorite they went and saw it again. this truly was a great film it was dark and funny and sad and truly emotional it was just fabulous. I am honestly just so enthused by this film and i really don't want to spoil it for any one just see it and truly be amazed at it i think that these film makers really have what it takes to go places and I hope to see more work from them in the future.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a37a28c6ed74793afc0f301b931afc7",
            "input": "Dead To Rights is about a Police Officer named Jack Slate who finds his murdered father and goes after the man that he thinks killed him.Jack is later shot and framed for the murder of the man he suspected of killing his father.Several months later on the day Jack is going to be executed he escapes from prison and searches the city for the man who framed him for murder.Jack's search leads him through a trail of *beep* that doesn't end until everyone is dead.Through out the game Jack uses weapons from M4 Carbines to his dog Shadow to kill endless streams of people in 15 levels.The game play is basically \"kill 30 people,find switch to open door.kill 50 people,find switch to open door\" over and over until the level is done.There are fun mini games too like playing as a stripper to distract bouncers at a Night Club so Jack can get to another area in the club,or bomb disarming.Dead To Rights is also a hard game.You will be put in an area swarming with bad guys armed with Sub Machine Guns while you only have a pistol.Near the end of the game skill turns to dust and you have to rely on luck.Dead To Rights is as gory as it is hard.If you shoot a guy in the face with a shot gun blood will splatter on the walls,ceiling and floor.And since there are several guys in each area the walls will be painted in blood.Family fun for everyone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c7a91b162604672a791feeaee36128d",
            "input": "A small pleasure in life is walking down the old movies aisle at the rental store, and picking stuff just because I haven't seen it. A large pleasure is occasionally taking that movie home and finding a small treasure like this playing on my screen.Long before Elia Kazan turned himself into a brand cranking out only notable movies (not good ones), he made this better than average drama. Watching it you begin to notice how many decent, good or nicely observed scenes have accumulated. Contrast that with his later films where the drama is writ large... preferably large, and unsubtle, and scandalous. Kazan was eventually more of a calculating promoter than a director. (um. No thanks) His future excesses are hinted at here only in the plot. The plague is coming! But here's an atypical Richard Widmark playing a family man in 1951 and avoiding most of the excesses of that trope; here's an almost watchable Barabra bel Geddes, with her bathos turned way down (well, for her); they're a couple and they share some nicely-written scenes about big crises and smaller ones. Here's an expertly directed comic interrogation with a chatty ships-crew; here's a beautiful moment as a chase begins at an angular warehouse and a flock of birds shoots overhead punctuating the moment. These are the small-scale successes a movie can offer in which a viewer can actually recognize life; something Hollywood, in its greed, now studiously avoids. These are the moments that make me go to the movies and enjoy them. It's a personable, human-scaled film, not the grotesque, overscaled production that he and others (David Lean) will later popularize, whose legacy is still felt in crap as varied as Pirates of the Caribean and Moulin Rouge.I just watched it twice and I'll be damned if I could tell you what Jack Palance is seeking in the final scenes, but it doesn't seem that important to me as a viewer. This reminds me of both No Way Out a Poitier noir with Widmark as the villain, and Naked City, which you should really get your hands on.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6ff279afaf448c1afb63af6890f6296",
            "input": "I can't believe how awful this movie turned out to be. I feel magnanimous even referring to it as a \"movie\". The acting was flat, the editing was terrible and the plot leaves many major questions unanswered. The premise was OK, if unoriginal: a small group of aliens is living in the US and trying to slowly take over humanity. But it goes rapidly downhill from there. How could they convince a \"human\" to accept an alien as his wife in order to make they alien-human hybrid they require? They show a larval alien but never show what it does. They have a plastic surgeon that can produce perfect looking skin on an industrial scale. They throw in the obligatory huge alien monster with teeth. The ending was almost too painful to watch. I suppose that I'm mostly disappointed that Bruce Boxlietner would have anything to do with this. How could he say to the huge alien monster with teeth, \"Get away from him you son of a b*tch\" with a straight face? It's a long fall from his Babylon 5 days. Avoid this at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aba7392ff21244558cdc49a3bf311812",
            "input": "Sudden Impact tends to be treated as Eastwood's artistic failure at a point in his career when he had established a good reputation as a director. The reason is actually not the film itself but the attitude it takes towards vigilantism which it seems to support. In some places it actually owes more to Death Wish than the original Dirty Harry film. One might argue if that is so- at the end of the day it's a film about guilt, justice and retribution. For me, at the end of the day it's more empathy than sympathy. However, in view of all these arguments it is easily overlooked that sudden impact is an awfully well made film. Forget the \"Go ahead punk, make my day scene\", that's iconic but not original. But look at the views of San Fransisco taken from the air, zooming in on the city. The first 15 or 20 minutes are quite spectacular. Or have a look at the brilliantly made scene where Sondra Locke's character visits her mentally ill sister in hospital. Eastwood makes great use of the juxtaposition of faces. So all in all Sudden Impact is a very visual film that really shows how mature Eastwood is as a director. And if I remember correctly it was actually the first time Eastwood put that on screen albeit in an action film of debatable ideology. Also, I think this is the first well paced film Eastwood directed. Although Eastwood has enormous talent as a director, dramaturgy has always been his weak point (see Play Misty for me, Breezy etc.) Thepace of the narrative leads to the visual elements being well integrated into the film and not distracting from the story. The only thing that is really annoying is the farting dog.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-305e1b304d9347829ad8693c8cbf5382",
            "input": "What happened? Those were the first words to come to mind after this awful movie finished for the first and last time on my computer screen. Nightmare on Elm St. had gone noticeably downhill after it's cult-classic of a first film, but I doubt anybody expected this horrible aberration. Nobody expected this cosmic joke of a film, and nobody is more distraught about it than I am.This is by far the worst ANOES film of the lot. It doesn't seem too bad at the beginning, with a genuinely creepy intro and a rather elongated shower scene featuring Alice. But then we hit rock bottom right at the beginning with bad acting and a jumbled sequence of events. I mean, sure, Freddy movies are supposed to be dreamlike and creepy, but this one is like a train-wreck in it's poor sequencing of events and awful plot setup. It feels like you're coming down with a terrible headache, not like you're getting scared. So the directing totally fails. None of the suspense and well crafted horror from previous sequels is found here, and even the death scenes are mostly just crass and moronic (the death by food especially), except for that one cool scene that's crafted like a comic book battle. That's why this movie gets a point.The storyline...lame, lame, lame, LAME. It was an excuse to gross people out and to make the MPAA mad, and nothing more.The acting...should I mention how Freddy has been turned into a childish boogey-man-like clown figure? How his rebirth scene made him look like a monster out of a 7 year old's horror book instead of the foreboding and nightmarish dream killer we've all known and loathed since the first film? That arm waving and stupid chuckling as he appeared again...ugh. And his one liners, too. Throughout the whole movie, they suck. Badly. A grade-schooler could come up with funnier stuff then the vomit Freddy spews throughout the 90 minute duration of the film. Hell, a chimpanzee could come up with much funnier lines than what Freddy's been told to say here. Who wrote the script for this? This movie is really irritating, too. It seems so pointless. Like a gnat buzzing around your head, a gnat that just WON'T go away. Freddy is just an annoyance now. We've seen him so many times before. This one's nothing different, and a lot of the time you just want him to take his awful one-liners and get off your TV screen. Alice, instead of the thoughtful and quiet girl from the last movie, seems annoying and very shallow, and this is obviously due to the horrible, horrible script this movie was fitted with. Lisa Wilcox may be a great actor, and sometimes it shines through the cracks here, but she can't save this movie. The other actors just suck, mostly.The last 15 or 20 minutes of Freddy's existence in this film are awful and embarrassing. I hope Englund was ashamed of this. Who wants to see Freddy running around like a mutated gorilla with his limbs stretched out, laughing like a cartoon villain? This movie destroyed anything positive I felt for the Nightmare series. I can't ever watch them again without this image running through my head; of the mangled cartoon abomination that Krueger became. He was slowly becoming a jokey, retarded pop culture icon, but this is the lowest of the low. This is rock bottom. Nobody will ever take Freddy Krueger seriously again after seeing this film. He's naught but a joke, a clown that is long overdue for retirement. Pathetic.Of all the movies I could hate, why did it have to be Nightmare on Elm St, a series which I once adored and liked a lot? The Dream Child represents the death of a legend, and the shattering of any hope I had in the Nightmare on Elm St. series. Freddy would go on to continue his downward spiral into clown status in the next installment, Freddy's Dead (which was more entertaining than this was, actually), and then he would go on to bring down the mood in Freddy VS Jason, and finally he would putter out into nothing, which is for the best.I know this has mostly been a rant about why Freddy sucks now, but this movie is overall, horrible, and one of the worst movies ever made. Not recommended to anyone, and even ANOES completionists won't want to see this one again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98385d61d1f24ebe8cef3df3a8366079",
            "input": "This film caught me by surprise. My friend told me that this movie was a \"chick flick.\" Boy, was he wrong! This movie has a great family appeal, with no sex scenes like _other_ movies. Jake Gyllenhaal does an excellent job in Homer Hickam's shoes. The supporting cast is great, as well.Science, coming-of-age, family quarrels, a great train scene... This film has it all. The soundtrack is good, although the score is presented quite choppily. The 50s music kicks the movie over the edge of greatness.The DVD is definitely worth its weigh in coal. Replay value is great - I've seen it quite a few times already.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10a894a4bc6a4827b5d4406618f2248b",
            "input": "What we have here is a damn good little nineties thriller that, while perhaps lacking in substance, still provides great entertainment throughout it's running time and overall does everything you could possibly want a film of this nature to do. I saw this film principally because it was directed by John Dahl - a highly underrated director behind great thrillers such as The Last Seduction, Rounders and Roadkill. I figured that if this film was up to standard of what I've already seen from the director, it would be well worth watching - and Red Rock West is certainly a film that Dahl can be proud of. The plot focuses on the overly moral Michael; a man travelling across America looking for work. He ends up finding it one day when he stumbles upon a bar in Red Rock County - only catch is that the job is to murder a man's wife. He's been mistaken for a killer named Lyle, but instead of doing the job; he plays both sides against each other and eventually plans to make a getaway. However, his attempts to escape are unsuccessful and he finds himself in a bad situation when the real Lyle turns up...John Dahl appears to enjoy setting thrillers on the road; he did it three years earlier with Kill Me Again, and again almost a decade on from this film with Roadkill. It's not hard to see why Dahl chooses this sort of location, as it provides a fabulous atmosphere for a thriller the likes of this one. Dahl also provides his film with a 'film noir' like atmosphere, as the plot mainly focuses on the central character and the word he is plunged into is full of dark and mysterious characters. The acting is largely very good, with Nicholas Cage doing an excellent job in the lead role, and getting A-class support from Lara Flynn Boyle, J.T. Walsh and, of course, Dennis Hopper; who once again commands the screen with his over the top performance. It has to be said that the second half of the film isn't as gripping as the first, but Red Rock West certainly is never boring and the way that Dahl orchestrates the grand finale is excellent in that all the central characters get to be a part of it. Overall, Red Rock West is a film that you're unlikely to regret watching. It's thrilling throughout, and you can't ask for much more than that!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1744f54a192a476d9e521afac713a1f7",
            "input": "This waste of time is a completely unnecessary remake of a great film. Nothing new or original is added other than Perry's backflashes, which are of marginal interest. It lacks the documentary feel of the first film and the raw urgency that made it so effective. Also painfully missing is the sharp Quincy Jones soundtrack that added to much to the original film. I can't understand any high ratings for this at all. It's quite bad. Why does anyone waste time or money making crap like this and why did I waste time watching it?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ceb36fb1cf71409eaf11825c3f44a9ae",
            "input": "Fabulous, fantastic, probably Disney's best musical adventure. I have loved this film for over 35 years because it is so imaginative, clever and fun. Even despite the silly \"flying bed\" scenes, the other scenes and dialog are magical and funny. Could they have picked anyone better than Angela Lansbury to play Eglantine? I cannot think of anyone more suited to the role. Remaking this classic would be as stupid as remaking Mary Poppins.David Tomlinson, though he had few quality movie roles, absolutely shines in this adventure. He was a comic genius who is often forgotten nowadays. Blustering, prim and proper Englishman -- nobody could really do slapstick and pull it off as gracefully as he does. It would be tragic to remake this film because Tomlinson has been deceased for a few years and nobody could step into his shoes and do his character justice.The dancing nightgowns and armor have a magical aura about them that other movies with witches just don't capture. I particularly enjoy the parts where the Germans invade Eglantine's house and she must defend it in any way she can.Bobbing along, bobbing along on the bottom of the beautiful briny, sea. Richard and Robert Sherman outdid themselves on the musical numbers. All of them are fantastic and worth remembering, Portobello Road being one of my favorites.A great film that still holds up today!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5746df075e34a3e96373554bb8a61ed",
            "input": "For animation buffs it's a must, but even general audiences will enjoy THE CAMERAMAN'S REVENGE, a very early example of 'pixilation' by the hard-working pioneer Wladyslaw Starewicz. Starewicz and his helpers painstakingly manipulated a cast of flexible insect figures to tell this story, paving the way for the likes of Willis O'Brien, George Pal, Ray Harryhausen, and legions of modern digital effect creators.THE CAMERAMAN'S REVENGE is only about 10 minutes long, but packs in lots of amusing detail as the story follows the amorous adventures of two beetles from their home to a nightclub, a hotel, a cinema, and, eventually, a prison cell. There are two brief dance numbers at the nightclub (performed by a frog and a dragonfly), a scuffle between a beetle and a grasshopper, and a large-scale donnybrook at the cinema, which ends with the projector bursting into flames. Pretty elaborate goings-on for 1912, when even John Bray and Winsor MacCay were just getting started, and Walt Disney was still in grade school!It's interesting to note, too, what an impact the alteration of a silent movie's title cards can have on the story being told. I've seen two versions of this film offered by two video companies, and watched them back-to-back, and although the image content itself is almost identical, two different sets of intertitles tell two very different stories. (And the plot outline someone provided above tells yet a third story, which suggests that there's another version out there somewhere.) The British Film Institute's print, which has rhyming intertitles, tells the story of two sibling beetles, each secretly married, who hide this information from one another in order to inherit their late father's fortune. The other, Russian print, tells a simpler story of married beetles who are each guilty of infidelity. In the Russian version Mr. Beetle visits his girlfriend at the \"Gay Dragonfly\" nightclub, while in the English version brother Bill Beetle visits his wife at the music-hall. Personally, I prefer the straightforward-- and spicier --Russian story; the BFI version tries to cram too much plot into what should be a simple tale, and some of the rhymes are a bit awkward.Still, in any rendition, THE CAMERAMAN'S REVENGE is a delightful film, and would make an ideal lead-in to that other great animated work which features beetles, YELLOW SUBMARINE.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3da2794a345d40df88de39a9baf516f3",
            "input": "Bellocchio refers to this as a mainly political movie, a description of the revolutionary movement in Italy, but that seems more metaphor than reality. Well, almost everything in the movie seems like metaphor. The revolutionaries, of whom we see and about whom we learn very little, might as well be mafiosi. Out with the old and in with the new.Andrea's Papa, a psychoanalyst, seems to stand for the usual traditional bourgeois values -- morally upright, unperturbed, clean and tidy, thoroughly ritualized.Giullia, the girlfriend of a revolutionary, seems to represent what can happen to someone who needs very badly a cause to support but is unable to muster up the kind of devotion such a commitment demands. (I'm guessing here.) Andrea, the adolescent boy, seems to be the only guy in the movie who is not in some unquiet way \"upatz.\" He's respectful of his father but disobedient too. He loves Giullia, or so we assume, although he's not really old enough to have learned how to manage his reflexes optimally, but he leaves her in order to show up at school and complete his final exams. His course between these contradictory lifestyles could be described as \"media.\" He's the man in between, who knows the meaning of gradualism, who can keep his cool while those about him are screaming.Most of this is summed up during the oral part of his finals when he is asked to translate and comment on an excerpt from \"Antigone,\" which contrasts the traditional authority of the gods with the notion of secularity and free will.That brings us -- by no particular course that I'm aware of -- to Marushka Detmars. She brings to mind a New Yorker cartoon of a few years ago. Two hippos are neck-deep in the river, staring at a gazelle drinking from the bank, and one hippo says to the other, \"I hate her.\" She's a good actress. (Let me get that out of the way.) But so is everyone else in the film. She carries with her, in her speech and manner, the rich glitter of outright lunacy. And it all comes from the actress too, not from directorial aid. Detmars isn't nuts the way Catherine DeNeuve was nuts in \"Repulsion.\" The walls don't turn to rubber and grow hands. Instead, we see her animated -- sometimes TOO animated. And she gives us shocking jolts when her mood abruptly changes and becomes threatening the way a looming thunderstorm is threatening.A critic described her as sultry, but that's probably not the word he was searching for. She's compellingly beautiful with her fluffy brown hair, her wide white ready grin, her impulsive giggles. And her eyes are like the eyes in the paintings on the walls of ancient Egyptian tombs. The sexy parts are pretty erotic, not so much because one of them is explicit, but because we've gotten to know the characters involved. (It's more interesting to spy on the honeymoon couple next door than go to a skin flick.) Actually there isn't THAT much sex. There is only one scene of simulated intercourse but the director lets it play out in what seems to be real time. At least real time for an eighteen-year-old boy.The young man who plays Andrea is fine too, which is a necessary thing, because the film depends almost entirely on him and Giullia. They have to carry it and they do. If it were not for their performances, I'm not sure this would be as interesting or as admirable flick as it is. It could easily have been turned into a rather slow, boring romance.Worth it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e91ac02ac0543dba3950b9257d7782e",
            "input": "This horror movie is really weak...that is if this is the correct movie I am commenting on. Nothing really terrible goes on as a family adopts a cute little German Shepard pup. I had a German Shepard and it is a really good dog. I did not get the idea to get one from this movie though, but rather from the comedy \"K-9\". That is another story all together though. This movie really doesn't have much horror at all as the most horrific scene is at the end and it looks really cheesy. Also, we see a guy almost put his hand into a lawn mower. That is about it. The father suspects something though, as his family seems to be getting rather strange, somewhere he finds out if you hold a mirror to them while they are sleeping you can see if they are possessed. All in all a really weak horror movie even by television standards...television movies that do work are out there as \"This House Possessed\" is pretty good and there is another haunted house movie about a woman and these strange creatures that is also rather good. This one is really rather dull.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bab68e584d7a466e8c6ae41e5b848cd9",
            "input": "I took a flyer in renting this movie but I gotta say, it was very, very good. On all fronts: script, cast, director, photography, and high production values, etc. Proves Eva Longoria Parker is head and shoulders in rom/com above bad actors such as Kate Hudson and Jennifer Aniston, who mug and call it acting. Who'da thunk it?Parker and Isla Fisher are in a class by themselves in this regard and should try to hold out for projects as good as \"Over Her Dead Body.\" Lake Bell is excellent, too, and this is the first time I have seen her. And finally, Paul Rudd gets to shine in a really good movie, instead of lesser films.A movie like this never gets its dues from close-minded males. It's too bad. As other IMDb reviewers here have noted, there is nothing lame about this gem --no hack writing or acting. And its depiction of contemporary L.A. and California, in general, makes every scene look bright, beautiful, clean, and otherwise outstanding in every way. Never before has a movie made L.A. look so good. Ah, what a little talent and a lot of caring can do for a movie.I won't divulge the plot, but as a long-time and hard-core atheist, I was willing to suspend disbelief and buy into the supernatural theme in order to enjoy an excellent and light-hearted piece of entertainment. It reminds me very much of the old \"Topper\" movies, which were also so enjoyable.This movie exposes popular, but otherwise hackneyed, movies like \"Ghost\" for the mediocre and overly sentimental crap fests they are. We already know the public taste leans heavily toward the mediocre. Some of us save our praise for the truly worthy, however.If you have enjoyed other overlooked gems such as \"Into the Night\" with Michelle Pfeiffer, Jeff Goldblum and Clu Gulager, \"Blind Date\" with Bruce Willis and Kim Basinger, \"American Dreamer\" with JoBeth Williams, \"Chances Are\" with Robert Downey Jr., Christopher McDonald and Cybil Sheppard, \"Making Mr. Right\" with John Malkovich, etc., you'll enjoy this. A first-rate job all around (even if it's kinda hard to believe a straight guy can pretend to be gay for more than five years.) But even that plot device doesn't detract from the movie's overall excellence.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2f1552a68d34610934e959a11997a30",
            "input": "I saw this film in Winnipeg recently - appropriate, given the location used. I first read Lawrence's book back in the 70's and for me, it's always been a very powerful picture of the trials of aging in our society. It resonated when I was young, and it resonates even more now. When the film came out, I was keen to see if the story could survive. and was thoroughly impressed, especially with Ellen Burstyn's performance. She manages to give us a complete human being, even though the character is generally cranky and judgmental - someone that you wouldn't want to live with. It's great to be able to see favourite characters come to life so authentically.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41e916c2e73b485f9f38a43f4bc9a987",
            "input": "There was not one single redeeming factor in this movie. The girlfriend and I both love action films. Especially fight scenes (Bloodsport and Kickboxer was awesome), but this movie was not entertaining. Five minutes of action followed twenty minutes of talking and \"angry\" facial expressions. The main hero is a troubled character who has seen battle and thus is forced to look seriously constipated at all times. The Army has disrupted his bowel movements on top of perfecting his fighting technique. The music isn't good either. They fight to the rap and hip-hop style of the streets, 'cause these guys are thugs. The rest of the soundtrack is the usual background noise to low-budget dramas.Everything about this movie is classic B-style. The actors deliver their lines as if reading them from cue cards and the lines themselves should be set on fire and left burning in some rotten Hollywood alleyway. The film is called \"Honor,\" but there was no honor in making this film. It was simply a waste of money, and spending wisely is something I consider to be honorable.Go see Felon instead. The fight scenes and situations are more real.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95c96d3129614295afbdfe65079d92f3",
            "input": "the writing of the journalists and the required over eager reckless press officer and sobbing grandma was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.I cant blame the actors, but surely someone must have said \"are you joking I cant say this!\"This episode had a press perspective and police perspective, while the police perspective was standard enough, the press perspective and characterization was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly unbelievable.I notice that this was an HBO co production, if so then perhaps the sledgehammer stereotypes can be explained in that light,I was completely cringing during the press conference scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely ring true. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am still waiting for the suspense.Skip Five Daysthis. the 2008/9 production with these characters is far better and more suspenseful even if the crime is over the top.This story had unforgivable moments which can only be described as staggeringly unbelievable.For a press officer to start a press conference without an investigating officer present to take press questions.so unbelievable it felt like amateur hour.I then began looking for Journalists called \"Scoop\" and for Perry White to make an appearance.I saw the 2009 Hunter before \"five days\"made it to Australia, not realizing it was a prequel and was looking forward to Bonneville and McTeer going around again.Head shakingly awful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7941e61969034ec29e8dba3ff3b825e8",
            "input": "I shudder to think what people must have thought of environmentalists after viewing this piece of overbearing, preachy cinematic trash. Larded with enough Indian-wannabe nuttery and space brother buffoonery to stock a new-age shop, Starlight makes anyone who gives a damn about the planet look like a feather-wearing crystal-fondling idiot.The plot? Alien Rae Dawn Chong arrives to guide a flute playing underwear model in a mystical quest to avert Earth's impending environmental collapse. But first they must defeat an evil alien who looks nothing so much like a refugee from a Castro street bar. Fortunately, they've got mystical grandpa Willie Nelson along to help (who looks faintly embarrassed by the proceedings, as well he ought to be) along with buckets of cheap F/X and reams of pointlessly swelling music.Sure, the clunky script helps to obscure the film's trite plot and staggering pace, but that's just the tip of this melting movie iceberg. Everyone concerned with this film should have their union cards revoked until they complete a real course in environmental science.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2ed524e8b5b42e3a66596326703b5bf",
            "input": "Before I explain the \"Alias\" comment let me say that \"The Desert Trail\" is bad even by the standards of westerns staring The Three Stooges. In fact it features Carmen Laroux as semi- bad girl Juanita, when you hear her Mexican accent you will immediately recognize her as Senorita Rita from the classic Stooge short \"Saved by the Belle\". In \"The Desert Trail\" John Wayne gets to play the Moe Howard character and Eddy Chandler gets to play Curly Howard. Like their Stooge counterparts a running gag throughout the 53- minute movie is Moe hitting Curly. Wayne's character, a skirt chasing bully, is not very endearing, but is supposed to be the good guy. Playing a traveling rodeo cowboy Wayne holds up the rodeo box office at gunpoint and takes the prize money he would have won if the attendance proceeds had been good-the other riders have to settle for 25 cents on the dollar (actually even less after Wayne robs the box office). No explanation is given for Wayne's ripping off the riders and still being considered the hero who gets the girl. Things get complicated at this point because the villain (Al Ferguson) and his sidekick Larry Fine (played by Paul Fix-who would go on to play Sheriff Micah on television's \"The Rifleman\") see Wayne rob the box office and then steal the remainder of the money and kill the rodeo manager. Moe and Curly get blamed. So Moe and Curly move to another town to get away from the law and they change their names to Smith and Jones. Who do they meet first but their old friend Larry, whose sister becomes the 2nd half love interest (Senorita Rita is left behind it the old town and makes no further appearances in the movie). Larry's sister is nicely played by a radiantly beautiful Mary Kornman (now grown up but in her younger days she was one of the original cast members of Hal Roach's \"Our Gang\" shorts). Kornman is the main reason to watch the mega-lame western and her scenes with Moe and Curly are much better than any others in the production, as if they used an entirely different crew to film them. Even for 1935 the action sequences in this thing are extremely weak and the technical film- making is staggeringly bad. The two main chase scenes end with stock footage wide shots of a rider falling from a horse. Both times the editor cuts to a shot of one of the characters rolling on the ground, but there is no horse in the frame, the film stock is completely different, and the character has on different clothes than the stunt rider. There is liberal use of stock footage in other places, none of it even remotely convincing. One thing to watch for is a scene midway into the movie where Moe and Curly get on their horses and ride away (to screen right) from a cabin as the posse is galloping toward the cabin from the left. The cameraman follows the two stooges with a slow pan right and then does a whip pan to the left to reveal the approaching posse. Outside of home movies I have never seen anything like this, not because it is looks stupid (which it does) but because a competent director would never stage a scene in this manner. They would film the two riders leaving and then reposition the camera and film the posse approaching as a separate action. Or if they were feeling creative they would stage the sequence so the camera shows the riders in the foreground and the posse approaching in the background. Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b84b5114ac934517bcd8dc073a122a78",
            "input": "I saw the movie last night and I really wanted to like it. My expectations for the movie had been going up and down ever since I heard it was being made. Some days I'd see something spectacular and some days I'd be disappointed.Yet being the kind of fan I am, I had high hopes for this movie but in the end I was sorely disappointed.While I love the Richard Donner movies I didn't like their sometimes campy nature or the changes they made to Superman's character and his powers.Singer however chose to take the worst elements of the Donner movies and put them in his version.While his Lex Luthor is slightly darker he's still nothing more than a shyster, a conman and a common criminal. He's no more intelligent than when Gene Hackman played him. Kevin Spacey does his best to play Luthor well but ultimately he falls victim to shoddy writing and unremarkable dialog.His henchmen are more two dimensional than even comic book henchmen. Most of them literally have no dialog in the movie.****SPOILERS AHEAD**** Kitty Kowalski is almost exactly the same character as Ms. Tesmacher. She seems to be as evil and cold as Lex Luthor but she proves to be just an underling who melts after seeing Superman in trouble and quite predictably betrays Luthor.The biggest disappointment in the movie was Frank Langella as Perry White. I wasn't a huge fan of the over the top Perry White in the Donner movies but at least he had a soul. He was after all said and done, a veteran reporter who cared about the truth and a good story. Langella's Perry White is nothing but a corporate stooge. He wants everyone to concentrate on the Superman related stories because they sell papers even though every other paper is doing the same thing. He doesn't care about the real stories, the real mysteries like the black out and what Lex Luthor is up to now that he's out of prison.The worst thing about Langella is that he's DULL! Some actors can be quiet and sober and yet have an undercurrent that lets you know that still waters run deep. Frank Langella is puddle.Brandon Routh is not a bad actor. He's OK but again there is not a single memorable line in the whole movie. Not the actor's fault. His movements are clearly meant to look graceful, like even the slightest movement of his fingers effects the way he flies. But it still looks choreographed and artificial.Lois Lane while badly written was surprisingly well acted by Kate Bosworth. Unfortunately, again, for a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and writer, she is about as eloquent as any teenage on Dawson's Creek.James Marsden was my favorite actor in the whole movie, mostly because he looks more like Superman than even Routh. Without any superpowers he manages to figure out Lois Lane's message, flies a plane to the location, gets on board Luthor's yacht and rescues Lois and her son.The only moving moment in the movie is when they are all trapped pantry as it is flooding with water and the ship is sinking. You see them slowly going being immersed in the water. You know Superman's going to come by at the last moment to rescue them but still you can't help but feel sorry for them.As I said before the plot is very haphazard. Unlike Singer has said, this is not a movie about a superhero returning and trying to find his place in the world. As soon as he returns the world welcomes him back with open arms. Lois is the only one who's not happy to see him back. Even Luthor is happy to have Superman back because it gives him a chance to settle the score with the man of steel.Superman is shown to be probably one of the dumbest heroes in the universe. A big green piece of meteorite is stolen from a museum, Lex Luthor is out of prison, he now has knowledge about Superman's powers and weaknesses, and yet he's still not able to connect the dots enough to know Luthor would be using kryptonite against him.According to the movie the only thing Superman is good for is lifting really, really heavy things. The action sequences are all incredibly predictable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-582c1c2f30a041c9a35b479d9b5a7c28",
            "input": "My roommates & I nearly shorted out our TV from the numerous spit-takes we did while watching this hilarious piece of 1970s self important pseudo-zen dreck. I'd read about this campfest for ages and scanned my local late night TV listings for YEARS in search of this elusive turd. Several years ago our local ABC affiliate was known for showing cool flicks for its late night weekend flick (ie \"Frogs\", \"Night of the Lepus\", etc). Then one day it happened: at 1:40am on a Saturday night (over 5 years ago) there it was! We had over 15 folks over and the flick did NOT disappoint!See! Andy Griffith as the silliest & most unthreatening bad guy since Jaye Davidson in \"Stargate\"!See! William Shatner sport a variety of things atop his head that only faintly resemble human hair (or anything organic for that matter).Hear! jaw droppingly inane 1970s psychobabble that makes \"Chicken Soup For The Soul\" sound like BF SkinnerFeel! Content that any decade was better than the 70s.For those still reading...the plot surrounds a bunch of middle class mid level a--holes who decide to suck up to their s---head boss (Griffith) by joining him on a cross dessert race that spans California & Mexico. They all wear leather jackets, looking more Christopher Street than anything else. Along the way they stop at a Cantina, get drunk, smoke joints (the sight Robert \"Mike Brady\" Reed smoke a joint is an image you won't soon forget), start a fight, attempt rape, and just act like a bunch of suburban middle class jack offs. Although I have an excellent copy that I taped off TV I WISH this one would be released on video so the whole world could enjoy its half baked goofiness.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1638e2e7643c448dbaa380bcc0683b63",
            "input": "its awful i cant believe that one of the greatest nonsenses in the world can be a blockbuster and the favorite movie of millions of people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! a movie which has no story,again shahrukh khan has been appeared on the screen with nothing new the same as usual he is trying to make you cry by start scrambling his head for thousands of times,i think this is to much,pretty zinta spouse to act the character of a Pakistani girl i didn't know that there is enough facilities in Pakistan for the Pakistani girls to do so many plastic surgeries on their face and also there are enough make up facilities??!! and also i didn't know that an Indian can cross the March's between both countries,go to Pakistan and start dancing and singing may be Pakistani soldier's were sleeping!!!!!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-989c556da2ba4361b73ad8d8ecf69e6d",
            "input": "The Caprica episode (S01E01) is well done as a pilot. Really, this episode is the exact same content as the DVD pilot release. That having been said, episode 01 gives a very substantive background of the very popular \"Battlestar Galactica\" series (both the original and the 2007 remake). It significantly applies most to the 2007 series. As is the trending plots of sci-fi of late, this series explores \"Virtual\" life or environment. On top of this, we are given much background on the Adama family line as well as their relationship with the unrevealed (in the Battlestar Galactica series) creator of the Cylons. To the most part, this first episode revolves around the popular topic of \"Virtual\" life and (as is expected) early life of the colonies, and the birth of the Cylons. Over all, I rather enjoyed this episode. Although, it was not new material for myself or anyone that has already seen the DVD release of the Caprica pilot, the series seems very promising. As is the case with many pilots, episode 01 leaves us with a cliff-hanger so to ensure a follow by an audience (sci-fi community). I'm definitely going to keep watching for resolve as well as development. I give this series 8 stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b8ec4b3bfa64b90bede08444b53854e",
            "input": "This movie is without a doubt a perfect 10/10.. for all you people out there who are rating this film low grades because it has no \"good plot\" or anything like that, thats ridiculous, saying that a Jackie Chan movie is bad because of its plot is like saying a porn movie is bad because it has no plot! you watch Jackie Chan FOR THE FIGHT SCENES, for the action its not so much concentrated on a good story or anything like that, if you look at how he makes movies and compare it to other American films from that era and even later you will realize that Jackie Chan's movies had over the top fights scenes and not really good plots while American movies had good plots but shitty action scenes compared to what Jackie Chan was doing at the time. Porn is watched for the porn, Jackie Chan is watched for the ACTION, i think you people are rating it bad because there's no plot because you think thats how a smart movie critic would rate a good movie but the way i see it is a good movie is a movie that can keep me entertained. Sure the middle of the movie was boring, VERY BORING, but put it this way the rest which is all action scenes and stunts very much do pay for all of that. This did change the way how American action movies were created, they have even stollen scenes from this movie. If you want a true man, a true entertainer then watch this movie and many more of Jackie Chan's, hes pure in everyway. He literally makes American movies look like a walk in the park, and even in TODAYS movies. American movies rely so much on special effects and safety wires and stunt doubles and so much more. Police Story and many other Jackie Chan films are pieces of work of a true entertainer who just goes all out and is very talented in what he can do. a masterpiece",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4017a259c6b4a5cb0df09725f355ebd",
            "input": "I wished I'd taped MEN IN WHITE so I could watch it again\" What ? You mean you really enjoyed it Theo ? \" No I mean I could watch it again to see if it was as retarded , stupid and as embarrassingly unfunny as I can remember it A lot of people have claimed it was made for children . May I suggest it was also made by children ? because the whole structure of the script lacks any type of discipline on the part of the producers and writers and much of set pieces seem to have been included because it seemed like a good idea at the time The cast don't help but I genuinely started to feel sorry for them . Honestly you can believe that during filming the cast had to lie to their families that they were filming a hard core porn film such was their embarrassment at having to appear in something as dismal as this . To give you an idea of how bad the acting is every time BAYWATCH babe Donna D'Ericco disappeared from the narrative I waited patiently for her to reappear then seconds later I forgot she was in the movie . Got that ? A star from BAYWATCH appears and seconds later you forget they're in the movie . This tells you all you need to know about the standard of MEN IN WHITE Fair enough it's trying to be a live action cartoon similar to THE GOODIES ( Although THE DISMALS would be a better adjective for this movie ) , though perhaps the movie deserves some credit for never descending to toilet humour , but considering this is a kids movie ( This didn't stop ITV broadcasting it at 11 pm ) then there should be no near the knuckle humour in it anyway",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af48450c346443d9823858ad5fdba4ad",
            "input": "Man, if anyone was expecting a great zombie movie after reading that title, then you are a retard and you deserve to be disappointed. As for myself, I was expecting a low-budgeted cheeseball zombie flick- and that's exactly what I got. I wasn't disappointed at all. I thought it was a cool little movie. The zombies were exactly as they should be, because all of the zombies had JUST been turned, so they are freshly-undead zombies. Obviously they did that because it would've been pretty costly if they had done full-on rotted zombie FX. I understood the whole thing, I have no idea how anyone could seriously nitpick this movie. It's called \"HOOD OF THE LIVING DEAD\" for the love of God! Would you watch \"Redneck Zombies\" and ANY Uwe Boll movie and actually EXPECT it to be great? Of course not! So why there are some morons on IMDb whining like school girls about this movie, I'll never understand. Oh and YES, there ARE worse movies out there, so stop saying that this was the worst you've ever seen, 'cause you know you're full of it! You ever watch \"ZOMBIEZ\"???? Or \"Feardotcom\"????? Or \"House Of The Dead\"???? THOSE are some of the worst I've ever seen. If you can't see that it's just a low- budgeted zombie movie obviously made by zombie movie fans, then something's wrong with you. I just had fun with it. Thumbs up from me and I'd also like to see a sequel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78a9e333cb33463e8561890f5d57dad2",
            "input": "An incoherent mess with a gratingly deafening sound track, \"Soul Survivors\" is the latest entry in the \"who's dead and who's alive\" genre of horror films. Two teenaged couples, Sean and Cassie and Matt and Annabel, prepare to go off to different colleges, but before they part until Thanksgiving Break, they attend one last fling at a rave-type party in some burnt-out church at the suggestion of lusciously slutty Annabel (Eliza Dushku, a.k.a. Faith, the other vampire slayer). Motiveless creepy guys start paying far too much attention to Cassie (the generic Melissa Sagemiller) for reasons that are never explained, and before long, the quartet leave the party. Driving away in their SUV, they are pursued and then passed by the motiveless creepy guys, who promptly and inexplicably do an intentional 180 in the middle of the highway, causing a nasty and fatal accident as the SUV flips over an embankment and plunges into a river. Sean is killed (or is he?), and Cassie spends the rest of the movie coping with loneliness and guilt (she was driving) when she's not being haunted by Sean's ghost or chased by those motiveless creepy guys. Much unexplained incoherence follows as Cassie's mental state degenerates further, until we reach the predictable conclusion. So, who is dead and who is alive? After ninety minutes of this purgatory, who actually cares?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d04a545913a41ae9b94b706c52dc0eb",
            "input": "Nightmare Weekend is proof positive that some people are so desperate to be 'in the movies' they are prepared to do almost anything.I'm not referring to the countless women who seem quite happy to appear completely starkers in this dreadful piece of trash (after all, the naked female form is a beautiful thing and nothing to be ashamed of). No...I'm talking about those who are more than willing to co-star with a badly made hand-puppet called George. Now that is embarrassing!!!A bio-electronic being created by brilliant scientist Edward Brake (Wellington Meffert), George (who looks like a demented felt clown with green wool for hair) is the artificially intelligent interface for an advanced computer system that operates a revolutionary device (a silver sphere about the size of a golf ball) that, when ingested, can reverse character disorders.Edward's personality altering experiments have been successful on lab animals, but the cautious scientist is reluctant to carry out tests on human subjects, fearing that there may still be side effects. His evil assistant Julie (Debbie Laster), however, has no such qualms, and proceeds to use three beautiful young women as guinea pigs. Inevitably, they all turn into hideous killer mutants.With bargain basement special effects, a cast totally devoid of talent, and a plot that is almost impossible to follow (I took notes as I watched the film, and even then I am not entirely convinced that my synopsis is accurate), Nightmare Weekend is a complete and utter disaster that not even several soft-core sex scenes and a touch of gore can rescue.This film also features one of the most irritating characters I have ever seen in a horror movie: Tony (Bruce Morton), a Walkman wearing idiot who bops away to crap 80s music in a manner that makes me look like Justin Timberlake in comparison.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67562165331c45d6bed27971b13c4fdd",
            "input": "This is one of the greatest love story movies I have ever seen. Yes, I can agree that some parts may seem dated, but this does not distract from the film. One should try to observe, criticize and enjoy any art form from the perspective of the time. Clearly by the \"Sex in the City\" standards, Charlie Chaplin was horribly boring. However, when judged from the prospective of 1925 America, he was fantastic. Likewise Sayonara is a breakthrough film in its look into a mixed-race love affair, American \"manifest destiny\" arrogance and prejudice, and the complexity of different cultures. It is a natural next step to such films as Gentleman's Agreement. Its purpose, however, was not just social commentary, rather, it is entertaining and enjoyable, with innumerable lines that one just doesn't forget.However, even when taken only as a love story, it is terrific. Although, some attack Brando's accent, he is at his near best in nuance and characterization. Buttons and Umeki (who both won Oscars) and the rest of the supporting cast add much to the film.Taka, the real star, does a fabulous job making you feel the passion she has for Brando, while being torn by her sense of obligation and loyalty. Her speech when she first meets and speaks with Brando is a classic and something rarely if ever matched in cinema. The dialog between Taka and Brando in her dressing room in Tokyo at the film's end is equally good. Of course, it doesn't have the mouth-sucking, spit-swapping and worse, that exemplifies love in today's movies, but that makes it all the better. It portrays true love and passion, and not just \"heat.\" If this movie doesn't touch you, then you are just too young, too cynical or dead.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66dd59e707c24e4793b40bf637cd33b7",
            "input": "I cannot get past the message of this movie. It's laid out much too clearly to ignore, and it is obscene because it has lost its sense of what it's about. I haven't read the novel, but Pollack's film opens with a scene at a CIA-front organization in New York, which is broken into by two professional assassins, headed by Max von Sydow, who proceed to brutally slaughter the half dozen quirky staff members we've come to know and understand. The staff include an elderly female receptionist, a fussy elderly professorial guy who's toupee falls off when he is machine-gunned (is that a joke?), and, last, the beautiful Tina Chen who looks up from the copier, realizes she is about to be murdered, and says, pitifully brave, \"I won't scream.\" Von Sydow replies sympathetically, \"I know.\" These murders are completely unexpected, savage, unmotivated by anything that we are aware of, and graphic. It is a brutal scene. There is absolutely no way in which von Sydow and his henchman can be redeemed. And yet that is exactly what Pollack tries to do towards the end.After having killed these innocent good guys, von Sydow switches sides (because the other side is willing to pay him) and assassinates the evil mastermind behind a complicated intramural CIA plot. The script then turns him into a perfectly reasonable, sensitive human being. \"It is better to live in Europe. Things are not so rushed.\" Or whatever. I swear I'm not making this up. Pollack wants us to believe that it is better to be an honest mass murderer than a crooked bureaucrat. That's the message. You should write it down in case you forget. Just exactly what kind of psychiatric shambles do you have to be in order to turn ordinary values, not to mention common sense, upside-down like that? I understand that there are thoughtful adults who dislike the government of the United States, even hate it, and who see conspiracies just about everywhere, providing a knee-jerk explanation for otherwise unexplainable events. I know that people who think this way exist because I number some of them among my closer friends. Nevertheless, at some point this dislike, this hatred, if it increases in intensity, must pass beyond politics or ethics and into the realm of the psychiatric. I don't for a moment believe that a man who murders people for money is better than a sinister government official. I don't care how suave and cultured the murderer is or whether he knows how to reach the Louvre on the Metro. Whoever is purveying that message needs either medication or meditation.I'd like to be able to argue that the production is as thoroughly rotten as its message, but I can't. It's quite well done. (In some ways that's worse, because it makes the film less dismissable.) Even New York City looks photogenic on the screen. And it's been a long time since I've thought of New York as photogenic. Robert Redford does an admirable job of projecting his character's initial shock and confusion, but then turns into a telecommunicational semi-genius. And, man, he looks just fine! His wardrobe is just right. Even his rimless glasses are becoming. And his peacoat. It's not everyone who can make a navy pea jacket look glamorous. He seems extremely handsome too, the swine. I want to look like that. I want to wear a denim shirt and a tie with such panache. Faye Dunaway is alright in her role but it's not too believable a role. Would anybody eagerly sleep with a guy who has just kidnapped her and is holding her at gunpoint? Even if he did look like Redford? Would anyone be emotionally wounded if, when this ambivalent relationship is about to end, Redford asked her not to tell anybody about what happened? Cliff Robertson is surprisingly good. He does one or two extremely good double-takes. The mailman is superb. The fight between him and Redford in a crowded apartment is exquisitely choreographed and, for once, we really don't know for sure how it will turn out, because Redford (a book reader after all) seems mismatched against the brute cunning of this hired assassin. This is one of John Housemann's final roles. A shame. He's a magnet on screen. And what an end to his life: a friend finds him lost, wandering the streets of New York, in a neighborhood he'd been familiar with for most of his life. Yes, the movie is very well executed, but I can't ignore that vicious, paranoid message. I have the same problem with Leni Riefenstahl's \"Triumph of the Will.\" Or her Olympic documentary in which the announcer is watching a foot race in which Jesse Owens is pulling into the lead and says ominously, \"This Negro is dangerous.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbd8895be2d0451c92fa6dd27bab27ff",
            "input": "I saw this gem of a film at Cannes where it was part of the directors fortnight.Welcome to Collinwood is nothing short of superb. Great fun throughout, with all members of a strong cast acting their socks off. It's a sometimes laugh out loud comedy about a petty crook (Cosimo, played by Luis Guzman) who gets caught trying to steal a car and sent to prison. While in prison he meets a `lifer' who tells him of `the ultimate bellini' – which to you and me – is a sure-fire get rich quick scheme. It turns out that there is a way through from a deserted building into the towns jewellers shop – which could net millions. Sounds simple? – well throw in all kinds of wacky characters and incidents along the way and you have got the ingredients for a one wild ride!! – word passes from one low life loser to the next and soon a team of them are assembled to try and cash in on Cosimos `bellini' lead by failed boxer Pero (Superbly played by Sam Rockwell – surely a star in the making) and reluctant crook Riley (William H. Macy) who is forced to bring his baby along with him as his wife was locked up for fraud!!.Based on the Italian film I Soliti ignoti (Big Deal on Madonna street) which also inspired a similar film to `Collinwood' – `Palookaville'. This knocks spots of the latter effort and although its written and directed by the Russo brothers it definitely has shades of the Coen Brothers about it. Produced by Steven Soderbergh and George Clooney, who has a small yet hilarious part as a crippled safe breaker.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b8b845997854d57a25b4e19346ea4e2",
            "input": "One of the things that makes this Ealing comedy so outrageously funny is the clever editing. Shots that would be considered absolutely essential to most modern comedies are deliberately left out. (This is what was known as British understatement.) Three instances: A comic fight is edited like this. Alec Guiness has invented a new cloth that will ruin the industry. Half a dozen businessmen invite him to their office to try to get him to sign a contract relinquishing his control of the cloth so that production can be suppressed. When he catches on to this, Guiness stands up and turns to walk to the door. Two men block his way. \"Excuse me,\" he says quietly, taking a step forward. The two men move between Guiness and the camera. Cut. A secretary is sitting outside at her desk. There is silence until the buzzer begins signaling her frantically. She takes up her notebook and opens the door to the inner office where a full-fledged noisy Donnybrook is in progress and the room is half wrecked. Guiness dashes out the open door.The following example would be unthinkable today. During the research phase of his invention Guiness sets up an elaborate chemical apparatus but instead of converting the experimental liquid into the new cloth, the device explodes. Again and again it explodes. The laboratory is cleared of all other work. The blasts continue. Ceilings fall down. Windows are blown out. The director of research is seated at his desk in a tiny office cluttered with debris, a bandage on his head. When the door behind him opens he jumps a foot in the air. \"Sit down,\" he tells his visitor, \"there's another one due at any moment.\" It is excruciatingly amusing -- and there is not a single shot of any explosions. This would be unimaginable now without a fireball, and maybe a building collapsing in slow motion.Last example, consisting of a series of quick, relentless cuts, put together precisely. Guiness is being pursued and is cornered in the lobby of an office building by people who want him to sign the contract. Faced with two men about to grapple with him, Guiness backs up with a determined expression. He bumps against a pedestal with an iron bust on it. The bust topples backward and bumps against the wall. There is a shot lasting about one second of the bust hitting the wall. Another brief shot of a metal shield hung above the bust being jarred loose and falling down. Quick cut to Guiness's head rising into the frame. Cut to the two men staring into the camera while horrible brass banging and thudding sounds are heard off screen. Cut to Guiness flat on his back. Nobody today would have the cojones to NOT show Guiness being crowned by that shield.I won't go on with this. It's a comedy alright but a pretty bitter one underneath all the hilarity. In solving one set of problems, Guiness has created dozens of others. He is opposed both by management and labor, neither of which is shown to much advantage. And of course the economic implications have to do with more than cloth. \"What about that car that runs on water with a pinch of something or other in it?\" one of the workers asks. \"Vested interests,\" comments another worker, as Thorstein Veblen nods in his grave. What WOULD happen if our problems with energy were solved overnight? If I owned shares of Exxon -- and I think I do -- I'd shudder at the thought. Where would the oil industry be if there were no more need for oil? For that matter, where would the police force and the FBI be if crime were to suddenly disappear? This is a thoughtful and very amusing movie, superbly directed and edited. The roster of performers is peerless. Joanne Greenwood with that husky voice. The blithering Cecil Parker. The wheezing mummified Ernest Thesiger. A first-rate job all around.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45aa1774547840e0a06ac5095c681f32",
            "input": "It took a long time until I could find the title in a special videothek in Berlin, and I was lucky to find an english version with hollandish undertitles. I think it´s one of the best horrormovies ever. It seems strange for me that some people call this movie a black comedy. I must admit, I wasn´t able to laugh about, when I saw it the first time (and it was the same with the second time!) On the one hand Trelkovski seems so nice and even cute in his shy behaviour, but on the other hand he beats this boy on the playground and there is no explanation for that. But the most weired thing is of course his transformation in Simone Choule and the fact, that he doesn´t know, who he really is. His halluzinations are the most terrifying in this movie. Of course it´s all in his mind, but is it this flat that brings out this female side of him or was it also before he moved in - I think that´s an interesting question. His shizophrenic behaviour is hard to understand and it´s horrible to see his two sides or identities fighting against each other. The result of it is that he cuts his hand first and later jumps out of his/her window. But this terrible cry - does that mean, that all will repeat again and again and again... that his soul is in a cage or something? And these egyptian hieroglyphs and other egyptian stuff ? The fact, that he/she looks like a mummy in the Hospital - that´s not an incident, but a clue in my point of view.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b439ca6fffc4ab0a4dcd66c0dd67ea2",
            "input": "The Sentinel represents everything about the soul-lessness of Hollywood and the saddening lack of imagination present in so many movies these days. I cannot possibly think of one good thing about it, it's all so generic, so factory-made and so lazy assembled that it really only exists as an infomercial on how to make money from the unsuspecting, undeserving public.A plot about a Secret Service Agent planning to assassinate the Prez could well be entertaining. If handled by a good director or caring cast that is. Douglas is the one who is framed. Basinger is the First Lady, with whom he is having an affair (an undeveloped, unresolved plot contrivance). Sutherland is the best pal who believes his guilty because there would be no movie if he didn't. And Longoria is nothing. A woman with a fortune of Maybelline and...that's it. I guess there are less requirements for women when entering the Secret Service. As usual in a film like this the role of the Prez himself is nothing more than a tool, a token and is very badly written.Clark Johnson's, he who gave us the equally as pathetic SWAT back in 2003, mechanical direction lacks any kind of signature and has all the visual sophistication of a cheap TV-movie. Douglas, Basinger and Sutherland look incredibly bored and phone-in their performances from afar. Eva Longoria, the most over-exposed woman of the 21st Century, is basically only in this to attract to the Desperate Housewives audience. Her role is 100% pointless and she does absolutely nothing to further the plot or add to character development. She barely has 2 lines to rub together. A truly shameless marketing ploy.If you're a glutton for punishment then don't let me stop you. But it IS time and money you won't be getting back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-daca38cbcca04c54a99862b43990e3de",
            "input": "Man I must say when I saw the trailer I was excited. Futuristic soldiers, taking on bad ass Vampires led by genre vet Michael Ironside....In Space. I mean I wasn't expecting high art, but It looked like a potential B movie classic. This was no doubt a TV pilot, reedited some time later into a feature film, after it wasn't picked up. Alright I'll start with the films few good points, the action was competent for a lower budgeted film, and the CGI and locations used were passable. Now onto the bad, first off Michael Ironside was barley in this, and his performance here....well it was cheesy not in a good way. But as I said he wasn't in it much anyways, so I can't blame him. One thing that was really stupid, was the PETA type group for Vampires', no I'm not joking, it's the dumbest most unbelievable thing I've seen in along time, and it's taken seriously. Also this film commits one of the major B movie sins, it teases a lesbian scene, and doesn't deliver. Most of all what sinks this film is nothing really happens. Since it was meant to be a pilot the script is almost nonexistent and it doesn't have a regular ending. Even the main villains, only come in towards the end. If ever a movie needed to up the Sleaze and gore factor, it's Vampire Wars. In closing I will say the main crew on the spaceship, were all very capable actors and could very well put this mess behind them, and go on to bigger and better things. They just had nothing to work with here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bb7ba1f86ed4d478c91d928363124d8",
            "input": "This short is a puzzlement. Words fail me here, as this is almost indescribable, Technically exceptional after more than 90 years (the visuals are remarkable and even occasionally amazing), this is not something you watch if you like things that are mundane or \"normal'-because it most certainly is not either. This be an odd one, gang. Well worth checking out, but if things like Ren and Stimpy make your head hurt, you may want to skip this. Recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-621bed889c2145f4bd2643f4a8336b37",
            "input": "My boyfriend and I both enjoyed this film very much. The viewer is swept away from modern life into old Japan, while at the same time exposed to very current themes. The characters are realistic and detailed; it has an unpredictable ending and story, which is very refreshing. The story is made up of mini-plots within the life of several geisha living together in a poor city district. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who is interested in a realistic romance or life in old Japan.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c83eb9fb6cd4a358bbe6869c970c76f",
            "input": "Babyface - Notorious Barbara Stanwyck flick where she is told by the local professor type that she has power- he tries to get her to read Nietzche- she says books ain't never done her no good.Soon we find out her father is basically pimping her out to a local politico and others.Finally she has had enough and relocates to the big city.We follow her trail of men up the ladder of success in an international bank.The dialogue is quite saucy for it's time and it was one the last films to come out before the self inflicted Hollywood production code.Look for a cameo by a young John Wayne as one of Stanwyck's willing victims.Part of the Forbidden Hollywood collection - I watched the extended version- the DVD has both versions plus Red-Headed Woman and Waterloo Bridge.An interesting movie and foreshadowing for future femme fatale roles that Stanwyck would play in the era of film noir. B+",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-780a4eb1ca9b4646ba74d2fe74d581ce",
            "input": "I must admit I'm a little surprised and disappointed at some of the very negative comments this film seems to provoke. I think its a great horror/sci fi film. Colonel Steve West (Alex Rebar) returns to Earth after an historical space flight to Saturn. While in space he contracted some bizarre and unknown disease. He wakes up in a hospital bed, he looks in a mirror and before his very eyes his face is melting! Escaping the hospitals supervision, he hides out in some local woods surrounding a small town. Unfortunately he starts to develop a rapidly growing hunger that can only be satisfied by eating other people. He must feed on human flesh and drink the blood of others to survive! Stalking human prey he begins his reign of terror! Its up to his old friend Dr Ted Nelson (Burr DeBenning) to find him and try and help him. He has to work alone as his boss General Perry (Myron Healey) wants it kept ultra quiet. Nelson can't even tell his wife Judy (Ann Sweeny). However, Sheriff Blake (Micheal Alldredge) becomes suspicious as General Perry turns up just as some of the local townspeople start turning up half eaten. I don't really understand why this film gets such negative reviews, what do people expect? Anyway, I really like this film. The star of the film are unquestionably Rick Bakers Special Make-up and gore effects which for the most part are excellent, and the fact their all prosthetic effects and no rubbish horrible CGI makes them even better. Writer and Director William Sachs isn't afraid to use them either, we get some nice long lingering close up shots of the incredible melting man and they hold up very well, even now. Photography, music and direction are a little bit dull, but professional enough. The script manages to create some sympathy for the the monster, shots of him looking longingly into Ted Nelsons house, or when he sees his own reflection in some water and reacts violently. The ending, set in a large factory of some sort, is pretty downbeat so don't expect any happy ending. Which surprised me. Also, the script doesn't really do anything with the premise, he just walks around melting and killing, with his friend trying to stop him, maybe a bit too simple. Personally I think the worst bit of the film is near the start when the fat nurse runs down a hospital corridor in slow motion, her screams are also portrayed in slow motion too, it looks and sounds totally ridiculous! You need to see it to believe it! I like this film a lot and recommend it to 70's and 80's horror/sci fi fans. A bit of a favourite of mine.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83163bcfe90b4101a954475b1d413547",
            "input": "I was really disappointed in this movie. Those that voted this thing a 10 have a screw lose. The acting was ok, kinda wooden and cardboard. The ending was sorry. I just didn't care for this at all.No way could I recommend this mess.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44222d5802b14a649372c4d725848ccc",
            "input": "This is a really old fashion charming movie. The locations are great and the situation is one of those old time Preston sturgess movies. Fi you want to watch a movie that doesn't demand much other then to sit back and relax then this is it. The acting is good, and I really liked Michael Rispoli. He was in Rounders, too. And While You Were Sleeping. The rest of the cast is fun. It's just what happens when two people about to get married meet the one that they really love on the weekend that they are planning their own weddings. I know... sounds kooky... but it is. And that's what makes it fun to watch. It will make your girl friend either hug you or leave you, but at least you'll know.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56ba169becff48b79d98fa901eb23562",
            "input": "Full House came to me when I was about 9. I remember seeing re-runs of America's Funniest Home Videos with Bob Saget, and one day my mom told me that he was also in a show called Full House. One day, I was lucky enough to catch an episode while visiting family. It didn't seem too interesting at first, but as I watched more and more, ever night at 9:00, I would just be so into it.This show really makes you want to be there yourself, hang out with the girls, go places with them, and maybe even join in their little family \"sing-alongs\".The thing I like most about Full House is that it's a great show for kids AND adults of all ages. There will be some parts that are more for adults, then parts that are meant for kids, so that the whole family will enjoy it. No matter how cheesy it can be, it's still a great show, and I would definitely recommend it to anyone.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2a121f695e3419f94aa9aeb525cc1d7",
            "input": "\"Masters of Horror\" has proved itself a poor arena for 'message episodes,' and while a definite case can be made for Joe Dante's 'Screwfly Solution' (one of the best episodes of the series, period), most efforts to do so have come across as anvil-heavy and unimpressive (nothing defuses horror more than a soapbox). And 'Pro-Life' simply fuses reactionary viewpoints with ultra-violence; young Angelique (Caitlin Wachs), seen running through the woods, is nearly hit by 2 doctors (Mark Feuerstein and Emmanuelle Vaugier) who just happen to be driving in to work at the local (and isolated) abortion clinic. Angelique's father, Dwayne (Ron Perlman), is a stone-cold, far-right holy roller who will do anything to prevent his daughter from getting an abortion. If for nothing else, 'Pro-Life' accumulated some buzz for its controversial issue, but John Carpenter treats this whole venture with startling indifference--he seems even less interested in making a movie than the script itself (which is admittedly poor); the slow pacing builds no tension, and simply brings the already ambling plot to a crawl. Even when Dwayne and his sons storm the clinic, guns blazing, it is a stunning non-event; later, when a doctor is tortured with a 'male abortion,' the scene comes off as gratuitous and unnecessary--an effort to pad out the underwritten film. The poor performances (Perlman is sadly wasted here) become an outgrowth of the script, and Carpenter's direction feels exhausted, as if 'Pro-Life' is the source of his next hot meal. By the time a spider-creature with a human head and a guy in a latex monster suit are prowling the hallways, you just have to wonder what the minds behind this mess were thinking...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e46a8afb7dbc4247a4b10e6c9817ced9",
            "input": "This movie had it all,action,comedy,heroics,and best of all some of the finest actors.Gunga Din will remain a classic to be enjoyed by all who like good movies.Excellent picture,i have it in my collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02c319ed6d664c38ab4b3b486adebcee",
            "input": "The film released at the start of 2000 alongwith MELA both disasters So sad to start a millennium with such nonsenseThe film seems to suit 70's but looks like an unintentional comedy for 2000Anywayz some classic gems from the film: Paresh Rawal I don't understand to laugh at his role or cry Reason: He goes searching his mother in the village worst part is when he realises a secret of Anil he keeps the secret in his stomach which becomes big and makes him look pregnant I remember in my childhood my teacher told me the same joke Urrf!!!! as a child i laughed at it that time but here?The whole film is a joke can't explain We have Anil in a dual role(One older and younger) and Rekha playing the older's wife and Raveena the youngers We also have reject Harish while Shakti playing the son of Aruna Irani who both fight on who has the worst wigDirection is outdated Music is badAnil tries hard looks too old in the younger role and too young in the older role yet good effort Rekha is adequate, Raveena too is okay Harish is bad Shakti Kapoor is terrible Aruna Irani is as usual Rajnikant is okay in a cameo",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7d7b371c5bc442d92c249689f71f949",
            "input": "RKO had a reputation for making folksy, homespun pieces of Americana.Anne Shirley (as Dawn O'Day) had been in films since she was a toddler. By 1933 she was in limbo - having played Ann Dvorak as a child in \"Three on a Match\" (1932) and a \"flower girl\" in both \"This Side of Heaven\" and \"The Key\" both in 1934. George Nicholls Jnr remembered Anne's work from a previous film and that's how she got this part. She also adopted Anne Shirley as her stage name. The memorable stories are there - Lady of Shallot in a leaky boat, the \"stolen\" brooch, the \"red hair\" incident. Anne was so right for the role of the chatty, heartwarming orphan. She was heartbreaking in her intensity, her eagerness to please and also her fiery temper. O.P. Heggie was wonderful as the understanding Matthew Cuthbert and Helen Westley was fine as the firm Marilla. Tom Brown was an excellent Gilbert Blythe. Gertrude Messinger, who had also been in films as a small child was fine as Diana Barry. Sara Haden proved she could play someone other than Aunt Millie in the Andy Hardy series, was Mrs. Barry.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77ea141e597640b194a560845c795fcc",
            "input": "Not even the most ardent stooge fan could possibly like the movie, (I one of them) the stooges just aren't given any material to work with. It is really a shame too because this is the only feature length movie the stooges did with Curly, and this one effort by them is painfully unfunny, when it could have had great potential. Awful musical numbers don't help any either. The short they did with the same title has more laughs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7613226906a4bb4a98b50398b1785ec",
            "input": "Mysterious murders in a European village seem the result of THE VAMPIRE BAT horde plaguing the terrified community.This surprisingly effective little thriller was created by Majestic Pictures, one of Hollywood's Poverty Row studios. The sparse production values and rough editing actually add to its eerie atmosphere and lend it an almost expressionistic quality. Overall, it leaves the viewer the feeling of being caught up in a bad dream, which is appropriate for a thriller of this sort.Even though the eventual explanation for the hideous crimes is quite ludicrous and is not given proper plot development, the film can boast of a good cast. Grave Lionel Atwill gives another one of his typically fine performances, this time as a doctor doing scientific research in an old castle. Beautiful Fay Wray plays his assistant in a role which requires her to do little more than look lovely & alarmed. Dour Melvyn Douglas appears as the perplexed police inspector who also happens to be, conveniently, Miss Wray's boyfriend.Maude Eburne, who could be extremely funny given the right situation, steals most of her scenes as Miss Wray's hypochondriac aunt. Elderly Lionel Belmore plays the village's terrified burgermeister. And little Dwight Frye, who will always be remembered for his weird roles in the FRANKENSTEIN and Dracula films, here is most effective as a bat-loving lunatic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a55dce2524e4e2a896bc654fdada208",
            "input": "This UK psychological thriller is known in the United States as CLOSURE. Exploitation of X-Files' Gillian Anderson, who plays an attractive middle aged businesswoman of substance named Alice. She must attend a business party and invites Adam(Danny Dyer), who just installed a security system for her, to be her escort. On the way home, speeding through the woods on a narrow lane, Alice's auto collides with a deer. After pulling the wounded animal off the road, the couple is savagely attacked by a drunken gang of thugs. Adam is beat to a pulp; Alice is gang raped and both are emotionally and physically devastated by the ruthless attack. When the identities of their attackers are discovered, Alice and Adam set out to exact revenge...brutal revenge. The couple at times find themselves at odds on how to deal with the ruthless attackers. Their final decision is to avenge with no mercy. Let there be no mistake, payback IS hell. Also in the cast: Anthony Calf, Ralph Brown, Francesca Fowler and Antony Byrne. Brutal violence, disturbing images, nudity and graphic rape.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f473206adac64bcdb4733363227b8423",
            "input": "This is real character and story driven drama at a level that shames most of what we see on TV at the mo.I was impressed right from the start. Don't be put off if your not a sci fi nut (like me...) This could be happening on earth, the fact that its in another galaxy just makes the show more interesting. there are no space ships or laser guns (None yet anyway) So far I've seen up to s01 e04 and I'm gripped and wondering whats going to happen next as there are so many possibilities.The cast play there roles with pasion. Eric stoltz is especially strong.This show really stands alone well, it doesn't matter if you watched BSG or not, in fact they are quite different. I've read some negative reviews from sci fi geeks who expected less drama and more aliens and ray guns etc but I would say ignore them.This is a really positive start to a show. Lets hope they don't cann it after 1 or 2 seasons like they normally do with good shows these days.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b76e8d3655ed4f7c80df6c0e82a65632",
            "input": "This was the first sequel I'd seen (apart from Return of Jafar) and I honestly thought before watching it that it would be close to the original. I was horribly disappointed.The storyline was, basically, the first script with a few extra characters and the situation turned around. Ariel and Eric have a daughter, Melody who isn't satisfied with life on land. She wants to become a mermaid. However, Ariel has kept her past from her daughter because she wants to protect her-and when Melody finds out she's upset and angry. And she then decides to run away, and she becomes a mermaid. So she's happy swimming around, and Ariel sets out to find her-as a mermaid.The story doesn't sound too bad written down, but the clichés and repeats of situations from the first movie are just too obvious. And adding the fact that Melody is, overall, extremely annoying, and the movie becomes almost unbearable.There's also a whole load of other new characters-Tip and Dash being two of them. They aren't too bad as characters in themselves-just try not to think of Timon or Pumbaa! The songs leave a lot to be desired too, they just don't have the same magical energy as the songs from the original did. The animation obviously didn't have a whole load of work put into it either-in parts it's jumpy, and not much imagination is used for the characters movements.Another piece of advice-try to forget about Ariel's original character while watching this movie. The beautiful, rebellious, curious teenager has 'all grown up' into a bland, boring wife and mother, and her trademark red hair is all tied up. This is much better viewed if you've never seen the original-you'll have nothing to compare it to.However, all in all, it could have been worse-it's not as bad as certain other sequels, such as Cinderella II. But it's not in the same league as the original. But it for your collection if nothing else but if Disney go on like this they'll lose all their older fans.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b66ae6c0a94243c0aaed59e3ffa3666a",
            "input": "A little girl lives with her father and brother in the middle of the countryside. This little girl Rosalie has some psychotic tendencies as the movie opens with her feeding kittens to some kind of creatures in the cemetery, and she has recently lost her mother who went crazy but whilst alive enjoyed staying in the woods all night. The premise of the film has a new young lady coming to Rosalie to take care of her. She is introduced to the evil of the woods while driving and, imagine the suspense here, experiences a huge blue barrel falling over the side of a cliff to somehow stop her car dead in its tracks. From there she walks to the nearest house and discovers Mrs. Whitfield who then goes into a whole lot of explanation about Rosalie and her family. The earnestness exuded by the Mrs. Whitfield character has to be seen to be believed. Well, the young lady meets up with the child and we soon learn that not only is she strange but everyone in the film is very bizarre as well. They all do share one thing in common which is none of them ever heard of an acting school. None of these people can act - as evidenced by the few vehicles any of them in the entire film appeared in before or since - and all of them look like they have little idea what is going on, pause to remember lines, and have all the conviction of a paper bag. The director plods through the material in a slow pace with this horrible piano music crescendoing here and there at things that are suppose to be scary. It takes us a bit before we get to a couple of murders by the creature friends, but by that time I didn't care. The murders are not convincing either, and truth be told the whole film looks like someone through it together on their friend's farm with the people and things on hand there. That all being said the ending does have some creepy aspects to it though we don't learn one darn thing about why Rosalie is like this or more importantly who the creature with the cheap masks are. Cheap doesn't even begin to describe the budget here with. It basically is a couple old farmhouses and some sheds at the end and of course the woods. Someone lent the director a couple old cars too. No special effects of any kind and only the most minimal make-up. There are so many guffaws/ridiculous moments to list, but I will just list a few here that at the very least made me chuckle from the lack of aptitude from the creative powers involved: 1)Watch the gardener's body well after he has been \"slain\". Len comes in and sees him butchered and you can see his fat belly heave with life. 2)the dying scene at the end where the actress playing Rosalie is killed. She looks like she is listening to directions and takes her sweet time dying considering the method. 3)How about the guy playing Roaslie's father giving us a cranky poor man's Andy Griffith. The scene where he is laughing about boy scouts dying was a weird hoot. The Child is indeed a very bad film and is very bad even for the standards of 70's cheese if you will. This isn't a B film but more like a Z film with producer Harry Novak making some money on virtually nothing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d200359717b547ed94502fbb65c710df",
            "input": "This was the worst film i have seen for a long time. Not only that it has nearly nothing to do with the other American Pie movies, the story is obvious, flat and absolutely not funny. The girls are nice though, but spending your time watching a cheap soft porno would possibly be greater than watching this film.This film seems to be a very bad made sex ad, made for an audience that is not older than 12.I never visited an American college, but i would seriously doubt that anyone who did could really laugh about any of the scenes.Save your time, do something else.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f13664109d54155ac4a66856ce4f899",
            "input": "Like a relative that gives you a bad gift, Soul Survivors has its heart in the right place but trips up with a bad execution. Stephen Carpenter's writing/directing effort borrows freely from other, better films, such as Jacob's Ladder and Abre Los Ojos (Open Your Eyes). For those who haven't seen either of these films, I won't give the premise away; suffice to say it's not nearly as well handled here than in those two superior films.Melissa Sagemiller stars as Cassie, about to go away to college. Her current boyfriend Sean (Ben Affleck) and ex-boyfriend Matt (Wes Bentley), both friends, and Annabel (acerbic Eliza Dushku) are in a car accident after being pursued by two killers (?) in transparent masks. She survives the wreck, but while attending college has visions of the hospital ordeal and dead people reappear and disappear, leaving her in a state of total confusion: who is dead? Who's alive? What's real?Soul Survivors has the look of a bad been-there, done-that, gore-filled, blood-splattered, body-stacking teen exploitation flick. True, it has its share of killer-stalking-the-victim scenes (plentiful, repetitive, and mind-numbing), but at least it attempts to build suspense through ideas rather than cliches, unfortunately rather unsuccessfully. It breeds confusion much more often than cohesion, as the story becomes jumbled, messy and incoherent near key points of the mystery (predictable as it is.)Horror fans who pick up a copy will have no idea they are in for a film that is more concerned with building an uneasy facade of reality than delivering a body count. Credit goes to Carpenter for attempting to create something beyond a derivative teen horror flick; too bad he's created a derivative psychological thriller. Sagemiller also deserves kudos for showing strength in the central performance, actually developing her character and evoking some sense of emotion as the unraveling Cassie. It's great the filmmakers try something different, but the film ends up a mixed bag and failed experiment.4 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1eed67c1497b4cab912b96feca1946c0",
            "input": "Mild SPOILERS contained herein. I'm spoiling this film to save you the trouble of having to watch it. Jet Li's movies fall into one of two categories: Shaolin period movies and movies set in modern-day Hong Kong revolving around Triads or Triad like organizations. Each genre has its best and worst films. `Twin Warriors' is Jet Li's best Shaolin era flick while `The Evil Cult' is his worst. `Fist of Legend' while in the recent past is the best `modern era' Jet Li movie. `Black Mask' without a doubt is the worst.Jet Li plays a self-exiled mercenary who received an injection that gives him superhuman ability, but shortens his life span. In his `new life' in exile he plays a pacifist librarian. When his old mercenary squad goes on a rampage, Jet Li becomes a vigilante determined to stop them. He dons a very silly corrugated cardboard mask so as to conceal his identity from the police (and public) as a librarian, as well as to conceal his true identity to his ex-comrades in arms.The version I saw was dubbed, and horribly at that. Why does Jet Li capture and hold hostage his library co-worker if he's a pacifist? Is there a love story between them? Why does the police chief not care when he learns of the Black Mask's true identity? The plot is just plain BAD. Bad by way of the superhero cheesiness, bad in the sense that characters are never properly developed, bad in its character interactions, all topped off by a half-explained story I quickly lost interest in. The action and martial arts sequences are way over the top. Lots of blood, gore (severed body parts aplenty), explosions, and Matrix style superhuman martial arts fiascos are present in the film. Unfortunately this is the films best and only selling point. If you want to see Jet Li playing a vigilante superhero in a Mission Impossible style movie `Black Mask' delivers. For the rest of us Jet Li fans it is a true disappointment. This is one of those movies where Jet Li never gets to be Jet Li: he gets neither the chance to charm us with his charisma, nor a chance to impress us with his impressive yet realistic martial arts ability. Normally a Chinese knockoff of Ozzy Osbourne would be enough to engross me in a film, sadly `Black Mask' proved to be an exception to that rule. Indeed the antagonist of this movie, by the way he dresses, his long straight hair, and trademark round sunglasses looks like the modern and aged Ozzy Osbourne. However the villain isn't on-screen long enough to make the gimmick worthwhile. I am assuming the likeness to Ozzy was intentional; in addition to the villain's look, he also ran a satanic looking hideout. So much more could have been made from the Ozzy Osbourne villain gimmick! If only the writer, director, or ANYONE had bothered to give a background to and develop the character of the film's arch villain!`Black Mask' was the first Jet Li film released on video in the USA after Lethal Weapon 4, and I'm glad I stayed away from it until now. It may well have ruined my whole perception of Jet Li as a martial artist and actor. If you want to see Jet Li at his worst, rent `Black Mask' and `The Evil Cult' and make it a double feature or horror, both intentional and unintentional. Otherwise stick to moves that utilize the talents of Jet Li, and have plots that are semi-well thought out and plausible. 3/9 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7be279485b64436f936e29085ac34d62",
            "input": "A film that dramatized an understandable reluctance to face the inevitable coming of the the second world war, when a Spanish Republican, sent by his soon to be overthrown government, (Charles Boyer) infiltrates himself into England looking for support for his cause by trying to influence wealthy mine owners not to sell coal to the fascists back in Spain. He upsets the locals, getting convincingly beaten in one scene, and later in the film facing an angry crowd of miners who see him as yet another threat to their shaky livelihood. Notwithstanding socio-economic hierarchy, xenophobia, and world politics, this film expertly delves into a dark and suspenseful intrigue involving unfaithful compatriots played by Katina Paxinou and Peter Lorre, and is expertly filmed in numerous darkly lit scenes set in a dreary hotel by James Wong Howe, and manages more than once to get under your skin.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b4d1253694c482d81de7c6cc6a63968",
            "input": "Having previously seen the abridged print presented by David Shepard, I finally got a hold of a complete--or nearer complete version, which was about 56 minutes compared to the 30-minute version more widely distributed. The Shepard print for Image Entertainment is certainly of superior quality, and the best parts are there, but it's nonetheless good to see the rest of the film and fill in some loose story ends.In the Shepard print, the film ends with Mary stating, \"You see, I've changed my mind--I'm never going home.\" Yet, in the complete version, Mary and Kenneth Driscoll end their relationship soon after that scene – Mary returns home to the country – and Driscoll rekindles his relationship with Vivian. This additional footage develops the character Vivian, who had little relevance in the Shepard version. Moreover, in the complete version, the film begins in the New Jersey countryside with Mary, where she reads and fantasizes about her ideal lover. She's disappointed by the reality of the advances by farm \"chore boy\" Johnny Applebloom (a character completely absent from the Shepard version), but after her affair with Driscoll, she returns to the country to presumably and eventually become a farmer's wife.Regardless of the print, 'A Girl's Folly' is a good little film for 1917, made by one of the top directors of the 1910s Maurice Tourneur. In it, Tourneur takes plenty of jabs at his own business, including by playing a caricature of himself--the director of the film-within-the-film. The two leads also give quality performances by early screen-acting standards: Robert Warwick, an actor playing a skirt-chasing star, and Doris Kenyon, as an ingénue aspiring to play an ingénue on the screen.Self-referential films, which made film-making the focus of the films, were nothing new by now. Mack Sennett had already parodied this type of film three years prior with 'Mabel's Dramatic Career'. Several aspects of this one stand out, though. Frances Marion's intertitles are humorous, including illustrations of the actors on a chessboard with a hand directing them--remarkable for 1917. I especially liked the film's final title cards where two observers remark on the film's happy ending: \"Gee but ain't that romantick!\" And, the other replies, \"Romance, nuthin! – That's movin' pictures!\" Fellow female screenwriter Anita Loos made a similar self-referential conclusion to another film from 1917 'Wild and Woolly'. Both writers helped change the role of their professions in the business and art.Some of the photography by Tourneur and John van den Broek is good, especially concerning the film-making business. The use of mirrors in several scenes is a nice reinforcement of the film's self-reflexivity. Furthermore, the editing is exceptional. The quick crosscutting during the studio scenes is especially salient; it serves to punctuate the hectic pace filmmakers work at, especially back then.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1dc04ee436ca4a018b8d9edb794a10a9",
            "input": "Another example of the unique talents of Cary Grant. A performance worthy of Oscar consideration, yet once again shunned by the Academy. Mr. Grant runs the gamut from silly to tender in this marvelous comedy about a man who decides to move out of the big city. The pitfalls of building a home are well chronicled and became the basis (loosely) for the more modern Tom Hanks vehicle, \"The Money Pit\".If you like good old fashioned comedy without the cursing and the gratuitous sex, this movie is a must see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-405454571b8a4a24a307dd9b8799c776",
            "input": "I watched about 30 minutes into this film before I finally got sick of getting bludgeoned over the head with this movie. The soundtrack, the so-called 'plot', and each and every actor. It's like they all think they're the main part of the movie and scream \"NOTICE ME!\" over and over again. The bad guy has his bad-guy music going on and says sinister bad-guy-like things, just in case you didn't quite catch on. The good guy does brave and noble things just in case you didn't know he was the good guy. And oh lord, the plane scene. \"MY HUSBAND IS MISSING! OH MY GOD! IT'S IMPOSSIBLE THAT HE GOT UP TO STRETCH HIS LEGS OR GO TO THE TOILET OR ANYTHING, HE MUST BE MISSING!\" (And yes, I know, his clothes were still there, but honestly, she woke up and started to panic before she even had time to look at the damn seat he'd been in.)As a religious girl, I want to apologize to the world for wasting the film this was printed on.And I want my 30 minutes back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c3399d404264505b9bef1ef60a7eb2b",
            "input": "One of the better Vance films succeeds more on interesting plot and artful direction by none other than Michael Curtiz. This time around a generally hated financier is found dead - shot in the head - in his locked and bolted bedroom on the upper floor. Philo Vance, hearing of the situation while about to set off for Italy, decides to end his vacation and try to solve what he thinks is a murder and what everyone else is considering a suicide. William Powell is as affable a Philo Vance as you will find. He never seems to press and is always very smooth in what he says and does. Powell is aided by a host of very talented actors - some first-rate character actors and actresses like Mary Astor as a niece that hated her uncle, Ralph Morgan as the dead man's secretary, Paul Cavanaugh as a rival dog fancier, Arthur Hohl as a mysterious butler, Helen Vinson as the next door kept blonde, and two really good performances by James Lee as the Chinese cook and portly Eugene Palette as a wise-cracking police detective. Add into the mix a wonderfully comedic turn by Etienne Girardot as a public coroner always missing his meal. It is this depth of suspects and a story that has many plots twists and turns that make The Kennel Murder Case a fast-moving, fun mystery.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7678dd4e38ec48be8d2de730d56838d8",
            "input": "John Candy. Need we say more? He is the main reason you should see this film. Most people don't realize how gifted he was as an actor. Witness him changing from poor slob to horny jerk. Just a simple(subtle) facial change and off we go. There are many great bits in this movie and many really dumb bits. The best moments for me are the KUNG FU U scenes as well as the great moment when John(in a trance) goes up on stage and talks about how much he loves his girlfriend-that is how much he and his genitals love his girlfriend. I'm sure reading this you might think this sequence sounds really crude. It is, but it is also very funny mainly because it is John Candy doing this bit. The story in general is pretty lame and Eugene Levy and Joe Flaherty(both SCTV alumni with Candy) are not given enough to do in the film. Levy has his moments, especially filming the wedding at the end(think Rod Serling) and the great scene when he is talking to his mother on the phone. Overall a good movie if you have had a tough day and need to put your brain on stupid. I give this one 4 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51e2248be7ad45ba9c7ceb0dd7f1ad11",
            "input": "It definitely fits the time period as the Axis & Allies were playing espionage games throughout most of North Africa & the rest of the world. It's not the best of films, but certainly not the worst of the budget films as described previously from the compilation War Classics. Duncan\"Cisco Kid\" Renaldo was actually very good in one of his first feature films. I really enjoyed the performance of Harry Parke (credited as Parkyarkarkus). Why he never got any bigger roles is beyond me. He played the perfect buddy/partner role and saved the movie...imho.As said, this film was part of a budget package from Superbox-Mart entitled War Classics. Eight movies for eight bucks, which included other never-heard-from-films that has some decent stars trying to pay the bills.This script is...well, not so hot. The editing & cinematography is...worse. If you can by-pass all of that and want to see the future Cisco Kid & a great sidekick that sadly never fulfilled his true potential, definitely pick it up! Otherwise, there's other WW2 films to watch.-Thunderossa.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-980bd72ef96a405bb9423d8a07f475c2",
            "input": "If you ever see a stand up comedy movie this is the one. You will laugh nonstop if you have any sense of humor at all. This is a once in a lifetime performance from a once in a lifetime performer. This is a stand up standard.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac2ad3a63e3e49f0bf1a35ce62be1bb5",
            "input": "A beautiful film, touching profoundly up the simple, yet divine aspects of humanity. This movie was almost perfect, and seeing as nothing in this world can be truly perfect, that is pretty good. The only minor thing I subjectively object to, is the pacing at some points in the middle of the story. The acting is also very good, and all the actors easily top actors in high-profile films. The actual directing seems to have been well thought through, and the script must have been amazing. There are some truly breathtaking moments of foreshadowing, and a quite gorgeous continuing circular composition of the story.The moment in the movie, when the main character achieves that feeling of being in heaven is the perfect ending to a truly brilliant yarn.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06cb815238234173b8381f5bd4ac80b4",
            "input": "Most of the French films I've seen - and enjoyed - were more talk than action, but that's okay. I found them interesting, well-photographed and with intriguing actors. (However, I did at one point wonder if Gerald Depardieu was in every French film ever made! It seemed that way.)This movie has the same interesting visuals and had a good opening. But then it became talk, talk and more talk....which is fine for a drama but not for a murder mystery. After awhile, I almost fell asleep watching this.Actually, the film was more like a play with almost all the scenes played out in one room. Thus, if you love plays, you should like this...but I want a little more bang for a murder story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81aa0623a0204def8bedc51aac06b08e",
            "input": "Maybe I'm a sap but this is the sweetest movies ever! I saw it for the first time when I was around 4 or 5, and I cried my eyes out. Between then and now (embarrassed at age 15) I have seen it over 25 times and have sobbed each and every one of them. Don't worry they're tears of happiness! And it's not all sap! There's a lot of humor and comedy in it too. Usually the whole talking animal thing can be a huge drag but in this movie it's not the case. My only word of advice: Even if you love this-Don't see the sequal...cornyness! I suggest everyone checks this out...you won't be sorry, no matter how old or young you are!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37959f9e49874591940a818dc708f3d9",
            "input": "This movie is the worst I've seen in the last 5 years. It is surprising how brilliant actors like two main characters in this movie has accepted to act in such worthless peace of trash. The film is rape/beating and revenge genre. Couple has gone to party and on the way back they hit a deer and he went out to finish it when a jeep full of bad guys comes. He didn't go to their car, instead he has been kicked and well beaten while she tries to run the car engine which betray her and she has been gang raped.Then somehow she is in her fathers house and one of bad guys is her neighbor so she took shotgun and wanted to kill him... So stupid scenario! Bellow Hollywood ! He was against that revenge but \"She is raped\" \"They laugh to her\" so she must kill them all... But once inside the house she was satisfied by pushing rifle's top in bad guys anus and went away while he has gone crazy and execute bad guy. Personally I think that director run out of money before finishing this because movie ends before they execute anyone else involved in this gang-rape and beating which is not big surprise because sponsor obviously has seen this and wanted to take back his money. LoL This movie is not even for people who enjoy watching rape because they won't see anything they are looking for... This director should be banned...It is for upsetting that this peace of trash has been made by British cinematography which I personally like and that is the reason I've watched this. Don't do it yourself you have better things to do that watching stupid scenario film ...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7818c4ea90d2461ab73f32af7c14ac26",
            "input": "I remember seeing this years ago when it first came out and I was floored by Parker Posey's performance. And the movie was pretty good also. For anyone who's spent a little too much time in the nightclub/after-hours scene, this movie will have a special charm for you. Not too serious, mostly funny, and Parker Posey definitely blazes her talented way through this indie gem.I especially liked the Diaz character (reminded me of every single struggling DJ I've ever known). And many other movies could take a cue from this movie on how to preach the virtue of responsibility without being boring and bland about it.Babaganoosh!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9624ea35630f4c769bb42c969296cdf1",
            "input": "My friends and I rented that movie last night and we had one of the greatest laughs in awhile. The movie is not supposed to be funny at all, but it is just so ridiculous and it lacks any realism whatsoever. First, Phillippe (I forget what his character is called and I don't really care) uses his regular employee ID to go through all the top-security terminals. Not only is that pathetic but it gets topped when his enormous efforts culminate in his finding the so-scary Lego-room, which hosts the super computers. This is plain funny. The tense mood that we are supposed to experience is completely spoilt by the childish looking room. The ending, like all else, is very very very cheesy, especially when the bad guy's lawyer shows up 'right on time'. Anyway, this movie is a good laugh. If you need something to make fun of, definitely see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7cf6a241b6ff45a2a06ce2d10d4c58be",
            "input": "I never expect a film adaptation to follow too closely to the novel (especially a beloved one, like Evening) but when I saw that the book's author, Susan Minot, was a screenplay writer and executive producer on the film, I thought that Evening would be a good adaptation.If you enjoyed the book, don't bother with this movie. It is so far afield of the book that the two hardly bear any resemblance to one another.Here, our characters are completely different: the bride is in love with Harris. Harris is the son of the housekeeper. Buddy is a drunk, in love with Ann and/or Harris. I don't think a single character made it from the book to the screen; oh it just gets worst with every passing moment.And, really, didn't we learn from Bridges of Madison County that cutting from the story we are meant to be enthralled in, to scenes of our heroes' grown children having obnoxious and juvenile fights, simply does not work on film? This film is a disaster. Skip it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83ed5578e90946648805ef07f7fc30aa",
            "input": "Very heart warming and uplifting movie. Outstanding performance by Alisan Porter (Curly Sue). I saw this movie when it was first released and enjoyed it immensely. I just caught it again on the Mplex channel, and Curly Sue touched my heart again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b544837868384c9586498d27c55d86a0",
            "input": "Ha. without a doubt Tommy's the evil one here. i don't know why, but for some reason, little kids in horror movies tend to come across as little butt munches. and since they're kids, they won't die. because they're annoying...well..except for asylum of terror. but those are few and far between.Anyway onto the movie. Can't find this movie on DVD? sure you can! all you have to do is buy the Chilling classics DVD pack! not only do you get Metamorphosis on DVD for $15, but you also get 49 OTHER MOVIES! what a bargain! pff. OK. i'm done advertising for these cheesy movies. let's just say, this movie ain't worth the 15 bucks on its own.So we have a chemist scientist. yeah. cause all chemist scientists look as handsome as this guy playing Peter. He's trying to come up with a serum to stop deterioration of the body. the college he works at wants to pull the plug on his project, so he tries it on himself. but because this is a horror movie, he sucks it up and starts and incredibly long transformation sequence that takes nearly 3/4 of the movie.To pad out the movie he gets into a relationship with some woman who has a son. and she was never married! scandalous! But of course Tommy is one of the most irritating characters....no. i take it back. HE IS the most irritating character. Far worse than the old crippled guy who wants to take over peter's work and gloats over him while he's in the hospital. that's right, even as an old cripple, you can still be the villain.So we see Peter start to randomly kill some people in visions he has until he realizes he's the one doing it and just decides to kill everyone in his path to get back to normal. However at the end he ends up de-evolving into a lizard. yeah, i know don't ask. The ending really doesn't make any sense. And if you're hoping for any really good payoff, you're not going to get it.This isn't a HORRIBLE movie....it's just frustrating because of the lack of a good payoff. if you already own the 50 movie pack and this is next on your list, you're not in for a snoozer, but you're also not in for a great movie. Just sit back, relax, and eat a lot of snack food. Because this movie isn't going to be making you jump out of your skin anytime soon.Metamorphosis gets 4 plastic lizard heads, out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2791c36cf00b4bedab730e6df3498bc4",
            "input": "A man and his wife get in a horrible car accident. When the wife is left in a persistent vegetative state, the man must choose between pulling the plug and letting her live. The decision is made even harder when he realizes her ghost wants to extract revenge on him and those around him.This comes to us from director Rob Schmidt, who made \"Wrong Turn\" (a film I have not seen). With only one horror film under his belt, and not a particularly notorious one at that, I was a bit reluctant to watch this episode, expecting Schmidt to be a \"Master of Horror\" in only the most liberal sense. My apologies to him for my underestimation. As of episode 10 in a 13 episode season, this was actually the best one yet.The issue of the \"right to die\" is dealt with and covered in enough detail to be a solid plot device. However, this is only the foundation on which the story revolves. Once the horror elements show up, the film goes from \"decent\" to \"spectacular\". Great acting, great plot, great dialogue, great suspense. I was a little creeped out at times (which is good) and most of all: the gore is in extreme abundance! I read a review of this episode prior to watching it, where the reviewer said there is a strong hint of \"Hellraiser\" in this. Through the first part of the show, I had no idea what they were talking about. Then there is a bit later where some images do remind me of \"Hellraiser 2\". However, I in no way wish to say that this takes away from the film. I can see no other way to create the effect that was created, and in my opinion this looks remarkably better than \"Hellraiser 2\".Some plot twists show up later on, and might invite the viewer to give the film a second look. I didn't watch it a second time, but I think the beginning would make more sense if I had (not that it's confusing). The subplot with the dental hygienist is also nice, and I found myself going back and forth about whether I disliked the main character for his relationship with her or if I felt bad for him. He's somewhat of an anti-hero to the whole story, if you will. I feel inclined to cheer for him as the protagonist, but he's completely unlovable.While the Stuart Gordon episode may be better and I'm excited about the \"Washingtonians\" episode, I think I could safely bet that this is the key episode of the season and by far the saving grace of what was otherwise lackluster and routine. When legends like John Carpenter let me down (again) I get a bit worried about the genre's future, but then a fresh face like Rob Schmidt comes along and gives me hope. This one is a keeper, and please bring Schmidt back for season 3!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4bfdc69c2f834227a854a2f20ac02089",
            "input": "After Disney's witty live-action George of the Jungle, I had high hopes for this flick. Major disappointment. Thread bare plot, bad acting, bad visual effects. This film relied on lame one-liners, idiotic ( and pointless) product placement, and the lamest most annoying side-kick in that gadget car thing. I took two young kids to see it and they where bored out of their mind. The only laugh received from this movie was bad standby of when needing a laugh show a guy getting it in the groin!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0cb4f5fc25164f47b9ba20592a78b74a",
            "input": "The producers of this film offer to pay funeral expenses for anyone who dies of fright while watching this movie. They should have offered intensive psychotherapy for anyone who really enjoyed this stinker. A young couple moves into a house, where a woman who looks like the woman from the couple lived. Extremely boring, and very predictable. In the end I ended up not caring about anyone in this movie.Avoid this one at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55123fb846d54334abea2ef6dd5b9b08",
            "input": "Obvious attack on Microsoft made by people who don't appear to understand intellectual property or market economies generally.Loony liberal tim robbins plays a painfully obvious caricature of bill gates, and is a cartoonish corporate villain ordering murders right and left.While microsoft may engage in some anticompetitive activity at times, it's unlikely they actually murder people. Therefore, the film is over the top and ridiculous from the beginning.The \"deeper\" point is apparently that major tech innovations should be free to the public, and not subject to intellectual property laws. However, this ignores the fact that most major innovations would never have been developed if not for the market incentives (and rewards) provided by intellectual property.It's one thing to be opposed to anti-competitive conduct -- that's common sense. It's quite another to be opposed to market competition in the first place, which is what the film's mantra (\"knowledge belongs to mankind\") represents.Yet another example of Hollywood being completely out of touch with reality.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb802fd7cd6241a4adc5ad7160aaaa1f",
            "input": "The reasons to watch this knock off... err... tribute to a great movie called Se7en: - It's on while your channel surfing and there's nothing else on. - Someone pays you to watch it.Do yourself a favor and pop in the DVD for Se7en, rent it, download it on iTunes, or put it in your Netflix cue and skip The Flock entirely. The Flock the same story with with a few changes. Furthermore the editing just wreaks of Se7en and actually ends up taking you out of the story several times. The worst one is probably the fly over desert helicopter shots, with sounds of people people chattering over the radio, except there are no police helicopters flying overhead in this one.Bottom line: I call it a blatant knock off. If you wanna be nice you can call it a tribute film, go ahead, but either way go watch Se7en.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e995f807d38146548471787bd6e9ebbb",
            "input": "There's so many negative reviews about \"Stay away, Joe\" in here I just can't stay quiet any longer and let this injustice happen. Here's a side you haven't heard yet.Elvis Presley's movies are my guilty pleasure for a simple reason: they are perfect films for a pure relaxation because I don't have to think when I watch them. That means I don't have to worry about missing a complex plot because there never is a proper plot to start with. I can just kick off my shoes, grab a beer, sit back, switch off my brains and enjoy all the general wackiness and catchy easy-going rock n' roll tunes from the grooviest decade of them all.In my books \"Stay away, Joe\" definitely falls into the \"so bad it's good\"-category. Now if you're like me and appreciate \"the trash value\", this is the ultimate 1960's camp experience. It's so bad that it's almost surrealistic to watch and just when you think that it can't possibly get any worse it surprises you in the most imaginable ways. In the end you're so amazed by all the new levels of stupidity you just don't know whether to laugh or cry. In a nutshell: I love it because it's so damn amusing that there once was a generation that actually made films like this. I still give it 1 out of 10 though - once it hits the bottom 100 it will became an instant bad movie classic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9db3bcd430d049299037ed82264a17c2",
            "input": "i really liked the first 2 seasons. because a lot of good characters disappeared later on. like most shows are kinda slow at first then get better in later seasons, but this is the absolute reverse. jenny from the 1st season and Valarie from the 2nd season were Sabrina's friends, i really didn't care for the others, jenny and Valarie were her coolest friends. i think for some reason, the producers wanted us to not like her college friends for some reason, they were so cruel to Sabrina. but my favorite episode from season 1 is cat showdown and my favorite episode from season 2 is witch trash, that is the funniest episode. i also thought it was funny how Libby was popular but she was always jealous of Sabrina, and never seemed to have a real boyfriend but was always wanting to be with Harvey. i just wished they could have made more better ones. i also liked how the first 2 seasons, during the opening credits Sabrina would say a few words while wearing a costume, like in the pilot episode where she's in the witch costume, i liked how she said \"this is so not me\" and later on she kept trying to change herself to something else is what i think, but this is a really cool show. it is kinda like the andy griffith show in a way because it good at first but once it turned color and barney fife left, it was longer good. but i still like to watch it, but the only reason i watch later seasons is because of sabrina. what i meant about the opening sequence is: the opening titles of seasons 1-3 shows Sabrina in front of a mirror posing with several different costumes and outfits as the cast members' names quickly flash on the bottom of the screen. At the end, Sabrina would say some sort of pun that related to the outfit she is wearing, then disappear. the opening sequence of season four includes the characters in bubbles. the opening credits of seasons 5-7 features Sabrina at various locations around Boston",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10f1f9f3f9fd443cb96f7c5bfcb4c693",
            "input": "Joshua Seftel's first film - a satire of memorable proportions - is about just as the title suggests: The corporations effect on War.The film is about a mercenary (John Cusack) traveling to Turaqistan (not a real country, fyi) to help the American government 'get their message across' to Turaqistan's leaders. He meets a reporter (Marisa Tomei) and we all know what will ensue with a lonely man + a hot reporter. Somewhere in the mix, a pop star named Yonica Babyyeah gets thrown in. As Yonica is marrying one of Turaquistan's most important people (a son of the president), a subplot is created where the mercenary must watch over this star, well, somewhat. The film starts off with a lonely Cusack in a bar; no more than fifteen seconds later, the film hooks you. With it's amusing and intriguing insight on terrorism and politics, the film's running time blows by you. The film has a lot more action than I expected, with the occasional scene of war, well choreographed fights and just sporadic scenes of murder. Though the story isn't much deep, the simplicity of it all makes the film perfect for both the common man and movie critics alike.In the final act of the film, the simplicity of it all turns very hostile and jumbled. I thought it was executed very well, but other may disagree, and I could understand why. Twist after twist is what the ending is all about, and like most films, it is a true hit/miss situation. Regardless, the three writers on the film (Mark Leyner, Jeremy Pikser & John Cusack) did a fantastic job creating a realistic and entertaining satire on today's situation overseas.Joshua Seftel does an excellent job insuring the film's integrity; not reducing the material to the most redundant of films (which I was afraid would happen). Seftel crafted the film as perfectly as one could: he created a vibrant atmosphere, one that is both examines harsh reality and cartoonish falsities; - contrasting them perfectly - as well as making the film feel as if you were watching it all. Seftel really gets you involved in all of the action and it pays off completely. No missteps here. Hopefully, he takes on more directorial jobs, for he is one director to look out for.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca0604461f0145c3a6bc834d896030da",
            "input": "We are not in the fairy tale of the naked emperor. We may confess the truth of what we see, without being stupid, confess, that this show is in many aspects just incomprehensible and that it is clear, that much of it was created out of pure intuition without real concept.Well, obviously many people like such stuff. I don't. I prefer well thought and planed shows. And I also confess, that the show is much to serious for my taste and boring...those love and drug stories...There are so many exciting soaps with lot of suspense (Dallas e.g.), but Twin Peaks can't catch my attention. I don't care about those people, except Cooper and Gordon Cole.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95a309f7a7454f9a9c1aaea8c201ad07",
            "input": "As much as I dislike saying 'me too' in response to other comments - it's completely true that the first 30 minutes of this film have nothing whatsoever to do with the endless dirge that comprises the following 90.Having been banned somewhere doesn't make a film watchable. Just because it doesn't resemble a Hollywood product does not make it credible.Worse yet, in addition to no discernible plot (other than there are lots of muddy places in Russia and many people, even very old women, drink lots of vodka) a number of visuals are so unnecessarily nauseating I'm in to my second package of Rolaids.As for spoilers - well, the film is so devoid of any narrative thread I couldn't write one if I tried.Don't waste your time or money, and don't confuse this with good Russian cinema.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcd729ea1b3d406b958c983fa15f14bc",
            "input": "I cannot believe that the Indian film industry still puts out such third-rate dross as Waqt. For starters, the storyline is totally implausible – spoilt son gets thrown out of family home so as to teach him some self-sufficiency. So what does he do? He promptly goes on to win some national talent contest by doing some star jumps in front of a panel of judges (I honestly am not joking here). In the meantime, his dad is dying of lung cancer, but keeps it a secret from the son, but he survives long enough to see his son become famous, to see his new grandson and also make a new toy giraffe with his own hands.The acting is cringe worthy in its hamminess – no effort was made to try and act in any convincing manner by any of the main players in this film. As usual for Indian films, the family lived in a huge mansion and seemed relatively untouched by the concerns of the real world.To be honest, the main losers when such dire films are made are the intelligent viewers who made the mistake of seeing such a film. The actors, such as Amitabh Bachchan and Akshay Kumar, will still be revered as Gods by those people who have nothing but blind faith in Bollywood.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-596291300ace417aa4c76848b6043566",
            "input": "`Mad Dog' Earle is back, along with his sad-sack moll Marie, and that fickle clubfoot Velma. So are Babe and Red, Doc and Big Mac, and even the scenery-chewing mutt Pard. The only thing missing is a good reason for remaking Raoul Walsh's High Sierra 14 years later without rethinking a line or a frame, and doing so with talent noticeably a rung or two down the ladder from that in the original. (Instead of Walsh we get Stuart Heisler, for Humphrey Bogart we get Jack Palance, for Ida Lupino Shelley Winters, and so on down through the credits.) The only change is that, this time, instead of black-and-white, it's in Warnercolor; sadly, there are those who would count this an improvement.I Died A Thousand Times may be unnecessary – and inferior – but at least it's not a travesty; the story still works on its own stagy terms. Earle (Palance), fresh out of the pen near Chicago, drives west to spearhead a big job masterminded by ailing kingpin Lon Chaney, Jr. – knocking over a post mountain resort. En route, he almost collides with a family of Oakies, when he's smitten with their granddaughter; the smiting holds even when he discovers she's lame. Arriving at the cabins where the rest of gang holes up, he finds amateurish hotheads at one another's throats as well as Winters, who throws herself at him (as does the pooch). Biding time until they get a call from their inside man at the hotel, Palance (to Winter's chagrin) offers to pay for an operation to cure the girl's deformity, a gesture that backfires. Then, the surgical strike against the resort turns into a bloodbath. On the lam, Palance moves higher into the cold Sierras....It's an absorbing enough story, competently executed, that lacks the distinctiveness Walsh and his cast brought to it in 1941, the year Bogie, with this role and that of Sam Spade in the Maltese Falcon, became a star. And one last, heretical note: Those mountains do look gorgeous in color.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fc2576baa3a448d86c50aa50d7cbb76",
            "input": "What can one say about a film that has one of the blackest, most nihilistic, and occasionally most weirdly -I wont say 'sympathetic'..I will say 'charismatic' villains in the history of the Cinema, and the best sword fight since Flynn and Fairbanks were in their heyday? This is an epic about a stubborn, sometimes foolish, incredibly courageous and honest mans fight for his honor and freedom against tyranny. I loved it. John Hurt and Tim Roth were great villains. Jessica Lange was very moving, tender, and sensual.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1018bfe5452940d0ad9082c9a3b0a5cc",
            "input": "Saw in on TV late last night. Yeah, I can hear what y'all say about this one. It IS likely to be categorized as one of those stereo- typical TV soap series. In all fairness, the story line does have a fine twist to it, and you might nod saying, \"Well, that's not what I expected.\" But, as a film, well it is not easy to spot a redeeming element. Casting, acting, camera work, cars, costume, setting, script, no, there's nothing to congratulate. Rated R?? Oh, that scene. Did we need it? This is a film that you can watch it and then forget that you even watched. And what was the title again?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbae0b8a492440bba1ba9a0dde7c2acf",
            "input": "This movie is truly boring. It was banned in Chinese cinema and i can see why. It's not because it's critical of the communist regime but simply because the movie is of such low quality. I would never want to pay money to watch this. I love movies from Chen Kaige and Zhang Yimou and i am disappointed such a poor movie could come out of China. It totally seems to ignore the audience and the director seems to have made the movie for himself. The shots of a person standing there doing nothing for up to a minute are hilarious and there's plenty of them. The cinematography and video quality are unbelievably bad. I looked this film up on the Net and it seems like people actually like this film. The only explanation i have for this is that some film buffs think that if a film is not in English it is automatically good. I can't see any reason why people would like this. this is not an art film it's of waste of celluloid.(That's if they actually shot it on film , which they didn't)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8aa87e25c0d94b00b7a65f248e482d4a",
            "input": "I think I've seen this sort of thing before: college graduates not realizing they have it pretty damn good, all the while, complaining that their lives suck.This movie is highly derivative of The Big Chill and Reality Bites from what I can make of it: they practically have the same plot.If anything good came out of this snore-fest, it was the music. That was it.As far as I'm concerned, I'm not impressed... but then again, I never expected anything less. This movie was directed by the same person that directed Batman and Robin; another movie that should only be viewed with a blindfold in tow.Now for the verdict: it's a 1 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01b97c4fbc504b2a914e6eb6ae334622",
            "input": "BASEketball is one of the funniest movies I have ever seen. It is an off-the-wall movie starring South park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker.They play two slacker friends who create a sport in their driveway which goes on to become a national sensation. Most of the gags are indeed hilarious but the funniest parts of the movie is when players attempt to \"psyche-out\" other members of the opposing team. There is no rule about what is not allowed, so naturally they do the craziest things possible. One flaw of this movie is that the pace is way too fast, and after watching for about half an hour I found myself asking \"Wow this this over already?\" Another hilarious part of the movie was how Joe and Doug continuously harass Squeak, who is a hyped-up little guy. BASEketball is a comedic classic with some very quotable lines, and it is very fun to watch!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0cdcea1da8d54bf19084d5c27e2a82ff",
            "input": "This film show peoples in the middle of the hottest 2 days in Austria. It shows people humiliating other peoples and being cruel to other peoples. It show the inability of people to communicate or talk with others.In the screening I have attended people were leaving in the middle because they could no longer watch the film. And rightly so. Because the film is not and easy one to watch. It has a very depressing message and there isn't any moment of mercy in the film. It is a very cruel movie, not for everyone's taste. You can not speak of terms of enjoyment from this film. It grips you in your throat and never let go and in the end you simply feels breathless because of its intensity.I can not \"recommend\" or \"not recommend\" this film. You should make your own mind based on what I have said earlier. Just be aware that this is not a regular film and it is not for everyone's taste.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-602be402c5ca404dae6f32009abd14d8",
            "input": "Prom Night 2 is an OK horror movie but prom night is way better and this movies about how the prom Queen Mary Lou in 1957 gets killed by her boyfriend and comes back 30 years later for revenge.The best actor in this movie is Micheal Ironside and the movie stars other OK actors and actress like Justin Louis (I),Wendy Lyon,Lisa Schrage and Richard Monette(I).And there are some good gore scenes like when Mary Lou kills the girl that is trying to hide in her locker by crushing the lockers together and how one of the students are on the computer and Mary Lou electrocutes him to death.Over all this is an OK/good horror movie and my rating is 4 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4024de842665471ca6e9ae086a7bdddd",
            "input": "Cult classics are nearly impossible to predict. Who could guess that Vision Quest, Fight Club, and 2001: A Space Oddysey, movies that were panned by critics and audiences alike upon their release, would become immensely popular? Like many IMDBers, I consider myself a movie expert. Unlike the majority of those who hated Envy(evidenced by a dismal 4.4 rating), I found Envy to be one of the funniest movies in the last decade.The plot of the movie is ridiculous. The dialogue isn't clever, the scenes have little continuity, and the script seems like it was written by a fourth grader. But that's exactly why the movie is so hilarious. You see, in order to appreciate the accidental genius of Envy, you have to enjoy the movie from an ironically-detached point of view.Why do I love Envy? Because the movie is bad to the point that it becomes good. This is the recipe for a cult classic, and Envy definitely fits the bill.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d346f72ead954902bb4a647e720f2306",
            "input": "Spoilers I loved the later episodes from college and on, but I wish I could get the last season on DVD. Unfortunately, the latest I could get is the first college season. Still the teenage years were sweet; although they focused a lot on magic, they also made her into a character that teens could relate to, deeling with the stuggles of teens, and children in divorced families. This show was very innocent; they did not get into the morbid teenage problems such as sex and drugs, but they did deel with pressure to fit in. I loved watching her grow up and cope with her magic on her own and trying to convince her Aunts to let go as she left the nest. The older episodes were cute, but it was just so much better to see her as (well not really a teenage witch anymore) but an adult witch. I loved Roxy and Mortgan; they were so talented! In the earlier episodes the Aunts were great actresses, but they were so strict, kind and loving, but they treated her like a young child in some ways, but not in every way. I mean they grounded her for every little mistake she made with her magic, I mean let her learn from her own mistakes for once! That was what I liked about the college episodes; she was able to learn from her own mistakes without be grounded over everything; that was annoying. Not to put down Hilda and Zelda. Melissa Joan Hard is beautiful and was perfect for the Sabrina with her Perky personality. I liked the last episode where she ran off the marry Harvey, but as somebody else said, it would have been nice to see what happened after. I mean I believe it was obvious they were getting married; where else would they be running off to in her wedding dress? But I would have liked to have seen it. I supposed they wanted to leave it up to the viewer to choose the ending though rather than spoon feeding it to us as most comedies do. Somebody said they could have shown them marry and go to school in the house, but they already graduated college. Sabrina had great job for a magazine and I think Harvey had a good job, because he lived in a nice apartment that we only see at the end, but they never say what he does. As a child they always talk about how he does not want to be an exterminator like his Dad. When Sabrian moved into the house that season, they never really explain how it happened. Actually, there is a lot the show does not explain, but I supposed it is supposed to be to leave it up to us and give it some mystery. Prior to Sabrina and her friends moving into the house, they show Hilda getting married and this whole spell that ends up with Zelda turning into a child. Hilda comes back in the last episode (and Zelda is there in some other form, but Beth is not on the episode) but they do not show Zelda's husband or what happened, like did they have children? Maybe they didn't want too much going on in one episode. I also liked Hart's sister who played her spoiled cousin! She was pretty and a great actress and it was interesting to see her grown up! I cannon believe it has been six years since the show went off the air! I still love the reruns! Also, I don't know if anybody noticed this, but in the earlier episodes, the town was called Westbridbe (a made up town I believe, which was supposed to be close to Salem) but in the later episodes, they don't mention the name of the town being caled Westbridge and I think they call it Boston, unless that is just where she worked. Also, I wanted to add, I found the episode, \"Wild Wild Sabrina\" where she is taught about the importance of rules, to be insulting. She was 18 and too old to be grounded; I would have been insulted if my parents grounded me at 18. And I think while an 18 year old might mess up how she did, they need to learn the consequences on their own. I think at 18 they know rules are important.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f0ff167042546b090b077e7298ac88f",
            "input": "I don't know where to begin. Tara Reid needs to be stopped before she's put in another movie. Stephen Dorff looks like he got his character's motivation from Val Kilmer in \"Top Gun\". Slater sleepwalks through this dreck. The direction, editing, sound (do we really need a heavy-metal video in the middle of a gunfight?), costumes (bulletproof vests with muscles on them), and hey, there's no discernible plot either. It amazes me that no one attached to the project stopped and said, \"hey guys, this just doesn't make any sense, let's start over\". Hopefully Slater's career can rebound from this disaster.Hands down the worst film I've ever seen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae340a0692de4d448d7b59d9e099c136",
            "input": "Your average garden variety psychotic nutcase (deliciously essayed with unhinged glee by Stephen Sachs) knocks off various dim-witted young \"adults\" (to use the term very loosely) in Dayton Hall University, which is being closed down for demolition. Featuring dreadful acting by the entire cast (Daphne Zuniga makes her ignominious and inauspicious film debut here as Debbie, a bimbo who has her head crushed by a car!), a hefty corpse tally of 10, okay make-up f/x by Matthew Mungle, a few bloody murders (baseball bat bludgeoning, chicken wire strangulation, your standard drill through the head bit, that sort of gruesome thing), a downbeat surprise twist ending which was later copied in \"Intruder,\" a creepy score by Christopher (\"Hellraiser\") Young, a slight smidgen of gratuitous female nudity, and endearingly incompetent direction by Jeffrey Obrow and Steve Carpenter (who also blessed us with \"The Power\" and \"The Kindred\"), this entertainingly abysmal slice'n'dice atrocity sizes up as a good deal of delectably dopey and drecky low-grade fun.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da13b80423b2494ba19292842d61f9cb",
            "input": "A trio of buddies, sergeants all in the British Army, carouse & brawl their way across Imperial India. Intensely loyal to each other, they meet their greatest & most deadly challenge when they encounter the resurgence of a hideous cult & its demented, implacable guru. Now they must rely on the lowliest servant of the regiment, the water carrier GUNGA DIN, to save scores of the Queen's soldiers from certain massacre.Based more on The Three Musketeers than Kipling's classic poem, this is a wonderful adventure epic - a worthy entry in Hollywood's Golden Year of 1939. Filled with suspense & humor, while keeping the romantic interludes to the barest minimum, it grips the interest of the viewer and holds it right up to the (sentimental) conclusion.It is practically fruitless to discuss the performance nuances of the three stars, Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen & Douglas Fairbanks Jr., as they are really all thirds of a single organism - inseparable and, to all intents & purposes, indistinguishable. However, this diminishes nothing of the great fun in simply watching them have a glorious time.(It's interesting to note, parenthetically, that McLaglen boasted of a distinguished World War One military career; Fairbanks would have a sterling record in World War Two - mostly in clandestine affairs & earning himself no fewer than 4 honorary knighthoods after the conflict; while Grant reportedly worked undercover for British Intelligence, keeping an eye on Hollywood Nazi sympathizers.)The real acting laurels here should go to Sam Jaffe, heartbreaking in the title role. He infuses the humble man with radiant dignity & enormous courage, making the last line of Kipling's poem ring true. He is unforgettable.Montague Love is properly stalwart as the regimental major, whilst Eduardo Ciannelli is Evil Incarnate as the Thuggee guru. The rest of the cast, Joan Fontaine, Robert Coote, Lumsden Hare, are effective but have little to do. Movie mavens will recognize Cecil Kellaway in the tiny role of Miss Fontaine's father.The film picks its villains well. The demonic Thuggee cult, worshipers of the hideous, blood-soaked Kali, Hindu goddess of destruction, was the bane of Indian life for 6 centuries, ritualistically strangling up to 30,000 victims a year. In 1840 the British military, in cooperation with a number of princely states, succeeded in ultimately suppressing the religion. Henceforth it would remain the stuff of novels & nightmares.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c96b5cbda0a64d97b9fae7d5cb3c6a43",
            "input": "Just the kind of movie I love. Some very good British actors as well as the one and only Sharon Stone. Catherine Tramell (Stone) masterfully manipulates a well educated group of people's lives, playing on their frailties to collect experiences to write a murder mystery book. She plays the female psychopath quite well while using her ample sex appeal to convincingly portray what could be considered one of the ultimate Black Widows. Tramell is use to dark places within society and freely partakes in sadomasochistic flings in the 'never visit after dark' side of town. From the beginning, there is nothing short of an R rating here from the dialog alone. Stone could also be described as a sort of female Hannibal Lecter, an emotionless femme fatal without the meal plan.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89d56ebf53e1407689c5d00899ba9fab",
            "input": "Proof that not everything Tarantino touches turns to gold. This is most definitely plastic, all the way. Its easy to see that without Quentin's involvement this would have probably sat on the shelf for years, that's assuming it would have ever got produced in the first place. It is about a woman with a fascination of death who gets a job cleaning up after crime scenes, Angela Jones is unconvincing in this role, William Baldwin is better as the Serial Killer who keeps Jones in employment!. All in all pretty poor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16452443d65b4ff4882fa2244aa7f3e7",
            "input": "The Gang of Roses. \"Every rose has its thorns.\"A mix of old western and hip hop, blended perfectly together. The clothing styles, the scenery, and the plot are all suited to what the director wanted. Plot - in five years, they robbed twenty-seven banks and then vanished without a trace. Now, a small western town is under siege, and one of the first victims is Rachel's sister. The Rose Gang is ready to ride again. And this time it's personal.Rachel (Michael Calhoun), Chastity (Lil' Kim), Maria (Lisaraye), Zang Li (Marie Matiko) and Kim (Stacey Dash), five gunslinging women who split up after five years of riding together. When Rachel's sister is killed, she ends up rounding up her friends once again and riding on a trail of vengeance. A good, muck around version of western. (If you've seen Bad Girls, well this is a little bit better in the ways of the female characters).I gave it 10/10 because the characters, plot and scenery made it for me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb5985c7dd4f49d4b9fb6951689f2a0e",
            "input": "Annoying, static comedy with a painfully miscast Peter Sellers as a smarmy, self-centered Casanova who always has his way with the ladies. A major blemish on Sellers' filmography, and, even worse, a film that seems to have been made solely to satisfy the ego of its star. (*)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c5c5ce1c2284252b1a59afcae201c00",
            "input": "Sergio Martino is a great director, who has contributed a lot to Italian genre cinema and, as far as I am considered, his Gialli from the 1970s are the undisputed highlights in his impressive repertoire. \"La Coda Dello Scorpione\" aka. \"The Case Of The Scorpion's Tale\" of 1971 is one of these impressive films Martino has contributed to Italian Horror's most original sub-genre, and another proof that the man is a master of atmosphere, style and suspense. My personal favorite of the Martino films I've seen so far is still the insanely brilliant \"Your Vice Is A Locked Room And Only I Have The Key\" of 1972, followed by \"Torso\" (1973) and \"The Strange Vice Of Mrs Wardh\" (1971), all of which I personally like even more than this one. That's purely a matter of personal taste, however, as \"La Coda Dello Scorpione\" is an equally excellent film that is essential for every fan of Italian Horror cinema and suspense in general.The film, which delivers tantalizing suspense from the very beginning has a complex and gripping plot that begins with the mysterious demise of a millionaire who has died in a plane crash. Insurance investigator Peter Lynch (George Hilton) is assigned to verify the circumstances the insurance company which is due to pay a large sum to the deceased man's wife. Soon after Lynch begins to investigate, a person is brutally killed, which is just the beginning of a series of murders...\"The Case of the Scorpion's Tail\" excellently delivers all the elements a great Giallo needs. The film is stunningly suspenseful from the beginning, the score by Bruno Nicolai is brilliant, the plot is wonderfully convoluted, and the killer's identity remains a mystery until the end. Regular Giallo leading-man George Hilton once again delivers an excellent performance in the lead. Sexy Anita Strindberg is absolutely ravishing in the female lead. The includes the great Luigi Pistilli, one of the most brilliant regulars of Italian genre-cinema of the 60s and 70s, and Alberto De Mendoza, another great actor who should be familiar to any lover of Italian cinema. Athens, where most of the film takes place, is actually a great setting for a Giallo. The atmosphere is constantly gripping, and the photography great, and Bruno Nicolai's ingenious score makes the suspense even more intense. Long story short: \"La Coda Dello Scorpione\" is another excellent Giallo from Sergio Martino and an absolute must-see for any lover of the sub-genre! Stylish, suspenseful, and great in all regards!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-566d4c51f8e3401fb1fa6f45f2906f26",
            "input": "When I went to watch this movie my expectations were really low, but I was pleasantly surprised. I thought I was going to watch a boring teen-flick, BUT in fact the plot is interesting and well executed, the acting was somewhat convincing - especially from Melville who really shows his talent in this movie, and the fight scenes were - for a low budget movie - very well done .I think this movie deserves a broader audience than it has received. It is a movie, which can be seen by the whole family - maybe not the smallest of kids, since it contains some rather rough scenes. A movie about love, and the problems that can occur, when you go against your family traditions. Yes, the movie is very much like \"Bend it like Beckham\", but I actually think this movie pulls it off better.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c7fdc5bef144d7d8acd17db1bd23c61",
            "input": "Grieving couple move to a cabin on a mountain after the loss of their daughter, discovering that there may be ghosts haunting the place, restless spirits of past occupants who committed suicide. Julie Pyke(Cheri Christian)blames husband Allen(Greg Thompson)for the horrible death of their daughter due to leaving the door unlocked and the marriage has deteriorated because of it. Julie remains in a zombie state, eliciting next to no emotion, remote and numb, only photographing a nearby abandoned prison, finding a startling image of a ghoul girl clinging to the bars of a cell. Though Allen doesn't see anything out of the ordinary, Julie continues to take pictures and we can recognize that something isn't quite right. A local handyman, Jim Payne(Scott Hodges), a rather distant fellow who harbors a secret becomes a dangerous threat when it is revealed that his dead mother might have something to do with the haunts occurring to the Pykes. Meanwhile the neighbors who sold the Pykes the cabin find themselves victims as well, alcoholic Mr Booth's abuse to his wife coming back to haunt him. Allen will conduct an investigation into the history of his cabin, attempting to unravel the mystery about the place.Plenty of ghosts moving about in the background in this somber supernatural tale with practically every character miserable. Cheri Christian remains so vacuous and lost, it's incredibly hard to connect with her despite the fact that you understand her plight. The acting, as is often mentioned, remains frustrating because none of the characters exactly are easy to latch on to. I guess it's supposed to be this way, under their circumstances, but the trouble I had was never being able to properly embrace the Pykes due to their constant state of aloofness. Cheri comes off as cold and detached, as I figure a mother would tend to be when you lose a child in such a way, but the icy nature left me pleading inside to embrace her which I just never could. I think the right performers, even if the characters are going through an emotional turmoil, can grab the hearts of their viewers, if a humanity reaches out to us..in this movie's case, the leads are unable to do so, for whatever reason. It could've been me, I don't know. I wanted to care for them, but nothing in the characters tugged on my heart strings. Anyway, as the film continues, Allen slowly uncovers certain truths and must defend himself against his wife who has convinced herself that their daughter is among them and she won't lose her little girl again. Jim, the unstable neighbor who believes that to stop the hauntings plaguing the area he must kill the Pykes, becomes a vital threat. The ghosts remain a central part of the movie, their presence, particularly Jim's mother, established throughout, off in the distance. The finale reveals all of them as Allen must find help for his wife while trying to thwart Jim's mission. I had a hard time getting into this one due to my unease with the leads and their characters.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fdf10e81a3e040eb875678f3f97899d1",
            "input": "Eyes of the Werewolf (1999) is a really bad movie. The premise was real good but the overall execution was just terrible. I wished the filmmakers would have taken their time with this project instead of rushing it into production. Some blind dude gets some new eyes, bad thing is that they belong to a mean old werewolf. Nasty things begins to happen to the dude as he turns into a cheesy looking creature. Can he find a cure before his hot girlfriend finds out? Who is that weird little troll who helps him out and what's up with that female cop? If you really want to find out, check out Eyes of the Werewolf!Not a bad idea for a movie. I just wished the filmmakers would have spent a lot for time in pre-production before they decided to shoot the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfbc3a7298234545b314b59a5660e714",
            "input": "Anyone that has see Tammuz's Child Eaters knows that this is a director that can do better. Let's hope it was not a case of too many hands in the pot (Telefilm anyone?)and that is was a case of second feature jitters. The characters are one dimensional and over used. The scenery is terrific however and showcases the Pacific Northwest beautifully.The cinematography is great. Shot almost entirely outside, the images are crisp and beautiful. You can almost smell the wind blowing through the leaves.Technically this movie is as sound as they come - it just lacks a heart.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9468b0b4424a4025a8c9287b7cbc4a49",
            "input": "Having seen the short a number of times at horror movie marathons, I believe it to be a humorous parody that slices to the main point of its reference.Though the themes are crusty and stale to today's viewers, it is by no means a crumby waste of time.Though being a student film gives little rise to an excuse, the proof is that it appears crafted with care on a budget of little to no dough.As noted by another reviewer, it is less than ten minutes which is plenty of time to cleanse the viewing palate with a toast of joy, sit back and loaf idly through the film.I think this short-bread of a film should be enjoyed as an appetizer for the title reference and the viewer should relax and roll with it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25dba2cf68b64bb49cc4a24ee1503a91",
            "input": "When I think of Return of the Jedi I think epic. Yeah Ewoks were in there so what? They're an interesting add to the movie (not to mention they are similar to the Vietcong who were also able to take down a technologically advanced army with primitive acts). Jedi is definitely more darker then the rest of the movies. Emperor Palpatine (portrayed by the amazing theater actor Ian McDiarmid) was one the best parts of the movie. Palpatine is so evil and vicious, Vader looks like Mr. Rogers compared to him . Speaking of Darth Vader, what an amazing end to such an iconic character. Vader is truly a modern day Greek tragedy and I think people can now especially understand and appreciate this after Revenge of the Sith came out. His redemption at the end was moving and really brings a happy yet bittersweet feeling to you. The best part was of course the special effects. It's amazing how a film from the early eighties can still stand the test of time with it's graphics. The scenes at Jabba's palace (Leia looks amazing in that metal bikini) and of course the epic three way battle at the end are still stunning to look at. In all Jedi's deep plot and emotional moments (primarily between Luke Vader and Palpatine and when Luke reveals the truth to Leia) and incredible special effects is a fitting end to one of the most beloved franchises in cinema history.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c9c2462b9ee478bb80acffbdcf2054a",
            "input": "I have rarely been subjected to such outright nonsense in a film that is supposed to be based on a historical figure. A horrible joke of a film, I cringed throughout. Terrible, trite, distorted and riddled with outright lies and half truths.The famous Hitler biographer Ian Kershaw was to originally be a consultant for this film. However, he found the script to be so historically inaccurate and ridiculous that he refused, and also demanded they stop using his name as a source (it embarrassed him to think people would think he was involved).One scene shows Hitler beating his dog. There is not one source for this. Hitler loved animals above people. He brought in the strictest animal welfare laws in Europe, banned vivisection and animal experimentation. He was also a vegetarian.The film turns his gaining of the Iron Cross into a farce, involving bribery. Utter lies. He was awarded it for repeated acts of bravery over a long period of time.There are no historical documents showing that Hitler ever had a sexual relationship with his niece. Not one.Apart from these, Hitler is portrayed as a rabid simpleton in this garbage flick.If he was even half as ignorant, demented and thick as he is in this nonsense film as in real life you would not even know he had ever existed. Never mind become the leader of Germany.Honestly, this film was utterly terrible.Go watch Downfall and give this a very wide berth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd2f04bb92c747cf95ee0a3a92cb1b49",
            "input": "For the first forty minutes, Empire really shapes itself up: it appears to be a strong, confident, and relatively unknown gangster flick. At the time I didn't know why, I thought it was good- but now I do. One of the main problems with this film is that it is purely and utterly distasteful. I don't mind films with psychos and things, to prove a point- take Jackie Brown, for example- but they're all so terribly shallow in this, but that is obviously thrown in for entertainment. You literally feel a knot pull in your stomach. Another major problem is the protagonist. He is smug, arrogant, yet- ironically enough- not that bad. He doesn't seem tight enough to be a drug-dealing woman killer. The fact is, at the end of the day, this film is completely pretentious. Not slick, not clever, just dull, and meaningless- this colossal mess should be avoided at all costs. * out of ***** (1 out of 5)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98b2444b75e54858a7727c9d57df2398",
            "input": "I ran across this movie on the tv and could not turn it off. Peter Sellers plays an unlikable fellow who falls for an extremely warm and cute Goldie Hawn (who wouldn't?). The way that Goldie's character holds herself from the beginning of the movie to the end is untraditional even today. This movie gave me a different angle into human relations and also I found it very funny. Peter Sellers role was a difficult sell, but I think he pulls it off well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-137e2f82dd0445888c67314048cade66",
            "input": "Another episode from childhood that, as an adult, I look back on with a different perspective. This was one of my favorite childhood episodes, one that really cemented my adoration of this show. However, on viewing this episode after 20 years, I'd say it is definitely one of the lighter ones, played for laughs and amusement, instead of the dramatic and well-constructed story lines in previous episodes in this, their first and best season. Perhaps this episode was written for a little fan R&R too! As Mr. Spock would say, the story just isn't logical but there are some amusing lines like, of course, Mr. Spock's final one at the end--when he asks the Captain, McCoy et al whether they enjoyed their R&R and they answer in the affirmative, he raises an eyebrow and says \"Fascinating...\" in only the way Mr. Spock could do that. An interesting story line, of course, the idea of an amusement park being actually amusing (instead of the fake and often annoying \"amusement\" of Disneyland, for example), being able to have one's wishes actually come true. Really, a great idea but not that well executed. And coming from Theodore Sturgeon, another of the great SF short story writers they used in the first season, one wonders how much tinkering was done to the script that Sturgeon turned in.Now, here is a little trivia I learned on this very site: In 1987, James Gunn established the Theodore Sturgeon Award for best short science fiction story. And I'll quote the rest from this site: In 1968 he {Sturgeon} wrote \"The Joy Machine\", a third script for the Star Trek TV series {Amok Time the other}, that was never shot. The main reason that it wasn't used in the series is that it contained expensive special effects sequences that would be too much for their budget. However, the script was adapted into a book by Sci-Fi writer James Gunn (Star Trek #80, The Original Series) and published by Pocket Books in 1996.I'd sum this up to say this episode is still very enjoyable, especially if one doesn't think too much about it. Just laugh and enjoy it and next episode we can get back to the serious stuff of protecting the universe.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37d783df18d64d9ea0175080b090a979",
            "input": "Impressed! This is the worst SRK movie and one of the worst Bollywood movies I ever saw! I didn't like the novel, but this movie made it worse! Very bad music, even worse actors (apart from SRK of course, though even he doesn't manage to save the movie), and not much sense. The director makes it all look very confusing, God knows why... Maybe it's because he's trying to make it all look very surrealistic, and yet credible. Well, he manages neither.Even if you've got a few hours to loose, don't watch this movie, please! (Saying this for your own welfare!) Keep searching, you will find something else to watch!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b9618bee4db4d768bf9a8cdd9d3ba79",
            "input": "I think its time for Seagal to go quietly into the night. What I have just seen makes all his direct to video releases in the last few years look like his early 90's smash hits in comparison.A secret bio lab is making a new kind of drug that jacks up a human's adrenaline system to the point where they become psychopathic killers or something. Somehow Seagal is supposed to stop the infection or its the end of the world...or something. Seagal also went through hit squads like jellybeans, every time I look up he was commanding a new face so it kinda got hard to follow character development as well I know Steven's athsma prevent him from yelling at the top of his lungs but even so why is he constantly being dubbed by people who sound nothing like him? Usually the films plot and action sequences can save it from being a total waste of time but this was not even close. Like I said, it was more of a horror movie with a lot of blood and shank stabbing rather than straight up fighting. The problem was it wasn't really scary and Seagal looked completely out of place because the infected people were supposed to have speed of light movement yet the 40 year old 280 lb Seagal killed them all singlehandedly? I guess the lone highlight of the movie was the first 20 minutes where the new recruits ask Seagal to come to the strip club with them.2 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b04edd7033724fcfb9405eb6ea084eb4",
            "input": "Although the actors were good, specially Fritzi Haberland as the blind Lilly, the film script is obsessively pretentious and completely arbitrary. A famous theatre director (Hilmir Snær Guðnason), becoming blind after a car accident, is on the run for himself and his destiny. Lilly, being sightless since her birth, is teacher for blind persons, and wants to make him \"seeing\" again. (Blind persons are seeing with their fingers, nose and ears.) Here this movie is becoming a roadmovie; and the longer the road becomes, the closer their relation develops, which was predictable since the beginning of the film. The theatre director is on the road to his mother (Jenny Gröllmann). His mother is living somewhere in Russia on the sea and making artistic installations - of course, what should she do other! - and she is still living, because she is waiting his son, to die. My God! This are destinies!Finally the son arrived! Mum is celebrating a big party! At the beach. Wind is blowing and a pianist is playing on a real piano in the middle of a dune. Yes, they are celebrating her farewell. The son arrives just in time. Mother can finally swallow the pills administered by a pretty nurse. Now a great artist can die in the arms of her great artist son, speaking sad contemplations about live in perfect German, while the son is answering with a rough accent. Because the son is unable to see, he is not falling in love to the nurse, - the film script would have become also too complicate! - but is looking for Lilly on the way back to home.Parallel to this roadmovie the sister of Lilly, staying at home is asking a gawky schoolmate to deflower her, who has first to booze himself to courage. The occasion is favourable. Because Mum (Tina Engel) is on journey together with the lover of Lilly, Paul (Harald Schrott). They are after Lilly, to bring her back. Paul and the mother of Lilly are not falling in love, because the film script would have become too complicate. The film script missed to make out of Paul something exceptional too. I would suggest an architect or a Pianist, or course a famous one! When they finally find Lilly, they want to convince her, to come back to Paul, because he has two eyes to see and is able to care for her. But Lilly felt in love to his pupil, the theatre director; did I mention, that he was even a famous theatre director?This is German film art! As you may see in this pretentious production, that the German film subsidy fund is not always producing good films, because they subsidy just such kind of pseudo intellectual films. This film is really embarrassing. I have the impression, that the film script has been cobbled together from some highbrows in coffee shops and restaurants. Everybody is entitled to contribute with an idea. Probably also Til Schweiger has contributed with some intellectual flash of wit, being a co-producer. I was reminded by this film script to an other German film of absolute painfulness: \"Barfuss\" - already the spelling of the title is not right! \"Barfuss\" DVD cover writes proudly: \"A Til Schweiger Film\". This film got also subsidies of Filmstiftung NRW, Filmförderung Hamburg and the FFA.Please don't spoil your time with this film! There are really good films in Germany. Watch out for film directors like Marcus H. Rosenmüller, Joseph Vilsmaier, Hans Steinbichler, Hans-Christian Schmid, Faith Akin ...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94f2a5e5fa4b4ab08fa91edc62b11735",
            "input": "Look, it's the third one, so you already know it's bad. And \"Maniac Cop\" wasn't good enough to warrant the second installment, so you know it's even worse. But how much worse? Awful, approaching God-awful.When Maniac Cop goes on a killing spree, a reporter exclaims, \"What happened here can ONLY be described as a black rainbow of death.\"1-- Rainbows are not black, and can never be. 2-- Rainbows are harmless, and can never inflict pain or death. 3-- A news reporter, one valuable to his agency, might find another way to describe the aftermath of a killing spree. \"A black rainbow of death\" is not the ONLY way to describe the given situation.This is what you're in for.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f7aaced525444178a92e73baabf04a9",
            "input": "Contrary to popular belief, this title , to me at least, is not so very bad. In fact. I regard it as a favoured film of all time. The welding of stories wasn't structured too well when you consider the differences between the series, however despite all this, you can watch it quite happily. For a feature film of its day, the scenes are well proportioned and the characters remain consistently believable.The sound/audio track is a personal favourite of mine. Nearly everything has a correct sound effect and many of the voices suit the characters much better than their, now badly cast US dub, counterparts. The sync is perfect in every shot. I had a few issues with the casting for the 'alien' voices (please forgive the crude naming, it has been a while since i've seen it). Otherwise however, the cast seemed perfectly balanced. I feel and believe in the characters of this movie. Dubs are often a subject i rarely agree with from so long ago. I loved the OSD's from back then but the castings often let series down.At this point i would like to add that this was one of the first anime i saw in my life. It has historical value to me, but even after seeing the original Megazone 23 it remained stronger and more watched in my collection.To my knowledge the title only ever made it to the US in Texas. Personally i think its a big shame. Had the correct audience been subject to it, i think Robotech the Movie would have been accepted and not tarnished over the years. I am involved with anime each day of my life and everyone i have shown this movie thought it was a nicely put together title.Watching the film after its separate components will allow the viewer to notice the evident plot holes between shows. However, without seeing the originals, a viewer wouldn't really notice. Since the animation is identical in style, there was no reason to question it back in its day. The UK had very limited access to anime. Laser discs were the most productive media. Personally i like the way Carl had the balls to at least push the genre. I mean Harmony wasn't going to put up the cash for the series to get publicised.Despite the few picky faults people have had with this film, The eighties feel of it keeps me in love. If you watch Megazone 23 now, to its original Japanese audio, or the new dub, i believe you will be greatly disappointed with the OSD. Cast your minds back to the original Bubblegum Crisis Dub soundtrack and imagine new eighties audio to E.V.E.Saying all this. This film's popularity nowadays is most likely down to its rarity on the open market. Personally, it spawned a collection for me. I'm now scouring the world for merchandise from the three components that made it up and if i ever get to meet Carl Macek, ill shake his hand for the effort, and buy him a pint or a crate for getting me into anime.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7584d4e6cb3849bb90b1170a5f0eac6d",
            "input": "This is the first of \"The Complete Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare\" BBC series I've seen, and if all of them are like this, I might watch no more. Being practically the full text of the play is everything this \"Romeo & Juliet\" has going for it, lacking in all other departments. Alvin Rakoff reveals himself as a dreadful director, both in the technical and artistic aspects. In the former, because he commits mistakes that even a first grade film student would wisely avoid. Take in consideration, for example, the badly edited first shot of Abraham and Balthasar in the opening scene, or the Nurse's entering of Friar Lawrence's cell, asking where's Romeo with him being so very in front of her that she'd clearly see him even if she was blind. And, in the latter, because every single one of the performers is misdirected, even if some of them are good actors. Rebecca Saire looks exactly the way I've always imagined Juliet to look like, and she doesn't seem to be a bad actress for a teenager, but her performance totally lacks passion of any kind. Patrick Ryecart as Romeo is even worse, being not only as dull as Juliet, but also way too old and not even good-looking, coming across as a combination of Malcolm McDowell and the Chucky doll. Putting them together makes impossible to think they feel anything for each other, let alone being the main players of the greatest love story ever written. Alan Rickman, in his screen debut, plays Tybalt like if he was Darth Vader, which is a huge mistake that takes away the complexity that Shakespeare intended, no character being a hero or a villain but all flawed human beings. This Tybalt is so mean-looking that we don't believe the characters' pity after his demise. As for Paris, I kept thinking of \"Prince Valium\" from Spaceballs. Only Celia Johnson manages to do the character of the Nurse some justice.At 168 minutes, this production is unable to make us empathize with the characters, because the characters don't empathize with each other and never seen to believe their own roles. The best screen version is still Franco Zeffirelli's. But, to be fair, this BBC one isn't nearly as bad as abominations like George Cukor's flamboyant geriatric version, or the crime against Humanity that is Baz Luhrmann's feature-length MTV video. 4/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b7bbe2d395f403ab588b4e895253a1c",
            "input": "This is one of those films that I could only sit through once. Charlotte Henry is fine -- in fact, all the actors were fine. The problem was in the script, the dialog, the direction, the editing, the sets and the special effects. Granted, this was 1933, but it really creaked. Part of the problem is that actors like Richard Arlen, Gary Cooper, W.C. Fields and Cary Grant are not recognizable (there faces cried for a recognition that was not forthcoming). The movie just clumped along with no cohesion. Much of Lewis Carrols spirit, humor and continuity are missing. What a pity! It's such a great book. I would recommend Disney's 1951 version.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35de063d66f54998985ca8bdbcda5e4c",
            "input": "I just saw the movie in theater. The movie has very few good points to talk about. Kareena's beauty and a couple of songs may be. Thats it. The movie is a complete disappointment in all areas. Anyone associated with the movie will be disappointed, even Mumbai Indians too (just now Chennai has made it to semi-final). But the worst I feel about the movie is the action scenes. Now days Bollywood is trying to copy action scenes from Hollywood. But they forget that Hollywood directors takes a lot effect to make it look like real. But unfortunately Bollywood directors do not have that much of time. They spend their time on songs and publicity of the movie. Now such too stupid action scenes may work in South as the audience just pay to watch their favorite actor killing bunch of people. But in Bollywood this is certainly not going to work. All the action scenes I wish I could have forwarded. At the end even some Chinese people appear from nowhere to beat Akshay Kumar. This is height of stupidity. Audience is not paying to watch such stupidity. I think Bollywood now should forget about the action movies. They cant make it. The last good action I have seen was from \"Ghatak\" and \"Khiladiyon ka Khialdi\". The current scene in Bollywood is really sad for action movie fans like me. Does these people see their movie after completion? Can't they figure out that the slow motion action (which is done using ropes) is too unrealistic and childish? Better not to have action scenes if you cant handle it. I just want to go back to Amitabh's era where movie like Zanjeer and Deewar were having thrilling action scenes. The sound effect was not very effective in those days, but visually it is much better than current era scenes. This movie now should open the eyes of the Bollywood movie directors. Please don't make any more action movies, until you acquire the art of making it realistic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-259218edabdb4f3f9fb7d5fb7b9bd6c3",
            "input": "I love the frequently misnomered \"Masters of Horror\" series. Horror fans live in a constant lack of nourishment. Projects like this (and the similar \"Greenlight Project\" with gave us \"Feast\" - like it or lump it) are breeding grounds for wonderful thought bubbles in the minds of directors with a horror bent to develop and bring to maturation food for we who love to dine on horror.This one began with a kernel of really-kool-idea and ran ... right off the edge of \"where in the world am I going with this?!!!\".I don't know how to spoil the spoiled but \"SPOILER AHEAD\" All of a sudden ... no, there was that light drifting across the night sky earlier ... we have long haired luminescent aliens (huh? ... HUH?) brain drilling males and ... yeah, I get it but ... well ... the worst curse of storytelling - a rousing and promising set up without a rewarding denouement.Cue to storytellers ... your build up has to have a payoff that exceeds build up. Not the other way around. Storytelling math 101.End of Spoilers - Big Oops!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-635a815cd95a472a8b2a6d6be966a435",
            "input": "I was excited to view a Cataluña´s film in the Berlin´s competition. But after the presentation I was total disappointed and furious. Too much blood, too much time, too much themes for nothing. The Spanish Civil War, like every war, was horrible. The revenge, a very human behavior, not pretty at all, is shown in uncountable films and plays, as well as the relations between homosexuals and the scepticism in Spain about Catholicism . But what Mr Villaronga try, is a pseudo tragedy that can belongs to the worst of the film´s history. It is really a pity to see Angela Molina in this movie. I advise nobody under no circumstances to go to see this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d16ae2ddc7f4a04a22e4720b77662e0",
            "input": "True, the idea for this TV series may have sprung from the immense success which Ally McBeal is enjoying worldwide, even here in Germany. However, this said, Edel & Starck is very different from Ally McBeal in many ways.The two main characters work beautifully together. Felix Edel (Felix Noble), played by well-known German actor, Christoph M. Ohrt and Sandra Starck (Sandra Strong - Noble & Strong, get it ???), played by charming Rebecca Immanuel, exchange quick romantic repartees and continually spy on each other while engaging in sitcom-like criminal cases in Berlin and surroundings. Further, they are aided by a magnificent cast of co-stars, most notably their secretary, played by Isabel Tuengerthal, who is a rare gem with GREAT comic potential. Also the shady wheeler-dealer, Otto, and the noble childhood pal of Felix, Frank, work very well, not to forget Sandra's best friend and room-mate, Patricia, played by the beautiful Barbara Demmer.All-in-all a joy to watch on Monday nites: no wonder that the series and its stars have received several prizes. Will Felix get Sandra ?I hope that we will have to wait for many more episodes to find out......",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-454e0c642f944f6dadfc1c32cc4da83c",
            "input": "I saw this film and heard the writer-director, Juan Gerard, speak at the Santa Barbara Int'l Film Festival.All I knew about it was that it was the story of an 8-year-old boy at the time of the Cuban Revolution in 1958 and how it affects his home and family.Its opening scene will bring to mind \"Cinema Paradiso\". In fact, the film is filled with references to classic films: The Roulette Wheel (Casablanca), \"chicken clucking\" (Rebel Without a Cause), references to Bunuel, \"Touch of Evil\"; you'll find more. The homeless man (Georg Stanford Brown)is a reference to Cuban folklore which often uses a black man as a type of Greek chorus.What this film really is is the culmination of a dream. Gerard's wish to honor his family and medium of film that he has loved all of his life.This is the true story of Juan Gerard and all the people in it are real,as are the events depicted. Gerard is actually an architect and engineer (and passionate film lover) but his dream was to make this movie. He and his wife decided to live that dream and Harvey Keitel became an \"angel\" who believed in Gerard and agreed to produce and star in it. Keitel holds the screen powerfully as the mysterious and secretive grandfather \"Che\". Brown and Keitel are the only Americans in the cast. Iben Hjejle (High Fidelity) and Gael Garcia Bernal (Y tu Mama Tambien) offer strong support in key roles.Truthfully, the first half of the film suffers from stiff delivery of lines, and some overracting, but stay with it. The last half is much better as the events of the revolution combine for the bittersweet, and honest climax. It is the first effort of Juan Gerard, but it is honest as he is and his passion and heart really come through,in this sincere first effort. I would definitely see it again, and hope that he continues his film career.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4781d35a0812478b903584d726f3a4fa",
            "input": "This movie was pretty good. The acting was great, and there were some really great actors in it like, Buchholz and Roger Moore. This film is full of surprises. Confusing at times...yes, but the twists and turns of the plot always keeps you in suspense. The only thing that this movie had too much of was exploding cars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-408ae64825954bf7b1f6f98619dd412e",
            "input": "In this little film we have some great characters but a very shallow plot. It is actually nice to watch because Singleton does a great job at presenting the esoteric conflicts and the interpersonal relationships. This makes the viewer forget the nonexistent realism that this movie supposedly is for. In fact what we have here is all the possible cliches and stereotypes put on celluloid in a rate higher than that of a soap. Definitely not a deep movie (even if it wants to be), but better than an average college movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-634731bd5f91464fbb96304e52af34aa",
            "input": "As if most people didn't already have a jittery outlook on the field of dentistry, this little movie will sure make you paranoid patients squirm. A successful dental hygienist witnesses his wife going down on the pool man (on their anniversary of all days!) and snaps big time into a furious breakdown. After shooting an attack dog's head off, he strolls into work and ends up taking his marital aggression out on the patients as he plans what to do about his \"slut\" of a wife. There are plenty of up-close shots of mouth-jabbing, tongue-cutting, and beauty queen fondling, as well as a marvelously deranged performance by Corbin Bernsen. The scene in which he ties up and gases his wife before mercilessly yanking her teeth out is definitely hard to watch. A dentist is absolutely the wrong kind of person to go off the deep end and this movie sure explains that in detail. \"The Dentist\" is incredibly entertaining, fast-paced, and laughably gory at times. Check it out!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4143ee86b163412bb6278a283d66fa1e",
            "input": "A unique film...one of the best of all time. Acting, script, Quincy Jones' score, cinematography, editing, etc. -- just fantastic. As most viewers know, this movie is based on Truman Capote's book about the famous murder of a Kansas farm family (the Clutters) by a couple of young guys during a misguided robbery. I've never seen a movie that so brilliantly turned a true story into a riveting film. The actors are solid across the board, but the focus is on the killers, Dick and Perry, and the law enforcement team pursuing them. Scott Wilson, as Dick Hickock is amazing. Cocky, twitchy, and devoid of compassion he comes across so charming, oily and plausible. Robert Blake as Perry Smith is extraordinary as well -- lonely, and at once empathetic and cold-blooded. Who could fold these characteristics into one individual and make us buy it? He does, and it's brilliant! A key point of the book is how it took the intersection of these two very differently sociopathic individuals to create the critical mass to commit such a stupid and heinous crime, and these two actors make it work beautifully. Both had moments in their subsequent careers, but these performances are high water marks, and that stands for acting period. The cops are wonderful too. Leading the investigation is John Forsythe, but the other three detectives are great as well. Unlike contemporary movies where producers feel it necessary to endow police with superhuman assets or foibles, these are just genuine flatfeet, working the case with determination and competence. They seem so real. I've never seen cops on the screen so powerful in their authenticity; and I've seen most of the crime classics going way back. Really one of a kind in this respect. PARTIAL SPOILER COMING (this movie's unique in that you already know what's happened, but I'm warning for the record). Of course, the best scenes from the best crime shows and movies are the interrogations -- the intellectual fencing matches between the cops and the crooks, Mano a Mano. This movie has hands down the best interrogation scenes you'll ever see on film. Watch Dick and Perry try to bluff their way through and slowly unravel, unaware the cops have the goods on them. But the cops need to deftly prep their suspects to fracture their alibis and hopefully elicit confessions. This is some of the best acting you'll ever see. Think Glengarry Glen Ross without the showboating. To help translate the sad and horrific angles of this true story, ICB was filmed at the actual Clutter house, and I've heard the Clutters were played by film students to give them a genuine feel. It works. These seem like decent, simple folk. It makes the crime so palpable and sad. I'll stop here. It's not a feel-good movie, but it is one of the best movies ever made, and so unique, it's mandatory viewing for every film buff.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf2167d087e44d878ecc792d8f91e559",
            "input": "When seeing this movie you should take notice to that it´s not a normal movie. It has no real story just characters, a bunch of gangster characters who come together in a perfect harmony. The dialogue is wonderful, you can just lay back and listen. The movie stands out thats why it´s hard to find a right way of describing it.Thats why the user comments on this movie is so mixed.I for one love the movie and recommend it to all who love one-liners and things that differ from the \"normal\". You can´t really put the finger on what´s so wonderful about it it´s just a comical world where gangsters rule. A place of love and danger. A movie that you can see more than one time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd0dda3ae9b142209e1042f76a685fc9",
            "input": "I.Q., in my opinion, is a sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you. If you ask me, James (Stephen Fry) really was a dull guy. To me, Ed (Tim Robbins) was more suited for Catherine (Meg Ryan) than James was. Anyway, everyone involved in this film did an absolutely outstanding job. Now, in conclusion, I highly recommend this sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you to any Tim Robbins or Meg Ryan fan who hasn't seen it. You're in for lots of laughter, so go to the video store, rent it or buy it, kick back with a friend, and watch it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-436d5518efc64347a307cb3000a9ae49",
            "input": "Wow, I forgot how great this movie was until I stumbled upon it while looking through the garage. It's a kind of strange combination of a bio of Michael Jackson, a collection of musical vignettes, and a story about a super hero fighting to save some little kids. The vignettes are good (especially Speed Demon), but the best part of this movie is the super hero segment, in which Michael Jackson turns into a car, a robot, and finally a spaceship (and it's just as weird as it sounds). Joe Pesci is hilarious, and has enough cool imagery and great music to entertain throughout!The real gem however is the incredible \"Smooth Criminal\" video, which makes the movie worth owning for that part alone!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8571e7f2293f4d95bc0c76eb1647fe79",
            "input": "These kind of movies where a psycho of one variety or another tries to damage the reputation (and eventually eliminate altogether) some naive person in order to take over their life. Fatal Attraction, Pacific Heights, The Hand that Rocks the Cradle, Single White Female, and a thousand made-for-TV movies are some examples of this. But while a few, especially Fatal Attraction and Pacific Heights could offer at least some extremely paranoid, suspenseful characters or a few plot twists, Unlawful Entry plays everything by the book. And were it not for the notoriety of its stars (Kurt Russel, Ray Liota, and Madeline Stowe), this movie would sink to mediocrity faster than a Danielle Steele miniseries.Russel plays Michael Carr, an incessantly naive guy who calls on the help of a pair of officers when someone breaks into his house and tries to attack his wife (Madeline Stowe). Unfortunately, he quietly vents his anger about feeling so helpless in the situation to the wrong cop (Ray Liotta), a typically psychopathic villain with no limits for his power. At first empathizing with Carr (probably only pretending to do so), the cop befriends the couple. But soon enough, the cops wants Carr out of the way so, destroying the guys life nearly any way he can (which is pretty easy when you're a cop, and when you're the cop who has installed the guy's security system in his house) in order to take over and presumably, get his wife. It seems less ends-oriented, and more like the cop just wants to prove his power. The wife is more like a trophy, in other words, than an end. And the story plays out entirely by the book, you can probably predict every occurrence before it happens on the screen if you've seen enough of these movies. From the \"shocking\" moment our main, naive character realizes he is a victim of credit card fraud (perpetrated by the psychopathic villain) to the turn-around-he's-not-really-dead finale.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-680ff6d14fce481783f5115b4bf59208",
            "input": "Casting bone to pick: David Jannsen was 38 playing the father of Robert Drivas, who was then, 31 (yeah, I realize he's supposed to be just out of college, but clues in the script have him being a loafer and so he's probably 24-25 in the script--- that still puts Jannsen in parenting classes in Junior High). I assume the AMA wrote medical miracle up in their 1938 Year in Medicine. This movie hasn't aged very well at all and now it's main appeal is just to see a snap shot of Sin City, circa 1969 and all the incessant smoking, the weird hair (Drivas has an atomic comb over that makes him resemble a well-groomed hip Cousin It) and trendy fashions that went along with it. If anyone remembers, LV wasn't exactly London... the city coddled the mob and codger gamblers in those days. Drivas comes off as sexually ambiguous; his dad thinks he might be gay (in a sad irony, Drivas himself died of AIDS at 47) and the soapy conflict is from the generation gap issue (ahem, as if one may call 7 years a gap). Sonny boy wants to be his own man and dad wants to pull him into the casino (Caesar's Palace!), and plies him with girls (including the horny-for-money Edy Williams). Interestingly enough, the son doesn't seem to mind being thought of as gay--- unusual for the time and a cute Brenda Vaccarro is nearby to swoon platonically over him. What nudity there is is awfully lame--- just what was needed to pull the audience in for an 'R' rating in the early days of the MPAA rating system (which then was G-M-R[16]- and X). The editing is HORRIBLE and there's stupid-silly overdubs by The Committee (a late 60's neo-avante-garde comedy troupe that mercifully faded off the map within a couple of years). Don Rickles is on board as a blackjack dealer... seemingly preparing him for a role as a floor manager in the much better CASINO two decades later. Not to give anything away, but they would've dealt with Mr. Rickles' character with power tools and a hole in the desert back then. A curiosity at best, far from Joshua Logan's usual caliber of work. Dos/Dias. Now go watch CASINO again...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8659dd566a544a2a814301e9a4f7fbf4",
            "input": "This 1939 film tried to capitalize on the much better Michael Curtiz's film \"Angels with Dirty Faces\". As directed by Ray Enright, the only interesting thing is how tamed these kids were in comparison with what's going on with the youth in America's inner cities today.The film is only worth seeing because of the presence of Ann Sheridan and Ronald Reagan, who showed they were well paired together. The Dead End kids have larger parts as the plot concentrates on them rather than in the older folks.In a way it's curious how arson was used in the same way some scrupulous landlords did in later years right here in New York. It was the quickest way to turn a property around never considering the social problems it created. In today's climate with so many guns around there is a new reality. The young kids of the story seemed mere pranksters rather than criminals. How times change!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4aaa47a0e8d0476daaf15534aa6d9ee5",
            "input": "Bad plot (though good for a B-movie), good fast-paced fight scenes, at most a 5 out of 10. But something has always bothered me about this film: how come Mariska Hargitay never speaks? In the TV version, she shares several intimate moments with Jeff Speakman, even a kiss in a garden. Yet in the regular (video) version, most of her scenes are cut and she never speaks at all. This bothers me because it not only takes out a female (though cliched) point-of-view to the film, it also makes the final shot seem creepy. This film would have been better had they kept her scenes in, because in those scenes at least she has a personality, one that undercuts whatever Speakman says.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3eb22dd2873d48c5a6ba5ff2e536f582",
            "input": "Claire Denis has demonstrated repeatedly that film does not need to tell a story, that it is sufficient to create an experience that allows the viewer to take the ingredients and make of them what they will.Ostensibly the idea within the framework of a most non-linear film is the older man living on the French-Swiss border, a man devoted to his dogs, who still has a lover, but whose cardiac status increasingly threatens his life. He has a son with a little family who infrequently meet with him, but when he discovers he is in need of a heart transplant he opts for going to Tahiti via Japan to obtain a heart transplant on the black market and to rekindle a long lost relationship with a son he had form a Tahitian women years ago.What Denis does with this outline of a story is use her camera to explore the loneliness of the soul, the vastness of nature, man's interaction with people vs animals, etc. Much of the time the 'film' doesn't make sense, but that is because we try too hard to connect all the dots laid out before us in beautiful pictures. Life is sort of like that: we look, see, observe, integrate, process, and make of it what we will.In using this form of film making (much as she did in the strangely beautiful 'Beau Travail') Claire Denis has developed a signature technique. Whether or not the viewer finds the finished product rewarding has much to do with our individual methods of processing visual and conceptual information. This is an interesting and visually captivating film, but many viewers will find it an overly long discourse about very little. Perhaps watching again will change that. Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-797661932c7649a2812a056c39f94278",
            "input": "Well, I have finally caught up with \"Rock 'N' Roll High School,\" almost 30 years after it first became a midnight movie sensation in 1979. (Latecomer that I am, I will probably first see this summer's new documentary \"Patti Smith: Dream of Life\" sometime around 2040!) And no, the film doesn't feel dated one bit, and yes, it was worth the wait. This is a very high-energy comedy that features loads of great music and some surprising moments. It tells the story of Riff Randell, adorably played by P.J. Soles, and the battle that she and her fellow students at Vince Lombardi High wage against their new repressive principal, Miss Togar. (Danny Peary, in his book \"Cult Movies,\" quite accurately describes Mary Woronov's performance as an \"evil Eve Arden.\") A typical teens vs. Establishment story line is beefed up here with some absurdist humor (those exploding mice, that giant mouse, the Hansel and Gretel hall monitors) and some truly rousing tunes. Riff is, of course, the #1 fan of that original punk band The Ramones, and that band dishes out a baker's dozen of its greatest songs during the course of the film, including five at a concert that is a total blast. Indeed, the sight of Riff furiously dancing to \"Teenage Lobotomy\" at this blowout may be the picture's funniest moment. And the initial appearance of Joey, Johnny, Dee Dee and Marky in their Ramonesmobile, and later slinking down a street singing \"I Just Wanna Have Something To Do,\" is quite exhilarating. The film ends with an explosive confrontation that is, I would imagine, every high school kid's wet dream. Fun stuff indeed. On a side note, The Ramones were one of the loudest bands that I have ever seen in concert, so I was very amused to note that the DVD for this film comes with optional English subtitles for the hearing impaired. How many aging punks out there found these subtitles necessary, I wonder....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd79e67fc8f54fe580b70afaffff53b1",
            "input": "This is the most saccharine romance I ever sat through. The perfect film for an idle housewife in kerchief, housedress, and ostrich-trimmed high-heeled mules to watch in the afternoon, lying on the couch eating bonbons. In fact, bonbons play a prominent role in the movie.The only reason I was able to watch to the end, is that I finally was able to gaze at Keanu Reeves' dreamy face in almost every scene. In most of his films, he moves too fast to get a good look. The only rapid action in this show is Giancarlo Giannini waving his hands with Latin emotionality - more Italian than Mexican, really. The dialog is as stiff as wood. Unfortunately, no bodices are ripped - the hero is disgracefully perfect-mannered and mild. The aristocratic warm-blooded old-world family cliche is as old as the hills. What does it matter if they are Irish or Italian or Mexican? This is a fairy story.I knew before the titles finished running that this would not be the movie I hoped for. The glowing grapes looked like the paragon of all food ads in Women's Day Magazine. I didn't see his name listed, but the art director surely was Thomas Kinkade, who paints the million dollar canvases of Irish cottages snuggled in fuchsias. This film was literally seen through rose-colored glasses. If you like dreamy pink and blue sky, this film is for you! (The bonbons looked really good, too!)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-015a2e33a6bf45ed8d7ca9420c738e28",
            "input": "If you want to watch a real 'quality' movie get hold of The Eden Formula. This wondrous film must have cost all of $50 to make. It features a wafer thin script, pathetically bad sets, lighting and camera work, and a stop motion, paper-mache monster that is utterly laughable (it looks like they sometimes used a guy in a rubber suit and/or a glove puppet for the monster - but all were equally dreadful). The actors all speak their lines as though they've never seen them before and are reading off a teleprompter. The special effects are way beyond lousy. And the only sad thing is that they dropped the really nifty original title 'Tyranasaurus Wrecks' which sums up exactly what you get for the full 90 minutes.This is what happens when you scrape the bottom of the barrel so hard you break through to the crud that lies underneath. I loved every minute of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c3ec87c387eb4b50a2d7a7f835c82263",
            "input": "This cool Marvel superhero game pays proper tribute by staying true to the comics. Of all the Marvel superhero games that have been so lame with weak graphics and gameplay, Spiderman improves in both departments. It also features the voice of Stan Lee, the creator of Spiderman comics.As you'd expect Spiderman does whatever a spider can. He does more than spin webs. In fact, he uses them as weapons and shields. When he's not using web in combat, he punches and kicks as well. Spidey has his hands full as he battles Venom, Rhino, Mysterio, Scorpion, and Dr. Octopus to name a few. Look for Captain America in a cameo.Most of the levels are challenging, but some of them require patience to beat. The only complaint about this game is that it's so short and can be completed in less than three hours. If you're a real Marvel superhero fan, this game is for you but don't expect long gameplay. Better luck in \"Spiderman 2.\" My evaluation: 9 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-589a90942fda483da660f27750c0a774",
            "input": "zero day is based of columbine high school massacre. and its a video diary of two boys. at first you don't know whats going to happen you think it is just a bad student film. until they start talking about the horrible things they are going to do in this quite school. until they start talking about pipe bombs and guns and going shooting in the woods. they is a lot to say about this movie. all know this film is well a film you forget you watching a film and watching a real video two boys made.the two boys act like they are in a weird cult. they burn all there stuff. like play station games books dvds homework stuff school stuff. these two boys can be anybody your friends you brothers or the people you see walking down the street. it goes through there daily actives (and that is making a gun. in the videos they make it mentions the bullying that happens to them and how people said stuff about there clothes and the things you are into I'm not saying its right but many people do do things like that.and also the thing is with this people are suspected to like it because of the sensitive topic they have chosen on this film.so thats my review on zero day.and lets just say the end shooting scene is messed up.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2adce41332e049ea969ab888ec1b349d",
            "input": "This film is really terrible. terrible as in it is a waste of 84 minutes of your life. Special effects are so terrible. The acting wasn't convincing.Its about a crocodile that attack a view tourists as they are filming a documentary about \"blood surfing\". Blood surfing is when they surf around sharks but it turns terrible wrong when a 31 foot crocodile interrupts there holiday. The sharks don't look real. The crocodile is even worse, and it gets even more pathetic when they are running away form the creature, but the crocodile gets stuck and 2 females flash it. The deaths are fake and the pirates are just to fill in time.A pointless, terrible film thats not worth seeing!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6eefe07344584803ae1cae4b072bfdaf",
            "input": "I being of Puertorican descent, had mixed fillings about this \"documentary\". First I was offended that Ms. Perez compared Senor Campos to Che Guevarra. Also just a point of fact,Mr. John Leguzaimo is not of Puertorican descent.His parents came from Columbia. Whomever did research on this was not very accurate. I feel that the future of our race rests on education. This message should have been resounding throughout this film, Education is our road to freedom and power I think any future endeavors of this production team should make this their focus.In my opinion,this film swayed toward an anti-American sentiment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80778826215046d28afbd52c03b6a3eb",
            "input": "ba ba ba boring...... this is next to battlefield earth in science fiction slumberness. genie francis (aka general hospital's laura) has a small role as a reporter and that in itself should tell you that this movie must be bad.... there is ben kingsley (an academy award winning actor) in this stinker and a few others decent actors. You have to wonder what possessed them to decide to do this awful movie. The music dramatically goes up and down like it's a major dramatic story. Even if you pay attention the plot is impossible to follow. The effects are mediocre as well and seem really dated. All of the actors speak in a monotone voice and have no realism to their dialogue. I could go on and on on how this is a bad movie. At least with Battlefield Earth it's so bad it's funny but this is just b o r i n g. Avoid unless you want to be lulled to sleep.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cff7bd7dae194526b2adc94bab82e88b",
            "input": "The movie is just as fun as staring at the sun.Sheriff Pataki is a total retard that loves nothing better to do than sit on his fat rear making a smoke ring from his puffy cigars and drinking booze while the doctor acts like a zombie version of Nicholas Cage sucking up all that so called \"Blood\" which in reality seemed like Fruit Punch.Most of all the plotting seemed very horrid to even call this piece of crap a movie.The rest of the characters in this movie are total wastes of time, the ending was awful, the outlines were cheesy, and the scenes were terrible. What else more should I say to you viewers out there? My advice would be to get your Rabies shot if you've already watched the movie. This movie may give you the foam in the mouth if you didn't get your up-to-date shots.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ef33c45e2914f32bb7e90e050cc8cb1",
            "input": "i think that's this is awful produced and directed movie. Benicio Del Toro shouldn't work in production of movies, he should put accent on his acting and that's it. Steven Soderbergh missed the whole point of the idea about revolution, about it's ideals, and most important about life of Che Guevara and so on. Camera is awful, like someone with 2 day working experience is shooting with it, music is ...i don't know..is there some music in the movie???? i will not recommended this piece of sh.. to no one. It's just wasting about 4 hours in front of the TV or whatever.... I can't figure out how can someone rate this movie more than 3 stars. DISASTER....DISASTER....DISASTER....DISASTER Don't watch please. Save yourself from this misery of \"movie\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b576f53e132458bb06f4f1df94041a3",
            "input": "Most people miss Hollywood's point of concept. If a hero can stimulate heroic deeds to the mind of a child, within the confines of the law then I, approve of the lessons being taught by Doc Savage.In all times of conflict or war, the public and government look for heroes to decorate. The motion picture industry brings heroes to the screen for people to identify with - such as Doc Savage, James Bond, Superman, Batman, Spiderman and others. Doc Savage is remembered by more than one generation as being the 'best of the best' before James Bond, Superman or any of the others. All others that follow Doc Savage are only a part of the character, not the 'Man of Bronze'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5fb7fefe1d641c1b33f8ce2e4420f85",
            "input": "To be honest at the time i first heard of this show i though it may be a bad idea to make a show that makes Muslims use racial jokes on themselves but it is the Exact opposite. I realized that the show doing that can help people understand that if a Muslim uses s a word like this in real life it doesn't mean it is a terrorist thing. It also show's how people give the Muslims a bad name because they play on their stereotype, by watching the show regular people will realize that all though there may be bad Muslims out it doesn't mean we are all bad we just try to live 1 day at a time, like how hard it was for Amair to get on a plane and how he used words like \"Blow up\" or Yaser saying we'll blow away the competition, and people took it the wrong way. Being a Muslim i know that stuff like this don't usually happen, but they do and many people think bad things about Muslims or Afghanistan or Iraq, its not right things are not like that. people will see how we are poorly treated by watching this show and it may make them think on how the act. I am glad a show like this came on the air. There are many shows that Piotr Muslim people as terrorists,many people do find them funny to my opioion it is OK to do it now and then because prety much everything is made fun of who are we to say you can not make fun of that is unfair, but it is done to often and really gives Muslin people a bad name.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e703437b6fce4e0d97577ca98ff75721",
            "input": "I really liked this film when it was released, and I still do, because the storyline makes you feel hopeful about life in general, and people too...one of the things I like about the films of Lawrence Kasdan. In addition to the positive vibes from the film, there are other reasons to like Grand Canyon. For one thing, it has an outstanding cast...Kevin Kline and Danny Glover, for example. In my opinion, Crash, the highly acclaimed film that won the Oscar for best picture, was very similar to this film. The difference is that Grand Canyon leaves you feeling positive. Crash had the opposite effect with me; it was very dark. I would choose Grand Canyon over Crash any day.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df971244df01498787db5333271c2fe9",
            "input": "Zentropa is the most original movie I've seen in years. If you like unique thrillers that are influenced by film noir, then this is just the right cure for all of those Hollywood summer blockbusters clogging the theaters these days. Von Trier's follow-ups like Breaking the Waves have gotten more acclaim, but this is really his best work. It is flashy without being distracting and offers the perfect combination of suspense and dark humor. It's too bad he decided handheld cameras were the wave of the future. It's hard to say who talked him away from the style he exhibits here, but it's everyone's loss that he went into his heavily theoretical dogma direction instead.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adf60d4be24e46d0a26e8a867cd86ec3",
            "input": "This was an atrocious waste of my time. No plot. The acting was so far below par, it should be used as an exemplar in acting classes of what NOT to do. It is merely a commercial rip-off of the earlier Universal Soldier, which also scrapes the bottom of the acting barrel. Its sad that VD needs to assert his ego every few years, and sadder still that people will pay good money to sit thru it. This kind of schlock gives Martial Arts movies a bad name. By comparison, it makes Segall, Norris, and Arnold look almost talented.Perhaps VD should take the Leslie Nielson track and do send-ups of his genre. At least then we could be laughing with him instead of at him.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65f2a9a3e442460086450a17c374508f",
            "input": "Roman Polanski is considered as one of the most important directors of our time, as the mind behind classics such as \"Rosemary's Baby\" and \"Chinatown\". Probably what makes Polanski's cinema a very interesting one is the fact that while he is capable of creating commercially attractive films such as the afore mentioned masterpieces, he is also fond of making low-key movies that are of a more personal nature. \"Le Locataire\", or \"The Tenant\", is one of those movies; a horror/suspense story about paranoia and obsession that is among his best works and probably among the best horror movies ever done.Polanski himself plays Telkovsky, a young man looking for an apartment in France. When he finally finds one, he discovers that it is empty because the previous tenant, Simone Choule, attempted to kill herself by jumping out of the window. After Simone dies of the injuries, Trelkovsky begins to become obsessed with her, to the point of believing that her death was caused by the rest of the tenants in the building.While sharing the same claustrophobic feeling of his other \"apartment-themed\" films (\"Repulsion & \"Rosemary's Baby\"); this film focuses on the bizarre conspiracy that may or may not be entirely in Trelkovsky's head, the catastrophic effects the paranoia has on his mind, and the bizarre obsession he has with the previous tenant.Trelkovsky's descend into darkness is portrayed perfectly by Polanski. While at first his performance seems odd and wooden, slowly one finds out that Polanski acts that way because Trelkovsky is meant to be acted that way; as a simpleton with almost no life, who traps himself in this maddening sub-world that happens to be inhabited by a collection of bizarre people. The supporting actors really gave life to the people in the building creating memorable characters that are very important for the success of the film.Also, the beautiful cinematography Polanski employs in the film helps to increase the feeling of isolation, and gives life to the beautiful building that serves as cage for Trelkovsky. The haunting images Polanski uses to convey the feeling of confusion and madness are of a supernatural beauty that makes them both frightening and attractive.If a flaw is to be found in the film, is that it is definitely a bit slow at first. this may sound like a turn-off but in fact the slow pace of the beginning works perfectly as it mimics Trelkovsky's own boring life and how gradually he enters a different realm. Also, the convoluted storyline is definitely not an easy one to understand due to the many complex layers it has. However, more than a flaw, it is a joy to face a thought-provoking plot like this one.While \"The Tenant\" may not be for everyone, those interested in psychological horror and surreal story lines will be pleased by the experience. \"Le Locataire\" is really one of Roman Polanksi's masterpieces. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca9398dfeab14dd1bca33b68f1e9f1b0",
            "input": "I have seen a lot of Saura films and always found amazing the way he assembles music, dance, drama and great cinema in his movies. Ibéria shows an even better Saura, dealing with multimedia concepts and a more contemporary concept of dance and music. Another thing that called my attention is the fact that, in this movie, dancers and musicians, dance and music, are equally important: the camera shows various aspects of music interpretation, examining not only technical issues but also the emotional experience of playing. The interest of Saura on the bridge between classical and contemporary music and dance is one more ingredient in turning this movie maybe the most aesthetically exciting among his other works. That's why I recommend it strongly to those who love good cinema, good music, good dance, great art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eea290a0a48244df8224568e4994dbe1",
            "input": "I went to see this film based on the review by Siskel and Ebert; not only did I get duped, but I took some friends along, and had to spend the rest of the day profusely apologizing for making them sit through this pointless crap. After this, I never went to see a movie based solely on Siskel & Ebert's advice.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8518ecfca9254d438358c164836e6e3a",
            "input": "I like this movie because it is a fine work of cinema, made by people who care enough to make it art and not just home movies. It is filled with Super-surfer Greg Noll's home movies, and a boatload of amateur video from others who align themselves with his 50-year passion. Nevertheless, it has been expanded to the degree that it approaches aesthetic glory. It is filled with artistic talent, and athletic talent, however trivial you might think surfing to be athletic. Surfers are not astronauts nor test-pilots. Nor are they surgeons(perhaps) or Ph.d's(again, perhaps). It believes in the quest of the surfer. It believes in the beauty of human goofiness. It believes in the great gift of peace, which comes from the cessation of war. Surfers celebrate the cessation of war on the north beach of an Hawaiian island attacked by Japanese zeroes fifteen years before. It celebrates the down-time of a country which fought a cold war-instead of a hot-war - with the Russian socialists. Surfing is the ultimate narcissism. It is dangerous, but only slightly historical. I suspect Alexander the Great would not be celebrated for his surfing technique. He had to go out and conquer a few dozen countries to get the favorable press he has received. This movie has no military heroes. It has no guns. The only beach-head surfers conquer has a beer-stand and and a surfboard shop. This is not a problem. Peace is not desperate. It is the joy of exhalation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9116a4cfba64d7385957579682db9f1",
            "input": "Another Norman Lear hit detailing the problems that African Americans had to go through in the turbulent 1960s and 1970s.With Esther Rolle and husband along with 3 children living in a Chicago high-rise project in a predominantly black neighborhood, the show depicted what black people were going through with a landlord (black agent Mr. Bookman) as well as prices and the day-to-day problems of just existing.The 3 children depicted how people seem to face their problems differently- from the comical JJ to the militant Ralph Carter, to their daughter who also aspired to attain success, this show was a perfect description of African-American life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-061cf66471d848309360a310a8622ff9",
            "input": "This is a pretty bad movie. But not so bad as it's reputation suggests. The production values aren't too bad and there is the odd effective scene. And it does have an 80's cheezoid veneer that means that it is always kind of fun. Watch out, too, for Jimmy Nail's brief appearance - his attempt at an American accent is so astoundingly rubbish it's fantastic. Fantastic too are Sybil Danning's breasts - they make a brief appearance in the movie but the scene is repeated umpteen times in the end credits in what can only be described as the 12\" remix of Sybil Danning's boobs. Has to be seen to be believed. As a horror movie it isn't scary, the effects are silly and Christopher Lee turns up to sleepwalk through his performance. I guess he was buying a new house and needed some cash for the deposit. The two central characters - the man and the woman - were so negligible that I have forgotten almost everything about them and I just watched this movie earlier tonight. The werewolves are noticeably less impressive than in the original movie, in fact, bizarrely, they sometimes look more like badly burned apes. The eastern European setting is quite good and the music provided by the new wave band Babel, while being pretty terrible, does at least give the film some added cheese.Overall? Good for a laugh. Not good quality but did you seriously expect it to be? And, at the very least, you've always got Sybil's knockers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4bd1bfd8243412f8faee520d59431f6",
            "input": "My kids picked this out at the video store...it's great to hear Liza as Dorothy cause she sounds just like her mom. But there are too many bad songs, and the animation is pretty crude compared to other cartoons of that time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d6a923ece4e4e62ae1830f4beccffcf",
            "input": "I'm not sure if this is some kind of masterpiece or just sleazy fluff elevated by the performances and visuals. Whatever the case, I'm sure I loved it. From the wonderfully twisted, lurid, intertwining stories, to the deliciously sinister performances from Robert Stack and Dorothy Malone, to the vivid, gaudy colour with which it's all captured, this is high-class trash and it's great fun. Not to mention the amusingly sly and thinly veiled sexual subtexts which permeate the entire film, always threatening to escape from the image into the dialogue but never doing so. I'd be lying if I said that the film's sheer entertainment value didn't contribute to my love for it, but there's some sort of bizarre artistry behind the unintentional (or was it?) comedy and I really, really dug that. I could really get into this melodrama stuff.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d39e467c2faa4572b791b51ebf312a4c",
            "input": "I see a lot of really negative posts by people who wrote in August, though the movie was not released in the US, at least, until the middle of September. Maybe these are unhappy expats living in S. Korea who saw it early. I am in the US and just saw it today. I thought the special effects were excellent, better than the trailer. The story was non-Western, but I think we are all used to this from many other movies. It wasn't at all hard to follow. The acting by the leads was weak, but other people were quite good. There was humor throughout, too. I rated it at 8 because I had a good time watching it, which is what I went for.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55e52450b1e2422993ad49869ffbfa23",
            "input": "saw this in preview- great movie- wonderful characterizations- witty and intelligent dialog- actors were fantastic- Peter Falk will be up for an Oscar- Paul Reiser was charming- photography was marvelous Reiser was at the theater when we saw the film, and he gave a vivid account about the making of the film- it had been a long dream of his to write a semi-autobiographical account of relationships between sons and fathers, and more specifically between him and his father- this was achieved in a dramatic and entertaining fashion- the supporting cast was well chosen and gave the film a feeling of family- i recommend this film to anyone who is longing to see intelligent drama and wonderful performances",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-85898b2c835b4124adb16e797947e437",
            "input": "This is one of my two or three favorite Stooges shorts, and undoubtedly Christine McIntyre's best performance with the trio. She is good in a number of other shorts, but here she is absolutely brilliant. Her singing is not funny at all, in fact it is downright beautiful, but the plot is constructed in such a way that the singing enhances the humor rather than detracting from it. We listen to McIntyre sing the entirety of Voice of Spring no less than three times, but it never gets old, partly because we don't tire of her voice, and partly because it blends so well with the Stooges' antics. The use of operatic soprano in a comedy is reminiscent of Kitty Carlisle's role in the Marx Brothers' \"A Night At The Opera,\" but the singing is much more a part of the comedy here than in \"Opera,\" and McIntyre (perhaps more in other performances than here) exhibited a comedic talent of her own that Carlisle never did. The Stooges' buffoonery, McIntyre's singing, and a well-constructed plot combine for 5 out of 5 stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8338c095950c4643803dcde450ed3204",
            "input": "Oh, well, this movie starts off well. It's kinda funny and seems like it could be a fun movie. Then it becomes a bit serious and goes off the rails. It sort of wants to be 'Boogie Nights' but it can't achieve it. If only it stayed with the tone of the first quarter of the film...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1fbc21e07b945a28206ce55b0c03503",
            "input": "My definition of a great movie is if you want to continue to see it over again. This movie for some reason strikes a cord in me even though the scenes with Scott Glenn still make me winch; I watch it over and over again and love the music!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-126d000915254b1d93fe976f47530eb9",
            "input": "This is one of the most boring horror films I have ever seen, as it's absolutely god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time. All the characters are boring, and the story is terrible, plus I could see the two twists at the end coming miles away!. The great setting and the creepy house definitely would have helped if it wasn't so damn boring, and there isn't one character to root for either, plus I hope it makes it's way to the bottom 100, because it deserves to be there in my opinion. When John Carradine finally shows up at the end, it's a pretty good scene but it's already way too late, and the only other screen time he had was in flashbacks, plus the only really gory scene in the movie is when a character gets his face messed up by Bee's, as it was rather gory. I got this in a DVD Horror set called Back From The Grave and everyone really overacts in my opinion, plus it's lucky this was included in a set I bought otherwise I would have chucked this out the window!. This is one of the most boring Horror films I have ever seen, as It's absolutely god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time, and I say avoid it like the plague!, you don't want to go through the torture. The Direction is absolutely terrible!. Carl Monson does an absolutely terrible! job here, making every thing look cheap, wasting his potential on making creepy atmosphere and just keeping the film at an incredibly dull pace. The Acting is just as bad. John Carradine is good in his scene, but other then that he's hardly in the film other then flashback scenes. (Carradine Ruled!!). Merry Anders overacts here terribly as Laura, as she didn't convince me at all. Ivy Bethune is OK, and somewhat creepy, but also overacted, she did have a creepy smile at the end though. Rest of the cast, I didn't pay enough attention too, as I had a lot of trouble getting through it, but they were all really bad. Overall please avoid this,It's not worth the agony!. BOMB out of 5",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a2a03ab90fe4084a55183b657df8115",
            "input": "Every kid has that movie that he pops into VHS when he has nothing to do, or when there is a babysitter around. This was that movie for me. I can tell you the whole plot exactly, I must have seen it 100 times at least, and I can say it is a good kids/family movie.I still have the tape, I haven't watched it in 5 years, but maybe I'll get around to it this week, and be a kid for the day. You just have to love the care bears, and their messege.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f3f1480a04d4b8b8dacb0826e9e786f",
            "input": "God! Zorro has been the the subject of about as many movies as Tarzan, and probably had about as many actors in the title role. This Serial is one of my own personal favourites, and as previously stated,it is one of the Top 5 Sound Serials. Oddly enough, this is one production that came out in that water shed year of 1939.* By the time of this production in '39, Zorro was really well known as a (Pulp) literary and movie character. The film opens up with a little foot note about the History of the Mexico's struggle for freedom from rule by a European Monarchy, namely Spain. The story invites comparison with the American Revolutionary War.The story concentrates its attention to the mythical Province of San Mendelito and its 'Council'. It is being addressed by Benito Juarez**on their gold mine's relation to the new Republic of Mexico. Gold shipments must get thru to Mexico City.Don Francisco Uncle to Diego Vega, states that he has organized a group of patriots to act as a protective force for the gold convoys.A thug from the Don del Oro mob, stages an 'insult' to himself and challenges Don Francisco to a duel with swords, Don Frasncisco getting run through.Suddenly the dark clad masked swordsman appears to sword fight and after carving the trademark 'Z' on the face of the bad guy, he dispatches him to the hereafter. Don Francisco declares with his dying breath to his ward Ramon (William Corson) that Zorro is his nephew from the city of Los Angeles. He also attempts to tell of the true identity of Don del Oro, but expires before completing statement.There is a big reception for Diego at Don Francisco's Hacienda, where Diego disappoints Ramon'sister (also ward of Don Francisco) with his timid act. \"A FOP!!\", she declares.Later,Diego and Ramon slip away to join up with a meeting of the volunteers. When they ask, \"who will lead us with Don Francisco now dead?\", Ramon declares \"Zorro, we are Zorro's Fighting Legion!\" Well there is a big battle with the Legion, now all clad on gray, with masks and capes, protecting the Gold Train. Then Zorro seems trapped at a man-made avalanche intended for the convoy, when, well, you know cliffhanger end of Chapter One.Wow! That was a lot of writing for one Chapter, but like most other Serials, the opening one is longer and has a lot of ground to be laid to set up the story line. Let's just let it suffice to say that there are 11 more good, well made, action filled Chapters following.ZORRO's FIGHTING LEGION has all of the elements that made for top cliffhanger action. We have an unknown evil leader who is fomenting trouble between different groups. There is a number of suspects as to who was really behind of the mask of 'Don del Oro'. We had soldiers, renegade Whites, hostile Indians and the Legion.In short, it's safe to say that there is everything one could want, and then some, in this Serial. And, incidentally, they wisely choose to not have the actors affect any Mexican accents.As to just what is there here that makes ZFL stand out from the rest? What makes it different or unique? Well........First of all, it has a much more elaborate and exciting musical score playing and underlining the drama and action on the screen. The opening theme even appears in a flamenco guitar rendition at the Cantina in Chapter One. This is probably the only time that such a highly specialized innovation appears in serial sound track.And yet there is one more feature that really sets the Fighting Legion saga out in front from all others. That is, the film not only has a heroic musical theme, but it also sports Lyrics, yes, the Legionairres sing! We hear them singing in the opening credits and in several Chapters! It really works well and adds to the feelings we get from the viewing.When the Serial was first shown on our local television (circa 1955), all of the gang immediately recognized the voice of Reed Hadley as belonging to 'Captain Braddock from RACKET SQUAD, the TV Series. Mr. Hadley had a very distinctive, deep voice.*** He also handled the role very well. His costume and especially the elongated mask looked very good and was probably very functional.There is a small slip up. A sort of minor anachronism occurs by having Benito Juarez(Carleton Young)addressing the San Mendelito Council, as Juarez was about 18 years old at this time (1824) and, though he was later perhaps the greatest single figure in Mexico's History, he surely hadn't achieved such prominence yet. His inclusion in story probably was to cash in on the release of Warner Brothers' JUAREZ that year, which starred Paul Muni in the title role.This is not only my pick as a top 5 sound serial, but also my favourite Zorro film.* We are reminded of the great crop of top flight movies that year, what with GONE WITH THE WIND, MR.SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON, THE CITADEL, JUAREZ, THE WIZARD OF OZ, OF MICE AND MEN, ONE MILLION B.C.,ZENOBIA, WE WANT OUR MUMMY all counted among the output that year.** Once again, Juarez did not ascend to any national importance until around 1850, about 25 years later. Also, the political sub-divisions are referred to as 'Provinces' in the story. In actuality, they are called 'States'. Just as we are called the United States of America, so too,South of the Border they call their Repubhlic the United States of Mexico.*** Reed Hadley was prominent in some very 'A' pictures in which his richly toned voice is exploited to good effect. Watch & listen for his narration in THE HOUSE ON 92nd STREET (1945) and GUADALCANAL DIARY (1945).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5326855ad25e4c51be6b5d22a342db14",
            "input": "How could I possibly pass up the chance to see Orlando Bloom and Heath Ledger together? Well, I couldn't and so, I rented this mess of a movie.I had never heard of Ned Kelly and was surprised by what I found out about this young man's legend. I was also surprised at how mediocre this movie was. Perhaps the fact that it was very, very late and at the end of a 4 hour movie marathon or maybe it was because it really is a little slow, I found this story difficult to follow. Not because the story is complicated, but because it is slow. Even with a slow story, Ledger and Bloom managed to create interesting, dimensional characters. Though I flounder to recommend this as a must see, it is a great story of Australian history (considering how young the country is, this is very rare and should be appreciated) and the film does have some good actions sequences. 6/10 see it for historical value....(yeah right...and that's the only reason to see it... ;) )",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82dc29e4b83b4556a1af87e1a9f23ac3",
            "input": "Probable reasons why so many people on this site have enjoyed this:1. They might not have read the book. 2. They might enjoy gore and violence in a film. 3. They might be very young and therefore not understand the violence. 4. People might not understand how somehow more scary and more violent it is compared to the original book. 5. There are sure to be many other reasons not covered here.The only thing I liked about this film is the song \"'Bright Eyes\".If perchance, you happen to be one of those people who has read the book, enjoys calm and peaceful films without violence and are quite old and understand scariness and violence, you are sure not to like this. Otherwise you will almost definitely enjoy this.Like in the book, a rabbit called Fiver in an unsuspecting warren warns of terrible danger to come. Only a few rabbits - including his brother Hazel - believe him and they set out on a dangerous journey to find a new place to live...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30e62c4f381c48cdb08f707c218b9d2e",
            "input": "Just get it. The DVD is cheap and easy to come by, the length is now standard and you've gone long enough without it. (When home video started, there were at LEAST three versions with parts missing..) Everything you've read is true. There is no defending it, and no living without it. The color is lush and wonderful to look at, and the production values are pretty good for a Saturday afternoon kiddie epic. But no question..the whole Santa Vs. Satan angle is so jaw dropping STRANGE it made the movie a hit at the time and a cult fave once home video really got underway. How good/bad/strange/ is it? I only saw the TRAILER as a kid,and remembered IT for nearly 30 years..including Murray's over the top voice over..I told my older sister, and she called me a liar and could not believe it was POSSIBLE for ANYONE to make a movie where Santa vs.Satan.. Add to it stuff like Santa asking for the Virgin Mary's blessing before setting off on Christmas eve, kids wanting to capture him and make him their SLAVE..and an international kiddie sweat shop..and it probably comes close to a lot of nightmares kids had in the 60's.. Like others here, I watch the thing every holiday season now. (My version of choice is The Mystery Science Theatre 3000 edition). But any old way you choose it, the movie is a demented masterpiece and a total must (along with Brianiac, by the way..).It never fails to make me laugh. Better, I think, then SANTA CLAUS CONQUERS THE MARTIANS. Parts of it can still make you cringe or just creep you out.(How many parents do YOU know go out for cocktails on Christmas Eve? \"If you get bored, just go downstairs and play the piano.\" DANG..) Freaky, boring, disturbing, funny, childish, strange..hey, what more can you want?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89e6dff076f04c02b223cf9316b31dee",
            "input": "At the time I recall being quite startled and amused by this movie. I referred to it as the most important movie I'd seen in ten years, and found myself bumping into people who said similar things. Bernhard has an unusually perceptive behavioral notebook. And she has shaped the bitter adolescent personality that we all had, into a corrosive, adult world-view. The two together provide a startling mix which may be too edgy for some viewers. (Hi Skip. I wish you weren't my brother so I could **** you!) Bernhards search for herself after returning to LA from New York, results in the immersive trying-on of various personas (all of which fit poorly) for our amusement, but enough of them involve acting out to appeal to a \"black imperative\" values system that the real barometer of her resituation is whether black culture accepts her. (It's been a while. Nina Simone comes to mind. And she has an impressive, solidly-built black lover in the movie) A pretty black girl attends the shows, and seems to be authorizing Sandra's faux-blackness, but ultimately rejects her.Just as Catholics deem themselves lucky to suffer for Christ, here Sandra depicts herself suffering at the hands of a black culture in which she craves a place; as if she cherishes her worthiness and her rejection. It's the only value system implicated in the films world, outside of Bernhards arty confusion.For a nation whose chief issues are racism and money, it's refreshing to see one of the 2 topics dealt with in an atypical way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b129f9f200d942449e10de2dbcc79dbc",
            "input": "A wonderful television mini-series completely ruined by a 45-year old woman trying desperately to pass herself off as a 16-year old ingenue! No exaggeration - that's the ACTUAL age of the character played by Ali MacGraw when the film opens just prior to the surprise attack at Pearl Harbor. This TV mini-series really is the most classic example of the title of this post and one I refer to whenever the topic comes up.That alone makes this completely unwatchable, despite the fact it's one of the best filmed WWII 'global' dramas TV has ever produced. If you have the stomach - or a decent fast-forward ability - you might be able to enjoy the late Robert Mitchum in a very strong performance. I'm stunned at some of the comments referring to the love story (pun intended). Did they watch the film with their eyes closed? Or are they aging boomers who never cease to amaze me with their \"selective memories\" and \"selective vision\". I'm a Boomer myself so don't think for a second I'm some hubristic young punk. 45 WILL ALWAYS LOOK 45. Get used to it. Deal with it. Age gracefully damnit.The Winds Of War could have been... so good. How much more would we be talking about this mini-series today, some 25 years later, had an ACTUAL ingenue been cast in such an important & critical role? Right now, with the constant haggard old biddy distraction, that alone cancels out most of the wonderful aspects of The Winds Of War.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-07d13268d07642bfbab21d06a7fc8745",
            "input": "When Stanwyck's husband-to-be is murdered on the eve of their wedding, she retreats to a mountain lodge, where she slips (sort of) off a cliff and is rescued by wealthy attorney Morgan. Morgan falls in love with her, leading to a definitely one-sided marriage, spent on a huge estate in Chicago (which appears to be surrounded by mountains!). Stanwyck is tempted by dashing Cortez, but eventually returns to Morgan, in a very subdued and unconvincing story resolution.This film has a great cast (Morgan in particular is one of my favorites) and a great director, but the script is meandering and seems pointless at times. I was so ready to enjoy this movie but I was ultimately disappointed. Still worth watching for the cast, and it's good for anyone who likes 1930s films.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e44427e570f8428ba4071b0e535605c5",
            "input": "This movie is pretty awful but I have some interesting information about it:It was filmed in 1976 at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff, AZ, as well as at Oak Creek Canyon near Sedona, AZ. A good bulk of the extras in the film are then-drama students from NAU. I was a freshman there that year, minoring in theatre, but for some reason I didn't get involved with the production. I did however know several people who did and can supply this rather odd fact:There is a scene in this movie where two of the principals, as part of their hazing ritual, have to run naked into the woods. They are seen from behind in the movie, doing just that. The thing is, those aren't the actors at all but two guys I knew from the theatre department. The identity of these \"stunt posteriors\" will remain anonymous, at least to this website, unless they decide to, um, \"reveal\" themselves!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1a0ba3fae9d4bc8a044e13a82ed83ce",
            "input": "A THIEF IN THE NIGHT is an excellent fictional account of the weeks leading up to the RAPTURE and the weeks following that pivotal event.I thoroughly enjoyed both the production values and the content values of this independent Christian movie.THE PRODUCTION VALUES. Hey, it's an independent movie, with a shoe-string budget, so, ya, it's going to look a bit cheesy (if your standard is A-list Hollywood fare). But, properly compared with other independent movies, this film is perfectly acceptable. More important than acting style, costumes, and music is the narrative itself. Is the story compelling? Do the dramatic moments work? Does the story trajectory build to a satisfying climax? The answer to all these questions is an unqualified \"yes.\" As a side-note, the truly important technical stuff--continuity, sound, lighting--are fine. The viewer is able to watch the show without being distracted by sloppy craftsmanship.CONTENT VALUE. The message of the movie is superb. When you consider how many ideas the movie-maker developed within the brief span of 69 minutes, you begin to appreciate his artistry. He presents the message of salvation, the consequence of unbelief, the danger of backsliding, the truth of the rapture, and the threat of a world-dominating satanic government with flare, imagination, and--most importantly for an evangelical movie--with biblical accuracy.The movie-maker is a good storyteller. For example, he develops the message of salvation in two important ways: (1) he shows us through action the reality of Jesus Christ's sacrifice for our sake. This is achieved in a subplot where the zoo-keeper is bit by a poisonous snake and nearly dies. The only cure is blood from someone who is immune to the snake-poison. The poison is like sin; the cure is like Christ's blood, shed on the cross. (2) The filmmaker also develops the message of salvation through dialog. He has various characters explain the truth about human sin and the need for salvation through faith in Christ. So, the movie-maker uses both action and dialog to tell his story.As a side-note, the fact that a movie produced by evangelical Christians actually contains dialog and scenes that convey a clearly delineated message of salvation, couched in explicitly evangelical Christian language, imagery, and theology is also perfectly acceptable. To criticize this film for being explicitly Christian is absurd; it's akin to criticizing a Nike commercial for promoting sport-wear. What else would evangelical Christian movie makers make, if not a film that states their case? Also, the fact that the movie-maker employs the idea that the unbelieving will be left behind in a godless world is, again, perfectly acceptable. The movie-maker uses the dramatic potential of that idea admirably. How do I know? I heard about A THIEF IN THE NIGHT from a woman who saw the show way back in 1974; it still lived in her memory thirty years later. How many movies can you say that about? All around, a very enjoyable, thought-provoking show. I plan on showing it to my teen group at church.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73a40551b67a47c39b31dcf78a4eaf51",
            "input": "When I first heard that Hal Hartley was doing a sequel to Henry Fool, I was excited (it's been a personal favorite for years now), and then wary when I heard it had something to do with terrorism. Having just seen it though, I was surprised to find that it worked, while still being an entirely different sort of movie than Henry Fool. The writing and direction were both dead on and the acting was superb...especial kudos go to Hartley for reassembling virtually the whole cast, right down to Henry's son, who was only four in the original. Like I said though, this movie is quite different from the first, but it works: I reconciled myself with the change in tone and subject matter to the fact that 10 years have passed and the characters would have found themselves in very different situations since the first film ended. In this case, an unexpected adventure ensues...and that's about all I'll give away...not to mention the fact that I'll need to see it again to really understand what's going on and who's double crossing who. While it was certainly one of the better movies I've seen in some time, it suffers like many sequels with its ending, as it appears that Hartley is planning a third now and the film leaves you hanging. I'll be sure to buy my tickets for part 3 ('Henry Grim'?) in 2017.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de8b31c0f66b4806b8a297355069e66d",
            "input": "Seriously the only good thing about this year ceremony were the winners.Although the ceremony itself was pretty short it still was somewhat boring. I think it's seriously time to look for a new director and producers for the show, who can come up with something REALLY new. It's pretty obvious that they tried to make the show more 'hip' and appealing for a younger audience this year by letting Beyonce perform and letting P. Diddy and Prince present a category. Also letting Chris Rock be the presenter was an attempt to re-new the ceremony and make it more appealing. None of it really worked out.Sure, Chris Rock is a funny guy but he wasn't really a good presenter. I really merely saw him as a guy who just talked every now and then in between of the different categories. His presence wasn't really as 'big' as for instance Billy Crystal's.Also the handing out of the awards was pretty dumb at times. Not letting everybody come to the stage but also handing out some of the awards in the middle of the theater was plain weird.Still, I can't remember being any more satisfied with the award winners. None of the movies really swept away the awards as the last couple of years always had been the case. So does that mean it had been a good year for movies with lots of competitive contestants? I don't think so. I think most of the movies will be largely forgotten in 20 years from now, with the exception of \"Million Dollar Baby\" and \"The Passion of the Christ\" maybe. Sure I don't agree with every single award that was handed out this year, for instance Caleb Deschanel should had won for best cinematography, not that I don't like Robert Richardson's work, he really did some amazing work for most of Oliver Stone's work but I really feel that Deschanel deserved the award way more. Also I would had liked seeing Jim Miller and Paul Rubell win for best editing and John Debney for best music. But oh well, there is no way the Academy Awards can please everybody of course, I understand that. There will always be people complaining about the winners.It also was funny to see that most of the award presenters were way more nervous than the nominees and winners. Did Prince said any of the nominees names right at once? And were is Sean Penn's sense of humor? Al Pacino and Jeremy \"I hope they missed\" Irons were the best presenters of the night.Overall a very forgettable show but with nice winners.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad26c21035ec4bf49154c79dd4d51e08",
            "input": "This is my favorite show. I think it is utterly brilliant. Thanks to David Chase for bringing this into my life.Season 11. The Sopranos: 5/52. 46 Long: 4.5/53. Denial, Anger, Acceptance: 5/54. Meadowlands: 4/55. College:6. Pax Soprana: 5/57. Down Neck: 4.5/58. The Legend of Tennessee Moltisanti: 5/59. Boca: 4.5/510. A Hit Is a Hit: 3.5/511. Nobody Knows Anything: 5/512. Isabella: 5/513. I Dream of Jeannie Cusamano: 5/5",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18e056d96817486386c131f7991e0356",
            "input": "(David H. Steinberg)'s script seemed initially having some real smart points that could've made good romantic comedy, BUT BUT BUT, oh dear ! What did ever happen in the way ???!!!! I'll tell you what happened. Originally it's (Animal House - 1978) and (Porky's - 1982). Although that was long time ago, but those are the pioneers, the godfathers of the new genre : the crude teen comedy. Then the 1990s came. After important instances that became smash hits (repulsive ones am I add) such as (Problem Child - 1990), (Dumb and Dumber - 1994), (The Nutty Professor - 1996), and (There's Something About Mary - 1998) which I think slackers is affected by, there was the top of the era and the prophet of the next era, the one and only : (American Pie - 1999) which's undoubtedly and incomparably a genre's icon. After that I think every comedy of that kind got to be that highly filthy, cum laude nasty, to be admired by the youth otherwise it might be out of fashion !I believe that (Slackers) had a smart plot first as a script, then its makers got to add some real big amount of : rudeness, filthiness, strangely shameless sex to be made - at those days - as easy as pie ! Like they had to fill every scene with freely elements such as : masturbation, oral sex, urination.. etc just to look a la' mode. They're wholly unnecessary elements to the story but surely THEY ARE so necessary to make the profits, and to catch the latest vogue in making teen comedies. The problem is in how all of that has replaced already any possible comedy in it.Some of its moments looked literally horrible, and that as you see is the point. It's all in (Jason Schwartzman)'s looks and performance; memorably disgusting to the utmost. So the ambition transformed from being that romantic comedy into making what wasn't done before of pure skinning images. To be more like a horror where you're asking all the time; what nastier would happen ? (vomiting, farting,.. etc); these are the easiest combination to create a comedy nowadays.Though even if you hated it you've got to love something (mostly for being bold), for me it was only Gina Gershon cameo's scene. Anyhow they designed it as a whole to achieve being outrages-for-outrageousness, like an adolescent's naughty dream. Though the majority of it was near to anybody's nightmare.What made me sad is that this one at its core was a real potential work, and not another cheap, another stupid comedy as it eventually managed to be. Remember well the details of stealing the exam (the first 2 minutes), so the movie's main plot (weirdo trying to reach a girl by blackmailing cool guys) through the pattern of (boy loves girl, and girl loves another boy) because save that, it's nothing but a candidly schlock. It dealt with its material the tacky way bunch of dirty college boys, who got nothing to do but making mawkish quip out of anything, would do. It ended up as being, and I'm sorry to say it, a smiling sh*t !At its end it said something (can you imagine !) about how it's the time and the place too for the impostor or the slack to win, totally like this comedy itself. It sounds good ending yet for totally another better movie; which could assure my opinion about this one as smart one.. Once ! And it doesn't need much to understand that this movie's makers were the real slackers ! Maybe being stupid is a way to be smart in Hollywood, but even if.. The final result here wasn't at least witty by any sense of the word. P.S : Its scriptwriter (David H. Steinberg), who wrote the story of (American Pie 2) as well, has a main page at the IMDb where you'll find under the \"Additional Details\" his usual \"Plot Keywords\" which are : Sex / Vulgarity / Crude Humor /... They just forgot to write Urineing while Showering or Baring 70 Year Old Women !",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5c3f79dc40e44a499b9d967ca1d9730",
            "input": "Meaning: if this movie got pitched, scripted, made, released, promoted as something halfway respectable given the constraints (yeah, I know, Springer, sex, violence), where is He?Reminded me of porn movies I saw in college, plot and dialogue wise.... shoulda just done something for the scurrilous porno market, showed penetration and be done with it-- would have made more money, the ultimate point of this exercise....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5793ef9fa3f4452db336c4035e8a07c5",
            "input": "Please, help the economy - spend your money elsewhere! The synopsis of the movie is: the First Lady has her husband assassinated because he was cheating on her. That's it. Undetected by anyone, except Cuba and Angie, she designs and implements a vast assassination conspiracy which no one knows about...and gets away completely free.Some specific points are particularly hilarious: While standing in front of the president, Cuba a deflects the assassin's bullet...which then enters the back of the president's head.Cuba and Angie watch film from a news camera, and they see...a clue. They go to great lengths to protect the film, believing that they are the only people that have a copy of this very public film.Cuba speaks with a presidential staff member. The PSM comments that there was no conspiracy. Cuba claims there was more than one person involved. The PSM then rants that the conspiracy includes the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA. Gosh, I wonder is the PSM is involved.Ms Archer, the First Lady, is a craptacular artist. Cuba can't make out a painting, and she says, \"You're too close...stand back...look from a different perspective, look from my perspective.\" Can anyone miss THAT clue?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04604782565d4b77979cb42b3a1714e6",
            "input": "when i first heard about this movie i thought it would be like The Duchess(2008), but when i saw the first 30 minutes of The Young Victoria i knew this wouldn't just be a solid movie. Almost everything in this movie is great, the costumes are really amazing and the settings are also beautifully shot.The only thing that really let me down are the performances. Emily Blunt(The Devil Wears Prada) is the star of the film, bringing Victoria to life and with this movie she shows that she is a great actress and maybe picking a first Oscar nomination for her performance. Rupert Friend is almost bland as Prince Albert but he has great chemistry with Emily Blunt. Paul Bettany is also solid as Lord Melbourne although i expected more of him. Jim Broadbent and Miranda Richardson both have supporting roles but are forgettable.To me the film feels like unfinished. Maybe that the screenwriters changed too many things in the script, i don't know but that's how i feel about the movie.But overall it's a great movie about the early years of Victoria with a Great performance from Emily Blunt.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-891dfd72db0e4aa28277f7713af5d01c",
            "input": "I was really horrified by this eerie movie. What an unusual dark atmosphere. And such a creepy musical score. Really promising! Indeed, after ten minutes you really start sweating, and feeling uncomfortable, for you start fearing the worst. This movie has the atmosphere of a true nightmare, and what's worse-it all comes out. For one hour and a half I have been trying to fight complete boredom and falling asleep, but the monstrous soundtrack kept me awake. Nuit Noire is a truly horrifying picture - for your eyes, your ears, your intelligence, and most of all: your wallet, since the thought of spending precious money on a movie ticket for this cheap amateuristic homevideo is the biggest horror of all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9260d1590a144238c0e16e7c1088632",
            "input": "The creators of south park in their own film here, this is a brilliant film with a huge entertainment factor. If you like Naked Gun films and are not young and not too mature or serious on your humor, you'll love this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd065167e4b5435683f74e5b263d9124",
            "input": "This movie is good for TV. I like it because I'm a HUGE fan of disaster films even though this is a family film. Accuracy on the film from the book is half-and-half They got the characters names right but in the book there was no storm chaser, the the car scene involving the Hatch family running away from the tornado wasn't in the book instead it involved Dan hatch and his friend riding with a police officer on their way to the police station for safety. and in the book Dan and his friend are both 12-years old. Thats all i can think of. Overall this was a good movie even though it could of have been a little more accurate to the book. Did you know the book was based on a true story of a series of tornadoes devastating a small Nebraska town in 1980?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55b57cae321b458f96e1ed6140354b2e",
            "input": "Why did it sound like the husband kept calling her Appy ? It ruined a great episode and so I can only give it a 6. Proper grammar and pronunciation are essential to a film.It was very Hellraiser what with all the skin ripping though I dunno how anyone can survive without skin the skin is a vital organ to the body the biggest organ actually and without we would die. The more a horror film is true the more creepy it can be and more entertaining.I do admit though that the stories from the great horror directors are very disappointing and very mediocre. 6/10 come on Yankies get your English up to par !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f78fa8a9a2c84df6b40d86c2e41b81ac",
            "input": "Wow what an episode! After last week seeing Mellisa constantly making cameos about the friendship of Annie and Brandi I almost puked. But that was nothing until seeing Mellisa's tirade after being fired. Seeing her hobble around on her cast spewing out obscenities and screaming for someone to get her purse was absolutely the most hilarious thing ever on reality TV. She continued to scream at people off set to get her clothes \"all of them\" like someone else would wear one of her hideous outfits. Mellisa you are like 40 years old and you still throw temper tantrums? Then Joan starts calling Annie and Brandie every name in the book, and gets up and quits the show! Both Rivers are spoiled brats who were only left on the show this long to keep ratings up. Mellisa crying and refusing to do an exit interview, just proves to America what everyone thought, you are a spoiled baby. WAH WAH I can't get my way! I love how Annie told the cameras she could manipulate Mellisa to think her way, and then did exactly that. Mellisa is by far the smartest contestant and clearly deserves to win the whole game.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-120ef076a007400db6ab88441bc41219",
            "input": "I missed the beginning of this film, which might account for why I disliked it so much. On the other hand I've studied the fall of the Roman republic for years so I know the story. Then again, that might also be the reason why I disliked this film.The film has more historical inaccuracies than extras. Though it's so inaccurate that I don't think they made an attempt for it to be correct, in which case it can be forgiven. The odd thing is that they sometimes go to great lengths to be historically accurate that it ends up getting confusing. Like throwing in Antonius' marriage to Octavia, and then pushing it aside two scenes later. Why even bring it up if it serves no purpose for the plot and Octavia is never even seen? And like calling Antonius by his actual name (Marcus Antonius) in some scenes, and by his strange English name Mark Antony in other scenes.Though historical inaccuracies aside, the film could still have been an entertaining watch if it wasn't for the leading lady. There isn't an ounce of dignity in her. She's hysterical, dramatical, and completely lacking control of herself. Instead of being a clever and composed queen Cleopatra turns into a hysterical teenager with a bad case of PMS. 95% of that comes from the poor acting, but 5% is also from poor script writing. Far too many stupid dramatic scenes are written into the script. Sometimes you weren't watching Antonius and Cleopatra, you were watching immature versions of Dawson and Joey from \"Dawson's Creek\".If you want to watch something about this period, watch... anything but this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9a082f9e36b4db1babece91cf1b9405",
            "input": "I have never read the book\"A wrinkle in time\". To be perfectly honesty, after seeing the movie, do I really want to? Well, I shouldn't be reviewing this movie i'll start off with that. Next i'll say that the TV movie is pretty forgettable. Do you know why I say that? Because I forgot what happens in it. I told you it was forgettable. To be perfectly honest, no TV movie will ever be better than \"Merlin\".How do I describe a TV movie? I have never written a review for one before. Well, i'll just say that they usually have some celebrities. A wrinkle in time includes only one. Alfre Woodard(Or Woodward, I am not sure), the Oscar winner. The film has cheesy special effects, a mildly interesting plot, scenes that make you go \"WTF\". The movie is incredibly bad and it makes you go\"WTF\". What did I expect? It's a TV movie. They usually aren't good. As is this one. A wrinkle in time is a waste of time and a big time waster. To top it off, you'll most likely forget about it the second it's over. Well, maybe not the second it's over. But within a few minutes.A wrinkle in time:*/****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bcdf8790fb740be80862f6ea5fc9790",
            "input": "I usually read reviews before I watch a movie. Guess what, I didn't do that before watching TLB, and I have to say I was very surprised to see the above average rating at IMDb. I found it to have a total lack of story. You just get dropped into it (and, sadly, not in the way Saving Private Ryan dropped us into the movie), and it also has a sudden end, which was very unsatisfying for me.I have to admit, the wounded soldiers looked pretty realistic to me, especially with the low budget in mind. But prepare yourself to have a laugh... Some guys are being tossed through the air after an explosion as if they are Olympic gymnasts. A mid-air corkscrew or somersault during WW I is a bit too much for me, especially when it's performed countless times during the movie...But the parts that really got me laughing until I almost cried were the scenes containing close combat. The screaming and shouting German voices...unbelievably funny. It seems as if they are spoken by one single actor / voice performer, because they all sound exactly the same, and it just sounds like a 'typical' German voice.I would absolutely NOT recommend this movie to anyone, except to people who just want to have some laughs because of the sad and corny quality of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f100a596044845588a305efad381964b",
            "input": "Marie: You are smooth. Dan: No, I'm not smooth. I'm Dan.If you're anything like me, smooth and single do not go together. You see someone you like, rare enough as that can be, and you want to say something but you don't. Or maybe you do say something but it ends up being perhaps the least intelligent thing you've ever said in your life. More often then not though, you stare from afar and admire without having to deal with taking that which most agree is the only way to get anywhere in life – a risk. You can't blame a guy for being a little frightened though. Maybe he's been burned hard before or maybe he's trying to focus all his energy on his career. There are reasons, some valid, some not, and all of them can be interpreted as excuses rather than reason. You tell yourself you don't need it or it isn't the right time for you but you still wish it were happening. Any way you break it down, it's not easy. Sound familiar? If you thought yes even just a little, then DAN IN REAL LIFE, the new comedy from director Peter Hedges, is a must-see. It will reach inside of you and somehow manage to both break and warm your heart all at once.The Dan from the title is Dan Burns (Steve Carell), an advice columnist who is admired for his insight into living a balanced, fulfilling and morally uplifting life. Four years or so before the film opens on Dan waking up to his day, he lost his wife and love of his life. After that tragedy, Dan was left to raise their three daughters alone. Between that and focusing on his career, finding love again was not one of Dan's priorities. And so he became more functional than feeling. Removed from the power of intimacy, Dan no longer knows what it means to be that close to someone and has resigned himself to never knowing that again. That is, until he meets Marie (Juliette Binoche) in a book and tackle shop in Connecticut on a quiet morning. They're interaction is casual, comfortable and it catches both of them off guard. There is only one problem really. She is already seeing someone. Unfortunately for all involved, that someone is Dan's brother, Mitch (Dane Cook). His entire family has come up to their parents' country home for their yearly visit and Dan must now spend the weekend pining and yearning for the fleeting feeling he had with Marie that morning. It only lasted an hour or so but it only took that long to awaken Dan's heart from its coma.With so many family members to deal with (Jack Mahoney and Dianne Wiest are at the helm), DAN IN REAL LIFE does drift away from its grander purpose from time to time. While the cyclone of kids and parents and aunts and uncles makes for trying times for Dan, Hedges also uses it unnecessarily as a means to distract, with the presumption that it would ultimately make for a more complete film. Luckily, Hedges has got Carell to carry the heavy burden. It is a pleasure to watch Steve Carell come into his own more and more with every picture he makes (despite the occasional EVAN ALMIGHTY-sized misstep). He is charismatic, charming and obviously a sharp humorist. As Dan, he is also self-deprecating, awkward and scared. Carell is the rare comedian who pushes himself to find character in his roles rather than rely solely on his comedic instincts and established persona. Perhaps more importantly, he is entirely relatable as Dan. Whether he's flopping down on the cot in the laundry room where he is subjected to sleep as the only single adult at this reunion or fidgeting around the kitchen, unable to stan d still in his anxiety, Dan is every guy who has even been unsure of himself and felt alone in the crowd. Carell gives Dan so much heart that he becomes the heart of the film itself at the same time.I wondered after seeing the film if I enjoyed the it as much as I did, despite its slight shortcomings (Juliette Binoche – I know you might like to lighten up every now and then but I don't recommend it unless there is chocolate involved), because of where I am in my life. Would someone who has found that someone else derive as much meaning and comfort from this film? I can't say. What I can say, as someone who knows what it means to be lonely, DAN IN REAL LIFE knows what it means to be surprised by life and love and how these moments and people need to be appreciated and cherished. It also knows that anyone who might be feeling lonely on any given day or for months at a time needs to be reminded that surprises still happen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4913940e8734060aa03bcb70e7c418b",
            "input": "James Dickey is a wonderfully descriptive author. When one reads \"Deliverance\", one is instantly transported into the lush backwoods of the Deep South. When one watches John Boorman's film version of the book, one realizes just how accurately he captures the essence of the book. The camera is as descriptive as the narration. The characters are fully realized, and the portrayals are fantastic. I first saw this movie in 1992, after my freshman year of college. I was in a phase where I was watching movies that were all released within a couple of years of my birth in 1973. Among them were \"Patton\", \"Papillon\", and \"All the President's Men\"; fine films, all of them. This one was easily the class of the group. That says a lot.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-338dbc069f5d49b9901b1662a3011604",
            "input": "Yet another film about a tortured self-centered, arrogant, unfeeling hateful, self-destructive lead character we are supposed to care about.Don't get me wrong I am very open to all kinds of off the wall movies that have as the lead character a strongly self-destructive character. What I object to about this one is that there is so little background to this guy. Why did this guy hate himself and the world? Had the script dealt with this more they might have managed to elicit some sympathy for him. As it is he just comes off as an unpleasant hateful character, not tragic, just hateful.After taking great pains to make this guy as crazy and anti-social as possible and making his fate as dark as possible the writer then has the nerve to make a happy ending....This is not the worst film I have ever seen but it is in there putting up a good fight! Man! Don't waste your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2654d9a814b442809735cf4daf562749",
            "input": "This one is just like the 6th movie. The movie is really bad. It offers nothing in the death department. The one-liners are bad and are something that shouldn't be in a NOES movie. Freddy comes off as a happy child in the whole movie. Lisa Wilcox is still the only thing that makes this one worth while. The characters are extremely underdeveloped. All in all better than the 6th one, but still one the worst movies of the series. My rating 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e108e78e40c04208a916bfc0c3070f7e",
            "input": "It's hard to say sometimes why exactly a film is so effective. From the moment I first came across \"The Stone Boy\", something told me it would be a great film. In spite of that, it seemed very unlikely that I'd ever have the opportunity to actually see it for myself. Then, one day, while looking through the online catalogue of my local library, I saw that they had recently purchased the DVD release of this film. Which I'm extremely glad for, because the cinematography is of a stunning depth and quality that an old VHS copy could never replicate.And speaking of the cinematography, I must single it out as far and above the most stunning aspect of this film. As a photographer who pursues very nearly the exact visual style portrayed in \"The Stone Boy\", I'm a firm believer in the fact that a great cinematographer can almost single-handedly carry a film. Here, he has a lot of help from an extremely talented cast, and a director who understands perfectly what the story needs. But to have Juan Ruiz Anchía behind the camera makes virtually every scene something of beauty. And you can almost never say that. Most films would never even expect such a thing of you. Scene after scene captures some detail, some little bit of visual magic that takes your breath away.The director, Christopher Cain, has had a long and interesting career. As far as I can gather, this film is not very representative of it. But, sometimes, to catch a director near the beginnings of his career, before all the big budgets and loss of focus, there's a real subtle magic to be found. Cain steps back in this film, lets things happen with a life of their own, and then ever further. Much like early John Sayles films, characters are given space to breathe, time to talk. Side stories happen because they do, and that's how life is. Cain displays a remarkable, raw, even outright painful understanding of human nature in this film.The acting ties much of this story together. When people talk, when they exist in this film, they do so as actual people, not held back by the fact that they are playing characters. Gina Berriault's script allows immensely talented and respected actors like Wilford Brimley, Robert Duvall, Glenn Close, and Frederic Forrest to spend time simply existing. Whether the things they have to say are minor or of deep significance, it all comes down with the weight of pure reality.When you look at the actors involved, or the great soundtrack by James Horner, it seems strange that such a film be very nearly forgotten. Maybe much of what makes \"The Stone Boy\" what it is was the time period it was made in. There's this 1970s hangover feeling to this picture that reminds me deeply of my own childhood. People talk of the 80s in terms of modern styles and music, but that's not the 80s I lived in or remember. The look of the images, the understated and dark knowing quality of the acting, and the overall result should get under the skin of any person who grew up in or near this era of time in North America. I see myself in this. I see how I saw the world. And a film like \"The Stone Boy\" sees the world for how it truly is.For more of this feeling, please see:The Black Stallion (1979), Never Cry Wolf (1983), Tender Mercies (1983), Testament (1983), Places in the Heart (1984), Matewan (1987), High Tide (1987), Driving Miss Daisy (1989), The Secret Garden (1993), The Secret of Roan Inish (1994), Wendy and Lucy (2008)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ada30ccd6504fcd9732370cc91b8039",
            "input": "I saw this movie today at the Haifa Film Festival in Israel after hearing rave reviews, but I guess the critics were just sucking up to Willem Defoe and his wife (the director) who were present at the festival. It is definitely the slowest movie I have ever seen with numerous pointless, ridiculously long scenes of nothing. Besides Defoe who was decent, the acting of the two and a half other people in the movie, Defoe's wife Giada included, was ridiculously awful (how they cast the part of the salesgirl at the bakery is beyond me). This movie is pretty much plot less with a lame attempt to be abstract and off the wall. The only scene that stirred any kind of reaction in the crowd was vulgar and came from nowhere as if just to add some kind of shock value to the dullness that is this movie. Sorry for being so harsh, but really this movie is a precious waste of time and money. I appreciate good indie cinema, but this movie is not worthy of moviegoers' time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-551a53d7884440bbbdb79d2cc73d81a2",
            "input": "I remember a certain Tuesday, the morning of 18/6/02 to be exact. I was dozed off, trying to convince myself to get out of bed when a horrific explosion was heard. I went to the kitchen where I have a view of several neighborhoods in the southern Jerusalem and saw a pillar of smoke rising from a distant point, the sight of the smoke was followed a minute later by the waling of sirens. I remember rushing to my bedroom, taking out my binoculars, racing back to the kitchen and spotting the image of a glass shattered bus. The bus was still near the pick up station where a terrorist boarded on it and with a single click on a TNT device, murdered 25 passengers, many of whom were on their way to school. The wife of a good friend of mine, sat on the bus at the back row, a seemingly arbitrary and meaningless decision that saved her life.I'm sure that every Israeli has at least one terror-related memory he wishes he never would have had and it was only a matter of time before someone made a film about it. As it turned out, the movie was about to become a repressed memory of its own.The film is about a play-write on a dry run, Haim Buzaglo (portrayed by, hmmm, Haim Buzaglo who also wrote and directed the film) that spends the better part of his day conducting staring contests with his blank word processor page. In the meantime, his girlfriend, a field reporter for the Israeli commercial channel, decides to make a piece about a debt ridden ex-army officer. Buzaglo, bored and a bit paranoid due what is medically known as the \"what on earth this hot babe is dating me\" syndrome, asks a private eye to conduct a stakeout on his girlfriend.As the detective progresses in his investigation, his observations are permeating into the play and later on, to the lives of its actors. In the meantime, the play metamorphoses from a comic play into an indictment against the aloofness of the Israeli society. As for the movie, well, the movie becomes an exercise in frenzy editing, ensconced in its petty cardboard characters and unreliable dialogs while drifting miles away from the subject it was supposed to deal with in the first place.When I say \"cardboard characters\" I refer to the characters that under the writer/director's obsession for a \"meaningful\" film, were devoid of any genuine dialogs and any shred of reliability. I won't elaborate too much about it. Suffice to say that I'm sure that homeless barefoot male prostitutes rarely go the theater. With the intention to see a play, that is.This movie, according to Haim Buzaglo himself is the first part of a current agenda trilogy. I sincerely hope that the other two films will be derived from the experiences like the one I wrote about in the beginning of my review as opposed to the secluded world of characters that are anything but existent and a plot that is anything but compelling.4 out of 10 in my FilmOmeter.P.S. This movie was a landmark in austerity. It was shot in ten days, all the cast worked for free and the entire cost of the film was about 12,000$ (no, I didn't omit a zero or two, twelve thousand dollars). Makes you wonder why it took 34,000$ to complete Blair witch project.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02425d1fdbbe4268bad6ba620952d46d",
            "input": "Clint Tollinger arrives in a small town looking for his estranged wife and news of his daughter, tho he finds her, the chance of any sort of reconciliation is very slim. Whilst here, the sheriff and the important townsfolk learn of Tollinger's reputation as a pistol specialist town tamer. As they are living in fear of a mysterious landowner who is stripping the town from them bit by bit, they hold a meeting that chooses to hire Tollinger to rid the town of it's unsavoury elements.Man With The Gun seems to be either a forgotten piece or a vastly under seen one, at the time of me writing this, it has just over 200 votes and a paltry 9 user comments written for it. It's a shame on either score because although the production values scream out that this is a B movie Western, this is a fine entry in the Western genre. That the piece takes on a rather standard plot theme of an harangued town turning to an avenging dark angel, probably hasn't done the film any favours over the years, i myself read the synopsis and thought it's just another in the line of similarly themed pictures. Yet i was pleasantly surprised to find a darkly dramatic picture boasting many enjoyable moments, both technically and as a functioning story.Robert Mitchum is in the lead as Tollinger, perfectly cast, he strides thru the picture like some brooding menace. We often talk about the screen presence that John Wayne and Charlton Heston had {justifiably of course}, Mitchum is right up there with the best of them. One sequence here sees him standing in the shadows at the back of a room as a meeting takes place, we don't see his face, but we can feel that piercing brood staring out at us!. The rest of the cast are also very much in Mitchum's shadow, so really it's solely with the big man that the films acting credentials are high, perhaps it's unfair to single out Ted de Corsia for a kick, but Man With The Gun's minor failings are with its villains, and sadly de Corsia is lacking any sort of villainesque menace. The score from Alex North is excellently layered {fans of Spartacus will certainly be pricking their ears up} and the cinematography from Lee Garmes is highly impressive when one realises that the majority of this picture was shot on the studio lot. Directed and co-written by first time director Richard Wilson, Man With The Gun holds few surprises for the genre, but it's dark in tone, violent and above all else, highly watchable. 7.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e1dab23e86434c7db767be8d96ce9264",
            "input": "Pearl S.Buck was a brilliant author that was a first American lady won Nobel prize in literature in 1938 and received her prize with Enrico Fermi an Italian Physit.She wrote this romance in 1931 which was a second one after her first novel (East wind and West wind) in 1930 and her beginning in literature was fantastic upon her premier novels.she won in 1935 (Pulitzer prize) in literature on her eternal novel (The good earth) which made a brilliant panorama on the life of Chinese peasant (Wung Lung) and his wife (O-Lane) and their efforts to face the hardness of hard positions in their earth to reach for their big fortune by their shoulders.Paul Muni succeeded in this role as Chinese peasant that he prepared himself in this role upon his sittings with Chinese people in San Francisco in their town to be Chinese exactly as a real and true.Shara Reiner succeeded in her role as (O-Lane) by this brilliant evidence that she won An Academy Awarded as a best actress in 1937.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af15d568ed894bae87b37fdb20a52b96",
            "input": "The Wicker Man Has Done The Impossible! It replaced Cat Woman as the worst recent movie in my steel trap cinema mind. YES it's really that bad. So bad that when sitting down to write this review I thought to myself \"If I had a choice to either see this movie again or to have red hot needles shoved in my eyes\" I might actually go for the red hot needles.Neil LaBute created a rare movie where Joel Schumacher could sit back and say with comfort and a guilt free mind \"Yeah that's some bad direction right there\".I think the first clue for myself should have been the tag line: \"Some Sacrifices Must Be Made\". Sure it might sound sort of cheeky ominous line to intrigue you but the sacrifice will be all on the audience side of the screen. Trust me on this the people responsible for this movie should be charged with a hate crime..or at least fraud for trying to pass this off as anything resembling entertainment. Seriously! The movie is about an island where men are just there for breeding and I would still rather with be stuck on Gilligans Island with only pictures of Condoleezza Rice then find myself stranded there.The most entertaining part about this movie was the guy who ripped the loudest fart I've ever heard in a movie theater. That's not a joke nor is it fictional. I've never been to a \"thriller\" and heard so much laughter through out the entire film. I can't tell you with an certainty if the laughs were intentional in some effort to lighten the cinematic tension or if they just really thought this crud would actual fly. I honestly found myself routing for a power outage or a perhaps a fight to break out in the movie theater, anything to make this more interesting which is pretty sad since Deez, Powder and I pounded 2 beers each before the film just for a little mental anesthesia (soon to be a law before all Nic Cage films, write to your congressman today, don't delay). At one point I actually thought perhaps this movie is really a spoof and Anna Ferris is going to show up…oh how I wish.Nic Cage throws out so much ham per frame I'm thinking of having a cholesterol test done today. To think that I ever thought Sean Penn was a d*ck for slamming Nic's acting, oh he's still a d*ck just lesser of one…yes Sean Penn's d*ck was lessened because of this film. Do us all a favor Nic play your strengths and stick to being pathetic losers and drunks. You cannot play superman you do not get to play strong hunky roles go straight to jail do not pass go do not collect 200 dollars. His best moments in this film are when he finally comes unhinged and actually punches out a burly woman to steal her bear suit (like the fart, not a joke or a functional moment during this review) then proceeds to run amok like Conan O'Brian's masturbating bear, but with half the hilarity of a bear knocking his junk around. Thankfully he meets his end shortly after when it turns out he's to be a sacrifice to the crowd at the new tour hybrid show of Burning Man and Lilith Fair. Yes!!!! I just spoiled the ending for you…and if you knew any better you'd build statues of me in worship and sing songs of my legend. I sat through this crap-fest so you don't have to.About half way through this little misadventure I kept thinking to myself Jack Bauer would have wrapped this case up in 20 minutes of real time..OK 35 minutes if Kim gets attacked by a mountain lion first. Even Steve Martin as Inspector Clouseau could have figured this out in under an hour…and you Sir are no Inspector Clouseau.If for some reason you are taken captive and you have a choice to see this film or take a bullet, take the bullet.Somewhere Uwe Boll is laughing at us all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d95ef79735645b7b81a16afa8f338e1",
            "input": "Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The Three Ages was Buster Keaton's first attempt at a full length comedy feature. The only similarities to Intolerance are the opening \"book\" scene and the fact that similar stories through the ages are edited together into a complete film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't succeed as a feature film, it could be reduced to three two-reelers. Fortunately, The Three Ages succeeds brilliantly as a comedy and contains some of the funniest routines I've seen in any of Keaton's film. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are simple boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the period satires are riotous and set the standard for future works by Mel Brooks and all films of this genre. However, I don't believe that anyone has ever topped this comedy. No one can play the lovable goof like Keaton and the stunts in this film are some of his best. In addition, Wallace Beery's appearance as Keaton's rival adds to this film's appeal. Anyone who thinks that comedy from the 1920's cannot be appreciated by modern audiences needs to see this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f63b9956688b42f78d6d56b3905ab8f3",
            "input": "This film is so bad - dialogues, story, actors and actresses - everything! - that it's hard to imagine that we'll see a worse movie this year or in the following years. \"Love's Brother\" (set in Australia among Italian immigrants) has nothing but shallow clichés about Italian culture to offer, and it is quite telling that even the Italians from and in Italy speak ENGLISH in the film. The message of the film - ugly people have to marry ugly people, beautiful people have to marry beautiful people - is truly discomforting. Giovanni Ribisi is quite good in films like 'Suburbia' or 'Lost in Translation', but here his pseudo-Italian accent is hard to bear. See this film at your own risk. Trash as trash can!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-342b1c049c3b4ad08fa76e7e204059d2",
            "input": "Despite the excellent cast, this is an unremarkable film, especially from the aviation perspective. It may be somewhat better than the egregious \"von Richthofen and Brown\" but not by much. \"Blue Max\" remains the best of a small market over the last 35 years while \"Darling Lilli\" is fun if not taken seriously. It's interesting to speculate what ILM could do with Zeppelins and Gothas in a new, high-quality WW I aero film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0954ab751d8e403b9edbb88418453c79",
            "input": "I'm glad that I saw this film after Mr.Sandler became famous.It is bad....bad,bad,bad. There is no plot. It's like watching a painfully dull home movie.I really enjoy his other films......but if you're a fan like me....stay away from this one. It may change your thoughts on Adam. You may never recover from the horror that is this film....I've had a better time watching old folks play scrabble in a home.......",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90b2be3c74d54bcb87b6e3d09737747c",
            "input": "This film aka \"the four hundred blows\" is a mistranslation.Faire les 400 coups\" means\"to live a wild life. As a French,I'm stunned when I see the popularity of this good ,but by no means outstanding film. 1.It's not the first film of the \"nouvelle vague\" move;check Agnes Varda's \"la pointe courte\",(1956)Alain Resnais's \"Hiroshima mon amour\"(1958),Claude Chabrol's \"le beau serge\"(1958) are anterior .Historically,\"les 400 coups \" comes after. 2.The \"nouvelle vague\" was sometimes ponderous and hard on their predecessors:Overnight,Julien Duvivier,Henri-George Clouzot,Claude Autant-Lara ,Yves allégret and a lot of others were doomed to oblivion.THis selfishness and this contempt is typically \"nouvelle vague\".You 've never heard (or read) the great generation of the thirties (Renoir,Carné,Grémillon,Duvivier already,Feyder) laugh at ,say,Maurice Tourneur or Max Linder.So,thanks to Truffaut and co,some people will never discover some gems of the French fifties or forties(Duvuvier's \"sous le ciel de Paris\",Autant-Lara's \"douce\",Yves Allégret's \"une si jolie petite plage \" and \"manèges\").THe novelle vague clique went as far as saying that William Wyler,Georges Stevens and Fred Zinemann were worthless! 3.\"Les 400 coups \" is technically rather disappointing:it's very academic ,the story is as linear as it can be,the teachers are caricatures,and the mother Claire Maurier delivers such memorable lines as (you've got to be a French circa 1960 to understand how ridiculous it is): Well ,your father 's got only his brevet (junior school diploma)and,as for me ,I've got only my high school diploma!You've got to know,that circa 1960,hardly 10%of the pupils had the HSD in France! Antoine Doinel should have been proud of his mother after all!She wants him to have diplomas,who can blame her? 4.Compared to the innovations of \"Hiroshima mon amour\",which features a brand new form,and a new \"fragmented \" content,\"les 400 coups \" pales into significance.Truffaut will master a new form only with the highly superior \"Jules and Jim\", helped by the incomparable Jeanne Moreau. 5.The interpretation is rather stiff;Jean-Pierre Léaud ,arguably listenable when dubbed in English ,is still decent,but he will soon degenerate into the most affected of his generation. 6.The topic=stolen childhood had better days,before (Julien Duvivier's \"Poil de carotte\" ,Luis Bunuel's \"los olvidados\") and will have after (Maurice Pialat's \"l'enfance nue\",Kenneth Loach's \"Kes\") I do not want to demean Truffaut,his movie is not bad,but,frankly,French movie buffs,prefer \"Jules and Jim\" \"l'enfant sauvage\" (a film honest ,true and commercially uncompromizing to a fault)\"l'argent de poche\"(as academic as \"400 coups\" but much more funny)or his nice Hitchcock pastiche \"vivement dimanche\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5914fc5904e41f18e6ec87df63b5180",
            "input": "It's such a shame that because of it's title this film will be avoided by people who hate football. Bend it Like Beckham is much more than a cheesy sports flick. The story line is touching and intelligent without being soppy, the jokes were laugh out loud funny, and the characters are well acted. Parminder Nagra and Keira Knightley are brilliant as teenagers Jess and Jules, putting in great performances both on and off the pitch. Anupam Kher is wonderful as Jess' worried father, and Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, who was so amazingly evil in 'Ride with the Devil,' comes across so well as the nice guy for once, making full use of his gorgeous Irish accent! Even if you don't like football, go see this film. If anything it'll make you smile.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b00a78a4a97a471c82915cfefc12f3bb",
            "input": "I'd never seen an independent movie and I was really impressed by the writing, acting and cinematography of Jake's Closet. The emotions were very real and intense showing, through a child's eyes, the harsh impact of divorce.A definite see!I'd never seen an independent movie and I was really impressed by the writing, acting and cinematography of Jake's Closet. The emotions were very real and intense showing, through a child's eyes, the harsh impact of divorce.A definite see!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8715dbb7437245a5b5de743dbaa9d48b",
            "input": "Walerian Borowczyks La Bete (1975) was obviously received in different ways: Some were appalled, some were shocked others applauded the courage. I however am completely untouched, bored and cannot stop asking myself why the display of incoherent, inconsistent images which vaguely orbit around a central theme are considered an intellectual journey.What was this movie actually about? Growing sexuality in a woman? I've seen great films on this subject, but this is not one of them. How can one attempt to portray a growing sexuality in a girl without at least trying to characterize her as a person not only as a narrative device to dream (in the nude) of beasts. Where there are no characters, there is no character study. The woman persecuted by the beast was not adolescent, the girl having sex with the black butler (is he also characterized as a beast?) has a very grown up attitude to sexuality, so where is the consistency? Is it a movie about religion? If yes we would need a bit more thematic material than a priest without function, character and charisma, but with a strong desire towards two young boys.Is it about bestiality? The metaphoric feel of the movie forbids any realistic examination of bestiality, especially as realistic examination requires realistic characters. So no real bestiality here. Some mythic beast and two priests talking to each other about the sin of bestiality. Enough for a college essay on the topic? I don't think so.Is it about sex? Is it about anything? I don't know. I only know that showing a fired gun doesn't make a film a war movie. Dealing with a topic must mean more than displaying its own associations with the theme.So look across the controversy. Don't be scared by the bestiality, nudity, ejaculations, masturbation and stuff. I am not. Look at it as you look at any other story and you might discover that this is a poorly made, poorly edited, poorly acted, really poorly written (okay, some pictures are quite nice, and the main character is a really good looking girl) cerebral masturbation of a director who thinks beating around the bush in a hypnotic slow manner will make a story intelligent. It doesn't. It makes it boring.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84c000897e1842a2b86dd61d46ec51eb",
            "input": "The cast although nothing special, all do an OK job, the story seems like a good idea, the script is bearable and the end has quite a good twist; so what's wrong with it?For a start the special effects are really bad (if this was made in the 60's) it might look OK but in 2003 there is just no excuse for visuals as poor as this. It makes me laugh that the DVD cover claims very proudly 'from the special effects creator of Jeepers Creepers'.Secondly the direction is weak, this film just does not capture the essence of the story, A doctor feeding the hospital inmates souls to the Devil (or demon type creature) should be tense or frightening; it simply isn't.All in all this is a pretty poor film, and although bearable and at times mildly entertaining, it is still probably best left alone.A rather sad 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7851d3e90b34d43a5b861010a92537b",
            "input": "Warning Spoilers following. Superb recreation of the base in Antarctica where the real events of the film took place. Other than that, libelous!, scandalous! Filmed in Canada; presumably by a largely Canadian crew and cast. I caught the last half of this film recently on Global television here in Canada. Nothing much to say other than how thoroughly appalled I was at what a blatant piece of American historical revisionist propaganda it is; and starring Susan Sarandon of all people! I can only assume that Canadian born director Roger Spottiswoode was coerced to make the USAF the heroes of the film when in fact the real rescuers where a small private airline based in Calgary; Kenn Borek Air.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-878c44eff91b4a63a810ecf7f6fa77be",
            "input": "This film concerns purportedly non-establishment types (aesthetically and sexually) who apparently cannot resist basic romantic needs. Although some excellent players take part, including Jon Tenney, Timothy Olyphant, and Cynthia Nixon, they are grounded by a puerile script which relies nearly totally upon clever dialogue; which isn't. Nixon's role possesses the best lines, but she often homes in on them too quickly, a timing flaw which must be saddled upon the director. The grotesque climax utilizes every available cliche, spent or not, and fittingly ends this drab attempt at comedy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98fe8a99b2ee4743a81823d876dba618",
            "input": "I really do not know what people have against this film, but it's definitely one of my favourites. It's not preachy, it's not anchored by it's moral, it shouldn't be controversial. It's just God. Any possible God, no matter the religion. And it's really funny.Jim Carry plays Bruce Nolan, a TV reporter usually stuck on the lighter side of the news, desperate to prove himself (more or less TO himself) that he can be taken seriously and do a good job in an anchor job. This drive is what is slowly driving his beautiful girlfriend Grace (Jennifer Aniston) away. When the final straws are executed, he's quick to not laugh, but yell in the face of God, who in turn gives Bruce his powers. Bruce then makes his life better for himself, until he's guilted into helping others, where he then continues to miss the point of his powers. Meanwhile, his constant excitement about his own life makes him more selfish, leaving his relationship on dangerous ground.OK, that was kinda long. But as a plot, it works well. The step-by-step fashion in which we meet the challenges of being God is much better than clustering his problems together, and is able to hide itself fairly well.As you probably know from hearing about this movie in the first place, Carrey's pitch-perfect acting stays in character (which, luckily enough, is him), and controls and gives atmosphere to the movie scene by scene. Whether they would admit it or not, the role was written or rewritten exclusively for Carrey. Without him, the humour would turn flat, as humour is half execution. And the humour is very good in the first place. But without Carrey, it would kinda feel like a It's a Wonderful Life wannabe.Jennifer Aniston is great and, no matter what some may say, does not act like the only excuse for the third act. At least, you don't think that when you see her. She gives a heartfelt performance and makes you forget you're watching a movie, she and Carrey feel very much like a real couple.The movie feels ggooooodd (see the movie to understand), has a very nice feeling, tackles the idea appropriately and better than expected and overall should never have been called slapped together just to save Carrey's career (which wasn't goin' anywhere.).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f30843e2f90e4f8baf31fd13751e606c",
            "input": "This bomb is just one 'explosion' after another, with no humor and only absurd situations. Really, pyrotechnics to the extreme. Reality is not one of its strong points. I give it a 1 out of 10. I would have made it a zero but that option wasn't permitted. Sorry, but Lithgow and Sutherland deserve better roles. But then at times we all need to have money. And I still recoil at that Tim Burton farce about Mars. Nicholson was brave enough to admit that was a turkey. But if that was a turkey, this movie then is not even a gizzard. I wish I could say, \"give me back my money\". You can bet I would if I could. But that is the trouble with premium services, the subscription variety.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ea251597fec486baf08c30e9ff2effb",
            "input": "''The 40 Year Old Virgin'''made me laugh a lot. I don't care if it is considered to be a very sexual comedy, I just enjoyed many of the jokes and scenes present in this movie. Steve Carell is perfect as the virgin nerd Andy Stitzer and I think the scene where Andy has his chest hair removed by wax one of the coolest, specially because it is real. Many of the actors and actresses present in this movie are well known or already famous,by the way.Andy Stitzer has a peaceful life. He is a little bit strange and collects lots of toys, but seems harmless. One day, while playing poker with his friends of his work, they discover that Andy is in fact...virgin! And he is already 40 years old! After this surprising revelation, all his friends are trying to make Andy sleep with a woman...the problem is the confusions in which Andy gets in,specially now that he is really starting to like Trish, a woman he met when she was buying a DVD player in the store he works at.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf3735c5aa8f4a7f9549335dd821921c",
            "input": "A terrible film which is supposed to be an independent one. It needed some dependence on something.This totally miserable film deals with the interactions among Irish people. Were they trying to imitate the wonderful film \"Crash?\" If so, this film crashed entirely.There is just too much going on here culminated by a little brat running around and throwing rocks into buses and cars which obviously cause mayhem.The film is just too choppy to work. One woman loses her husband after 14 years to another while her younger sister is ripped off by a suitor. This causes the former sister to become a bitter vetch and walk around in clothes not worth believing. The older sister also becomes embittered but soon finds romance.Then, we have 3 losers who purchase masks to rob a bank. Obviously, the robbery goes awry but there doesn't seem to be any punishment for the crooks. Perhaps, the punishment should have been on the writers for failure to create a cohesive film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19e672b1f611460eae5a2b617e983000",
            "input": "Hmm, Hip Hop music to a period western. Modern phrases like \"cool\" and too many others to keep track of. \"The sistahs are in tha house\"!?French manicured nails on hard riding girls. Microphone packs CLEARLY visible on Li'l Kim's back. I just can't go on with the litany of errors made by the director and editors.The acting isn't as bad as I've ever seen. The women did well enough with a poor script.It was weird hearing Louis Mandylor speaking in his native accent.The girls are beautiful. The costumes fabulous albeit completely incorrect. I just can't believe they would dumb down what could have been a great story. I would feel offended to believe that this movie was loaded with such trappings that it would play well in the inner city.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfcaa3eae3de40c984ffc0a34b615d26",
            "input": "The whole point of making this film, one of the earliest and best international color releases of cinematic opera, was to make it more accessible to the masses. And it succeeded admirably in doing so. The general public would not sit still for a love story about two young exotic lovers in ancient Egypt if played by the typical 300 pound over 40 tenor and soprano with the vocal equipment to sing the glorious music properly. Hence the visual substitution of the beautiful principals (a young Loren, handsome Della Marra, and a slinky Ms. Maxwell)who make the story much more believable, giving those not familiar with the plot or the music a better chance at being wooed into the lovely arias who otherwise might not be. Altogether, an enchanting introduction to one of Verdi's great works. I remember seeing this when I was in junior high school and it certainly awakened my interest in opera, a form with which I was then not well acquainted. I still regard this film fondly and would recommend it highly to those who might appreciate the great music accompanied by better than average visuals. Luciano Della Marra was a standout as Radames, and unfortunately for audiences did not appear in any other films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-994990e5d2da4eee96a018d310d736db",
            "input": "\"The Man In The Moon\" is a pretty good movie. It is very touching at times and is very well done in all respects. I wouldn't say the film was terribly original, but what is these days?The cast members all did a great job with their respective roles. I really enjoyed seeing Reese Witherspoon at such a young age, and does quite a good job. Jason London does a fine job as well. And the only other person I recognized was Sam Waterston, who did a fantastic job with his role. I really liked Sam's character (Matthew Trant) a lot. At times he seemed to be the kind of father you dread, but in the end you really like his character. The rest of the cast was very good as well.If you're into touching movies about growing up and dealing with what life throws at you, then you ought to watch this film. I'd suggest reading the plot synopsis and if that sounds like something you'd be interested in, then go for it. Anyhow, hope you enjoy the film, thanks for reading,-Chris",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7612419a24914649a7a9f323193bf2de",
            "input": "The good news is a movie was made, drawing on a supposed Aztec myth and featuring an unusually Aztec-American (is such a word exists) cast. The bad news is, it was dead at birth.If Ed Wood had come out of retirement and coached George Romaro through his classic 'Night of the Living Dead,' this is what we might have come up with. 'The Legend of Diablo' is clearly fodder for any future resurrections of 'Mystery Science Theatre 3000!'I don't think one can even call this a 'B' movie. The production values are so abysmal that I kept getting the feeling I was watching either a lengthy skit from a variety show or a backyard 8-mm film shot by a group of school kids. SOME SPOILERSThe basic plot line sounded interesting enough to lure me into renting it. A rural California sheriff finds a box containing an Aztec demon and accidentally unleashes it on the unsuspecting community. His daughters, one hot and one homely, team with a gringo FBI man and a priest, to try to re-cage the demon. Meanwhile, every zombie scene one has ever seen in previous undead movies is re-enacted-poorly. These zombies walk more like an army of Nutty Professors than the undead! The supposed infrared scenes from the demon's viewpoint are nothing special … and he/she/it sure seems to back up a lot (as opposed to turning around the moving forward). And the scene where the priest lures the demon out of the cave in fast-motion is ludicrous! It really, really appears to be done for comic effect-although I know it wasn't! I kept expecting the Benny Hill theme music to start playing & for the whole gang of zombies to start chasing the priest all over the beach!Of course the Darth Vader/Field of Dreams voice, calling the FBI agent becomes downright comical. Then again, so was most of this cheese ball! Robert Napton, director and writer of the screenplay, should win SOMEthing for this effort! (How about a lifetime blackballing, like the 'Hollywood 10?') This one, I now see, is rated 1.5 on a 10-scale. I fear this might be a tad generous! Is there anything good about this movie? Well, Lindsey Lofaso looks pretty hot as the younger daughter of the dead sheriff. This is probably why her homely older sister (Calvi Pabon) really ran away from home! Fred Estrado is reasonably decent as the FBI agent. I wonder if Mario Soto, who played Father Rodriguez, is the same Mario Soto who pitched for the Cincinnati Reds? If so, he should have stuck to baseball. In fact, they couldn't have done any worse if they had gone with a baseball theme and called it 'Demons in the Outfield!'If I find out this was actually a project for a community college cinema class, I will issue apologies. It might be good enough for a B or even B+ as long as the gang got the college's camcorder back to campus in one piece! 'The Blair Witch Project' proved that a cool, campy movie could be made on a shoestring. 'The Legend of Diablo,' though, didn't appear to have a shoestring OR shoes to work from! It was low-budget, low-talent, low-everything. The very final scene-and I mean about the final 10 seconds of the film-is the ONLY mildly creative or interesting moment.I paid $3.45 to rent this. I could have better spent it on a hamburger!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35fb47a5f76140eeac4f5ff42a27e878",
            "input": "Oh my. How can they make movies of such beauty, but that are so terribly bad. I mean, even Uwe Boll doesn't make crap like this. There is not even a hint of a decent story, multi-layered characters, or attraction. It's just a random sequence of pointless chatter joined together to make a 'movie'. I suppose only children up to 3 years of age could enjoy it, given the world is so utterly dimensionless and the story so incoherent, that anyone older would be annoyed by it. But then again, it's far too scary for anyone under 6 years of age, that there's probably no one that should watch this movie at all.Take my advice and stay far, far away from this movie. Your little daughter can make a better storyline, and though she probably isn't able to draw pictures this pretty, her tales are much more worth listening to. And please, in the name of whoever you believe in, do not expose your children to this piece of ****. I'll give it 2 out of 10, and that's exclusively for the graphics, because the story and character development are so awful they'd deserve a negative rating.And if you decide to watch it anyways... remember that I warned you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a35e06fa58ab4fc2aeb0f2ebaddade8b",
            "input": "I first saw this mini-series a number of years ago on British television and was immediately captivated by the story. This rather surprised me as I am not a great fan of either 'Jane Eyre' or 'Wuthering Heights'; I consider the heroine of the former to be a self-righteous bore, and the latter piece of work as overblown claptrap.'The Tenant of Wildfell Hall', like the aforementioned works, is also somewhat depressing in parts. However, the darker parts of the film were offset by the excitement of Helen's escape, the breathtakingly wild and beautiful landscape of Yorkshire, and the sexual magnetism of Toby Stephens.This film successfully portrays the frustratingly restrictive lifestyle of all women of the time. At best they suffered from a form of minor domestic tyranny as portrayed by the treatment of the womenfolk in the Markham household. At the other end of the scale, there is the unfortunate Helen who is married to a wealthy man of high estate, but is exposed to brutality and humiliation alternating with long periods of neglect. She runs away and experiences a brief moment of freedom but, as a women of mystery living alone in a rural community, she inevitably becomes the subject of spiteful gossip and speculation.Tara Fitzgerald is excellent as the long-suffering Helen Markham. Not only incredibly beautiful (in spite of that terribly unflattering hairstyle) with the most amazing cheekbones, she is also more than capable of playing the central role in the film. Tara is dignified and aloof while, at the same time, allowing us to see that Helen is still dangerously vulnerable. Rupert Graves IS the depraved, yet curiously attractive Arthur Huntingdon - after seeing him, I could never imagine another actor playing that part. Pam Ferris deserves special mention for her role as Gilbert's indulgent mother, as does the actress who played his sister Rose, and Simon Carter who is the uncharitable vicar with a taste for the Good Things in Life. Finally, I could watch this film for Toby Stephens alone; he is so good-looking,rugged, sexy, sensitive (but not in a nauseatingly sentimental way). I am not even sure if he is a good actor as my hormones prevent me from judging him objectively!If there is a fault with the film it is the use of flashbacks which I felt both interfered with the flow of the story and made it slightly confusing. Other people, who have watched this film with me, also had problems with this, and I found I had to explain to them that certain scenes were in fact retrospective.I am extremely grateful for the people responsible for making this film. Not only did I puchase the video (a rare occurrence), but it led me to buy Anne Bronte's superb novel. Naturally, this was better than the film, but only by a narrow margin. I recommend that anyone interested should watch the film and then read the book in that order.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb0ba3f52b0847778180d09f9ec3054d",
            "input": "After his classic film noir homage Chinatown Roman Polanski returned to the themes that had given him his greatest hits in the 60s with this creepy psychological horror which, like Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby, deals with the paranoia and claustrophobia generated by apartment living.Claustrophobic environments are the ones which Polanski is best at creating, and this has to be the most suffocating and confined picture he ever created. The emphasis on side walls and distant vanishing points is greater than ever, and even in the small number of exterior scenes the sky is rarely glimpsed. But The Tenant is not just confined spatially, but also in the intensity with which it focuses on its protagonist. Trelkovsky, played by Polanski himself is not only in every scene, he is in virtually every shot. When he is not on screen more often than not the camera becomes Trelkovsky's point of view. And of course almost everywhere he looks he sees his own reflection staring back at him in a mirror.I can't think of any film that is more about the internalisation and solitude of one character. Some psychological thrillers, like M or Peeping Tom, manipulate us into feeling sorry for the mentally ill protagonist. Others, like Psycho, attempt in-depth scientific analysis of his mental condition. The Tenant fits into neither of these categories – it simply immerses us completely inside Trelkovsky's experience without demanding we actually understand or appreciate what is going on inside his head. We feel his paranoia and obsession even though it is constantly revealed to us that they are irrational.Polanski was also a master of the slowly unfolding horror film. Often in his horrors there is an ambiguity as to whether there is actually anything sinister going on, but they are among the most effective at frightening audiences. Why? Precisely because they unfold so slowly and invest so much time in painstakingly setting up situations that they immerse the viewer in paranoia. A much later Polanski horror, The Ninth Gate is a bit of a mess plot-wise but at least it still manages to achieve that creeping sense of dread.This is a rare chance to see Polanski himself in a major role. His talent in front of the camera was as good as behind it, and he is absolutely perfect as the meek Trelkovsky. Another standout performance is that of the all-too-often overlooked Shelley Winters as the concierge. In actual fact it is rather a stellar cast, although many of the familiar faces look out of place in this strange, Gothic European movie. Also sadly many of the French actors in supporting roles are atrociously dubbed in the English language version.The Tenant is more polished and less pretentious than Repulsion, but it lacks the suspense and the character that make Rosemary's Baby so engrossing and entertaining. The Tenant is good, with no major flaws, and Polanski was really on top form as a director, but it's not among his most gripping works.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8721df77f90a49efb06fbb13afe0d334",
            "input": "As incredible as it may seem, Gojoe is an anime- and Hong Kong-inspired samurai action flick with a pacifistic message. This ankle of the film is effectively portrayed through the protagonist (a great acting job done by Daisuke Ryu), a killer-turned-to-boddhist-monk Benkei. Benkei has sworn never to kill again, but he still takes up the sword to fight what he thinks is a demon invasion...Gojoe is a film difficult to rate. It's visual imagery is stunningly crafted and beautiful, but it uses too much trickery (circling camera and high speed drives, expressionistic shots, leeched colors, digital effects etc.), so the end result is somewhat tiring. That said, the beginning and the ending of the film are nevertheless both elegant and powerful. If only the director Sogo Ishii would have been wise enough not to overuse his bag of tricks.Other problem with Gojoe is the amount of violence. For a film with such an anti-violent message Gojoe wastes way too much energy and screen time to depict the endless battle scenes. Also, the way the violence is shown is always on the edge of being self-indulgent; in fact, a blood shower against the night sky seems to be one of the films signature images. Luckily, Ishii is wise enough to show the ugly, tragic side of violence as well. Still, it seems that Ishii is not sure whether he's making a traditional action film or a deeply moral allegory. The audience can't be sure of this, either, until the very end of the film. The powerful (albeit cynical) ending is what saves Gojoe; it clearly emphasizes that this film is something more than a mere gore-fest.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5740a9b0a68b4678b0bb74cc852f9fdb",
            "input": "Weak scripts at times? Yep! Cheesy special effects at times? Yep! Deliciously guilty pleasure most of the time? Yep! More about Carl Kolchak and Darren McGavin? Yep! I always enjoyed science fiction as a kid, but found so much of the Dracula/Frankenstein/Mummy/horror stuff as just so much crap. It took Abbott and Costello to give me a new perspective on the classic Universal monsters, and it took Carl Kolchak to win me over to the \"dark side\" of entertainment. The Duke had Rooster Cogburn, Eastwood had Dirty Harry, Garner had Maverick and Rockford, Selleck had Magnum, and Darren McGavin had Carl Kolchak. Mixed in with all those weak scripts, cheesy special effects, that baroque group of supporting characters and actors and guest stars, there was Darren McGavin as Carl Kolchak. He had a wry sense of humor in spite of the danger, was an idealist in his pursuit of the truth, and a realist when it came to accepting the obligatory incompetence and eventual cover-up by government officials. Additionally, unlike 98% of us, Kolchak was willing to stick his neck out and do what needed to be done, even if it meant his demise, the end of his journalistic career, or jail time. For all his faults, including no taste in clothes, Carl Kolchak was a man of charm and wit who drove a beautiful classic yellow Mustang (which was an old used car at the time) on his way to save the day for humanity. As good as any other fictional hero Carl Kolchak was the everyman hero brought to life every week for one season thanks to Darren McGavin. Now that he's passed on and his show is on DVD, I hope he's having as much fun watching me watch him have fun playing Kolchak The Night Stalker all over again!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be40d026de5b48798d9fe9c85a952ab9",
            "input": "From the first time I saw the box cover of the movie and the stretched out photography I thought this guy, this friend of the 'Scwarz' must be like 6 foot or 6ft 2in. Not 5 feet tall. Not that, it's his fault. At any rating, I turned on the movie one cool night in Tucson, out on the second story-deck with a good cigar and let it roll. At that time my wife was having an affair and things were going down hill for me, so I needed a good diversion. But, as bad as the movie was...I totally enjoyed it, with a bottle of Merlot too, I might admit. Truly, I have watched this movie many times. It always makes me feel good!! It's not that it 'tries too hard' to be cool or that 'It's so close' to hitting the mark for an action film....It's frantic. And then truly clueless. Then frantic again. It's the best of the best when it comes to a slow speed chase scene. Wow!! I never felt safer in my life. Warm and happy too. I was thankful that they conserved on the gasoline during the chase, due to less production in the summer months...anywho The direction was 'uninspired' the action and fight sequences needed to be choreographed, or re-choreographed and tightened up, the sound was off the delivery didn't hit you, it just kept on going, the other way. The 'locals' of that village that they were in, the town rather, were 'Off cue' they also did not seem to follow what was happening very well, the would look and even 'stare' into the camera lens. Like a deer in the head lights kind of thing only some of them with a smile, a smiling deer. I feel bad because 'Columbu' I just bet has a good heart and a caring spirit for people in America as well as for his own countrymen. However \"Baretta's Island\" is very lethargic and unbelievable. Even still I like it a lot. My now x-wife hates it, but I love it! The funny thing is, I am pretty discriminating when it comes to movies I like or even 'love'. All in all, I like Franco. So there it is. As a movie adding addendum to this if you like killing a few hours with truly fun to watch, straight to video-B movies or 'bad' movies for your little library collection then, if you can find it, check out 'The Big Sweat' (1991) with Robert Z' Dar..you know the big guy from 'TANGO & CASH'. 'The Big Sweat', a bomb of a cop story with no real plot discovery and acting that is so lame, it might as well be 'on crutches' and at the end of 'The Big Sweat' I think they ran out of money, because they had a picture of the cast and just set it on fire and let it burn during the credits. -Good fun. But all in all, not as good as Baretta's Island', I gave it a '1' and an overall rating of 'awful' for awful-good B' movie. I'm waiting for the sequel, maybe like 'Baretta's revenge on Montazuma' (Franco takes a Mexican vacation and gets sick on the water then, declares war on the water co.) or 'Baretta's powder war' where as he would stake out a large drug lord in his country and chemically gene-splice and create a hybrid super bug (insect) that would be bred and dropped into the cocaine fields and eat the coke and upon passing it through the bug, it forms a chemical reaction that turns the coke to pure powdered sugar. Then another sequel he would have to get the young people rescued from excessive sugar addiction and so on. He could get a major tooth paste company to endorse and partially fund the project with careful product placement in the feature. Right?(*)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-225862b420174299bfe5c659497cbe83",
            "input": "This may actually be the worst movie that I have ever scene. Incoherent would be a compliment. Even the end made no sense but it was a tremendous relief that it was finally over. I watched it with a kind of fatalistic fascination to see if it could continue to deteriorate and it did. By the end of this mess I was sorry any of the characters survived and I wasn't feeling too charitable about the actors either.If you want to watch a train wreck, I recommend hanging out at a train station. Even waiting on a deserted train platform beats this mess. Apparently I haven't vented enough to fill up my prescribed ten lines so, at the risk of redundancy, I will say it one more time. This movie is a zero and it would be less if I had a word for an even lower rating. How about minus zero?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee837b1da2c74e27bdfd3e6685491205",
            "input": "This was fun to watch, spookily atmospheric and effects were pretty good considering they were bang in the middle of World War Two. The plot did unravel pretty quickly at the end with the villains getting their comeuppance.It must have been a good one to watch at the local flea pit in the 1940's when they were facing the biggest threat to their liberty from the Nazis - well made with quite a serious message about the dangers to Britain from third columnists.But Arthur Askey was so annoying & unfunny you just wanted him to shut up - well at least I did ! I suppose different tastes in different times but the clowning around became tiresome. If he was playing an annoying little man as part of the script then he succeeded.A good watch and quite short at just over 80 minutes - a good background for older kids too so they have an idea of what train travel in austere times was like; uncomfortable slow, dirty trains, being thrown off for no reason, surly staff ....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ffbb24754a24dea8ed52d9bda20b82e",
            "input": "Saw this movie when it came out in 1959, left a lasting impression. Great group of actors. A little short timewise but a great movie all the same. Have only seen once since then and that was some time ago. Hopefully they'll put it out on DVD if they haven't already.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-330a2c25298f4f4f979ae1faa18d1370",
            "input": "Bill (Buddy Rogers) is sent to New York by his uncle (Richard Tucker) to experience life before he inherits $25million. His uncle has paid 3 women Jacqui (Kathryn Crawford), Maxine (Josephine Dunn) and Pauline (Carole Lombard) to chaperone him and ensure that he does not fall foul of gold-diggers. One such lady Cleo (Geneva Mitchell) turns up on the scene to the disapprovement of the women. We follow the tale as the girls are offered more money to appear in a show instead of their escorting role that they have agreed to carry out for the 3 months that Bill is in New York, while Bill meets with Cleo and another woman. At the end, love is in the air for Bill and one other .............The picture quality and sound quality are poor in this film. The story is interspersed with musical numbers but the songs are bad and Kathryn Crawford has a terrible voice. Rogers isn't that good either. He's pleasant enough but only really comes to life when playing the drums or trombone. There is a very irritating character who plays a cab driver (Roscoe Karns) and the film is just dull.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-491ee0b59e0649709ef9931191d08412",
            "input": "From a modern sensibility, it's sometimes hard to watch older films. It's annoying to have to watch the stereotypical wallflower librarian have to take off her glasses and become pretty and stupid to win a man. Especially such a shallow and inconstant man. He's obviously a player (I wouldn't trust him to stay true to her) who doesn't want to settle down, who only looks at dumb attractive women and always calls them \"baby\" (ick!). Even after she totally changes her appearance and her life for him, he only goes to her after he's (supposedly) rejected by another woman and learns that Connie spent all her money renovating a boat for him. I wanted her to stand up to him, not pathetically chase after him! His sudden conversion within a few minutes was totally unrealistic and did not work for me.Apart from that subplot, I did like the movie. How can you not like sailors dancing with each other?! (You can tell they were from San Francisco.... ;D) The \"rehearsal\" dance was great, watching Ginger Rogers purposefully fall in and out of the \"correct steps\" was great. The last dance scene \"Face the Music\" with the beautiful costumes and the art deco set was beautiful. And I really enjoyed \"We Saw the Sea\" (though they did use it a few too many times, as if they realized it was their best song). Anyway, the plot was a bit weak, like most musicals (IMO) - and the songs were OK, but the dancing was worth watching the film for. I wish they could have showed some shots of San Francisco since that was were the film was supposedly set.It's also weird to see such a lighthearted naval film with the knowledge of what Hitler was already doing at that time. I have to try to suspend all knowledge to submerge myself into a made up fantasy land.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5b519bbeb4f4be3ba224b358aeff94b",
            "input": "Well, I am delighted to hear a rumor that this may finally be issued on DVD. When that will happen, I don't know, but I will grab it when it's released.In my humble opinion, this is Errol Flynn's most entertaining film, especially when \"Gentleman Jim\" Corbett's ring career begins in the film. Then it goes from a good film to a great one.Few people could play arrogant men and still come off as a likable good guy as well as Flynn could and this film is a perfect example of that. Reportedly, this was Flynn's favorite role and I believe that. You can just sense how much fun he was having here. Ward Bond also looks like he was really enjoying his role playing the famous John L. Sullivan. Bond, too, was never better.There is just the right amount of action boxing scenes in here and they are pretty well done, too. Corbett's family is fun to watch, too, as they carry on in the stands during Jim's matches. Out of the arena, Corbett's family's constant arguments and yelling can get a little too loud and annoying but they set the stage for a fitting conclusion.And speaking of the conclusion, Sullivan's speech to Corbett after the big fight is very touching and the highlight of the film. Some mean-spirited critics (Variety, for example) didn't like that ending nor the fact that much of the film is fictionalized but - duh - most films are fictionalized, like it or not. And, in this case, it made for a nice story and nice ending. (In real life, Corbett was a very soft-spoken true gentleman, not anything like Flynn's portrayal, but Flynn still make him a good guy.)This is one of the more entertaining classic films I have ever watched and I eagerly wait for the DVD.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44245aaac53e43449e8088bfe65c067a",
            "input": "Not good! Rent or buy the original! Watch this only if someone has a gun to your head and then....maybe.It is like claiming an Elvis actor is as good as the real King.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d59fb9d389a41a8bcc91d74e6281e72",
            "input": "Roy Rogers stars as Jesse James and his look-alike, gambler man Clint Burns. George \"Gabby\" Hayes is Mr. Rogers's ex-pal, Sheriff Gabby. Gale Storm (Jane Fillmore) and Sally Payne (Polly Morgan) are a noteworthy team, as two reporters on the lookout for stories about the elusive outlaw hero.Of course, mistaken identity / impersonation is a plot development, since Rogers essays a \"dual role\". Rogers is charming, as usual; but, there is nothing really elevating this his performance above the ordinary - any potential to deliver a memorable Jekyll/Hyde performance is done in by poor material. The better pair to watch are Ms. Storm and Ms. Paye as the St. Louis Journal reporters - they are the film's highlight. The songs are fine, though badly synched. *** Jesse James at Bay (1941) Joseph Kane ~ Roy Rogers, George 'Gabby' Hayes, Gale Storm",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a49bf07d941a46e5b06142bddcce15ae",
            "input": "Nothing in this film interested me. I thought the actors were asleep while they were performing. That's not laid-back Stanislofsky method, that's just walking-through and saying lines, I'm afraid. Kidman's performance is sad. The story is, however, mildly entertaining if you want to put up with the bad acting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66f120f0a9214df58e22b6189792f329",
            "input": "Intrigued by the synopsis (every gay video these days has a hunk on the cover; this is not necessarily to be construed as a good sign) I purchased BEN AND ARTHUR without knowing a thing about it. This is my second (and I assure you it will be my last) purchase of a CULTURE Q CONNECTION video. As far as I am concerned, this DVD is nothing but a blatant rip-off. I do not make this observation lightly – I am a major collector of videos, gay and mainstream, and I can state with some authority and without hesitation that BEN AND ARTHUR is quite simply the worst film I have ever sat through in my life. Period. My collection boasts over 1,600 films (93% on them on DVD) and of those, well over 300 are gay and lesbian themed. I hardly own every gay movie ever made, but I am comfortable in stating that I pretty much purchase almost every gay video of interest that gets released, and very often I buy videos without knowing anything about the film. Sometimes, this makes for a pleasant surprise - Aimee & Jaguar, It's In The Water, Urbania and Normal are all examples of excellent gay titles that I stumbled upon accidentally. So when I read on the box that BEN AND ARTHUR concerned a conflict between gay lovers and the Christian Right, one of my favorite subjects, I decided to take the plunge sight unseen, despite my previously disappointing purchase of another CULTURE Q CONNECTION title, VISIONS OF SUGAR PLUMS. That film was pretty bad, but compared to BEN AND ARTHUR, it viewed like GONE WITH THE WIND. So what was so wrong with BEN AND ARTHUR? Plenty! To begin with, the \"plot\" such as it was, was totally ridiculous. This film almost made me sympathetic to the Christian Right – we are asked to believe not only that a church would expel a member because his brother is gay, but that a priest would actually set up a mob style execution of a gay couple in order to save their souls (like this even makes sense). The writing is so poor that many scenes make no sense at all, and several plot points reflect no logic, follow-up or connection to the story. Murder and violence seem to be acceptable ends to the gay activist / right wing conflict on both sides, and the acting is so bad that it's difficult to imagine how anybody in this film got hired. The characters who are supposed to be straight are almost without exception clearly gay - and nelly stereotypes to boot; the gay characters are neither sexy nor interesting. This film is enough to put off anybody from buying gay themed videos forever, and the distributors should be ashamed of themselves. The only advantage this picture has over my other CULTURE Q Connection purchase, VISIONS OF SUGARPLAMS, is that this one has a soundtrack with clear dialogue. Hardly a distinction, since the script is so insipid that understanding the script only serves to make you more aware of how bad this film truly is. It is an embarrassment to Queer culture, and I intend to warn everyone I possibly can before they waste their money on it. At $9.95 this film would have been way overpriced; I understand that it's soon to be re-priced under $20, which is STILL highway robbery. I paid the original price of $29.95, and I never felt more cheated in my life. The only true laugh connected with this drivel is the reviews – I have seen \"user reviews\" for this film on numerous websites, and there is always one or two that \"praise\" the director / writer / actor in such a way that it's obvious that the reviewer is a friend of this Ed Wood wannabe. How sad. How desperate. I just wish IMDb would allow you to assign zero stars - or even minus zero. If ever a film deserved it, this is it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f138328aa9949f28b7f8c8e754bdefc",
            "input": "Ashanti is a very 70s sort of film (1979, to be precise). It reminded me of The Wild Geese in a way (Richard Burton, Richard Harris and Roger Moore on a mission in Africa). It's a very good film too, and I enjoyed it a lot.David (Michael Caine) is a doctor working in Africa and is married to a beautiful Ashanti woman called Anansa (Beverley Johnson) who has trained in medicine in America and is also a doctor. While they're doctoring, one day she is snatched by slavers working for an Arabic slave trader called Suleiman (played perfectly by Peter Ustinov, of all people). The rest of the film is David trying to get her back.Michael Caine is a brilliant actor, of course, and plays a character who is very determined and prepared to do anything to get his wife back, but rather hopeless with a gun and action stuff. He's helped out first by a Englishman campaigning against the slave trade that no one acknowledges is going on (Rex Harrison!), then briefly by a helicopter pilot (William Holden), and then by an Arab called Malik (Kabir Bedi). Malik has a score to settle with Suleiman (he is very intense throughout, a very engaging character), and so rides off with David to find him and get Anansa back - this involves a wonderful scene in which David fails miserably to get on his camel.Then there's lots of adventure. There's also lots of morality-questioning. The progress of the story is a little predictable from this point, and there are a few liberties taken with plotting to move things along faster, but it's all pretty forgivable. The question is, will David get to Anansa before Peter Ustinov sells her on to Omar Sharif (yes, of course Omar Sharif is in it!)?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bc9a22601ee4132b5112b3b2abb62d8",
            "input": "Not a knock on Korman as he was very funny on the Carol Burnett show. He was also good at playing secondary characters in Mel Brooks' movies (\"High Anxiety\" comes to mind). He is, however, not a person who can carry a movie in dueling roles no less. This one is basically a \"Gremlins\" knockoff, following a tradition of such movies as \"Critters\" and \"Ghoulies\". It is not a very good knockoff either, on par with \"Ghoulies\", but with a much lighter tone to it as it is no where near as dark as that movie got. In fact, this one is too light and frothy, and unfortunately many of the jokes end up falling flat. Though I did give it a 3 for a score, this is only because there is a movie that is even a worse \"Gremlin\" knockoff. If you watched Mystery Science Theater 3000 you know the one I am talking about...the infamous \"Hobgoblins\". This one has a guy finding a little critter in some underground place (I only saw this movie once a long time ago so I don't remember everything to clearly) and it starts out friendly enough. However, this creature quickly becomes unfriendly and of course more are spawned and that is the movie. More misses than hits in the joke department, and it is also really lame to see Korman playing the evil brother role. Best to skip this one, but then you may want to check it out just for kicks.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d0f3e3d2ff04e028d2d7f2c7fd9f806",
            "input": "The fourth \"Tremors\" feature goes back in time, to the year 1889. \"The Legend Begins\" in the small city of \"Perfection\", which was then \"Rejection, Nevada\". As the story begins, seventeen miners are killed by the ghastly \"Graboids\". Some of the characters in the present-day \"Tremors\" films have ancestors, both figurative and literal, in the past. Most obvious is the ever-returning Michael Gross (as Hiram Gummer). Unlike his descendant, Mr. Gross is inept with firearms; so, he hires gunslinger Billy Drago (as \"Black Hand\" Kelly) to shoot 'em up some \"Dirt Dragons\".This one takes some getting used to - as it takes place in the distant past. It's like a western with miniature versions of the original film's monster \"Graboids\". These tamer \"Dirt Dragons\" are nowhere near as terrorizing as their \"Tremors\" (1990) counterparts. Consequently, in this film, the characters spend an awful lot of time on the ground, which would not have happened in the original movie. And, it was weird to have the citizens give up the fight so quickly, when Gross temporarily decides to leave town. Why so helpless? Why didn't Brent Roam (as Juan Pedilla) immediately rally the people to fight without Gross? Disappointing.**** Tremors 4: The Legend Begins (2004) S.S. Wilson ~ Michael Gross, Brent Roam, Billy Drago",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ad954a2d5cf4af18a5dad0284ab6957",
            "input": "Am not familiar with the trilogy but came upon this film last night on Showtime. The film looked very well done with the set design and the cinematography, but the screenplay was stilted and wooden. The acting was fairly bad- thought the two female leads were serviceable. You never really believed anything the supporting actors said though. There were the stereotypes- bible-thumping Reverend without a hint of nuance, authoritative Captain, hot-headed soldier, etc. I am sorry to say that based on these deficiencies I clocked it straight away as Canadian without knowing it to be such-the Telefilm Canada end credits gave it away. I know I'm a horrible person.Maybe I missed something in the beginning but the hostility towards the girls is never explained. Here they are besieged in a fort by werewolves and the men are wasting time and energy brutalizing two young women for no reason. FOCUS people. There's a bit more of a pressing situation beyond your walls than whether or not these girls are lesbians-that's just my inference for the hostility directed towards them. If they can aim and fire a gun you might as well make nice with them. The question of their \"immortal soul\" can be resolved later.Also, I guess this relates to the rest of the trilogy, these girls are supposed to be the protagonists? One of them murdered the Indian guy at the end that saved one of their lives. I guess one is just a victim of her condition who can't be necessarily blamed for her actions, but the other is just a murderer who doesn't deserve her happy ending.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f337924142be4d759554e04fcf96d9ab",
            "input": "Due to the invention of a \"The Domestication Collar\", flesh-eating zombies are brought under control, and become productive members of society; however, they perform menial tasks. The servile dead attend to those living in fenced US 1950s-styled small towns, while untamed zombies roam around in \"The Wild Zone\". In the town of \"Willard\", pre-teen K'Sun Ray (as Timmy Robinson) lives with parents Carrie-Anne Moss and Dylan Baker (as Helen and Bill Robinson). Alas, the Robinsons are the only family on their street who do not own a zombie; their new neighbors, the Bottoms, have six. So, to keep up, the Robinsons obtain zombie Billy Connolly (as Fido).Unfortunately, Mr. Connolly's \"Domestication Collar\" is damaged by an old lady's walker, and he eats her; then, new and hungry zombies infest the town. Meanwhile, young Ray has grown attached to Connolly (the boy and his zombie are like TV's \"Timmy and Lassie\") and, the Robinson family find it difficult to cooperate with the controlling \"Zomcom\" authorities. \"Fido\" doesn't go far enough into its own intriguing \"Wild Zone\"; but, it is a colorful, stylish, and amusingly satirical addition to zombie film lore. Ray and the cast perform well, individually; with nubile zombie Sonja Bennett (as Tammy) and owner Tim Blake Nelson (as Theopolis) the most memorable pair. Director Andrew Currie and crew, including Rob Gray (design), Jan Kiesser (photography), Don MacDonald (music), and James Willcock (design), deservedly won awards.******* Fido (2006) Andrew Currie ~ K'Sun Ray, Carrie-Anne Moss, Billy Connolly, Dylan Baker",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58004dd1ed844b5dadca30e58b1570a2",
            "input": "The film portrays France's unresolved problems with its colonial legacy in Western (Francophone) Africa through the befuddled and complex psychoanalytical prism of a young woman, France (herein symbolically representing her nation). It is an often engaging and challenging portrait of a young woman's desire to come to terms with a traumatic moment in her past, in particular, and a nation's desire to reach out to the 'other' it once 'owned' and moulded. This is reflected in the way in which it centres entirely around the notion of travelling (or being in transit) from the present to the past; remembered realities to undeniable contemporary political and economic actualities.The characters all play a symbolic, albeit a limited and unconvincing role. France, meant to be a visual as well as a totemic representation of contemporary French society, leaves one indifferent to her plight as she seems still to be imbued with the same naiveté she enjoyed as a child-in fact as a child she seems more in possession of her reality. The rest of the rag-tag ensemble is just forgettable. The black Africans are, to say the least, offencive impressionistic portraits of former colonised peoples now colonised by the director's poor handling of her material. They are no more than a dark and moribund backdrop against which the blythe-like France wonders seeking a world she never knew, and hoping for one that can never be found in Cameroon.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ec265bb0df9413b974c1e54cb533345",
            "input": "Shintarô Katsu, who played the blind swordsman \"Zatoichi\" in a total of 27 movies, ends the Hanzo trilogy with this excellent film in which he gets to make love to a ghost, Mako Midori (Blind Beast).The big stick, used often in the pursuit of justice, is retired forever.Katsu was his usual impudent self as he pursued those who would steal from the treasury to lend at usurious amounts to those who could not afford to pay.The usual amazing swordplay and skill of the big guy was present, along with the blood.I'm going to miss him.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-650e11c3385a43fa8db6be6e6deb80fa",
            "input": "Disney has now made straight-to-video sequels to a good bunch of their many animated features. Two of these were made for their 1991 classic, \"Beauty and the Beast\". Well, these ones aren't really sequels, as they are both set in between the events of the first film. The first of these two straight-to-video films was \"Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas\", which seems to be disliked by quite a few fans of its theatrical predecessor, but I think that can usually be expected with sequels. However, this second one, \"Belle's Magical World\", is definitely inferior.The film features three short stories, all of which take place while Belle is in the castle, and the place is under the spell of the enchantress. The first is \"The Perfect Word\", where a misunderstanding at the table between Belle and the Beast leads to trouble, and neither wants to be the first to apologize. The next story is \"Fifi's Folly\", where Fifi and Lumiere's fifth anniversary is coming up, and Lumiere is unprepared, so Belle helps him. However, Fifi sees Lumiere practicing romance with Belle, and thinks they're actually in love. The film ends with \"The Broken Wing\". In this story, Belle takes care of a bird with a broken wing, but a bird in the castle will probably mean trouble if the Beast finds out, as he hates birds! The plot description I gave is for the original VHS version of Disney's third \"Beauty and the Beast\" movie. Apparently, in the DVD version, there is another story added called \"Mrs. Potts's Party\", but I've only seen the original version. However, since I highly doubt that one story would stand out as a classic over the rest, I see no point in watching the special edition. Anyway, the first thing I will say about \"Belle's Magical World\" is that the animation is very 2-dimensional compared to what we're used to from Disney, which would obviously disappoint many people. I didn't like \"Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas\" that much, but you certainly can't say the same about its animation. I'm sure the stories in \"Belle's Magical World\" could entertain many kids (mostly younger ones, I think), and each story has a moral, so they could also teach them some valuable lessons. However, for adults, the film really doesn't have a lot. I personally didn't find any good humour in it, found that the constant conflict between Belle and the Beast got tiring, and the stories did not impress me too much at all in any way (they're not very well written). In \"The Perfect Word\", the way Belle says to the Beast, \"You're acting rude... and foolish!\" is a bit cheesy, and I think there are quite a few other cheesy moments in these stories.By the time this straight-to-video movie first came out, I was around eleven or twelve years old. I don't know what I would have thought of it at the time, as I had lost interest in Disney by then, and it would be years before I would gain any of that interest back. Even when this movie was first released, I think I was a bit past the age group it was aimed at. I never saw \"Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas\" until a couple months ago, but unlike that film, I never even heard of this one until recently, I think just after seeing the first sequel to Disney's 1991 hit. Well, as much as I like the theatrical original, I wouldn't have been missing much if I never became aware of this film's existence. For little kids, I'm sure \"Belle's Magical World\" can be highly entertaining, and probably somewhat educational with its morals, but I do not recommend it for adult Disney fans.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a7c332f12e7428899442a45adf651fc",
            "input": "OK where do i begin?... This movie changed my life! The plot was seamless. James Cahill has out done himself. Initially after a first viewing i was disappointed that i hadn't seen it on the silver screen. However this was before exploring the DVD's many features!!!! Oh my god Jakes Cahill's commentary of the film was almost as flawless as his acting. he told of industry secrets used in the film that you only get with experience.I was so impressed by the other actors. The scene where the security guard is talking to the girl in the hallway, reminded me of some of my favorite blue (pornographic) movies. I am certainly with Gangsta when he expresses his disappointment with no sequel.I am still blown away with each viewing of the martial arts skills involved, matched only by the sign indicating the location of the library at the school... and possibly the guy playing a retard! All in all a timeless classic and the best film to come out of Europe in years! where my Oscars at dawn!!!!!!!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c99a7866143e409c9e5009961a9fc6de",
            "input": "Much underrated camp movie on the level of Cobra Woman, etc. Photographic stills resemble Rembrandt prints. Sometimes subtle dialog and hidden literate touches found throughout.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78818639395744a2b197959ed79dcafc",
            "input": "This is the kind of film you want to see with a glass of wine, the fire on, and with your feet up. It doesn't require that much brain-power to follow, so is very good after a long day. I would say it is very unrealistic - if you expecting anything serious, then don't bother, but it is very funny. Just the thought that a businessman would go so far as to agree to live in a slum for a while, and then actually get to enjoy it... I would definitely recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-734438fb1a8a4260abbe4e1b2c9c70a9",
            "input": "This is probably my favorite movie of all time. It is perfection in its storytelling. It will break your heart not because it's over sentimental but because you will truly feel every emotion these characters go through. You feel for Doggie because of the hopeless situation that existed for young girls in China at that time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05158e2680af4777b9b762f899009526",
            "input": "Last of the Johnny Weissmuller Tarzan films and a good thing too, as this is easily the worst of the 12 films he made over a period of 16 years. No mermaids are featured here either as a beautiful island woman tries to escape the clutches of her people, who worship a god and try to force her to be its bride. She finds Tarzan and Jane, who try to protect her. George Zucco is present as a potentially villainous High Priest but isn't used to his full advantage. Also on hand and worthy of mention is a hugely annoying guitar player/singer who goes into song every so often. Even the \"great\" Robert Florey can't aid this one.*1/2 (of four)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-779abfad57c24975af26de96b75b3d2b",
            "input": "After having seen \"Marrying Mafia\", I'd nearly lost my faith in Korean movie business. But this one brought my faith back.Leading female character who is university student forced to teach the spoiled, rich but charistmatic high school student guy. He is actually female character's age. Through some hilarious quarrells, these two end up being great friends.I was pleasantly surprised that newcomer kwan sang woo did his job with excellency. He was such a revelation!! Actress Kim ha nul was also charming as usual.This movie tried hard to avoid any cliches that can be seen in typical romantic comedies. And it didn't show us any unnecessary nude, sex scenes. It was brilliant, lovely , fresh, made me want to see it again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0464d9a8eb0d4dd6b9d1950eb0d1c083",
            "input": "In my book \"Basic Instinct\" was a perfect film. It had outstanding acting on the parts of Stone, Douglas and all the supporting actors to the tiniest role. It had marvelous photography, music and the noirest noir script ever. All of it adding up to a film that is as good as it will ever get!This sequel is the exact opposite, it cannot possibly get worse, bad acting and a lame script, combined with totally inept direction, this is really bad, boring, annoying. The only thing that somewhat keeps you concentrated is the relatively short wait for the next scene that is an exact re-enacted copy of the original. These copies are so bad they make you laugh and I laughed a lot in spite of myself, because it was like watching the demolishing of a shining monument. The only thing that is good in this horrible mess are the excerpts of the Jerry Goldsmith score of BI1. Michael Caton-Jones and the half-wit responsible for the script even included the \"There is no smoking in this room\" dialog in the interrogation scene and yes she sends her attorney (who is now a solicitor) away! I am sorry I have seen this awful film that should have never been made! It does damage to the original, so bad is it. The only redeeming value is the realization that cosmetic surgery (and I am sure Ms Stone afforded the best surgeon money can buy) can do a good job but can obviously not restore the perfection of the original. And what concerns the human body applies to film-making, too. There should be a law: Don't ever make a sequel to a perfect film!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e277d151f9404dc79e1e9babe95855e6",
            "input": "A very bad attempt at a young spinal tap. At least the music in spinal tap was good.This is really a very sad case of Hollywood nepotism at it's worst. A bunch of Hollywood execs, bad musicians and producers create some \"poopie\" show so their kids can be in the spotlight. Oh please!!! The potty humor was even bad. I hate this stuff when there is really incredibly talented kids (musicians, actors and artists) out there busting their butts to have success and this crap comes along.Help u all!!!! Why wasn't Gene Simmons in it??? Ameriac's taste in entertainment is going down the toilet.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c15d41ebb11341de9e0540210b6b86ee",
            "input": "Director Samuel Fuller concocts a brilliant visual set-up: cocky pickpocket unwittingly lifts some microfilm from a woman's purse; it turns out she's a courier for the Communists, and now she and the grifter are being watched by the police. The Film Noir Formula is all its glory--before the ingredients became clichés--including waterfront locales, floozies, saxophones on the soundtrack, and one hell of a climactic fistfight. Performances by Richard Widmark and Jean Peters are right on target, and the smart, sharp script is quite colorful. Fabulous Thelma Ritter received an Oscar nomination for knockout supporting role as a \"professional stoolie\". Exciting, atmospheric, tough as nails. *** from ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b4ee154fd884bb086b1e48d1f7032b9",
            "input": "Kurt Russell is at his best as the man who lives off his past glories, Reno Hightower. Robin Williams is his polar opposite in a rare low key performance as Jack Dundee. He dropped the Big Pass in more ways than one.You'll see some of the most quotable scenes ever put into one film, as Jack hisses at a rat, Reno poses, and the call of the caribou goes out.Don't miss this classic that isn't scared to show football in the mud the way it should be played.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd0820a6f8d94ca4baddf5facc4e899d",
            "input": "I don't hand out ten star ratings easily. A movie really has to impress me, and The Bourne Ultimatum has gone far beyond that. Furthermore, this trilogy has come together so nicely, that I believe it to be one of the greatest motion picture trilogies of our time. Though all three films could not be any more different from the Ludlum novels, they still stand as a powerful landmark in cinematic achievement. The Bourne Ultimatum made me want to cry that the series was complete, yet I could not even attempt to stop smiling for hours.From the moment that the opening title appeared, I knew we were in for a ride. Paul Greengrass has done it again. Everything we love from the previous Bourne films is here once again: the action, the dialogue, and of course the shaky camera. However for me, that last one was never a problem. I think it adds to the suspense.I will be back to see this film several times before it is released on DVD, simply because it is genius. It is a perfectly satisfying conclusion, and should stand the test of time as a fantastic movie, and altogether, an unforgettable trilogy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-282239a94f3749eb9dd3d0e98f04af83",
            "input": "It's difficult to put into words the almost seething hatred I have of this film. But I'll try:Every other word was an expletive, the sex scenes were uncomfortable, drugs were rampant and stereotyping was beyond the norm, if not offensive to Italian-Americans.I'm not saying the acting was terrible, because Leguizamo, Sorvino, Brody, Espisito et. al, performed well. But...almost every character in the film I despised. Not since The Bonfire of the Vanities have I disliked every character on screen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8fd22d357054a1680cbe4ae27c79026",
            "input": "I'll say this to begin with:...Why, oh why, can't WB do what these short film directors do? Sandy is obviously an amazing Director, and deserves some credit from WB and DC. But I guess they're kinda put on edge when a man with a $12,000 budget can make a super-hero fan drool. The World's Finest is one of the best short films I've ever seen, Trailer or not.I think choosing a Bodybuilder(Mike O'Hearn) to play Superman was a genius choice. Let's face it people, Superman is no super-model. He may be handsome, but a GQ Stud he is not. And I don't know what that guy a few comments above me was on, but Superman is actually pretty beefy(Have you ever actually read a Superman comic?). I Guess that fact alone just floors me...It seems like such an obvious choice to get someone with some actual muscle-mass to play a Super-hero, rather than a pretty-face. Same Thing for Batman, Bartram is in incredible shape, and an excellent Batman...I don't know guys...If given a bigger budget, and his own movie...I think Bale and Bartram would be Neck and Neck. Bottom line, This is one of only a scant few of Super-Hero movies with actors that actually LOOK the part.The Acting is pretty nice as well. I don't know what every one is talking about, O'Hearn isn't that bad. He's damn convincing as Superman, and Bartram...Well, he IS Batman. I mean, come on people, this movie had a $12,000 dollar budget, what were you expecting?. Everyone Else is great too, except Two-Face seems a tad crazier than usual...But hey, we only have Tommy-Lee Jones as a reference. Oh, Lois is pretty hot too.The SFX are flippin' sweet too. I mean, Seeing Superman lift the car up...MAN!, how cool is that. Versus the \"Tank\" scene in Grayson, I may have to put this one above that, since Mike actually looks like he's flying, and with ease. The Flying sequences left something to be desired, but once again, with a bigger budget...Oh, And he even used a Batmobile!(It was probably a Model, but it looked damned convincing).All in all, this trailer's only downfall was a lack of a serious budget. And WB refuses to admit that Collora is a credible Director, and NEEDS to be apart of some kind a Project...But no, they'll(Like most of the Marvel projects) just keep getting these hack directors who show almost no regard for the fans and what they care about, and keep churning out these gamble movies. Thank god Superman Returns was a hit, or that seriously would've been the end of it. World's Finest is excellent, and in my book, counts as a Superhero Movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38f5b93c7ccc49c597be5aa291cd423a",
            "input": "Hitchcock displays his already developed understanding for visuals in this early silent film. The plot of the film, involving two boxers fighting over a girl, is straight-forward drama without much to recommend it. Hitchcock's talent, though, is found in his stunning use of images. Nearly every shot is filled with visual symbols. Especially memorable is the jewelry that one boxer gives the girl just before she marries the other boxer. He slides it up her arm in a clearly sexual way and with one simple movement Hitch has shown us all we need to know. The boxing scenes are handled well with some interesting point-of-view shots that again prove how far ahead of his time Hitchcock was. The film also gives insight into his later treatment of women. The object of the boxers' desires is driven by money and lust, not reason or love. The only other women in the film are either beautiful party girls who make open offers of sex or old crones who help to destroy happy relationships. All in all, the Ring is a must for anyone interested in Hitchcock's early work and his development as a visual storyteller.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cf1308e94e44ffa9b9d5ce61f353e63",
            "input": "This is some of the worst acting I have ever seen. I love Almereyda's Nadja, but this is just absolute dreck. Aside from a few moments of interesting cinematography and music this film is just nonstop bad acting and dumb material. Jared Harris is particularly bad, but no one in this is remotely good. The plot is a joke, but not the haha kind. I don't even know if you can forgive movies that are this bad. Please erase the last hour and a half of my life. How did this director make Nadja and Another Girl Another Planet?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1eadde5993084ff98cb6248205404662",
            "input": "I know a lot of people don't like this movie, but I just think it is adorable. There's not much I can say, but the movie is a feel-good movie I guess. The songs are beautiful, the costumes are beautiful, the voices are beautiful, and there are a lot of funny lines in the movie, especially as Briggitta learns about the do's and don't's of society. If you like musicals, I'd say you'd like this one!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3e2e5a3ed7c472e81c1058a94192037",
            "input": "How hard is it to write a watchable film with Vince Vaughn, Paul Giamatti and Kevin Spacey? Apparently VERY difficult for the writers here.I still have no idea how Santa is younger and looks 20 years older than Vince (who plays the BIG brother). I must have missed that part of the story but in reality, it really didn't matter. Many scenes seemed out of place and contrived; the kind of \"funny notion\" scenes that are drug out WAY too far to where any sense of comedy is lost.The director/producer tried to go \"tear jerker\" at the end, which would have been suitable if ANYTHING leading up that point had been worth following.Ugh, major disappointment. I can see how some people might enjoy this OK, since many people will take any garbage they're fed, but I would strongly encourage waiting for DVD on this one. NOT worth the $23,978 it takes to get your family to the movies these days.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa99f03dbaa745daa144f3b13b4139a6",
            "input": "From the acting, direction, scriptwriting and art direction this film is just entirely ill conceived and the money would have been better spent on shoes for land mine victims. When did we get so sad that they have to fill a a children's movie with sexual innuendo to keep the parents attention.Dr Suess is rolling in his grave right now, what with the \"dirty ho\" \"S.H.I.T\" and fake erection scenes etc etc etc. Its shameful how they trade on the name of Suess to get the parents to bring their kids, throw in the profanities to try for the teens and a few sad parents who won't watch a a film with their child if there is no T & A. Greed greed and more greed.Compare this to the classic children's films and we can get a disturbing view of world is turning into. These guys should stick to making MTV videos. How on earth this movie got >400 votes as a perfect 10 is beyond me. (unless its the directors family)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eff3d2f4339b412b8ee4b4b0daf73d55",
            "input": "The fourth in the \"Dirty Harry\" series, this film features one of the most despicable, ugliest, unlikable, profane, disgusting females I have ever seen on film: \"Ray Perkins,\" played by Audrie Neenan. She is the modern nasty low-life version of the 1945 \"Detour\" character, \"Ann Savage.\"Her foul mouth and gutter attitude turned me off so much I never watched this film again until I acquired a profanity filter which shut her up....and least some of her! Then I could enjoy the rest of the movie.Everywhere \"Harry Callahan\" (Clint Eastwood) goes, violence immediately follows.....within minutes! It happens so often it's almost laughable but it makes for a fast-moving, entertaining film with a satisfying ending as all the scumbag villains are eliminated one-by-one.This is a very sophomoric film that appeals to our base instincts.....and connects, sad to say. Most of us like to see these dirtballs get it in the end, and who does it better than Dirty Harry?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-822b4e9782b74b1ab7b47cb5a9ce1652",
            "input": "Very good except for the ending which was a huge disappointment.The script was very good as was the acting. The visuals were often very grainy but this in a way added to the film as the snowy features were in good places that helped create a mood towards the film. This affect was ruined by the extremely unbelievable ending. I was going to give this film an 8 out of ten but the ending knocked it down a point to 7 because it seemed to depart radically from the first 75 minutes of the movie and seemed quite forced at the end to make the film makers look clever. This movie though was much better than films with quite a lot larger budgets and seemed to be filmed like a home movie with some extra equipment. Not much in the way of special effects as these go but for suspense it was very good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0aea383e49e4dedb099b59ebea2459c",
            "input": "I watched this movie as I liked the plot, a group of strangers are held captive trying to figure out how they're connected.The setting and the premise were obviously influenced by the first (and best) Saw movie & although there wasn't much action the story moved at a relatively good pace.There was comedy relief ion the form of the two bickering 'Alpha males' and it was a welcome surprise (for me anyway)to see Melissa Joan Hart hasn't given up on acting yet.A few things let it down for me personally; 1. The paedophile was way over characterised making him get turned on by everything from children to dead bodies.2. MJH's line about her cop ex 'getting her into this' when in reality, he was the least deserving person to be there, he hadn't KNOWINGLY contributed to the events leading up to their capture.3. The ending..... what sort of movie just ends in the middle of something going on? There was no resolution, no cliff hanger, no obvious end... it just ends.And for that alone I dropped two stars off my rating. The first 2 points I would let slide but not the end!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73659ad3e61f4248a35e3335031ef11f",
            "input": "The plot of GOODNIGHT MR TOM on paper makes it seem we are in for a large dose of maudlin,sickly sentiment.But,talented director Jack Gold is an expert on touching the emotions in the right manner,and it emerges instead as a compelling,deeply moving wartime drama with excellent production and lead performances.One of the best,if not the best TV movies of the 1990's which possibly would've had even greater success if it had been released in the cinemas.The evacuation of children to countryside towns and villages in World War II was of course a common practice,but in the case of the young boy here was doubly important because of a wretched home life in the UK's capital.The horrors of war on the home front are not drifted over though,and the construction of the film until it's throat-lumping,misty-eyed ending leaves us with a sense of optimism despite what has happened before.It is almost(but not quite)worthy of comparison with the finale to IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE(1946).All in all,a modern classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82948261be52412f8eb5150860d5893a",
            "input": "This is just as good as the original 101 if not better. Of course, Cruella steals the show with her outrageous behaviour and outfits, and the movie was probably made because the public wanted to see more of Cruella. We see a lot more of her this time round. I also like Ioan Gruffudd as Kevin, the rather bumbling male lead. To use Paris as the climax of the movie was a clever idea. The movie is well worth watching whatever your age, provided you like animals.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f8410421c8f4913bffdb2dcbf529bff",
            "input": "Most book adaptations are bad but this film left out key parts of the storyline and changed the description and some characters. They rewired the storyline and combined scenes and changed the order. They added ridiculous things into it that never happened in the book and would never happen.If i hadn't read the book beforehand it would have been an incredibly dull film, it didn't make you care about the characters, like them or dislike them. It turns the characters into jokes.Awful.Ridiculous.Waste of two hours of my life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d63b1c31355e4cd89ea130aa95a813e5",
            "input": "This movie is horrible. Everything in it has been done before. There is nothing original. I cannot stand when writers don't come up with their own plots.A girl makes a wish on her 13th birthday and wakes up as an adult. Hmm, sounds a lot like a movie in the 80s called Big. What is even more annoying is Jennifer Garner's acting. She doesn't act like she is 13 she just acts like she is stupid.From then on, you can guess the whole plot. She gets a good job and it just so happens that a friend she had at 13 works with her. Wow, how awesome! But, no....her friend is bad and turns on her, trying to get her job. But, of course, she wins in the end when she comes up with a \"great\" idea.There's also a dancing scene in the movie that I've seen a thousand times before.I hate this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c587efd3cf354c6bba3924caa5143068",
            "input": "When teenagers go on a trip in a camper van there are many clichés that you can guarantee will follow.1)The teenagers will be warned not to go where they are going by a crazy local. Dan Van Husen handles that with ridiculous exposition about deadly Sirens. What, who, how and why are handled in one almost unintelligible burst. 2)The van will break down. 3)Whilst looking for help the group will be split up and be picked off one by one by whatever monster they have been warned about.4)They will find a house inhabited by a madman, he will capture them. 5) The house will have a phone but it will not work, it will be disturbingly decorated, there will be flickering neon light, spiders and maggots. 6)The madman will catch them as they try to escape in a vehicle that won't start (here the high speed getaway was to be made on a tractor). 7)The madman will be seemingly killed only to come back from the dead for a cheap, weak scare and will then be killed properly. 8)Only a girl will be left alive from the group. 9)There will be an unnecessary twist at the end. Add to these elements naked Sirens (who the characters seem to react to in startling different ways despite the fact that everyone that sees them is supposed to fall into lust with them immediately) that seduce and kill the teens, throats being ripped out and bodies being pulled in half and you have something resembling a twelve year old boys dream movie.I think it is only fair to say that my opinion of the director and his previous work is as low as it is possible to be but I am happy to point out that there are a few elements that boarder on pleasurable and are a great improvement on his previous film, Darkhunters, which is one of the worst films I have ever seen. At times the cinematography is very good, the music and editing are a cut above his previous films and some other low budget horror movies. I was impressed to hear that it was achieved with a third of the money spent on the previous monstrosity. However, the worst things about this movie are not to be found in the body of the film, it is ultimately a mildly diverting if pointless movie that has been done time and time again, but amongst the DVD extras.If you do rent this film I implore you to listen to the director's commentary it is beyond belief. There is more to say about this than the film itself. One staggering part of the commentary is the director's claim that the film is cliché leaden because it was a preconceived idea. He says it is a deliberate attempt to use all of the clichés and openly he wonders if \"people will get it\". I'm afraid to say that if this is supposed to be a clever nod and a wink to films of the past and the genre clichés within them then it is not wittily scripted enough, acted in an appropriate tone nor directed with enough style to work. If this film was made to order it leads me to ask one question; \"What was the point?\" This is s afilm that just slips right into the canon of bad horror movies, any attempt to do something clever or different haven't worked.The next nugget of brilliance is a conversation about the snobbery towards digital film formats. They rightly point out that digital is often synonymous with cheapness and ease of use. However, the best moment of the conversation comes when they bemoan the fact that when Michael Mann makes a film in the format he is branded as a visionary. There is a simple distinction to be made here; Mann is a talented director who will use the format to fit his story and style, Roberts is a horror hack who uses it to produce bottom shelf genre pictures . I think the differences are obvious and the comparison is not only arrogant but redundant.The best moment is reserved for Robert's comments about people who have taken the time to review his previous film. Those who didn't like it are generalised as 'geeks' and he even goes as far as to single out specific people for having the nerve to voice their opinion in forums that encourage them to do just that. I must admit I was slightly disappointed that my review of his last film wasn't singled out for ridicule. The tirade goes further as the group joke about Norwegian reviewers, complete with 'hilarious' accents to imply that people from Norway wouldn't know a good film simply because of where they are born. As always these sorts of comments say more about those saying them than those they are targeting, they simply make the director and his friends look ignorant.The package in rounded out with a tasteful featurette about how the Sirens were cast. Robert's swears blind in voice over, 'I didn't want to make a film that was like Baywatch' as we see audition tapes of topless and naked girls writhing around on the ground. There is also a simpering, self-indulgent documentary about the making of Darkhunters during which Robert's says that a reviewer has claimed that Forest is \"The best British film in years\". I don't know who he is trying to convince. At one point in the commentary track Robert's says jokingly \"I can see people sitting at home saying \"this isn't amazing, its sh$t\" he isn't wrong.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-479902b917a44dec8342ea01ea1cc0e0",
            "input": "DIG! is funny, fun, amusing, interesting, stylish, and very well done. Knowing that it was made on such a shoestring budget over 7 years it is amazing that such a story can be told, especially with such style and substance. If you are a music fan or documentary fan this is a must see.Focusing on The Brian Jonestown Masssacre and The Dandy Warhols over the years is a brilliant way to show the contrast between a decent band who meets with moderate success through perseverance and the ability to compromise and a genius megalomaniacal lead singer backed up by a varied cast of characters who sabotage their own success through drugs, alcohol, and insanity. If I did not know that this is footage of real people, I would swear it was an incredibly well written and imaginative scripted piece. The story is compelling, concise, and simply amazing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b97096a053f74042895f012c747b908c",
            "input": "Outragously entertaining period piece set in the 30s, it is a spin on the classic cliffhanger series, as much as \"Raiders of the Lost Ark\", only done on a low budget and much campier by director Michael Anderson. The opening scenes laces liberal amount of gothic art nuveau, predating Batman by two decades. Starring Ron Ely (Tarzan) as a perfectly cast hero and the gorgeous Pamela Hensley as the local latina Mona tagging on to our hero on a goldhunt in the non-existent latin american country of Hidalgo. Best line, our hero to Mona, holding a fist to her chin just as you expect him to be tender with her and give her a hug: \"Mona, you're a brick!\"Paul Wexler's ham-and-cheese blackhat, Captain Seas is a an absolute delight. Expect a little \"Raiders..\", a dash of \"Batman\", a little \"The Lost World\", a little \"Lost Horizons\" and a whole lot of campiness and you'll get it just right. Watch out for cult favorite Michael Berryman in a small part as undertaker and enjoy the campy use of John Philip Sousa's patriotic music. A prime candidate for DVD release, it is certainly overdue. An unmissable treat for the whole family. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8be1a434f663458dab0d5a09444070a6",
            "input": "Soap Opera about a small town married woman (Kay Francis) who works at the local newsstand, performs as leading lady in her local playhouse, but dreams of becoming a star on Broadway. When a famous actor who is a ham, a windbag, and a womanizer to boot, arrives in town she visits him in his room with dreams of him giving her tips to stardom - he pretends his valet is his \"manager\" tricking her into believing she has all it takes but \"experience\" to become a big star. Her husband finds out and punches the guy resulting in the actor's unexpected death - which leads to a murder trial and even more unexpected: a life prison sentence for hubby. Next thing you know she's joined a traveling Burlesque show in hopes of one day making it to Broadway and making enough money to get her man's freedom - all the while her baby is sleeping in a trunk!This film has a pretty interesting plot, well, a bit far-fetched perhaps, but very melodramatic (with tons of melodramatic music to make sure you get it) - all *greatly* enhanced by the strong, emotional performance given by Kay Francis - she just makes this film. Also helping here is the well-done acting by Minna Gombell in her role as a \"getting close to forty\" older lady who works the burlesque and befriends Kay. Worth seeing, especially for Kay Francis fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b69932533de94cf2bdf19a0ede9fc39f",
            "input": "A longtime fan of Bette Midler, I must say her recorded live concerts are my favorites. Bette thrills us with her jokes and brings us to tears with her ballads. A literal rainbow of emotion and talent, Bette shows us her best from her solid repertoire, as well as new songs from the \"Bette of Roses\" album. Spanning generations of people she offers something for everyone. The one and only Divine Diva proves here that she is the most intensely talented performer around.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ea1e53c308447c9ad0cd87a67096c34",
            "input": "OK, I know that a lot of people will probably resent this review as Watership Down is a \"classic\" and a standard part of most people's childhood, but seeing this film for the first time at the tender age of 18, I must admit: I really hated it.We watched this film because my sister had read the book and really enjoyed it, and many people who whimpered at the very words \"Watership Down\"- their memories of seeing the film as children and having their emotions torn at the seams- recommended it. To be honest, I wish I hadn't bothered. I gave it the benefit of the doubt; generally I don't like to stop watching a film half way through. This was an exception. It was really, really, excruciatingly, sickeningly dull. This film was possibly the slowest thing I've ever watched (imagine a doped-up snail in space), and really didn't \"do it\" for me. The art was alright; the backgrounds were nicely made if not a little bland and twee, yet the rabbits themselves were not very endearing and the animation was quite jumpy and poorly produced.I'm not going to go into huge details about the storyline; basically it is the tale of a group of rabbits who leave their warren due to the infiltration of humans in the area. Generally a moralistic story about the perils of human interactions on the environment, it uses anthropomorphic rabbits to put the message across. For me, I kind of wished that they would get gassed, not because I'm a horrible sadistic person, but because the characters were uninspiring, annoying, dull and generally quite rude (oh I'm so terribly English). I found that I was constantly looking at the clock whilst watching the film, and it took a whole 20 minutes or so before anything actually happened, and even that was a terrible anticlimax.If I were to praise it in any way, I'd have to admit that the concept of showing children the perils of building on the countryside and hopefully unveiling the arrogance of humans etc etc is quite well-meaning. Maybe it is all in general sanctimonious and preachy, but the message it's trying to put forth is good in its nature. The musical score was not bad, too.So, to conclude, this film is pretty poor. I couldn't watch it the whole way through, or I'd probably be forced to eat my own legs in sheer boredom. Granted, it isn't \"Torque\" bad, but it still doesn't rate highly in my eyes, so I've given it a 2/10.Hope this helps.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a1faf2be3da48fda2c60d624aef6feb",
            "input": "This movie is simply not worth the time or money spent. Full of clichés and a plot that makes absolutely no sense ! I cant believe that so many people have given this awful movie a 10. My guess is they are stooges of the movie maker. If I could give this movie a zero, I would. Too bad IMDb doesn't allow that. The only reason I watched it because I went with a friend who really wanted to see it. Whats sad is that I never had great expectations from this movie to begin with and yet I felt short changed. Take my word, don't waste your $8 on this piece of trash. The only entertainment I got out of the movie was making fun of the directors name. In all, highly NOT RECOMMENDED !",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9850830e64c4f6280f0fe84fb516df5",
            "input": "I have never been one to shy away from saying that most action films just plain do nothing for me. Most times they are blatant vehicles to blow stuff up, show off sexy models, and throw any semblance of reality or intelligence out the window. With that said, the Bourne series has been fantastic. Doug Liman ushered in a new take on action by using a more cinema verite style, showing the fights in full force and making our super spy someone we can relate to emotionally as well as humanly. This is not the sci-fi absurdity that was Bond (before they did an overhaul in the style of this series no less). There was a lot to worry for when the Bourne Supremacy came out. With director Paul Greengrass taking over, what could have been a second-hand copy of the original ended up being an improvement in style and flair. The stakes were raised and the story was enhanced because of it. Greengrass needs to be given a ton of credit for being able to keep up appearances with the latest installment, The Bourne Ultimatum. In what is an amazing conclusion to a top-notch trilogy, the action is brought to a new level and story and performance are never compromised.Once again, Bourne is brought into the minds of the CIA by false pretenses. Someone has leaked information about the Treadstone upgrade called Blackbriar and once Bourne is located trying to converse with the newswriter who broke the story, he is assumed to be the mole. Only Pamela Landy, she who was on the case to find him in Supremacy, knows that he can't be the one. Bourne's motive has always been to stay clear of the government and live his life in peace. It has been the CIA who keeps bringing him back into the open to wreak havoc on them. What ends up transpiring is that Bourne wants to know the source as well to finally find out the truth of who he is and what made him into a killer. The film, then, becomes a chase against time and each other to find the source and see if the government can close the breach and tie off all loose ends, or if Bourne can get his revenge on those who took his life from him.In what is probably the simplest storyline of the series, with only one chase lasting the entirety of the story, it has possibly the biggest cast of characters and turning over of loyalties to expose the corruption that has been behind the full story progression. This is not a detriment at all, however, as it allows for more fights and car chases that work in full context to the plot. Admission to this film is worth it for the apartment fight, between Bourne and the CIA's second asset, alone. The chase jumping through windows in Madrid is cool on its own, but when they finally meet up, we get a ten minute or so fight that is as invigorating to watch as any scene you'll see. Also, rather than using a massive car chase as a climatic set piece like in the first two films, we instead get around three small scale road races, just as intense, but staggered enough to never bog the action down into monotony.After five years of waiting, we also find out the origin of our favorite operative with heart and feeling. By the end of the film we will find out what has been the cause of all the espionage and destruction that has taken place around him. No one could have done it better than Matt Damon. He has the physique and attitude to be believable in the action sequences, but also the range to pull off the moments of intelligence and cat and mouse correspondence with those against him. Joan Allen reprises her role with the same amount of dedication to her job, but also a bit more disenchantment for what is going on around her after how Brian Cox's character, from the first two films, took matters into his own hands. Needing a role in that mold, we are given a nice turn from David Strathairn. Like Cox, he is working at the top of the food chain and answers to no one when making a decision. With as much trying to cover up any connections to his bosses of the Blackbriar program as he is trying to do his duty to his country, you can never quite gauge what he will be capable of doing. Even the little guys do a wonderful job, like Paddy Considine as the reporter who starts the leak at the center of everything, Albert Finney as a man from Bourne's past and possibly key to his origin, and Edgar Ramirez as one of the CIA's operatives sent to take Bourne out. Ramirez is a nice addition to the role that has been successfully played by Clive Owen (Identity), Karl Urban, and Martin Csokas (Supremacy). He doesn't talk much, if at all, but he has the look and robotic efficiency down pat and hopefully will get more roles to show what he can do post a nice turn in Domino.In the end, one has to applaud Paul Greengrass for continuing to exceed expectations and bring this series to a conclusion that builds on the success of its predecessors rather than destroy them. His skill at the close-up hand-held look is astonishing and has the same kinetic energy as Tony Scott, but without quite the seizure-inducing cuts. Rather than feel like over- production, his use of hand-held enhances the environment and puts you directly into the action. Let's also credit cinematographer Oliver Wood, who shot all three Bourne films. He was able to work with both directors and work his style into a nice harmony with them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6e5515008a44787ad2cf9716dbb706f",
            "input": "... This isn't the first time Stanley blurred the distinction between genres to such great effect, either. In Dr. Strangelove you had a comedy about a horrific situation, and here the basis is a terrifying scenario which actually yields some very funny moments. Slow-burning madness and attempting to kill one's family isn't hilarious of course, but the dialogue is very knowing (\"five months of peace is just what I want... \") and there is a terrific drinking scene which would be riotous if you included just one type of spirit, but is spine-chilling when you factor in the other.I disagree with those who say that the hotel has a negligible effect on Jack Torrance in the filmed version. The cues Nicholson provides the audience as an actor merely hint at the potential for madness, which is only reinforced when we learn that the head of the family has struggled with alcoholism and is emotionally distant from his wife and son. The environment that he is in, however, then absorbs those personality defects and unleashes them upon his consciousness. In much the same way as buildings are sometimes thought to soak up events that happen there, the hotel feeds on the frailties of a troubled but sane man, and uses his weaknesses against him to eventually take him beyond the point of no return. He may have dormant flaws in his personality before he arrives, but to me the Overlook itself is the trigger that sets them off.Kubrick's cold and detached approach to directing works splendidly for a chilly horror film, and the unpredictable force of nature that is Jack Nicholson teeters all the time between making you giggle and scaring the wits out of you. When he explodes, you won't be sure how far he can go. Together they made a great team and with a blend of their talents gave us a classic. If you want a great viewing experience, then this is an example that well and truly shines...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eaf7a6b493d642faa8340c05839f1827",
            "input": "I couldn't agree more with Nomad 7's and I A HVR's comments. A perfect laid back Sunday morning movie. The humor is subtle (exact opposite of \"slapstick\" as one misguided commenter noted).But what always ceases to amaze me is how often I find myself wanting to come back to this movie over and over. I originally copied this movie onto VHS about 12 years ago when it was premiered on one of those Pay Cable free weekend previews(HBO maybe?). Had never heard of it previously. Don't know why it wasn't marketed that well. ?? When DVD's were released en mass, it was one of the first movies I replaced. A great combination of cast and writing. Plus, the back drop of Montana wilderness doesn't hurt things either (beautiful).It's probably not the type of comedy for everyone, but what is? If Adam Sandler type stuff is up your alley, this probably won't be your cup of tea. This movie needs your full attention. The humor is mostly in the dialog.I believe my next viewing will probably be about my 12th. But I still know that when it gets to the scenes like the one where the hoods of the police cars start blowing off, I'm going to loose it (Ed O'Neill's face is PRICELESS!). Recommended 110%.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8866449f500245f7b9eec48691c52fb8",
            "input": "While the original titillates the intellect, this cheap remake is designed purely to shock the sensibilities. Instead of intricate plot-twists, this so-called thriller just features sudden and seemingly random story changes that serve only to debase it further with each bizarre development. Worst of all, replacing the original spicy dialog is an overturned saltshaker full of unnecessary four-letter words, leaving behind a stark, but uninteresting taste.There was promise--unfulfilled promise. The prospect of Michael Caine pulling off a Patty Duke-like Keller-to-Sullivan graduation is admittedly intriguing. Unfortunately, this brilliant and respected actor only tarnished his reputation, first by accepting the role in this horribly re-scripted nonsense and then by turning in a performance that only looks competent when compared to Jude Law's amateurish overacting.If you haven't seen the classic original, overlook its dated visuals and gimmicks. Hunt it down, watch it, and just enjoy a story-and-a-half. As for the remake, pass on this insult to the original.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51ac7f09145b4b5ab5c9ab5ac9ec3926",
            "input": "A woman, Mujar (Marta Belengur) enters a restaurant one morning at &:35 unaware that a terrorist has kidnapped the people in said restaurant & is making them act out a musical number in this strange yet fascinating short film, which I only saw by finding it on the DVD of the director/writer's equally fascinating \"Timecrimes\". It had a fairly catchy song & it somehow brought a smile to my face despite the somber overall plot to the short. I'm glad that I stumbled across it (wasn't aware it would be an extra when I rented the DVD) and wouldn't hesitate at all to recommend it to all of my friends.My Grade: A-",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6844fea8ee234e6094c477c931a94a98",
            "input": "This is the only full length feature film about the world of bridge. I found the first 10 minutes a bit slow, but after that, the movie is absolutely perfect in describing professional bridge players and how they go about earning a living. Some of the scenes are very funny. I don't think that a non-bridge player would get the charm of this movie. Some of the dresses are really beautiful, pity the movie is in black and white - I can only imagine what they would look like in color. The way the media are portrayed is absolutely hilarious. There is no way on earth bridge will ever be like that. Watch it as soon as you can, and tell your friends about it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6d18a58aaee466488d9b24f0f674cf7",
            "input": "Enough is enough...sometimes they just need to stop making movies based on a concept that is long dead. The first Tremors movie was great. The second one was ridiculous. The third one was nauseating. The tv series was depressingly awful. And this movie just drives the stake deeper.Basically another excuse for cheap computer effects and puppetry, now we have the series set in the Wild West, in the 1800's, and they fight graboids. Like a rehash of the first one, they have to learn how to beat them all over again. Mildly entertaining I suppose. Otherwise this straight-to-video release, just like Tremors 2 and 3, is just going way too far. Oh and I continue to wonder how there is never any record of these events taking place...did they just simply forget to record this unprecedented event? I think something like this would be history-making, so our pals in the first film wouldn't be so unprepared. Movies like this that ruin the original just make me crazy. Avoid this garbage.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f3c1f2599891449c804ae30c76ef9c02",
            "input": "I just finished watching \"El Otro\". I have always taken my hat off to Julio Chavez's performances, as he is a great actor, but this movie is really depressing and slow. I guess that it would have been even worse if it wasn't for Julio. Anyways, this is definitely a film that you will never understand if you are not from Argentina, and even if you are, I would advise you not to rent this movie in order to have a nice time with your girlfriend, boyfriend, family or friends... it is really depressing and incredibly slow, and the plot does not make a lot of sense neither. Probably the director wanted to show the fragility of the human life, but what he does is bore and impress the audience with scenes that shock you a little bit. It gives you something to think about, but not in a good way. Overall, I definitely didn't like this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1aeba0ecf5c4d47acd26693f637ab05",
            "input": "Domestic Import was a great movie. I laughed the whole time. It was funny on so many levels from the crazy outfits to the hilarious situations. The acting was great. Alla Korot, Larry Dorf, Howard Hesseman, and all the others did an awesome job. Because it is an independent film written by a first-time writer, it doesn't have the clichés that are expected of other comedies, which was such a relief. It was a unique and interesting and you fall in love with the characters and the heart-warming story. I heard it was based on a true story? If so, then that is hilarious (and amazing!). I highly recommend this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a849d53d602b43dda549bb438e60e156",
            "input": "I hate this movie. It is a horrid movie. Sean Young's character is completely unsympathetic. Her performance is wooden at best. The storyline is completely predictable, and completely uninteresting. I would never recommend this film to anyone. It is one of the worst movies I have ever had the misfortune to see.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83e4102fcb764bc9ba839a899cefe5c2",
            "input": "I must admit I am a big fan of South Park and was expecting Basketball to be funny but nowhere near as good as it turned out to be! I think this is what happens when you mix David Zucker, Matt Stone, and Trey Parker together. This movie has so much replay value and at no point bothers to take itself seriously. The slap stick style humor mixed with Stone and Parker just works flawlessly. The kind of humor present in Basketball was not popular upon the time of it's release and had it come out today it would be a hit. Don't bother trying to be critical, just leave your brain at the door and expect endless laughs to come. Recommended to anyone with a good sense of humor.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de7de7e2993046b3801c495978463b9c",
            "input": "One of the lamer wedding movies you'll see. Smacks too too much of its time period so it was out of date before it hit the theaters. The ethnic stereotypes are like a Henny Youngman joke, except they just aint in the least bit funny here. Molly Ringwald, well what else needs to be said. Give you a clue to the silliness, she destroys a $10,000 wedding dress, because \"It just won't be me\" makes it into this rag, with straps and puts on a top hat, and everyone smiles cutely at her moxy, rather than ringwalding her neck. Its a helluva a cast too, check out how heavy Ally Sheedy is. Wheeeew!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e090787b0f8a46c0b5f5ab766f03ac70",
            "input": "EUROPA (ZENTROPA) is a masterpiece that gives the viewer the excitement that must have come with the birth of the narrative film nearly a century ago. This film is truly unique, and a work of genius. The camerawork and the editing are brilliant, and combined with the narrative tropes of alienation used in the film, creates an eerie and unforgettable cinematic experience.The participation of Barbara Suwkowa and Eddie Constantine in the cast are two guilty pleasures that should be seen and enjoyed. Max Von Sydow provides his great voice as the narrator.A one of a kind movie! Four stars (highest rating).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f84e3dd543c3410ebbb3b58c5a687b3f",
            "input": "Insignificant and low-brained (haha!) 80's horror like there are thirteen in a dozen, yet it can be considered amusing if you watch it in the right state of mind. The special effects are tacky, the acting atrocious and the screenplay seems to miss a couple of essential paragraphs! \"The Brain\" takes place in a typical quiet-American town setting, where every adolescent works in the same diner and where the cool-kid in high school flushes cherry bombs down the toilet. It is here that a TV-guru named Dr. Blake and his adorable pet-brain begin their quest for nation-wide mind controlling. Under the label of \"independent thinkers\", a giant cheesy brain sends out waves through television sets and forces innocent viewers to kill! How cool is that? Now, it's up to the Meadowvale teen-rebel to save the world! The funniest thing about the plot is that it never explains where Dr. Blake and his monstrous brain actually come from. There are obvious references towards extraterrestrial life but that's about it. Meh, who needs a background in a movie like this, really? There's not that much bloodshed unfortunately and the \"evil\" brain looks like an over-sized sock-puppet. The only more or less interesting element for horror buffs is taking a look at the cast and crew who made this movie. Director Ed Hunt and writer Barry Pearson are the same men who made \"Bloody Birthday\" (guilty pleasure of mine) and \"Plague\". Both those are much better movies and they wisely decided to resign the film industry. The most familiar face in the cast unquestionably is the great David Gale, whom horror fans will worship forever for his role in Re-Animator. A girl named Christine Kossak provides the nudity-factor and she's obviously a great talent… She has exactly 3 movies on her repertoire of which THIS is her \"masterpiece\". In her debut, she was credited as 'runaway model' and in \"3 men and a baby\", her character is referred to as 'one of Jack's girls'. I really wonder how she feels about her career as an actress…",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4ef075424104201a8c4c0e7546f889e",
            "input": "This isn't exactly a great film, but I admire the writers and director for trying something a little different. The film's main theme is fate and small, seemingly insignificant things that can greatly change the future. In some ways this reminds me of the film SLIDING DOORS, though instead of focusing on one random event, seemingly random stuff happens repeatedly and each one helps build to the cute conclusion. Plus, an odd bald guy seems to understand all this and he talks about this during one brief scene--like he's some sort of omnipotent being but there's absolutely no explanation of him in the film (like the two guys that fight each other in the clock tower in THE HUDSUCKER PROXY).The DVD jacket shows just Audrey Tautou. This is capitalize on her success in AMELIE, though she is only one of many actors in the film and there is no one starring role. The pace is brisk, the acting fine and the conclusion isn't bad at all. The only reason I didn't score it higher is that some of the characters were a bit uninteresting and I think the movie could have perhaps been tightened up with a few less subplots.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3d907dc8f3a448bab4d78d9167693f6",
            "input": "Right from the start you see that \"Anchors Aweigh\" is a great comedy. Gene Kelly and Frank Sinatra make such a funny team! The songs they sing together are pure entertainment. Kathryn Grayson is gorgeous and really sweet. Dean Stockwell is the cutiest child actor I've never seen. If you are fond of piano, you'll be amazed by José Iturbi. This movie was the first one to combine animation with real actors and it did that wonderfully in an unforgettable dance number. Undoubtedly one of Kelly's funniest movies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d31798475a74afcba9d890200392e9d",
            "input": "I just recently watched this 1954 movie starring Vincent Price for the first time on Turner Classic Movies. Price portrays Don Gallico, a magician/inventor who is driven to murder when his boss steals several of his magical inventions (and also his wife, portrayed in a brief role by the lovely Eva Gabor). Even though Price is a murderer, I actually found myself rooting for him, he is a sympathetic character who is driven mad by the greedy people around him who keep taking advantage of him.Although this movie doesn't have the \"horror\" factor of some of his more famous roles (such as my favorite, \"House of Wax\") it nonetheless has enough going for it to keep the viewers interest. This is a must for Vincent Price fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-691e7da138eb4ccca2ab2d369f886a50",
            "input": "This movie is a bad to alright rip off of Friday the 13th. The movie is about a killer named Bernie who kills people around a camp councilor training camp. He kills people because the camp councilor training camp is on land that was owned by his father, and when the police came to forcefully take his fathers land they accidentally killed his mother (Another F13th take off). The intro is seeing Bernie killing his first victims. Then we are introduced to a family going camping in the same woods, soon after they arrive they are joined by a strange old man who likes talking about his son. Later we learn that his son is Bernie and that he has him locked up in the back of his caravan after having broken him out of a mental institute. He sets Bernie after the family so they can take their stuff and then the chase is on.This Movie is only recommended to those who enjoy B grade 80's Slashers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3f11bff87764c5a858c6d9937e5aa83",
            "input": "In spite of its impressive cast and crew pedigree Gingerbread Man crumbles early and often. The plot is unrealistically convoluted, the actors sport bad accents and director Robert Altman's participation amounts to collecting a pay check. Once again he has assembled an impressive cast (Like Woody Allen, everyone wants to work with Altman)that this time around to the letter is miscast. But that's only part of the problem.Kenneth Branagh is Rick Magruder a high powered Georgia lawyer who in the film's heavy handed opening scenes manages to get himself preposterously seduced by a mysterious catering company waitress who convinces him she is in grave danger from an ex-husband and a loony dad. With red flags everywhere the astute lawyer plods on even managing to get his children in harms way. Fights of gun and fist follow along with a requisite car chase and if that's not enough there's a hurricane thrown in for the ridiculous finale.Branagh plays MacGruder with a mealy and unconvincing Southern accent. Running around in a trench coat in all kinds of weather he's blind to the obvious in order to keep the story going. Hipster Bob Downey Jr. is every bit as bad as a P.I. but with a little more emphasis on the bad accent. Robert Duvall as the old man is Boo Radely all growed up en crazier than a bed bug serving some thick slices of ham but at least his twang is plausible. The female leads (Embeth Davidtz, Darryl Hannah, Famkhee Jansen)are lean leggy and unemotive. Even the celebrity lawyers doing cameos (Vernon Jordan) are wooden with the few throw away lines they have.In addition to paying little attention to his actors, Altman's mise en scene dripping with Spanish moss is murky and shapeless, his action scenes comic book. It lacks his offbeat touches and observations (he does inform the viewer that the Stars and Bars still wave in Georgia)that make a well done Altman so unique. Unfortunately, Gingerbread Man is Altman at his worst, even if the pay is the same.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09ed9de65ad949429b6bf72c0b2b500d",
            "input": "This is one of the greatest movies ever maybe even the greatest movie ever. I had forgotten about the movie for about 12 years. Until I saw an add on TV for ADGTH and it brought back fond memories of me watching it when I was a little kid. And when I watched it a few nights ago I became addicted to the movie. Usually I don't like animated family movies but this one is special it is the perfect family movie.The ending of the movie always touches my heart and saddens me very much but that is what makes this movie amazing better than all of the garbage that is coming out for kid movies today. I mean the movie is G rated and it is about 2 dogs who are involved with gambling, there is a lot of smoking, drinking, murder, death and hell depicted in the movie. Which I Believe makes the movie from good to great. I mean movies today don't bring reality to kids and in this movie they did.RIP Judith Barsi & Dom DeLuise",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e01931db3824a41aabd37ffc645610c",
            "input": "SAPS AT SEA Aspect ratio: 1.37:1Sound format: Mono(Black and white)Suffering from 'hornophobia', Ollie embarks on a 'restful' boat trip, but he and Stan get mixed up with an escaped convict (Rychard Cramer). Chaos ensues.This feature length comedy - an OK entry which nonetheless unspools like a mere imitation of Laurel and Hardy's best work - marked the final collaboration between L&H and producer Hal Roach. Episodic in structure, the movie culminates in a memorable ocean voyage after The Boys are taken hostage by villainous Cramer (who shoots a seagull to prove how tough he is!). The gags are OK, but inspiration is lacking, perhaps due to the recruitment of actor-turned-director Gordon Douglas, previously responsible for Ollie's first solo effort in the sound era (ZENOBIA, produced in 1939), but whose work here lacks a measure of pzazz. Fair, but nothing special. L&H regulars Charlie Hall and James Finlayson make guest appearances.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5451b88bfb144ae5905b7a8f0a9a6d7a",
            "input": "\"Giant\" is one of the most boring, overly-long Hollywood contraptions ever. Many scenes seem utterly fake and without energy. Rock Hudson, Elizabeth Taylor, and James Dean are wasted in this big Hollywood production. A central notion to this movie, that a rancher would ever resist drilling for oil on his land, is absurd, and I know this because I'm from Houston. A couple of scenes, especially Dean serving Taylor coffee, redeem this otherwise boring film. For a much more accurate and interesting depiction about how modernism changed the ranches in Texas, see \"Hud\" (one of Paul Newman's great performances) or \"The Last Picture Show.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac63f06972584b32a7b99a0d4507aa8c",
            "input": "Rip off of \"Scream\" or especially \"I know what you did last summer\", there's some entertainment here, and a little scary, but they needed some originality.An entertainment score? 6.5/10 Overall? 5.5/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcd150ac47594ff78de1a109f059dbcc",
            "input": "I saw this film tonight in NYC at the Landmark Sunshine. I didn't know what to expect, I'd not read much about it as I knew I would see it no matter what. All in All, it is very well done. It doesn't focus on the generalization of \"Anti-War\" statements, which to me, left the politics out of it. The soldiers mainly spoke of their awareness of toxicity in their training in boot camp, and how hard it was once they returned to civilian life. It was really good to see Paul Rieckhoff and Camilo Mejia tell about the difficulty in surviving not only the war, but refusing the command to go back when it was against personal morals. Make no mistake - this is not an anti-war film. Anyone who says it is hasn't seen it or is not living with the scars of war on their souls.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-519871bd9fbd45ceabb2d1b6b54c0c5b",
            "input": "Wow, a movie about NYC politics seemingly written by someone who has never set foot in NYC. You know there's a problem when at one moment you expect the credits to roll and the movie continues on for another half hour. The characters are boring, John Cusack's accent is laughable, and the plotline teeters between boring and laughable. A horrible movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-079e7acd272c4bbea9181c720a5d4de7",
            "input": "For real film people, this film is a must, since it works as a perfect little allegory for the movies themselves. Janos Rukh/Boris Karloff's science has to do with capturing and projecting light from cosmic phenomena. This light can do harm, or it can be harnessed to do good. On the one hand it blinds his mother, on the other it is used to cure blindness (\"I can see!\" shouts a young girl on whose eyes this light is projected). When Rukh/Karloff is himself poisoned by the uncanny power of this light, we see him actually emitting a ghostly glow on his hands and face like a badly developed negative, drawing attention to the fact that the man we are watching is a projection, an entity viewed on film (only visible, as in a movie theater, when the lights are out).There is a wonderful passage near the beginning where Karloff/Rukh explains his research as being informed by the fact that everything that happens is captured in light which rolls through space for millions of years, as the light from Andromeda was emitted from that Galaxy at a time when the earth was still molten rock. There are passages in the film when this new science is juxtaposed to older cultural vehicles: that of the writer, in the persona of Beulah Bondi/Arabella Stevens; and religion, emblemized in the sculptural figures on the local cathedral Karloff blasts with his projector/ray gun. One has to wonder here if this film was meant to glance at what was going on in Germany at the time, and particularly at Riefenstall's use of film the year before to promote a regime that certainly would go on to do a lot of harm:Triumph of the Will. Happily in the end, Mother (Violet Kemble Cooper) intervenes, reminding Janos Rukh of the first rule of science. If only more movies made you want to stand up in the theater and shout: \"I can see!\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-663ce4cf6ef541608152d4019a31de6f",
            "input": "I know nothing of the Iliad so can not comment on it's accuracy to that story. However, as a stand alone film I found this very boring. The battle scenes tried to be large and spectacular but they were just obvious CGI.The acting is poor and no doubt Brad Pitt was cast just to attract the ladies. But he does not make a good warrior, too pretty i am afraid.Good points are is the design. This film does look good with the landscape and castle buildings/walls impressive. I do like a film that at least tries to get the characters accents true but this film just seems to ignore it completely. we hear American, Scottish English anything but what you might expect for a film about an ancient eastern civilisation.All in all, I do not recommend this film for a family sit down. It is too long and the young will get bored.For adults, it is OK if you don't care about the lack realism.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82d73117f58349278a902b3ad94c2f99",
            "input": "For quite a long time in my life, I either did not like this film, or I liked this film but not as much as many more. I watched it recently (at a sleepover, funnily enough) and I liked it more than I had done since I was under 6 or something. I now appreciate it more, as I do with a few other Disney classics that I have watched recently (including \"Sleeping Beauty\" and \"Pinnochio\" or however you spell it). I now very much appreciate the animation, the clever \"Disney\" plot turns, the humour from the mice, the emotions expressed and the plot. The animation is very well done, often it seems you are wherever the other characters are, watching them. The animation also does well portraying the styles of the backgrounds, including the town (which is shown twice briefly). Disney changes this from the original fairy tale in a surprisingly good way, injecting clever plot turns ,such as the mice making the clothes and the key part (usually I do not like Disney films very much if they are not that similar to the original story, but with this I am not overly bothered. I feel they made necessary changes to make this a good Disney film. Often I do not think Disney changed the book in a good way in some of their films). You know the story already, Cinderella is a girl working for her horrible stepmother and stepsisters. She goes to a ball with the help of her fairy godmother and loses a glass slipper...This is a film very much to be watched with other people. Immediate family is not good enough. To enjoy this, I recommend you watch it with friends (and immediate family, if you like. :-) ). I recommend this to people who like Disney at least a little bit, people who like fairy tales and for people who like mice. Enjoy! :-)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a01dfe7603ac43b9967419f29ec207b4",
            "input": "Supposedly a \"social commentary\" on racism and prison conditions in the rural South of the 1970's, \"Nightmare\" is full of bad Southern stereotypes, complete with phoney accents. Not only would it be offensive to the sensibilities of most American Southerners, this tawdry piece of work comes off as just a thinly-disguised \"babe in prison\" movie--especially in its uncut original version. Nevertheless, acting is generally above average and the late Chuck Connors, in particular, does a good job of making viewers hate him--even though he looks somewhat uncomfortable in several scenes. There's also a change-of-pace role for the late Robert Reed, who appears as the lecherous warden, and Tina Louise (previously Ginger of \"Gilligan's Island\") made a rather believable sadistic prison guard. My grade: D. ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b99032dbd4a49b2901f8f1eaadb41fa",
            "input": "This is to the Zatoichi movies as the \"Star Trek\" movies were to \"Star Trek\"--except that in this case every one of the originals was more entertaining and interesting than this big, shiny re-do, and also better made, if substance is more important than surface. Had I never seen them, I would have thought this good-looking but empty; since I had, I thought its style inappropriate and its content insufficient. The idea of reviving the character in a bigger, slicker production must have sounded good, but there was no point in it, other than the hope of making money; it's just a show, which mostly fails to capture the atmosphere of the character's world and wholly fails to take the character anywhere he hasn't been already (also, the actor wasn't at his best). I'd been hoping to see Ichi at a late stage of life, in a story that would see him out gracefully and draw some conclusion from his experience overall; this just rehashes bits and pieces from the other movies, seasoned with more sex and sfx violence. Not the same experience at all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d27112576444ab685ecf40a29f2b294",
            "input": "My Brother And I Have Pokemon 4Ever On DVD. We Watched It Like A Couple Of Times And It Was The Best. Too Bad It A New Pokemon Didn't Talk This Time. I'll Get Used To It.The Iron Masked Marauder Was Pretty Mean When He Captured Celebi With His Dark Ball. Good Thing Ash And Sam Managed To Snap Him Out Of His Control.There Was Only One Song In The Ending Credits Called Cele-B-R-A-T-E Performed By Russell Velazquez.Pokemon 4Ever Became A Success Since The Three Previous Films And People Will Always Love That Film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe56287ca5ce499db50c898a58b36794",
            "input": "I must say that I had wanted to see this film for a long time, and I was not disappointed. The acting of Dominic Monaghan is simply fantastic. As a part insomniac myself, I can relate with how the story develops. I have never experienced anything of the sort but some awake moments overlap the sleeping and it can be scary. It was a great film, worth every penny. I hope that one day I can work with Tess myself, it would be an honor and beyond. I can recommend it for everybody. Maybe not small children as they may get scared. But if you are an insomniac like me, you'll understand the world, the mysteries and the fear. You'll love it. F.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be9eee5ffd154330b4b0a60515c37592",
            "input": "This is on my top list of all-time favourite films! It is a fantastic and insightful film. It was Historically interesting and great to watch! I thought the acting from Emily Blunt was fantastic and Rupert Friend was a fantastic Albert, the best actor was chosen for Albert. The costumes were gorgeous and the settings and scenes such as the opera house, were amazing and detailed. I just loved it, all of it! I loved the childhood scenes were she's getting 'bullied' by John Conroy. And where her mother says she has to walk stairs with an adult. One again the writers have done it! They produced this fantastic script! It thoroughly deserves the awards they got. (Oscar and BAFTA wining Sandy Powell, for costume design. A BAFTA for best make-up and hair, an Oscar in Best Achievement in Art Direction, Best Achievement in Costume Design, Best Achievement in Makeup. Broadcast Film Critics Association Awards for Best costume design, also nominated for best actress Emily Blunt. CDG for Excellence in Costume Design for Film - Period. Hampton's International Film Awards for an Audience Award for Best Narrative Film. PFCS for Best Costume design.Sudbury Cinefest, doesn't say what for. VFCC for Best Actress, Emily Blunt.) Overall 10 wins and 11 nominations! That pretty good! Have a look yourself, its really interesting! Personally Rupert Friend should have got an award.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-105cc66ff2784e5688ff1448c050eae4",
            "input": "Sometimes I just want to laugh. Don't you? No analyzing, no critiquing and no looking for deeper meaning. Rent this movie, watch it all and laugh your ass off. Don't want to admit you liked it? Fine. But don't trash it here when you and I both know you liked it. It's Damn funny!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-069155cda65440f09b1bbea4db5ad6ec",
            "input": "hi I'm from Taft California and i like this movie because it shows how us little town people love our sports football is the main thing in Taft and this movie shows just how important it is i personally think they should make another one but instead of actors use us kids to play the games well show you our determination we've beat Bakersfield every game for the past 6 years and since I'm a senior next year its my last chance and then its college we've had running backs lead the state and I'm next if you want to know me I'm kyle Taylor and i average seven to eight yards a carry and about five times a game ill break away on a 75 or around that yard run so check us out at our website and go to our sports page bye",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d14463fc73434a14bfa0507ee225858e",
            "input": "The title of this film nearly put me off watching it. Not being a Manchester United fan, the mere mention of Beckham was a bit off putting, however I put my prejudices behind me and I'm glad I did.I wasn't expecting much of a film, but I was pleasantly surprised. The film sped along with me never looking at my watch and I enjoyed every second of the film. If you liked East is East then you'll love this film. OK so the storyline is nothing new, and the classic storylines are contained within the film but it's all done very funnily, and with a breath of fresh air. The film moves very fast and keeps the audiance entertained. The occaisional funny moments are a good chuckle and not some poor attempt at humour, and best of all it's a good british comedy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ea816b9331b4f699fe79a7b618ce238",
            "input": "This is an excellent film about a traditional working class family in Northern England. Filmed on location in Bolton, it stars James Mason as the father who is the dominant force within his home. Or so it seems. Cleverly, the film, based on the play, portrays the complexities of family life. The supporting cast is terrific as well, with many familiar faces lending support.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c87919919394b2eb88abad1db9a5b27",
            "input": "When it comes to Paul Verhoeven and erotic thrillers, most people think of \"Basic Instinct\" and some maybe of \"Showgirls\". But Verhoeven has made his best erotic thriller years before these two movies: \"De Vierde Man\". This film is mesmerizing and mindblowing - and above all the story is absolutely plausible, which makes the whole experience even more intense. The performances by Jeroen Krabbe, Renee Soutendijk and Thom Hoffman are exceptional, and Verhoeven's direction does the rest. \"De Vierde Man\" makes even \"Basic Instinct\" look quite tame... It can't get much better than this, a true classic of erotic nightmare cinema. 10 out of 10, at least...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a24911b5f7443f29d8988d9e0e028ec",
            "input": "I first saw this at a foreign film festival. It's a beautifully paced nail-biter about a plot to relieve the Estonian treasury of a billion or so in gold. It's all shot in a gritty, grainy style that Hollywood rarely uses --- but it captures the atmosphere of the newly emancipated Baltic states beautifully (note: Tallin was actually looking a lot less grim in 2003 when I was there).There's a lot of humor and some romance, too. I don't want to spoil a number of startling yet logical surprises, so I'll just say this heist film starts from a great script, and the directing and performances are top notch. DARKNESS IN TALLIN is simply the fastest and most nerve-racking example of its genre --- I'd put it up against RAFIFI, TOPKAPI, and it's miles ahead of the new OCEAN'S 11, though (deliberately) not as glossy. RENT OR BUY IT NOW.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c004c4bb36e9436b92659ab11d86253b",
            "input": "This movie was so bad I couldn't sit through it without doing something else. There was no plot and no point. I was thoroughly bored and for a film about a stand up comedian, I couldn't recall one joke or funny line worthy of the description. Politicians with no charisma speaking technical jargon could not be less entertaining.So how was this made? Is there no quality control in film? Watching the girls in bikinis was the only distraction during this horrible experience.It's hard to imagine that Adam Sandler who has become popular and has appeared in fine comedies was able to survive after this kind of exposure. He was not funny in the least in this movie so it proves that the writing is so vital in effective comedy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e33915b656c4814aa4fb7284504f62c",
            "input": "This film is definitely a product of its times and seen in any other context, it is an incredibly stupid movie. Heck, even seen in its proper context, it's pretty bad!! Mostly, this is due to a silly plot and very self-indulgent direction by the famed Italian director, Michelangelo Antonioni. In this case, he tried to meld a very artsy style film with an anti-establishment hippie film and only succeeded in producing a bomb of gargantuan proportions.The film begins with a rap session where a lot of \"with it\" students sit around saying such platitudes as \"power to the people\" and complaining about \"the man\". Considering most of these hippies have parents sending them to college, it seemed a bit silly for these privileged kids to be complaining so loudly and shouting revolutionary jargon. A bit later, violence between the students and the \"establishment pigs\" breaks out and a cop is killed. Our \"hero\", Mark, may or may not have done it, but he is forced to run to avoid prosecution. Instead of heading to Mexico or Canada, he does what only a total moron would do--steals an airplane and flies it to the Mojave Desert! There, he meets a happen' chick and they then sit around philosophizing for hours. Then, they have sex in one of the weirder sex scenes in cinema history. As they gyrate about in the dust, suddenly other couples appear from no where and there is a huge orgy scene. While you see a bit of skin (warranting an R-rating), it's not as explicit as it could have been. In fact, it lasts so long and seems so choreographed that it just boggles the mind. And of course, when they are finished, the many, many other couples vanish into thin air.Oddly, later the couple paint the plane with some help and it looks a lot like a Peter Max creation. Despite improving the look of the plane, the evil cops respond to his returning the plane by shooting the nice revolutionary. When the girl finds out, she goes into a semi-catatonic state and the movie ends with her seemingly imagining the destruction of her own fascist pig parents and all the evil that they stand for (such as hard work and responsibility). Instead of one simple explosion, you see the same enormous house explode about 8 times. Then, inexplicably, you see TVs, refrigerators and other things explode in slow motion. While dumb, it is rather cool to watch--sort of like when David Letterman blows things up or smashes things on his show.Aside from a dopey plot, the film suffers from a strong need for a single likable character as well as extensive editing. At least 15 minutes could easily be removed to speed things up a bit--especially since there really isn't all that much plot or dialog. The bottom line is that this is an incredibly dumb film and I was not surprised to see it listed in \"The Fifty Worst Films\" book by Harry Medved. It's a well deserved addition to this pantheon of crap. For such a famed director to spend so much money to produce such a craptastic film is a crime!Two final observations. If you like laughing at silly hippie movies, also try watching THE TRIAL OF BILLY JACK. Also, in a case of art imitating life, the lead, Mark Frechette, acted out his character in real life. He died at age 27 in prison a few years after participating in an act of \"revolution\" in which he and some friends robbed a bank and killed an innocent person. Dang hippies!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b27d1750d11c433384d31f45268128e0",
            "input": "the only scenes wich made me laugh where the ones with christopher walken in it(the crazy filmdirector)the rest of the movie was just boring.in the first hour or so nothing really happens.jokes which supposed to be funny aren't and zeta jones douglas is really overacting.julia roberts does a routine job of the former ugly duck (yeah right!) into the girl next door (where did i see this before?) who gets the guy.for short.i really didn't care what would happen with the main characters.if cusack really fell of the building in a suicide attempt the movie could have been more interresting to watch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e732fa362f76490e906ab6798d1fe6d3",
            "input": "Picture the scene where a bunch of scriptwriters sit around a table and one says \"lets have a black woman approach an unsuspecting member of the public (also black) in the street and ask him if he is black, then walk away\". The other writers fall about laughing hysterically until one suggests they repeat it in every episode. More laughter. Now if you think the premise is funny, and the show contains many such types of situation, you will enjoy this show. For the rest, use your zapper and find something more entertaining like watching paint dry. Those that have written glowing reports of this show should either get out more or be forced to watch television comedies that are really funny. Another example of the humor in the show, a girl tries to get out of paying at a supermarket checkout by trying to hypnotise the cashier. Marginally funny the first time but why repeat it over and over in different shows with different cashiers? I could give other examples but these just might be treated as spoilers, divulging why this comedy just is not funny at all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9aa0e17e274042559c08a56393e30427",
            "input": "(Honestly, Barbra, I know it's you who's klicking all those \"NO\"s on my review. 22 times?? How many people did you have to instruct to help you out here? Don't you have anything better to do, like look at yourself in the mirror all day?)Steven Spielberg told Barbra that this was \"the best movie I've seen since 'Citizen Kane'\". That pretty much says it all - and serves as a dire warning!What are the ingredients for a sure-fire cinematic disaster, and one that will haunt you, never letting you forget the tears of both laughter and pain? The ingredients: Barbra Streisand's face, a musical, feminism, Barbra Streisand's voice, Barbra Streisand directing, and an ultra-corny/idiotic premise.Hollywood is full of egomaniacs, this much we know. In fact, nearly everyone – by definition – has to be an egomaniac in Hollywood. Why would anyone want to act? For the \"art\"?!? Well, if you're dumb enough to believe what they tell you in their carefully prepared interviews… And Streisand has the biggest ego of them all! This is quite an achievement. To be surrounded by narcissistic cretins, and yet to manage to top them all – remarkable.The movie, like all her \"solo\" endeavors, is an ego trip straight out of hell. Every scene Streisand is in is automatically ruined. Stillborn. But as it that weren't enough, she sings a whole bunch of Streisandy songs – you know, the kind that enabled the Mariah Careys, the Celine Dions, and the Whitney Hustons of this world to poison our precious air-waves for decades now. Just for that she deserves not one but 100 South Park episodes mocking her.The premise, Streisand dressing up as a man to study to become a rabbi, sounds like a zany ZAZ comedy. Apart from it being a cliché, the obvious problem is that Streisand doesn't look like a woman nor does she look like a man – in fact I'm not even sure she's human. The way she looks in this movie, well… it cannot be described in words. E.T. looks like a high-school jock by comparison. She looks more alien than Michael Jackson in the year 2015. She looks HORRIBLE.The songs. They made me shiver. Particularly \"Papa Can You Hear Me Squeel Like A Demented Female Walrus In Heat?\" and \"Tomorrow Night I'll Prepare the Sequel, YENTL 2: THE RETURN OF THE BITCH\".Did you know that Streisand considered having a nose-job early on in her career, but changed her mind when they told her her voice might change? Can you believe that? She should have done it! Killing two flies with one swipe, that's what it would have been.If you're interested in reading my biographies of Barbra Streisand and other Hollywood intellectuals, contact me by e-mail.SHOULD BARBRA STREISAND FINALLY GO INTO RETIREMENT? CLICK \"YES\" OR \"NO\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0401f7962dd541f2a274a41bfdbf0f0d",
            "input": "One of the best documentaries released in recent years. Some points...1. Hugo Chavez was elected Venezuela's president in 1998, his support largely coming from the poorer regions of Venezuela.2. In 2002, a coup briefly deposed Chavez. At the time, Irish filmmakers Kim Bartley and Donnacha O'Briain were in Caracas, shooting a documentary about Chavez for British television. Their film deconstructs the coup and its aftermath, and electrifyingly records history unfolding on-the-spot, outside and inside the presidential palace.3. Chavez aimed to free Venezuela from the free-market policies imposed on it by the US. Though Venezuela's oil was already state-owned, it was run for private benefit by executives who Chavez wished to replace.4. Despite being the world's fourth largest oil supplier, Venezuela remains swamped by poverty, its resources literally sucked away by foreign multinational corporations.5. The documentary begins by portraying Chavez's first years as president before the coup. It focuses on his popularity with the poor, and his various policies which proved popular with working class locals (educational plans, distribution of the oil revenue, grass-root democracy etc).6. Chavez was a huge proponent of education, and printed thousands of copies of the Venezuelan constitution, encouraging children and adults to study and understand it.7. When Chavez came to power, he immediately pledged to redistribute oil profits. This, understandably, made the oil companies nervous.8. A media-war broke out. The six private TV stations promptly began opposing the state-run TV station. They questioned Chavez's motives, sanity and sexual orientation.9. Without media support, the coup would not have been successful. The film makes it clear that coups rely heavily on the media to disseminate information and that news can be easily fabricated.10. Under the guise of \"re-establishing democracy\", the opposition silenced the state-run TV station, dissolved the National Electoral Board, Supreme Court, National Assembly and took control of the military.11. Moneyed interests, backed by the military elite (encouraged by the US and CIA), organised a citizens' march on the presidential palace to effect the coup. Snipers shot at Chávez supporters, but the private media stations edited footage so it appeared that return fire was aimed at the opposition march that in fact had been safely diverted.12. Police went on a shooting rampage against Chavez supporters, further bloodying the streets.13. Chavez, held captive, refused to resign. Of course the media/government then lied, saying he had resigned, but Chavez's cabinet members communicated the truth to the international community, which eventually got the message back to Venezuela by cable TV.14. The people rose up, pressuring the return of the president they had elected, whom only a referendum could constitutionally replace.8.9/10 - At a little over an hour long, this doc is far too short. Nevertheless, its an engrossing piece of journalism and deals with a form of \"media warfare\" which rarely gets touched upon. Makes a great companion piece to \"The Battle of Algiers\".Worth one viewing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fec481662bd84bf0bfac235627925a7d",
            "input": "Hardcastle and McCormick is an excellent TV show. Yes, it is predictable much like The Dukes of Hazzard, Hunter, The A-Team, etc etc etc.This show is just good clean television. The relationship between Hardcastle and McCormick is quite amusing. They often take jabs at each other several times an episode, which adds a great deal of humor to the show. It contains several car chases in almost every episode, but, who doesn't enjoy a good car chase? Especially with the Coyote! I only wish they made clean television like this today I highly recommend this!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d82cee865fc4641b4e387f99b5e1a23",
            "input": "Okay...so i've seen a lot of really odd/unusual movies in my day. Fear and loathing in Las Vegas comes to mind when I think of that. Well not anymore...from here on out, whenever someone asks me, \"hey, what's the most unusual movie you've ever seen?\" Slipstream is what i'll say! And I do not mean \"unusual\" in a good way.From the very beginning of the movie, it was obvious that this was going to be one of those \"trippy camera effect\" movies. By that I mean, little things like flashing images on the screen, rewinding and fast-forwarding people's words and scenes, messing with the color on the screen, flash forwards and flash backs constantly...then you have the actual acting itself. People randomly get violent, shoot things/people, say the weirdest things that just don't make much, if any sense.The movie is about a writer who starts to intermingle real life with the book he's writing and for a lack of a better way to explain it, you basically see this \"trip\" he goes on throughout the movie. The thing is, Johnny Depp went on a similar trip in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas but the only difference is that his trip was entertaining to watch, not painful! Honestly, I had a real hard time even finishing Slipstream. It kind of hurt my brain a bit.I can see some film buff making a claim as to this movie having certain cinematic nuances that make it not only unique but add to the feeling of dementia...blah, blah, blah. Point is, this movie hurts your brain when you watch it....it makes very little sense, it takes all of your concentration to even remotely try and understand what is going on and even at the end, the only thing you can be happy about is that it's over...and you can say you actually sat through it! So in closing, if you want to see a movie that will have you saying \"what the heck\" over and over again both out loud and in your head, go ahead and waste an hour and 30 minutes and check this out.Mr Hopkins, while I applaud you as an actor and commend your choice to take a stab at directing....please, do not ever make a movie like this again. Next time, try something that relies a little more on great storytelling than camera techniques that tend to leave the viewer with a headache.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f330d3d2ab3f44538ccf6f1de576e5f5",
            "input": "I'm afraid that I didn't like this movie very much. Apart from a few saving graces, it's nothing to write home about. J-horror has boomed for the last five-six years but the films themselves have on more than one account been repetitive and carbon copies of a previous success. This is one of them.Basically this is a supernatural slasher movie. The beginning is promising with chilling scenes from a morgue where a dead girl has her eyes graphically sewn together, but soon after opens them. However, after that, it's quickly downhill for this flick.To be kind I will start with the things I like about \"Gawi\". On the plus side, the visuals are gaudy and the movie looks great for it's type. For those who like their horror movies gory there are a few nicely executed (no pun intended) murder scenes. We also get a few good suspense sequences/set-pieces.However, there are quite a few drawbacks also...First of all, and my major complaint about this movie, is that the plot skips and jumps forwards and backwards in time with an alarming intensity. Usually that's not a problem for me, but here, where the students look exactly the same no matter what age they are, I was confused on more than one occasion.The performances are okay I guess (a little hard to tell when you don't know the language), but seem a little stiff. And for a horror movie, I don't think it was scary enough. For a while I was quite bored actually.Being a fan of giallo movies, I was expecting quite a lot from \"Nightmare\", but unfortunately I was quite disappointed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ca026186eca4b9085899851c2456212",
            "input": "I was probably one of the few Australians not watching the tennis when this series aired. I have to say when William McInnes first appeared I though, that is one crappy actor! But as the series continued he toned down his performance and I totally loved him. He was such a rotten guy but he did make me laugh. I watched the show to see Hugo Speers (Heart and Bones, The Full Monty) and Tom Long (SeaChange, Two Hands). It was interesting to see Speers play a nice, quiet man and even more interesting to watch Tom Longs' rippling muscles! Sigh... Seriously, Long's performance was a total shock and really brilliant. He stole the show. Martin Sacks was good also in a small role, and the leading actress put in an entertaining performance. I'd recommend this programme if you enjoy stories with a twist and watching Tom Long walk around with no shirt on...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d92c1c397e44104bc77fe26c9c26bac",
            "input": "Whoever wrote the script for this movie does not deserve to work in Hollywood at all (not even live there), and those actors need to find another job. The most dreadful hour and some minutes of my life... and I only kept watching to see if it would get better which, unfortunately for me it did not.Even at the end, the credits gave me anxiety. I guess there weren't a lot of people behind the movie so they had to roll the credits slowly... very slowly.This movie is definitely a great \"How Not To Make a Movie\" guide. Too bad I can't give a 0.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d1f32e46b886448b8084b8a98e883b81",
            "input": "Moonwalker is a Fantasy Music film staring Michael Jackson with different segments. I will rate each segment individually.Segment 1 opens the film with a Music video. The Music video is a concert of Michael Jackson performing the song \"Man in the Mirror\", the Music video also show's montages of historical figures such as Gandhi, Martin Luther king JR, John Lennon and more. The first segment was a good choice to open the film i liked the song and also loved the montage of the historical figures. I even loved the message in the song. I give the first segment a 9/10.Segment 2 shows a montage of Michael Jackson's start from the Jackson five to his solo career. The montage i thought was well made, i liked the animation they put into it and i also loved their choices of songs such as \"I I want you back, Beat it, Thriller, can you feel it and the way you make me feel.\" The only thing i wish they could have done a little a better in one of the songs in the montage is \"We are the world\". The reason why is all you see is rain drops and in those drops are images of Michael Jackson and the chorus of the celebrities, but it's a little hard to see the chorus. Other than that the segment is still good. I give it a 9/10Segment 3 is the song Bad. You're probably thinking it's Michael Jackson's Music video of bad,Well yes and no. This segment is the Music video but it's redone by Kids. The segment was cute but it wasn't as good as the other segments. I give it a 6/10Segment 4 is a short Claymation Music film that takes place after the kid's version of bad called \"Speed Demon\". The short is about Michael Jackson being chased by his beloved fans and the press and he disguises himself as a rabbit and rides a motorcycle to try to get away from them. The claymation in the chase sequence was great but some parts in the film the Claymation characters looked a little fake when they interact with real people. Also at the end of the clip out of nowhere Michael Jackson rabbit costume comes to life and he's dancing with it. I liked the dancing but that was like out of nowhere. I give it a 8/10Segment 5 is Michael Jackson's Grammy winning Music video \"Leave me alone.\" The Music Video is about the media poking their nose at Michael Jackson's personal life and Michael Jackson feels they won't leave him alone no matter how much he's proved innocent. The music video really speaks out( but keep in mind this happened before the child molestation this just all about the rumors of him in the 80's.) but i didn't feel this Video should be in this Movie because it's a kids Movie and i don't think kid's will understand what he's singing about. I give this Music video 8/10Segment 6 leads us to the main story of the whole movie called \"Smooth Criminal.\" Michael Jackson plays a gangster who uses his powers of a wishing star as a crime figure to protect children ( including John Lennon's son Sean Lennon) from an Evil Mobster named Mr Bigg (Played by Joe Pesci). The segment i thought really brought out the film especially when he danced and sang the song \"Smooth Criminal\" with a bunch of Criminals. I also thought the special effects were good. The weird thing about the Segment is why are kids hanging out with a grown man it never explained why. Also Joe Pesci character talks about Drugs and what he plans to do with them. I mean why would you talk about drugs in a kids film. Other wise it was good. My rating for this segment is a 8/10Segment 7 is the final segment of the whole movie. The film end's with Michael Jackson singing a Cover version of the Beatle's Song \"Come Together\" and then during the credit's we see Michael Jackson singing with Ladysmith Black Mambazo. Michael did a good cover of \"Come Together\" and i think it was good idea putting including a group of good singer's with a talented musican like him. My rating is 9/10This movie is a good Michael Jackson film i think it really brings out children s Imagination. The film is almost as Imaginative as the Beatles animated movie \"Yellow Submarine\" if you like Michael Jackson and you're up to a film with a lot of creativity this is the film. My Overall rating for this movie is 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99473b3d9fda4cf8981fb9620e08c3bb",
            "input": "I had high hopes for this movie, because I enjoyed the book so much. However, I don't think I would have understood the premise of the movie if I hadn't already read the book. The movie is a noble attempt to show the despair of people trying to break the bonds of overpowering government rule, but the book portrays the suffering much more thoroughly. The corrupt government officials have comfortable, almost luxurious lives, while the common people struggle to obtain the bare necessities for survival. Perhaps most people feel this way toward their leaders and rulers regardless of whether or not they are actually oppressed or repressed. Orwell's dystopia seems as if it could exist in many places in our modern world. It has been several years since I've read the book, but one hears references to Big Brother, the Thought Police, and Newspeak frequently in the media and casual conversation. Probably many people using these terms don't realize where the terms came from. I strongly recommend that you read the book.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0b4220ad708468c9657e5c0a94f0bc7",
            "input": "There are movies, and there are films. Movies are more often than not merely cinematic \"candy,\" whereas films are true works of art. Fraulein Doktor is certainly well-placed in the latter. As most viewers, I was highly impressed with the battle scenes, but the poignancy of the portrayal of the central character is what I consider to be the most sterling quality of the film. Having done everything possible to serve her country as a true daughter of Deutschland, all the while in the throes of morphine addiction, die Fraulein is treated very shabbily by the German high command despite all of her efforts. The scene in which the Doktor is being conveyed in the rear seat of a Mercedes Benz command auto, alone, desolate, and sobbing is perhaps one of the saddest yet truest depictions of a \"spy's\" lot in life. Only the emotional pain presented by Richard Burton in the Spy Who Came in from the Cold comes close. Fraulein Doktor is a far deeper film than one may realize upon a singular viewing. I only wish that its producers would see fit to release it on DVD so that those who have never experienced it can, and those who have seen it can again (perhaps again and again)enjoy this exceptional motion picture.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f880ac78a95b43e6842e2f6692b16bf2",
            "input": "This was the third remake of SLEEPING WITH THE ENIEMY After YAARANA(1995) and AGNISAKSHI(1996)AGNISAKSHI was the only one which worked and was a better filmDARAAR is directed by Abbas Mustan who sadly failed in their attempt herethe story was good but the handling wasn't that good and the heroine was shown too regressive and the climax too was disappointingDirection is bad Music is goodRishi reprises his role of YAARANA(strangely which also was a remake of SWTE) and looks too fat for the lead and is okay Juhi is decent while Arbaaz tries too hard in his debut and does manage in many scenes to chill the audiences but his voice was terrible Johny is too loud",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b494c414bc04bd5af9e259e618100b8",
            "input": "Loretta Castorini (Cher)is a woman in her late thirties, a widow, who lives with her parents in a duplex apartment in Brooklyn. She is engaged to marry Johnny Cammareri (Danny Aiello), a bland man, more out of a resigned duty than actual love. Before their wedding Johnny takes a trip out to visit his mother who is sick and leaves Loretta the function of playing the olive leaf with his brother Ronny by notifying him of their impending wedding. Ronny (Nicholas Cage) hasn't forgiven Johnny for being the cause of his accident which caused him the loss of his hand (and subsequently, his then-bride-to-be), but he does fall for Loretta, and hard. After a heated affair Loretta out of respect for Johnny tries to avoid Ronny, but his dark looks and overpowering masculinity win her over. Meanwhile, Loretta's mother Rose Castorini (Olympia Dukakis) is not only suspecting her husband Cosmo (Vincent Gardenia) is seeing another woman, but is also herself the subject of admiration from a college professor and wonders why do men chase women. Things get complicated when Johnny returns from Sicily to tell Loretta they can't be married.The setup is pure sitcom, but the story, written by John Patrick Shanley with a deep understanding for Italian-Americans living in New York, is genuine: he gets the idiosyncrasies of these people and their day-to-day foibles and quirks, and all of the characters have a deep romanticism that comes through in key moments throughout the story. Loretta, a character hardened by the loss of her husband and knowing her chances of happiness are slim, slowly emerges as a woman who is so swept by the sudden recognition of love she becomes the heroine of La Boheme -- the one who acknowledges the love of the man with the wooden hand (in a clever gender reversal), and Cher inhabits the role and makes it hers and in her own style subtly trades her frumpiness to a deep, dark beauty. Ronny is pure fire and Nicholas Cage exudes masculine power as if he were channeling Marlon Brando. The Castorini's and the Cappomaggi's, counterbalancing the central couple, both express their love for each other in two very crucial moments: the latter couple, on the night of the full moon when Loretta and Ronny consummate their affair -- a rare scene depicting love and intimacy among the elderly --, and the former at a tense moment over breakfast when Rose bluntly reveals, in touching words, that she wants Cosmo to stop seeing his mistress Mona (Anita Gillette).MOONSTRUCK is not only the romantic comedy and date movie of choice, but also a beautiful examination of love and passion among regular people. The ending is a tour de force of emotional impact, the family situation going beyond the momentary complications to cement it in tradition going back to the days of immigrants, and is one that elevates this movie from being just another feel-good movie to a classic. MOONSTRUCK deservedly got its Oscars for Best Writing, Actress, and Supporting Actress, and has proved to grow beyond its time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6de5a118d4ce4a738db246c56fd9a61a",
            "input": "\"Fever Pitch\" is a sweet and charming addition to the small genre of sports romances as date movies or movies a son could be willing to go to with his mother (though the guys in the audience got noticeably restless during the romantic scenes).I have lived through a milder version of such a story, as my first exposure to baseball was dating my husband the spring after the Mets first World Series win and then I watched the Mets clinch their next one because I was the one still up in the wee hours with our two little sons, who have grown up to teach me more about baseball through our local neighborhood National League team's other heartbreaking failures to win it again (and it was me who took our older son to his only Fenway Park game as I caught a bit of Red Sox fever as a graduate student in Boston).So compared to reality, the script believably creates two people with actual jobs. It is particularly impressive that Drew Barrymore's character is a substantive workaholic who has anti-Barbie skills, though she pretty much only visits with her three bland girlfriends during gym workouts that allow for much jiggling and the minor side stories with her parents don't completely work.It is even set up credibly how she meets Jimmy Fallon's math teacher and how she falls for his \"winter guy\" -- though it's surprising that his Red Sox paraphernalia filled apartment didn't tip her off to his Jekyll-and-Hyde \"summer guy.\" Their relationship crisis during the baseball season is also played out in a refreshingly grown-up way, from efforts at compromise to her frank challenges to him, centered around that they are both facing thirty and single. Fallon surprisingly rises to his character's gradual emotional maturity.While the ending borrows heavily from O. Henry, the script writers did a yeoman job of quickly incorporating the Sox's incredible 2004 season into a revised story line (with lots of cooperation from the Red Sox organization for filming at the stadium).The script goes out of its way to explain why Fallon doesn't have a Boston accent, as an immigrant from New Jersey, but that doesn't explain why his motley friends don't. The most authentic sounding Boston sounds come from most of his \"summer family\" of other season ticket holders, who kindly kibitz the basics of Sox lore to neophyte Barrymore (and any such audience members).The song selection includes many Red Sox fans' favorites, from the opening notes of the classic \"Dirty Water,\" though most are held to be heard over the closing credits as if you are listening to local radio and are worth sitting through to hear.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88ad62d23d1d47ecb565b3d77f3c3821",
            "input": "I'm surprised that anyone involved with the production of this series would actually admit responsibility. The script is so unfunny it must have been written by someone who failed the entrance exam for the Canadian Comedy Writers' Union (and that's saying something!). Get out your binoculars if you want, but there's nothing resembling a joke in sight. Ronnie Corbett must have been flat broke to demean himself with this rubbish. The rest of the cast are so lacking in any kind of acting or comedic ability I'm amazed it lasted past the first episode - correction, past the auditions. All I can say to those who are amused by it is that they must be very easily entertained. And it's obvious that the production costs must have been all of ₤100 per episode. And just in case anyone thinks I'm commenting as a foreigner who is unfamiliar with English humour, I must add that I am indeed English.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75fc3107b9c64a7f95e29d5a22c3a01e",
            "input": "I appreciate the need to hire unknowns for these kind of 'horror' movies, but they should at least hire some proper actors. The sergeant especially is guilty of using his monotone to bulldozer every single line he has. But let's face it, the lines aren't really important. There isn't really a recognisable plot, so most of the writing involves the words f**k, s**t, m*****f****r and other assorted bad language in place of proper dialogue.The 'story' as it is, is mostly made up of seemingly random gore and death, with a couple of cringe-worthy 'surprises', which happen around 10 minutes after you see exactly what's going to happen. Not only this, but there are several glaring plot holes and continuity errors (Why are they going in there? Didn't he have a weapon? Wasn't he dead?), so it makes the whole film seem as if it has been cut down by the several hours it would take to fix them.Another film which simply relies on blood and gore instead of any real cinematic experience.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03defc0335a04951a293e90b6143ae7a",
            "input": "I was very surprised with this film. I was touched with the lives that paulie touched along his way to find his \"marie\" the little girl he was separated from. The humor was also very good and it did not hurt the story as i thought it would probably do. Actually i was expecting \"paulie wants a cracker\" jokes to hurt this film but even that was done in a very humorous scene that turns very touching when paulie is in the research lab press room conference. So if you wish to see a good \"animal that talks\" film check this one out, much better than Dr. DOLITTLE in my opinion. PAULIE also has a surprised twist in the end that is done very nicely as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11458a724a804e0c8c40dc1913a737e7",
            "input": "... and yet, we were told, there was another hour and 20 minutes left to go.Why, oh, why wasn't there an editor to tell the writer/director to snip, snip, snip? Apparently that writer/director has previously done shorts; as a short, this would have been okay. But the lack of dialogue starts to grate after twenty minutes. The lack of much music glares. The background noises (talking, traffic, and especially a ubiquitous helicopter) get old really fast. But the worst failure is in story. There is precious little beyond a short.After an hour we saw variations of the same scene over and over again. I nearly screamed at the screen, \"We get it, we get it!!!!!\" It's amazing that after that left the theatre, we could drive home, watch the Daily Show and parts of the Colbert Report, get ready for bed,and know that the audience was STILL trapped in the theatre.It's not enough to indulge your vision. You have to give the audience enough to share your vision.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2309d9811a54420aa69a5c45fa283e91",
            "input": "I rarely write a negative review for this site, but this time felt complied to. Night Listener is without doubt one of the dullest films I have ever seen.There was nothing happening in this film what so ever - I didn't care for any of the characters, didn't buy in to the whole mystery type plot, didn't care how it ended....nothing.There is no comedy, no action, no thrills, no suspense, nothing. The highlights include (no spoilers - there's nothing to spoil): a man climbing through a window, a dog barking outside a hotel room, a car going over some rough ground and a truck beeping it's horn.I really enjoyed \"One Hour Photo\" and hoped for a similar eerie role from Williams, but alas was sorely let down. What's more disappointing is that I'm sure there is a good film in there somewhere - the idea was interesting and I should have felt sympathy for the characters, but it just didn't work for me.I might even have given it 1/10 but that score is reserved for the remake of The Producers",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adb12bdd5a3e49e1bd9a964f33b71463",
            "input": "If ever I was asked to remember a song from a film of yester years, then it would have to be \"Chalo Di Daar Chalo Chand Ke Paar Chalo\" for its meaning, the way it is sung by Lata Mangeshkar and Mohd. Rafi, the lyrics by Kaif Bhopali and not to mention the cinema photography when the sailing boat goes out against the black background and the shining stars. The other would have to be \"Chalte Chalte.\" Pakeezah was Meena Kumari's last film before she died and the amount of it time it took can be seen on the screen. In each of the the songs that are picturised, she looks young but after that she does not. But one actor who didn't change in his looks was the late Raj Kumar, who falls in love with her and especially her feet, after he accidentally goes into her train cabin and upon seeing them, he leaves a note describing how beautiful they are.Conclusion: Pakeezah is a beautiful romantic story that, if at all possible should be viewed on large screen just for the sake of the cinema photography and songs. The movie stars the Meena kumari, Raj Kumar and Ashok Kumar and is directed by Kamal Amrohi.Kamal Amrohi's grandson has now started to revive his grand father's studio by making a comedy movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6350903eaf64452b17c54bb200fba47",
            "input": "It's hard to believe people actually LIKE this dreck! I do think kids can enjoy it, but to me it's the kind of kid film parents can't bear to sit through. Predictable plot, boring Belushi, and possibly the worst kid actor of all time. I will give the director some of the responsibility for the kid, but she was truly painful to watch. I feel embarrassed for her now, having people know it was her. When she sang the Star Spangled Banner I had to turn the sound off--then I came here and discovered they did that because she won Star Search. I've always felt Jim Belushi should be ashamed to trade on the name of his wonderful, sadly missed brother, and this crap shows why. Zero stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e9917f784114533b42b36efe11dd0d9",
            "input": "...........as I was when I saw this movie) I will never watch this movie again, not because it is a bad movie, but because it scared me so much! As I said, I was 14 when my English teacher decided to show it to us; the reason for this is that we had read an extract from the book.All the girls in my class were TERRIFIED when the Woman in Black comes through the window and floats over Kidd's bed, although, just before that there is something that also frightened us, which was when Kidd finds the toy soldier underneath his pillow, and he hears a child's voice say \"It's for you\". That scene still haunts me to this day, nearly 7 YEARS after I saw the film.If you are easily scared, AVOID THIS FILM!!!!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38f782a9be6446498e3198b8001a8db0",
            "input": "Lexi befriends Jennifer, a thin, intelligent girl at her new school. Lexi's parents have just split up. Soon, Jen tells Lexi of her eating disorder, and the two begin dieting and exercising together. They both are in the school's volley ball team. Lexi's mum becomes aware of her daughter's illness, as she is losing lots of weight. Lexi is admitted to hospital. She is diagnosed with Anorexia nervosa, and is made to gain weight. Her father visits her in hospital, and orders a feeding tube. She is better and is allowed out of hospital and she tells her mum that Jen has bulimia. This leads to the two falling out, as Lexi's mum tells Jen's mum her suspicions.At a party Jen is hit by a car, and because her heart is weak it kills her. Lexi's condition worsens, as she blames herself for her best friend's death...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d27a0a095330405e94b2f9bd15639a7b",
            "input": "I love Paul McCartney. He is, in my oppinion, the greatest of all time. I could not, however, afford a ticket to his concert at the Tacoma Dome during the Back in the U.S. tour. I was upset to say the least. Then I found this DVD. It was almost as good as being there. Paul is still the man and I will enjoy this for years to come. I do have one complaint. I would of like to hear all of Hey Jude.Also Paul is not dead.The single greatest concert DVD ever.***** out of *****.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae5c0c62f9f14115a8277d7cda5ab20b",
            "input": "This is a strong movie from a historical and epic perspective. While the story is simple it is pure and straightforward. In truth, it is the standard story of a simple, honorable man whose honor comes into conflict with the more educated and wealthier men of the period.Poor vs. Rich, honorable vs. dishonorable, a classic but well-told tale without much of the glitz of hollywood stinking up the screen.Extra points just because you can almost smell the people on the screen. :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-076f473128514a1385bd6578a6382043",
            "input": "***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Juggernaut is a British made \"thriller\" released in the US by First National. Karloff is Dr. Sartorius who has to leave his research because his funds have dried up. Karloff is forced to retreat to France and start up a medical practice. He is propositioned by a conniving woman who wants to get rid of her much older husband. She knows Karloff needs the money.Karloff agrees to the proposition and soon becomes the personal doctor of the husband. All the while, the wife is prancing about town with the local no good playboy. Karloff finally injects the old geyser with poison and he kicks off. However, his son (from another marriage) arrives a few days before the killing and finds out the will has been changed. When he spills the beans to the wife, she goes berserk and even bites the son's hand.Meanwhile, Karloff's nurse has misplaced the hypo Karloff used to kill the old man. When Karloff finds out he isn't getting any money, he asks the wife to poison the son. The nurse suspects Karloff and finds the missing hypo. Analysis shows poison, but not quite in time as Karloff kidnaps the nurse.To make a long story short, the nurse escapes, gets the police, and manages to save the son who is about to be injected by Karloff. Karloff instead injects himself and dies.This movie does have some good points. Karloff is possessed and plays the type of mad doctor he did in The Devil Commands and the Man Who Lived Again. It is peculiar, however, to see him walk around stiffly and slightly hunched over. We never find out why he is walking this way. I suspect the director thought it made him more sinister.The actress playing the 2-timing wife overacts something terrible. She has a French accent. Even though she overacts badly, you still manage to hate her (or maybe you hate her because of her acting...).A little below average for a Karloff vehicle. If you buy the Sinister Cinema VHS copy, the audio is a bit choppy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-febb2390a66f492db003b1e0a391a67b",
            "input": "I took my 10-year-old daughter to see Nancy Drew over the weekend and found myself thoroughly entertained. First off, it was clean, and I mean by my standards. The majority of kids' movies today are full of crude toilet humor and gross-out jokes to elicit cheap laughter from the pre-teen crowd. Nancy Drew is smarter than that, however, and the humor is subtle and clever.The title role is played with a refreshing vivaciousness by Emma Roberts, who is perky and polite without ever becoming annoying. Unlike The Brady Bunch Movie, where the anachronistic characters are jeered and ridiculed, Nancy's style is treated with respect and dignity. It's a great moment when the LA \"style-conscious\" girls with their Paris Hilton streetwalker attire are dismissed by the boutique owner, while Nancy, in her penny loafers and homemade Butterick pattern dress, is embraced. This movie shuns the we-need-to-enlighten-this-wholesome-girl tack so many Hollywood movies take. Nancy remains true to herself and her values throughout.The mystery is just tense enough at times to be engaging. There were several suspenseful moments where my daughter nervously grabbed my arm, but there were no gratuitous shock scenes. It's all based on tension and mood and is a lot of fun. The supporting cast is good, particularly Marshall Bell as the creepy caretaker. There are some great cameos by Eddie Jemison, Chris Kattan and Bruce Willis and many moments that will make adults smile.This film deserves better ratings than some have given it. Not only was I glad not to be dragged to yet another computer animated film where talking animals burp and pass gas all over the place, but I was also very entertained. Had I been there without a child, I still would've enjoyed the movie. This is one DVD that will have my daughter's name on it under the Christmas tree.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-129a914268e34458821312b3cda8aa5a",
            "input": "I think this is what this movie wants us to say at the end of the movie! or Damn Australian? I still don't know, but what I know is that I really liked this movie but that couldn't be my favorite movie!Great story with great actors but with a terrible end... To make you cry and say 'Oh, she's so good'... Still, who made it? What really happened? Who's that guy? No answer to these questions...Mysterious movie with a good mark overall... I give it a 8/10, going on the 8.5!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8c4840f9e0d436995d201fc30490dee",
            "input": "Twin brothers separated at birth (Due to the deaths of their parents) reunite twenty five years later to avenge their parents and take back their million dollar tunnel. Double Impact runs at two hours long and basically adds no real approach to the Corsican Brothers plot and Jean-Claude Van Damme while adequate as the evil twin brother is just embarrassing as the good twin brother. Also the action sequences aren't as exciting this time and Jean-Claude relies more on gunfire then on his martial arts. Also the supporting cast is wasted and at two hours the movie is just plain dull.* out of 4(Bad)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20f115bed46b4e2089796c8a32f1e91e",
            "input": "I cannot accept the negative comments of other reviewers. They are too critical, perhaps because they are stuck in the past. I would like to see a comment from someone who had never seen Basic Instinct 1, perhaps someone very young ? I left the cinema feeling glad that I had not been swayed by the IMDb reviewers. 14 hours later I am still trying to find flaws in the plot but I cannot think of anything serious. My advice to everyone is see it for yourself and make up your own mind.It follows a similar pattern to Basic Instinct 1 but the plot is less confused. It still left me wondering at the end but in a more satisfactory way. Sharon Stone is as sexy and evil as before and wears her 48 years extremely well; this remains her defining role. David Morrisey was satisfactory even though he is no Michael Douglas. Of the supporting cast I particularly liked David Thewlis as the police detective.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-644508b79628451b857c19bce2d73207",
            "input": "I saw this back in '94 when it was finally released. Apparently because Orion pictures was in bankruptcy, I think, the movie had not been released a couple of years earlier.I have problem remembering details partly because I haven't seen it in a long time, but I do remember it as a very dull movie. I kept debating whether to walk out of it. The store was not at all interesting or engaging. Was a 3rd rate America Graffiti imitation. None of the performances make it worth watching either. One of the biggest disappointments since a local newspaper reviewer gave it a high rating.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59c377a68711469eb8d3fa809b13e1ce",
            "input": "Man To Man tries hard to be a good movie: it has its heart at the right place, it aspires to be epic and it has a message that no doubt everybody will appreciate. But there lies also some of the problems of this picture. It strives so hard to be good and to get its message across that sometimes the viewer must feel unchallenged. So it is only adequate that the images which are used by this picture are simplistic - Man To Man doesn't let the viewer decide what he thinks is right but is hammering its message in his head. Joseph Fiennes exemplifies this in his role: he does his best to look concerned, genuinely moved and all the other emotions you can express with the single one facial expression his repertoire has to offer. Add that the movie is overlong and loses its speed towards the end you would be easily led to the conclusion that Man To Man is not worth watching. But there are enough points to defend it: it is entertaining, has some humorous scenes and the show-stealing Kristin Scott Thomas. Of course you should not compare it to humanistic masterpieces like The Elephant Man (David Lynch) but you'll be leaving the theatre satisfied. It tries to grab your heart (even if your brain thinks that it is too obvious) and succeeds most of the time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12c349f5857c46bc88432373fe5c29be",
            "input": "This is an extremely boring film. If you grew up during the Vietnam Was, as I did, then you've seen and heard all of the film footage and arguments here a hundred times by now. But what really makes this film boring is the narration by director Carlton Sherwood. The majority of the film is shot with Sherwood talking directly into the camera about his opinion of this conflicting time in the history of our nation.If you're old enough to remember Vietnam, then you won't find anything new here. There is no new evidence to condemn John Kerry or new evidence worthy of another documentary on Vietnam. Younger viewers who are interested in the subject should see George Butler's excellent film Going Upriver! Stolen Honor was clearly meant to be a hatchet job on John Kerry, but it fails miserably at accomplishing that goal.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64cf464ee5094b9a87a071491085a0dd",
            "input": "When I was a kid I watched this many times over, and I remember whistling the \"Happy Cat\" song quite often. All the songs are great, and actually memorable, unlike many children's musicals, where the songs are just stuck in for no real reason. The scenes and costumes are lavish, and the acting is very well-done, which isn't surprising, considering the cast. Christopher Walken is very catlike, and doesn't need stupid make-up, or a cat costume for the viewer to believe he's a cat transformed to a human. And Jason Connery's so cute, as the shy and awkward miller's son, Corin, who falls in love with beautiful and the bold Princess Vera. This is a really fun, enjoyable, feature-length movie, where unlike most fairytales, the characters are given personalities. Some of my favourite parts are when Puss makes Corin pretend he's drowning; at the ball when everybody starts dancing a country dance, as it's \"all the rage abroad\"; when Walken is in the kitchen, dancing on the table (he's a pretty good dancer, too!); and when Vera tells Corin all the things she used to do when she was young, like pretending she was a miller's daughter. I'd recommend this film to children and parents alike, who love magic and fairytales. And it actually IS a movie you can watch together, as it won't drive adults up the wall.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18789b86fbb84bebba40ec05f38ab471",
            "input": "Words can hardly describe it, so I'll be brief. \"The Thief of Bagdad\" was my favorite movie as a child, and it has never ceased to astound or enchant me. I loved this film from the first moment I saw it, when I was a boy of six who had started reading \"The Arabian Nights.\" I remember walking into the TV room in the middle of Sabu's battle with the giant spider and being instantly beguiled.Rarely has so much beauty, magic, and wonder been captured on film. Sabu and John Justin are superb as the dashing heros, Conrad Veidt is throughly delightful as the wicked villain Jaffar, and Rex Ingram is a joy to watch as the sardonic genie. Georges Perinal's photography is some of the best use of Technicolor. One of the three credited directors is Michael Powell, a filmmaker who has been rightfully heralded by the critics but is often overlooked by audiences for his remarkable films, including \"A Matter of Life and Death\" (aka \"Stairway to Heaven\") and \"The Red Shoes.\" He is one of the true masters of the camera, right up there with David Lean, Akira Kurosawa, and Orson Welles.As with all great works of art, the beauty of \"The Thief of Bagdad\" lies in the detail. Every frame has its own magical charm. The story never lags, and the characters and their actions are always involving. Here is a film that will never grow old.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a746bdf1e64542038b8c12aaafcf301a",
            "input": "BASEketball is awesome! It's hilarious and so damned funny that you will wet your pants laughing. I have seen it so many times I have stopped counting. But everytime it gets funnier.Trust me on this one...BASEketball is a surefire hit and I loved it and will continue to love it. I hope one day there will be a special edition DVD brought out!!!Ten Thumbs Up!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f548512e559410e8b4b71cd04e55be0",
            "input": "In the immortal \"Shaun of the Dead\", we are introduced to a London where the slackers and the high-and-mighty alike are forced to battle flesh-eating, reanimated corpse versions of their friends and family. At the end of the film, it is suggested that the zombies are rendered harmless and used as cheap labour. \"Fido\" presents us with an epilogue to \"Shaun\" set in 1950's America, in a hilariously witty and original \"what-if...?\" movie.The film is set post-zombie-apocalypse, for a change; after the terrors of the Zombie Wars, ended by the creation of the ZomCon company and their patented zombie collars which make the corpses as docile as lambs. Every town in the world is fenced off from the Wild Zone, the once-fertile landscape torn asunder by the surviving zombies and left-overs from the apocalyptic wars. The idyllic town of Willard is your typical, pristine 50's suburbia, with one small difference; social status is measured by a family's amount of domesticated zombies. Unfortunately, the Robinson family has no zombies whatsoever, due to their patriarch, Bill's, fear of the reanimated dead. Timmy Robinson and his mother Helen both suffer from the pressures of suburban life, until the day that Helen purchases a zombie servant in a desperate attempt to impress the neighbours.The zombie earns Timmy's love when he rescues him from a pair of violent bullies, and the two form a bond to rival the classic \"boy-and-his-dog\" cliché... a boy and his zombie. Timmy names his \"pet\" Fido, and he soon becomes an aid for both Timmy and Helen to escape the prison-like routine Bill has put them in. But when Fido's domestication collar goes on the fritz and he devours the elderly Mrs Henderson, the Robinsons have to contain their connection the sudden wild zombie epidemic and still manage to keep their beloved Fido.A film whose sharp wit and satirical gore carry it just as much as its all-star cast (including \"The Matrix\"'s Carrie-Anne Moss as Helen Robinson and Billy Connelly as Fido), \"Fido\" is a zom-com for the ages. With some rather twisted subplots - for example, the sweet and unsettling feelings that Helen and Fido begin to have for each other - and a poignant commentary on 50's suburbia and the zombie genre, the film manages to bring out the worst (and the best) in its characters while still enabling you to care for them.\"Fido\" is, by far, one of the best dark comedies I've ever seen, one of the best films that I've seen in a long time, and THE best zom-com since the incredible \"Shaun of the Dead\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e42e90d79d440f9bed19c1a73eaf2f9",
            "input": "Farrah Fawcett is superb in this powerful 1986 drama, where she plays Marjorie, a woman who manages to escape the clutches of a would-be rapist. Well done to Farrah for being a Golden Globe 'Best Actress' nominee.When her rapist Joe (terrifically played by James Russo) comes into her home, which she shares with her two roommates (who are conveniently out!), Marjorie has to play along with Joe's frightening demands. It does make for some disturbing and shocking images!When her roommates come home, they are astounded (to say the least) by Marjorie's actions, and a great performance by Alfre Woodard who desperately tries to convince Marjorie to do the right thing and turn him into the police, makes the film even more nail-biting.I do find Diana Scarwid quite irritating, but when Joe finally admits that he came there to kill them all, it makes the film a very emotional piece of drama indeed.Overall, Extremities is a brilliantly thought-out and well-acted movie and I must have watched it hundreds of time by now! Well done to everybody involved.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c65b43108e94e0fadf7aea5fff34871",
            "input": "I noticed \"Fire\" was on cable the other night and I began watching it because I couldn't recall anything specific about it other than I remember it being a horrible film when I saw it back in '85. Twenty years later the film is still awful. Besides the synthesizer, the saxophone was the most abused instrument in pop music during the 1980s, as is evident in the title song. Hearing that song again made me want to jab a screwdriver in my ears to end the sonic misery inflicted upon them. And to compound this musical assault Rob Lowe's character played saxophone, and there was one scene where he played a solo that went on and on like he was Charlie Parker, only his shrill tone and playing were more reminiscent of a monkey playing a kazoo. All the characters were intensely unappealing, although I must say they did a great job of casting equally unappealing actors to portray them. Actually I thought Mare Winningham was appealing, and I initially felt sorry for her character because she wore funny underwear, but then near the end of the movie she decides to have sex with Rob Lowe's character who would probably be voted most likely to transfer a variety of sexual diseases if such thing were voted upon.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1a8604b69554e0e803d333e3ded0d62",
            "input": "There is one great moment in *Surviving Christmas* that almost makes it worth the pain: James Gandolfini cracks a shovel over Ben Affleck's stupid head.This movie serves as yet another unfortunate example of James Gandolfini proving what a great actor he is whilst simultaneously besmirching his career by acting in this film.Young and wealthy ad exec, Drew Latham (Ben Affleck) has been inculcated into believing that one must never be alone on Christmas. (And there, from the outset, is the underlying problem with our suspension of disbelief in this idiotic movie: how many people of Drew's social standing, in 2004, truly care one way or another whether Christmas is spent alone or with half the family or with a fifty-dollar prostitute?) Storyline finds Drew buying off a family to spend Christmas with, on the condition that they pretend to be his own, insensately ignoring all the indications to the contrary that his money has not bought the emotions he was seeking.For $250,000, a surly suburban truck driver, Tom Valco (James Gandolfini), and his disheveled wife, Christine (Catherine O'Hara), agree to be Drew's ad hoc family, against protests from their son, Brian (a very one-dimensional Josh Zuckerman) and daughter, Alicia (a very soft-focused Christina Applegate). Drew then spends the rest of the movie supposedly recapturing his youth or - something. The messages in this movie are as twisted and illogical as its dry-mouthed storyline. Fraught with overt psychoses, Drew plasters a fake smile on his face and blindly remains in denial against every denigration that he was supposedly buying the Valco family to avoid.Which begs the question: If Drew is paying these people to recapture some semblance of joyous familial emotion, how psychotic must he be to pretend happiness amongst their barbs and mental anguish over his presence? It is not a case of the Valco family hiding their true feelings and pretending to be happy while around Drew - three of the four members make it patently clear they despise him. Is he so incognizant that he cannot see that his money is not buying him the \"family\" atmosphere he was inculcated into believing was a truth in the first place? As with all movies this opprobrious, one wonders how *four* screenwriters could possibly get so tangled in their own narcissistic dreams of appearing in a credits sequence that they will overlook any semblance of plausibility, or intelligence.Director Mike Mitchell, who was responsible for *Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo* - stop right there. 'Nuff said.Gandolfini and O'Hara somehow manage to shine, proving their mettle amongst this mess. Christina Applegate is willowy and cutesy and blond and fiery in all the right places, scathingly cutting Drew into little strips of carcass for most of the movie, then doing an about-face and falling in love with him because the script tells her to.And I wouldn't go so far as to say that Affleck is a bad actor, but John Schneider better look over his shoulder. There's a whole new level of Desperately Seeking Talent in town.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-757fd54aff0347e1ae9b6794734dcb65",
            "input": "This film story is bad enough, which can happen in real life. I'm very can not understand when they show us this bad film. I say it was bad because there is some reason. 1. if Madonna was rich and can do everything she want, then why she falling in love with that bad man. 2. How can the story script is so weak? She was so rich, can do everything she want, but not dare to divorce her husband that is very impossible.The words I LOVE YOU, it doesn't meant anything in this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be59a36fb3f34b22aa714b469335d968",
            "input": "All logic goes straight out of the train window in this British horror film, set in the London underground and starring the usually reliable Franka Potente (Run Lola Run), Franka plays Kate, a businesswoman on the way from an office party to meet friends who falls asleep at an underground station, only to wake up and find she has been locked in and finds herself being chased by \"someone\" or \"something\" with killer intentions.Plot holes and unbelievability are rife and there are very few moments that are actually jumpy/ scary but plenty that are just plain dull.All in all an unpleasant film that should just stay locked underground forever and do us all a favour.The only plus point here is the inclusion in the cast of popular veteran actor Ken Campbell, who's done better than this – that's even including \"Erasmus Microman\"!.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd1dd280a29647b096a5a5cb416de235",
            "input": "No wonder this movie never saw the light of day. The timing was of the release was awful. The Gong Show had already \"jumped the shark\" by the time the movie came out, so who would pay money just to see a few of the censored clips from the original run of the show? And the show clips are just a tiny bit of this pathetic, 90-minute whine by Chuck Barris about how hard his life was as host of the show. Did he really expect we would feel sorry for him and his messed-up millionaire life? Did he really think we even wanted to KNOW about his life? (Obviously so, since he later wrote his weird autobiography about his career as a CIA operative.) Did he think the gag of having everyone, everywhere audition for him would stay fresh for 90 minutes? Or the network executive hounding him at every turn? This might have worked as the plot for a 30-minute sitcom episode, but not as a full-length movie. However, it was nice to see Rip Taylor, Gene Gene, and the Unknown Comic again (although, to make the movie \"spicy,\" they included only his most vulgar routines). And as someone else has pointed out, this is Phil Hartman's first significant movie part (even though it lasts only a minute). Note his name is spelled HARTMANN in the credits, which is the name he was born with. You can't miss his voice and facial expressions, even though he's much thinner and younger than in the SNL days. Ed Molinaro (Hill Street Blues) also has a tiny part; one of his first after leaving the soap world.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c2e822e99ed4b14a58815fa79e683d5",
            "input": "I haven't actually finished the film. You may say that in this case I have no right to review it, especially so negatively. But I do, only because I stopped it on account of I couldn't watch anymore...I got over halfway, and I only got there by promising myself something good was just around the corner. This film is so tiresome, so lackluster that I was actually insulted. I haven't read many of the other reviews, so I'm not sure if there are other homosexual teens who have suffered through it, but I am homosexual, and I did go through \"similar\" revelations, day dreams, issues etc etc. There were maybe two moments where I actually felt this film could go somewhere, where I felt it may have some inkling of meaning, or relativity, but these hopes were dashed the moment the next set of cliché-ridden narration came on. I mean, just look at the quotes on the IMDb page. Unfortunately you're not able to hear the scratchy play back, nor the echo-ey fades if you're just read the quotes, because they are just too painful/ridiculous/stupid to miss. I did give the film three stars, and all three of those stars go to the films cinematographer who did a fantastic job attempting to transform Archer's tired \"concepts\" into something watchable. Mind you, I pray he wasn't the one who decided to include all the long shots of TV closeups...another unnecessary cliché already over done in films such as Korine's Gummo... I think it is extremely fitting that this film premiered at Sundance (only because Archer had connections in the festival via volunteer work he did, by the way...) because Sundance seems to be the one festival where cliché heavy drivel like this is still accepted as \"arthouse\". No, it's not art house, I'm afraid it's just plain s**t-house. Do not watch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58c4e86414194173b0a9fc8d40077fb6",
            "input": "From the beginning of the show Carmen was there. She was one of the best characters. Why did they get rid of her?! The show not the same as before. Its way worse.The best episodes were with Carmen in them. You can't replace someone from the beginning! That is like South Park without Kyle or Child's Play without Chucky! It's not right! The niece who replaced her is just, ugh! Awful. She doesn't fit into the storyline at all. She was one of the main characters, and the niece can't replace her. She was an awesome actress. Way better than the niece. Get her back, or you'll lose a TON of viewers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a33b93276ffb479e82d86770e5c84ab9",
            "input": "In my opinion, this movie's title should be changed from \"Only the Brave\" to \"All About Lane\". I went to a screening of this film a few months ago and was quite disappointed with the outcome. Although, I appreciate that the director made a movie about the men of 442nd - a subject matter that long deserved addressing in the film industry - the acting in some parts of film was quite stale. The performances of Marc Dacascos, Tamlyn Tomita, and Jason Scott Lee were all great. However, the director should have NEVER put himself as the main character in the movie. Sorry Lane, you are just not a film actor. Stick to what you're good at - theater acting. Gina Hiraizumi's performance in this film was also horrible. She should never have been given a speaking role and her looks were unfit to play the part of a Miss Nisei queen. There were other young actresses in the film who were naturally beautiful and whose performances were wonderful... Why weren't they cast for that role? Another major problem with this film were its action sequences. The Japanese-American soldiers don't look like they were fighting German soldiers... let alone anyone. Granted this was a low budget feature, but since this was a war-based film, isn't it important to show some actually fighting? This film was a worthy attempt, but definitely not worth a major distribution.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87876696297041b2b2402d2db403cb67",
            "input": "I may not be a critic, but here is what I think of this movie. Well just watched the movie on cinemax and first of all I just have to say how much I hate the storyline I mean come on what does a snowman scare besides little kids, secondly it is pretty gory but I bet since the movie is so low budget they probably used ketchup so MY CRITICAL VOTE IS BOMB!!! nice try and the sequel will suck twice as much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3687aedc4a524fd6b9da26583dcd5621",
            "input": "Lost, probably the best t.v series ever made. the storyline is clever and when all your questions are answered watching one episode, 100 more are raised. if lost can carry on it's magnificent ways and not get too carried away then it will be stapled the best show ever. The survivors of a plane crash are forced to live with each other on a remote island, a dangerous new world that poses unique threats of its own. after reading this your thinking how on earth can that be interesting? and heres your answer, every season SO FAR has always been full of surprises, your always questioning your self why did that just happened and what's gonna happen next each time, very unexpected thing's happen and the story goes on wonderfully SO FAR! The series just sucks you in, it's chilling and very addictive, everything from the wonderful creators and directing to the magnificent performances by the cast creates a very believable story. Lost is simply unbelievable, amazing, highly entertaining, top notch, t.v at it's best.How ever you want to put it. Lost beat's all other show's by a landslide. And if your hating or criticising Lost you don't know how to watch t.v or watch drama. Lost simply doesn't disappoint, you would think a series carrying on for so long can't keep getting better. But it does! It just keep's on flowing it's unlike anything you would ever think off. \"Every thing happens for a reason.\" And that is truly shown in the series. Eventually you will reach a point were all the clues and everything that's happened or being done adds up. You will feel and realise how the characters have changed and how and why everything is going on. The 10 minutes of excitement: You see something you didn't see coming, something major has happened to character or on the island. There's hope somewhere. You see a major twist that can or will change everything. You hear your thought's churn, you wonder what's gonna happen next. Your heart beating. The 30 minutes of brilliance: You see a flawless scenes, tension building, you hear wonderful music by Michael Giacchino. You see great flash backs, impressive acting. You see wittiness, chilling atmosphere, which then get's converted back into tension.Everyone has there show that they are addicted too, that they can't get enough of, that they admire every minute and can't wait for the next episode, That they talk about 24/7. Too me and many others it's this series. Lost. Once you start watching, you won't get enough. The creators did a flawless job. Lost is completely unique and original, you won't see anything like it. The clever idea of \"flashbacks and flashforwards\" and something major and different in every season sucks your thoughts. Would they ever make a series like \"LOST\"? Something so interesting and something you will always remember. It simply has stunned the world when it hit t.v. A new generation of dramatic/sci-fi. A instant classic before it reached out to the viewers.I'm sure you all heard of lost and it's 5 star reviews, and your annoying friend that won't stop telling you about it, so what's stopping you from watching?Every episode leads to something new and it just doesn't stop getting better and better, you get more interested as it goes along, you learn things that are on the island that you wouldn't even think off. The characters start to become very likable, and if your the critic type you would love to see Lost in further detail, things like how the relationship between characters develop and how they learn the ways to under look and take on challenges from the Island. All together it's a great drama and a flawless series. I guess we just all hope that lost will not have a downfall in the episodes to come and go to far.....so if you don't watch lost, read the comment from the top again and you should change your mind. Seeing is believing, so until you start watching you will never know .I strongly recommend this masterpiece of series: LOST!! start watching!!! You have not seen nothing until you watch LOST!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-223c47653c4041c5a4805052e6e998c3",
            "input": "I'm overwhelmed by the work of Jim Carrey. I keep on getting this movie stuck in my head. The Grinch liking Martha May, Cindy Lou(who's very annoying; her sweet innocence) who tries to get the Grinch in the Christmas spirit, the childhood of the Grinch (very funny!), and moreover the weak obvious ending with- Christmas isn't all about presents. I have to say, I felt stupid walking out of the theater with a bunch of babies and toddlers laughing and so forth, but this movie was a good full-lengthed adaption of Dr.Seuss's short film and IS for all ages.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cc0b1e32aea4635b880b57b1f89cf34",
            "input": "Written by the excellent McGovern and directed by Frears this film was a slight disappointment. It seemed too short. It spent far too long creating the Hovis atmosphere, and laughing at the Catholic demands. Then very quickly you have the fascist and socialists vying for the family's attention, and the terrible conclusion.Still my wife thought Liam was cute.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e2d1a00ec5b4605a15c39e74add88d4",
            "input": "I watched SHORE LEAVE the other day. I've seen it so many times, and I never get tired of it. Strangely enough, every time I watch it lately, it takes me right back to the very first time I saw it. Including this time. Must be that sense of mystery and \"What IS going on here?\" about it.Oddly enough, the one part of the story that ALWAYS felt awkward and uncomfortable for me, this time, actually had a HUGE effect on me-- Ruth. I think a lot of it was Gerald Fried's score. A real masterpiece, that! The romantic section was reused-- much more extensively-- in THIS SIDE OF PARADISE. But of course, it debuted here. I get the impression that, out of all the girls Kirk knew over the years, she may have been the \"sweetest\". When she said, \"Do you have to go?\", combined with the music, I could really feel the pain she must have felt at not being able to have him stay with her.Someone commented online that Ruth looked older than he was, yet she wasn't supposed to have aged at all in 15 years. Which makes me think... MAYBE she was one of the teachers at the academy. Kirk had an affair with an older woman! (Perhaps he thought back to this in \"MIRI\" when he told Janice, \"I never get involved with older women.\" Maybe he meant, \"...anymore.\"Reading ST reviews the other day, I see where someone compared WHAT ARE LITTLE GIRLS MADE OF? with I, MUDD. But it seems SHORE LEAVE oughta be in there, too. What are all those \"people\" if not androids? And could \"The Caretaker\" be related to \"The Old Ones\" from the earlier episode? Whoever he is, he seems to be one of the RARE cases in ST where you have a race that is actually \"superior\" as opposed to merely thinking they are.Yeoman Barrows seems to be filling in for Yeoman Rand. Considering how much attention Dr. McCoy showered on her, it's just one more frustrating example of a potentially good character who appears once and then never shows up again! Sheesh.One thing missing from the last several I've watched that snuck back in here was, Spock smiling. He was! I saw him. I really prefer knowing there's 2 sides to him going on inside all the time, rather than this \"submerged\" business. When he said, \"Enjoy yourself, sir.\" near the beginning, you could see it wasn't just his addressing his superior officer, but talking to his friend. And at the end, when he needlessly says, \"Totally illogical!\", I can't help but think he does it purely to provoke a reaction. He may not be smiling or laughing, but I think he likes seeing his fellow crew members around him happy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66d7a32d024947839b4af3d6fc8a2bf9",
            "input": "New York playwright Michael Caine (as Sidney Bruhl) is 46-years-old and fading fast; as the film opens, Mr. Caine's latest play flops on Broadway. TV reviewers poke fun at Caine, and he gets drunk. Passing out on the Long Island Railroad lands Caine in Montauk, instead of his residence in East Hampton. Finally arriving home, Caine is comforted by tightly-attired wife Dyan Cannon (as Myra), an unfortunately high-strung heart patient. There, Caine and Ms. Cannon discuss a new play called \"Deathtrap\", written by hunky young Christopher Reeve (as Clifford \"Cliff\" Anderson), one of Caine's former students. The couple believe Mr. Reeve's \"Deathtrap\" is the hit needed to revive Caine's career.\"The Trap Is Set… For A Wickedly Funny Who'll-Do-It.\" Directed by Sidney Lumet, Ira Levin's long-running Broadway hit doesn't stray too far from its stage origin. The cast is enjoyable and the story's twists are still engrossing. One thing that did not work (for me) was the curtain call ending; surely, it played better on stage. \"Deathtrap\" is a fun film to watch again; the performances are dead on - but, in hindsight, the greeting Reeve gives Caine at the East Hampton train station should have been simplified to a smiling \"Hello.\" The location isn't really East Hampton, but the windmill and pond look similar. And, the much ballyhooed love scene is shockingly tepid. But, the play was so good, \"even a gifted director couldn't ruin it.\" And, Mr. Lumet doesn't disappoint.******** Deathtrap (3/19/82) Sidney Lumet ~ Michael Caine, Christopher Reeve, Dyan Cannon, Irene Worth",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5ad2866f288490eba3543cbe4c179ac",
            "input": "You'll notice that the chemist, who appears in two scenes and gets to speak, is played by Stephen King. \"Don't give up your day job\" is the standard thing to say, but that's not fair. King acquits himself reasonably well: he's no worse than any other member of the cast, and better than most. The story, on the other hand, is pure rubbish. Please, give up your day job.Never have I seen so many dreadful performances - of which the lead actor's (the LEAD ACTOR'S!) is probably the worst - gathered together in the one film. Everyone acts hammily, but not in any entertaining way; they all somehow manage to go over-the-top without expending, or manifesting, energy. I blame screenwriter/director Tom Holland. It can't be that ALL the actors are REALLY this bad. What are the odds against that? Admittedly, I've never heard of any of them before, but still, I don't think I could walk into a talent agency and walk out with this many bad performers if I tried: ONE actor, despite my best efforts, would turn out to have talent. So what's more likely - that Tom Holland rolled a dozen consecutive snake-eyes, or that he wrote a lousy script and then directed it poorly? That would also explain why actors are bad in direct proportion to their prominence in the script. The more direction an actor got, the worse he performed. (\"You want me to bend over like a hunchback, talk from the back of my throat, show all my teeth, and look bored, all at the same time? Okay...\")This theory is confirmed by the fact that Holland undeniably managed to co-write a lousy script. Several writers here have commented on the fact that Billy Halleck is not a likeable character, but that's a misleading way of putting it. He's not a knowable character. All we find out about him before the supernatural stuff starts happening is that he's fat, and that all he can think about is food. (\"All I can think about is food,\" he tells us, helpfully.) And in the end...(Sigh) I suppose I ought insert a spoiler warning here...In the end he becomes evil. Why? I can only shrug. Perhaps he's under some kind of enchantment. Yeah, that's probably it. By \"evil\" perhaps I mean \"inexplicable\" - it's not so much badness as a socially undesirable suspension of ordinary means-end psychology. Anyway, his actions at the end make no sense, nobody's actions make much sense, and this is despite the fact that the characters do little but explain their motivation for the benefit of the audience.By the way, here's my nominee for hammiest line/delivery: \"I don't think you'd like it. IN FACT...\" [big dramatic pause] \"...I don't think you'd like it at all.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-143f207ee09b4a02841a2b7af7a3a59a",
            "input": "I thought that this movie was pretty lame. If you're looking for cheesey, you may like this. I, myself, don't mind a fair amount of cheese, but this was ridiculous. The progression of the movie bored me and the storyline was very weak.The only thing entertaining about this movie was the day-glo zombies, but even that isn't reason enough to see this flick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c0c6b1a00854f2b994d0b30be4c70aa",
            "input": "I'm so glad I happened to see this video at the store. I was looking for some happy movies and this one turned out to be a true gem. I loved that the movie, a love story of sorts, wasn't about some beautiful twenty-somethings; rather, it's a story of some beautiful sixty-somethings, who used used to be twenty-somethings. It's a good, well written, and wonderfully acted story with fabulous WWII band music thrown in as well. It's also got a delightful surprise in it for Scottish castle lovers. It left me smiling and ready to watch it again, which I did a couple more times before I turned it in. I highly recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73887f5bcb8b49978dc376b61ea1059e",
            "input": "Well, sorry for the mistake on the one line summary.......Run people, run!! This movie is an horror!! Imagine! Gary Busey in another low budget movie, with an incredibly bad scenario...isn't that a nightmare? No (well yes), it is Plato's run...........I give it * out of *****.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2944533bfc547fd8c9ea11c5985e137",
            "input": "Oh dear. Some of the best talent in British TV made this serial, and so I can only assume that they were working under incredible time pressure, and had to settle for first takes of many scenes.There ARE some frightening scenes in this Highland mystery (mostly when the \"monster\" attacks and we see it from his point of view), but I'm afraid that I found most of the story unintentionally funny ! Such as the moment when the hero discovers a dismembered corpse on a golf course: Oh look, there's a hand ... oh, and there's another hand over there ... hmm this is a bit puzzling ...For many years fans of British cult TV shows campaigned to have this serial released on VHS or DVD, but the BBC always said no. Now I think I understand why !",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6407a845ff34c96ba6092d2e3bbe1b9",
            "input": "\"FULL HOUSE,\" in my opinion, is an absolute ABC classic! I'm not sure if I've never seen every episode, but I still enjoyed it. One of my favorite episodes is where Jesse (John Stamos) and Rebecca (Lori Loughlin) get married. If you want to know how what made it so funny, you'd have to have seen it for yourself. It was a two-parter, so you'd have to have seen both parts. Another one of my favorite episodes is where Jesse, Stephanie (Jodie Sweetin), and Michelle (Mary Kate & Ashley Olsen) get locked in a gas station on Michelle's birthday. You'd also have to have seen it for yourself if you want to know how and why that happened. I have many other ones that I like, too. Everyone always gave a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though it can be seen in syndication now, I strongly recommend you catch it just in case it goes off the air for good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62db98fef80245c09316fc1f69df7179",
            "input": "Wow... what would you do with $33m? Let me give you a choice; you can either a) shred it and flush it down the toilet or b)make a film based on the premise of Whoopi Goldberg as a hard nut futuristic cop partnered with a rubber dinosaur who uses terms like \"I didn't butt trumpet\" and blows raspberries on the basis that this is funny. That's right, you would choose the option that has more merit - flushing down the toilet.This has to be seen to be believed. I cannot even find the words to describe how bad this film is. It doesn't even fit into the \"so bad - it's good\" category. I actually have it on the television as I write - and whilst watching I felt the need to come onto IMDb and register my disgust.Considering Jurassic Park was made a couple of years before, how on earth did they think that audiences would any longer tolerate a man dressed in a rubber suit? WG should have simply walked and damn the consequences. Everyone concerned will go to hell for this criminal waste of money.I have to stop writing - I am about to implode.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e15708d64c9c42249063c0c8ea6169f0",
            "input": "The Sopranos is arguably the greatest show in Dramatic Television history.Its hard to think of another series that boasts so much intelligence, sublime writing or first rate performances.Across its epic scope it produces fresh and iconic characters and a constant level of high quality. Centering around the life of one Tony Soprano, a man who lives in two families. One is the conventional wife and two kids nuclear family the other a huge New Jersey Mafia group, of which he is the boss of both. Played by James Gandolfini, of True Romance and The Mexican fame, Tony is a fascinating, scary but also likable guy. Full praise must be given to Gandolfini for making a womanising and horrifically aggressive brute a genuinely identifiable and perfect leading man. Contemporay American drama has never had such an arresting and iconic figure as Tony.The cast of hundreds never boasts a flat performance and such stand out characters like Paulie Walnuts and Ralph Cifaretto will stick in your memory for ever.The true genius of this tale however, is the creator and writers bravery and revolutionary take on a conventional drama series. Twenty minute long dream sequences, powerful and original use of symbolism and metaphorical imagery and truly shocking scenes of violence. Yet all this style is met by truly touching themes of love, honour and respect for family. The series never becomes cold hearted or gratuitous.With TV now competitive and often poor The Sopranos stands tall above the rest as America's most original and compelling drama. Forget Family Redifined. This is Television Redifined.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6180c84047e4728bb75a6e034e405b5",
            "input": "Well, this is probably one of the best movies I've seen and I love it so much that I've memorized most of the script (especially the scene in the storage unit when Jerry Lee breaks wind) and even with the script in my head I still like to watch it for Jerry Lee, that German Shepherd is hysterical and really is put to the test to see who's smarter. The tag line holds true as well. Not to mention the acting is great, though Christine Tucci sounds different in a whisper (Check filmography under CSI if you don't know what I mean). It's too bad that this movie only contained the single issue Dooley and Jerry Lee had to work with, it would have been pretty cool to see the tricks that Zeus and Welles had up their sleeve.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1175fb3b0c2493dbf8db4200dc126ae",
            "input": "A surprising rent at a local video store, I was pleased to find a media satire worthy enough to challenge Oliver Stone's \"Natural Born Killers.\" And almost as disturbing. I think it went well with my viewing to be in late 2004 watching the Republican Machine do it's magic on the majority of America's television viewing populous. It brings up the question \"Are we really that manipulative?\" It definitely skewed my view. There was also a larger theological question being provoked- the story of Christ. Could word of mouth and overwhelming dependence on something exploitive as television produce a messiah? Could the story of Christ been exaggerated? Could it have been completely fabricated? It's something the movie puts in a extremely perceptive light.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-588dfee9051548cdbd844faebb16e3c9",
            "input": "An excellent interpretation of Jim Thompson's novel, this neo-noir thriller has all the requisite elements--deranged ex-boxer turned drifter, alcoholic widow with sinister desires, ex-cop turned small-time crook, and a kidnap plot destined for doom. Yet, the film never crosses into cliche country, but remains fresh and intriguing. The performances are all superb, particularly Bruce Dern's role as the wicked sleazeball, Uncle Bud. There is a tense uncertainty to the film's movement which, intentional or not, adds to the grim proceedings. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-736666dbaa524608abdd98a3237f08e0",
            "input": "Sometimes a premise starts out good, but because of the demands of having to go overboard to meet the demands of an audience suffering from attention-deficit disorder, it devolves into an incongruous mess. And for three well-respected actors who have made better work before and after, this is a mortal shame.So let's see. Premise: a loving couple who lives in a beautiful home is threatened by a bad cop. Interesting to say the least. Make the encroaching cop a little disturbing, why not. It was well done in THE HAND WHO ROCKS THE CRADLE and SINGLE WHITE FEMALE, and it's a proved ticket to a successful thriller.Now herein lies the dilemma. Create a disturbing story that actually bothers to bring some true menace into its main characters while never going so far as to look ridiculous, or throw any semblance to reality, amp up the shock factor, and make this cop so extreme -- an ultra bad variation of every other super-villain that's hit cinemas since the silent age.The producers, and directors, chose the latter. Thus is the resulting film -- badly made, with actors trying their darnedest to make heads or tails in roles that they've essayed before, and nothing much amounting to even less.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20808c7aeb47413b8da12a3270496a60",
            "input": "I was expecting the movie based on Grendel, the book written by John Gardner in the late 1970's. It was based on the Beowulf epic, but told from the perspective of the monster. Whatever you may think of Gardner's book, a movie based on the Beowulf epic should not be entitled Grendel, when it doesn't say anything more about the monster beyond the few pathetic scenes in which the CG monster is shown as nothing more than a modified Predator. On top of this, the writers should also be punished for screwing up the original story so badly and contributing to the continued growing ignorance of mass TV audiences throughout the US.Typical Hollywood to get this so wrong. Very disappointing and a complete waste of time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-beed4bed374b4ad6846acef970b2d5cf",
            "input": "The whole Biker Movie genre has to be made up of the worst films ever made. This one delivers a lot of fighting, generous amounts of blood, bikers fighting Indians, and a shanty town that gets blown up and torn down one shack at a time. The acting is beyond terrible. What ever happened to Robert Walker, Jr.? At one point he was in some major studio productions, and then he just faded away. This movie really blows, but if you have not seen a Biker movie in a long time, it is a good one to watch. At the end of the movie, you should feel a bit trashy for having watched it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2830f604b15d45399c420cea3975c22f",
            "input": "After the initial shock of realizing the guts of Mr Branagh to film this, I was literally shaking with the excitement of having this epic just ahead of me. I was not disappointed. So true to Shakespeare and yet so accessible. It blew my mind. I always enjoy seeing, or rather listening to, Branagh and it made me wonder...is this movie dubbed in other countries? That would be like painting a moustache on the Mona Lisa.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75e76895972446b89319ca578d5869e2",
            "input": "I picked this up in the 'Danger After Dark' box set, and watched it solely because of my interest in the performance of Hyde and Gackt. I expected a corny horror film that was a huge gore-fest and with very bad dialogue. Which is exactly what it would have been if it had been made in America. Instead I found myself intrigued by the good development of the characters, and the way that Sho (Gackt) develops through the movie as a person. The acting skills of both stars was surprisingly good, considering they aren't professional actors, and the director did a marvelous job with it all, setting it in the future minus the flying cars and holographic billboards.On a side note, Taro Yamamoto's performance was very surprising. The only other film I've seen him in is Battle Royale, where he plays Shogo Kawada, and in this film he seems to be the exact opposite of Shogo. Toshi is bright, exuberant and hyper, serving as a sort of comic relief with his antics. Shogo was the big tough guy on the island who killed without thinking anything of it. So, watch out for his performance, if you're familiar with Battle Royale, you'll be very surprised by him.But don't be thrown off by the summary on the back of the box, because this isn't really a vampire movie. It's just a movie with a vampire in it. That Hyde's character is a vampire is almost a background fact with what's really going on in the foreground, and you guys will love the last scene. It's a really moving picture at some points, the photography is really well done. It's definitely something to pick up the next time you're at Blockbuster.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5169ad2712b4700b59cf780365f60df",
            "input": "This is probably one of the worst \"wanna be a low budget hit films\" to credit the dinosaur genre. The film is so predictable you could go away, cook yourself dinner, go answer the phone or whatever and when you're back you'll know exactly what has happened. The special effects are so poor you would have thought Lego bricks were used and the \"super fast\" dinosaurs were so tame that it makes a pet dog look like a super predator. The acting is over cooked. They try so hard, yet there just isn't enough character behind them to get into the characters and as for the scientist... Yeah okay we know exactly whats going to happen to the blonde chick in glasses. Stereotypical was created for films like this. If you want to watch this film, I suggest you aren't in as a serious mood as the cast and crew obviously were. And if you are really really into dinosaurs and know everything in the world about them, don't watch it, you might break the screen - the facts are that far off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c3c139cb93b6486eb2cd88733109d45c",
            "input": "I was really looking forward too seeing this movie as it has been advertised as a must-see movie for people that love movies about nature. The movie shows different climates and the animals associated with them by starting at the North Pole and going down south as the movie progresses. The footage from this movie is often breathtakingly beautiful and I many times wondered how on Earth they could have taken some of the shots under water or in the sky. However beautiful, a large part of the footage I had already seen in the TV series 'Planet Earth', narrated by David Attenborough. I found Attenborough's narration of Planet Earth to be much better than the narration of Earth. 'Earth' is an easier movie. It skips much of the scientific detail that Attenborough covers in his 'Planet Earth' series. For instance, Earth will tell you that a tropical sea is an ideal nursery for a young humpback whale, because there are few predators. Planet Earth will tell you that a tropical sea is a good nursery, because the water is low in oxygen and doesn't contain enough nutrients to support very large animals, like large sharks, etc. To me, that's an important difference. That, together with Attanborough's far superior voice make Planet Earth a far better documentary than Earth. Still, however, I think Earth is worth watching for the beautiful footage and the fact that it's easier to understand makes it interesting for children too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-924e695be1bb4fbeab43ab2129255bdb",
            "input": "First, this film is not a \"thriller.\" Neither is it \"gripping, taut.\" It might have been so based on the script, but the direction's slow pace makes it difficult to get into.The plot itself is very interesting and ingenious. Unfortunately, we only get a sense of *how* ingenious after the picture is over. That leaves us with over two hours of long sequences with music playing over them punctuated by some action scenes that don't grab the viewer, and \"cunning vixen\" scenes that inject a little more overt intelligence.I wish this had been the fast-paced thriller the box promised. It would've been an outstanding film. Instead, Spike Lee made it plod along through the end.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03e2cab9c0b8407a83c57604a61e17f3",
            "input": "THE ITALIAN is an astonishingly accomplished film for its time. Stunningly shot, with lighting effects that are truly sublime, this is an early gem that clearly reveals REGINALD BARKER to be a pioneer director of equal standing to D.W. GRIFFITH and MAURICE TOURNEUR. How much control Thomas Ince exerted over the production is hard to know, but this film still has extraordinary power. The simple story of an Italian immigrant struggling to keep his family alive in New York, is very moving. The themes of social injustice, revenge and forgiveness are completely relevant today. The use of close-ups is outstanding and the powerhouse performance of GEORGE BEBAN is electrifying. What we need now is a really good print transferred to DVD so we can truly appreciate this early masterpiece of cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c30340a4f354c979ba7100bae653c38",
            "input": "What more can I say? The acting was, almost without exception, amateurish. The directing and continuity were pitiful. The sceenplay was predictable down to the very last scene and the dialog tedious. One of the features on the DVD was labeled \"Gag Reel\" but that could have been a description of a viewer's reaction to most of the movie.One of the most amusing things was in the director's comments on the DVD. He said, with a straight face, that he had set out to make a movie with high production values and a name cast - and that he had succeeded. With delusions like that it's easy to understand how the movie turned out as it did.Perhaps the most disappointing aspect was the monster. The darkwolf suit was a modified ape suit (per the 'making of' feature on the DVD) and rather looked it. The mask and claws were little better than off the shelf jobs from any costume store. The cgi effects were painfully obvious and of quality similar to an inexpensive video game.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a090b493cb645fa892dcb223eaa22ba",
            "input": "While \"Santa Claus Conquers the Martians\" is usually cited as one of the worse films ever made, this Mexican-made film from 1959 is so bad it makes \"SCCM\" look like \"It's a Wonderful Life.\" You have to wonder what the people who made this film were thinking; perhaps they meant it as a third-world allegory about capitalist greed and conspicuous consumption. Nah . . . They just weren't very good. The same production company made an even more disturbing version of \"Little Red Riding Hood\" in which the wolf's obsession with our heroine has unmistakable hints of pedophilia. (Perhaps this was the inspiration for \"Freeway.\") Back to \"Santa Claus\": instead of the North Pole, Jolly Old Saint Nicholas resides in a satellite in geosynchronous earth orbit (shades of \"MST3K\"); instead of elves his toys are made by children chosen from around the world; and he had sophisticated spy equipment to check just which kids are naughty and nice. The result is like an Orwellian outer space sweat shop. It's enough to turn you off Christmas forever. This and other low-rent Mexican children's' films were dubbed in English and widely distributed in the U.S. in the early 1960s; no wonder the sixties became such a turbulent period in American history. The baby boomers who were forced to endure these \"family\" films as children would be all too eager to turn revolutionary.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa71e3a1a5b74f2188ca2d1c8eda132d",
            "input": "I was fooled to rent this movie by its impressive cover. Alas. It is easily one of the worst movies ever made. Judging by the acting of the film characters, it's more a comedy than a horror film. No surprise why no one else has written comments on the imdb. Avoid it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2358b5bc2bd94e8986e8f776f8ceef55",
            "input": "I happened upon this flick on a rainy Sunday, intending to tune-in to something else. Out of curiosity, I accessed the comments here, and found myself watching it to the end. I really didn't do so with intent -- this was one of those movies where you're \"fascinated,\" and watch it for \"another couple of minutes,\" until you finally just watch to the end. And the indictment of it in most of these comments made it more fascinating to view. The one comment where the person really liked it seems to be solely as a result of liking Ladd and Spano, and their earlier roles. But great isn't anywhere to be found anywhere here - story, performances, and particularly the absurd courtroom hi-jinks. We all know that Perry Mason (before Raymond Burr passed the 300-lb. mark), and Ben Matlock, are granted some leeway in cavorting around the courtroom, instead of being boringly confined to a lectern. And Matlock is especially granted the privilege of entering exhibits often by simply going to the jury and showing them, before the judge and prosecutor have even been informed of, or shown, them. No real-life judge or prosecutor would stand for this.Both Perry and Ben almost always ended the proceedings by wringing a confession of the real killer. Actually Perry nearly always did this, but often Matlock would simply present overwhelming evidence of the true culprit, pronounce it \"reasonable doubt,\" and then leave it to the cops and prosecutors to proceed against the guilty party - sometimes on-camera, sometimes presumed at the end of the show.But that said, Holland Taylor's histrionics and the amount of leeway afforded her, in the courtroom portion of this story, made the actions of Matlock/Mason more-closely resemble the slow, often boring detail such as seen on Court TV and in real-life courtrooms.Every character in this presentation was either insipid, unsympathetic, obnoxious, boring, improbable - or some combination of two or more of these.The ending was the most banal, absurd, even silly conclusion possible - but again, fascinating because of this. Ladd and Spano are attractive individuals, and t.v. movies would appear their best forte - probably best in 2nd-lead (probably better if \"3rd-\") roles, even in this venue. Taylor could be cast as the aunt or mother of one of them. Give this one 1 star for the story/performances, and 3 additional for the fascination factor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-698fa86783834adebe89f36a6aef7632",
            "input": "*Contains spoilers due to me having to describe some film techniques, so read at your own risk!*I loved this film. The use of tinting in some of the scenes makes it seem like an old photograph come to life. I also enjoyed the projection of people on a back screen. For instance, in one scene, Leopold calls his wife and she is projected behind him rather than in a typical split screen. Her face is huge in the back and Leo's is in the foreground.One of the best uses of this is when the young boys kill the Ravensteins on the train, a scene shot in an almost political poster style, with facial close ups. It reminded me of Battleship Potemkin, that intense constant style coupled with the spray of red to convey tons of horror without much gore. Same with the scene when Katharina finds her father dead in the bathtub...you can only see the red water on the side. It is one of the things I love about Von Trier, his understatement of horror, which ends up making it all the more creepy.The use of text in the film was unique, like when Leo's character is pushed by the word, \"Werewolf.\" I have never seen anything like that in a film.The use of black comedy in this film was well done. Ernst-Hugo Järegård is great as Leo's uncle. It brings up the snickers I got from his role in the Kingdom (Riget.) This humor makes the plotline of absurd anal retentiveness of train conductors against the terrible backdrop of WW2 and all the chaos, easier to take. It reminds me of Riget in the way the hospital administrator is trying to maintain a normalcy at the end of part one when everything is going crazy. It shows that some people are truly oblivious to the awful things happening around them. Yet some people, like Leo, are tuned in, but do nothing positive about it.The voice over, done expertly well by Max von Sydow, is amusing too. It draws you into the story and makes you jump into Leo's head, which at times is a scary place to be.The movie brings up the point that one is a coward if they don't choose a side. I see the same idea used in Dancer in the Dark, where Bjork's character doesn't speak up for herself and ends up being her own destruction. Actually, at one time, Von Trier seemed anti-woman to me, by making Breaking the Waves and Dancer, but now I know his male characters don't fare well either! I found myself at the same place during the end of Dancer, when you seriously want the main character to rethink their actions, but of course, they never do!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b60485742d904620801d551576c1f8f4",
            "input": "Honestly, I went to see the movie, not because of the actors, not because of the plot but because it was rated 17 here in Luxembourg and a movie has to be really brutal or pornographic to be put in this category. Believe me, being a movie-freak, I have seen quite a lot of brutal films in my lifetime (Ichi the killer, Irreversible, Hellraiser) but this movie was by far the most disturbing and brutal picture I have ever seen. The plot is plain stupid, the directing is awful, acting was mediocre even the music was a cheap copy of so-called \"Horror Soundtracks\". There isn't a single intelligent aspect in the whole movie, and some of the scenes are really hard to stand. (especially the scene, where you see the embryos in the glasses and hear the baby cries--horrible). I can't understand why the movie was rated 16 in Germany, where normally the criteria are real tough (e.g. kill-bill (brutal but it made fun of itself and had great allusions to Asian cinema and besides a magnificent directing) even a movie like state of grace is rated 18). No one can call this a Horror movie, because actually it was more about showing gore than about scaring the public (Showing the \"Creep's\" face in the middle of the movie was a very bad decision); for me (excuse my expression) it is just one insane director living out his disturbing fantasies. In some scenes you see violence, that has absolutely nothing to do with the plot nor does it explain anything. The plot has holes and flaws, the dialog is boring, honestly I can't mention a single positive aspect of the movie except for the British and Scottish accent.If I had something to say, I would ban this movie from the theaters, I fully understand why none of the big production companies invested their money in this crap.I'm looking forward to getting feedbacks to my thread and I'd be happy to discuss about one or the other topic.\"Livin' the dream baby, livin' the dream\" David Aames",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48b615676bc1444fb56bb548a22b4b28",
            "input": "I would have rated the series a perfect 10 for outstanding and consistently high quality story and character development had it not been for the last episode of Season 10! The final episode of the 10th season \"Unending\", where (it would certainly appear that) the Asgard have been killed-off in a very rushed, unconvincing and very unceremonious fashion, left me in disbelief! From the extremely rushed end of the series, it's obvious that many of the story arcs were originally scheduled to occur over at least one more season. My guess would be that they rapidly accelerated these stories to position the Stargate SG-1 franchise for the two upcoming direct-to-DVD moves!Unless the Asgard return in a future SG-1 movie (with a very good explanation of the \"apparent\" extinction), I think that the fans have been cheated with a poor clean-up of loose-ends!Poor end to an otherwise brilliant sci-fi series.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2849dee6af0e43339cf842b598342acf",
            "input": "I saw this movie while it was under limited release, mainly for the novelty of seeing Pierce Brosnan with a moustache, but it turned out to be one of the funniest movies I have seen all year. It starts out almost as a thriller, but steadily progresses into a hilarious piece of work full of one-liners and great comedic energy between Pierce Brosnan and Greg Kinnear. Also, while I say this movie is a comedy, it doesn't forget it has a heart at times and can be very touching when it needs to be. When I went into the theater I didn't know what to expect much more than a moustache, but what I got was one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. Leaving the theater I felt very fulfilled from the film and plan to see it again in wide release. I recommend it to anyone who appreciates a good comedy with a well-written script and a big moustache.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9856cbce7274eb397a262eeecab2258",
            "input": "While I recently gave OPERATION PETTICOAT a positive review, I really didn't like this film even though it had so many similarities. Both were made just a few years apart, both starred Cary Grant and both were WWII comedies. However, the overall tone and style of the films were quite different. KISS HER FOR ME, overall, just seemed like a cheaper film--with poor writing, little energy and some VERY broad performances--even when compared to OPERATION PETTICOAT. I think that at least much of the blame for this lies in casting Jayne Mansfield. The combination of her ample talents and limited acting ability really made this A-budget film look like it came from a 3rd rate studio. Plus, there wasn't much chemistry or energy in pairing her with Cary Grant--an actor generally loved for his grace and class. It's sort of like pairing Sir Lawrence Olivier with Marjorie Main.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa87faa6dcaf430a9d42635b310634f1",
            "input": "When it comes to movies I can be pretty picky, and I'll complain about anything and everything that is done wrong. While every movie has its flaws, The Night Listener had an exceptionally low count.If you read the last review (it was hard, since half of it was written in caps and it contained no actual information about the movie), you may have been led to believe that this movie was not too well done. Unfortunately, if you read more than 3 lines into that same review, you discovered the poster's reason for disdain: he/she does not like the fact that the director is gay (or that the production team smokes crack...apparently).So, despite the fact that I have never written a review before, I thought this movie deserved one based on its merits, not the sexual orientation of its director. Let's go over a quick checklist first: 1. Great plot? Absolutely. I won't give a shred of it away, but the plot is highly compelling and definitely not what one would expect based on the commercials. This is a thriller, not a horror, and it should be approached as such. The story really will amaze you, even more so because it's true (and the plot did stay quite faithful to the actual events).2. Wonderful Acting? Oh Yes. Robin Williams long ago broke free from the chains of the comedy type-cast, and he has since flourished in serious roles for which many people would have wrote him off just a decade ago. He once again achieves high form in his role in The Night Listener, playing a radio host who becomes increasingly troubled by and entangled in a case of...well, I'll let you see for yourself.3. Excellent direction? Certainly. Now, unlike the other poster to which I referred, I actually know something about direction. I've been sutdying the art of direction at school now for 3 years. Of course I really don't think that makes a lick of difference (the only thing that matters is if YOU like the direction), but I thought I should simply establish once again that I'm basing my opinions here on something both substantial and relevant...for example: not the sexual orientation of the director (or the alleged drug habits of the production team, LOL).Patrick Stettner's direction was moody and dark, and he allowed the angles and lighting to help create those so-sought-after feelings of \"tension and release\" rather than the messy, fast-paced camera-work and quick cuts we're so often subjected to today. Some people can truly show you a story through their camera, while other's feel as if they have to make the story with the camera. I really appreciate when someone these days has the courage to just use the camera as its supposed to be utilized, which is as an eyeball through which we all see.4. Lighting, cinematography, and editing? Great all around. I've already wrote so much, and I could go on about these last three things for another ten paragraphs, so I'll just wrap it up.In short, go see this movie. Don't listen to people who have alterior motives for trashing it, especially if they're so stupid that they unknowingly reveal that motive 1/4 of the way through their post. Enjoy the show! -Ben",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64cbeb1b18ae447a8008b45d643ecece",
            "input": "Reviewed at the World Premiere screening Sept. 9, 2006 at the Isabel Bader Theatre during the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF).This had an interesting premise but seemed to go on too long with too many shots of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The bits of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were especially striking. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was quite something as well. Scenes of the activity at the Three Gorges Dam project were also a complement to the Jia Khang-je films at TIFF (the feature Still Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were also built around that subject.Director Jennifer Baichwal, Producer Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on stage for a Q&A after the world premiere. Producer Noah Weinzweig was introduced from the audience and was thanked as the most key person that assisted in the on the ground access in China itself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3570e5b69bd34f559de4bc1843c0ec29",
            "input": "The TV guide described the plot of SEVERED TIES as thus : \" An experiment on a severed arm goes awry \" so right away I thought this was going to be about an arm that`s got a mind of its own as seen in THE BEAST WITH FIVE FINGERS or THE HAND or someone getting an arm transplant as in BODY PARTS . Both premises are tried and tested , or to be more accurate tired and tested so I was curious as to how the producers would approach the story . I actually thought they were making an arthouse movie like PI down to the use of B&W photography at the start of the film but the makers seemed to have tired of this approach after 20 seconds and decided to make a splatter comedy similar to THE EVIL DEAD . I`ve very little to say on this except that I disliked THE EVIL DEAD movies and I disliked SEVERED TIES and it seems really unfair that films like this use an obscene amount of rubber when the third world is crying out for condoms",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f147bb94f407407e85437cbe1ae7017c",
            "input": "This has to be one of the best movies to come out of HK in a long time, i was eagerly waiting to get my hands on this movie just looking at the title. Loads of fantastic actors in this show and i was particularly impressed with Sam Lee's impossibly believable insane behavior and Edison's portrayal of a killer machine, which totally reversed his normal idol image. i would definitely recommend to those looking for a stylish and action packed movie. However, i must warn you, this is also an equally depressing movie, as every character in the movie is in some kind of dead end and trouble of their own, and struggling to breathe. Makes you think about what is life about really.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa325e41e5c941d8981520dd7f51757d",
            "input": "i'm not sure if it is available worldwide - but if anyone who's deciding what is supposed to be put on videotapes and distributed in video clubs - is reading this - please , please buy it! (if I wasn't clear: GET THE MOVIE INTO VIDEOSTORES!)can't be explained - must see!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68c1bfd87cda436291c91e6ab28c3ae0",
            "input": "I read so many comments that I, too, shared about remembering this movie and wanting so badly to see it again but I didn't know the name of the movie. Thankfully, because of doing a search and finding the title on this site, I read the comments left here and realized that this was the movie I remembered. I then did a search and did find the movie and was so thrilled to be able to watch the movie once more 40 years later. Because of this site and your comments, you helped me and so I want to thank all of you. I want to share how I was able to find this movie for all of you who were looking for a copy as well. It was on the VHS version of Wonderful World of Disney's \"Call it Courage\" which contained 2 movies, the second one being \"The Legend of the Boy and the Eagle.\" It touched me now as much as it did 40 years ago and now I own my own copy of it. I think it is only available on VHS. I found it on ebay and I have seen several copies of it there. Enjoy it, I know I did!It is a wonderful story about the love of a boy and the eagle he took care of. When it was time to sacrifice the eagle, the boy set the eagle free because he couldn't allow it to be killed. After the boy was forced to leave the tribe for punishment after freeing the eagle, the eagle, too, saved the boy's life and more than that, taught him how to survive. The closeness that the boy and the eagle shared in the wilderness was so moving and the filming was really remarkable. What a wonderful era this was. I have never seen anything come even close to this movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4be97459d4934a59bbcd9ad1001a2e1a",
            "input": "Mimicking its long title the movie finds ways to come close to the 90' mark. The beautiful sets are here with all that made the Hamer production values a trademark, yet Paris drowned in the fog is a sign of indolent neglect. The story is obvious and can be summed up in a dozen words so there comes nothing unexpected and nothing worth more than 5% of your attention to be expected.The directing is heavy as a direct transfer from the stage play, actors are mostly stiff as wax figures (ok this is a Hamer feature, only it's sometimes better featured in the whole package). My conclusion: this movie is trash, not worth the time I spend that evening. Eternal life is a boring matter and I should have hoped the guys in charge of programming at the Cinemathèque would have known better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74ab1c195dfd417b80393e66fe00b7d2",
            "input": "Stewart Moss stars as a scientist who is on a working trip with his wife, and one gets the feeling that he was picked for this role for his ability to roll his eyes back in his head...imagine the auditions for this..\"can you...no, that's not quite it, thank you, next!\". Anyway, he's bitten by a bat, and then, he's either changing into some kind of bat creature and killing people or....he's not. For no one else sees his strange transformations, but he himself seems to think that he's changing because his wedding ring pops off when his hands turn into claws, etc. To its credit the movie does kind of hold back on whether he's just nuts or whether he's actually transforming into something until almost the very end. This has some good locations & sort of a decent atmosphere at times but unfortunately none of that can make up for the somewhat lame story and the wonderfully bad acting. Kind of fun in a \"so bad it's good\" way, but leans more towards just plain bad. 4 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b73c9e1825674545a5b4a741e75dd4e9",
            "input": "As a poker enthusiast I was looking forward to seeing this movie - Especially as it had Scotty Nyugen in it.Basically, Scotty Nyugens short spots in this film are all it has going for it.The characters are unlikeable and annoying, the soundtrack is awful and the plot, well, there isn't one.I honestly got a headache and found myself reading the barcode number on the DVD box after twenty minutes I was THAT bored. Its actually ashame that Nyugen was in this movie as otherwise I wouldn't have wasted $16 buying it off Ebay.Take it from me - AVOID like 7 2 offsuit!!! Dire. :(",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-297a1b0f24c44c3d8c5322bd03636ed9",
            "input": "S.S. Van Dine must have been a shrewd businessman in dealing with Hollywood. Most of the film series' from the studio days were usually confined to one or two studios. But apparently Van Dine must have sold his rights to each book about Philo Vance one at a time. Note that Paramount, MGM, Warner Brothers, and more all released Philo Vance films. Only Tarzan seemed to get around Hollywood more.MGM produced the Garden Murder Case and starred Edmund Lowe as the fashionable detective. Of course MGM had the screen's original Philo under contract at the time, but Bill Powell was busy doing The Thin Man at the time and I guess Louis B. Mayer decided to concentrate him there.Edmund Lowe is a pretty acceptable Philo Vance. Lowe had started out pretty big at the tail end of the silent era with What Price Glory and then with a string of films with Victor McLaglen with their Flagg and Quirt characters. But after McLaglen got his Oscar for The Informer, Lowe seemed to fade into the B picture market. The Garden Murder Case involves three separate victims, Douglas Walton, Gene Lockhart, and Frieda Inescourt. The sinister atmosphere around the perpetrator kind of gives it away, the mystery is really how all the killings are connected and how they are accomplished.I will say this though. Vance takes a very big chance in exposing the villain and the last 15 minutes are worthy of Hitchcock.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32694b7d0f354572a8d3f6de872287f8",
            "input": "ok. for starters, taxi driver is amazing. this, this is not taxi driver or amazing. what it is is bad. but i thought it was bad funny, which means that it did have some redeeming qualities. like the dialogue...wow. there was more or less no plot, the characters were all stupid, and the movie was preachy. there were some places were i thought the movie would dive into taxi driver type violence, which would have hit the message at the end of the movie on the head much harder. i can't even believe that there are like 20 other people who have seen this movie. yeah, it's worth watching if you are real bored and you want to reaffirm the fact that anyone can make a movie, or at least can try to.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d8363d5a29f4c30921ed88fee45e076",
            "input": "I don't remember a movie where I have cared less about where the characters have come from, what happens to them or where they are going. I realize that Hollywood's greatest pastime is navel-gazing, but these people are either too despicable or too boring to take up time with. For what it's worth, though, the discussion that followed the showing, under the auspices of the Key Sunday Cinema series, did make allowance that possibly the three women did show some redeeming characteristics. I disagree.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8090f59e8c341109c5815874071e663",
            "input": "This film speaks a universal language; one can relate it to the self, community, society or the wider world. It has a way of not only opening up several questions but also setting one in pursuit of discovering and asking the right questions in order to get to that point of self conviction / ownership. The portrayal of the stereotypes within the film addresses the archetypes around us which must be recognised as being the repeating cycle of destruction, the opposing force of innovation, creativity and growth. The factors which disturb the natural flow of things must be made apparent and tackled. The Idea, is definitely a film to be experienced and not just viewed as it taps into one's internal voice / conscience through the looking, it makes one feel as opposed to just watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2f699d8d67e40bea05c49e6e78d8cfc",
            "input": "Prior to seeing Show People, my impression of silent comedy was essentially slapstick, and slapstick only. I could not imagine how screen comedy could be possible without relying heavily on spoken word or numerous pratfalls. But this masterful film proved me wrong. Davies, in my view, was probably the greatest comedic actress to come along prior to Lucille Ball. I mention Lucy primarily because Davies' mannerisms and facial expressions reminded me of her to the point that I wonder if Davies wasn't one of Ball's primary influences. This is coming from a 21 year old who had never before seen silent comedy, and I must say that no matter how much of the period-specific references you actually get (I didn't, apparently), you will not be bored by this movie. You will probably even laugh more than you would at most talkie comedies. This is not only my favorite silent comedy, but easily among my ten favorite comedies of all time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1cf2da93441408180f1b01640991d16",
            "input": "I have been watching horror movies since I was 5 years old, beginning with Childs Play.Since then, I have seen good horror movies and bad, but this is without question, the DUMBEST movie I have ever seen! The actors did all they could with the material. The plot was just idiotic. Plus , it was just all gore. I can stomach a lot of blood, but that was just ridiculous! In one of the scenes, a character gets stabbed in the rear end and choked with his intestines! Plain Stupid! Another problem with this movie is that its boring and probably the slowest movie ever made. The end of it is just dumb. But then again, it goes with the rest of it! At the end, when the girl gets away from the cannibal/ancestor, she receives help from a old lady. The old lady is making tea, but when she turns around to talk to the girl, the girl attacks her! She turned into a cannibal! Retarded movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-200d859f4f4344d2a2dbbfe788b5a24c",
            "input": "If you haven't seen this obscure little charmer, you should seek it out. It is the story of a bumbling, wartime Sad Sack (Fred MacMurray) who is listed 4-F each time he attempts to join any branch of the military. He finds a magic lamp which of course contains a genie (Gene Sheldon), but the genie is even more bumbling than MacMurray is, sending him across time to serve in all the wrong times and places than the one he wants. It is cute, cheerful, and pure fluff, and you can't help but like it. The plots is much like a Disney film, particularly since the two stars (MacMurray and Sheldon) both made numerous Disney films in the 50's and 60's, although not together. Needless to say, it all ends well for everyone, and the viewer goes away feeling pretty good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ff061e5c6274b9380b112ee983111b2",
            "input": "Van Dien must cringe with embarrassment at the memory of this ludicrously poor film, as indeed must every single individual involved. To be honest I am rather embarrassed to admit I watched it from start to finish. Production values are somewhere between the original series of 'Crossroads' and 'Prisoner Cell Block H'. Most five year olds would be able to come up with more realistic dialogue and a more plausible plot. As for the acting performances, if you can imagine the most rubbish porno you have ever seen - one of those ones where the action is padded out with some interminable 'story' to explain how some pouting old peroxide blonde boiler has come to be getting spit-roasted by a couple of blokes with moustaches - you will have some idea of the standard of acting in 'Maiden Voyage'. Worse still, you can't even fast forward to the sex scenes, because there aren't any. An appallingly dreadful film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2a6d4b327074fc69d176fd69b11bc59",
            "input": "This is the best movie I`ve ever seen !!! Thomas Beckett & Richard Miller -two mankinds who want to survive in the \"jungle\" of violence and madnes, one shot - one killed !!? You must kill, if you getting doubt about something, YOU MUST SURVIVE !!P.P.- I appologise of my bad / worst/ English !!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-178a324caad0417c9055a58d242ab620",
            "input": "Astounding.....This may have been A poor attempt at remaking the already recreated Omen Movie, but I sure enjoyed it.That last Man who commented is a fool, This Movie was one of a kind, And the Music Dark, Jerry Goldsmith Himself, would had applaud this Movie.Great recommendations from Myself to Watch or Buy this Film.I collect horror Movies and Soundtracks, So listen to what I have to say, not that other idiot.There is only one thing that do not fascinate Me, the endings.According to Prophecy it is all inaccurate, Including Final conflict, and Left behind.But My conclusion being.... There great Movies...and should be seen, before the Great Depression falls upon Us, and Before the Democrats Take over the Presidency too.So Signed....Jacob Eder...A Farmer, with A Mastermind.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e215774d4859475fb7ed16fba5516d5a",
            "input": "This, like Murder She Wrote, is one of those shows, that after a stressful day at school, I sit down in front of the TV, and watch. Why? Because I genuinely enjoy it, and it's a shame it's not on the air anymore. Dick Van Dyke is amazing as Dr Mark Sloan, a doctor-turned-detective, who with his son, solves murders. He is joined by a largely unknown but very competent supporting cast, namely his real-life son, Barry Van Dyke. Victoria Rowell is also good, but I noticed that every series her hairstyle changes. i also liked Scott Baio and Charlie Schlatter, but I particularly loved Michael Tucci as Norman, and was puzzled how he suddenly disappeared. This show is so entertaining,with great guest stars, it's a bit obvious at times, like Colombo, but in every episode, there is always something to chuckle about. In conclusion, a great series, with two thumbs up and a 10/10. Bethany Cox",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b783172bad6448083438bf4235d879f",
            "input": "This is a really interesting movie. It is an action movie with comedy mixed in. Foxx teams up with comedian Epps in this movie to give it a comedic spin. It will keep you wondering whats going to happen to Foxx next. It was a well shot movie, the director used the right colors in this movie(dark blue colors) to give it the right kind of feel. Kimberly Elise also starred in this movie and it is always a pleasure to see her on the big screen. She plays her role well. Even Jamie Kennedy is in this movie. It's worth seeing it you haven't seen it. It's definitely worth having if you are a Jamie Foxx fan. It deserves more credit than it is actually given.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c147c6e3ed7849339847c40bf1bd941a",
            "input": "From everything I'd read about the movie, I was excited to support a film with a Christian theme. Everything about the movie was very unprofessionally done. Especially the writing! Without good writing a movie doesn't have a chance. The writer/director said in an interview that he didn't want to give away how the title relates to the story. Believe me, it was NO big surprise. I kept waiting for the teenage/young adult back-story to unfold, but it never did. As someone who has gone through a divorce, I was very disappointed. This movie would have been NO comfort to me when I first went through the emotional turmoil that divorce can bring to your life as a Christian!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f69ef5d1bbb0473badc6924b4db5311d",
            "input": "Super Mario 64 is undoubtedly the greatest game ever created. It is so addicting that you could play it for hours upon hours without stopping for a break. I've beaten the game 4 times, but I've never gotten all 120 stars...(I've gotten 111)...but I hope to achieve them eventually. Even though I didn't officially play this game until I was seven in, I loved watching my sisters play it. Now I am 13 and still play this, erasing games and starting over again.The graphics are unbelievable for an early N64 game. The gameplay is addictive. The controls are great. The levels are tough, but not impossible. The Bowser fights are challenging.I would like to tell you more, but why don't you just get it for yourself? Put the X-BOX 360, PS3, and the Wii away and go find yourself a Nintendo 64 and play this amazing, wonderful game.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfd0ce7a6f3f4fa2847f650c1d037696",
            "input": "National Lampoon was once a funny magazine. Whether you liked the stoner hippie days of the late sixties or the smug and sassy coke-head days of the seventies (when the comedy was fortified with plenty of naked babes) depends very much on your date of birth, but everyone agrees that by the early eighties, middle age had killed off whichever remaining sparks of anarchic humour that the drugs hadn't, and offerings like this film and the increasingly terrible spin-off records shot further holes in the hull. Outside of a nicely illustrated title sequence, there's absolutely nothing to recommend this singularly depressing stinkbug. If you make it through the baffling opening segment, 'Growing Myself', hoping things will get better, tough luck - they don't. Whoever thought the idea of a woman being brutally raped with a stick of butter was comedy gold deserved to have his head handed back to him on a platter of dog mess. If there's ever a global shortage of guitar picks, the negatives of this rambling, incoherent ragbag of crummy ideas and dire performances may well serve some purpose.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78dc506e39a64e2988afe7fb6e4fc3f0",
            "input": "This is the best version (so far) that you will see and the most true to the Bronte work. Dalton is a little tough to imagine as Rochester who Jane Eyre declared \"not handsome\". But his acting overcomes this and Zelah Clark, pretty as she is, is also a complete and believable Jane Eyre. This production is a lengthy watch but well worth it. Nearly direct quotes from the book are in the script and if you want the very first true 'romance' in literature, this is the way to see it. I own every copy of this movie and have read and re-read the original. The filming may seem a little dated now but there will never be another like this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90342987366c4c70a51f4ddf56f6ed12",
            "input": "Somewhere near the bottom of the film studio ladder you can find companies like U.F.O, Troma and beneath them lie Seduction cinema.Seduction is a direct to video production company that specialize in lesbian themed, non-hardcore erotic movies. It has developed a very dedicated fan base that purchase each new title as they are released but sadly the company has become too closely associated with frequent star Misty Mundae. I say sadly because recent mainstream interest and her appearance on the show Masters of Horrors has caused her to set her sights a little higher than the zero budget S.C efforts which forces the company to find a new identity. But back in their glory days they released this film on a very appreciative world.The gorgeous Misty Mundae is forced to attend a boarding school at the request of a absent father. At the school she meets her absurdly hot room-mate played by Ruby Larocca who immediately has designs on her but the headmistress (Barbara Joyce) has other plans. In typical S.C style the movie stops every ten minutes for a extended sex scene but unlike most of their efforts this one has a somewhat interesting story and a couple of good performances. Ms. Larocca appears to be having a great time as the sexual predator who views Misty as a tasty meal and Darian Caine makes a welcome (though brief) appearance as Satan. This is the sort of film that Jess Franco would crank out in the 70s (although this one does not have the hardcore sex that Franco was always willing to throw in for foreign sales) and fans of that madman's work would be wise to give this one a go.To me, as a long time zero budget cinema fan (and Troma worshiper), I came across the Seduction cinema films through their parody films (Playmate of the apes, Who wants to be a erotic billionaire) but I actually prefer their more original works. You either see past the low budget and occasionally weak acting or you get hung up on these things and just hate all of these films. For me the most obvious thing that unites these no-budget movies is a real sense of fun. These low budget companies are able to create their own unique style which gives the viewer something very different from the bland, by the numbers, studio efforts that load up the multiplexes.If you have never seen a Seduction cinema film either this or Sin Sisters (featuring both of the Mundae sisters) are excellent choices to begin with. This one is a fun, fast paced film (although the frequent exterior shots of the school do get a little old) and the DVD is totally loaded with extras including a ton of previews of other company offerings, a great behind the scenes featurette and some deleted scenes including a alternate opening. I do recommend you pass on the disc's bonus feature, the first film by director, as it is quite weak and not really worth viewing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eff5c5b729914852bed59e353b36f9ec",
            "input": "Take your basic Frankenstein flick, inject some Reanimator (but not the good parts), and you have Doctor Hackenstein. Certainly, this was obviously inspired by aforementioned films but it never materializes as anything special on its own.A scientist accidentally kills his wife, so the whole movie takes place over the course of one night as he attempts to revive his wife. To revive his wife, he decides to chop off body parts from some women that have become stranded and, coincidentally, decide to stay the night at his place.I can't really say the acting is bad, nor is the directing. Everything here is just way too standard. What little attempts there are at humor actually work (check out the scene when Hackenstein keeps hiding behind his deaf assistant because she would undoubtedly be very upset if she saw him clutching a woman and a needle), but that's hardly enough to recommend this film. The music is decent, what blood that's there is decent, and the cast looks quite good. And for half of the time, I was even entertained by this film. But I never felt like this was anything more than a time waster. Avoidable.Try Frankenhooker instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-556ba6e906c549c3acb82bd35b066698",
            "input": "A hilarious Action comedy in which Damian Szifron takes into the lives of Díaz, a cop whose wife has cheated on him. He is living in a hotel feeling guilty about his wife's unfaithfulness, falling into depression he stops caring, running red lights just for fun, feeling sorry for himself. And Silberman, a Jewish shrink on probation, a leftist liberal who does not trust cops at all. He is told to accompany Díaz in his daily duties, unable to refuse due to the terms of his probation. Soon the situation reverts when Silberman himself finds out his wife is cheating on him, and ends up being comforted by the very person he was supposed to help, a person he did not trust at all in the beginning. A nuclear conspiracy, car thieves, international spies, a hysterical wife. Weird characters in a delightful comedy about friendship and heroism.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e9dec7aa493412790f28f2eef4d7ef3",
            "input": "Robert Standish's novel is about a triangular romantic situation on a Ceylonese tea plantation... So the events of the Ceylon backgrounds and pictorial beauty are rewarding points to William Dieterle's film...The story is about a rich powerful planter (Peter Finch), who brings a charming and tender beauty (Elizabeth Taylor), into the jungle as his bride... The plantation, of course, is endangered by some kind of wild life... For this reason Taylor — elegant as never in dazzling costumes — finds herself in a strange atmosphere... The echo determination of a ghost, the bad temper of a husband obsessed by the memory of his autocratic father, a highly dangerous disease, and the fury of wild animals...In her confusion, boredom and annoyance Elizabeth Taylor looks to a friendly face, a pretentious foreman (Dana Andrews), who admires her beauty but tries to conquer her love...With echoes of \"Jane Eyre,\" the mysterious Yorkshire mansion with a brooding master, and \"Rebecca,\" the innocent young second wife hunted by the image of the glamorous first wife, \"Elephant Walk\" is a menace melodrama with a wide view of a huge tropical bungalow, exotic dances with rage excessively colorful, stampeding big bull elephants, amazing mansion set on fire, all in the company of an exquisite creature with an unquestioned beauty and talent...The movie gave Liz a change of scenery, and allowed her more creative energy and self-respect than most of her other willful debutante-rebels… The wife here has a sharp tongue and a strong will, and so Taylor plays her movie star heroine with more spirit than she was given credit for…",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc029067739d48e09929e1980c282a35",
            "input": "I have to say I was really looking forward on watching this film and finding some new life in it that would separate it from most dull and overly crafted mexican films. I have no idea why but I trusted Sexo, Pudor y Lagrimas to be the one to inject freshness and confidence to our non-existent industry. Maybe it was because the soundtrack(which I listened to before I saw the film) sounded different from others, maybe it was because it dared to include newer faces(apart from Demian Bichir who is always a favorite of mexican film directors) and supposedly dealed within it's script with modern social behaviour, maybe because it's photography I saw in the trailers was bright and realistic instead of theatrical. The film turned out to be a major crowd pleaser, and a major letdown. What Serrano actually deals here with is the very old fashioned \"battle of the sexes\" as in \"all men are the same\" and \"why is it that all women...;\" blah,blah,blah. Nothing new in it, not even that, it uses so much common ground and clichè that it eventually mocks itself without leaving any valuable reflexion on the female/male condition. Full of usual tramps on the audience like safe gags about the clichès I talked about before(those always work, always) and screaming performances(it is a well acted film in it's context)..and by screaming I mean, literally. The at first more compelling characters played by Monica Dionne and Demian Bichir turn out to be according to Serrano the more pathetic ones. I completely disagree with Serrano, they shouldn't have been treated that way only to serve as marionettes for his lesson to come through...he made sure we got HIS message and completely destroyed their roles that were the only solid ground in which this story could have stood. Anyway, it is after all, a very entertaining film at times and you will probably have a good time seeing it (if you accept to be manipulated by it).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33a8e0a5c0a94a2887fd4bd9be7cc97f",
            "input": "It seems to me, as a recent film school graduate, that in these times of New Zealand film reaching new heights, the general public seems to think every New Zealand film made is great. Sione's Wedding proves this is dead wrong.It's completely overrated and not funny, and far from the 'hilarious' film other users of IMDb have commented. The only really funny thing I found in this film was Derek the wannabe black guy, but other than that the jokes were recycled crap that we'd all heard before.Being of half-Samoan decent, I wanted to see how the film was going to deal with Polynesian representation. It was a complete balls-up - I know it's a supposed comedy, but I didn't feel like the characters had anything new to say about Polynesian identity, even if it was in a tongue-in-cheek manner. I was most disappointed with the ending of the film and the resolution of the character's relationships - Mikaele was the player who only messed around with white women, comes to slightly turn his ways when the 'Dusky Maiden' comes to town, has an epiphany that maybe he should start looking for a stable relationship, then at the very last minute rejects it and accepts his position as a Polynesian Playboy for palagi women. I didn't understand why they did this.All in all, it was very disappointing. My whole family went to see it expecting to have a good laugh, but ended up being really bitter about paying to see it at the cinema. The jokes are lame at best, the acting, particularly of Sefa's girlfriend, APPALLING, and honestly I would've been happy if I had got my hands on one of those pirated copies of the film to save myself the $15 ticket price.I think the only good thing to come from the movie is that it's the second step (behind No. 2, of course, a far superior film to this one) in the birth of Polynesian cinema. I hope Pacific filmmakers in the future can learn from Sione's Wedding in how to NOT reflect Polynesia and have something more meaningful and sensible to say. Even if it is done in a comedic fashion.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b1f927a3a124364b946db33d6ab4131",
            "input": "While this film certainly does possess the stench of a bad film, it's surprisingly watchable on several levels. First, for old movie fans, it's interesting to see the leading role played by Dean Jagger (no relation to Mick). While Jagger later went on to a very respectable role as a supporting actor (even garnering the Oscar in this category for 12 O'CLOCK HIGH), here his performance is truly unique since he actually has a full head of hair (I never saw him this way before) and because he was by far the worst actor in the film. This film just goes to show that if an actor cannot act in his earlier films doesn't mean he can't eventually learn to be a great actor. Another good example of this phenomenon is Paul Newman, whose first movie (THE SILVER CHALICE) is considered one of the worst films of the 1950s.A second reason to watch the film is the shear cheesiness of it all. The writing is bad, the acting is bad and the special effects are bad. For example, when Jagger and an unnamed Cambodian are wading through the water, it's obvious they are really just walking in place and the background is poorly projected behind them. Plus, once they leave the water, their costumes are 100% dry!!! Horrid continuity and mindlessly bad dialog abounds throughout the film--so much so that it's hard to imagine why they didn't ask Bela Lugosi or George Zucco to star in the film--since both of them starred in many grade-z horror films. In many ways, this would be a perfect example for a film class on how NOT to make a film.So, while giving it a 3 is probably a bit over-generous, it's fun to laugh at and short so it's worth a look for bad film fans.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-976467b4f8d144e6ad6a6294de627abc",
            "input": "For a low budget project, the Film was a success. The story is interesting, and the actors were convincing. Eva Longoria, who now stars on the TV Show \"Dragnet,\" is sexier than ever. The locations were ideal for the ganster plot, and the director shows his talent by taking on many roles for his project. Of course this low budget film could use better editing transitions and more special effects for the gun scenes, but the music keeps this script moving. Although this film has it's share of problems, such as continuity, I must say that I would rent the director's next movie. If your a film student, you could learn a few things from the director's commentary.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f450123a25d45608be5a232f527ee19",
            "input": "I saw this on TV so long ago that I can't remember when it was, but it still stands out as one of the scariest, most unnerving films I've ever seen. There is a simultaneously subtle but intense dread induced by the woman in black lurking at the edge of the frame, not quite clearly visible, so that you feel (like the solicitor hero), unsure whether its just imagination or not. It is also one of the few films which has really made me fearful to keep watching. \"Production values\" be hanged, good films are about a director's ability to create atmosphere using film, actors, locations/sets, music, attention to detail, and ...imagination. A real gem.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cecfbf330f2543778c05ee986613d9e9",
            "input": "The plot of this movie hangs on one important point: that this murderer was also a responsible, loving, caring father. Not that being a father and a murderer is impossible. But this man is shown murdering a teenage girl without provocation or reason and without emotion. This girl was someone's daughter. I don't think a father who cared so much about his own daughter could have been so cold-blooded to someone else's daughter. Or, alternately, could have been so cold blooded and yet worry about and care for his own daughter. And the idea that a convicted murderer would actually ask his victim's parents to take in and care for his daughter is beyond belief.That said, the characters were acted with conviction by the actors. I thought changing Scott Bakula's eye color did make him seem more cold and menacing than he usually is. You couldn't see into his eyes at all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-715e72e6009641cfb6940719c83b780c",
            "input": "OK, so it was written in 1996, before 9/11, so you can give it a little credit for worrying about terrorists and the idea that the CIA director makes a plot to blow this doomed plane out of the sky before it brings doom to the world, is prescient. That's it. That's the good stuff. The acting...fair. The plot...silly. The \"twist\"... unnecessary. DOOOOOOOOOOOM It isn't as though no one ever thought of what to do when a plane gets contaminated. Don't you think bureaucrats have a manual for \"plagues\" and how to contain them? Proper execution of such a plan is always a problem, as we saw after Katrina. But they have a plan. It isn't to send them off to Iceland and then to Mauritania. And if the virus is carried in the air, why was the plane door open and the \"shooters' standing there with no protection? In fact, did it ever occur to anyone to shoot her legs? That would stop her. But not as dramatic. I'm a sucker. I always watch a movie to see the end, once I started it. But this was a waste of time, and for the most part, predictable. I saw it using a recorder so I didn't have to watch all the ads, that was a plus. It's a good example of why I watch so little network TV. Rubbish.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c03c5f9b8934153800adc72989796a9",
            "input": "Leave it to Paul \"sex on the brain\" Verhoeven to come up with a pointlessly sleazy and juvenile version of the INVISIBLE MAN story. If he'd direct a Pokemon film, I'm sure he'd turn it into some massive orgy of sorts. I don't mind sex or even sleaze (check my other reviews) on film but frankly, it's obvious the director has a one track mind and he couldn't see interesting aspects about an invisible man storyline than the kinky implications it comes with it. It's a shame because it could have been good if the film didn't spend so much time having an invisible Kevin Bacon grope women. The game cast of actors does what it can with the one-note cheesy script but I felt bad for some of them, including William Devane, who is totally wasted here.But then what could I have expected from the director of SHOWGIRLS, which, btw, is much more entertaining than this stilted & bad film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9badc067fdbe449a885e3877aee36e87",
            "input": "House of games has a strong story where obsession and illusion play a big part. A psychologist offers to help a patient with his gambling debts and gets caught at the game.Have you ever felt fascination for something that was both dangerous and wrong? Watch what happens if you pursue this urge and go all the way. Sit on the edge of your chair as tricksters are being tricked and victims turn into perpetrators. You're never sure of who is exactly who in this movie.This is both a quality and a drawback of the script. As the movie ends you feel that the story lacks a bit of consistency. But all this is largely compensated by the excellent psychological development.This is definitely one of the best movies about gambling.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8766b98fea174415b85a88cdf4f4d2ae",
            "input": "....after 16 years Tim Burton finally disappoints me!!!! Whatever happened to the old Burton who read \"The Dark Knight Returns\" by Frank Miller as research for his preparation to direct Batman back in 1988-89? By the looks of it Burton didn't research the book nor the movie cause he got everything WRONG! This movie sucks! It's not as good as the original and it doesn't deal with the same subject as the original. If you want a good ape movie watch the original.**out of****stars",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b6d46833f9f4f979ec6128648566551",
            "input": "Love the TV show. Was hooked first time I saw it. Wish I was there acting in with them. It touches reality when you love someone and you are thinking that you want to spend the rest of your life with, then at a turn of events that you meet someone else and that person is more of who you want to be with. You are in a situation were you have to choose one or the other. Someone is going to get hurt, there's no stopping that. Making the decision is hard but, do you want to go on being unhappy when you could have been. Why go on and live a life that you thought that you wanted or thinking you are doing the right thing and you both be unhappy. That other person isn't going to wait a life time waiting, they have a life a well. Making the decision that you really want will be better in the end. Making the best of what you have is a good thing a well. Money, cars, houses, etc....don't make you happy, having the one person that you really want to be with to share it with does.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95f730594fee4c0cac65a47130d5df14",
            "input": "Why should you watch this? There are certainly no reasons why you shouldn't watch it! Superbly and amusingly directed by Albert and David Maysles, Grey Gardens was originally intended to be a film on the gentrification of East Hampton, but it turned out to the brothers that it would be more interesting to produce a study on the eccentric life of the two Edith Bouvier Beales, the aunt and cousin of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. Their life was certainly an amusing one (Edith spent most of her day in bed singing operas, Edie performing pirouettes and majorette dances with their many cats, one was named Ted Z. Kennedy) The film is interesting because it is both funny and sad - Edith died shortly after the film was released (in February 1977) aged 82 after experiencing some of the fame that she and Edie received after the film (she danced and sang in a nightclub Edie Beale Jr was born in 1925 and is still living in Miami Beach.This film is both engaging and spellbounding.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5aad6a71f8e9484fb5b7cb87c698a48a",
            "input": "In A Woman Under the Influence Mabel goes crazy, but I can see why she does go crazy. If I lived the kind of life she lived with the family she has I would go crazy too. Everyone in her family is off their rocker and not completely with it. She is constantly surrounded by people yelling at her and telling her what is best for herself and people that aren't the sharpest knifes in the drawer.To start with the one person closest to her in her life, her husband, Nick, is a little off his rocker. He is always yelling at her when he is home telling her how to live her life and to stop acting like an imbecile. The rest of the time he is working long hours at his job and he isn't there to support her when she needs support. The one person in her life that should always be there for her is never there and if he is, he is just making her feel worse. She relies on him for support and always goes to him first when she feels she is acting wrong and he does nothing to support her. When she comes home from the hospital all he does is tell her how to act, instead of comforting her, he just yells at her and tells her what to do.The other major people in her life are her parents. Her parents do nothing in her life for her. Mabel basically runs their lives because they are afraid to stand up to her and stand up for her. In the end she even asks her father to stand up for her and he doesn't understand, and when he does get it he still does nothing. They do nothing to help Mabel recover or to keep her from going crazy because they do nothing for her period. The only person that tries to do something for her is Nick's mom. Nick's mom is adamant about having Mabel committed. She doesn't want to have Nick deal with it so she has the doctor commit her. It seems as though everyone is against Mabel and they feel that having her committed is a good idea because then they won't have to deal with it anymore. They all want to live their own lives and do nothing for Mabel except for yell at her and make her feel like she is doing something wrong when she really isn't. That is why she went crazy, and why she had to be committed, it was her family's entire fault.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66344fbc0a7c4c0c97493131efc792b4",
            "input": "What do you call a horror story without horror and story? This is the most irritating thing about the film: I get the feeling the writers never really decided what's actually going on in the film! It's a different thing to know it, give hints for the audience and not completely reveal it, but here, you get the feeling the screenwriters don't know it, characters in the film do not know it and audience sees that no one knows! (Remember \"Cube\"? Even that film knew more about itself.) I've consumed a lot of 80's horror / gore films and this movie certainly has its roots deep in those films. But a lot of important things are missing. We really know nothing about the characters. They keep repeating empty lines over and over again. The story isn't really developing - it never goes anywhere. B-acting is OK in this type of horror films, but there's not much to act in the script. We don't care about the characters. There's nothing to remember about them. There's not even cheesy humor or unnecessary sex. And most importantly - no thrills, no chills.You only get some commonly used elements of the horror film genre. They show the Lordi monsters one by one but their characters don't really contribute anything for the story.I honestly believe that this amount of story, character development and atmosphere could be achieved with minimal amount of crew and equipment. Oh yeah, film makers used to do that - and more - some 20 years ago! I felt the shared embarrassment of the audience as the film ended. Too bad really.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3706736309e24a0287890df8bdbfba9c",
            "input": "Has anyone been able to buy this movie? My Uncle \"Hutch\" was a Real (not Reel) pilot who is seen tossing his wings in the air and then snatching them with his fist as he was awarded his pilot's wings. He's only on screen a few seconds but my family would love to have the movie. He was killed in a dogfight over Italy, he was only 24 at the time. Do we know the film studio that made it?Or has anyone seen it at a video store, like Blockbuster? I wish they would make entire catalogs of these old movies available as it is so cheap to make DVD's these days.Please email me at nfny40@yahoo.com if you know where I can buy a copy. Thank you.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-07d21ca2581745bd851018614047b764",
            "input": "Was this movie stupid? Yup. Did this movie depth? Nope. Character development? Nope. Plot twists? Nope. This was simply a movie about a highly-fictionalized Springer show. It shows the lengths that some people will go to get their mugs on TV. Molly Hagan did a great job as Jaime Pressly's mom. Jaime is....well...GORGEOUS! This flick wasn't so much made to be a \"breakthrough\" movie, rather, it was intended to life in a trailer park (I live in a trailer park and ours is nothing like the one in this movie) where everyone sleeps with everyone else, all the girls get pregnant by different guys, and all the guys drive rusted-out '66 Ford pickups (exaggeration, of course, but that's the picture everyone sees when you mention \"trailer park\"). Some people over-analyze movies (case-in-point: Star Trek freaks). I watch movies purely for the entertainment value; not to point out that the girl is wearing a different shirt in a different scene (read the \"Goofs\" bit about Connie's shirt. Could it have been better? Sure. But it was funny as hell.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87231ccd44be443496fc99affd25b42e",
            "input": "A very high-standard Columbo story which was actually the first filmed episode of the long-running series but was originally transmitted second (after \"Murder By The Book\").Robert Culp makes his first of three appearances as the guest murderer in the series and plays the owner of a private detective agency, who blackmails the wife (Patricia Crowley) of a rich, highly influential businessman (played very sympathetically by Ray Milland) after he falsifies a report, in her favour, after it is discovered she was having an affair. The wife later rebels against the blackmail scheme but is killed in a fit of rage....A very satisfying episode in many respects, particularly as the plot is so strongly set-up and subsequently developed and also because of the rare Columbo ingredient that the crime is an unpremeditated killing. The whole thing is further enhanced when the widowed husband uses the murderer to assist Columbo in his investigations: a feature that facilitates numerous good quality scenes, particularly in the first sequence when the three central characters meet and Columbo's crucially deceptive qualities are wonderfully in evidence.Directed with flair by Bernard L. Kowalski and acted to an appropriately high level, this really set the tone for whole series (since \"Murder By the Book\" was let down by a poor ending). The script by Columbo creators Richard Levinson and William Link is precise, well-structured and well-thought-out and is underpinned by a steady, productive pace and meaningful sequences which really exhibit the unpredictability of the story. Ultimately, the finale fittingly epitomises that Columbo has always been one step ahead of the murderer.Overall, this is a very fine piece of detective work for Columbo, and strongly suggests that the production team had worked positively and constructively to render a polished Columbo story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb67b9f499104dff8df364f79ff85781",
            "input": "This movie bewilders me. It may be that I'm just a stupid American, but I really just don't get 400 Blows. Everything I've read about this movie has been a total rave, but I just couldn't stay interested. I'm sure that it was as revolutionary in film-making as all the critics say, but when it boils right down to it, it's just really really boring. Maybe it's the language barrier, may I'm just not \"sensitive\" or \"artsy\" enough, but whatever the case is, I hated this movie. The story itself isn't bad; it's about a young French boy who is treated unfairly by his parents and his teachers, and eventually he ends up in a juvenile facility. That in itself ought to be interesting, and it was, at first. There was nothing wrong with the dialogue, but then again it's hard to say because half of the conversations weren't subtitled and for no apparent reason, so I didn't always know what was going on. But for the dialogue we could understand, it made enough sense. The actors were believable enough, but it's hard to say what a real person would do in these situations. So you feel for the main character, but only in the sense that when he gets into trouble you think, well that sucks. The plot isn't even your typical plot. Each time he gets in trouble, he gets into more trouble than the last time, but the reasons never vary too much. And through the entire film you realize that there's nothing the main character can really do about it. So it's more like just waiting to see how it ends. The ending, by the way, was completely over my head. It's way too artsy for me, and I just didn't get it. Leading up to the end was easy enough to follow. The structure was certainly there, and it made sense as well, but everything was really drawn out. For the amount of dialogue and significant moments, the movie could have been an hour shorter. It just didn't end. Part of it was the unnecessarily long shots, none of which were especially memorable; for example, the ending was a clip of the main character running down a country road that lasted a good thirty seconds. Now, I'm sure that had some deeper meaning in it somewhere, but for the average viewer, I'd rather have gotten up to get some more food during that time. Or at least done something a little more useful than sit and watch this boy running, like doing my laundry, or taking a nap. Final Verdict The feeling throughout the whole movie was that this probably would be very moving and just amazing and that it would teach me some great life lesson, if I could only get what the director was trying to say by his… unique decisions. As it was, I just felt cheated out of a good two hours of my life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc5a0fbde77547c380ee6ccae296b829",
            "input": "If you like cars you will love this film!There are some superb actors in the film, especially Vinnie Jones, with his typical no nonsense attitude and hardcase appearance.The others are not bad either....There are only two slight flaws to this film. Firstly, the poor plot, however people don't watch this film for the plot. Secondly, the glorification of grand theft auto (car crime). However if people really believe they can steal a Ferrari and get away with it then good look to them, hope you have a good time in jail!When i first read that Nicolas Cage was to act the main role, i first thought \"...sweeet.\", but then i thought \"...naaaa you suck!\" but then finally after watching the film i realised \"...yep he suck's!\".Only joking he plays the role very well.I'll end this unusual review by saying \"If the premature demise of a criminal has in some way enlightened the general cinema going audience as to the grim finish below the glossy veneer of criminal life, and inspired them to change their ways, then this death carries with it an inherent nobility. And a supreme glory. We should all be so fortunate. You can say \"Poor Criminal.\" I say: \"Poor us.\"p.s. - Angelina Jolie Voight looks quite nice!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71941affa81a49ae9435fcfa37243f9d",
            "input": ".......Playing Kaddiddlehopper, Col San Fernando, etc. the man was pretty wide ranging and a scream. I love watching him interact w/ Amanda Blake, or Don Knotts or whomever--he clearly was having a ball and I think he made it easier on his guests as well--so long as they Knew ahead of time it wasn't a disciplined, 19 take kind of production. Relax and be loose was clearly the name of the game there.He reminds me of guys like Milton Berle, Benny Hill, maybe Jerry Lewis some too. Great timing, ancient gags that kept audiences in stitches for decades, sheer enjoyment about what he was doing. His sad little clown he played was good too--but in a touching manner.Personally I think he's great, having just bought a two DVD set of his shows from '61 or so, it brings his stuff back in a fond way for me. I can remember seeing him on TV at the end of his run when he was winding up the series in 1971 or so.Check this out if you are a fan or curious. He was a riot.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d93809a943864cda8bb9126652dfa01f",
            "input": "Greatly enjoyed this 1945 mystery thriller film about a young woman, Nina Foch,(Julia Ross) who is out of work and has fallen behind in her rent and is desperate to find work. Julia reads an ad in the local London newspaper looking for a secretary and rushes out to try and obtain this position. Julia obtains the position and is hired by a Mrs. Hughes, (Dame May Witty) who requires that she lives with her employer in her home and wants her to have no involvement with men friends and Julia tells them she has no family and is free to devote her entire time to this job. George Macready, (Ralph Hughes) is the son of Mrs. Hughes and has some very strange desires for playing around with knives. This was a low budget film and most of the scenes were close ups in order to avoid the expense of a background and costs for scenery. This strange family all live in a huge mansion off the Cornwall Coast of England and there is secret doors and plenty of suspense.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e58495fbfb542a588378acb16a532c7",
            "input": "I watched this movie on the grounds that Amber Benson rocks and Nick Stahl is generally pretty cool - I figured that any film featuring two actors I like and respect couldn't be all bad. And in that sense, I was right - considering the cringe-making dialogue they were given, both of them perform reasonably well. Not well enough to stop the movie from sucking, you understand, but well enough that I was able to make it through the 75-odd minutes of movie (and that's the main sign of an awful film: when, at 40 minutes through, you're already praying for it to be over).It's hard to know where to start with the problems in \"Taboo\". The dialogue, as mentioned, is appalling; wooden and completely unnatural. January Jones' acting is unbelievably bad, and since she's the character we spend most of our time following around the house, this is an unforgivable flaw. The plot manages to be so convoluted that it makes no sense while simultaneously being so clichéd as to be completely predictable (literally, not one of the major 'twists' in this film would surprise anyone but a toddler). A few interesting shots aside, the director tries far too hard with far too little success, awkward tracking shots and jittery camera-work distracting from what little element of story there is.Three of this movie's stars are awarded for the fact that it contains Amber Benson, and the last is tossed in on the grounds that one of the jokes made me snigger a little bit. I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone, ever, under any circumstances. Avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2feac68c33ab41858a2a18469a744a08",
            "input": "...I saw this on cable back in the late 1980's as I was a big wrestling fan since 1986. I saw this on VHS in a 'for sale' bin and bought it.In 1998, I started training as a wrestler after the Air Force and would always go back to watching this to see how it was a very accurate portrayal of people that are involved with wrestling ( families and friends that wouldn't understand us, the travel, the heartbreak, etc. ). Henry Winkler is funny and sometimes sad to watch as nobody else can understand what a genius he is creatively. A great way to separate himself The Fonz character he played on Happy Days at the time. Plus, look at the cast...William Daniels ( Knight Rider ), Polly Holiday ( Alice ), and wrestlers Roddy Piper and Chavo Guerrero Sr. If you get a chance, watch it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ddbc4b12154f47f6b798b4c8774e50c2",
            "input": "\"Panic\" is kind of a crime comedy-drama with William H. Macy, Donald Sutherland and Neve Campbell in the leading roles. Alex (played by Macy) is a guy who kills people for living. But for the moment he's facing a depression and that's why he is seeing a therapist. That's where he meets Sarah (Neve Campbell) and he falls in love with her. He's also facing another problem: he wants to quit the family business (the killings), but he doesn't now how to tell this to his father.What follows is the story of a guy during he's midlife-crisis, facing the regular problems: falling in love with a pretty young girl and everything that goes with that.Pretty good acting performances by the cast. Macy is excellent as the depressed Alex. I had high expectations for this one and it was a good movie but he doesn't completely deliver. The story was rather flat and cliché..7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6125bfced4c4933ae734fefbec567a3",
            "input": "The Ogre doesn't seem to have won itself a very good reputation since its release in 1988, and I guess a reason for that may be down to the fact that it was given the subtitle 'Demons 3' in order to help it sell better. Well, the film is directed by Lamberto Bava; the man behind the first two Demons films, and ogres and demons are somewhat alike (in that they're both 'monsters' anyway)...but other than that, this film has no connections to the other two films. It is, however, rather good! Italian filmmakers are famous for ripping off popular films, and while it's not completely obvious; it seems to me that this one has taken a fair bit of influence from Hellraiser. The plot focuses on a female horror writer who moves with her husband and son to a castle in Italy. She is haunted by memories from when she was a child and found an Ogre living in her basement. It's not long after moving into the castle before these visions return...and it may be more than just a coincidence as she comes to believe there's a murderous ogre living in the basement.The film was obviously shot on a budget and it was made for Italian TV, so it would be unrealistic to expect something brilliant; but for what it is, this is certainly a very decent horror film. Lamberto Bava may not have as keen an eye as his father Mario did; but he takes time in building up a foreboding atmosphere that really compliments the film well. The central setting, a large castle, makes the perfect place for a story like this to take place in and Lamberto makes the best of it; even if it does involve ripping off superior films at times; such as the Inferno-style pool scene. The plot itself is not quite as good as the atmosphere as several scenes are drawn out far too long and the relationship between the characters is rather strange (particularly between the husband and wife). There's not a great deal of bloodshed, but Bava does get to do a little bit with the special effects. The ogre itself looks really silly and it's a good job that we don't get to see it very often. We do boil down to a fitting, if highly predictable, ending and overall I have to say that this film is much better than expected and comes recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-537acafb84f746f494adf3c7859f2055",
            "input": "Anybody who has ever been a fan of the original series, or even has a clue about the storyline should be embarrassed by this series. The Borg does not come around until Q brings the Enterprise to the Gamma sector, the Klingons are NEVER seen until Kirk encounters them, the NCC-1701 was the FIRST ship to carry the Enterprise name....need I go on? Berman and Pilliar have made a mockery of Gene Roddenberry's creation. After he died, they only saw $$$$ and just went their own way. No wonder Majel Barrett was in every single episode of star trek until this series. I don't blame her for not being involved with this mess. Poor Bakula. He's a great actor, as are the entire cast. I like them all, but the storyline is tragic and ignores all of the precedents set by the original series. Just check the ratings. I think more people watched Deep Space 9 (which was untimely canceled).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4c9fc3e428b4511b4cc498bb0e1ea37",
            "input": "We know from other movies that the actors are good but they cannot save the movie. A waste of time. The premise was not too bad. But one workable idea (interaction between real bussinessmen and Russian mafia) is not followed by an intelligent script",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d086ec6ef314f40b3670c0082bb84c9",
            "input": "This was a great romantic comedy! Historically inaccurate (Einstein had no nieces or nephews as noted elsewhere in IMDb) but he made a great matchmaker. He brought together two very nice people played by two of the best actors working. The supporting cast (Lou Jacobi, Joseph Maher, Gene Saks, Stephen Fry, etc.) all clicked on screen and made this a great viewing experience. The fact he drove a car to get around seems to contradict all those images and posters of him riding a bicycle to get around. And did he wear socks in one scene...reportedly, the professor never wore socks! (Two new entries for the IMDb goofs section.) Historical inaccuracies and inconsistencies aside, this was a great movie to watch with a great cast. I give it an 8!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd65aacdb05848e9ab2c2aedaf319804",
            "input": "Well, what can I say, this movie really got to me, it's not so bad, as many say, I really loved it, although the idea seems so simple, and rather boring, it isn't. First of all I enjoyed the soundtrack (Bryan Adams), it really goes with the movie. Second the simple story, and the drama of Spirit gets your attention. One thing I like the most is that they didn't give the stallion a human voice to interact with the other horses, it makes the movie more realistic, not many animations seem realistic now do they ?, but... I don't know, making animals talk is just so... lame.One of the most beautiful animations of 2002 in my opinion, I recommend it to everyone, not just the kids :), because it is very relaxing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42a6769a09eb48f2a82ba12c5bfaad9d",
            "input": "James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan play co-workers in a Budapest gift shop who don't really like each other, not knowing they're really sweetheart pen pals who have yet to meet.A very charming romantic comedy, very engagingly played by it's two likable stars and a very eager-to-please supporting cast. The story is well written and the film has that romantic innocence (don't quite know how to explain it) that films today just don't have. This can obviously be compared to the recent You've Got Mail, and the original wins in every way.This is mandatory viewing each Christmas, I can't think of a better way to jumpstart a Christmas feel than this little gem.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f8d6c206bf74ce49718507cfd015c65",
            "input": "Primal Species (1996, Dir. Jonathan Winfrey) International terrorists get a surprise when their cargo turn out to contain living dinosaurs. The army commando team now have to think fast, if they want to prevent the extinction of the human species, instead of the reptiles.You look at the cover and you gain your first impressions of the film. That is pretty much it. The acting is only just acceptable from a few characters. The story is poor, with the whole film based on the army and the marines trying to kill the dinosaurs. This film came out three years after 'Jurassic Park'. Instead, this film looks to have come out 13 years before 'Jurassic Park'. The dinosaurs costumes are so poorly made, and i do mean costumes. There are obviously people dressed up, and this film makes no attempts at hiding this. A scene when a dinosaur runs down a corridor is created in a way, in which it looks like someone is riding the creature. The is one good thing, which comes out of this film. The short running time. At only 1 hour and 15 minutes, it doesn't waste too much of your life, but still try to avoid it altogether.\"It's like a Friday the 13th Nightmare.\" - Officer (Brian Currie)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdcb5c0f5ef94532a56dfd6fe6b4ea1a",
            "input": "Not only does this film have one of the great movie titles, it sports the third teaming of 70s child actors Ike Eissenman and Kim Richards. I seem to remember this film being broadcast Halloween week back in '78 going against Linda Blair in Stranger in our House. I missed it on the first run choosing to see the other film. Later, on repeat, I saw I made the right choice. The movie is not really bad, but, really lacks any chills or surprises. Although, I did like the scene where Richard Crenna shoots the family dog to no avail.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8a684d9000f4f3c95a0d8e162caca4a",
            "input": "VIVAH in my opinion is the best movie of 2006, coming from a director that has proved successful throughout his career. I am not too keen in romantic movies these days, because i see them as \"old wine in a new bottle\" and so predictable. However, i have watched this movie three times now...and believe me it's an awesome movie.VIVAH goes back to the traditional route, displaying simple characters into a sensible and realistic story of the journey between engagement and marriage. The movie entertains in all manners as it can be reflected to what we do (or would do) when it comes to marriage. In that sense Sooraj R. Barjatya has done his homework well and has depicted a very realistic story into a well-made highly entertaining movie.Several sequences in this movie catch your interest immediately: * When Shahid Kapoor comes to see the bride (Amrita Rao) - the way he tries to look at her without making it too obvious in front of his and her family. The song 'Do Anjaane Ajnabi' goes well with the mood of this scene.* The first conversation between Shahid and Amrita, when he comes to see her - i.e. a shy Shahid not knowing exactly what to talk about but pulling of a decent conversation. Also Amrita's naive nature, limited eye-contact, shy characteristics and answering softly to Shahid's questions.* The emotional breakdown of Amrita and her uncle (Alok Nath) when she feeds him at Shahid's party in the form of another's daughter-in-law rather than her uncle's beloved niece.Clearly the movie belongs to Amrita Rao all the way. The actress portrays the role of Poonam with such conviction that you cannot imagine anybody else replacing her. She looks beautiful throughout the whole movie, and portrays an innocent and shy traditional girl perfectly.Shahid Kapoor performs brilliantly too. He delivers a promising performance and shows that he is no less than Salman Khan when it comes to acting in a Sooraj R. Barjatya film. In fact Shahid and Amrita make a cute on-screen couple, without a shadow of doubt. Other characters - Alok Nath (Excellent), Anupam Kher (Brilliant), Mohan Joshi (Very good).On the whole, VIVAH delivers what it promised, a well made and realistic story of two families. The movie has top-notch performances, excellent story and great music to suit the film, as well as being directed by the fabulous Sooraj R. Barjatya. It's a must see!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d0b9a7fddc447c1861d4c462b817a90",
            "input": "In a college dorm a guy is killed by somebody with a scythe. His girlfriend Beth (Dorie Barton) discovers him and tries to commit suicide. She's institutionalized. A year later she's out, has a new boyfriend named Hank (Joseph Lawrence) and is about to spend Spring Break with Hank and four other mindless friends in a BIG, beautiful condo in Florida. Naturally the killer pops up (for no reason) and starts killing again.Lousy slasher thriller--a textbook example of how NOT to do a low-budget horror movie. For starters, large portions of this film are ENDLESS filler of these six idiots videotaping themselves, having \"fun\" (more fun than the audience), getting drunk, acting stupid etc etc. Also there is NO nudity in here at all. I'm not saying a horror film needs nudity but ANYTHING to liven this up would have helped. None of the deaths are really shown (you hear them), are only a little bloody and there is no gore. There's one REAL gruesome one--but that's not till the end.With a few exceptions the acting sucks. Dorie Barton is dreadful as the main woman and Tom Jay Jones is lousy as Oz. Chad Allen pops up as Brad and he's TERRIBLE. Lawrence is actually very good--handsome and hunky and giving this crap his all. And Jeff Conaway pops up in a small role doing a pretty good job.Logic lapses abound--after they realize a friend has been killed two of the girls casually talk about sex; Baston's non reaction to seeing a friend getting killed is kind of funny and WHAT happens to Lawrence? His character disappears without a trace at the end! Dull, stupid, no gore, no nudity--skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87e69d0556b64815987972ab6b315217",
            "input": "When they killed off John Amos's character they killed the show. He was the vital part of the info structure. You had a story of an inner city family's struggling to make it the best way they knew how. They were poor, they were black, and they were living proof that if you have Jesus and your family that nothing is too hard. Sure James would lose jobs and JJ would fail in school but the family always managed to find a way. James was the strong male role model that earned the income and disciplined the children. Florida was the strong lady that would everyone including James when he needed a shoulder to cry on or hug to make it. The kids had personalities and input which made them important as a family unit. Their neighbor Willona was also a key element because she represented not only a friend but some dear enough to be family. Things were bright, gritty, funny, and honest until they changed the course of the program. James dies and JJ took over the show. Flo was still mom, Thelma was blossoming into a lady and Michael was still the militant midget but JJ was the show. We were expected to believe that the family with no father or prominent bread winner was going to be able to stay in the apartment. I guess James's paycheck didn't do much for the family. They were only threatened with eviction because they said they were moving and not because no one in the house was working. I know that JJ, Flo, Thelma and even Michael eventually got jobs but come on here be for real. James worked so much that you could feel for him but the others weren't realistic at all and that's a shame.JJ was the comic relief but I felt the show need substance. It's OK to be funny but they had a chance to show a real family and what it took to survive in the real world and they threw it all away on a few laughs. Michael's character almost disappeared while the rest of the cast slipped into the shadows of the JJ Evan's show. I mean really, here was a guy that was failing in school, he kept getting laid off, and he painted for money in about two episodes. James had always been there to encourage his talent but Flo and the rest of the family didn't seem to care.Why did it take him so long to understand that painting was what he was meant to do? He could have sold painting's on the street or worked for people that print billboards and cards. (He did but something went wrong with that.) Why did he not make it and why did the others give up on their dreams? I'll tell you why, it was because they didn't have a father in their life to care and to cheer them on and their mother stopped being their to support their dreams. The show stopped teaching us about growing, building and learning and started teaching us about gimmicks and catch phrases. They should have kept James. If any show needed a father it was that one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1f60f077df74115aea140bc42ec011a",
            "input": "\"Who Done It?\" contains many surefire laughs and gags. It is not only one of the best Stooges films with Shemp, it is one of the finest short comedies Columbia produced. Director Bernds originally wrote the screenplay in 1946 for the Stooges, but when Curly Howard suffered a career-ending stroke, it was tailored for the Columbia comedy team of Schilling and Lane (their version was released as \"Pardon My Terror.\") It obviously was too good for the Stooges to pass up, and it was finally filmed by the Stooges at the end of 1947.Old Man Goodrich calls ace detectives Shemp, Larry, and Moe out of fear that he will be murdered. When they arrive at his home, Goodrich has disappeared, and his niece and assorted goons try to get rid of the Stooges. Will they find Goodrich and bring the niece and goons to justice? Shemp is particularly funny in this film. His reactions after being given a mickey by Christine McIntyre are superb; he gives his trademark sound (eeeb-eeeb-eeeb) and Miss McIntyre is noticeably trying not to laugh! Other funny scenes: the close-up of Moe's mug looking through the camera lens; and the in-the-dark fight with all cast members involved.Nikko the goon (played by Duke York) is one of the most unusual looking characters ever portrayed in a Stooges film. With his kinked hair, he could almost pass for a Stooge, if he didn't tower over everyone else! \"Who Done It?\" is a gem among the Stooges films with Shemp. Even die-hard Curly fans will enjoy this one! A true Stooge classic. 9 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52163e42d69d4213850f66ac455c9104",
            "input": "Okay, note to the people that put together these horror acting legends DVD-collections: I truly am grateful and I hugely support the initiative, but … have you even watched the films before selecting them as part of the collection? When I purchased the Boris Karloff collection there were several films in which the star only played a supportive and unessential role (\"Tower of London\", \"The Strange Door\"). \"The Invisible Ray\", however, is part of the Bela Lugosi collection and here it's actually Boris Karloff who overshadows Bela! This actually would have been a great title for the Boris Karloff collection instead! Bela Lugosi's character is quite possibly the most good-natured and earnest one he ever portrayed in his entire career and good old Karloff actually plays the mad and dangerously obsessed scientist here. \"The Invisible Ray\" features three main chapters. The first one, set in Dr. Janos Rukh's Carpathian castle is pretty boring and demands quite a lot of the viewer's patience, but of course the character drawings and the subject matter discussed here are fundamental for the rest of the film. Dr. Rukh (Karloff) demonstrates to a couple of eminent colleagues (among them Bela Lugosi as Dr. Benet) how he managed to capture extraterrestrial rays inside a self-manufactured device. The scientists are sincerely impressed with his work and invite Rukh and his lovely wife Diane along for an expedition in the heart of Africa. There Dr. Rukh isolates himself from the group, discovers the essential element \"Radium X\" to complete his medical ray and goes completely bonkers after being overexposed to the meteorite himself. The third and final act is obviously the best and most horrific one, as it revolves on a good old fashioned killing spree with ingenious gimmicks (melting statues) and a surprising climax. Karloff glows in the dark and, convinced the others are out to steal his discovery and even his life, he intends to eliminate them using his deadly touch. The narrative structure of \"The Invisible Ray\" sounds rather complicated, but the film is easy to follow and entertaining. The story is rather far-fetched but nevertheless compelling and director Lambert Hillyer provides several moments of sheer suspense. Boris Karloff is truly fantastic and so is Lugosi, even though he deserved to have a little more screen time. Their scenes together are the highlights of the film, along with the funky images of the glowing Boris.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cf5864b094b4cd1be9afe710a27334d",
            "input": "I saw this at the premiere in MelbourneIt is shallow, two-dimensional, unaffecting and, hard to believe given the subject matter, boring. The actors are passable, but they didn't have much to work with given the very plodding and unimpressive script. For those who might have worried that Ned Kelly would be over-intellectualised, you can take comfort in the fact that this telling of the story is utterly without any literary depth at all, told entirely on the surface and full of central casting standards. However, it doesn't work as a popcorn film either. Its pacing is too off-kilter and its craft is too lacking to satisfy even on the level of a mundane actioner.I very much doubt Gregor Jordan could sit back and say to himself \"this is the best I could have done with the material\".Ned Kelly is a fascinating figure, and equally so is the national response to him. Possibly folk genius, possibly class warrior, possibly psychopath and probably all these things, he has dominated Australian true mythology for over 120 years. Once again, his story has failed miserably on the big screen.Such is life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-359a580273fc4101b85c0ce131b00cfd",
            "input": "First one was much better, I had enjoyed it a lot. This one has not even produced a smile. The idea was showing how deep down can human kind fall, but in reference to the characters not the film-maker.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d425e47158bf4b369013154e290a975c",
            "input": "\"Le Locataire\"(\"The Tenant\")is without a doubt one of the most important horror movies ever made.Polanski stars as a Trelkovsky,a timid file clerk living in Paris,who answers an advertisement for an apartment,only to find that the previous tenant attempted suicide by leaping from the apartment window.Trelkovsky is compelled to visit her in the hospital and there he meets Stella(Isabelle Adjani).Trelkovsky immediately moves in when the previous tenant dies and,at first,is quite pleased with having found such a nice apartment.His happiness is soon replaced by waves of paranoia as he becomes increasingly suspicious of his neighbours,who seem to be trying to provoke Trelkovsky into repeating the previous tenant's suicide.This film is great.Polanski manages to create a surreal atmosphere of dread and paranoia.Plenty of brilliant moments such as the classic scene where Trelkovsky discovers the previous tenant's tooth in a hole in the wall,or the fever dream where he wanders into the building's bathroom to find the walls covered with hieroglyphics.The photography by Sven Nykvist is truly beautiful.\"The Tenant\" is a neglected gem.It may be difficult to track down,but it is more than worth the effort.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4219e2f937042828d76dcc7bc4df0af",
            "input": "Williamson's accent is tough to wade through. He speaks incredibly quickly, like he is in a rush to get through the lines. During the soliloquies he acts as if he is talking to someone, when he is supposed to be talking to himself. All that and his bald spot just annoyed me. He was just too old for this role. In reading other accounts of Williamson, maybe he got this role because he was mad and the director decided to do a bit of life-imitates-art or forced method acting. When the actors declare Hamlet mad you believe it! Marianne Faithful is a stunning beauty and could botch the role of Ophelia and still get a pass. The set is dark and foreboding but it does look as if shot in a real castle especially the scenes in the tunnels/corridors where the dead king shines as a great light in the sky.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23a0acdb9a8549e2943afd28c28ade69",
            "input": "Of those comments here before mine, I mostly agree with Edyarb's. The story and the script apparently had potential to be funny, but though managing at some points, in other places it failed. You could see them wanting to make a joke, but no one in the audience laughed. (Also agree with Edyarb's view on the end credits: leave it normal or make it cool, but not what they've done now.) OK, that gives a more negative feeling than what I actually had watching the movie. I enjoyed it; it was pleasant entertainment for a night and definitely didn't feel like a waste of money to get the ticket. The best jokes are the ones that go a little bit outside of the expected and are fairly mature, like Luke Wilson's character Matt asking the super chick \"P*nis or bed?\" when she told him she'd \"get him a new one\" after a wild night in bed, ending up breaking the bed and leaving Matt sore.I cannot, however, agree with bgs1614,who says that the film could earn an 'R' rating - there was absolutely nothing in the film to justify that. Some sexual acts yes, but nothing explicit, only humorous, and no nudity whatsoever. (Maybe he was at a prescreening that showed more...?) I'd like to compare this to two recent films I went to see with no expectations whatsoever: Superman Returns and Click. I didn't really expect anything from either one - I was a big fan of the original Superman films and the trailer for Click only showed it as a potentially chauvinistic (which I wouldn't oppose) film. Superman surprised me with actually having me feel good(goosebumps!) about seeing his first heroic deed, like seeing a long lost friend and feeling happy about it. But for the rest of the story I'd rather watch My Super Ex-girlfriend, at least it offers some surprises. Click again was a TOTAL surprise, much better and deeper than the trailer and about five minutes away from being a really excellent movie. The jokes also work much better than in Ex-girlfriend, both the naughty ones and the more advanced ones.Anyway, the only reason I compared these three films is that they are the three last ones I've seen, within a very short period, and also because I went to all of these with basically no expectations at all. I'd rank them Click, Girlfriend, Superman.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e90149d82bf9413586450d2c0947c150",
            "input": "The tighter the drama, the better the film of sister rivalry! This little gem was mainly promoted as a comedy upon its release in Sweden, so I'm glad to find that wasn't the whole case. Funny bits on small-town bickering are there to enjoy, surely, but the drama takes center stage, as the story progresses. And not just family drama, it also raises poignant questions on respecting differences of peoples' lifestyle choices.Great character ensemble with many superb and moving dramatic scenes that score credibility points; and they're not just scattershot, but hold everything in place. It just makes me assume that if Ingmar Bergman had made this (the drama would suit him!), the international attention probably would have been immediate.7 out of 10 from Ozjeppe.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f65a5b87da540188ec8b12659ce337d",
            "input": "I would not hesitate to put this adaptation of 'Death Trap\" in a top 5 list of the best stage-to-movie adaptations ever. Caine and Reeves (an underrated actor who never really got a chance to do more than soggy romances and \"Superman\") play off each other extremely well here. Even Dyan Cannon - who I normally don't care for - is perfectly cast in a role that exploits her annoyance value as an actress.I'm not sure that comparisons of \"Deathtrap\" with \"Sleuth\" - another brilliant stage-to-screen adaptation featuring Michael Caine - are valid, or even fair. Yes, the two stories have a lot in common. But \"Sleuth\" is as much about class warfare as the battle of wits, and the house in \"Sleuth\" is set is at least as much a character in the movie as the two actors - the house doesn't really have an equivalent in \"Deathtrap\". And \"Deathtrap\" isn't so much a battle of wits as it is a pointed vignette about how people are no damned good (and never as smart as they think they are) and deserve everything they get. I'll just say that both movies are superb examples of the genre, and well worth your time and money. This is America, after all. You don't have to choose! I won't give away the twists and turns of the plot, but I don't think it matters anyway. I've watched the DVD eight or nine times in a dozen years, and still enjoyed the chemistry and the timing and the mean, scary moments when things go \"all pear shaped\". It's all done so well that the ride becomes more important than the actual destination.Anyone who likes black-hearted comedy and suspense in the Hitchcock style of film-making will probably enjoy \"Deathtrap\" immensely.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa86ad37242843de9959f67e5dbd05f4",
            "input": "This is the Neil Simon piece of work that got a lot of praises! \"The Odd Couple\" is a one of a kind gem that lingers within. You got Felix Ungar(Jack Lemmon); a hypochondriac, fussy neat-freak, and a big thorn in the side of his roommate, Oscar Madison(Walter Matthau); a total slob. These men have great jobs though. Felix is a news writer, and Oscar is a sports writer. Both of these men are divorced, Felix's wife is nearby, while Oscar's is on the other side of the U.S. (The West Coast). Well, what can you say? Two men living in one roof together without driving each other crazy, is impossible as well as improbable. It's a whole lot of laughs and a whole lot of fun. I liked the part where when those two British neighbors that speak to both gentlemen, and after Oscar kicked out Felix, he gets lucky and lives with them when he refused to have dinner with them the night earlier. It's about time that Felix needed to lighten up. I guess all neat-freaks neat to lighten up. They can be fussy, yet they should be patient as well. A very fun movie, and a nuevo classic. Neil Simon's \"The Odd Couple\" is a must see classic movie. 5 STARS!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e7892eab25d45a2b03fa037a69aef33",
            "input": "I saw this movie when I was a child. It blew me away. This was before the days of television, so a movie of this magnitude, could send a young kid into orbit. It so impressed me, that I went to see this movie for twelve consecutive days. The special effects used at this time were far ahead of its' time. Sabu was a real delight, as was Rex Ingram as the Genie. I found myself singing \"I want to be a sailor\" for months after the film left town. I would recommend this movie to any and everyone. I forgot to mention Conrad Veidt, who was as villainous a character as you'd ever want to meet. Also, June Duprez was never lovelier than she was in this picture. The color was outstanding. Give this movie an AAA!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f574d8e92674eab96cc6043670337be",
            "input": "Scary Movie 3 (2003) was a bad idea to begin with. The last film was a mediocre effort. Put it next to this load, it's a comedy classic. Whilst part two was filled with a lot of dated humor and cheap shots, at least it was funny. There's nothing funny about forced humor. Jokes, pratfalls and sight gags are supposed to be naturally funny. Hitting the viewer over the head with tired jokes is not cool. The humor in this film was caters to juvenile imbeciles who'll laugh at anything. When they catered to the junior high school crowd, any sense of self respect was tossed out the window. Ring parodies are not funny. I have watched them in comedies since 1998. They're so dated. Michael Jackson jokes are not cool either. What's even worse is making fun of two broken down has been \"performers\" whose best days were NEVER.The death of American cinema has been a slow one. Films like this are the nails that are being pounded into it's coffin. Whatever happened to real humor? I haven't laughed out loud in a movie theater in a long time. Too many bad movies rot the brain. You want proof? Go to your local mega chain video rental store and see what's on the shelves. This movie is bad. Don't believe the hype. I would rather watch Scary Movie 2 in a continuous loop than to suffer through this poor excuse of a comedy ever again!Definitely not recommended (unless you have a handful of brain cells).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e271b2ef95e475280a136cb0923228e",
            "input": "Excellent endearing film with Peter Falk and Paul Reiser joining forces as father and dad.Dad shows up one evening to state that after over 40 years of marriage, mom (Olympia Dukakis) has left him.The rest of the film depicts the father and son on a day trip to get dad's thoughts off what has occurred. With them away, the daughters can play detectives.The story shows the adventures of father and son in their discussion of life, what should have been, why mom was complaining about dad as they discuss their philosophies of life.We see an unexpected fishing trip and pool playing which leads to a near brawl. Both men seem to break out of their daily lives.The end is a downer as we learn why mom suddenly left. It becomes a story of courage and the human spirit in the face of adversity. It's never too late to change.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5b53483d6914e05968705356a1d609d",
            "input": "When I first saw a glimpse of this movie, I quickly noticed the actress who was playing the role of Lucille Ball. Rachel York's portrayal of Lucy is absolutely awful. Lucille Ball was an astounding comedian with incredible talent. To think about a legend like Lucille Ball being portrayed the way she was in the movie is horrendous. I cannot believe out of all the actresses in the world who could play a much better Lucy, the producers decided to get Rachel York. She might be a good actress in other roles but to play the role of Lucille Ball is tough. It is pretty hard to find someone who could resemble Lucille Ball, but they could at least find someone a bit similar in looks and talent. If you noticed York's portrayal of Lucy in episodes of I Love Lucy like the chocolate factory or vitavetavegamin, nothing is similar in any way-her expression, voice, or movement.To top it all off, Danny Pino playing Desi Arnaz is horrible. Pino does not qualify to play as Ricky. He's small and skinny, his accent is unreal, and once again, his acting is unbelievable. Although Fred and Ethel were not similar either, they were not as bad as the characters of Lucy and Ricky.Overall, extremely horrible casting and the story is badly told. If people want to understand the real life situation of Lucille Ball, I suggest watching A&E Biography of Lucy and Desi, read the book from Lucille Ball herself, or PBS' American Masters: Finding Lucy. If you want to see a docudrama, \"Before the Laughter\" would be a better choice. The casting of Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz in \"Before the Laughter\" is much better compared to this. At least, a similar aspect is shown rather than nothing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1cdd5306beb84be9a54186a27c8976ce",
            "input": "Fascinating yet unsettling look at Edith Bouvier Beale (Big Edie) and her daughter (Little Edie) aunt and first cousin to the late Jacquelyn Kennedy Onasis. They live in a rodent infested, rundown mansion which was considered a health hazard by the city. It becomes quite clear very quickly that these two are well past eccentric. Little Edie seems to be the most off as she acts with the mindset of a ten year old even though she is actually 53. The content is pretty much made up of two things. The first are the conversations were Little Edie lambastes Big Edie for driving away all her potential suitors and ruining her aspiring career as writer, actress, and dancer. These discussions usually become very rhetorical, nonsensical, and often times amusing. The second part consists of long bouts of attempted singing by both parties. Each of course thinks their singing is perfect and it's only the other who sounds bad. In one amazing scene Big Edie actually physically attacks Little Edie with her cane just to get her to stop her warbling. Very captivating yet one gets the feeling that their is some serious exploitation going on here and the subjects are just too far gone to know it. The filmmakers seem to treat this like a freak show at the circus, coming each day to record (and chuckle) at whatever bizarre behavior may come about. Ultimately this is a sad picture as it shows how the world has simply past these two by. Their hopes and dreams as decayed as the mansion they live in. Despite their bickering these two need each other more than ever. For without the other there would be no refuge from the loneliness. Most amazing line comes from Big Edie whose many cats relieve themselves throughout her bedroom. Her response to a complaint about the smell is simply unbelievable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67416a172ede44b0aba0ca8f824604d0",
            "input": "Before Sunrise is romance for the slacker generation. Richard Linklater's romantic drama is an offbeat telling of a dream come true for most people. The film depicts romance in all it's glory, but without any of the pitfalls that befall most couples; and in short the film is about two people that have a relationship that's as close to perfection as relationships will ever come to - with just one problem, the problem of time. While most relationships wind down with time, this one keeps going strong throughout and time itself is the only thing that wears out. Before Sunrise is certainly not the typical sentimental 'Hollywood romance', which is another aspect that puts this film leagues ahead of the pretenders. The story follows two people, Jesse; an American and Celine; a French girl that meet on a train into Vienna. They instantly connect, and after telling her his awful idea for a television show and almost getting off the train, Jesse asks Celine to join him for the day in the picturesque city of Vienna...Before Sunrise works principally for two reasons - realistic acting and an immense script that builds the characters through their thoughts and feelings and thus allows us to get to know them as we do the people in real life. This allows the characters to be free, and it's easy to believe that these are real people and not just actors working from a script. This also allows us to feel for the characters for who they are, and not merely because they're the protagonists. This kind of realism is hard to capture as, at the end of the day, we as the audience know that they're watching a film and not observing real life; but Before Sunrise represents one of the truest to life exhibitions of realism ever to be seen on screen. A truly great script cannot work on it's own, and needs great actors to deliver it to an extent that does it justice, and although I'm not a fan of either Julie Deply or Ethan Hawke; on viewing this film, there is nothing you can do but give them both respect. I don't know whether they were in character or just playing themselves, but when a film is this good; it hardly matters.In a film like this, it is the writing that's the most important thing, and contained within the script are several observations about life, most of which I personally could relate to. This represents what Richard Linklater has achieved with this script as not only does it create and build the characters, but it also manages to expose what true love is, along with several other aspects of life. The fact that not all the anecdotes are relatable to me personally again represents the brilliance of writing. Everyone is different, and so different parts of the script will appeal to different people. There could be certain aspects about one person that one person loves and another hates; and that's the case with the musings in this script. Adding to the beauty of the film is the city of Vienna. The city itself isn't really important to the film as this is a story that could have taken place just about anywhere - but it makes for some lovely visuals and the upbeat, energetic romance that blossoms throughout the movie is matched by the beauty of the location.Before Sunrise is simultaneously beautiful and captivating. Richard Linklater has created something that is rare in the world of cinema; a film that captures the beauty of life without ever going over the top or being overly sentimental. Before Sunrise is what it is. And what it is, is pure cinematic brilliance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb1c7cef9d5643729ce355fba312a858",
            "input": "Gwyneth Paltrow is absolutely great in this movie, but the story is, unfortunately, half-baked, and David Schwimmer's energy is sort of like cold mush. When he closes his mouth and gets serious for a moment or two there is a rush of what-might-have-been. Who thought 25-year-old kiddies would be entertaining?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e80cd18e18d43fcb2417fd77c1e7cb9",
            "input": "As big as a Texas prairie and equally as boring. Even Liz Taylor, James Dean, Chill Wills, and Dennis Hopper can't float this overbloated boat. Taylor actually LOOKS bad--wrong wardrobe, wrong hair, and wrong makeup--a unique accomplishment in her remarkable career. Hopper gives the only believable performance, and Dean in the climactic scene displays remarkable talent as something we usually don't remember him for--a comic actor. Rock Hudson is his usual prototype of Barbie Doll Ken and makes one wonder what a, say, Redford could have done with the male lead. There is no discernible plot that provides any tension until the final twenty minutes, just a pastiche of milestones that have little relationship to each other. Except for Hopper, there is no character development, only a collection of cardboard cutouts that pop up periodically for no discernible reason like random targets in a shooting gallery. To its credit, the film does tackle racism and sexism at a time when they were taboo subjects, and it does have SIZE, making it an excellent choice for ridding yourself of unwelcome house guests. Those with the DVD version can spare themselves some of the tedium by starting with the second disk. You won't be missing anything of interest.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8dc2b88dd39b40c0865ab48546d57412",
            "input": "As with all environmentally aware films from the 1970s SOYLENT GREEN has a rather cheesy view of what ecological meltdown is . Overpopulation means there`s too many people to feed ? I was under the impression that famines were caused by either war or failed economic policies . Stalin`s policy in the Soviet Union in the 1930s left millions dead because of famine and to this day the greatest man made tragedy was Mao`s rural policy in China which led over 30 million starvation deaths in the 1950s . And let`s not forget the great famines in the horn of Africa in the 1980s and 90s which were to do with conflicts not overpopulation . You might like to also consider that two of the most heavily populated areas on Earth , Hong Kong and Macau , have never suffered a famine in modern times . Likewise the expansion of shanty towns around cities as seen here isn`t strictly down to overpopulation - it`s down to economic factors where people flock to cities to find better paid work than in the countryside ( It`s a symptom of industrial progress - not of too many births ) so the image of the streets of New York city being too congested to walk through and of having people sleep in stairwells is somewhat laughableBut don`t be fooled into thinking SOYLENT GREEN is a pile of corny tree hugging crap because I consider this to be the best ecological film of the70s . It plays on the contempary audience`s knowledge of the world where Sol and Thorn are beside themselves with joy at finding fruit , brandy and fresh meat . Thorn gasps in amazement at having ice in his whisky , puffs on a cigarette and delivers the classic line \" If I could afford it I`d smoke two , maybe three of these a day \" . But it`s the visage of the euthanasia chamber that`s memorable as Thorn gazes at the images of wild animals , flowers , running water and snow covered mountains , a world Thorn`s generation has never known . This is a very haunting scene which makes SOYLENT GREEN a very memorable film , combined with the fact it features the final screen appearance of Edward G Robinson as the wise old Jew Sol Roth",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2741540dbaa4e9d89e4ffe120e674f2",
            "input": "This movie is more Lupin then most, especially coming from Funimation. Other then the bad dub, it isn't bad.The first hour is a lot like the Comic (which is what all Lupin the 3rd stuff is based on). Lupin's trying to get a huge treasure. Fujiko's using Lupin's weakness to women to try to get something out of it. The last bit isn't that bad, he's with another women, but of course Fujiko's still him number one.A lot of the other Lupin movies are more Family with cuss words then Lupin. Any good Lupin fan I think will be pleasantly surprised (I know I was after hearing so many bad things about this movie). It might be a bit better without the little animations rolling during the credits (they make it a little mushy) but overall, it isn't a bad film. Good enough to be one of the few I'd watch again of the Lupin III movies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-027c69a031874e209053135483b82bea",
            "input": "I read one other review that expressed the view that Platoon was a never ending cycle of marines killing people, being killed, taking drugs and talking trash.I don't agree with that because the film actually had more to it, but it a way, I can see what this person is trying to say: this had no real plot - which is a point i agree with.It is self-indulgent Stone at his best. He really wanted to show, not only how war leads to death, but also how it is extremely traumatic on those who survive. Unfortunately, the film seems to over \"glorify\" this aspect and the grand finale is just way too champagne, grand-standing, Oscar-hunting \"let's create an enduring image\" for my liking.The problem I have with Stone and other film-makers of his ilk is that they fail to understand this simply concept: depicting the terribly bloody deadly waste that war is DOES NOT PROVE OR EVEN REFLECT ON WHETHER it was an unjust or immoral war. We have seen the same thing emerge at the moment with Iraq. In case you're missing the point, let me put it to you bluntly: if you saw how truly bloody the second world war was and how destructive it was on the lives of the surviving soldiers, would you think it was an unjust war? If that fact alone doesn't convince you that it was an unjust war, then why should depictions of the horrors of Vietnam convince you that it was wrong to go to war in that instance. Personally, I do not support America's decision to go to war in Vietnam, but i certainly don't subscribe to the \"this war is wrong because people died and suffered\" theory. I don't think that motivations are always wrong by default, just because war in itself is terrible.This says nothing of the fact that the ending or the final big \"twist\" was a bit stupid. However, this is not Stones first oddball departure. Wall street was a magnificent film, up until the last 30 minutes or so when it made a dreadful \"wrong turn.\" JFK is probably one of the few films Stone did that actually ended very well.But it hardly matters in this one because there was very little plot up until that point of the film to twist around. And this is why i gave it such a low mark. It was virtually story-less and ultimately boring - unless you fell for the manufactured poignancy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8d29254c1fd41b5a73c46741f794b86",
            "input": "OK well i found this movie in my dads old pile of movies and it looked pretty good from the cover but the movie actually sucked!! OK the first story with the swimmer was pretty good but it took a while to get into, then the one with the boy was completely retarded! It wasn't even scary! His dream sounds like a little kid's bedtime story. Then the news girls one was completely retarded too. I'm sure someones going to call up the news guy and ask him to go out with you. But that one ended cool where she stabbed him and she was in the hospital and she saw him on t.v and he said all that junk to her. Next was that pretty gay story about the guy who brought back the dead people..OMG its so stupid I'm not even going to say any more about it.The last one was the best. It wasn't that scary but the idea of the story was pretty cool..uh yeah the girl gets possessed and she kills all her classmates or something. Then when they're all done telling their dreams to each other the losers get on the bus (TO HELL AHAHAHAH) and they see all the people from their dreams on the bus(Ha). The End.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f86b25172fa54ff5937e961df0d93e57",
            "input": "This movie displays the kind of ensemble work one wishes for in every film. Barbara Bain and Donald Sutherland (who play husband and wife)are positive chilling, discussing the \"family business\" as if it were a grocery store or a dry cleaners. Macy, Campbell, Ullman, and Ritter are also terrific. They play off each other like members of a top-notch theatrical troupe, who realize that a quality product requires each actor to support the others unselfishly. And finally, there's Sammy (David Dorfman). What an amazing performance from a child...and what an uncanny resemblance he has to Ullman, whose son he plays!We're treated to a unique story in \"Panic,\" and that's a rarity in these days of tired formulaic crap. The dialogue is sharp and smart, and this relatively short film nevertheless has the power to elicit a full range of emotions from the viewer. There are places to laugh, to be shocked, to be horrified, to be saddened, to be aroused, to be angry, and to love. It's not a movie that leaves you jumping for joy, but when it's over you're more than satisfied knowing you've spent the last ninety minutes experiencing a darn good piece of work.More of us would go to theatres if we were treated to quality fare like this. When are the powers that be in Hollywood going to wake up? It's a real shame when something this good fails to get exposure beyond festivals and households fortunate enough to have cable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e0f343515974b75bec2dc07dda04a54",
            "input": "i saw this movie when i was 13 and i really liked dana plato who later starred in different strokes as kimberly drummond . i don't think it's garbage .it was not meant to be a sequel to the documentary either . its just a cute kids movie about 3 children who go after men trying to find the boggy creek monster . the men get hurt and the kids rescue them with the help of the creature .haunting shots of the arkansas swamp and scenery were neat . this is a good movie for kids ,no real violence a few mild scares but good fun for the young kids.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9118e24ffbe4cfc8b19553015d1663e",
            "input": "This is sad this movie is the tops this should at least be in the top 250 movies here. This is still the best Action movie ever done. The action movies of today are badly done The actors and action directors do not no how to do it fighting and stunts properly. only some no how to do it mostly from Hong Kong like Jackie Chan. The stunts are so clever and wild i do not think we will see the likes of ever. The start where Chan and his team go down the hill car chase through the hill town is just amazing. The end fight stunts are for me the best fight stunts ever put to film. The end stunt sliding down the pole crashing through the glass Jackie was badly hurt.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6e1acc72d79451dbcdb9ead61e4922b",
            "input": "I'd never heard of this, then found out it's the man with the deadly lens, which I'd heard of but not seen. Connery's presence drove me to buy it, and it's not good. It wants to be a sort of cross between Dr Strangelove and Mash, but it just isn't that funny, unless you find the name General Wombat (?) funny. It comes across as a flat 70s thriller until the last ten minutes, when it springs to life. There are many, many flat scenes in the Whitehouse between the president and his aides which don't work. It's almost as if the initial cut was too long, and the first half was edited down to get to the whole nuclear bomb ransom storyline and the suicide bomber attacks, which i think are meant to be played for laughs, but again, aren't that funny. The location filming is excellent but the studio stuff looks like cheap TV. I could not believe the man responsible for Key Largo, Crossfire and Elmer Gantry did this. Only laugh: Connery throws away his wig before putting on his helmet and jumping out of a plane. It makes Never say Never again look like genius.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed63ae1804ad4259b6bf0a92d23332f6",
            "input": "Envy stars some of the best. Jack Black, Ben Stiller, Amy Poehler, and the great Christopher Walken. With such a cast, one can only expect the best. However, with \"Envy\", no one could save this disaster.Tim Dingman (Stiller) and Nick Vanderpark (Black) are best friends and co-workers at a sandpaper factory. Both are making a decent living, but because Tim has a better performance at work, he's able to afford more than his buddy Nick. Nick is a dreamer who's always coming up with new ideas for inventions. One day, Nick comes up with the idea for a spray can that makes dog poop disappear (Yes, I'm serious). Falling in love with the idea, Nick decides to really invent this product. He makes an offer to Tim to invest in his idea and share the profits 50/50. Tim refuses thinking the idea will never work.Nick's invention, titled \"va-poo-rize\" (again, i'm serious), ends up making millions. He enjoys spending his money on things like a much larger house, a horse, a personal trainer, and fancy deserts. Tim starts feeling envy for Nick. Hence the name of the movie.The concept isn't bad, but it still turns out awful. This movie contains some of the worst dialog and very poor performances from all the cast. Then again, as I mentioned earlier, none of them could save this mess. Not even the great Christoper Walken, playing a homeless character named \"J-man\", made this movie funny. The movie is bad from the start and only continues to get worse.I recommend this movie if: *you like crap (no pun intended) *you want to see Jack Black in a white tuxI say, avoid this movie at all costs, but avoid ESPECIALLY if: *you're offended by bathroom humor *you love animals",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d595763d3e44e5496aadbd92502e46e",
            "input": "This is waaaaay to much.. so frustrating to watch.. I was waiting for the whole damn movie to end and to finally get some ANSWERS!!.. and what I've had in the end was nothing but a HUUUGE neon-sign question mark above my head!!!!! I haven't seen such a bad acting and such a nonsense movie in a long long time.. and what's bothering me is.. how come someone (an actor) read the script of such a bull!?#@ movie and say: OK, I'M IN!!! LET'S FILM THIS! This is horrible!!! THIS MOVIE SUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!!!!! I just can't believe I've spent an hour and a half of my life on something like this!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1991386935d34e108eb4ac3bf4ed9a34",
            "input": "This is one of my favorite family movies. Loved it when I was little and it still holds up with me now that I'm older. I still laugh at all the same old jokes and might even shed a tear a times. I never have much cared for animals talking, or at least UN-animated ones but this one I'll stand up for. It's a pretty old movie but it will always hold a place in my heart.There aren't any other live animal movies that I can think of at the moment that I even could compare with, let alone like as much as this one. I might be giving too much praise to this movie but I don't think show. I really holds that great message that\" Home is where the heart is.\" Or at least that's the message I gained from it. Definitely recommended for a good old family movie night.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00cc2bdf89f549da937b4983cb581508",
            "input": "I read all these reviews on here about how this is a such a good movie. Jeez, this movie was predictable and pretty boring. The acting was below average most of the time, especially by Mckenna. I haven't seen a more pathetic attempt at making someone \"badass\" in a movie. Oh man, this movie was a letdown. I also read somewhere this might be a cult classic. I know there are followers of the director, but this movie was just a average piece of film.The script was lame, for the most part the acting was lame, this movie was lame.Oh and pray for the guy that used to be in Cheers. He looks really bad. The best actor in this movie was probably the guy in Office Space, and he was only in this movie for about 8 minutes.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bf8b9effe72495491658e7e40696d02",
            "input": "The first five minutes of this movie showed potential. After that, it went straight from something possibly decent to some sort of illegitimate comedy. The best part is that I couldn't stop thinking of Supertroopers thanks to Joey Kern. I would recommend watching this movie for the sheer fact of learning how not to make a movie. There are so many scenes in this movie that makes one just stop and wonder if the entire cast and crew just stopped caring at some point. The thing that amazes me most about this movie is that it grossed $22 million in the box office and only cost about $1.5 million to make. Congrats to Lion's Gate for being able to pull that one off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3429187488d748d0924e260b5a9584e7",
            "input": "A fascinating look at the relationship of a single father in 1998 and a single mother in 1881, tied together by a time-traveling teenager. Reminded me of \"Somewhere In Time,\" Richard Matheson's \"Bid Time Return,\" as rendered by Christopher Reeves and Jane Seymour.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-289390fea75245509c7b79ac506c08cf",
            "input": "So far after week two of \"The lone of Beauty\" I am a little disappointed.Some of the acting is good, as long as we except that it is only drama.I am unsure how people can feel that this FICTIONAL DRAMA is \"factual\" coverage of the \"Thatcher\" years - it is okay as drama, but I feel the award winning book is still much better.I Wonder if the BBC will ever give us the follow up and the next part of the drama and the years that follow with \"Things Can Only Get Better\" finishing with 2006 and the Fact that we are still waiting! with that promise from a Government that is full of sleaze.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d449f3c134864c09bb57b48ee76a5e6e",
            "input": "Eddie Murphy really made me laugh my ass off on this HBO stand up comedy show.I love his impressions of Mr. T,Ed Norton and Ralph Cramden of \"The Honeymooners\",Elvis Presley,and Michael Jackson too.The Ice Cream Man,Goony Goo Goo,is also funny.I saw this for the first time when it came out in 1984.I laughed so hard,I almost fell off my chair.I still think this is very funny.Eddie Murphy,when he was on \"Saturday Night Live\",made me laugh so hard,he is one of the best people to come out of\"Saturday Night Live\".\"Eddie Murphy Delirious\"is his best stand up performance next to \"Eddie Murphy Raw\".I give \"Eddie Murphy Delirious\" 2 thumbs up and 10/10 stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0a84c3ae1f14545b7807145a871213a",
            "input": "This is one of the greatest child-pet movies ever created. I cry every time I see Shadow yelling \"Wait, wait for me Peter!\" as the family car is pulling away. This is a must see if you love animals! Best Movie Ever! The lines in the movie are sometimes stupid. Like when Sassy says to Chance; \"Cat's Rule and dogs drool!\" Lines like this I could do without, but when I was six I bet I loved that line. The storyline may seem hooky to some, but I like it. Shadow as the older dog who's preparing Chance to take over for him when he's gone is really moving when you think about it. It reminded me of my childhood dog. I think everyone can find a piece of themselves in \"Homeward Bound.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5c1c2853d1d42b2b0e1adeaf92312f0",
            "input": "Everything about this film is hog wash. Pitiful acting, awful dialog, ugly native girls. this movie sinks into oblivion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The director must have been a weekend bender. Robert C. is totally lost and has not got a clue on what is going on . The college kids are worst. No acting talent at all, very stupid reasoning, and just down right dumbbells. Special effects are for the birds. The so called security force around this park belongs in toy land: with stupid looking guns, walkie talkies that are useless; and a computer system that ranks with a roll of toilet paper. if the park is under construction and nothing works; why bother inviting potential clients until everything is complete. the writers should be the first victims of the mess along with the producers and the crew. The whole film belongs in a septic tank shot to another planet for viewing. What a gem. Convicts should have to watch this, so they can commit suicide.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ef607aa9c18470e9f2233ee165a07fa",
            "input": "Anyone who's watched a few Lifetime Movie Network movies knows that plot credibility is the first thing that gets brushed off the planning table. So, when crazed Lara moves into Patti's home and methodically begins to drive her landlady bonkers, I didn't even blink. When Lara eventually ramps up her activities to threatening poor Patti, and dares her to do anything about it, I just nodded. You see, on Planet LMN, people don't behave the way they do for any particular reason, they just do it to keep the action going. Only on Planet LMN could someone almost have the owner of a home thrown out of their own house by means of their seductive powers!! Poor Patti - she just trusted too much, and Lara went off her medicine, and then there was this big fight at the top of the stairs involving a syringe full of deadly stuff that ends up injected into someone's tummy, and a body bag going out the front door. The horror!But take it from me, this Planet LMN product is a classic. You need to watch it once, just for the great laughs you'll have. On the Improbability Scale, I give this film a 95/100. Make a big batch of popcorn and get some apple slices, too. You'll understand later.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29169bf434474ab4a415aed7cd9cdb38",
            "input": "Victor McLaglen's performance is one of the finest in film history.I think we can all feel for \"Gypo\" because we've all struggled with what is right and what isn't and been wrong. This was one of the first art-house pictures to be released by a major American movie studio (RKO Radio Pictures).Joseph H. August's cinematography is at its very best here. However, August's stunning portion was mostly overlooked; he didn't receive the Oscar nomination he rightly deserved.This is a psychological drama, with thought, philosophy, sadness, all conveyed with as little words as possible.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86732117c6124bfab2c1345730f67878",
            "input": "Can only be described as awful. It is bad to start with and then gets even more bad. When you start you really have to watch it through because it is impossible to believe that it can get worse - but fear not because it does. Another poorly written script for a donkey director for no-talent offspring of past movie stars. It's hard to decide if the script is worse than the acting or whether the directing is worse than both. As for the hero - well he belts up everyone including one scene where he beats the living daylights out of the tough by swinging open the wardrobe door and smashing him against the window with it. And in another scene he gets thrown through a window and crashes 20ft onto concrete - doesn't even blink - then gets up immediately and gets stuck into the baddies. This is a really ridiculous movie. Lucky it only cost me $1 to hire.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-280639b441a84ed6a10b37085cb95fe8",
            "input": "This movie was so badly written, directed and acted that it beggars belief. It should be remade with a better script, director and casting service. The worst problem is the acting. You have Jennifer Beals on the one hand who is polished, professional and totally believable, and on the other hand, Ri'chard, who is woefully miscast and just jarring in this particular piece. Peter Gallagher and Jenny Levine are just awful as the slave owning (and keeping) couple, although both normally do fine work. The actors (and director) should not have attempted to do accents at all--they are inconsistent and unbelievable. Much better to have concentrated on doing a good job in actual English. The casting is ludicrous. Why have children of an \"African\" merchant (thus less socially desirable to the gens de couleur society ) been cast with very pale skinned actors, while the supposedly socially desirable Marcel, has pronounced African features, including an obviously dyed blond \"fro\"? It's as if the casting directors cannot be bothered to read the script they are casting and to chose appropriate actors from a large pool of extremely talented and physically diverse actors of color. It's just so weird! This could be a great movie and should be re-made, but with people who respect the material and can choose appropriate and skilled actors. There are plenty of good actors out there, and it would be fun to see how Jennifer Beals, Daniel Sunjata and Gloria Reuben would do with an appropriate cast, good script and decent direction.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1b09e0dec9746b3a765c2ac36b78a34",
            "input": "The above seemed a much more appropriate title when me and my suicidal underlings decided to watch this masterpiece of modern bullshit Erotic,Scary, Suspenseful, Well thought out, these are all the things this film fails to be.It is however incredibly funny, the slow sound effects and bad dubbing add to this to make one of the greatest comedies I have seen in recent years. And yet this film doesn't even try to be funny and that is one of the movies grand achievements, it becomes a comedy without even attempting to amuse.Throughout the film an old guy who looks amazingly like Santa Claus goes around ploughing over zombies and smashing vampires into the ground. This made me fail to believe the films title, if this was vampires vs zombies why were the vampires and zombies not fighting? Oh well whatever, besides there were more flaws to this rental than the title. Such as this one; there has been a virus sweeping through America creating zombie like beings who go around acting a lot like your average tourist. And yet there's only four zombies in the entire film. Another problem is besides one shop everywhere is deserted. Surely you'd see zombies roaming about in the woods or in the background a bit. In fact I believe they just drove around in a circle of forest over and over again since they didn't have a high enough budget to film in a wider location, that or the director didn't want to waste his precious time filming in different areas of wood he was to busy sitting in a trailer jerking off to be bothered with such trivial matters.In fact the director had so much fun doing this that he didn't have enough time to hire a big enough cast or even an editor. And so he told the eight members of the cast to dress up as different people and try not to act inconspicuous, whilst I assume he changed his name and began randomly snipping at the film reels \"editing isn't a hard job anyway right?\" The only reason this \"movie\" found it's way into our bag was because somehow we got it confused with Freddy vs Jason, strange how these things happen isn't it. And the only way we made it though the night was by strapping gas masks on and bolting them to our skulls to avoid the stink of this nauseating mess.Oh yes we did laugh at the end, but I'm sure one does that a lot when he has lost his sanity...................",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4486c963477d44a885a9ef7b1115537e",
            "input": "One word: suPURRRRb! I don't think I have see anything like this in a long time on network or cable television. Watching this show was like taking a breath of fresh air amid TV schedule filled with reality shows and boring re-runs. I have to say I had my reservations. After all, critics were almost unanimous in crying foul and downgrading the show. But when half an hour was over (by the way, thank you, NBC, for running a commercial-free show), I was left with the feeling of instant love, love at first glance, the true love that one feels in his guts. Everything about this show screamed EXCELLENCE.Graphics in this show were at least as good as Finding Nemo and Shrek. No small feat considering those movies took years to be developed.Cast was marvelous. I am partial to John Goodman's voice, but the rest of the team certainly were on par with John. Special mention: Lisa Kudrow's guest appearance. She was on top of the game creating neurotic, pudgy, and lovable panda with a Jewish streak in her. (Panda from Brooklyn? Only in this show.) Script was funny, with a lot of inside and adult jokes which were sharp, yet not tacky. A note for all parents: this is NOT for children. This show was never advertised as such, and there's a reason why it's set for 9PM, not 8PM. So if you'd like to complain about \"objectionable context\", save your breath. Adults deserve a comedy made just for them, and Father of the Pride is it. Not everything was perfect. I was a bit puzzled by Siegfried and Roy's characters. Do I sense \"stereotype\" when it comes to them? Yes, they are gay. Yes, they are flamboyant. Yes, they speak with German accents. But that's yesterday's news. Give us something new, something fresh, something funny. Putting the old jokes in a new show is definitely the wrong approach. I understand that the creators of this show wanted to use the \"star power\" that these guys have. That's fine by me. But please don't dwell on something everybody already knows by heart. Hopefully, the rest of the show is not going to play the same old record over and over. In general, the show is definitely a Must-See-TV. Funny, witty, with a few unexpected twists here and there -- there haven't been a comedy this good since Seinfeld. I am certainly looking forward to the next episode.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5bcc83c040d44c728a8301b6a949614d",
            "input": "GBS wrote his own screen adaptation of this Nobel Prize winning play but didn't live to see it produced (he had won an Oscar in 1938 for his brilliant adaptation of his 1914 play PYGMALION). When Otto Preminger mounted (produced and directed) this production in 1957, seven years after Shaw's death, he had noted British author Graham Greene do the adaptation and it was a solid choice.Taking a cue from Shaw's own screenplay, Greene uses material from the stage Epilogue to create a framing device to meld the two acts of the play (one early and one late in Joan's story) into a unified and most satisfying whole. Where on stage the shift in tone is buffered with an intermission, here it works just as well with a return to KING Charles Balois's bedchamber (where the man Joan put on the throne is dreaming of the events which led to his current situation), and more material from Shaw's Epilogue - the introduction of the shade of John Gielgud's Warwick (the English \"king maker\").The majority of the language is solid GBS, and the performances from stalwart Shauvians (like Felix Aymler's Inquisitor or Harry Andrews' de Stogumber) to relative newcomers (the film established Jean Seberg's career) are first rate. It may jar some, only familiar with Richard Widmark's many movie villains, to see him playing a frail and somewhat silly Dauphin, but the performance - oddly top billed - is professional, even if arguably miscast.The symbolism of the opening credits and the director's choice to use the visual vocabulary of black and white filming all serve Shaw and the story well. Go in expecting quality entertainment and you won't be disappointed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d57f7c2e0244fe3806b776ae5e51efc",
            "input": "I won't go into too much detail about the plot of this movie as other reviewers have covered pretty much the same ground.Just wanted to say that I really enjoyed the film very much. Peter Falk's performance alone is reason enough to watch the film.A small scale 'road trip' movie with Falk & Paul Reiser in upstate NY in the fall is the setting for most of the action in the film.Very well written with an adult target audience in mind. Plenty of reality based humor & some well played drama give the film a feeling that it could be your own family.Really can't say enough about this film except that it's a damn shame that a lovely movie like this doesn't get more exposure while other trashy junk out there does.It's great to see Falk with a big leading man role again & he makes the most of it. It proves that his famous friend & writer/director John Casavettes was right in casting Falk in many of his ground breaking films of the 60s & 70s.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f16c975adc6d41f2ae80e7155f915fc1",
            "input": "Billy Wilder is co-credited for the story, and his unsentimental touch is noticeable in this quite original tale of ghostwriting songwriters who both work for burnt-out music legend Oliver Courtney. The obvious misunderstandings are gotten out of the way quite quickly, thank heaven, and what remains is a witty and breezy concoction with some fine songs (and some more forgettable ones), Crosby at his most charming, a great turn by Broadway legend Mary Martin and Basil Rathbone and Oscar Levant providing most of the cynical barbs (Levant is in rare form and his quips haven't dated at all). A delightful surprise, and recommended for all fans of the genre.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3afe575163934a8988205299ce4169c3",
            "input": "After finally viewing this movie in its entirety, I am completely mystified by the adoration it has received by critics and online users alike. Is it the worst Western ever? No, I wouldn't say that. But \"the last great American Western\", a phrase I saw applied to it more than once? Not even close.A movie that tries to tell a story like this needs believable characters that speak believable dialogue, and the dialogue in this film is among the most hackneyed and clichéd that I've ever seen. The movie can be measured in groaners per minute; as in, how many times is an actor or actress forced by the script to say something that no human being would say in real life? There's so many instances of this that it's distracting. Cheesy lines come at you in waves; predictable, unoriginal, and often. If bad dialogue doesn't bother you, then how about bad gunfights? Few Westerns can show you gunfighting that's completely unbelievable while desperately trying to make you take the action seriously. It's okay if there's a comic edge to such gunfighting, such as in Silverado, but in Tombstone the very staged and very stiff choreography of the early gunplay is just another reason to leave this movie off the list of good Westerns. The final showdown somewhat redeems the director on this score, but by then, I was so disinterested in the movie that it was beyond saving.Other than those flaws, I can say the visuals are stunning - the movie's well shot and the settings all look great. The acting is passable, especially considering what the actors were given to work with. However, if you're looking for the last great American Western, do yourself a favor - go rent Unforgiven instead.3 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-176ec6402c33469db75ec4ac8b2fb8a0",
            "input": "Sogo Ishii has taken the old myth of Musashibo Benkei and stood it on its head to produce a dark, gory, spellbinding and terrific-looking movie. Those unfamiliar with the legend won't need to be; the story explains itself nicely as it goes along. Well worth seeking out even though there are no English-language home video versions.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4598d5051e404cc58baab8a21da7e5fc",
            "input": "It just seems to run true to form, any movie starring Dolph Lundgren is bad! I don't know if it is the fact that the storyline in full of holes, or that Dolph is such a bad actor. No spoiler here, He seems to overdue the pushing and shoving and grabbing and touching thing in this movie. In my opinion it is a wonder that some of these projects find venture capital to get in the can and to the theatre.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35456ec7b40646d0b7476cf8c1573669",
            "input": "How this film gains a 6.7 rating is beyond belief. It deserves nothing better than a 2.0 and clearly should rank among IMDb's worst 100 films of all time. National Treasure is an affront to the national intelligence and just yet another assault made on American audiences by Hollywood. Critics told of plot holes you could drive a 16 wheeler through.I love the justifications for this movie being good... \"Nicholas Cage is cute.\" Come on people, no wonder people around the world think Americans are stupid. This has to be the most stupid, insulting movie I have ever seen. If you wanted to see an actually decent film this season, consider Kinsey, The Woodsman, Million Dollar Baby or Sideways. National Treasure unfortunately got a lot more publicity than those terrific films. I bet most of you reading this haven't even heard of them, since some haven't been widely released yet.Nicholas Cage is a terrific actor - when he is in the right movies. Time after time I've seen Cage waste his terrific talent in awful mind-numbing films like Con Air, The Rock and Face-Off. When his talent is put to good use like in Charlie Kaufman's Adaptation he is an incredible actor.Bottom line - I'd rather feed my hand to a wood chipper than be subjected to this visual atrocity again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d326fa45096f44db902794cf5d213867",
            "input": "From the awful death scenes to guns that fire without making sounds to a character called the Fiend. It's all tiresome, slow moving, unimaginative drivel. It was OK seeing the guy with the cape and the hunchback lurking around. Visually it was creepy and probably occupied the moviegoer of the time, but even in 1936 one would think that there would have been a little more imagination and verisimilitude to even a film like this. I just kept waiting for something to happen of any importance as people stood around making speeches and acting like they were posing at an office picnic. And then there are those bullets as a previous commentator mentioned. Perhaps the best clue would have been to search for a water spot on someone's pants pocket.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-842bb77d347340d2b689462ff7384614",
            "input": "The Legend of Bloody Jack is set in the Alaskan wilderness & starts as a relative of some murderous deceased occultist Lumberjack reads incantations (The Evil Dead (1982) style) from an ancient spell book in an attempt to resurrect him, he succeeds & not being a big believer in family unity the Lumberjack dude kills his relative. Two days later & Ray (Travis Quentin Young) along with his sister Dawn (Erica Hoag), her boyfriend Nick (Craig Bonacorsi) & four of their friends pull up outside a cosy log cabin (The Evil Dead style...) with a view to a relaxing weekend in the wilderness. Unfortuntaely the killer Lumberjack dude show's up with his axe & starts to slaughter the friends one-by-one...Edited, written, executive produced & directed by Todd Portugal this is a pretty rotten modern slasher flick the likes of which are killing the horror genre for me, I'm just not a big fan of ultra low budget horror films with the production values of a holiday video. The script is absolutely terrible in every way for 80 minutes, it has every bad slasher cliché, the character's are awful, the dialogue is terrible & it's hard to care about anyone or anything in this pretty worthless excuse for a teen slasher film. The teens are even more annoying & stupid than usual, the script is more moronic, predictable & flawed than usual & the killer Lumberjack dude is just lame. Then there's the final 10 minutes or so which, if you make it that far & believe it's tough going, produces one of the worst twist ending in slasher film history which as far as I'm concerned pokes fun at us the paying audience who has just had to sit through 90 minutes worth of crap. I will now spoil the ending so anyone who doesn't want to know it stop reading now. Basically just before the end of the film it cuts back to Ray telling a story & it turns out he was telling the story of what we had just seen & Nick & Dawn & everyone else berates him for telling such a bad story (I felt their pain) & then proceed to pick holes in it & laugh at it. From saying why did they stand around & argue, why didn't they pick the axe up & such things, I felt like this was poking fun at the audience as those were the sorts of things I was asking myself while watching this crap & to have it shoved down my throat & made perfectly clear that the makers knew the script was crap & could see all the holes in it & went for a twist ending which unashamedly rubbishes the preceding 80 minutes (which we have just had to sit through remember) is just a little grating. Then to add insult to injury the Lumberjack dude turns up & kills everyone within two minutes, why didn't he do that to start with? It would have saved everyone a lot of time.Director Portugal turns in a real mess, this has the worst continuity between night & day in a film I have ever seen. The whole film is meant to set at night & I suspect the makers tried to use the day for night process but it didn't work & most of it looks like it is set during the day. For example, look at when Lisa is trapped in the bathroom & she climbs out of the window. It is clearly pitch black outside when we are looking out from inside the bathroom but when she falls to the ground & the films cuts to an exterior shot it's bright daylight. Then there's the fact Ranger Vince says we can't get a search party out here until 'the morning' indicating it was supposed to be night, then several minutes later when he walks outside & it looks like it's the middle of the day he is actually carrying around a torch which is clearly on & he is clearly pointing it in the directions where he is looking like it's night. Anytime there is a scene set in the cabin look at the windows, it's pitch black outside & when the Ranger walks in through the door to start with is also another clear example. The continuity in this film is simply the worst I have ever seen. There isn't much gore, there are a few scenes of an axe going into people bodies but nothing memorable. It's not scary, there's no tension or atmosphere & the appalling day & night continuity is just so distracting because it's so obvious.Technically the film is rock bottom, again the continuity between night & day has to been seen to be believed how bad it is. The special effects are poor & they couldn't even afford to show a car blowing up even though it's pretty vital to the plot. This has amateur hour written all over it from start to finish. The acting is absolutely brilliant & everyone involved should get an Oscar, nah only joking, not really they were utterly awful & even the girls who got their breasts out weren't very good looking.The Legend of Bloody Jack is just an awful teen slasher flick, it looks like it was shot on a camcorder without the use of a tripod or steadycam, it has awful effects, is boring & has a twist ending which is either the most insulting in horror film history or I've got it totally wrong & it's the most clever. Not recommended, watch a decent slasher from the 70's or 80's to remind you how they should be done.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f38bf12539124d0494503685e2f6cd5a",
            "input": "A young solicitor from London, Arthur Kidd is sent to a small coastal town of Crythin Gifford to oversee the estate of a recently passed away widow Mrs Drablow. While attending her funeral, a mysterious lady dressed in black catches his attention. Supposedly Drablow lived a reclusive life, and locals kept pretty quiet about her. After this he heads to Mrs Drablow mansion that can only be reached on a causeway through the swamp during low tide. There he encounters the woman in black again in cemetery out back of the house, and things begin to get creepy as terrifying noises start coming from the marshes. Now can Mrs Drablow's belongings and listening to her recorded dairy entries help Kidd figure out this gloomy mystery that the locals fear to talk about.Often highly regarded amongst horror fans as being one of the most chilling ghost stories ever and I can see their point. But only in doses does it draw upon tag. Yes, from what you can gather I was left a 'little' under-whelmed, despite really liking it. I was expecting goose bumps throughout the whole feature, but that's probably it… expecting. Mainly I had a similar reaction with the 1980 haunted house thriller 'The Changeling'. When you hear so many good things, it's sometimes hard not get caught up with it.Anyhow what the British TV presentation of \"The Woman in Black\" effectively does is bring out a truly old-fashion, slow burn spine-tingling premise driven by its moody locations, disquieting atmosphere and first-rate performances. Subtly blankets the psychologically gripping story (adapted off Susan Hill's novel of the same name), as the simple mystery authentically opens up with a depressingly tragic tone and successfully characterises its protagonist. Little seems to happen, and can feel drawn out, but the fragile randomness of it catch you off guard. Whenever the camera focuses on the lady in black. Who mostly appears as a background figure, it's ultimately creepy. She might not appear all that much, but when she does…. Talk about unnerving! That also goes for that downbeat conclusion. Pauline Moran, who plays the woman in black, competently gets us nervous by just her gaunt appearance and sudden positioning. A pale look and those minor mannerisms just seem to haunt you. She's a spirit you don't want to cross paths with, yet alone let her see you. An accomplished performance by a marvelously moody Adrian Rawlins as the solicitor Arthur Kidd does hold it all together. In support are solid turns by Bernard Hepton, David Daker, Clare Holman and David Ryall.Drawing heavy on its lushly sombre rural town and foggy coastal locations adds more to the realistically eerie plight and the centre piece were everything unfolds in the forlorn, time-worn Victorian house that comprehensively suffocates the air with constant fear. Director Herbert Wise carefully fabricates alarming imagery that slowly covers one secretive piece at a time in a smoothly paved out rhythm of well-judged contriving. Instead of going out to shock us, some scenes contain a distressing intensity that won't let go. The sound effects are masterfully used, by surrounding and disorienting the air. Rachel Portman's harrowing musical score knows how to get under your skin during those eerie moments and then stay with you.This rarity made-for-television feat is a stimulating rich and unsettling supernatural spook-fest. It might not share much new to the sub-genre, but it competently sticks to it strengths to deliver what counts in this curse.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e69567d194c14f76b191c60a8282b2ec",
            "input": "Somehow, this movie manages to be invigorating, bittersweet, and heartwarming at the same time. Stars like Tony Shalhoub (from Providence) bring the tale to life. The story itself is inspiring. We see a desperate, up-and-down life through the most innocent eyes imaginable: a bird's.Paulie begins his life as a baby parrot given to a little girl (played by Hallie Eisenberg, also known as the Pepsi girl) with a speech impediment. While she learns to speak correctly, so does Paulie. However, unlike most birds, he can speak and understand everything being said. The military father doesn't like the bird, so he is sent to a pawn shop and bought by an aging artist, Ivy. She teaches him manners, etc., while traveling across the country to find Paulie's owner. The movie continues with several twists of fate, until Paulie ends up at a laboratory where he is eventually hidden away in a basement, and found by a Russian custodian, who is touched by the bird's story. the plot is in keeping with the simple, metaphorical theme that language is a gift, and a curse. I would like to say that the soundtrack is astounding. A beautiful mixture of flute, digital base, and horns enhance the movie to the point of pure ecstasy. The sweeping camera angles and breathtaking scenery beautify the story even more. And, as a final remark, the puppetry is entirely believable. (Unlike in star wars, where Yoda resembles a Muppet) This film is one of my favorite movies, with the added remark that my wonderful parakeet of four years died recently. Overall, I give this movie **** out of four stars, two thumbs up, and a big hug.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8af531965eb84bfeaeab69aafa4c9c1b",
            "input": "For a mature man, to admit that he shed a tear over this film is a mature response, to a mature film.If one need admit more then perhaps one could say that, \"Life\" can never be the same, after viewing such advent for it has moved us to the next level.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb50d9618ea041fdbdd3941c469ef357",
            "input": "This is a low budget film with a cast of unknowns and a minimum of on location shoots. The Philippines substitute for Thailand and nobody actually goes to Hong Kong. The stock shot of a Cathay Pacific jumbo jet landing at the old airport makes the transition perfectly. This film proves that you need neither mega budgets nor a headliner star to produce an excellent movie. It contains neither the gaffes nor the excesses that young filmakers often stumble into. Solid workmanship from people who know all the aspects of movie making and who understand the compromises between art and box office. An excellent piece of work!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4de2a068b96040d8a684e90eb5f384eb",
            "input": "Watched this as a late TV movie last night purely by chance. The blurb for the film said something to the effect of mother stays with daughter and goes on romantic journey, as I tuned in there's the carpenter hard at work on a new conservatory - played by Daniel Craig no less - so the plot was immediately apparent.It turns out that eponymous mother's carpenter love interest is also the daughter's boyfriend, so there's trouble brewing and not too many surprises. But I'd been caught by Anne Reid's compelling performance and I was hooked. The direction allows her plenty of space for staring into mirrors and adjusting scarves, when she exudes sadness.The sex scenes were fascinating and taboo-breaking. Shouldn't older women's bodies remain covered up? Not here and we're treated to a delicious reawakening in the Mother's sexuality. Even more startling are the drawings she's made that (SPOILER!) once discovered confirm her daughter's suspicion that something's going on here.Cathryn Bradshaw as the daughter didn't convince me quite as much as the rest of the cast, but that could be me. With her waves of pre-Raph locks I kept expecting to see Julia Sawahla, whose more intense face would have suited the confrontations better to my mind. Bradshaw has a rounder happier face that didn't carry the anger that emerges as the film progresses.The ending is weak. If the goodbyes for Mother as she leaves in disgrace are so indifferent then perhaps we could see some close-ups of those waving goodbye and see something of their individual reasons. Whatever she's done, she's a recently bereaved widow leaving for the lonely home she shared with her husband for 30 years, and I found the lack of sympathy jarring. For a film so full of emotion (and be warned it's like opening champagne, you'll never get the lid back on) the ending is a cold contradiction.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6756c5fed8694e698fb5d9e7ec5a69e8",
            "input": "So often a band will get together for a re-union concert only to find that they just can't get it together. Not so here. This concert is just shear brilliance from start to finish. These three musicians obviously got together beforehand and plotted and planned what was needed to ensure this was not just a nostalgic bash to satisfy someone's ego. This is obvious from the start, before they even step on stage. Many faces in the crowd weren't even born when these guys first performed. From the first song they capture that old magic that was Cream, 3 men, 3 instruments, no fuss. Clapton, by his own admission, said he had to stretch himself for this concert because there were no keyboards, synthesizers etc so we get to see him at his best. Ginger Baker demonstrates why so many drummers today, speak of him as some sort of drumming guru. Jack Bruce just great. They really managed to put together a piece of magic that will stand the test of time for many years to come. This one's a 10 for me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-735861ddfc334cc1bbd468bc7467421f",
            "input": "I reflect back to the days when I held my boyfriends hat to smell him into existence in my time alone when I was 16. The little moments of this film are so accurate and right on pace with what is going on in the minds and hearts of young girls during those coming of age teenage years. Now at my age I want to preach to them about their decisions and how life during those times are not as important as it all seems in those moments. That if they can be patient in their youth and wait to experience the hardships of life both external and internal that life would be so much sweeter. But then again young people today are faced with some variables that I never had to deal with a youth. The three main characters well played by all three actors (Kerry Wahington - Lanisha, Anna Simpson - Joycelyn and Melissa Martinez- Maria) give us the very believable depiction of a piece of reality for young girls living in impoverished situations. They have impoverished family lives all being raised by single mothers with expectation of Lanisha whose father is present but not actively supporting her day to day. The have impoverished educational systems and lack direct contact with achieving role models. These situations powerfully affect them and is their reality but all this is of no great depressive concern to these young women in their day to day. They except their plight and focus on the same things young girls all over the world are concerned with. Finding true love in a male, having good friends that you can depend on, gaining some respect/love and responsibility from parents and enjoying life. This is were this film cross the race, age and gender gap imposed upon it by its characters and the setting in which it is stamped. The Director and writer McKay explains on the DVD how each of scenes got into his head, by just observing young people of that age that lived in those types of neighborhoods. Plus you add three up and coming actresses who are not so far removed from that time in their own lives that you get a real good synergy of reality and acting at its best. The one thing I know about (African Americans and Hispanics) is that there is always a spiritual family member or neighbor that is in the foreground or near ground believing in a better day and better life and future in spite of the present situation and is role modeling that to some extent. This was never touched in the movie in order not to preach and I understand that but it also narrows the culture to having no hope in anything other than themselves. The HOPE FACTOR: I now think about my future and where I have come from and say as Lanisha did ` Today is a good day.' Yes poverty still exists, racism, sexism, and any other ism that we can added. Yes some of each of these young girls actions perpetuate the isms and are self-destructive, everything around them is impoverished but NONE of those actions past or neither present nor their environment leaves them without hope for a bright future. I was left with saddened hope of each of the characters and a deeper desire to be a role model in the life of some young girl on the edge of making a destructive decision. I suppose that is the value of film it should not only entertain but cause each of us to think, reflect and then act in some positive way to make this world a better place.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a33c04f9c89846f9b80c996d96098e83",
            "input": "I've been a fan of all things Bill Maher for 15 years but this film was disappointing and at times disgusting. Of course, I am Catholic, come from a well-educated family and go to church of my own volition, which probably puts me at ends with quite a few of Bill's opinions.Bill's problem is that he presumes that religion is uniformly negative. He's correct to document the sociological aspects of it i.e. one faith builds its holidays on top of another and that many wars have been started because of religion (or, more accurately, by the sinister appeals of men to the ultimate and unquestionable authority of God), but that said he never looks at its positive side. Quite frankly, I think that hell would freeze over before Bill would ever humble himself and travel to the slums of Calcutta where Mother Theresa spent her life working with the poorest of the poor. She's dead now of course, but he could easily visit the Jesuit priest in East LA who runs Homeboy Industries, which works with young men typically with gang and prison backgrounds to teach them career skills, get their tattoos removed, and to become responsible members of society, or he could visit USC's Institute for Advanced Catholic Studies, which has brought together some of the world's finest theologians, diplomats, and investment bankers to study ways in which to ethically integrate the world's poorest countries into global capital markets and thereby improve the standard of living for the half of the world's people who live on less than $1 a day. Of course he won't do that because that would require him to consider evidence that does not easily fit into his preconceived beliefs about religion, and it's so much easier to continue to make snide, superficial jokes.That fits into the other large problem with Bill's movie, which is that he never subjects himself to anyone either on his level or who is better than he is. In this movie, you have Maher the Cornell grad spend most of his time talking down to truck drivers at a nondenominational Christian truck stop service, in a night club with a Dutch guy who smokes pot all the time, with the minister of a storefront church in Miami who claims to be the reincarnation of Christ, and with an actor playing Jesus at a \"Holy Land\" theme park.What you won't see in Bill's film, beyond some superficial speculation alongside a Ph.D in Grand Central Station that religion chemically alters the brain like drugs do and that religion is the fallacy of tradition wrought on the masses, is any sort of serious and questioning interviews with philosophy and theology professors from schools like Notre Dame, BYU, or Wheaton College, who could easily rhetorically decapitate him in a debate on the matter. You won't see any serious discussion of any of the writings of C.S. Lewis, G.K. Chesterton, or any papal encyclicals, and of course you also won't find any discussion whatsoever of any of the non-Abrahamic (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) faiths whatsoever. All you get at the end of the day is a textbook example of a condescending, snobby elitist from the west side of LA who makes a movie for his own kind and who has absolutely no gut-level understanding whatsoever of how the other half of America that elected George W. Bush (twice) lives their lives or about the school of thought behind it.I get a lot of what Bill's saying, but for someone possessing his intellect and influence, this film was nothing less than pathetic. Anyone interested in the kind of intellectual ferment that indie documentaries typically bring could find more stimulation in an old rerun of the Teletubbies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b2ee861d30d444192f2b28db9a44b02",
            "input": "\"Nothin'. There ain't nothing' in Room 237. But you ain't got no business going' in there anyway. So stay out. You understand? Stay out.\" Never has there been such a feat of psychological horror as this film achieves. This is the highest rated horror film of all and rightly so. Jack nicholson is a superb actor and this is one of the greatest performances in cinema.Its about a family moving to an isolated and deserted hotel for 5 months over the winter. Then the father (Jack) becomes almost possessed by the horrors in the hotel.Kubricks direction is nothing short then perfect. The tense tracking shots, agonising music, mystical messages and perplexing plot makes this the best horror film ever made.Throughout the film there is constant references to danger, death and horror. Red is used in EVERY scene. Is the red purposely put in by Kubrick? Of course!.This is a definitive Kubrick classic and this is the third of his films I have given 10/10. He is a perfectionist in his direction and you can see it in all his films. He loves to perplex his watchers in everyone of his films.I will be talking about this film for months to come. It has infinite depth.In conclusion, this is the cornerstone of horror and tension. A masterpiece of terror 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4bbf245ef6fb498880980ef0afb0c8b1",
            "input": "Hollywood now has officially gone too far and I really hope that this travesty of a motion picture creates a genuine backlash against their crap machines, in spite of the good box office returns. If you are an industry person reading our comments looking for hints on what to do next, STOP. Stop making our TV shows into these repellent, stupid, money grubbing waste of time movies that suck. By doing so you are proving one thing: Hollywood is out of ideas, and going to see the movies they churn out only perpetuates the cycle of disgust. What's next -- You guys gonna go & ruin The Bionic Man??The film is just plain wrong, and manages to get the most stupid, simple fact of the show totally incorrect by forgetting (or ignoring) that Tom Wopat & John Schneider's Bo & Luke Duke were *REFORMED* moonshiners. They had been busted, learned their lesson, gone straight, and were there to help people and be good neighbors who just happened to shoot dynamite tipped arrows from hunting bows & drive like Steve McQueen. Denver Pyle's Uncle Jessie was also the moral center of the family, always insisting that the Boys do good, even at their own expense or embarrassment while he made sandwiches and coffee for when the chores were done. They always did the right thing and had a sort of earnest naiveté about them that was quite appealing. We wanted to be more like them than we were, sorta. My favorite gimmick from the show was how they always buckled their seat belts before roaring off, which was apparently too moral for this film.By transforming the Duke family into a pack of leering, wisecracking, criminally minded, redneck baiting, misogynistic losers the movie has no moral standpoint, where the show was all about how honest or incorruptible the Dukes were -- Are the Duke boys in this movie supposed to come off as good guys? I wanted to punch them both in the nose. They seem to have a lot of free time on their hands that could be spent doing chores back at the farm and end up pursuing less than noble ends, if not acting like a pair of 14 year old boys who haven't grown up. There should be no marijuana use, no gawking at buxom, nubile coeds & their breasts, no shenanigans involving the Brothers in da Hood. All of it looks like the work of a marketing consultant who took a poll at the mall of what 14 year old boys like to see in movies. The problem being that 14 year old boys cannot possibly remember the show, IMHO shouldn't be seeing this movie either, and the parents who might feel nostalgia for the show will be disgusted by what the writers, director & producers did to our collective memories just to part us from our money, which is exactly how I feel. What were they thinking???And boy did they *EVER* get Daisy wrong. Jessica Simpson all dolled up like a Pamela Anderson mall slut may be the only reason for anyone to see this disgrace, but you can service your needs just fine downloading some promotional stills of her, printing them up & pinning them to the wall in a restroom. She is hardly in the film at all (which is the movie's only saving grace), and the ten minutes or so they used her was STILL excessive. Catherine Bach's Daisy may have had the same kind of shorts, and long legs that make people feel funny just looking at her, but the Daisy she played was a *PERSON*. The pratfalls she elicited by simply being who she was had an almost natural ring to it. She remains one of the most outrageously sexy pop culture icons ever created but there was somebody at home. And most importantly she was a sweet, caring person who couldn't help it if the guys went Ga Ga over her.By contrast, Jessica Simpson appears phony, contrived, made up, costumed, posed, aloof, bored, out of place, and I don't think she even looks that great in the outfit. She doesn't look like a person but a plot device, conjured up during a deal with someone representing her agent. Ms. Simpson would be well advised to fire that person immediately and pretend like the whole thing never even happened. Whatever the joke was, she isn't in on it and is disgracefully exploited for T&A. If that's all she wants from her career, executive produce the sequel if only to ensure yourself enough screen time at least, because this effort was just pathetic.The bottom line is SKIP IT. For the cost of two tickets and a Slurpee to go you can pick up one of Warner Bros. excellent box set collections of the original shows on DVD and the entire family can watch them together. That was why it worked. The only real purpose I can see in the film might be it's future use as an interrogation tool at Guantanamo Bay. Twenty minutes of this & they'll be singing a choir.1/10, and I mean it. And STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM THE BIONIC MAN, you schnooks.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4213589bf23d4c6b922dc025ae619462",
            "input": "With the badly injured Tony in an induced coma, two things happen: Tony imagines himself leading the life of a salesman attending a business convention, while his family and friends go through hell trying to cope with the possible loss of the big man. The dream sequences are right out of an old TWILIGHT ZONE episode, as Tony finds himself transformed into an Average Joe trying to deal with a missing wallet and mixed-up identities while on a cross-country business trip. His intonation as a blazer- and khaki-wearing schnook is more mid-American and less that of an Italian thug from Noo Joisey. A nice touch. The shockingly long-haired, hippy-dippy AJ (whom Paulie calls \"Van Helsing\" at one point) has a nice scene with his comatose old man. The best moment has the big boys trying to talk about life without Tony, which immediately breaks down into a territorial dispute. Vito gets off a line about the new-dead Gene possibly having been a closet case, which is interesting in light of what we are about to learn about Vito.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d427e7aed2a4deb90f8f7c28d7be993",
            "input": "One of the best records of Israel's response to the murder of Rabin.Extremely true and natural, it captured the spirit of the nation.Especially important was the response of young people to the trauma of Israel's loss and the feeling that we shall overcome.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3662b482a3fc4de08850ece6918e7498",
            "input": "Unlike another user who said this movie sucked (and that Olivia Hussey was terrible), I disagree.This movie was amazing!!!!!! Olivia Hussey is awesome in everything she's in! Yeah she may be older now, because many remember her from Romeo and Juliet, but she's wonderful! This story line may be used quite often, but it's a unique movie and I'll fight back on anyone who disagrees! I enjoyed this movie just as much as I have any other Olivia Hussey movie. Olivia's \"my girl\" and I love her work.I saw this for the first time on Saturday (4/14/07) and fell in love with it. Not only because's it's an Olivia movie, but because of it's unique story line and wonderful direction.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c43e8abb9cc349548e3c1dd586b79e80",
            "input": "It's difficult to know where this adaptation starts going wrong, because I think the problem begins with the books themselves. Alexander McCall Smith has worked out that you read them not for the detective stories, but for his deeply condescending and completely spurious vision of an Africa that does not exist. He's done for Botswana what Borat did for Kazakhstan - not as successfully, but based in as much fact.Once I realised this, it ceased to gall me that Jill Scott, an American singer/actress, is cast as Mma Ramotswe. If she is to represent a land that is not Africa, how appropriate that she is a black woman who is not African? She's not the only American on the cast; Mma Makutsi is played by Anika Noni Rose. Both women are far, far too young for the roles they're playing, and far too glamorous. Both brutally murder the local accents, and both focus so entirely on this brutality that they fail to offer much in the way of acting. Scott's Mma Ramotswe is bouncy, cute and soft. Rose's Mma Makutsi is an annoying motor-mouthed bitch.The result is almost unwatchable. The principal cast is redeemed only by the presence of Lucian Msamati, who turns in a decent performance as Mr JLB Matekoni. Hes comes off smarter and more intense than in the books, but I find myself unable to blame Msamati for this - he's a shining light in an ocean of suckage. The contradictions between his performance and the books are clearly laid at the feet of whichever committee of butchers wrote the script.To me, McCall Smith's writing has always been highly entertaining yet notoriously bad. He refuses to be edited. As a result, his books contain experiments in grammar that border on the scientific, and characters that change name mid-sentence. It is therefore something of an achievement that the writing team on this project actually made it worse.The dialogue is now largely Anglicised. Characters speak of \"opening up\" and \"sensitivity to needs\". Mma Ramotswe and Mr JLB Matekoni flirt openly. Mma Makutsi moans about not having a computer, but given her constantly restyled hair, makeup and jewellery, I'm surprised she doesn't have a MacBook in her handbag along with her Visa card.So what are we left with here? It's difficult to be upset with this crappy adaptation because honestly, most of the things I like about the original books are apocryphal anyway. McCall Smith paints a fictional Botswana populated with cute, non-threatening black people who are full of amusing and palatable wisdom-nuggets. It reads well despite linguistic travesty, but it is a vision of how a certain type of white person wishes black people were. It just isn't true.Given that, it's hardly surprising that this show sucks as much as it does. It remains to be seen whether European and American audiences will even notice, however.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e3fa04341784d87bfad94afbb2683c2",
            "input": "Ohhh man! Now this is what I'm talking about! As far as bad/cheesy horror flicks go this movie was truly in a class of its own. A real gem!First off, the film wasn't originally in English. That's okay because the voice dubbing was truly exceptional! Here is my favorite excerpt from the dialog (and there is plenty more where this came from)… \"I'm feeling a little better. I'm just thirsty… FOR YOUR BLOOD!\"And what drama! Here is a play by play recap of the interaction between the military and scientists…Scene 1… Scientist: \"You can't do that… It'll be a disaster!\" -- Military Officer: \"That's just science fiction\" (he then proceeds to cause a complete disaster just like the scientist predicted).Scene 2… Scientist: \"If you do that many people will die!!!\" -- Military Officer: \"you don't know what you're talking about.\" (he does it and many people die).Scene 3… Scientist: \"Don't do that… It'll kill everyone!\" -- Military Officer: \"That's nonsense\" (he then proceeds to kill everyone)Scene 4, 5, 6, 7… (you get the idea).If that wasn't enough… there were a few scenes that really stood out as instant classics! In one scene, the military has literally 10 guys pointing guns at two unarmed men. The leader yells, \"Go get 'em!\" and all 10 army guys, one at a time, drop their guns and fist fight the two adversaries! Instant classic!And don't worry. No attention to detail was left out! This movie even had a hip/upbeat '80's keyboard/synth soundtrack to set the mood!And trust me… I realize this review might contain some spoilers, but there are so many goodies in this epic I really only scratched the surface. A movie of this caliber only comes out once a decade! A true movie watching experience! A masterpiece! Wow!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ffccd475b4ff482ca68b995070f291a2",
            "input": "This movie surprised me. Some things were \"clicheish\" and some technological elements reminded me of the movie \"Enemy of the State\" starring Will Smith. But for the most part very entertaining- good mix with Jamie Foxx and comedian Mike Epps and the 2 wannabe thugs Julio and Ramundo (providing some comic relief). This is a movie you can watch over again-say... some Wednesday night when nothing else is on. I gave it a 9 for entertainment value.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3417c4bf6d4044b385b0f01f9171c184",
            "input": "In 1948 this was my all-time favorite movie. Betty Grable's costumes were so ravishing that I wanted to grow up to be her and dress like that. Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., was irresistible as the dashing Hungarian officer. Silly and fluffy as this movie might appear at first, when I was eight years old it seemed to me to say something important about relations between men and women. I saw it again the other day; I was surprised to find that it still did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa444d72b13044d0a42ebff02548b376",
            "input": "I was bored, around 10pm, so I watched this movie. And I could not stop laughing. Everything was so ridiculous. The way the kids were acting like they were older than 11 just cracked me up. One of the kids had a ring, that supposedly killed people after 3 or so years. It gave me the impression that he wanted to be a gangster.It's pretty hard to take little kids seriously, especially when it has to do with eating worms. They act like everything is such a big deal, like if Billy (the main character) doesn't eat the worms then the world will end.This is a good movie for little kids (excluding the fact that a 5 year old says 'penis'), but not for teens or adults who don't want to waste their time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75d42b1b788c47189d7b0151fe03edbd",
            "input": "Heavy-handed moralism. Writers using characters as mouthpieces to speak for themselves. Predictable, plodding plot points (say that five times fast). A child's imitation of Britney Spears. This film has all the earmarks of a Lifetime Special reject.I honestly believe that Jesus Nebot and Julia Montejo set out to create a thought-provoking, emotional film on a tough subject, exploring the idea that things are not always black and white, that one who is a criminal by definition is not necessarily a bad human being, and that there can be extenuating circumstances, especially when one puts the well-being of a child first. However, their earnestness ends up being channeled into preachy dialogue and trite situations planted to move the plot along. The decent production values and interesting use of documentary-style camera footage are not enough to accomplish their aim when the script and the acting fall flat.Logic is often compromised for the sake of creating tension: Soid first tries to blackmail Pablo into participating in her documentary in exchange for helping them escape, then in the same breath basically tells him not to trust her because she's not helping them out of altruism. Well, duh. And for a man on the run, Pablo is far too swayed by a temper tantrum. Cristina's well-being is so important to him that he's fleeing capture and jail or deportation for her, but he's willing to risk all that to appease her when she doesn't want to go to Mexico. Right. Talk above over-permissive parenting. Third, when Pablo's employer Charlie gives the phone to Detective Bright, she is remarkably unprofessional, especially given her seniority - did she really think she was persuasive? Oh, yeah, I would have turned myself in. CCH Pounder's Detective Wims could wipe the floor with her.To be fair, I'd like to list the things I liked. Um, I liked the midget. And I liked the fact that the midget was named Sexy. There's cross-dressing, always a plus; juvenile cross-dressing, no less! Harry is infinitely cuter than Cristina. But my favorite moment in the film has to be when Cristina kicks Detective Not-So-Bright. I also find it interesting that, in a heavily minority cast (which I much appreciate, by the way), the black character is the racist one. Too bad it's just thrown out there and not further explored.There's a distinctive, unconventional score, but it's nonetheless generally context-unspecific, not enhancing mood or tension in any scene, except the pathetic, anguished wailing every time the main character is in anguish, as though they think his acting doesn't show it enough: 'Just in case you weren't sure, he's upset, and we have the musical cues to prove it.'Stilted, clichéd dialogue results in a depressing lack of subtext; everything has to be spelled out in dialogue, even when the body language had been up 'til then conveying it just fine. For example, every impassioned speech Pablo makes, and Mrs. Knight's lament that her child won't be crawling into bed with them in the morning.'Papi, tell me about Mama again' - what shameless, blatant exposition introducing the generic dead wife! (She's always the most beautiful woman the widower had ever seen, the kindest he had ever met. Why can't we see a man cry over a woman like Shakespeare's - she may be fat, ugly, obnoxious, but his love for her is deep as oceans? Now _there's_ a story which would move me.)The police always being literally one step behind them gives many scenes the out-of-place feeling of a French farce. Most boring foot chases ever - Bright and Lightning are so out-of-shape and easily-fooled (he certainly isn't quick as lightning, and she, well, I don't feel the need to spell things out). Some guy dragging along a small child outrunning a bicycle cop, complete with macho biker picking a fight but then being felled by a child? To quote Margaret Cho, that's so sad. Would we ever see this on 'Cops '?Hackneyed and over-the-top deus ex machina: as an employer, would you really waive checking his green card just because he can quote the author of the inspirational saying on a poster behind your desk?Plus several scenes, including the above, threaten to devolve into porn: 'Well, I'll do this favor for you, as long as you do something for me...' I can almost hear the bowm-chicka-bowm-bowm.When the parents view the footage shot of Pablo's remorse, the grieving mom's freak-out is the most real the movie feels. Unfortunately, this is diminished by the fact that she looks completely swayed by his emotional speech right up until she goes ballistic. A more ambivalent look would be more convincing here.I'm in constant awe of the stupidity of the main character doing things for the sake of plot: holding up a convenience store without a mask, visiting the dead girl's grave. And why doesn't the mother recognize his face from when she saw him before he drove off?! 'You seem awfully familiar...'What is the purpose of that wholly unnecessary, somewhat gratuitous scene with Soid and the artificially-enhanced bartender? Character development? Tch. Too little, too late.Speaking of unnecessary traits that never went anywhere, Detective Lightning's saying skeptical Detective Bright must be a Scorpio shows how little he really knows about the occult. And I don't think that believing in fate quite qualifies as voodoo mumbo jumbo.At the end, when Bright holds Pablo as he dies - wait, why does she care now? Her character is as inconsistent as Soid's. What, she has to shoot him just because she said 'Stop, or I'll shoot'? (She's cared _so_much_ about her integrity thus far.) He was unarmed. There was no need for lethal force. What's wrong with shooting him in the leg to immobilize him?Finally, Cristina's childlike acceptance of her mother's death giving Dr. Knight peace over his daughter's death - so forced. And the contrivance of the family whose child was killed becoming Cristina's new family... It angers me that she could be a 'replacement' for their little girl. It's also unrealistic that a white couple would take in the Latino daughter of the man who killed their own daughter. I'm not saying there aren't generous, loving people who would do that. I'm just saying that the characters here are never developed far enough for me to believe that _they_ would do that.I find it offensive that another IMDb reviewer said that of course as a woman she was moved by the sappy scenes. I am a woman who reserves my emotional movements for moments that don't wax sentimental in a manufactured manner.Co-writer, co-director, co-star Nebot said himself he wore too many hats during this production. Too many cooks may spoil the broth, but one cook alone just might end up making an after-school special.In conclusion, this film's title has less to do with the story and more to do with the feeling of regret, helplessness, and loss accompanying the revelation that you will never see your money again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbd51ca941754faa957192c9a97b5476",
            "input": "I went to see this movie at our college theater thirty years ago because I liked Bruce Dern in Silent Running and Family Plot. To this day (sorry Jack Nicholson), it is still the dullest movie I've ever seen. It just went on and on with no discernible point and then - it just ended. The lights came up and I watched everyone looking around in confusion. Had the projectionist missed a reel? I've never had the urge to find out. All I remember about the movie is that it was a non-drama about some annoying college basketball players and their coach. The most enjoyable part of the movie was watching the totally mystified audience afterwords. Fortunately, this was just an exception for Jack, Bruce, and Karen Black.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c0b3ae2f6994ca3849fb4fcd7b68541",
            "input": "At least it's not full of sensless violence or fluff. It's also not very full of thought or a smooth storyline. This story had some potential but the director appears to have lost site of the green. The story is disjointed and goes off in strangedirections, to no conclusion. I also don't believe the director spent much time around a golf country club, either. Some of the depictions are absurd. Not very engaging.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-346df814c3f9425799a91ebedd03ff34",
            "input": "This movie leaves the intellectual mind thinking and trying to analyze the story. I too cannot understand why people would trash this movie.If you are a Jerry Bruckheimer fan, this movie may not suitable for u.This movie presents high degree of realism. The actors and actresses' performance is examplary. Not fake, just natural. No special sound.effects, so special side effects.The camera work is excellent, the music is oh so good. I can't wait to get the soundtrack.It leaves your body numb, like Constant Garderner.The directly has raw talent, certainly not a follower.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1446dd0b2c124251a854a6e3a9aa6e96",
            "input": "How does an usual day start in Point Place, Wisconsin...First of all, Red, the tyrannical father of the Forman family and a WWII veteran, sits at the kitchen table and reads his newspaper while his overjoyed wife Kitty serves breakfast. Then comes their skinny son, Eric, he sits at the table as well, and his father starts his daily yelling, usually involving placing his foot in Eric's behind if (insert reason here). If his promiscuous angel-faced sister Laurie is at home, she comes along, then Red stops yelling and kindly talks to her, making Eric feel left out of the family.Once this daily (painful) ritual is over, Eric rushes down to his basement, where all his friends are already hanging out. And when we get to see them, it becomes obvious Eric and his redhead tomboy girlfriend, next-door neighbor and childhood friend Donna Pinciotti are the sanest people around. Meet Steven Hyde, the conspiracy theorist who hates disco and doesn't really care about what's around as long as it's not funny to watch; Michael Kelso, the kind of guy who thinks that he will get through his life only by his looks and that carrots grow in trees; Jackie Burkhardt, the one who thinks of herself as the prettiest girl around, spoiled kid of a rich father, and, of course, cheerleader; and Fez, a naive but oversexed foreigner who loves candy and can't keep a secret. At first they simply hang out, gossiping and making fun of Kelso, but then they all sit in a circle and let the real fun begin... before going out doing something they'll regret later.Meanwhile Red goes out and meets Donna's weirdo parents, Bob and Midge. He's rude, but they don't mind, as they think he's joking. Somewhere around is Leo, an aging hippie, who's constantly confused and makes word plays without even noticing.Did you imagine that seemingly peaceful neighborhood with all these awesome characters? Of course, most seem \"clichéd\", but the show takes the cliché to a new level. Now throw in some of the most wicked story lines a sitcom can offer, sit down and enjoy one of the best TV shows ever. The one that never does two times the same thing and which is, compared to most sitcoms that are \"cute funny\", purely hysterical. If you get hooked, don't let this show let you go. Bite on the hook over and over and, man, you will see the sitcom genre from a whole new prospective.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b37db79795e4c999ea7c855fd85df6e",
            "input": "What was an exciting and fairly original series by Fox has degraded down to meandering tripe. During the first season, Dark Angel was on my weekly \"must see\" list, and not just because of Jessica Alba.Unfortunately, the powers-that-be over at Fox decided that they needed to \"fine-tune\" the plotline. Within 3 episodes of the season opener, they had totally lost me as a viewer (not even to see Jessica Alba!). I found the new characters that were added in the second season to be too ridiculous and amateurish. The new plotlines were stretching the continuity and credibility of the show too thin. On one of the second season episodes, they even had Max sleeping and dreaming - where the first season stated she biologically couldn't sleep.The moral of the story (the one that Hollywood never gets): If it works, don't screw with it!azjazz",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a8d2512d34e441ea0c466d57166c0a7",
            "input": "This movie could have been a decent B-movie if 3/4 of the the movie wasn't so much focusing on the sex scenes. I mean, he's a sex addict, and I'm sure that there's a lot more that goes on with sex addicts outside of having sex on a constant basis. Michael Des Barres did a good job considering what all he had to do, which wasn't much. At one point or another, one would have to laugh at him, because his character was so pitiful. Nastassja Kinski was alright in her role as the concerned sex therapist, she could've of done more though and I'm not suggesting her having sex. The person that stood out the most to me in this movie was Rosanna Arquette in her convincing role as the loving and concerned wife. There's something about beautiful inside and out that strongly appeals to me. She played that role and as you watched the movie, you start to feel bad for her.\"Diary Of A Sex Addict\" while not Oscar material or a modern classic to anyone's standards, is quite informative and does a fair job in showing you how one's personal demons can take over and ruin the very things in life you think highly of.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a953bc87895447e988b98b637f157cb2",
            "input": "The reviews I read for this movie were pretty decent so I decided to check it out. BAD IDEA! This is another movie about a ghost out for revenge against a group friends. The story is stupid, mix two parts Ringu with one part Prom Night, a sprinkle of I Know what you did Last Summer, and add a tiny dash of Single White Female - now blend until completely nonsensical. There is nothing new to this plot, and revisiting the clichés I've grown so fond of wasn't even entertaining this time. This movie jumps to and from the past too much, and once I made sense of it all I realized it still didn't make much sense. Characters go from sane to psycho killer in the blink of an eye. Speaking of characters, they are all your stereotypical favorites - the greedy selfish lawyer, the egocentric actress, the has-been baseball star, the video voyeur, the bitter girl, the spooky quiet chick, the 'nicer-than-nice' nice girl, a freakin' black cat... and I didn't care about any of them. Perhaps a better writer could have made the movie work, there were some decent scenes in it, but overall this movie was a mess. I should also mention a certain 'video tape' that would have been IMPOSSIBLE to shoot. This movie isn't the worst Asian horror has to offer by far, but it is still pretty bad. If you just want to see some creepy images in the dark, or just want to laugh out loud at some over the top acting, or just want to yell \"you're stupid!\" at a movie screen, or just want to have another Asian horror flick up your sleeve when someone asks you how many you've seen - this movie is for you. Those seeking a decent plot look elsewhere.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d1b44552d08640cb81869e92c7a422fc",
            "input": "This is a film that on the surface would seem to be all about J.Edgar Hoover giving himself a a big pat on the back for fighting Klansmen,going after Indian killers, hunting the famous gangsters of the 1930's, fighting Nazi's in the US and South America during world war 2 and Commies in New York during the early 1950's. Of course in 1959 we did not know about Mr. Hoover's obsession for keeping secret files on honest Americans, bugging people like the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr, but worst of all,his secret love affair with his deputy director,Clyde Tolson( If you want to know more about that subject, I suggest seeing the film Citizen Cohn). Hoover aside, This story of a life in the FBI as told by Jimmy Stewart makes for a decent, but dated film. Vera Miles as his devoted wife is also good. But Jimmy is the movie. As much as Hoover controlled production and always made sure the FBI was seen without fault, Jimmy Stewart gave the film a human side,quite an achievement considering Hoover was always looking over his shoulder. The background score is also pleasant. I have read recent online articles suggesting that this is a forgotten film. Jimmy Stewart was one of the greatest film stars of all time and none of his films should be forgotten. TCM was the last network to show it a long time ago and I hope they show it again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c38fa1de42d54184a1b343bc7f1daddb",
            "input": "Well, it's yet again a film that plays with your sentiments and you come out all soft as opposed to a rocky film. But I'm a sucker for those so I gave it a good score... the acting was very good and there were a lot of feeling. The violence is kept to a minimal which makes a change. I'd have given it a 9 if it were not for the salute at the end! All in all a good movie with very good actors.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-286f74a705d24e74a231b81e8c77ab58",
            "input": "I always have a bit of distrust before watching the British period films because I usually find on them insipid and boring screenplays (such as the ones of, for example, Vanity Fair or The Other Boleyn Girl), but with a magnificent production design, European landscapes and those thick British accents which make the movies to suggest artistic value which they do not really have.Fortunately, the excellent film The Young Victoria does not fall on that situation, and it deserves an enthusiastic recommendation because of its fascinating story, the excellent performances from Emily Blunt, Paul Bettany and Jim Broadbent, and the costumes and locations which unexpectedly make the movie pretty rich to the view.And I say \"unexpectedly\" because I usually do not pay too much attention to those details.\"Victorian era\" was (in my humble opinion) one of the key points in contemporary civilization, and not only on the social aspect, but also in the scientific, artistic and cultural ones.But I honestly did not know about the origins from that era very much, and maybe because of that I enjoyed this simplification of the political and economic events which prepared the landing of modern era so much.I also liked the way in which Queen Victoria is portrayed, which is as a young and intelligent monarch whose decisions were not always good, but they were at least inspired by good intentions.I also found the depiction of the romance between Victoria and Prince Albert very interesting because it is equally interested in the combination of intellects as well as in the emotions it evokes.The only fail I found on this movie is that screenwriter Julian Fellowes used some clichés of the romantic cinema on the love story, something which feels a bit out of place on his screenplay.I liked The Young Victoria very much, and I really took a very nice surprise with it.I hope more period films follow the example of this movie: the costumes and the landscapes should work as the support of an interesting story, and not as the replacement of it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd6cf93b66864f1aa03cc006db4a93c5",
            "input": "Perhaps the worst thing about Carlos Mencia's comedy is that every joke needs to be followed with an insult at the people in the crowd that aren't laughing. If there's anybody who's insecure, it's a comedian who won't shut up about his audience.Then again, perhaps the worst thing about Carlos Mencia's comedy is that he doesn't get off his free speech high horse. If you want to be funny, just make a joke, don't explain all the reasons why you're saving the American way with your failed attempts at generating laughter.Hmm... actually... the worst thing about Carlos Mencia's comedy is that it substitues meanspirited jabs at ethnicities for legitimate humor. Avoid this like the plague.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2e2381dec5043869e12d0f144f1f4dc",
            "input": "I just viewed the film two days ago, and I was filled with anticipation, being that Paris is my second favorite city in Europe and I spent a very romantic 18 months there in the '80's. I was somewhat disappointed that most of this group of vignettes, while original and artistically done, did not capture the \"light\" and beauty of the city very well.Nor enough of the romance! We saw none of the tree-lined boulevards... There was too much darkness, not only literally but figuratively. Some of the plots manipulated the viewer it seemed, and let him/her down \"flat \"(the Marais sequence, the coiffure salesman sequence, to give two examples). The uplifting, good ones: The Mime sequence, the cemetery, the Montmartre (though it left too much to the viewer to comprehend), the \"Cowboy\" vignette ,and the Sacre Coeur-- seemed few and far between, and I would have liked to have seen such a wonderful actor as Orlando Bloom be in something that would have showcased his originality more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1281cb1e75df4493ab230036d2dd6db3",
            "input": "The 1967 In Cold Blood was perhaps more like \"the real thing\" (Think about it: would we really want to see the real thing?), but it was black and white in a color world, and a lot of people didn't even know what it was, and there was an opportunity to remake it for television. Plus, if you remake it, you can show some stuff not shown in the original. The book In Cold Blood by Truman Capote was the first \"nonfiction novel\". Truman's book was in fact not 100% true to the real story. I thought the Canadian location sufficed for Kansas pretty much for a TV movie. Look for the elements of sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll: Dick's womanizing, Perry being an aspirin junkie, Perry playing blues guitar.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d479aa0e94ee4fc489c1b6a24efcdedf",
            "input": "Mr. Destiny - 3.5/5 Stars\"Mr. Destiny's\" theme is recycled from many films spanning many different years. Its theme ranges from recent spoofs on such plots (see \"Scrooged\"), to the same, more serious and dramatic notion that worked in \"It's a Wonderful Life,\" and a century earlier in the story of Scrooge as told by Charles Dickens in \"A Christmas Carol.\" \"It involves an ungrateful man being taken on a guided tour of his life, and witnessing how his life could have been (or would have been) first-hand. In most of these types of movies the guardian angel rescues a man from ungratefulness and shows him his life in retrospect, or how it could have been. Should have been. Would have been. In this case we are shown a businessman named Larry (James Belushi). He hates his life. He lives with an unexciting wife (Linda Hamilton) and yearns for a bigger life with bigger meaning. If only he had hit the ball at the state championship in high school years ago. He is convinced his life would have been better. I guess he remembers this seemingly small moment of his life because it made a big impact on his subconscious side, but I doubt a grown man would yearn for one single act from high school. Still, it works in the movie.Anyway, Larry is driving home from work one night, where he is a penpusher along with Jon Lovitz, when his car breaks down. He wanders into a bar looking for a pay phone, and reluctantly decides to tell the bartender (Michael Caine) about the way his life is turning out. This is where we first see him remembering his childhood baseball strike-out.The bartender listens and nods, apparently not worrying about any other customers. This is probably due to the fact that the bar, though old and tattered, seems to have never been occupied by any living humans save these two men. In fact, Larry even makes a comment about never seeing the bar before. This is most likely for a certain reason that the audience is expecting before Larry. So the bartender, who may as well be an angel of God incarnate, just like Clarence, fixes Larry a special drink of his, which ends up putting Larry's life on reverse, showing him what his life would have been like if he had hit the home run all those years before. But Larry has no idea of any change at first, just like Jimmy Stewart didn't realize that Clarence had erased his life until he went into the bar and got kicked out Larry continues to be oblivious to any change until he goes to his home to find the lawn different outside, and a large, wrestler-type man occupying his home.Larry soon finds out his life would indeed have been very different had he hit the home run. Instead of marrying Linda Hamilton he married Rene Russo and moved into a large mansion with children. He finds out that Jon Lovitz is no longer his friend but an employee of his. And the most surprising fact of all is that with his new life, that Larry has always wanted...he finds himself lusting after his old wife, Linda Hamilton; proof that sometimes money and a great-looking yet shallow wife don't make up everything in a man's life, like an intelligent wife and love and true happiness. Just like \"It's a Wonderful Life\" showed the audience a man's life is what he makes it, and that every person has an impact on people, \"Mr. Destiny\" shows us that material wealth is not the same as spiritual wealth, a lesson taught us over and over again, but never quite so fluffy, forgettable and truly sweet as it is shown us in \"Mr. Destiny.\"\"Mr. Destiny\" is never exceedingly hilarious, but it is a sweet, good-natured comedy that never takes itself too seriously. The problem with all the \"It's a Wonderful Life\" retreads out there, like \"The Family Man,\" is that they try to be as influential and memorable as \"It's a Wonderful Life\" was. But there are only so many times you can single-handedly rip off a famous film, and \"Mr. Destiny\" knows this, and plays right to the fact. It doesn't try to be anything it isn't; rather, it is something it didn't try to be, and this is obvious to the audience. ",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a778e00bbfba4c26a4f10fbd116065fd",
            "input": "Hollow Point, though clumsy in places, manages to be an extremely endearing and amusing action movie.The primary entertainment value here is humor - everyone turns in clever performances that provide the film with a great deal of energy.Oh, by the way, advocates of gun safety will be horrified by the conduct of the characters in this movie...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4748c751c201465bb3e85acea42ff9f6",
            "input": "I must say that I really had no idea that I was going to sit down and watch this movie. I guess it was the fact that I had nothing better to do between class. But, for once a TV movie caught my interest. More importantly Helen Hunt caught my eye. I really wasn't a big fan of hers prior to this film. Sure I liked Twister and As Good As It Gets. But, something about this movie really did it for me. I would now see myself as a huge fan. This movie comes with high marks from...me. Give it a chance, it won't let you down.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7ec79c5572e4a5887456c48f5379f2c",
            "input": "The Cowboys could leave you a little sore in the saddle. Definitely not one of Johns best movies. Don't get me wrong, with any John Wayne move there is always some good spots. And this one has it's fair share. But over all the picture moves slow and just doesn't live up to the aspirations it could have been. Bruce Dern again does an outstanding job as the villain. Roscoe Lee Brown is another bright spot in the movie. The kids in the movie were average but could have been cast better. This would be a good movie for the eight to fifteen year old movie goers.This would be a good family move to watch with your children. Just be aware, there is a couple of scenes that you may want to take a look at before you let the young ones see it. But most kids that I know who have seen the movie like it. Maybe it's because they get to see kids their age do all the grown up work.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7fda4990af1456d8846cfbb0142087b",
            "input": "This is one of those movies that you and a bunch of friends sit around drinking beers, eating pizza, and laugh at. Unfortunately for me I found myself watching this one alone. My friends and I rented a big block of movies and never got around to seeing this one. It was due back and I figured that it was a waste not to watch it. So I did, and I was impressed at how absolutely terrible this movie is.Now, I love bad movies quite a bit, and I probably would have liked this one if the \"hero\" wasn't so utterly loathsome. The entire movie I was hoping that he'd put that stupid sword down and let someone kill him! He does very little heroic things in the movie. He's a beefy, disgusting, stupid thing. He has less redeeming qualities than the villains do. And what was it with all the naked chicks? I mean, I love naked chicks just as much as the next guy, but this movie went a tad overboard in that department.Well, anyway, if you love bad movies and can stand a disgusting \"hero\" then I'm sure you'll like this schlock of a film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af498d4bd02247dcb4bd044674030fac",
            "input": "I have to be 100% honest with you fellow IMDb users. I wanted to see this movie for a very long time only because of the poster. Doesn't Charlotte Gainsbourg looks extremely sexy and charming smiling that way? I'm in love with that woman! I got what I expected...but only half. This film should deliver expectations for those who enjoy all kinds of romantic comedies or stories involving intelligent humor and light dramatic situations.While I don't agree with another fellow IMDb user who states that the movie is overrated; I must admit that \"Préte-moi ta main\" has plenty of flaws.My main problem with the film is the lack of on screen chemistry between the main characters. There isn't a single scene previous to the climax that shows the main characters sharing a moment \"of romance\" or even a clue to suggest that they're interested in each other.In fact, the only scene were both share a moment is tremendously awkward (when both are in the couch) and does not help the audience understand about a possible love interest. I didn't buy the dinner sequence.Still, the movie delivers very funny moments and has a strong dialogs that support such an ingenuous premise. I mean with ingenuous that it would be very difficult to execute such a farse by a 43 year old man in these days.I understand it's a movie and that's why I accept it as a funny situation. Plus, the humor is versatile. There are moments involving S&M, funny lines with Chabat's best friend, some lesbian references, funny situations involving the family women, and more.Charlotte Gaionsbourg's performance is top notch and she's by far the reason to watch the movie. She's funny, sexy, looks very thin and fine, and demonstrates she's a versatile and talented actress who can pull out a comedic and dramatic performance in sheer brilliance.Alain Chabat is a fine actor and gives a very decent performance. I think the supporting cast do what they can.The score, art direction, and other technical aspects are really good and give a dynamic look to the film.Those who enjoy this kind of cinema should be pleased after the ending credits. It's a good example of feel good cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cb0927bba064dfa96cf24f90788f3c7",
            "input": "Nick Millard aka Nick Phillips should have left well-enough alone when he made \"Criminally Insane\" 10 years before the release of this god-awful waste of time and effort. The fact that the original \"Criminally Insane\" was less than an hour in length should have clued him into the fact that he had probably milked this storyline for all he was going to get out of it...but instead he opts to use TONS of footage from the original in this one as well, even to the point of recycling the original opening credit sequence! Unfortunately, bringing back the rapidly aging Priscilla Alden did not save this one. What little bit of original footage there was in this flick looks as if it were filmed with a rented hand-held camcorder! If this film cost more than $100 to make I would be very surprised and I would be equally surprised if it made anything close to that amount! Avoid this one and watch the original instead!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16e8e9b17dac4c0dbbb0d8334caacf0b",
            "input": "An expedition led by hunky Captain Storm (Mark Dana) travels to the Valley of the Kings in Cairo to find out what happened to an earlier expedition. They meet beautiful mysterious Simira (Ziva Rodann) who joins them. They soon find themselves faced with a blood drinking mummy...and only Simira seems to know what's going on.A real snoozer. I caught this on late night TV when I was about 10. It put me to sleep! Seeing it again all these years later I can see why. It's slow-moving, the mummy doesn't even show up until 40 minutes in (and this is only 66 minutes long!), the acting ranges from bad (Dana) to REAL bad (George N. Neise) and there's no violence or blood to be found. This movie concentrates more on second rate dramatics (involving a silly love triangle) than horror.This rates three stars because it actually looks pretty good, everyone plays it straight, there's some good acting from Diane Brewster, it's short and the mummy attack scenes (all three of them) aren't bad. They're not scary just mildly creepy. Still, this movie is pretty bad. A sure fire cure for insomnia.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ec56ccf2c0a42bf9e355ddaabe3ccae",
            "input": "Young beautiful Eva (Hedy Lamarr) marries an older man (Zvonimir Rogoz). Unfortunately he can't satisfy her sexually and ignores her. Frustrated she goes home and plans to get a divorce. Then, one day, she's skinny dipping in a lake in the middle of the woods. Her horse gallops off with her clothes...and she runs after it! She meets young and very handsome Adam (Aribert Mog). They make love and she realizes this is the man she wants.ENDING SPOILER!!!! Naturally, since this was made in 1933, she has to be punished for her sin so it leads to a tragic finale. END OF ENDING SPOILER!!!!This horrified people in 1933 but it's pretty tame by today's standards. Lamarr's nude swim shows nothing and when she runs after the horse totally nude, it's either shown in extreme long shot or is covered by branches and such. There's only a few minor shots of her breasts. Also when she has sex with Mog, nothing is shown but her face but you see her achieving an orgasm. These scene were considered pretty extreme in their day and were cut out completely of the American release. Now today they're back in. This film would get by with a PG-13 easily now.Shock episodes aside this is just OK. It is beautifully filmed and there's next to no dialogue. Except for the music score this could be a silent picture. Luckily all the actors are good--Lamarr and Mog especially and they're so attractive that they just take your breath away watching them. Also the sequence where they make love is easily one of the most beautifully shot and acted sequences I've ever seen in a movie. The scenes with the sexual symbolism (there's quite a few of them) are unfortunately pretty obvious today. I actually started to giggle during one!So, great direction, beautiful imagery, attractive actors, good acting all around--but I wasn't exactly bowled over by it. I found the movie slow-moving (beautiful imagery does not make a picture for me), somewhat dull, obvious, static and had a negative ending. I can live with the ending but it doesn't excuse the other problems I had with it. Also the final sequence is REALLY strange--and out of place. So I admire this film more than anything else. It was well-done and I'd recommend it but with caution. Many people seem to love this movie so I'm in the minority. Use your own judgment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09842a50e7fa4f09b454c6ed3497aa21",
            "input": "(Spoiler included, some would say)This film is not possible to take seriously. At some parts it is so awfully stupid that I just can't help laughing at it all. Try me for the sequence where Stallone's character jumps some 20 meters with full climbing gear or (and this is really my favorite) snuffs a bad guy by sticking him onto a stalactite. Yeah, what ungodly strength did he muster to accomplish such feats? I dunno, but he sure gives reality a run for the money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04896f312da94314bfe5eecc11819124",
            "input": "Several features of this film immediately date it. The sound is rather shrill and one realizes what great strides have been accomplished in sound reproduction in the ensuing years. The language of the dialogue is rather quaint and unnatural and the acting is still reminiscent of its transition from the stage techniques.Bette Davis always gives a strong performance in all her films as she does in this early period of her very successful career. I do feel however that somehow the cockney accent does not fit the facial expression. I think it is the assumed cockney accent that does not ring true for me.Somerset Maughan loves to delve into human relationships of great dramatic intensity which will please all movie-goers. As in so many of her character roles, Bette Davis can switch from a beautiful seductive woman to a viper full of fiery hatred. Leslie Howard is well cast as the withdrawn English artist with a club foot desperately seeking a partner and making a bad choice in a scheming little waitress.Towards the end of the film the young doctor meets his true love in a busy street. They cross through the traffic completely oblivious to a multitude of horns and whistles screaming at them. This scene is possibly meant to be funny, but i find it quite ridiculous in this otherwise very serious film. It is probably construed to send you home with a smile on your face. And after all as far as we can see (and hope for) it is a happy ending.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9aee917eabfd420590bb09ef93a90d28",
            "input": "This is simply one of the finest renditions of Dicken's classic tale. The script very accurately follows the story originally penned by Dickens, and captures a perfect balance between a film atmosphere and a play atmosphere. Viewers fond of either format will find enough of the story rooted in their presentation style of choice.George C. Scott brings a delightfully realistic approach to the character of Scrooge, and is very convincing in the character development instigated by the visits of the ghosts. I found that he was able to win me over to the point where I sympathized with the old miser, something rarely done in other versions. The superb job done by the supporting actors add greatly to this production, which is simply the most enjoyable of all the Christmas Carol versions I have seen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2211e82def5438babc9e30abaead9ad",
            "input": "If you like films about school bullies, brave children, hilarious toddlers and worm eating, then How to Eat Fried Worms will appeal to you.The film is about a boy named Billy, who when arriving on his first day at a new school, discovers that some of his classmates have played a prank on him by putting worms into his lunch. The school bully, Joe and his \"team\" of friends start teasing Billy and calling him \"worm boy\".Billy decides to play along by saying that \"he eats worms all the time\". Joe and his friends don't believe him but Billy assures them and bets Joe that he can eat ten worms in one day otherwise he will come to school with worms in his pants.The boys take Billy up on his bet, leaving the weak stomached child with a mission to gain respect from his classmates by eating worms cooked, fried, or alive.The film may sound gross but there are a lot of messages in it. For one, it portrays true friendship and how to accept people for who they are. It also shows you why some bullies resort to bullying other children.The film's protagonist, Billy is a strong minded and brave person who all of us can relate to. It is easy to empathize with him as we silently cheer for him to reach his goal, even though we might not always agree with what he's doing or the choices he makes.The children in the film are portrayed exactly how children are in real life and the film deserves a lot of credit for that. The child actors are the stars of this show, showing true emotion and feeling than most other children's movies portray.Some adults may not enjoy this film but kids will, perhaps even teenagers.There are hardly any other good movies on circuit at the moment, so if you're not in the mood to see snakes on a plane, try worms on a plate in How to Eat Fried Worms. It is a feel good fun film and not just Fear Factor for kids.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-761f5bb521874e25b20d2124b3e07296",
            "input": "One is tempted to define the genre of Gert de Graaff's movie as `event of the thought' following the example of Merab Mamardashvili. The nominal storyline is a certain Bart Klever's torturous quest for that ephemeral substance which constitutes the essence of personality. The script for his new movie is taking shape simultaneously on his computer and in his own imagination. This film-monologue originated as a response to Fellini's `8 ½' and cost Gert de Graaff 13 years of work. Excitedly playing with real and fictional characters as well as with the audience, it reveals the whimsical interconnection of the real and imaginary, the paradoxical co-existence in two different galaxies: that of Guttenberg and that of MacLhuen. For some time we are apt to side with the script writer, who believes that the cause of all misfortune is the damned stereotypes of mass mentality (`man', `catholic', `window washer'). And together with him we fall into a trap when the author-creator is finally faced with the insoluble dilemma: how can one eliminate from the future movie. Bart Klever? Just five minutes before the finale thanks to the common petty reproaches of the wife of the creator, who is deeply immersed in work, we realize that together with the main character we have again been `framed'. Really, what is the price of the art for the sake of which it is acceptable to renounce one's own name and the day-to-day care for the young daughter?So who is he, this Bart Klever? Is he a brilliant prophet or someone possessed like Frenhoffer from Balzac's masterpiece (just like the latter the script writer in the end erases from the computer memory everything has written)? Gert de Graaff suggests that we answer this question ourselves.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ba7830919e24cb3a9460cfb5406f5f8",
            "input": "\"Telefilms\" tend to fall under the pitfalls of a low budget and a hasty shooting schedule, which is why this film always tends to buck the trend.George C. Scott embodies Ebenezer Scrooge perfectly, fully encompassing all of his cold tendencies, and still makes him a simpathetic character. The production value for this film was exceptional, never relying on boffo special effects or soundstage set-ups, yet relying on the depth and clarity of on-site shooting and strong backdrops. A movie that certainly stands alone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-596a7e064dcd4b8b886a04ac3a99796b",
            "input": "This film has nothing whatever to do with the Sphinx, and the title is just a come-on. The story concerns an imagined true and concealed tomb in the Valley of the Kings, of King Seti I, second pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty, New Kingdom period. It is not a bad yarn, and a great deal of the film is shot on location. Even the scenes in the Winter Palace Hotel lobby in Luxor were really shot there, and not in a studio. The second unit stuff is endless, and they must have been let loose on Egypt for weeks. Frank Langella is very good indeed as a sophisticated Egyptian. He should take it up as a sideline. The film is essentially ruined by one of the world's most irritating actresses, Lesley Anne Down, who plays the lead. She spends the whole film wondering how she looks, are her blue eyes refracting light at the correct angle, do all the fellas lust after her, etc. Having started life as a model at the age of ten, what hope could there be for her? She epitomises everything that is most revolting about female vanity and dim-witted inanity. And to think that this film was directed by Franklin Shaffner, who won an Oscar for 'Patton'! He allows this terrible actress to whimper and simper through the film, hysterical one moment, flirting the next, in a kind of hurricane of idiocy as she reels from one man to another, either screaming or making bedroom eyes, it matters not. She is supposed to be a young Egyptologist. But she has never been to Egypt before! She takes a taxi to Giza and catching her first glimpse of the pyramids, gushes in ecstasy: 'But they're so BIG!!!!' Barf! OK, so that was the script, but she takes to the banality too readily, giving the impression that it is her natural element, which I don't doubt for a minute. Elements of the story are sound. There is, indeed, a serious problem about a black market in antiquities there. True! Well done! The novel by Robin Cook, which I have not seen, may be OK for all I know. It was fun to see the name of Cyril Swern as sound recordist on the film, as I knew him pretty well long ago. Stanley Kubrick's step-daughter Katharina is described as 'draughtswoman'. I wonder what that means? Maybe she did some set work. Anyway, the antiquities in the film are pretty good, actually. And we get to see lots of the Cairo Museum and numerous scenic locations. They actually go inside King Tutankhamun's Tomb! I don't imagine that would be allowed today for a movie. A lot of inappropriate scenes take place in mosques. That would not go down well today, but in 1981 such things were not on the agenda. The music for the film is absolutely appalling, worse than Lesley Anne Down in fact! But there were sound track elements which were surprisingly authentic, one being the cacophony of traffic noise of Cairo, which is accurately rendered in the background, and would make anyone who knows Cairo chuckle nervously. Also, the loudspeaker calls to prayer are there the whole time, another touch of authenticity. Why didn't they get this right? It could have been good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66198ff4ce9440c78e449fbf3c1b1219",
            "input": "Man oh man! What a piece of crummy film-making! But this is a guilty pleasure from my childhood even though I hate to admit it. They showed this movie on my basic cable system all the time. Where I grew up in San Jose, California (right on the border of Cupertino) we had this thing called The G Channel on our cable system. And they basically showed the same one movie over and over and over again. Wanda Nevada was one of those movies. I fell in lust and love with the young Brooke Shields and loved her dopey adventures in the Grand Canyon in the 1940s. The script makes almost no sense, the direction is poor, the few highlights are that Henry Fonda makes an appearance, a lot of dialog that's so bad it's good and a nice Carole King song played over the end credits. Maybe you have to be stoned to truly enjoy this flick. And hey, everybody knows there ain't no gold in the Grand Canyon!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ac10101308d423e949496901c404dec",
            "input": "Family problems abound in real life and that is what this movie is about. Love can hold the members together through out the ordeals and trials and that is what this movie is about. One man, Daddy, has the maturity and fortitude to sustain the family in the face of adversity. The kids grow up,one all be it, in the hard way, to realize that no matter how old they or a parent is, the parent still loves their children and are willing to provide them a cushion when they fall. ALL the actors portraying their characters did outstanding performances. Yes, I shed a tear along the way knowing I had had similar experiences both as a young adult and later as a parent. This true to life is one which every young adult, and parent, would do well to see, although some will not realize it until they too are parents. A must see for those who care about their families.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1816b4868380421f87fbf899ac75145f",
            "input": "This zippy and fun short from 1916 - the time when Charlie Chaplin and Fatty Arbuckle were the big names in comedy - features the young Oliver Hardy as a ne'er-do-well who has to quickly impress his wealthy uncle by producing a wife and baby for his visit.Of course this does not go smoothly and soon there are rather more wives and babies than he can cope with; plus the mandatory chases and misunderstandings that are the hallmark of early movie slapstick.Restored well it can be viewed as part of 'The Early Films of Oliver Hardy' and is now available on DVD, a fine addition to the available corpus of the big screen favourite comedy duo.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a8888b7d39a4844a23557a527094a48",
            "input": "Wendy Wu: Homecoming Warrior has a very good, strong plot but is ruined by cheesy details throughout the movie. I am a younger teenager and didn't enjoy this movie very much. I thought the effects were horrible, but they might seem entertaining to younger children. The matrix moves ruined the action, you know that it was absolutely fake. Then there was the Yen Lo, an evil spirit who temporarily possesses random people and homecoming in which Wendy was striving to win. It all ends like a typical feel good movie when Wendy and her Buddhist monk cousin Shen defeat Yen Lo (and destroy him forever) in the end. So Wendy learns a lesson...blah, blah, blah. I'm ready for the next DCOM.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef471b1c1ae84a5a810fe87da2d075a2",
            "input": "I seems in the beginning a interesting film, a Spanish thriller in a interesting nowadays Madrid, but it isn`t none of that, is actually a film only interesting for future films directors learning about what not to do making a film, it can`t be worse in others words, even the presence of a oscar winner ( Mira Sorvino ) isn`t enough to justify the $ 3.00 dollars expended to see this film , the acting is horrendous and it seems the actors were just waiting to finish the daily shots to go home, it lead to nowhere and is boring, weak and bad, don`t expend time or money on this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22cc6408f77a41109e9b8c27ebf3f5d6",
            "input": "This movie is a good example of how to ruin a book in 109 minutes. Except for the names of the characters the movie bears very little resemblance to the book. A book full of strong Latino characters and they are represent, for the most part, by non-Latinos. There is no character development in the movie and we have no reason to love or hate the characters. And to delete a complete generation is inexcusable. Isabel Allende has written a powerful book and the book is what should be read!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9de9aa32c2741639a3381134812e2f4",
            "input": "This is a comedy of morals, so occasionally a gentle touch of bitterness occurs, but a lightness soften all sarcasm and irony flows till all of a sudden one moment will halt your heart and changes everything.This film, marvelously written and directed, is a gem that shines perfectly, with beautiful acting by all. Jean-Louis Trintignant is exquisite as usual, and Romy Schneider is a pearl, perfect and glowing, that is not to be missed. A truly wonderful film !!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca96c62676c6426ba7a21663cfa65faf",
            "input": "I stole this movie when I was a freshmen in college. I've tried to watch it three times, the second two because friends wanted to see it. \"Sweet, Adam Sandler, I've never heard of this movie, but since he's so funny its gotta be funny.\" Wrong! I can't make myself watch this pile of crap after the dream boxing match/insult war, where burning the guy with a good zinger causes your opponent physical pain. You would think that terrible comedy hurting you is ridiculous, but after watching this you'll know its true. This movie isn't worth the price I paid for it. I've watched a ton of Steven segal movies, and I've even watched Crossroads twice... but I still couldn't watch this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-986eb0f24c6341bb978c2d05b4c63081",
            "input": "It's a little disconcerting to have a character named Gig Young in a movie...played by Gig Young. But this film is where Gig got his name and also a nice career boost after playing small parts under another name.I'm going to go against the majority of the other comments and state that I really enjoyed this film, mainly because of the vibrant performance of Barbara Stanwyck as Fiona. She was funny, angry, vulnerable, caring, and feisty as the oldest of three daughters whose mother died on the Lusitania, and whose father was later killed during Woar War I. As the \"man\" of the house, Fiona has stood steadfast for years against settling her father's will which would therefore allow a Donald Trump type named Charles Barclay to get the family home. But Fiona's keeping a secret as to why she hates Barclay so much. Geraldine Fitzgerald is the middle, flirty sister, who is married to an Englishman but craves her youngest sister's boyfriend (Gig Young).If you're a Stanwyck fan, this is a no miss.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21fc9846ab9740c7b1594b1a555f3261",
            "input": "Barbara Stanwyck plays Lily Powers. She's a waitress for her father's speakeasy in a little crummy mining town. He also sells her to men. She escapes to New York and literally sleeps her way to the top.Originally I had only seen the 71 minute version but it's pretty extreme--for its time. Nowadays it's pretty tame. The movie moves very quickly and has tons of sexual innuendo--some of it comes off as pretty silly (but fun) today. It moves so quickly you can easily ignore that most of it could never happen--even in 1933. There's nothing classic or monumental about this--it's just a quick, gleefully dirty little film that's lots of fun. It only falls apart at the end with a little \"moral\" ending that the censors demanded. It comes across as unbelievable and stupid (I saw it in a theatre and the audience laughed at it--one guy quite rightfully said \"No way\") I just saw the uncut 75 minute version which has a different, somewhat tragic and MUCH better ending. This version was thought to be lost until 2004 when it was discovered by mistake! I believe this is the only one in release--but be aware. The acting is good--Stanwyck jumps into her role and plays it WAY over the top. She makes you believe that she enjoys being cruel and sleeping around. There are also strong supporting performances from handsome Donald Cook and George Brent. Also look for a pre-stardom John Wayne in a hilarious bit as a meek and mild office worker! Fun, dirty and fast. I give this a 9.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-531b6e40a2724fb5845db5e40effe1de",
            "input": "In France, it's considered polite from French critics to genuflect to the apparently cohesive chain of films Brian De Palma left behind him. However, a good proportion of his films are marred by bombastic effects \"Carrie\" (1976), \"the Fury\" (1978) \"Scarface\" (1983) without mentioning his borrowings from Hitchcock. Here, in \"Dressed to Kill\", it's impossible not to think of \"Vertigo\" (1958) for the long sequence in the museum while the key moment in the lift makes inevitably think of the shower anthology sequence in \"Psycho\" (1960). About our involved film, I don't want to revive the old debate: does De Palma rip off Hitchcock? Instead, i would tend to be generous and to classify \"Dressed to Kill\" in the category of De Palma's winners alongside \"Sisters\" (1973) and \"Obssession\" (1976). With however some reservations and they're the ones I previously enumerated which fuel the bickering between De Palma's rabid fans and his detractors.If there's one sure thing in \"Dressed to Kill\" which can generate general agreement among film-lovers, it's De Palma's virtuosity in directing. He wields his camera just like a filmmaker expert is supposed to do. His sophisticated camera work brilliantly fuels the suspense which entails a rise of the tension and a discomforting aura. The audience is easily glued in front of the screen. This is helped by the use of several long silent sequences during which everything depends on looks and gestures. By the way, in \"Psycho\", there were also long silent, suspenseful parts...But the main drawback in De Palma's 1980 vintage is that the quality of the plot can't be found wanting and appears to be a rehash of many formulaic, corny ingredients pertaining to an incalculable number of murder stories. The prostitute is the sole witness of the crime. Then, she's suspected by the police and has to act on her own (with a little help from the victim's son from the scene in the subway onwards)) to track down the murderer and to prove her innocence. Apart from the fact that De Palma uses a type of character who for once isn't demeaned at all, it's a menu which smells the reheated. And the filmmaker ends his film on a sequence that echoes to the opening one. Yes, it's superbly filmed but when one discovers its real function, one figures: \"it's almost gratuitous filler\". Perhaps De Palma wanted to stretch his film beyond one hour and a half when at this time the viewer knows (and even before) who the killer is.The two central mainsprings in De Palma's set of themes articulate hinges on manipulation and voyeurism. The latter theme is well present in \"Dressed to Kill\" from the first scene onwards which makes the film almost look like a soft porn movie. And the filmmaker isn't afraid to film his main actress and wife Nancy Allen in her underwear. I find his approach about this theme rather doubtful. But maybe the first sequence was conceived to be a mirror of the viewer and De Palma wanted to stir his peeping tom side.I don't want to demean at all De Palma's work. His prestigious work in directing which entails a communicative treat to film redeems the global weakness of the story and its doubtful aspects. Twenty six years after, the controversy he aroused amid movie-goers isn't ready to subside.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5486309ed7014c6b87a7aad457575741",
            "input": "How do comments like the one that was the headline by high school girls even make it on this site, this was the stupidest movie I have ever seen, it was ridiculous, how can any moron sit there and say that just because a movie makes you jump it is a good movie, that might be the most idiotic thing I have ever heard, I could sneak up behind you and go \"Boo\" and it would make you jump, but that does not mean I am qualified to write or direct a movie, not to mention \"they tied everything together at the end\" is not a good reason for a movie to be well received. What kind of movie would it be if they didn't tie everything together, I guess that would make it half a movie, not a whole movie. So basically this idiot girl is complimenting them for finishing the movie, well I love how the youth of today hold the media and production companies to such a high standard. No wonder the political system of this country can get away with whatever they want, we have idiots like that coming up in our country, what would happen if this girl actually ends up leading something someday, that is a scary thought. Get a life and go watch a real movie sometime, try Shawshank Redemption or On the Waterfront, or something like that, and don't comment that it was \"boring\" after you see it, just use what little brain God gave you to analyze it a little.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f7be83084094bfa87a1ae319ca7d0f5",
            "input": "Basically, this movie is one of those rare movies you either hate and think borders on suicide as the next best thing to do, rather than having to sit through it for two hours. Or, as in my case, you see it as a kult hit, one of those movies wherein the humour, the plot, the acting, is actually very hidden but for those of us willing to go looking for it, trusting the director well, the reward is: U laugh your A.. of !! The fact that U have to find the things mentioned above, actually makes the movie even more funny, because u get the impression the director isn't even aware of how funny his movie is, which doesn't seem likely and therein lies the intelligence at the helm of this magnificient project called : Spaced Invaders !!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e447cb77aa34070838e03b32175e61c",
            "input": "Other than some neat special effects, this movie has nothing to offer. They threw in some gore and some nudity to try and make it interesting, but with no success. Kevin Bacon's acting was pretty good, but he couldn't salvage the movies lack of plot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0354797c6aa942c4aa7c31ce2781a25f",
            "input": "Forbidden Siren is based upon the Siren 2 Playstation 2 (so many 2s) game. Like most video game turned movies, I would say the majority don't translate into a different medium really well. And that goes for this one too, painfully.There's a pretty long prologue which explains and sets the premise for the story, and the mysterious island on which a writer (Leo Morimoto) and his children, daughter Yuki (Yui Ichikawa) and son Hideo (Jun Nishiyama) come to move into. The villagers don't look all too friendly, and soon enough, sound advice is given about the siren on the island, to stay indoors once the siren starts wailing.Naturally and slowly, things start to go bump, and our siblings go on a mission beating around the bush to discover exactly what is happening on this unfriendly island with its strange inhabitants. But in truth, you will not bother with what's going on, as folklore and fairy tales get thrown in to convolute the plot even more. What was really pushing it into the realm of bad comedy are its unwittingly ill-placed-out-of-the-norm moments which just drew pitiful giggles at its sheer stupidity, until it's explained much later. It's one thing trying to come up and present something smart, but another thing doing it convincingly and with loopholes covered.Despite it clocking in under 90 minutes - I think it's a horror movie phenomenon to have that as a runtime benchmark - it gives that almost two hour feel with its slow buildup to tell what it wants to. Things begin to pick up toward the last 20 minutes, but it's a classic case of too little too late.What saves the movie is how it changes tack and its revelation at the end. Again this is a common device used to try and elevate a seemingly simple horror movie into something a little bit extra in the hope of wowing an audience. It turned out rather satisfactorily, but leaves a bad aftertaste as you'll feel cheated somewhat. There are two ways a twist will make you feel - it either elevates the movie to a memorable level, or provides you with that hokey feeling. Unfortunately Forbidden Siren belonged more to the latter.The saving grace will be its cinematography with its use of light, shadows and mirrors, but I will be that explicit - it's still not worth the time, so better to avoid this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a13d93449364bdc8480480c6ea1db2a",
            "input": "Upon concluding my viewing of \"Trance,\" or \"The Eternal,\" or whatever the producers are calling this film, I wondered to myself, \"Out of all of the bad movies I could have seen, couldn't I have at least seen one that was entertaining?\" Even if a film is not well made in terms of acting, directing, writing, or what have you, it can at least be fun, and therefore worthwhile. But not only is this film bad in artistic value, it's incredibly boring. For a plot of such thinness, it moves awfully slowly, with little dramatic tension. At the very least, in a low-brow attempt at entertainment, the deaths of the characters could have been cool and/or gory, but the creators of this dreck failed in that department as well.What does this movie have going for it? Pretty much nothing, unless you get entertainment out of watching Christopher Walken, who is capable of being brilliant, put so little effort into his acting that he falls into self-parody mode (WHY did he decide to do this film anyway?).I give this film 3/10, because, God help us, there actually have been worse movies made before.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-820bf7ebc1a14b05beafeed44c7c8a0d",
            "input": "I was totally impressed by Shelley Adrienne's \"Waitress\" (2007). This movie only confirms what was clear from that movie. Adrienne was a marvelously talented writer-director, an original and unique artist. She managed to show the miseries of everyday life with absurd humor and a real warm optimistic and humanistic tendency. Ally Sheedy steals this movie with a terrific performance as a woman who has fallen over the edge. Male lead Reg Rodgers, looking like Judd Nelson, is fine. There is also a great cameo by Ben Vereen. The song at the end of the movie \"The Bastard Song\" written by Adrienne can stand as her optimistic eulogy: \"It's a world of suffering,In a sea of pain,No matter how much sun you bring,You're pummeled by the rain...Don't let the heartless get you down,Don't greet the heartless at your door,Don't live among the heartless\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d583ab1ae1274114a9ef655fc7c3c65e",
            "input": "You're using the IMDb.You've given some hefty votes to some of your favourite films.It's something you enjoy doing.And it's all because of this. Fifty seconds. One world ends, another begins.How can it not be given a ten? I wonder at those who give this a seven or an eight... exactly how could THE FIRST FILM EVER MADE be better? For the record, the long, still opening shot is great showmanship, a superb innovation, perfectly suited to the situation. And the dog on the bike is a lovely touch. All this within fifty seconds.The word genius is often overused.THIS is genius.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee0a1f42f4444bfba6f3573a3a5cdf8d",
            "input": "I didn't expect much from this, but I have to admit I was rolling on the ground laughing a few times during this film. If you are not grossly offended in the first ten minutes, this might be a film for you. Ditto if you are the type that would enjoy watching Amanda Peet shuffling cards for an hour and a half. It's certainly not a momentous work of comedy, but given the low-budget indy genesis this is masterful. To level the playing field for comparison, imagine all of the studio films with their budgets slashed by a factor of 100 or so and see what you get! Kudos to Peter Cohen and his network for seeing this through. I look forward to his next effort.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f599a53f11a84fc09076224a2285f3b0",
            "input": "I was excited to discover this late sixties comedy staring some of my favorite people - Maggie Smith, a very young Bob Newhart and, of course, Peter Ustinov. My disappointment was thus compounded to discover the film doesn't work as either a comedy or a perfect heist film. Ustinov plays a small time crook just out of prison who sets his sites on a large American corporation based in London. Bluffing his way past dimwitted CEO Karl Malden and tech geek Newhart, Ustinov passes himself off as a computer expert and immediately plans the 'perfect heist' part of the film. To do this he needs to get passed a tamper proof security system that guards the corporation mainframe. And here is problem one. His perfect plan only works because everyone else in the film is remarkably trusting and stupid. His lame excuses are taken at face value and this must be the only computer center anywhere not to bother with video cameras. The second problem is the heist (fraud really) happens within the first 30 minutes of the film robbing the rest of the picture of much in way of dramatic tension. Maggie Smith is sadly miscast as Ustinov's ditsy next door neighbor/secretary who just can't keep a job. I love Maggie Smith but she just seems too together here, too composed, the part called for more of a wacky, physical comedian. Furthermore, Ustinov and Smith have no chemistry together, maybe it's the age difference, but the later romantic relationship, as devoid of actual romance as it is, still comes off a little creepy. Ustinov co-wrote the script, and it was thought well of at the time, but I found it unfunny, meandering and a sad waste of a great cast.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d70eef5e38c442cbcdf85c95e12a763",
            "input": "This is a Japanese film but there is quite a bit of English also spoken in here. It's a pretty film, with nice visuals, featuring the scenic beauty of Hawaii.However, that was the only redeeming quality for me. The story was generally boring. Who wants to watch a young woman sulk for 90 percent of the film because her \"picture\" husband is a lot older than he advertised he was? Granted, that could be a bummer......but get over it!Only in the last 10 minutes does she do an about-face and become fond of him. By then, for most viewers, it was too little-too late. We'd fallen asleep by then.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eccc836bbf364d8989209e46b98dd7ee",
            "input": "There are many different versions of this one floating around, so make sure you can locate one of the unrated copies, otherwise some gore and one scene of nudity might be missing. Some versions also omit most of the opening sequence and other bits here and there. The cut I saw has the on-screen title WITCHCRAFT: EVIL ENCOUNTERS and was released by Shriek Show, who maintain the original US release title WITCHERY for the DVD release. It's a nice-looking print and seems to have all of the footage, but has some cropping/aspect ratio issues. In Italy, it was released as LA CASA 4 (WITCHCRAFT). The first two LA CASA releases were actually the first two EVIL DEAD films (retitled) and the third LA CASA was another film by the same production company (Filmirage), which is best known here in America as GHOSTHOUSE. To make matters even more confusing, WITCHERY was also released elsewhere as GHOSTHOUSE 2. Except in Germany, where GHOSTHOUSE 2 is actually THE OGRE: DEMONS 3. OK, I better just shut up now. I'm starting to confuse myself!Regardless of the title, this is a very hit-or-miss horror effort. Some of it is good, some of it isn't. I actually was into this film for the first half or so, but toward the end it became a senseless mess. A large, vacant hotel located on an island about 50 miles from Boston is the setting, as various people get picked off one-by-one by a German- speaking witch (Hildegard Knef). Photographer Gary (David Hasselhoff), who wants to capture \"Witch Light,\" and his virginal writer girlfriend (Leslie Cumming), who is studying witchcraft, are shacking up at the hotel without permission. Along comes real estate agent Jerry (Rick Farnsworth), who's showing off the property to potential buyers Rose (Annie Ross) and Freddie (Robert Champagne) Brooks. Also tagging along are their children; pregnant grown daughter Jane (Linda Blair) and very young son Tommy (Michael Manchester), as well as oversexed architect Linda Sullivan (Catherine Hickland - Hasselhoff's wife at the time). Once everyone is inside, their boat driver is killed (hung) and the boat disappears, so they find themselves trapped and basically at the mercy of the \"Lady in Black.\"So what can you expect to find here? Plenty of unpleasantries! One of the characters has their lips sewn shut and is then hung upside down in the fireplace and accidentally slow-roasted by the rest of the cast. There's also a crucifixion, witches eating a dead baby, a swordfish through the head, someone set on fire, a possession, a Sesame Street tape recorder, the virgin getting raped by some demon, a guys veins bulging and exploding thanks to voodoo doll pokes and some other stuff. From a technical standpoint, it's a nice-looking film with pretty good cinematography, a decent score and good gore effects. The hotel/island setting is also pretty nice. Blair (particularly at the end) and Ross both seem like they're having fun and Knef is great as the evil witch. Even though people like to ridicule Hasselhoff these days, he's not bad in his role, either.On the down side, despite all the gore, the film seems somewhat dull and it gets monotonous after about an hour. The supernatural themes are muddled and confusing, too. When characters are being swept into the witches lair to be tortured and killed, the filmmakers unwisely decided to superimpose the screaming actors over some silly looking red spiral vortex effect that looks supremely cheesy. And the witch lair itself is vacant and cheaply designed with unfinished lumber. And while most of the cast is at least decent, a few of the performances (particularly the \"actress\" who plays Hasselhoff's girlfriend and the kid) are so bad they're constantly distracting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70df69f4af9a43f3a011d0b39ebb1a4b",
            "input": "This film is definitely an odd love story. Though this film may not be much to shout about, Nicole Kidman carries the film on her own the rest of the cast could quite easily be forgotten, though Ben Chaplin does do quite a good job of Hertfordshire Life with shots of St Albans & Hemel Hempstead town centre depicting the true essence of the area. What starts outlooking like a regular episode of the popular British TV series\"Heartbeat\" soon turns into a gritty gangster getaway action flick.Nothing truly memorable happens in this simple small film and thus ends-up as fairly decent weekend entertainment. A good one to watch, and if you like the hero john are lonely thirty something you may find something to identify with in his character.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3905224f53b4ec1bf798f63b6e7fb73",
            "input": "\"Rival reporters Pat Morgan (Ginger Rogers) and Ted Rand (Lyle Talbot) are always trying to out-scoop each other on stories. The latest involves the mysterious death of a philanthropist who fell to his death after a shriek was heard from his penthouse apartment. The two reporters start out as rivals but combine efforts to solve the crime and write the story when more residents of the apartment building turn up dead,\" according to the DVD sleeve's synopsis.This said-to-be follow-up to \"The Thirteenth Guest\" has little to do with the earlier movie; it is not a sequel, as has been inferred. Ms. Rogers continues to develop her skills. Mr. Talbot adds a little humor to his characterization. They are a pleasant team, the plot is interesting and mysterious; but, the resulting film is very dull. The opening and closing are startling. A long-winded wrap-up of plot development points follows the climax.*** A Shriek in the Night (1933) Albert Ray ~ Ginger Rogers, Lyle Talbot, Harvey Clark",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f4d4d151206449098bc1cd7b6afbf00",
            "input": "I thoroughly enjoyed A Man Called Horse when it was released in 1970, but Return played like a typical sequel. Everything about it -- budget, script, plot, casting, and acting -- was inferior to the original. Gale Sondergaard as Elk Woman, an elder of the Yellow Hand tribe, looks nothing like an Indian, and neither do half of the other \"Indians,\" who were played by Italians, Mexicans, and Latinos with cheap wigs. And the old guy who played the chief acted more like a fat old squaw than a fierce leader of warriors. He even used the bow like a woman! Finally, Richard Harris, who did such a superb job in the original, seems to be coasting this time around. I guess he couldn't resist the easy paycheck he got for reprising his role as Horse.To be fair, there are some interesting moments in the movie, such as Horse's undergoing a painful purification ritual to \"find his vision\" and rally the Yellow Hands against their Indian enemies and white oppressors, but on the whole, Return is uneven, boring, corny, and predictable -- just like most sequels.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d51c359c31134ce6a702b9afe1ada900",
            "input": "Pegg has had a few hits in the past few years, starting with \"Shaun Of The Dead\" in 2004, movie on to \"Hot Fuzz 2007\", early 2008 he came out with \"Run Fat Boy Run\" and now comes this, \"How To Lose Friends And Alienate People\" which is in many ways one of my favourite comedy's of the year.The film is about Sidney Yound, a man who writes a failing magazine who makes fun of celebrity's mostly because he is not one of them. Anyway, one of the most successful magazine owners (Played By Jeff Bridges) invites him (Out of nostalgia) to work at his magazine. Sidney is of course excited and moves to America, there he meets a girl currently writing a book, and hilarity ensues.This film is great and I hope more come out like it in the near future. Pegg has once again given people everywhere another good film and I cant wait to the see the third part of the blood and ice cream trilogy \"Paul\". I Rate this film 81%.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c9c6f60785a48c4980c1325996ef7dc",
            "input": "Unfortunately I made a mistake and I paid 7 Euros at the movie theater to watch this shallow meaningless movie. My points;Film is based on 2 things;1) Ethnical point of View: As it happens on most of the American Films, the writer thinks itself as an expert after learning 2 or 3 things about the Asian culture. But unfortunately it is not enough. Knowing kunefe and 2 names of other foods doesn't make a person understand a culture. For example shaving is the sign of clean life in Asia but everyone was trying the girl to stop that. Lebanese people are Christian (Ok they got that) and their cultural forms and beliefs and approaches are completely different from other Arabic countries. The main difference between eastern and western culture is we don't make ethnocentrism. So we don't judge people after their first question about our life as the father figure did in all of the film. 2) Sexual revolution of a girl: There is nothing much to say about this. Show me 10 girls which had these on their sexual awakening than I will say that I am wrong.I wrote this comment because the producers are promoting the film in the black humor genre. Please watch Dr.Strangelove and understand the meaning of black humor. A black humor has to reflect the truth and has to focus the audience to the funny parts of it. Where is the truth? Where is the meaning about the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9d7cd24008e49d180b7c2835547bf86",
            "input": "OK, so, Chuck Norris somehow found a way to get this sequel produced. I have one question-why? Who read this script and said, \"Sound's great! Original!\" This movie is regurgitated crap that I wouldn't tarnish my toilet bowel with. Of course it is another story, following in the tradition of MIA, Invasion USA, Walker, Texas Ranger, Delta Force and so on in which Chuck Norris, of course, is the one man who can same America from some bad guys. He doesn't even need a gun most times. It's stupid patriotic jargon that stales the mind. Big surprise that the only one who will direct these Norris film's is Chuck's son Eric. Eric Norris has primarily worked on all his father's films and TV shows. Doesn't this strike anyone as a sign that he has no directing talent? Afterall, he's directing the same people as before in the same stories as before...only difference is the characters' names. If this is supposed to make me patriotic and cheer for the USA, than our country is in much worse shape than I ever imagined. Hopefully, this will be the nail in Chuck Norris's acting coffin.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c776b0ec89ca4216a6fe40526bf06c18",
            "input": "When I first got my N64 when I was five or six,I fell in love with it,and my first game was Super Mario 64.And I LOVED IT!The graphics were great for it's time,a good plot,great courses and above all,the best music I heard in a Nintendo game.I don't remember the plot completely,but I think Princess Peach was kidnapped by Bowser,and Mario has to rescue her.The object of the game is to get 120 stars from the curses in the castle.Each had about five or six challnges to get the stars.There are secert parts of the castle,where you can get more stars.But of course,you have beat Bowser.*I think there are three levels to beat Bowser on* Lets start with the characters.Mario is the main character,and gets helpful advice from Toad,so he is basically one of your only alliances.I heard that Luigi and Yoshi are in the game towards the end.The main villain is Bowser,and there are a bunch of other characters like Boo and Goomba.The characters are really great.Next,how about the graphics?People say Gameplay is more important then the graphics,and I agree completely.But with he great plot,there are great graphics.Especially for it's time.I have a whole bunch of other Nintendo games like 007 and their graphics don't compare to Super Mario.Bright colors,great effects and awesome sound effects.I found the graphics in the water courses very very good.Next to the Bowser world ones,it has the best graphics in the game.Now,the music.This is my favorite part of the game.Growing up,when I played this at a young age,I'd gladly leave the game on all night so the music would put me to sleep.Especially the music from Jolly Roger Bay,which was peaceful and wonderful.There are others that are great too,especially in,once again,the worlds with Bowser,are the ones that stick with me the most and are my favorites.This game was my favorite past time as a developing gamer,and I love it.This game gets 10/10 or *****(5)/*****(5) GO PLAY THE GAME!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8efcf3e145564da0aeac728c62ff1c5d",
            "input": "I loved watching ''Sea Hunt '' back in the day , I was in grammar school and would get home do my homework and by 4:30 would be ready to watch ''Sea Hunt '' and Mike Nelson in his underwater adventures .I loved it ! He took to you a place not very accessible at that time , under the great blue sea . Pre ''Thunderball '' or even before Cousteau became common , there was Mike Nelson sparking the imagination of kids .I'd be willing to wager that more than a few kids developed their passion for oceanography or biology or one of the sciences from watching this show .Underwater photography also progressed , the fascination for exploration is easily stimulated thru watching this show . Watch and enjoy !!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ad9ce6e8d1a431abed8174e4a51763a",
            "input": "This is a very dramatic and suspenseful movie. There are many plots and turns. The story or the director opens question marks on the death row or presumed crimes committed by black people. This film is very well directed by Arne Glimcher and the fine sound of James Newton Howard is excellent. Strong performance of Sean Connery and Ed Harris. If you liked this one don´t miss \"TRUE CRIMES\" or \"THE HURRICANE\". My wife and me gave 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-727bc3e672324c69ad4ca8e32542ea6c",
            "input": "I bought this (it was only $3, ok?) under the title \"Grey Matter\". The novelty of seeing Sherriff Roscoe in a non-DukesOfHazzard role intrigued me. As the other reviewers warned, it's a pretty boring tale of a top secret government experiment gone awry.And yes, there are plenty of establishing shots, especially of a house with a pool in front of it. Some of the characters and interiors are so nondescript I guess the filmmakers worried we might forget who is who, so they keep tipping us off by first showing the outside of the buildings. It's actually kinda funny. After awhile the pool shot feels like a tv channel's station identification logo, reminding us that we are watching \"Grey Matter\".I also enjoyed two bouts of name-calling. At one point an angry test subject taunts somebody in charge by calling her a \"Scientific b*tch!\". It's just a very inadequate insult. Several scenes later a different subject lets off steam by muttering about that \"scientific b**tard!\". It just sounded very awkward to me.Someday this movie will disappear forever. Another decade from now it will likely be impossible to find any copies of it. Almost like it never happened.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5eb53acaf563457cbb66c31c396c8439",
            "input": "This film, in my opinion, is, despite it's flaws (which I maintain are *few*), an utter masterpiece and a great and glorious piece of art.What Mr. Bakshi has done here is to create an utterly beautiful film and has shown his immense talent and versatility as a director of animated films. He does not receive 1/100th of the credit he deserves for literally saving the art of animation for an adult audience. If it were not for Mr. Bakshi, I don't believe animation would have survived the Disney onslaught. What is more, with The Lord of the Rings, he has not only created a beautiful animated film, but he has created an entirely new art form - unfortunately one that never quite made it off the ground.Most people will complain about the use of rotoscoping in the film (the use of live action images which are used as background images and often animated over using various techniques from what appears to be small amounts of tinting to full blown animation). But I feel that the people who complain about it simply cannot accept an art form which is out of the norm. No, this is not Disney animation. No it's not live action. No, it's not \"cheating\" - what it is is a new, fascinating, and absolutely wonderful art form. Something so fresh, and so new that it feels completely at home in such a fantastic tale as \"The Lord of the Rings\". Bakshi's pioneering use of this technique brings the subtleties of Middle Earth to life is a very dark and mysterious way, in particular, the darker of Tolkien's creatures, particularly the Nazgul, are realized in a way that traditional animation or live action have not been able to accomplish.Peter S. Beagle's screenplay (based very little, as I understand it, on an early draft by Chris Conkling) is a very loyal adaptation of Tolkien's works. Where possible he uses dialogue directly out of the novel and it feels at home in the world which Bakshi has created. There are many cuts that were made to fit the first book and 3/4 into a single 2 hour 15 minute film, but there are very few changes to the storyline. There are a few holes which it would have been nice to have filled: The reforging of Narsil, the gifts of Galadriel, the Huorns at the battle of the Hornburg, but, again, with the time limitations he had (already the longest animated feature in history), these are certainly understandable (though it makes one wonder how they could have been explained in a sequel).Also there is the delightful (one of my favorites) score by Leonard Rosenman (who also scored Barry Lyndon and Star Trek IV (the score for which is clearly based on his LotR work)). It is bombastic and audacious and, dare I say, perfect. It stands on it's own as an orchestral triumph, but when coupled with the images of the film, it enters a whole new world of symphonic perfection. So far from the typical Hollywoodland fare that it turns many people off.The voice actors are wonderful. Of particular note is John Hurt as Aragorn who just oozes the essence of Strider.The character design is also wonderfully unique, though not often to everyone's taste. But remember that it is the duty of the director of an adaptation to show you what he/she imagines, not what you might have imagined, and so Aragorn is realized with a distinctive Native American feel and Boromir appears in Viking inspired garb. This is perhaps not what you imagined, but I can only applaud Mr. Bakshi for showing us what he \"saw\". It also might be noted that he spent a significant amount of time with Priscilla Tolkien in developing the character outfits for the film.One farther word - the Flight to the Ford sequence, in my opinion, is one of the most subtlety beautiful sequences ever to be caught on celluloid. Bakshi is not afraid to slow down the pace for a moment, and his mastery is clearly shown by the incredible tension is able to build. Bakshi's artistic ability and Tolkien's incredible work fuse in this sequence to a glorious peak which has yet to be equaled.The recent DVD release (2001) by Warner Brothers, is sorely lacking. While we can offer our eternal thanks that the film is finally available in widescreen format, the package is woefully short of extras. How glorious it would have been to have had a director's commentary, been able to see the 20 minutes of extra footage that were removed for the theatrical release. Another delightful addition could have been the assembled the live action footage which was later animated over. Also present in the DVD release is the utterly horrible voiceover at the end of the film which is a departure from the simple voiceover which occurred in the very final frames of the film. This version is plastered and poorly rendered right over the musical climax of the score.Of course, the greatest tragedy of all is that the sequel was never made. We will never be able to see Bakshi's interpretation of Gondor, of Shelob, of Faramir, of the Cracks of Doom, of Eowyn's battle with the Witch King or Gandalf's confrontation with him. We will never be graced with Bakshi's image of Denethor or the Palatir or the Paths of the Dead. It is a shame beyond all shames that we will, in the end, have to accept Peter Jackson's glitz and glitter Hollywood, action film version of these later events in Tolkien's masterpiece, but, I suppose even that is better than having no cinematic version at all.David",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb422adcddcc4985a6c503e66c225589",
            "input": "I could see this film is super He didn't surprise to oneself when so that it was taking place for the truth, this way by itself how swigged flight to the which didn't have the place but it is only such an conspiratorial theory, Right?Very I liked watching this film when I was the child. I am interesting which so that it was if it turned out that such a flight was taking place really, certainly to it for not a belief because it is denying logic and the common sense. Who at healthy senses, sent to kids with space shuttle into the orbit. I very like reading for the subject, American and Soviet space programs. I know a few missions of space shuttles remained provided by CIA with the clause TOP SECRET certainly these are only such my divagations but who knows?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e40fc2bbbbc64f4fa0c8a8db97cfc9c0",
            "input": "Oh, what fun there is here! Amy Heckerling has a flair for directing comedy (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Look Who's Talking) but here it looks like she told the actors to go out and have fun. Micheal Keaton breezes through the role of Johnny, easily his best screen performance. Joe Piscopo is great as the appropriately named Danny Vermin, what a shame directors didn't pick up on this. And I have even mentioned Richard Dimitri playing Moronie and the character's unique vocabulary. I don't think it's an accident that the bulk of the character's name is spelled MORON.Good lines are sprinkled throughout the movie, with Peter Boyle, Griffit Dunne.Maurren Stapleton, Merilu Henner given good lines. Even actors with minor roles like Dick Butkus and Alan Hale get in a good lines.recommend it to a friend.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-425934c796b54de0831b78de6bdf28cb",
            "input": "\"Hak Hap\", or \"Black Mask\" (in english) was a disappointment. I was told that it was a sort of \"Japanese version of the Matrix\". Imagine my disappointment. The film was either badly dubbed or the soundtrack didn't time well with the film. Another thing is that the dialogue was pretty much bad. There was very little thought put into the English version of this film and it appeals only to the \"senseless action\" genre. Not a film I would want to see again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0dbb18096ee9409192b90c3a105e7514",
            "input": "A long time ago, I watched this movie from the middle on cable. I then had a crush on Mary Moronov. I saw her again in Eating Raoul. I was convinced that she's the hottest woman on screen.I maybe biased about this movie. 9 out of 10.This's the only movie I own on original tape.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b3ff894647a47a2bbfde0a5c1839a1a",
            "input": "Jungle Fever is too highly stylized, stereotyped, and comes across as essentially dishonest. Wesley Snipes was wrong for the lead and there was no chemistry between him and Annabella Sciorra. Even though there's plenty of talent in this movie, it's mostly wasted because the parts are reduced to little more than decorative cameos. Also, instead of simply showing racism for the ugly and stupid thing it is, Spike Lee chooses to wave it around like a flag in a most whining and irritating manner. I made it through most of the film but I couldn't quite finish it, and that, for me, rarely happens.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1bc17913406246cfb2fea61b2be9e56a",
            "input": "Overall, I enjoyed this film and would recommend it to indie film lovers.However, I really want to note the similarities between parts of this film and Nichols' Closer. One scene especially where Adrian Grenier's character is questioning Rosario Dawson's about her sex life while he was away is remarkably similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's character is questioning Julia Roberts, although it is acted with less harshness and intensity in \"Love.\" Also note that \"Anna\" is the name of both Dawson's and Roberts' character. Can't be coincidence. Now Closer is based on Patrick Marber's play and supposedly this film is loosely based on Arthur Schnitzler's \"Reigen\" so I'm not sure how this connection formed.Anyone have an idea?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9590e649e4324e60813f4ed41a109d6d",
            "input": "One of the most nihilistic and brutal films I've ever seen, but also one of the most tragic and moving ones. This is an action-melodrama like the world has never seen it before. Sometimes the plot got me close to tears, while in the next moment delivering shocking revelations like a bone-crunching blow to the guts. Chilling performance by Edison Chen. The story of a HK-Cop and a Cambodian killer hunting each other down, while bit by bit losing their humanity, is a strong one. Featuring very little dialog in favor of haunting imagery and gritty camera-work, \"Dog bite Dog\" is pure HK-Bloodshed without the Heroism.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e1ad793299b4a91aa88bf305f90f5bc",
            "input": "This movie is one reason IMDB should allow a vote of 0/10. The acting is awful, even what some here have lauded, the Carpathia character! The script looks like it was written in haste. In one scene, the black preacher who was left behind, when asked by Buck what \"dan7\" in the computer graphic meant, said, \"Daniel 7, *CHAPTER* 24.\" He probably meant VERSE 24, but the film makers missed this slip up. Perhaps the worst part is that the film's eschatological position is Biblically unsound. While many Christians have espoused the film's interpretation of end-time events, such interpretation, in *my opinion*, is faulty. To understand these flaws, read \"Christians Will Go Through The Tribulation\" by Jim McKeever and \"The Blessed Hope, A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture\" by George E. Ladd.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b880046eb51040fbadbb8c23d29acced",
            "input": "I was very moved by the story and because I am going through something similar with my own parents, I really connected. It is so easy to forget that someone whose body is failing was once vibrant and passionate. And then there's the mistakes they made and have to live with. I loved Ellen Burstyn's performance and who is Christine Horne? She's fantastic! A real find. There is probably the most erotic scene I've ever seen in a film, yet nothing was shown - it was just so beautifully done. Overall the look and feel of the film was stunning, a real emotional journey. Cole Hauser is very very good in this picture, he humanizes a man spiraling downwards. I liked the way the filmmaker approached this woman's life, never sentimental, never too much - just enough to hook us in, but not enough to bog down.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13000bd681d8457e8956333f7a59eac8",
            "input": "i watched this film many years ago and have searched for it ever since in my opinion although very raw it is very educational as to what the future can hold i enjoyed the movie and to this this day rate it very high sorry to all those that disagree but a movie should always be judged each to there own and in my opinion its great give it a go with all the cloning and test tube babies that are happening today who are we to judge this film, this may be a dramatised event of what is to become but there you go. All the horrors of today are so far fetched even i laugh but this one gets me thinking and it scares me as a mother what if i was desperate,after watching this movie i would think twice sorry but i love the movie make your own mind up don't watch the movie making- just aknowledge the story and ask yourself this how far would you go for a child?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92f90138ca03486ea3fc5fbd8034bf19",
            "input": "I don't know why some guys from US, Georgia or even from Bulgaria have the courage to express feelings about something they don't understand at all. For those who did not watch this movie - watch it. Don't expect too much or don't put some frameworks just because this is Kosturica. Watch the movie without prejudice, try to understand the whole humor inside - people of Serbia DID actually getting married while Bil Clinton bomb their villages, gypsies in all Balkans are ALWAYS try to f*ck you up in any way they can, LOVE is always unexpected, pure and colorful, and Balkans are extremely creative. For those who claims this is a bad movie I can see only that the American's sh*t (like Meet Dave, Get Smart etc) are much much worse than a pure, frank Balkan humoristic love story movie as Promise me. The comment should be useful and on second place should represent the personal view of the writer. I think the movie is great and people watch it must give their respects to the director and story told inside. It is simple, but true. It is brutal, but gentle and makes you laugh to dead.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-641dea00120c433795861e7da04da4b7",
            "input": "MABEL AT THE WHEEL is one of those movies with a behind-the-scenes story that's more interesting than the movie itself. This was Chaplin's tenth comedy for Keystone during his year of apprenticeship, and his first two-reeler. Here he played one of his last out-and-out villain roles (although the feature-length TILLIE'S PUNCTURED ROMANCE was yet to come), and it also marked one of the last times he would work for a director other than himself. In fact, Chaplin's conflicts with director and co-star Mabel Normand almost got him fired from the studio.Chaplin hadn't gotten along with his earlier directors, Henry Lehrman and George Nichols, but according to his autobiography having to take direction from a mere \"girl\" was the last straw. Charlie and Mabel argued bitterly during the making of this film. Chaplin was still a newcomer at Keystone and his colleagues didn't know what to make of him, but everyone loved Mabel. Producer Mack Sennett was on the verge of firing Chaplin when he learned that the newcomer's films were catching on and exhibitors wanted more of them A.S.A.P., so Chaplin was promised the chance to direct himself in return for finishing this movie the way Mabel wanted it.Unfortunately, none of that drama is visible on screen in MABEL AT THE WHEEL, which looks like typical Keystone chaos. The story concerns an auto race in which Mabel's beau (Harry McCoy) is scheduled to compete, but wicked Charlie and his henchmen abduct the lad, and Mabel must take the wheel in his place. For all the racing around, brick hurling and finger-biting the film is frankly short on laughs, but there are a few points of interest. There's some good cinematography and editing in the race sequence, though there aren't really any gags, just lots of frantic activity. Chaplin himself looks odd, sporting a goat-like beard on his chin and wearing the top hat and frock coat he wore in his very first film appearance, MAKING A LIVING, but the outfit suits the old-fashioned villainy he displays throughout. At least it's novel to watch him play such an uncharacteristic role. Visible in the stands at the race track are such Keystone stalwarts as Chester Conklin, Edgar Kennedy in a strangely dandified get-up, and a more characteristic Mack Sennett, spitting tobacco and doing his usual mindless rube routine. As a performer, Sennett was about as subtle as the movies he produced, but you have to give the guy credit: he knew what people liked. These films were hugely popular in their day. Mack's performance doesn't add much to MABEL AT THE WHEEL, but he probably had to be on hand for the filming of this one to make sure his stars didn't kill each other.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11514884aac54134a1b6ad94c3562227",
            "input": "This movie was rented by a friend. Her choice is normally good. I read the cover first and was expecting a good movie. Although itwas a horror movie. Which i don't prefer. But no horror came to mind while watching the movie. It was a dull,not very entertaining movie. The appearance of Denise Richardswas again a pleasure for the eye. But that's it. We (the four of us)we're a little bit disappointed. But feel free to see this movie andjudge it yourself.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2656129a8e84ec1b3dbb184f9f32fc1",
            "input": "As someone who likes chase scenes and was really intrigued by this fascinating true-life tale, I was optimistic heading into this film but too many obstacles got into the way of the good story it should have been.THE BAD - I'm a fan of Robert Duvall and many of the characters he has played, but his role here is a dull one as an insurance investigator.The dialog is insipid and the pretty Kathryn Harrold is real garbage-mouth. From what I read, there were several directors replacing each other on this film, and that's too bad. You can tell things aren't right with the story. I couldn't get \"involved\" with Treat Williams' portrayal of Cooper, either. He should have been fascinating, but he wasn't in this movie. It's also kind of a sad comment that a guy committing a crime is some sort of \"folk hero,\" but I admit I wound up rooting for the guy, too.Not everything was disappointing. I can't complain about the scenery, from the lush, green forests of Oregon to the desert in Arizona.I'd like to see this movie re-made and done better, because it is a one-of-a-kind story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5255b71580a649f696475020415b81a4",
            "input": "Another of my delves into the bargain bin, this movie gave me exactly what I expected - a load of trashy horror complete with screaming ladies.It all started so well - I liked the little intro with the \"newsreel\" about the young couple being exposed to a nuclear blast, and was totally absorbed right up until the first person caught fire...From then onwards the film descended into outright silliness, and at times became almost embarrassing to watch. When the heroine turned out to have been afflicted with the same condition as the main character (the ability to light one's own farts without the aid of a match) it seemed almost as if someone had thrown the idea in at the last moment (\"that'll be good!\" you can almost hear them say...) As for the almost psychic link between the main character and the nuclear power plant, well...The movie came across as cheap tat - if you pay more than £1.50 for it you've been done.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5a45642372949f88281888873181f31",
            "input": "Who would have thought that such an obscure little film could be so haunting and touching? I am really impressed. It's a shame that more people have not seen it. I loved, as always, Hans Zimmer's score. And what a directorial debut by Bernard Rose! Yet I wonder if I should call this a horror film. It could easily be argued that it is a fantasy or a drama as well. Well, regardless, I love the interpretive potential it has. Everything and everyone in Anna's (played by Charlotte Burke)dreams represents a real conflict in her life...the house itself, the tree, Mark, the lighthouse, etc. It is the many details such as these that make the film so good for repeated viewings. I hope I come across another little movie as loaded with emotion and psychological meaning as this one some time soon.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e47e080aaabe4da4a1a86d7116dcfe5c",
            "input": "Artemesia takes the usual story about the art world, eg, \"You can't paint that! But I want to!\" and plasters it with sex and scandal to make the whole film, well, interesting, but not remarkable.The story is about one of the first female painters around, Artemesia who course, is fiercely independent, but just can't stop thinking of men, and their bodies… for artistic purposes of course. She soon gets private tutoring from one of a well known artist, but soon tutoring becomes much more then art, and soon after that, scandal erupts! Funny how they could take a historical biography and make it almost into a soft-porn fantasy. I mean, was Artemesia THAT much of a man-hungry person? Also, it's quite funny when she's insisting that she \"paints for herself!\" yet falls for the first person she sees.Actually, the story itself is quite fascinating, and it ends with a trial, which I always love. But I wasn't too crazy about the male lead who played her teacher, who looked rather like the person someone like that wouldn't fall for. I woulda gone for the young fisherman :P",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf3fc64d0d094539add5a6584efa44aa",
            "input": "I come to Pinjar from a completely different background than most of the other reviewers who have posted here. I'm relatively new to Bollywood films and was born and raised in the US. So I don't have a broad basis for comparing Pinjar to other Indian films. Luckily, no comparison is needed.Pinjar stands on its own as nothing less than a masterpiece.In one line I can tell you that Pinjar is one of the most important films to come out of any studio anywhere at any time. On a mass-appeal scale, it *could* have been the Indian equivalent of \"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon\" had it been adequately promoted in the US. This could very well have been the film that put Bollywood on the American map. The American movie-going public has a long-standing love affair with \"Gone With the Wind\", and while Pinjar doesn't borrow from that plot there are some passing similarities. Not the least of which is the whopping (by US standards) 183-minute run time.Set against the gritty backdrop of the India-Pakistan partition in 1947-48 is a compelling human drama of a young woman imprisoned by circumstances and thrust into troubles she had no hand in creating. Put into an untenable position, she somehow manages to not only survive, but to grow -- and even flourish.If the story is lacking in any way, it's in the exposition. Puro's (the protagonist) growth as a person would be better illustrated -- at least for western audiences unfamiliar with Indian culture -- if her character's \"back story\" were more fully developed in the early part of the film. But that would have stretched a 3-hour movie to 3 1/2 hours or perhaps even more. Because not one minute of the film is wasted, and none of what made it out of editing could really be cut for the sake of time. Better that the audience has to fill in some of what came before than to leave out any of what remains.I could use many words to describe Pinjar: \"poignant\", \"disturbing\", \"compelling\", \"heart-wrenching\" come to mind immediately. But \"uplifting\" is perhaps as apropos as any of those. Any story that points up the indomitability of the human spirit against the worst of odds has to be considered such. And Puro's triumph -- while possibly not immediately evident to those around her -- is no less than inspirational. For strength of story alone I cannot recommend this film highly enough.Equally inspiring is Urmila Matondkar's portrayal of Puro. All too often overlooked amid the bevy of younger, newer actresses, Urmila has the unique capability to deliver a completely credible character in any role she plays. She doesn't merely act Puro's part, she breathes life into the character. Manoj Bajpai's selection as Rashid was inspired. He manages something far too few Indian film heroes can: subtlety. His command of expression and nuance is essential to the role. He brings more menace to the early part of the film with his piercing stare than all of the sword-wielding rioters combined.If you only see one Bollywood film in your life, make it Pinjar.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3cf5965f35fe4fbca8c4dc24e0ff8649",
            "input": "First a quick 'shut up!' to those saying this movie stinks. You can't go to every movie expecting 'Citizen Kane'. This was actually a fun movie. Jason Lee is good in everything he does. The only flaw in this movie is, I don't think there was enough chemestry between Lee and Julia Stiles. They should have dwelled more on that. Other than that, the movie is good fun. Selma Blair needs to eat something. She's worrying me. But she still looks beautiful. So yes, I recommend this movie for a date or light saturday afternoon fun. Go see.RATING: **1/2 out of ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a3347b10f5945b8bbcbd512c5886c59",
            "input": "The lovely Eva Longoria Parker plays Kate, who dies after an ice angel crushes her before the \"I do's\" with fiancé Henry(Paul Rudd). After two years Henry has yet to move on and his sister Chloe(Lindsay Sloane)is very concerned. Chloe arranges for Henry to talk with an attractive psychic Ashley(Lake Bell). Ashley is to contact Kate's spirit hoping to help Henry get on with his life. When the psychic starts getting attracted to Henry, Kate's ghost appears to nip the romance in the bud. There are some funny situations; but if you've seen the trailers you have seen the substance of the film. Also in the cast: Stephen Root, Jason Biggs, William Morgan Sheppard and Wendi McLendon-Covey. I personally thought that Bell stole the show from Parker. And Biggs as usual a pain in the butt. Still this movie was over-hyped.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d1580c1b29b42fabc2ede0990657a8d",
            "input": "I liked this movie a lot. The animation was well done and the romance was cute. I liked most of Bryan Adams' songs and the Hans Zimmer score was excellent. What a lot of people don't realize is how well it relates to the Heart of Darkness/Apocalypse Now themes (what happens when so-called \"civilization\" invades someone elses home, what does it mean to be \"civilized\" etc.). The opening scenery and music were very stirring. The film is a lament to an America that was once beautiful.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d944f24f896421c8a3d460ea8816f33",
            "input": "Dev Anand (or Prashant) and Zeenat Aman ( Jasbir/Janice) are siblings brought up in single parent families. Jasbir (the sister) grows up in an affluent environment but this is not enough to lead her to reject her life and ultimately join a hippie movement that eventually leads her to drugs. Prashant (the brother) on the other hand grows up in a less affluent environment but grows up to be a matured gentleman. The story marks Prashant making efforts to save his little sister (who is perpetually in a trance) from a hostile hippie environment. This movie stands the test of time, commenting that cults and hippie groups are a place for those who give up on their lives when they should instead stand up and be counted in the face of adversity. Great music compositions in this movie that mean different things in different situations and to different people, and the director brings forth an eerie feeling to it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe70eb2b526e4a9399cc8420d65ca418",
            "input": "I knew that 'Evening' was a girlie film, so I was expecting to be bored. A wicked tease on IMDb had said that it was a 'chick flick' but that your companion would survive.Survive? Yes. I am still here, but when the two of us came out we were amazed to find that it had only lasted two hours - it seemed a much longer evening than that! I suppose that, for Yanks, it is supposed to be elevating or fascinating because it is about rich people living on the beach - well, next to the beach, in a house with a wide verandah and a lawn but no apparent lawnmower. If that sort of thing impresses you it might seem quite a short film.There's a Monty Python film about a Knight who just won't die. He ends up a wriggling (why do Yanks add an third syllable to this word I wonder) torso in the road still shouting threats at his nemesis. This film is also about a sort of living dead. Vanessa Redgrave (inappropriate name for the grave dodger shown here) goes on and on dying whilst having inappropriate guilt. She's not worried about having been a wide-eyed, breathless bimbo, but imagines herself a murderess.Obviously, being a girlie film, there's a chap who is supposed to be the Mr Darcy/Heathcliff character. I'm not a woofter, so I can't claim to be a good judge of such things, but the tedious wimp who is wheeled out for this role seems only to have the title of servant in his favour. He's a bloodless cypher.As you might gather, the main characters aren't much cop, but the minor ones manage, amazingly to be much worse. There's a fellow whose only job is to react to the news that his girlfriend is preggers. Fair enough, but it isn't the role of Hamlet - why ham it up so badly? Forgetting that it was a girlie film, I thought he was going to be thrown out because any decent girl-friend would have told him that face-fungus didn't flatter him, but then I realised that she must have encouraged him to grow a 'beard' because he looked worse without it.I kept awake by noticing which actors and actresses had their earlobes attached or free and noting interesting bits of scenery - if you're dragged along to it, see if you can spot the stuffed buffalo head, just the sort of thing you'd expect in a beach cottage.Apart from the obligatory wedding, there is only one piece of action. You'd have thought that they'd have got it right. Sadly, though, the hit and run accident is carried out by a car that couldn't be there. When the accident is discovered the cast wander about shouting for a character that they can't know is nearby (but we do as the audience). If they don't have any clue that the person is within a couple of miles of the place, then why do they wander about aimlessly shouting for him? I suppose that the director's excuse is that it is supposed to be a half-remembered dream sequence...Another scenery item that caught my attention was a copper bottomed saucepan. I didn't think that the technology to do this was developed until the fifties.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ae09824de0741ae876d290e30c35439",
            "input": "This movie is one of my favourites. It is a genre-mixture with ingredients of the Action-/Horror-/Romantic-/Comedygenre. Some of the special effects may seem outdated compared to modern standards. This minor flaw is easily ignored. There is so much to discover in this story. The romantic relation between the two main characters is so beautiful that it hurts. The visuals are beautiful too. The action is great which is no surprise, it is originating from Honkong, birthplace of the world's best action movies. The humour sometimes seems a little bit silly but in a good way. Somehow this movie is being able to balance the different moods and keeps being good. Absolutely recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f80f28aac5994c1e84f2db727e47aefd",
            "input": "and this IS a very disturbing film. I may be wrong, but this is the last film where I considered Burt Reynolds an actual actor, who transformed the role, and delivered a message.Jon Voight and Ned Beatty are also excellent. They are unassuming and unaware; businessmen wanting to enjoy the country. Little did they know what would happen next.The photography and sets are realistic and natural. This was before the days of Wes Craven.What is most disturbing about this film is the fact that places like this still exist. In America, country folk still detest city people; it is almost a century and a half since the Civil War.You will enjoy this film. It was filmed in the rural sections of South Georgia, which still exist. Just don't drive past that to Mobile, Alabama; That area still has not been repaired since Hurricane Katrina. 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71734b0a509a4efab3fea054ecbb1369",
            "input": "Unfortunately many consumers who write reviews for IMDb equate low budget with not good. Whatever else this movie might need, more budget really isn't part of it. Big sets and lots of special effects would have turned it into another Lara Croft movie. What we have here is a step or two better than that.The nearly unknown Alexandra Staden is captivating as the enigmatic Modesty, and this is crucial for this movie to work. Her wise little smiles and knowing looks are formidable, and you find yourself wishing that the camera won't leaver her face. It makes it workable that the bad guy Nikolai, played by also little known (in the U.S. at least) Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau might take an unusually cerebral interest in her, something Modesty can exploit. She is able to divert his raping her with just a shove and spitting out \"stop wasting my time!\" then storming off between his heavily armed yet suddenly diffident henchmen. Making a scene like that plausible doesn't happen by accident.Probably the biggest problem I have with the rail-thin Staden playing Modesty is it just isn't very believable for her to go hand to hand with an athletic and muscled looking guy like Coaster-Waldau and beat him. She just ain't a Peta Wilson or a pumped-up Hilary Swank type actress who can throw a convincing punch. Coaster-Waldau letting himself be overpowered by Staden looks like he's just roughhousing with his little sister.Since this is not really an action film, this isn't a big flaw. I just hope they do better on that if and when they make sequels.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbaf6554f77e437788ac5710d84d0826",
            "input": "I just finished a marathon of this series, and it became agonising to watch as it progressed. From the fictionalising of the historical elements, to O'Herlihy's awful accent in later episodes, the show just slumps the further it goes. If you are looking for some low quality production generalised WW2 fluff, then I could recommend season 1, but avoid anything after that, it degenerates into being one step from a soap opera, with increasingly worse story lines and sensibility.The old B&W film is by far the best of any form of entertainment with the Colditz name attached to it, and even that is not what one could hope for.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-917c103f367d4681bf0a5d0ab92aed19",
            "input": "On this 4th of July weekend it's heartening to see the spirit of the Declaration of Independence alive and well in the film \"War, Inc.\" Just as our founding fathers gave the back of their collective hand to King George III, this film exposes in hilarious fashion the craven war-profiteering by the current crop of capitalistic creeps who are intent on indecently privatizing the government, to include privatizing war itself.The cast in this satire absolutely shines. John Cusack is wonderful as a droll, conflicted corporate assassin, and the beautiful Marisa Tomei is superb as his love interest. (My gosh, \"George Costanza\" was right. Marisa Tomei is so attractive!) But it is John's sister Joan Cusack who really steals the film. Her portrayal of a bossy, yet simultaneously sycophantic, personal assistant is priceless, and more than once I just couldn't stop laughing at the brilliance of her performance. She not only possesses fantastic comic timing, her face is as expressive as one could ever wish for in an actor. Dan Ackroyd, too, has a short, but very effective, cameo in the film as the head of the company which is running the war, the Tamerlane Corporation. Sitting on a \"throne\" with his pants down around his ankles, Ackroyd even looks like the arse clown who currently occupies one of our real thrones of power. You won't have to think too hard to recognize that person. Much of this movie was filmed in Bulgaria, which is why we are able to see so much real military equipment. (You just know that the US military would never have cooperated in making this satiric expose of war-profiteering.) I especially enjoyed the character of \"Omar Sharif\" as played by the Bulgarian actor Lyubomir Neikov. In one scene in which he is on the dance floor with Marisa Tomei he has a couple of lines that could summarize our entire foreign policy attitude toward the foreign leaders we install - and uninstall - in power.Naturally, this film won't appeal to everyone. If you believe that the on-going privatization of our foreign policy, the military, intelligence collection and analysis, prisons and the corrections system, public health, and a myriad of other government services is a good thing you may not find much to like in this film. If you believe, however, that destroying people and countries in order to add to some corporation's bottom line is an abomination I think you'll find much to appreciate in this film. Nothing could be more in keeping with the Spirit of Independence that heaping well-deserved ridicule on corrupt powers that be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a67716b686d414682225d7aad7ebd5f",
            "input": "I am Black American and I loved this soap opera. I watched it dubbed in Spanish on Telemundo, almost 5-7 years ago. The story was a TRUE story about a black slave who's love affair with a white commander led to her leadership and candid, whimsical way of living.A lot of us could learn a lot from XICA. She took what she had, nothing, and saw her possibilities. Many would argue that she sold herself out - but she was trying to secure her future and that of her future children.It was such an excellent soap opera, that I thought it would be released on DVD, but it's not being released. This soap opera was the best soap opera EVER. We need for it to be released on DVD or broadcast on TV again. It's playing on Azteca America right now, which is only available in Mexico or in the US by paid cable. We need it released again to Telemundo.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f5fc6b52b2f4e3c858a5fc778f8cc44",
            "input": "Silly, simplistic, and short, GUN CRAZY (VOLUME 1: A WOMAN FROM NOWHERE) goes nowhere.This brief (just over sixty minutes) tale isn't so much inspired by the classic spaghetti Westerns as it is a rip-off of Sam Raimi's THE QUICK & THE DEAD (his admitted homage to the spaghetti Westerns) brought into a contemporary setting. In QUICK & DEAD, Sharon Stone's character seeks revenge against the dastardly sheriff (played by Gene Hackman) who, when she was but an urchin, placed the fate of her father (a brief cameo by Gary Sinise) in her hands; she accidentally shot him through the head. In GUN CRAZY, Saki (played by the nimble Ryoko Yonekura) seeks revenge against the dastardly Mr. Tojo (played with minimalist appeal by Shingo Tsurumi), who, when she was but an urchin, placed the fate of her father in her hands; she let her foot slip off the clutch, and dear ole dad was drawn and quartered by a semi truck. The only significant difference, despite the settings, is the fact that Tojo sadistically cripples Saki with … well, I won't spoil that for you in case you decide to watch it.In short, Saki – a pale imitation of the Clint Eastwood's 'Man With No Name' – rides into the town – basically, there's a auto shop and a tavern alongside an American military base, so I guess that suffices for a town – corrupted by Tojo, the local crimelord with a ridiculously high price on his head for reasons never explained or explored. Confessing her true self as a bounty hunter, Saki takes on the local gunmen in shootouts whose choreography bares more than a passing similarity to the works of Johnny To and John Woo. Of course, by the end of the film Saki has endured her fair amount of torture at the hands of the bad guys, but she rises to the occasion – on her knees, in a laughable attempt at a surprise ending – and vanquishes all of her enemies with a rocket launcher.Don't ask where she gets the rocket launcher. Just watch it for yourself. Try not to laugh.The image quality is average for the DVD release. There is a grainy quality to several sequences, but, all in all, this isn't a bad transfer. The sound quality leaves a bit to the imagination at times, but, again, it isn't a bad transfer.Rather, it's a bad film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f17b125411914d89a73e714d50e9dd45",
            "input": "i don't know what they were thinking.by they,i mean anybody even remotely connected to this disaster.i've seen so bad movies,i've seen so really bad movies,and then there's this.but i will say one thing.whoever wrote the script has manged to put what could possibly the most inane dialogue over written,onto the screen.there is nothing good about this movie,either from a technical standpoint or any other standpoint.whoever allowed it to be made and then released should have been fired immediately.there are a few fairly well known names in this movie.actually i hesitate to use the word movie.it's more like a collection of random scenes that have no relation to another and make less than 0 sense.anyway,i fail to see why anyone with any dignity would appear in this.i got it really cheap,and i still got ripped of.even if i had gotten this movie for free,i would still have been ripped off.this is an absoluter 0/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-018c92d1a222464e80396773ff723572",
            "input": "This was a good film with a powerful message of love and redemption. I loved the transformation of the brother and the repercussions of the horrible disease on the family. Well-acted and well-directed. If there were any flaws, I'd have to say that the story showed the typical suburban family and their difficulties again. What about all people of all cultural backgrounds? I would love to see a movie where all of these cultures are shown - like in real life. Nevertheless, the film soared in terms of its values and its understanding of the how a disease can bring someone closer to his or her maker. Loved the film and it brought tears to my eyes",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e672bc4aa30f48ada5d644e2bbc7fe3c",
            "input": "Fay Grim is a true example of what I call a completed puzzle film. It has all the pieces of acting, direction, storyline, and entertainment value. They all fit together and when done so create a masterpiece, Fay Grim.This film follows a single mother Fay Grim trying to raise her son to not grow up to be her father who ran away from the law and went missing. Soon the CIA contacts Fay in desperate pursuit to find 8 journals of her husband Henry's. These journals were filled with confessions of his long past in the CIA and his involvement with countries and their government doings. Fay is sent to find these journals, in return to release her brother from prison, and is sent on a cat-and-mouse chase all over Europe to recover these journals and learn of the hidden secrets of her husbands past she never knew about.Parker Posey had already been an actress I liked after I watched her in The OH in Ohio and Best in Show. She brought liveliness to these two comedic roles of hers, but Fay Grim was a far different role than the other two movies. Posey made me believe what was happening on screen, I felt for her, I rooted for her, and I wanted to know more. She grabs you while she is on screen and when she is off you can't stop thinking about what is happening to her.I haven't seen any other previous works by writer/director Hal Hartley but I believe I will look into viewing some of his earlier films if they are half as good as Fay Grim was.If you decide to make a smart movie choice next time you decide to rent a movie or purchase a DVD I'd highly urge you to choose Fay Grim. If you have any common sense on how a film should be you will enjoy this movie immensely.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e832bfa3049d47b9bc2171a9f4dce985",
            "input": "The acting, other reviews notwithstanding, was remarkably well-done. Brad Pitt handles the role of an annoying, obnoxious Austrian climber quite well. Other acting is fine. The story could have been riveting, but somehow, it misses - one never really understands or cares for the characters shown, and so the story, which could have been quite dramatic, fails to draw in this audience.Beautiful scenery and cinematography, a remarkably dramatic true story, important events that shaped the world that we live in - but I could not, try as I might, involve myself in this story. As an unabashed Brad Pitt fan (I consider him one of the top 5 actors of his generation), I expected to *love* this flick - and yet, it left me cold.It could be a failing within myself, but I tend to point toward the creative end of this movie - direction, scriptwriting, production, editing - somehow, they lost me. It's a shame, because it could have been wonderful.Good acting, dramatic story, beautifully shot - it should have been magnificent. It wasn't. Probably worth watching, just to make your own mind up on it - but don't expect too much, and perhaps you won't be as disappointed as I was. Mostly, it bored me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5d789a92dda4c7682f9d21cea91ee9a",
            "input": "In Iran, women are not permitted to attend men's sporting events, apparently to \"protect\" them from all the cursing and foul language they might hear emanating from the male fans (so since men can't restrain or behave themselves, women are forced to suffer. Go figure.). \"Offside\" tells the tale of a half dozen or so young women who, dressed like men, attempt to sneak into the high-stakes match between Iran and Bahrain that, in 2005, qualified Iran to go to the World Cup (the movie was actually filmed in large part during that game).\"Offside\" is a slice-of-life comedy that will remind you of all those great humanistic films (\"The Shop on Main Street,\" \"Loves of a Blonde,\" \"Closely Watched Trains\" etc.) that flowed out of Communist Czechoslovakia as part of the \"Prague Miracle\" in the mid 1960's. As with many of those works, \"Offside\" is more concerned with observing life than with devising any kind of elaborately contrived fictional narrative. Indeed, it is the simplicity of the setup and the naturalism of the style that make the movie so effective.Once their ruse is discovered, the girls are corralled into a small pen right outside the stadium where they can hear the raucous cheering emanating from the game inside. Stuck where they are, all they can do is plead with the security guards to let them go in, guards who are basically bumbling, good-natured lads who are compelled to do their duty as a part of their compulsory military service. Even most of the men going into the stadium don't seem particularly perturbed at the thought of these women being allowed in. Still the prohibition persists. Yet, how can one not be impressed by the very real courage and spunk displayed by these women as they go up against a system that continues to enforce such a ridiculously regressive and archaic restriction? And, yet, the purpose of these women is not to rally behind a cause or to make a \"point.\" They are simply obsessed fans with a burning desire to watch a soccer game and, like all the men in the country, cheer on their team.It's hard to tell just how much of the dialogue is scripted and how much of it is extemporaneous, but, in either case, the actors, with their marvelously expressive faces, do a magnificent job making each moment seem utterly real and convincing. Mohammad Kheir-abadi and Shayesteh Irani are notable standouts in a uniformly excellent cast. The structure of the film is also very loose and freeform, as writer/director Jafar Panahi and co-writer Shadmehr Rastin focus for a few brief moments on one or two of the characters, then move smoothly and effortlessly onto others. With this documentary-type approach, we come to feel as if we are witnessing an actual event unfolding in \"real time.\" Very often, it's quite easy for us to forget we're actually watching a movie.It was a very smart move on the part of the filmmakers to include so much good-natured humor in the film (it's what the Czech filmmakers did as well), the better to point up the utter absurdity of the situation and broaden the appeal of the film for audiences both domestic and foreign. \"Offside\" is obviously a cry for justice, but it is one that is made all the more effective by its refusal to make of its story a heavy-breathing tragedy. Instead, it realizes that nothing breaks down social barriers quite as efficiently as humor and an appeal to the audience's common humanity. And isn't that what true art is supposed to be all about? In its own quiet, understated way, \"Offside\" is one of the great, under-appreciated gems of 2007.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5444b4c04268420f87f3f64670ecabd6",
            "input": "EARTH is a must see for children and adults. My son had great fun watching all these funny birds and ice bears. We can learn a lot from this movie and we should be proud on our great treasure on earth. There are some animals in danger to disappear. Exactly that problem should prevent all the authorities of our planet. This documentary offers many exceptional pictures that I have never seen before. Then it is well accompanied by a heavenly music. The director did a great job here that gets high respect. Nothing can stop me and my family to give EARTH the highest rate. I hope so much that the stuff will create a sequel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3907a4a25dca41e9961e908e0f35da84",
            "input": "This may not be the worst comedy of all time, but it's close. The producers of this movie stole an hour and a half of my life, and I want it back!Chris Kattan is funny for about 10 minutes. His high pitched voice and mad flailing start to get old, and then you realize that the rest of the movie is much worse. He falls into a long line of former SNL-ers that have attempted movies. Some have been brilliant, some have failed miserably. There's not much middle ground in this category. Although Chris Farley was brilliant, and then okay, and then not so funny, and then dead...so I suppose he hits the entire spectrum in one career.Avoid this movie like the plague.c",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5080507ddb7f46f1afe68da98f89813a",
            "input": "To bad for this fine film that it had to be released the same year as Braveheart. Though it is a very different kind of film, the conflict between Scottish commoners and English nobility is front and center here as well. Roughly 400 years had passed between the time Braveheart took place and Rob Roy was set, but some things never seemed to change. Scottland is still run by English nobles, and the highlanders never can seem to catch a break when dealing with them. Rob Roy is handsomely done, but not the grand epic that Braveheart was. There are no large-scale battles, and the conflict here is more between individuals. And helpfully so not all Englishmen are portrayed as evil this time. Rob Roy is simply a film about those with honor, and those who are truly evil.Liam Neeson plays the title character Rob Roy MacGregor. He is the leader of the MacGregor clan and his basic function is to tend to and protect the cattle of the local nobleman of record known as the Marquis of Montrose (John Hurt). Things look pretty rough for the MacGregor clan as winter is approaching, and there seems to be a lack of food for everyone. Rob Roy puts together a plan to borrow 1000 pounds from the Marquis and purchase some cattle of his own. He would then sell them off for a higher price and use the money to improve the general well-being of his community. Sounds fair enough, doesn't it? Problems arise when two cronies of the Marquis steal the money for themselves. One of them, known as Archibald Cunningham, is perhaps the most evil character ever put on film. Played wonderfully by Tim Roth, this man is a penniless would-be noble who has been sent to live with the Marquis by his mother. This man is disgustingly effeminate, rude, heartless, and very dangerous with a sword. He fathers a child with a hand maiden and refuses to own up to the responsibility. He rapes Macgregor's wife and burns him out of his home. This guy is truly as rotten as movie characters come. Along with another crony of the Marquis (Brian Cox) Cunningham steals the money and uses it to settle his own debts. Though it is painfully obvious to most people what happened, the Marquis still holds MacGregor to the debt. This sets up conflict that will take many lives and challenge the strengths of a man simply fighting to hold on to his dignity.Spoilers ahead!!!!!Luckily for the MacGregor's, a Duke who is no friend to the Marquis sets up a final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham to resolve the conflict one and for all. This sword fight has been considered by many to be one of the best ever filmed. Cunningham is thought by many to be a sure winner with his speed and grace. And for most of the fight, it looks like these attributes will win out. Just when it looks like Rob Roy is finished, he turns the tables in a shockingly grotesque manner. The first time you see what happens, you will probably be as shocked as Cunningham! Rob Roy is beautifully filmed, wonderfully acted, and perfectly paced. The score is quite memorable, too. The casting choices seem to have worked out as Jessica Lange, who might seem to be out of her element, actually turns in one of the strongest performances as Mary MacGregor. The film is violent, but there isn't too much gore. It is a lusty picture full of deviant behavior, however. The nobility are largely played as being amoral and sleazy. The film has no obvious flaws, thus it gets 10 of 10 stars.The Hound.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b0b4313809743f3bb71c75299507907",
            "input": "Slackers is just another teen movie that's not really worth watching. Dave (Devon Sawa), Sam (Jason Segel) and Jeff (Michael C. Maronna) are about to graduate from Holden University with Honors in lying, cheating and scheming. The three roommates have proudly scammed their way through the last four years of college and now, during final exams, these big-men-on-campus are about to be busted by the most unlikely dude in school. The plot is very stupid and there's no reason why to watch this unless your looking to shut off you brain for a little while. Slackers is just a predictable teen flick that really adds nothing new to the genre. The comedy in Slackers is either hit or miss but there's no real true funny or original moment in the movie. Its really just a collection of gags and some are actually pretty funny. Though for every joke that works there's at least eight more that don't. The screenplay is full of penis and breast jokes that some high school and college students may enjoy. Even if they do they probably won't remember this film after awhile as its not a very memorable comedy. Jason Schwartzman plays the freaky Ethan and after appearing in some good comedies he has stoop pretty low. Jaime King and Devon Sawa are the other main stars but they do a rather poor job in this film. This is directed by Dewey Nicks and this is his first film so you can't blame him too much. The funniest character was probably Laura Prepon though, she's not in the movie very much. The film is very short at only 86 minutes long however, that may be too long for some people who don't really like this type of humor. Slackers isn't the worst film of 2002 but certainly is below average. When compared to other films in the genre there's a lot better out there such as Not Another Teen Movie, American Pie and its sequels , Scary Movie 1 & 2 etc. So unless you have seen most of them and you're looking for something new then Slackers might fit that bill but its better if you just watch something else. Rating 4.3/10 a below average teen comedy that's worth skipping.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4fc07392b4f4d37ad0df8e63403eea1",
            "input": "There are many adaptations of Charlotte Brontë's classic novel \"Jane Eyre\", and taking into consideration the numerous reviews written about them there is also a lively discussion on which of them is the best. The short film adaptations all suffer from the fact that it is simply not possible to cram the whole plot of the novel into a movie of about a 100 min. length, consequently these movies only show few parts of the novel. The TV series have proved to be a more suitable format to render all the different episodes of the heroine's life.There are three TV mini series, released in '73, '83 and 2006. The 2006 version is not only the worst of these three, but the worst of all Jane Eyre adaptations and a striking example of a completely overrated film. The novel's beautiful lines are substituted by insipid and trivial ones, and crucial scenes are either deleted or replaced by scenes which have nothing whatever to do with the novel. What it all leads to then is that the characters portrayed have not only nothing in common with the Rochester and Jane of the novel and behave in exactly the opposite way as described in the book, but that also their behaviour and language is absolutely not consistent with the behaviour of the period in which the novel is set. It is a silly soap opera, in which the actors look and act as if they had been put in the costumes of the 1850ies by mistake. This \"Jane Eyre\" (as it dares to call itself) is indeed a slap in the face of Charlotte Brontë.The 1973 version is very faithful to the novel in that the long dialogues between Mr. Rochester and Jane are rendered in nearly their full length. But what works beautifully in the novel does not necessarily work beautifully on the screen. At times the language of the novel is too complex and convoluted as to appear natural when spoken on screen, and the constant interruptions of the dialogues by Jane's voice-overs add to the impression of artificiality and staginess. And despite the faithfulness to the novel the essence of the scenes is not captured. Another problem is the casting of the main characters. Sorcha Cusack's portrayal of Jane as a bold, self-confident, worldly-wise young woman is totally at odds with the literary model, and Michael Jayston, although a good actor, does simply not possess the commanding physical presence nor the charisma necessary to play Rochester. Although a decent adaptation it simply fails to convey the passion and intensity of the novel and never really captivates the audience.All the faults of the '73 version stand corrected in the TV mini series of '83 with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clarke. Although from a purist's point of view Timothy Dalton is too handsome, tall and lean to be Rochester, he possesses the essential qualities for the role: He has an imposing physical presence, great magnetism and an air of self-assurance and authority. And despite his undeniable handsomeness he looks grim and stern enough to play the gloomy master of Thornfield convincingly. But the excellence of his performance lies in the way he renders all the facets of Rochester's character. Of all the actors who have played Rochester he is the only one to capture them all: Rochester's harshness, nearly insolence, his moodiness and abruptness, as well as his humorous side, his tenderness, his solicitude and deep, frantic love. Dalton's handling of Charlotte Brontë's language is equally superb. Even Rochester's most far-fetched and complicated thoughts ring absolutely true and natural when Dalton delivers them. He is the definitive Rochester, unsurpassed and unsurpassable, and after watching him in this role it is impossible to imagine Rochester to be played in any other way or by any other actor.Zelah Clarke delivers an equally excellent performance in a role that is possibly even more difficult to play well than the one of Rochester. She portrays exactly the Jane of the novel, an outwardly shy, reserved and guarded young woman, but who possesses a great depth of feeling and an equally great strength of will. She catches beautifully the duality in Jane's character: her modesty and respectfulness on the one hand, and her fire and passion on the other, her seeming frailty and her indomitable sense of right and wrong. She and Dalton have wonderful chemistry and their scenes together are pure delight.As regards faithfulness to the literary model this version also quotes verbatim from the novel as does the '73 version, but with one important difference: The dialogues are shortened in this version, but the core lines which are essential for the characterisation of the protagonists and the development of the plot are rendered unchanged. Thus the scriptwriter avoided any artificiality of speech, while still fully preserving the beauty and originality of Charlotte Brontë's language. And in contrast to the earlier BBC version the essence of each scene is perfectly captured.The plot of the novel is followed with even greater accuracy than in the '73 series. It is nearly a scene for scene enactment of the novel, where equal time and emphasis is given to each episode of Jane's life. It is the only Jane Eyre adaptation that has a gypsy scene worthy of the novel, and the only one which does full justice to the novel's pivotal and most heartrending scene when Jane and Rochester meet after the aborted wedding. Timothy Dalton in particular plays that scene with superb skill. He renders with almost painful intensity Rochester's anguish as he realizes Jane's resolution to leave him, his frantic attempts to make her stay and his final despair as she indeed leaves him. It is a heartbreaking, almost devastating, scene, which will stay with the viewer for a long time.With even the smaller roles perfectly cast, an excellent script and two ideal leading actors this is the definitive and only true \"Jane Eyre\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d26868cf0667433989863fb5f3071da1",
            "input": "This is a quite slow paced movie, slowly building the story of an ex stripper who begins a new family life with a complete stranger. The viewer slowly feels that there's something wrong here ...I really loved this movie even though it leaves a slight bitter taste in the end. It is clever, well paced and very well acted. Both Philippe Toretton and Emmannuelle Seigner are deeply into their characters. The little son \"pierrot\" is also very touching.A thriller which does not seem like one. A very unconventional movie, very particular atmosphere throughout the whole movie though you might feel awkward a few times with a couple of scenes.i'll give it a 8/10 !!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d4bc9f46dd74354ac93691c1ed92424",
            "input": "An excellent series, masterfully acted and directed, but unloved (I am told) by Mr Deighton and withdrawn by him after a single presentation. It is now only viewable in private collections, and via the British Film Institute at special request. Very unfortunate, as Ian Holm's nuanced portrayal of the weary-but-determined Bernard Samson is superb; one of his very best performances. The supporting cast, including the young Amanda Donohoe and Hugh Fraser, are superb. With Mel Martin playing the conflicted and traitorous wife, and Michael Degen as the mercurial Werner, the story positively simmers with the tragic and fateful personal consequences of the great game.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d04056d7e5e542af989976b08ad9426d",
            "input": "Okay, let me break it down for you guys...IT'S HORRIBLE! If Roger Kumble did such a fancy job on the first Cruel Intentions then why did he do such a bad job on this. I'm sorry but this movie is stupid, true it may have improved if its series was ever aired but lets be realistic...this movie a crock! A lot of bad acting *NOTE The Shower scene* \"Kissing Cousins\" ?????? What kind of line is that? \"Slipery when wet\" ?????????? Can we say DUH-M! This movie had effort, I'll give you that, but it was too stupid! They even tried to make it funny by giving the house servants stupid accents which actually....WASN'T FUNNY! It was pathetic. Not to mention that they made everyone in the this one look Absolutely NOTHING like the original cast. It's as if they made them look different on purpose or something! I like watching it when I'm really really really board which doesn't happen occasionally. For those of you who did like it...Okay, what were you thinking? Could you possibly choose this movie over the other one which had great acting and the fabulous Sarah Michelle Gellar? A movie is gold if it has Sarah Michelle Gellar in it, DUH! But this movie doesn't, no offense Amy Adams. Oh, yeah since when does Sebastain have a heart????? UGH!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd8a235571e9479e8e72756883cb5af4",
            "input": "Sure, it was cheesy and nonsensical and at times corny, but at least the filmmakers didn't try. While most TV movies border on the brink of mediocrity, this film actually has some redeeming qualities to it. The cinematography was pretty good for a TV film, and Viggo Mortensen displays shades of Aragorn in a film about a man who played by his own rules. Most of the flashback sequences were kind of cheesy, but the scene with the mountain lion was intense. I was kind of annoyed by Jason Priestly's role in the film as a rebellious shock-jock, but then again, it's a TV MOVIE! Despite all of the good things, the soundtrack was atrocious. However, it was nice to see Tucson, Arizona prominently featured in the film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b401d58d13024a0d8b7a0507e1194f7d",
            "input": "CARRY ON MATRON was released in 1972 and it's becoming clear that the series has reached a natural end with the best entries like CLEO , UP THE KYBER and SCREAMING being from the mid to late 60s In itself MATRON is by no means bad it's just that we've seen it all before with a thin plot ( A bunch of spivs trying to break into a hospital to steal a supply of contraceptive pills which they plan to sell to third world countries ) surrounded by gags of a slightly amusing though unsophisticated nature . I think that's where the problem lies - The gags aren't all that amusing with the unsophisticated nature starting to show its age . Did we need another movie that uses a man dressed up as a woman in order to drive the plot ? Perhaps the worst criticism I can make is that I saw CARRY ON MATRON this afternoon , less that twelve hours ago and I have a problem in trying to remember a very funny line . That's a serious problem for a comedy",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72c4e9814441465397394fd5b4cdb7ee",
            "input": "Gordon Parks, the prolific black Life magazine photographer, made a true ticking-timebomb of a movie here - one that does not mess around! Based upon the true story of two NYC cops - later dubbed Batman and Robin - who singlehandedly employed radical tactics to clean up their precinct neighborhood of drugs, this is a cop-buddy movie before that term became a repetitive formula. Lightning paced, there is not one unimportant throwaway scene here.Man, early '70s NYC must have been a terrible place to be a police officer, from the looks of movies like this and \"Serpico.\" These two cops start out as safety-division rookies, busting dealers in plainclothes in their spare time. But instead of receiving applause from the city police department, they receive nothing but resistance and antagonism from their peers. They have to singlehandedly navigate a minefield of police and legal corruption, boneheaded assignments meant to keep them from their work on the streets, ruthless drug kingpins, and a nasty ghetto neighborhood.Both David Selby and Ron Leibman are fantastic in the leads; part of the entertainment is watching Leibman's eyes darting around crazily in every scene in what is a flawless comic performance, and Selby's acting is low-key and wry. These two make all the comedy aspects of the story work - displaying a palpable frustration mixed with gutsy determination. Director Parks, who was already known for his coverage of controversial subjects in his photography, does not shy away from the grittiness of the story. Rather, the movie is uncompromising in portrayal of the toughness of the world of police and streets criminals that these two men inhabit. Adding to this realism is the fact that the real Hantz and Greenberg acted as technical advisors for the film, and even appear in surreal cameo roles as two fellow officers who ridicule the protagonists. It is a real tribute to the effectiveness of Parks' direction that he manages to perfectly balance this depressing mileu with bright comedy.Why has MGM/UA let this sit on the shelf for 30 years - barely giving it a home video or DVD release in the U.S? It is a minor masterpiece from the 1970s.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0f26c8e1b0d480992486df246525b41",
            "input": "This first installment of Crispin Glover's personal magnum opus asks you to think a little, and so can't be recommended for any viewer who doesn't want to sit and puzzle over Glover's imagery or follow the surprisingly simple—but weirdly obfuscated—thread of his narrative. To the more casual viewer, yes, it's probably going to come off as a confusing mish-mash of odd, startling, and disturbing imagery for imagery's sake. You get the sense that Glover doesn't mind that this is the case, and he'll almost as gladly listen to why someone hated the film as to why they enjoyed it. Glover's innate eagerness for and about his work and how audiences interpret it is strongly communicated not only through the film itself, but also through the unusual question and answer sessions that he frequently conducts following showings; he clearly hopes that people will continue to think about what he has presented.The easiest way to interpret and dismiss the film is to label it as Dada or nihilist, a juvenile attack on the modern movie industry from an actor who's worked both without and within. But there's a reason why Glover performs his slideshow before showing his movie, and it's not only to sell books; his books juxtapose and create a narrative from images and text that Glover pieced together, and What Is It? does similarly with imagery drawn from Western culture. What Is It? is an endearing and compelling film in ways one hardly expects while viewing. Much has already been made about Glover's use of actors with Down's syndrome, and indeed that is one of the most initially striking aspects of the film. So jarring, in fact, that many seem to interpret it as some sort of far-reaching crusade to see a more realistic and/or dignified portrayal of the disabled in movies and television—or, on the absolute other end of the spectrum, as a kind of direct exploitation of the disabled. But it's not either, and maybe that's part of what makes this film so uncomfortable for many: the underlying agenda is not a political one or one of hatred, but one of looking beyond the mainstream culture into a kind of outsider ugliness. It's not a film about Down's syndrome, but it is a film that is owned by the actors with Down's syndrome who appear in it.I'm the sort of person who is entirely gung-ho when it comes to ugliness and strangeness being portrayed so starkly that it is beautiful; happily for me, this is pretty much exactly how What Is It? presents itself to viewers. Glover uses the strange images of snails, death, and the disabled in part because he wants his audience to feel discomfort at either the sheer oddness of the imagery or the visceral reaction one has to the dying screams of an anthropomorphized snail. In some ways, the weirdly compelling (and occasionally downright grotesque) elements of What Is It? remind me of the work of the painter Francis Bacon… he of the infamous popes, yes, and the odd distortions of the human figure that inevitably make viewers cringe and want to look away. Like Bacon's paintings, Glover's film manages to be opulent and humble, grainy and polished, chaotic and well-realized… and the contradictions help to make it all the more disconcerting. But still this is not an entirely serious film, and it largely manages to sidestep the greatest pitfalls of pretension through the use of humor that, for the most part, derives from the use (and juxtaposition) of familiar items, images, and names of popular culture. And when What Is It? is funny, it is very funny.Overall, What Is It? is an impressive first film from Glover as a director and writer, and his presence as an actor in the film proves not to be nearly the distraction one might expect it to be. Watching it is like being an observer in the kind of dream that isn't exactly good or bad, but just strange… and that leaves you feeling slightly grimy when you wake up. If that's the kind of art you enjoy, What Is It? is likely to exceed your expectations and be well-worth the effort of catching it in the theatre, along with The Big Slide Show and Glover himself. All in all, it's an experience you're unlikely to forget any time soon.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2eda92ea6d7a49f5ac0146c2e0caee58",
            "input": "Well, I must say that this was one hell of a fun movie. Despite the fact that the dubbing was pretty cheesy, and there were some odd moments where the film seemed to turn dark blue for no apparent reason, I was not disappointed. The story was actually pretty interesting: the last member of the Poison Clan must track down the other five members and discover who among them is using their skills for evil, and who is using them for good. The catch being that during training, all of the clan were masked, and all have since returned to society in disguise and changed their names.The fights are a joy to watch, as each member of the Poison Clan has a different fighting style: toad (my favorite), snake, scorpion, lizard, and centipede. The fight scenes have the actors jumping all over the place, and thankfully the camera stays planted and uses a wide enough shot so you can clearly see all of the action.The one drawback to the movie is that the story tends to drag a bit in the first half up until the first fight sequence. But stick with it, and you won't be disappointed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ec3a393159644798a1432f5cbf7bd51",
            "input": "Yes AWA wrestling how can anyone forget about this unreal show. First they had a very short interviewer named Marty O'Neil who made \"Rock n Roll\" Buck Zumhofe look like a nose tackle. Then it was Gene Okerland who when he got \"mad as the wrestler\" would say either \"Were out of time\" or \"Well be right back\" acting like he was mad but actually sounding forced. After he went to the WWF Ken Resneck took over even though his mustache looked like week old soup got stuck to it was a very fine interviewer who \"Georgeous\" Jimmy Garvin called mouse face which made me fall off my chair laughing. After he jumped ship then Larry Nelson came on board which he was so bad that Phyllis George would of been an improvement! Then there's Doug McLeod the best wrestling announcer ever who made every match exciting with his description of blows! Then he was offered more pay by the Minnesota North Stars hockey team. At ringside who can forget Roger Kent who's mispronouncing of words and sentences were historic Like when a wrestler was big \"Hes a big-on!\" punched or kicked in the guts \"right in the gussets\"or when kicked \"He punted him\" or \"the \"piledriver should be banned\" after Nick Bockwinkle used it on a helpless opponent.(Right Roger like you care!) After he left to greener money(WWF) they had Rod Trongard who's announcing style was great but different. Like when a wrestler scraped the sole of his boot across another guys forehead he'd say\"Right across the front-e-lobe\" or when a wrestler is in trouble \"Hes in a bad bad way\". He also would say AWA the baddest,toughest,meanest, most scientific wrestlers are here right in the AWA!(No extra money Verne Gagne!) After he left(WWF) Larry(Wheres Phyllis?!) Nelson took over and I would talk to someone else or totally ignore him.(WWE wisely didn't take him!) Also Greg Gagne had the ugliest wrestling boots I ever saw a yellow color of something I don't want to say.Also when hes looking for the tag he looks like he wants to get it over with so that he can run to the nearest restroom! Jumpin Jim Brunzell was such a great dropkick artist that you wonder why Greg was ever his partner. Jerry Blackwell(RIP)was also a superstar wrestler but you wonder why Verne had himself win against him.(Puhleeeeze!) Then when Vince McMahon would hire Gagnes jobbers, he would make most of them wrestle squash matches. I like to see the Gagne family say wrestlings real now!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65b5af8fed284d86b8aa90552576151b",
            "input": "Very intelligent humor Excellent performing I can't believe how people could think it deserves a 1/10! I hope this movie will be shown everywhere so everyone can enjoy it If you ever have the opportunity, watch it... don't miss it There is a part when the principal actors are driving and singing \"Happy birthday\" and \"el payaso plinplin\" (an Argentinian song for kids (I think... it could also be south American, I'm not sure)). This two songs that have the same melody... but people don't usually realize that... it's just grate! I tried to write this in both Spanish and English, because it's an Argentinian movie... but the page wouldn't allow me :( Hope you enjoy it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-157405023c084a22aebb404e9d3994df",
            "input": "Chilling, majestic piece of cinematic fright, this film combines all the great elements of an intellectual thriller, with the grand vision of a director who has the instinctual capacity to pace a moody horror flick within the realm of his filmmaking genius that includes an eye for the original shot, an ice-cold soundtrack and an overall sense of dehumanization. This movie cuts through all the typical horror movies like a red-poker through a human eye, as it allows the viewer to not only feel the violence and psychosis of its protagonist, but appreciate the seed from which the derangement stems. One of the scariest things for people to face is the unknown and this film presents its plotting with just that thought in mind. The setting is perfect, in a desolate winter hideaway. The quietness of the moment is a character in itself, as the fermenting aggressor in Jack Torrance's mind wallows in this idle time, and breeds the devil's new playground. I always felt like the presence of evil was dormant in all of our minds, with only the circumstances of the moment, and the reasons given therein, needed to wake its violent ass and pounce over its unsuspecting victims. This film is a perfect example of this very thought.And it is within this film's subtle touches of the canvas, the clackity-clacks of the young boy's big wheel riding along the empty hallways of the hotel, the labyrinthian garden representing the mind's fine line between sane and insane, Kubrick's purposely transfixed editing inconsistencies, continuity errors and set mis-arrangements, that we discover a world guided by the righteous and tangible, but coaxed away by the powerful and unknown. I have never read the book upon which the film is based, but without that as a comparison point, I am proud to say that this is one of the most terrifying films that I have ever seen. I thought that the runtime of the film could've been cut by a little bit, but then again, I am not one of the most acclaimed directors in the history of film, so maybe I should keep my two-cent criticisms over a superb film, to myself. All in all, this movie captures your attention with its grand form and vision, ropes you in with some terror and eccentric direction, and ties you down and stabs you in the heart with its cold-eyed view of the man's mind gone overboard, creepy atmosphere and the loss of humanity.Rating: 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9343d87060554a2b918b05b119dab03b",
            "input": "Movie: There are some very interesting comments on IMDb about this movie. Its truly awful. Not enough money is spent on the movie and the way Spike Lee has made it, it seems like a combination of an indie film and an action flick. Characters/Actors: Denzel has done \"EXACTLY\" what he does in every movie, so no surprise there. Here is a little mind game for the readers. Quickly think of 10 Denzel movies. Now count how many of them were in which he played a cop/detective/body guard, whatever. Clive Owen, hmmmmmm, this guy needs a better role on his plate soon. His best performance was I think in \"Beyond Borders\". Other than that he did pretty much the same thing as he does in every movie as well. His tone and way of talking was very similar to what he did in \"Sin City\". Surely this guy knows acting, what he doesn't know is better way of choosing roles. He is in desperate need of a better agent. Jodie Foster was brilliant in the movie, if you are watching her for the first time in your life. She has done better. She has had better roles. It so happens in Hollywood that even the biggest stars fall down on their knees and pick up low class roles as Jody Foster did in this movie. Plot: Plot was not confusing, in fact, I could think of such a plot, in fact the whole movie, while taking a dump after a nice big Chinese dinner. I mean come on, ****SPOILER ON THE WAY----> I am sick of the un-necessary Haulocast and the Racism token. The movie is about bank robbers, why put the Haulocast and the Racism in there, nice try playing with people's emotions, worked on anyone? NOT ME. Police let the bank robbers go thinking they were hostages? Riiiiiiight, please, we're talking about US police force and security here. Nobody could find out where Clive was, I mean they didn't find anything different with that room. Who're we kidding? Conclusion: Sure, go watch this movie, if nothing, you'll have a nice time talking to you friends how bad the movie was. At least people won't think you're stupid to go watch this movie because they'd think you went to watch it because it has a big star cast \"MISTAKE\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-227b7ffe6b2c480d84594fc1666b7ed7",
            "input": "Man's Castle is set in one of those jerry built settlements on vacant land and parks that during these times were called 'Hoovervilles' named after our unfortunate 31st president who got stuck with The Great Depression occurring in his administration. The proposition of this film is that a man's home is still his castle even when it's just a shack in a Hooverville.Spencer Tracy has such a shack and truth be told this guy even in good times would not be working all that much. But in a part very typical for Tracy before he was cast as a priest in San Francisco, the start of a slew of classic roles, he's playing a tough good natured mug who takes in Loretta Young.One of the things about Man's Castle is that it shows the effects of the Depression on women as well as men. Women had some additional strains put on them, if men had trouble finding work, women had it twice as hard. And they were sexually harassed and some resorted to prostitution just for a square meal. Spence takes Loretta Young in who's facing those kind of problems and makes no demands on her in his castle. Pretty soon though they're in love, though Tracy is not the kind to settle down.The love scenes had some extra zing to them because Tracy and Young were having a torrid affair during the shooting of Man's Castle. And both were Catholic and married and in those days that was an insuperable barrier to marriage. Both Tracy and Young took the Catholic faith quite seriously.Also in the cast are Walter Connolly as a kind of father figure for the whole camp, Marjorie Rambeau who's been through all the pitfalls Young might encounter and tries to steer her clear and Arthur Hohl, a really loathsome creep who has his eye on Young as well. Hohl brings the plot of Man's Castle to its climax through his scheming. Man's Castle is grim look at the Great Depression, not the usual movie escapist fare for those trying to avoid that kind of reality in their entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45862cd153cd41409210e6809eea99e5",
            "input": "They made me watch this in school and it was terrible. The movie is outdated. The episodes become confusing because fact is combined with fiction to make the story more interesting.The teachers talked about it as a treat but really it was a painfully boring experience.I have read that very few people who appear in this are actors, but most of them them do what they do in the movie in real life.This accounts for cheesy acting very often. Also, very often the story becomes mildly outrageous and far-fetched. I don't like the way some of the lines were written and wish they had more meaning to them. Though, it was written to be educational, funny, suspenseful, and hip, It ended up being boring, dry, far-fetched, and old. I hope no one takes time to watch this movie because you would be just fine not seeing it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65f27796e6fb499aaf1e0e0f49ab5be2",
            "input": "I teach Japanese for an online high school and I include cultural activities so that the students can learn about the country as well as the language. And watching \"Gung Ho\" is one of the requirements. The students can either buy or rent the movie. Stereotypes or not, this helps the students to see that other people view the world and their lives differently than we do. Many of my students have told me that they enjoyed the movie so much, they are going to get a copy for themselves. It is really interesting to see what we value in this culture and what they value in their culture. I just wish I could get a cleaned-up TV version. I'm not really into the crude language the auto workers use all the time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98facb67bba344ba9e3b2f6db59ac56c",
            "input": "What a delightful romp – a very competently made film that has so much charm and a feelgood factor that a lot of romantic comedies lack. Einstein is brilliantly acted by Walter Matthau, while Meg Ryan's Catherine is unforgettable – better than I have seen her in those films opposite Tom Hanks – as the young mathematician struggling to be recognized.You don't need to be a young woman to understand Catherine's struggle and feel sympathetic for her immediately, and as a young man it's easy to understand what must have gone through Ed's (Tim Robbins) mind in pursuing his true love. There's universal appeal in these emotions, even if I.Q. keeps it all light, fun and tied up nicely.Sure it's not heavy, but if you look there are some subtexts. People remember Albert Einstein as a scientist yet he was a great spiritualist; his sayings such as something along the lines of, 'If it is not impossible, then why do it?' suggest he is a believer in fulfilling higher goals beyond one's immediate grasp. In this film, there are questions of what an accident really is – such as whether Albert and his whacky sidekicks' intervention in prying Catherine away from stiff-upper-lip, loveless James (Stephen Fry – who gives this otherwise cardboard character life and you cannot help but feel for his lack of feeling) counts. How much intervention happens in our lives that we do not see, and comes across as serendipitous?And of course, we'd like to think in real life, despite what we often observe of the people we know, that we Edwards get the Catherines and Jameses have to learn how to defrost the icewater in their veins. How nice to know that it might work out in I.Q.'s innocent (and disturbingly, exclusively Caucasian) Eisenhower-era land of make-believe.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d03b2f682eb3468cb8bc96fdac6c42f5",
            "input": "To all the reviewers on this page, I would have to say this movie is worth seeing. So It was made in 1972, so what. The fashion in the movie was exactly the same fashion of its time. People who didn't study culture of the decades would think that this movie is a cheese ball. Compared to the modern series, `Left Behind,' (Which is made for our time right now) it does look cheezy. However, the only cheezy part of the movie is the fashion, which again was over 30 years in the past. BUT. The message that is sent in this film is very powerful, and carefully preserved. There is just so much to say, but I refuse to say it. (for fear of spoiling it) So go out and see this film! If you don't like the message that it sends, then you have issues, that need some attention!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b4e423de40740acad822ad8166ef049",
            "input": "This interesting Giallo boosts a typical but still thrilling plot and a really sadistic killer that obviously likes to hunt his victims down before murdering them in gory ways.Directed by Emilio P. Miraglia who, one year earlier, also made the very interesting \"La Notte che Evelyn Usci della Tomba\" (see also my comment on that one), the film starts off a little slow, but all in all, no time is wasted with unnecessary sub plots or sequences.This film is a German-Italian coproduction, but it was released in Germany on video only in a version trimmed by 15 minutes of plot under the stupid title \"Horror House\". At least the murder scenes, which will satisfy every gorehound, are fully intact, and the viewer still gets the killer's motive at the end. But the Italian version containing all the footage is still the one to look for, of course.A convincing Giallo with obligatory twists and red herrings, \"La Dama Rossa Uccide Sette Volte\" is highly recommended to Giallo fans and slightly superior to Miraglia's above mentioned other thriller.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adcc6caa1a094a4a8c09ec58ebf8c9b1",
            "input": "I awake suddenly, aware that I'm drooling onto the plastic couch cover, and realize it's a warm Saturday afternoon. Why was I sleeping? Did I hit my head? Or accidentally swallow all of my grandma's muscle relaxers? Could it be adult onset narcolepsy? No, I momentarily paused on Cheap Seats while channel surfing, and the stunning lack of humor and talent drained my life force with such speed that I blacked out.It's that head-shaking, mouth-agape, shoulder-shrugging bad. But I have to give these moronic and boring twins credit for selling this idea through. Perhaps they had the same effect on the ESPN programming executive that they had on me, and when he/she woke up, a few horrendous episodes were already in the can and he/she hoped that since all the viewers will be asleep, no one will now how awful it is and he/she can keep the $425,000 annual salary.You've been warned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d314fddf9244cedba1b3428b8793e1c",
            "input": "This was my favourite film as a child, and I have been in the stage production a few times so it will always remain my favourite muscical and I doubt anybody could ever re-make the story of Oliver Twist on screen, any better than this one did.My all-time favourite ''bad guy'' has to be Oliver Reed as Bill Sikes. Not only did he scare the life out of my when I watched it as a 6 year old, but now as a woman I can empathize more with Nancys character, the bar maid/prostitute who helps Oliver get the life he deserves.Jack Wilde as the artful dodger, was fantastic, and I don't think anybody could ever out-do him, as the street-pocket picker, and best friend of Fagin. The music is fantastic, especially Fagin's numbers, I'm also quite thankful they didn't give Bill Sikes a musical number, it wouldn't of worked with him being such a sinister character.I think Carol Reed did an excellent job of Nancy's sticky ending, keeping it a G rated movie by disguising her beating, but giving enough away to show the violence of Bill towards her. This movie is both charming, and charismatic as a musical sing-along, as well as being a moving drama that follows a young boy as he tries to find where he belongs in life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-765744762fce4a22b0c75630036f2070",
            "input": "One of the most heart-warming foreign films I've ever seen.The young girl is an amazing talent. Stellar performances by her (Doggie), the old man (the king of masks), and Liang (the Living Boddhisatva).(SPOILER) The deplorable treatment of children, especially females is disturbing.Loved the music. The original Chinese dialog heightens the emotional intensity of the performances and the story.This is a MUST SEE -- enjoyable family film, although not for very young children. Would have rated the DVD release even higher if the soundtrack had been transferred better onto the DVD and the transfer had included the widescreen version.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86c3b346b5924390875fc17510f6fa23",
            "input": "This is one of the most spiritual movies I have ever seen. I headed up with about 150 people to St. George and we saw this movie in the visiting center of the St. George temple.. Not one person had dry eyes in the audience. Also, there were some non- religious and anti-Mormon people in the audience who felt the spirit of the movie and were touched by the captivating music and reenactment of the story of the pioneers and the hardships they faced because of their beliefs.I recommend this movie for anyone who wishes to understand more about Joseph and the hardships that the pioneers went through. After all, it is apart of American History.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0bbe318af45648d3a5747e85544c6178",
            "input": "My siblings and I stumbled upon The Champions when our local station aired re-runs of it one summer in the 1970's. We absolutely adored it. There was something so exotic and mysterious about it, especially when compared to the usual American re-runs (Petticoat Junction, Green Acres... you get the idea). It had a similar feel to The Avengers (not too much of a surprise, since it was also British and in the spy/adventure genre).I would love to see it again now -- hopefully it holds up. I've mentioned this show to others and no one has ever heard of it, so I began to wonder if I'd imagined its whole existence. But the wonder that is the web has allowed me track down information about it. Hopefully it will find a new generation of fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eebff9a8ab8447cca31c4d52b1d525a5",
            "input": "Thank G_d it bombed, or we might get treated to such delights as \"Skate Fu\" where we can see the likes of Brian Boitano performing a triple lutz & slashing bad guys to ribbons with his razor-sharp skates, but I digress. One thing that could have helped this turkey would have been a little T & A from Ms. Agbayani. It's not like the world would have seen anything new (at least that part of the world who saw her Playboy spread.) I truly believe that porn would have suited her 'talents' much better, although Aubrey Hepburn couldn't have stayed afloat in this sewer. One explanation for Kurt Thomas' presence could be a traumatic brain injury, possibly from coming up short too often on dismounts. It's a good thing the IOC wasn't as diligent on 'doping' as they are now, or Kurt would surely have been stripped of his medals. To be avoided at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1dd6839a06564258a7322b168b114e72",
            "input": "With films like \"Wallace & Gromit\" and \"Chicken Run\" under their belt, the good people from the other side of the pond, Aardman Animation, are now introducing us to a bit of their twisted humor in the form of \"Creature Comforts\".Derived from a short done early in their careers, \"Creature Comforts\" is a slice-of-life show where snippets of conversation are removed from their context and given to an animal of some sort.Aardman Animation went across the country interviewing people with innocuous questions such as, \"Are you a liar?\" and then speed things up a bit asking about their sex lives.The answers, while seeming to be boring and mundane, are actually quite funny, when you understand the dialogs come first and the animals are added later.How many of these animals look like the person making the statements? One of the characters discussing what he looks for in a woman, \"I like them kind of thin.\" is an insect, the Walking Stick.There are two dogs discussing odors and smells, while sniffing the behind of a poodle, as they talk about the different smells of a woman.There are two birds in a cage. As the \"wife\" tells the litany that is her health, her long suffering husband stands by her, saying nothing.While it might take some time for \"Creature Comforts\" to find it's \"legs\", it should find a place on television for those who are tired of the ordinary. While there are more reality shows than Carter has liver pills, \"Creature Comforts\" is one of a kind and definitely worth watching.Some of the humor might seem a little racy, it's the claymation that catches the attention of the children (like the old Batman series of the 60's, the jokes are subtle enough the kids won't get them) and it's the jokes that are there for the adults.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c1b9613657a4857b7dbf875d11c2e25",
            "input": "It seems that Salvatores couldn't decide what to do with this movie: some of it is a very weak thriller (and I say very, very weak), some of it is an attempt to explore the relationships between the main characters. Both things have been tried in psychological thrillers, but in this case the movie cannot hold things together, due to poor, superficial scripting, bad acting and a too dark, too dull cinematography. I'd say that Salvatores gave his best in other genres and in other settings, where he was free to look at the characters without having to think about the plot. On the whole, a B-movie, hardly worth your money... Vote: 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab06c0e8ba2e48b787b78a589584b607",
            "input": "America. A land of freedom, of hope and of dreams. This is the nation that, since its independence, has striven to bring democracy, prosperity, and peace to the entire world, for the good of all mankind. There are times, however, when one cannot help but wish that the American's would just stay on their side of the Atlantic. This 'movie' (and I use that word with some reservations) evokes these feelings with an intense purity. This vision of hell follows the adventures of Calvin, a freakish jewel thief who was created by attaching the severed head of Marlon Wayan onto the body of a two foot-high dwarf. After inadvertently dropping a large diamond into the handbag of Vanessa, a career-woman who is reluctant to have children, Calvin realises that in order to recover the diamond he must ingratiate himself with her. So, as any normal man would, Calvin dresses himself up as a 2 year-old and parks himself upon the poor woman's doorstep, where he is discovered by Darryl, the broody husband of Vanessa. Darryl incongruously falls for Calvin's disguise despite the fact that the 'baby' has a full set of teeth, stubble, a tattoo, a knife-scar, and the sex-drive of a 16-year-old. Even more absurdly, Vanessa doesn't see past Calvin's baby-wear either and actually attempts to breastfeed the diminutive pervert. This wretched assault upon the soul of mankind attempts, and fails, to find humour in rape, scatology, sexual assault, and paedophilia, however, in a dishonest attempt to transform itself into a piece of 'family-entertainment' the Wayan brothers stir in a sickening amount of sentiment and flawed morality. The brothers dim attempt a Freudian rehabilitation of their thieving rapist by revealing that he \"had a bad father\". Repeatedly hitting Darryl in the crotch enables Calvin to develop the loving father-son relationship that both he and Darryl have always wished for. As if this wasn't ridiculous enough, Calvin's attempts to sexually assault Vanessa somehow convince her that it is selfish for a woman to indulge herself with a successful career, and that instead she should spend her life playing the role of the housebound little-woman, who spends her time alternatively squeezing out babies and cooking for her husband. In this movie the Wayan brothers have mixed their crass and twisted form of humour together with the clichéd sentimentality that has infected much of Hollywood's recent body of work. Additionally, they are endemic of the current generation of black comedians who are responsible for transforming African-American humour into a poor and wretched shadow of itself that over-indulges in fart-jokes and crude sexual gags. By rights these two should be legally barred from picking up anything even remotely resembling a camera ever again. Unfortunately the current artistic and moral bankruptcy of American cinema means that by this time next month they will undoubtedly have filmed two sequels and be making millions of dollars from tacky merchandising deals.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01c36db057154c2c91048ef27a604c22",
            "input": "I found this movie thought-provoking, and its ambiguity refreshing in a world of quick-fix films where we are manipulated into loving the \"good guy\" and hating the \"bad guy.\" Scott Cohen, a very handsome television actor, does a great job of portraying the family black sheep/lost child who aspires to gain his father's love and respect, as well as that of his widowed sister-in-law with whom he apparently has a history. Judd Hirsch plays against his usual good guy image as a father who triangulated his sons and now is left with the one he always rejected.When I saw this at the Tribeca Film Festival, I was enchanted by the lovely way the sawdust was used to portray a family tradition, as explained by the director.This is a fitting successor to the classic \"Ordinary People.\" I just realized, Judd Hirsch was in that, too!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95c273da72f44272a316deb786a057ce",
            "input": "Imagine you're a high-school boy, in the back of a dark, uncrowded theater with your girlfriend. How bad would a movie have to be, in order that you would feel compelled to leave the theater and head home before it ended? This movie is that bad. Really. Movies often become so bad that they're good; this movie is beyond that stage of bad-ness. It is painfully bad. Horribly, terribly, crime-against-humanity bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88b77c1bbbfb4fc1827212b6b37fdb5a",
            "input": "Lovely piece of good cinema. This is one of those films that you see smiling and you do not know why. Well, one of the reasons could be that we are before one of the most surprising directors today, and he is able to film emotions.When you are watching the film you can feel what Mr. Straight was feeling when he took the decision to go to visit his brother with his \"marvellous\" John Deere. What changed in his mind?, what changed in YOUR mind when you watched this film?A beautiful fraternal love story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8653d15903bf4768b79fa1df3b76ee38",
            "input": "(aka: BLOOD CASTLE or SCREAM OF THE DEMON)*spoiler*This was a drive-in feature, co-billed with THE VELVET VAMPIRE. A Spanish-Italian co-production where a series of women in a village are being murdered around the same time a local count named Yanos Dalmar is seen on horseback, riding off with his 'man-eating' dog behind him.The townsfolk already suspect he is the one behind it all and want his castle burned down. The murders first began around the time Count Yanos' older brother, Count Igor Dalmar was horribly burned and killed in a lab accident.Then a woman Ivanna (Erna Schuer) that Igor hired before his death to assist him in his experiments shows up. Yanos agrees to hire her in place of his brother and together they seek the formulae for the regeneration of dead cells. Yanos wants to bring Igor's charred corpse back to life.But of course Igor is still alive (although horribly burned) and stalking and killing the women in the village. We see his char-broiled face appear at various points in the film, so we know he's still alive, making the whole thing seem a little bit too obvious.Igor meets another fiery end when he gets into a fight with Yanos over Ivanna, with the burning candles falling on to the same bed that Igor stumbles on to, meeting yet another, final char-broiled end.The Retromedia DVD is taken from a VHS source and looks quite grainy and bad. Other than an even scratchier trailer, no other extras are included. Although it has a nice, creepy Spanish castle and good atmospherics, I found it to be fairly boring and predictable, with no excitement or mystery, whatsoever. 3 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c81bb462919e40019fbf1795a6a65bc3",
            "input": "The Williams family live on a ranch located in the middle of the remote desert. They find themselves in considerable peril when the place is suddenly thrust into a time vortex where the past, present and future collide in a wildly chaotic and unpredictable manner. Director John \"Bud\" Cardos begins the film on a compellingly mysterious note and gradually allows things to get stranger, crazier and more exciting as the loopy story unfolds. Moreover, Cardos fills the screen with plenty of dazzling visuals and does a nice job of creating a genuine sense of awe and wonder. The admirably sincere acting from a game cast qualifies as another major plus: Jim Davis as hearty patriarch Grant Williams, Dorothy Malone as his cheery wife Ana, Christopher Mitchum as the concerned Richard, Marcy Lafferty as his lovely wife Beth, Natasha Ryan as sweet little girl Jenny, and Scott C. Kolden as the gutsy Steve. The funky special effects offer an inspired combo of gnarly miniatures, neat stop-motion animation monsters (said creatures include a tiny spindly hairless guy, a big, lumpy, fanged beast, and a scrawny lizard dude), and nifty matte paintings. Richard Band's rousing full-bore orchestral score really hits the stirring spot. John Arthur Morrill's crisp, sunny cinematography likewise does the trick. A fun flick.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d7a2720dab94dd9ae779019457a5306",
            "input": "Dressed to Kill understandably made a bit of a ruckus when first released in 1980: you had \"Police Girl\" in a role that was mega-erotic, as Angie Dicknson played a sexually frustrated housewife looking for good times in all the wrong museums (and there into apartment elevators), plus Nancy Allen as a call-girl, Michael Caine as Norman Bates's sophisticated New York cousin, and enough lurid imagery to last two movies of the period. Today it's slightly less incriminating by standards and such, though the unrated version has some of the most \"hot\" content of any of De Palma's films, at least in his quasi-auteur period of the 70s and early 80s, where he seemed to repeat themes over and over, ideas taken right off the film-reels of Hitchcock classics and given a tawdry uplift. It's a simple tale that one partly already saw in Sisters, and then again to an extent in Body Double, and also in Blow Out. Cutie Allen plays call-girl Liz Blake, who has to clear her name of suspicion of killing Kate (Dickinson, in full blown 'MILF' mode), after being found with a razor, the murder weapon from Dr. Elliott's office (Michael Caine, stone-cold performance most of the way).From the start, which De Palma seems to do as a way of setting up a dangerous sexual fantasy scene as a way of topping the opening scene of Carrie (which, perhaps, he does just in editing terms), we get a series of technical knock-out turns through the point of view of style itself: the tracking shots in the museum, meant to stir up more of a fascination with the process itself, of following and wanting to be followed, than any kind of tension; the chase through the subway (a precursor to Carlito's Way) is done with a precise level of suspense, meanwhile, with a slightly exploitation bit thrown in with the black gang; the character of Peter, Kate's son (Keith Gordon), who plays what is essentially a younger version of the real life De Palma as a kid (science geek, obsessed with Hitchcock and voyeurism). And it's all entertaining and entrancing as hell as something that comes close to a real synthesis of what makes De Palma's thrillers so unique while being so self-consciously untainted by a fearless attitude of film-making.On the other hand, that same self-consciousness ended up coming back to bite the director in the butt a few times in recent years, and somehow in Dressed to Kill it starts to become very erratic and disappointing as the story has to wrap itself up. As the Psycho themes come together even more apparently (man who wants a sex-change, doesn't even think he's killing as it is *she* who is doing it), there is an expository scene in the police station that makes the aforementioned Hitch film look like an astonishing psychological revelation. And the final scenes at Peter's house, also calling painfully into recollection a much more accomplished sequence in Carrie, are meant for a manipulation that even for De Palma is asking for it; the final shot especially, albeit a master's class in how to copy yourself. Yet there is a very deranged and, within itself, perfect scene at the mental hospital amid this confused denouement, where the doctor does some work on a nurse, to which all the other inmates act like animals in a zoo, and an over-head shot going up and up over the scene is one of the best shots of sexual/general perversion ever captured on film.A shame then that the film ends on such a strange and unsettling manner, where up until then it is a remarkable piece of pulp cinema, where class is all around in the technical aspects (soft lighting, intricate camera movements seemingly so simple) amid subject matter that should be found in the mix of paperbacks for 25 cents. It's no masterpiece, but I'd certainly take it over most of the director's recent thrillers any day.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76bf7120b3e2435a9386ba58f01e7f28",
            "input": "This film deals with two ex-football players who are Fred Williamson, (Mack Derringer) and Gary Busey, (Lenny) who work as private eyes and meet all kinds of ladies and men with some bad backgrounds. Mack Derringer is approached by his ex-wife Vanity (Jennifer Derringer) who works at having sex talk over the telephone. Jennifer is being threatened by one caller who wants to do horrible things to her and she asks for his help along with several other ladies. Mack & Lenny have more time on their hands and often go to Miami, Fl. golf courses or hang out in a Sports Bar where all kinds of city things go on. There is lots of punches, killings and plenty of double meaning words that bring this film completely down to a big ZERO. Don't waste your time, this film cost me only 50 cents and that was too much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6220eec6f2e4ec7a880753c3d57e440",
            "input": "I know that there are some purists out there who poo poo anything that is not exactly like the original, however sometimes spin-offs can stand on their own merits. I like the new Iron Chef because it is similar enough to the Japanese version but at the same time caters to American spirit. I love Alton Brown as commentator, because he explains things with flair. The Iron Chefs themselves are very interesting. I know the originals were probably the best chefs on the planet at the time, but Bobby Flay is the only American Iron Chef to beat them. Mario Batali seems to have the most fun when cooking, making comments and being flashy while creating. I have watched the series and find all the players work together well. The judges are not always the best choices, however. There are a few exceptions, like the lawyer turned foodie, but most of the judges are questionable in being able to handle what is served. I enjoy watching the chefs hustle and the challengers are surprising. The food at the end always looks amazing and sometimes it inspires me in the kitchen. Perhaps that is all anyone can ask, to want to really eat what is served. The only thing I would really change about the series is to ask folks on the show to lighten up a little. Sometimes the mood becomes a bit too tense, and that isn't always fun to watch when you are expecting more amusement. I liked the version with William Shatner (Iron Chef USA) because it was so over-the-top like the original, but I can tell it was a pretty expensive proposition. I wish he had stayed with this version and been the host - between Bill Shatner and Alton Brown, that would have me grinning for an hour. As long as you don't expect the original Japanese version and can accept this series on its own merits, you may find it to be an enjoyable hour.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62353617a3f94275b81d32e180818da3",
            "input": "Apparently Hollywood is just handing out money to anyone with a camera and the ability to speak. This movie was mind numbingly bad. The casting was terrible, the acting unspeakable, and the story filled with holes. Script? who needs script? I was surprised that the movie wasn't as verbally vulgar as I thought it would be, however I got enough shots of T&A to last me a lifetime. The movie was like listening to a 19 year old street racer with ADD (who decided to buy a car instead of go to college) tell a story. Being so poorly scripted, I thought the two brothers in the film were lovers at first. The scenes at the racetrack, along with the main female actor in the film kept making me think of Herbie: Fully Loaded. This is the kind of film is what Grindhouse modeled itself after...only the writers thought they were being serious.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-303034f140884af98de890694265e523",
            "input": "It's been a while since I've watched this movie, and the series, but now I'm refreshing my memory! This was a very funny movie based on the classic series! Johnny Knoxville and Seann William Scott were hilarious together. Bo and Luke Duke help Uncle Jesse run Moonshine in the General Lee. When Boss Hogg forces the Dukes off their farm, Bo and Luke sneak around Hogg's local construction site and find samples of coal. They soon realize that Boss Hogg is gonna strip-mine Hazzard County, unless the Dukes can stop him, with the help of their beautiful cousin, Daisy. My only two problems with the movie was that Burt Reynolds wasn't right for the part of Boss Hogg, and Sheriff Rosco P. Coltrane was way too serious. Other than that, I highly recommend THE DUKES OF HAZZARD!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-223ff06ef91a4b7eb5b8502ee33b2c7e",
            "input": "The only part lacking in this movie is Shue's part as the daughter wanting to follow in her \"aunt's\" footsteps as a daytime soap star. Otherwise it would be a perfect 10.It seems that every actor enjoyed their parts and overacting to fulfill their own enjoyment as well as the script - I have to wonder if a little ad lib'ing wasn't taking place in parts. It was well cast and there are some classic lines that will stick with you.It's a fantastic movie everyone should see at least once. I'd recommend not drinking anything that would sting coming out your nose.You'll definitely want to watch the last scene closely, 'Nurse Nan' has a little secret she'd rather not have shared with you.If you love daytime soaps or despise them, this move pokes fun in all the right places.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c96c409c372349f88b4f494378ff743c",
            "input": "The image of movie studios being financially-driven instead of creatively is not without truth (in fact, it's more true than false). This begs the question why Castle Rock Entertainment allowed Kenneth Branagh to create a full-length, uncut version of \"Hamlet\" with his complete creative control among other things. Of course, Branagh had to agree to some concessions (a star-studded cast, and a 2.5 hour version for wider release), but why would the film studio allow Branagh to spend money on a 4 hour version that they knew few would see? Could they have, at least in this case, had enough respect for the material and Branagh's vision to create something for only a few people? That is not a question that I can answer. Whatever the reason, this is a glorious vision for those who are willing to spend four hours watching \"Hamlet.\" Everyone knows the story, so I will not spend much time on that. However, unlike other productions of the play, stage included, this is a completely uncut production, which has never been done before. According to some, Shakespeare never intended for the play to be produced uncut, leaving the decision of what to include to the director's discretion. That being said, I have no doubt that had he been able to see it, the Bard would have been overjoyed with Branagh's production.The film is top-heavy with film stars, although most have mere bit parts. All play their parts equally well. I would have thought Branagh too old to play the part of Hamlet, and while he still may be, his performance more than makes up for it. Hamlet is a complex part, displaying every emotion from grief to anger, happiness to madness, and everything in between. Branagh nailed it. Derek Jacobi is terrific as the wily Claudius, whose deception and treachery sets all these things in motion; his unique voice is perfect for the role. Julie Christie is also very good as Gertrude, Hamlet's caring mother who doesn't realize what is going on until late in the game.The classical actors are cast in bit parts (Judi Dench is on for all of 60 seconds and has no lines), but at least they're in it. Surprisingly, no one takes this to heart; everyone gives it their all, and it shows. Special mention has to go to Jack Lemmon and Billy Crystal, who are excellent. Robin Williams is a little too silly, but he's not bad (his part is pretty small anyway).Yet, this is undeniably Branagh's show. He adapted one of the most famous plays in history, and in so doing, he took on a whale of a project; it's impressive that he got it done, but the fact that the film is this good is a monumental achievement. What I really liked about this film is that you don't have to be a Shakespeare scholar to enjoy it. As most people know, Shakespeare is difficult to digest, but Branagh and his cast understand this. \"Hamlet\" is still immensely enjoyable to just sit and listen to the actors deliver the brilliant dialogue and excellent acting.This is a must see for anyone and everyone. It may be four hours long, but it's definitely worth it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ea02d6b982a4491b164b62ab4f40021",
            "input": "A number of factors make it easy for me to state that I still think this is the most important science fiction film ever made, despite some of the acting, outdated dialogue etc.First, there is the scale of imagination in describing the Krell, a humanoid race native to the planet, now all dead, who were 1 million years more advanced than Earth humans(us), and their technology, particularly the 8,000 cubic mile machine.Second, there is the music and sound effects, which are inseparable from each other. It creates an eerie, unearthly feeling, unlike \"2001\", which had traditional classical music.Third, its \"monster\" is not only the most powerful and deadly ever envisioned, it's also based on real science and doesn't break the laws of physics and biology.Finally, and most importantly, Forbidden Planet is the only movie ever made that attempts and, more incredibly, succeeds in making an honest, intelligent and mercilessly logical statement on the limits or ceiling of human (or any other biological entity's) development, no matter how long we survive as a species.In other words, it predicts our inevitable destiny.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f12827b9dbe8442f95e2b294eb4daaf1",
            "input": "Will and Ted's Bodacious journey is an existential trip through themes of mortality, religion, time, Heaven and Hell, man's quest for fame and his fears of the body being overcome by a soulless machine. It is the most intelligent work of fiction since Paradise Lost and references many great past works of art- Dante, Iron Maiden, Virgil, Shakespeare. This time the dudes are a famous rock band having travelled through time collecting icons from the past- Napolean, Joan Of Ark (Noah's wife), Oscar Wilde, and Charles Darwin. They took the skills they learned from each of these people, abducted a couple of Princesses, and finally learned to play their guitars and write hit songs. These songs teach the world to love again and war, hunger, evil are vanquished for eternity. We fast forward into the distant future where an evil dictator who despises good music called Simon Cow-Al wants to rule the world. He eats Rooshus (the cool guy from the first film who helps Bill Playboy Esquire and Ted Theodore Alvin) and gains the power to send two cyborgs back in time. The cyborgs are living tissue over metal exoskeleton and coated in mimetic poly alloy allowing them the survive the turmoil of time travel, and they can imitate anything they sample by physical contact. It is their job to Kill the good Biff and Fred and take over their lives by making terrible music that no-one could like. By doing this they will change the world forever- Gryll and Jed's music will never be made leaving a world of war, famine, and hatred, and more annoyingly, bland boy/girl group pop music. There is a startling twist as the good guys actually are killed and they have to work out a way to save the world, themselves, and their wives from the evil Dopplebangers inhabiting their bodies.Penelope Spheerhead shows her knowledge of both youth culture and real culture by mixing modern day music and phrases with post modern sets and artistic references, and seeks to teach us all something by delving into our very psyche to show us ourselves. She presents the nightmares which faced the late 80s teen in a society which had abandoned them and beckons us to dissect the post structuralist jingoism, self love, and malaise of the time. Charging us with a belief that we can indeed change the world it is an inspiring message, but in order to achieve such dreams we must traverse and indeed face our nightmares. To overcome is to succeed, to defeat Death is the first step in truly living and not merely surviving. In the words of Kenneth Reeves- 'Wow!' Best Scene: For a fun game- see how many songs, bands, and albums cover references you can spot throughout the film. There are at least 6.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-15017295a36c4246b5c0a899df19d2f0",
            "input": "Was it foreshadowing when Tori complained that her first boyfriend was treating her like a robot, and then her new boyfriend (the murderer) turned out to be a designer of artificial intelligence? I think so. Scenes to make you squeal with delight: montages galore, a strip-tease in a kimono (what do you call it when you seductively put clothes on, instead of take them off?), and a climactic battle on skis! Definitely tune in for the beginning and end, but you can grab a sandwich during the second act when all the plot is happening. Is it better than CO-ED CALL GIRL? Nah. Does Tori ever make it to paradise, or out of the snow, even? Nope.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-622df3f27c1848bc9654c77c4e54cc44",
            "input": "A pretty average scifi film. The plot was more or less obvious from the start. Although the acting was reasonably good, the writing seemed very cliched, using ideas taken from numerous films.The basic plot: Scientists working on a deep space research platform rescue a fighter from crashing into the red dwarf that they have been orbitting. Onboard they find a stasis pod, which coincidently malfunctions at that very moment. After 2 or 3 minutes of the man in the pod waking up, you realise that he is a complete lunatic. Something which totally escapes the 3 person crew of the research ship...After that it becomes a rip off every other film involving a psychotic madman terrorising innocent victims, overall I think Speed 2 was a better exploration of the subject matter, which I didn't consider to be a good film either.Not a good film, get Aliens out and watch that again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb9405c0b9db4e83aef940bb937e2e32",
            "input": "There are plenty of comments already posted saying exactly how I felt about this film so Ill keep it short.\"The Grinch\" I thought was marvellous - Jim Carrey is a truly talented, physical comedian as well as being a versatile clever actor (in my opinion). Mike Myers on the other hand gets his laughs by being annoying. I used to like him very much in his \"Waynes World\" and \"So I Married an Axe Murderer\" days - but Ive never been fond of Austin Powers and \"the Cat In The Hat\" has just finished me off. This film was horrible - the gags were horrible! inappropriate for children not only in adult content but in the fact that some of them were so dated they havent amused anyone for 50 years! The plot was messy, messy, messy! Its a shame really because the children were very likeable as was \"Mom\". They probably could have picked a better villain than Alec Baldwin - but he could have pulled it off if it weren't for Myers ugly, revolting over-acted portrayal of the Cat.I mean - did Myers even glance at a script? Was one written? The other actors seemed to have one - but the Cat just seemed to be winging it!On the other hand I would like to mention that the sets and props were marvellous!!! But unfortunately they cant save this film.Poor Dr Seuss - the man was a genius! Dont ruin his reputation by adapting his work in a such a lazy, messy way!!!1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1846ff09b61c4f82831aa03876a5d71e",
            "input": "Yesterday my Spanish / Catalan wife and myself saw this emotional lesson in history. Spain is going into the direction of political confrontation again. That is why this masterpiece should be shown in all Spanish High Schools. It is a tremendous lesson in the hidden criminality of fascism. The American pilot who gets involved in the Spanish Civil War chooses for the democratically elected Republican Government. The criminal role of religion is surprisingly well shown in one of the most inventive scenes that Uribe ever made. The colors are magnificent. The cruelty of a war (could anybody tell me the difference between Any war and a Civil war ?)is used as a scenario of hope when two young children express their feelings and protect each other. The cowards that start their abuse of power even towards innocent children are now active again. A film like 'El viaje de Carol'/ 'Carol's journey' tells one of the so many sad stories of the 20th Century. It is a better lesson in history than any book could contain. Again great work from the Peninsula Iberica !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f350667f1474b46a1e8f0e62b49b22b",
            "input": "Ladislas Starewicz's curiosity with insects and cinema melds into a short film about a love triangle between Mr. Beetle, an artistic grasshopper, and Mrs. Beetle. The rather simple story of an adulterous beetle couple that both seek stimulation outside their marriage is similar to a Biograph or Vitagraph short of the time. Starewicz's twist on the story is to use embalmed beetles with wires straightening the legs in frame-by-frame animation. The story builds as Mr. Beetle is unknowingly caught on camera with a dragonfly from the local nightclub by a jealous grasshopper. When Mr. Beetle comes home to find his wife in the arms of her artistic friend, he chases her around angrily, but eventually forgives her and takes her out to see a movie. However, Mrs. Beetle soon learns of her husband's infidelities as the movie they watch is the jealous grasshopper's footage of Mr. Beetle and the dragonfly together. Mrs. Beetle thrashes Mr. Beetle with her umbrella, Mr. Beetle jumps through the screen, and they both end up in jail after the projector they wreck catches on fire. The insects are placed in humanized settings such as a house or a nightclub, and are given human characteristics of jealousy, anger, lust, and revenge. The insect characters carry briefcases, drive motorcars, and even wear shoes yet they also twitch their antennae and open and close their mandibles as real insects would. The novelty of the story doesn't wear itself out, even after multiple viewings, but as fluid as the movements are, the film moves slowly. Action happens with intricate detail, but rapidity and a quicker pace of filming is lost in the process. Despite its pace, the film is an excellent example of Starewicz's early puppetry and is highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f114a9e5997a4385a0b3e0780c10acb0",
            "input": "This Showtime movie really deserves a far better viewer rating than a 4.5; I gave it a 10 based on the story and the acting of the two stars. After reading the viewer comments, I was surprised at how many folks expected this movie to be a comedy. Yeah, I see that IMDb lists it as Comedy/Drama under Genre. That sure is misleading, isn't it? Fortunately, I saw the movie before logging onto this website so I did not have that expectation. In fact, based on the synopsis of what I heard, I fully expected it to simply be a Drama. I'm wondering if disappoint at this not being a funny movie caused so many low votes.Another factor that might have caused low votes is that this movie is very much 'character-driven'. 'Driving Miss Daisy' is an example of another character-driven movie that comes to mind. Someone's previous comment complained about a boring trial. Tom's (Danny Glover) work scenes seemed to distract from the real plot of the movie. That is, how he was engineering the upward social climb of his family - or his personal troops, if you will. However, they served to establish credibility and justification as his right to move to Greenwich and move 'up' in the world.Tom's obsession became a compulsion. He proved that he would stop at nothing to blend into the white neighborhood. His chagrin when another black person moved next door was not due to skin color. It was because of everything the 'interloper' represented; everything that Tom had left behind. In essence, Tom had become an Oreo cookie: Black on the outside but White on the inside.The last 20 minutes of this movie are among the most powerfully written, directed and acted (by Whoopi Goldberg) I have ever had the pleasure to witness. I realized that the climax of the film was not the obvious event that happened next door (don't want to give it away). The climax is verbal and Whoopi delivers it. I am still not clear if it is the conversation when she informs Tom which college Tom -Two is going to or when she releases it, all in the middle of the night and Tom wakes up. Nevertheless, the denouement is great. You know that life on that street will never be the same.My favorite kind of character-driven flick: people go through problems, some pain, do their dance, they grow, they change, and life goes on. As an audience member, I may learn something or be inspired.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21841e17788647e09d423501204c3fe6",
            "input": "The movie has the longest, most tortured and agonized ending of any movie I've seen in a long time. Unfortunately it starts right after the opening credits. January Jones gives such a wooden performance, I was surprised she didn't go up in flames when she got near the candles in the film. I don't really remember her from the other films she's done (a blessing I have to believe. I never criticize an actors performance because in film there are too many things which can affect it but in this case,it is so bad that it actually stands out from the ATROCIOUS script. Granted she's given lines and situations Meryl Streep would have trouble with but I swear at times shes reading from a cue card off set. At other times I thought she might actually be learning disabled or slow in some way. For REAL! The plot, dialog and pacing are as bad as you'll ever see but there is still no excuse for this performance nor for the director that let it be perpetrated. I feel sorry for the other actors. Cruel intentions/ 10 little indians/breakfast club shoved into a rotten burrito then regurgitated by a grade school writer- director. Take that back this has Studio exec crayola all over it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4915b2977b949e3a58cd12147c9a0ea",
            "input": "After reading the other tepid reviews and comments, I felt I had to come to bat for this movie.Roeg's films tend to have little to do with one another, and expecting this one to be like one of his you liked is probably off the mark.What this film is is a thoughtful and unabashed look at religious faith. The only other film like it-in terms of its religious message-would have to be Tolkin's `The Rapture.'I am astonished that anyone could say the story is muddled or supernatural. It is a simple movie about Catholic faith, miracles, and redemption--though you would never guess it till the end. It is also the only movie I can think of whose resolution turns, literally, on a pun.As a (happily) fallen Catholic myself, I know what the movie is about, and I find a sort of fondness in its ultimate innocence about the relation between God and man. But if you are not familiar with the kind of theology on which the film is based, then it will go right over you head.As a film-as opposed to a story-`Cold Heaven' it is not ground-breaking. While `The Rapture' is heavy with pictorial significance and cinematic imagery, `Cold Heaven' downplays its own cinematic qualities. There are no striking shots, no edgy effects, no attempts to fit the content to the form. It is workmanlike shooting, but subdued. Nor does it have dialogue or acting to put it in a class of high drama. It is a simple story that unfolds simply. It may seem odd; but at the end the mystery is revealed. It looks ambiguous; but with a single line the ambiguity vanishes in a puff of Catholic dogma.In this regard, `Cold Heaven' has at its heart exactly the same sort of thing that drives a movie like `The Sting,' or `The Sixth Sense,' or `Final Descent,' or Polanski's `A Pure Formality.' All of these are films with a trick up their sleeves. They may frustrate you along the way, but they have a point-an obvious one, indeed--but the fun is, at least in part, in having been taken in.Still, even if it seems like little more than a shaggy dog story with a punch line, it is worth watching for way it directs-and misdirects-you. Try it-especially if you are, or have ever been, a Catholic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db0978d76a7d4807bf7e7761fa80ebbc",
            "input": "I must admit that this is the type of film that I would normally eschew, but I rented it basically because of the stars. I certainly was not sorry. In fact, as you see, I rated it five stars. This film is the perfect combination of sharp directing and superior acting.Andy and Hank Hanson are brothers who decide to commit the uncouth crime of robbing their parents' jewelry store. The crime goes terribly wrong - thus beginning an examination of the three men in the Hanson family. Through a series of flashbacks, we get to know Charles Hanson and come to an understanding of the strained relationship between father and sons.Younger brother, Hank is basically a screw-up. He has always had trouble holding a job and pretty much goes in the direction of the wind. Hank is insecure, cowardly, and very much under the influence of his big brother. Ethan Hawke has the character of Hank \"nailed to a T\" and gives what is probably his best performance thus far. He shows us a man who is basically good-hearted but so influenced by outside forces that he is unable to follow through with any important task.Andy - on the surface - appears to be a successful businessman, but we soon discover that he is addicted to drugs and has been embezzling from his company to pay for his habit. It is Andy who concocts the scheme to rob his parents' store, and he gets weak-willed Hank to commit the act. Philip Seymour Hoffman - surely one of the finest actors of our time - plays Andy. Hoffman is an actor who has the ability to portray a man who, on the surface, is a charming businessman liked by his acquaintances but a real slime ball underneath. He is absolutely perfect for the part of Andy or it might be said that he, through his superior acting skills, made Andy the perfect part.Albert Finney plays a father common to his generation. Charles Hanson is not a bad or unfeeling man, but he has a lousy relationship with his sons because he never really understood what was necessary in nurturing a positive bond between his sons and himself. He has always been too quick to criticize and admonish. He always made it clear that he favored his younger son over his older thus causing a wide emotional rift between himself and Andy. As we get to know Charles and Andy, the thought of Andy forming a plan to rob from his father becomes less unbelievable.On a personal note, I cannot believe how much Charles Hanson reminded me of my own father, and how much Andy and Hank reminded me of my own brother and myself. Perhaps this may be one of the reasons that I enjoyed the film so much as this story of a distant, critical father, a more successful older brother, and a less successful younger brother hit so close to home. Fortunately, my brother and I never came to the state of committing a crime against my parents- guess we were made of sterner and more moral stuff.This complex of personalities and actions has been expertly put together by director, Sidney Lumet. At eighty-three, he still has the chops to give the audience engrossing characters and edge-of-seat action that hypnotizes. 12 Angry Men was his first film made fifty years prior to Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, but he hasn't lost any bit of his magic touch in showing us characters that will be long remembered.The events and characters in Before the Devil Knows You're Dead are harsh and unattractive, and this is definitely not a feel-good movie. However, it is two hours of ultimate entertainment which I thoroughly recommend.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32ca901774a94b2182971ea0267b3b4a",
            "input": "Not a movie for everyone, but this movie is in my top 10. I am a lover of black comedy. With a cast including Richard Dreyfus (Vic), Jeff Goldblum (Mick), Larry Bishop (Nick) and Gabriel Byrne (Ben 'Brass Balls' London) in the leads, the lines can't help but be dry. The supporting cast is nearly dead center. Counting the minor flaws in the movie: Ellen Barkin's make-up gave her face has a washed out look; there were a couple of gimme cameos by Joey Bishop and Richard Pryor that served no purpose, and Michael J. Pollard's screen time was too short. Over all, the cast was just incredible without egos to wreck a fine script. If you have seen Larry Bishop's (writer, director) film, Underworld (a dark crime flick), you will enjoy this one. His next outing (writer, director, actor) is Hell Ride with Michael Madsen and Quentin Tarantino.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6225ca322374930b2b8b18777e64fb0",
            "input": "If there was anything Akira Kurosawa did wrong in making Dodes'ka-den, it was making it with the partnership he formed with the \"four knights\" (the other three being Kobayaski, Ichikawa, and Konishita). They wanted a big blockbuster hit to kick off their partnership, and instead Kurosawa, arguably the head cheese of the group, delivered an abstract, humanist art film with characters living in a decimated slum that had many of its characters face dark tragedies. Had he made it on a more independent basis or went to another studio who knows, but it was because of this, among some other financial and creative woes, that also contributed to his suicide attempt in 1971. And yet, at the end of the day, as an artist Kurosawa didn't stop delivering what he's infamous for with his dramas: the strengths of the human spirit in the face of adversity. That its backdrop is a little more unusual than most shouldn't be ignored, but it's not at all a fault of Kurosawa's.The material in Dodes'ka-den is absorbing, but not in ways that one usually finds from the director, and mostly because it is driven by character instead of plot. There's things that happen to these people, and Kurosawa's challenge here is to interweave them into a cohesive whole. The character who starts off in the picture, oddly enough (though thankfully as there's not much room for him to grow), is Rokkuchan, a brain damaged man-child who goes around all day making train sounds (the 'clickety-clack' of the title), only sometimes stopping to pray for his mother. But then we branch off: there's the father and son, the latter who scrounges restaurants for food and the former who goes on and on with site-specific descriptions of his dream house; an older man has the look of death to him, and we learn later on he's lost a lot more than he'll tell most people, including a woman who has a past with him; a shy, quiet woman who works in servitude to her adoptive father (or uncle, I'm not sure), who rapes her; and a meek guy in a suit who has a constant facial tick and a big mean wife- to those who are social around.There are also little markers of people around these characters, like two drunks who keep stumbling around every night, like clockwork, putting big demands on their spouses, sometimes (unintentionally) swapping them! And there's the kind sake salesman on the bike who has a sweet but strange connection with the shy quiet woman. And of course there's a group of gossiping ladies who squat around a watering hole in the middle of the slum, not having anything too nice to say about anyone unless it's about something erotic with a guy. First to note with all of this is how Kurosawa sets the picture; it's a little post-apocalyptic, looking not of any particular time or place (that is until in a couple of shots we see modern cars and streets). It's a marginalized society, but the concerns of these people are, however in tragic scope, meant to be deconstructed through dramatic force. Like Bergman, Kurosawa is out to dissect the shattered emotions of people, with one scene in particular when the deathly-looking man who has hollow, sorrowful eyes, sits ripping cloth in silence as a woman goes along with it.Sometimes there's charm, and even some laughs, to be had with these people. I even enjoyed, maybe ironically, the little moments with Rokkuchan (specifically with Kurosawa's cameo as a painter in the street), or the awkward silences with the man with the facial tics. But while Kurosawa allows his actors some room to improvise, his camera movements still remain as they've always been- patient but alert, with wide compositions and claustrophobic shots, painterly visions and faces sometimes with the stylization of a silent drama meant as a weeper. Amid these sometimes bizarre and touching stories, with some of them (i.e. the father and son in the car) especially sad, Kurosawa lights his film and designs the color scheme as his first one in Eastmancolor like it's one of his paintings. Lush, sprawling, spilling at times over the seams but always with some control, this place is not necessarily \"lighter\"; it's like the abstract has come full-throttle into the scene, where things look vibrant but are much darker underneath. It's a brilliant, tricky double-edged sword that allows for the dream-like intonations with such heavy duty drama.With a sweet 'movie' score Toru Takemitsu (also responsible for Ran), and some excellent performances from the actors, and a few indelible scenes in a whole fantastic career, Dodes'ka-den is in its own way a minor work from the director, but nonetheless near perfect on its own terms, which as with many Kurosawa dramas like Ikiru and Red Beard holds hard truths on the human condition without too much sentimentality.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81706451d7c94501b61c6c9708b51c0a",
            "input": "I admit I have a weakness for alternate history stories, from ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE to GROUNDHOG DAY to 12:01. Among those greats is this little gem. It's pretty difficult to get through MR. DESTINY without giving a nod of appreciation to each and every cast member, from the goodhearted James Belushi to the murderous Courtney Cox. This movie lacks the gravitas and scale to make it a great film, but it's a fine cheer-up on a rainy afternoon. It's also a great rental for an inexpensive date.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43d22ef748564525a7701dd683c91c78",
            "input": "A very cute movie with a great background provided by the city of Boston and Fenway Park. As a baseball fan and light movie addict, it hit a homerun for me. Plenty of laughs and plenty of authentic baseball scenes with real ballplayers and real references to past Bosox failures. And how enjoyable was it to watch a movie with a baseball theme without having to endure an overage, over-the-hill, self-serving Kevin Costner attempting to make believers out of a critical audience? Jimmy and Drew did a fine job as a young love-struck couple suffering from Jimmy's Bosox \"jones\". It was a bit whacky and out of left field, but there really are Sox fans that are that fanatic and live their lives through the fortunes of their beloved team. The movie coasted along at a fast pace and the ending, although predictable, had the charm and sentimentality of so many other popular movies, without being overly pretentious. Also enjoyable was the return of Willie Garson to the screen. I miss the forever-popular \"Stanford Blatch\" from Sex & the City. He's always funny, even when he does or says very little. So buy yourself two box seats, some popcorn, and get ready for a fun time. \"Fever Pitch\" is a winner.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac513ea5ed5a4b2f9d1a73a5cd30ade0",
            "input": "The Fallen Ones starts with archaeologist Matt Fletcher (Casper Van Dien) in the desert discovering the mummified remains of a 42 foot tall giant, now there's something you don't see everyday. Matt is working for property developer Morton (Robert Wagner) who wants to build a holiday resort on the land & he calls in fellow archaeologist Angela (Kristen Miller) for reasons I'm unsure of. Anyway they both try to figure out what they've got on they're hands when some of the team go missing, Morton calls in security guy Ammon (Navid Negahban) to handle the situation. Meanwhile ancient text translator the Rabbi Eli Schmidtt (Tom Bosley) translates some ancient text (as he would) & is shocked to learn of a evil prophecy in which these giants will rise up & take over the world for the Fallen One, or something like that. It's up to Matt to save the day & the whole planet...Written & directed by Kevin VanHook, who also has a small role in the film as the ancient warrior leader at the start, I personally thought The Fallen Ones was a terrible film & it's as simple & straight forward as that. There are so many things that are just plain bad about The Fallen Ones both on a technical & conceptual level, the script doesn't make a whole lot of sense & it doesn't really get going until the final 20 odd minutes by which time I had almost lost the will to live. The character's are awful & as clichéd as you like, the dialogue is bad as in very, very bad & the entire film is predictable, I mean it's not going to come as a surprise that Casper Van Dien is going to save the day is it? It's not a huge surprise that the mummified giant is going to come back to life either so why wait until over an hour into the film when most of the audience will be in some sort of comatose state. This is bad, very bad. You have been warned.Director VanHook doesn't impress, the fight scenes are absolutely awful & why dress your bad guys up in a horrible shade of purple? They look naff. To give it a bit of credit the special effects on the giant Mummy itself are actually good although there's not that many of them since he doesn't make an appearance for over an hour, there are also some normal sized Mummy's that look to have come straight from the set of The Mummy (1999), unfortunately these aren't used to any great effect & in fact are wasted as some comic relief. The mechanical Mummy was a pretty good idea but looked silly & there is no way on Earth that all those people inside could work in sync with each other to operate it, actually the more I think about the more ridiculous the idea is. Forget about any scares, tension or atmosphere & don't even think about any gore or violence because there isn't any.Technically The Fallen Ones isn't anything special & apart from the impressive giant Mummy effects there's little her to get excited about. The ghost CGI & water effects are terrible, it was made-for-TV & it's shows. The acting was poor, Wagner looks embarrassed & this is probably the only thing the likes of Dien & Bosley can get these days.The Fallen Ones is a bad film, there's no two ways about it as far as I'm concerned. Not recommended on any level or in any way, one to avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ed19e78c6c34f829ff401b1d2ed4c5c",
            "input": "Loved the film! This was my first glimpse at both Reese Witherspoon and Jason London, both of which are two of my favorites. Must say that no matter how many times I've seen this movie I can't help but tear up. One of those movies that should become a classic for all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98685c0ca28c443cb508eff3a018f18e",
            "input": "The \"Men in White\" movie is definitely one of the funniest, if not THE funniest, comedy movies I ever watched! (and I watched quite a lot!) It is about two garbagemen, who become \"Men in White\" and then stop an invasion from space. It is also a parody of lots of classic movies, such as \"Men in Black\", \"Star Wars\" or \"Dr. Strangelove\". Anyone who says that this movie is crappy has something wrong with his head. There are tons of funny gags and jokes here, and you might actually get injury to your mouth from laughing too hard (it happened to me!). If you can watch this movie on TV, watch it now - you certainly won't regret it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-634e9da2c0f24360a850321d46a2317c",
            "input": "'Before the devil knows you're dead' is one of the best movies I've seen in along time. The acting fromthe excellent ensemble cast is incredible. Philip Seymour Hoffman putting in an outstanding performance and is electrifying every time he's on screen. Ethan Hawke matches him scene for scene and Albert Finney simply chews up the screen. Marisa Tomei is, however,criminally underused, but looks amazing for her 42 years. The script is excellent, the story-line non-linear but easy enough to follow. Sidney Lumet, although not known for his blockbusters, has turned out a gem with this one!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec0d00888e44448f836331d10e499567",
            "input": "Director Douglas Sirk once said `there's a very short distance between high art and trash, and trash that contains craziness is by this very quality nearer to art'. This statement defines his cinema perfectly, a very unique body of work that includes classic stage adaptations, adventure and war films, westerns and of course, his famous melodramas.Sirk's melodramas were, as the very word signifies, dramas with music. The music sets the tone for his masterful style, and every stroke of his brush (Sirk was also a painter) leaves a powerful image on the screen-turned-canvas. But this ain't life but its representation, an imitation of life. Sirk never tried to show reality, on the contrary. None of the directors of his generation made a better use of all the technical devices provided by Hollywood (most notably Technicolor) to distinguish the artificial from the real thing. Let's remember that his golden period coincides with the time when Hollywood films turned its attention into the social drama (Blackboard jungle, Rebel without a cause). Sirk always knew that cinema was meant to be something else.Another of Sirk's statements summarizes this: `You can't reach, or touch, the real. You just see reflections. If you try to grasp happiness itself your fingers only meet glass'. I defy anybody that has seen Written on the wind to count the amount of mirrors and images reflected that appear on screen. One ends up giving up.Therefore, we are in a hall full of mirrors where there's no difference between real and its false copy. Nobody can say that the Hadley are real people. That town ain't real either, with those hideous oil pumps all over the place. So in this realm the acting is affected, the decore is fake, the trick is visible. Everything is pushed a little bit off the limit (the sexual connotations of Dorothy Malone with the oil tower, for example). Sirk was criticizing and theorizing at the same time.`The angles are the director's thoughts; the lighting is his philosophy'. In Written on the wind we follow the fall of a traditional way of life both in a geometrical way and in terms of light and shadows. The Hadleys house, with its different levels connected by the spiral staircase operates in a strictly metaphorical way. A house that resembles a mausoleum, that no party can cheer up. As tragedy progresses from luminous daylight to shadowy night, Sirk's photography becomes an extension of the inner state of his characters, and so are the colours of the clothes they wear. Drama is thus incorporated to every element at the service of the director's craft.Sirk considered himself a `story bender', because he bended the standard material he was assigned with to his style and purpose. Written on the wind is a good example. It wouldn't work in any other hands.The other director that was using similar strategies was Frank Tashlin, who was for 50's comedy the same that Sirk was for melodrama. Their films are full of the machinery of american life -advertising, TV sets, jukeboxes, washing machines, sport cars, vacuum cleaners- to depict its emptiness and decay. I'm inclined to think that their films were regarded in a different way by their contemporary audiences. The game was played by both sides, so it was camp. Now we regard them as `cult' or `bizarre', because we are not those spectators anymore. That is why Todd Haynes's homage `Far from heaven' turns into a pastiche, because it reproduces Sirk's work nowadays as if nothing happened in between. Then Sirk turns exactly into that painting hanging in the art gallery that Julianne Moore and the gardener discuss in the aforementioned film.Sirk understood the elements of melodrama perfectly. There were always immovable characters (Rock Hudson and Lauren Bacall here) against which he could assemble a series of split ones. His balance through antithesis is remarkable and not surprisingly we root for the split characters, because these are the ones Sirk is interested in too. When Robert Stack flies the plane and `tempts' Lauren Bacall with all sorts of mundane comforts of the world below them (obvious Faustian echoes) we are strangely fascinated with him too, as we are when the devilish nymphomaniac little sister painfully evokes her past with Mitch alone by the river.In the Sirk's universe the studio often-imposed `happy ends' have no negative impact. In fact they worked just great. Sirk was fond of greek tragedy and considered happy endings the Deux ex machinea of his day. Thus the final courtroom scene fits well and one must also remember that the whole film is told in flashback, so we know from the very beginning that tragedy will fall nevertheless over the Hadley feud.It was pointed out the many similarities between Written on the Wind with the Godfather saga. I absolutely agree and I'm sure the parallel is not incidental. Both share the theme of the old powerful father head trying to keep his empire going while protecting his family. The temperamental son portrayed by Robert Stack has an amazing physical resemblance with Jimmy Caan's Sonny Corleone. The action of fighting her sister's male friend is symmetrical. The non-son in which the old man put his trust is also common in both films, as the fact that both families carry the names of their town. Even details as the gate that gives access to the property, and the surroundings of the house covered by leaves, suggest that Coppola had Written on the Wind in mind while setting his masterwork. Because both films deal with the subject of Power: the acquisition of power, its manipulation and legacy (even Kyle Hadley's sterility, the event that hastens the turmoil, is an issue easily tied to the central theme of Power, in this case, a weakness in sexual power). The other great film that deals with power and uses american life as its representation is Citizen Kane. One wouldn't think at first of similarities between Welles and Sirk's films but there are a good many, starting with the petrol business as the origin of the family's fortune and ending in the fact that Mitch Wayne (Rock Hudson), as Charles Foster Kane, was adopted by a tutor, having his own father alive. Amazingly, the same actor (Harry Shannon) perform both Wayne and Kane's fathers. This detail is cannot be a coincidence.Written on the Wind is a masterpiece in every aspect, in execution and vision, in style and technique, a highlight in the career of this wonderful director. Some say that this is his best film. In my opinion, `Magnificent obsession', `All that heaven allows', `There's always tomorrow' and `Imitation of life' are just as good. And for those who put Sirk in the level of Dallas or Dinasty I wish them no happy end.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92c7b9b3a5f346229695efeaeaf53584",
            "input": "Well this film has certainly had a fair amount of hype; From the buzz at the Toronto Film Festival to gushing reviews on CBC Radio. A refreshing, wacky, hilarious indie movie apparently. I'd been looking forward to it for months.How can I put it this simply? It sucked in a very big way. An exercise in cinematic lameness that makes Adam Sandler look like a comic genius.At best it was mildly amusing and at worst coma inducing. An amerterish script badly directed and shoddily edited into a ramshackle mess.And what was with the music being 500db louder than the rest of the sound track? That was about the only truly odd thing about it.If you want to see a genuinely funny, bizarre movie involving aliens then try Repoman. There is no comparison!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7cad6969cdec438dbab9a02306a35484",
            "input": "L'Hypothèse du tableau volé/The Hypothesis of the Stolen Painting (1979) begins in the courtyard of an old, three-story Parisian apartment building. Inside, we meet The Collector, an elderly man who has apparently devoted his life to the study of the six known existing paints of an obscure Impressionist-era painter, Tonnerre. A narrator recites various epigrams about art and painting, and then engages in a dialogue with The Collector, who describes the paintings to us, shows them to us, tells us a little bit about the painter and the scandal that brought him down, and then tells us he's going to show us something....As he walks through a doorway, we enter another world, or worlds, or perhaps to stretch to the limits, other possible worlds. The Collector shows us through his apparently limitless house, including a large yard full of trees with a hill; within these confines are the 6 paintings come to life, or half-way to life as he walks us through various tableaux and describes to us the possible meanings of each painting, of the work as a whole, of a whole secret history behind the paintings, the scandal, the people in the paintings, the novel that may have inspired the paintings. And so on, and so on. Every room, every description, leads us deeper into a labyrinth, and all the while The Collector and The Narrator engage in their separate monologues, very occasionally verging into dialogue, but mostly staying separate and different.I watched this a second time, so bizarre and powerful and indescribable it was, and so challenging to think or write about. If I have a guess as to what it all adds up to, it would be a sly satire of the whole nature of artistic interpretation. An indicator might be found in two of the most amusing and inexplicable scenes are those in which The Collector poses some sexless plastic figurines -- in the second of them, he also looks at photos taken of the figurines that mirror the poses in the paintings -- then he strides through his collection, which is now partially composed of life-size versions of the figures. If we think too much about it and don't just enjoy it, it all becomes just faceless plastic....Whether I've come to any definite conclusions about \"L'Hypothèse du tableau volé\", or not, I can say definitely that outside of the early (and contemporaneous) works of Peter Greenaway like \"A Walk Through H\", I've rarely been so enthralled by something so deep, so serious, so dense....and at heart, so mischievous and fun.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-701937888e84486b9e4b34a0b1d8b7b2",
            "input": "It was 1974 and it starred Martin Sheen.That alone says what to expect of this movie.And it was a movie. According to the movie, Slovik had reformed, got a good woman, and didn't want to fight.In real life, Slovik may have been a naive innocent, or he may have just wanted to manipulate the system.Whoever Slovik was or wasn't is for history to decide, but this was a movie that dealt with dessertion at a time when a country was questioning why it was fighting, and the movie took sides.With no regard to servicemen who were in Viet Nam either in 1974 (as Willie Nelson would say, let's tell the truth, it was about the Viet Nam war, not WWII), EoES was as propagandistic as Gung Ho was in the forties.According to this movie, Slovik stated his position, plain and simple. He had a nervous problem. Heck, I have a clinical nervous condition, and trust me, if I had done military duty, it would have been no problem for me to either just let my nerves go and fail at my tasks and get a demotion or put on KP duty or latrine duty with no problem.If we believe the teleflick, Slovik didn't have that option, no doubt because of his criminal history.Whatever the viewer wants to believe is up to the viewer. I've learned that movies from this decade or that decade, in dealing with service or military duty, will pretty much take the same stance over and over.1940s and 1950s, serve your country.1960s and 1970s, mock your country.This is the history.The whole movie seemed predictably Hollywood to me. He refused to serve and only when he was being strapped up to be executed does he show emotion.Such an emotional outburst could have easily worked to his advantage in his declaration of his nervous condition, but obviously the movie wanted to show him as a human being and only when he is about to die does he become sorrowful.I'm not a Catholic, but I thought the recital of the hail Mary by Ned Beatty and Sheen at the end, with the Lord's prayer, was funny as it sounded like they were trying to see who could say it faster.I don't see how this movie could be watched without realizing it was aimed at Tricky Dick Nixon and the Viet Nam war.I hope it was all worth it for Slovik and anyone who chose to follow his example.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccbaf686459d43e999057471d12fb15f",
            "input": "Made after QUARTET was, TRIO continued the quality of the earlier film versions of the short stories by Maugham. Here the three stories are THE VERGER, MR. KNOW-IT-ALL, and SANITORIUM. The first two are comic (THE VERGER is like a prolonged joke, but one with a good pay-off), and the last more serious (as health issues are involved). Again the author introduces the film and the stories.James Hayter, soon to have his signature role as Samuel Pickwick, is the hero in THE VERGER. He holds this small custodial-type job in a church, but the new Vicar (Michael Hordern) is an intellectual snob. When he hears Hayter has no schooling he fires him. Hayter has saved some money, so he tells his wife (Kathleen Harrison) he fancies buying a small news and tobacco shop. He has a good eye, and his store thrives. Soon he has a whole chain of stores. When his grandchild is christened by Hordern, the latter is amazed to see how prosperous his ex-Verger. The payoff is when bank manager Felix Aylmer meets with Hayter about diversifying his investments. I'll leave it to you to hear the unintentional but ironic coda of the meeting.According to Maugham he met a man like Max Kelada (Nigel Patrick) on a cruise. In MR. KNOW-IT-ALL Kelada is a splashy, friendly, and slightly overbearing type from the Middle East who is on a business trip (regarding jewelry) by steamship. His state-room mate is Mr. Grey (the ever quiet and proper Wilfred Hyde-White) who is somewhat, silently disapproving of Max. Max likes to enliven things, and soon is heavily involved in the ship's entertainment. At this point the story actually resembles part of the plot of the non-Maugham story and film CHINA SEAS (1935), as Max makes a bet that he can tell a real piece of jewelry from a fake (after insisting that a piece of jewelry he spotted is real). I won't describe the way Max rises to the occasion.SANITORIUM is the longest segment. Roland Culver plays \"Ashenden\" (the fictional alter-ego of Maugham - a writer and one time spy as in Hitchcock's THE SECRET AGENT). Here he has to use a sanitorium for a couple of months for his health. He finds a remarkable crew of people, including Jean Simmons as a frail but beautiful young woman, Finlay Currie as an irascible Scotsman, John Laurie as a second irascible Scotsman who is \"at war\" with Currie, Raymond Huntley as a quiet patient who only shows his internal anger at his situation when his wife shows up, and Michael Rennie as a young man who has a serious life threatening illness. Culver watches as three stories among these characters play out to their conclusions. The last, dealing with Simmons and Rennie, is ironic but deeply moving.It was a dandy follow-up to the earlier QUARTET, and well worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f606615bb8374772ac191336ffed17d6",
            "input": "This may be one of the worst movies to ever make it to production, ever.1. The most exciting part is the beginning, where the guy is walking... and walking... and walking (spoiler). There is about 15 minutes of just walking. How? 2. Not to mention there's a lot of issues with the lighting, and it's almost like they even shot the night scenes during the day. 3. The acting was TERRIBLE. It looks like they found a community theater (in Mexico)... and then took the people who were turned away.Please, for the love of everything holy, don't rent this movie. If you know someone who owns it, apologize to them. The director should be subject to punishment through the war crimes tribunal for foisting this on the public.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f4ac4f5890f420ebaf13bfa44974bd9",
            "input": "When I was younger, I thought the first film was really good in childhood, so I decided to see the sequel. This is an example of why some films shouldn't have sequels, because the first film is usually best, and it is. Basically now that Ariel and Eric are married they have a daughter who isn't allowed outside the house because they are worried about the sister of Ursula (the octopus legged villain from film one), Morgana getting to her. When the kid gets out she asks Ursula's sister to turn her into a mermaid, like her Mum was. This makes Ariel go back to the sea to find her. The same good voice artists, it's just the story that could have had a bit more thought. Adequate!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44690bf8ba244d2bb0139bdacc336d86",
            "input": "This is another fantasy favorite from Ralph Bakshi; after watching it on YouTube that is. Set in the distant past after the Ice Age, it is a prehistoric sword-and-sorcery quest between good and evil. Nekron, Lord of the realm of Ice and his mother Queen Juliana, has set their sights on conquest of the known world. When their glaciers destroy's the village of a man named Larn, he (Larn) vows to avenge his people and kill the Ice Lord. Meanwhile, the sub-human minions of Nekron and Juliana capture Firekeep's King Jarol's sultry daughter Princess Teegra; but she manages to escape, and eventually meets with Larn, who promises to escort her back to Firekeep; if the sub-humans don't find them first.This movie did very little box office (as did most of Ralph Bakshi's films), but has become a cult classic, partly for the quality of the art, a collaboration between Ralph Bakshi and the famed fantasy artist Frank Frazetta. Also, I have heard that the screenplay was written by Gerry Conway and Roy Thomas, the two men who had done Conan comic book stories, and the background painters included James Gurney, the illustrator of the Dinotopia novels; though admittedly I had never read Conan or Dinotopia. And also the painter Thomas Kinkade, noted for his artwork for figurines, music-boxes for The Bradford Exchange Company besides paintings. And like Bakshi's films The Lord of the Rings and American Pop, this movie was rotoscoped, but the process works better in this film than in the former.So overall, I think it's one of the best animated fantasy movies ever made, and an awesome collaboration between two great minds - Ralph Bakshi and Frank Frazetta. With plenty of fantasy, sexual innuendo, and thrilling adventure.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-812ab703cd7040d7a46c0c3cf4668bb2",
            "input": "First of all, I loved Bruce Broughton's music score, very lyrical, and this alone added to the film's charm. The best aspect of the movie were the three animals, superlatively voiced by Michael J.Fox, Sally Field and the late Don Ameche. Whereas Fox has the funniest lines, Ameche plays a rather brooding otherwise engaging character(the voice of reason), and Field adds wit into a character that is always seen telling Chance off. The humans weren't as engaging, and sometimes the film dragged, but that is my only complaint. This is one beautiful-looking film, with beautiful close up shots of Canada, I believe. Although the film itself is quite long, there is never a seriously dull moment, and this is advantaged by the voice work and a well-written script. All in all, a charming and perhaps underrated film, with a 9/10 from me. Bethany Cox.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0894b4ec3af1477cbb3659c9197c1acd",
            "input": "Awful, simply awful. It proves my theory about \"star power.\" This is supposed to be great TV because the guy who directed (battlestar) Titanica is the same guy who directed this shlop schtock schtick about a chick. B O R I N G.Find something a thousand times more interesting to do - like watch your TV with no picture and no sound. 1/10 (I rated it so high b/c there aren't any negative scores in the IMDb.com rating system.)-ZaphoidPS: My theory about \"star power\" is: the more \"star power\" used in a show, the weaker the show is. (It's called an indirect proportionality: quality 1/\"star power\", less \"sp\" makes for better quality, etc. Another way to look at it is: \"more is less.\")-Z",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-624b31df6b9449c3a6a8393ccde7cdd6",
            "input": "Mean spirited, and down right degrading adaptation to the classic children's tale not only lacks the charm of its forefather but lacks any talent what so ever. Mike Myers should not only be ashamed of himself for his horrible performance that is a clear rip off of what Jim Carrey did but he should give up acting all together. He is so annoying that you would want to beat the crap out of him if you were able to jump right in the film. The sets are ugly and the cinematography is very poor. I have seen a lot of bad film this year, but this not only takes the cake but it is with out a doubt one the worse films ever made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-064df31555b94feaaebfe563f8c8dd17",
            "input": "I do agree with everything Calamine has said! And I don't always agree with people, but what Calamine has said is very true, it is time for the girls to move on to better roles. I would like to see them succeed very much as they were a very inspirational pair growing up and I would like to see them grow as people, actresses and in their career as well as their personal life. So producers, please give the girls a chance to develop something that goes off the tangent a bit, move them into a new direction that recognises them individually and their talents in many facets. This movie that is being commented is not too bad, but as I have seen further on in their movies, their movies stay the same of typical plot and typography. When In Rome is good for audiences of younger generation but the adults who were kids when the twins were babies want to follow the twins in their successes and so hence I think we adults would like to see them make movies of different kinds, maybe some that are like the sixth sense, the hour, chocolat, that sort of movie - not saying to have just serious movies for them, humour ones too yes, but rather see them in different roles to what they have been playing in their more recent movies like this one and New York Minute. (Note: I am from Australia so excuse my weird spelling like reognise with the s instead of z)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97caeb75bd5a40ef8bba17187682b89f",
            "input": "Princess Victoria (Emily Blunt) is in line for the throne of England. The present King William (Jim Broadbent) is not well and may not live long. However, Vicky's scheming mother, The Duchess of Kent (Miranda Richandson) and her aide, John (Mark Strong) want to force Victoria to sign papers declaring them to be the \"regents\" until she is older, since she is only 20 years of age. The young lady refuses, despite John slapping her around. It is another sign that Victoria has a strong will and deep love for her country. Yet, when William does pass away, shortly after her 21st birthday, Victoria knows she has a heavy duty before her. First, she must surround herself with the \"right\" advisers to govern wisely. She chooses handsome Lord Melbourne (Paul Bettany) who, although an older man, is mentioned as a suitor for Vicky. Which brings us to the young queen's second major decision. Sooner than not, the young queen should select her future mate, as it will bring stability to her life and to those of the kingdom, for an heir must appear in the coming years. Meanwhile, in Germany, some distant relatives of the British royal family are hatching some plans as well. Handsome Prince Albert (Rupert Friend), of the Saxon-Coburg dynasty, is prodded by his father to court the young English royal. Once he arrives at the palace, he is smitten and the feeling seems to be mutual. But, since he is a minor player on the map of royal match-making, can he succeed in winning her heart? This is a lovely film, made even better by a completely winning performance by Emily Blunt as Victoria. Yes, she is beautiful but it is her intelligent reading of the role that scores mightily. Friend, too, does well, as do the other actors, including Broadbent, Richardson, Bettany, Strong (what a repulsive role!), and the rest. Also, the movie is gorgeously shot, costumed, and set, making it a visual treat in every way. If anything is lacking, it is an extra dose of dazzle, as the film seems a bit too straightforward and prosaic, at times, with a somewhat unimaginative edit. However, this is only a minor, minor point of argument in an overall very successful and gorgeous film. In short, young and old, should make time for Young Victoria. It is a most worthy film among 2009 cinematic offerings.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-751264a68c394215a39dbb8f9d8e57f0",
            "input": "If you ask me the first one was really better one. Look at Sarah M. G., she is real, mean, cruel girl, look at Amy Adams she is just little fool hanging around. She is nothing! People don't adore her! Second, Sebastian was cute and hot in first movie, now he is \"baby face\". Story is not that good, and i do not understand. Why didn't they make this one first, it is the beginning. Loosy actors, nothing with story. This is not cruel, this is playing. First one has better actors, better story, and its mean. I think that the music is better in cruel intentions 1 and the music is better in cruel intentions 3. It is not the worst movie I saw, but in compaer with first one its one big, big, big nothing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1546ae617e04fb085e53c1a85417fb5",
            "input": "This is one of the best movies to come from Bollywood in years. Certainly the best this year until now. Indian to the core, the panoramic visuals, the heart-pleasing dialogs and the melodious and soft music make the movie an exceptional one. The apt depiction of Indianvalues and culture makes the viewer search for his/her roots in them and invigorates the mind and spirit with a sense of pride and a new lease on life.This movie is for viewers who enjoy a call to their imagination and philosophical senses. If you like watching movies to get all your nerves excited through on-screen action, sex or terror, then this movie is not for you, because you will find that the movie is not full of 90 degrees twists in it. It is as simple a story for a movie as it can get. But that's exactly where the art of the movie lies. One gets a real life experience, and the best thing is, this experience is one full of values and hope. It is about the positive side of life, about the sweet things that God has showered on humans, as against the regressive movies that insist on showing dons, terrorists and underworlds. This is not about things and people that have gone bad. It is about the goodness that still persists, and that keeps the world running. Of course, every genre of movies is respectable but it takes a lot of courage and talent to come up with a movie that swims against the current and tries to open the eyes of the public to the hidden realities and truths. Having said that, here's more... The movie is the journey of a couple from their engagement to their arranged marriage - yes, that's right, it is an arranged marriage and the couple come to know each other only through their parents, and learn to love each other. The 6 month gap between engagement and marriage is a long time, not full of \"enticing\" happenings, but one that nurtures the growing love and devotion of the couple to each other. They learn together the importance of their relationship and of this invaluable period of their lives, and work to strengthen the bonds of marriage. But have these been strengthened enough? Their relationship will face the test of not only time but also fortune. Will they pass this test? That is what \"Vivah\" is about.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1642b528a8294babbf909a93d857fa5b",
            "input": "I guess if a film has magic, I don't need it to be fluid or seamless. It can skip background information, go too fast in some places, too slow in others, etc. Magic in this film: the scene in the library. There are many minor flaws in Stanley & Iris, yet they don't detract from the overall positive impact of watching people help each other in areas of life that seem the most incomprehensible, the hardest to fix. Both characters are smart. Yet Stanley can't understand enough to function because he can't read; he can't read because he's had too much adventure in his childhood. Iris, although well-educated, hasn't had enough adventure and so can't understand how to move past the U-turn her life took. In both their faults and strengths, the characters compliment each other. It may be a bit of a stretch to accept that an Iris would wind up working year after year in a factory, or that a Stanley never hid his illiteracy enough to work in construction or some other better-paying job. And while these \"mysteries\" are explained in the course of the story, their unfolding seems somewhat contrived. I assume no one took the time to rethink the script. Even so, it's a good movie—just imagine what De Niro, Fonda and Plimpton would have done on screen if someone had!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51471b0877ae4bcdb5a77e70428c90dd",
            "input": "This film is self indulgent rubbish. Watch this film if you merely want to hear spoken Gaelic or enjoy the pleasant soundtrack. Watch for any other reason and you will be disappointed. It should be charming but isn't - it's just irritating. The characters are difficult to care about and the acting is poor. The stories within the film are also charmless and sinister. I was expecting a heartwarming family film but this also held no appeal to my fourteen year old daughter. It is rarely that I cannot see a film through to its conclusion but this one got the better of both of us.Although the film is set in current times it has the look and feel of a cheap East European film made during the Cold War. There isn't even enough in the way of beautiful Scottish scenery and cinematography to redeem it. A real shame because as a film this is an embarrassment to Scotland.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1059f18a577f4dafbcbc77510f8dc6fc",
            "input": "Let me state first that I love Westerns & Civil War stories. I also consider John Ford as an excellent director. I also have the same high feelings for John Wayne & William Holden's acting ability.I cannot remember if I saw this film when it first came out in 1959. Last night was the first time I saw it since then.As per my 4 rating, one can say I did not like the movie.I now will attempt to tell some of its shortcomings.John Lee Mahin who wrote the screenplay from Harold Sinclair's novel, was a very gifted writer & wrote many fine scripts, This script is poorly written & badly researched. They make mention of the awful conditions of the Andersonville prison, At the time of the movie Andersonville was not in operation. They also use rifles that were not used at the time.John Ford was directing films for over 40 years & won 4 Oscars. He must have been ill during the making of this.His usual style was missing. It could be that this was film in the south & east and not in Monument Valley.He normally had a stock company of players he used in nearly all his film, MOST were missing this time. This time only minor cowboy stars Hoot Gibson & Ken Curtiss have roles & of course Anna Lee has a small role. There were no other familiar faces except for the 3 stars. (see below) Mr. Fords stock company made most of his films the classics they were; sadly missed here.Now we come to the main stars John Wayne & William Holden. The Duke also must have been ill,he seemed out of place here. This sort of role usually fit his style perfectly, he was just adequate here. Wiliam Holden did the best he could, but nowhere as good as he usually was.It was required that there be an actress in this type of movie. Here in her first major role (second film) is Constance Towers, a very beautiful person, But not really an actress, She is still having roles on Television. Let me be kind and say she has had a long career,more based on her looks than acting talent. Also in caas as Ms. Towers servant is Tennis Star Althea Gibson.I am glad she stuck to tennis.The rest of the production credits were far from the usual high standard of other John Ford films There were a few military type songs supposedly done by the marching cavalry, not good at all. The action scenes were good but come at the end of film.Ratings *1/2* (out of 4) 47 points (out of 100) IMDb 4 (out of 10)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b4f1b5840f241a8ba4d88ab2ae403d9",
            "input": "This overrated, short-lived series (a measly two seasons) is about as experimental and unique as a truck driver going to a strip bar. I am not quite sure what they mean by \"ground-breaking\" and \"original\" when they fawn all over Lynch and his silly little TV opus. What exactly is their criteria of what is original? Sure, compared to the \"Bill Cosby Show\" or \"Hill Street Blues\" it's original. Definitely. Next to \"Law & Order\" TP spews originality left and right.Fans of TP often say that the show was canceled because too many viewers weren't smart enough, open enough for the show's supposed \"weirdness\", its alleged wild ingenuity, or whatever. As a fan of weirdness myself, I have to correct that misconception. There is nothing too off-the-wall about TP; it is a merely watchable, rather silly whodunit that goes around in circles, spinning webs in every corner but (or because of it) ultimately going nowhere. The supposed weirdness is always forced; the characters don't behave in a strange way as much as they behave in an IDIOTIC way half the time. There's a difference...Whenever I watch the \"weird dream\" sequence in \"Living In Oblivion\" in which the dwarf criticizes the director (Buscemi) for succumbing to the tired old let's-use-a-midget-in-a-dream-scene cliché, I think of Lynch. You want weird? \"Eraserhead\" is weird - in fact, it's beyond weird, it's basically abstract. You want a unique TV show? Watch \"The Prisoner\". You want a strange-looking cast? Felini's and Leone's films offer that. TP looks like an overly coiffed TV crime drama in which all the young people look like fashion models. The cast gives TP a plastic look. Kens & Barbies en masse.In fact, one of the producers of TP said that Lynch was looking for \"unique faces\" for the series. Unique faces? Like Lara Flynn Boyle's? Sheryll Fenn's? Like those effeminate-faced \"hunks\" straight out of men's catalogs (or gay magazines)? Don't get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with getting an attractive cast, especially with beauties like Fenn (the way Madonna would look if she were 1000 times prettier), but then don't go around saying you're making a \"weird show with weird-looking people\". And I have never understood Lynch's misguided fascination with Kyle MacLachlan (I should get a medal for bothering to spell his name right). He is not unlikable, but lacks charisma, seeming a little too bland and polished. His character's laughable \"eccentricities\" were not at all interesting, merely one of Lynch's many attempts to force the weirdness, trying hard to live up to his reputation - him having completely lost his edge but that time. Everything Lynch made post-\"Elephant Man\" was very much sub-par compared to his first two movies. What followed were often mediocre efforts that relied on Lynch's relatively small but fanatical fan base to keep him in the public eye by interpreting meanings into his badly put-together stories that don't hold any water on closer scrutiny. In other words, Lynch is every intellectual-wannabe's darling. So Laura Palmer was killed by her Dad...? He was obsessed by the devil or some such nonsense. That's the best this \"great mind\" could come up with... You've got B-movie horror films that end with more originality. Lynch is neither bright nor hard-working enough to come up with a terrific story. Check out my \"TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism\" list.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcb3e5acfd2047eebdc2a963b1c6089e",
            "input": "Entrails of a Virgin is so bizarre and incomprehensible that it allows the viewer to interpret it subjectively, applying whatever meaning he wishes to its inexplicable excesses of sex and violence. If this was an intentional characteristic of the film, it would be a work of postmodern brilliance-but of course it isn't. Without getting too much into plot summary, let's take a quick walking tour of the events. At a secluded cabin, an orgy is in progress, which includes topless wrestling and diaper p***ing. A vanload of latecomers joins the orgy in progress, but they have unwittingly been followed by a monster I like to call \"the muddy ninja.\" This monster precedes to slay orgy participants one by one, except the proverbial virgin (if you don't count oral sex) who receives his seed and consequently becomes so passionate with desire that she masturbates with someone's severed hand. Finally she has her guts pulled out, and then there's a scene which seems to imply that she's pregnant with a baby muddy ninja. Got all that? If you're going to rent this movie, it's best if you don't speak Japanese and don't have any subtitles. In a season populated by boring Hollywood flicks, putting this in your VCR might be the cinematic equivalent of shock therapy. It will certainly be something different.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ba974c12571453bb5b41127b438c321",
            "input": "Genre: Dinosaur, animation, New York, time travel, circus.?Main characters: Rex the Tyrannosaurus rex, Elsa the pterodactyl, Dweeb the Parasarolophus, Ooo the Triceratops, a boy called Louis, a girl called Cecilia and Captain New-eyes. ? Actors: John Goodman (Rex), Yeardley Smith (Cecilia), Martin Short (Stubbs the clown), Felicity Kendal (Elsa) etc.?What happens: Four dinosaurs (see above) are fed some \"brain grain cereal\" and are now cuddly, friendly dinosaurs who are going to be nice to children. They go into New York, with big plans…My thoughts: This is a cute animated film. The animation of the dinosaurs when they go cuddly and friendly is a bit floppy and not-so-good, but they look pleasant all the same that way. I like the dinosaurs when they are cuddly and friendly, they are nice, friendly and good. I like (almost) all the characters featured, especially Elsa and Cecilia, but of course I like the others as well. Overall, I like this film a lot! :-)Recommended to: People who like good children's animated films, people who like dinosaurs, John Goodman and people who think that circuses aren't always what they seem… Enjoy! :-)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d955dea7c5bb4d6f824015d1704458b7",
            "input": "This is not a movie you watch for entertainment, at least most people I know would not.It's portraits the cruelty to both body and mind that happen in a war pretty well, the characters seem plausible, especially because you \"read their minds\", something more often found in books and rarely in movies, however done very well in this piece. I would place it next to \"All quiet on the western front\" and \"Die Brücke\" in terms of leaving a lasting impression.I wish I could screen it at school, along with the other two movies - however finding a copy of it showed to be pretty hard - which is a shame.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-408ad840cbdc457291bd7de94e8eb349",
            "input": "During a Kurt Weill celebration in Brooklyn, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? was finally unearthed for a screening. It is amazing that a motion picture, from any era, that has Weill-Gershwin collaborations can possibly be missing from the screens. The score stands tall, and a CD of the material, with Gershwin and Weill, only underscores its merits, which are considerable. Yes, the film has its problems, but the score is not one of them. Ratoff is not in his element as the director of this musical fantasy, and Fred MacMurray cannot quite grasp the material. Then, too, the 'modern' segment is weakly written. BUT the fantasy elements carry the film to a high mark, as does the work of the two delightful leading ladies - Joan Leslie and June Haver. Both have the charm that this kind of work desperately needs to work. As a World War II salute to our country's history - albeit in a 'never was' framework, the film has its place in Hollywood musical history and should be available for all to see and to find its considerable merits.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d38a72d1c58441dad45dd2c1c3e7f04",
            "input": "This is a truly awful film. What they have done is taken a TV show, which was never aimed at young children & given it the George Lucas treatment (i.e. ruined it by kiddifying it to appeal to the younger audience).OK so the Thunderbirds TV show wasn't exactly the most cerebral of shows, in fact it was pretty formulaic, but it was always enjoyable to watch (especially when the models got blown up) and the voice cast wasn't too bad.This suffers from bad casting & bad acting (with the notable exceptions of Sophia Myles as Lady Penelope & Ron Cook as Parker, who seem to be the only cast members to have a clue about how their characters should be played) & after this travesty I wouldn't let Frakes direct traffic.The whole point of Thunderbirds was that it was about the whole Tracy family & how they worked as a team, preventing disasters or coming to the rescue of those involved in disasters.Avoid this rubbish like the plague.I only give it 1 out of 10 because a zero rating is not supported.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49f2266057c041b5b3c64cb9fa5f49fc",
            "input": "Soon after watching this film you will realize why it didn't even make it to the theaters! This movie does not deserve the \"prequel\" tag. Instead this is a common theme in Hollywood, rip off previously good movies with disastrous prequels, sequels, etc.This film's plot was bouncing all over the place like a ping pong ball, and the character development was non-existent. I seriously felt like I was watching a comedy at some points in the movie because the acting was so bad. P Diddy needs to stop tainting movies with his horrible acting, he actually made me laugh every time.The only good thing that comes out of this movie is Jaclyn DeSantis, who looks excellent in this movie and actually brought some enjoyment from watching this film.If you are a big Carlito's Way fan, I recommend you not watch this. If you decide to watch it anyway then treat this movie as if it ripped off the original, because that is exactly what it did.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9fc97b784e1460db45aa70a1443f73b",
            "input": "Cinderella is a beautiful young woman who is treated cruelly by her wicked stepmother and stepsisters. One day, a ball is to be held in honor of the prince, but Cinderella has no chance of going, because her stepmother and stepsisters won't let her. With the help of her fairy godmother and her animal friends, she is off to the ball, with the warning to return home by midnight. At the ball she meets the handsome Prince Charming. When the clock strikes midnight, she runs home, leaving behind one of her glass slippers. With the help of her animal friends, her true identity is revealed. She and the prince later get married, and they live happily ever after.Cinderella, released 56 years ago, was a huge box office success, and it continues to charm audiences to this day. It has a well-written script. The characters are memorable. The songs, including \"A Dream is A Wish Your Heart Makes\", \"So This Is Love\", and the great \"Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo\", help tell the story. This was my favorite movie growing up, and it hasn't lost any of its charm. A true Disney masterpiece! Recommended. 10/10 P.S. The recent DVD release is the best way to appreciate this film, including featurettes, deleted scenes, music video, vintage radio programs, and a restored print of the movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea581f0a140c4d8682e148e6a995291b",
            "input": "I have to say I totally loved the movie. It had it's funny moments, some heartwarming parts, just all around good. Me, personally, really liked the movie because it's something that finally i can relate to my childhood. This movie, in my opinion, is geared more towards the young gay population. It shows how a young gay boy would be treated while growing up. All the taunting, name-calling, and not knowing is something I, like most other young feminine boys, will always remember, and now finally a movie that illustrates how hard it really is to grow up gay. So, I would definitely recommend seeing this movie. Probably shouldn't really watch it until a person is old and mature enough to understand it",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d56e0438655f4162a31b5b117460b623",
            "input": "Fay, the sister of the notorious Nobel prize-winning smut poet Simon Grim, still loves Henry Fool. Their son receives an ingenious orgy-in-a-box from an undisclosed sender and a chase across three continents ensues, involving a supremely sad-sack collection of government agents, terrorists, flight attendants, and bellhops.Parker Posey delivers a perfectly timed comic performance, including some brilliant physical work. With strong contributions by Jasmin Tabatabai and Saffron Burrows, Fay Grim proves in the best Billy Wilder tradition that nothing is funnier than a beautiful woman in trouble.Another good score by Hartley (and thanks in the credits to the American Academy in Berlin, where Hartley served as a fellow in Fall 2004).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1b612cb2382452e8db6c776eeac64ff",
            "input": "Enormous fun for both adults and children, this film works on numerous levels: there is everything from car crashes and cake in the face to some very good (yet subtle) jokes for adults.Glenn Close is at her sublimely evil best as Cruella (`call me Ella') De Ville.After three years in Dr. Pavlov's Behaviour Modification Clinic she is cured of her desire for fur – even the puppy-skin fur she had so intensely desired. She even has all of her fur coats placed in the dungeon of the extraordinary castle she inhabits.But it wouldn't be a ‘Dalmatian' movie without the subterfuge and machinations of Cruella and you know that something will change her behaviour modification. And now she needs one extra puppy (hence 102 Dalmatians) to complete her nefarious scheme this time round.Ioan Gruffudd is instantly appealing as the hero of the film that runs the `Second Chance' dog shelter. Though he was in `Titanic' and in last year's television version (as Pip) of `Great Expectations' I didn't recognize him; well, he was ‘Fifth Officer Lowe' in `Titanic' and I didn't see `Great Expectations' so I am not terribly surprised.Gerard Depardieu does a delightful turn as the furrier-pawn of Cruella. He prances and postures in the most outlandish and outrageous of fur clothing you have ever seen – and does it well. His 'Wicked Witch of the West' homage is hilarious.Tim McInnerny is superb is Cruella's not-so-evil henchman – he was also ‘Alonzo,' Cruella's butler, in `101 Dalmatians' and you may also recognize him from all of the `Black Adder' Brit-Coms. He plays his usual bumbling, good-hearted, somewhat dim-witted character to great effect.Oscars for costuming are generally given for the entirety of the costuming in a film. This is unfortunate as the clothing worn by Glenn Close is amazing – it is incredibly detailed (note her handcuffs when she is being released from the Behaviour Modification Clinic) and worthy of such an over-the-top character. Her clothing alone deserves at least an Oscar nomination.Animation holds a special place in my heart – but comparing this film to the original animated film is like comparing apples to orangutans: it can't be done. Suffice it to say that `102 Dalmatians' is even better than the film version of `101 Dalmatians' that came out in 1996. There is a lot to like here: from the sight gags, the dialogue, and the costumes to the casting - it is a good film for the whole family.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2357656653e24de1b654092207a1ee3c",
            "input": "of watching this as a child. Although I'll probably find it god-awful now, it was kind-of spooky stuff as I was only seven or so. I also recall working on a Saturday-afternoon puzzle while watching it, so I wasn't really paying much attention. However, the scene with the rolling boulders has been burnt into my mind ever since. I've asked numerous people if they've seen this flick but to no avail. 12 years ago, one person mentioned that, possibly, he had seen it, but he thought it merely a dream; a fanciful piffle like wind. It's no dream, my friend. No dreaming now. Again, I haven't seen it since then, but I can't wait to find a copy and stuff it into my VCR. Anything that can stay embedded in my mind's eye for 23 years deserves a '10'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8563be9f616643d295b405748154e0d7",
            "input": "Has there ever been a movie more charming than this? One of the reasons everything works so well is that the group of actors really seem to interact and have an effect on each other's lives. The center of it is the \"romance\" of James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan, who work together and can't get along face to face but who completely connect with each other anonymously as pen pals. But there are also supporting characters and unlike a lot of romantic comedies (including \"You've Got Mail\", the recent update of \"Shop\") they're not just whipped up to support the two leads and their needs. Everyone gets to be an intricate part of Ernst Lubitsch's rich tapestry of charm. One of the most heartwarming scenes in movie history takes place when the near-tragic Frank Morgan casually and humbly searches for someone to have Christmas dinner with. A must see! **** out of ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-664419ee6d7a4adc8b2495e7a0ab367f",
            "input": "Well.......in contrast to other comments previously written I have to say that the only good thing about this film is the fact that one guy in it looked a bit like Jason Donavon which reminded me of my youth. I have no idea how it won any awards, and although I'm sure a great deal of effort went into making it it was all fruitless as the final outcome is one which screams of early 90's foreign soap operas. The plot was non-existent, the cinematography was hopeless and the acting was on par with an a-level performance. It was unfortunately long and the sub-plots were incredibly unrealistic....for example....if your best friend slept with your ex-boyfriend of 6 years after only 2 weeks of being broken up you would not all remain the best of friends. It was all fantasy. That's all! Oh yeah, and the weird 90's house/soft core indie was mind numbing!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2aa45a76070746e6a3b5f044301c600c",
            "input": "For me every piece of art is to be judged by these criteria: Form, Function and Meaning. Guernsey seems to be dedicated to forms: nice shots and sometimes interesting acting. The long close ups suggest a function that the viewer may fill in by himself. Because of lacking texts the story becomes a quiz. An introvert person suggests to have depth, but sometimes it turns out he has nothing to say. This film acts like an introvert person. If you have not read the synopsis you cannot see that it was the suicide (and the unanswered question Why?) that changes Anna's view on life and makes her suspicious. 'Why don't you speak to me?' asks Sebastiaan. Anna doesn't answer, she only starts looking a long time at him without saying a word. What is the function of that shot? What does it mean? My question is like Sebastiaans: What has this film to say? What is meant by this movie? The answer for me: It shows us a handful of persons with the passion of a glass of water. The story of their lives is simple and boring. Motives behind their actions are not shown. The rest is: skins, residences, landscapes. Nice and artistic done, but meaningless without having disposal of 'instructions for use'. In my opinion this film is made for fellow artists, not for the common viewer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a46b7e7b4de24ae8be11a8fd64bd2591",
            "input": "Zombi 3 has an interesting history in it's making. Firstly, it is a sequel to Fulci's hit Zombi 2, with Zombi 2 itself being of course a marketing ploy to trick people into thinking it was a sequel to George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead aka Zombi. Confusing enough? Basically, none of the films have anything to do with one another, but who cares when they make money. I guess Fulci himself starting to not care about the production about half way through Zombi 3 when he decided to walk out. Bruno Mattei was brought on board to help pad the film with additional scenes to lengthen the running time.Zombi 3's plot is your typical zombie fare. Scientists develop a serum on an island in the Philippines, terrorists steal it unleashing a plague, and zombie run amok. The scientists want to create an antidote, while the military is set on mowing down everyone without prejudice. There are also brief inserts of a Radio DJ preaching about how we treat the planet. Overall, I actually liked this film. I heard horrible things, but I find the goofy dialogue quite enjoyable. The film seems to be an attempt at raising awareness about pollution, corrupted military, Man playing God, etc. I get the feeling this was at one point a serious film, but it veered off in a weird direction, presumably when Mattei came on board.Besides ripping off other zombie flicks, this was very reminiscent of Romero's The Crazies. You hear the Radio DJ breaking the good news with, \"When you see the men in white suits & gas masks, Run to them for Help.\" This is of course played to the images of the men in white gunning down zombies. Later, they straight up steal a scene from Crazies in which one of the regular, uncontaminated people is killed by mistake.The gore factor is pretty good in this one with zombie hordes around every corner. How is it cool? Let me count the ways…1. Zombie Birth 2. Flying Zombie Head 3. Zombie Birds. 4. Zombie with no legs swimming in a pool. My favorite zombie was the machete-wielding maniac at the gas station. He was bad ass and nearly tore down the entire building trying to kill a girl.Favorite Quote – When a sergeant insists on cremating a zombie, the scientists asks, \"Don't you think that once the ash is in the air, it will fall to the ground, and contaminate everything?\" To which the Sargeant boldly replies, \"Now you're talking science fiction.\" He also continues to mention the \"Science Fiction\" told by the scientists even at the end when everyone dies.Extras: Gallery, Trailers, and Interviews, most notably the one with Mattei where he insists he directed 40% of the scenes, yet cannot recall which ones or any other significant details.Bottom Line: A must see for zombie and Fulci fans.Rating: 7/10Molly Celaschi www.HorrorYearbook.com MySpace.com/HorrorYearbook",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a279b37dd894c09b4b95595e5f891a7",
            "input": "A lovely old - fashioned thriller coming on like a cross between Alfred Hitchcock and David Lynch,\"Red Rock West\" follows the misadventures of injured veteran unemployed oil worker Mr N.Cage as his luck turns from bad to worse after he ends up with an empty gas tank and barely enough money for a cup of coffee in a one ute town in the back of beyond. It has been established right from the start that Mr Cage might be down but he is not out,and he might be broke but he will not steal,not even in his present dire circumstances.Consequently when he is mistaken by Mr J.T. Walsh for the man he has commissioned to murder his wife,Mr Cage calls on the wife to warn her of her husband's intentions.In turn she,in the person of Miss L.F.Boyle, offers him even more money to murder Mr Walsh.Mr Cage decides to leave whilst he is still in front but as he is driving out of town he hits a man in the road.Tempted as he might be to drive on,he takes the man to hospital,where it turns out he has been shot.Mr Cage is detained by the Deputies who call the sheriff who turns out to be Mr J.T.Walsh. Events take a further complicated turn when,escaping from custody,Mr.Cage narrowly avoids being run over by the real hit-man on his way to fulfill his commission.About now you might be forgiven for thinking \"enough already\",but as it happens on the screen it seems a completely logical turn of events,the narrative flow of the movie at this point seeming unstoppable. Mr D.Hopper is comfortably cast as the hired killer,like Mr Cage a USMC veteran.This little piece of serendipity keeps Mr Cage alive long enough out-think the murderous trio and survive,a little more battered but still unbowed. It is a tribute to everybody involved that what sounds on paper remarkably like a piece of nonsense is in fact a tense exceptionally well made picture with fine performances all round. \"Red Rock West\" is a movie - lover's movie.Within five minutes you know you are going somewhere you've been before on plenty of occasions,but you'll be very happy during the trip.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6aac45b05377449f80773657b145ce57",
            "input": "Has to be one of the worst wastes of 35mm movie film ever unleashed on the public, the sequel to the at least entertaining pseudo-documentary original film \"The Legend of Boggy Creek\". Bad script, worse acting, etc., etc., Dawn Wells had to be hoping that Gilligan would come rescue her and take her back to the island just to escape from this piece of clap-trap.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90942ed707d744a5a1d5a3ad1e7f61dd",
            "input": "Anarchy and lawlessness reign supreme in the podunk hick hamlet of Elk Hills. The town elders deputize tough, cagey Vietnam veteran Aaron (a wonderfully robust and engaging performance by Kris Kristofferson) and several of his fellow vet buddies to clean up the place. The plan goes sour when Aaron and his cruel cronies decide to take over Elk Hills after they get rid of all the bad elements. It's up to Aaron's decent do-gooder brother Ben (amiably played by Jan-Michael Vincent) to put a stop to him before things get too out of hand. Writer/director George (\"Miami Blues,\" \"Gross Pointe Blank\") Armitage whips up a delightfully amoral, cynical and wickedly subversive redneck drive-in exploitation contemporary Western winner: he expertly creates a gritty, no-nonsense tone, keeps the pace brisk and unflagging throughout, and stages the plentiful action scenes with considerable muscular aplomb (the rousing explosive climax is especially strong and stirring). The first-rate cast of familiar B-feature faces constitutes as a major asset: Victoria Principal as Ben's sweet hottie girlfriend Linda, the fabulous Bernadette Peters as flaky saloon singer Little Dee, Brad Dexter as the feckless mayor, David Doyle as a slimy bank president, Andrew Stevens as an affable gas station attendant, John Carpenter movie regular Charles Cyphers as one of the 'Nam vets, Anthony Carbone as a smarmy casino manager, John Steadman as a folksy old diner owner, Paul Gleason as a mean strong-arm shakedown bully, and Dick Miller as a talentless piano player. Moral: Don't hire other people to do your dirty work. William Cronjager's slick cinematography, Gerald Fried's lively, harmonic hillbilly bluegrass score, and the abundant raw violence further add to the overall trashy fun of this unjustly neglected little doozy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa0f209d77784b778f55037b33308e4d",
            "input": "Having seen the Peter O'Toole version recently, I was ready to be awed by the smart writing in this version. Little time is spent on the fighting, which I prefer. Instead, we are shown all the many motives underlying both the French and English (who held Normandy) politicos and priests who put her to death. Even the worst hypocrite of them all, the archbishop, leaves us with the thought that \"Of course, she was innocent. The innocent have always had to suffer for the ambitions of the mighty. She had no idea what she was saying, no idea of the implications of blasphemy or going against the church. Unschooled, she had no idea of what the church's stand on such matters even was.\"Preminger was true to the myths surrounding her death, and I appreciated the preview on the tape that showed the flames reaching up and burning her. Why? They used gas jets in the movie, and 2 of them were stopped up. Suddenly, the air pressure blew out the stoppage and the flames leaped up right on her. Thankfully for her, they didn't have to repeat the shot as it was SO realistic: she WAS being burned!! Pretty traumatic introduction for an Iowa girl to her new career of acting.John Gielgud performed outstandingly. He is the English politico who is orchestrating the show. He also makes the point that once you condemn someone to death, you don't want to be around to watch them die. You might shrink from your 'duty' the next time...not that such delicacies bother the soul of our would-be president. We Christians, even the most anti-Semitic have no problem with falling back on the Old Testament when it comes to capital punishment, even though it was overridden by Jesus' words. Bring on public executions like this little girl's. Smelling burnt flesh might bring us respectable folks to our souls' senses.The only little 'pick' I have about this film is that we are not shown why the priest who has been so adamantly urging her burning becomes so suddenly so contrite, even to the point of madness. There should have been more expansion of his character, more dialogue--as the sudden 'coming to his senses' doesn't make sense.And, whether Graham Greene does this deliberately or not, St. Joan is such a self-assured little upstart, you almost but not quite, are glad she meets her come-uppance. And, when she turned down life in prison, for some reason I thought of Anne Sexton, the poet who accused Sylvia Plath of 'stealing her death' when she committed suicide ...knowing such an action guarantees immortality. You gotta wonder!!If ever there was a good example of obsessive thought and logic-tight compartments, this is one. St. Joan should have turned Buddhist and quieted the 'voices in her mind'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e799fb7fd5ab4c2b81a0bf521c47fd35",
            "input": "I loved this movie. Great storyline and actors and good movie sets. It told the story in a way I can easily understand and pay attention to without falling asleep. I would like to know where I could get the soundtrack. I can not find it anywhere. Please email me if you know where I could get the soundtrack. Other than not being able to find the soundtrack I thought the movie was fascinating. Swayze did a great job. I think this is some of his best work. His past movies were OK, but this one really told a story for a change. This will go down in history as being one of the best TV films ever aired. Congrats to the producers and writers of such a great piece of work.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce27742ac9bf41f1aa3fe38759374b28",
            "input": "The movie confuses religious ethics and ideals so much that it fails to create coherent argument against the death penalty on any level. By presenting the lawful execution of a convicted murder as the catalyst for the apocalyptic end of mankind the movie elevates a parent killer to the status of martyr for Christ. Somehow, according to the plot, god is outraged that society has chosen to rid it's self of a fanatic who killed his own parents by starting them on fire while they slept defenselessly in their beds. Yet this same god has no indignation for the acts of the killer. The lead character, an nonreligious pregnant suicidal woman, ultimately gives her own life in a defiant but implausible attempt to unsuccessfully save this convicted killer. In other threads of the underdeveloped plot Jesus comes back as a powerless and frustrated vagabond to symbolically unleash the wrath of God. The modern lackluster incarnation of Christ not just dehumanizes him but mocks the messianic ideal of all religions as well. He is unable to affect humanity for good and unemotionally skates the edges of life waiting for mankind to destroy it's self. Meanwhile, with little help from Jesus the mentally unstable pregnant woman finds herself with the ability to reincarnate herself into her newly born soulless child which somehow saves all of mankind from the wrath of the almighty. I also interpreted that as a statement in support of abortion on some levels. This movie which attempts to weave many religious themes into a thriller fails to make any religious point that I could clearly interpret except to mock people's beliefs. It raises many questions that it never even attempts to answer. It disregards the religious values of its audience while attempting to portray an asinine version of their fulfillment. Silly",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61f8cf9a1cd744ed9a506e857931a944",
            "input": "This is apparently one of Shemp's first shorts with the Stooges. (This excludes his much earlier vaudeville years with the team). But the threesome's comedic timing is at its honed best here. Aside from the intense slapstick scenes, there are others more subtle, but just as funny. Watch Larry when Shemp asks him to look at the camera for a snapshot. Or watch the real object prompting Moe's exclamation, \"Oh...highly polished mahogany!\"Emil Sitka is at his bewildered goofiest. And the goon may look scary, but he's somehow funny. He seems as frustrated and perplexed with the Stooges as are \"regular\" people in other shorts.For Shemp aficionados, this is a must have episode. It won't disappoint.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8184e84c301e43a8b4de8216ff9e544e",
            "input": "I admit, I had to fast forward through this poorly transferred DVD after about 30 minutes -- NOTHING was happening, and everyone has already described the \"plot.\" But has anyone mentioned the opening scene -- a butcher knife is stabbed through a wig and it's impaled on the grass in the front yard! I'm guessing the bratty kid did it, put it's never explained. Really trippy opening.I wish this had been a better written or thought out film, because what we're left with if pretty daft and a movie that makes no sense isn't a \"clever\" movie, it's just a poorly executed film.I would like to see a cleaned up version and if there was any missing footage, I would like to see if it would help. Otherwise, this is an odd little film that is best if fast-forwarded through!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11c85decf1c944a4954c5c94b178657f",
            "input": "I make just one apology for this film: there are far, far, too many wide angle close-ups, and if they irritate you beyond endurance, fair enough. They drove ME barmy for the first ten minutes or so. But after that I made a kind of a truce with the terrible cinematography; and long before the end of the film, I had ceased to care. This is too rich a comedy to be destroyed so easily. It's hilarious, it's witty, the comic delivery of ALL of the cast is flawless, and however much Usher peers at his characters through a cold, fish-eye lens - HE may not care for them much - he manages to present them with warmth. `Mystery Men' is, in fact, not only funnier, not only more clever, but also deeper, than anyone seems to have given it credit for being. The jokes in the Austin Powers movies, for instance, as well as being less funny than the jokes here, are also much more toothless. The satire of `Mystery Men' bites when there's something worth biting and gnaws gently when there isn't. It doesn't mock just any old thing. Which is why, contrary to what some (I must regard them as unobservant) critics have said, it never runs out of ideas.The `super' heroes are an attractive bunch. Sure, they're second-rate, but they're not merely second rate. The Blue Rajah, for instance, does nothing but throw cutlery at people, and he isn't THAT good at it. On the other hand, neither is he comically bad. He's better in his limited field than most people, and he DOES practise diligently. He's not a buffoon, which makes him a much funnier character than if he was. If Superman is Christ in a cape, the Mystery Men are all the minor demigods from the foothills of Mount Olympus, in capes. Much funnier; also much more endearing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-340b76cff8dd4c16929322410aaa9936",
            "input": "This video contains an outsmart way to confuse and manipulate Americans about Islam. It's a pity that the people who did it really believe that American people is so dumb to believe in it, perhaps, as an American citizen, every person must protest against this kind of crap. If you want to know the truth about Islam, don't let nobody tell you... THE QURAN IS PUBLIC! you can read it by yourself and decide if what they say it's true or false...The video uses a lot of audiovisual strategies directed to manipulate and associate things that are not even related. The music used at some points prepare the public to hate what they see, even if they don't really understand what's going on in there. They use images that are misplaced from their original content.To end the comment I would like to make a reflexion... Don't you think you can do the same exact movie with every religion in the world?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9798936d4f6949c6bcbf77a9d44f5dbd",
            "input": "I saw this film at the Toronto International Film Festival. Filmed during an actual qualifying match for the 2006 World Cup, Offside works brilliantly as both a comedy and a tragedy. The film follows the fortunes of a group of young women who are caught trying to sneak into a football match at Tehran's Azadi Stadium. The country's Islamic religious leaders have decreed that women may not sit with men at sporting events, lest they be exposed to cursing and other morally questionable behaviour. This hasn't stopped the country's young female fans, who continue to sneak in using various tricks. But Panahi focuses on a small group who have been caught and are being detained agonizingly close to the action. They beg the bored soldiers guarding them to let them go or at least to let them watch the match. The soldiers tell them they shouldn't have tried to get in, that they could have watched the game at home on TV. They banter back and forth in almost real-time as the game continues, just off- camera.There is one very funny sequence where a young soldier accompanies one of the girls to the restroom. Since there are no female restrooms at stadiums, he has to clear the room of any men before he can allow her to go in. Plus, he makes her cover her face so no one can see she's a woman. This is accomplished using a poster of Iranian soccer star Ali Daei as a mask, with eye holes punched out.You get a real sense that even the soldiers are baffled by the prohibition, and are only carrying out their orders so as to hasten the end of their compulsory military service. One soldier complains that he was supposed to be on leave so he could take care of his family's cattle in the countryside. Little by little, the girls and the soldiers talk to each other, and there are numerous small acts of kindness on both sides to show that these are basically good people living in terrible circumstances. However, the soldiers' constant reminder that \"the chief\" is on his way lends a sense of menace, since we don't know what sort of punishment the women will face.Unlike most Iranian films, which are known for their strong visuals, Offside is filmed in a realist style with no artifice. In fact, the film was made during the actual qualifying match against Bahrain that took place on June 5, 2005. The \"plot\" in many ways was determined by the result on the pitch. If Iran won the match, they would qualify. If they lost, they would not. Since the World Cup has come and gone, I don't think it is a spoiler to say that Iran won the match. The scenes of celebration at the end of the film were real and spontaneous, which gave the film a real authenticity. Seeing how much this meant to the people of Iran was deeply touching.As well, one of the young women makes reference at the end of the film to seven fans who died during the Iran-Japan match on March 25, just a few weeks before. They were trampled to death after police began to spray the crowd with water to move them in a certain direction. Knowing that this was a real-life tragedy added another level of poignancy to the celebrations.I don't want to go off on a long political tangent, but this film gave me real hope that there are those in Iran who are hoping for change and working at it. Iran is a nation of young people, and it is only a matter of time before they take the place of their elders in the political sphere. Films like this one show the proud spirit of the Iranian people in spite of their present difficulties, and it's my sincere hope that there is a brighter future for them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc7f7ee2922947249dfa76e7706d471c",
            "input": "I think this is almost all I need to say. I feel obliged to explain my actions though. I've basically never seen such an armateur production, and I mean that in all senses of the word. Although the physical camera work, boom MIC operation and other technical aspects of this film are laughable, unfortunately its not the only areas.Unlike some classic independent films that have been saved by their scripts great characterization and plot, this unfortunately has an awful script, awful acting and worst of all, awful annoying characters.It's a crime that for the every independent film that gets, distribution like Haiku Tunnel, there's a 101 other indie films that died silent deaths. I don't know who the Kornbluth brothers know at Sony, but that can be my only explanation as to how this amateur family production ever got distribution. I'm quite bemused as to why they picked this up.The ONLY part of this film that holds out any intrigue is its title. However, the reason for that is even a let down. I hope this review will save a few people that may be intrigued by this films title from going to watch it. I've seen a lot of films in my time, and I'm very forgiving when in the cinema, but this was too much. I'll never forget 'tunnel', for marking an important point in my life experience of cinema. Shame it's such a low point.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3efd51a61b8e4af1a6d002f3e191fda1",
            "input": "Ben Stiller doesn't so much act as react. And he does it very well. He is very dependent on the comedy going on around him. In There's Something About Mary, the stand-up hair scene only works because of Stiller trying to keep a straight face. When he confronts Mary's other two suitors, he is the unfunniest guy in the room but the scene is hilarious.In Along Came Polly, the formula breaks down for reasons that are difficult to fathom. Stiller is surrounded by an array of comic talent. Hank Azaria and Philip Seymour Hoffman get the best lines, of which there are too few. Having said that, Hoffman relies a little too much on bodily humour - you know we are in trouble when they go to the fart jokes to raise a laugh. A basketball scene where Hoffman hams it up is completely overplayed (though it throws up one predicament in the form of a shirtless opponent that does raise a smile - noticeably through Stiller's reaction). However, everyone seems to be acting in a bubble, there is very little reaction. Hoffman and Stiller's characters could have played off each other much, much more. Aniston again reprises her Rachael role, but Stiller is no Ross. It is more of a \"Joey with a crush on Rachael\" scenario.Polly is a by-the-numbers rom-com and that is its failing - it lacks heart. You don't root for the characters. With a little bit more work we could have had a deeper story, but in the end the film's failure comes down to poor writing. Worth watching if it pops up on TV on a slow night, but you'll regret forking out cash to see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb86c78391a04446b548d40d7ebd301f",
            "input": "There have been some funny movies about spirits to come out of Hollywood. Cary Grant was an angel in \"The Bishop's Wife\" (1947). Of course the best were the Topper movies in the late '30s-early '40s. And, more recently, Warren Beatty's \"Heaven Can Wait\" (1978), which was a remake of 1941's \"Here Comes Mr. Jordan.\" These were well-written, funny, entertaining comedies, all of which centered around supernatural creatures like ghosts and angels.Now comes writer-director Jeff Lowell, making his feature film debut with a story of an unlikable, bitchy young woman, Kate (Eva Longoria Parker), who gets killed on her wedding day and then comes back to harass the fledgling spiritualist, Ashley (Lake Bell) who is falling for Kate's fiancé, Henry (Paul Rudd). One thing that is clear at the outset: Longoria Parker is no Constance Bennett (Marion Kerby in the first two \"Topper\" films), who is the standard against whom all female ghosts are measured.There is a line right at the beginning when Henry's sister, Chloe (Lindsay Sloane) tells Henry, \"You don't smile.\" That aptly described my situation throughout this film.The main problem with the film is that the script just isn't very funny. But it's made worse by Longoria Parker's presence that just rubbed me the wrong way every time she appeared on the screen. Just to start out with, compounding her lack of comedic talent, she is covered with so much pancake makeup, who knows what she really looks like? Kate gets killed while setting up for her wedding by a falling frozen statue. She's so unreasonable that the angel who instructs her about what her afterlife is about walks out on her (well, she actually just fades out), so Kate finds herself back on earth as a ghost without knowing what her mission is.Chloe wants Henry to snap out of the funk into which he has naturally descended after Kate's death (from what I saw of Kate, he should have felt a wonderful relief), so she introduces him to Ashley, who really doesn't know what she's doing as a spiritualist (she is also a cateress to make ends meet), to see if she can get Henry back in touch with Kate. There's a lot of meshugaas that goes on.The vacuity of the film is epitomized by a \"B\" story revolving around Ashley's assistant, Dan (Jason Biggs). This is thrown in near the end, but the way Ashley handles it indicates that she's as much of a boob as Kate. Since Dan is apparently attracted to both of these severely flawed women, he deserves whatever he gets.Eventually Kate appears to Ashley and the fun should begin. It doesn't, and more's the pity because in other hands this could have been pretty funny. As it is, Norman Z. McLeod, Constance Bennett, Roland Young, Alan Mowbray, and Co. must be turning over in their graves to see this is what their brilliance in the first two \"Topper\" films has wrought.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4afb269d2d442bba3904873597bac43",
            "input": "This is the worst thing the TMNT franchise has ever spawned. I was a kid when this came out and I still thought it was deuce, even though I liked the original cartoon.There's this one scene I remember when the mafia ape guy explains to his minions what rhetorical questions are. It's atrocious. Many fans hate on the series for including a female turtle, but that didn't bother me. So much so that I didn't even remember her until I read about the show recently. All in all, it's miserably forgettable.The only okay thing was the theme song. Guilty pleasure, they call it... Nananana ninja...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5edda29ef89494e9e02669c9dcd840d",
            "input": "I first saw Rob Roy twelve years ago. With little money for entertainment, I rented it for my fiancé and I to watch on a bone chilling winter's night. The movie I had wanted was gone, so I rented this instead, not expecting much, and was very much surprised with how good it was. I just recently watched it again, and loved it every bit as much as the first time. For those unfamiliar with the story, it's about Scottish outlaw Robert Roy MacGregor, a cattleman and folk hero. From the little I know about the man and his story, liberties have been taken with the facts, but it's a movie, not a textbook, and so the filmmakers can be excused. Basically, the plot of the movie is that Rob Roy borrows money from the Marquis of Montrose to buy cattle which he then intends to sell and reap a large profit from. But, his plan is foiled when the friend entrusted with the money is robbed of the cash and murdered in the forest. Our hero finds himself on the run after failing to settle the matter with the Marquis, and Mary, his wife, suffers a sadistic rape at the hands of Archibald Cunningham, a smarmy Englishman with no soul. Atrocities ensue, until, in an immensely satisfying conclusion, Rob carves Archibald up like a Christmas turkey. There are many great performances in this movie, but allow me to touch specifically on a few. Liam Neeson, as usual, is fantastic, a sexy beast you can't take your eyes off of. Honestly, this man is like ice cream: even when he's bad he's good. His Rob Roy is an honourable man struggling to provide for those who depend on him, in the best way he knows how. Jessica Lange, as Mary, gives this woman a fierceness which is a nice change from the simpering, dull movie wives audiences are usually forced to endure. You just know she doesn't take any b.s from Rob, or anyone else for that matter. Tim Roth is completely over the top with his portrayal of the evil Archibald, yet somehow, it works. All the posturing and preening, combined with some wicked dialogue, result in one of the most memorable movie villains in recent memory. Combine all of this, and the stellar work by other supporting players, with the luscious scenery of Scotland, and you have what amounts to one really, really cool movie. If you haven't seen this, I highly recommend that you do.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4970f62e5be84ef2aad15349a3867e8a",
            "input": "Like many Americans, I was first introduced to the works of Hayao Miyazaki when I saw \"Spirited Away.\" I fell in love with the film and have seen it many times. Now I am on a search to see every film by Miyazaki. One of his earlier works is \"Castle in the Sky.\" Although it's still enjoyable, it's not as good as \"Spirited Away\" (though comparing this or any film to his 2002 masterpiece is perhaps unfair).A young boy named Pazu (James Van Der Beek) is working in a mine late one night, when he sees a girl fall slowly from the sky. When she wakes up the next morning, she introduces herself as Sheeta (Anna Paquin). But Sheeta has a secret, and before he knows it, Pazu is pulled into an adventure that will lead him into danger with pirates, the army and a lost floating city.Going into a film by Hayao Miyazaki means you can expect one thing: a sense of wonder and magic. Many filmmakers have tried, but no one can create a sense of magic and awe like Miyazaki. Watching a film by Miyazaki is like experiencing a fantastic dream from your childhood.Because the film is animated, dubbing the film does not pose much of a problem because it is next to impossible to determine whether or not the lip movements match up to the words. It also helps that the translated dialogue is well-written and voiced by talented actors. The voice acting is varied. James Van Der Beek fares best. He brings an irresistible enthusiasm and excitement to the role of Pazu that is perfect for the character. Anna Paquin is nearly as good as Sheeta. She's frightened by the events going on around her, but she knows what she has to do. Mark Hamill is unrecognizable as the evil Muska. He's dangerous and wants something from Sheeta, and will do anything to get it. The other voices are bad. Cloris Leachman is awful as Dola. Leachman may have won an Oscar for \"The Last Picture Show,\" but she's annoying as the pirate leader. Leachman gives the character an obnoxious squawk that's nearly always monotonous. It's so bad it nearly ruins the film! Jim Cummings is an effective voice-over actor, but he's miscast as the general.I would definitely recommend seeing \"Castle in the Sky.\" I'll probably end up buying it myself. But even though it's not as good as \"Spirited Away,\" it's still pretty good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a2a748c71a44e99bd914076d6c84b2f",
            "input": "Noll's comfortable way of rolling out blunt comments, often with expletives, to describe things that he is more knowledgeable about than most is quite refreshing. There is one other character in the film that constantly tries to verbalize complicated issues, using more language than necessary. This guy should never have been given a Thesaurus. Cut to Noll and you know you're in for a treat!The way the pioneers of big wave surfing are portrayed is very evocative of a \"lost era\". Nevermind the fact that no one knows how these guys made a living, much less took care of issues like medical care. The use of old film clips throughout was masterfully done.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db2ed5d8bc17405d841f546c232d8b5f",
            "input": "Richard Willaims is an animation god. He was hampered in directing this film by the producer. The final product is a very uneven film with a very convoluted story, but some amazing moments of animation (like Emery Hawkins' \"Greedy\"). Joe Raposo's repetitive music doesn't help either. It was made in wide screen so the VHS doesn't show it in all it's glory, let's hope for a letterboxed DVD someday. Still it's worth watching for some eye popping animation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f79df1b7a28047c2a70744f49de91dba",
            "input": "It looks to me as if the creators of \"The Class Of Nuke 'Em High\" wanted it to become a \"cult\" film, but it ends up as any old high school B-movie, only tackier. The satire feels totally overshadowed by the extremely steretyped characters. It's very un-funny, even for a turkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc7f61ca99e1475681674c329021488f",
            "input": "When I saw this \"documentary\", I was disappointed to see Serbian Propaganda in action once again. Even though Serbia and its nationalist politics is main reason of Yugoslavian breakup, it is not mentioned in this \"documentary\", which is made by Bogdanovich whose name tells us that he is Serbian and his movie that he is far from being objective. It is one in the set of lies pushed by Milosevic regime. Everyone else is guilty only Serbians were right and victims, even though most of the War Criminals tried in Hague are Serbs, even though Serbs are one who have committed genocide against Bosnians , and attacked Slovenia, Croatia,and Bosnia all independent nations recognized by the UN.Breakup of Yugoslavia was not avoidable because Serbians did not want to release the grip their nationalism has put on Federal Yugoslav government, so SLovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, and Bosnia were forced to become independent nations in order to protect their interests.If you are interested in an objective documentary about breakup of Yugoslavia, and fact led documentary this is not it . You should watch \"Yugoslavia:Death of a Nation\", Made by Discovery channel and BBC.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e24f6ecc7d646bd80c257b5281d67b6",
            "input": "American movies about war and Nazis simply cannot be good. They can not refrain from becoming idiot and following an agenda. All Nazis are bad, crazy, too proud, and Americans are so modest yet so capable and sensible and human. Come on, stop this bullshit. The main character says something like \"by this trial, we have to make aggressive war a crime\". Is America a peaceful nation with its world #1 $420 billion \"defense\" budget (#2 China with just $51b)? Is it simply spent in this without any... ROI? Why portray America as a peaceful nation when it isn't? I deeply dislike movies with an agenda - they throw art to hell and try to persuade us into believing something. Hollywood should put a label on movies, just as record companies have that \"parental advisory\" label. We should have a \"bullshit advisory\", \"propaganda advisory\" or a \"politically correct advisory\" label on some movies. This is one of them.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-171aa1a2b5ae447f9672fb0b7d09a4ba",
            "input": "Personnaly I really loved this movie, and it particularly moved me. The two main actors are giving us such great performances, that at the end, it is really heart breaking to know what finally happened to their characters.The alchemy between Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson is marvelous, and the song are just great the way they are. That's why I didn't feel surprised when I learned it had won 5 golden globe awards (the most rewarded movie at the Golden Globes), an Oscar and even a Grammy. This movie is a classic that deserves to be seen by anyone. A great movie, that has often been criticized (maybe because Streisand dared to get involved in it, surely as a \"co-director\"). Her artistry is the biggest, and that will surely please you!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b31652e2e4a44d9acb4312858bf919b",
            "input": "An excellent and accurate film... McGovern takes great pains to research and document his writing and it pays off. He is not afraid to tell the truth, even though it might draw unfavourable reviews and comments from some who like stories to be clean and sweet and glossy.Once again, McGovern brings in Christopher Eccleston, though not in as high a profile a role as he played in Hillsborough. I found this movie as accurate, well acted and well presented as Hillsborough and I applaud McGovern for his poignant unapologetic writing. Well done and my hat is off to the writer, the actors, the production crew. A great film!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efaed34233254a4285925d555895f837",
            "input": "Faithful to the work of Pearl S. Buck whose years spent in China as a child of Missionary parents that provided her with deep insights into the Chinese culture and its philosophy, this film adaptation is brilliantly done, both in technically artistry and acting.Wang Lung is a humble farmer grateful for the basics of life: to survive off of his land and to be newly wed to Olan, a servant to a rich and powerful family in the village area. Despite Wang Lung and Olan's best efforts to farm the land, raise kids, and build savings and wealth, a famine threatens to wipe out everything they have worked for. Choosing not to sell their land, a traditional Asian belief, they instead journey to a major city to wait out the famine. While in the city, they are reduced to begging and being just one of hundreds of other unfortunate homeless families. Although not a looter, Olan gets caught up in a mob looting at a rich man's house. She's summarily rounded up for execution by the army, but is saved at the last minute. Her good fortune, however, is that she found valuable jewels at the looting site that affords her and her family the opportunity to return to their farm to start over again. The newly found wealth transforms Wang Lung. He becomes selfish, self-centered and takes credit for the find. He becomes a very rich farmer but that only makes matters worse as he increasingly becomes more unappreciative, arrogant and difficult to reason with. He loses touch with the basic things in life that money can't buy: loyalty, commitment, trust, fairness and honesty. As punishment, nature once again turns the table on Wang Lung by sending a plague of locust to destroy everything he has. Brought to his knees, Wang Lung enlists the aid of all friends, former friends, workers, and family. With all that help, he succeeds in saving the farm. From that experience, he once again returns to humbleness and an appreciation for the basics in life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6d6cd41018a49c0b4d3d8518689b90b",
            "input": "I'll be blunt and to the point. This film is not good at all. The film buff part of me hated the acting, script, story, direction and almost all of the editing. Amanda Peet has proven that she can act, as she was a high point of 'The Whole Nine Yards'. So she should have avoided this movie with a ten foot pole. However, the infantile part of me found this film to be very funny. If you can forget about how underpar the production quality is, and if you find smut jokes funny, then you should be all right. And for those of you who can't get off your pedestal, thats your choice. My inner child hasen't died, and I laughed a fair bit. Even then, only a 3 out of ten, because as a movie, it really does stink.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5fe6e162b2e54be0834a07f0c697d829",
            "input": "I read Tom Robbins' EVEN COWGIRLS GET THE BLUES as a teenager. I loved every word. It was sexy, funny, and full of glamorous scenery and beautiful writing. But when I saw the movie, I could not believe what a dull, sour, joyless piece of junk it was. How did this happen? I think someone in Hollywood read this book and filed it under \"GAY PRIDE -- WOMEN -- LESBIANS.\" (That's the Library of Congress subject heading.) Now anyone over 12 who reads the book will know it has NOTHING TO DO with real lesbians, any more than STAR WARS is about real space travel. The book was obviously -- and I do mean OBVIOUSLY --written by a heterosexual male who loves the IDEA of lesbians (in the nude, all the time)but has never really met one.Still, someone in Hollywood said, \"uh oh, better give this to a Gay director or Gay People will make trouble.\" So they handed it to Gus Van Sant. Nothing against the man, but -- however Gay he may really be -- he has not a clue as to how to make a funny film. Gus Van Sant took a straight man's playful fantasy of guilt-free girl/girl action and male voyeurism turned it into a dull, literal-minded Lesbian Power Recruiting Poster. It's like turning an Oscar Wilde comedy into an Arthur Miller tragedy. Not pretty.The main clue that Gus Van Sant had absolutely no idea what to do with the source material is the riotously bad casting. His clout allowed him to hire the very best. His ignorance of the novel's real subtext (a straight man's fantasy, not a gay pride recruiting poster)caused him to make choices that were not only bad, but bizarre.Let's meet the cast of EVEN COWGIRLS GET THE BLUES.PAT MORITA as \"THE CHINK\" Okay, there are few name-recognition Asian actors. And Pat Morita, in HAPPY DAYS, was fairly funny. But casting him as THE CHINK was wrong, wrong, wrong. Pat Morita has no idea that the Chink is a very funny man. (Gus didn't tell him.) Pat also doesn't seem to know that the Chink is . . . well, SEXY!!! In the book he's not wise old Mr. Miyagi. He's more like Hugh Hefner! He's a randy old goat and he knows A LOT about pleasing the nubile and responsive Sissy AND Bonanza Jellybean. (You see, in the book, they aren't REALLY lesbians. Do you get that this is a straight man's fantasy yet?) JOHN HURT as \"THE COUNTESS.\" Okay, he's a gay friendly man. But he is a SERIOUS, SHAKESPEAREAN ACTOR!!!! You need someone who is fun, and camp, for this role. For John Hurt to be cast as a goofy guy like the Countess is tragic and sad. I kept expecting Paul Scofield to wander in all dressed up as Thomas More, and sadly shake his head. \"Now, Richard, you know you've lost your soul entirely. For shame, my former student!\" And yes, John Hurt was funny (and pretty gay) as Caligula. But that was BLACK humor, not playful and breezy humor like the book.RAIN PHOENIX as \"Bonanza Jellybean.\" No talent, no training, no problem. Except that in the book Bonanza is funny, playful, cheerful, (mostly) heterosexual, and loving. In the movie she's sullen, passive, expressionless, and dull. As for her taste for women, Robbins in the book puts it like this. \"God knows I love women, but nothing can take the place of a man that fits.\" Uh, Gus? Did you read this book? UMA THURMAN as \"Sissy Hankshaw.\" This is a tough role. In the book Sissy really is an unusually passive and timid heroine. Still, a more accomplished actress might have manufactured a twinkle in her eye, or a sway in her walk, to imply some sort of hidden strength or hidden enjoyment of her adventures. Uma doesn't pull it off, probably because Gus never told her Sissy is supposed to ENJOY being a hitch hiker with a beautiful body and giant thumbs. Uma plays it more like she's in a TV movie about a girl dying of leukemia. This movie is sour and dull. And I accuse YOU, Gus Van Sant!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2096eb730aa4f9591c30acb60cd0c46",
            "input": "I have been familiar with the fantastic book of 'Goodnight Mister Tom' for absolutely ages and it was only recently when I got the chance to watch this adaption of it. I have heard lots of positive remarks about this, so I had high hopes. Once this film had finished, I was horrified.This film is not a good film at all. 'Goodnight Mister Tom' was an extremely poor adaption and practically 4.5/10 of the book was missed out. Particularly, I found that a lot of the characters and some great scenes in the book were not in this. There was not much dialogue, It was rushed and far too fast-moving, but I was mostly upset by the fact that you never got to see the bonding and love between William Beech and Tom in this film which was a true let down. The casting was not all that good,either. I thought this could have been really good, but it was so different to the book! Anextremely poor adaption, one of the worst I've seen. This deserves a decent remake that'd better be 1000 times better than this pile of garbage.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95c4e37fb1c24ed7be49f60a4f47df31",
            "input": "I remember watching this movie with my friends when we were 4 years old, but the weird thing is that I never watched it after that. The other day I was babysitting and my cousin never saw All Dogs Go To Heaven so we rented both movies and watched them together today and he really loved these movies. So many memories came back watching this movie once again and I have to admit I even cried a little. I'm 22 years old and the ending still gets to me. All Dogs Go To Heaven is one of the most touching animated films and I'm shocked honestly by this rating of 5.8, I thought this movie would bring back good memories for others as well. I admit the animation was a bit typical but the story is just so charming and fun.Charlie is a gambling dog who gets killed by another gambling dog, Carface. But when Charlie wants revenge he comes back to Earth with a watch that can't stop ticking or that's the end of his life again. When he and his best friend, Itchy, look for Carface and spy on him they find out how Carface gets all his money, he has a little orphan girl who talks to animals and finds out who is going to win the races. Charlie takes the girl, Ann-Marie, and makes fake promises in order to get the money. But he ends up learning that maybe he should put Ann-Marie first before himself when Carface goes back to him with a vengeance.All Dogs Go To Heaven is the perfect family film, it's not Disney, but this is an excellent family film to watch. Not to mention that it's just so cute and touching. I know it's ridicules and some people call me crazy, but this movie for me when I was a kid made me believe that dogs have souls. How could they not? They're just so loving, and I think I'm going to cry again. But anyways, I would just recommend this movie for anyone, it's a fun movie to watch.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d805f3134c943f89eaf52e586c7818b",
            "input": "I love this movie because I grew up around harness racing. Pat Boone behind the sulky reminds me of my father who was drawn to the trotters because, unlike thoroughbred jockeys, men of normal height and weight can be drivers. Yes, the 1944 Home in Indiana is a better movie, but it's also a very different movie. April Love is light and easy to watch, a feel good movie. (Disappointing though that Pat Boone's religious/moral views prohibited him from ever kissing the girl! Quite a change from today's standard fare.) Home in Indiana with Walter Brennan (filmed in black and white with no hint that anyone will ever burst into song) captures the stress and struggle better thereby making the ultimate accomplishment more satisfying but it requires a bigger emotional investment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b3a74b3377543168d06ba477416e2d4",
            "input": "Having watched this movie on the SciFi channel, I can only conclude that this film was made by a bunch of amateurs who have never seen a movie in their lives. The film is an endless sequence of bizarre occurrences, or \"delights\" as the friend reading over my shoulder is telling me. The plot isn't really worth commenting as, but basically a plane carrying football players crashes into Yeti territory. Before the movie is over, we are treated to yetis ripping hearts out, yetis waddling in an effort to run before jumping 50 meters, yetis ripping a man's legs off and beating him with them, a woman killing a rabbit at 30 meters with a javelin, a yeti surviving several bullets and being set on fire with no apparent harm, a yeti dangling off a cliff by holding to a man's shoe, yet then jumps off, and a whole collection of further, bizarre occurrences. Basically, if you aren't staying up on a Saturday for the expressed purpose of watching the worst of SciFi channel original movies, avoid this film like the plague. Or as my friend reading over my shoulder says: \"It's the best movie I have ever seen.\" To which the friend on my right says: \"Only battle techno music could have made it better.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eee188a4ec7c41228f0ac0c595e24fae",
            "input": "The pilot is extremely well done. It lays out how the characters bond in future episodes. I don't think anyone could have created a better pilot for this show. It displays remarkable creativity on the writers part. Although not everything was straightened out because it was the very first episode, a lot of events that happen in future seasons were demonstrated in the pilot. An example would be Ross and Rachels future relationship. Even though the nervousness of a first episode appeared, it was overcome by an amazing plot and outstanding cast choice.Bravo.A great start to an unbeatable comedy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ebd4be2f7614dabad03d84ec3c46a2c",
            "input": "Meatball Machine is an amazing splatter film, it has an original plot with young love, buckets of blood, and weird alien creatures that mutate people into freakish robotic war machines.Now the film isn't for everyone, people who love splatter films or the movie Tetsuo: the Iron Man will applaud it.The special effects can be cheesy at some points of the film, but your not exactly suppose to take the film very seriously.Yet, all in all it's a lot of fun, well if you find budding romantics infested with slimy tumor like gobbles who seek to destroy each other in bloody alien oozing battles.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-669f2862609b4df5a7282d9f2394164e",
            "input": "Firstly, I would like to point out that people who have criticised this film have made some glaring errors. Anything that has a rating below 6/10 is clearly utter nonsense.Creep is an absolutely fantastic film with amazing film effects. The actors are highly believable, the narrative thought provoking and the horror and graphical content extremely disturbing. There is much mystique in this film. Many questions arise as the audience are revealed to the strange and freakish creature that makes habitat in the dark rat ridden tunnels. How was 'Craig' created and what happened to him?A fantastic film with a large chill factor. A film with so many unanswered questions and a film that needs to be appreciated along with others like 28 Days Later, The Bunker, Dog Soldiers and Deathwatch.Look forward to more of these fantastic films!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22eee2cd9ebd4411928506a8b6d7b700",
            "input": "So i consider myself pretty big into the anime scene, with very few shows i simply WILL NOT WATCH.this show, however, i would recommend to anyone.Quite possibly the most Original series to date, it;s got just about everything i could ask for. A side story, so to speak, about an unconditional love that will NOT be admitted to, a very blatant comedy, and a very well put together voice acting cast (both Japanese and American translation).If not for the terribly funny aspect to it, it would be, just another anime.More or less, as i have noticed, a 'love it or hate it', very few people i have seen introduced to this series will end up with a distaste for it.Original to the core, with everything you could ask for in an afternoon, bet the house on this series. I'm ready to ASSURE you that you will enjoy it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22745475a7804667bc0ff20de6128dd2",
            "input": "Says Andy: \"Nobody gets hurt, everybody wins.\" Before he says it, we know the opposite is true: Everybody gets hurt, nobody wins. This is a new strand in American movies, or perhaps an old strand brought back at long last. Think \"Eastern Promises\", \"There Will Be Blood\", \"No Country for Old Men\". These movies are dark, serious, extremely well made, and don't care about happy endings. I love them. \"Before the Devil Knows You're Dead\" fits the general description, but creates an atmosphere all its own. Kelly Masterson's debut script is as close as a Hollywood movie will ever get to a Greek tragedy. Paying tribute to fellow veteran director Stanley Donen, Sidney Lumet expertly and soberly turns the sombre story into an outstanding, old school character drama. The opening shots, although of an obese accountant doggy-styling his trophy wife, have the look and feel of a Dutch master's painting. By contrast, the drug dealer's condo looks more like a string of Mondrians. Great performances all around. Only Albert Finney's character Charles feels a little over-acted, eyes wide and mouth agape almost all the time. But then he is in trouble deep, deeper than any of the troubles most of us will ever know. For compensation, Marisa Tomei is super hot. But of course you don't need me to tell you that. Why her character Gina would want to be with a guy like Andy, we're never told, but that's okay. Action is character, after all. The unique and magic touch of Carter Burwell's music makes this fine movie a masterpiece. Don't miss it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4d93a0d55074a3fb1efc63af049eb4d",
            "input": "Look, there's nothing spectacularly offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a typical rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it really has no sense of movement, you feel as though you could get up and walk away at any moment. The production of the movie also has the feel of a debut movie made about fifteen years ago. I'd recommend re-watching a classic movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this shallow imitation. Oh, one other BIG problem...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously disappointed with the way they've made him look here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11cf06c0485941a0aabfc722bffa1385",
            "input": "Quite what the producers of this appalling adaptation were trying to do is impossible to fathom.A group of top quality actors, in the main well cast (with a couple of notable exceptions), who give pretty good performances. Penelope Keith is perfect as Aunt Louise and equally good is Joanna Lumley as Diana. All do well with the scripts they were given.So much for the good. The average would include the sets. Nancherrow is nothing like the house described in the book, although bizarrely the house they use for the Dower House looks remarkably like it. It is clear then that the Dower House is far too big. In the later parts, the writers decided to bring the entire story back to the UK, presumably to save money, although with a little imagination I have no doubt they could have recreated Ceylon.Now to the bad. The screenplay. This is such an appallingly bad adaptation is hard to find words to condemn it. Edward does not die in the battle of Britain but survives, blinded. He makes a brief appearance then commits suicide - why?? Loveday has changed from the young woman totally in love with Gus to a sensible farmer's wife who can give up the love her life with barely a tear (less emotional than Brief Encounter). Gus, a man besotted and passionately in love, is prepared to give up his love without complaint. Walter (Mudge in the book) turns from a shallow unfaithful husband to a devoted family man. Jess is made into a psychologically disturbed young woman who won't speak. Aunt Biddy still has a drink problem but now without any justification. The Dower House is occupied by the army for no obvious reason other than a very short scene with Jess who has a fear of armed soldiers. Whilst Miss Mortimer's breasts are utterly delightful, I could not see how their display on several occasions moved the plot forward. The delightfully named Nettlebed becomes the mundane Dobson. The word limit prevents me from continuing the list.There is a sequel (which I lost all interest in watching after this nonsense) and I wonder if the changes were made to create the follow on story. It is difficult to image that Rosamunde Pilcher would have approved this grotesque perversion of her book; presumably she lost her control when the rights were purchased.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c5aa450d36d495fa874244fa033e064",
            "input": "The only words you need fear more than Joe Don Baker if your thinking of watching a film are Greydon Clark , and if they are both there , run for your life . However this is a very funny film because they actually take themselves seriously ! It starts out bad and goes downhill from there , repeated scenes , the Good The Bad and The Ugly like shootout will have you rolling on the floor with laughter .Yes , he's the best deputy sheriff in Texas , tracking a mafia hit-man to Malta as only he can . He makes his own rules , does things his own way , all the while wearing cowboy boots and sidearms cowboy style . You want to see a bad but funny film ? Go ahead on , its your move !",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-494f18490a3140e280d480f7da0e55d0",
            "input": "I'm here again in your local shopping mall (of course, 'cause that's where the high school kids hang out!!!!!) to demonstrate how awful \"BENDY POO: PROM COURIER\" really is!!!!! To prove how bad this joke of a DCOM this is......we're going to take these four sumo wrestlers, and stuff them into this photo booth. How...cozy!!!!! Hai! Huuuuuuuarrrrghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Uh!!!!! How awful is it????? It's so bad, Disney Channel flushes away its money, yet again, with those exciting yet determining 10-second promos, keeping the viewers wondering, \"WHEN IS THIS GOING TO BE ON?????\" And then, suddenly, when it DOES come on, for one, this not only got a higher TV rating than usual, but this was only seen once!!!!! Oh, no!!!!! One time everyone!!!!! Plus, this movie is about high school and stuff, and believe me, I will NOT go any further with what else is in there.....Say ch...smile!!!!! (SNAP!) Avoid this one at all costs. 0/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b220da4d01c4244bef1daa9de25bb2f",
            "input": "I just watched \"The Last Wave\" in my school's fine arts library. It's intriguing, like all Peter Weir's stuff, but it's not always as attention-holding as I would have liked. I found myself fascinated by the ideas being thrown at me (because they are very well handled by the film's director Weir)but at the same time I was not stimulated enough by them. AKA I got a little bored in spots.The plot surrounds an Aussie lawyer who becomes obsessed with certain dreams he has which link him to an Aborigone group he is defending.It starts out with an intense weather sequence and has some very awesome mood effects throughout (most notably the bizarre, \"belching\" sound design)and strong direction; but it just didn't entertain me like Weir's later films do. I might just need to watch it again though.Good film about obsession and mystery. Because, in the end, the mystery that exists between the whites and the Aboriginies offers some very severe consequences.God bless Peter Weir, though. For him alone this film is worth watching ... very organic director. Like an Aussie response Malick! I'd give it a 7 because it's got enough great ideas to overcome its boring moments.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d61a38d4bf943b29d947b8edfa2481a",
            "input": "Let me be clear. I've used IMDb for years. But only today I went through the trouble of registering on the site, just so I could give this movie the lowest possible rating. I've seen hundreds of films, some of them bad, a few awful. Never, though, have i seen such a contrast of pretense and incompetence, of high intentions and failure.Mira Sorvino is horribly cast as the princess, but entirely unbelievable as Phocion, a young boy. Fiona Shaw is always an entertaining character, but the dialogue in the film is much worse, even, than in the insipid French play that is the source (Marivaux never reached Hollywood until now, and we should keep it that way).To illustrate, for example, that Leontine is a brilliant, passionate philosopher and scientist, she is shown frantically pouring chemicals from beaker to beaker, shouting out names of famous scientists. And the romance between Agis and the princess is played even sillier. For this, the pair should receive a joint 'Clair Danes' award, which in a just world would be awarded for gratuitously anachronistic and uninspired re-interpretation of interesting teens from literature as brats of the 1990's (see Miss Danes in Les Miserables).Aside from the atrocious plot and dialogue, there are some attempts to introduce artistic tropes into the filming. For example, there are moments when a handful of spectators are faded in and out of view of the action, sitting in chairs, watching the principal characters. The Director wants us to realize she's adapted a play. I get it. But it doesn't happen at all until far into the film. At that point, seeing a crowd of people sitting in chairs for a moment, then disappearing, is creepy and distracting. They're like some sort of un-scary zombie crowd, appearing through the mists, filling us with dread. When you see the horrible frolic and song that ends this movie, you'll want to rouse your own crowd of zombies and kill them all for the grave injustise of poisoning your mind for 112 minutes.-Matthew McGuire",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c767b89327be461f8104836b84eb2fd6",
            "input": "I liked this TV show because it was it's own thing a girl who is on her sixteenth birthday finds out that she is a witch and her she lives with her aunties in the house and they are both witches as well. Well this took her about a few weeks of getting used to. When she used her powers for the first time it was so funny because she turned her enemy into a pineapple. She had to turn back time and repeat a day. This series is really cool and it is a typical teenage series but it wore thin when she moved out of her house and to an apartment with her fellow college friends and then it got boring and I stopped watching.I loved her aunties they were so funny and the other one was really ditzy. I loved Valerie and I hated Sabrina's enemy Libby she was ugly.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11b4d31728f94c5495e70681055c92d0",
            "input": "The often misunderstood Zabriskie Point is Antonioni's political film, Antonioni's American film. Stylistically, it follows suit after \"Blow-Up\", meaning that the pace is faster than the previous epics, though certainly no less idiosyncratic.Basically the common mistake is that the film glorifies the hippie generation. Not so.The two protagonists come from vastly different environments. Mark from the \"rebel\" youths, Daria from an estate agency corporation. But in true Antonioni fashion, they are both alienated, both trying to escape their surroundings. Mark leaves a meeting of rebel students and Black Panthers disappointed with the verbose empty rhetoric, while Daria keeps uneasily being on the move with her car.Antionioni, the master director, after portraying the rebelling youth as confused and shallow, then moves to the city. An environment saturated by corporatism, billboard advertisements, meaninglessness, that has to keep expanding to accommodate the similar expansion of the population, generating a profit at the same time. It is this environment that the two protagonists escape from, though it seems mostly out of coincidence.Indeed, when Daria stops by a small village in the outskirts of the desert, the environment is just as suffocating, and the people just as lost cases, best exemplified by an old boxing champion, now reduced to a shadow of himself, sitting around drinking and smoking and talking nonsense. A stunning melancholy sequence, made even more powerful with the inclusion of some half wild children living around, brought in by some \"benefactor\" but \"destroying a genuine piece of American history\". In a not-so-obscure symbolism, there is Antonioni's opinion on the hippies. Just a half-positive glimpse in the canvas of human alienation.And then there is the desert, the landscape used to devastating effect, by turns pure and terrifying, primeval, wild and dead. The sequence where the two protagonists make love, \"joined\" in fantasy by the \"flower\" generation reflects the similar sequence in \"Red Desert\", where Giuliana tells her son a story. It is a colourful intermission in a colourless landscape. A vivid half-fantasy in a suffocating reality.The ending probably belongs to the pantheon of great endings in cinema, the Western civilization blown to pieces. A catharsis, an exorcism.Antionioni's two \"international\" films (the British \"Blow-Up\" and the American \"Zabriskie Point\") are lesser efforts than the previous masterpieces, but that is largely because of the faster pace and the inevitably contrived settings (swinging London, flower-power America). But when it comes down to it, it's clear he hasn't lost the edge.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7833798a34ea4f50b49cba8fdb27461a",
            "input": "I feel like I'm the only kid in town who was annoyed by Branagh's performance. He is a fine actor by most accounts, but he simply could not pull off the Southern accent. I mean, it was deplorable. It was as if he was trying too hard to be a Yank. One of the previous reviewers questioned why U.S. actors were not cast in this film. I second that notion. It's wonderful when actors/actresses wish to expand their horizons, but it's another thing to try too hard so that a performance becomes strained. Maybe it was Altman, but he's a such a great director...Well, I really don't want to bash Branagh for his absolutely hideous accent too much. Everybody deserves to screw up here and there. But it is hard to watch something so annoying that you'd rather choke on a chicken bone or eat a bucket full of crap than sit through The Gingerbread Man.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46108e355337471fbf6966e493828ae7",
            "input": "The movie held my interest, mainly because Dianne Keaton is my favorite actress. I disagree with some of the other posts on the grounds that the plot was not convoluted. I had no trouble following it (maybe some people had too much eggnog the night before). The movie was very sad and touching as well. What more do you want? Alexa Davalos is a fine new talent (beautiful too), and Tom Everett Scott does an excellent job with his part as well. The relationship of the mother and daughter may have been a bit unrealistic, but the behavior of the young people in the movie was not. It was tragically sad but enlightening. It sure beat the other shows that were on TV New Years Day evening",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97c705cdb05040f0a8bca80844731503",
            "input": "Paul Greengrass definitely saved the best Bourne for last! I've heard a lot of people complain about they way he filmed this movie, and some have even compared the camera style to the Blair Witch Project. All I have to say to that is...are you kidding me? Come on it was not that bad at all. I think it helps the action scenes to feel more realistic, which I would prefer over highly stylized stunt choreography. As for the rest of the movie I really didn't even notice it.You can tell that Damon has really gotten comfortable with the role of Jason Bourne. Sometimes that can be a bad thing, but in this case its a really good thing. He really becomes Jason Bourne in this installment. Damon also has a great supporting cast in Joan Allen, Ezra Kramer, and Julia Stiles. David Strathairn was a great addition to the cast, as he added more depth to the secret CIA organization.Even though the movie is filled with great car chases and nonstop action, they managed to stick a fair amount of character development in their with all of that going on. This film stands far above the other two Bourne movies, and is definitely one of the best movies of the 2007 summer season!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a99d2f9f57a47daaaaae9052929dc41",
            "input": "This is indeed quite the strange movie... First, we have an ex-U.S.-gymnast trying to turn actor (or something), and this seems to be the only role he ever got (that I know of anyway) -- and for good reason. While he does pull off the role well enough to keep some interest, it is a rather bland and flat performance. Second, we have the WORST EVER sound effects ever used in a movie!!! I'm not kidding. This alone makes the movie extremely comical, but in that annoying way. hehe And third, while we have a generally decent acting supporting cast (including the required hot chick!), an actually not-so-bad story, and some cool visuals; the dialogue, fight scenes involving gymnastics (hilarious!), and overall execution of the plot are weak. This movie would have been barely better as a network TV movie (too bad Fox wasn't around in 1985). It's one of those movies that's simply bad, yet you can't resist watching and even enjoying it once you get used to it, especially now that it has found the perfect eternal home on late night TV and cable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76926408d97f467d80093b42b8e560d3",
            "input": "Christopher Lloyd is funny and really believable as \"Al the head angel\". This movie is much better than the first, but it has great special effects that the first did not have as well as a much better plot and writing.OK - it was written for kids, but adults have as much fun as the kids do. Tony Danza does a very realistic job in his role - but this is NOT a Taxi reunion.Danny Glover is actually good and even seems to be very human in his emotions as well as showing some real acting talent for a change, a pleasant change.Watch at least once - it is worth the effort to catch it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68b57dc92d9e4f35a80800fc0621c274",
            "input": "Perhaps the funniest 'backstage at Hollywood' movie ever, especially for a look at comedy short factories like Keystone.Marion Davies should get a medal for bravery for taking a part where acting poorly in front of a camera is part of the role. Plenty of cameos for film buffs.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14c34407b7de41198394d6657f7a59e6",
            "input": "I had heard some not too good things about this movie and had probably seen the low score here at IMDb and that's why I had avoided it. Today they showed Vanilla Sky on TV and as I had nothing better to do... and as it turned out, I would have had a hard time finding anything better to do. Vanilla Sky is a frightening, sad and touching movie, actually one of the best I've seen in a while. I was surprised by how I was affected watching it. It's hard to explain, but during the movie your feelings towards the characters and your perception of what is going on changes and it's quite an emotional journey. Vanilla Sky really touched me in a way that is very rare for a movie, or any media for that matter.I really recommend everyone to watch this movie. Regardless of what you have heard about it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b9e6f467cd94ecd9e594c57f43d84aa",
            "input": "I remember when this film was up for the Academy Awards and did not win in any category. For the life of me, I cannot remember what it was up against, but one thing I can say: It was one of the best movies I have ever seen. And the fact that Steven Spielberg directed the film did not persuade me one bit.Essentially, it is about a black woman's trials and tribulations as she is growing up from a girl to a woman. There are a lot of insinuations that are disturbing and horrifying, but all of them are needed to see how much this woman has put up with. Along the way, we see other women who have had to put up with their hardships and walk with them to redemption. Whoopi Goldberg gives her best performance ever in this movie. Danny Glover should have also gotten at least nominated for his role in this film. And the best part of this movie is that it treats its subjects humanely, not like some sideshow freak shows like the more recent \"Beloved\" did. I encourage anyone of any race to see this film. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98585ca9a3c8465da576667454aa1419",
            "input": "I saw \"Paris Je T'Aime\" because a friend really wanted to see it so I went along with him. Going in, I was indifferent about the film but leaving the theater I really regretted wasting 2 hours of my life sitting through this tepid production. The \"stories\" are almost completely forgettable except for the fact that most of them were awful. What do Gena Rowlands and Ben Gazzara have to do with Paris? The endless parade of American actors most definitely gave this French film a remarkably non-French feel. The clichés about Paris were endless. Yes, most of them were playing with clichés about Paris but by spending so much time making fun of French clichés, they directly and regrettably promoted them once more. Yes, Paris is the city of love. We get it.The worst segments were: the one directed by Wes Craven (Oscar Wilde); the one with Nick Nolte; the mime one (the worst?); the hair products one; the one with Juliette Binoche (Willem Dafoe as a cowboy in the middle of Paris?); the vampire one (When I think of Paris I think of Elijah Wood). The one with Natalie Portman, which really looked like a Mentos commercial and it was stupid (the blind young man should know Portman was just playing a part when she called him). On and on it went. It felt endless.I didn't like the Coen Bros one as well. It really plays with those Parisien clichés but I didn't find it funny. Just annoying. The Gus Van Sant one was interesting but it was so slight (and the punchline was obvious) that it barely registered.There were only two \"successful\" segments and they were the one about the immigrant nanny who leaves her baby at a kindergarten only to babysit a baby for a rich woman. Nice irony there. And the segment about the African who is stabbed. It's the best segment in the whole film but this segment has nothing to do with Paris. The story could have taken place in any city around the world.The last segment, the one with the chubby middle aged woman was sorta interesting too but the underlying tone was bad. They wanted to celebrate her limited grasp of French but the segment came off as being condescending.The whole project felt forced and uninspired. Almost like the French government sponsored this film to promote tourism. All in all, with only about 10 to 15 minutes of interesting stuff, \"Paris Je T'Aime\" was an awful cinematic experience.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c980ded924d4cb39b277ff039757a77",
            "input": "Brokedown Palace is not the kind of movie I would ever like to see. I also did not like the movie when some Aussie man smuggled drugs in Thailand and accused Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale of drug smuggling. I would not go to that country no matter what after I saw this movie. In fact this movie stinks. I prefer to visit Germany to meet beautiful single women. Germany is the country I tolerate. I also would rather stick to the United States instead. After I saw some of the movie in the theatre including the false accusation of drug smuggling, I left the theatre and had my money refunded because I cannot tolerate this movie. If you are going to to Thailand to meet someone there who could be a drug smuggler, forget this!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2e12603e81643c789228f64618bc653",
            "input": "I first saw this movie back in the 1980's and now in 2006 this movie still is one of the best movies I have ever seen! I would recommend anyone to look at this movie. You will not be sorry. It is well acted out, so real and never a dull moment. The acting is superb and the location makes the movie seem like you are there. From the beginning right up to the end, this movie is the type that makes you lose your attention. The actress does an excellent job of portraying the girl who survived this horrific plane crash in the Amazon and it shows how she managed to survive in the Amazon all alone. It is unbelievable that anyone could survive under such conditions. This is why this movie is so appealing. The fact that this is a true story makes the movie even more interesting and to think that a young girl could survive from this ordeal is overwhelming. I find this movie one that I can watch over and over again and one that I never get tired of. This is indeed quite a compliment as I have hundreds of movies! I would say this is probably my favorite movie and the best I have ever seen!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b66ae7d11cf54d368a220a9574f8ca2e",
            "input": "It ran 8 seasons, but it's first, in early 1959, and it's last, in the autumn of 1965, were shorter than seasons 2-7. CBS chief William Paley canceled Rawhide's production after watching the 1st show of season 8, in September, 1965, because he disliked the series without Eric Fleming as Gil Favor, who had departed after season 7. The last new episode aired in November, 1965. The lone 1966 CBS broadcast, on January 4, 1966, was a rerun. I have often wondered why Rawhide didn't switch to color filming for it's last season? Most of the big westerns of the 1960s had gone over to color by 1965. CBS was broadcasting in color that autumn, for many of their sitcoms, but westerns like Gunsmoke and Rawhide remained in black and white. Gunsmoke was the last western (and last prime time network series to switch to color) on September 17, 1966, for the episode Snap Decision.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58add4ce0aad4ab38b06024c7cfdf0dd",
            "input": "What can i say about this movie? I have seen it quite a few times since the first time when i was around 6. I have seen the english version and it is done very well. It is a great movie for all ages, but it is directed more for children. I love the childlike humor and appreciate it. If you have not seen it, you should try to rent a copy, you will not be disappointed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-818d0f69cc724505ad177d962a42714e",
            "input": "On the back burner for years (so it was reported) this television reunion of two of the most beloved characters in sitcom history started off badly - and went straight downhill from there. Mary Richards (Mary Tyler Moore) and her best friend Rhoda Morgenstern (Valerie Harper) meet in New York after a long estrangement and catch up on each other's lives. What a novel concept! But, sad to relate, nothing worth talking about (let alone making a movie about) has happened to either of them in the intervening years. So, instead, the script contents itself with throwing out one hoary old plot device after another (most having to do with older women in the workplace), while completely missing the quirky charm and sophistication that made the original show a winner. The supporting cast is instantly forgettable, the humor is nonexistent, and the chemistry which Moore and Harper once had together is gone. Moore allegedly stalled this project for years, waiting for \"just the right script\" before committing herself. If this was the one she considered \"right\", what on earth were the ones she turned down like? It's not the age of the characters that does this in (for time inevitably marches on), but the almost complete lack of imagination coupled with a blatant disregard for the elements that made the series work. At one time this was intended as a pilot but, all to obviously, it failed to generate any interest among potential sponsors. Or for that matter, among potential audiences. Quickly and mercifully forgotten, the film is a travesty and an insult to a classic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-259317ae96604879bab85d099025c84f",
            "input": "Jamie Foxx is my favorite comedian. However, I feel that he sold out in order to gain his first big budget lead role. Foxx follows in the footsteps of the likes of Chris Tucker, Martin Lawrence and Dave Chapple, who have all seen their talents wasted by stereotyping producers who think black males who commit pretty crimes is a funny concept (See: Money Talks, Blue Streak).Okay I laughed a few times and granted all of these comedians continue to pick up hilarious roles, but I would love to see these guys branch out ala Marlon Wayans portrayal in Requiem to a Dream. Or In Living Color's Tommy Davidson and Damon Wayans moving performances in Spike Lee's satire Bamboozled.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60943a9091a943ae950ee7bd519c89c0",
            "input": "I watched FIDO on some movie channel and I have to say that I've become an instant fan. The film feels like a comic book that perfectly captures the look and feel of the surreal 1950s, you know the wholesome decade when they danced to Elvis while dropping nuclear bombs in the desert just for the heck of it. People were so naive back then that it's frightening and the idea that those clean cut folks would find it normal to have zombies as pets actually works here.Kudos to this Canadian production, the colorful crisp cinematography and the excellent cast, including Carrie Anne Moss, Billy Connolly, Henry Czerny and the kid.It's a shame this film wasn't a bigger hit. It deserved more recognition. It's much better than the stuff from Tim Burton or the SHAUN OF THE DEAD team. Oh well. It's an instant classic nonetheless.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b648d3c0108480daa81cbb43e41ed08",
            "input": "For that matter one of the worst FILMS ever made. Plot goes as follows. Slog through jungle looking areas for 10 minutes or so. Have Bo go somewhere and strip. Slog through the jungle some more. Give Bo another excuse to strip. Back to the jungle. Oh look! There's a Tarzan looking guy! Strip, Bo - strip. Kill the safari people. Tarzan looking guy has a fight scene. Saves Bo. Bo strips. Run credits. Run credits, run.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0b05cda1e904cebbd7f084323f10864",
            "input": "Initially, I would have thought that Secret Sunshine had something critical to say of religion (and here being Christianity), and wondered if it would be something of a rant against the ills of blind faith, or the manipulative power of those who are supposedly holier than thou. Surprisingly, it was none of the sort and was largely non-judgemental, putting in place events as a matter of fact, and allowing the audience to draw their own judgement and conclusion.And I can't help but to chuckle at the role of Song Kang-ho, a man who's taken a liking for widower Shin-ae (Jeong Do-yeon), and starts going to church when she does. The reasons for church going are many I suppose, either to find inner peace, to seek help, being afraid of eternal damnation in the fires of Hell, to reaffirm faith, or even things like wanting to get married in a church, or to skirt chase (I kid you not). But to each his own reasons for turning up in church every Sunday and participating in prayer groups for fellowship, what is indeed dangerous, is when the underlying ulterior motives, do not get satisfied, and that's when frustration sets in. Or when you discover how hypocritical man can be, portraying one face inside the house of God, and displaying yet another outside.Shin-ae and her son Jun moves to the town of Miryang, which is the birthplace of her deceased husband. Wanting to start life anew, she opens up a piano shop to give lessons, though in discovering her new found freedom and in a moment's lack of good judgement, has another tragedy befall her. And that takes one hour to get to. Secret Sunshine really took its time to get to this point, where things then begin to get slightly more interesting with Shin-ae now taking to embracing religion to deal with and accept her current state, reveling in the comfort that religion, and fellow believers, can offer.What began as crying out for sympathy turns into acceptance and belief that religion offers that silver bullet to solve the ills of all mankind, and sometimes you wonder if it's because of your personal myopic view of what the almighty is doing for you, that you begin to adopt a somewhat selfish opinion that everything's good going your way, and in Shin-ae's case, her magnanimous attitude in wanting to forgive others who had trespassed against her, forgetting something very fundamental that it the feeling can cut both ways too.The last act is probably the most fun of the lot as it says plenty, where most of us can identify with - why me, and why not someone else, as we rage against our faith and start questioning, unfortunately, with no hard and fast answers available. It is then either we fall by the wayside, or continue with destructive deeds so rebelliously. But somehow the plug gets carefully pulled in Secret Sunshine so as not to offend, and what could have been an ugly character mouthpiece, got muted.If you bite into the hype this movie is generating, then perhaps you'll realize only Jeong Do- yeon's excellent portrayal is worth mentioning, as she totally owns her role as the widow Shin-ae who is probably the most unluckiest person on Earth in having to deal with that many tragedies over a short period of time, and if you look at it carefully, most of which are of her own doing. Watching her transformation, is worth the ticket price, and despite having my personal favourite Korean actor Song Kang-ho in the movie, this is something he just breezed right through.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1835bfefd11e4bd68d452204c8bb7e4d",
            "input": "how can this movie have a 5.5 this movie was a piece of skunk s**t. first the actors were really bad i mean chainsaw Charlie was so retarded. because in the very beginning when he pokes his head into the wooden hut (that happened to be about oh 1 quarter of an inch thick (that really cheap as* flimsy piece of wood) and he did not even think he could cut threw it)second the person who did the set sucks as* at supplying things for them to build with. the only good thing about this movie is the idea of this t.v. show. bottom line DO NOT waste your hard earned cash on this hunk of s**t they call a movie.rating:0.3",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-886ebe4cd7854bc59eb6475c82cc04d5",
            "input": "I really loved this film, yes, I know it was fairly far fetched, there is no way that Shelby car could have managed to stay on the road as well as the 540i with all it's traction control and other gizmos but other than that the whole film was well put together. Cage was excellent as usual and the rest of the cast were also pretty good with the exception of the Brit Bad Guy, he was a little \"too\" much don't you think? Anyway, great film, great cars and great acting. I for one made sure my car was locked and alarmed in my remotely controlled garage that night. :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54c03dfd4e4548df94980ac80b61379a",
            "input": "Heh, if I tell you to compare The Dark Knight with some 18-years-old comics-adapted movie rated 5.9, will you call me crazy? That's just to catch your attention. Everyday I meet people complaining there are no good movies, who seem to only know the recent blockbusters. It's never a bad thing to search and explore old movies, especially those with good artistic values. Dick Tracy is one of those can't be easily outdated, in terms of technology.The negative reviews mainly complained about DT's \"messed up\" story. But it appears to me that the storyline is quite clear, and I had no problem following it. I didn't see the comic books, yet I am not a huge US comic fan, but I appreciate the top-notch film-making and performances. Maybe the expectations of most people were too high about the story it would tell. But, if you see a movie casting Madonna and Warren Beatty together, what would you expect. I had some scratches on my head, and can't help but wonder, did we really see the same movie? The title role, although not as competent as it sounds, still was able to pull him up and charm the audiences. Madonna was more express-less than \"breathless\" in her seductive role, but added a lot of fun to the story. Al Pacino was funny and prodigy to himself. Apparently he's bold enough to go sarcastic on his previously successful roles. We can see a hybrid of Scarface, Michael Corleone, Adolf Hitler and Robert De Niro punching our stomaches to make us laugh. And many thanks to make-ups.To me it's not bad at all. The surreal feeling really got me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cc2aa307fe7478d937e7533f09803cd",
            "input": "This movie should be shown to film school students as an example of what NOT to do. The original kicked some major tire squealing butt, this horrible disaster breaks the cardinal rule of Bruckheimer films, which is: we all know they suck, but they have great action. This film has NO ACTION. This film is BORING. Where are the cars? Where are the chases? Where's the tension? Where's the suspense? Where's the rush? Where!!?? This isn't really a movie at all, it's a bad commercial. 50 cars in 24 hours? That is wrong. They have 3 days to steal them, the ad is wrong. How bad is that? The leads acting is stiff, wooden and forced. The villain, the cop, the others...who cares. They utter their pointless lines, they serve the illogical plot. They slog through it the best they can as the music video director says \"don't worry we'll make a lot of fast cuts and no one will notice how bad the film is\" or \"we'll fix it with lots of loud music\" The \"script\" isn't really a script at all, it's more like a list of cliches with an ending that is a total ripoff of: -------Warning - possible spoiler------ 5------4-----3-----2-----1------ The Fugitive. The biggest crime of all is the underuse of Vinnie Jones, man....this is the baddest, coolest mofo since Jules in Pulp Fiction. And what do they do!? They make him a mute who's hardly in the film! Make Vinnie the main villain and he could have saved the film. How could they have been so dumb? How? How? Why? The original film is very entertaining with a cool trick at the end that gets the driver away. The original has a great 40 minute chase that delivers! Go find the original. Or if you're craving some real car chase action go rent RONIN. The chases in Ronin raised the bar by which all other car chases will now be judged. Bruckheimer and Cage had all that money, all those resources, all that experience, and they can't even come close to matching a film made 25 years ago for $250,000? How can that be? You feel like you got ripped off after seeing this movie. Where I was once excited to see Coyote Ugly, Remember the Titans and Pearl Harbor, now I say: God help us all. ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-797d5122859a4ea192ad4e45009a004b",
            "input": "You probably all already know this by now, but 5 additional episodes never aired can be viewed on ABC.com I've watched a lot of television over the years and this is possibly my favorite show, ever. It's a crime that this beautifully written and acted show was canceled. The actors that played Laura, Whit, Carlos, Mae, Damian, Anya and omg, Steven Caseman - are all incredible and so natural in those roles. Even the kids are great. Wonderful show. So sad that it's gone. Of course I wonder about the reasons it was canceled. There is no way I'll let myself believe that Ms. Moynahan's pregnancy had anything to do with it. It was in the perfect time slot in this market. I've watched all the episodes again on ABC.com - I hope they all come out on DVD some day. Thanks for reading.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b3506384b544e64a827a4a66dc9483f",
            "input": "Not a `woman film' but film for the gang. One of the worst films ever made by a male director about woman. Director Andy McKay simply doesn't know woman. Peaks of bad taste, American Pie's humor style, crude story, no sense, groundless story, refuted characters. Vulgar fantasies came to life on screen. Insulting and definitely not funny. I wonder how three good actresses accepted to take part in it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6e1a3e2cee944deb75e02cd893890cf",
            "input": "A dog found in a local kennel is mated with Satan and has a litter of puppies, one of which is given to a family who has just lost their previous dog to a hit & run. The puppy wants no time in making like Donald Trump and firing the Mexican housekeeper, how festive. Only the father suspects that this canine is more then he appears, the rest of the family loves the demonic pooch. So it's up to dad to say the day.This late 70's made for TV horror flick has little going for it except a misplaced feeling of nostalgia. When I saw this as a kid I found it to be a tense nail-biter, but revisiting it as an adult I now realize that it's merely lame,boring, and not really well-acted in the least bit.My Grade: D",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0be7c0cee9e3410a9574dfc4fd293d2a",
            "input": "This has the funnist jokes out of all the Cheech & Chong flicks. It's the first one I saw with these guys. I found it to be really good. My dad actually recommended me to get it. WHAT A GREAT ROLE MODEL, and my GRANDMA actually bought it for me, knowing what it was like. What a family I have. Well this movie is pretty good and great to rent when you want to see a good classic. I must warn you though, this isn't gut-busting funny. It has its moments but not as funny as There's Something About Mary. Check it out anyway. I'm sure you'll laugh. Unless your an anti-drug activist or something.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca21e8383de54ed4b74144d276a7fa2c",
            "input": "This was surely the stupidest, crudest, most repulsive film I have seen in quite some time. I was tempted to turn off the VCR, but, as in the fascination watching a horrible car accident, I literally found it COMPULSIVELY HATEABLE in every conceivable way and slugged it out through to the end. I am by no means a prude who objects to the comedic portrayal of sexual antics on the screen. Animal House, Porky's, There's Something About Mary, both American Pie movies, and even the notorious Freddy Got Fingered I have found highly enjoyable on their own crude terms. Mamie Van Doren's breast-baring sponge bath is the most horrifying appearance by a naked geriatric since The Shining. Ineptly edited and shot, with incredibly annoying performances from Devon Sawa and Jason Schwartzman, the film ended, without the benefit of having made me giggle once. The only useful purpose for the film is as a textbook example of how not to make a gross out picture. Oh, and it would also serve nicely as a lawn fertilizer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fa09b2b77ab400a8d26e93c42f9b2dc",
            "input": "I was not only an extra in this movie, I got to see it in Boston to a sold out cinema. Over a thousand Boston Red Sox / Farrelly fans jammed themselves into a movie theater near Boston Common to watch a comedy....about them....Red Sox fanatics! Drew Barrymore and Jimmy Fallon star is this cute comedy about love and lust. The love is between the two young lovers. The lust is for the Red Sox winning the world series. Although Fallon is not a great actor, he is the best actor for the role. He is funny enough and gets the most laughs. Barrymore on the other hand is the same old Barrymore. At times, I felt supporting actress Ione Skye would have been a better actor for the role. All in all, all Boston Red Sox fans will love this movie. For the rest of the world, this is just a funny movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e15d9af3f3a4844b9038529a43b1da0",
            "input": "Will all of you please lay the hell off Todd Sheets!?! Let's give you $30,000 to make a movie and see what you come up with! The guy got 735 zombies and a regular cast to work for FREE! Sure the acting is laughable at times. Yes the make-up is not greatest you'll ever see. But it's not the worst either, if you want to see that, go watch Zombie Nation with it's raccoon zombies.This is pure, good old fashioned Guerilla Film-making! Todd is a consummate professional, and an all around nice guy. There are holes in the plot, yes. The plot does seem far-fetched. But what the hell, I still love this movie. I wish Todd Sheets would come out of hiding and do the remake of this that he was going to. If anyone has ever tried to make a movie, they know that just finishing it, is an achievement in and of itself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-143d5596ffd7403486352959109fa3b5",
            "input": "I guess when \"Beat Street\" made a national appearance, \"Flashdance\" came at the same time. The problem with \"Flashdance\" is that there was only one break dancing scene and the rest was jazz dance and ballet. That was one of the reasons why \"Beat Street\" was better. The only movie that could rival \"Beat Street\" seems to be \"Footloose\", because both movies focused on how dance had been used by people to express their utmost feelings.The break-dance scenes in \"Beat Street\" come just before the middle and at the end of the flick. And I loved all of them. Almost all of the break tricks were featured in the break jam scenes: the jackhammer, the flares, the head spins, the suicide sit, the crazy legs, the mortal, the forward flip, the figure four---almost everything.Like \"The Warriors\", \"Beat Street\" does have violence related to the gang life in the hip hop world...but in a much less violent way than the former. The only major fight scene in \"Beat Street\" was when graffiti artist Ramon (which in the movie was abbreviated as \"Ramo\") is chased by a rival gang member on the New York City subway tracks.....fighting each other on the third rail and both dying by electrocution on that rail. Well, although that chase scene ended tragically, it was better that they died that way than having blood exploding from a gang gunshot.Most of the gang stuff in the flick was graffiti related to the hip-hop culture, and rap music. A lot of rap music appeared in the flick, because hip-hop members used rap music as a diversion to the negative aspects of gang life. Even the theme song of the movie, which closed the curtain to the flick, was not just an homage to hip-hop culture--it also was an homage to the death of Ramon.By the way, during the dance scene called 'Tango, Tango', I guess the female drummer in the pit orchestra conducted by actress Rae Dawn Chong was Sheila E. making a cameo appearance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5de3023b3a9494f873d02d36bb7d7bc",
            "input": "As a lover of the surreal (in art and film) I was pleased to discover this film on IFC. It is definitely a keeper. Most of the other reviews tell the general plot (not all correct) so I won't bother to bore anyone with that. The main thing is the alternate worlds concept which is brought on by Ana's impending illness, and the way she manages to link with someone else after being so \"alone\", and finally with her family, which I believe is still at least a little troubled. It only can be called a horror movie in that it has frightening scenes but is a fantasy (with a little hint of \"coming of age\" only because Ana is a pre-teen who \"hates boys\"). I heartily recommend it to those who appreciate the stretch of their imagination.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f463191ca48043379d159b4c34f3b0b1",
            "input": "\"Night of the Living Homeless\" was a fairly strong finish to the first half of Season 11. Obviously a parody of various zombie movies, most notably Dawn of the Dead, this episode parallels the homeless with the living dead, as creatures who feed and thrive off of spare change rather than brains.Kyle is blamed for the sudden mass outbreak of homeless people when he, out of the goodness of his heart, gives a $20 to a homeless man in front of his house. More homeless people begin to infiltrate South Park, until the town is completely overrun with them. This is a very strong Randy Marsh episode, as he assumes the role of the shotgun-wielding leader of the adults who take refuge on the roof of the Park County Community Center. But before Randy makes it to the community center, he is accosted by hundreds of homeless people while hilariously screaming \"I don't have any change!!\" Unfortunately, the refugees end up losing Gerald Broflofski to the homeless, when he tries to escape by catching a bus out of town, and unwittingly tosses away all his change for the bus to distract the homeless people. Then he becomes one of them, asking everyone for change.The boys attempt to find out why there are so many homeless people in South Park, and find a man who is a director of homeless studies. They find out that the nearby city of Evergreen used to have a similar problem with the homeless, so they escape to Evergreen to find out what they did to solve the problem. Unfortunately, homeless people break into the man's house, and he attempts to take the easy way out by shooting himself. However, he fails several times, as he shoots himself in the jaw, in the eye, in the chest, in the neck, in the shoulder, screaming horribly until he finally dies. This scene may have been funnier had a similar scene not happened in \"Fantastic Easter Special\" two weeks ago.Meanwhile, a member of the refugees discovers that due to the homeless problem, the property values have nosedived, thus the bank has foreclosed on his house, making him homeless. Randy immediately turns on him, holding the gun to the man's head. When the man finally begs the others for a few bucks to help him out, Randy pulls the trigger.In Evergreen, the boys find out that the citizens of the town sent the homeless to South Park, and that the passing of homeless from town to town happens all over the country. The boys modify a bus that leads the homeless out of South Park and takes them all the way to Santa Monica, California.The zombie movie parallels and the great Randy Marsh lines make this one definitely re-watchable. 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22301e21806847c1a0d884d2260d0a46",
            "input": "I have seen this film numerous times and for the life of me, I cannot understand why some people compare this to BABE. This film is not about the secret life of ALL animals who secretly can talk. Instead, it is about a Parrot who learns to talk to help his owner, a little girl with a serious stammer, overcome her speech impediment only to be separated from her in a heart-wrenching scene early on. Then the great journey begins. Paulie the Parrot sets out to try and find his one great friend, Marie.Along the way, he meets several wonderful people and numerous nasty people. He falls in love with a girl parrot and loses her. He gets conned into a life of crime and then captured by a bad scientist who wants to exploit him.He recounts his tale to a sympathetic Janitor in the Lab who agrees to help him escape and find his beloved Marie.Tony Shaloub shines as the kindly Janitor who has an open mind and big heart and who determines to help little Paulie despite the risks. Jay Mohr plays the voice of the Parrot AND one of the seedy characters he comes across.There is a little suggestive language but this film is appropriate for most kids and even more so if the parents join in on the fun and watch too. It is a witty, clever, epic animal-adventure story and ultimately a great love story about a Bird and his little girl. He search for Marie ends with a quite an unexpected surprise for most people who don;t know much about Parrots.Kids who have seen the wild Green Parrot Tribes in Los Angeles and Pasadena will especially benefit from seeing this film and understanding that Birds, especially Parrots are not disposable pets. All children everywhere, will see that Pets form deep attachments themselves and that the love and loyalty of a dog or parrot is a gift to be treasured.so no BABE here, more of an incredible journey with a twist.Enjoy and try no to tear up during the sad parts.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-197b1ad7a5fe439984003583bc1e60e7",
            "input": "What do you get when you have bad acting, bad directing, scenes that are excruciatingly long, terrible lighting, painful editing, and awful effects? You get Jessica: A Ghost Story Seems its shot on betacam, which is fine, but the lighting has to compliment this medium. In this case it does not. There are a few CU's where the person's face is entirely in shadow. One scene in particular is the scene at the psychiatrists. It's a joke if you ask me. Some of the scenes were so long that they could have easily been cut in half... but I guess then they wouldn't have a film at feature length. The main character is incredibly flat. He's the LEAD male, so he should have some \"hero\" elements to his character, but he does not. He whines and is scared the entire film. I could go on, but I don't want to waste my time. Although the lighting was terrible, I must say that they did have nice camera movement. Too bad the lighting didn't compliment it. The cover of the DVD is nice, and that's where it ends. Just terrible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1bd077ffc194432e8bc90705aa36f1b3",
            "input": "I was sadly disappointed by this film due to the fact that it felt false and the characters were not strong enough to carry the films pretty weak attempt at horror. The basic idea for the film was interesting but unfortunately it wasn't able to excite, really scare or shock me - there was one part in the entire film that I thought was gruesome but even that didn't redeem it. I did get to like the character of Kate by the end of the film as she seemed to soften and become a little more realistic by the end, the character played by Jeremy Sheffield was not actually needed for this film and I think the director/writer got carried away with the myriad of characters used for no purpose, if he had left it at the basic characters making it more of a solo effort on Kate's part, it may have worked - Jeremy's acting was wooden to say the least and I felt uncomfortable watching the bad on screen chemistry - or lack of it. Such a shame. Disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b925c5d9eca45989abd78a67e477cd8",
            "input": "This story is about the romantic triangle between a nth. African male prostitute, a French transsexual prostitute (Stephanie) and a Russian waiter who speaks no French and never seems to shave.As a film it is dull, dreary and depressing, shot either on foggy, overcast winter days or in badly lit interiors, where everyone is bathed in a weird blue luminescence. And yes, I know, it's because the white balance was out. Everyone is pale and downcast and looks haggard, shabby and dirty. Bodies are bony and shot in such closeup that they look quite ugly and unappealing. Moles, greasy hair. Yuk. Bad news in a film where people spend a lot of time either naked or having sex.And the story? Well, Stephanie's mother is dying. All three characters go back to Stephanie's home village where, through a bunch of flashbacks to desolate countryside and predictably dingy interiors, we see a bit of Stephanie's childhood as a boy called Pierre. The mother dies. Well... and that's about it, really. Character development is kept to a minimum, as is the denouement of the story. I suppose the storyline is not linear (it would explain a lot of non sequiteurs) but really, after paying my seven euros I don't feel like having to construct the film myself: that's what the director takes my money for. To expect me to join the story telling process and get my hands dirty, so to speak, is asking way too much.This film is a heap of pretentious rubbish made, above all, from a desire to epater les bourgeois (ie shock the straights). I can see how it was a shoo-in for the Berlin Film Festival, and I can see why it got nowhere.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc5ee92dff5748f0a63d9d098e0df000",
            "input": "I watched the show 10 years ago and loved it!!! Am now in possession of the DVD and was watching the series, and waiting for scenes I knew were in the show (when Lucas confronts Gail in his house)and realized it was missing - all of a sudden I was watching the seduction without the lead up. Then I went on line to check out all the BIOS of the stars and came across the comments about the shows being out of order. Thank You!!!!! But there seems to be some conflict. Some comments state \"Strangler number 19 then Triangle 20, when another had them around the other way. And also Potato Boy 5, and Dead to the World 6, were reversed as well. Can someone clarify?????",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b27753a8fb54dd09f49ff4f20371cb8",
            "input": "I enjoyed the previous Ittenbach movie that I'd seen, \"Burning Moon\". But while that movie was rather grim and nasty, \"Premutos\" seems to mostly play it for laughs. While its admirable how Ittenbach made this movie with no money in his spare time (and the DVD documentary is worthwhile to see this), I found myself constantly battling not to fast-forward to the next gore scene. Sure, there's gore, and if that's all you want then go ahead and enjoy. But be warned: there's an inordinate amount of lame comedy and tedious story exposition. Many are comparing this to Peter Jackson's movies, especially \"Braindead\". But looking at what Jackson did on a similar budget in \"Bad Taste\", it's clear Ittenbach is lacking one thing that Jackson has - talent. 3/10 (for pretty good and plentiful gore effects, and for getting the most out of limited resources - but not worth the money I paid for it)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59cc2f2834d648c58e0d3a2392c52900",
            "input": "This movie is an eye opener for those who can only the glamorous lifestyles of the stars. It tells you how people who would like to do good are not able to. Plus the bomb blast scene is very real.What you read and are taught just does not happen!!!Can raise your BP level by 10%All actors played their role very well.Some scenes may / could have been avoided to include teenagers.This movie is quite adult in nature.Not a movie that can be seen with family.Casting is great!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05ba06cf17084d48a2c604262f275475",
            "input": "When I first heard about this series on AnimeTV,I have to say that out of all the shows that I have seen,this one tops it all off. I had to see this show,and that is what I really did. When I got the first volume of this show,it was the best. I really liked the animation,and all the fight scenes were awesome. I have to say that my favorite characters in the show were Saber,and Archer and of course I also like Illya. And of course,all the episodes on the volumes were interesting,and very cool. Another thing I have to say about the series is Michael McConnohie(famous for Transformers,and others) playing the voice of Berserker. He does have a cool character. And I even watched the entire series all over again before watching the final volume. So if you to see something good,then see this show,it's the best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-643e4dab1a374ee39d3abbf7992ac2e2",
            "input": "I like my Ronald Colman dashing and debonair, the fellow you see in such films as If I Were King and Kismet. I like him as the epitome of civilization as in The Lost Horrizon and Random Harvest. A brooding Colman isn't a favorite of mine.But in A Double Life precisely because his part as actor Anthony John is so offbeat for him, Colman was recognized with a Best Actor Oscar for 1947. It became his best known part.Colman is an actor who really does take the Method quite seriously. He's just finished a successful run in a comedy of manners and he's quite the jovial fellow. For a change of pace now that that play has concluded its Broadway run, Colman is bringing a revival of Othello to New York. About as opposite a part as you can get.His leading lady in both is his former wife Signe Hasso who loves him dearly, but can't take his change of moods when he's at work. Colman loves her dearly as well and wants her back. But he's heading for a mental breakdown when he starts confusing himself with the jealous Moor Othello and Hasso with her role as Desdemona.Unfortunately Shelley Winters as a poor waitress who a depressed Colman picks up gets in the way of his madness and she winds up like poor Desdemona in the play. Killed in the same manner and now it's a matter for homicide cop Joe Sawyer.Colman's performance is so good that one does kind of wonder is this an occupational hazard with actors? I'd shudder to think so, were there any unsolved homicides in or around Laurence Olivier and Orson Welles then they essayed Othello. I could never quite buy the story for that reason, but I certainly do applaud Ronald Colman and what he did with the part. I'm sure there was a tinge of regret in him winning the Oscar though because one of the other nominees was his good friend William Powell for Life With Father. Others in the running that year were Gregory Peck for Gentlemen's Agreement, John Garfield for Body and Soul, and Michael Redgrave for Mourning Becomes Electra.Colman gets able support from the rest of the cast including Edmond O'Brien who finds himself in the unwanted part of Cassio in Colman's jealous fantasy. Still you will find no Iago equivalent in A Double Life, no one prodding the jealousy, it's all in his own mind.And that from one of the most cultivated and civilized minds of the last century.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b36c9f28d7c4e6c93011b24c81fa099",
            "input": "A prequel to the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica series, from the same creative team Ronald D. Moore and David Eick as well as new series co-creator Remi Aubuchon. Caprica is set in the twelve colonies some 58 years prior to the events of Battlestar Galactica. The new series in addition to its human drama also chronicles the key steps in the development of what would become the Cylon race.The pilot and the series are set to follow two families; the Graystone's which include Daniel (Eric Stoltz) a computer genius and corporate tycoon and his equally brilliant but rebellious daughter Zoe (Alessandra Toreson), while the Adama's include Joseph (Esai Morales) a lawyer and his son William the future Admiral of Battlestar Galactica.Like Battlestar Galactica the series includes some great experienced actors in Eric Stoltz, Esai Morales and Polly Walker as well as some very talented relatively new actors including Alessandra Toreson and Magda Apanowicz.For fans of Battlestar Gallactica there are similarities and continuities with that series but it is also very different. In the pilot at least the science fiction elements are definitely present but are smaller part of this series. The scenes on Caprica while reflecting a more technologically advanced society also have retro feel, this is achieved through some of the architecture, the costumes and the way it is shot.While the look and feel of the two series have some substantial differences some of the themes will seem very familiar, religion is again very important here, while the racial theme rarely touched on in BG is far more important. We also touch on terrorism the existence of a soul and whether or not a machine can have one, as well as issues related to crime and government.The pilot has been released direct to DVD in an extended and unrated version prior to airing on TV, the series is set to start in 2010.Like Battlestar Galactica this series is filmed in Vancouver",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17bd3bb4e138426e908b38bcb294ca17",
            "input": "If you like animal movies, this movie will please. My wife likes animals and animal movies, she especially like the parrot in this film. It is geared towards kids, but I laughed at most of the humor. The French fashion character made me laugh, and adds balance to the script. It is a Disney film, with its sappy, happily, family apeal, but I like leaving the theater with a positive fealing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68c8292e5e49455fb77abc2aad36ab1b",
            "input": "The young Dr. Fanshawe(Mark Letheren), an avid archaeologist, is dispatched by his Museum boss to the large country home of Squire Richards(Pip Torrens), where his task is to find provenance for and catalogue the collection of antiquities and curios belonging to the recently deceased father of the Squire. The Squire is surprised by the arrival Fanshawe, he hadn't been expecting him for another week, but none the less welcomes him and gets his only servant, Patten (David Burke..of Dr Watson fame), to show him to his room, as Fanshawe must stay over for some days in order to finish his rather large task. Patten it would seem is not the friendliest sort and seems to resent the extra work that Fanshawe's visit will entail, the large empty house providing an endless amount of cooking, cleaning and maintenance for him. Fanshawe is a fussy sort, very neat and precise with everything having its place, whether they be his clothes or his books and papers and he is rather disgusted by the dirt in his room. Needless to say he is rather eager to begin his work, but unpacking he finds his binoculars have been damaged in transit, so he asks the Squire for a replacement pair, The Squire who is a modern thinking man but also it would seem rather uncultured with such matters, is also eager to get rid of the clutter around the house, so he obliges and walks Fanshawe to the top of the hill so that he can survey the estate and the surrounding villages, there the Squire directs him to points of interest, including Gallows Hill, where locals were hung for their crimes and misdemeanours, his interest is also taken by a local abbey which the Squire describes as a ruin, but Fanshawe can see through the binoculars that it clearly isn't, he investigates further and pays a visit to the site of the abbey and is shocked to find that there are but a few stone remnants? Fanshawe doesn't have too much time to think about this conundrum as he darkness falls he feels he is being watched, he feels a presence, he begins to see moving shadows in the woods, startled he runs home. Over dinner he imparts details of his harrowing day to the Squire, Patten overhears the story and suggests an explanation for it..The Binoculars! they used to belong to a local man called Baxter, whom it would seem collected bones and skulls from Gallows Hill, boiling them up for some concoction or other, Baxter had disappeared mysteriously one night, the late Squire had acquired his belongings, including a mask made out of a skull and some old etchings of the area. These etchings fascinate Fanshawe as they portray the Abbey he seen through his binoculars, but he learns that the abbey had been destroyed during the reign of Henry VII and so it would be impossible for Baxter to have drawn the sketches, never the less they are signed and dated by Baxter to the recent past so he concludes that the binoculars have some special power. That night he has horrifically vivid dreams, when he wakes, he sets off with the binoculars to have a closer look at the abbey through them, what he finds surprises him but has he put himself in perilous danger by doing so? Fanshawe finally becomes trapped in his dangerous obsession, as darkness falls the Squire and a search party go in search of the now missing archaeologist, they are alerted by dozens of loudly cawing crows circling above Gallows HIll, they quicken their speed, but will they be in time to help or save Fanshawe from his destiny? The Ghost Story for Christmas series of films made by the BBC sadly ended its initial run of films in 1978 with The Ice House, they were for the most part based on the work of the great M.R. James. In 2005 and 2006 the series was revived briefly and thankfully A View from a Hill also marked a return to the work of James, whose ghostly writings have haunted many generations of readers. Director Luke Watson being new to the series might have worried fans of the older films, but he returns to the period setting abandoned by the later films which immediately sets the tone for a great Ghost story, his direction is assured as he stays true to the mood of the masters works and gradually builds up the fear factor to a terrifying climax, all the while keeping what the viewer sees to a minimum, thus upping the tension and mystery. The Autumn countryside provides oodles of atmosphere, the falling leaves and low lying sun providing an unsettling backdrop for the sinister events to come. The cast it must be said are all superb and are perfectly cast in their respective roles. The idea behind the binoculars is simple but very effective, the use of a man made object to see supernatural beings and events that the naked eye cannot see, may even have influenced Álex de la Iglesia in his film La habitación del niño (2006) of the following year, with which it bears striking similarity. I had heard mixed reviews of this particular film, but i must say i found it at all times intriguing and it even raised a few hairs on my head and gave me a few shivers, something that doesn't happen much these days, i think any negativity surrounding the film can only be attributed to its pacing, which to my eyes is perfection but to modern audiences it will be seen as deathly slow. Plenty of time is given, even within its brief 40 minutes running time, for character development and plot expansion and i must say its a new favourite of mine and certainly one of the better films of the decade.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2d4a5da6f244b899c1112438e199783",
            "input": "OK this movie had a terrible premise. Be serious according to the movie they had just been through an apocalyptic war yet they have money to buy huge robots and pit them against each other. Each country decides instead of investing into rebuilding their country they would rather fight with robots no one could afford. Here's a better idea, lets rely on our most inept resource,jocks, to fight our battles. Everyone says what about the director, what about him. He makes a good movie, he makes a bad movie. There is no reason to give this movie some credit just because of the director, maybe he was asleep? I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, because it was so cheesy and ridiculous I had to laugh. I actually had a good time watching it, well except for the cowboy mentor who turns out to be an assassin(trust me no one would see this guy as an assassin, so it is a surprise, however lame) What kind of training exercise is a jungle jim anyway. I was sad to see Mst3k had not done this one. I am giving a two star rating however because nothing could be as bad as \"manos the hands of fate.\"The budget does not matter either, I have seen plenty of reasonable movies that had nothing for budgets like cube. The storyline was not even plausible and I have seen better acting in school plays. Surly they could have afforded an eleven year old from any middle school play.Anyway pick it up, it is a fun movie to watch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d02325342d544a8b88965f0ec9c081f0",
            "input": "I admit that I am a vampire addict: I have seen so many vampire movies I have lost count and this one is definitely in the top ten. I was very impressed by the original John Carpenter's Vampires and when I descovered there was a sequel I went straight out and bought it. This movie does not obey quite the same rules as the first, and it is not quite so dark, but it is close enough and I felt that it built nicely on the original.Jon Bon Jovi was very good as Derek Bliss: his performance was likeable and yet hard enough for the viewer to believe that he might actually be able to survive in the world in which he lives. One of my favourite parts was just after he meets Zoey and wanders into the bathroom of the diner to check to see if she is more than she seems. His comments are beautifully irreverant and yet emminently practical which contrast well with the rest of the scene as it unfolds.The other cast members were also well chosen and they knitted nicely to produce an entertaining and original film. It is not simply a rehash of the first movie and it has grown in a similar way to the way Fright Night II grew out of Fright Night. There are different elements which make it a fresh movie with a similar theme.If you like vampire movies I would recommend this one. If you prefer your films less bloody then choose something else.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22e91e03f9904cef947975b86a88a9a8",
            "input": "Does this film suck!! Horrible acting, horrible script, horrible effects, horrible horrible horrible!! Nothing redeeming here for even the most die-hard of horror fans! A crazy killer stalks students at a college. People are showing up dead in the hallways, but still, class carries on as normal??? After about the 4th body, I would think that they could allow the students a few days break! LOL. This about as bad as it gets folks. This film should be shown as a means of torture to criminals. You have been warned!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-026c8de010e2445c994025d4833092cd",
            "input": "This is probably one of Brian De Palma's best known movies but it isn't his best. Body Double, The Fury and Carrie are better movies but this movie is better than Blow Out and Obsession. De Palma is very influenced by Hitchcock and this movie is a take off on Psycho. Angie Dickinson is a bored housewife who is thinking of having an affair and after her psychiatrist, played by Michael Caine, turns down an offer, Dickinson meets a man in a art gallery and she winds up sleeping with him. After this point it's best you don't know what happens but there is a murder and Nancy Allen is a call girl who gets a look at the killer. Dennis Franz is the detective on the case who really doesn't trust Allen and she has to find the killer herself. It's a pretty good movie but isn't one of De Palma's best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99f1d9ecf1044b11886cf261dfd295c4",
            "input": "Why a good actress like Elizabeth Berkley stars in this commonplace movie???!!! The cast gives some good performance (Elizabeth Berkley as a Barbie girl, Ele Keats as a girl without mother and Justin Whalin, a guy eternally lessened by his bother), but the direction is extremely boring and the story is NOT so interesting and original. I can NOT believe that a movie like this was produced for the big screen! Julie Corman (the producer): are you CRAZY???!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0a31b16ca0b436dab118065351415cf",
            "input": "Born Again is a sub-standard episode from season one. It deals with the subject of reincarnation and just doesn't fly. I've never been big on reincarnation and that could be part of my apathy toward this episode. It does reference the Tooms case which is some nice continuation from the previous episode. But the positives end there. Which is unfortunate because that takes place at the beginning of the episode. I think it's ludicrous that a dead guy would chose to reincarnate in the body of a completely unrelated girl. And he waits until the girl turns eight to start exacting revenge. There's even a serious lack of witty Mulder & Scully dialogue to keep the episode afloat. If you're into reincarnation, maybe this episode is up your alley. If you're not, then at least you can learn what bradycardia is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fbc8d23a6e344509813a67ecb8a1003a",
            "input": "This is an excellent film for female body-builder & female action fans! I think that Sue Price did a great job in this film series (Nemesis 2,3,4) and proved to be a great fighter. She has a very striking appearance and a will of iron to resist the powerful Nebula (Nemesis 2). Though not a film of great value and Sue Price's acting skills not the best to have met in my life, the movie itself was something awesome, a priceless gem for fans of female body-builder action! Well, some parts of Nemesis 2 have been copied by other famous sci-fi films, such as Terminator or Predator, but that's not the point. The point is that A.Puyn casted in that film a very talented body-builder who put all of her energy and body talent to show us the best she can do. I really enjoyed that film and watched with the same enthusiasm Nemesis 3 (a rather boring sequel) and Nemesis 4 (a much more interesting sequel than 3). What a pity it hasn't shown yet on DVD :-(",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8484c1b751d240d49857f8ae13510544",
            "input": "It makes the actors in Hollyoaks look like the Royal Shakespeare Company. This movie is jaw dropping in how appalling it is. Turning the DVD player off was not a sufficient course of action. I want to find the people responsible for this disaster and slap them around the face. I will never get that time back. Never. How is it possible to create such a banal, boring and soulless film? I could not think of a course of action that would relieve the tedium. Writing the required ten lines is incredibly difficult for such a disgraceful piece of cinema. What more can you say than reiterate how truly awful the acting is. Please avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ec865291b9748a485b8415a6dae5a8a",
            "input": "I was taken to this film by a friend and was sceptical about a Swedish film with subtitles. However, I thoroughly enjoyed every minute of this beautiful film. The unnecessary cruelty that man is capable of was portrayed confidently without overwhelming images - although animal lovers may have to shield their eyes for a brief couple of seconds somewhere during the first 10 minutes. A traditional story of humility versus brutality and hope versus tragedy was illustrated from a satisfyingly fresh angle using a spectrum of characters with very natural flaws and features. I particularly liked how the film managed to address multiple aspects of hypocritical human behaviour that concern bias, discrimination and sanctimonious pretence. An absolute gem of a film that I will promote to all who will listen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd88defa50f246098e8703dfeb907004",
            "input": "This movie had lots of great actors and actresses in it and it addressed some very noble issues. It's full of emotion and the direction is done well. The storyline progresses very quickly, but I guess that's better than having to watch a 3 hour movie. This is an easy movie to watch again and again and enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36318d37543044ec9bf913713fa45703",
            "input": "It's amazing to see how Nikhil Advani manages to attract people to the theater till the very day of the release. I mean..... look at the cast here , the promotion is superb, good enough songs and the trailers are fine. This makes it a house full on the first day, but it's only when people go and see the film they realize that there is no way their money is refundable. House full the first day , the movie is out the next week. This film, inspired by 'Love Actually' is what they say, didn't manage to handle the whole cast well. They tried to put in big stars but ended up by not even managing to bring out even an average performance by any one. The stories are hollow and cheesy, so the audience can't connect with any single one of them. It's a big disappointment to all those who like big stars or for that matter Nikhil Advani after his big success of 'Kal Ho Na Ho'.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-216a7aa050e74b56b8a185c1dbd64199",
            "input": "This movie was messed up. A sequel to \"John Carpenter's Vampires\", this didn't add up right. I'm not sure that I enjoyed this much. It was a little strange. Stick to the first \"Vampires\", it's a good movie. \"Vampires: Los Muetos\" wasn't a good attempt of a sequel.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d6a474bcf0a42058b3a583fe0da54e5",
            "input": "I rented this one to see Vanesa Talor one more time. She can act, but doesn't get a chance in this clunker. The opening sequence is an elaborate crane shot of mountain landscapes. Must have come from a stock archive, because the movie is shot direct to videotape. The production values make _Blair Witch_ look professional. There's a really cheesy animated statue, but no other effects worth noting. This movie is bad, but not amusingly so. The players would do well not to mention it on their resumes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eee2fd9d54c9432f97222488cf674ded",
            "input": "Most people who chase after movies featuring Audrey Tautou seem to not understand that Amelie was a character - it is not really Audrey Tautou's real life personality, hence, every movie she partakes in is not going to be Amelie part 2, part 3, etc.Now with that said, I too picked up this movie simply because Audrey was in it. Yes, it's true, there is a big gap after the first scene where she isn't seen at all for maybe 45 min, but I didn't even miss her because I was having so much fun with the other characters. The guy who lies about everything is too funny, the guy who justifies people who run out of his cafe and skip out on the bill by finding coupons and such which balance out the loss, actually.... getting into all the characters here could take quite a while, but this is one of the best movies I've seen in a while.Audrey Tautou's character Irene is not the overdone sugary girl that Amelie was. In fact, as Irene, her rudeness to a bum asking for change caught me off guard at first. In this film, Irene is a girl with good intentions, but over the course of a (very awful) day, her disposition becomes more and more sour and pessimistic.What makes this film completely great is you have all these really interesting stories and plots building... very entertaining to watch, great scenery and shots, very colorful and never too slow, and all of the characters can actually act. The best part of the movie comes with about 20 minutes left.... this is when all of the plots start to mesh together and the ride really picks up and everything ties together and makes sense, and the whole butterfly effect blossoms. I swear, it was the best 20 minutes of film I've seen in quite a while, and the ending.... It made me think \"damn I really lucked out finding this movie\". The ending to this movie is top notch. Whoever wrote the script for this is brilliant, because not only are there all these other subplots going on, but to somehow make them all tie in together (and in a sensible manner, which is the case here) but also to make each character feel human and come alive, not just some stale persona used as a crutch to build up this whole butterfly effect... very impressive.I highly suggest this movie as it's a great film to watch anytime, in any mood, with any company or alone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c511c82766e45eca24d9480141f0bcf",
            "input": "Tommy JOnes and Matt Dillon do the gambling world proud. The various moves with the wrists had to be learned as throwing craps is a skill in and of itself.There are a few surprises. AS cynical as we are today, I fully expected the 'good girl' to be crying over his grave, instead of his Buddy's. Especially with her remarks about 'going to the funeral of her best friend', when she first meets Matt. And then of course you expect Matt to kill the guy who threw battery acid in Mr. Allen's face, blinding him (interesting role by Bruce Dern). WRRROOONNNNGGG!!! some of the other Hollywood endings DO happen, but the writing is so excellent, the acting so carefully wrought that you're blissfully unaware.And the music is OUT OF THIS WORLD. Taking us back to the 50s when our 'native passions' were first being unleashed by the music of Ray Charles and Bo Diddley. Even a little racism raring its ugly head in Chicago, but at a club called, wonderfully, 'Biloxi' with a Confederate flag backing up the racist remarks. I'll be watching it again, just to hear the music. Good thing I have the FACTOTUM sound track, so I can listen to that in the car. Watch both together, and you'll see how Matt has matured....playing bar room characters in both. NOw that he owns a bar in the Paramount HOtel in NYC, he probably has great opportunity to do his studies. Great actor, just coming into his own. He shows finely nuanced performances ...the good and the bad in his characters. His 'young boy off the farm' is a great study, made especially poignant because of his bassett-hound eyes. He makes love, convincingly as well. Since he was in several movies with Diane Lane as a teen-ager, I wonder how that it ...making love to an actress you kinda grew up with. Adds conviction, I'll say that.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de94c1d9749045e8bb4420c5420143e4",
            "input": "If you love cult 70's Sci-fi the way I do, or if you like movies such as \"Repo Man\" or \"Buckaroo Bonzai\" than you're going to love this one. It's a stream of consciousness 70's Sci-fi spectacular, including a 22nd century junkyard and the Earth a million years from now. This movie is pure 70's. Put on Steve Miller's \"Fly Like An Eagle\" or Pink Floyd's \"Dark Side Of The Moon\" and you're ready to go!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a78902cc755e491687fcd0e9950faeb3",
            "input": "I picked this film up at my local library. Having met the director at a film festival late last year, I was curious to \"check out\" his work. I was pleasantly surprised.The film takes a fresh look at familiar subjects, love, infidelity, friendships, jealousy. It can be a bit 'talky' at times but never so much as to completely sink the film. I enjoyed watching a love story with characters that CLEARLY belong together and watching them make conscious decisions rather than haphazardly \"falling\" into something as important as love.The contrast between this film and the average low-budget shoot-em' up black film is quite distinct. Check it out. If you're lucky, your copy will come with a copy of the soundtrack like mine did. Good stuff!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33a2e88b19d34c29916182a079a71df2",
            "input": "\"Against All Flags\" is every bit the classic swashbuckler. It has all the elements the adventure fan could hope for and more for in this one, the damsel in distress is, well, not really in distress. As Spitfire Stevens, Maureen O'Hara is at her athletic best, running her foes through in defiance of the social norms of the period. Anthony Quinn rounds out the top three billed actors as the ruthless Captain Roc Brasiliano and proves to be a wily and capable nemesis for Brian Hawke (Flynn). For the classic adventure fan, \"Against All Flags\" is a must-see. While it may not be in quite the same league as some of Errol Flynn's earlier work (Captain Blood and The Sea Hawk, for instance), it is still a greatly entertaining romp.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab3465911ae546d0bb9d2a52f02928a7",
            "input": "The Hazing is confused mumbo-jumbo that wants so hard to be The Evil Dead that it even references Bruce Campbell several times. The problem is, it is simply not in the same league as that terrific movie. This movie is nowhere near as original. The plot has been used before, by Kevin Tenney in Night of the Demons, and that was a lot more fun. This flick wastes too much time with complicated exposition before getting the kids into the spooky mansion and starting the demonic happenings.Brad Dourif is, as usual, not given much to do here, but when he is on screen he puts in another over-the-top performance that would make Christopher Walken jealous. As for the acting of the kids, it's passable but by no means good. The shaky camera work is more annoying than clever or atmospheric. There are a few good moments when the first guy gets possessed and throws around some deadly one liners while dispatching his victims, but it was never scary for a second. The gore level is mid-range to low, but the director tries to make up for it by showing the actresses topless a few times. All in all, just okay if you have 87 minutes to waste.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2e845b23e3e458298bf06f9e8c4bff0",
            "input": "I remember Devil Dog playing on TBS almost 20 years ago, and my older sister and her friends watching it and laughing all the next day. It's not that bad for a made-for-TV horror movie, but it is derivative (mostly of The Exorcist) and businesslike, for lack of a better word. It won't blow you away with artful cinematography or great acting, but it's not a waste of time, either. It's the kind of movie you watch to kill a couple of hours when you aren't in the mood to think too hard.However, if you go into the movie looking for some laughs, you won't be disappointed. The early scenes, with Lucky the Devil Dog as a cute little puppy with Children of the Damned eyes are hilariously non-threatening, and the climactic blue-screen effects of a giant black dog (with horns!) are pretty side-splitting. And keep an eye out for the cloaked Satanist in Maverick shades toward the beginning.Not a great horror film by any stretch of the imagination, but I wish they still made stuff like this for TV.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3901be5dd9a54c85b0f2da735dbe9dc8",
            "input": "Burt Kennedy used to be a very good director, but you'd never know it by this lumbering mess. Not only does this film look cheap, it IS cheap--most of the battle scenes are lifted from the far superior \"The Last Command\" from 1955, and that footage, shot 32 years previously, looks more contemporary than anything in this picture. The few action scenes that were actually shot for this movie are disorganized, confused and incompetent, looking just as shoddy as the rest of the picture. This has the look and feel of a bad student film (and the budget didn't seem to be a whole lot more). It moves like molasses, the acting for the most part is either over-the-top ham or under-the-top comatose--although Raul Julia comes off better than most of the rest of the cast--and it's chock full of annoying historical inaccuracies. On top of that, it's WAY too long. If you're going to make a boring film, do it in an hour or so and get it over with--don't stretch it out over three hours, like this one does. If you want to see a good movie about the Alamo, check out John Wayne's 1960 version, or even the 1955 film from which this movie stole its action scenes. Hard to believe it took six producers to make a movie this lousy. Skip it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-15eb0729409f428fa7113e33d2250ab1",
            "input": "First, this was a BRAVE film. I've seen Irreversible and can understand the comparisons. However, I cannot begin to understand the people who've trashed this film. I can see how the end may have come off extreme but I'd be lying if I didn't say I wished that every guy who's ever forced a woman into sex deserved exactly what Jared got. Conversely, it didn't solve anything or make anything better and the fact that the film doesn't pretend to is what made me appreciate it.The comment prior to this one called the film pathetic and claimed no adult would stick with. I certainly did and intently. I'm 24 years old. The way the film drags made it realistic to me. People have become so used to eye candy and fast paced plots on screen that if you ask them to concentrate too long on one brick in the foundation of a film, not only do they lose interest, they demolish whatever has been built, and call it rubbish. When in actuality it's their lack of patience and comprehension that needs fine tuning and not the product of a creative mind such as Talia Lugacy's.Rosario Dawson displayed the numbness of self-destruction flawlessly. I think she portrayed Maya pre and post assault with great ease and the transition between the two is an act I rarely ever see done well. Often times, much like the films \"aimed at teens\" mentioned in the prior comment, the effects of rape are displayed as either extremely manic and impulsive or terribly depressed, isolated and lifeless. Dawson, in my opinion, manages to perform the balancing act so many survivors fall prey to: drone-like existence in the waking hours, working some dead end job to survive (and distract) and then overindulging in vices in order to lose themselves in the haze of substance abuse rather than face what sobriety brings.I thought this film told the truth and I appreciated it for finally showing people a different side of rape. So many people let the end of this film devour the middle and the beginning...I believe that Maya's face during the act was the end...not the act itself...not the vengeance or the meaning behind it...just her face...thank you",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2fb1e3b74285486b9f0e6c756651b49f",
            "input": "A meteor drops from the sky and reawakens a plesiosaur that long ago used to terrorize the area around Crater Lake . As the monster eats the locals they try and find away of killing the monster.Recent attempts at sending up old horror and science fiction films like Lost Skeleton of Cadavra and Alien Trespass are kind of rendered moot when you have films like Crater Lake Monster available for screening. It's the sort of film that those films spoof and send up only this is the real deal. Its everything those films try to be only with out the tongue in cheek and its so much more fun because of it. This is a real drive-in sort of film that had the unfortunate luck of coming just as Star Wars changed the way we look at special effects. The monster, a mix of stop motion and a life size head, is a charmingly quaint little beast. The filmmakers spoil the audience with frequent shots of the monster and its mayhem. Sure its clear that its all fake, but isn't movies about suspension of disbelief? Actually I think its about really cool monsters, which this has.I like this movie in a low budget drive in sort of a way. If you want a real authentic drive in monster movie look no farther. This would be perfect for a double or triple feature with similar lake monster films (Boggy Creek etc.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee870553009b447ba04aa8b5909ce0d0",
            "input": "Marvin(Rob Schneider)does not have the ingredients to be a cop which is his lifelong dream. But his luck changes when he has a car crush(a very bad one)and is found by a doctor. The doctor has to use animal organs to rebuild him. After this moment, he starts to have wild behaviours unconsciously and becomes a best cop one could ever be. By the time, he realises the changes and his animal instincts starts to take over his human side. In the mean time, he finds a lovely girl and try to be a perfect gentleman that means he has to control himself and behave civilised. I am not a big fun of Rob Schneider. In fact, this is the his first film I have seen. However, I can easily say that he is the best person to play the loser.(See his part in Ally Mcbeal, quite funny actually).There are some good parts in the movie such as his flirting with the goat. In such movies, the biggest problem is that the script is seems to make the viewer feel less intelligent. I am sure this movie is okay to watch as long as it is not taken too seriously. But very sad to see such films doing very good in the box office. The Animal is not the worst film I have seen to date but fails to get more than *.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-597df0685c5241b6ba73b307b5b53a2d",
            "input": "Back in his youth, the old man had wanted to marry his first cousin, but his family forbid it. Many decades later, the old man has raised three children (two boys and one girl), and allows his son and daughter to marry and have children. Soon, the sister is bored with brother #1, and jumps in the bed of brother #2.One might think that the three siblings are stuck somewhere on a remote island. But no -- they are upper class Europeans going to college and busy in the social world.Never do we see a flirtatious moment between any non-related female and the two brothers. Never do we see any flirtatious moment between any non-related male and the one sister. All flirtatious moments are shared between only between the brothers and sister.The weakest part of GLADIATOR was the incest thing. The young emperor Commodus would have hundreds of slave girls and a city full of marriage-minded girls all over him, but no -- he only wanted his sister? If movie incest is your cup of tea, then SUNSHINE will (slowly) thrill you to no end.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74012973ad02494fa84b354c88793960",
            "input": "Attack Of The Killer Tomatoes is a \"parody\" of bad monster movies which ends up being worse than the movies it spoofs. The (very meager) story tells of tomatoes who revolt against those who treat them badly. Basically,they spin and growl (yes,they growl) and the next thing you know the person is covered in ketchup. The actors are no-names who never made movies after this,so there would be no point to name them. There's a guy who's hired by the governement to try and stop the menace of tomatoes. He's accompanied by a black guy who's master of disguise and a girl and a guy who dives. Anyway, there's another woman who spies on the first guy that works for the government. if this isn't making much sense to you, you understand. This movie never would have been very good in the first place, but it even lacks the fun of laughing at stupid attack scenes. The movie is horribly cheezy, which although being the whole point,really really hurts what could've been a (reasonably) entertaining movie. At one point, a giant wax tomato \"slides\" on an unconcealed plank of wood with wheels on it! Maybe I would've recommended the movie if it would have enjoyable camp value, but even this is lacking from this terrible movie. 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14bc7b5abe7a45f292a21c0aca9a84dd",
            "input": "Joel schumacher Made a heck of a choice when he decided on this cast and this script. The story is well written and well laid out, and this entirely new cast of 10 or 12 central characters was absolutely brilliant. It seemed that there were 6 \"leads\" and about a half dozen supporting, and by far this is the best thing about the movie, the fresh young faces of tomorrow. It has been a long time since hollywood has touched the controversial vietnam war films,which says something for the\"story that needed to be told\"(as stated by schumacher) and Tigerland lands in that handful of top war movies period. Yet it can not be labeled as a war movie because it seemed to be based more on the human spirit of Bozz and the others. I Think anyone who just wants to see a good film with out all of the special FX, but just good, gritty drama should go see Tigerland, obviously Shumachers Best works in the past 8 years.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1128a780108c428fae2e05cfa96dfaad",
            "input": "One of the most unheralded great works of animation. Though it makes the most sophisticated use of the \"cut-out\" method of animation (a la \"South Park\"), the real talent behind \"Twice Upon a Time\" are the vocal characterizations, with Lorenzo Music's (Carlton from TV's \"Rhoda\") Woody Allen-ish Ralph-the-all-purpose-Animal being the centerpiece. The \"accidental nightmare\" sequence is doubtless one of the best pieces of animation ever filmed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14db38c6d27c45b5a9951e6189314a25",
            "input": "This film is really vile. It plays on the urban paranoia of the 70s/80s and puts it into a school context. I'm not saying that urban crime wasn't a problem for a lot of people or that schools weren't/aren't problem areas but this vile piece of exploitation takes the biscuit. Violence is beyond anything realistically imaginable but in this case it's not a case of social issues but a white, upper-middle class student uses it to turn himself into the crime kingpin of his local high schoiol. And of course he knows how to play the system. Does that sound familiar. Yes. This turd is pure violent exploitation, a really nasty piece of work. It's disturbing brutality dressed up as a social comment. This belongs in the same category as trash like Exterminator, Death Wish 2-5 and so on and so on. The only remarkable thing is that Michael Fox was so broke at the time that he had to do stuff like this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb5530eb5dba42b8a133b5cb36fbbc75",
            "input": "I saw this movie as a kid on Creature Feature when I lived in New York. It was a pretty creepy movie, though not as good as Horror Hotel. I just bought this movie on DVD, and it is different from what I remember because in the DVD that I bought there are several scenes where the actors speak in French and/or Italian and no subtitles are provided. Then the other actors respond in English to what was being said. Kind of weird. Also on the DVD box, the names of some of the actors are spelled differently than on IMDb.Aside from that, this movie is different in that the character of Elsie takes her clothes off and provides a nude shot in one scene and in another scene Julia tries to force Elizabeth (Barbara Steele) to make out with her by pushing her down on the bed and kissing her while Steele resists. That scene existed in the TV version, but it was very edited. I wonder if there is any extra footage that could be incorporated into a remastered ultra-edition? It seems sad that some of these old low budget classics have been spliced to bits and sold in all kinds of edited versions. Where are the master tapes and all the unused footage? Aside from the first boring twenty minutes before Allen is delivered to the Castle, the rest of the movie is pretty good. There aren't too many special effects (but Herbert's face after Julia clubs him is a good one). The creepy atmosphere and the strange, exotic, and seductive look of Barbara Steele make the movie a lot better than it should be. I can honestly say that if Barbara Steele had not been in this film, it would be a big zero. She makes the movie a ten!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ade637b8ee774025b1163d0ee9c3bfed",
            "input": "There is a scene near the beginning after a shootout where horses are running. If something red catches your eye it is because a white van is parked behind a bush by the trail. I thought I had seen bad but this is it. A white van in a western. Did they not catch this? Oh well, and I paid top dollar at the rental. It will make you want to grab your buddies and have them all put in 10 grand and make a better movie. The talking was so so slow, the acting was mostly OK but couldn't be taken seriously due to the poor nature of the filming. There is a door at the sheriffs that looks like a door today with the particular trimming. I say watch this movie, and move Cabin boy into #2 on the worst of all time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72b7677bf895486cb4c8caa8bfe20c27",
            "input": "This so-called prequel is just a badly made remake to to a better version of Dangerous Liasons. The plots are identical as is most of the script. I loved the book its based off of, and I loved the first movie, but I'm not even going to bother with the 3rd movie. The pointless banter between the two main characters in the prequel was completely predictable and unoriginal, and...I just can't stress how bad the movie was. If you don't want to take my word for it, just watch it, and you'll see what I mean. If you've read a review that says that 'If you likes the first one, you'll like the second one' the only reason that is is because IT IS THE EXACT SAME MOVIE! Although the plot is not even as good. They took so many lines from the first movie, Its hard to tell which movie you're watching.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77e8469d5cd54751ace117210e3ae4a1",
            "input": "O my gosh... Just give me a minute to breath. This movie takes you on an awesome ride and doesn't let you go until the very last blow in your face ending. This is the the movie for fans of Stormriders and such. Legend of Zu was beautifully created, although I didn't like a few things, they used alot of stand ins. I wanted to see the real person fight but, oh well... a few small let downs,and I didn't really like it a lot until I watched it again, when you understand it more it totally kicks A**! I encourage anyone who ever wanted to see a true Asian movie, to see this movie. I give this movie one of my highest ratings.Go and see it when it comes out in America!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9ca491886db4e8e8a77eb5cdfe60f20",
            "input": "I've seen all four of the movies in this series. Each one strays further and further from the books. This is the worst one yet. My problem is that it does not follow the book it is titled after in any way! The directors and producers should have named it any thing other than \"Love's Abiding Joy.\" The only thing about this movie that remotely resembles the book are the names of some of the characters (Willie, Missie, Henry, Clark, Scottie and Cookie). The names/ages/genders of the children are wrong. The entire story line is no where in the book.I find it a great disservice to Janette Oke, her books and her fans to produce a movie under her title that is not correct in any way. The music is too loud. The actors are not convincing - they lack emotions.If you want a good family movie, this might do. It is clean. Don't watch it, though, if you are hoping for a condensed version of the book. I hope that this will be the last movie from this series, but I doubt it. If there are more movies made, I wish Michael Landon, Jr and others would stick closer to the original plot and story lines. The books are excellent and, if closely followed, would make excellent movies!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5177b3fc52c8498b863c0ba96dc88e72",
            "input": "Saw a trailer for this on another video, and decided to rent when it came out. Boy, was I disappointed! The story is extremely boring, the acting (aside from Christopher Walken) is bad, and I couldn't care less about the characters, aside from really wanting to see Nora's husband get thrashed. Christopher Walken's role is such a throw-away, what a tease!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e4a1d4de2c2423191511c9ee8b842e6",
            "input": "This was a typical grade B movie in 1940s Hollywood and yet it succeeded way beyond its expectations. Why? It has a wonderful plot and backed up by Nina Foch, George MacReady and Dame May Witty, as a female villain, of all people.When a young lady answers an advertisement for a secretary, she certainly gets more than she bargained for. The only talents her employers are seeking are those which will lead to her demise. Seems that Witty and MacReady want to pass her off as their daughter-in-law and wife, respectively. MacReady killed his real wife and wants to do Foch in as well so that a body can be claimed.The film deals with how Foch tries to get town people to believe her and how she is thwarted in practically everything she does. Why don't people believe her?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04c9b86162c04d49bfe3816c9fd85475",
            "input": "I must be that one guy in America that didn't like this movie. I guess this just wasn't my style or something, I just don't see what's so fascinating about it, this was *barely entertaining, let alone one of the greatest achievements in cinema history. It's about a guy that came from nothing, and goes on to become a drug lord. Pretty simple way to describe an entire movie, and that's exactly my feeling about the entire movie. Contrary to what a lot of people think, just because a movie is about mafias/drug trade/criminal groups doesn't automatically make it a great movie, don't forget good storytelling.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-801e19ef7ae543fda62231da9d996ab7",
            "input": "Are you kidding me?! A show highlighting someone who opens cans and envelopes for a meal? How talented do you have to be to do this? She MAY be able to cook but it is NOT portrayed in this half-hour stomach churning painful production. I know she has a Martha-Stewart-esquire empire. So does Warren Buffett but I don't see him with fake knockers opening cans of cream corn and Alpo.She has a nephew named...Brycer. Brycer? Stop talking about anyone a name that stupid.More time is spent on \"table-scapes\" than actual cooking. Who has that kind of time?! Silicon should be on your spatula, not on my TV. This show should be on Cartoon Network, NOT Food Network.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1eccdff625af404a8eb7638f9f84dcf2",
            "input": "So, not being a poet myself, I have no real way to convey the beauty and simplicity of this documentary. The effortless motion of Goldsworthy, as he molds natures beauty into his own work is captivating. Watch him stick reeds together in a web hanging from a tree in a close up for a few minutes while he speaks of his work, and then receive the payoff when the camera cuts to the wide shot. Be amazed by the ease with which he operates and then realize the futility when a slight breeze knocks down the entire web.The genius of Goldsworthy seemingly knows no bounds as his inspiration is nature itself. It is in the essential change of nature where his work, though complete in its own sphere, is made whole.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9fcde83e403f4d73854eac2b0f2302a6",
            "input": "How this film was made with so many big stars is beyond me. This is a terrible cliché' ridden film with the worst acting any of these actors have ever done. It really surprises me that so many of these A list stars would agree to this unfunny film. What's even worse is the fact that is made almost 100 million here in the states. It does go to show however that big stars can pull in the bucks, even if the film is terrible. I felt sorry for everyone involved in this snore-fest. Billy Crystal tried his best with the what he was given and the rest of the stars seemed to be walking through the motions. Whatever you do, don't fall for the excellent cast because no one could have saved this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a152c25d3854449dadc55f47a1c077bb",
            "input": "I would put this at the top of my list of films in the category of unwatchable trash! There are films that are bad, but the worst kind are the ones that are unwatchable but you are suppose to like them because they are supposed to be good for you! The sex sequences, so shocking in its day, couldn't even arouse a rabbit. The so called controversial politics is strictly high school sophomore amateur night Marxism. The film is self-consciously arty in the worst sense of the term. The photography is in a harsh grainy black and white. Some scenes are out of focus or taken from the wrong angle. Even the sound is bad! And some people call this art?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1756e54a98f044e1ac4e8dbf88082236",
            "input": "Abysmal with a capital \"A\". This has got to be one of, if not THE, unfunniest show on TV right now. I'm about as anti-bush as it gets, but this show doesn't even get a chuckle out of me. What you think of Bush as a president has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not you'll like this piece of crap show. The \"jokes\" are not funny at all. For example, in a scene when lil bush has his underwear on his head: \"Welcome to camp al-qa-eeda!\". There is NOTHING funny about that. Is it even supposed to be joke? The commercials that were shown in the weeks leading up to the show, hyping it up, were funnier than the show itself, and that's just sad. Hopefully this does not even get considered for a second season. It shouldn't even have had a first.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54847091c32c474c8f5d60db53b6a57a",
            "input": "This is a genuinely horrible film. The plot (such as it is) is totally undecipherable. (I think it has something to do with blackmail, but I'm not entirely certain.)Half of the dialogue consists of useless cliches. The other half is spoken by the various actors in such unintelligible imitations of \"southern\" accents that (thankfully) the words cannot be recognized.But the one true tragedy of the movie is that such a historic talent as Mary Tyler Moore apparently was in such dire financial or personal circumstances that she appeared in it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d382608570c4239a990839c51b6e986",
            "input": "Possible SPOILERS: Not SureWhile watching The Lion King 1 1/2, I couldn't help but have mixed feelings about the whole film. It is definitely a good way to spend about an hour and 15 minutes. But there is nothing about it that would give you the same sort of feeling that The Lion King did. The story, for those who haven't read the other reviews, is about how Timon and Pumbaa meet, and how they affect events in the original Lion King.There are actually some very funny jokes in the movie. My favorite part is when they show the pair raising Simba. However, for me the worst parts have to be when they show Timon and Pumbaa directly interfering with the events of the original. I can never look at the \"Circle of Life\" or \"Can You Feel the Love Tonight\" sequences the same way again (I'm okay with the \"I Just Can't Wait to be King\" sequence).The voice talents are excellent. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella do a wonderful job, as do Matthew Broderick, the guy who does Rafiki, and the hyenas. Even the actor who does young Simba sounded enough like Jonathon Taylor Thomas for me. But why did they even include a voice actor for Zazu? He literally had only 2 lines, and neither were very necessary. The additions of Julie Kavner and Jerry Stiller only add to the talent, although you still can't hear Timon's Mom's voice and not think of Marge Simpson.There are some scenes that seem to not fit in with the original, the one coming to mind being when they are pride rock at the end. How did they have time to fit in the initial fight with the hyenas?As for the DVD itself, you can't help but feel that for a 2 disc set, the special features are especially lacking. They could have easily fit a commentary, or another aspect ratio on the 1st disc. I enjoyed the \"Who Wants to be King of the Jungle\" game, even if it is the most shameful example of cross promotion I've ever seen. Some of the questions are actually difficult.Overall, a good movie, though not nearly as good as TLK or even TLK2.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63fc63b3e3f1435aba3edcdd9aeff0d0",
            "input": "What a loss the passing of director Emile Ardolino was! He could take a light script and, with the right casting and editing, put a twinkle in it and make it shine like a star. This particular star may not be the brightest in the sky as great romances go, but it is definitely one that keeps you tuned in to the end. You really want to know how things are going to work out.The script is perfect for Cybill Shepherd, who at the time needed to capitalize on her \"Moonlighting\" success for the new generation who was (fortunately for her) probably unaware of how many big screen major duds she had after a very promising start. In this film she's every bit back in form as a still-pining widow living vicariously through her daughter (Mary Stuart Masterson on the cusp of stardom which would peak with \"Fried Green Tomatoes\" two years later). She may have looked too young for the role, but that works well for the way the story unfolds. This is her film, but she doesn't overstep her bounds as a lead.SHepherd graciously allows Robert Downey Jr. to carry much of the film and shows a more mature comic flair than he had in his previous films to that point. And there's ample support from Ryan O'Neal (in his best role in years) and Christopher MacDonald. Masterson's natural charm pretty much coasts on its own, either that or she has a way of making her character seem like a breath of fresh air with every word.Ardolino makes good use of his cast's sex appeal the same way he did with \"Dirty Dancing\", but this film is not quite as sizzling so you could still watch it with your parents if they happened to be in the room. (Use your best judgment, they're your parents after all.) I give this film a high mark because it is very user friendly, romantic comedy enthusiasts will find it sublime, and those who are just watching along with them should find plenty of humor to enjoy as well.Again, credit goes to Emile Ardolino for making the most of a charming script by Randy and Perry Howze. (Where are they now?) Ardolino's next film would be the phoned-in sequel to \"Three Men and A Baby\" but his final theatrical release (Sister Act) would finally give him the nine-figure-grossing smash hit he deserved. Mr. Ardolino, your cinematic touch IS missed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfc197dc7cd041d5a4ec94fb5b00d9ed",
            "input": "Wealthy psychiatrist Lindsay Crouse has just published her first novel and is feeling down about her profession feeling that it's hopeless to help her patients. A young gambling junkie client asks her to help him pay off his debts if he truly wants to help him get better. Here she gets involved with Joe Mantegna. To reveal any more of the plot would spoil one hell of a fun movie and 'House of Games' may very well be the best con movie I've seen. David Mamet wrote and directed this gem that's full of snappy dialogue, great one-liners, and enough twists to keep you guessing til the end. Crouse is perfect as the uptight psychiatrist needing a change and Mantegna tops her as the devilishly sly con-man. And with the exception of a coincidence in the last quarter of the movie, the film is in utter control of it's audience; and we are loving the con.*** out of ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f297b611fd824594909476b9df147267",
            "input": "Just a comment on New Orleans accents...An earlier reviewer noted the following: \"This film, could have been shot in New York, or another Northern big city because it presents us with characters that speak more like \"broklynese\" than maybe a Southern accent one might hear in that part of the country.\" There was also another comment along these lines from an English reviewer.Many people in New Orleans do, in fact, sound \"broklynese\". I have never found out why. (It's mentioned in \"A Confederacy of Dunces\" by John Kennedy Toole.) I always appreciate movies taking place in New Orleans that include this detail, as this one did. Too often it's just the Hollywood version of the standard Southern accent.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fc3c7564ae942a68abd6c8904dfa1bc",
            "input": "This film was so predictable, that during the entire time you're hoping that the obvious suspect is innocent, and there's some other big twist still coming. However... it doesn't. He just continues to act creepy, and she continues to ignore it. Mary found very incriminating evidence at his place, and she still trusted him? And what was that \"baiting the trap\"? There was no trap. She confronted him, he said \"excuse me. I have to go kill someone\" He left, and that was the end of it. They make attempts to use other suspects, (like that one older carnival girl at the end) but they're completely underdeveloped. Actually, all the characters are underdeveloped. They have no depth, and the setting is just plain strange... who hangs out in a recycling factory?? Its choppy and nothing is well developed. For example: When she leaves his place after having the beer, and he finds the pics and she runs out and he catches her and they end up having sex in that car... what was that? Her reactions weren't portrayed. In the car she acted scared like it could have been practically rape- but then all we see is her showering the next morning. booooooooo It could have been so much better.. sooo much better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c594251658e0409dabe87001823d2207",
            "input": "Protégé runs in a linear fashion; expect no fast-paced action, and neither will you find yourself with baited breath because there are simply no seating-on-the-edge moments.There is not much of a crux, so don't expect one either. I would not fault the acting - the show would have been much worst if not for Wu's acting which was the film's only saving grace. And, oh that cute little girl too.The humour is at best, weak, and the show must as well pass off as an anti-drug campaign which employs the usual shock-tactic (esp in the scenes with Zhang) to tell us stuff that we already know - i.e. drugs break up families, heroin drives you crazy, it is not so easy to wean off, you will fall into a vicious cycle.I know it may seem all a little harsh, but I feel that the show is far from seamless and somewhat patchy (*SPOILER ALERT*: Take for example when Andy Lau got brought to the police station: what? we were just told 'oh we have all the tapes and evidence against you since 1997', and THAT is how he got caught. Nope, no chasing-car action, just a jump-of-scene, which kind of undermined Wu's role as an undercover in the first place.) I suspect the lack of creativity is attributed to the fact that it is after all, a production of Mediacorp Raintree - a Singaporean production film company.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6cb52530d2bb4de28b808ff11cf44b98",
            "input": "B Movie? Yes. DIY? Yes. First Movie? Yes. But Aestheically A+. This movie definitely had some bad sound/editing/lighting/acting/etc. etc. problems. However, this movie has many positive things about it. First off, the most annoying character dies first! Second, its made to be a parody/funny B Rated Horror movie. The comments our killer makes to his victims left me and my friends rolling around on the floor laughing.The problem is a lot of people try to take every independent movie and expect it to be a masterpiece. Take it for what it is, a bunch of kids right out of high school made their first movie. For what it is, just that, it is really good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60d4eccce1004ca0b63d0ed00745715f",
            "input": "Reading a wide variety of \"Scoop\" reviews over the past few days, I walked into the theater prepared for a subpar outing from Woody. Happily, I couldn't have been more wrong. Granted, Woody the performer is slowing down a touch or two, but Woody the writer/director is in fine form - and found a credible way to integrate his 70-year old self into the story. Judging from the laughter and guffaws, the audience ate up Allen's one-liners and dialogue in a way that I haven't seen in several years. In a movie landscape dominated by software-approved story arcs, twentysomething tastes and assembly-line formula fare for kiddies, it's a source of both satisfaction and inspiration to see Allen pursuing his highly personal and still-rewarding path.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc2a6ec7088f4decb26c61510495b3a7",
            "input": "Since the title is in English and IMDb lists this show's primary language as English, i shall concentrate on reviewing the English version of Gundam Wing(2000) as presented in the Bandai released DVD set. My actual review for the whole series is under IMDb's entry of \"\"Shin kidô senki Gundam W\"(1995).Very little is changed in respect to plot, script and characterization its adaptation to English and it really depends on your own taste to choose which language to watch this show in. Purists can stick to Japanese all they want, but for a more \"realistic\" experience i recommend the English track since all the characters, except Heero Yuy, are not Japanese.(most of them are Caucasian in fact with a couple of non-Japanese Asians.) For one thing, the characters' personalities come across more \"directly\" than in the Japanese version. The contrast between the characters is stronger thanks to some give-or-take performances but a very well cast group of actors.Wing Gundam's pilot Heero Yuy is a highly trained soldier who suppresses his emotions but slowly learns the value of his humanity. Voiced by Mark Hildreth who's deadpan delivery can be criticized as \"bad acting\" but it matches Heero's personality very well.Deathscythe Gundam's Duo Maxwell, ever cheerful in the face of death is given a crash course in the cherishing the value of life and friends. He is possibly the best acted character in the whole show, masterfully played by Scott McNeil. He may sound a little too old for his age, but Duo's English voice easily out ranks his irritatingly nasal Japanese one.Trowa, the pilot of Heavyarms, is a lost lonely soul who's only purpose so far has been combat; despite his inner desire to form connections with the people around him, he only knows how to kill, not to befriend. Kirby Morrow gives a somber but realistic performance as Trowa Barton.Quatre Rebarba Winner is voiced by Brad Swaile who has no trouble brining out the caring nature of the character and the shattering of his innocence as he experiences horrors of war and death first hand. A huge plus point is that Quatre no longer sounds like a girl(and yes he is voiced by a female actress in the Japanese version) but a bona fide typical 15 year old guy.The impulsive but determined Wufei Chang voiced by Ted Cole may seem a little over-the-top but it plays out in stark contrast to the more subdued roles of Heero and Trowa.Relena Darlian sounds older in English, voiced by Lisa Ann Bailey. This might not sit well with her youthful personification early in the series but as her character matures later into the story, her voice follows suit and ends up fitting in very well with the character development.Zechs Merquise would be one of the more drastically changed voices when compared to the Japanese version. Both voices bring out different sides to the same character. His Japanese voice is haughty, authoritative and commands respect , keeping in line with his high ranking status and charismatic nature. His English voice by Brian Drummond is more subdued, sounding more devious and \"snake-like\", highlighting Zechs' secretive nature regarding his hidden agendas and staunch beliefs in his ideals.The members of OZ are a mixed bag really. Treize Kushrenada voiced by David Kaye is given a more realistic and down-to-earth performance compared to his larger-than-life Japanese style of speaking. However, Lady Une does not convey her split personality as contrastingly as in the Japanese version and Lucrencia Noin just sounds.........bored most of the time. The cannon fodder pilots and military leaders are nothing to speak of either.I would have appreciated if they took the time to give different characters different accents to reflect their ethnic backgrounds. The Maganac Corp's voices were generally uninspired but could have been more interesting if they were given middle eastern accents. The members of the Romerfeller Foundation would have also sounded better with some classy European accent that reflects their status of nobility.Despite underwhelming acting from the side characters, the main cast manage to carry the show and it results in an overall less over-the-top and more realistic rendition of Gundam Wing's script. Very faithful to the original Japanese script, keeping all the underlying thought provoking ideas and themes about politics, war and human nature. Sadly, it also retains the flaws of the original Japanese script.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ad74fe70aad4d35ac7bdc1e21f04819",
            "input": "The whole does not even come close to the sum of the parts. No problem. This film features a line-up of some of the most diversely creative directors of our time and some really famous names in the cast. The segments are devised around the same theme, \"Love in Paris\", but the resemblance ends there. Actually, considering that the approach to the theme from all these different directors takes so many forms, it is amazing that we can even feel we are still watching the same film. No great effort has been made to turn it into a comprehensive whole. This buffet has so many great ingredients, I am glad nobody tried to put them all in a single dish.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db73e1dab00f4915b03811820257fc93",
            "input": "Well, I bought the Zombie Bloodbath trilogy thinking it would be mindless gory fun. That's what it is, without the fun. This film truly is mindless, it is absent of any plot or character development, or any sort of storyline. The basic problem with this movie is the kills and gore. Basically, every kill looks EXACTLY the same. ZOmbies ripping someone apart. Yeah, that's okay, but you need some original kills too. I mean it got really lame, every kill looked exactly the same, filmed exactly the same way. Thats what killed me. I love gore, and the gore in this film did nothing for me. It was just boring. No storyline, just the same lame scene over and over again with a different person. I wanted to like this movie, too. I love shot on video gore movies...like Redneck Zombies. But I couldn't kid myself. This film has it's good points, but none of those are in the film. I understand that many of the \"zombies\" helped out with the flood and there were like over 100 zombies, which is pretty cool how they got so many people involved and helped out in the world. But overall, this is a terrible film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcc500769cd54724a642bd77b143553d",
            "input": "I was always curious about this film because it is so tough to find, so when I stumbled upon it on Ebay I forked over the $10 and bought it, now I understand why its so rare! This film is SO bad, so terribly written and hopelessly low budget that the ending credits, which show all of the cut scenes where they fumbled their lines, are literally the movie's highlight. The film is about a psychic (Pettyjohn, cast for one obvious reason, her topless scene) whom uses her powers with an experimental machine to pull objects from another dimension into this reality. When she pulls in some kind of box like object the military nonchalantly throws it into the open back of a truck with one soldier to guard it, and gee, what do you know? SURPRISE! A kid in a foam-rubber monster costume pops out, instantly kills the soldier with a scratch across his face, then escapes to a nearby city. But rather than deploy half the armed forces of the county to find it and protect the public those in charge just leave it up to Pettyjohn and Ray to find it on their own, but no matter, this movie blows all its credibility LONG before then. This barely escapes being voted a 1 by me only because of unintentional laughs, somebody needs to alert the producers of \"Mystery Science Theater 3000\" if they don't know about it already! 2 out 10, really, REALLY bad!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36aef8a03a624d668d1e4e59c2185553",
            "input": "Without question one of the most embarrassing productions of the 1970s, GAOTS seems to really, REALLY want to be something important. The tragic truth is that it's so entirely valueless on every level that one can't help but laugh. Reaching in desperation for the earthy elements of Ingmar Bergman's films, it follows a city couple's day in the wilderness...they walk along a shady path, allthewhile pontificating like a U.C. Berkeley coffee clatch. Almost every line of tarradiddle dialog delivered here is uproariously bad(\"I feel that life itself is made up of as many tiny compartments as this pomegranate....but is it as beautiful?\") After what seems like an eternity of absolutely nothing happening(well...OK...we are treated to some nudity and a tepid soft sex scene), there is finally a VERY anticlimactic confrontation involving a pair 'Nam vets who are making the nature scene and performing some pretty harsh folk ballads with an acoustic guitar. Nothing at all eventful or interesting happens IN THIS ENTIRE FILM. I thought the Larry Buchanan picture \"Strawberries Need Rain\" was a weak example of a Bergman homage. \"Golden Apples\" is every bit as bad, but the ceaseless random verbiage it presents makes it memorably awful. 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-767c8f4cf4e5495a8c5d77769022e85b",
            "input": "The storyline is absurd and lame,also sucking are performances and the dialogue, is hard to keep your Eyes open. I advise you to have a caffeine-propelled friend handy to wake you in time for a couple Gore-effects.Why they bring Alcatraz in?In this case,becomes increasingly difficult to swallow. All the while ,i wondered who this film aimed for?Chock full of lame subplots (such as the Cannibalism US Army-captain)This is low-grade in every aspect.BTW this Movie is banned in Germany!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b74dbf7f39014683ab464717dd8b2597",
            "input": "The larger-than-life figures of Wyatt Earp and Bat Masterson, and the specters of George Armstrong Custer and Sitting Bull, loom over director Anthony Mann's hugely entertaining first western with James Stewart. Although Stewart's quest to avenge his father's murder is the primary story, Winchester '73 is really an ensemble piece, with the eponymous, one-in-a-thousand firearm passing through the hands of many colorful owners, including a wry trader (John McIntire, especially great) and outlaw Dan Duryea, who's even more despicable than usual. The film's conflation of fiction and history produces a breezy pace and an ambivalent tone brilliantly in step with Mann's pared-down, compositionally rigorous film-making. His themes of psychological unrest and past dictating present faintly underlie this tall tale of good and bad men chasing after a fabled gun, but they starkly emerge in a vignette about a husband's cowardice and failed attempt at atonement, and are defined in Stewart's conversations with sidekick Millard Mitchell. Mann's use of environment is what sets him apart from other filmmakers of westerns. Instead of gazing at vistas from afar, he incorporates them into the drama as characters that redirect, complicate, or evoke the human characters' goals. Just as mountains, caves, and rapids had to be accounted for in The Naked Spur, here a gunfight occurs amidst the loose rocks and boulders of a small mountain, a physical obstruction that fatalistically determines the roles of victor and victim between two equally skilled sharpshooters. (I would be remiss in not recognizing cinematographer William H. Daniels's contribution, particularly his superlative day-for-night, open-range photography.) Not merely an adept outdoorsman, Mann presents an equally vivid picture of Wyatt Earp-patrolled Dodge City, primarily through scaled, multiple-plane staging. The shooting contest does not depend on brisk camera shifts or twitchy cuts for effect because Mann instinctively knows where to place the camera and how to move it to display the greatest density of information in a given shot. Nor does he care to spell out the plot in dialogue, relying on the actors' eyes or a well-chosen image to convey the stakes. One scene in particular serves to explain his attitude: Mitchell's telling of Stewart's motivation to Shelley Winters, which is interrupted by the climactic gunfight that soon enough reveals all. Light without feeling insubstantial, intense without being overbearing, Winchester '73 seems more modern than its contemporaries and is a joy to behold.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7dd1fec8356b426c93f6c9c1980eedfd",
            "input": "This is a wonderful movie in a lot of ways. Everyone in my family enjoyed it. The animation is excellent and easily demonstrates that there are plenty of producers who create films that are as visually brilliant as anything that comes from the Disney Studio.One difference from the normal Disney fare is that this Dreamworks movie does not feature some wise-cracking side kick for comedy relief. And, there are no sudden moments where the characters break into song. I am sure that a scene at the beginning of the film would not appear in a Disney picture: the birth of Spirit. But it is done tastefully and is not offensive at all. \"Spirit\" was a great breath of fresh air. Don't get me wrong. I have loved Disney for years and will continue to do so. \"Spirit\" is another example of great animated fare. As soon as it was over, my kids wanted to watch it again. I had the same feeling. I thoroughly recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0dff0821bafa40f7ad108f73472e417a",
            "input": "Master director Ching Siu Tung's perhaps most popular achievement is this series, A Chinese Ghost Story 1-3. Chinese Ghost Story stars Leslie Cheung in some distant past in China as a tax collector who is forced to spend a night during his \"collecting trip\" in a mysterious castle in which some strange old warriors fight and meet him. Beautiful actress Joey Wang/Wong is the ghost who lives in that castle and is under a domination of one powerful demon, a wood devil who collects human souls for herself/itself with the help of her beautiful ghosts. Leslie and Joey fall in love, and even though ghosts are not allowed to live with humans, they decide to break that rule and live happily together for the rest of their lives. This is not what the wood devil thinks and our protagonists have to fight for their lives and their happiness.This film is no less full of magic than other films by Ching Siu Tung. His masterpieces include Duel to the Death (1983) and the Swordsman series, which all have incredible visuals and kinetic power in their action scenes. Ghost Story is full of brilliant lightning and dark atmosphere, which is lightened by the strong presence of the beautiful and good willing ghost. The effects are simply breath taking and would work at their greatest power in the big screen. The camera is moving and twisted all the time and it adds to the fairy tale atmosphere this film has. There's plenty of wire'fu stunts, too, and even though some think they are and look gratuitous or stupid when used in films, I cannot agree and think they give motion pictures the kind of magic, freedom and creativeness any other tool could not give. When people fly in these films, it means the films are not just about our world, and they usually depict things larger than life with the power of this larger than life art form.The story about the power of love is pretty touching and warm, but the problem is (again) that the characters are little too shallow and act unexplainably occasionally. Leslie and Joey should have been written with greater care and their characters should be even more warm, deep and genuine in order to give the story a greater power and thus make the film even more noteworthy and important achievement. Also, the message about love and power of it is underlined little too much at one point and it should have been left just to the viewer's mind to be interpreted and found. Another negative point about the dialogue is that it's too plenty and people talk in this film without a reason. That is very irritating and sadly shows the flaws many scriptwriters tend to do when they write their movies. People just talk and talk and it's all there just to make everything as easy to understand as possible and so the film is not too challenging or believable as it has this gratuitous element. Just think about the films of the Japanese film maker Takeshi Kitano; his films have very little dialogue and all there is is all the necessary as he tells his things by other tools of cinema and never talks, or makes other characters talk too much in his movies. This is just the talent the writers should have in order to write greater scripts.Otherwise, Chinese Ghost Story is very beautiful and visually breath taking piece of Eastern cinema, and also the song that is played in the film is very beautiful and hopefully earned some award in the Hong Kong film awards back then. I give Chinese Ghost Story 7/10 and without the flaws mentioned above, this would without a doubt be almost perfect masterpiece of the fantasy genre.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c4692bdcaf04b0da5debeb1e1429ca8",
            "input": "I first didn't want to watch this film, for the trailer gave the impression of a common and too expected film...but as I recently had the pleasure to discover the surprising \"Mensonges et trahisons et plus si affinité\"\" which was beautifully directed and written by Laurent Tirard (screenwriter of \"prête-moi ta main\"), I changed my mind and decided to try it, thinking that \"Prête-moi ta main\", would be as good as \"mensonges...\". And it is absolutely not. The script is not bad, but it is not as well directed as \"Mensonges...\", the actors not as generous (especially Charlotte, as boring as she usually is) as Edouard Baer or Clovis Cornillac, and too be honest, I still don't understand how such crap can have such a success, even with such a casting... Anyway the story could have been a pretext to create so many interesting plots, but it is not as good as Tirard's \"Mensonges...\" though it's also written by him. Easy, unsurprising, and lazy work. Totally overestimated!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ff894db36a1479fada08a6c7d56c317",
            "input": "I have been watching this show since I was 14 and I've loved it ever since. I love this show because it's just plain funny! You will enjoy this show a lot because it shows something new and funnier everyday and my favorite part is when Benny always has her last comments on George after every punchline about his fat giant head.*laughs* I would laugh and I'd watch it with my friends at home it'd be like we were watching a funny movie but short. Love George Lopez. Funny, talented,funny,spectacular. This is a cool-funny-family comedy series enjoyable to everyone and you will definitely enjoy it--I did! And if you haven't watched it yet I suggest that you start watching because you wouldn't want to stop watching it. Even though there aren't anymore brand new episodes I still enjoy the re-runs. Still funny. Never wears off. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-09e5a61763354da2bc880b8a2bb2c5ec",
            "input": "This film has renewed my interest in French cinema. The story is enchanting, the acting is flawless and Audrey Tautou is absolutely beautiful. I imagine that we will be seeing a lot more of her in the States after her upcoming role in Amelie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f792d36b01743248761256a3386406c",
            "input": "I watched this movie alongwith my complete family of Nine. Since my younger brother has recently got married, we could connect with the goings-on. The movie stands out for the classical touch given to the romance of the engaged couple. Thankfully this time all Indian locales like Ranikhet Almora etc have been used, which have been already visited by most of the urbanites, hence adding to the connection with movie. The dialogues are much better than those in the \"Umrao Jaan Ada\" - a supposedly dialogue based movie. The background music is augmenting the \"soft focus\" of the movie. It somehow remind me of VV Chopra's \"Kareeb\", in which neha and to some extent Bobby did full justice to the character. Same here, in that the lead pair does not disappoint in any department-looks or acting. The Supporting cast are too good. I rate the actress playing the role of Bhabhi in the front league. The situations of family interactions portrayed are real and you smile when you find yourself in place of one of the characters. Songs were too suiting the scenes and going along well with the movie. However, though I respect Ravindra Jain for his body of work from movies to Ramayana, I missed Ram Laxman badly.It had no double entendres(Sivan category), no bikinis, no intrigue, and no nonsense. You would comfortably watch the movie with your parents except if you're already or going to be soon engaged. I want to express on candid thing here that though Suraj proposes that the marriages is between families and not only individuals, his approach is totally individualistic. The movie is only about Prem & Poonam, rest of the characters are incidental. Art immitating life? The \"peripheral characters\" are consigned to the background and the only protagonists are the lead pair. Coming back, Everything was almost great. Except, for the drama part. The situation of tragedy was artificially created. The outcome, the sacrifice and the ensuing heart change are not compelling at all. That is why it lacks the emotional punch-the very purpose of this turn of events. But, a twist in the tale was necessary to transcend the movie from a beautiful pre-marital video to a 'feature film'. But I kept waiting for the punch and it never came. The preaching by Mohnish Bahal and later by Alok Nath on dowry was out of place and it made things too overboard. May be this will help the movie a tax-free status. But the plot could have been made more interesting and non-linear than what it was.There were too question in my mind when the movie ended: 1 Has the movie really ended? 2 Has the movie ended?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4108ef4638e6457fbc790037ebcf51ef",
            "input": "Back to the roots with \"like it is in heaven\" - what are the real values of life? These Swedes carve out a message that appeals to every heart. We've seen it twice now in a cinema packed to the last seat: love pure and joy within the music of a choir that's simple, yet full of power once everyone finds his or her inner tone. From the glitter of fame to the school of of his youth, now empty and ready to be adapted as his new home after collapsing on stage, Daniel wants to start listening and is drawn into the lives of the simple, warm and rough people of the North.He wins the hearts with music and gains the capacity to love and be loved unconditionally.Don't go see it if you've been normed to Hollywood. This stuff contains no extras, just your laughter, your compassion, your tears!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74240f3323624d2a89182f0c54e221d4",
            "input": "It's Die Hard meets Cliffhanger when a ski resort is besieged by terrorists and it's up to one cop, Jack (Crackerjack) to stop this.A B-action movie that borrows from other films and is quite good with pretty good action, a ridiculous plot (as always in these movies) and three fine stars. Thomas Ian Griffith as the cop and Nastasja Kinski and Christopher Plummer as terrorists. If you don't like stupid B-action movies this is not for you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40a961b929a2414d9fdc1a928ccce116",
            "input": "This doesn't quite plumb the depths of Creepshow 3, but it comes close. It also uses the same technique of using some of the same actors in multiple roles throughout the anthology, which is distracting to say the least.It also rather irritating rips off The Twilight Zone (with the bookshop being comparable to Serling's later Night Gallery). Unfortunately, the producers & writers forgot that Serling would build up sympathy for his characters before messing them over. None of the characters are particularly sympathetic or interesting until the last segment.Framing story: Adam West is... well, himself. He doesn't go the Bruce Wayne/Batman campy 60s route, but he rarely does. He simply plays the not-particularly-enigmatic \"Jay\" (there's an ominous spine-chilling name to compare to the likes of Dr. Terror, Eramus, and The Cryptkeeper), and makes some mildly awkward/creepy statements.Abernathy: Seen Rod Serling's \"A Stop in Willoughby\"? Then you've seen this. The red herring of the nutso wife is introduced to no purpose, but even the main character's friend identifies him as a wimp. As well directed as can be expected, but basically incoherent.Nex's Diner: Reminiscent of various Serling time travel stories, mixed with Steve Allen's \"A Meeting of Minds.\" Most of the actors aren't too bad (except for Josh Astin as Cassius, who manages to walk, talk and even breathe awkwardly), and the idea is mildly interesting. But like Abernathy, it doesn't go anywhere. The main character raises some relatively reasonable questions, bugs out a bit (who wouldn't?), and for some reason he ends up banished to a nuclear wasteland.Life Replay: Not a bad little piece, and manages to predate both Click and Creepshow 3. I suppose it says something that people are fascinated by the magical properties of remote controls. The main character is mildly sympathetic. Nothing substantially innovative here, but it's okay.Fighting Spirit: You see the twist coming a mile away but like the main character, it has some heart and it's a decent story of defeat and redemption.Finale: So... why do people end up in cold storage in silver lame suits? Don't know. And doesn't make sense. So... all the protagonists wandered into the bookstore and became trapped? Kinda undermines the happy ending with the boxer (thanks, guys!), and the guy in the first segment died. So how did he get trapped? Did he visit the bookstore before he died, got trapped and... didn't die? What? Huh? I supposer this isn't expected to make sense because it's supernatural. But still...Overall: basically not dissimilar from the two newer Twilight Zone series, or some episodes of Tales From the Darkside or Monsters. The last two stories and part of the second are probably worth your time. But there's nothing really spectacular here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-746cb63c44a0446583fbab60502a9546",
            "input": "But the rest of us, who love a good sentimental and emotional story that is a lock to get you crying..enjoy! Tom Hulce is magnificent as Dominick, a mentally slow trashman who loves professional wrestling and his brother, Eugene, played by Ray Liotta, who is a doctor and who works very long hours. Due to Eugene's work schedule, Dominick is alone a lot of the time and tends to make questionable judgment calls. He really just wants to be a good boy, to do the right thing, and to make his brother proud of him. He stops in church to pray at one point and expresses his emotions so openly and so well that the character has you crying before the damn movie even gets really started. Not about to give anything away here, but the movie is extremely involving and sad and heartbreaking. Those unafraid of these things will have a field day with this beautiful story, its loving characters and a great song I cannot quote here, that has nothing to do with the movie at all but is strangely appropriate..but you hear it in a bar.I thought Tom Hulce would be nominated for this movie, since he was for 'Amadeus' I figured that might give him the inside track to actually winning. No such luck. Liotta is just as good but has less of an emotional impact, but then he does later on. All I can say about Jamie Lee Curtis is that she doesn't have much of a part here but it was nice of her to lend her name to a small drama set in Pittsburgh about two brothers who you will never forget.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28653aac7f564096862adbacab776679",
            "input": "The alternate title of Ecstasy, is Symphony of Love; a title which appropriately describes the mood and feel of the film. Ecstasy is an early talkie, and could have very well been a classic film, if released during the silent film era. This film is a visual treat, and is deliberately paced so the viewer can savour its sensuous lyric quality, which is presented in an artistic low-key fashion. The director's style is distinctly European. The subject matter and approach to sexuality was far more sophisticated, than what was being produced in Hollywood, at that time. Consider the censorship code in the US, during the 30's, that pretty much sums it up. Hedy Lamarr, one of the great beauties of all time, was a perfect choice for this 'Symphony of Love.'",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea9e299410b5456d89eee4c351417514",
            "input": "This is one strange hacked together film, you get the feeling that the bond company had to come in on this one, I'm not surprised there's no credits on it, who would want to be associated with this film. The Acting of all involved is terribly stilted and the plot jumps around all over, it all makes very little sense. As I said before it looks like the bond company had to come in because it seems like there was alot of footage that wasn't shot that needed to be, and all the music was very ill-fitting library music (cheap I guess). Very, very odd. I might actually buy a DVD of it though, if it could let me in on what the hell was going on, and what happened to this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-710c93d8f08f42eb8dc4129d42ea9040",
            "input": "That is no criticism of the film, but rather a comment on how blind we are to our own past. I recently watched Winter Soldier, and The Ground Truth was like watching a remake or sequel-- except it was about Iraq rather than Vietnam. Similar to Winter Soldier because of it's one-sided message, both films illustrate how gleefully we rush to engage in conflicts based on false pretenses, and allow our young and brave (and often naive) to bear the brunt of this greedy war profiteering. Both films effectively show that the mentality forced into the minds of the young and willing make them efficient killing machines, but the training falls woefully short of teaching the diplomatic and policing skills necessary to effectively win the hearts and minds of the people they're supposedly fighting for. This is ultimately what lost the war in Vietnam, and will likely lose the war in Iraq as well. My only negative comment is that the film is so one-sided it could be easily passed off as left- wing propaganda. Not by me, mind you, but by those aiming to discredit the film and message. A more balanced point of view would speak to a larger audience.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6993e0c4e0d74aa2bb620b43f76d9851",
            "input": "Madhur has given us a powerful movie Chandni Bar in the past. His next film Page 3 was one of the worst movies of all time. It apparently tells the story of some high class people in India. After seeing a scene where the man forces another man for sexual reasons to Star in a Movie. I felt like spitting and breaking the DVD. Coincidently i did. The reason why was the movie contains scenes of child pornography and molestation. I literally vomited and was shocked to see a movie showing naked children. Very disturbing stuff, there was no need to show the children fully naked. One of the rich guys likes to kidnap poor children and sell them to foreign people, British men in this movie. I am shocked to know this film was a Hit in parts of India, otherwise Super Flop in UK, USA and Australia. I'm from UK, and this kind of stuff makes me sick, shouldn't of been released in UK.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-650920c5fe44422899c694ceb8a9e61d",
            "input": "Kalifornia is disturbing. I believe there is no reason for this story to be told. It is neither entertaining nor does it have social value. Technically, the movie is very well make, the performances are top rate and first class. The story develops in an intriguing way that holds interest. But at the end this movie sickens and is abhorrent to decency. I recommend Kalifornia to no one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7dcc3ee5157c4bd39b49a8a1b465befb",
            "input": "The acting in this movie was superb, but mixed with the truth about the condition of many Africans in South Africa made it heart wrenching. It was good that the writer isolated Boesman and Lena from others run from their homes, so we could share fully in their triumphs and defeats; the conflicts they shared as they grew together and apart. Worth seeing when you put the movie in it's proper context.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47f0ce9c55f04b5899e08cf5081fa7dc",
            "input": "It isn't always easy to explain what a movie is like, but this time I think I've found it. It reminded me of two movies: Trainspotting (small time criminals scoring some drugs and doing some stupid things in Schotland) and The Blair Witch Project (because of the style of filming).It's about the loyalty between two friends, one of them is coming out of jail, the other one hasn't been caught yet. With a stolen vehicle they drive through the Scottish countryside but than run out of petrol. As they try to find some fuel, they find a farm in the middle of nowhere. The farmer thinks they want to rob him and points a gun at one of them. Than it all goes wrong. One of the friends accidentally shoots the farmer's daughter and they have to run. What follows is a man hunt through the fields and woods of Schotland. The two friends literally have to run for their lives.Apparently this movie was shot in only 12 days time. OK, that's not exactly unbelievable because the biggest part of it is always in the same place: the Scottish countryside, but I still find that quite amazing. Especially because this isn't actually a bad movie. It's perhaps not the greatest movie ever, but they still can be proud of what they achieved. I had a nice time watching it and overall I enjoyed the movie. I give it a 7/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-608eddc985d64d91afca6129f7f12cec",
            "input": "Predictable, told a thousand times story with the usual drama in between, a couple of pretty raunchy sex scenes intermingled with some character paranoia, 70's style incidental violin horror music that is comical at times, i couldn't help chuckling to myself.I usually like Defoe, and it has to be said that the acting is not all that bad, the \"plot\" develops at a reasonable pace and does keep you guessing from time to time. Its just that it's all too predictable, i felt like i was watching a made for TV drama instead of a new movie. Maybe thats the style the directors wanted, but it has to be said that the review i read on here before i saw the movie could only have been written by someone involved in its production.Don't expect too much, and if i could wind the clock back i wouldn't have gone to see it at the cinema. I would wait for the bargain bins at your video shop, I'm sure it wont take long.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc5edfa7f41f49a08247ff0770fb70b1",
            "input": "Return To the Lost World was filmed back-to-back with the 1992 version of The Lost World.In this sequel, the same five people, lead by Challenger return to the plateau where a group has started drilling for oil which is threatening to destroy the land. Gomez has something to do with this. They manage to defeat the drillers and the plateau is saved, much to the delight of the natives.Like in The Lost World, what few dinosaurs we see are made of rubber and these include a T-Rex and Ankylosaurus.John Ryhs-Davies and David Warner reprise their roles as Challenger and Summerlee and three of the other actors are also back.Despite reading several bad reviews of this and those cheap looking rubber dinosaurs, I enjoyed Return to the Lost World.Rating: 3 stars out of 5.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6edc2c0204ec4c5dbaacbf8254517807",
            "input": "Inspector Gadget was probably my all-time favorite 80's cartoon. I enjoyed both the first and second seasons of the series as well as 1992's Christmas special \"Inspector Gadget Saves Christmas\". Some Gadget fans are quick to criticize the second season (1985) of the show, but they need to compare it to DiC's 2002 release of \"Inspector Gadget's Last Case: Claw's Revenge\" for then, they will find the second season to be absolute gold.Being a Gadget fan, I couldn't resist the opportunity to see the animated Inspector Gadget in something that wasn't Gadget Boy-related. I purchased the film, and I swore to myself that I'd be objective; I knew that sometimes artistic liberties would be taken from the original series. I was not even prepared for what I was about to watch.There was barely a shred of the original show still intact.Here is a short list of just some of the cons for this movie: *The humor is non-existent from the original series.*Penny and Brain (originally having a nearly equal part in the series as Gadget) are missing from the action for fifteen to twenty minute intervals.*The original music by Saban & Levy is not there, and the score that exists is sub-par. (Understood that Saban has his own production company now, but at least \"Inspector Gadget Saves Christmas\" had good music, even without Saban.) *Don't expect to see any of Gadget's gadgets which made the show so endearing, such as gadget-copter, gadget-brella, gadget-mallet,gadget-coat (which actually was used but it was not even called the same thing), as well as his standard other hat and hand gadgets. In this movie, his gadget legs were telescopic instead of springs. That kind of stuff annoys true fans of the show, and simply aren't necessary to change.*The gadgetmobile from the original series is now a fast-talking, supposedly \"hip\" convertible. All the fans from the original series enjoyed the gadgetmobile transforming into the gadget van and vice versa.*Chief Quimby is now very short-tempered and even mean to Gadget. He was always grumpy in the original series, but this pushes the situation a bit much.*Penny no longer has a computer book.Are there any positives to this movie? OK, here goes...*Maurice LaMarche does a good job of taking over for the great Don Adams as Inspector Gadget.*In one scene, Chief Quimby alludes to an actual villain from the cartoon series: the Great Wambini (classic \"Gadget\" villain from the second season, voiced by Louis Nye).Looking for more redeeming factors for this movie? Well, you're out of luck. Life is about making choices and living by those choices. Most situations in life have a purpose even if it is to teach a lesson. The lesson learned here: keep to the original formula! \"If it ain't broke, don't fix it.\" True Gadget fans should steer clear from this movie; you will surely be disappointed.Hopefully, DiC and Shout! Factory will continue to release more of the original series after the 2006 release of \"Inspector Gadget: The Original Series, Volume 1,\" containing the first 22 episodes of the series. As a true Gadget fan, lover of 80's animation and many of DiC's programs, I urge you the viewer to purchase \"Inspector Gadget: The Original Series, Volume 1\" and \"Inspector Gadget Saves Christmas\" DVD's which are excellent and sure to bring back good memories.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c10caed9ff847cabe371e3bb550f6e8",
            "input": "A well-made and imaginative production, refreshingly free from cliché, this somewhat picaresque affair recounts a tale of a close friendship that develops between a man and a boy under less than ideal conditions: the man an escaped convict who has kidnapped the youth for his value as a hostage. Expertly directed by Alan Gibson with a fine sense for balanced narrative movement, the film provides freshness in nearly every scene, as felon Martin Steckert (Richard Harris), believing that his rejection for parole was particularly undeserved, contrives a convoluted but ultimately successful escape plan, following which his spontaneous nature comes to the fore as he flees to the lakeside residence of his childhood. Often bursting into song or dancing a few steps, the capricious Steckert gradually gains the trust and affection of his captive and, as police close in for an inevitable showdown, the tethered pair are seen to be a great deal alike in their responses to forms of rejection, as discerned by a psychiatrist (Lindsay Wagner) assigned to aid a zealous police lieutenant (James Coburn) who is in charge of the manhunt for Steckert and his \"prisoner\". This is an engrossing story, worth telling, a quickly-paced and novel adventure that profits from a capital performance by Harris, fine turns from Wagner, Coburn, and Karen Black, along with Justin Henry as the snatched lad, with an appropriately whimsical score contributed by Wilfred Josephs, and top-notch cinematography by Frank Watts, with all footage shot in a beautiful autumnal Ontario province.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86d822f7f47241d4b0fca3f7829adb43",
            "input": "This movie looks like it was made for TV . For years I waited for some movie to be made about Rubin Carter, because I loved to see him box at the old MSG, and to see this movie was very disappointing.I have alot of respect for Mr Washington, but he was awful and boring.There is really nothing good to say about this movie except I did like the song.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4f4e06cafd7496dafe711d3fac80d39",
            "input": "This is really a great unknown movie.Perfect dialogue without the typical clichés.This movie relied on the actor's talent and it was pulled off.It even had a little bit a comedy in it,but it wasn't overdone.Once in the Life is what a crime drama is supposed to be,not the typical special affects garbage with sex thrown in.I especially loved the interracial aspects of it all.Now onto the actors themselves. Laurence Fishburne was superb at playing a career petty criminal.It's a shame that he's only allowed to show his talent in his own movie. Titus Welliver was fabulous as Fishburne's junky half-brother. Eamonn Walker added flavor to the already perfectly spiced film. Paul Calderon was perfect as a grease monkey/drug lord.I loved his acting since \"King of New York\". But the best acting in this film came from Gregory Hines and Michael Paul Chan,who were paired perfectly as two of Calderon's henchmen.Once in the Life is for sure a keeper. ****1/2* out of *****.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33694e2daefa47dcb0ad9fcdb2e0440f",
            "input": "First of all i'd just like to say this movie rawked more than any of the recent crap that hollywood has cooked up out of its bowels. McBain is a true action film with more violence than most viewers can handle. It has all of the classic elements of a late 80's/early 90's action film....the random gratuitous acts of violence (ie. when Walken and crew go in to confront the drug dealers to get money they just show up and kill them rather than letting them live and just taking their money), the snapping of necks, the guys on fire, the guys that get blown off buildings, and of course the guys who are on fire that get blown off of buildings. Walken is at his finest in this picture delivering memorable lines such as, \"let's go sit..........out on the deck.\" and others that make this film a top buy off of the clearence rack at the local video store. if you have a bloodlust for unnecessary random acts of violence rent this movie today and satisfy your thirst.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2d3a93f38364089a781c2b25a9e469e",
            "input": "I must warn you, there are some spoilers in it. But to start it off, I got \"Spanish Judges\" on February I think. It was mention it was the last copy, but as I see, it wasn't back-ordered. But either way, I have it. I thought it was good. I wanted to see this mainly because of the great actor, Matthew Lillard (I'm surprised no one on the reviews mention the scar) although it is kind of low budget, getting enough money to make this film would be worth spending. Man, what a good actor.The story it about a con artist known as Jack (Matthew Lillard) who \"claims\" to have merchandises called The Spanish Judges. If you don't know what Spanish Judges are or haven't seen the trailer for this and this is the first review you have read, I won't even say what they are. I figure it would be a big twist of no one knew what it was. He needs protection, so he hires a couple who are also crooks, Max and Jamie (Vincent D'Onofrio and Valeria Golino) as well as a crook that goes by the name of Piece (Mark Boone Junior). He has a girlfriend who won't even tell anyone her name because she's from Mars, as she said. So they (mainly Jack) call her \"Mars Girl\". Everything starts out fine, but then it turns to one big game. A game that involves some lust, lies and betrayal.There was some over acting in it (Matt and Valeria, as well as Tamara, were not one of them). There were some scenes they could've done better and the score could've been a little better as well. Some of the score was actually good. The theme they used for the beginning and the end (before the credits) was a good song choice, that's my opinion. The fight scene in the end could've been a little longer and a little more violent, but what can you do? One more comment on Matt: Damn, he plays a smooth, slick con man.I know this is a review, but I need to make a correction towards NeCRo, one of the reviewers: Valeria Golino is not a newcomer. According to this site, she has been acting since 1983. To me, and hopefully to others, she is well known as Charlie Sheen's Italian love interest in both the \"Hot Shots!\" movies. But good review.Although I think it's one of the rare films I've seen and it's really good (which is why I gave it 10 stars above), I will give the grade of what I thought when I first saw it.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b27f138c06d4538acb15cf7152fd5c8",
            "input": "Full Moon High (1981) 3 of 5 Dir: Larry Cohen Stars: Adam Arkin, Ed McMahon, Roz KellyTony (Arkin) is your average ordinary high school guy. Prepping for the big homecoming game, girlfriend trouble and growing hair in strange places…you know the usual. But the hair in strange places part gets a wee bit out of control when a trip to Transylvania with his father (YES! McMahon) leaves him with a wicked case of the furballs. Now doomed to walk the world forever young as a werewolf how will Adam get any girls?'Full Moon High' is not often talked about but it is a silly and entertaining horror spoof. Larry Cohen (Q the Winged Serpent, The Stuff) incorporates as many gags as he can possibly come up with as writer / director. Arkin (H20: Halloween, 20 Years Later) shows nice timing in the lead role. If you happen to be a fan of spoofs like 'Airplane' and 'Student Bodies' I think you'll have fun with this chuckle-fest.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7562638aadfe4d0a9e70fe209585917b",
            "input": "As a knowledgeable fan I recommend this film as faithful to the facts and well acted. As an 11 year old living in Istanbul I heard some friends talking about a new music sensation that caused girls to scream. I thought hmmmm, if girls like them, they must be crap. My only records until then were Haley Mills, The Everly Brothers & Ricky Nelson. Soon after while on vacation with the family at a military cafeteria in Ismir I heard a song (which I later learned was 'Love Me Do') and was floored by the difference between it and every song I had ever heard until then. When I heard the 'Meet The Beatles' album of my older brother I was hooked for life. Having read the definitive book of their beginnings (by Davis) I was surprised that this movie followed the facts very well with the exception of leaving out most of the sex and some of the drug use (it did touch on the use of methadrine/dexadrine). >",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1c54320ad814b8cbd100e94f3ac0527",
            "input": "A really bad sequel. Part 1 had a lot of funny moments - part 2 is just bad (in a boring way) and obviously made to squeeze money out of the fans.Shame on you, Otto Waalkes!The only slightly amusing moment in the film is Helge Schneider who apparently seems to be pis*ed about the other characters. It's quite easy to identify with him...The screenplay is sloppy/non-existent. The director should do everyone a favor and quit his job immediately. The acting is worse than a 2nd grade school play. Technically the movie is awful as well, but who can blame the cinematographer/sound guys who had to work with such an untalented director?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7403f9d798964ab4b2c331f15ab45ab1",
            "input": "Will they ever make movies without nudity and sex? This came on at 3:00 on Sunday afternoon and I couldn't believe what they showed. Thank God my son was outside or I would have been freaked out if he had seen the soft/medium porn! Do people who make movies not care who they offend or corrupt? Kids could have been watching after church and that is what they show???!!! The acting was good and I enjoyed the suspense but GEE! There was violence and bad guys but that is to be expected in a western movie. Randy Travis was really good in his role. If the writers, directors and producers would just quit putting on so much uncalled for sex scenes. What has to happen to get them to quit going in that direction? Where can I complain?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-190023f26b414c258a67484f8c93e500",
            "input": "Now i have read some negative reviews for this show on this website and quite frankly I'm appalled. For anyone to even think that the Sopranos is not Television then i'm afraid i don't know what the world has come to. Let me tell u something. I started watching many T.V shows like Lost, Prison Break, Dexter, Deadwood and even Invasion. But all of those shows lost their touch after the first season, especially Lost and Prison Break which i refuse to watch because the companies took 2 genius ideas and butchered them by making more than one season. Then we have The Sopranos. I can honestly say that this is the only television series that i have ever watched where i have been enthralled in all of its season, and more importantly all of its episodes. There is no department that this show doesn't excel in. Acting- Nothing short of superb. James Gandolfini is one of my favourite actors and i feel that his acting is absolutely stunning in every episode, after i heard that HBO wanted Ray Liotta to play Tony i felt that it would've been the better choice, however after watching the first few episodes, i knew that HBO had done a great job in casting James as Tony. The raw emotion he displays is superb. Then we have everyone else, Edie Falco, Michael Imperioli, Lorraine Bracco, Dominic Chianese (whom i remembered as Johnny Ola in the Godfather Part 2) and my personal two favourite characters Tony Sirico and Steve Van Zandt Paulie 'Walnuts' Gualtieri and Silvio Dante. All of these actors perform to the best quality, and all giving an excellent performance in each episode. Then we have the story, never have i been so sucked into a T.V show before. The story is nothing short of excellent. Each episode is directed superbly and the Score of this show is just fantastic. I feel that The Sopranos is one show that i can watch again and again and never get bored of. Its got everything from hilarious humour to brutal violence, but nonetheless it is and will always be the best thing to ever grace the Television, and I challenge anyone to find a real flaw in the show. Not just say its too violent, or they feel that the character of Tony is immoral, i mean it is a mafia show at the end of the day, i don't think that the characters are going to be very honest or loyal to God. I implore everyone to watch this show because believe me, you'll be hooked from the very first episode, i was and i have even gotten a few friends who had firstly refused to watch the show, hooked on it. Trust me when i say that this show is a Godsend compared to the crap that comes on T.V. After you've watched the first season, you'll inevitably agree with me when i once again say that this show dominates Television, and no T.V show current or future will ever upstage the marvel that is The Sopranos.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d566726e2b3b48868155503db9432293",
            "input": "this is one of the funnier films i've seen. it had it's crude moments, but they were full of charm. it's Altmanesque screenplay, brilliant physical humour, and relaxed friendships were a pleasure to watch, and a slice of life most of us can relate to. and i can say with a measure of honesty that i was afraid for Steve Carell's nipple..i truly was. surprisingly, this is a good-natured, unabashed comedy that is essentially about love, and the many relationships we may find ourselves in along the way. Catherine Keener was terrific as Trish, and all of Steve Carell's friends were flawed but amiable, and so much fun. the idea that they suspected that Carell was a serial killer is a hilarious metaphor for a forty-year old virgin. but the simple truth was that he wanted to be in love first. original, charming, and very funny. highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71df389cdedc49b48358dcd27b74e065",
            "input": "I was not entirely impressed by this film. It was originally named Sin Eater and should have stayed that way considering that is all that was talked about for the last half of the film. I'm not even sure what the first 20 minutes of the film had to do with any of the rest of it. It was very slow and what was with picking Robocop (Peter Weller) as one of the main actors. That was a sad point.All in all I would say check this out if you are into things dealing with the Catholic religion but don't expect an Exorcist or Stigmata from this film. It will surely flop after a few days and word gets out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f2d26ab4f014ed585e96f294123395b",
            "input": "I bought this movie last weekend at my local Movie Gallery. It was buy 2 get 2 free and I needed one more so I chose this one. Horrible mistake. The box reads like it would be a really good movie. Well, it starts out like it is going to be this great movie. For about 5 minutes, that is. The movie is about a young woman, Laila, who gets killed trying to save her beau, Jack, from a bull. Laila's dad, Cordobes, is a rancher that the townspeople are afraid of. He assumes that Jack killed Laila because she was supposedly afraid of this bull, and goes on this hunt to find him. That was the first 5 minutes that is good. What follows after that is only gonna get 100 times worse. Whoever wrote the script, in my opinion, had to of been on some kind acid trip or something because nothing else made any sense what so ever. Jack is on the run and finds this traveling radio DJ named Mary who gives him a ride. I think Mary is supposed to be a virgin Mary type character. You know, Jesus' mother. But, who knows, I couldn't make heads or tails of it. As they're running... we get to see bad guys, magical visions, ghostly encounters, flashbacks, etc... And all these things are done in such a way that your brain hurts from trying to figure out what's going on. Needless to say, I took the movie back and exchanged it for something else. It's horrible I tell ya, horrible. And, there is absolutely no bull-fighting in this movie. Unless you count the first minute of the movie. Hope I helped some other people keep from wasting their time on this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-527e7291ac78485d9ebbbb654d13e901",
            "input": "I know some people think the movie is boring but I disagree. It is a biography of a very complex and extraordinary person. I liked the characters in the film and think that leaving parts of Archie's life a mystery captured his humanity. I don't think the purpose of a good biography should be the detailing of someone's life but rather the complexities and relationships that make them interesting. And what is more fascinating than someone so successfully reinventing themselves? \"Men become what they dream - you have dreamed well.\" Good job to Lord Attenborough. I also wanted to mention that Nathaniel Arcand really stood out to me as a charismatic actor and I hope to see him in more films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cab1474072584199bf46f038e9d0c09e",
            "input": "A FROLICS OF YOUTH Short Subject.A teenager, embarrassed by his fear of dogs, runs away from home. The abandoned spaniel he finds helps to change his mind.PARDON MY PUPS is an enjoyable little film, with Shirley Temple stealing all her scenes as the hero's lively kid sister. The opening gag - dealing with bedwetting - is in poor taste, but is quickly forgotten. Highlight: the climactic fisticuffs, which look impressively realistic.Often overlooked or neglected today, the one and two-reel short subjects were useful to the Studios as important training grounds for new or burgeoning talents, both in front & behind the camera. The dynamics for creating a successful short subject was completely different from that of a feature length film, something akin to writing a topnotch short story rather than a novel. Economical to produce in terms of both budget & schedule and capable of portraying a wide range of material, short subjects were the perfect complement to the Studios' feature films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7403990e4e41449caa90c781ca53fad9",
            "input": "I watched part one two days ago and today I saw part two. Of course the two parts are worlds apart so I am a little shaken by all that I just saw. I felt consumed by the knowledge of the inevitability of Che's death; for me, it clouded the entire movie. I suppose that is exactly what Soderbergh wanted us to feel, the slowly evolving inevitability of his death. Part Two was so downbeat compared to, again an inevitability but in Cuba it was positive and in Bolivia it was so negative. The politics of the movement in Bolivia were only alluded to but rarely confronted didactically. For me the memorable scenes were all at the end of the film: the confrontation with the jailer and the milder talk with the Bolivian official where that official questions Che about the failure of the peasants to support his revolution. I had not considered the national differences playing as much role as they did in the conflict, Argentine versus Bolivian. I thought Soderbergh dealt admirably with the inevitable problems of supply in a revolutionary struggle; how do you get food without antagonizing the peasants who do not have enough themselves. I was struck by how hard it would be to try something as Che tried. I guess it is all in the timing; is there sufficient anger against the government to begin the movement; in Bolivia there wasn't. Che realized the terrible corundum of revolutionists in his letter to Fidel read at the beginning of the film: If not now, when, 50 years from now. A very thought provoking and well done film; make every effort to see it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d750e02ec32a4636a3a91b14e1465446",
            "input": "(spoilers?)while the historical accuracy might be questionable... (and with the mass appeal of the inaccurate LOTR.. such things are more easily excused now) I liked the art ness of it. Though not really an art house film. It does provide a little emotionally charged scenes from time to time. I have two complaints. 1. It's too short. and 2. The voice you hear whispering from time to time is not explained.8/10Quality: 10/10 Entertainment: 7/10 Replayable: 5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10edcf572f444c79b2abea3024a1bf7e",
            "input": "This film does not fail to engage and move, even in 2008 to an audience only familiar with modern over-produced sound and computer enhanced techniques.The experience of the movie goer in 1922 who could only see this in a cinema with others on their big screen must have been truly profound and a thoroughly satisfying experience.One has to ask could a film maker today make a two hour silent movie and make it interesting and achieve the same structure tempo and balance as this movie has. Silent film making was pure art, it had to hold the attention through its structure, direction and acting - there was no padding out with more words or computer generated distractions. A poorly made or uninteresting silent movie is unwatchable.This film needs to be put into context for those who might be disconcerted with the mention of Christian themes. This is not a 'Christiany' film, it is not selling anything. These themes along with reference to current moral standards often appear in this era - also church going on Sundays was a national past time, Christianity was a given in most households thus the film is only depicting normal life as it was then. The themes would have rung true and deep at the time.It is most odd given the strong support to good Christian thinking of this particular movie (and it is not preaching religion to anyone, only highlighting the difference between hypocrites and the honest)that in 1922 a Pastor in an open debate with a representative from the film industry with a large crowd denounced Pickford as an example of immorality, along with some other individuals he named. NY Times 1922.Maybe they should have watched this movie that also came out in 1922 and, learned some lessons.The Pastor complained that since the film industry had started church attendance had dropped 500,000. The film representative in the debate however made the following observations; that saloon attendance had also dropped, that there were far more pastors in prison than actors (fact) and that selecting a few examples from among the many was not representative of the whole.Thus there was an ongoing battle between church and the film industry during the early days of film.This is a wonderful film about being honest and true to family friends and to be willing to make sacrifices. Mary Pickford, naive, honest, feisty, full of happiness and joy, faithful, humorous and silently sacrificing - though poor and uneducated she represented the perfect character. This however is not thrust down our throat but revealed bit by bit through the film.This is reminiscent of some modern Chinese films where characters are slowly, languidly revealed over the course of a film and it is this tempo that creates a stronger connection with the character. It has a smooth even tempo for the first half that builds all the elements for the last section. The last 30 minutes are great film making and it has to be appreciated it was achieved without the benefit of sound, running dialog - it was achieved through deft acting and great directing. It is sometimes surprising to realize that at the end of the film you haven't hear a word spoken, but it feels like you have heard everything.The supporting cast put in great performances especially Gloria Hope, Jean Hersholt and Lloyd Hughes. The final few minutes are typical Pickford understated humor as she goes outside under the pretext of sweeping the snow, a near perfect balance and ending. This is a special type of touching humor that should not be underestimated. Chaplin used this device often and copied some of from Pickford.Another special observation to be made about Silent films and especially Pickford films is that the star often has to hold the camera for much of the movie without the audience becoming jaded or bored, with the actors over-exposure. That Pickford is usually thoroughly the center of attention through most of her movies but the people still couldn't get enough of her is a testament to her fine acting ability.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4580fb37adb48d0b901e4d9c2db4707",
            "input": "This second film is just as interesting as the previous one except that there is no suspense. We know what he is going to do and what is going to happen before it is even hinted at on the screen. Then the pleasure comes only from the way the various tricks happen and the succession of them. We know there will be dynamite in the car, that he will lose a wheel, that the car will have a crash, just to speak of the car. And that is what happens. Now the details and the particulars are for you to discover them in the film. That he may be baited by some dumb woman is obvious and has to come but we know that he has already seen through her and that he knows he is being dragged into a trap. Now, how is he going to get out of it? That's what you must discover by yourself. And don't worry he will get the main trafficker but how is another story. A speed boat is no match to our busy beaver on the river. We also know when he is going to be wounded. They did not know what bullet-proof jackets were in those days. It's true recently it was discovered that some GIs did not have that kind of equipment in Iraq. But what is the meaning of such a film? This insistence on hunting the traffickers and this blindness that does not see that it is the prohibition that creates the problem. But the film is a constant and perfect illustration that there is no value what so ever that can stand in the way of this moralistic crusade against the forces of evil. Why not simply legalize these goods so that they can be properly observed and under surveillance? When something is not illegal or pushed out of the way it is all the less fun to use them, to do them. It is the forbidden or the restricted that is attractive.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e29f2d9d8e24badb977fc7c6eb8ef20",
            "input": "I had fun watching Red Eye. It's not a masterpiece, but it's well directed and structured. Cillian Murphy and Rachel McAdams are perfect in the role. Yes, it's the same old story with a different setting but Wes Craven gave it a good pace. At least not another Scream with the usual college killer. It's nice when you can see a clean, coherent thriller even when originality doesn't stand out as its main character. Particularly from a film-maker like Craven that has brought so many innovative ideas to the thriller and horror genre in the past and that now just lends himself to bringing home what could have been a good TV movie had it not been released theatrically. Good job!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6f50bc4fd2d4527ba1f974a12b0e1b1",
            "input": "Having Just \"Welcomed Home\" my 23 YR old daughter from a year in Iraq, Camp Anaconda medical support unit, I felt compelled to get this DVD. I wanted to hear other returning vets feelings in order to attempt to better understand her mentality on arrival and not waiting until after something bad happened. Regardless on your take on the war and peace this movie serves as a great start for all Americans to begin the healing of our returning vets emotional void. The paramount statement of the entire movie is \"Take Action\" on the problem . Incredibly emotional movie. I would highly recommend this movie to the vet the vets entire mature family and ask that they follow through with a plan to listen comfort help the returning Gulf War Enduring Freedom vets.Fast forward nearly one year later & My daughter has seen this DVD. Took account of her emotions and actually has made a commitment to re-up for another 6 years. Her take on her time spent in the sand is that she did some good. Local Balad children got first rate medical treatment for various common ailments not ordinarily able to afford free with an escort and translator. Her look over her shoulder at her Iraq tour was . \"We changed some hearts and minds back there\" Great DVD you have to keep an open mind and see all sides",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1b6e3818cc1431ca25a82971f1896d4",
            "input": "There is an excellent reason Edison went straight to video: it would have landed in theaters with a crumbling thud. The movie lasted entirely too long and was perilously boring. Just a notch above lowbrow (thanks to Freeman and Spacey, who obviously had a spare two weeks before their next films), the bad guys are as laughable and action as near non-existent as Justin Timberlake's acting. I hate to knock the guy, but the sooner he realizes that pop is his forte, the better.The movie isn't all bad...just mostly. I like the fact that LL Cool J was given what appears to be a shot at being leading man. He deserves it. And, unlike his fellow musician and co-star, he can act. Kevin Spacey is almost always enjoyable as well (you can see him gulp several times as he chews the scenery), and Freeman has the ability to elevate this flick to three stars (out of ten...he's not THAT good).When all is said and done, the ultimate error with this movie is that it is a mundane and tiresome piece of pseudo-action poppycock that fails to keep anyone awake. It also fails to make anyone give a good crap about any of the characters. All in all, t's just plain boring. That being said, rent this when you are suffering from insomnia.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c418a990d7c446d98e94a8b33b0884af",
            "input": "This is a gem of a movie not just for people who like fun and quirky premises, but who love the history and traditions of Sci-Fi and Classic Hollywood movies. Each alien of the Martian crew is the embodiment of a classic Sci-Fi character or member of Hollywood royalty and it's pure pleasure watching them bounce of each other and the residents of Big Bean.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40e4098a80fc429a81ec45bf904ad7f9",
            "input": "This is a extremely well-made film. The acting, script and camera-work are all first-rate. The music is good, too, though it is mostly early in the film, when things are still relatively cheery. There are no really superstars in the cast, though several faces will be familiar. The entire cast does an excellent job with the script.But it is hard to watch, because there is no good end to a situation like the one presented. It is now fashionable to blame the British for setting Hindus and Muslims against each other, and then cruelly separating them into two countries. There is some merit in this view, but it's also true that no one forced Hindus and Muslims in the region to mistreat each other as they did around the time of partition. It seems more likely that the British simply saw the tensions between the religions and were clever enough to exploit them to their own ends.The result is that there is much cruelty and inhumanity in the situation and this is very unpleasant to remember and to see on the screen. But it is never painted as a black-and-white case. There is baseness and nobility on both sides, and also the hope for change in the younger generation.There is redemption of a sort, in the end, when Puro has to make a hard choice between a man who has ruined her life, but also truly loved her, and her family which has disowned her, then later come looking for her. But by that point, she has no option that is without great pain for her.This film carries the message that both Muslims and Hindus have their grave faults, and also that both can be dignified and caring people. The reality of partition makes that realisation all the more wrenching, since there can never be real reconciliation across the India/Pakistan border. In that sense, it is similar to \"Mr & Mrs Iyer\".In the end, we were glad to have seen the film, even though the resolution was heartbreaking. If the UK and US could deal with their own histories of racism with this kind of frankness, they would certainly be better off.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a87abc53cf3e4262a65c27c71b8705fd",
            "input": "Dark Wolf (Quick Review) Let's get right to it: This is a repugnant piece of rotting roadkill with cow sh*t on it. It's just an awful movie. It's an urban werewolf movie with some of the worst acting imaginable and a story as weak as any gangly nerd from an 80's high school drama film. What's worse is that poor Kane Hodder was duped into playing the gigantic evil werewolf. Kane f*cking Hodder. Someone's trying to ensure that playing Jason Voorhees is the height of his film career...Anyway, former Playmate Jaime Bergman is also in the movie and she eventually becomes a werewolf, too. It's kind of a crappy cop drama with the world's worst looking werewolf in it. But it does have moments of near-rampant nudity. But that's about all. Want to know more? Okay, the werewolf is generally an ugly-looking black blur zipping around the screen. And when we're privileged enough to actually see a transformation sequence, we're presented with something that resembles a full-motion video from a video game made during the early stages of the Playstation. The first Playstation. The CG animation is really that primitive. Only good for horror hardcore fanatics that want to see small moments of nudity surrounded by rampant visual vomit. 2/10www.ResidentHazard.com",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45eb4fe06b3d40a48ef8c96991749343",
            "input": "Gino Costa (Massimo Girotti) is a young and handsome drifter who arrives in a road bar. He meets the young, beautiful and unsatisfied wife Giovanna Bragana (Clara Calamai) and her old and fat husband Giuseppe Bragana (Juan de Landa), owners of the bar. He trades his mechanical skills by some food and lodging, and has an affair with Giovanna. They both decide to kill Giuseppe, forging a car accident. The relationship of them become affect by the feeling of guilty and the investigation of the police. This masterpiece ends in a tragic way. The noir and neo-realistic movie of Luchino Visconti is outstanding. This is the first time that I watch this version of `The Postman Always Rings Twice'. I loved the 1946 version with Lana Turner, and the 1981 version, where Jack Nicholson and Jessica Lange have one of the hottest sex scene in the history of the cinema, but this one is certainly the best. My vote is ten.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-775d939551ef4203901ee76bf74a6223",
            "input": "I couldn't watch more than 14 minutes of it. It's a GREAT combination of really bad acting and really bad directing. The shots used are disgusting, they broke the 180 degrees angle all the time. My head hurts try to watch that load of \"you know what\". Dirt on the \"mystery machine\" window make you see light from the lighting on the windows...annoying. What else... it's so badly framed all the time it's just make you want to scream at that lady directing there. I only directed short films, but I'm pretty sure I'd be way better than that directing a feature film.... the story is unbelievable, just the long french kissing scene at the beginning tell you that it's gonna be pretty awful. So pretty much, try to avoid this really bad movies at all cost, it'll save you the 5 bucks or so for the rental, and that 1h30 hour of your life you'll never get back...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4caa8151f94943c2979a7b206a4e72dc",
            "input": "Father of the Pride was the best new show to hit television since Family Guy. It was yet another masterpiece from the talented people at Dreamworks Animation. Like The Simpsons, the show centers around a nuclear family (of white lions, in this case). It also contains many memorable supporting characters including Roger the surly orangutan, Vincent the Italian-American flamingo, the eccentric white tigers Blake and Victoria, the faux patriotic Snout Brothers and Chutney the elephant. The other stars of the show are the Sigfreid and Roy. They are incredibly eccentric and do everything in a grandiose manner, making the most mundane activities entertaining. The combination of cute animal characters with very adult dialog and controversial issues (drugs, prejudice, etc) is the source of the program's brilliance.The blame for this show's failure lies with NBC. They opted to broadcast the episodes in no particular order (perhaps being influenced by which guest stars they could promote) rather than the more logical production order. Several times, the show was preempted for an extra half-hour of such dreck as The Biggest Loser (as if 60 minutes of that was not enough)! It is indeed an ill omen for the future of television as art if an original and daring show like this fails while Fear Factor and American Idol dominate.Luckily, the complete series was released on DVD and the show now has an opportunity to gain a larger following. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50b37bd43d3a4ec9bdcc302196b1226f",
            "input": "I saw the film twice in the space of one week, both times the at a cinema in Orpington, Kent, UK. The place was packed both times and people had to be turned away. From the start of the film with Henry Winkler getting 'injured' on the football field the whole audience was in uproar with laughter, laughter that lasted until the credits.For those who love American wrestling this film is a must, but be ready to see Henry Winkler as you have never seen him before. Also look out for a very well known actor whose trademark wrestling move is a head-but!If you get a chance watch this movie and it is family comedy entertainment at its best!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ffc3360f4594a85a871238ebf530787",
            "input": "I imagine that the young people involved in the making of \"Necromancy\" (aka \"The Witching\" plus a bunch of other titles) must have felt a little weird being on the set of a horror movie with the man who: participated with John Houseman in the production of a proletarian play (\"The Cradle Will Rock\"); scared people into thinking that aliens were invading (\"The War of the Worlds\"); and directed and starred in the greatest movie of all time (\"Citizen Kane\"). And now Orson Welles was starring in a third-rate flick about a satanic cult.There's basically nothing creative about this movie. Lots of nudity, but the background music always proves really distracting. Even if the movie wasn't particularly predictable, it still wasn't worth seeing. How low Welles had sunk. Fortunately, over the final thirteen years of his life, he narrated the documentary \"Bugs Bunny Superstar\" (about the Warner Bros. cartoons of the 1940s) and hosted the documentary \"The Man who Saw Tomorrow\" (about Nostradamus). I recommend those two, but not this one. Just avoid it.Also starring Pamela Franklin and Michael Ontkean.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0bb477f8c9d042389c9707cb84dd1448",
            "input": "This is the official sequel to the '92 sci-fi action thriller. In the original, Van Damme was among several dead Vietnam War vets revived to be the perfect soldiers (Unisols). In this one, it's, I guess, about a dozen years later, since Van Damme has a daughter about that age. Now he's working with the government in a classified installation to train the latest Unisols - codenamed Unisol 2500, for some reason. As usual, something goes wrong: the on-site super-computer (named Seth - like the snake in \"King Cobra\" the same year) goes power-crazy, takes command of the Unisols, and even downloads its computer brain into a new super-Unisol body (Jai White). We're lookin' at the next step in evolution, folks! Most of Van Damme's fights are with one particularly mean Unisol (pro wrestler Goldberg) who just keeps on comin': drop him off a building - no good; run him down with a truck - no go! Shoot him, burn him - forgetaboutit! Much of the humor is traced to how Van Damme is now outmoded and out-classed(he's even going grey around the edges). But, though he takes a lickin', he keeps on kickin'! Most sequels of this sort are pretty lame - pale imitations of the originals, and while this one is certainly no stroke of genius, it manages to be consistently entertaining, especially if you're a pro-wrestling fan.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ff8eda4648f440090ff71fc88a6d6ae",
            "input": "Cillian Murphy and Rachel McAdams star in this action/thriller written and directed by the master of suspense, Wes Craven, himself. The whole movie starts with some trouble at The Lux Atlantic, a hotel in Miami. The problem is all fixed by Lisa Reisert, the manager of the hotel. Then she goes to the airport, and that's where all of the trouble begins. She meets Jackson Rippner, who doesn't like to be called Jack because of the name Jack the Ripper, if you know you him and I mean. Then they board the plane, and crazy enough, Rippner and Reisert sit next to each other. For the next half-hour, Lisa is terrorized, tormented, and terrified by Rippner. I won't give anything away. Then we move on to where Jack is chasing Lisa in the airport. Then Lisa goes to her house to see if her father is okay, and crazily enough, Rippner is already there. There is nearly twelve minutes of violence and strong intensity throughout that entire scene. In total, about 25 minutes of intense action comes at the end.Not only was the movie intense but it had a great plot to it. Like I said, I will not give anything away because it's so shocking and thrilling and somewhat disturbing/frightening. And the acting from every single character in the movie, even the ones with no lines at all, were all pitch perfect. It was incredible. Everything was awesome in this movie! The acting, the music, the effects, the make-up, the directing, the editing, the writing, everything was wonderful! Wes Craven is definitely The Master of Suspense. Red Eye is definitely a must-see and is definitely worth spending your money on. You could watch this movie over and over and over again and it would never ever get boring.Red Eye I have to say is better than 10 out of 10 stars.Original MPAA rating: PG-13: Some Intense Sequences of Violence, and LanguageMy MPAA rating: PG-13: Some Very Intense Sequences of Violence, and LanguageMy Canadian Rating: 14A: Violence, Frightening Scenes, Disturbing Content",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-79a6bc579c3c47f483bd2be662765e19",
            "input": "He now has a name, an identity, some memories and a a lost girlfriend. All he wanted was to disappear, but still, they traced him and destroyed the world he hardly built. Now he wants some explanation, and to get ride of the people how made him what he is. Yeah, Jason Bourne is back, and this time, he 's here with a vengeance.OK, this movie doesn't have the most elaborated script in the world, but its thematics are very clever and ask some serious questions about our society. Of course, like every Hollywoodian movie since the end of the 90's, \"The Bourne Suprematy\" is a super-heroes story. Jason Bourne is a Captain-America project-like, who's gone completely wrong. In the first movie, the hero discovered his abilities and he accepted them in the second one. He now fights against what he considers like evil, after a person close to him has been killed (his girlfriend in \"Suprematy\") by them. That's all a part of the super-hero story, including a character with (realistic but still impressive : he almost invincible) super powers.And the interesting point is that the evil he fights all across the world (there's no frontiers in the Bourne's movies, characters are going from one continent to another in the blink of an eye), is, as in the best seasons of \"24\", an American enemy, who's beliefs that he fight for the good of his country completely blinds him. Funny how \"mad patriots\" are now the N.1 enemies of paranoiac Hollywood's stories.Beside all those interesting thematics, the movie isn't flawless : the feminine character of Nickie Parson is for now on completely useless and the direction is quite unoriginal when it comes to dialogs scenes. But all that doesn't really matter, for \"The Bourne Ultimatum\" is an action movie. And the action scenes are rather impressive.Everyone here is talking about the \"Waterloo scene\" and the \"Tanger pursuit\" and everyone's right. I particularly enjoyed the fight in Tanger, that reminds my in its exaggeration and craziness the works of Tsui Hark. Visually inventive scenes, lots of intelligent action parts and a good reflection on American's contemporary thematics : \"The Bourne Ultimatum\" is definitely the best movie of the series and a very interesting and original action flick.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34b2d54883e04ec6819188b9406171ad",
            "input": "I have loved this movie all of my life. It's such an intelligent story also, with plenty of classical allusions. eg. The ship that went missing decades earlier was called the Bellerophon. Well, in classical mythology this was the man who slew the Chimera, a legendary beast composed of two or more other creatures. In FP, Walter Pidgeon is clearly the chimera- himself and his Id monster. I like movies where the writers have clearly credited their audiences with a modicum of intelligence, unlike most modern blockbusters which spend $150m on special effects, but about $1.50 on a screenplay.Cheers",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4912931cbf04699b08ad835c132057c",
            "input": "\"A Mouse in the House\" is a very classic cartoon by Tom & Jerry, faithful to their tradition but with jokes of its own. It is hysterical, hilarious, very entertaining and quite amusing. Artwork is of good quality either.This short isn't just about Tom trying to catch Jerry. Butch lives in the same house and he's trying to catch the mouse too, because «there's only going to be one cat in this house in the morning -- and that's the cat that catches the mouse».If you ask me, there are lots of funny gags in this cartoon. The funniest for me are, for example, when Mammy Two Shoes sees the two lazy cats sleeping and says sarcastically «I'm glad you're enjoying the siesta» and that she hopes they're satisfied because she ain't, making the two cats gasp. Another funny gag is when Tom disguises himself as Mammy Two Shoes and slams Butch with a frying pan and then Butch does the same trick to Tom. Of course that, even funnier than this, is when the real Mammy Two Shoes appears and both (dumb!) cats think they are seeing each other disguised as Mammy and then they both attack her on the \"rear\" - lol. Naturally that she gets mad and once she gets mad, she isn't someone to mess with. But even Jerry doesn't win this time, because he is expelled by her too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8658ed060e414332b7769f9fac0309f2",
            "input": "\"Hatred of a Minute\" is arguably one of the better films to come out of Michigan in recent years. Not to say that it's a brilliant film by any means, but it's definitely worth a watch. \"Hatred\" chronicles the sordid adventures of Eric Seaver (played by director Kallio), a formerly abused child now grown up, and starting to listen to his evil side. \"Hatred\" is very nice visually. The shots are creative, and the lighting is approporiately moody and interesting to look at. This film actually has an element of production value to it, unlike other recent Michigan releases like \"Dark Tomorrow\" and \"Biker Zombies.\" Subtle dolly shots and stylized shot composition show good use of this film's $350,000 budget. However, \"Hatred\" stumbles in the same places that so many other local films do, and that's in the story and character department. Essentially, things just kind-of happen. Eric Seaver doesn't evolve at all. Basically, he's always been crazy, it's just that people are starting to notice. The film just wanders along its merry way with very little development. Also, the ending is very abrupt. However- since this is a horror film, since when do we care about plot? We just want to see people die, and \"Hatred\" certainly delivers. As the body count mounted, people in the theater started cheering \"Kill her! Kill em' all!\" When people scream back at the screen, it's always fun. That's the place where \"Hatred\" succeeds. It's fun. And in the end, that's all that really matters.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd875a207ec74298bf02115d57c706b3",
            "input": "This is by far one of my favorite of the American Pie Spin offs mainly because in most of the others the main character (one of the young Stiflers) always seems unrealistic in nature. For example AP: The Naked Mile. You have a teenage guy surrounded by naked college chicks , and has one in particular hot on his trail to rid him of his virginity \"problem\" and he ends up stopping mid-deed and rides a horse back to sleep with his girlfriend, who keep in mind gave him a \"guilt free pass\" for the weekend. I can appreciate the romantic aspect of the whole thing but let's be realistic; most people who are watching these movies aren't particularly searching for a romantic story.Whereas the most recent installment finally seems to realize who the audience is and good old Erik Stifler seems to wake up and smell the roses and as always Mr. Levenstein lends his \"perfectly natural\" eyebrow humor to the equation and scored a touchdown with this new movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f12f110ce6a741a29b45c959289ae7b5",
            "input": "The 1963 version of \"The Haunting\" has been one of my favorite horror films for years, so I anticipated the release of this 1999 remake with a good deal of trepidation. It hardly seemed that any follow-up could exceed or even equal the original masterpiece. Unfortunately my worries were well-founded: This movie stinks.I don't know what the people involved in this film were thinking. Jan De Bont, who seemed to have had a fluke when he directed the excellent \"Speed,\" does as poorly here (or perhaps even worse) as he did with the much-hyped duds \"Twister\" and \"Speed 2: Cruise Control.\" Hey Jan, stick to cinematography, would ya? Liam Neeson is adequate in his role as the doctor-pretending-to-be-a-sleep-psychologist -- I don't think he is capable of turning in a truly bad performance -- but even he cannot save a lame script and weak story. Catherine Zeta Jones proves once again (as she did in \"Entrapment\") that she lacks the acting ability to rise above the material that is handed to her. The female lead, who did great in an episode of \"The X-Files,\" looks lost here as Eleanor, an insomniac hovering on the edge of sanity. And that blond guy, whoever he is, is more wooden than the laughably strange statuettes of children carved into the woodwork around the house. I don't think he changes expression once during the entire film.(SPOILERS AHEAD)The reason the first movie worked so well is because we were never sure whether the house was truly haunted or whether the manifestations were a result of Eleanor's precarious mental state. No spirits are actually seen in the original, leaving much up to the imagination--a hallmark of other great horror films like \"The Changeling\" and \"The Blair Witch Project.\" In this updated version, we of course get tons of CGI ghosts, which basically (in the face of the weak script/plot) make the movie totally unscary. The f/x aren't even that great, considering they were done by ILM. The frozen breath looks particularly fake. The effects in the underrated Peter Jackson film \"The Frighteners,\" which I saw just before this one, were a lot better. The wooden carvings of the children, which are supposed to look creepy, just look silly (especially when they scream), and the CGI monsters are nothing to write home about. Rather than providing a relief from the bad acting, bad direction, and bad writing, the effects only add to this mess of a film.Some particularly dumb scenes: When the three other characters break into Eleanor's bedroom, and none of them seem at all surprised to find a huge scowling demon hovering over the bed. The scene where Eleanor \"sees\" the former lady of the house hanging from the rafters... the acting here is particularly bad. And last, but not least, the unintentionally hilarious bit where Wooden Blond Guy utters an uninspired shout of what is supposed to be anguish, leaps up on a piece of furniture, and starts slashing away at the painting of the old, evil guy who built the house. We actually get some satisfaction in this scene, as seconds after his attack, Blond Guy is dragged over to the fireplace by the ghost of the old guy and promptly gets his head cut off by the flue. It was the only part of the movie I enjoyed.In sum, stick to the original 1963 \"The Haunting.\" 3/10 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14a516307fff4e0a914e050730895ea8",
            "input": "Sisters In Law is made by the same directors of the rather curiously fascinating 'Divorce, Iranian Style' which was as exactly as it stated, as we got a glimpse of Divorce court in Iran. Now they've turned their attention to the court system in Cameroon, Africa. What's great about this court is that 2 of the magistrates are Women, which is unusual for such a country like this. Anyways, they deal with plenty of men used to getting their way around the women, but this film is remarkable in the fact that it appears that women has made great strides in society, with divorce legal and women's rights being recognized. So the judges often chastise the men for behaving in a primitive way in these times. Not to say that the women who appear at the court get the softer treatment. One of the prime focuses of the film is a case of child abuse done by an Aunt. The judges waste no time in lashing out at the woman with fury. And who said that justice isn't served anymore? With these 2 behind the bench. They often carry out maximum penalties! Ya! You go girl!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ea299d7a9e0496096b92051506848f5",
            "input": "The movie \"Slugs\" is unique because the titular vermin are actually the good guys in this horrific tale of nature gone awry. You see, these poor slugs have been mutated through the pollution of evil humans and don't mean to do anything malicious, they're just slugs- slugs with sharp teeth who eat flesh and excrete poison, but slugs none the less. The real bad guys are the humans, who either actively try to destroy our beloved slugs, or overreact when they encounter them.For example, take the scene where the guy puts on the glove full of slugs. They were just hanging out in a comfortable work glove when out of nowhere this giant hand came at them, and they reacted instinctively, defending themselves and biting the guy. Now, instead of seeking medical attention for his slug bite, this guy runs around his greenhouse screaming like an idiot, spills some highly volatile chemicals, starts a fire, knocks a bookcase over on himself, and cuts off his own hand- then the fire and volatile chemicals mix and his house explodes. How can you blame that on the slugs?This movie paints a portrait of humans that is less than favorable. The characters in this movie include the dumb sheriff who hates everybody, the drunk hick who's mean to his dog, and the lumpy sidekick whose wife is at least forty-five years older than him. There's also a set of drunken teensthat get attacked while copulating, and we have to see the skinny long-haired freaks' genitals. Meanwhile, there's a guy who looks like a demonic Leslie Neilson who yells \"You don't have the authority to declare happy birthday!\" for some reason. Finally, this parade of loathsomeness is rounded out by the guy from the MST3K classic \"Pod People\" whose face explodes after eating a slug-laces salad (another easily avoided fate blamed on the helpful, harmless slugs).Humans are portrayed as greedy, stupid, racist, alcoholic, and, in one pointless scene, as would-be rapists. In the movie's climactic scene, the villainous humans try to burn the slugs who are cowering helplessly in the sewers, Well, since they're idiots, the humans succeed in BLOWING UP THE ENTIRE TOWN. They alone do more damage than the slugs ever did!If you hate humans, and I know I do, you'll appreciate \"Slugs\". If you're a fan of bad cinema, you'll also appreciate this crapfest from the director of \"Pieces\" and \"Pod People\". There's enough bad acting, silly dialog, illogical plot twists, lame special effects, pointless scenes, and poor dubbing to hold your attention.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54368aa4dcbe40e3a78e87b861294625",
            "input": "Prussic gas, a murderer donning a red clansman suit and hood wielding a white whip, and the murders of college school girls at the hands of paid convicts enlisted by a mysterious mastermind who keeps his face hidden within an office containing aquariums of turtles and fish. The inspectors at Scotland Yard, Higgins(IJoachim Fuchsberger)and his superior Sir John(Siegfried Schürenberg)certainly have their hands full with this case. It all seems to center around student Ann Portland(Uschi Glas), who, when she turns 21, is to inherit a great deal of wealth. The girls who are targeted share a room with Ann, but the reason for their murders remains a mystery SY's finest must figure out. The staff of the girls' dormitory all seem to be hiding something and certain members of the faculty are falling prey to the killer in the red monk robe disguise, talented enough to precisely strangle the necks of those attacked with the whip. Two prisoners are commissioned by a mystery man to use the newly created toxic gas created by a scientist murdered at the beginning of the film during what was supposed to be a monetary exchange for his creation. It's a clever scheme where a driver, Greaves(Günter Meisner)meets the convicts(..who hide in a barrel)who are assisted by a corrupt prison guard. Taken blindfolded to the secret room of the mastermind, he gives them orders on who to kill and how. Uncovering this operation is a top priority for Higgins and Sir John for it will lead them to the truth they seek in regards to the murders and why they are happening. Under suspicion are girls' dormitory headmistress, her author brother, a sweaty, incredibly nervous chemistry teacher, a snooping gardener, and the Bannister. Some are red herrings until they are disposed of, throwing the viewer for a loop each time until the real mastermind is discovered. The ending features multiple twists. Out of the Krimi films I've seen, THE COLLEGE GIRL MURDERS is the closest to a giallo with it's colorful killer, a convoluted plot yielding lots of surprises and potential suspects, & sordid shenanigans between adults and the college girls at the dormitory. I think you can also see the influence of James Bond on this particular Krimi film with the villain mastermind's secret hideout with an alligator pit(..which isn't used), the fake bible/water pistol, when opened, fires the gas into the face of startled victims, the Greaves' Royles Royce which has latches that cause flaps to darken the windows without revealing the passenger in the back seat, and the peep holes used to spy on the girls in their rooms and while swimming. Many might consider Sir John a liability due to his bumbling, buffoonish behavior and how he often undermines Higgins' abilities to get at the truth(..perhaps poking fun at know-it-all British inspectors who harm a case more than solve it)..I felt he was used as comedy relief, particularly with his attempts at psychoanalyzing suspects and potential victims, often misunderstanding what are told to him. Higgins, using the skills adopted over his years as an investigator, instead follows the clues/facts, often avoiding Sir John as much as possible. Capable direction by the reliable Alfred Vohrer who keeps the pace humming at a nice speed, and the screenplay is full of interesting characters and lurid content..the fact that so many of the adults surrounding the dormitory are suspect, any of them might be the one wielding the whip or calling the shots behind those murdered girls' executions. I'd say this may be one of the best(..if not the best)examples of the Krimi genre, for it keeps you guessing, always one more ace up it's sleeve..the revelations unearthed at the very end are quite eye-opening(..and, you even get a literal unmasking of the real mastermind pulling the strings to top it all off).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7330800f2f3946f68f80285150b247d2",
            "input": "My husband rented this from a video store thinking it was suspense. (He never reads the synopsis).Well, it would be funny if the thing was watchable. It simply isn't. The same thing over and over, no intrigue, and WHERE did they find the leading man?. The leading man, Michael Des Barres, is not even feasibly good-looking, especially for this role he is given. Also, sexual harassment at work is something, if you want to see, rent Michael Crichton's \"Disclosure\". At least Michael Douglas looked good in the early 90's. Alexandra Paul, who is usually watchable, plays an embarrassing scene here. There are also lighting effects cheaper than your at home web cam. Don't even waste time renting this. 0/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fece4758e7bd4e3ca81758bffebc5eb6",
            "input": "Saw this movie on its release and have treasured it since. What a wonderful group of actors (I always find the casting one of the most interesting aspects of a film). Really enjoyed seeing dramatic actress Jacqueline Bisset in this role and Wallace Shawn is always a hoot. The script is smart, sly and tongue-in-cheek, poking fun at almost everything \"Beverley Hills\". Loved Paul Bartel's \"doctor\" and Ray Sharkey's manservant. This was raunchy and crude, but thank god! Unless you're a prude, I heartily recommend this movie. FYI for anyone who likes to play six degrees of Kevin Bacon, Mary Woronov & Paul Bartel were in \"Rock & Roll High School\". Mary Woronov and Robert Beltran were in \"Night of the Comet\" together. They were all three in \"Eating Raoul\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-abb0692b6cf0479b8f23fbee68455c92",
            "input": "This movie was bizarre, completely inexplicable, and hysterical to watch with friends while drinking in a big empty house. I really love the opening stuff with Lisa wandering about lost in a gorgeous city. I want to be a beautiful stranger lost in some exotic European locale, though maybe not in a low budget horror flick. Definitely get the ending where there are the strangely non-sexual sex scenes that were cut out (in my DVD copy anyway). Don't attempt to understand it, just go along and watch out for the weird bits...which is everything. Don't watch this if you actually want plot or characterization or anything at all to make sense. Pretty beautiful, though you may just give up on this and decide to watch an actual horror movie, like say, Dead Alive.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6390a62af1f4608a5e19d1a160a62e0",
            "input": "I know I should like this film, and I do for the most part, but as other's have mentioned, it is a bit long in the tooth. I to also found the raging hormones of the all male crew to be a bit annoying. It's a wonder they didn't start panting and howling at the moons as well. I also have to say that overall, the movie leaves me cold. It's a very sterile atmosphere that permeates the film. On the plus side the effects are great (besides the cartoon monster), as are the effects, props, costumes and of course Robbie. If the robot was not in this film, I don't think it would have been as popular as it was/is. The second half of the movie picks up steam once we start to investigate the forgotten gadgets of the \"Krell.\" As many times as I've seen this movie, the Krell still leaves me scratching my head as to exactly who or what they were. Based on what was being produced at that time, besides \"This Island Earth,\" Forbidden Planet is miles above the average Sci-Fi movies of the time. Being filmed in color also adds to its enjoyment. Certainly a classic in its own right, flaws and all, and deservedly so.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78881d7dec01400aaadced6078ad9055",
            "input": "With a movie called \"Gayniggers from Outer Space\" how could you go wrong? Just throw in some over the top stereotypes for the characters, use the Village People as the main suppliers for the soundtrack, and throw in tons of gay-gags. Plot is unimportant. Too bad, this film doesn't contain any of this and every joke misses the spot. The characters all look alike apart from the german gaynigger, one or two jokes work, the rest fails.The title made me laugh and I was prepared to laugh even more about the film. My expectation were to high apparently.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de9eb2dc65364a54b21a0381d6290c0b",
            "input": "I'll keep the review of this program as short as possible. Skip it. Low budget, not funny, lousy script. Acting not quite as bad as the writing, but still bad. That's all you need to know, but I will continue for the sake of writing more than necessary.This is a film with three segments, each one parodying some other type of movie. A MUCH funnier film with this same exact idea is \"Movie Movie,\" with George C. Scott. Very obscure, but worth searching out. MM parodied films of the 1930's, and did it with elegance, precision and dry wit.This movie did not. It parodies three types of films, supposedly from the late 70's, early 80's era, only it is parodying films I've (almost) never heard of. The first is, I guess, a parody of \"Kramer Vs. Kramer,\" in a way. Peter Reigert does his best with a dirt poor script. The second is a parody, of, I don't know what...a Danielle Steele novel? I mean, you might see a story like this on Lifetime TV, but in a movie theater? I mean, I remember the 70's, I was there. This is a soap-opera type parody about a fetching young woman who sleeps her way to power. These type of things usually parody themselves, so I don't see how this was even necessary.We are on somewhat easier ground with the third segment, \"The Municipalians,\" which parodies cop movies. I noted elements of \"The New Centurians\" and some \"Dirty Harry\", both of which were almost 10 years old when the film was created. Yeah, nice and current. Robby Benson plays the idealistic young rookie (over-the-top wimpy) while Richard Widmark plays the grizzled veteran cop who drinks whiskey while sitting in the police car (OH! Stop! My sides! He's actually drinking booze in the Police car! How irreverent!) Note that this was the first film after \"Animal House\" to have the \"National Lampoon\" name attached. Wow. To go in five years from that classic flick to this pile of dung is nothing short of shocking. I could go on for hours about the sad decline that caused one of the most cutting-edge and original voices in American humor (that would be National Lampoon, the original magazine for about its first 10 years or so) to sell out and begin a long, slow slide into a world of crap, where now the magazine is long gone and it only exists as a brand name to slap on low-budget \"comedy\" films for a fee. Yet another reason why capitalism (and cocaine) sucks so bad.Anyway, this movie is a serious time suck. Don't waste your 90 minutes. I want mine back. On the positive side, Fred Willard's in it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef7a2f3c5ac14def91e2a0a77e375d30",
            "input": "A story of amazing disinterest kills \"The Psychic\" over and over again. The characters and plot are completely uninteresting (as is Fulci's mad camera work, which is usually a redeeming factor in his films), and any grasp of suspense is nowhere to be found. It's padded out to an insufferable degree--by the end, you won't be clamoring with excitement but stricken with boredom (and, like me, maybe an uncontrollable urge to fall asleep). Jennifer O'Neill's performance deserves occupancy in a better movie. Fulci gorehounds beware--there's just not much going on in \"The Psychic.\"3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-295ac9c1608a41278cd378d42d21a0cf",
            "input": "Oh, come on people give this film a break. The one thing I liked about it was......... Sorry, still thinking. Oh yeah!!!! When John Wayne came and shot up the the bad guys. Oh, sorry, wrong movie, I was thinking of a better quality film. Let me see now, I'm still trying to defend it. Oh yeah, the chick that was from Clueless was in it. Don't put down Stacy Dash. I mean, we all make mistakes. But boy, Stacy, you made a dooooosie.Hey, one thing that has never been done in a western, even an all female cast, they actually hung a woman from the gallows. That might be a western first. Even though her neck should have been broken and she survived the ordeal, still, you've got to give the director some effort for trying a western first. Also, I've never seen a woman lynched from a horse in any western, although that didn't happen in this movie, I just thought I would give the director another idea for Gang Of Roses#2, which should be made right after Ed Wood's Bride Of The Monster #2. Maybe that was what the makers of this film were going for. Orginality, especially with an all African woman cast and an oriental cowgirl.Heeey, if the makers of Gang Of Roses want to make a sequel to this mess, you could have such slang like, \"Hey, don't you be takin about my homegirls\" and \"talk to the hand, baby, talk to the hand.\" You could also have a surfer dude type deputy marshal that says things like, \"That gunfight was TOTALLY RAD man, totally.\" You know things like that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2876c9de3f054ef8b985fddbbd0df939",
            "input": "I just want to add my two cents worth, and forgive me if I am repeating something that has already been posted, but I feel it is worth reminding people of the everlovin' genius of Damon Runyon. Without the wonderfully street, hilarious writings of Damon Runyon this film would never have been made - nor most of the other great classics that deal with gamblers & the like from before 1960. Damon Runyon worked as a newspaper man, and he was from Colorado, but he sure did _get_ the street scene of the East Coast. If you are not a dedicated fan of old Hollywood comedies, I would recommend a few other flicks from Damon Runyon's writings; \"the Lemondrop Kid,\" and \"Little Miss Marker,\" both feature Bob Hope, who, aside from his politics, has always been a funny man. (As a West Coast liberal, I find his politics fairly funny, too!) Damon Runyon lives!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41df8b47519f42c4a24f628d2a40e3c4",
            "input": "I'm a big fan of Italian films from the seventies, and I wouldn't hesitate to list the beautiful Barbara Bouchet among my favourite actresses of all time, so I did go into this film with some hopes. However, it soon becomes apparent that this is a largely pointless film that isn't going to go anywhere. Clearly nobody would go into this expecting much more, but the fact that this is pointless gets more annoying when you consider that it's also rather dull and none of the characters are interesting. As the title suggests, the film focuses on a 'rogue'; in this case one that steals, womanises and smuggles stuff. That's basically all the plot that this movie has. The film does have a real 'seventies style' to it and the idea of it all being very carefree gets across well. It sometimes seems like directors Boro Draskovic and Gregory Simpson were trying to put across some sort of point, although whatever that point is doesn't come across very well. Seeing Barbara Bouchet on screen is always a pleasure, and that is the case here too; she's definitely the best thing about the film and the sequence in which she hangs out of a car naked is the best part of the film. Overall, The Rogue will probably have some appeal for people who love the seventies style, but unfortunately it doesn't have much else to offer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f02d2604fec94f47bab029c5dc2c211f",
            "input": "This is absolutely the dumbest movie I've ever seen. What a waste of a splendid cast. That's James Cromwell as the ignoramus playing deputy. I could go on and on, but I would obviously be spending more time on this review than anybody ever did on the script. The only thing this movie is about is us vs. them and how to revel in profane slapstick beyond any reasonable human being's tolerance. This is one of the 10 worst movies I have ever seen -- and I LOVE James Garner.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-442bf586165c4e408693915c4f9c481d",
            "input": "I first saw this as a child living in East London. The scars of Hitlers Luftwaffe were all too evident and the landscape of the movie was reminiscent of our street. I remember having nightmares after seeing it. The odd thing is, it really hasn't dated if viewed as a piece of social history in Cinema fiction. Apart from a globally destructive war, the scale of the machines was badly awry, more Nano-Technology now, but overall, an excellent and well-crafted work. It was interesting to see how space travel was perceived back then. I would think that firing a spacecraft from a gigantic gun would almost certainly kill the astronauts. However, much was right. Mans desire for war, mans inhumanity to man. The means of war as a catalyst for development. ",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5993a5abdfad4173b2d687e019ec6426",
            "input": "I stopped five minutes in when Beowulf was given a double-shot, automatic crossbow with sights on it. Not only do crossbows not have telescoping sights, but Beowulf beat Grendel in hand-to-hand combat. The terrible, wooden acting and eternal darkness that plagues all Sci-Fi Original Movies didn't help either. Having only gotten a few minutes in before I felt my bile rise and decided to watch I Love Lucy reruns instead, that's really about all I have to say. But, you might as well just realize that it's a made-for-TV movie and skip it right there.A travesty.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35c1c1e675314de4ba5edcf27de4ec2e",
            "input": "A warm, touching movie that has a fantasy-like quality.Ellen Burstyn is, as always, superb.Samantha Mathis has given many great performances, but there is just something about this one will haunt your memory.Most of all, you've got to see this amazing 5-yr. old, Jodelle Ferland. I was so captivated by her presence, I had to buy the movie so I could watch her again and again. She is a miracle of God's creation.Judging by the high IMDB rating, I'm not the only one who was mesmerized by this young actress.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d6d8a0a86e24a50987381a6e3cac235",
            "input": "Before seeing this, I was put off by the subject matter, but this is not your average triumph over adversity story. Although this is technically about blind Tibetan kids climbing Mt. Everest, there is so much more to it. This movie shows the very strong, often contradictory personalities of two highly accomplished blind adults leading the children, Erik and Sabriye. Erik is an American blind mountain climber/athlete and Sabriye is a blind German academic who started a school in Lhasa Tibet. They are both exceptional in their own ways, but disagree on what will really build confidence in the kids. Erik wants them to reach the summit while Sabriye wants them to enjoy Erik as a role model and take pleasure in moment. The nuances are complicated and one walks away not really being sure who was right or if the whole climb was a mistake or a great idea. The most profound scenes are with the Tibetan children themselves and the hardships they faced before finding their way to the school. The most moving for me was the story of Tashi, a frail teenager who grew up on the streets after his parents abandoned him. I could watch a whole movie on his life and was happy to learn that thanks to the school, he is now running a successful small business with some of his fellow students. If you liked Spellbound or Murderball, you will love this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ea5c38d1d1f4897a9e6b644b9c99917",
            "input": "...but the actress playing the daughter just doesn't come across as credible.It doesn't work for me when I see an actress of about 25 years playing the role of a 12-year-old... Other commentators have suggested that this is one of the messages of this film, that children may sometimes seem more adult-like than adults, but with the casting as it is in this film, it just doesn't work for me.you might want to check other comments to find out what this film is actually about, because i couldn't bear watching it to the end.i agree that the premise for this film is beautiful though - I wish another director would try to pick up this story again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2aa5da2677543549a449f15806afd44",
            "input": "I had always been a big Lynda Carter-Wonder Woman fan so when the Sci-Fi Channel ran this movie,I had to see it.I was bitterly disappointed.This is a Wonder Woman movie in name only.She doesn't wear the right costume [she must have refused to or had ordered major changes] and the plot runs like a poor man's James Bond.There's none of the things that made the comic book heroine a success i.e. the superhuman strength or determined will.It's just one long bad dream.I don't even think Cathy is all that attractive anyway.I wouldn't waste your time on this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-200ba9b482da4870adee393204062e7e",
            "input": "The movie started off strong, LL Cool J (Deed) as an undercover police officer, with partner Sgt. Lazerov (Dylan McDermott from the Practice, possibly miscast as a bad guy?) committing robbery and murder. Deed refuses to kill the drug dealer, which sets up the conflict of a dirty cop with a conscience. The other big names (Freeman, Spacey et al) are well cast and the movie shows promise.The movie begins to fall short as soon as Justin Timberlake (Pollack) is introduced. Given the opportunity to make a good movie that people will possibly see repeatedly, or one that teenage girls will go and see the once because of Timberlake, I would choose the former. Even talented actors have to work hard at their craft; Timberlake is NOT talented and no amount of hard work can save him. I would have thought he would put on a better show, given the fact that he has been acting talented for years. Everything he did in this film was unconvincing.Just because a singer sells millions of records and sells out stadiums, it does not automatically translate that they can act successfully in feature films. Even hardcore N'Sync fans will not be able to ignore the obvious lack of acting talent.That aside there are a few plot holes, such as Pollack's sudden sniper ability and deadly operation of warehouse machinery. This movie had so much promise. Thoroughly disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84a127c502ac4b64aa70007461986d38",
            "input": "This is a great example of a rather simple Film Noir story that is handled exceptionally well--thanks to excellent direction by Otto Preminger as well as some lovely acting performances. Dana Andrews stars as a hot-headed detective who all too often uses his fists instead of his brains. Soon after the film begins, Andrews is being reprimanded for this and is warned that if this continues he'll be off the force. A bit later, while investigating a crime he's attacked by a suspect and Andrews is forced to fight to protect himself. This time he does NOT use excessive force but the assailant is killed. Andrews panics and assumes they won't believe him so he tries to cover up the death--though instead an innocent man is ultimately blamed for the crime.There's a lot more to the film than this--including a plot involving a slimy villain (Gary Merrill) and a love interest for Andrews (Gene Tierney). All in all, this is one of the better examples of the genre--with great gritty dialog, superb lighting and a simple yet very effective story. This is the way Noir was meant to be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22db269e59044574b1b0e717966a32a4",
            "input": "Having not read the novel, I can't tell how faithful this film is. The story is typical mystery material: killer targets newlyweds; woman investigator falls in love with her partner and is diagnosed with a fatal disease. Yes, it sounds like a soap opera and that's exactly how it plays. The first 2/3 are dull, save for the murders and the last 1/3 makes a partial comeback as it picks up speed toward its twisty conclusion.Acting is strictly sub par, though it's hard to blame the actors alone: the screenplay is atrocious. During the last 1/3 you stop noticing because the film actually becomes interesting, but that's only the last 1/3. Director Russell Mulcahy is very much in his element, but there's only so much he can do with a TV budget and the network censors on his back. He's pretty much limited to quick cutting and distorted lenses, though he managed to squeeze in a couple \"under the floor\" shots during the murders in the club restroom. Unfortunately, as this is made for TV, the cool compositional details he uses so well with a wider image are nowhere to be found. Note to producers: give this man a reasonable budget and an anamorphic lens when you hire him.Summing it up: this film is bad by cinema standards and mediocre by TV standards(watch CSI, instead). If you're in the mood for a film like this, I've some excellent suggestions: pick up a copy of Dario Argento's \"Deep Red\"(my highest recommendation; superb film), \"Opera\", or even \"Tenebre\". They're stronger in every category.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8c25655aa7d4818b834ebd0e70b1bbd",
            "input": "This film comes as the ultimate disappointment in Tsai Ming-Liang for me. It oozes laziness from its every frame. So I'm not going to analyse it thoroughly either. But some observations:1. If the premise is drought, why we get to see city landscapes with blooming green trees? I wonder if that was supposed to mean something in the metaphorical context of the film (in which thirst notifies the craving for intimacy, and watermelon the trivial substitute, sex). Or it is only a matter of lousy film-making, not giving a damn about being coherent.2. We don't get to know what had happened to the porn actress, why she is unconscious or, presumably, dead. It seems a question of no importance as long as the message of supreme alienation is successfully (=bombastically) delivered, but in retrospect, her inert body proves to be a cheap dramaturgical gimmick, a pretext – just as gratuitous and exploitative as the activity it is employed in.3. Nothing is expressed in this movie that Antonioni hadn't expressed better 40 years ago – and without needlessly humiliating his actors.4. The musical numbers (recycled from 'The Hole') felt like a secondary-schooler's idea of artistic counterpointing, executed on that very secondary-school level of skill. If that was the point, the point sucked.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aac8c905310f4814a452773e6d25cd1a",
            "input": "A thematic staple of cinema since its inception is that genre involving seductive women whose wiles and means entice susceptible men not only into their arms but also into dire circumstances that typically will only result in jeopardy for the male victims, along with incertitude as to whether or not temptresses will be forced to take their medicine, and here Susan Lucci performs as a siren, although her acting chops from a primarily soap opera pedigree are inadequate to make her performance a credible one. Isabelle (Lucci), inconstant wife of venture capitalist Stewart Collins (John O'Hurley), begins a love affair merely for fun with yacht salesman Richard Davis (Philip Casnoff), simply a bagatelle for her but an earnest matter of the heart for Richard, apparently mesmerized by his lover while she takes advantage of his ardour by engaging him in a risky plot that will graduate into a scheme of murderous intent. When Davis becomes convinced that guileful Isabelle is a victim of physical abuse administered by her husband, he desperately attempts to free her from what he feels is a marital trap in order that he may wed her himself, coming to believe that the only clear solution to his plight will be found in a rudimentary essay at hiring a professional assassin who will dispose of the allegedly violent Stewart. In the wake of the hit-man's assault upon Collins, a pair of police detectives, performed by Joe Grifasi and Dean McDermott, become increasingly curious concerning Isabelle's possible involvement in the crime, while at the same time reality dawns upon enraptured Richard who might have to pay a dear price in return for his inamorata's maneuvering. Lucci and Kasnoff are properly cast as a viable pair of conspirators, each giving a reading that makes for a boring rather than charming set of lovebirds, but O'Hurley and McDermott offer strong turns in a film that suffers from a hackneyed scenario as well as uninventive direction and design elements. Released upon a Fremantle DVD, this largely lustreless affair depicting a man 'neath the spell of a seductress does benefit from top-flight visual and sound quality, and although no extra features are provided, the above-average production quality enhances able efforts from cinematographer Robert Primes and composer Stephen Edwards.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e9d7bc63d0445b09148fff98cd27760",
            "input": "Houseboat Horror is a great title for this film. It's absolutely spot-on, and therefore the only aspect of the film for which I can give 10 out of 10. There are houseboats, there is horror, there's even horror that takes place on houseboats. But if there were ever a tagline for the film poster, it would surely be 'Something shonky this way comes...' for Houseboat Horror is easily the worst Australian horror film I've ever seen, not to mention one of the worst horror films I've ever seen, and a fairly atrocious attempt at film-making in general. The good news is, it's so bloody awful, it sails straight through the zone of viewer contempt into the wonderful world of unintentional hilarity. It's worth watching *because* it's bloody awful.The category of 'worst' comes not from the storyline, for the simple reason that there actually is one: a record producer, a film crew and a rock band drive up to the mystifyingly-named Lake Infinity, a picturesque rural retreat somewhere in Victoria (in reality Lake Eildon) to shoot a music video. Someone isn't especially happy to see them there and, possibly in an attempt to do the audience a favour, starts picking them off one by one with a very sharp knife. Even more mystifying is how long it takes the survivors to actually notice this, On the surface, it looks like a very bog-standard B-movie slasher. You've got highly-annoying youths, intolerant elders, creepy locals (one of whom, a petrol station attendant, would easily win a gurning competition), and let's face it, my description of the murderer could easily be Jason Voorhees. Ah, but if only the acting and production values were anywhere near as good as the comparative masterpiece that was Friday The 13th Part VII. Unfortunately, Houseboat Horror is completely devoid of both these things.But in the end, this only makes what you do get so ridiculous and amusing. Fans of one-time 'Late Show' and 'Get This' member Tony Martin will already be aware of some of the real dialogue gems ('Check out the view...you'll bar up!'), while the actual song to accompany the music video is so bad it has to be heard to be believed - I can't help wondering if writer/director Ollie Wood hoped it would actually become a hit. The horror element is comparable I think to B-slashers of the genre and particularly of the period, but there were times when I couldn't help imagining someone biting into a hamburger off-screen and seeing a volley of tomato sauce sprayed at the wall on-screen.Indeed, if you've been listening to Tony Martin recommending this film as hilarious rubbish like myself, I don't think you'll be disappointed. Any fans of 'so-bad-it's-good' horror should not pass up the opportunity. Whether you'll 'bar up' or not though is another matter. If, on the other hand, you are in search of genuine excellence in the Australian horror genre, get yourself a copy of the incomparable 'Long Weekend' and don't look back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5345c04e88d415691a1d33faa973797",
            "input": "I am amazed that movies like this can still be made. I watch all kinds of movies all the time with my friends and i can say that this is one of the best i ever seen. Never thinked that a movie of 146 minutes can make me think about it on and on.Washington, charismatic and intense as ever, plays Creasy, a washed-up ex-counter-terrorist agent who's taken to the bottle. Once he's assigned to protect young Pita (Dakota Fanning) in Mexico City, his emotional and redemptive arc is jump-started in the way only an adorable little girl can provide. Inevitably, Pita is kidnapped by thugs, and Creasy decides that most of Mexico City must pay the price for daring to take away his character's teddy-bear-clutching catalyst. Yes, he has become...a Man on Fire. You must see this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88112be4e9494e96a0147c105a46a8a5",
            "input": "OK...this one's a weirdy....Honestly, I can't tell you all the inner plot-points of THE BEAST, cuz I started losing interest when nothing happened during the first 45 or more minutes - but just wait, it definitely does \"pick up\"...The plot involves something about a monster in the woods that some French aristocrat chick screwed back in the day. Eventually you see \"THE BEAST\", which looks like a guy dressed in a giant rat-bear costume with a horse cock attached to it. The scene takes place with the aristocrat woman running around the forest looking for a lost sheep. The sheep ends up dead and the woman gets scared. THE BEAST pops up, rapes the chick and shoots 400 gallons of spunk all over her. Eventually the chick starts to enjoy the beast's \"attention\" which results in some pretty novel simulated sex scenes, including an unnervingly erotic foot masturbation scene where the woman jerks the beast off with her feet while the monster shoots more huge loads everywhere (yeah, I've got a twisted foot-fetish - so sue me....)...The whole film is told in flashbacks and long-winded dialog scenes that tended to be a bit tedious. A \"shocking\" but predictable ending concludes this extremely strange film...THE BEAST is a film that I find kind of hard to rate. The cinematography itself is quite eye-catching and the sets, costumes and locations are elaborate. The plot is a little convoluted and seems to take it self awfully seriously for what ends up being such an unintentionally hilarious film about a chick boning a rat-bear. A good bit of tits, ass, and hairy 70's French bushes to help make up for the dull first half of the film. I have to honestly say, that if it weren't for the graphic scenes of the BEAST spackling all over the willing maiden, this film would have been a real bore - that is unless you like dull dialog and some graphic horse sex (the beginning has a VERY up-close and personal scene of two horses boning, including a pulsating and spunk covered female horse vagina...YUM!!!). But the BEAST sex scene is so strange and such a refreshing change from the rest of the film, that I have to say that those scenes alone make up for what otherwise would have been a real snoozer. I have to recommend this one to anyone who thinks they've seen it all - the BEAST rape really is out-there and something to be witnessed. Also recommended to any fans of 70's/80's sleaze films - this one ranks pretty high with them. Worth a look for you sick rat-bear beastiality lovers out there (like me)...8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a45fee15ab4457093a804c2901565f2",
            "input": "The concept of the legal gray area in Love Crimes contributes to about 10% of the movie's appeal; the other 90% can be attributed to it's flagrant bad-ness. To say that Sean Young's performance as a so-called district attorney is wooden is a gross understatement. With her bland suits and superfluous hair gel, Young does a decent job at convincing the audience of her devout hatred for men. Why else would she ask her only friend to pose as a prostitute just so she can arrest cops who try to pick up on them? This hatred is also the only reason why she relentlessly pursues a perverted photographer who gives women a consensual thrill and the driving force behind this crappy movie. Watching Young go from frigid to full-frontal nudity does little to raise interest, but the temper tantrum she throws standing next to a fire by a lake does. Watching her rant and rave about her self-loathing and sexual frustration makes Love Crimes worth the rental fee, but it's all downhill to and from there. Despite her urge to bring Patrick Bergin's character to justice, her policing skills completely escape her in the throes of her own tired lust and passion. Patrick Bergin does a decent enough job as a slimy sociopath; if it worked in Sleeping With the Enemy it sure as hell can work in this. But I can't help but wonder if the noticeable lack of energy Young brings to the film conflicts with his sliminess. I'm guessing it does and the result is a \"thriller\" with thrills that are thoroughly bad and yet comedic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ac0a79fab7f4cd2a56031435727e5e0",
            "input": "This movie was one of the funniest movie I've seen in years and the laughs from the audience members support me. Not since My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002) has the laughter been as spontaneous and intense. Easily has intricate as last year's Mr. and Mrs. Smith (2005) in its use of parody (espionage in Mr. and Mrs. Smith and sex in My Super Ex-Girlfriend). Director's Ivan Reitman balance between comedy and drama, between crazy and downright ludicrous is great. Never does the shock and dramatic serious crack the rule of comedy. At the same time, this predictable romantic comedy never loses its touching emotional elements even if the ending is broadcast in advance. In some ways, it's so evident that it's great to see how it plays out. Just like in real life, sometimes the truth is so evident that one can't really see it. Easily eight out of ten stars ranking up there with Tootsie (1982). Possibly a nine (depends on how it appears on a second viewing).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea0c22f411f8479b94f96521f215d1ca",
            "input": "Before I watched this film I read a review here stating that this film could possibly be one of the best films ever!? ha ha Scene by scene the tension grows alright... from the annoying characters in this movie. From the little girl talking gibberish and trying to drown the little boy, to the killer just running about without any notice (and who was the guy at the beach talking to the little boy!?)..things just seem to happen and then go unanswered in this film. As I watched it seemed like the film was going in one direction, then just doesn't go anywhere, but into a new direction...and on and on...The acting is great, but the writing is horrible. Each character, in each scene, says or does something so unbelievable, unrealistic and the reactions of the fellow cast/extras are simply strange. There are no resolutions to the problems developed throughout the film, making it confusing and ultimately a big waste of time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e954bf8693d400e99939bda64e28d5a",
            "input": "EL MAR is a tough, stark, utterly brilliant, brave work of cinematic art. Director Agustí Villaronga, with an adaptation by Antoni Aloy and Biel Mesquida of Blai Bonet's novel, has created a film that traces the profound effects of war on the minds of children and how that exposure wrecks havoc on adult lives. And though the focus is on war's heinous tattoo on children, the transference to like effects on soldiers and citizens of adult age is clear. This film becomes one of the finest anti-war documents without resorting to pamphleteering: the end result has far greater impact because of its inherent story following children's march toward adulthood.A small group of children are shown in the Spanish Civil War of Spain, threatened with blackouts and invasive nighttime slaughtering of citizens. Ramala (Nilo Mur), Tur (David Lozano), Julia (Sergi Moreno), and Francisca (Victoria Verger) witness the terror of the assassination of men, and the revenge that drives one of them to murder and suicide. These wide-eyed children become adults, carrying all of the psychic disease and trauma repressed in their minds.We then encounter the three who survive into adulthood where they are all confined to a tuberculosis sanitarium. Ramala (Roger Casamajor) has survived as a male prostitute, protected by his 'john' Morell (Juli Mira), and has kept his life style private. Tur (Bruno Bergonzini) has become a frail sexually repressed gay male whose cover is his commitment to Catholicism and the blur of delusional self-mutilation/crucifixion. Francisca (Antònia Torrens) has become a nun and serves the patients in the sanitarium. The three are re-joined by their environment in the sanitarium and slowly each reveals the scars of their childhood experiences with war. Tur longs for Ramala's love, Ramala longs to be free from his Morell, and Francisca must face her own internal needs covered by her white nun's habit.The setting of the sanitarium provides a graphic plane where the thin thread between life and death, between lust and love, and between devotion and destruction is played out. To detail more would destroy the impact of the film on the individual viewer, but suffice it to say that graphic sex and full nudity are involved (in some of the most stunningly raw footage yet captured on film) and the viewer should be prepared to witness every form of brutality imaginable. For this viewer these scenes are of utmost importance and Director Villaronga is to be applauded for his perseverance and bravery in making this story so intense. The actors, both as children and as adults, are splendid: Roger Cassamoor, Bruno Bergonzini and Antònia Torrens are especially fine in inordinately difficult roles. The cinematography by Jaime Peracaula and the haunting musical score by Javier Navarrete serve the director's vision. A tough film, this, but one highly recommended to those who are unafraid to face the horrors of war and its aftermath. In Spanish with English subtitles.Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8fe0c19568fa424191a043a0c2851c8a",
            "input": "This movie is finally out on DVD in Italy (completely restored). I have seen this movie so many times and I find it even actual these days (2003) when Italy suffers again from a sort of brainwashing dictatorship (or the US for that matter). I am glad there are outcasts as the one played by Mastroianni in this movie who can sing out of tune; maybe they can teach the Sophia Lorens of this world how to be strong and fight to be recognised as human beings.Back to the movie: as most people here already mentioned the acting is wonderful but the audio background is astonishing. I must assume that unfortunately something is lost if you don't understand the Italian language but I can assure you that the show-off of machism, the distortion of reality in that ever-present radio-chronicle of the Hitler visit to Rome can really make you shiver!A masterpiece!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b93f6c24fdca42898a6ad4d56bc43d43",
            "input": "\"What the Bleep Do We Know!?\" was one of the worst times I have spent at the movies. It was less of a movie and more of an after school special, but at the same time nothing special at all. The attempt at a narrative in which they grounded their ideas was absolutely pathetic, which almost anyone will tell you. Marlee Matlin in her underwear just shouldn't happen. I won't dwell on it. What I will reveal is a criticism that many are unable to formulate. This movie, while tedious, also suffered a tremendous flaw in reasoning. It was horribly contradictory because it took such a manipulative, become a creator of your life, manifestation of abundance, shoeless piece of propaganda. Interconnectivity is explained as a large party of our existence. However, the movie encourages that we control our surroundings with our minds. It completely neglects that there are other people with minds that could be controlling us, which seems to be more the case. Or at least the structures in which we exist greatly limit us. In this way, the movie was inappropriately solipsistic. Solipsism and interconnectivity just don't mix unless you're God almighty. If you are, you will be impressed (?!?) by all the neat things this movie will reveal that You can do. If not, you will be sorely disappointed, a moron, or perhaps both. Also, the title is so ridiculous, I have trouble warning people not to see the movie because I feel retarded mentioning it by name. Shame on everyone involved.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-563aed67fb4a4b0690737f4fe242fb3a",
            "input": "Al Pacino? Kim Basinger? Tea Leoni? Ryan O'Neal? Richard Schiff? My mouth was watering. I dropped everything to watch this movie on Cable. 30 minutes in I was having trouble staying awake. 60 minutes in and I hit the record button and fell asleep. Finished watching it the next morning. Shouldn't have bothered. What a waste of a great cast and an idea that could have been an interesting story of a \"Day in the Life...\" Cure your insomnia if you have it and watch this movie. I guarantee you at least an hour and a half of uninterrupted sleep. Dialogue horrible. Continuity non-existent. Camera work could have been done with a hand held Super 8 and looked better. This movie was a total disaster.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e6fe709dea94826842e5b6d0fbdcaf2",
            "input": "You know the story..Pretty kids alone in the woods,when BAM!something starts cutting them up.Well this crap is no different.A bunch of kids return to a cabin where the male leads twin brother disappeared for years before.Suddenly an \"UNKOWN CREATURE\" stars cutting them up,and their only help is a doctor/biker.To say this film was bad is an understatement,it's smut! The acting was horrible.The creature looked very cheesy. And as all films do these days they try to get you with a twist ending,which they do not!There is one bright spot to this film- LOST star Maggie Grace as the female lead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-666a41eaf9cf419681f20edf932f6405",
            "input": "This was a truly bad film. The character \"Cole\" played by Michael Moriarty was the biggest reason this flopped, the actor felt that conjuring up an unbelievably awkward southern drawl would make this character more evil, it didn't. After about 20 minutes I had wished for a speech therapist to make an appearance, this would have added some sincerity.- 1) badly acted - 2) unsympathetic characters - 3) razor thin plot lineYuck!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4280548d4b0408087dbbb9ef4e1dd97",
            "input": "Nothing revolutionary here; just impeccably elegant, restrained cinema.GARDE A VUE is confined almost exclusively to a drab police station, and mostly to one interrogation room, but director Claude Miller (who made the wonderful film THIS SWEET SICKNESS, among others) intercalates spare glimpses of exterior tableaux as minimalist locale scenography. Miller's restraint, especially early on, is breathtaking, and his exquisite handling of the consequently-pivotal interior mise-en-scene makes for captivating viewing.Lino Ventura is superb as usual, succeeding to legitimize a character that, on paper, is cliche: the laconic, hard-nosed, world-weary homicide detective. Ventura lives the role, making it completely believable, even though the script allows us little access to his inner workings; the film ends at the very moment it appears he will be forced to confront his failure for the first time.Michel Serrault is equal to the task as the suspected child-killer who shrewdly spars with the single-minded flic. The exchanges between the two are more-often-than-not pregnant with tension and the aura of a constantly metamorphosing playing field for a battle of wits. Serrault's character is by turns deplorably haughty and cunning, and pitiable; then later....The \"message\" of GARDE A VUE, if one were to search for one, is a condemnation of police methodology and the kind of pressures that make a cop over-zealous to, if necessary, close cases at the expense of justice. For most of its length though the film shines as nothing more than an exemplar of how to turn a potentially soporific set-bound scenario into a suspenseful drama of the utmost cinematic economy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac6794b63f944ea9877722aadd1dbd5e",
            "input": "The great and underrated Marion Davies shows her stuff in this late (1928) silent comedy that also showcases the wonderful William Haines. Davies plays a hick from Georgia who crashes Hollywood with help from Haines. They appear in cheap comedies until Marion is \"discovered\" and becomes a big dramatic star. A great lampoon on Hollywood and its pretentions. Davies & Haines are a wonderful team (too bad they never made a talkie together) and the guest shots from the likes of Charlie Chaplin, Douglas Fairbanks, William S. Hart, John Gilbert, Elinor Glynn, and Marion Davies (you have to see it) are a hoot. A must for any serious film buff or for anyone interested in the still-maligned Marion Davies!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37ca95c29d654f88b8ba07e0439bbb16",
            "input": "Heather Graham couldn't play a convincing lesbian if her life depended on it. Who do the producers of the movie think they are? the ABSOLUTE WORST, most UNREALISTIC movie i've seen in as long as i can remember. This movie is so bad that i felt compelled to sign-up on IMDb and make sure the rating of this \"film\" drops.omg i'm Heather Graham, i just kissed a drunk chick, so while she's passed out i'm REALLY going to pace around my room for HOURS asking myself frantically \"WHAT HAVE I DONE?!\".. Jesus heather, get over it and grow up... and i'd like to forward that same sentiment to the idiot producers... and while i'm at it, instead of this movie being all about an pathetic excuse for a coming out story, perhaps it would have been more suitable to focus the plot onto a character who's mentally unstable... like your so-called \"lesbian\" character... after all, i know the first time i had gay sex, when i left the next morning i jumped to the sky in excitement in the middle of the street... honestly b*tch, get a grip... WHAT A JOKE! and please note there are many many many more flaws and appallingly stupid aspects to this lame flick, but i'm so sick of even thinking about it anymore. bottom line, if you're a smart person you'll hate this movie, and if you're not a smart person, then you'll love it... it's as simple as that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e188a8c5db44384bccbbe7bf4c05d89",
            "input": "Humphrey Bogart clearly did not want to be in this film, and be forced to play a part-Mexican or he would have been suspended. Believe me , he made the wrong choice! Presumably, after the success of \"Dodge City\", Warners tried a follow-up with Errol Flynn and his usual list of buddies, like Alan Hale, Guinn (Big Boy) Williams, Frank Mc Hugh and the ever-present John Litel, but they made the huge mistake of trying to present Miriam Hopkins as a love interest for Flynn v. Randolph Scott, and as a singer to really make things bad, because she proved one thing, and that is she cannot sing. The story was not too bad, but with Bogie clearly miscast also, it turned out to be a poor Western that was overlong, and on a low budget, but in fairness, color would not have helped.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-abb237c9b27c40669e8f6bcc336aebf8",
            "input": "i know you've read that before, on countless other films no doubt if you're reading the comments here, but voodoo academy still stands as the absolute worst film i've been able to track down. no doubt the really bad ones aren't even available to buy or watch on tv, but even so i feel it's fair to qualify that i'm not just some dumb renter who picked badly.i've seen two thirds of the bottom 100 ranked films here on the imdb, and i'm ticking of the remaining ones with every chance. most of those stand head and shoulders above this... excersize in absolute monotony.i like to rate truly bad films (as in ones with no humour even in how bad they are) by how many people you need to watch it with to make it all the way through. if you can watch it by yourself, it isn't that bad. if you can watch it with one single friend... it's bad but could be a lot worse.it took 5 of us to make it all the way through voodoo academy. and not even the usually fun moments of watching bad films (spotting the boom mic for example, 3 times in this one if i'm not mistaken) could take away the dry taste in my mouth. yes i'd watched it, but i'd also forced 4 of my friends to watch it with me to achieve that end.i hope and pray we saw the directors cut... to think that there could be a version with 20 more minutes of big eyebrowed lugs with baby oil glands rubbing their torsos just scares the hell out of me. so much of the film centers around this.i do applaud david decoteau for managing to lens this film in two days on a short budget, just as i applaud him for convincing people to pay him to make what is no doubt a celluloid version of some of his fetishes. but it isn't a good film. the original shop of horrors was shot in the same length of time for a comparitive amount of money (considering inflation) and was an utter gem. it's not an excuse for how bad this baby is.spoilers ahead...it's not even worth picking apart the plot holes or cliched know it all hero characters... the pacing of the film... is insane... nothing... is interesting for the length of time decoteau dedicates to the pectoral self massaging. no matter what your alignment or sex... rubbing just cannot sustain that kind of screen time.the acting is cheese... but not overly amatuer... i've seen a lot worse in better films... but somehow it's the semi competent delivery of some of the worst lines you'll ever hear in a film, that really grates.rent this if, like me, you have a fascination with the worst of the worst, and only if you're going to watch it with a group of people who are prepared to work to get through it. this is no ha ha ha the set wobbled affair. it's an endurance test you probably want to skip.i'm sure there is worse... but i wouldn't be surprised if it has decoteau's name on it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-459af68cf5354bd493a43516b62074cb",
            "input": "I can admit that the screenplay isn't very good, and that it has some slow parts, but all of you critics of this movie need to learn how to have some fun. First of all, the performances are great (Michael Douglas, Kim Basinger, Kiefer Sutherland, and Eva Longoria. Michael Douglas proves he has still got it, and Kim Basinger plays a very interesting character as the cheating wife. Kiefer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, play the dynamic duo, both adding their incredible talent to the pot. And second of all, this movie is the most fun I have had in years in a Theodore. Its plain and simple, if you want to go to the movies, and have a lot of fun see, The Sentinel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9df20e49090475f80744bdd3ad1f863",
            "input": "After watching many of the \"Next Action Star\" reality TV eps TiVo taped this gawd-awful tripe for me. For some bizarre reason - and I only have myself to blame - I watched the whole thing, hoping that there would be *something* unique in the entire movie. After so much hype about Joel Silver's \"Midas Touch\" with action flicks, he might want to make sure he bones up on his alchemy.First, the only redeeming value of the entire film was Billy Zane, and even he couldn't lift the slipshod writing out of the crapper. Having said that, Zane's performance falters about 2/ 3rds of the way through, as he doesn't even seem to know what else to do other than look smug. Can't blame him here, though. The writing, quite frankly, sucked. Let's take ideas from \"Rat Race,\" \"Enemy of the State,\" \"Terminator,\" \"Midnight Run\" and any bad gambling film you can think of and simply rehash it. And who's brilliant idea was it to have TWO bridge chase sequences in a ROW?Sean Carrigan, the \"man of the hour\" of \"The Next Action Star\" shows all of the strengths and weaknesses the casting directors mention during the entire run of the series. A one-note johnny, Sean plays the dumb good looking jock very well, but struggles with shouldering the weight of the film. Quite frankly, we never quite seem to care about whether he lives or dies by about mid-way through, as Carrigan fails to provide a reason for the audience to even like him. His dumb-but-lucky routine gets old as there really isn't anything about the character to root for.But Carrigan is a dream compared to the wooden, rigid Corinne Van Ryck de Groot. Did Howard Fine really tell her to pretend to be a Terminator for the first half of the film? I don't think so. I kept expecting her to quote Arnie. Her character \"performance\" can be compared only to the dramatic depths of \"Freddy Got Fingered,\" though not nearly as well-developed. The camera loves her in dark, shadowy limousines, but in the harsh light of day her demeanor sucks all energy off the screen. Jeanne Bauer showed more natural life in her five minute bit part than Corinne showed at any part of her screen time.Ultimately, Sean has the rugged good looks to provide a good lead in an ensemble cast, but shouldn't have been left to do this one solo. It was simply too big of a task for him. \"Next Action Star\" colleague Jared Elliot may or may not have had better luck with some more dynamic characterization, but it's hard to tell given Jeff Welch's lame script. Someone should take Welch's iMac away from him before he hurts himself or anyone else. And finally, Van Ryck de Groot simply was outclassed and way out of her reach, even for complete shlock like this. Joel Silver should be ashamed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dce3af9756a945d8bcdd6d73208a1ff2",
            "input": "Saw this Saturday night at the Provincetown Film Festival, and it's a stick-to-your-bones movie -- it's really stayed with me. Adapted very smartly from what is probably an excellent novel, it's a back-and-forth-in-time drama with fully rounded characters, thoughtful rumination on life choices, and, I'm not exaggerating. one of the greatest casts ever assembled in 100+ years of movie-making. Wonderful work from everyone, led by a luminous Vanessa Redgrave as a dying, deluded Newport matron, and Claire Danes as her much younger self. Meryl Streep's daughter Mamie Gummer is, like Mama, the real deal; Patrick Wilson looks like Paul Newman circa 1958 and doesn't overplay the charm; and what a pleasure to see such excellent stage actors as Barry Bostwick and Eileen Atkins contributing sharp, detailed cameos. Hugh Dancy, also from the stage, doesn't bring much edge to the somewhat clichéd role of an unhappy rich wastrel, and the family issues are resolved perhaps more neatly than real life would allow. But it's a deliberately paced, visually gorgeous meditation on real life issues, and you can cry at it and not feel like you're being recklessly manipulated. Also, what a sumptuous parade of 1940s/50s automobiles.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc33ed6bcb1b4dc79eb58b5e9bb51e70",
            "input": "This movie was a brilliant concept. It was original, cleverly written and of high appeal to those of us who aren't really 'conformist' movie pickers. Don't get me wrong - there are some great movies that have wide appeal, but when you move into watching a movie based on \"everyone else is watching it\" - you know you're either a tween or don't really have an opinion. This had a lovely subtle humor - despite most people probably looking only at the obvious. The actors portrayed their characters with aplomb and I thought there was a lot more \"personal\" personality in this film. Has appeal for kids, as well as adults. Esp. nice to find a good movie that's not filled with sexual references and drug innuendos! A great film, not to be overlooked based on public consumption. This one is a must buy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd2008c595cd4a44879573fd2dd55df9",
            "input": "...okay, maybe not all of it. Lured by the false promise of bikini-clad women on the movie's cover...but the HORROR...THE HORROR... ...whatever you do, do NOT watch this movie. Gouge out your eyes, repeatedly bash your skull in...do what it takes. Never again--never forget!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd177df6e4604116aa2ef5b02407ebe2",
            "input": "Michael Curtiz directed this 1930 very-stylish whodunit from a script by Robert Presnell Sr., Robert N. Lee and Peter Mine. The original novel they adapted was \"The Kennel Murder Case\", perhaps from a writer's standpoint the best of the Philo Vance mysteries by the strange S.S. Van Dine. Vance was a long-worded and superior detective genius, and his character being assigned to William Powell probably meant the executives at Warner Brothers were aware of the possibility that in less-engaging hands this detective might alienate viewers. Fortunately they assigned suave William Powell first to the character.; later he was played by Basil Rathbone, Warren William, and Paul Lukas before being consigned to \"B\" picture status.The other question as always with Warner Brothers executives is why they chose Vance as a character; their penchant was to choose men who operated outside the law, with no apparent discrimination between a vicious murderer and a champion of individual rights against all comers. This film has a despicable villain who gets murdered, and a claustrophobically challenging locale inside an apartment complex. The characters are unarguably unusually well-realized, the direction rather good and unusually swift-paced; and except for a darkish B/W look, the film avoids the comedic asides, superfluous characters and irrelevant dialogue characteristic of many early detective entries. Jack Okey did the good art direction. The music by Berhard Kaun is serviceable; Orry-Kelly did the costumes. William Reese provided the mostly-indoor cinematography. In the interesting cast, Powell is THE Philo Vance of his time, mostly sober-minded with just a hint of sardonic humor here and there. Eugene Palette is better than usual playing very straight as an admiring police partner to Vance, with his very professional timing. The other actor who comes off best is handsome Paul Cavangh, very effective as always in what was written as a red herring part. Mary Astor is attractive but at this point in her career she talked a bit too fast to be as effective as she later proved. Also in the cast were Helen Vinson as the villain's woman, Jack La Rue, Ralph Morgan (best known as Frank Morgan's brother), Robert Barrat as the villain everyone has cause to kill, Archer Coe, and Frank Conroy as his likable brother with Robert McWade as the D.A.; quirky and funny Etiienne Girardot has a delightfully witty part as the funny little forensics doctor who comes onto the crime scene. James lee as the abused Chinese servant is excellent and intelligent. The story breaks into four parts. First there is shad doings at a dog show, where Vance, Coe and Cavanagh are all showing West Highland terriers. Cavanagh's dog is killed, by Coe, to prevent him winning the title over his own entry. The second portion of the scene involves a leave-taking; someone is confused enough by who has gone where, after Coe parts from his girl friend, Vinson, to murder his nice brother by mistake. Enter Vance, to find out who did in Archer Coe in a locked room and how, with the help of Palette; the romantic difficulties are straightened out, the Chinese servant is exonerated, we find out who broke the expensive vase, who will marry whom, how Archer Coe was done in and why the butler did not do it--but someone else with a good excuse did. This is a more-than-good little mystery, which skilled Hungarian-born director Curtiz took quite seriously. He used wipes, swift cuts, changes of camera angle and alternations between straightforward and daring camera-work to achieve variety, interest and a sustained pace. Many writers, critics and experts, myself included, consider this to be the best of the Vance projects, although others are estimable as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b51e2c5890a471286dccdbea29dec90",
            "input": "The Deadly Wake is THE PERFECT MOVIE for film students... to learn how NOT to make a film!Let's see... what did the crew mess up in this flick? Worst music mix Worst editing Worst script WORST ALL-TIME DIRECTING Worst acting Worst choreography Worst cinematography Worst props Worst sets Worst lighting Etc. Let's face it, if this \"film\" had been in ultra-high contrast black-and-white, AND silent... it still would have been awful. All scenes are dark (lighting people call it \"black\"), often, the music score drowned out the meandering dialogs, which was OK because nobody ever spoke two whole sentences without long pauses for effect. The \"evil\" robot was hilarious... what was that? Jazz dancing? Oh... I guess it was supposed to be walking tactically or something. I'm sure it struck fear into the hearts... of the poor editors. And, how do you edit so much footage of garbage? Not possible. Garbage is garbage, no matter how you splice it. How did anyone ever get this thru the dailys???Bottom line is- I couldn't stand to watch more than 15-minute segments, it was so bad... but I did see the whole thing (with lotsa breaks) just to see if it had ANY good parts in it at all. NOPE! NONE!A perfect example of how not to make a flick... a must see for EVERY serious film student!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf539471f44a4f1e9989de56c5169946",
            "input": "Genghis Cohn is a (very) mildly entertaining British movie about a German police commissioner in the late 1950's who is haunted by the ghost of a Jewish comedian that he killed 15 years earlier while serving under Hitler in the SS. The ghost comes back and wants his killer to live as a Jew to atone for the murders he committed.Otto, the German policeman actually knows this ghost's name because, the last thing he did before he died was said, in Yiddish, `Kiss my ass'. The policeman didn't speak Yiddish, so he asked around until he found the meaning. The `kiss my ass' left such an impression that everybody involved with that killing learned and remembered the comedian's name, Genghis Cohn.There are a bunch of men who are murdered in the jurisdiction of the police commissioner, and there are no helpful clues. The men are murdered with a set of knives that are missing from the local butcher. The butcher announces that his knives are missing while the commissioner is in the store to get a liver and onion sandwich, so the commissioner is a suspect. The first man is killed while making love to the butcher's wife, so the butcher is a suspect. But the butcher maintains that he would be very busy if he killed every man that slept with his wife. All the men are killed immediately after the climax of lovemaking.I think I might be a bit angrier than the ghost of Genghis Cohn if I was killed like he was. He seems to be very good-natured about it, as if he was just in a mild car accident. I can only guess that it is because it is a British movie and they are known for being a very polite people. He uses some of his material from his stand-up routing, and I just didn't find it very funny.I gave this movie a 4 because it was just kind of goofy. I thought it should have been a little more serious than it was. The movie turns out to be a murder mystery (where did this come from?), and it seemed that Genghis should have been more helpful than he was. The movie gave me a tiny look into Jewish culture, but was only skin-deep. Do all Jews love liver and onion sandwiches? Do they all say `shtoop' and `meshuganah' in their daily vocabulary? Isn't there more important stuff that we should know about the culture?I saw this movie at a Jewish community center in Berkeley, CA, and I was the only person in the room whose hair was not fully gray or white. (I have no gray or white hair.) There were 18 of us, and after the movie they stayed for about 20 minutes to discuss the movie. There were 2 main concerns expressed there: 1. The movie was way too light-hearted and future generations might not understand the gravity of what happened and 2. As the Holocaust survivors are dying off, future generations will not know what really happened. I thought that this second concern was ridiculous and I told them I thought they didn't need to worry because there is tons of literature out there and there will always be people who like to watch movies, like myself. The murder of 6,000,000 people by a very bad man will not ever be forgotten. I write this last paragraph because they charged me with telling others about my experience that day.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c23666d1310482a86ab95c5752589e6",
            "input": "Being someone who lists Night of the Living Dead at number three in her top five favorite movies of all time, and at the same time loving this student film parody, I feel I must defend this movie against the previously posted scathing reviews. This short but sweet opus has always been a crowd-pleaser at horror and science fiction movie marathons where those who attend have a love of the genre yet know not to take zombie movies too seriously. This film is a tribute to the original, not an insult. It is intended to be funny, and many others who I have heard chant for and applaud it agree with me that it succeeds. Especially for those of us who have seen NOTLD 50+ times. Watch for the director cameo as news reporter Jeff Drexel, and also if you have the opportunity catch his Alien parody, Loaf.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13fd8bd6d4114e7a8c091929dcca05d6",
            "input": "Five passengers at a bus depot tell each other their scary dreams while waiting to be picked up. But is there more to these nightmares than meets the eye?Lucky me, five bad movies for the price of one! Each segment features the very worst in acting, special effects, make up and music. And these were supposed to be scary? Hmm.. I think I've been more freaked out during an episode of Teletubbies. I swear, you'll sit there like I was, bored to tears waiting in vain for something interesting to happen. Don't bother. It never does. In fact, I even stopped fast forwarding the commercials, as they were a good deal more entertaining than the main feature. AND the ending is the ultimate cop-out. Yep, none of this actually ever happened. If only the same could be said for the day I set my VCR to record this cobblers.. 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94f0016cdcc24fd8b7c1b1a97c3f68b4",
            "input": "The movie itself made me want to go and call someone so they could enjoy it too. It was extremely funny. Angelena Jolie was wonderful as Juliet. The parents are hilarious.They are caterers as well as enemies.The kids play the parts of Romeo and Juliet in the church play.They fall in love and their parents try to keep them apart.(Spoiler Ahead. I think) They sneak off after a party and do it. Surprisingly they still want to get married in the end of the movie. If you don't like stereotypes and the defilement of classic literature don't watch. If you don't mind those you will have a blast watching this one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f03c392783c547e397c034c7c81abd7c",
            "input": "Mt little sister and I are self-proclaimed horror movie buffs. We have seen just about EVERYTHING, especially zombie flicks. Now, we have seen a lot of good zombie movies, and a lot of bad ones. This BY FAR is the WORST movie I have ever seen in my entire life. Not only was the acting horrible, but the special effects, graphics and ever \"zombie\" make-up was the worst I have seen. If you can even call it make-up ( black eye shadow around the eyes) This is totally proof that you should never judge a book by it's cover. Cause the cover to the movie is the only sweet thing about. do your selves a favor and DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was so adamant about this movie I went as far as putting a sticky note on the inside of the movie before i returned it to movie saying \"This movie sucks, don't waste your time, return NOW\" hahahhaa I don't want anyone else to waste a good movie night on this POS movie! i don't even know how it got the ratings that it did, t should be in the negative",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0cdb608cc15646cc8185b3dd9ab630a9",
            "input": "to be honest, i didn't watch all of the original 'howling', but those scenes i saw made it obvious that the first howling was a great movie. so great, that seven horrible sequels had to be made. they started off with \"Howling II: Your Sister Is A Werewolf\". i got this movie on VHS from my uncle sometime ago when he was giving away a bunch of old movies he bought back when Atari was brand new. i just watched it last night, and it wasn't really BAD, it was just weird. i mean, the whole thing with Sybil Danning going three-way with two of her werewolf minions was just out of place and quite disturbing (but kinda hot), Christopher lee about to stab a dead karen as if she's a vampire, etc. actually, this movie was actually like some sort of mish-mash of Dracula and The Lost Boys...except with werewolves, because everything Christopher Lee (whom played Dracula himself) was saying about werewolves pretty much ripped off from every other vampire movie (stake in the heart, garlic, the creature of the night must die AT NIGHT, and the ruler of werewolves lives in TRANSYLVANIA). not much for the acting, but the worst of it came from Annie McEnroe. i swear, at some point in the film i found myself rooting for the werewolves to rip her throat out, because that damn throat always had to say SOMETHING. Anyway, the plot is pretty silly and clichéd, so there's no real point in telling you, you could just read about it on Wikipedia. By the way, the thing that really makes me nauseous about this movie is the fact that it's the ONLY film out of all the seven sequels thats related in any way to the original (not counting Howling IV (1988), which was a remake of the original, or in other words, a sequel based on the same novel). so don't see this movie. there's no real horror, hardly any werewolves, and just horrible special fx. 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a69aa2f81c0d4651ae56dc14a274e1d4",
            "input": "This movie is a very poor attempt to make money using a classical theme. I used to love Superman movies, but this one made me want to shoot myself. Very poor acting, outrageous special effects, and a plot equal to zero. To summarize : Superman leaves earth, because scientists discovered pieces of his home planet, some were in space (duh) , doesn't tell his girlfriend anything before leaving (duh again), takes off in a spaceship (?!?),comes back i think 5 years later, and look forward to hooking up with his girlfriend again (who is now razing his son, which son, in my humble opinion is at least 7 years old). And what about that Lex Luthor ? Trying to grow a new continent in order to sell land ? Please !!I vote 1 out of 10 for this movie, only because i am not allowed to vote 0. If you have anything else to do with your time, don't go to see this movie, and even if you don't have anything else to do, stay home and watch TV !",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-957599c1fcf7412e9e62a75311f3a7f5",
            "input": "Can A-Pix ever, ever, ever do anything right? This movie was meant to be seen on TV in a letterbox format. Since A-Pix doesn't even believe in pan and scan, we see whole scenes where a shoulder on the left side of the screen talks to a shoulder on the right side. Of course, not that you are missing much. This movie is incredibly bad. It's very hard to enjoy a film where characters are screaming at the top of their lungs during 80% of the movie for no reason.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62143bcdfb824cd58574f4243199ab99",
            "input": "Writer/Director Peter Greenaway cements his title as the High Lord of Art House Pretension with his latest exercise in obnoxious self-indulgence, 8 ½ Women. The film follows a wealthy Englishman and his son on their mutual quest for sexual satisfaction, as they lure and blackmail women (guess how many) into joining their personal collection of concubines.Think of any possible way that this premise could be offensive, and chances are Greenaway's done it. The female characters are little more than a catalogue of fetishes for the two protagonists to partake of. There's the Kabuki-obsessed Mio, the ever-pregnant Giaconda and Beryl, who's got a thing for farm animals. Giulietta has no legs and uses a wheelchair, she's the \"half woman,\" get it? Greenaway vehemently denies all accusations of misogyny, but if this isn't it, then what is?The film goes on to eroticize anything and everything having to do with Japan, a continuation of themes from his snore-worthy (but less sexist) 1996 film, The Pillow Book. But where the The Pillow Book was erotic and graceful, 8 ½ Women just gets horny and exploitative. Greenaway's work is tasteless and arrogant in its fetishism, and the only person likely to enjoy watching it is the auteur himself.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d222425a516640d3960347036905ab03",
            "input": "The Lack of content in this movie amazed me the most. First i though that people was going to compare this to Rock On! but i'm really surprised myself to say that this was worst than Rock On! So-so story Horrible cast Ajay Devgan Jamming with Salman Khan and Asin you gotta be kidding me. The music was Okay Khanabadosh was the track of the movie the rest was bad! Vipul Shah hasn't still learn from Singh is King's critically bashed comedy. Now Asin.. where do she come from sorry for Asin's fan out there but she suck*d big time in this movie seriously bad acting she didn't look good at all overdose of make-up! My final verdict go watch Aladin with your family instead wasting your time here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-166cbc123947433c94222d7dbf784eec",
            "input": "In April of 1965, CBS broadcast the first of Barbra Streisand's monumental television specials. The show was not only a runaway ratings success, but garnered 5 Emmy awards as well. This is one of the most memorable moments of 1960's television and (unfortunately) the kind of television special they don't produce anymore. Filled with wonderful songs and a spectacular performance by Barbra, this special is a must view for any Streisand fan and anyone interested in early television.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-946f3d03f82b410f924d7f5547618d6b",
            "input": "8 Simple Rules is a funny show but it also has some life lessons especially one mature lesson about moving on after a lose which was the episode where Paul died which was the first episode I have ever watched of the show that comes on ABC. The Hennessy clan -- mother Cate (Katey Sagal), daughters Bridget (Kaley Cuoco) and Kerry (Amy Davidson), and son Rory (Martin Spanjers) -- look to one another for guidance and support after the death of Paul (John Ritter), the family patriarch. Cate's parents (James Garner and Suzanne Pleshette) lend a hand. I am glad later in the 2nd season of this show they decided to put David Spade in this show since he was done with the NBC series, Just Shoot Me! But all and all this show is pretty good. This show reminds me a lot of the classic family sitcoms from the 80's and 90's that used to be on ABC.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8151b30b66b2458e89e5973dde9419aa",
            "input": "I won't give anything away by describing the plot of this film other than to say that it begins with the return to Israel of a young blind woman whose closest friend and companion has just committed suicide. It unfolds like a detective story as the blind woman tries to figure out why her friend ended her life. As she pursues her investigation and the information accumulates, it leads inexorably to a devastating conclusion. The film is expertly paced and the acting, especially by Talia Sharon as Ya'ara, the blind woman, is excellent. Israeli film has definitely come of age and is now fully competitive with other foreign films, though few have found a large audience in the U.S.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-baa8db0c60a84f5fb6e6da11d9157c5f",
            "input": "A lovely little B picture with all the usual Joe Lewis touches.... people ripping up pillows and auras of lurking fear. Also, alas, an ending that comes out of nowhere, because, apparently, the auteur has lost interest in the movie, or perhaps because as a B picture it has to fit into a slot.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4c816f900cd43b9b5b3e42d7896b1f9",
            "input": "If you're after the real story of early Baroque painter Artemisia Gentileschi, you'll be disappointed- however if you're after a reasonably crafted bodice ripper with an art theme, you've found you're movie.This film is such a foundationally inaccurate depiction of Artemisia Gentileschi's life that it almost made me weep. (Type in Artemisia inaccuracies in Google and check out some of the fact vs. fiction articles.) From a purely technical point of view though, the film was alright: the sets, costumes, and especially the chiaroscuro lighting helped create an immersive early 17th century experience; although the above mentioned GLARING FACTUAL INACCURACIES let it down a bit.I wonder how the director/co-writer Agnès Merlet defended her film at the time? Perhaps she refused to portray Artemisia as a victim, which would've been unfortunate, because lets face it, she was.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18488fd293544650ad9aa2f39047127f",
            "input": "Fragile Carne, just before his great period. Although it is sometimes hesitantly directed, and marred by longueurs, HOTEL DU NORD is full of the faded charm and beauty typical of French films of the late 1930s, as well as a relative lightness of touch unusual with this director. All of his great virtues are here: the cramped interiors broken up by gliding, complex, delicious camera movements; a melancholy deployment of light and shade; remarkable, wistful sets by Alexander Trauner, which are so evocative that they, as the title suggests, take on a shaping personality of their own; the quietly mournful music of Maurice Jaubert; a seemingly casual plot about romance, tragedy and fatalism that casts a noose over its characters; extraordinary performances by some of the greatest players of all time, in this case Louis Jouvet and Arletty.In fact, the film's biggest failing, and I find myself astonished (as someone who usually, didactically, minimises its importance) to admit it, is its script. It has plenty of wit and poignancy, but without the poetry and irony regular Carne collaborator Jacques Prevert brought to their best films, it cannot avoid slipping into cliche (even if it is only cliche in hindsight).Ostensibly set in the boarding house, the film sets up its opening idea of community with two interconnecting tales of doomed love, and emotional, metaphysical and actual isolation The doomed love scenario is the one that works least well. Annabella is very beautiful, but not very good at doing tragic, while Aumont's callowness, brilliantly appropriate though it may be, by its nature obtrudes any real, felt, romance. Maybe it's just me, but I find it hard to sympathise with a couple, so young, so attractive, who, after only a few months, are so racked with despair that they have to shoot each other. Their high-flown lines are rather embarrassing too. Of course, this affair is not meant to be plausible - they are symbolic of youth, hope and possibility being crushed in France, or maybe France itself, despairing, resigned, waiting for death. For symbols to be truly powerful, they must convince on a narrative level, which, I feel, they don't quite here.What saves this plot is its connection with the story of M. Edmond, a character linked to the great tradition of French gangsters. Although we only learn it gradually, he is a killer in hiding, living off the prostitute played by Arletty, having dobbed in his accomplices. In his previous 'role' - and the theatricality of his position is crucial - he had one set of traits; in hiding he has assumed their complete opposite. Living a rather aimless life, he is profoundly shaken by the lovers' pact, and becomes fatalistic, realising the folly of trying to cheat death.In this way - the admission that one is less a person than a collection of signs, and that death is an unavoidable reality the most powerful masculinity must succumb to - Edmond is like a romantic prototype of Melville's clinical killers. With one exception - he gives briefly into hope, a delusion which only strenghtens - if that's not too much of an unbearable irony - his fatal resolve.All this could have been trite if it wasn't for the truly amazing performance of Louis Jouvet. I had studied his theatrical work at college, but this was my first taste of his screen talents, and he reveals himself to be worthy of the greats - Grant, Mastroianni, Clift, Mason, Mitchum, Cotten - giving a quiet nobility to a role which is more of a conception (he, needless to say, is allegorical too) than an actual person. Edmond begins the film a minor supporting character, but emerges as a tragic hero of some force. Like all those major actors, Jouvet's brilliance lies in what he conceals.On a formal level, what amazes is Carne's grasping, ten years before its flourishing, of the techniques of the great Hollywood melodramas of Sirk, Ophuls, Ray and Minnelli. Although his theatricality lacks the fluidity and clear-eyed beauty of Sierck's contemporary German melodramas (check out the masterpieces ZU NEUEN UFERN and LA HABENERA), Carne's style truly fits his theme - that of entrapment, paralysis, resignation.The film's principle motif is that of water - the credits float and dissolve, the hotel stands by a waterway - but instead of Renoir's open river of possibility, we have a canal, stagnant and manmade, going nowhere. The film begins as it ends, and the setting never changes, except for one brief interlude from which both escapees are doomed to return. Characters can only escape through death - their entrapment is emphasised by the narrow rooms they occupy, the walls and frames that hold them captive, the windows that look out on an escape they can never achieve. Any hope at the end, therefore, is profoundly, if romantically, compromised.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b24b89502624f7aab6c1cf011653847",
            "input": "Bad Actors, bad filming, choppy dialog, shallow characters, but then again it was a bad premise in the first place. Basically, an 11 year old who is bullied because he has very little money is given a blank check by a moronic criminal. Of course, the 11 year old happens to possess enough technology and intelligence to purchase a house, cash a check for 1,000,000 dollars, and even foil three bumbling idiots, reminiscent of the three stooges. Preston Blake is an annoying, obnoxious, boy, who decides that, when written a blank check by a complete stranger, he will take advantage of the situation as best as he can. In other words, he wanders into a bank, hands a teller a check he makes in his printer, and miraculously walks out with a million bucks in cash. Preston is also apparently capable of reaching incredible speeds on his bicycle, due to the fact that a man driving a Jaguar after Preston and his 10-speed could not catch him, even when Preston jumped a row of cars.Of course, with every hokey adventure movie, there has to be hot heroine. In this case our hot heroine is a child molesting FBI agent who dates the eleven year old Preston, and promises another date when he turns 17. However, the absolute worst aspect of this film was not its casting, nor its sloppy dialog, such as \"The only other way I could think of skinning a cat is to stick a hose up it's butt and then pick up the fur\". It was, rather, the entire fact that nobody in the entire film seemed to realize that the FBI does not give a damn about random people . What I have failed to explain is that Preston uses the alias \"Macintosh\" to masquerade as an entrepreneur of sorts. Of course, the FBI finds this intriguing and sends our young heroine after Preston, who uses his 11-year old wit to first scream when lobsters fall on his face, then treat her to hamburgers, finishing with a ridiculous romp through a cemented area where water jettison's from the ground. Our heroine fails to realize during this whole adventure that the criminal the FBI is pursuing is slipping and sliding right behind the two, as they make their way to Preston's limousine, complete with a 1-dimensional driver who never fails to provide cheap, 3rd rate laughs that the whole family can choke on.Overall: 1/10 is incredibly gracious for this film. I don't see how it only has a 4.4/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0de795d0d8c0476ebe4ba1172ad16f21",
            "input": "This is the moving tale of Scotland's legendary hero, Rob Roy, and his battles with the feudal landowners. Like Braveheart to which it is frequently compared, it is not very historical. Despite their primarily fictional nature, I rate both of these movies highly and would be hard pressed to choose between the two. The 13 Century William Wallace is, as others have noted, a larger than life national figure, while the early 18th Century Rob Roy comes across as an honourable but ordinary Scotsman.The story revolves around a clan chieftain, Robert Roy McGregor, who lives in a Scottish highland cottage with his wife Mary and their two young sons. As the movie begins, he and his fellow clansmen are hunting down some thieves who have stolen the local lord's cattle. Rob Roy then wishes to improve the living conditions of his people so arranges to borrow one thousand Scottish pounds from a local noble, the Marquis of Montrose, in order to buy cattle to herd to market. He temporarily entrusts this money to his friend, Alan McDonald. When both McDonald and the money turn up missing, Rob Roy finds himself in conflict with Montrose as well as his despicable protégé, Archibald Cunningham, and his sleazy factor, Killearn. Rob Roy's honour is also tested when Montrose seeks to involve him in false testimony against his rival, the Duke of Argyle, whom he wishes to accuse of being a Jacobite.The charismatic Liam Leeson is brilliant as the kilted highlander Rob Roy, an intelligent, virile, and noble hero and a man whose sense of honour is pivotal to this tale. Personally, I feel that this is Neeson's best performance, his brogue (albeit Irish) adding authenticity for the average viewer. Rob Roy is a stubborn, proud, courageous, and honest man whose word can be trusted. He is a loving husband & father, and also touchingly loyal to his friend, McDonald, who is accused of robbing him. Tim Roth masterfully portrays his major adversary and surely one of the most heinous and sadistic cinematic villains, Archibald Cunningham, an egotistical, ruthless strutting peacock. He is very effeminate for someone who makes it his major business to ravish the local women, whether willing or otherwise. The pathetic Cunningham himself constantly refers to the fact that he is a bastard unaware of his own father's identity, though this hardly justifies his horrendous misdeeds of murder, rape, and thievery. Also, he mercilessly casts aside the young servant girl, Betty, after she becomes pregnant with his child, resulting in her suicide. John Hurt plays the arrogant and foppish Montrose, who is eventually implied to be Cunningham's father.The movie is essentially the very believable love story between an ordinary man and his wife, beautifully depicting the passionate relationship between Rob Roy and Mary. Those who question the presence of passion within marriage should watch this husband and wife! I think the phrase used by this pair, 'How fine you are to me...' is surely one of the most beautiful expressions of love in all cinema. The most compelling performance is possibly by Jessica Lange as Rob's wife, Mary McGregor. Lacking make up, she has the pretty but natural look of a sturdy peasant wife and mother. The actress brings great courage and dignity to her role when she is brutally raped by the despicable Cunningham, while the disgusting Killearn looks on. Her dialogue is plain spoken but filled with pride and grace. I give Hollywood its due that for once they showed just enough in the rape scene to reveal its cruelty as well as Mary's pain and humiliation, but nothing intended to sensationalize. Their kinsman, Alastair McGregor, shows emotional anguish when he learns of Mary's rape, and further torment when she swears him to secrecy never to reveal to her husband her violation by Cunningham. Of course this film features the beautiful scenery of the Scottish highlands, also lavish period costumes and appropriate musical scoring. There are no grand battle scenes as in Braveheart, but continuous engaging action and a particularly gripping sword fight in the final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham. This is a captivating movie featuring both tense action and a beautiful love tale.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa8f3a6b98e6403e891807c62fb34e27",
            "input": "This show was great, it wasn't just for kids which I thought at first, it is for the whole family.The first season was mostly about the father looking after is two daughters and son, he sadly passed away in season 2, I Could believe it when I heard it.I am clad they carried on with the show as that what would really happen in really life and I need to mention The Goodbye Episode it was so well made, it must of be so hard for them to film this , you could tell they were real tears in theirs eyes. I am 24 year old male and this episode did make me cry me as I know how they felt as my father died when I was 13 years too just like Roy.Season 2 and Season 3 had great comedy in there also season 3 had some of my Favorites such Freaky Friday, Secrets.I Still think the show was Strong enough to go on, I was disappointed that it ended, it was one the best no it was the best Family comedy show ever since Home Improvement and it could have been the next Friends.it should never have ended but still love watching the repeats everyday.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32ac71e9356044c8bb8647f9dcb73e98",
            "input": "As I watched this movie, and I began to see its' characters develop I could feel this would be an excellent picture. When you get that feeling, and the movie indeed fills those expectations the experience is rare. I had that very feeling throughout this movie. Robert DeNiro and Cuba Gooding Junior played riveting and amazingly strong parts which were both Oscar worthy. The supporting cast was equally as strong creating a winning foundation for the picture to grow on. I can say without any hesitation at all, see this movie it will not disappoint.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc1bbc33a1c7472caf660c3bedc98d91",
            "input": "VERY dull, obvious, tedious Exorcist rip-off featuring a Doberman with red eyes - that's the extent of the special effects in this made-for-tv cheapie. Richard Crenna is about as animate as a chew toy. Very 70's dress & music only add to the torture. Should put you to sleep almost as fast as \"The Corpse Vanishes\", or \"The Blue Hand\". Practically worthless. MooCow says eaghhh what a stinky dog! :=8P",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2371400891d94e0f908972d7580dc6a5",
            "input": "I truly despised this film when i saw it at the age of about 6 or 7 as I was a huge fan of Robin Williams and nothing he could do was bad. Until this. This complete trash ruined Robin for me for a long time. I'm only recovering recently with his funny but serious part in Fathers day but then he went on to create another mistake, Bicenntinial Man i think it was called but the point is. Robin should be getting much better jobs by now and now he has returned to performing the slime that originated with this 'classic'.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2760cade989b41e89c24256b6a09b200",
            "input": "What if a platoon of G.I.'s from the Japanese army were to be send back in time 400 years right in the middle of the feudal wars that led to the formation of the Tokugawa Shogunate? Great pitch right? The movie does exactly what it says on the tin.Thankfully the writers didn't bother to explain the, usually ridiculous in sci-fi movies, scientific mumbo jumbo of time transport. No how's or why's. They just did. However the time transport sequence itself is trippy as hell and quite beautiful, if not a bit dated. Not as silly as one would imagine.The rest of the movie follows the premise to a T. But while it loses a bit of steam with the various subplots that follow the G.I.s arrival to medieval Japan, it picks up with a devastating battle sequence. Undoubtedly it's the main order of the day. The whole concept and by extension the movie itself, was probably originated from this simple pitch: what if G.I.'s equipped with the latest in modern warfare were to fight samurais? And boy does it deliver.The main battle sequence that spans more than half an hour is probably one of THE best of its kind in 70's action/war movies. Not only is it relentless and exhausting in pace and length, it's also a terrific mish-mash of styles and techniques that only unique premises like G.I. Samurai can deliver. I mean, where else would you get the chance to feature tanks, ninjas complete with shuriikens, a helicopter and samurais in the same shot? The G.I. platoon led by lieutenant Iba tears literally through hundreds of extras, gunning them down with machine guns, mortars, grenades and tanks.This mish-mash of styles is with one foot firmly rooted in the sprawling jidai-geki epic of Kurosawa's Kagemusha or Hiroshi Inagaki's Samurai Banners, while the other is in western action and war movies. There are stylistic touches (like the wonderful slow-motion shots and bloody violence) that bring Sam Peckinpah or Enzo G. Castellari circa Keoma to mind. Japanese cinema has always been influenced by westerns and other Hollywood works and vice versa, and G.I. Samurai effortlessly turns this east-meets-west melting pot into an exciting film.The film-makers thankfully take the whole thing seriously and the movie benefits immensely from it. Not that tongue-in-cheek mentality is completely absent, it's just that it doesn't try to pander to so-bad-it's-good audiences that enjoy laughing at their movies. The budget was probably hefty, as it is evident in the hundreds of extras, elaborate costumes (very decent for a production that is not a traditional jidai-geki) and special effects. The camera-work and editing are all top notch, almost better than a movie with no higher artistic ambitions deserves.It's not withouts its flaws either of course. There are many \"song\" scenes, where all sorts of 70's Japanese rock, disco and country songs play over montages (there's a bonding scene, a love-interest scene, a \"war is hell\" scene etc). The songs themselves are pretty lame and corny and detract from the whole thing. Although it clocks at a whooping 140 minutes, it flies like a bullet for the most part. Still some scenes, flashbacks and subplots in the first half could have been clipped for a tighter effect.The cast also deserves a mention, featuring such prominent names as Sonny Chiba, Isao Natsuyagi (Goyokin, Samurai Wolf), Tsunehiko Watase (The Yakuza Papers) and Hiroyuki Sanada, all of them hitting the right notes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a6fe8f5fc43450b8af6ad2aa30abdad",
            "input": "This is an Excellent little movie! The acting is good and the music is fantastic!! Play it on a 5-1 sound system and enjoy! It will never win any awards but its good clean fun for all!! I recommend this movie to all fans of pretty girls funny and hansom men as well as robot lovers everyone!!1 P.S. It also stars Lisa Rinna! Enjoy!!This is a very hard movie to find, It is out of print. I first saw it on Showtime many years ago but recently found a used VHS copy. Its still a must see for all!!!This is an Excellent little movie! The acting is good and the music is fantastic!! Play it on a 5-1 sound system and enjoy! It will never win any awards but its good clean fun for all!! I recommend this movie to all fans of pretty girls funny and hansom men as well as robot lovers everyone!!1 P.S. It also stars Lisa Rinna! Enjoy!! Dave Engle This is a very hard movie to find, It is out of print. I first saw it on Showtime many years ago but recently found a used VHS copy. Its still a must see for all!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e4214426c9d4d90b2e5a1cf97d72abc",
            "input": "By no means my favourite Austen novel, and Paltrow is by no means my favourite actress, but I found the film almost totally delightful. Paltrow does a good job, and Cummings, Stevenson and the one who plays 'Miss Bates' are all absolutely terrific. The period detail is not alienating; the feel of the movie is just right, in fact. But the real 'find' is Jeremy Northam as Mr Knightley. There could not be more perfect casting, IMO. I hated Mr K in the novel, but found him wonderfully human and humane in the film. Northam's good looks and smiling eyes are no hindrance to enjoyment, either! Highly recommended. AnaR",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa8fb95047b3455da17d752c37542511",
            "input": "This is like \"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon\" in a more surreal, fantasy setting with incredible special effects and computer generated imagery that would put Industrial Light and Magic to shame. The plot may be hard to follow, but that is the nature of translating Chinese folklore to the screen; certainly the overall story would probably be more familiar to its native audience. However, an intelligent person should be able to keep up; moreover, the martial arts scenes potency are amplified by eye popping CGI.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ae5d1ced62d45f0946e137da8be3160",
            "input": "Made in the same year as \"Vertigo,\" this is an equally bewitching movie, though in a much lighter vein. It's set in an enchanted New York during the winter: Kim Novak is a witch who casts a spell over James Stewart, but gets caught in it instead. The interesting sidelight is that Novak's rival is played by Janice Rule, who originated the part of Madge in \"Picnic\" on Broadway (the part that Novak would make famous on film).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0da488d42234faaa9a236d436681d7f",
            "input": "I actually intended to see this movie in the theatre. It was actually sold out. I actually went to see Solaris instead, which actually was the worst movie to be released in 2002.Victor Rosa (John Leguizamo), a tough, streetwise 'street pharmacist', freaks out when he sees a kid get shot, so he decides to go clean and invest all of his money with Jack (Peter Sarsgaard). Things seem to be going pretty well until Jack skips town with his girlfriend Trish (Denise Richards). This happened very late in the movie, so had they not revealed this in the preview, it might have been an interesting twist. But they did, so it's not.In fact, there's not a single interesting thing about this movie; everything is given away in the preview. If you saw even one preview, you saw the whole movie, so you might just want to think really hard to fill in the gaps. Go to the website, download the preview, save yourself $3.99. There is not a single surprise or twist in the entire film, other than how terrible the soundtrack is.I hope that whoever was in charge of writing the soundtrack was fired. Twice. Most of it is what music would be like if the only songs allowed to be released were Ricky Martin and Gloria Estefan duets, and (I may shatter the fabric of the space-time continuum with a concept as mind-numbing as this) they both had less talent and musical ability.The acting is at best poor, the script is at best a crime against humanity, and Denise Richards is at best 67% styrofoam and 33% ziploc bag. You know things are bad when John Leguizamo (he was in The Pest!) upstages the rest of the cast with his acting abilities.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2753e4c88de64e349501acd94e5f017f",
            "input": "In a word, this film was boring. It lacked life and spark. A big problem is with the two leads. Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow had no chemistry whatsoever. He was boring, and she was annoying. The visuals were interesting, but they didn't enhance the scenes. If anything, the visuals tended to detach the audience from what was happening on screen. None of the action sequences felt real, and hence, the film failed to create any real drama or a sense of danger.The film had potential, but it needed a better script, better acting, and a better director. I kept thinking during the film, you know, this movie would've worked if Harrison Ford was Sky Captain, Karen Allen was Polly, and Steven Spielberg was the director. Ignore the critical acclaims for this film. The critics I think are praising the film because they *want* to like it and want it to succeed even though it fails on so many different levels.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82d3b489cb5f48a0970a13a4e3cf6cce",
            "input": "What a wonderful movie, eligible for so many labels it never gets: Science fiction, film-noir, with a script and dialog of high intelligence which assumes an educated, cultured audience.....the kind of English language movie only done in pre-1960 England (and shown only in USA art movie houses when it first arrived), and never, ever done in the USA.Main characters in The Man In The White Suit(1951) starring Sir Alec Guiness and Joan Greenwood routinely use polysyllabic, science reference words like \"polymer\" and discuss and explain concepts of chemistry like \"long chain molecules\" and then communicate the importance of these to the average man and the benefits science provides him.The Man In The White Suit (1951) is the opposite of the video-game explosion movies which now (2009) dominate world cinema, and certainly dominate major USA cinema.......it's a carefully acted, intelligently told story delivered by gifted and believable educated English actors (who play educated, accomplished people), and it's all done with comedy, charm, pathos, and sense of irony which ancient Greek dramatists would have approved of.Everybody should see this movie, and someday, somehow, some worthy filmmaker and his supporters should make another like it.It's wonderful.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82d89fb240c54e0ba07ddd93acf0b22f",
            "input": "(A possible spoiler or two)  \"Soul Survivors\" is quite possibly the worst theatrical released movie ever. Nothing makes sense at all, there's some plot about a girl who has strange visions of people who may or may not be dead. The entire movie is just a bunch of random shots of things that don't really tie together, by the end of the film.  Tha acting is non-existent, the camera work is jerky and the script is so confusing, it just makes the movie even harder to watch. I kept waiting for something to tie the movie together but nothing came. Definitely the worst film of the year. -****1/2 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb163473e7f247aa8038c912f1b96660",
            "input": "Since the start of her career in the 70's and vastly throughout the exuberant 80's, Elvira (Cassandra Peterson) has grown into a modest icon and genuine cult figure in the world of horror & bad monster movies. While Ms. Peterson has taken on various supporting roles in motion pictures, covering a wide variety in genres, it was her TV-character Elvira that brought her the most fame. Part of her charm – and respect from the fans – lies in the fact she never turned her back on the horror genre that made her famous (unlike many other big name actors & actresses that like to distantiate themselves from their \"early\" work). I've seen only bits & pieces of her TV performances, but her cameo role in Ghoultown's recent tribute song \"Mistress of the Dark\" really encouraged me to check out more of her stuff. One thing had been clear to me already long before this music video: Over the years, Elvira had become a force of influence herself by the time the mid-80's came around.And in 1988, after films like \"Fright Night\" and \"TerrorVision\" incorporated homages to and spoofs on her TV-work, it finally happened: \"Elvira, Mistress of the Dark\", the motion picture. Now, I had seen the trailer for it already back in the VHS rental days, but it took me until last week to finally see the actual film. A few years ago, I did manage to watch \"Elvira's Haunted Hills\" (made in 2001), but for some reason it didn't impress me all that much. Was it really that forgettable, or should I give it another watch? I actually really do feel like re-watching it now, as this first Elvira film from '88 really convinced me. Though perhaps partly responsible for making this film work, might be Sam Egan and John Paragon with their contributions to the script, there really is no way to deny it: Cassandra Peterson has a great feel for comedy (she also co-wrote the screenplay).When Elvira learns she's one of the beneficiaries of a Great Aunt (she never heard of before), she takes it as the long cherished opportunity to start up her own show in Las Vegas. Out to claim her rightfully inherited money, she travels to a quiet New England town. But the uptight townspeople of Falwell are in for a treat. In less than no time she manages to shock and insult all noteworthy inhabitants of the conservative little town with her (often unintentionally) provocative behaviour. To make things worse, her inheritance turns out not to be what she expected: A rundown mansion, a cookbook and a poodle. But what she doesn't know, and her evil uncle Vincent Albot does, is that her Great Aunt was a witch, and the cookbook contains recipes to concoct the most hellishly dark powers imaginable. And if you haven't turned off the movie yet by the time Elvira has cooked up her first dish from the recipe-book, then rest assured, you're going to sit out this ride with a smile on your face.It's surprising how a script rigged together with boob-jokes, witty one-liners, movie references, inside jokes and bade taste merriment also manages to tell a coherent story. Simple, of course, but coherent. While other movies, heavily relying on gag-like situations, often make you loose track of the story completely (like the \"Naked Gun\" films, for example), this film doesn't. A lot of horror-comedies were being produced during the 80's, but not a lot of them actually worked. Let alone a horror-spoof that doesn't derail at some point (\"Killer Party\", although I'm grateful for this one going completely bonkers during the finale) or becomes too tedious too quickly (\"Saturday the 14th\"). Although \"Elvira\" is more comedy than horror, it doesn't loose track of what it's doing and consistently builds up towards a mildly grotesque finale, complete with a supernatural showdown in the streets of Falwell between newborn witch Elvira and evil uncle wizard Talbot, including a real honest-to-god witch hunt and Elvira's very own burn-at-the-stake moment.I'm telling you, there's no power in hell that could make this movie unfunny. One of the first giggles I got was during the opening credits already, when Daniel Greene's name appeared. Daniel who? Oh yes, I recognized his name (and later on his dim-witted macho-face). How can one not forget Daniel Greene once you've seen... \"Atomic Cyborg aka Fists of Steel\"! But if you haven't seen \"Atomic Cyborg\", then I'm sorry, but you won't be able to laugh with his face in this one. And on a side-note: I never could have imagined Elvira looking this cool while ignorantly driving away from a gas station. Even Robert Rodriguez could not have made that shot look any better.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-336790f244054b368f70c4bdea95baff",
            "input": "Well...now that I know where Rob Zombie stole the title for his \"House of 1,000 Corpses\" crapfest, I can now rest in peace. Nothing about the somnambulant performances or trite script would raise the dead in \"The House of Seven Corpses,\" but a groovie ghoulie comes up from his plot (ha!) anyway, to kill the bloody amateurs making a low-rent horror flick in his former abode! In Hell House (sorry, I don't remember the actual name of the residence), a bunch of mysterious, unexplained deaths took place long ago; some, like arthritic Lurch stand-in John Carradine (whose small role provides the film's only worthwhile moments), attribute it to the supernatural; bellowing film director John Ireland dismisses it as superstitious hokum. The result comes across like \"Satan's School for Girls\" (catchy title; made-for-TV production values; intriguing plot) crossed with \"Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things\" (low-rent movie about low-rent movie makers who wake the dead); trouble is, it's nowhere near as entertaining or fun. \"The House of Seven Corpses\" is dead at frame one, and spends the rest of its 89 minutes going through rigor mortis, dragging us along for every aching second...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0efc460576214c2396e4766432c8803d",
            "input": "I saw this film without to know what about were... I'm a fan of Branagh, even more his Shakespeare' films, and, in the beginning, I saw it only for this... and I finished with tears in my eyes, because the great, great serenity, values, affect and brave philosophy about Life of Helena's girl. Recommended to people who are bored with TV programming (in Spain, at least).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ffc4150fcb7b4243b8ef74758058c559",
            "input": "80 minutes, and it felt twice that long! Brief Crossing is not brief enough. Indeed, the first 50 minutes or so consist almost entirely of a dialogue (more of a monologue, really) of a woman approaching middle age, tediously droning about \"men,\" disappointment, sex, aging, and her recent breakup, to a French teenager she met in the ship's cafeteria.The tedious monologue continues as they go to duty-free shop, and to a bar, where finally her self-involved rant pushes him away. The \"story\" can't end there, of course, so she persuades him to listen to her drone on more as she brings him to her cabin.What little romance, sex, or for that matter, anything at all this film has besides bitter rantings is hardly enough to justify the price of a rental unless you are one of those who love dramas where nothing interesting happens at all. Yes, the ending is very nicely done, but it is scant reward to subject yourself to what amounts to a turning your living room into a virtual therapy session with a narcissistic whiner.Of course, some people like it. I could be wrong.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6001183439e64759afd4f5d3b4cf2247",
            "input": "I stopped watching this POS as soon as the snakes started \"taking over\" the plane.At first I thought maybe it should get a \"one\" for the comic relief. But then I realized I could just watch the three stooges for free and laugh more! Whatever respect I might have had for Samuel Jackson has been irreversibly destroyed. And Hollywood demonstrates once again how removed from reality they really are. When I was a kid we used to catch snakes for fun. The only thing snakes would do is huddle at the bottom of the cargo bay. And no amount of Hollywood cartoon snakes can change that.This movie isn't worth a trip to Blockbuster. Be warned: if you pay for it, the only \"victim\" is your dumb ass.If you want to be really scared, I suggest the Descent. If you want humor, go to your local stand up comedy club. Their worst performer will be a million times better than this trash.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-049d20bef9cd4c0daa849ab21cc5f6a0",
            "input": "Now I had the best intentions when watching this one. I like some of Tony Scott's work, also a friend of mine told me it was a great movie, even though I heard otherwise from other people. But this was simply hopeless. In my humble opinion, Tony Scott was trying too hard. It was all just too much. Allow me to elaborate. Miss Knightley was overacting, and not in a good way. The people who did perform well, were Mickey Rourke, Edgar Ramirez, and Christopher Walken, but their screen time just wasn't able to save the movie. There were a few scenes that jumped out in their originality, yet somehow it felt like they were written by someone other than the main writer. A certain tune was used around 4 times, which really started to bug after the second time. I'm a firm believer of not using the same tune more than once. Also, the editing really went out on this one, as the cutting rate is rather high. Oh, and the repetitive echoing of some of Keira's lines simply sounded cheesy after hearing it for the second, third, fourth time, and so on. Basically, my opinion is that if you want to see an action-flick that is high-paced and \"somewhat\" funny, and you don't care about everything I mentioned above, you might like it. (On a side note: I'm not a Keira Knightley fan.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a005490fc5d946e9a9db05e95e89b77e",
            "input": "...this verson doesn't mangle the Bard that badly. It's still a horrible minimalist production, Hamlet's Dutch uncle is inexplicably dubbed by a Spaniard (whether it's Ricardo Montalban or not is subject to debate), and Maximilian Schell overacts like never before. Most of the dialogue makes it through unscathed, and the fact that the MST3K version feels obliged to point out repeatedly that the speeches are long *duh* doesn't strike me as incredibly humorous. Mostly it's just bad acting, though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2187c504cf6749f39a492faa575e447e",
            "input": "I have to say the first I watched this film was about 6 years ago, and I actually enjoyed it then. I bought the DVD recently, and upon a second viewing I wondered why I liked it. The acting was awful, and as usual we have the stereo-typical clansmen in their fake costumes. The acting was awful at best. Tim Roth did an OK job as did Liam Neeson, but I've no idea what Jessica Lange was thinking.The plot line was good, but the execution was just poor. I'm tired of seeing Scotland portrayed like this in the films. Braveheart was even worse though, which is this films only saving grace. But seriously, people didn't speak like that in those days, why do all the actors have to have Glaswegian accents? Just another film to try and capture the essence of already tired and annoying stereotypes. I notice the only people on here who say this film is good are the Americans, and to be honest I can see why they'd like it, I know they have an infatuation for men in Kilts. However, if you are thinking of buying the DVD, I'd say spend your money on something else, like a better film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02c7ab3eef7b4d09a0c6a196b96f1ec9",
            "input": "This is a small film , few characters ,theatrical.And yet it says something about Ireland that you won't find elsewhere.This film IS IRELAND. In all it's grubiness, it's sadness,it's self-delusion.The Boys , Master Doyle , SP O'Donell, The Cannon , Senator Doogan's daughter , Gar and above all Madge.I know them.I'm in the pub with them or kneeling to pray with them. They are our sad history and they are our present.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49a3a77f83ff4b2fb49d884c8bfdb8b4",
            "input": " What can I say? This is one of the most perfect films ever made. Its a throwback to the glitxy,sterling romantic comedies of the 1940s..but with a modern touch.The screenplay bursts with wit,charm,humor and tenderness,the cinematograpy is breathtaking(NYC never looked so beautiful),and of course there is the cast! Dudley Moore turns in the performance of his career as Loveable,drunken Arthur Bach. He is also wistful and real..one of the film's best lines is his poignant \"Not Everyone who drinks is a poet...some of us drink because we're not poets.\" The great Sir John Gielgud won a much deserved Oscar for his splendid performance as Hobson,Arthur's valet and caretaker.Although He considered it a \"take the money and run role\",He brings to the character all the talent ,experience and bravura of an expert tragidian and a sly comedian. The supporting cast is also out of thisworld,from Geraldine Fitzgerald's sassy Grandma Bach to Stephen Elliott's bombastic Mafioso. The score is also extremely memorable and compliments the film perfectly.The only real problem with the film is the ill fated sequel it spawned.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e53b8e3b1ea042fab520686defae4462",
            "input": "I saw an early screening of this film in New York and I, along with my friends and pretty much the entire audience, were vastly disappointed. The movie wasn't even so bad it was good; it was as lifeless as a snake-bite victim. Samual L. Jackson looked surprisingly tired through most of it and the snake effects were lame. It reminded me of one of those cheesy SciFi movies, except the cheesiness of this movie was not funny or even campy. It all seemed worn, flat, and overtly formulaic. I'm shocked to say I actually think Anaconda was more fun. It's easy to understand that SOAP realizes it's a piece of s*it and plays along with it, but what the film fails to embark on is a script that has any scares of suspense. It's the worst kind of lame movie: it's joyless.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-941d6b62d45e4ac48703e23c48bbb666",
            "input": "It's hard to rate films like this, because do you rate it on production or just fun?I saw this film back in about 1988/89 or so when I was a boy and I'm sorry to say it started a life long fascination with ninjas. The plot is fairly dire and the acting is of course terrible, but there is a certain mystique surrounding the ninjas in this film which makes for quite a good atmosphere. What is important are the fight scenes, while a 'little' sparce, are really good.I must say it was better when I was a boy, only now can I see the glaring points of unbelievable nonsense in the film, but as a \"sit back with a few beers\" martial arts film I can't fault it, it delivers and is much better than the mountains of \"American Ninja\" Style rubbish that was churned out in the 80's with hundreds of guys in black suits but really not very good fight scenes.In an interesting note, Dusty Nelson, the writer and director of Sakura Killers did another ninja film under the Bonaire movie flag called \"White Phantom\" I have no idea if this was meant to be a sequel to Sakura Killers\" but the Sakura clan is once again a main feature, including the same logo and similar story only this time including a White Ninja. This too, while being mostly dire, had a small sense of atmosphere but the fight scenes are even more sparce and to be frank, are pretty awful.So, if you are a martial arts fan then give it a blast to kill a few hours!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9db544d28db43ef9f97b7c9bf019221",
            "input": "Well let me just say something about these actors, they really were a good decision, and from experience, having actors really brings the dialogue to life. If you walk into this even fifteen minutes late, you'll be in for a shock, the movie will have already began. You don't want to miss the first few jokes, assuming you came to not miss any jokes.Wow! I have never seen a movie that ended with such a final ending. Not to be harsh, I mean I loved it, but it just surprised me that it really kept going until it stopped! But i'm getting ahead of myself, lets start with the very start of it, when it began. The plot outline goes like this, there is this man, and not to give away any spoilers, (*Spoiler Alert!!*) (he hasn't had any sex ever(!) they use this plot device to set the story moving, and there are (intentionally or not, it could go either way) some funny situations had by the main characters, some containing irony, and jokes, and awkward situations, you know.The director uses the advancements in technology by combining the film shot on the set and scripted dialog, some music, and jokes to make a funny movie, designed as a comedy, where he takes us on a journey from the opening credits to the end with an entirely full movie in between. I went into this movie expecting to see a funny comedy because of what I already knew about it, and left feeling as though i had just left a theater that just played a funny comedy. TEN STARS!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1a630bd890542c6af6d8eee47efd0d1",
            "input": "My complaints here concern the movie's pacing and the material at hand. While using archival film and letters lends the film a fresh and interesting perspective, too often the material selected to highlight simply isn't very interesting (such as when Goebbels complains about this or that ailment, &tc., or the ad nauseam footage of his small German hometown). Also, the movie crawls along in covering c. 1920-1939 and then steams through the war years. In sum, the film is little better than a History Channel documentary, with the exception that the filmmaker has a slightly greater sensibility than your average History Channel documentary editor and thus can more artfully arrange the details of Goebbels' life. Still, I found it wanting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c44289d9e19449cb89d5ced783e738e6",
            "input": "Tony Scott destroys anything that may have been interesting in Richard Kelly's clichéd, patchy, overwrought screenplay. Domino Harvey (Kiera Knightley) was a model who dropped out and became a bounty hunter. This is her story... \"sort of\".The problem with this rubbish is that there isn't much of a story at all and Scott's extreme graphic stylization of every shot acts as a distancing mechanism that makes us indifferent to everything in Harvey's chaotic life.You just don't care about Harvey. Knightley plays her as an obnoxious, cynical brat who has done nothing to warrant our respect. She punches people she doesn't like and sheds her clothes and inhibitions when the situation calls for it, but she isn't the least bit real and Knightly isn't the least bit convincing, either.The film is boring. It's loud, too, and shackled with one of the most annoying source music scores I've heard in a long time. The final twenty minutes are a poor re-run of Scott's \"True Romance\" climax with Domino's gang going to meet two sets of feuding bad guys who are -- surprise! surprise! -- destined to shoot it out with each other at the top of a Las Vegas casino.Unfortunately, this potentially exciting conflagration is totally botched by Scott and becomes a confusing, pretentious, pointless exercise in celluloid masturbation. This is not an artistically brave or experimental piece; it is a failure on every level because it gives us no entry point to the lives and dilemmas of its characters.Mickey Roarke looks good as a grizzled bounty hunter, but he disappears into the background as the \"narrative\" progresses. Chris Walken turns in another embarrassing cameo and Dabney Coleman, always solid, is underutilized.Don't be fooled by this film's multi-layered, gimmick-ridden surface. It is still a turd no matter how hard you polish it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26216bdf2192438e92c287232ff51458",
            "input": "Although DiG! was being hailed as being closest to what the music industry is like it is highly fabricated. The director has misled the audience into believing the Brian Jonestown Massacre disappeared off the face of the earth post-'98. And the rivalry between the Dandy Warhols and Jonestown has been milked. The truth of the matter is not really exposed in this film.That said this film is endlessly quotable and is an interesting watch as we get a look at two groups of very talented musicians creating their art. One of the best things this film has going for it is a unique perspective between the indie music scene and the larger corporate scene.Recommended mostly for the music and the two fantastic bands.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-489598a310f14b21bd67ea5857966b51",
            "input": "\"Extreme Makeover: Home Edition\" is yet another 'feel-goody', so-called 'heart warming', and out-for-ratings show that ABC has had the time to put together.I understand the troubles that these families go through. For that, I am sorry. But wouldn't you think that putting four wide-screen plasma televisions, three flat-screen desktop computers, an inground pool taking up half of a backyard, and closets full of expensive designer clothing is a BIT too excessive for ANY family? Sure, these families have been through a lot. Sure, they deserve nicer things that what they had previously had.But honestly, the things that Ty Pennington and his crew put into these houses are enough to suit an entire neighborhood.Another thing that really irks me about this show is how Ty and his crew always have something good to say about every little thing that relates to the family, or the family's condition. Telling a wheelchair-bound person that he or she is 'so strong', or 'very brave' really does get old after a while. That may sound rude, but believe me; watch this show, and you'll see what I mean.All in all, this show is overrated. If you want to watch it, go ahead. This comment is just a heads-up for what you'd be watching.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afc34b44bc944a8ab7d65a9b28fc9c80",
            "input": "Great movie when I saw it. Have to say one of my favorite movies of all time. I saw it like 8 times in the theater and got the DVD. As I got older and saw it again I realized that the movie is average. Compared to movies that are known ad good comedys, this is nothing. I mean Rock was hilarious in the movie and the whole switching with the racial stuff breaks a little barriers which is great. Also the thought of how the movie goes is a nice way of thinking. It's like most thought of a movie but also a little twist which is a very nice touch. I like the movie overall so i give it a...Still a good 7/10 for me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b35b5293ddb448bbb1e7819f3c519bd",
            "input": "Bugs life is a good film. But to me, it doesn't really compare to movies like Toy story and stuff. Don't get me wrong, I liked this movie, but it wasn't as good as Toy story. The film has the visuals, the laughs, and others that Toy story had. But the film didn't feel quite as... I don't know, but I thought it was still a pretty good film. A bugs life... I don't want to say this, is a film that I don't remember. I saw it years ago. Of course, I haven't seen Toy story in years, but I still remember it. I shouldn't have reviewed this film, but I am. I am giving it a thumbs up, though it's not exactly the best work Pixar has done.A bug's life:***/****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-897aa0eda87241cfa0b8a3801c076b16",
            "input": "I have been learning about the Zodiac for four years now. And I'm not saying I know much more than anyone else...in fact out of most of the people who know and read and learn about Z, I am prolly the one with the least knowledge...But I do know or at least I think I know that most of the stuff in this wouldn't happen...From how he signed his name...to how he killed people...I thought that Godfather was the worst film ever...The cinematography was that of a five year old...not saying that my films are any better but I am not someone who is making movies for the mass population...The acting I thought for the most part was pretty good really I did...the lead didn't talk that much on camera or at all I forget and don't know because I stopped watching...his voice overs where good...But really spend the four dollars and 70 cents on something else...like a large pizza or something...Until I learn how to write a review, Psycho Phil",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff762a6607ce411986d2f5523d16f901",
            "input": "Not really a big box office draw, but I was pleasently surprisedwith this movie. James \"I did some things to Farrah Fawcett\" Orr co-wrote and directed this movie about an ordinary, average guynamed Larry Burrows who thinks his life would have beenincredibly different if he hit a homerun at a key baseball gamewhen he was 15. But thanks to mysterious and magical bartenderMike, Larry gets his wish, yet soon realizes that his new lifeisn't exactly as he hoped it would be.I must say, this movie really impressed me. Critics have givenit mixed, and I must say the concept is really interesting andpulled off well. Yes, it is a little standard, but packs enoughfunny moments, drama and excellent acting to make it reallygood. James Belushi (I think) was Oscar worthy for his role. JonLovitz is perfect, and Linda Hamilton plus Renee Russo shine intheir roles. Michael Caine is perfect as the bartender. It'sjust a good movie with a good lesson. If you've never seen, Ihighly recommend you check",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23c1cde308754541a9554c188a4d923a",
            "input": "The trailer for this movie didn't do the movie justice. And while the movie didn't know what it really wanted to get across, the first half of the movie being a light, romance comedy and the second have a more serious, romantic drama, the overall impact was much better than I thought it would be. This movie was more of a date movie, but the trailer made it into more of a suspense thriller which it never really turned out to be. Kidman, being one of my favorites, of course I'm biased, but this movie proved to be a light, sensitive, if somewhat quirky movie that deserved better. Three out of four stars. 9/5/02.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00378bdfb63d4ffd995e47b1ffebb420",
            "input": "this movie is similar to Darkness Falls,and The Boogeyman(2005)but it's also much more graphic than both,and not as good as either.it's also slow and fairly predictable.it's also got shades of Deliverance and the Amityville Horror.plus,we get some new age flavour thrown in the mix and some of those scenes come off as a motivational/inspirational sermon.really,this movie is a hodgepodge of almost everything.even though it is gory,the makeup effects are not very realistic looking.in fact they look kinda cheap.aside from all that,there is some really awful clichéd dialogue.and i won't say when,but there is a point where a couple of the character's actions were not authentic or believable,given the circumstances.nobody in their right mind what would have acted this way.once you watch the movie,you'll know what i mean.there's also some gratuitous nudity for nudity's sake.it just wasn't necessary at all.the good news is that the acting was actually pretty good.better than this movie deserves.so,after carefully weighing the evidence,id say this movie was passable,but not good.my verdict for The Tooth fairy:4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0dff5627fbfa48058244aa28793c836b",
            "input": "Absolutely the worst film yet by Burton, who seems to be getting worse with each film he directs. A miserable script loaded with cliches is only the first of many objectionable aspects to this film. This is the kind of movie where every time something happens, you'll be sure to hear someone shout out \"he's lost his gun!\" or whatever it is to let everybody know. Carter is really awful and so is Wahlberg, who can't play this straight and be convincing. Very nice effects and photography, but poor music in the John Williams mold by Burton's crony Elfman. Heston appears in a nonsensichal scene to spout out his most famous catch-phrases from the first movie. Very poor results.If anyone else out there also saw \"Sleepy Hollow\", they will probably have noticed, as I have, the declining quality of Burton's films. I've heard that this particular project was produced by others and that Burton was brought in as director, in which case his judgement should be questioned. But I think he has allowed any possible vision he might have had earlier in his career to slip; the evidence is there in the films. In \"Sleepy Hollow\", he couldn't decide what kind of movie he was making, whether it was a comedy or a real horror movie, and the population of british character actors (Chris Lee, etc.) made you also think it was kind of a monster rally film (those are never scary, as horror fans know). The movie couldn't succeed on either horror or comedy because it was so schizophrenic, and no style had been developed to smooth the two together. \"Planet of the Apes\" is much the same way, and the result comes off more like \"Total Recall\" or \"Tango and Cash\" than like sci-fi. He's also fallen into the rut of so many other \"big\" directors of trying to satisfy the entire possible audience. Word to Burton, if you're out there -- pick something and do it straight, or use some style to peice it all together (as in \"Mars Attacks\" or \"Beetlejuice\") or you might as well retire, because people like me that are fans of your movies will stop going.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5d9a70b601d4d42901f34c730f588e2",
            "input": "After having seen a lot of Greek movies I feel very suspicious against most of them. But after watching this I felt astonished. The movies is great without a big try. You cannot claim that the screenplay is so great or the photography is perfect or something technical. It's a real story and it is happening in Greek rural areas in places forgotten from God. The movie is like a punch in the stomach and I would really wish that things are not like this. It obviously talks about the xenophobia of the Greek people (the ignorance)to anything different. The problem of this guy is not that he is an ex-convicted. The problem is that he is not one of these people. He is different and they do not want them (that's why all the good things he is doing turn boomerang to him). And also speaks about the apathy of the people, because there are some people who are against the hunting of the King, but they do not dare to say their opinion. In the end you can clearly see the hypocrisy of the society being religious and trying to act like God says, but at the same time acting so unfairly to the King. This shows how easily people rationalize their feelings or their beliefs according to the established system. In the end you can have a positive lesson from this very bad story, meaning that you can understand and be part of this society only if you want to become one of them. If you want to remain different and even alone, you are lost (and it is not far from reality) I think it is tragic that the story is real and this should be a bell for everybody. No comment for the main actor because he is already given an award and I believe that his play was great. Small comment for Hatzisavvas (plays the policeman), he is like a dinosaur, he has played a lot of roles and I'm sure that this role for him was very easy but he plays it so great that you cannot deny him a big bravo. I definitely recommend this movie to anybody who wants to see a good Greek movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a645c322d57a4c9a8886eee95cd676a7",
            "input": "My friends and I rented this from Blockbuster because we saw Nana Visitor's name on the box. This movie is a travesty I hope she negates from her CV.The \"plot\" was lose and flaccid, the acting was mostly dry and unbearable in some parts. The movie made no sense whatsoever. The rough plot of an alien parasite species that infects humans has been done many times by films with much better scripts than this, for example, invasion of the body-snatchers and The faculty.If you ever have the misfortune to come across this movie, I suggest you burn it.How it classes itself as a horror movie when there was no use of fear, suspense, gore, terror or any of the usual horror film techniques I don't know, however if you still find yourself wanting to watch this film I suggest you have a lot of sugar before hand, so you can find parts of it funny.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d109a27543c4dc48736f13625509a9d",
            "input": "Out of the first five episodes of Hammer's short-running \"Hammer House of Horror\" series, this fifth episode with the wonderful title \"The House that Bled to Death\" is arguably the creepiest one. As a great fan of the Hammer Studios' Gothic Horror films for many years, I wonder what took me so long to finally start watching the series quite recently. So far, I've only seen the first five episodes, and I have a strong feeling that the best is yet to come, but even if the series stays as entertaining as the first five episodes are, I will be satisfied. Whereas the second and third episodes were great to watch for their morbid and ingeniously dark sense of humor, this fifth entry is definitely the one out of the first five that delivers the most genuine Horror. The episode begins when an elderly man murders his wife out of unknown motivations. Years later, William (Nicholas Ball) and Emma Peters (Rachel Davies) move in the house with their little daughter Sophie (Emma Ridley). Soon after moving in, however, the family have to find out that there is something terribly wrong with the house, which is seemingly haunted... The second episode directed by Francis Megahy is a lot better than his mediocre previous entry, \"Growing Pains\" (Episode 4), and the fairly unknown actors deliver good performances. The film is also well-made in terms of effects, cinematography and score. \"The House that Bled to Death\" is a solid episode that delivers the elements that my fellow Hammer-fans should like to see in a Short Horror tale. The film delivers a creepy atmosphere, genuine scare moments and intelligent twists, and is suspenseful and highly entertaining from the beginning to the end. Overall, this is highly recommendable to Hammer fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5bb8cd5fbfd2493abf59605430366cb9",
            "input": "This movie is so, so, so horrible, that it makes angels lose their wings. Shaq had tried to make other crossover efforts, like his work in Shaq-Fu for the NES and his plethora of unbearable rap albums, and later, the epic serving of horrible film-making that is Steel.There's not a single good thing to be said about this movie. I saw it a bunch of times when I was very young, but I must've been an idiot then, because this movie takes all that is enjoyable about films and tears it apart. It's fun to mock. I saw it on the Disney Channel a while back and spent a few minutes doing that. Although, once the thrill of mocking it is done, you still become overwhelmed by its terribleness.If you see it on TV, try this: consider, as your watching the film, removing from it all the scenes in which Shaq uses his magical genie powers. If you do that, it becomes like a film about a pedophile chasing a kid and rapping to seduce him. That's kinda funny, and disturbing.A horrible example of film. Do not, unless looking to mock it, see this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-784a364cba694258b09dc7f8529543e0",
            "input": "Bathebo, you big dope.This is the WORST piece of crap I've seen in a long time. I have just stumbled onto it on late night TV and it is painful to watch. Really painful. How does something like this get made?? Horrible, horrible, horrible! OOOOOO ..... The toilet is flushing by itself again! Scary toilet! Scary toilet! Scary toilet! 1992 doesn't seem like that long ago to me, but watching this makes it seem like 1952. I mean its horrible. Please don't waste your time on the drivel!Scary old black man telling them not to build the pool in the yard. Scary! Scary! How does this stuff get MADE???",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5074a85786f142a381e22404b60f5b5f",
            "input": "The Fluffer may have strong elements of porn industry truth to it - but that doesn't make up for the fact that it's pretty shabbily directed and acted - and with a very mediocre script.B grade from start to the exceedingly drawn out finish.It would be embarassing to think of the general public being offered this piece as an example of state of the art gay film making.Hopefully it has a limited life in the gay film festival circuit and is allowed to die a natural death on video.This film will open the Queer Film Weekend in Brisbane on April 10, 2002. I think its success there will be strongly influenced by the amount of alcohol consumed in the preceding cocktail party - they're gonna need it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05de1f7752544661b99137f7c86e50c7",
            "input": "I only wish that Return of the Jedi, have been directed by somebody else, I mean, there is far too much ewoks scenes, completely unnecessary. Besides this time our heroes look like different people: Princess Leia no longer fights with Solo, Luke looks boring, Darth Vader is not as evil as before, and Yoda just dies.But there are many extraordinary things going on this episode that i just can't hate it.SOME SPOILERS 1- Jabba the hut 2- The Sail Barge attack sequence. 3-The emperor (now that's evil) 4- The Speeders chase at the endor forest. 5-The Last Battle. 6-The Dark side seduction scene. 7-The return of Anakin to the good side of the force. 8- And the last celebration.Some of those are so good that they can bring tears to your eyes. If some scenes would have been cut, and another director was hired, this would have been as perfect as episode 4 and 5, but still is extraordinary. 9 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afefdba19cb74c57bffed520e6f2fc03",
            "input": "And I thought The Beach was bad, with the difference that this movie has one of the greatest actors of our time, Nicolas Cage. Don't blame him for the awful script, if any one can make any sense of what the hell was the point of that movie, give your self a pat on the back. Its a cross between The Village and a crappier script. Its starts off kinda catching your eye, and then as it goes further into the plot, it just makes no sense, and don't get me started about the ending!!!! What was that? The only thing that makes this movie exist is Nicolas Cage usual great humor, and his ability to be funny in the weirdest situations. If you go to a blockbuster and this is the only movie to watch, save yourself five bucks and just go back home and turn put some thing on fire and when some ones asks you why, just say the stupidest thing that comes into your mind, and there you go!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-baa88da8aa0a42779197c53121623f8c",
            "input": "I loved this film. I first saw it when I was 20 ( which was only four years ago) and I enjoyed it so much, I brought my own copy the next day. The comedy is well played by all involved. I always have to rewind and rewatch the scene where Mr. Tsanders explains why he found water at 6 ft in one area and 227 feet in another area. Also look for Jason Robards father who plays Mr. Retch. Talent ran in that family.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6677cb1d8bd54d5abe92b6f89e04a60b",
            "input": "I really liked this movie. Of course the idea is pretty much out there...the federal government arranging to have a tracking device implanted into the jaw of an small-time thief to lure a more dangerous thief/computer hacker out of hiding. But Alvin Sanders, the man who the feds have \"volunteered\" to be implanted with the device, is a very likable person and it turns out to be a lot of fun getting in his head with him for a little while. Alvin even eventually proves himself to be much more than a good-humored but passive or one-dimensional character when he shows that he is not nearly as easily manipulated as he may seem. Definetly worth a watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2924f2ddada245849dfc8ce8f628a557",
            "input": "I was dying to see this once I saw the ridiculous MEATBALLS poster and divined that it had to be the best satire ever. What a brilliant idea for a satire--the genre is rife. Unfortunately, the finished product (as I think all involved probably realize) is a catalogue of missed opportunities, not-quite-there performances and (thankfully!) a few extremely hilarious, inspired bits. Janeane Garafolo, who is very striking, looks really bad here, probably because she is uncomfortably struggling to make her flat role funny. David Hyde Pierce is just sad to watch, trying to hard to be funny and looking like a Castro nerd. Molly Shannon is so funny just SEEING her makes you laugh, but somehow her segment fails to snowball into something hysterical. Paul Rudd had great teen mannerisms and was sexy as hell, the other guys are also really funny (the nerdier ones). I think the problem is the director just doesn't move things along at the right pace. He starts out very deadpan, and that sets the monotone. But when he lets things get really outrageous (the drug sequence is the second funniest moment I've had all year in movies, the first also coming in a lame movie: Andrea Martin in ALL OVER THE GUY complaining about the movie IN & OUT), it's just plain funny. I wanted this movie to work so badly, but it just didn't. The clothes and styling for 1981 are 99.9% PERFECT, and the very few songs used are also perfect. This ends up as a medium-bad MAD TV episode, complete with frustratingly overlong sketches.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8356d8d8dea474ca41cb0878ec0549e",
            "input": "This isn't the comedic Robin Williams, nor is it the quirky/insane Robin Williams of recent thriller fame. This is a hybrid of the classic drama without over-dramatization, mixed with Robin's new love of the thriller. But this isn't a thriller, per se. This is more a mystery/suspense vehicle through which Williams attempts to locate a sick boy and his keeper.Also starring Sandra Oh and Rory Culkin, this Suspense Drama plays pretty much like a news report, until William's character gets close to achieving his goal.I must say that I was highly entertained, though this movie fails to teach, guide, inspect, or amuse. It felt more like I was watching a guy (Williams), as he was actually performing the actions, from a third person perspective. In other words, it felt real, and I was able to subscribe to the premise of the story.All in all, it's worth a watch, though it's definitely not Friday/Saturday night fare.It rates a 7.7/10 from...the Fiend :.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3664bc4ca46a43f1be5e6c72e55d130a",
            "input": "I have seen it. It's not \"good\" but interesting in an understated way. The boys in it are quite naturalistic but................the graphic/gratuitous final gang rape scene is repugnant and -oh yes- the arbitrary insertion of second world war footage is offensive in the way it attempts to compare real horror with this misogynistic contrivance. Real atrocity is real- this film is just atrocious. However, the film has a look which can draw you in. But it seems to me that is the \"Emperor's New Clothes\", but in fact in reverse. The film looks good, but the direction, story, content and final feeling you take away from this film is vacuous. If a feeling can be vacuous-this is it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccb500179bde429a8698568897c89bbe",
            "input": "It is an excellent thriller from Turkey which can make sense.Great job from Gokbakar brothers.First of all,i want to point on screen play.Generally screen play in most films from Turkey is not enough,but GEN has the best shots to be said \"perfect\".And also transition parts are really excellent.On the other hand,\"Gen\" has a great topic that influence everyone.Especially,a woman ,who wants to be a psyciatrist in a sanitarium ,has a mother that is a habitual insanity.Principal causes and psychological consequences are given in Gen.The only thing you have to do is to combine all the hints.There is an impressive aggression part Doga Rutkay and Sahan Gokbakar played.This performance may be more realistic than \" Irréversible(Monica Bellucci) \".The last thing i want to say is \"Watch this movie,you'll get confused\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8036587a35ce422bb1cc9d14b5283ace",
            "input": "i tried to sit through this bomb not too long ago.what a disaster .the acting was atrocious.there were some absolutely pathetic action scenes that fell flat as a lead balloon.this was mainly due to the fact that the reactions of the actors just didn't ring true.supposedly a modern reworking of the Hitchcock original \"Lifeboat\".i think Hictcock would be spinning circles in his grave at the very thought of it.from what i was able to suffer through,there is nothing compelling in this movie.it boasts a few semi big names,but they put no effort into their characters.but,you know,to be fair,it was nobody's fault really.i mean,i'm pretty sure the script blew up in the first explosion. LOL.it is possible that this thing ends up improving as it goes along.but for me,i'm not willing to spend at least three days to find out.so unless you have at least a three day weekend on the horizon,avoid this stinker/ 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-edac890fd8b44e94b128826a05d8e5f4",
            "input": "Terrfic film with a slightyly slow start - give it a chance to start cooking. Story builds in interest and complexity. Characters and storyline subvert expectation and cliche at all the right moments. Superb New York City locations - gritty, real - are a fantastic antidote to the commercial imperatives of \"Sex in the City\" - in fact, the entire film is an antidote to the HBO/Hollywood notion of New York City , sex and relationships. It's a rare film that treats its characters so honestly and compassionately. LOVED IT! Great cast with notable performances by Steve Buscemi, Rosario Dawson, and her love interest (forgot his name!).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4eec6da5e17744508957ca463d59dd74",
            "input": "WWF Survivor Series 2001This was among the worst events of 2001. Perhaps its biggest flaw was the fact that it didn't follow suit to most of the previous Survivor Series'. There was only ONE survivor series match. And that Survivor Series match went on for 45 minutes. What's more, anyone with a working brain would know that it would end with The Rock versus Austin and The Rock prevailing for his team. And don't get me started on the preview before the event. No matter who won it was obvious that no one was going to f***ing die. There was no need for all of that pointless hype. Whatever the storyline, it was just a wrestling event.And as for the rest of the matches: the first match was Christian defending his European title against Al Snow. It was a good fast paced match and its good to see a heel winning a match fairly. William Regal versus Tajiri was boring and we've seen it 2 or 3 times before. Edge versus Test was good but nothing great. The tag titles steel cage match was the best match of the evening. The battle Royal went on for 10 minutes and no one really cared who'd win in the first place. The Women's title match wasn't great. No, not in the slightest. The main event must have been the most hypocritical match in history. The Alliance lost but guess what, after 5 months every single Alliance superstar returned. The match itself was poor. The Rock eliminated 3 of them and Jericho eliminated 2. The Rock was too caught up with his acting to be there when the invasion began. Jericho was the one that jeopardised the whole match. If I wanted any 2 to be eliminated in the early going it would be them. Everyone knew that Kane, Big Show and Undertaker were just fall guys. 7 matches isn't enough for a Survivor Series. If there's ever a Survivor Series as bad as this again I'll",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cb47a71822e408fa81f52eb7754d2ab",
            "input": "I am so appalled by this documentary. I am deeply embarrassed and ashamed by the way Puertoricans were portrayed. This documentary was not about the culture of Puertoricans. It was about the culture of Nuyoricans. Puertoricans and Nuyoricans are two different cultures. Very different cultures and should not be generalized to the Puerto Rican population. Rosie, before you make a documentary, you need to do the research. You also need to check and make sure your sources are credible. Puerto Ricans are not all loud and they do have class, which is one thing the documentary lacked to show. When I saw Rosie and Jimmie on the View and Rosie on Martha Stewart I was very excited about watching. I even made sure to let my parents know since they love Puerto Rico so much. After the first five minutes I could not believe how the documentary bashed the US and made Puerto Ricans look like a bunch of guinea pigs. You need to go and visit Puerto Rico and you will see that Puerto Rico is not a 3rd world country where more than 50% of the population is in poverty. Puerto Rico has colleges and well known Universities, roads, cars, shopping centers, malls (The largest Kmart and JCPenney's I've ever seen), restaurants, theaters, beaches, hotels(Ritz, Hilton,etc.), casinos, churches, agriculture, Auto Expresso, and restaurants just to name a few. Poverty? NOT 50% of the population is. Puerto Rican culture is about family, music, food, celebrating, and trying to move forward not backward. Oh, and new cousins don't just pop up out of no where. No that is not a Puerto Rican thing, that is a ghetto thing. We are not bastards. Parents of Puertorican descent who would like to teach their children about Puerto Rico should invest in a trip with the family so they can see first hand what Puerto Rico is all about. They will see its beauty, people and culture. Please don't show them this documentary because it will only cloud their minds with negativity. Oh, and please don't tell your American friends to watch this documentary because it will only make the Puertorican people look ignorant.Yes, I am born and raised PUERTO RICAN from the island. Just so you know!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64ecbbac6ea141e18b238a7abbfeca5b",
            "input": "This movie gets both a 6/10 rating from me, as well as a 9/10. Here is why: As a standard horror movie for the standard horror crowd, where action and gore and scares are taken into consideration, this movie WILL bore you. It's basically a family drama similar to what you'd see on the Lifetime channel, but put in a horror universe. The story and formula are age-old, retreaded hundreds of times. If you're looking for any originality in the plot structure or the minimal conflicts, you'll be disappointed. Take away the zombies and you'll have something just as melodramatic as A Beautiful Mind, tripping on cheese. This is the 6/10.However, the basic synopsis and idea is pretty original and over-the-top. It's literally something you and your friends would joke about when you're half-drunk . . . but that joke actually got a theatrical release. The idea gets a 9/10 from me. The only reason it isn't perfect is because they could have taken it even further, but they didn't.The mix of both is mixed. I thought it was funny, but as with most all comedies, it wasn't THAT funny. I had my mom and little sister watch it with me and the jokes we made about it were funnier than the jokes scripted. There were moments of utter genius, but there were also moments of pure boredom.I sincerely hope that other movies take this kind of over-the-top risk and original ideas. I just can't say it was perfect, or even near it, because of the lack of originality to the plot.A GREAT family movie. A great movie to watch with a bunch of guys (or girls). A great movie to watch with anyone . . . but if you watch it alone, it will be a bit boring. Other people always make this kind of movie funnier and richer.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf36e7094c994641af2d40e820f7c2ad",
            "input": "To call this anything at all would be an insult to everything else. Some expletives might describe it, but still too positively. Normally one ignores this kind of rubbish, but it was so stupid that one can but despair. Would have though that even Americans and commercial TV-stations would have given this piece of s**t a miss. But as the Germans say: Gegen die Dummheit kaempfen die Goetter selbst Vergebens!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9040216b114641348f8c02dd3f89c98a",
            "input": "I generally LIKE watching Burt Lancaster's films--especially when he is needed to go nuts with his imposing screen presence like in Elmer Gantry. However, his greatest strength, his magnetism, was occasionally also his greatest weakness as he rarely, if ever, underplayed ANYTHING. And it is this lack of subtlety that really hinders The Rainmaker. Now I understand that his character was meant to be a sort of showman but how Katherine Hepburn could fall under his spell is completely inexplicable. She is supposed to be smart but doesn't seem so when Lancaster's blarney is being thrown about the screen! In addition to this, the story is perhaps one of the most stagy looking films I have ever seen and it is way too obvious that this is a movie based on a play. It just looks like it was mostly filmed in a sound stage instead of in the great wide open West like it was supposed to be.Overall, a very overrated film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-926a1dbfc42644c19d3bdf377233ba62",
            "input": "I never understood why some people dislike Bollywood films: they've got charismatic actors, great dance numbers, and heightened emotion--what's not to like? What I didn't realize was that I had only seen the upper-crust of Bollywood. Then I watched \"Garam Masala\". I could tell from the first scene that this was not a movie I was going to like (the film opens with a montage of the two leads driving around a city and apparently happening serendipitously on a series of photo setups populated with gyrating models), but I kept hoping things would improve. Sadly, they didn't. The main problem is that the two protagonists, Mac & Sam, are completely unsympathetic. They spend the entire movie lying to women--and lying brutally- -in order to get them into bed, and the audience is supposed to find this funny, and be charmed. The boys are unscrupulous and inept, and not in a lovable way. Mac even goes so far as to have one of the women drugged in order to keep her from discovering his cheating. The script is extremely poor, with repetitive scenes, setups that never lead to anything, and illogical actions and statements by the characters. In fact, the characters are never really developed at all. The males are boorish, greedy jerks, and the women merely interchangeably beautiful. If you go by this movie, you would think that \"air hostesses\" are pretty easy to pass from man to man. In reality, betrayal is not so humorous. The only bright spots I found in the movie were one dance number that had brilliant sets, and a few slapsticky moments involving the French-farce, door-slamming aspects of the story. But Bollywood dancing is better enjoyed in movies choreographed by Farah Khan, and for slapstick you might as well just go straight to the silent comedies of Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd, who seem to have influenced writer/director Priyadarshan not a little. Priyadarshan also takes false credit for inventing the story: the basic premise of the plot is stolen from the 1960 play \"Boeing Boeing.\" The original author of that work, Marc Camoletti, is credited nowhere. At least Priyadarshan changed the title for this remake, rather than brazenly using the original without giving credit, as he did in his 1985 version of this same tale. (According to IMDb's credits list.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6b0d69685c34ffba61fdfa0bbea5623",
            "input": "Before I'd seen this, I had seen some pretty bad Christmas films. But once I saw this, \"Jingle All the Way\" looked better than \"The Godfather\". \"Santa Claus\" is a jolly film about Santa helping out some kids, but it almost feels demonic watching it. Santa's jolly ho-ho-ho is replaces by an evil, devilish laugh that I'm sure has turned many kids off of Christmas. The plot of this massacre is very strange, which fits along with all of the performances and dialog. Santa lives high above Earth in the North Pole where he, and kids from all around the world get ready for Christmas. But Santa has an enemy named Pitch, or Satan. Pitch tries to ruin Santa's Christmas by making three boys naughty, and by creating diversions, like moving the chimney and making the doorknob hot. When Pitch causes Santa to be attacked by a dog, it's up to Santa's helper Pedro and Merlin the wizard to get Santa out of this pickle. Everything about this film, along with being downright bad, is so bizarre. Satan dances a lot and he actually seems much more merry than Santa. Santa talks about delivering presents to all the boys and girls, yet he seems to only deliver to 5 houses of kids in Mexico. The reindeer are wind up toys, and when the reindeer laughs, I'm amazed it doesn't bring tears to kid's eyes...it's frightening. Everything is terrible. The first 10 minutes are simply Santa playing the organ while kids sing to it. Probably one of the strangest scenes is Santa shooting Pitch in the butt with a mini-cannon and uproariously laughing about it while Pitch dances around in pain. I think parents are better off telling their little kids about where babies come from, than showing them this. The only positive is it will have you laughing hysterically if you can appreciate bad cinema.My rating: BOMB/****. 85 mins.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50d5d0d15c29434c999bad36999271db",
            "input": "Another of many nearly forgotten movies cranked out by Poverty Row in the 1930's, resurrected by the magic of DVD.Starring stock Universal player Lionel Atwill (often a supporting actor in numerous Frankenstein movies) as a pair of twins involved in a murder racket. One kills the victims (stockbrokers involved in a scam) and asks witnesses for the exact time, while the other is deaf and is proved \"innocent\" because he could not have spoken to witnesses.Of course, where it falls apart is if it was a congenital deafness, wouldn't they both be deaf? Oh, well.Atwill does a pretty good job here, faking being deaf and mute. Unfortunately, no one else here can really act worth a darn.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4bf167fc0314f08bddb6f529b53b0c5",
            "input": "In Holland a gay writer Gerard (Jeroen Krabbe) gives a lecture. He stays overnight with a beautiful woman Christine (Renee Soutendijk) and has sex with her (by imagining she's a boy). He plans to leave the next day, but gets a look at a picture of Christine's hunky boyfriend Herman (Thom Hoffman) and decides to stay to have a try at him. Then things get strange.A big X-rated art house hit in the US in 1983. Why was it X rated? Let's see...there's strangulation, full frontal male and female nudity, castration, mutilation, simulated sex, a scene in a church with a cross that will shock most people, a gay sex scene in a crypt...and it's all a comedy!!!!! Paul Verhoeven made this after \"Spetters\". \"Spetters\" was attacked by the critics for it's extreme sexual sequences and denounced as trash. So, Verhoeven filled this film with very obvious symbolism thinking the critics would think it was art and praise it. He was right! Critics loved the film not realizing that Verhoeven was playing a big joke on them. Still, it's a great film. It's beautifully shot by Jan de Bont (now a director himself) and there's so much symbolism and obvious \"hidden\" layers in the dialogue that you're never bored. All the acting is great--Krabbe plays a thoroughly despicable character but (somehow) has you rooting for him; Soutendijk is just stunning to look at and plays her part to perfection--the little smile she gives when Gerard agrees to stay with her is chilling; Hoffman is extremely handsome with a great body--he deserves credit for doing the church sequence and going at with Krabbe in the crypt.This is not for people easily offended or the weak of heart, but if you like extreme movies that playfully challenge you (like me) this is for you! A 10 all the way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-968297c773cd4744a3fda31ba599904b",
            "input": "I borrowed this movie from library think it might be delightful. How wrong am I!It is such a bad movie that I have to write something about it. Mira Sorvino is SO bad in the movie, it is very painful to watch the scene with her. She is a pretty girl, but in this movie, She is not seductive at all, but I will have to witness her awkward attempt to seduce almost all the other major characters. It is so ridiculous.And the dialog of the film is so pretentious, and lack the humorous fact that make then acceptable.Totally failure.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-128559f17ce742f6a7a74c7423a4c277",
            "input": "My kid makes better videos than this! I feel ripped off of the $4.00 spent renting this thing! There is no date on the video case, apparently designed by Wellspring; and, what's even worse, there's no production date for the original film listed anywhere in the movie! The only date given is 2002, leading an unsuspecting renter to believe he's getting a recent film.This movie was so bad from a standpoint of being outdated and irrelevant for any time period but precisely when it was made, that I'm amazed that anyone would take the time and expense to market it as a video. It might be of interest to students studying the counter-culture of the 1960's, the anti-war, anti-establishment, tune-in, turn-on and drop out culture; but when you read the back of the video case, there's no hint that that is what you're getting. If you do make the mistake of renting it though, it is probably best viewed while on drugs, so that your mind will more closely match the wavelength of the minds of the directors, Fassbinder and Fengler. Regardless of your state of mind while watching it, I can tell you that it doesn't get any better after the first scene; so, knowing that, I'm sure you'll be fast asleep long before the end.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8850ce6113b64b2f8bc902fabfb0cf21",
            "input": "Lavish production values and solid performances in this straightforward adaption of Jane Austen's satirical classic about the marriage game within and between the classes in provincial 18th Century England. Northam and Paltrow are a salutory mixture as friends who must pass through jealousies and lies to discover that they love each other. Good humor is a sustaining virtue which goes a long way towards explaining the accessability of the aged source material (which has been toned down a bit in its harsh scepticism). I liked the look of the film and how shots were set up, and I thought it didn't rely too much on successions of head shots like most other films of the 80s and 90s do. Very good results.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8abce84719f4728b9241040f1595456",
            "input": "Let me get the bad out of the way first, James Hanlon is absolutely terrible trying to act his descriptions of what was going on with the rookie training and events of the day. Really it is in stark contract to the other fire fighters without acting aspirations who are natural in their delivery.That said it is an amazing film that is impossible to watch without tears in my eyes. I am an English guy from London but I love New York and have visited many many times before and after September 11th. It is a second home to me and I can't help but feel devastated at the loss of life but also the destruction of part of such an amazing beautiful city. This is the real deal, in with the fire fighters with everything collapsing around them. I am so glad the footage exists to show people how it was on the day. It is a shame that they didn't use any footage of people jumping from the buildings because friends who were there tell me this is such a major part of their memory, it should be included to show future generations just how terrible it really was.Conspiracy theorists can go to hell by the way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0b6a1ca38d24b989dd3cd08143ad450",
            "input": "A film with very little positive to say for it.Firstly it has zero pace and is positively lacking in any drama.Besides being remarkably slow The Empty Acre seems dedicated to using the same stock footage again and again. I lost count of how many times I had seen \"that\" field at night or that bit of cracked earth.It also has the fundamental flaw of thinking that if the audience don't know about things they will be gripped rather than just confused. So with no signs that there are any issues we suddenly find the marriage is not what it seems to be despite being given the impression that it's fine. We find Jacob is possibly the worst farmer in the universe as he seems to spend no time on the farm and also seems to have bought land with a wholly useless acre. Beth has a key to a warehouse of books? There are innumerable other questions some of which are resolved later in the movie, much later, in fact too late.And on the point of the acre. Horror filmmakers note that large inanimate objects are inherently not scary – and also if they're meant to be an acre big then make them so.There is also a frightening lack of reasonability as Beth (the best performer in the piece, followed by Jefferson – the cop) suddenly appears to be accused of everything under the sun just because she is on \"medication\".With the full ten minutes plus of running round the fields looking for the missing child (did he crawl out of the window? He's six months old) the film descends into badly written scene after badly written scene. Bad plinky plonk \"horror\" music fails to add atmosphere.Often bad films can be amusing but not The Empty Acre, which is just bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4f95f1955434ce585d76e6ba6d33fe7",
            "input": "From a poorly contrived plot line that makes almost no sense to bad dialogue and disjointed scenes to the ultimate downer, bad acting (even Peter Falk can't find his way) \"Finding John Christmas\" is better left lost. Ms. Bertinelli's performance is without depth or emotion as are her co-stars, William Russ as brother Hank and David Cubitt as love interest Noah. Jennifer Pisana as Soccoro, the daughter of single dad Noah is almost unbearable to watch let alone listen to singing. But who can blame them with material like this. Michael J. Murray's script is juvenile at best. Each year at this time I search the TV guides and wait anxiously for some of the really classic Christmas and inspirational holiday films to appear on the small screen. Films like \"Miracle on 34th Street\", Ernst Lubitsch's delightful \"The shop around the corner\" and, of course the 1951 version of \"Scrooge\". There's Frank Capra's classics \"It's a wonderful life\" and \"Meet John Doe\". Hey, forget the classics. What about \"Home Alone\" or \" Home for the Holidays\" with Holly Hunter and a great performance by Robert Downey Jr.? My present to you is by way of advice. Your time would be better spent searching out these films than finding \"Finding John Christmas\". Merry Christmas!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d66bcc6030bd464e88c9bb193ac26521",
            "input": "This movie has a very simple yet clever premise - an unemployed man trying to steal from a convenience store, and the store clerk catches him in the act... the thief runs away with the store-clerk right after him. All the while, the store clerk is in trouble with a low-rank Yakuza chinpira (gangster). Along the chase for the thief, they catch the eye of the Yakuza who's been looking for the convenience store clerk. The story then moves into high gear in the form of a Tom & Jerry (cat & mouse), but is added with the dog chasing after the cat. The entire 2nd act of D.A.N.G.A.N. Runner (can be translate to English as \"PINBALL RUNNERS\") is about the chase, and the chase goes on & on to the point that by the end of the 2nd act, the bum forgets why he is running away, and the Yakuza don't remember which of the 2 guys he is chasing, nor does he remember why they're running away from him.Similar to SABU's later film POSTMAN BLUES, the bulk of the film is simply all chase and action, with plenty of physical comedy and dark humor injected to keep the audience engaged. What falls short is the ending, to which the chase stops when the three men run out of steam, and into one of the most chaotic Mexican stand-offs you'll see on film that looks almost as if Sabu was paying homage to Tony Scott's TRUE ROMANCE (written by Quentin Tarantino).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a04ce82d077942b48dae4275fcc52639",
            "input": "This movie is a ripoff of James Cain's novel, THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE. Apparently, the director and producer never bothered to pay for rights to this story--perhaps the fact that we were in the middle of fighting the Italians in WWII might account for their forgetting to consider royalties! Despite this, the movie isn't really just an Italian version of the Hollywood movie. In some ways it's a lot better and in other ways, it is definitely not.The three central characters in this movie are really pretty ugly people. In fact, the male and female lovers are a bit icky-looking. The male lead is pretty ordinary except for his profuse body hair (particularly on the back and shoulders) and his lady love is, to put it frankly, unattractive. They are a very, very far cry from Lana Turner and John Garfield in the Hollywood version. And the ill-fated husband is really, really obese and loves to walk around shirtless--and his counterpart in the American film, Cecil Kellaway is definitely better looking (and probably better looking than the other two Italian leads, actually). And this unattractiveness is generally a reason I actually preferred the Italian film--since I just could NOT imagine a finely coiffed \"dish\" like Lana Turner in the middle of nowhere married to Kellaway--I am 100% sure she would have had dozens of better offers! Whereas, the Italian wife frankly might NOT have been able to do much better and this made the marriage actually believable.Part of the Italian film's believability comes from the blunt way it handles sex. The sanitized American film tries to make you believe that although Turner and Garfield kill Kellaway, they never actually get around to sex! This is pretty silly and totally unrealistic. In addition to the casual sexuality of the film, it's also pretty casual in showing the seamy side of life--with lots of sweaty people, a fly strip hanging over the kitchen table and everyone appeared to need a bath.The movie is also pretty fast-paced compared to the over-long American film. And what you get due to brevity isn't all good. The film lacks a lot of the style and polish of the American film--with grainier footage, relatively poor orchestration and sets. It sure ain't a pretty film, but the Neo-Realistic-like style makes the film seem more realistic. But it cannot make up for the short-cuts in the plot. Many of the plot elements in the later American version are either missing entirely or glossed over. And the ending seems a lot less interesting than the American film--and misses the entire human nature dilemma when Turner and Garfield turn on each other like rats (the best part of the American film).So which is the better film? Well, a lot of this probably depends on you. As for me, the Warner Brothers film was simply too polished and too unrealistic (though many like this style and may dislike watching films with subtitles)--but it packed a great ending. And the Italian film was much, much more realistic--until the crappy ending that seemed too rushed. So neither film is exactly great, but I'd give my nod to the Italian one being a bit better. It's too bad they couldn't have combined the best elements of both films into one exceptional film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-179561c47f2f4eb3828b3648efb4b82e",
            "input": "The only complaint I have about this adaptation is that it is sexed-up. Things that were only hinted at in the novel are shown on-screen for some weird reason. Did they think the audience would be too stupid to understand if they were not shown everything out-right? Other than that, this is very good-quality. All the actors do marvelous jobs bringing their characters to life. For the shallow women out there, it's worth watching at least because Toby Stephens as Gilbert is the sexiest thing ever. If I were Helen I would have conveniently forgotten I was still married the minute I laid eyes on him...Sort of a spoiler- The ending scene is a funny reversal of what happened in the book.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b98a268357034d4e9bba259cbab86f41",
            "input": "I am Puerto Rican and this is one of the worst documentary of I've ever seen of any type. You can see that the people on it are clueless. They don't know much about Puerto Rico and its culture. They claim to be Puerto Rican because they are from Puerto Rican descendants, but they probably know less than others who are not from there. You can see while they are talking that they are contradicting themselves. If you would like to see a real, and I mean a real, genuine documentary from Puerto Rico, then you must see \"Mi Puerto Rico\". That's a serious, real documentary. Not like this piece of junk. Rosie Perez based this documentary on herself. I thought it was suppose to be about Puerto Ricans. They keep repeating I didn't know. Well, that's about the only thing they got right on this so called documentary. I hate to see such a piece of garbage being done using the name of the Island. It brings down the standards.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d4842d34b964f05a8992f6153b7289e",
            "input": "I just saw this movie tonight, opening night. It was great!! I'm a big fan of sports movies, and this was right up there as one of my favorites. Dennis Quaid was great. (Oh, by the way, Mr. Quaid, if you read this...my sister lives in Austin, where you live.....and she was supposed to buy you a drink once...well...she kinda stood you up...but she didn't mean to! :C) [not that anyone's going to believe that...]) ANYWAY, it's a great movie. Everyone who likes a good sports movie, should go out and see it! :C)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9c50b81cad84b4388c32a8523ae621f",
            "input": "This was a delightful presentation. Hemo (blood) as a Greek god was so well played by the animation with vanity, arrogance, snobbish superiority and innocent wonder. The quote (or scene) I recall vividly is when Hemo tires of \"all this plumbing ... you haven't learned my secrets at all\" and threatens to storm out, the Scientist answers him in a single word \"Thalassa\" -- salt water which horrifies the Fiction Writer but mollifies Hemo and segues so neatly into the chemical aspects of blood. Such a splendid blend of entertainment and information make this a classic as fresh and engrossing today as the day it was released. Stimulating the interest and imagination is fundamental to teaching kids to love learning.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-91f6e56b313141e39054912a9b4a917b",
            "input": "Take:1. a famous play2. a director with now ideas of his own who is using3. a copy of the stage design of a popular theatre production of the play mentioned in 1.4. an actor for the lead - who has no feeling for the part he's playing And you'll get: \"Hamlet, Prinz von Dänemark\"I listened to the radio play of \"Hamlet\" with Maximilian Schell as Hamlet and I was so disappointed. I hoped that the filmed version would be better, that Schell would at least have a body language to underline what he's saying - nothing. Then the set... the minimalistic design is not everyone's taste, but usually I like it when there's just enough on the stage to make clear what's the setting and nothing more. Alas, that's on a stage, in a theatre. It won't work in a film based on a play that actually has believable settings. That the idea for the set was copied from the theatre production in which Schell played the Hamlet already... let's say if that was the only thing to complain about... I ask myself how Schell could get the part of Hamlet anywhere in first place and how anybody could allow him to play Hamlet a second time. If you've got the choice to view any of the about sixty films based on \"Hamlet\", don't watch this one, unless you're a masochist, or really hardcore, or like to poke fun on untalented actors.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cebe0f40f854627b5a1cb5a0401e27a",
            "input": "Anyone who visited drive-ins in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, must have seen a film or two by American International Pictures, a distributor that resembled 1980s giant Cannon Films. Wherever movie-goers ventured, AIP would be right there to supply the latest en vogue titles - in the 50s came horror movies like 'Voodoo Woman' and 'The Undead;' in the 60s were Frankie Avalon-Annette Funicello beach comedies and biker flicks like 'The Glory Stompers;' and into the 70s, AIP churned out grindhouse-level trash like 'Cannibal Girls' and 'Sugar Hill.''Dillinger,' released in 1973, is one of the more 'highbrow' AIP efforts that capture the true spirit of drive-in film-making; it is one of those uneven, over-the-top flicks that satisfied the masses' thirst for entertainment, craftsmanship and common sense be damned. On the whole, 'Dillinger' is typical for its era: entertaining and worth a couple of hours, but certainly not memorable. Heavy on action and short on both acting and historical fact, 'Dillinger' was a fair effort by screenwriter-director John Milius ('Magnum Force') but certainly left room for improvement in his extensive career.The 109-minute 'Dillinger' - epic for AIP's scope - follows the quest of FBI Midwest chief Melvin Purvis, played by Academy Award winner Ben Johnson. Purvis was the investigator who sought revenge for four FBI agents killed in a 1933 Kansas City ambush that helped gangster Frank Nash to escape justice. At large were the men who supposedly plotted that breakout, including expert bankrobber John Dillinger (Warren Oates), Pretty Boy Floyd (Steve Kanaly), and psychopath Baby Face Nelson (Richard Dreyfuss). Dillinger eventually joined forces with Floyd and Nelson, taking along Homer Van Meter (Harry Dean Stanton) and Harry Pierpont (Geoffrey Lewis). He also hooked up with Billie Frechette (Michelle Phillips), a prostitute of French and Indian extraction. While taking place over several months in 1933-4, 'Dillinger' is basically a chase film, with Purvis's entourage looking to run down and kill off the men wanted by J. Edgar Hoover.'Dillinger' has a documentary feel, listing dates and places while Johnson supplies loose narrative as Purvis. Milius keeps an honest Depression look, using authentic fashion, cars, weapons, and buildings; he also sprinkles around black-and-white photography and stock footage of gangster shootouts. The film is never boring, moving at a quick, if haphazard, pace. The action scenes are Dillinger's strongpoint, edited competently by Fred Feitshans Jr in his last professional effort. Thousands of blank ammunition rounds must have been used to make this film, not to mention pounds of explosives. This film is certainly not for the squeamish, with people getting shot and dropping dead all over the place. The violence, while gratuitous, brings some understanding of the mayhem that organized crime dumped on American life.This film never transcends its exploitation status, however, because the needed writing just isn't there. John Milius, somewhat overrated as a filmmaker, places way too much emphasis on action. The action scenes (mostly blood-filled shootouts) are impressive and comparable with any major crime film of its era, including 1967's 'Bonnie and Clyde.' But we simply don't get to know much about Dillinger and his gang members as people; the vital relationship that develops between Dillinger and Frechette is barely touched upon, with the pair meeting in a bar during one scene and cavorting as lovers just ten minutes afterward. Melvin Purvis also seems to wander in and out of the storyline, becoming a prominent figure only when Milius needs to keep the film from unraveling. All too often, the film takes on a shoot-'em-up persona when its characters could have been explored in detail.Aside from this, the picture's main crime is ignorance of historical fact. While many say that 'Dillinger' is just a film, it's films such as this one that create fables and make them permanent. Those with knowledge of gangster history will point out that John Dillinger was not the last of his ring to die, as Milius's screenplay and the film's documentary style encourage us to believe. In fact, Dillinger died before Baby Face Nelson and Homer Van Meter; he also was said not to be carrying a gun on the night of his death, nor did he have Billie Frechette in tow. While these inaccuracies might make for high drama, there is no reason why Milius couldn't have stayed with the facts and written a great story around them.Warren Oates's performance as Dillinger is quite good, although he sometimes looks unconvincing. Oates is humorous and nicely portrays how Dillinger became consumed by his larger-than-life image in the American press; however, we never really feel the menace he invoked in his lifetime. Ben Johnson gives some life to Purvis, suave but rather flat. Michelle Phillips brings emotion to the Billie Frechette character and it's really too bad that Milius's screenplay didn't flesh out her relationship with Dillinger. We never learn what drew her to a cold-blooded killer, other than the stereotype of an easy-going girl who is attracted to men of danger. The supporting roles with Kanaly, Dreyfuss, Stanton, Lewis, and a briefly-appearing Cloris Leachman, are acceptable for such talent.As a piece of 1970s exploitation, 'Dillinger' appears doomed to retail bargain bins, which is exactly where I picked up MGM's DVD release for $4.99. The film is nicely presented in widescreen (a must for drive-in flicks) with subtitles in French and Spanish. Dillinger's theatrical trailer is supplied as a lone extra. Largely forgotten except by gangster movie fans and drive-in enthusiasts, the film doesn't really call for much else in way of supplementary material. For fans of the genre, it's certainly worth checking out.** out of 4Roving Reviewer - www.geocities.com/paul_johnr",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b831ee0c1534c79b2b41ecd1ffe8f45",
            "input": "Now look, I won't lie to you, but I only got this movie for $3.99 from a friend because it had Danni Filth, the lead singer of the ever popular death metal band \"Cradle Of Filth\" in it. I expected of course violence and gore at its finest, as that is what Mr Filth can be portrayed as, amongst a plot line.But dear god, I was oh so wrong. This movie seriously bites, big time. Being a low budget film (haha, wait, make that ZERO BUDGET), this obviously lacks the beautiful Howard Stern orchestra musical scores and the Spielberg special effects. Nope, it's all one camera, bad angles, and bad blood scenes.Take for example when our star and violent fiend, Mr Filth, violently kills a mugger. A grab at the throat, and blood spits out, but oh my, it looks like there's a juice packet filled with fake blood in the man's shirt.To you Cradle Of Filth fans: You'll hear two songs throughout the movie, but with the camera angles and shoddy filming, they drag the overall pleasure of the song DOWN.My final comment: Steer well away from it. It's blood, gore, breasts, and hey, even a shoddy story to go with it. So if you like appalling violence, near no voices (yes, there's hardly any words in this movie), then by all means, buy it. But if shoddy movies isn't your thing, then avoid it. Don't waste your money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d10c254d0f54cf891e30f9a88b0e392",
            "input": "So, every year there is at least one movie, that hasn't got any chance of being a box office success, because from the moment of production, even before one simple shot is filmed, everybody's picking on this movie... There is a long list of these kind of movies, and in the end, some are really bad (Battlefield Earth (2000)), some may have their flaws but are quite enjoyable (Catwoman (2004), Elektra (2005)) and then there are a few, which actually are really great for what they are, but no one admits! I mean, my gosh, just because the wide crowd does have to have a victim each year they can pick on, not everybody has to join them. So yeaaah, maybe those movies aren't perfect, but c'mon, how many movies are? Not every movie is supposed to be a new The Lord of the Rings! Not everybody will enjoy these movies, but I bet there are more than who admit they do. Hudson Hawk (1991), who is just hysterical funny, Color of Night (1994), which may not be Oscar-worthy, but is definitely a not dumb at all thriller with some nice twists, Swept Away (2002), which I thought is a great mix of sick humor and a beautiful romance, Gigli (2003), which was great entertainment with some really memorable lines and not badly acted at all from the former \"Bennifer\"-Couple, and this year it's \"Basic Instinct 2\"! Well, when I heard the rumors of a sequel to one of my favorite movies I was very sceptically, and although I really love Sharon Stone I stayed sceptically until I've finally seen this movie. And really, I was very positively surprised! I can't understand why it gets such a bad press and such a bad voting here. It never simply copies the original, it has a quite clever story, has tension, action, humor and the absolutely stunning Sharon Stone reprising the role of her life! With 47 years when shooting the movie she looks hotter than many stars in their 20s, but it's more than her being beautiful, it's brilliantly acted, with all her looks, her famous smile, the way she speaks and moves... from the very first frame she's in you can't take your eyes off of her. It's simply a pleasure to watch her as Catherine Tramell, and all of the other actors deliver solid performances, too! So I really can't see what's wrong with this movie... it has a dark, thrilling, sexy and gritty look, strong performances, and you never felt bored! Maybe the story isn't Oscar-caliber, but it never even tries to be! It's an entertainment-movie, and by this standard it absolutely delivers in my opinion! So give it a try!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea61dce723f141fd8fad628f612d07da",
            "input": "Didn't know anything about the movie before watching and I think it was the \"no expectation\" factor that helped me endure at first and later like it more than I anticipated.The setting was interesting, strange but interesting. The storyline had gaps/jumps that I think throws the audience off a bit. There's no great soundtrack playing in the background, creating the \"romantic\" ambiance. BUT they all didn't matter.The chemistry between Emma and Luis was simply exquisite. There was some inexplicable strange chemistry that I couldn't resist; I fell in love with it and here I am, writing this review. The subtle love portrayal by the two actors was superb, and I believe, that is the core of this movie.This movie is not an everyday romantic comedy; in fact, not all of us will appreciate it. I had to sit a while and then slowly began to comprehend the little things I didn't catch at first. I cannot guarantee everyone will like it, but I hope YOU do.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28e45032a0c3469e854914d3d9478c6c",
            "input": "Before seeing this, I was merely expecting another mediocre soft core copy of the much imitated \"Emmanuelle\" series starring Sylvia Kristel. It was really surprising how good this one turned out to be. It actually has a story, and it is very romantic indeed. What makes 'Yellow Emanuelle' so good is it's leading heroine, the beautiful and exotic Chai Lee. She plays her character, Emy Wong so sweetly, that the viewer just has to feel something for her when her dreams crash down around her. Emy Wong is a much-respected doctor, statuesque, with a regal quality. She comes from an important old family, where ancient customs are still practiced. Emy will remain a virgin until she is married, to a man she has never met. The beautiful doctor seems OK with this arranged marriage. It is simply how it is done in her world. However she does not plan on meeting and falling in love with the British pilot who ends up under her care in the hospital where she works. Emy decides to do away with custom, and she gives herself to her Western man. But only after a very long courtship, as Doctor Wong is anything but an easy woman. Her pilot, George, is a good guy, and promises to marry Emy, so that she doesn't lose her respectability and place in her rigid society. Neither one counts on a third party, one Ilona Staller, who destroys their relationship through a series of vicious games. Emy is made to believe that she has been abandoned by her man, that he only played a game with her in order to sleep with her. Her place in society is gone, she has been debased. The film takes a surprisingly dramatic and depressing turn as this proud, elegant woman gives up her career, as well as a sweet relationship with her caring father, and succumbs to a life of drinking and prostitution. I was surprised to find myself so engrossed in this operatically tragic tale. I was on the edge of my seat when George blows back into town, and unknowingly walks into a hotel where his beautiful Emy is working as a prostitute! Classic drama. I imagine many viewers were a bit frustrated by all this drama. One would expect lots of sex and nudity here, but there is not much. And when there is, it is totally non-exploitative, and very artsy and soft-core. If you are a fan of the first Emmanuelle, with Sylvia Kristel, than you most likely will appreciate this, lesser known classic. I was especially impressed by the extra attention to details. The whole segment where Emy takes George to her fathers house on the island is really nice. Her father shows George, and the viewer his impressive collection of Bonzai trees. He has a whole miniature forest built out of these amazing trees. Totally unexpected. After catching it on late night cable TV years ago, I spent much time searching the internet for a copy of the film. When i finally got it i found that the video version was longer. More sex? No, more melodrama. For the DVD release there is a subplot about George suddenly keeling over with some unknown deadly disease! I actually preferred the cable version better. I am glad that this rare gem has been released finally on DVD. I must also mention the beautiful cinematography and the bizarre and catchy 70's soundtrack. While watching this one you just get the feeling that you are watching something very rare, and quite special. I recommend it to thoughtful viewers who don't need sex and violence to maintain their interest.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-07864eb38ca64eeab8ec8f605795d054",
            "input": "Discovery Channel/Animal Planet must be ashamed of themselves. This Fantasy is modeled after the \"Walking with Dinosuars\" series. Even though this is 100% fantasy it is presented in the same factual and archaeological way. Even mixing the fantasy dragons with T-rexs and the extinction of the dinos. Added to being shown on an educational channel instead of say Sci-Fi it gives an air of factual authenticity to this show.On its own the show is about an 7.5/10 far as entertainment goes. But the way in which it is presented I have to give it a 1/10. Don't get me wrong I have no problem with fantasy but they way they put this out is so wrong. I can really see young kids and slow adults believing that they did find a dragon and that this is real.I also think this weakens the great \"Walking with Dinosuars\" series because now you have to view that with a mind of how much is fantasy on that mini-series.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9e1f344f6334f36a700221d186a6a8b",
            "input": "I suppose that today this film has relevance because it was an early Sofia Loren film. She was 19 years old when the film was made in 1953.I viewed this film because I wanted to see some of Sofia Loren's early work. I was surprised when she came on camera having had her skin bronzed over in brown makeup to resemble an Ethiopian princess. Surely, today, this would have been viewed as a slur and to be avoided in movie making. It actually became annoying watching Ms. Loren in skin color paint throughout the film.Yes, this film would have been better made if the real opera singers had made this movie. Then, the singing and the actual facial gestures of the real artists would have been apparent. I discount the comments by others about whether the real opera singers are older and heavier in weight.As beautiful as Ms. Loren was at age 19 and still is today, the film would have been better received as though it were being performed on the stage. After all, we don't see beautiful young people on stage with \"old opera singers\" back stage singing from behind the curtain! Do not discount the success of using heavy-weight opera singers. One only has to refer to the most artistically produced television commercial for the J. G. Wentworth Company with the opera singers on stage singing so professionally the praises of the company's product. This is one of the best and entertaining TV commercials produced to date.The quality of the movie print also makes this production of a somewhat lesser quality. The color ink has faded much and that can not be helped.To improve this film on DVD the production company should add English language subtitles so that we, who do not speak Italian, can know what the lyrics are saying. It would help the story and teach it more than the narrator giving 30 seconds of introduction to the scenes.Watch this film not because of the story of Aida nor the fact that this is an opera. Aside from Ms. Sofia Loren none of her co-actors are known nor remembered by this writer. Instead, watch this movie if you are a fan of Ms. Loren and wish to see her at age 19 -- no matter what the production is.Larry from Illinois",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e774739c9724e9ba30aa9c22407dcc3",
            "input": "Inept, boring, and incoherent supernatural \"thriller\" in which college student Cassie (Melissa Sagemiller) is the constant victim of hallucinations and nightmares after a car accident claims the life of her boyfriend Sean (Casey Affleck).I can't begin to tell you how bad this is...nothing of any importance ever happens nor is there ever any sort of actual entertainment value. I did not like this cast in this particular film - they are all sadly unconvincing (then again, their roles are no good). To promote this as a horror film is a joke. Where are the scares? There's no sense or suspense - there are a few good songs but that's about it.How on Earth did this project get the green light? Writer-director Steve Carpenter has no discernible vision or talent that I can sense. Worst of all, the conclusion really makes the whole movie pointless.The alleged \"killer cut\" that I watched is 86 minutes of pure tedium.1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cdf2314730d948d1858678736b23a3ee",
            "input": "I have not seen the first film and if it anything like this have no great desire to. Having just watched it a few hours ago I am struggling to remember a thing about it. From what I remember it's main plot seems to be a group of very annoying people stay at a house with that dodgy old woman from Friday the 13th and are stalked by plank of wood man.Some people die, the film ends, I am starting a law suit against the person who sold me this film as I want compensation for the missing time in my life. I will pay u £1 to take this film off my hands......oh wait I already gave it away to a \"friend\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c62f5d7836a4875b70813685a0b53ca",
            "input": "***SPOILERS*** On of the first WWII movies coming out of Hollywood that shows how the war effected those GI's, or in this case US Marines, who fought in it.21 year old Al Schmid, John Garfield, was just starting to live with a well paying job-earning some $40.00 a week-at the local steel mill and girl Ruth Hartley, Elenore Parker, whom he was about to marry when the Japs spoiled everything for him, and millions of likewise young Americans, by attacking the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor. Doing his duty as an American citizen Al immediately joined the US Marine Corps hoping to get back at the Japs knowing, correctly as it was to turn out, that the Marines would be the first American combat units to get a crack at them.Al finally got his chance when his unit, the 1st Marine Division, landed on August 7, 1942 at Guadalcanal in the far flung Solomon Islands to engage the Japanese who were were in control of it. It was during the battle of the Ilu River that Al almost single handed stopped a massive Japanese Banzai attack holding off, with his machine gun, wave after wave of suicide attacks by the determined Japs until help, or reinforcements, finally arrived. It was during the bloody fighting Al was hit in the face by a Jap grenade that ended up blinding him.Now back in the states convalescing at a naval hospital Al is faced with something far more harder to overcome then battling a battalion size attack of Japanese or German soldiers. He's faced with a future where he'll never see again and having to depend on others to look after, or for, him!We get to see in the film \"Pride of the Marines\" Al battle himself far harder then he did the Japanese troops on Guadalcanal in just coming to terms with his disability. Not wanting anyone, especially his girlfriend Ruth, to feel sorry for him Al in fact is the one who feels sorry for himself more then anyone else in the movie. It's with the help of Navy Nurse Virginia Pfeiffer, Rosemary DeCamp, and Ruth together with his US Marine buddy Lee Diamond, Dane Clark, that in the end gives Al the courage to face his blindness with the same strength that he faced wave after wave of Japanese troops on Gudalcanal. A courage Al thought he lost back in that God-forsaken island hell in the South Pacific.Based on the true story of US Marine Sergeant Albert Schmid \"Pride of the Marines\" showed what we were to expect from the tens of thousands of wounded US Servicemen coming back from the war. We get to see how it in many ways was far more difficult for those fighting the war to adjust to a peacetime America when they left something, like in the case of Al Schmid, behind on the battlefield. Al's battle with his personal demons was a lot harder then the Japanese that he fought in that they were part of him and thus had to fight himself in order to overcome and eventually defeat them. Despite the help that he got from both Nurse Virginia and his girlfriend Ruth as well as his Navy doctor-who has a striking resemblance to actor Gregory Peck-it still was up to Al to overcome the fears that he faced. Fears which he and only he had to both battle and overcome, like he was told by everyone in the movie, all by himself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55af958e90994ab5873ca167ef481ec3",
            "input": "Joseph H. Lewis was one of the finest directors of film noir. This is surely his best.It doesn't have some of the standard features of what we now call film noir. Though American-made, it is set entirely in England. It lacks gangsters. It lacks a femme fatale. It does not lack crime.The title character answers an ad. She is overjoyed that she'll be making some money as a secretary. Instead, she wakes up days later as the pawn in a frightening plot. Only a very strong person could survive such a terrifyingly unsettling ordeal. And Nina Foch gives the sense of a strong woman as Julia.Part of the excitement comes from casting against type: Ms. Foch has an elegant manner. She is no screaming, cowering victim. She is actually a bit icy and patrician, albeit impecunious. This makes her character's plight all the more believable.Surely the single most fascinating element is the casting of Dame May Witty. She was (and is) probably most famous for the charming title character in \"The Lady Vanishes.\" She has a sweet manner and a harmless, slightly dithering manner. But here she is far from a heroine.George Macready is excellent as her extremely troubled son. The whole cast, in fact, is superb.It seems that this famous and brilliant movie was made almost by accident. Undoubtedly the director knew exactly what he was doing. But he did it on a low budget. That is the thrill and charm of film noir, the real film noir: It is small, convincingly lowlife, and, in this case, unforgettable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d92120c7bec84c22b8da88981f323afa",
            "input": "This for me was a wonderful introduction to the talents and beauty of Marion Davies. She is not only gorgeous but hilarious in this film. (I believe that Lucille Ball may have modeled her later career on Davies' style, that could be termed \"zany beauty\".) Vidor's direction is light but sure-handed, the story is a chestnut of course but the acting is marvelously contemporary, and the star-watching element for fans of the silent era, with many cameos, adds to the overall fun. It combines the elements of slapstick with adult drama and good old timeless romance quite well. For all movie fans who have a knee-jerk reaction to watching silent films, sit through this one and it may change your attitude. ",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26d17639b9004436a7eb8fbc87df9275",
            "input": "My Take: Makes use of its familiar plot with fine performances and a few genuine moments of excitement. The plot is familiar. An innocent man is framed for a plot to assassinate the President of the United States, the first traitor in the United States Secret Service. As his fellow secret-service agents pursue him, he tries to prove his innocence. Of course we know his innocent, and the real culprit is just around the corner, but I was still entertained by THE SENTINEL. In this time where thrillers are reduced to being too ludicrous and too abundant in action sequences, THE SENTINEL is a good lick-back to all those good old-fashioned political crime thriller. The familiar plot is elevated by neat thrilling sequences and terrific performances.Michael Douglas, the perfect man for the job, is long-running Secret Service agent Pete Garrison, who is framed for being part of a plot to assassinate the President. Former colleagues in the secret service (Kiefer Sutherland and Eva Longoria) pursue Harrison while he tries to find out who is behind the possible assassination and the traitor in the Secret Service. This leads to a lot of chase scenes that, surprisingly (and thankfully), are never unbelievable. The screenplay also offers a subplot involving Garrison having an affair with the First Lady (played by Kim Basinger). This thankfully wasn't unnecessary like most subplots are to these kinds of films.The films director is Clark Johnson (S.W.A.T.) who manages to make the film look good. Although many have criticized it as \"should have been a TV movie\", I must disagree. Agreed, this is not a perfect film, and much of it is inspired from other action thrillers and political intrigues like IN THE LINE OF FIRE or an episode from the TV series 24 (which this film closely resembles when it comes to style and star Sutherland), but even so, this film takes its plot into serious heights and doesn't abandon even its smaller details. The performances are terrific (with a top-notch cast, its bound to be, even with the by-the-numbers script.All-in-all, I award it ***1/2, not perfect, but not far from it.Rating: ***1/2 out of 5.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84d1f65cf1e247b687c0912467c8c3fa",
            "input": "I don't know how anyone could hate this movie. It is so funny. It took a unique mind to come up with this storyline. It's not your typical alien movie. These aliens are so stupid and confused. You need to rent it at least once.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8ca285b40864d59b88519ebda88e97a",
            "input": "Don't waste your time or money on this one. The half decent cast might fool you into thinking that this teen-thriller, whilst hardly about to break any records, might lightly entertain for 80 minutes.It won't.It won't make you scared, laugh, cry or even challenge your intellect. It will leave you wondering how on earth this movie ever finished production. Yes, it really is that poor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0027b7b6bc6b4a4eae6d3558d5b72afc",
            "input": "The movie is basically a boring string of appalling clichés which do not offer a real cross-cultural insight. The Middle Eastern leg of the journey is described in a particularly irritating way: there obviously are mud brick villages, dirt tracks in the middle of the desert, women clad in black robes and belly dancers. I wonder how camels and date palm trees were missing from the whole picture. The personality of the two main characters is very clumsily sketched and many situations are hardly credible. The original idea might have been interesting, but at the end of the day if you are looking for cultural insight, you should skip this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd06416b73074f14a7213aeb9c350963",
            "input": "I wanted to see an action comedy with a satirical twist (as this film was touted) but this one failed me miserably. For me, the plot was a bit confusing to follow and I rapidly lost interest. I feel so sorry for John Cusack, Joan Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Marisa Tomei and Hillary Duff for getting involved with this movie. I'll remain a fan of all of them but only time can heal my feeling over this one. The one thing I can say positively about the film is that Hillary played Yonica's character so well that I didn't even recognize Hillary; it took me a few scenes to realize that it was her. Luckily I rented it for $1 through Red Box; had I paid to see it in on the big screen, I would be really fuming!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa39f4af94604b44acf8f78c713452b0",
            "input": "Pretty disappointing prequel to the first two films, it's got none of the suspense of the first nor the interest of the second. By concentrating on the guys who 'run' the cube, it basically takes away any of the sense of tension inside the cube, as we simply don't care about the characters inside. Much of the film is simply boring, and it only becomes truly terrible with the introduction of the glass-eyed superior and the green-eyed crazy marine. After that, though, it just descends into over-the-top unintentional hilarity. The ending is fitting though, tying it back into the first one in an indirect way. The script is terrible, the acting mediocre at best, and the direction unimpressive. A much lesser follow-up.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c937eeb089d4748aa962d943b56d9d9",
            "input": "I happen to like Leslie Howard, in his better films. Yet, for some reason, his performance in OF HUMAN BONDAGE never has moved me tremendously. I first saw the film on my college campus in 1972 and the reviewer in the college newspaper made the comment that in the 1930s and 1940s Howard played the roles supposedly later picked up by Dirk Bogard as the man who was born to be betrayed. This is not usually the case (off hand I think of Ashley Wilkes as a man who might be betrayed, if he and Scarlett O'Hara were meant to be an item by Margaret Mitchell - but Ashley loved Melonie, not Scarlett). Howard could play any type, and a role like R. J. Mitchell or Professor Henry Higgins is not one who is betrayed.*(*One can make the case that Philip Armstrong Scott is betrayed by the two strangers he shows hospitality to in 49TH PARALLEL, but they are Nazis who consider him - a liberal, westerner, Canadian - fair game to double cross in wartime. It isn't the same as emotional betrayal, and Howard does not shrivel up as a result, but faces the Nazis and captures one after beating him up.) I think what the reviewer meant was that Howard could be soulful - or try to be soulful. Witness his poet - dreamer - wanderer in THE PETRIFIED FORREST. But that character was not betrayed, except by history perhaps (as he feels his type is as out of date as the gangster played by Humphrey Bogart). The character of Philip Carey in Somerset Maugham's OF HUMAN BONDAGE is soulful too. He is sensitive for several reasons. He has an interest in art and tries to become a painter - but unlike the artist Strickland in THE MOON AND SIXPENCE he has no real talent. So he decides to concentrate on medical studies, accentuated by a club foot condition he has. Here he is a man with low self-esteem who is set up to be betrayed.Philip finds that betrayal in the form of Mildred a Cockney waitress (Bette Davis) who is mercenary and as selfish as they come. Why Philip falls for her is not really addressed in the film, but he does find the woman fascinating. And she finds him an easy meal ticket. Ironically in being so captivated by this slut, Philip fails to notice two other women who are interested in him (Kay Johnson and Frances Dee), and are more fit to be his mate. He also keeps finding himself forgiving Davis when she has affairs with other men (Alan Hale and Reginald Denny - the latter a friend of Howard's). Although Howard's performance captures the doormat tendency of Philip towards Mildred, he really does not show enough passion (until late in the movie, when he turns on her). That is why I find I never cared for his performance here - it lacks any reality. His later tortured insistence in GONE WITH THE WIND that he loves Olivia De Haviland, not Vivian Leigh, has more consistency with a man in love. But the performance of Davis as Mildred makes the film important. She had a wide variety of parts up to 1934, like the girlfriend of the deaf pianist in THE MAN WHO PLAYED GOD or the spoiled heiress who gets murdered in FOG OVER FRISCO or the mouse-like secretary in THREE ON A MATCH. As Mildred she finally showed she could be a major actress by playing a selfish bitch.Curiously her performance was not all of one note. While she uses and abuses Howard for two thirds of the film, culminating in that famous scene where she shows how disgusted his kissing of her made her, her last scenes show she too could fall apart due to her health deteriorating, and her inability to keep any honest jobs. When Howard rejects her the viewers fail to note how equally vicious he becomes (he asks what happened to her baby - she tells him the baby died and Howard says brusquely that he is glad, which is hardly the response she expects). In the end Howard does finally get his life in order, but Mildred ends a casualty (ironically her death discovered by her old boyfriend Denny on a medical call). The Motion Picture Academy of Arts and Sciences did fail to nominate Davis in 1934 (leading to the largest write - in campaign in it's history, and a permanent change in it's rules), but Davis was established as a star. In one year she won the Oscar as Joyce Heth in DANGEROUS. And in two years she co-starred with Howard again (as equal stars) in THE PETRIFIED FORREST.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68dc521dd7344d92ad0ddcb87cee0495",
            "input": "The 12th animated Disney classic is a reasonable movie told through a simple story. Even though a little dated, it deserves a place in the list of Disney classics.It's not among Disney's top works, but is satisfying. One of Disney's most \"simple\" works, yes, but keeps a certain magic and enchantment (which old Disney is well known for). This was an important movie because it saved Disney from a delicate situation. If this was a failure, there wouldn't be any more Disney animated classics.\"Cinderella\" is somehow like a return to Disney's 1st animated classic (\"Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs\") because it brings back the fairy tale genre. It's not clear where the story takes place, but I suppose it's somewhere in France because this is based in a tale by Charles Perrault.There are plenty of likable characters, such as Cinderella, the Prince, Bruno (the dog), Jaques and Gus (the two main mice), the Fairy Godmother (for a fairy she sure is funny), the birds, the King and the Grand Duke.Jaques is very smart and amusing. I love his voice. Really has that mouse-like quality. Gus might not be that smart, but he's humorous.The King is hilarious, but I think that what makes him so funny is his short temper. The Grand Duke is a very cool chap and funny too. They're two of my favorite characters in this film and responsible for many of the most amusing moments.The Prince is certainly one of the most charming in Disney. No doubt that Prince Philip from \"Sleeping Beauty\" was inspired on this prince, because they are very similar-looking.On the other hand, Lady Tremaine (the stepmother) isn't supposed to be likable because she's cold, jealous, bitter and cruel. Her daughters (Anastacia and Drizella) aren't much better than her. However, the stepmother isn't as annoying as her ugly and selfish daughters. Cinderella, the main character, has nothing to do with them. Cinderella is gentle, kind, pretty and lovable. By the way, I think her beautiful pink dress is much nicer than the one given by the Fairy Godmother.Lucifer (the cat) is hilariously malicious. The way he walks, sticking up his nose in the air and those arrogant and snobbish facial expressions make him funny. Ironically he's very much like the stepmother when it comes to personality. He always agrees with the stepmother's attitudes towards Cinderella. Lucifer has the right name for him because he's such a devilish and mean cat. Yet, there's nothing annoying about him.The soundtrack is simple but pleasant, although not among Disney's best. The best song in this movie is \"Bibiddi Bobiddi Boo\".There are plenty of well known talented voice actors in this, such as James MacDonald, Marion Darlington, Eleanor Audley, Verna Felton and Luis Van Rooten.Despite being simple-looking, the movie has good artwork, as well as its nice details, although never something \"out-of-this-world\". However, the King's palace is a spectacular masterpiece, being truly majestic and colossal.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-690d5ecb54fc409eb782c15a472142c2",
            "input": "Tony Arzenta, a Sicilian hit-man or professional killer, decides to leave the business, and his former employers do not agree.In terms of content, this highly enjoyable action movie doesn't have one; in terms of sheer amusement, it is fun—it is very melodramatic, violent, quite brutal, the car chases are notable. \"Arzenta\" is an unpretentious ,yet very likable film—much better than the current Hollywoodian trash that gets the same label. It comes from Delon's rather short flirting with the Italian B cinema of the '70s. It carefully uses Delon's tough guy persona, belonging to the gallery of bad-ass thugs that he made in his youth. I enjoyed very much the fact that Delon made this film, that he had a role in a good Eurocrime flick.The score is very fine, with a good introductory song—making felt that gusto that the Italians had for the film considered as a synthetic work,where the musical art has an important part.In Tony Arzenta/ Big Guns/ No Way Out the very appealing Erika Blanc (31 years in '73) appears as an unnamed hooker.Meanwhile, Arzenta's girlfriend, Sandra,is played by Carla Gravina (a starlet that practically left the movies after '75).\"Arzenta\" is interestingly filmed—an ambitious visual conception, some Expressionistic peculiar angles. The movie was directed by the prolific Duccio Tessari,the one who made also Zorro (the Delon comedy).Needless to mention that these two films,Tony Arzenta (1973) and Zorro ,are very unlike.The first one is a bloody melodramatic violent action movie--the second is a lighthearted comedy,more kindred to a spoof,though remarkably coherent and skilfully made.Duccio Tessari directed films like Kiss Kiss... Bang Bang (1966),Sons of Satan ,The Bloodstained Butterfly ,¡Viva La Muerte... Tua! ,Tough Guys (1974),Safari Express (1976) ,etc..",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a2a8ec3979b94200aa66df2d6e651dc2",
            "input": "First off, I'd like to say that the user comments alone left me with tears in my eyes from laughing. One comment that bad SF movies become good comedies is right on the mark. MST3000 made it's living off that.If you look at THE ANGRY RED PLANET as the fever dream of a 10 year old comic book reader from 1959, you'll have the handle on this sucker. All the elements are there: the pseudoscience, occasionally logical, more often hilariously infantile. The adolescent boy attitude toward sex, with the \"gigolo\" captain (good call on that one, guys!) making eyes at the buxom \"scientist\" with hair so red it's a wonder it doesn't set off the fire alarms. The ridiculous conception of Mars as a planet so alien that everything glows red, yet one alien monster has a mouse face, and the blob alien has an eye that rotates like a kid's toy. The comic relief, an overweight astronaut (!) who sounds like he never finished the 8th grade in Brooklyn and has a psychotic fixation on his ray gun. And of course, the mere fact that alien = dangerously evil. If these people had met E.T., they would have roasted him in two seconds flat! \"OW\" indeed!Don't get me wrong. I rated this movie low. Still, it's never boring (except when the scientist tries to explain everything - only to make it all sound more and more ridiculous), and you have to admit, in your little kid core, it makes you jump a few times. Okay, then don't admit it. I guess you were never 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3099f7f4a7e24aaca8bb2cd9b9be2d3d",
            "input": "I saw this bomb when it hit theaters. I laughed the whole time. Why? Because the stupidity of it seemed to have made me go insane. I look back on it and realize there was not ONE funny thing in the whole movie. At leat nothing intentional. It IS awfully funny that Lizzie cn chew a piece of Nurplex and become a gigantic, carnivorous demon...yet her itty-bitty little dress is perfectly intact, despite the fact that she is now hundreds of times larger than she was when she first put it on. Or the kind of movie in which a man can be shocked with a defibulator and only fall unconcious, and return to conciousness without ANY medical attention. And don't let me get started on the ridiculous fate of the \"villain\" that they decided they needed to create \"conflict.\" Uh huh.To the person complaining about Disney only targetting kids-The raunchy parts of this film seems to disprove that statement. Do we really need Daryl Hannah accusing Jeff Bridges of having kinky video tapes? You do if you're Disney and you're out of ideas for making the movie appeal to the above-8 crowd without writing a more intelligent script! I am thoroughly convinced that Disney pays off the ratings board so it's movies can get away with murder and still get family-friendly ratings.What a waste of the DVD format.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6dbe33ba42f94c29910b6897267c4b55",
            "input": "Cannot believe a movie that can be made that good in 1987 and is virtually unknown in the west. Not to repeat other reviews here. The score is very good and moving. Literally it means \"Dawn please never comes\" - when it comes, the beautiful ghost and the lover will be apart forever. After 24 years, Joel and Leslie still look great. I enjoyed Joel in God of Gamblers and many movies by Leslie including Better Tomorrow.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-483c03266d0f4c21a94bcf2f6e025df0",
            "input": "Yes, this is one of the great musical movies I grew up with with such great entertainers as Frank Sinatra and Gene Kelly, not to mention the petite and glorious voice of Kathryn Grayson. The music and dancing is superb. I understand Frank took lessons from Kelly; and there is Kelly dancing with Jerry Mouse, which is quite unique for the time. Betty Garrett plays the waitress who falls in love with Sinatra. She is one of Hollywood's great underrated stars. I saw this again on A&E TV and as well have it in my old VCR tapes. Never get tired of these old musicals. Whatever happened to Hollywood??",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d359e74647b44960b09245798fc946c2",
            "input": "Hello, can anybody hear me? I don't know why you came to this page, but if you're a fellow viewer of this movie: join the fanclub! This movie was so unbelievably bad I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it. I think it's a must see, it's bad in a nice way. Every cliche ever invented for a horror movie can be seen here. I'm afraid it's very hard to get a copy of this movie, but it should be in the top 10 of worst movies ever made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b4dd65122e14ef2ad7e1dbe8da714a9",
            "input": "Brilliant actor as he is, Al Pacino completely derails Revolution – his Method acting approach is totally ill-suited to the role of an illiterate trapper caught up in the American War of Independence. Much of the blame should be attributed to director Hugh Hudson (yes, the man who made Chariots Of Fire just a couple of years earlier – talk about a come-down!!). One of the many jobs of a director is to marshal the actors, coaxing believable performances from them, but in this case Hudson has allowed Pacino to run amok without asking for restraint of any kind. It's not just Al's career-low performance that hinders the film though: there are numerous other flaws with Revolution, more of which will be said later.Illiterate trapper Tom Dobb (Al Pacino) lives in the north-eastern region of America with his son Ned (Sid Owen/Dexter Fletcher). He leads a simple life – living off the land, raising his son, surviving against the elements. The country is lorded over by the English colonialists, but during an eight year period (1775-83) a revolution takes place which ends with the British being defeated and the independent American nation being born. Dobb gets caught up in the events when his boat and his son are conscripted by the Continental Army – swept away by events they can barely understand, the Dobbs finds themselves fighting for their lives and freedom in one bloody engagement after another. Tom also falls in love with Daisy McConnahay (Natassja Kinski), a beautiful and fiery woman of British aristocratic ancestry. Their forbidden love is played out against the larger historical context of the fighting.Where to start with the film's flaws? Most key actors are miscast – Pacino has been criticised enough already, but Kinski fares little better as the renegade aristocrat while Donald Sutherland is hopelessly lost as a ruthless English soldier with a wobbly Yorkshire accent. Robert Dillon's script is muddled in its attempts to bring massive historical events down to a personal level. At no point does anyone seem to have decided whether this is meant to be an intimate character study with the American Revolution as a backdrop, or an epic war film with a handful of sharply drawn characters used to carry the story along. As a result, the narrative falls into no man's land, flitting from \"grand spectacle\" to \"small story\" indiscriminately and meaninglessly. John Corigliano's score is quite ghastly, and is poured over the proceedings with neither thought nor subtlety. Hugh Hudson's direction is clumsy throughout, both in his mismanagement of Pacino and the other key actors, and in the decision to use irritatingly shaky camera work during the action sequences. The idea of the hand-held camera is to create immediacy – that feeling of \"being there\" in the confusion of battle and musket fire. Like so many other things in the film, it doesn't work. The one department where the film regains a modicum of respectability is the period detail, with costumes, sets and weaponry that look consistently accurate. But if it's period detail you're interested in a trip to the museum would be a better way to spend your time, because as a rousing cinematic experience Revolution doesn't even begin to make the grade. Nothing more than a £18,000,000 mega-bomb that the ailing British film industry could ill afford in the mid-1980s.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62049390e76f43c3bf5b505eeb49c9c2",
            "input": "\"I moved out here to get away from this kind of thing!\" The small town sheriff laments.\"This happens a lot in Chicago?\" His deputy asks.Well, no, not really. The plot is that a group of Martians mistake a Halloween Rebroadcast of Orson Welles' War of the Worlds as an account of a real Martian invasion, and conclude they need to get in on the action! What follows are a bunch of mishaps involving the Martian's haphazard attempts to conquer the town of \"Big Bean, IL\". Everyone concludes they are kids in really good costumes, except for the Sheriff's daughter and her friend, a kid in a duck suit.The Martians themselves are comical, and you get the impression they are no threat to anyone but themselves pretty early on. It's a fun family movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3f51f2c5395488e9db8738bec29408f",
            "input": "Henry Hathaway was daring, as well as enthusiastic, for his love of the people of the early days in US history. However, to critique historical inaccuracies of his film about Brigham Young and the Mormon people are not necessary or useful in commenting for this film. In my opinion, Hathaway did superb direction that conveys what a Mormon people were in the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints during the time period beginning with the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to the date of film release. In often subtle filming and dialog delivery, he covered Mormon philosophies and teachings in many of the segments and scenes.I remember watching this movie on many Saturday mornings during my youth in the early 1950's. That was just over 10 years after the films release and before the Los Angeles Temple was completed, which I watched being constructed and instilled more curious wonder of who Mormons were. I recently purchased this film and will enjoy the following messages that Hathaway interpreted in his film.1. Love for all people, regardless of their personal beliefs, 2. Charity to those in need or not, 3. Family is high in importance, 4. Listen respectfully and carefully, because even opposing messages have important points to consider and adopt, 5. Work hard, both individually and in community, 6. Prepare and store for future days of need, 7. Hope is a binding link to a higher being, and for our daily lives, 8. And, that there is a unique quality to any group, and appreciate those that are identified as beneficial.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60ca1fb280cf499f935655e67194025b",
            "input": "This movie was supposed to have depicted a 'ladie's man' bachelor who was ready and willing to settle down once and for all. However, I did not care for his mission to settle down, because I didn't care for his character. I don't understand what all of these beautiful women saw in him. He had absolutely no class, or charisma. He should've at least had a way about himself that made ladies weak in the knees other than his saxophone playing, but to no avail. Just because he is a musician does not make him sexy. Not to mention, the things he did to get the attention of a married woman he fell in love in a span of five minutes of knowing her were absolutely outrageous and ridiculous. Does this man have any shame what-so-ever? Had he tidied up, and stopped doing and saying stupid things he would have been more attractive as a character, but alas, his character was bland and boring.Gina Gershon's character was unnecessarily British. She could've just as easily been an uptight out-of-towner with her regular speaking voice than do a poor British accent that sometimes would fade through out the movie.The only two characters I cared for were the fish and frog. Now those two had chemistry! Academy nominations for both… STAT! Plot holes, lack of character development, horrible acting, unnecessary drama, cliché moments... What a mess of a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eadc7939f08e46e99a45f50efbf77c39",
            "input": "Skip McCoy is a three time loser pick pocket, unable to curb his instincts back on the street, he picks the purse of Candy on a subway train. What he doesn't realise is that Candy is carrying top secret microfilm, microfilm that is of high interest to many many organisations.Director Samuel Fuller has crafted an exceptional drama set amongst the seedy underworld of New York City. Communist spies and shady government operatives all blend together to make Pickup On South Street a riveting viewing from first minute to the last. Based around a Dwight Taylor story called Blaze Of Glory, Fuller enthused this adaptation with heavy set political agenda, something that many at the time felt was over done, but to only focus on its anti communist leanings is doing it a big disservice.Digging a little deeper and you find characters as intriguing as any that Fuller has directed, the main protagonist for one is the hero of the piece, a crook and a shallow human being, his heroics are not born out of love for his country, they are born out of his sheer stubborn streak. It's quite an achievement that Fuller has crafted one of the best anti heroes of the 50s, and i'm sure he was most grateful to the performance of Richard Widmark as McCoy, all grin and icy cold heart, his interplay with the wonderful Jean Peters as Candy is excellent, and is the films heart. However it is the Oscar nominated Thelma Ritter who takes the acting honours, her Moe is strong and as seedy as the surrounding characters, but there is a tired warmth to her that Ritter conveys majestically.It's a B movie in texture but an A film in execution, Pickup On South Street is a real classy and entertaining film that is the best of its most intriguing director. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48470ad095a143e591746d1d8fe1644c",
            "input": "I'm biased towards any movie that paints a luxuriant picture of Italy - in my opinion the most romantic country in the world. Unfortunately the movie was rather short, unusually so for a period piece, and a little sparse on the cinematography aspect. However, the excellent story makes up for it. The four ladies embark on a much-needed relaxing vacation with problems on their minds. Over the course of the movie, they realize their problems and begin fixing them. They believe San Salvatore, the castle they stay in, has an enchanting effect on people. \"It's a tub of love,\" says Lottie Wilkins. You can watch their gradual change from dissatisfied to exuberant as the Italian seaside works its magic on them.All their problems and their solutions are plausible. The actresses were great. The background music seemed very appropriate for an romantic Italian locale. All in all, a 10/10 movie for me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1ecab1ef1214b19b9a2ef7739b6e32a",
            "input": "I don't often go out of my way to write comments, but for this I had to, just to warn anyone that might think that by watching this they will see a comedy. This doesn't come close. While the premise (change in colour/gender/whatever) is bad enough (and has been done, better, many times before)the actual transformation of two black guys into two white girls is one of the least convincing transformations ever put on screen. It would be bad enough if all that was required by the script was a change to white chicks. However the Wayans brothers are required to disguise themselves as two specific white women. As you will have guessed by now, they fail completely. I have seen drag queens without makeup make more convincing women than these two do with the best special effects and make-up people that Hollywood can provide. Its appalling. Add to the mix a basketball player built like a building, terrible dialogue and more plot holes than a golf course and this film hits a new personal low. And I like bad movies! Avoid like the plague.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-510e87b30bf7412789e0745ece58974f",
            "input": "{Possible spoilers coming up... you've been forewarned.}This is absolutely one of my all time favorite musicals and movie musicals! (The other is Damn Yankees with Gwen Verdon, Tab Hunter and Ray Walston) As we all know, sometimes the luster (not to mention the songs) of a show are lost in its transition from stage to screen. This is, for the most part, DEFINITELY not the case here.The sets are divine, bright and colorful, the characters are bigger than life and you can't help but love them, and Michael Kidd's choreography is absolutely stunning. (So glad to know they used the original Broadway choreographer)All of the actors \"bounce the ball\" (that is, have unbeatable chemistry) to perfection in this film. Frank and Marlon are absolutely believable as the proprietor of the oldest established permanent floating crap game in New York, and the most notorious gambler who bets on even the most minute things-- such as his fever going up to 104 if he doesn't take penicillin. Sweet, fresh faced Jean Simmons is perfect for the role of Sarah (although it is true, her singing pipes are not as outstanding as that of Isabel Bigley or Josie de Guzman)-- the mission doll with a heart of gold and a drive to heal all. And last but certainly not least (on my list anyway) is Miss Vivian Blaine, reprising her Broadway role as Miss Adelaide-- the Hot Box lead singer and dancer who would like to finally end her 14 year engagement to Nathan with marriage, and rid herself of the psychosomatic cold he's given her.First off, kudos to Stubby Kaye and B.S. Pulley as they reprise their Broadway roles as Nicely-Nicely Johnson and Benny Southstreet. There were never two more loveable gamblers than these guys.Brando is superb, as usual, and though he's not got the voice of Robert Alda or Peter Gallagher, you forget it-- as he has this sense of determination to bring all he can to his role as Sky Masterson. \"Luck Be A Lady\" gives me chills every time I see him perform the number. Especially enjoyable is hearing him say \"Daddy... I got cider in my ear.\"Simmons is charming and pleasant in a role well suited to her looks, voice and the way she carries herself. You long so dearly for her not only to win Sky (or, toward the end, believe him), but to help people overcome their gambling, drinking and other sins, and live a life with God. Her rendition of \"If I Were A Bell\" is splendid, to say the least!Sinatra is the man. He is so perfect for the role of Nathan Detroit-- and here he sings parts that Sam Levene from the Broadway cast never could (terrific actor, but the chap was tone deaf... go figure). I really enjoyed the addition of the song \"Adelaide\"... wish some guy would sing like that to ME. Frankie's cool, slick demeanor transcends the boundaries of this movie. But most importantly, you want him to marry Adelaide.And speaking of Adelaide, Vivian Blaine is just sheer perfection in this role. From the accent to her belting out \"Adelaide's Lament\", she's just terrific. And she's also my favorite part of the entire movie. She really makes you feel for Adelaide... especially when she cries right before and then again during \"Sue Me\". I still haven't decided whether I like \"Pet Me Poppa\" better than \"Bushel and a Peck\"... maybe I like them equally. Either way, she does fantastic with those as well as \"Take Back Your Mink.\" (I'm sad that they left out \"hollanderize\" from the film...) She's absolutely MARVELOUS, not to mention hilarious, and my favorite part of the entire film.One of the best things about this movie is their lingo. It's a mixture of high class and street slang. Never do they use \"It's\", \"I'll\" or \"That's.\" It's always \"It is\", \"I will\" and \"That is.\" Overall, Guys & Dolls is one of my favorite all time movies and musicals, and it's one that you should take time to watch every time it comes on. My only complaint? No \"Marry The Man Today.\" Now THAT'S a good song.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fef2c01b99f84f108d94ac27b8afd7f5",
            "input": "I have seen a lot of PPV's in the past but this is the most entertaining, intense PPV and the most complete DVD i have ever seen. The DVD extras are worth it because they it gives a different view of how the wrestlers act after the show (such as the chris benoit interview/edge interview), some glimpse into the Monday Night Wars era,the first match of Hogan winning tag title gold and some promotional talk. Additionally there is a good music video.1. Tag Team Table match: Bubby Ray and Spike Dudley vs. Eddie Guerro and Chris benoit 7/10 This was a pretty good intense match to start off the show. Not too many holds and just pure raw physicallity. Spike can hold his own in tables matches and Guerro and Benoit gave good pure wrestling skills on the mat. 2. WWE Crusierweight championship: Jamie Noble w/ Nidia v. Billy Kidman 3/10 The crowd really didn't care about either wrestler and didn't get interested until Kidman did a shooting star press. Usually people expect a lot of high flying in a cruiser weight championship, but this had very little. In fact it was so bad that when Noble hit his finisher, no one even cared or knew (you can tell by the lack of camera's flashing). The ending was quick though. 3. WWE European Championship: Jeff hardy v. William Regal 5/10 I've never really liked regal as a wrestler, he lacks intensity and style. Hardy was impressive but really didn't get a chance to show off his high flying act, although he still performed some good counters and added that needed fast pace to the match. It ended off quickly which was perfect for this match. 4. John Cena v. Chris Jericho 6/10 It's funny looking back at Cena's very first PPV, how he used to act, how he used to dress, and how he used to look (watch his interview, it's pretty funny). This was a good intense match with Cena showing a nice variety of holds, suplexes, counters and some aerial. Jericho was sub-par but definitely helped Cena launch his career. Cena Wins.5. WWE Intercontenital championship: RVD v. Brock Lesnar 8/10 This was a very intense and good match. Both wrestlers styles really matched up well on the screen, with Brocks pure power and raw energy vs. RVDs skill full moves and quickness. RVD looked great in this match (better than his later matches with edge and cena)and the entire match was fast pace. The ending worked perfectly because it still preserved Brock's undefeated streak while giving RVD his just desserts in his home state.6. No disqualification match: Booker T v. Big Show 7/10 Another solid match that lacked a certain intensity as the RVD match but still a good follow up. Although it started off kinda slow (which it always is with big show) Booker T was impressive and did a sick move on the announcers table. The finisher was awesome, the ending was a great upset and big move up for Booker T.7. WWE Tag Team Championship: Hogan and Edge v. Christian and Lance storm 5/10 This was a mediocre match. Hogan comes out like usual to a huge pop but his variety of moves lacks that intensity and energy. Then again Christian doesn't exactly have the greatest athletic abilities himself. This ended up being a mediocre match at best but was still OK for PPV. 8. Triple Threat Match for the Undisputed Championship: 10/10. Rock v. Undertaker v. Kurt Angle.Easily the match of the year. This is by far the best triple threat match i have ever seen. It had close falls, plenty of finishers, stolen finishers, raw energy, intensity and fast pace. No one could predict who would come out of this one. If your going to buy this DVD i would buy it strictly for this match. (ending? watch for yourself!)Overall this was a solid PPV with plenty of extra goodies to keep you watching again and again. Although this is hard to find (i had to pay a little more than usual for this DVD) it is definitely worth your money.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea052e99d2c74faebf5aca2f2f71bddd",
            "input": "The Education of Little Tree is just not as good as it could have been. Little Tree's education is about things like the circle of life and how you should look at a star to help you. Whatever happened to the three R's? Readin' 'Ritin' and 'Rithmetic? When the idiot back talks the teacher at the boarding school place he starts crying and talking to the sky. Oh my gosh. Sure, the lady was a little harsh, but then James Cromwell's character comes and takes him away, leaving the audience thinking that Little Tree was absolutely right. He should learn to adapt to new discipline. Those were the times! Talking to a star is not going to change a thing! Little Tree needs to learn that his adoring guardians are not always right.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-026ea54f5c254340aae917cf4db62b0c",
            "input": "I love this freekin movie! Walsh is a true master of the cinematic form, his film have been sometimes in my opinion, overlooked. But this film is a favourite of mine because it really gives you the feel of the time the film was set in.\\All the wonderful characters that existed, the lifestyle, the mode of dress, the way they spoke, OK they might be exaggerated, but it is good to know that there were occasion when two men tried to outdo each other with insane stunts.I just felt it was apiece of history thats should be wathced by many people and appreciated because of that fact.Can I get it somewhere on DVD? I have only seen it on TV. But for anyone wanting a slice of life movie about that period of time this is the perfect one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47fded001f4e4013ba311413761eb204",
            "input": "This move was on TV last night. I guess as a time filler, because it sucked bad! The movie is just an excuse to show some tits and ass at the start and somewhere about half way. (Not bad tits and ass though). But the story is too ridiculous for words. The \"wolf\", if that is what you can call it, is hardly shown fully save his teeth. When it is fully in view, you can clearly see they had some interns working on the CGI, because the wolf runs like he's running in a treadmill, and the CGI fur looks like it's been waxed, all shiny :)The movie is full of gore and blood, and you can easily spot who is going to get killed/slashed/eaten next. Even if you like these kind of splatter movies you will be disappointed, they didn't do a good job at it.Don't even get me started on the actors... Very corny lines and the girls scream at everything about every 5 seconds. But then again, if someone asked me to do bad acting just to give me a few bucks, then hey, where do I sign up?Overall boring and laughable horror.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c2d26e0f3a34e5b8b5f88221154dd4d",
            "input": "Keanu Reeves stars as a friend of a popular high school student who suddenly commits suicide...he and his friends go through emotional turmoil and share their reactions to this horrible incident...Good acting by Reeves and a young Jennifer Rubin..but on the whole is a little too much.. 4 of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-07a8602399e24013a4ca5de789027265",
            "input": "More TV movies ought to be made like this one. I saw it way back in '93 when it was first on TV. Helen Hunt and Steven Weber were both terrific, giving very gritty and realistic performances. Weber was especially good, turning in an exceptionally creepy and understated performance as the child molester/killer. This film really increased my respect for Hunt as an actress. The director also directed \"Hoosiers,\" which was somehow both formulaic and exciting. But the direction in both of these works has the same stark, simple realism that is so appealing. If you like TV movies that aren't predictable and filled with overacting, see it if you can. The side story about Hunt and Fahey's affair is also appealing without detracting from the main story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-961d1633d7be4249beb70b15ddb7c059",
            "input": "Adorable! I saw Domestic Import in Philly in October with my kids. We all liked it so much that we saw it a second time with my parents. I haven't heard them laugh like that in years! It was the first time that I can remember seeing a movie that my parents and my kids could enjoy. It's really cute and we can't wait for it to come out on DVD. They need to make more movies like Domestic Import. It is refreshing to go to a movie that three different generations can enjoy (and not be embarrassed). I have not seen a movie this cute since My Big Fat Greek Wedding. I loved Mindy Sterling as the mother. She was also in Austin Powers. Howard Hesseman is in this too and he is hilarious. I remember him from WKRP.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6edfdb23f6a4451dae018c7c4ca8ea3d",
            "input": "honestly, if anyone has a brain, there's not 1 positive thingto say about this movie what so ever. I lost my $1 renting this. I'd rather laugh at Will Smith saying \"If you got a dream, you got to protect it\". all the actors must've been bored or had no fame at the time. even Matthew Mc Conahay *however you spell it* was better then all the actors in this movie, when he played a psycho in Texas Chainsaw 4. If you see this movie, and have anything good to say, you IQ, must be extremely low, with such bad taste in movies, it hurts. Thank YOU...and the TRUTH, has been spoken!Save yourself from the misery. Get Devil's Rejects, now that's a classic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb11fd9bc5e840bcaf7995a854cbbe35",
            "input": "The movie seemed to appeal me because of the new type of Pokemon Celebi. But the plot was out of course and didn't have as an interest as the other movies. It was a waste of money and time. The same corny humor and cliche bad guys. The movie was of no use to make if you wanted to make Pokemon famous. The movie should better not associated with animes such as Dragonballz, Digimon, or Yu-Gi-Oh. The drawing and settings are of no level rising to the standards of original anime. It is a shame even to talk about this movie. I bet Pokemon fans will be disappointed with the outcome of the movie and give up on Pokemon. Digimon is more of an anime and doesn't fall anywhere close to Pokemon.It's second movie is coming out late 2002.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55b973a37dbc45d7bdf269733cf05969",
            "input": "First, let me say that Notorious is an absolutely charming film, very lovingly rendered of its time and subject(s). Gretchen Mol is utterly, painfully convincing, the very soul of the contradictions smoothly reified by Ms. Page herself. Irving and Paula Klaw are richly drawn as the working-class stiffs they were (having met Paula at Movie Star News in 1990 I can say that Lili Taylor's performance is unimpeachable), and Jared Harris as John Willie (Coutts) is an adoringly debauched genius. Anyone with an interest in the recorded history of American attitudes toward sexuality must see this movie, in a theater preferably, where votes made with dollars count more.Second, I will allow that I am a producer of material similar to that for which the Klaws would become famous, which is no way affects my estimation of Ms. Harron's work as the splendid piece that it is, but does condition my view of Notorious as an act of political resistance of the first order. Ms. Harron has crafted a work of subtle subversion. Along with V for Vendetta, it is a movie about another time for our times.Few readers of this site will be aware that the government they will see enacted in Notorious (through transcription of the very words uttered in closed Senate committee hearings) is a very close approximation of the one they live under right now. While Ms. Harron expressly disallows that she has a political agenda appended to this film, her faithfulness to the facts, and the respectful and unsensational way in which she renders them, synchronizes Notorious with the present day. The very acts that Notorious portrays in loving and accurate detail are defined as obscene by the Communications Decency Act, recently brought to the Supreme Court as a First Amendment case and turned back there at the behest of the Bush administration. In other words, the delicate and ineffectual bondage depicted in Notorious is indictable today by Federal prosecutors in whatever (hostile) jurisdiction they choose. Of course, there were no hearings in the Senate or elsewhere on this matter when the CDA was passed. Of course you know nothing about it, because you don't want people in Peoria telling you what you can and cannot look at (likewise, people in Peoria probably don't want me telling them what they're allowed to view). Of course Notorious will never be indicted. It's Hollywood. It's lawyered up. Countless Klaws will, however, continue to be steamrolled by a puritanical bureaucracy that has not advanced its aesthetic, moral or biological composition much in 50+ years.In addition, Notorious posts no 18 USC 2257 compliance statement, which is mandated by the unnoticed \"earmark\" recently voted into law. If any media contains images of \"sadomasochistic restraint\" it is required to make available (ex warrant) records of age and circumstance of all performers. Notorious fails in this regard also.In addition to being a splendid piece of entertainment and an (nearly) accurate historical document, Notorious will be the litmus against which the Bush Justice Department is itself judged with respect to the 14th (Equal Protection) Amendment and on perhaps several other Constitutional grounds. In this regard alone, a debt of gratitude is owed Mary Harron. You'll be grateful in any case, Constitutional or otherwise, if you see this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20893104021248fbae05f34eb872af2c",
            "input": "i watched this movie 10 years ago. and have watched it on video an average of once a year since. it's the type of movie that's timeless, because the themes are universal, yet the stories and conversation are so personal. it's also one of the very few movies that capture you from frame one til the credits roll, despite the fact that there are, really, just two (very involving) characters. this owes a lot to the engaging acting by hawke and delpy, who make us believe that they are actually jesse and celine. this is also the first movie i saw that mentioned reality TV, and now, the phenomenon is rampant! i love the way this movie just envelops the audience in its space, and makes you think, however jaded you may be, that you are one of those characters. it also made me want to ride the train around Europe! i have not met anyone who has not been able to relate to this movie. maybe that speaks about myself, my friends, or just the sheer genius of this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b44d0a641da407ea9dcbad946147614",
            "input": "I'm not saying that because the production values were so low, but because it was filmed terribly. That shot of the girl washing her hair in the creek? Did we really need to sit there for an overlong shot and watch her do that for 5 minutes in the same spot? It was terrible, the lighting was just plain bad. You could barely see anything and when the characters were talking, you could barely hear what they were saying. Did I watch the whole movie? Of course not I skipped through most of it, and I don't want to hear anyone say I need to watch the whole thing first to judge it. This film was so poorly done and executed that even by independent and low budget standards it's just plain terrible. Awful movie...don't waste any time on it unless you want a good laugh, but even then it's not because of the actors \"funny\" lines, it's because of how painstakingly bad the production is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c69253709614625a7c9b25040d654bb",
            "input": "but there are not too many of them. Probably the worst \"major release\" film I have seen in my life. Definitely the worst for this year. There is no point in commenting on the plot, the cast or the acting. The problem is beyond all that. It lays in the absolute stupidity of the annoying kind (not the funny kind) of everything that takes place on the screen. I don't know why I gave it a 2/10 instead of 1/10. Probably, because of Steven Martini. He really did try. Bottom line - 95 minutes washed down the toilet along with a few brain cells. Avoid at any cost.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e496fcc21d746d487e5a59f2ab22b41",
            "input": "Having been pleasantly surprised by Sandra Bullock's performance in Miss Congeniality, I decided to give Murder By Numbers a shot. While decent in plucky, self-effacing roles, Ms. Bullock's performance in \"serious\" roles (see Hope Floats, Speed 2, 28 Days) leave much to be desired. Her character is at the same time omniscient, confused, and sexually maladjusted (the sub-plot of Sandra's past comes across as needless filler that does little to develop her already shallow character). The two teenage boys gave decent performances, although their forensics expertise and catch-me-if-can attitude is belied by stupid errors that scream \"We did it!\" Chris Penn as the all-too-obvious suspect is wasted here, as is Ben Chaplin's token partner/love interest character.***Spoilers Ahead*** Mediocre acting aside, the biggest flaws can be traced to a TV-of-the-week plot that never has you totally buying into the murder motives in the first place, and as mentioned, the stupid errors (vomiting up a rare food on the murder scene, an all too convenient and framing of the school janitor, the two boys hanging out together in public, a convenient love interest to cause friction, etc. etc) cause the view to go from being intrigues to being bored and disappointed by the murderers. The ending was strictly \"By the Numbers\" and was probably the most disappointing aspect of the movie. Using the now-cliched tactic of almost showing the climactic scene at the beginning of the film, and then filling the audience in how we arrived at that moment, the final scenes surprise no one and lacked any of the so-called intelligence the film purported to arrive at it's conclusion. A somewhat promising concept, but poorly executed and weak in nearly every way. * out of ****.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b63196db01ef45ae8cb756476d0fb483",
            "input": "Nine out of ten might seem like a high mark to give for a straight to video sci-fi movie that's been vilified at the US box office and roundly criticized as the poorest movie of Kurt Russell's career.I have my reasons.Firstly when you read negative reviews of this film, they usually start with the wooden nature of Russell's interpretation of Todd, the eponymous Soldier. I'm going to start here too, with my surprising statement that this is possibly the finest piece of acting I've seen Russell pull off. Todd is an emotional cripple and suffering from intense PTSD - this movie being written before the phenomenon was as widely recognized as it is now.The portrayal is spot on. Todd is withdrawn, uncommunicative and a loner. He suffers from irrational anxiety - keyed to a fever pitch by training that teaches him to analyze every movement and interaction with another human being for signs of betrayal and danger. His hyper-focus brings with it an inability to comprehend the bigger continuum that the tasks he is given to do sit within - there is a scene where he cuts himself slicing carrots and continues to work unfazed, not cleaning up the cut or the blood. Many interpret this as a sign of his physical toughness and focus on the job at hand, but it is also a sign that he is simply performing the requested task by rote - not comprehending the relationship between the vegetables he's preparing and the food that will be eaten later.Todd's dialog is spartan to say the least - the two big talking scenes he gets are central to the plot of the movie and both underline the bleak nature of his existence. Fear and Discipline we are told. Always. Fear to keep him pumped up to a hyper alert state where the smallest detail will not pass him by, keeping him ready to react on a knife edge. Discipline to hold him in check through his fear, to overcome it and perform tactically. The inference is that he has no time to think and cannot afford feelings. Many viewers have different interpretations of his reaction to the hug from Nielsen's Sandra - but I believe you have to interpret it from the perspective of a human who's only experience of an embrace is in combat - the trembling represents him suppressing his fight / flight instincts reacting to the fear of being grappled, his movement and vision restricted - Fear and Discipline indeed.Then there is the subtext of his abandonment (Twice in fact) - so representative of the way our society tends to toss infantrymen onto the rubbish heap of society when they've served their terms. 40% of the unemployed are ex-military in OUR world, in HIS it can only be worse. Russell quickly picks up the mantle of Mace's responsibility to his wife and child - desperately in need of a mission, even one with such a high likelihood of his death.Then there is the military subtext too - the conflict between Busey's Church and the hotshot from HQ, Mekum. Mekum's new men are faster, stronger, more accurate and aggressive. Any one of them could pound Todd into the ground - but it's not about the tools you have it's how you use them. An incentivized Todd given the freedom to exercise his initiative and acting without the numbing effect of perceived superiority utilizes ambush tactics and sneaky tricks to cut a swathe through the newer unit - sent in without support, cover or reconnaissance. It is a reminder that military power cannot make up for a failure in leadership.There are many other subtle themes. When a film is shot and scripted so minimally, it leaves plenty of white space for your own interpretations to take root. Watch Soldier with an open mind and see what it teaches YOU.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccd74825048e48ae9d9ecce262a001b3",
            "input": "Power Rangers, the completely awful kid's show from the 1990s still continues to disturb young children with it's complete cheesiness, and awful settings.This show was not entertainment, it was an excuse to teach children violence in showing kids how to fight one another in order to solve their differences.The toys were further demonstration in how to promote a violent television show and such.I have never been able to figure out what the purpose of this completely ridiculous show ever was.As such, it remains one of the worst kids shows ever made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ca29fea597441c99c39e78222f05f3b",
            "input": "I just saw this film on Turner Classic Movies last night and was blown away by Victor McLaglen's performance:In every sense of the word a \"tour de force\". The atmosphere of 1922 Dublin evoked through the cinematography and production design really foreshadowed techniques used in the best film noirs of the 40's and early 50's.Very nice attention to detail also;during Frankie McPhillip's (Wallace Ford's) wake, the mourners are all praying in Gaelic. Max Steiner's score is unforgettable. As in later films such as 1939's GWTW, he appropriated folk ballads to lend local color and a sense of place and time. John Ford: already a film giant in 1935!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2218500c888249fc82571045aedac91c",
            "input": "I never thought an old cartoon would bring tears to my eyes! When I first purchased Casper & Friends: Spooking About Africa, I so much wanted to see the very first Casper cartoon entitled The Friendly Ghost (1945), But when I saw the next cartoon, There's Good Boos To-Night (1948), It made me break down! I couldn't believe how sad and tragic it was after seeing Casper's fox get killed! I never saw anything like that in the other Casper cartoons! This is the saddest one of all! It was so depressing, I just couldn't watch it again. It's just like seeing Lassie die at the end of a movie. I know it's a classic,But it's too much for us old cartoon fans to handle like me! If I wanted to watch something old and classic, I rather watch something happy and funny! But when I think about this Casper cartoon, I think about my cats!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be314cfb601b42019558b64d2474c58e",
            "input": "This is definitely a stupid, bad-taste movie. Eddie Murphy stars in what is written like a sitcom. He is surrounded with his perfect family, full of good family values. If you're looking for politically correct entertainment, this movie is for you. But if you hate the idea of being the only one not to laugh at obscene gags in a movie-theater full of pop-corn addicts, just flee.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d1d05bf998874b699fc8afcfa909f9ca",
            "input": "For my first taste of Shakespeare on stage, I cannot believe what these people did to a perfectly good play. -Let's start off with the good bit, shall we?-Alan Rickman is alright, although some of his dialog could have been delivered with more feeling. The rest of the actors needed to pull it together. Romeo, Romeo, whyfore art thou not dead yet, Romeo? The actor, while not only completely wooden and deadpan, could not read his lines with any gusto at all. He was completely out of focus, had difficulty even looking Juliet in the face, and absolutely NO grace with the lines that he was given. Whoever cast him deserves to be punished. Juliet is almost passable, but she gives no depth to her character,and seems to be completely out of touch with the play. Mercutio was incredibly creepy and completely out of character for the entirety of his dialog. Benvolio was unfeeling and mercilessly choppy with his lines. I was forced to endure this half-baked production of Romeo and Juliet. The acting was stilted and the costumes were nothing short of distracting. I have seen kindergarten puppet shows with more effort put into them. I only wish that i could give this movie a rating of zero.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b5248c281874e4d963965669ac0656d",
            "input": "This is such a fantastic movie, a Western about a self-concerned man (Jimmy Stewart) going up to the Klondike for gold. On the way, he gets hassled by a local sheriff in Alaska (John McIntire, giving a wonderfully evil performance), whom he hassles back. McIntire threatens that he'll be a dead man if he ever comes back through his town, which is, unfortunately, the only way back to the States. The main chunk of the story is about the peaceful Klondike town of Dawson being turned upside down by new residents from McIntire's town. Ruth Roman, for instance, who has come with Stewart and his two companions (Jay C. Flippen and Walter Brennen, who plays Stewart's best friend), builds a saloon (a Hollywood front for a whorehouse) and tries to run the town's restaurant and hang-out place out of business. She paves the way for McIntire and his goons to come up, too. In 1953, Jimmy Stewart and director Anthony Mann made one of the peaks of the Western genre, The Naked Spur. The Far Country is just the tiniest bit less, and it contains 99.9% of what made that film so special without, of course, feeling like a cheap copy. Like The Naked Spur, The Far Country boasts beautiful, on-location cinematography. The landscape is gorgeous. Stewart gives one of his best performances (nearly equal to his biggest success of 1954, Rear Window). I suppose it could be considered cliche, as he starts out a selfish loner and learns how that kind of existence plays out in the end. Still, Stewart plays it so damn well, he makes this character very human. And the supporting performances are universally fantastic. In addition to those I've mentioned, the adorable French actress Corinne Calvet is very good. And I ought to single out Walter Brennen, as well. He seems to have specialized in playing best friends. His relationship with Stewart is very touching, since he is, at first, the only character who is able to bring out any humanity in the cynical man. The screenplay is very well written, and Mann's direction is impeccable. A masterpiece. 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9e9e6530ce04916b61f96f11a3af454",
            "input": "I couldn't bear to sit through he entire movie. Do families like this really exist somewhere? There have been many comments describing this family as akin to LLBean models and such, and I think that that is a great description of how they behaved.More absurdly unbelievable writing/acting occurs as we meet a character referred to in High School as \"pigface\" who, of course, has grown into a drop-dead gorgeous 20-year Harvard-educated plastic surgeon (but only to do good in the world-not for the money,) and she beds Steve Carrel on the first date. That's when I quit watching...If you can completely suspend your disbelief for two hours, then perhaps you'll enjoy this sentimental, self-indulgent waste of time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff7fced0bed0400e859f3f171694154f",
            "input": "I feel totally ripped off. Someone needs to refund the $4.95 I spent at Blockbuster to rent this homemade mess. This is NOT a musical it is a complete waste of time and my evening. What I don't get is why did this get distributed in the first place???...somebody MUST have been doing some heavy drugs the night that deal was made. I've seen better films come out of film schools and I have been to film school so I can say that as a fact. The quality of this work is also just SO VERY bad to view...shot on DV??? Nuff said. The songs are not songs but just banter that sounds the same in every section. Want to see a good musical? THEN DON'T RENT THIS MOVIE.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b639fa51354491584699bae375abbc9",
            "input": "I agree with \"Jerry.\" It's a very underrated space movie (of course, how many good low-budget ones AREN'T underrated?) If I remember correctly, the solution to the mystery was a sort of variation (but not \"rip-off\") of 2001, because the computer controlling the spaceship had actually been a man, who had somehow been turned into a computer. And like HAL, they tried to disconnect his \"mind\", but not the mechanical parts of him, and as with HAL, it led to disaster. There is at least one funny moment. When the Christopher Cary character, who can't find any food, finds the abandoned pet bird, there's a kind of ominous moment, but then the obvious thing doesn't happen after all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-717da03c6b4b470e8677865c189388ea",
            "input": "I can't believe currently this movie is rated a 6.9. Anyway this movie was probably one of the most touching real Indian movies I have ever seen. It was really refreshing to see a movie that showed traditional family cinema. As for the story I thought it was great it was about shahid kapur being set up on an arranged marriage with amrita rao. He is kind of a happy go lucky kind of guy, while Amrita Rao is a traditional Indian girl who is very helpful to her uncle but the only problem is her cousin doesn't seem to get as much attention as she does so her Aunt dislikes Amrita with a passion. This upsets Amrita because she just wants her aunt to love her. It was also very touching to see that although Amrita's family wasn't that rich maybe just middle class to lower class, while Shahids family was quite upper class, they still treated their family with respect and didn't even ask put them down which really struck a nerve with me. This is because i've actually seen people being very rude to people who are not as well of thinking their below their standards which i feel is very shallow. This movie showed that shahids family was willing to look at the great values that Amrita had been brought up with and turned a blind eye to the fact she wasn't a rich business tycoons daughter or anything. All in all this movie deserved an 8/10 I wish more and more of these kind of movies were made.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31fa9c5774be4569b636b808947c8216",
            "input": "The best Laurel and Hardy shorts are filled to the brim with mishaps, accidents and destruction, mostly caused by Stan, but with Ollie receiving the bulk (!) of the punishment-- see the great 'The Music Box' (1933) or 'Towed in a Hole' (1932) as some some classic examples.Here, however, for some reason (is it because it was based on a sketch by Stan's father?) the boys play it 'straight' in a 'comedy' built around jokes and supposedly funny situations. It doesn't come off. It's merely another third-rate tedious 30s comedy, heightened only by the personalities of Stan and Ollie who never really display any of their trademarked gestures (Ollie's finger wiggling, Stan's blank stares, etc.) or comic abilities.The film begins with them running from the police. Since we never see or know why, it's hard to believe or accept their fear of being caught, and thus hiding in Colonel Buckshot's mansion. The premise for the 'humor', Ollie passing himself off as the Colonel and Stan passing himself off as both the butler and the maid are never very engaging. They are not playing 'Stan and Ollie' in this film. Their parts could have been played by any of the pedestrian studio actors and it would be just as poor.Stan could mime and make whatever he would do funny, but he doesn't get the chance to do any of that here. He's constrained by uttering too much dialog to 'move' the plot, but none of it rises much above the silly. We are treated to endless third rate comedy chestnuts such as the running gag of not correctly pronouncing Lord Plumtree's name, the \"Call me a cab! Okay you're a cab!\" joke, cops losing their clothes and being seen in long johns, and a non-sequiter ending of Stan and Ollie as the two parts in a painfully obvious horse costume as they make their escape on a bicycle for two, and James Finlayson is still doing his silent-era full body takes and Keystone Kop jumping jacks.Stan and Ollie do much better in a situation comedy in 'Sons of the Desert'(1933) where we get to see them do what we love about them -- be themselves. In fact, 1932-34 seem to be their best years.Since this film does not play to any of their strengths, why bother with it? I have to give it a 3.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e783c82072584eef9681b43147adf8f5",
            "input": "First of all, f117 is not high tech any more and it is not a fighter aircraft.Secondly, the f14's and f18's cannot change their appearances; they are not transformers. Thirdly, the f16 has only one m61 cannon, not two. Last but not the least, at the end of the film, Seagle selected sidewinder missile. But somehow when he pulled the trigger, the actual missile fired turned out to be a maverick. As I have the experience of seeing f18's and f14's being mysteriously transformed into f16's, this small transformation of missiles is not a big surprise to me. However, there is still one question I have to ask: How did they manage to use an air to ground missile to shoot down a flying f16...When students hand in really bad work, teachers assign 0's. Now I think for the sake of properly marking this film, IMDb should seriously consider adding a '0/10' option. Otherwise, it is not fair for those who receive 1 out of 10...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b83a78e21b9423d85d665a3927b9108",
            "input": "I have seen most, if not all of the Laurel & Hardy classic films. I have always enjoyed there comical stupidly, even after watching it over and over again. This new film attempts to bring back the classic with two new actors who resemble both Laurel & Hardy, however fails miserably for various reasons. One of which is how out of place their cloths are (still early 20th century) however are both portrayed in the 90's setting. Some of the former dialogue was brought back, however it also fails miserably to come close to the classic series. This film could very well be the worst film I have ever seen and should be pulled off the shelf and locked away forever. The real Laurel & Hardy are surly spinning in their graves at such a bad imitation.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3103b2d628164cd881f9a5ecdce016fb",
            "input": "This is a beautiful, rich, and very well-executed film with a rich and meaningful story. Basically, it tells how an old master story teller needs to find a (male) heir to carry on his craft, but ends up not getting what he expected in his very male-dominated world. The characters must then deal with their situation and the old master must grapple with the conflict between his desire for a companion and heir and his and society's traditional notions.The story is fun, emotional, and complex. The exploration of the characters, their lives, and emotions, is rich and compelling the character development is strong while the characters are complex and not one dimensional at all. The film expertly conveys the old man's emotions and his desire to find an heir, and compellingly shows how he and the kid handle the situation. There is also humour, sometimes quite subtle, at appropriate points. The film also examines the good and bad of traditional Chinese culture, creating further interest and depth to the film.The directing, acting, and scenery are all outstanding. Added to the other strengths, this creates rich and convincing visual images and compelling, real characters. As a result, the film evokes strong empathy for, and feelings about, the characters.Some have claimed that the ending weakens the film, but I do not necessarily agree. Perhaps it could have been stronger with a different ending, but any improvement in the overall film would have been rather small.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1dd321c4c0fd47068d22daf88d73a192",
            "input": "An idiotic dentist finds out that his wife has been unfaithful. So, no new story lines here. However, the authors managed to create a stupid, disgusting film. If you enjoy watching kids vomiting, or seeing a dentist imagining that he is pulling all his wife's teeth out in a bloody horror-type, go see (or rent) the film. If not, move on to something else (MY FAIR LADY, anyone?)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b53e5d7ea4f4563ad83fd2a63353409",
            "input": "I'm watching this on the Sci-Fi channel right now. It's so horrible I can't stop watching it! I'm a Videographer and this movie makes me sad. I feel bad for anyone associated with this movie. Some of the camera work is good. Most is very questionable. There are a few decent actors in the flick. Too bad they're surrounded by what must have been the director's relatives. That's the only way they could have been qualified to be in a movie! Music was a little better than the acting. If you get around to watching this I hope it's because there was absolutely NO other option! The sequel (yes sequel) is coming on now....I think I'll skip it! Jason",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a70a09211489483d8f08305429e9e478",
            "input": "What was there about 1939 that helped produce so many excellent Hollywood films? Well, whatever it was, the magic may also be found in this Columbia picture. It's a long forgotten screwball comedy that Turner Classic Movies has begun to show. (Maltin's movie book does not contain it.) In nearly every department, Amazing Mr. Williams is a jewel.It's the story of a first-rate police detective who can never find the time to marry his intended. As the wedding bells are about to ring, he gets called to the scene of a murder. The lady in question has to learn the hard way not only to enjoy the pursuit of criminals but to belong to the police force. There are a lot of laughs in the process.Melvyn Douglas proved again that he had few peers in light comedy. Joan Blondell was at the peak of her career and is a delight. Edward Brophy and Donald McBride are hilarious.The film goes on a bit too long, but who cares? The screwball comedies are always able to entertain, and this film belongs right in there with the best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bfaccc1a62348538fb4053ad1f5a3a5",
            "input": "OK. I admit. I'm one of those nerds who have spent all to many hours with my beloved DVD player and my wonderful television set watching science fiction series. Star Trek (Next Generation) was my first space date, and since then I've switched partners regularly. I've seen'em all, it seems, and my favorites are «Lexx», «Farscape» and the new «Battlestar Galactica», in other words: the newest, state of the art space operas. But, I also have a general crush on the old fashioned ones, the cheap ones, like the magnificent four seasoned BBC show «Blakes7». Here, the budgets are smaller than hobbits, the special effects seem to be made on a Commodore 64, but who cares when the scripts are sharp and intelligently written with dark humor, the acting dead serious and at times even high class?But why do they always speak English in the space future? Because this is NOT the future, it's fantasy for kids. Still, it can be irritating at times. Me, being a Norwegian, have often damned this appalling fact that one never makes genre series, like science fiction, for Scandinavian viewers. I never ever thought of the fact that this might have happened. But it did, actually, once, and even in my own homeland, Norway. I was two years old when the so called Fjernsynsteatret (TV theater section) of our national public service channel Nrk produced this three episode version of Blindpassasjer (The Stowaway).When I first heard of it, I was not surprised of the fact that until this day, the show has only been screened once in Norway, making it impossible for me to actually see it. It went on Swedish, danish and Finnish television also, in it's time, but that was a long time ago. There have been no video or DVD release of it, not a surprise either, and when it was screened on an art house cinema, this happened in Bergen, a city far far away from Oslo (where I live). And then there's another fact about «Blindpassasjer» that didn't surprise me, that it was written by the two Norwegian authors Tor Åge Bringsværd and Jon Bing (Bing&Bringsværd). This duo basically introduced the SciFi genre to Norwegians in the seventies; they published anthologies and wrote what they called fable prose. In my opinion, Bringsværd is the most interesting of the two writers, and has written several great and entertaining novels, masterpieces even, some of them hilarious, such as «Bazar» and «Syvsoverskens Dystre Frokost». No other than this guy, also an acclaimed dramatist, could construct the script of «Blindpassasjer».When I finally got to watch it, it was because a strange swede who recorded the three episodes on VCR in the 80's, eventually managed to transform it to DVD and give it to me. He was a nice bloke. So I sat down and watched it, with Swedish subtitles, bad sound and some scrapes and errors; but the thing came through and I was surprised that I eventually came to love it.The exterior scenes with the spaceships and planets are better than the ones in Blakes7, and the credit goes to Caprino studios (who made the famous Flåklypa Grand Prix), and the interior of the Marco Polo (the space ship) works better than I'd expected. The acting is typically theatrical, but it works better than when they play Ibsen, to put it mildly, and Bjørn Floberg carries his role solidly, as does Trini Lund. The legendary actress Henny moan delivers her lines in a serious and laid back tone which fits the genre, but this is an ensemble play, and I'm happy to say that Ola B. Johannesen carries his mustache with nobility, and Marit Østbye is a really hot space chic of my standards.But is it really that good? Well, one have to swallow the rather abrupt ending, the pretentious criticism of «modern society», but yes, it's, well, not really really really fantastic, but charming, cool, nostalgic and pleasant. One and a half hour of classic Norwegian SciFi.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9cf679a5a3d49bea3a9c8fe68e8a960",
            "input": "I remember having a pretty low regard for a venture like this when it was first released. James \"Not Jim\" Belushi, a hammy kid actress, and a cheesy title in a John Hughes formula. You couldn't have paid me to see it 15 years ago. But, I got caught up watching it while wasting away a Sunday afternoon, and it hits me on a couple of levels. The fairy tale (part Pretty Woman, part reverse Pretty Woman), the very vulnerable, Elizabeth_Perkins_in_Miracle_On_42nd_Street -like performance by Kelly Lynch, the escapism. Over all, it gently pulls some very nice strings. It's pretty hard not to fall into the story, develop a crush on Kelly Lynch, identify with James Belushi, dislike the stiff bad guy boyfriend, and laugh at the Curley Sue lines. Has all the ups and downs, with a happy ending, and the kind of message you want to hear. Go ahead, waste your time on this movie, it's worth it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8f421b321d64ae09035f0efc1a79965",
            "input": "Frank Capra's creativity must have been just about spent by the time he made this film. While it has a few charming moments, and many wonderful performers, Capra's outright recycling of not just the script but considerable footage from his first version of this story, Broadway Bill (1934), is downright shoddy. It is understandable that he would re-use footage from the climactic horse race, which is thrilling. But he uses entire dialogue scenes with minor actors, then brings back those actors and apparently expects us not to notice, for example, that Ward Bond is 14 years older! Unless you want to see one of the last appearances of Oliver Hardy, skip this one and watch Broadway Bill instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59e161c1a6d74226ab566930beda253c",
            "input": "Yet another Die Hard straight to video rip off with cardboard villains… How many more of these god awful cheaply (and badly) made rip off of the more popular action movies of the late 1980's and early 1990's are there still lurking out there? For the record (not that you will care really) this one is yet another blatant rip off of a combination of Die Hard, Under Siege and Speed 2 complete with a full complement of clichés and predictability.The non descript villains are the usual selection of cardboard cut out gun toting thugs who are dispatched by various means as the film progresses, the hero naturally is an ex cop or something that has family and attitude problems and of course he brings along to the party not only the usual emotional baggage but also a matching piece of eye candy and his annoying son.The supposed luxury cruise liner that is running between Florida and Mexico is carefully described as a cross between a liner and a ferry – this goes someway to explaining how come they appear to be larking around on a rusty cross channel ferry – in New Zealand! The acting is as wooden as the deck, the script woeful, the one liners predictable, the villains utterly inept and the plot has holes in it you could sail a boat through.There seems to be a never ending tide of this sort of rip off straight to video rubbish polluting the late night slots of television and the DVD bargain bins of supermarkets everywhere (although even this film is so bad it has yet to see a DVD release yet but give it time!) Is there any chance of something at least half decently made, semi believable and most important ORIGINAL?!? No, I thought not…..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf3f2bdf99244aac81c6419a37927bca",
            "input": "As serials go \"Zorro's Fighting Legion\" is one of the best action serials of the 1930s. Made in a period when the studios could still field a large cast, this one has wall to wall action throughout its 12 chapters.In 1824 the President of the newly formed Republic of Mexico Benito Juarez (Carleton Young) is trying to put his new country on a solid financial footing. To that end, he has arranged to have rich gold shipments forwarded to the capitol from the local San Mendolita mine.Members of the local council plot to steal the shipments on behalf of Don-del-Oro a gold armored god, who with the aid of the local Yaqui tribe, hopes to install himself as the ruler of Mexico. Opposing him is Don Francisco (Guy D'Ennery) who forms a legion of locals to aid Juarez. When Don Franciso is murdered by Don-del-Oro's men, a stranger, the fopish Don Diego (Reed Hadley) arrives in town. Diego aka Zorro takes over the legion with the help of his friends Ramon (William Corson) and Juan (Budd Buster). The token heroine of the piece is Ramon's sister Volita (Sheila D'Arcy).Both Diego and Ramon hold seats on the local ruling Counsil. It soon becomes apparent that some of the other members of the Council are in league with Don-del-Oro. First there is the Chairman of the Council (Leander de Cordova), the head of the militia Manuel (John Merton), Chief Justice Pablo (C. Montague Shaw) and Gonzolez (Edmund Cobb). Zorro suspects that one of these men is Don-del-Oro, but which one?What follows are several hair raising escapes by Zorro and his confederates from the followers of Don-del-Oro. We have the ever present collapsing rope bridge, the deep chasm between two cliffs over which only Zorro can jump to safety, and the usual assortment of explosions, fires and coaches and wagons crashing or going over the cliff. Hats off here to Republic's fine team of stunt men lead by the legendary Yakima Canutt and the Yrigoyens, Bill and Joe. Canutt performs his signature stunt jumping on a team of runaway horses and then falling beneath the coach which he repeated in other films including John Ford's \"Stagecoach\" the same year.Anyway, Zorro finally unmasks the false god Don-del-Oro and restores peace to the valley before riding off into the sunset in Chapter 12.Others in the cast include Jim Pierce, Curley Dresden and Charlie King as Don-del-Oro's hence men and if you look closely you may spot bits by future serial star and Lone Ranger Clayton Moore and stuntman Canutt in bits. \"Big\" Jim Pierce by the way, may be best remembered for playing Tarzan in 1927's \"Tarzan and the Golden Liom\" (1927) and for his marriage to Joan Burroughs the daughter of Tarzan creator Edgar Rice Burroughs.Thoroughly enjoyable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1a7483e7ef94ed09674c9a84ccb86c5",
            "input": "This is a dramatic film in the whole sense of the word. It tells a tail that here in Greece we live as a routine in everyday life without realizing how sad it is. Sure it has some extremes.. but every now and then real life sorrow surpasses art.It is deeply critical of the goals we pursue and the whole social structure build around them. The film has a deeper understanding of Greek ways of life, stereotypes, and social structure. Unlike most Greek films that have a certain fast-food-mainstream audience, this one does not target anyone in particular but while you watch it you feel that someone put the best possible words and pictures to describe your feelings. I am not a big fan of traditional music either but I wouldn't like to hear anything else when it was played during the film.If someone told me to say something against this film I'd define the following, sometimes the transition between scenes seemed sudden or somewhat cut. I guess the editing had to cut it up to fit the 2hours and a bit for the theatres..Anyway I could write more and more to express my thought over this but I guess u have to see it and discuss it with a friend. A must see",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff2d95ff24374ae89eef44b803407a85",
            "input": "This movie barely followed the story line of the movie. All of the fascinating points in the book didn't even exist in the movie. They ended up turning it into a cheesy \"tween\" Disney movie \"crush\" story between Meg and Calvin. It was so bad it should have been Hillary Duff playing the part, or one of the likes. This movie was nothing more than an insult to the intelligence and mysticism of the book. I can't believe Disney could even get away with making such a cheap, basic rendition. If you've ever read the book, I think you would agree it could easily be made into a movie of \"Lord of the Rings\" equivalence. This movie should have never been able to use the title of A Wrinkle in Time. Poorly done.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-941be56139b54d189731059c026c98e7",
            "input": "One previous reviewer called this film \"pure visual joy\" I am wondering if s/he saw the same film that I did. \"High Art\" had to have the most relentlessly depressing interiors since \"Seven\". One can almost forgive Sheedy and Mitchell for the cliché of going to a B&B for their First Time. Of course, before they do that, one has to watch opium-den parties inhabited by people who are not apparently gainfully employed but can somehow support a flourishing drug habit. Not to mention the icy stares from those familiar movie types, the Girlfriend/Boyfriend At Start, who are well aware they're going to be thrown over sometime in the next 100 minutes or so. The movie also states that the Sheedy character has retired from professional photography for ten years now. What did she do, retire at age twenty?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9735163f9e3048f0be5d15a86f7390ce",
            "input": "I was very surprised how bad this movie was. Nice cinematography and beautiful landscapes can only take the movie so far. I was hoping for a rerun of Hero, but this is much, much worse.This movie is why kung fu movies got a bad reputation in the first place. No believable characters (even within the cartoonish world of kung fu movies, these characters are ridiculous), virtually no plot, and ridiculous story twists.This movie is so boring and so frustrating because it reminds you of trying to play a make believe game with a child. Every time you think your silly battle makes some sense, they invent another ridiculous twist that makes no sense (\"Ah ha, you only think you've got me with your super powers and 10,000 ray guns, but I ate my vitamins laced with plutonium and teflon, so your ray guns don't work and I'm invulnerable to your super powers....tap tap no trade backs infinity PLUS one.\") Children can continue with this lunacy, because they don't really care whether anyone is listening because they are having a fun time. However, for the VIEWER, especially the adult viewer, this long movie is worse than a bout with bad gas.SPOILERS AHEAD Note to kung fu movie makers, (a) if you have a knife in your back it hurts unless you are on PCP, in which case your kung fu is not strong, (b) if you repeatedly fall on your back, which has a knife in it, it will hurt more and do more damage, unless it is a fake prop, (c) when you get stabbed in the heart with a knife, you die, especially in ancient china where there isn't a Kaiser Permanente around the corner, (d) kung fu fights don't last for hours while 3 feet of snow falls, and (e) sometimes it is worth while explaining your characters and their motivations.In any event, go watch Hero again, because at least within its own little world it is comprehensible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6e812e70f7649a4afeb8bfe7817342a",
            "input": "I'm not alone in admiring the first Superman movie, a film that Richard Donner executed masterfully. I am also not alone in scorning Richard Lester's Superman 2... which brings us to the Richard Donner cut of the same movie, sadly it is still an absolute abomination.Superman's world is one where suspension of disbelief is required in strong doses, but Superman 2 stretches things too far. It doesn't matter who directed Superman 2 because the script insults the intelligence of a first grader. In a sense there is no plot because the characters have zero motivation to act the way they do, unlike the original superman. With or without his powers, Superman's strength (or lack thereof) is handled in the least believable manner. There is too much to criticize, so I will not bother. I condemn this movie... perhaps the slapstick in the Lester version is more appropriate to the moronic script this movie is based on. Super-Duper bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6cbc0ab86ba64fcc820e9737dbe7bb31",
            "input": "I just got done watching \"Kalifornia\" on Showtime for the fourth time since I first saw it back in July of 2001. You would think that with the recent wave of serial killer films, that \"Kalifornia\" would be amongst some of the earlier films worthy of mention but hasn't. Perhaps if this film had been released sometime between like 1996-1999, maybe it might have been more successful. In my opinion, \"Kalifornia\" is much different from most serial killer films released during the late 1990s. It has an almost completely different atmosphere from most of today's serial killer films like \"Seven\" or \"The Bone Collector\". Many serial killer films have shown a killer but that person is always behind a mask or we never see enough of them to actually learn anything about them. \"Kalifornia\" is a film that actually tries to break through that barrier and actually understand the criminal mind. It tries to answer questions like \"why do they do the things they do? Is it because of something that happened in their past? Does it make them feel superior or powerful? Or do they do it because they like the thrill of the kill?\" These are some of the things that \"Kalifornia\" tries to answer but also leaves room for us to try and figure things out for ourselves. Brad Pitt makes an everlasting impression as Early Grayce. When we first meet Early in the beginning of the film, we see that he is obviously one disturbed individual. When we first see him, it's late at night. Early is possibly drunk. We then see him pick up a rock, throw it off a bridge, and it later lands on the windshield of a passing car. Pitt is fierce in this film. It is always good to see him when he plays psychos or really bad people. It's funny that this would later lead him play a true loon like in \"12 Monkeys\" and that he would be on the other end of the spectrum in David Fincher's \"Seven\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca4016afac3444f7a3a0de501b1eeb4d",
            "input": "Being the first feature film with Robert De Niro (although not released for years later), this is worth the watch. De Niro's role isn't huge, yet amusing as one of two friends who first try to prevent another friends marriage only to later chase him down to force him into it. Any die hard De Niro fan will get a kick out of an early performance by arguably the best actor today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a96428e846134d11bef9de8e8650a45f",
            "input": "Okay. Yes, this was a very-tight-budget movie with continuity errors (like single scenes obviously filmed in sunshine and then in shadow and then mixed together), and as much as I love Nick Mancuso he was often a little too good at the burnt-out part, and some of the minor supporting cast was really bad (plus at least one actor was used for two different but conspicuous roles). But come on. Richard Grieco was hysterical (his hair alone is worth the trip). Steven Ford was very likable. Mancuso had some great lines, while Nancy Allen, ironically, was completely bland and uninteresting. Classic? No. Bad parts? Yes. Entertaining? Big yes. I would have loved to have been on-set the day they decided what kind of hairstyle Grieco would have. \"Are you fast?\" ... \"Y'ain't THAT fast.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-07070690c400416fb76b848fe1e8a4db",
            "input": "Good sequel to Murder in a Small Town. In this one Cash and his police Lt. buddy unravel a sticky plot involving a Nazi criminal, a philanthropic witch, and a family of screw-ups and their wierdo helpers. As in the original, the viewer is treated to a nice little mystery with distinctive sights and sounds of pre-war America. Go see it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ec72e39449a4c0d911557fcf5075aa7",
            "input": "This 30 minute documentary Buñuel made in the early 1930's about one of Spain's poorest regions is, in my opinion, one of his weakest films. First, let's admit that 70 years later, Spain is much richer than it was then (and when I say this, I fully admit that wealth can bring problems of its own, like excessive individualism and consumerism, though all in all wealth it's a far better condition than the extreme poverty portrayed here). And if poverty receded in Spain it was not exactly with the sort of socialism that Buñuel favored, but with Western European style capitalism. But one of the most shocking things about the movie is this: in one scene, the narrator chides that in school, children are taught the value of Pi. Teaching math to poor people, the horror!. Buñuel shortsightedness is at its most glaring here, not realizing that it is access to the latest knowledge and technology what will help the poor overcome their situation. What is he proposing? That children are taught exactly what at school? Doesn't Buñuel understand that it is the lack of modern technology that has made them poor in comparison with other people?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bd0131568da4f9783cf794abe610c34",
            "input": "I figured that any horror film with Orson Welles in it would be weird. Necromancy sure was but it was a little too weird for it's own good. The film does indeed have a creepy feel as it deals with a coven of satanists/witches in a small town and a young woman's attempt to escape them. The director though seems to be deliberately trying to confuse the audience by using flashbacks and dream sequences. By the finale, there are too many unanswered questions. What's worse, as the story is so confusing, it's pretty hard to root for any of the characters. It seems odd that Welles would agree to headline this film especially since he doesn't have that much to do. Maybe someday they will put out a tape of the outtakes and bloopers from this movie. Now that would really be fun!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d79a598d173e4fbf9a93d591d71a750b",
            "input": "I really think that people are taking the wrong approach at this one. First of all, I find this short-film very entertaining and interesting. I just take it for what it is. I think the suspense and mystery are ingenious in their insinuation upon the watcher. One other thing that caught my fancy was that it immediately gets the viewer involved even though there is no clear story, just hints and pauses and emotions played out by the characters that kind of give you the impression that there is a story to all that is going on. No-one else could have done that better than Lynch. This is the essence of lynchianism at its best. Sure, I will agree with anyone that people that start viewing this with the desire to be entertained without any really imaginative work from the viewer's side, will find themselves disappointed. And in good right. Lynch is not about that. At least this side of Lynch is not. The one that helped make Lost Highway/Mulholland Dr. is at full tilt here and people that just expect to be entertained like they would watching anything else, will just not get what this is all about. My opinion is that Darkened Room is all about messing with your animal-core, your instinctual self, by giving you the means (image, sound, situation) by which you instinctively react. It's not about pleasure of any kind, it's about getting the desired reaction out of you. And, that, my friend, is pure art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2db7a82f56224d08bd5ec4e40f341c63",
            "input": "I can fondly remember Bo Derek's heyday and the UK press attention (the mucky Sun & News of the World papers especially)- all following her small role in \"10\" with Dudley Moore. Understandably, much fuss was made of her photogenic face, crystal clear blue eyes and her perfectly formed bouncing breasts. Unfortunately, acting is, and never was, her forte! I think they should make one of the triple disc collections you always find in the bargain DVD bins- Orca, Tarzan the Ape-man and Bolero. All these films could be nominated for the \"So Bad They Are Great\".It would be a guilty \"must buy\" of mine! Should you ever read your press, or this comment Ms Derek, please do not be offended- ALways had a soft spot for you and there are more important things going on in the world to worry about than your acting ability. Much Love.x",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ff2b33d23994d389ba2aa11fe1b292b",
            "input": "Every great gangster movie has under-currents of human drama. Don't expect an emotional story of guilt, retribution and despair from \"Scarface\". This is a tale of ferocious greed, corruption, and power. The darker side of the fabled \"American Dream\".Anybody complaining about the \"cheesiness\" of this film is missing the point. The superficial characters, cheesy music, and dated fashions further fuel the criticism of this life of diabolical excess. Nothing in the lives of these characters really matter, not on any human level at least. In fact the film practically borderlines satire, ironic considering all the gangsta rappers that were positively inspired by the lifestyle of Tony Montana.This isn't Brian DePalma's strongest directorial effort, it is occasionally excellent and well-handled (particularly the memorable finale), but frequently sinks to sloppy and misled. Thankfully, it is supported by a very strong script by Oliver Stone (probably good therapy for him, considering the coke habit he was tackling at the time). The themes are consistent, with the focus primarily on the life of Tony Montana, and the evolution of his character as he is consumed by greed and power. The dialogue is also excellent, see-sawing comfortably between humour and drama. There are many stand-out lines, which have since wormed their way into popular culture in one form or another.The cast help make it what it is as well, but this is really Pacino's film. One of his earlier less subtle performances (something much more common from him nowadays), this is a world entirely separate from Michael Corleone and Frank Serpico. Yet he is as watchable here as ever, in very entertaining (and intentionally over-the-top) form. It is hard to imagine another Tony Montana after seeing this film, in possibly one of the most mimicked performances ever. Pfeiffer stood out as dull and uncomfortable on first viewing, but I've come to realize how she plays out the part of the bored little wife. Not an exceptional effort, but unfairly misjudged. The supporting players are very good too, particularly Paul Shenar as the suave Alejandro Sosa.Powerful, occasionally humorous, sometimes shocking, and continually controversial. \"Scarface\" is one of the films of the eighties (whatever that might mean to you). An essential and accessible gangster flick, and a pop-culture landmark. 9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb06cc0ba7664d7da8c0d7e63821ad3b",
            "input": "I will give it a 3 just because it showed history that we need to know about, to prevent it from happening again. I agree with the comments from the gentleman from UK. The movie was pretty terrible. All cliché, no real plot. Historical and technical inaccuracies abound. Look up the technical specs on DE 529, or any Everts class Destroyer Escort, and you will see what I mean. I now its black history month in the US, and Im going to be called a racist just for saying this, but the history of this ship is not that great. They did some escort work, chased a \"submarine\" that turned out to be a hulk that they rammed. Sorry, but black people did a lot more in WWII then this silly movie gives them credit for. This movie makes them look like whiners. Let the name calling commence, I can handle it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d24ee5195fea4743bd64ad52e3e05589",
            "input": "Turned out to be a classy production with what must have been a low budget. The variety of characters is amazing, from axe-wielding dwarfs to 7ft ghouls! I enjoyed the relationship between the leads, not overly sentimental but romantic enough to keep the interest going. I also enjoyed the mix of humour (which can be very easy to get wrong, too much/not enough) which meant it didn't get too dark, nor too spoofy. It was a great step up from Eaves' other efforts, Hellbreeder and Sanitarium, in terms of storyline and production. They have a great website which is worth checking out. Can't wait for Bane, if the level of improvement continues, it should be fantastic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-519d3e56036e4fc09724bf37c692eb2e",
            "input": "I laughed so hard during this movie my face hurt. Ben Affleck was hilarious and reminded me of a pretty boy Jack Black in this role. Gandolfini gives his typical A performance. The entire cast is funny, the story pretty good and the comic moments awesome. I went into this movie not expecting much so perhaps that is why I was so surprised to come out of the flick thoroughly pleased and facially exhausted. I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys comedy, can identify with loneliness during the holidays and/or putting up with the relatives. The best part to this film (to me anyway) were the subtle bits of humor that caught me completely off guard and had me laughing long after the rest of the audience had stopped. Namely, the scene involving the lighting of the Christmas tree. Go see it and have a good laugh!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-959501ca68cd4e35a838a22c20d249b0",
            "input": "Absence of a GOOD PLOT, absence of decent ACTING, absence of good CINEMATOGRAPHY, absence of decent looking SPECIAL EFFECTS...need I go on? Review MAY contain SPOILERS. The actors appear to be READING their lines, and not very well at that. Most of the \"actors\" were acting like they were in a SECOND GRADE play. The story appeared to have been written by one of the aforementioned second graders...it's not really all that convoluted...it's just so SIMPLE and DUMB, that a person thinks they must be missing something so they think it is convoluted. Nope it's not, it's EXACTLY as SIMPLE as you think it is. I UNDERSTOOD the \"film\", that's how i KNOW that it STUNK! MOST of the film just had people sitting around talking(reading their lines), TRYING to look sinister. The narrator was ANNOYING. The \"special effects\" were LAUGHABLE. I love low budget movies. I also like Carolyn Munro, Tom Savini, Jack Scarry, and Michael Berrymore...just not in THIS movie...you can tell they weren't getting paid, or weren't getting paid much, because neither their hearts NOR their talents were in it. I LOVE Tony Todd...however, he was only adequate in this movie. In fact, Tony Todd's performance is the ONLY reason I gave it 3 stars instead of 1...and Tony was only in it for a whole TWO MINUTES (seriously)! I would suggest to fast forward the DVD to the two minute Tony Todd segment. If I had gone to the theater, and paid more than a DOLLAR to see this \"film\" I would have been P.O.'D and demanded my money back. Hopefully the people who made this will do better next time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ff5825f7afd4293b9344565ccbe36cf",
            "input": "... or maybe it just IS this bad. The plot is a cheap rehash of the first, which is weird, since it's supposed to be a prequel, not a sequel. Pretty much the entire movie seems like a cheap remake of the first, with scenes mimicking the things that happened in the first, only a lot more ridiculous and unlikely. Where the first had a great cast, this one consist of B-list actors and rejects. The acting is mostly horrendously bad. Half of the good lines in the movie are taken directly from the first, as is nearly every major character, including the ones who weren't in the first movie. I realize this was made up by a TV series pilot episode, but that's no excuse. They didn't have to turn the (bad) footage into a movie. Only one thing is marginally good, and that's the erotic sequences. However, as these are nowhere near as good as the ones in the first, even this isn't raising it above a rating of 1. If you have a chance to see it for free, and you're a straight guy, it could be worth checking out, if you want something erotic that isn't porn. If not, avoid at all costs. 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3af289c9316b403d94ce230a98ccb6e1",
            "input": "Dear Readers,With High Expectations, Human Beings leave Earth to begin a new life in Space Colonies. However, The Allied Forces of the United Earth Sphere Alliance gain great military control over the colonies and soon seize one colony after another in the name of Justice and Peace...The year is After Colony 195. Operation Meteor. In a move to counter the Alliance's tyranny, Rebel Forces from several colonies send new arsenals to Earth disguised as Shooting Stars...However...The Alliance forces catch on...Gundam Wing is the most popular and most successful of the entire Gundam Series. With cutting-edge Anime animation, stunning action, amazing Mobile Suits, Breathtaking scripts, and some of the most unforgettable characters in Anime History.I'll try to explain the plot of Gundam Wing as best as possible. Earth has now colonized space, but the UESA forces have forcibly occupied them along with the help of the mysterious Elite Force OZ and their shadowy leaders, Treize Kushrenada and the Romefeller Foundation. Five pilots are sent to Earth piloting Mobile Suits with extraordinary power known as the Gundams. Pursued by the Mysterious Lieutenant Zechs Merquise, Treize's second-in-command, a young teenager named Relena, and the Alliance military, the Gundam pilots unleash hell upon Earth for the Freedom of the Colonies while all the while, a plot most sinister architected by Treize begins to start.Signed, The Constant DVD Collector",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c715e15e3a142bdace6828961e30a72",
            "input": "I usually comment only on movies that I like, figuring \"everyone to his/her own taste,\" but here I want to make an exception. The premise of this movie, which somehow seems to get lost in the shuffle, is that these two self-centered adults have a perfect right to go off to Las Vegas, get drunk, get married, and inflict incalculable suffering upon their respective broods of children. Even allowing for the culturally sanctioned inebriation, they have neither the courage nor the sense of responsibility to wake up the next morning and undo what they have set in motion. After all, \"love\" is all that's important, isn't it? To hell with everybody else. Whether or not things \"work out in the end\" is really not the point; in fact it's quite irrelevant. The point is that disrespect for others, especially if they are young persons, and especially if they are in a position of dependency, is made light of and thereby reinforced by this movie. There are far more innocuous behaviors these \"parents\" could have performed that would have brought down an army of social workers on their heads in a heartbeat.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a40ed174e424a1592545d5c8a045d38",
            "input": "This film resembles in many ways `Enemy of the State' with Will Smith and Gene Hackman, as we have an innocent (black) man being pursued by the `government' with all the modern technology known to man. Usually when storyline is copied like this the result is a disaster. That does not apply here. Of course I love everything David Morse does, so maybe my comments are not fair, but there were more good things about this film then that. The main baddy, played by Doug Hutchison, was brilliant, and the story flowed with excellent extras such as David Paymer and Robert Pastorelli. Our hero, Alvin Sanders (played by Jamie Foxx), was however irritating most of the part. He is so out of place, cracking bad jokes, evoking no sympathy from the audience. Or not to begin with, the strange thing is that he kinda grows on you (and on his followers as well!). I didn't expect much when I rented it, but was surprised with a good solid action movie with comedy bits. 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2ae904ac9b5461fb59b5101010692aa",
            "input": "Scott Bartlett's 'OffOn' is nine minutes of pure craziness. It is a full-frontal assault of psychedelic, pulsating, epilepsy-inducing flashing lights and colours, and the first true merging of film and video in avante-garde cinema. There's no story to speak of, but Bartlett uses images of nature – particularly the human face and form – to provoke a sequence of emotional reactions, integrating these biological phenomena into the highly-industrial form of modern technology. In a sense, the film represents the merging of humanity into his tools, his machinery, his technology. This theme connects loosely with the subplot of HAL9000 in Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey (1968),' and, indeed, Bartlett's opening sequence of images – flashing colours before a close-up human eye – recalls Dave Bowman's journey through the Stargate. The visuals are richly-coloured, a confronting blend of sharp, vivid photography and increasingly-grainy video, as though we're sitting too close to a television screen {as a matter of fact, the end product was recorded from a TV monitor}.There appears to be some confusion about the film's release date. IMDb lists the film as a 1972 release, but both the National Film Registry and the National Film Preservation Foundation give 1968 as the correct year. Perhaps this disparity reflects the time between the film's completion and its first public screening. Either way, the visuals are distinctly ahead of their time, occasionally reminiscent of a 1980s music video, and some brisk techno music wouldn't have gone amiss, either! 'OffOn' captures grainy, fragmented images, presenting life from the warped perspective of a computer processing too much information. I had a thought – and please don't laugh at this free-thinking interpretation – that an extraterrestrial civilisation capturing Earth's television signals might very well receive such a disjointed, alien documentation of human life, a bizarre montage of only vaguely-familiar imagery that couldn't possibly make any coherent sense. Perhaps this is where Mankind, with all his technology, is eventually heading, towards an irreversible merging of film and video, of purity and artificiality.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c05851c6a0b5439a87933d2b04897636",
            "input": "I was watching this movie on Friday,Apr 7th. I didn't see the last scene ( cos I was talking with my bro n Mom in law at the same time ). Anyone can tell me what happened to her?I watched slightly that her husband was hearing someone was talking to his wife in the bedroom and then he opened the door,she's dead already.What happened to her? Did she kill herself? How could she arrange everything like the phone calls,meanwhile she's at home when her husband was talking to this strange admirer?Anyone can explain to me,please. I am so so curious!! ( in the end,I read that she suffered from Multiply Disorder Personality ).Thnks before.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67b927b16720471e8407e00f355f145a",
            "input": "I read some comments on the internet about this film like \"...harder then Hostel...\", \"the camera never screens of when it's getting really brutal...\". But none of them is true. The camera never screens of, because there is nothing to screen of. The same scene is repeated hundred and hundred times again. Women lies on a table, killer rapes women a few times, killer cuts women into pieces (you never see this during the whole film!). Police come and arrested him. Killer fools the jury. Film over. In Germany we would say :\"Viel Lärm um Nichts\". All in all, one of the most boring films I ever see. Absolutely non-recommendable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-df6a210e95e84c37b1224353078b1139",
            "input": "\"Girlfight\" follows a project dwelling New York high school girl from a sense of futility into the world of amateur boxing where she finds self esteem, purpose, and much more. Although the film is not about boxing, boxing is all about the film. So much so you can almost smell the sweat. Technically and artistically a good shoot with an sense of honesty and reality about it, \"Girlfight\" is no chick flick and no \"Rocky\". It is, rather, a very human drama which even viewers who don't know boxing will be able to connect with.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9d532fb17ec432d93c59a12af05c1e7",
            "input": "I so wanted to believe in this movie after the only form of mainstream comedy this country recognises is slapstick and stereotypes.Of course, it went completely the other way - let's be cool and edgy - and came out the other side with little to show for it. I bet One Small Seed went nuts for this. I know SL did.None of the main characters have the comedic chops to pull it off. Even Danny K had better timing. I'm actually being serious. Every time they introduced a bit character I kept thinking, \"Darn, this person should have been the lead!\".Independent doesn't mean that the camera work needs to be horrible. Black and white did nothing for this movie - actually with such flat dialogue it hurt this even more by bringing the boredom into sharp relief. The black and white also wasn't crisp. The composition was horrible. The use of music was horrible. Strangely enough I watched Little Miss Sunshine after this movie and the composition on that was superb - maybe that's why the deficiencies in this movie stick out in my mind.I think Corne (who was funnier than the leads before he even said anything) was speaking to this movie and not David - see it and you'll understand. I bet the guys who organise Oppikoppi were dismayed. One would think nothing happens there at all. I got the feeling it could have been filmed in someone's back garden. I know regular guys who have much funnier, raunchier and wittier conversations than any of these \"comics\". The dude who they hooked up with end was OK though.Guess SA comedy's gonna stay in the stone age a little longer. Nice work guys.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac48c1e429ac4aa4a4f40ac14618b526",
            "input": "at first I had the reaction a lot of people left with after seeing this: that shots of fat people sunbathing, etc were cheap shots in a way. OK so he's doing diane arbus meets. . . whatever. . . but it wasn't long before I realized that this wasn't being done in a dehumanizing way, as the images unfold I felt that the problem was entirely the audience's: we are conditioned by Hollywood and also movies from just about everywhere actually to feel that to watch people above a certain age behave in a sexual way is something unseemly, something that ought not to be shown. if this were all the film offered it would be a great deal. however, the story of the woman with the abusive boyfriend and his drunk friend really hits like a ton of bricks: very eloquent storytelling, incredible performances, and to think the scene was improvised. that blonde guy is a genius actor. finally I want to contradict those who say this film is all about how pathetic all these people are. the old man who is on the make with the woman who finally dances for him is completely an a OK character that breaks that mold, so don't oversimplify the film by overlooking him. yes his dog gets killed. this ain't a rosy picture of the world but it's not . . . completely hopeless. anyway I felt really grateful to the filmmaker for making such a beautiful film all in all. I wouldn't say each of the threads were as strong as the strongest, but I say this movie basically kicks ass and would highly recommend it. . .",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77fdda767d2a40f4aaded4e3ee59cc05",
            "input": "Return of the Boogyman is a dreadful movie which doesn't play like a movie, it plays like an episode of a TV sitcom when they flashback to older episodes. Return of the Boogyman is just a clip show.Mutch of the film is constant and annoying flashbacks from the first movie. Over and over again the same footage. How boring this is.The movie really is about a psychic woman who has visions of the first movie.I have seen the first movie I don't want to see the same scenes over and over again and I don't know who would. The whole movie looks like it was quickly made to make a few bucks and thats it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-542aa2108f6b4ff5a0b8eda7cad16c9a",
            "input": "A very strange and compelling movie. It's about a very awkward and tightly wound man who attempts to navigate his life as a door-to-door fundraiser/salesman. The director was able to capture a very unnerving tone that really served the story well. Original and unsettling while also finding a great deal of humor in the pain that accompanies life. There is a sequence at a testing facility that really stood out and made me laugh out loud which is not something I do as frequently as I should. One of the more memorable films I've seen in a long while. Hasn't left my mind and I look forward to future efforts by Bronstein. Fantastic performances all around. The simple line \"I really appreciate it.\" is now iconic to me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-326d30643999455a997e75723097a179",
            "input": "I enjoyed every moment of this beautiful film and was intrigued about this female painter I had never heard of before. So I set out exploring her life and work afterwards. As could be expected, I found out that the film was not exactly historically accurate. I was a little astounded however by the very negative comments on the film because of this inaccuracy. Come on, guys, a film isn't and shouldn't be a biography (nor a novel!). Any historical film distorts reality, because it should be a work of art in its own right. A film director is fully entitled to use elements from reality and history to create a world of his own. Artemisia is a wonderful film and I think it brought many people (including some that now give negative comments) to explore the life and work of this fascinating artist.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b858c8f171f947049fac83ee6d2e75c0",
            "input": "Poor Basil Rathbone, an egotistical composer who's lost his muse. He's been faking it for some time, buying his lyrics and his music from various sources. Trouble is that two of the sources (Bing Crosby music) and (Mary Martin words) happen to meet and fall in love. And then they discover what they've been doing. Complications ensue, but all is righted at the end.Crosby and Martin sing terrifically. Mary had signed a Paramount contract and also at the same time doubled as a regular on Crosby's Kraft Music Hall Radio Show. For reasons I don't understand, movie audiences didn't take to her, so she went back to Broadway and did One Touch of Venus in 1944 and stayed there.Basil Rathbone in one of the few times he played comedy does it very well. His ego is constantly being deflated by sidekick Oscar Levant and again I'm surprised they didn't do more films together.As in most of Crosby's Paramount vehicles, no big production numbers, but I agree with the previous reviewer about the title tune being done as an impromptu jam session in a pawn shop. Good job by all.A surprisingly original plot and great entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-622c9946b25b4b0e96fc1d729a4f100d",
            "input": "This was the worst movie I have ever seen Billy Zane in. I understand that this movie was mainly to showcase the new comers, who did pretty good for newbies, but over all, the movie was not believable.With all of the gunfire, you would think the police would have intervened. Even the coin being a bug on Sean was stupid. The way Sean suddenly realizes the coin is the bug, was not realistic.Looks like this movie was slapped together fast. Poor job. Get a better writer.The count down to the end was not in sync with anything. It took longer to fight. And what a coincidence that each time Billy was going to blast Sean, he'd be out of bullets. Once, I can believe, but not twice. Actually, Billy's character was goofy. It was so stupid when Sean punches him out at the end. It was like a comedy. Bad! Bad! Bad!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a6baa857f6e468d8070d3a2b7eb153e",
            "input": "I'm one of those people who usually watch programs and keep my feelings about a show private. However, Pushing Daisies is my exception. I became curious about the program from the commercials that aired which gave glimpses of the premise of the show. I was skeptical about it at first, especially after the finale of Six Feet Under was still in my head. Here we go again, I thought. I watched the first, second, third and all the other episodes. Wow! First of all, I thought it took the subject of death and presented in a way that was palatable without being morbid. The characters were engaging and I like the thought of Ned the main character not being able to literally touch the love of his life, Chuck without the consequences of her dying.Most of the characters have a longing for things they can't have. Besides Ned and Chuck, Olive longs for Ned. Lily and Vivian longs for their niece Chuck and Emerson is always longing for the monetary rewards from the mysterious deaths they solve. I think the characters are picture perfect and believable. I like how Emerson who is black plays off of the rest of the characters since as an African American; I like the subtle cultural humor that sometimes comes from him.All in all, this visual fairytale is one of the most valuable pieces of entertainment that I've seen out of the 2007 season. I think the show has enough romance for the romantics and enough who-done-it for the mystery buffs. I just wish the writers would get back to work, so that the show can continue to evolve.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c21eb7690b5b4636a2ac0229c06101c3",
            "input": "There is so much of worth in this movie that it is hard to know where to begin with praise. Let me begin by expressing my admiration for a perfect portrayal by Reese Witherspoon. That her performance stands out in the excellent cast is praise indeed. Robert Mulligan has seldom disappointed those of us who have admired his work. Every frame of The Man in the Moon is evidence of film making at its best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcb3001e4ff84f0ea213662b04ecdc74",
            "input": "OK, I bought this film from Woolworths for my friend for a joke present on his birthday, because the front cover had a sexual innuendo in it.But we decided it to watch it anyway. Just for hilarity purposes.And I'm sorry, but this has got to be, one of THE worst films in history.It began off alright, and we thought \"Ok this might actually be OK\". But after about 10 minutes, we were sadly mistaken.It began when the \"mysterious paint baller\" turned out to be the most obvious character, the Scouser/Australian (I say that because he had an accent which couldn't be identified), who's acting might I just say, was abysmal.Then it got to the end, and by that time, we had all lost the will to live. The paint ball finals.The only thing I did like about this plot is that they didn't actually win, but annoyingly enough they won by default.And I know this has nothing to do with it, but the name the team were given was just awful. Critical Damage. I mean they could of picked a more awesome name, like \"The Destroyers of the Anti-Christ\" or something. Or that's what the film should of been called anyway.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52697ddc2f34434e9e5201a22089d594",
            "input": "I have no idea what the other reviewer is talking about- this was a wonderful movie, and created a sense of the era that feels like time travel. The characters are truly young, Mary is a strong match for Byron, Claire is juvenile and a tad annoying, Polidori is a convincing beaten-down sycophant... all are beautiful, curious, and decadent... not the frightening wrecks they are in Gothic.Gothic works as an independent piece of shock film, and I loved it for different reasons, but this works like a Merchant and Ivory film, and was from my readings the best capture of what the summer must have felt like. Romantic, yes, but completely rekindles my interest in the lives of Shelley and Byron every time I think about the film. One of my all-time favorites.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61555132740545d281d770d13325325e",
            "input": "Just picked this up on DVD and watched it again. I love the bright colors vs. dark imagery. Not a big Beatty fan, but this is an excellent popcorn movie. Pacino is astounding, as always, and well, this movie marked the period where Madonna was her absolute sexiest. I wish she had stuck with the \"Breathless\" look for a while longer. Charlie Korsmo's first really big role, other than \"What about bob?\". The makeup effects were cutting edge then and still hold up for the most part. Beautiful scenery and mood transport you directly into a comic strip environment. The cars, wardrobe, buildings, and even the streetlights et a great tone, not to mention the perfect lighting, although the scenes with a lot of red can get a tad annoying, as it tends to blur a little. Just wish Beatty had gotten the chance to make a sequel. All in all, a fun few hours.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-755bea089ad040a8b2dc879567ccb61a",
            "input": "My husband and I are the parents of an autistic little boy who lives in the same township as the screenwriter of this movie. We were very upset that the JCC is bringing this movie to its Jewish film festival because of the way that the mentally disabled character Frankie is portrayed. We went to see this movie at the local theater when it came out. We demanded out money back. We would encourage the screenwriter to donate a portion of the funds to the JCC's Achad program to apologize.We did not like seeing Frankie - a mentally disabled and perhaps even autistic teenager - as part of a joke in which he keeps dropping something to look at the nanny's breasts.There was no point to Frankie's character other than to say \"hey, being mentally disabled is funny.\" Challenges like Frankie's are a serious matter. Families like mine are truly suffering.The screenwriter needs to explain herself. Does she know families with disabled kids? Does she see the families with disabled kids week after week at the JCC pool?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2dac0d306261463fa4a75f6f93959368",
            "input": "Hooper is Not Funny, Not Fasted paced, Not romantic and Non informative. There is no real drama. You would think that a movie about the world's greatest stuntman would have some drama, there was an attempt but it didn't seem real. No Character study, no lessons learned, it did not even look like the actors were having any real fun, they were just trying to act like they were having fun. There is no reason to watch unless you like to look at Burt and want get an occasional glimpse of Sally. Prancer the horse was beautiful and did what he was supposed to do. In fact Prancer was the best actor in this movie. Smoky and the Bandit was such a fun movie that I was ready to like Hooper. This movie turned out to be a real disappointment and waste of time",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2802b597bfee49d1b67abfea50adfa4c",
            "input": "This complicated western was a milestone in the career of JAMES STEWART after his return from war service, wanting to change his image by doing a western, which is largely regarded as the reason for the influx of westerns in the '50s since it's very impressive. Too bad it wasn't photographed in Technicolor.Stewart wins first prize for \"the gun that won the West\", but then has to spend the rest of the film trying to recover it when it's stolen. SHELLEY WINTERS is a shady gal with an unsavory reputation and STEPHEN McNALLY is the local bad boy gunman in Dodge City. WILL GEER is Wyatt Earp and DAN DURYEA is Shelley's bad boyfriend. And wouldn't you know that, it being a Universal-International film, TONY CURTIS and ROCK HUDSON (both quite unknown at the time) have bit roles.An interesting sequence features the first Indian attack, whereby CHARLES DRAKE reveals himself to be a coward who rides off, leaving Shelley alone in the horse-drawn wagon. He later redeems himself, but it's just one of the twists and turns that has the gun passing from one unsavory hand to another--but finally ending up with the rightful owner.STEPHEN McNALLY and JAMES STEWART have quite a final shootout that is almost as melodramatic (but not quite) as DUEL IN THE SUN's blazing guns finale. McNally makes the perfect villain and DAN DURYEA is equally treacherous in the kind of villainous role he played throughout the '40s as a low-life gunslinger.Tightly constructed story is extremely well directed by Anthony Mann, and it's fun to see ROCK HUDSON (credited as Young Bull) wearing Indian war paint and TONY CURTIS as a young soldier who casts longing glances at the then slim and attractive Shelley Winters.Well worth viewing and definitely an above average story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4138f0f3477441ac93571a3ebb55d039",
            "input": "Loony Tunes have ventured (at least) twice into the future. The first time was with the brilliantly funny \"Duck Dodgers\". The latter time was with this … um … effort. \"Loonatics Unleashed\" isn't without merit, and might be considered a good product were it not that it isn't up to Warner Brothers quality. WB cartoons are noted for their cheeky humor, appealing at least as much to adults as to children. These pedestrian superhero episodes, on the other hand, cannot fail to convince adults to pass them up.The premise of the series is that 6 ordinary individuals (2 bunnies, a Tasmanian devil, a duck, a roadrunner, and a coyote) live on the \"city-planet\" of Acmetropolis and acquire super powers when a meteor strikes the planet in 2772. What's confusing is that the titles section features these individuals with a count-up to 2772 from the 21st Century. Cute, but frelling stupid.In each episode, the super sextet – amid mildly amusing but essentially banal banter – fight various super villains. For the most part, these are types that appear in every mediocre superhero adventure series and even some of the better ones. Like many mediocre superhero series, this one takes its villains far too seriously for the context. And of course these guys are the only characters that laugh – the usual evil laugh, of course. Why is it that villains in predictable superhero adventures always – ALWAYS – laugh evilly at every opportunity? Animated material of this sort seems to leave laughter exclusively in the province of villains and (occasionally) their henchpeople and/or henchthings.In point of fact, the makers of this series missed their best bets right from the get-go. The superpowers of the characters are sometimes based on their previous normal abilities, but sometimes not. The problem here is that we don't see enough WB looniness. Lexi and Ace have fairly ordinary biologically generated energy weapons and have virtually no personality traits one could describe as \"Bugs-like\". What we have here is basically the silly and drekish \"Teen Titans\", including its overly \"modern\" animation \"look\", but with animals. Feh.The other misstep by the program's creators is (or are) the villains. As noted before, these are not terribly imaginative and do the evil-laugh bit excessively. Amazingly, the writers totally missed the obvious technique of making villains from stock WB characters as well as the protagonists. Adding to the fun could have been, say, Jupiter Sam – as well as The Fudd, still hunting wabbits – as well as Tech E. Coyote converted into a really neurotic villain – and so on. Ah, the sadness of missed opportunities….Sadly, this whole production has gone into too much overtime (that is, a 2nd season). Nevertheless, we can rejoice that there's something new out there for the 14-going-on-9 crowd. The rest of us can hope for a 3rd season of Duck Dodgers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d37d0bf42a5e4bf98925bf410b32d38e",
            "input": "Just emailed a friend who's in film school about this flick. Something to avoid when making a film - characters blabbering senseless, overwrought, convoluted monologues on screen that are ultimately trite and unconvincing. If the film is an attempt at social realism, these verbal barrages are so over-the-top that they actually draw attention to the film constructed as film and effectively neutralize that intent. Is it the acting, or the script that is bad, or both?The protagonist is also highly unbelievable for social realism - ravenously consuming canonical English literature and the bible while high or hungover and able to produce such profoundly sophomoric soliloquies while intoxicated? And how is such an unattractive, unwashed and verbally noxious character able to bed most of the women he meets within minutes of encountering them? (I had to applaud when one chick finally threw him out onto the street, despite his whining and self-pitying banter).The viewer encounters pretentious references to Ancient Greek literature, Nostradamus and the Book of Revelations. The impending doom of mankind, in the form of bar codes imprinted on our foreheads or right hands in spooky biblical fashion, is presented to a character who is oh-so-cleverly exposed in his role as a guardian of empty space. This flick is over-scripted and over the top - a melodrama clumsily infused with pedestrian \"philosophy\" about the meaning of mankind, life, etc. It is trite, overwrought and tedious.There are some very fine English films available with content similar to this film. \"Nil by Mouth\" is an excellent, far more interesting excursion into the lives of individuals in a similar social milieu. Ditto for \"In the Warzone.\" And although the comparison is not even warranted, check out anything by Peter Greenaway, who far more deftly handles dialogue, wit and absurd characters and situations.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20a50c009e6946adae031b7c483d8f02",
            "input": "Saw this film yesterday for the first time and thoroughly enjoyed it. I'm a student of screen writing and I loved the way the minor characters intervened just when something pivotal/climatic happened in a scene. I thought the dialogue was very sharp and the premise of story is rather shocking - at one particular point Barbara Stanwyck is openly flirting with her daughter's boyfriend; AND rekindling some passion in her husband whom she hasn't seen in ten years; AND with the gunshot signal 'two shots and then one' she hooks up with her old shag mate Dutch (the reason she left town in the first place!) ALL AT THE SAME TIME! The moral majority must have been totally incensed when they saw this flick back in the 50's.Love the costumes and cinematography and the straight from the hip dialogue - just to watch Barbara Stanwyck and Co doing the 'Bunny Hug' is good enough reason to rent this film on DVD.One of the best films from that period I've seen in a long time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22a623b4854841cc81f20a822af4e1ba",
            "input": "\"step aside for hollywood veterans?\" (the wayan brothers were 'asked') thats what hollyweird demanded and thats what it got. However, like so many of its recent decisions this one was a stupendous mistake.The director is SO out of touch with todays audience, attempting to bring back physical pratfalls and gags in place of funny dialogue is just a DISASTER. I knew it, the audience knew it and the CAST knew it.What a shame, why did they EVER consider changing directors? Not only that but the two Wayan brothers played as two of four primary characters, without them its just a farce and a sad one.SP",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7025a873091c4ef38b3a8fc85bd48480",
            "input": "Well let me say that I have always been a Steven seagal fan and his movies are usually great but this just don't measure up to the rest. This in my opinion is very stupid I did not like it all. The biggest reason I don't like it is because it is very flawed and to me does not make much sense. The acting is very bad even Steven seagal does not do good acting, The rest of the actors I can see because they just do direct to video movies. It does not follow a straight storyline everything happens at once so that why it doesn't make much sense. Ther is barely any action in it at all and in order to make an action movie good you usually need action in it. The special effects are very bad and you can tell are fake. So all in all this has to seagals worst movie of all so if you want to see a Steven seagal movie don't rent this one just pretend it does not exist. So just avoid this movie.Overall score: ** out of ********** * out of *****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c005df8c2ed4a90a2207492767e61f3",
            "input": "The filming crew did not have good access to the occupied territories, so filming of the Israeli side dominated. I was struck by the nearly completely opposite points of view of the mothers. The Israeli mother lost a child who had the possibility of a life of tremendous happiness. The Palestinian mother lost a child who had only the possibility of a life of privation and despair. With such completely different viewpoints, any meeting had no real chance of any meeting of the minds. The word \"peace\" did not have the same meaning to each of them. Peace to the Palestinian was freedom. Peace to the Israeli was security. With such an abyss, is this sort of film really worth much? I finished with the feeling that I had watched pointless propaganda -- both sides were unconvincing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e23e44adcea4cb88e83489b99293386",
            "input": "I think this has the potential of being the best Star Trek series yet, I say POTENTIAL.. we all know there is a chance they will drop the ball and run out of ideas... BUT I HOPE NOT! For those that have not seen it..SEE IT! Without that annoying \"PRIME DIRECTIVE\" floating over their heads every time they encounter races it could be cool.. and Scott Bakula was without a doubt a GREAT CHOICE for Captain, and the Vulcan Babe is hot too, (Check out the decontamination scene)I gave this a FULL 10... it blows away ALL the other series openers.. I hope this goes longer than 7 years...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a84c7fd8167459c9b0d28610d3e147b",
            "input": "The peculiar charisma of Martin Kosleck brings a certain believability to his character of the frustrated artist. He imbues his dialog with an odd sense of realism, making the sculptor Marcel a convincing individual. The character manages to come across as a real person and not so much a typical B movie villain.The story line is nothing to write home about, and many scenes are dull. What makes it work is the strange chemistry between Kosleck and Rondo Hatton as the Creeper. Kosleck's talkative, philosophical character is contrasted with Hatton's low key, monosyllabic approach. The character of the Creeper isn't developed much beyond a basic monster level, but Hatton suggests undeveloped possibilities and makes you wonder about his back story.This movie was on Shock Theater a lot when I was a kid, so I have a certain nostalgic fondness for it. It's worth seeing once, anyway, for those who enjoy Forties horror movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42a53701a8c546bba6e63b864533a368",
            "input": "This is such a great film! Never mind the low rating here. I really have no idea where that came from, they must be discussing a different film then. Because I absolutely loved it and found it to be a little hidden treasure. It's story was so original and charming.. I really can't think of anything bad to say about it. Maybe it has to be ''your type of thing'', but, I saw this with my sister and my mother, and we all were taken by it. The acting was also very good, and that is hard to do in a film like this. But I found all the characters very intriguing and sympathetic. I've always been very fond of Dougray Scott and found his new ''dark'' role very interesting. It is really awful hard to get me to like a bad guy, but I absolutely had no problem with that this time. Even more so, I adored him. Everyone who loves a good thriller/drama that also has a good dose of love and tragedy should definitely go see this film, no question about that! Anyone wanting to see a film with 80% bloodshed, should go rent something else, though.. But I guess the title already kind of gives that away. This is a love story, not Saw 3.I give this film 4 out of five stars!!! Good job!!!xxx Enjoy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4155bc7c860e4e1fbf1b1f1da486850b",
            "input": "This apology for a movie is about absolutely nothing! Rachel Griffiths must have needed the money. The film must have been made on a very low budget, because the lighting was non existent. I made a vow if I ever see Pete Postlesumthingor other I'll commit suicide. I'd be happy to know if there was 1) a plot or 2)a script. My biggest regret is I wasted my time watching this rubbish.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0482e4f15954e15bd9fff647d78dce5",
            "input": "HOLES is not your average Disney stuff- it's very, very fun, even for adults who usually cringe at the cutesy, focus-group designed \"family entertainment\" that Uncle Walt's studio passes off as live-action. Perhaps the secret of this film's success is in its faithfulness to the original book, which is a little bit darker than your average kid stuff. The action begins when Stanley Yelnats is sent to a boys' prison camp, where all the inmates are forced to dig holes under the desert sun as a form of rehibilitation. But as the story progresses, Stanley's tale becomes interwoven with that of a legendary treasure, and this adventure becomes ten times more fun than any Disney movie about an all-boy prison camp has any right to be. Jon Voight is especially nasty and colorful, and Sigourney Weaver is beautiful, as always.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e75dd6673ed4a079f079e65adcdb9dd",
            "input": "Firstly, this is a very dated film, non-focused in its exposition of the left wing political revolution. Honestly, when someone says that the only way to be truly revolutionary is to cease to be intellectual ( which in itself is quite nonsensical, since the answer was arrived at by precisely being intellectual) it reduces me to despair; as if we all should return to being apes in the name of equality - it is simply ridiculous. Our intellectuality is only one of many human qualities, but this does not mean we should not educate ourselves to the highest possible degree. But no doubt this non-educational message ties in with Godard's use of rock music; hence The Rolling Stones.The song 'Sympathy for the Devil', whose creation we witness, and from which the film takes its name, is in fact nothing special. The chord sequence, which is not especially original, was used to much better effect in Led Zeppelin's 'Thankyou'(Led Zeppelin II). Apart form that, 'Sir' Mick Jagger declaims in his usually nebulous manner (rather like Bob Dylan)- notice how the first melodic phrase is unimaginatively repeated over again to form the verse.Besides the fact that the Black Panthers depicted in this film, don't seem to know what they are fighting for, the most interesting scenes involve the equation of fascism with pornography; a message that in fact undermines the sexual 'liberation' of the 1960s and today ( indeed, a message that would belie the behaviour of The Rolling Stones around the time the film was made).No wonder, the DVD came free with The Sunday Times! For a truly profound historical exposition of left-wing sympathy, listen to Luigi Nono's masterpiece, 'Al Gran Sole carico'd'amore'.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d57377f7119f47589dff952b414e2873",
            "input": "This film is horribly acted, written, directed and produced. But it's so campy it's actually semi-watchable. That's SEMI watchable.The storyline (what little there is) makes virtually no sense whatsoever. The Barney Drum character is the only real comic relief in the movie and that gets tired after about 30 seconds. Many of the Canadian supporting cast can be found in TV commercials.. None of them went on to anything else that I'm aware of. And of course Sly Stallone's even less talented brother well..... =\\Trivia: It was filmed almost entirely in and around the little village of Claremont, Ont. (about 20 miles N.east of Toronto) I recognized many local landmarks/intersections/buildings. I think the Drive-in scene was filmed at the now demolished \"Oshawa Drive-in\" just before it was torn down.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a9d9c8ade194bd4bff8eb412a0ac498",
            "input": "In one word... abysmal. I give it one star for the hippie sex scenes and eye candy women, otherwise forget it. Corman's worst effort, bar none. Ben Vereen should have had his name permanently stricken from the cast. I cannot believe that this is now going to be on DVD (as of 2/15/05) with \"Wild In The Streets\" - another retro stinker. I woke up sick in bed this morning with a cold, decided to watch a movie to cheer me up some, scanned the digital channels... the premise looked interesting enough because I like viewing B-movie sci-fi, hippie culture and rebellious teen flicks. It seemed familiar somehow and with Ben Vereen in the cast, I thought... why not? What a big mistake... it was a horrible start to my day.Only after viewing it, I now know why the familiarity crept into the recesses of my newly-awakened brain. I remembered seeing coming attractions for this film as a 14-year old (I'm 45), back in the early/mid-seventies at the Sombrero, a local art theater that no longer exists... the whole theater laughed hysterically and even groaned out loud at how bad this movie looked. Acting: dreadful, story: awful, cinematography: nearly-awful, music: terrible, sound: horrendous, directing: a joke. If you choose to watch this after my warning, remember... \"I told you so.\"\"Gass-s-s-s\" is the perfect title for this film... you feel \"gassed\" after viewing this putrid movie - or maybe that you should be taken to a \"gas\" chamber for wasting your brain away. I have seen homemade Super 8 movies that put this film to shame. Definitely a new addition to my all-time Top Ten WORST films... it's up there (er, down there) with \"Tentacles.\" Ted in Gilbert, AZ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41ed6d0d149b44d58de9a936f7646574",
            "input": "Most of the episodes on Season 1 are awful..There is no comparison to Twilight Zone or Outer Limits, as they programs actually had decent story lines. Most of Amazing Stories are well dull..not amazing in the least..go rent or buy the Twilight Zone series...I have heard Season 2 of this series is much better..also for some reason on the DVD's they cut out the Ray Walston parts which further diminishes this compilation. The one cool thing is to see actors and actresses when they were younger in 1985...Most of the story lines are very predictable though and the series could of been better with twists and turns that left you wondering...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fce4e6868dac4b46ac6dc641850d5ae0",
            "input": "I've seen this film literally over 100 times...it's absolutely jam-packed with entertainment!!! Powers Boothe gives a stellar performance. As a fan of actors such as William Shatner (Impulse, 1974) and Ron Liebmann (Up The Academy, 1981)I never thought an actor could capture the \"intensity\" like Shatner and Liebmann in those roles, until I saw Boothe as Jim Jones! As far as I'm concerned, Powers Boothe IS Jim Jones...this film captures his best performance!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1a2980e520143a494dfc47831941cc0",
            "input": "\"Sleepwalkers\" is the first film which Stephen King has written a script for. Given this, and the excellent Santo & Johnny song that they used as the theme of the movie, you would be expecting a odd, and ultimately fulfilling viewing experience. Unfortunately, that's not what you'd be getting. The thing is, they could have probably made it a good movie. The beginning is intriguing what with it's small town spooky atmosphere. But something strange happens about 20 minutes into the film. The film turns funny for no apparent reason! From that moment on the whole atmosphere of \"Sleepwalkers\" is ruined.For those of you who have seen it, who can ever forget good old Johnny screaming out \"COP KABOB!!\" after jabbing the pencil into that one cop's ear?!? But don't get me wrong, the humor has no redeemiing quality. I just rented it again to see if mabye I was wrong the first time around, given how original the plot sounded, but I was right. Man, what a waste. I can't believe they got the rights to that Santo & Johnny song. I gave this a 2.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e2b8ca8666a4c8e947021c577384c99",
            "input": "Textbook example of an underestimated movie.Although one can watch this movie over and over again and laugh every single time and still see something new in it, it's still regarded as just another funny picture. And although the movie has inspired many and added it's quotes and images to the pyche of all it's viewers, Moon Over Parador still hasn't received the acclaim it should. Even the brilliant cast with Academy Award winner Richard Dreyfuss and Raul Julia, to mention one, is not able to change this perception.But after watching Raul Julia as Roberto Strausmann make Richard Dreyfus an offer he can't refuse in a meatlocker by reading him a good review of a part that he once played one can only come to one conclusion: this stuff is timeless! In fifty years we will have the proof.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b28f2df57a7b4185976ba87cf6a49bf5",
            "input": "Yet another remake of \"Fistful of Dollars\", Sergio Leone's remake of Kurosawa's \"Yojimbo\" (suggested by the novel 'Red Harvest').This one is strictly a B-Movie; taken as that, it is rather enjoyable. the direction is crisp, the acting full of verve, the limitations of its 'direct-to-video' photography well-handled.The weakness of the film is in the disastrous decision to marry the 'fistful'/'yojimbo' plot to a sub-plot from Leone's 'Once Upon a Time in the West'. Although leone directed both 'Fistful' and 'West', his motivations behind the two films couldn't be anymore different. The 'Man With No Name' (Eastwood) is a borderline socio-path with a soft spot for broken families. Harmonica (Chaeles Bronson) is obsessed with his own broken family, and obsessed with revenge. These two characters would not have had much to do with each other. In order to bring them together, 'Gun Crazy' has to twist it's plot and complicate it until we lose track of which story we're actually following.But this is a B-Movie after all, and filled with action and silliness; it's entertaining on that level, just don't expect anything more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22dae44c5c47414da30b7d6ca7be3efa",
            "input": "I've seen the Gator Bait films, and this is almost exactly the same thing as those. A woman is sexually assaulted by a group of degenerate men and systematically exacts her vicious revenge on each of them. The thing that sets this movie apart from those ones (although not very far) is that the sexual content is not glorified. There is full frontal nudity many times throughout the film, but not for a second is it ever sexy. Some of the rape scenes might seem a little extensive, but that's only because the movie is trying to strengthen the audience's need to see this woman seek revenge.This is a weak film, it has no other way to maintain interest other than manipulating our natural desire to see this woman get revenge on her attackers. I Spit On Your Grave is not the kind of movie that you expect to deliver a serious moral, but I was glad to see that, since it contained a significant amount of violence inflicted upon the female lead, it was not meant to pass off as a T&A film.B-movies are notorious for being driven by nudity and out of control adolescent sexuality, and while I Spit On You Grave is unmistakably a B-movie and contains more than its share of nudity, the nudity does not drive the plot. On the other hand, the only thing that drives the plot is an empty necessity for revenge against a group of rapists. These men are evolutionary drop-outs just like they were in the Gator Bait films, and the biggest challenge for the writers seems to have been to come up with new and exciting ways to kill them, but the reason the film can never be anything more than a meaningless B-movie is because it does not deliver a message of any kind, but instead it simply satisfies the audience's desire to see a bunch of rapists get exactly what they deserve. The one problem that this leaves is that we have to sit through the sexual attacks. Oddly, the first half of the film is the part that contains the most nudity (although not by much), but it is by far the most painful to watch. We are even let down a little as we watch the woman obtain revenge since a couple of the deaths were so elaborate that they were obviously impossible (it seems like pure luck that the guy in the lake at the end felt such an overwhelming desire to hug the motor on the boat and press his genitalia against the propeller, staying that way while the woman yells some final words at him and pulls the cord), but again, this movie satisfies only the desire for revenge that the first half filled us with.(spoilers) You know that this is all the movie means to do, since it literally ends the minute the last guy is killed. The woman does not live happily ever after, she doesn't write her book, she doesn't leave and never return to that nightmare place, she just gets in the boat and motors around the lake while the movie simply stops in its tracks. But hey, what more did you expect?Oh, and did you read the tagline? If you decide to waste your time watching this, try and find any man getting broken or burned. I was really looking forward to those…",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe624c8b15974e1da9ea23b94338da3e",
            "input": "I think this is probably one of the worst movies I've watched in a long time.Trying to get the 'same characters' with different people is *such* a bad idea. If they couldn't get Sara Michelle G. and Ryan P. in this one, they should have just cut their losses and said to heck with it. Instead they get NEW actors that are horrible at what they did. I seriously felt like I was at a High School or (bad) College play with the lever of acting these people put forth.Where do they get some of these people? Was this their first movie? It sure seemed like it.This movie also parallels the original in a few lines of speech. I had just got done watching the first one and popped #2 in. I was all excited to get to watch the second one and it ended up being the worst show I've seen in a while. I don't hardly EVER *EVER* turn off a movie, but this one definitely went off after about 30 - 40 min.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84fb5cbc1a2b484ab24d1383986f2d37",
            "input": "This is just a joke of a movie,they lost me already at the opening scene (Spoilerwarning) dangerous creature kills other creature in his cage,this is watched by a scientist that works there on a monitor and guess what she does,well lets go in to the cage to check the stuff out,omg how dumb do those writers think human beings are come on thats the same like jumping in a fish tank with a great white shark because it ate your goldfish...Pretty useless and even more dumber.And i will not even talk about the cast because they aren't worth the effort. why they didn't fired the guy that wrote that immediately is a mystery to me.....And this kinda dumbness continues the entire movie. Only good thing where the cgi that is better then average for these kinda low-budget movies.If these kinda things don't bother you go see it,but be warned if your IQ is above 60 you will probably hate it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad24f5897c614fef89b9869cdaf30f1d",
            "input": "This is one of the first films I can remember, or maybe the first one. Exactly the beautiful kind of film than introduce a kid, sweetly, into the world of violence and addictions were we live. A little bit of Babe, Casino and Constantine, all this well mixed into a carton, and we get this. I don't know if its truly rated for kids, but I think it was very cool, very funny and interesting. I hate when a film (spescially a carton)can have a good end and its ruining because every character must have a happy end, even if it sounds weird (Im not a bitter person).But this was OK, he simply goes heaven and they let it in that way.All this is just a critic, Its a good movie an something new. very touching and I gotta go",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9acc6d32ed6c44378d60b9bc962f22db",
            "input": "From it's uninspiring title to the flat acting performances, Curdled is very much an unremarkable film throughout. The film has gained some fans by way of the fact that Quentin Tarantino's name is attached to it, and the silly and out of place nod to the Rodriguez/Tarantino flick 'From Dusk till Dawn'. These things do not make a great movie, however, and this is more than evident all the way through 'Curdled'. The film suffers from an all too obvious lack of ideas, and it tries to mask this with murders that are meant to be stylish and events that are supposed to be disturbing. The Mexican music score that accompanies many of the sequences in the film is obviously meant to be cool, but it's becomes annoying very quickly; especially as aside from the fact that the lead character is Mexican, it doesn't fit with the tone of the movie. The film's plot is typically offbeat and it follows a gorehound who, because of her obsession with grisly murders, takes a job with a firm that cleans up murder scenes. It sounds boring and it is.William Baldwin is the only 'name' on the cast list, and even he doesn't make an impression. He hasn't been given anything to do in the movie and aside from talking to his victims and standing around trying to look menacing, he's pretty much wasted. Angela Jones, or rather; the taxi driver from Pulp Fiction, takes the lead role as the murder obsessed young woman, and it is always clear that it's her involvement with Pulp Fiction that won her this role, not her acting ability. She may have been good enough in her small role in Tarantino's masterpiece, but she doesn't have the talent to lead a film by herself. She looks lost and out of place for the majority of the film, and if it weren't for her Latino accent; she wouldn't convince the audience that she's a weirdo on any level. Curdled is a one hundred percent-proof piece of forgettable trash. Films like this often win themselves praise for invention or black comedic antics; but this one fails on all levels. Whether you're a Tarantino fan, William Baldwin fan, horror fan or just a movie buff; this is one to miss.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d30f12be1a6840ec81dc105b084fc849",
            "input": "This film was the first British teen movie to actually address the reality of the violent rock and roll society, rather than being a lucid parody of 1950s teenage life. In an attempt to celebrate the work of Liverpool's Junior Liaison Officers the opening title points out that 92% of potential delinquents, who have been dealt with under this scheme, have not committed a second crime. However, this becomes merely a pretext to the following teen-drama until the film's epilogue where we are instructed that we shouldn't feel responsible or sorry for such delinquents however mixed-up they might seem.Stanley Baker plays a tough detective who reluctantly takes on the post of Juvenile Liaison Officer. This hard-boiled character is a role typical of Baker. Having been currently on the trail of a notorious arsonist known as the firefly and does not relish the distraction of the transfer. However, as in all good police dramas he is led back full circle by a remarkable turn of events, back to his original investigation.His first case leads him to the home of two young children, Mary and Patrick Murphy (played by real-life brother and sister duo), who have committed a petty theft. Here he meets Cathie (satisfyingly portrayed by Anne Heywood) their older sister whom he eventually becomes romantically involved with. It quickly becomes obvious that the squalid environment of such inner-city estates is a breeding ground for juvenile delinquency.The elder brother of the Murphy family, Johnny, is the leader of a gang of rock and roll hoodlums. McCallum does an eye-catching turn as the Americanized mixed-up kid, who owes more to the likes of Marlon Brando, than any previous British star. One is reminded of Brando's character Johnny from 'The Wild One' who led a leather-clad gang of rebellious bikers in much the same way as this film's 'Johnny' leads his gang.Thankfully the preachiness of earlier Dearden crime dramas such as 'The Blue Lamp' is not so apparent. Instead we are presented with several well drawn-out characters on both sides of the law as the drama of the delinquents and the romantic interest between Heywood and Baker takes the forefront.The plot, whilst at times predictable, does deliver some memorable scenes. The disruptive influence that rock and roll music was thought to have had is played out in a scene where Johnny abandons himself to the music, leading a menacing advance on the police sergeant. The most grippingly memorable piece of film however is the climatic classroom scene where a bunch of terrified school children, including Mary and Patrick, are held hostage at gunpoint by Johnny. Obviously in the light of the real-life Dumblaine Massacre this scene seems all the horrifying. Understandably because of this the film is seldom aired or available to modern audiences.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47a9584fe20e46839c517b6af6cedea0",
            "input": "I cannot believe the same guy directed this crap and Dracula 2000. Dracula 2000 was innovative, fresh, and well written, if poorly acted.This pile can't even claim that. It starts with the defeat of Dracula at the end of Dracula 2000. Then ignores the narrative afterwards describing what happened after that. Following the narrative properly could have made this a good sequel somehow, but Craven chose to go in the style of his older films, having no good tie but the main villain's name.Even the actor playing Dracula was different (going from dark hair in Dracula 2000 to a blonde here).Avoid this movie if you have any respect for your taste in movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0632dfccac4c4b6c82b424fcd3b65a7b",
            "input": "Brilliant movie. The drawings were just amazing. Too bad it ended before it begun. I´ve waited 21 years for a sequel, but nooooo!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7c719a443a64b789cb9f88cd58d9c3d",
            "input": "Being a fan of the manga and anime of Go Nagai (DEVIL MAN, DEVIL LADY, VIOLENCE JACK, etc.), I was looking forward to this one. I'd seen neither the manga nor the anime, so I had no preconceived notions going in. Good thing, too. What we have here is a series of silly softcore movies of the type that used to turn up with alarming regularity on cable channels late at night. While it's tame compared to what gets rammed down the throats of regular cable viewers (our hero's naughty bits are either tastefully tucked away behind a strategically glued-on scarf or emblazoned with a ridiculous sunburst effect), there are prolonged scenes of bondage and torture that lend the proceedings just enough smarminess to make it unsuitable for the kiddies. While I have nothing whatsoever against nude female heroes, I do dislike amateurishly made movies (there are at least four in this series). On the plus side, there's at least one stunningly beautiful actress in each of the four episodes I saw. It's no wonder Nagai's TESTICLE BOY never made it...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9b66d89c4724d84a3bb33fb07cb79d8",
            "input": "First thing first . In this genre movie the first thing you need is a good music , and thats where Mr. shankar and his party fails.music is completely pale and uneffective. On other hand there is AJAY DEVGAN , WHO HAS REMOVED A LETTER 'A' from his spelling , done good job but was of no use to a bad casted movies like this.ASIN is like a doll which is used to amuse public, even though she is good to look at but her role in movie is to dance, actually she is dancing member of a rock band and i don't think any rock band have there dancer as a member of band.in nut shell this movie is a piece of crap a piece of ***t. watch it if you wanna get fooled.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f24d5997fae4435ab3e52ca4c301fc30",
            "input": "Perhaps I'm out of date or just don't know what Electra is like in current publications... But the Electra that I read was far more manipulative and always seems to have a plan. She usually used others to do her dirty work and more often than not some sort of double cross was involved. Just when you think you have it all figured out she pull the wool over your eyes and gets her way.This movie was fairly weak on the dialog, the acting wasn't particularly convincing, and the action was spotty. I was really looking for something more along the lines of Frank Miller's book \"Electra Assassin.\" Which is much darker than anything in this movie.Special effect where cool, action was interesting at times, but more often than not the story and plot was slow or illogical. Tha Hand was not menacing enough, and Electra was not..... bitchy enough. She's the girl you love to hate... but in this story, I just didn't care either way.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1359499d3a2e4217b37b0ef1d828d362",
            "input": "in fact,it's basically the same movie.and they couldn't even get the time line of events correct.maybe that was intentional due to laziness or not caring.either way,this thing is a real woofer.it doesn't even deserved to be called a movie.i viewed this as a so called second feature on the disc containing the original The Boogeyman.i thought my head would explode,and i urge you to run as far in the opposite direction of this thing,if you should be cursed with the misfortune of combing across it's path.it should come with a warning label like:Warning-may cause your i.q to drop several points if you are within it's vicinity.for me,there's no doubt this thing is a 0/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0513dc691766428986af4bf4da9db758",
            "input": "\"La Maman et la putain\" is the beautifulest film of all time. And what's most moving about it may be the relation between reality and art the movie deals with, which is directly inspired by Proust's \"A la Recherche du temps perdu\".Indeed, \"La Maman et la putain\" and \"In search of lost time\" apparently tell the same story : the one of the failure of love, which repeats itself endlessly. The first woman's name is always Gilberte, and the second woman appears like a twisted and deformed double of Gilberte : Veronika is like a \"whore Gilberte\", beautiful like the night, whereas Gilberte was pure, and \"beautiful like the day\". After the failure of the first love, a second love begins, but this one is like already doomed by the first one. Veronika takes the place of Gilberte, in Alexandre's life and in the movie. She progressively eclipses her, first by time to time, Gilberte's still coming when Alexandre waits for Veronika,then totally. That shows it's the same sad story repeating itself, the same \"unfaithful woman\", like Alexandre says, who appears endlessly - and unfaithful is for Proust the higher point in love, which makes it exist, but which also underlines its illusions.Art is what causes the passage between what's outside - the illusion of love - to what's inside, which is the truth, and is a learning of this truth. For instance, when Veronika notices the strange way Alexandre makes is bed, he answers that he saw it in a movie, and then, that a movie, \"it's made for that, to learn how to live, how to make a bed\". Alexander wants to live like he was in a film, he wants his life to be art. This conception of art comes from Proust, with whom Eustache shares the same rejection of \"political art\" and realism in art. \"La Maman et la putain\" fights against a conception of art \"principaly political\" - see for example the ironical review of a political movie by Alexandre. Like Proust says : \"Art doesn't care for all this proclamations, and only exists in silence.\" First of all, art is introspection. And that also why realism or naturalism is rejected : art needs to transform reality to exist. Proust writes : \"I discover the illusion of realism, which is a lie\". That's why \"La Maman et la putain\" doesn't hide its artificiality, underlines by the way the actors \"say\" their text : \"the more you seem artificial, the higher you go\", said Eustache.Eustache and Proust both share this idea that the artist is a \"translater\" of a inner truth. But, Alexandre failed where Eustache succeed. \"La Maman et la putain\" tells us the failure of a character to be what he truly is. You can sens the tragedy arise when you go further in the movie, which becomes saddest. You can see it in the face of Alexandre, who looks more and more like a living-dead. You can see it by the fact that the scenes become longer, and that after a while, nothing happens outside. At the end of the movie, when you see Alexandre writing, and Veronika asking if he's writing his life,you can guess that he's not, that even literature failed. The end of the movie shows the symbolic death of Alexander, who is smashes by the heaviness of reality. And in this tiny nurse's room, Alexandre looks more like Albertine than Marcel.To explain this failure, we can say that Alexandre is a Balzac's reader. In \"Forme et signification\", Jean Rousset explains that, in Proust's, the readers of Balzac, who are Swann and Charlus, are unable of any artistic creation, because they're stuck in reality, which they mistake with art. They see reality in art and \"are not aware of the transformations that necessarily exist between the life of an artist and his work, between reality and art\". And that's exactly Alexandre. He claims for instance that he \"loves a woman for parallel reasons, because she played in a Bresson's for example\". He's like Swann, who falls in love with Odette because she looks like a Botticelli's woman.\"Life is perhaps not my vocation\". This thought is indeed by Eustache, who committed suicide, even if it's said by Alexandre. Nevertheless, there is a difference between Alexandre and Eustache : if Eustache is absolutely Alexandre, Alexandre is like a double without art, a horrible vision of the artist, which crystallizes his fears.By fallowing Veronika at the end of the movie, Alexandre is condemned to illusions. It's death that remind me the last frames of the movie, in the face of Jean-Pierre Léaud as well as in the endless pucking of Veronika. Or maybe it is already hell that describes the end, like in Sarte's \"Huit-Clot\", and absolutely not like in the final liberation of \"Le Temps retrouvé\". If Eustache had read Proust, Alexandre could never have finish the book , always perturbed by life and Veronika when he tries to read it at his apartment or in the cafés. \"La Maman et la Putain\" is like a inverse double of \"In search of lost times\", which tells how Alexander doesn't become an artist, whereas \"A la Recherche du temps perdu\" tells how Marcel becomes a writer (Genette).If, like Baudelaire says, an artiste tells \"reality at the light of his dream\", it is his nightmare that Eustache tells us in \"La Maman et la putain\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c790170a73a4f9b9de08fedfe1a19de",
            "input": "It's hard to say which comes out on top, James Cagney's charm and energy or the mouth- opening excesses of Busby Berkeley's three grand showstoppers at the close. I give it a tie, with Footlight Parade one of the funniest and quickest of the early Thirties musicals. Although the movie clearly belongs to Cagney, Joan Blondell adds immeasurably to the good-natured story line. And what's the story line? It's about Chester Kent (Cagney) who produces musicals, and who now is just about out of business as the talkies take over. He starts doing Prologues, live musical entertainment offered on stage before a movie starts. He gets the idea to do bigger ones and more of them, moving them around the country. He's a ball of fire and ideas, and he needs all the ideas he can get to keep relentlessly producing these things. But a rival is spying on him and stealing his ideas; Nan Prescott (Blondell), his wise-cracking secretary, loves him but he's too busy too notice; an office girl in black-rimmed, round glasses (Ruby Keeler) wants a chance to dance; his wife turns up saying she didn't divorce him after all; a blonde gold-digger is setting her hooks in him; his partners are cheating him...my gosh, what's next? This may all sound like a lot to digest, but everything happens fast, with Cagney bouncing, strutting, striding, finger-snapping, barking orders and occasionally - until the big last number when he goes all out singing and dancing -- doing a step or two just to show how it's done. Instead of \"Let's put on a show, gang\" we have \"We need to build three shows in three days, so lock the doors and let's start rehearsing.\" These three super Prologues are going to feature 40 chorines, spectacular effects and will mean a rich contract, with forty Kent units in deluxe movie houses...the whole Apollo movie house circuit! Exhaustion threatens, feet ache, but all those unbilled chorines in skimpy costumes (which include Ann Sothern and Dorothy Lamour; you can quickly spot Sothern but Lamour is more generic) stay the course, dancing their hearts out, giggling and chattering and looking remarkably unsweaty. And then the curtains go up as each Prologue is presented in separate movie houses, one after the other on the same night, with the owner of the Apollo circuit going to determine that night whether he'll save Chester's skin or not. First up is \"Honeymoon Hotel\" with Dick Powell and Ruby Keeler in a 9 minute production number that features a lot of wholesome lasciviousness, with brides and grooms (some might even be married), bedrooms and beds, and doors with \"Do not disturb\" signs. Then on to the next theater and 11 minutes of \"By a Waterfall\" that probably had the Warner Brothers accountants worrying about bankruptcy. This number is so excessive -- dozens of swimming girls, trees, fountains, a huge grotto with waterslides, a giant pool -- you'd never think there was a Depression on. Berkeley pulls out all his tricks -- synchronization, human patterns, legs and arms doing all sorts of precision things -- and he does it in the water, with a lot of underwater photography looking up. The girls are sure game. They come up smiling with water in their eyes and still hit their marks. The whole thing must have been incredibly difficult and exhausting. Ruby Keeler, who has a couple of quick shots in the water, is the only one who looks a bit cautious. And finally, the smash finale...11 minutes of Cagney dancing and singing with Keeler to \"Shanghai Lil,\" with all sorts of bar girls and their customers, unusual in that the races are mixed up. There's Cagney and Keeler dancing on the bar, dancing on a table, Cagney fighting. There are what looks like fifty or sixty marching marines, hupping back and forth, rifles tossed and caught. Then...this is true...a human picture forms of Franklin Roosevelt and the NRA eagle. This may be the only Hollywood musical production that has ever featured Roosevelt, a big federal agency and a bevy of sexy Chinese prostitutes. That's entertainment, folks. It's great! Of course, Chester's Prologues get the big contract and Nan gets Chester. The movie is full of juicy clichés that make us smile. Ruby Keeler is so endearing as she earnestly stomps out her taps with her arms flying that you want to help her along. Joan Blondell makes us forget about a lot of Hollywood females who might have been more beautiful but who had a lot less wit and personality. The movie, however, belongs to Cagney, who grabs and shakes it, and to Berkeley, a man for whom too much was never too much.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ac78c9496184c2e9f4a153314f01fe5",
            "input": "I don't know what it is with this movies. But movies about history or religion are always criticised by their accuracy. Of course it's not 100% accurate. It's difficult to make 100% accurate films nowadays when even the \"experts\" disagree with each other. Therefore I rather like to judge a movie by what it is trying to say than pick on all the inaccuracies.So I start by saying that I liked this mini serie. But I do agree with the critique that his childhood years went by too fast. The series should have been a three part story, his childhood being the first part. But if they didn't have more money to shoot more story who am I to criticise that???There's only one real problem I have with this movie and that's the fact that it's told in a history book way. Especially the second part which is just a sum of events that happened. I rather would have liked to see Hitler more humane (more scenes where he doubts himself etc.). Noah Taylor did that more in the movie 'Max' which seem to work better I think. Nevertheless I'm glad this was made and own it on DVD. Just to remember more vividly what happened and see Carlyle giving his best. 7.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c79256806ef945529ea517cfd5ce2e8f",
            "input": "It's rare, nowadays, to find a romantic comedy that isn't incredibly disgusting in short doses throughout the entire movie (eg. Big Fat Greek wedding; Me, Myself & Irene). There were only a couple of unnecessarily demented jokes in this movie, nothing unpalatably profane. All around, it was a cute movie with likable characters. I thought the ending was a little abrupt. It feels like they should have ended it at the world series for a real bang up finish. The acting left a little to be desired, but was made up for by the pace of the story. If I'd known it was a Farrelly brothers movie I would have assumed it to be a stomach turning piece of garbage and not watched it, but it seems that even they are capable of accidentally making an okay movie. Good for them, I hope they pull their heads out the rest of the way and start consistently making good films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52e495724238447c917bcf05e9d11ce8",
            "input": "I had just reached thirteen when I first saw this series and I am watching it again, on DVD, over thirty years later. The pictures over the opening credits have never left me. It has affected my view of the world and the peoples in it. My parents were with me long enough to have seen the series with me, and we always discussed the programme afterwards. It gave me a love for studying history and the highest marks I got in our school's public exams!Sir Laurence Olivier's voice and delivery is timeless and perfect. I get the feeling that the people who lived through it would feel that this is their version of the history of the Second World War. I cannot imagine ever getting bored looking at it. Maybe an similar Cold War series could now be contemplated, although who could replace Sir Laurence is difficult to imagine.Buy it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-039570898e2348069a4e221af35547f4",
            "input": "There are few really hilarious films about science fiction but this one will knock your sox off. The lead Martian's Jack Nicholson take-off is side-splitting. The plot has a very clever twist that has be seen to be enjoyed. This is a movie with heart and excellent acting by all. Make some popcorn and have a great evening.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f451fdd70550497e8d24dd90037908cc",
            "input": "This movie really deserves the MST3K treatment. A pseudo-ancient fantasy hack-n-slash tale featuring twin barbarian brothers with a collective IQ of hot water, character names that seem to have been derived from a Mad Libs book, and such classic lines as \"Hold her down and uncover her belly!\", The Barbarians crosses over into the \"so bad, it's good\" territory.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e590bee50c78416e9829d136f5288f64",
            "input": "I just saw The Drugs Years on VH1 and I love it. I think it reflects the drug history very well and most importantly IT HAS A STRONG MESSAGE TO THE ALL GENERATIONS. There is woodstock, there are Joplin's, Hendrix's and Jim Morrison's deaths, there are many many examples of drug use and drug abuse. It completely cover the time line and evolution of drug use in America in both good and bad ways. In my opinion this documentary is well done and I would like to congratulate to its creators because this is exactly what is needed to be playing in the TV in these days. I am waiting for the DVD release. You should definitely see it!!! This movie is stunning-- BIG TIME!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d9df1280f7d414290dd887e4cf96280",
            "input": "Warning: contains a spoiler. Corny plot and in many cases terrible acting. Fontaine is great, but some others, particularly Richard Ney, Ivy's husband, are exceedingly wooden. Ney lies in bed, dying of arsenical poisoning, with every hair in place. Yet the movie is so juicy and so suspenseful. More faithful to the book than most movies of its era. Casting Joan Fontaine as a poisoner (and an adulteress, which was just as shocking then - I'm not kidding, kids) was a masterful stroke. She's just her usual Joan Fontainey self. As murderers were supposed to, she dies by falling \"feet foremost through the floor into an empty space.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6787fe75398d421aac78dc2940de724e",
            "input": "This is not a \"loose\", but a precise, faithful remake of 1958 Monicelli's classic \"I Soliti Ignoti\" with Toto', Mastroianni, Gassman, Cardinale etc. And that's the reason is good, it copies all the funny characters and the plot, even in details (like the scene where the photographer steals the camera from the local market).I have watched the superb old version many times and I knew by heart all the gangs and the ending but I still enjoyed \"Welcome to Collinwood\", which has its own freshness and atmosphere. It is interesting to see how the life and ways of the little thieves in 1950's Italy are adapted to 2002's USA. Things haven't changed much. 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47067b66795f4e659cafeab47d48f803",
            "input": "I've heard about this movie for many years, and finally got a chance to see it. A massive murdering of cheerleaders back in 1963 and 1969 eventually cause a cheerleading camp to close up. Fast forward to 1982, and Bambi, a former student, opens it back up with new recruits, among them Candy (Carol Kane), Glenn (Judge Reinhold), and Sandy (Debralee Scott). One by one, they are murdered by the killer, until only one remains. It is then when we find out who did it and why.Also in the movie are Tom Smothers doing a terrible accent as a Canadian Mountie, and Paul Reubens doing his Pee-Wee Herman schtick. The plot overall isn't very well developed, and quite lame, but some funny scenes do occur, namely the House of Bad Pies and the strip poker scene. The ending seems like it's thrown together, which is a shame.Overall, good for about ten or fifteen minutes total, the rest you can just fast forward through. Maybe catch it on TV, but it's not worth buying.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1398ffb956f5447da0c3e4027a3dfdc9",
            "input": "This was not enjoyable to watch. Frank puts all his dreams on the back burner and gets a normal (boring!) job just so his stepson can go to film school, but his stepson decides that he'll make a humiliating documentary about the man instead. A documentary filmmaker should point the camera and simply shoot, not manipulate and comment with snide captions. The bitterness and resentment of the filmmaker towards his stepfather is obvious. And sad. The goal seems to be to make Frank appear dumb and pathetic, instead he comes across as the most human of the 3 people featured.Essentially a smear campaign all dressed up as something much smarter and edgier than it really is. It left me with an intense dislike for the filmmaker.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12cedd1cf1f24839bfa1a9c669f35d3b",
            "input": "I watch LOTS of bad films, LOTS!!!!!! It's kind of a hobby, really. Almost every Saturday nite a group of friends and I get together and watch trash from around the globe - ANYTHING. Turkish super hero movies, vampire flicks from Brazil, Italian gorilla transplant movies, Kevin Costner films, ANYTHING (except maybe Raising Helen) but Ihave never seen a WORST film than THEODORE REX. Never. And it's not even entertainingly bad in an Ed Wood kinda way - it just SUCKS. Now this film was famous in Hollywood at the time it was made because Whoopi took off the gloves and made it clear to the press and anyone else who would listen that she HATED THIS PIECE OF CRAP = she tried to get out of her contract, she whined, she moaned but nonetheless they pour her fat butt into this leather skin tight futuristic cop uniform that is ghastly to see, yikes!!!! And you can just see her seething during takes - doing everything but looking off camera for her agent so she can scream at him. The dinosaur has about three facial expressions and the script is so horrible a third grade class could do a better job if promised cookies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5393bc601f644dfbbcc90a6df40b4b1e",
            "input": "This is is a thoroughly unpleasant, if slickly made, movie. I tried it because it stars Richard Dreyfus and Jeff Goldblum, two good actors, and because the plot line - a mob boss is about to be released from a mental institution - sounded promising. The movie is billed as a comedy, sorta. What we have is an endless series of shots - you should pardon the pun - of people in dimly lit and elegant, if somewhat surreal, interiors, shooting each other - in the head, stomach, kneecap, foot, heart (no part of the anatomy is avoided, it seems) while uttering vague and cryptic dialogue, some of which is supposed, evidently, to be humorous in a sort of post-modern way. Goldblum's dialogue for the whole movie could fit on a 3x5 card, and he wears a single facial expression - a sardonic grin - throughout. Ellen Barkin and Gregory Hines do the best they can. Burt Reynolds does a cameo. The credits list Rob Reiner and Joey Bishop, but I somehow missed them (good move on their part). The whole thing is cold, sterile, mechanical and unsavory; an heir, I suspect, to the style of 'Pulp Fiction', 'Fargo' and 'Natural Born Killers'. If you liked those, you'll probably like this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50dcc69e232b421fb7786da684aec721",
            "input": "\"Happenstance\" is the most New York-feeling Parisian film I've seen since \"When the Cat's Away (Chacun cherche son chat). \"A film from last year released now to capitalize on the attention Audrey Tatou is getting for \"Amelie,\" its French title is more apt: \"Le Battement d'ailes du papillon (The Beating of the Butterfly's Wings)\" as in summarizing chaos theory as a controlling element in our lives.Tatou's gamine-ness is less annoying here because she only occasionally flashes that dazzling smile amidst her hapless adventures, and because she's part of a large, multi-ethnic ensemble, so large that it took me a long time to sort out the characters, especially as some of the cute guys and older women looked alike to me, and some of the characters fantasize what they should do such that I wasn't sure if they were doing that or not. But I loved how urban the coincidences were, from immigrants to love nests to crowded subway cars to hanging around cafés.The subtitles quite annoyingly gave both parts of a dialog at once.(originally written 12/8/2001)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b53a045ae114bcb83e72bf27958703f",
            "input": "My 2 year old likes the Doodlebops show, it seems to keep his attention for awhile. The characters are interesting, vibrant with primary colours and all. There's not much educational content that the intended target audience could benefit from, but they do seem to have a theme each show and try to teach kids about sharing and respect and other basics, so I like it for that. It's well produced with high production values. But it's really just an average show like most of the shows on TV these days. We don't buy into the merchandise angle and have our son wearing everything Dooblebop. I don't think we'd spend money to go to a live show, if they ever came to town. Going to The Zoo or the Science Centre is a far better experience for everyone involved and in my opinion is money better spent.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d47ebf405fd40188df00429472fe7bf",
            "input": "Every once in a long while a movie will come along that will be so awful that I feel compelled to warn people. If I labor all my days and I can save but one soul from watching this movie, how great will be my joy.Where to begin my discussion of pain. For starters, there was a musical montage every five minutes. There was no character development. Every character was a stereotype. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy foreign guy, etc. The script felt as if it were being written as the movie was being shot. The production value was so incredibly low that it felt like I was watching a junior high video presentation. Have the directors, producers, etc. ever even seen a movie before? Halestorm is getting worse and worse with every new entry. The concept for this movie sounded so funny. How could you go wrong with Gary Coleman and a handful of somewhat legitimate actors. But trust me when I say this, things went wrong, VERY WRONG.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-633dbf81ef4f47478802f2cba1a0525e",
            "input": "A slight, charming little movie to be sure, but a superbly-crafted one. Gwyneth Paltrow shines in this early showcase for her British accent, and the cast assembled around her all lap up the dialogue. This came out around the time of Sense and Sensibility, and I'm sure I don't know why that one garnered all the Oscar attention. Emma is Jane Austen's most accessible and least stuffy story, told well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-934047b82f0c4f8692996287ad838b4e",
            "input": "Cradle of FearThis isn't a movie where intricate delicate little narrative nuances occupy our attention. This is not a film where the special effects are supposed to leave us slack-jacked uttering that sense of whoa. What it is though is a slice of lo-fi goth horror which leaves little to the imagination, created in the eyes of the director, Alex Chandon, as \"a throwback to sleazy '70s and '80s horror\".This is a very visceral experience for 2 hours, where four plot lines are connected through lots of watery blood, reams of dismembered body parts and innards, tied by an intestinal thread of revenge. The purveyor of such horrific violence is Dani Filth, lead-singer of the metal band Cradle of Filth, executing a role he was destined to play. As other's have said, there is nothing new about wanting to carryout occultist revenge. In this particular context a convicted sexual predator and murderer, Kemper, the father of our devilish avenging-angel, compels his son to exact retribution on those who are some how connected to convicting him to purgatory within an insane asylum.What this provides for the Chandon, who should be congratulated on also penning and editing this piece, is the opportunity to let his sick mind run free. He seems to take delight in the idea of splattering blood into the orifices of those on screen, and into every nook and cranny that can be reached. We are also treated to close-ups of skull's being crushed, demonic rape, and other assorted imagery to engage those who relish getting up close and personal to their horror. And for some of those who closely follow these type of films, there is the odd sequence which may have you thinking, \"Did I just see what I thought I did\", because of course Pretty Woman this 'aint. It reminds me of some of the gore-fests created out of Italian horror some 20 to 30 years ago, and a number of other works where disgusting images have left their mark but not the context in which they were viewed.Story 4 of the set is particularly intriguing where the idea of ones obsession can ultimately lead to death in the pursuit of internet violence through the \"Sick Room\", where the user is in control of how a life can be snuffed out. Further acknowledgements should also go out to a pounding soundtrack that allows Filth to exercise his daytime talent, and an effective use of drum and bass, often overlooked in film-making as a viable form of supporting visuals. Using the city of London as a backdrop with real people as opposed to movie stand-ins also adds support to the commando feel of the film. OK, classic it may not be, but blood, guts, intestines, occult and demons in a slightly perverse unproblematic way it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02b5ab9b7e6e4aa1ad808f9fad5963f7",
            "input": "I suppose many people comment/review their first movie on IMDb because the movie was spectacular or horrible -- I'm writing due to the latter.I was excited for the sequel to \"Wargames\" .. I thought the original was quite good considering its time period and content, I felt it was worth watching more than once. This being 2008, I had high hopes for what they would do with this film. Computers, Gaming, Terror, Military over-zealousness have all grown so much since the time of the first film, and \"Wargames: The Dead Code\" had an opportunity to bring it all into a great flick.The movie failed on pretty much every level, but I particularly blame the writers and anyone who had any input regarding the realism of gaming aspects. \"The Dead Code\" was a 1990's air flight simulator with a few people on the ground waving their arms. Meanwhile, Will Farmer is button mashing about 7,000 commands -- none of which are impacting what is happening on the screen. Until finally he \"wins\" by clicking a box on the screen with his mouse that release gas that instantly kills 20,000 virtual people (nobody is near the gas). Because he beat 5 LEVELS in 15 minutes, this tells RIPLEY (the real life war machine) that he is a high level terror threat.Even though any 5-16 year old could complete this same task - The government believes he is a lethal threat to humanity. They say things like \"He has expert knowledge of bio-terror\" ... He displayed less knowledge than someone who read the first 3 paragraphs of the Wiki entry on Bio-Terror. So then a movie-long chase scene with about .01% of the budget and excitement of any of the Bourne titles ensues. They have about 1000 opportunities to catch him and clear up the entire matter.. sometimes they are mad they barely miss him.. but other times they masterfully create opportunities just let him go intentionally to follow him.Ugh... I would write more.. but I already wasted 1.5 hours watching this, I would rather watch the Broderick and Joshua play tic-tac-toe for 1.5 hours.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9183b9ab3bd74c9c8fbab828b482d5a7",
            "input": "I believe in keeping religion out of government and out of the movies. When I want a sermon, I'll go to church, but I don't want one from a movie. I don't mind some supernatural themes, (after all, religion is about as supernatural as you can get!) but this movie had so much preaching in it that I was really annoyed. The landlady reminded me of witches that of seen in other movies. The bad guy even looked like he had horns. And what a silly ending: the hero went into the meeting and yelled at all of those old men, and that broke the spell. If only life were that simple. I think that when movies are that stupid, they ought to be distributed with a warning: DANGER! PREACHING CONTAINED HEREIN!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3462ce6959c47f2ac507e6076f24bf7",
            "input": "Cary Grant and Myrna Loy are perfectly cast as a middle class couple who want to build the house of their dreams. It all starts out with reasonable plans and expectations, both of which are blown to bits by countless complications and an explosion of the original budget.There are many great laughs (even if the story is somewhat thin) sure to entertain fans of the stars or the late 1940s Hollywood comedy style. A definite highlight comes when a contractor goes through a run down of all expenses, which must have sounded quite excessive to a 1948 audience. As he makes his exit, he assures the client (Grant) that perhaps he could achieve a reduction of $100.00 from the total...or at least $50.00...but certainly $25.00. Hilarious!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e7716ec1dd14682af5e767e04ddb980",
            "input": "Mardi Gras: Made in china is an excellent movie that depicts how two cultures have much in common but, are not even aware of the influence each society has on one another. David Redmon open your eyes and allows you to see how the workers in china manufactures beads that cost little to nothing and are sold in America for up to 20 dollars. When Redmon questions Americans about where these beads come from they had no clue and seemed dumb founded. When he told them that they are made in China for less then nothing with horrible pay and unacceptable working conditions, Americans seemed sad, hurt, and a little remorseful but didn't really seem that they would stop purchasing the beads after finding out the truth. When Redmon questioned the workers in china they did not know that Americans were wearing them over their necks and paid so much for these beads. The workers laughed at what the purpose was behind beads and couldn't believe it. This movie is a great film that gives us something to think about in other countries besides our own.M. Pitts",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-260262afc04747bca3e6118fe93c3472",
            "input": "A beautiful new print of \"Zabriskie Point\" is playing in Paris and seems to be doing well in the Latin Quarter. It's time for a full evaluation of the film. Let's hope that the new print means that a DVD with some insightful \"extras\" will be out in the near future.I remember watching ZP when it came out and thought it was a crashing bore. This time around I was totally awed and would classify it as a \"near-miss\" masterpiece. The first part of the movie is a time capsule of late '60's Los Angeles, I lived there then, and Antonioni did a masterful job of capturing the essence of the place. Kudos to production designer Dean Tavoularis who found some incredible locations and did outstanding work.The print I saw runs 1 hour 50 minutes. It is forbidden to those under 16 (or 18, I can't remember). I suspect there is quite a bit of restored footage in this print. SPOILER -- I wonder how much of the desert sex scene was originally cut. What appears today seems rather tame by current standards.There is no soundtrack music until almost 1 hour into the film. Before we hear extraneous noise such as radio broadcasts, etc. Antonioni was very daring to do this. I remember how much was made at the time of the lack of acting skills of non-actors Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin. This time Frechette did not bother me. Halprin is weaker but gradually improves as the film continues.Much of the student riot footage looks like stock footage to me. One shot is in a different aspect ratio & distorted by the wide screen. Of course, there is actual staged footage, but not all that much.I'm still trying to figure out how Antonioni did some of the shots of Frechette flying the plane. It looks like he really did some of the flying - there's no blue screen or double in some shots.I hope to get back to see the film a second time. Recommended highly to all Antonioni fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-289a8f14f77c40a88441b7da40665e96",
            "input": "I just saw this cartoon for the first time and recognized the caricatures of famous black entertainers... Cab Calloway, Bessie Smith, (not Josephine Baker or Sophie Tucker, who was white), Thomas \"Fats\" Waller, Bill \"Bojangles\" Robinson, Stepin Fetchit (notwithstanding) Louis Armstrong and the chorus girls are out of the famed \"Cotton Club\" in Harlem. True... stereotypes are there, but this was the way it was... and these cartoons were meant as adult entertainment at your local cinema before the main feature. Harmann & Ising cartoons tended to be more \"cutesy\" and more upscale, (after all... we are talking about M-G-M) than the standard animated short done over at Warners, Paramount, Universal, Fox, RKO or lowly Columbia. Even Disney's very early Mickey Mouse had loads of barnyard humor before Uncle Walt cleaned him up just before he went \"Technicolor\".Disney had some cartoons with caricatures of black entertainers as well... for example, 1937's Silly Symphony \"Woodland Cafe\". But we have to remember that these films are part of a certain time and place. 50 years from now... clips of the Simpsons, Family Guy, and South Park will be also scrutinized, analyzed... and even vilified by future viewers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba89ef44814c41e4991eced616e719ed",
            "input": "Okay, if you've seen The Ring, you've basically seen The Grudge. It's trying to be scary by just having freaky camera work and loud sounds, but it fails miserably. The plot, if you can call it that, is weak and rather full of holes, for instance, how would the care center have known that Yoko didn't show up for work when the people who lived in the house were not there? And it's not really clear what Bill Pullman's character had to do with anything. He just kind of came out of nowhere to advance the plot. It didn't make a lot of sense what happened to the original family. Who was hanging in the room, the little boy or the dad? And was Yoko alive or dead when the care center guy found her? There were too many unanswered questions and I was too bored to think about it more.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb55568c542f4416a5ec3d224075c86d",
            "input": "- A small time hood tricks the local mob boss out of a lot of money. Of course the mob boss wants his money back and doesn't care who he has to kill to get it. The punk enlists his friend and an old mobster to help him save his life.- If this sounds ridiculous, it is. The whole idea that this Izod-wearing, dune buggy-driving punk could hold off one of the most powerful mobs in Rome is just plain silly. His friend may be good with a gun, but he's up against a group of trained killers. The old mobster is little more than comic relief and no real help when it comes to the face off with the mob. There's also a sub-plot about how the friend's father was killed years ago by the mob boss, but there's little made of it and it doesn't help the movie any at all.- The mob boss, Mister Scarface, is played by Jack Palance. I suppose he got the name because he has what looks like a shaving nick on his cheek. Palance is as ineffective as the rest of the cast, doing what he must to get a paycheck.- I've seen some pretty good Italian crime/cop flicks recently, but Mister Scarface isn't one of them. Check out Syndicate Sadists or Revolver instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bad9638a7ac3490d9de0f13bbf296698",
            "input": "A found tape about 3? guys having fun torturing a woman in several inhuman ways.Yeah, spoiler.First of all, the acting made this short not scary at all, the woman seemed to have orgasms, not suffering. Some of the punishments were so ridiculous! what's shocking about throwing some meat or spin her in a chair? If you are shooting a nonsense tape, at least make it good. The only part to remark is the end: the hammered hand and the pierced eye, the rest of the film is really poor. To end the boredom, the supposed story about the tape being investigated, extra bullshit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30b076538460488cbcd56ca63500fb7b",
            "input": "OK, I am not Japanese. I do know a little about Japanese culture, and a little less about Japanese pop culture. Other than that, I am Spanish, I eat paella and I like black humor.Good, with that point set, I can comment on the movie: I have no idea on how it is enjoyable to the Japanese audiences, Mamoru Oshii is quite a good director- despite the overly pedantic postmodern stuff in the style of Talking Head, and even that was curious and somehow interesting- and I am surprised he came up with this. It may just be one of those lost-in-translation cases, I am afraid it is, but as a European viewer watching the film with subtext overloaded English subtitles I just thought it was horrible. The jokes seemed bad, the script was overcooked- I mean, give the audience a break, and shut up a little you damn narrator- to the point of almost making my head explode over an overkill of fast-paced speaking and absurd action.However, I thought the animation was really cool. The idea is great, and it is well exploited in those animated scenes. However, the eye-candy finishes as soon as the characters are left aside to start with an endless not funny at all mumbo-jumbo speech over still pictures. It just makes you want to fast forward to the next cut-out hysterical characters scene.I read Mamoru Oshii is actually planning on a sequel for this. The idea was good but horribly exploited. Maybe the second part will bring up the good parts of this first one and actually make an interesting movie, or maybe it will be more and more over-narrated scenes. But hell, if you thought Talking Head was dense, Amazing Lifes of Fast Food Gifters will give cause you a stroke.Of course, all this comment is based on the experiences of someone who is European. Probably this is totally useless to Japanese people, maybe it was a really funny film lost in cultural frontiers and translation. Maybe.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ddf3cee3b8d499fac6dbea01dc7c352",
            "input": "Knights was just a beginning of a series, a pilot, one might say. The plot (I really shouldn't call it that, there wasn't any plot) wasn't logical at all and there were many mistakes, like [warning, I'm summarizing the plot]:In the beginning of the movie someone said that there was only a couple of those cyborgs (the bad guys) but after the climax, Nea found out that there were many many more left of them. And it was told that cyborgs were hard to kill, but after a month's training, Nea could kill them with a single blow.The movie was just pure kicking. I wasn't surprised at all, when I found out that the leading star was a kick boxer.There was ONE positive thing in the whole movie: it really gave a great deal of laughter when watching it and talking about it with my friends. I recommend watching it, if you are in need of laughter.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2aa6561cd1f74994969122fcd719ba54",
            "input": "What a surprising treat to come across on late television. Had I only read a brief plot rundown on a television listing before seeing the movie, I would have passed. The idea of a movie about a hit-man-seeing-a shrink-wanting-to leave-the-business-and-falling-in-love....sounds trite. But the film works. From the start of the movie, it's clear the man carries a weight on his shoulders, before he even says a word. The look and feel of the film is perfect. dark, but not obnoxiously so.Aside from the hit-man family aspect which provides a touch of surrealism, Macy's character grapples with his marriage, and his father's control. Macy shows a repressed sadness, and his bedtime talks with his young son are amazing. The young boy shows acting skills well beyond his years, and the interaction between the father and son is so very natural, personal and loving.This is one of the best movies I've seen in a while, and I can't believe I came across it by accident on late night television.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68d93c4a655247e88524e715b54b42a3",
            "input": "I thought this was a wonderful way to spend time on a too hot summer weekend, sitting in the air conditioned theater and watching a light-hearted comedy. The plot is simplistic, but the dialogue is witty and the characters are likable (even the well bread suspected serial killer). While some may be disappointed when they realize this is not Match Point 2: Risk Addiction, I thought it was proof that Woody Allen is still fully in control of the style many of us have grown to love.This was the most I'd laughed at one of Woody's comedies in years (dare I say a decade?). While I've never been impressed with Scarlet Johanson, in this she managed to tone down her \"sexy\" image and jumped right into a average, but spirited young woman.This may not be the crown jewel of his career, but it was wittier than \"Devil Wears Prada\" and more interesting than \"Superman\" a great comedy to go see with friends.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19fa4c875ed345a088fe47c55f977ca1",
            "input": "This movie has made me want to become a director, and Michelle Rodriguez is brilliant. How the hell wasn't she on mtv's top 25 under 25, she beats them all. This film definitely deserved the grand jury prize at sundance, best film i have ever seen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-719de0c286a94442bdd86f0de4d52eaf",
            "input": "Love it, love it, love it! This is another absolutely superb performance from the Divine Miss M. From the beginning to the end, this is one big treat! Don't rent it- buy it now!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a22b1f4a226349dc81320d482cda44da",
            "input": "Robert Taylor definitely showed himself to be a fine dramatic actor in his role as a gun-slinging buffalo hunter in this 1956 western. It was one of the few times that Taylor would play a heavy in a film. Nonetheless, this picture was far from great as shortly after this, Taylor fled to television with the successful series The Detectives.Stuart Granger hid his British accent and turned in a formidable performance as Taylor's partner. Taylor is a bigot here and his hatred for the Indians really shows.Another very good performance here was by veteran actor Lloyd Nolan as an aged, drinking old-timer who joined in the hunt for buffalo as well. In his early scenes, Nolan was really doing an excellent take-off of Walter Huston in his Oscar-winning role in The Treasure of the Sierre Madre in 1948. Note the appearance of Russ Tamblyn in the film. The following year Tamblyn and Nolan would join in the phenomenal Peyton Place.The writing in the film is stiff at best. By the film's end, it's the elements of nature that did Taylor in. How about the elements of the writing here?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6314560a9afa434fa0c4081ff0596891",
            "input": "First of all yes I'm white, so I try to tread lightly in the ever delicate subject of race... anyway... White People Hating Black people = BAD but Black People Hating White people = OK (because apparently we deserved it!!). where do i start? i wish i had something good to say about this movie aside unintended comedy scenes: the infamous scene were Ice Cube and co. get in a fight with some really big, really strong, really really angry and scary looking Neo-Nazis and win!!! the neo-Nazi where twice the size :), and the chase! the chase is priceless... This is NOT a movie about race, tolerance and understanding, it doesn't deliver... this is a racist movie that re-affirm all the cliché stereotypes, the white wimpy guy who gets manhandled by his black roommate automatically transform in a skinhead...cmon simply awful I do regret ever seeing it.Save your time and the dreadful experience of a poorly written ,poorly acted, dull and clearly biased picture, if you are into the subject, go and Rent American History X, now thats a movie",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c636b9341ad4de88ca744546f012e41",
            "input": "For the life of me I can't understand the good reviews on this piece of crap. It was pointless. Matthew Modine was horribly miscast as a leading ladies man. Gina Gershon, well, others have said it, but I'll reiterate, why the stupid accent? Totally unnecessary. And her acting was just bad. I don't know if she was thrown by the accent, or what. There was no chemistry between these two. And the girl Modine was in love with, suddenly she's shoving half a head of lettuce in her mouth and acting in a goofy way? Where did that come from? I think we were supposed to feel sorry for her as we saw her marriage to a workaholic begin to crumble, but frankly, I couldn't care less about any of these people.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d03aeef148284ff0b9a92509da51da08",
            "input": "This inept adaptation of arguably one of Martin Amis's weaker novels fails to even draw comparisons with other druggy oeuvres such as Requiem For A Dream or anything penned by Irvine Walsh as it struggles to decide whether it is a slap-stick cartoon or a hyper-realistic hallucination.Boringly directed by William Marsh in over-saturated hues, a group of public school drop-outs converge in a mansion awaiting the appearance of three American friends for a weekend of decadent drug-taking. And that's it. Except for the ludicrous sub-plot soon-to-be-the-main-plot nonsense about an extremist cult group who express themselves with the violent killings of the world's elite figures, be it political or pampered. Within the first reel you know exactly where this is going.What is a talented actor like Paul Bettany doing in this tiresome, badly written bore? Made prior to his rise to fame and Jennifer Connelly one can be assured that had he been offered this garbage now he'd have immediately changed agents! Avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0598f8b73bda46f4aaf725eb2dfbeebc",
            "input": "This movie is one of my all time favorites. Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen, and Douglas Fairbanks Jr...what a cast. Not to mention Sam Jaffe as Gunga Din. Drama, action, adventure and comedy all rolled up into one. The final battle scene still to this day gives me chills and the ending always leaves me in tears. If you haven't seen it, I'd strongly recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-96437f0e16a347ffbcde948f5b872d6e",
            "input": "I picked this up at the video store because of Tarantino's recommendation (\"If you don't like (this), go f&^% yourself!\") on the box... seemed like a ringing endorsement.... I was expecting something a bit more like \"Death Proof\"... not much actual violence in this one tho, or plot, of character, or dialogue. Look at the poster. It's all there. Stunts, and rock. It goes back and forth. A week or so in the life of an LA band that does a crappy magic show, at a level that you'd maybe see in one of the lesser casinos off the Strip, and an Aussie stuntman new in town finding his feet... They work, they meet girls, they party. End of story.The band obviously needed all that stuff because they are frankly second-tier, and playing a style that was already dated in 1978. It has to be said that the stunt bits in the film are genuinely spinetingling - that Aussie fellow really is something, and the film seems largely motivated by love and respect for the \"art\". I hung it there to see what crazy thing he'd do next. Just wish he could have found a better vehicle.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f68d4c9bcb04912b47e0416297b2eb9",
            "input": "Steven Spielberg wanted to win an Oscar so bad that he figured that he wouldn't win by directing special effects epics (he was nominated for three of them: \"Close Encounters of the Third Kind\", \"Raiders of the Lost Ark\", and \"E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial\". So he decided to get very serious by directing \"The Color Purple\", a period film with no special effects. Spielberg's first serious drama is a remarkable movie. But the Academy voters who voted back in 1985 still didn't give Spielberg any respect. \"The Color Purple\" received 11 Oscar nominations including Best Picture, but Spielberg was unfairly snubbed when he wasn't nominated for Best Director. It got worse on Oscar night when this film didn't win a single Oscar. It got completely shut out. That wasn't right. \"The Color Purple\" should have won a couple of Oscars including one for Whoopi Goldberg's spectacular film debut as Celie, a woman who suffers at the hands of an abusive husband (frightfully placed by Danny Glover), then gets stronger throughout the film thanks to some special friends. Oprah Winfrey also made her film debut here and gives a great performance as Sofia, one of those friends' of Celie. Since I'm from Chicago, I had already known Winfrey from her talk show (which at the time of this films' release hadn't gone nationwide). Like Goldberg, what a film debut! Margaret Avery is terrific as Shug Avery, another friend who also happens to be the mistress of Celie's rotten husband. All three actresses received well-deserved Oscar nominations for their work here (Goldberg for Best Actress; Winfrey and Avery for Best Supporting Actress). Set in the south during the first half of the 20th Century, \"The Color Purple\" is a film so strong that it made me cry at the end. It also made me laugh at times too. Why Academy voters were so hard on not nominating Spielberg for Best Director is a mystery that still puzzles me today. But Spielberg would eventully go on to win two Oscars years later for \"Schindler's List\" and \"Saving Private Ryan\", making him one of the best movie directors of all-time. But he should have gotten nominated for this movie. The job that he did going from special effects blockbusters like \"E.T.\" to a serious drama like \"The Color Purple\" was remarkable.**** (out of four)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2e6f2a6091d473982fe047aab4a7bbc",
            "input": "Why, o' WHY! ...did I pick this one up? Well... i needed a no-brainer in the summer heat, and the cover looked cool.Of course I should've known better. This is a really, really bad movie. And it gets embarasing when the makers know it's bad, and try cover it up by adding some sexy/beautiful women, and some sex-scenes to it. Well, folks... it does'nt cut it, does it!If you WOULD like a cool movie about a big reptile that is actually very, very good, well-played and funny: go rent Lake Placid! (that is an order)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49bcc63588b2420585aa901b529f5036",
            "input": "Although the director tried(the filming was made in Tynisia and Morocco),this attempt to transport the New Testament in the screen failed.The script has serious inaccuracies and fantasies,while the duration is very long.But the most tragic is the protagonist Chris Sarandon,who doesn't seem to understand the demands of his role.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ead66b6f9f074ea58064e090af308a19",
            "input": "\"Gespenster\" Question of to be cool in the German cinemaThere are not many German films in the last ten years, who have made me so interest. Yes, the problem of the most German films are in this film \"Gespenster\" too. He is on some places to uncooked to be good to see. Special the figure of Toni (Sabine Timento) is too cool. But thats is in German films always so. Everybody must to learns this coolneß - is the realism in this films. Thats difficult to understand. But in this case it makes some sense, because she steals and she lies - she is the kind of girl is better you never love it, because you lose it. Thats not clear for the other girl Nina in this film. She love her - and she would lose her. But Nina lost everything. She will play with soft emotion and a sad feeling. There is no way - but you must take it said Herbert Achterbusch for twenty years. Thats so often the way it goes in German films. Why? Nina (Julia Hummer) is not inside of the laws of society - the is outside - and there she have no chance. This films tries not on every place to gave her a part inside. Thats one of the problems - the stupid break with conventions - the criminal fascination. Throw it all away - and go nowhere! But the actress plays this difficult part very interesting. On the other side - there the parents - who are the pendant to the two girls. The have a car - a hotel suite - the have money and live in world with music of the opera. But the film stand always in some distance to seem. There is no much explaining of them.In the center of this film, there is one scene you will never forget. The two girls got to a casting. And there they should say how they find together. In this scene Toni will lying on. She said a fantastic story-has nothing to do with her. And then Nina will say the truth. She said it in an introversion way. There is no exhibition in it. She looks to the bottom and said what will happened for here. Thats a great moment. In the next scene on the party with pictures in red this feeling is going on- than Toni goes away...Okay, The film will end - in the German way of coolneß - rubbish - here the circle of sadness is closing. But there was a moment - where is happening something else - and this moment was important. He is more than German coolneß - and this moments are rare in the German cinema in this time!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d229af18e5f2422b8add31e18e6cfad2",
            "input": "What do you do with a 14-inch cocked porn star who was involved in drugs and murder, and then died of AIDS? You make a movie, of course. The probable reason why it wasn't made earlier is the fact that Eddie Nash would have been in the way of its production. So it's no coincidence that the film was made just a little while after Nash was sent to prison.The best thing about the movie is its quick pace. There is no time wasted on unnecessary crap. And why would it be? There is too much good material here to require dull filler scenes.The cast is good. Kilmer has been mediocre in a string of movies, so here was finally a role quite suitable for him. Bosworth is cute so it's irrelevant how she acts (she's solid), and McDermott, who is otherwise quite annoying, is rather good, to a large extent because he is wearing so much facial hair that I didn't recognize him at first. (I wish they did that to Cruise in every movie so I wouldn't have to watch his dumb face.) I utterly failed to recognize Christina Applegate, and wouldn't have known she was in it, had I not seen her name in the end-credits. Kudrow is charming as ever, a bit unusual to see her in a dramatic role. (Btw, \"Friends\" is the worst TV sitcom of all time.) The only casting choices that were questionable were an early near-cameo by Carrie Fischer and the totally absurd inclusion of the 90s moron Janeane Garofalo. You thought I'd include Paris Hilton, too, didn't you? No, I think Hilton is the ideal choice in her 10-second appearance as a dumb whore. Because the film is about decadence, among other things – and about a porn actor – she fits in perfectly.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9bd6938f8ae4cef9a57c35ad5dd785e",
            "input": "this is a great movie. i like it where ning climbs down to get his ink, and the skeletons chase him, but luckily he dodged them, opened the window, and didn't even notice them. xiao qian is very pretty too. & when he stuck the needle up ma Wu's butt, its hysterical. and when he is saying love is the greatest thing on earth while standing between two swords is great too. then also the part where he eats his buns while watching thew guy kill many people. then you see him chanting poems as he ran to escape the wolves. the love scenes are romantic, xiao qian and ning look cute together. add the comic timing, the giant tongue, and u have horror, romance, comedy, all at once. not to mention superb special effects for the 90s.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e233338309d44aab99aa6c7b39db113d",
            "input": "Seven Pounds stars Will Smith as Ben Thomas, an IRS collection agent who has an ulterior motive for meeting those who have gotten behind on their tax payments. Thomas caused the deaths of seven people whilst driving talking on his phone and the movie follows his attempt to try and atone for his, quite frankly, unforgivable crime.The story line is as subtle as a brick through a green house window. What you see is exactly what is happening - even the ending of Titanic was more surprising when compared to Seven Pounds. There is absolutely no twist whatsoever, there is never any confusion or doubt as to what is happening.Normally I only like Will Smith when is in full Bad Boys mode. The guy is at his best when sporting a gun, driving a Ford GT and saying \"Aw Hell Nah\" as whenever he tries to act serious it only comes across as a pathetic attempt at trying to gain an Oscar which he is so obviously is desperate for. This is probably the main reason why I wasn't looking forward to the movie, although here he is very understated. There are flashes of comedy but they are subtle, in fact it was the most understated Will Smith performance I have ever seen and for that reason alone he was fantastic and ironically should be nominated for a major award.The supporting cast were all grand too - Rosario Dawson looked pretty much at deaths door the whole film and Woody Harrelson and Barry Pepper were fine as where all the other bit players.Overall it is a weepy - but it isn't throwing all the usual clichés and sentimental violins to give you no other choice but to cry. There were a few times that even my hardened heart nearly broke. You will be hard pressed not to find one of the situations that does not relate to your own life which makes it seem all the more real.I would give it 8/10. The Will Smith show moves onto drama without all the desperation of The Pursuit of Happiness and comes of all the better for it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb44aaf91c4c43049f8217fd2f785492",
            "input": "In sixth grade, every teacher I had decided it would be a great idea to make this movie the curriculum for an entire semester. Every class had something to do with this terrible show. We watched it in English and wrote in journals as if we were one of the characters. In math we talked about charts and other sea crap. In science we talked about whales (which was actually somewhat interesting, so this wasn't a 100% waste of time). All day everyday was torture. Not only that, but they would subject us to this horror twice a day by making us watch it in study hall as well. I could see if this was a new series or something, but it was, like, '93. I'm still trying to block this out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eec2ea16014b4674b9d6b337b7bf8474",
            "input": "I was supposed to review this for a website, and I watched this with optimism that perhaps it would at least be a cheesy yet entertaining rip off, and it didn't even do that well enough.\"666: The Child\" is probably one of the worst supernatural thrillers I've ever seen (Even worse than \"Godsend\") with scenes that rip from \"The Omen\" without shame. The ending is even very similar to the way \"The Omen\" ends. Not to mention that the acting, writing, and story are all just hackneyed. If these movies make money, I'm sad to see where Asylum is headed. It's embarrassing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e43bdc96e8ed4d2183cc202ba747139a",
            "input": "A have a female friend who is currently being drawn into a relationship with an SOB who has a long term girlfriend. Of course the SOB is very good-looking, charming, etc and my friend is a very intelligent woman. Watching Jean Pierre Leaud's character at work is exactly like watching what goes on in real life when guys like that destroy the lives of our female friends. It's tragic, and you know she's going to end up very hurt, but there's nothing you can do. Leaud is brilliant. Totally empty. A blank throughout, he pulls the faces and tells the stories he thinks will get the reaction he wants.The scene two hours in when Leaud and Lebrun have made love, and the next morning he puts on a record and, very sweetly and charmingly, sings along to amuse her is brilliant. The \"What the hell am I doing here with this idiot\" expression that flickers back and forth across her face will be in my memory for a long time to come.It's a long film, but see it in one go, preferably in a cinema. Takes a while to get into, but then the time just disappears.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b49d3c77f0d40e7bc13f0a3a8801a47",
            "input": "Oh, brother. The only reason this very irritating film avoids getting the total \"bomb\" from me is because it's at least historically noteworthy as the first Three Stooges film (when they weren't yet on their own and were still saddled with that painfully unfunny Ted Healy). But even as a longtime Stooges fan I'd have to say that young Moe, Larry and Curly are badly used here as three zany assistant janitors to Mr. Healy's taller boss janitor. They're not featured steadily through the movie and their silly on-and-off-again stints paint them more like zany overactive cartoon characters trying too hard to be amusing.Most of this toothache deals with Jack Pearl seeking in vain to get some chuckles from the audience himself as a man who impersonates Baron Munchausen (here's a good example of the level of humor: \"I object!\" \"On what grounds?\" \"Coffee grounds!\"). His sidekick is none other than a young Jimmy Durante, but even the schnoz himself is a bore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a131685c7fc426089c4a51f7c0a9bc6",
            "input": "I went in not knowing anything about this movie and I walked out in an half hour knowing everything about it. It was one of worst movies I've ever seen. I'm a generally a nice person but if somebody told me they liked this movie, I would probably never talk to them again. Anybody who likes it throughly is most likely to have an extremely dry, hermit type personality. I'm gonna also include that they think they are pretty intelligent too, just like the self-centered fart bags who do the voices for the movie. I know everyone has different types of humor, some people may not even like mine, but that's okay; I don't think this covers any range of humor though. This movie is as flat and dull as Wes Anderson's mind. Go in and get ready to walk out; it's best to get your money back too.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-743a3217aad14729948c014642566b6b",
            "input": "This thought long lost flick sometimes comes available on the web. So I bought me a copy. Well, of course the acting is terrible and the story line is childish but it does have his moments. I think people who searched this one also knows the backstory of it. It was made by a grindhouse cinema owner for an extreme low budget. But for me he surely didn't spoiled the money on props but on the make up. The make up is for that kind of flick well done. The zombies are watchable and the gore is intact. The only problem with that kind of movies is the quality of the pelicule. It's terrible, luckely no hiss on the sound but sometimes it's way too dark. So you have to watch clearly to see the gore. In a funny way they tried to sell this one as really not for the squeamish. A voice-over tells in the beginning of the movie to watch out for a sign and a man appearing with green flashes, that tells you there is gore on the way. Of course that doesn't work, made me think of Cannibal Girls, had that annoying bell when the red stuff started to flow. They had the original idea, Cannibal Girls was made a year earlier. Don't go for the storyline, go for the zombies and notice a continuity mistake. When the girl and guy are making love first she takes of her bra, then they make love and suddenly her underwear is back on...try to do that, or am I getting a bit offline,...eat it you ugly corpses",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c4b478cd3ab422a917c1fddc5b3b313",
            "input": "I'll be honest, this is one of the worst movies ever. If not, then it's VERY close. Ever seen a bad teen soap opera. Well this is like one of those. Except worse. For example: (POSSIBLY SPOILER) girl: I wanna go somewhere else.guy: all we need is here.girl: but I wanna take myself somewhere different.guy: I'll take YOU somewhere else.... Proceeding this line they have sex. The music is bad pop and bad punk rock. If you've EVER read the book, avoid this movie like the plague. They completely change the personalities of the characters and the events. Additionally, they just get rid of things. Also, the movie ends about before the book finishes. It is an AWFUL movie. So, if you haven't read the book, don't watch it. If you HAVE read the book, burn it (the movie). If you like stupid teen soap operas that are lower quality than your average low quality teen soap opera, go for it. Then again, should we expect anything different from MTV?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed4aa709848f4153853e2836a7e602f9",
            "input": "In Where The Sidewalk Ends, Otto Preminger reunites Dana Andrews and Gene Tierney, surely in hopes of recapturing the magic of his Laura. But they're wildly dissimilar films, set in different strata of New York (not to mention at opposite poles of the noir universe). A fine mist of the Gothic hovers over the upscale Manhattan of Laura, with its erotic obsession and faint whiff of necrophilia; Where The Sidewalk Ends is pure urban soot and grit befouling a town of basement apartments, steam rooms and parking garages.But it's every bit as fine a movie as its revered forerunner, and dyed-in-the-wool noir (Laura, by contrast, one of the clutch of films from 1944 which the French first dubbed `noir,' was still very much a sophisticated murder mystery). Daylight enters only on very temporary sufferance, and director of photography Joseph LaShelle makes the most of the alleys and brownstones, the docks and the El. This is quintessential big-city - specifically Big Apple - noir, like several others from the bumper crop of 1950, like Side Street and Sleeping City and The Tattooed Stranger and Edge of Doom.As the movie opens, police detective Dana Andrews is on the carpet for his brutal ways, particularly his vendetta towards crime boss Gary Merrill (whom we learn was set up in business by Andrews' ne'er-do-well father). When an out-of-towner is stabbed to death at a floating crap game operated by Merrill, the hair-trigger Andrews roughs up a witness, causing him a fatal crack to the skull (exacerbated by a steel plate installed in the veteran's head). Realizing that his job's already on the line, Andrews dumps the body in the river after making it look like the suspect had taken a powder.Of course, that's far from an end to it. The corpse is discovered, his estranged wife turns out to be Tierney, and all the evidence starts to turn toward her father (Tom Tully), a hack driver who happened not only to have been cruising the same mean streets the night of the murder but to have ample reason to want his abusive son-in-law dead. But the embittered loner Andrews finds in Tierney a summons to his better nature; he tries to exonerate her father while still keeping his own involvement in the whole sordid business a secret....Not so epigrammatic as Laura, the script for Where The Sidewalk Ends (by Ben Hecht) shows a pungency of its own (in a second dressing-down, his superior tells Andrews, `Look at you - all bunged up like a barrelhouse fag').But while Laura spread its attention over half a dozen characters, here Andrews is all but the sole focus (even Tierney's role is far less central than her half-spectral Laura). And Andrews may never have excelled his performance here. It's tight-lipped and taciturn, but never more eloquent than when his face is silently registering the anguish to which his own obstinacy has brought him. He's a pent-up sufferer who can find release only through the safety-valve of violence (he even lashes out against his loyal partner, Bert Freed). To be sure, he finds too swift a road to redemption though the agency of his beautiful co-star. But that was the style of the times, and a sweetened-up ending does little to undermine this New York story of violence, corruption and urban entanglements.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fad42e89e6114de5aab6c711e0bd0381",
            "input": "Mindless dribble about the second coming of Christ in the form of a hippie and albino looking Sandra Locke. You have no idea what's happening on the screen with the irritating theme song \"Suzanne\" being played over and over throughout the movie until when \"The Second Coming of Suzanne\" is over you already know it by hard no matter how hard you try to forget the whole thing.This off-the-wall armature movie maker Logan,Jared Martin, is out to make the movie of the century but is so rude and obnoxious that none in the banking world is willing to finance his project. Planning to go on his own Logan then spots this couple at a seaside café and is fascinated with the young woman Suzanne, Sandra Locke, who reminds him of someone he knew in another life: Jesus Christ.With Logan's assistant and all around gofer Clavius, Richard Dreyfuss,somehow getting a $740,000.00 loan from the bank to finance Logan's masterpiece he starts to work on Suzanne by flattering her about her talent as an actress in order to get her interested to be in his film. This leads to Suzanne not only leaving her boyfriend artist Simon, Paul Sand, but later Simon being so depressed and feeling all alone takes a gun to his mouth and blows his brains out.The movie also has two somewhat unrelated sub-plots in it that has to do with a young autistic girl Dorothy, Kari Avalos, who's cured of her autism by Suzanne after everyone else, at the psychiatric hospital that she was committed to,failed. It's not really known what exactly Suzanne was doing at the hospital but she seemed to be some kind of orderly or volunteer there; was this supposed to show us in the audience that she, like Jesus, could miraculously heal the sick?There's also this newspaper columnist and big time businessman tycoon Jackson Sinclair, Gene Barry, who seems to be either going through a very difficult mid-life crisis or has seen a biblical-like vision that changed his life forever. Sinclair had been searching for the meaning of life as well as what it's all about all through the movie and wanted to know why there's all this suffering in the world, like this movie that he's in, and seemed to have found the answer when he first laid his eyes on Suzanne. Sinclair also got some sense knocked into his head when his private chauffeur David, Mark Rasmusser, who's gotten sick and tired of his weird and crazy hallucinations almost running him off a cliff in a kamikaze like drive along the Pacific Coast.The movie \"The Second Coming of Suzanne\" goes on with a number of unrelated sequences, probably to fill or pad in some time by it's director and film editor, and then goes to it's final scene in a Christ-like crucification on a hill as Logan has all the cameras rolling. It turns out that the crazed Logan got so carried away with his masterpiece as he tried to replicate, on the helpless and tied up Suzanne, the actual crucification of Jesus Christ some 2,000 years ago.Hard to sit through and almost impossible to follow \"The Second Coming of Suzanne\" puts you through the same kind torture that Suzanne is put through by Logan and the makers of the film. The movie tries to be arty but that's just an excuse to cover up it's brainless and non-existent storyline and even worse the terrible and amateurish acting by everyone in it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-405e774f018d458a8ddd080899579d09",
            "input": "This movie is really bad. The acting is plain awful except Michael Ironside. I don't get the story. Richard Grieco is the only survivor after a fight between two Mc-gangs. He comes to a town and suddenly he is choosened to fight against the bad people who wants indian-land. At the cover it said he was a indian himself that returned too his home-town, I didn't hear that in the movie, if so it wasn't clear.Richard Grieco was one hell of a bad actor. Stiff and ugly. He said his lines like it too. And we wouldn't talk about Sean Young, she hasn' been any of my favourite actors but in this movie she plays a indian women who falls in love with Bolt (Grieco). She is awful.When I rented it I choosed between this and Subterfuge with Amanda Pays. I choosed this one because of Michael Ironside was in the cast. Maybe I should have taken Subterfuge.Don't see this unless you think Richard Grieco looks tough on a motorbike with sunglasses.I will soon uptade the cast-list because I have it at home. I wrote it down after I seen the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e59d0e585b924906922b9f7c022620d3",
            "input": "This is not horror, as the first part was: This is (\"campy\") light and humorous entertainment. Like in so many sequels, the action starts right away with no explanations. But there's boobs, so I don't complain. And real boobs that is. If I understand correctly, those are quite rare today amongst the teenage girls in U.S. of A. Which brings to my mind the fact that the main actress here is Pamela \"Bruce's sister\" Springsteen.This cannot be thought without the first movie, so I compare this to it. Again there is too small clothing (mainly pants) and funny hair, it's not hard to tell what decade this film is made in. Again there is really strange characters, this time even more visibly \"pathological\" ones. Especially the personnel of the camp. It's like some mental rehabilitation summer camp. People are older: Most of the actors must be at least 25, but I think they're supposed to be 16 or something. Some \"methods\" used by the Evil Dyke are quite unpleasant. Actually this movie don't have much in common with the first part, and this is worse than it in every way.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-084e37ca48904d0eb8a2acc73b09782e",
            "input": "for my opinion, the middle of the film, specially the love scene is a bit too long, but the whole time you can imagine this desert feeling. but the best, what made this film unforgettable are the great explosion pictures, their color, slowmotion and the pink floyd music are unique in filmhistory!destruction in its propper and popular form.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78019e5f02e7420aba70a56a319db48c",
            "input": "Mario Lanza, of course, is \"The Great Caruso\" in this 1951 film also starring Ann Blyth, Dorothy Kirsten, Eduard Franz and Ludwig Donath. This is a highly fictionalized biography of the legendary, world-renowned tenor whose name is known even today.The film is opulently produced, and the music is glorious and beautifully sung by Lanza, Kirsten, Judmila Novotna, Blanche Thebom, and other opera stars who appeared in the film. If you're a purist, seeing people on stage smiling during the Sextet from \"Lucia\" will strike you as odd - even if Caruso's wife Dorothy just had a baby girl. Also it's highly unlikely that Caruso ever sang Edgardo in Lucia; the role lay too high for him.In taking dramatic license, the script leaves out some very dramatic parts of Caruso's life. What was so remarkable about him is that he actually created roles in operas that are today in the standard repertoire, yet this is never mentioned in the film. These roles include Maurizio in Adriana Lecouvreur and Dick Johnson in \"Girl of the Golden West,\" There is a famous photo of him posing with a sheet wrapped around him like a toga. The reason for that photo? His only shirt was in the laundry. He was one of the pioneers of recorded music and had a long partnership with the Victor Talking-Machine Company (later RCA Victor). He was singing Jose in Carmen in San Francisco the night of the earthquake.Instead, the MGM story basically has him dying on stage during a performance of Martha, which never happened. He had a hemorrhage during \"L'Elisir d'amore\" at the Met and could not finish the performance; he only sang three more times at the Met, his last role as Eleazar in La Juive. What killed him? The same thing that killed Valentino - peritonitis. His first role at the Met was not Radames in Aida, as indicated in the film, but the Duke in Rigoletto. So when it says on the screen \"suggested by Dorothy Caruso's biography of her husband,\" that's what it was - suggested. What is true is that Dorothy's father disowned her after her marriage, and left her $1 of his massive estate. They also did have a daughter Gloria together (who died at the age of 79 on 10/7/2007). However, Caruso had four other children by a mistress before he married Dorothy.Some people say that Lanza's voice is remarkably like Caruso's, but just listen to Caruso sing in the film \"Match Point\" -- Caruso's voice is remarkably unlike Lanza's. In fact, from his sound, had he wanted to, Caruso could have sung as a baritone. He is thought to have had some trouble with high notes, further evidence of baritone leanings; and the role he was preparing when he died was Othello, a dramatic tenor role, which Lanza definitely was not. Lanza's voice deserved not to be compared with another. He made a unique contribution to film history, popularizing operatic music. He sings the music in \"The Great Caruso\" with a robust energy; he is truly here at the peak of what would be a short career. His acting is natural and genuine. Ann Blyth is lovely as Dorothy and gets to sing a little herself.Really a film for opera lovers and Lanza fans, which are probably one and the same.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3c13c306a364e338ad79453eadca759",
            "input": "As a mother of 2 young children who are or should I say have been growing up with the many reincarnations of Scooby I feel well positioned to comment on the historical and current version of Scooby.If as a family we had not seen any episodes prior to Shaggy and Scooby get a clue we may have enjoyed it as a light weight, nothing special Saturday morning cartoon. But that in essence is the problem it is in it's current format so light weight that it will not have the longevity of the \"old\" Scooby and gang. I'm sure it may succeed in a quick monetary return but I'm sure the long term buy in of old and young is in very real danger of being lost. My 6 year old son on seeing the new version was really disgruntled and without any prompting said that it looked really badly animated and why wasn't it anything like the last series(Where are you).Scrappy Doo was an anomaly but still infinitely better than this. Let's hope Get a clue will be apropos with reference to the producers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-097abdf4e5324eae8c17758a26eef5e5",
            "input": "I just saw this movie the other day when I rented it, and I thought this was going to be just another movie with a girl trying to prove a point, but Diane joined boxing because she wanted to. I thought this movie was good. I gave it a 8/10. That's how good it is. Plus a movie with Michelle Rodriguez is always good. Even is she's been in only six.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe592d4fd3274efca51b20d18b38c8c3",
            "input": "This was a disappointing film. The people seem to have no substance, the lead protagonist Martin Cahil has zero redemptive values, in fact everyone in it including Jon Voight epitomizes sleeze. I would not recommend this film to anyone. The violence is distasteful, though artfully done. The filming is to black, at least the print i saw fit this category. A disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c93d3e40666a42c9a7f5851822dd5fde",
            "input": "Although THE FLOCK has some pretty good acting by veteran Richard Gere, and some okay shots that might harken some back to THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS days, the movie stretches credibility to the breaking point and destroys itself against a plot that really leads nowhere.The film is about Erroll Babbage (Gere) who works for the department of safety and is preparing to retire. His office thrusts upon him his replacement, Allison Lowry (Claire Danes, STARDUST), who quickly discovers that Babbage is obsessed with his job. And that job ain't very fun. He monitors hundreds of sexual offenders who are on parole in his jurisdiction. Allison goes with Erroll on many calls to check up on his \"flock\" of offenders and learns that he is in desperate need of retirement. But Erroll is good at his job even if his methods aren't. He taunts sexual predators and even has physical conflicts with them. Erroll justifies his actions by bringing up these deviants' pasts. It is this \"good justification\" that challenges the audience on some level, letting us see how brutal Erroll is and yet how out-of-touch he's become (by being too close to his job).When a teenage girl goes missing in Erroll's \"area\", he immediate leaps to the conclusion that she was abducted by one of his flock. But how could he know? Is Erroll that good at his job? Allison challenges him and Erroll pushes back. Their battles become as fierce as Erroll's need to find this missing girl.Although the set-up for the story was okay, it didn't have any umpf! I will give credit to Richard Gere, however, who plays the Erroll character very well. Battling retirement. Worried about everyone who's near his flock. Disgusted with those he's responsible for overseeing. Disgusted with himself for having to do some of things he does. Quite a change in character portrayal for Gere. But beyond him there's not much else. Some of the sets are okay (dark and dangerous) but there are so many other problems as to be laughable.I'll be the first to admit that suspending disbelief is a requirement whenever watching films. But that suspension has limits. The biggest push against those limits is the destruction of EXTREMELY vital crime scenes. Someone as meticulous as Erroll would KNOW that moving a body would be a huge no-no. Or trampling through a crime scene. Or moving evidence. It went beyond and hurt the film to no end.The other damaging part of this film is that we never get into Clair Danes' character, Allison. She's almost dropped by the wayside at the end of the film and we're never privy to what her intension might be: Will she stay or leave? Will she end up like Erroll if she does stay? This isn't a horrible film as it does touch on some uncomfortable moral ground, but the story as a whole needed to be tightened up.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3137f0a4e5d427fbc4031b81071ef20",
            "input": "This is a wonderful film... First impressions of cynicism and crassness are soon dissipated by a fun loving display of how men and women's baser motivations diverge (Vive la difference !) You can love people despite and sometimes because of their weaknesses. Human beings are a bit rubbish really, but we have big hearts and we try our best, despite temptation. It's not our fault when sometimes temptation can't be resisted, that's just who we are.There is a consistent stylishness from start to finish; crisp photography and sharp composition, very pleasant viewing when you add provocative content, well suited music and laugh out loud scripting.Watch out for the very young \"lone wise voice\"... brilliant; wisdom from innocence balancing comedy from the human condition.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-270d5b624b0d455a8d34afa0d7242a52",
            "input": "Well where do i start? i think it's very insulting to the original Annie with Aileen Quimnn. I love the film Annie, and i was expecting this to be a brilliant film, but i was so disappointed! the acting is awful, the original Annie came out a few years before i was born, I'm now 25 and Annie is still one of my favourite films, So i was really excited to see Annie 2. The acting was awful in the film, were any of the characters original? very badly written, directed and acted. This is not a film i wish to see again, and any Annie lover i recommend that you don't watch this film because it will only leave you very disappointed. The young girls singing isn't bad but still doesn't compare to the original",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6617100533934120b95863e7b097a3f9",
            "input": "Story of a good-for-nothing poet and a sidekick singer who puts his words to music. Director Danny Boyle has lost none of his predilection for raking in the gutter of humanity for characters but he has lost, in this film, the edge for creating inspiring and funny films. Strumpet is painful to watch and barely justified by the fact that it was made for TV.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a2ac4f5d3ca409e9ab51ebf7c54f0b4",
            "input": "Seriously crappy movie.First off, the movie starts with a cop and his partner parked outside of a warehouse/furniture store. The \"bad\" cop takes a girl, which they had pulled over, into the warehouse's attic, while the newbie cop sits outside and ponders what could be happening up there. The \"bad\" cop eventually returns with a heavy duffel bag, and the newbie cop doesn't think there are any problems, but he still wonders what was in the bag, so he asks, gets a bullshit response, and then he thinks everything is OK (for now).The \"bad\" cop repeats this process, and even once with a tit scene (made it slightly better). But eventually people start to catch on, which took awhile considering how f***ing obvious it was. One girl gets a voodoo curse placed on her just in case she dies, like ya do. Now, the \"bad\" cop eventually kills this magically protected bitch, and then he gets rid of the duffel-bagged body.Since she had the oogey-boogey magic put on her, she comes back with lots of eye-shadow on, which is supposed to indicate that she may be a zombie... also, the magic curse causes all of the other girls to become \"eye-shadow monsters\". Some of the girls meet up with a dude, who is apparently a currency specialist, and he offers them a ride (they look normal to him apparently). But when the girls see other people, such as the one girls husband, he freaks out because she is hideous (some people freak out, but others don't even notice).... massive plot hole.So, to wrap it up, the eye-shadow monsters kill the \"bad\" cop, who in turn ends up becoming a zombie in the last scene. It was as though they were trying to prep us for a sequel! Like anyone would want to see part 2 of this cow dropping.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b1a51ca4df74cbfa518b6e34b826661",
            "input": "I was one of quite a few extras in this big bomb. I just happened to be in the right place working safety for the race scenes at A.I.R. as it was know as back then.Thank goodness my scene in in the first few minutes of the movie and I don't have to sit through the whole thing. It was more of a big party than a movie set but hey, the pay was good.Attention to detail was not a strong point for this one, but who was going to know.The funny thing was seeing the cars in the track at the really slow speed and then in the movie speeded up to the what was close to normal speed.A lot of the scenes were changed as they were filmed I suppose to shave cost and time.But every one was having such a good time who cared!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-edb1d108886a42518ce992b4d139a13a",
            "input": "Academy Award winner Robert Redford (Best Director. Ordinary People 1980) captures the majesty of the Montana wilderness and the strength of the American family in this acclaimed adaptation of Norman Macleans classic memoir.Craig Sheffer stars as the young Norman, and Brad Pitt stars as his brother Paul, an irresistible daredevil driven to challenge the world.Growing up, both boys rebel against their stern Minister father (Tom Skerritt).While Norman channels his rebellion into writing, Paul descends a slippery path to self-destruction.Also starring Emily LLoyd as wild-hearted Jessie Burns.The film won an Academy Award for Best Cinematopghaphy in 1993.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c94ab06af1014a018f619bcb7b85a4a6",
            "input": "\"Secret of the Lens\" is perhaps a pretty campy all-time favorite of mine. The best and funniest from Kajawari Yoshiaki, who is known for splatter anime and sleazy hentai-ecchi anime. I wish he did more campiness like this.My favorite scenes are the psychedelic CG sequence, the parts where Lord Helumis blows up his failing henchmen, the party riots that Bill causes (one of the funniest scenes) and whenever my favorite character, Worsle appears.Check this out.WARNING:This is not for serious sophisticated Anime fans!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa9d654621e846e5b7eb24ce0cbcf86b",
            "input": "I had never heard of this one before it turned up on Cable TV. It's very typical of late 50s sci-fi: sober, depressing and not a little paranoid! Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is pretty much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is unmistakably an extremely low-budget venture! While not uninteresting in itself (the-apocalypse-via-renegade-missile angle later utilized, with far greater aplomb, for both DR. STRANGELOVE [1964] and FAIL-SAFE [1964]) and mercifully short, the film's single-minded approach to its subject matter results in a good deal of unintentional laughter - particularly in the scenes involving an imminent childbirth and a gang of clueless juvenile delinquents!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fba5b4786cdb4d38ad7e77c063472252",
            "input": "I'm going to review the 2 films as a whole because I feel that is how it should be considered, and watched. When I talk about 'the film' I am talking about parts 1 & 2 together when watched one after the other, as they should be.Thank you Jon Anderson, Steven Soderbergh & Benicio Del Toro.This film is a refreshing, bold, gritty and true film. And, it hearkens a new style of film making. No Faux drama. No Swelling sound track. Not Faux Documentary style. Just clean shots and an attempt to stick to the facts. I have been reading Jon Anderson's \"Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life\" and recently finished Fidel's Auto biography, and this had helped my ability to soak this film in properly. But I have to say that it is Jon Anderson's exhaustive, penultimate and wonderful biography that has given this film the proper historical back bone. Anderson was consultant on this film (or these 2 films). What makes this film a true thing is that it is clean. No swelling music or slow-motion photography to heighten drama, and even more importantly; no fake documentary shaky camera. Just square shots and straight forward shooting style. The type of camera used makes you feel right there in the jungle. Benicio Del Toro should be given full honors for this, I never doubted him as Che throughout the film... not once. He did a wonderful job and I will respect him for ever for this. Some people complain that the film only deals with 2 slices of his life and not the whole. But I think this is one of the true beautiful aspects of this film: it doesn't try to be everything. It doesn't try to 'tell the story'. A person's life is too multifaceted to try and tell in 2, 4, 8, 16 or 32 hours. This is one of the subtle beauties of this film, it resists that temptation, and stays focused on the intent of letting us GET A FEEL FOR CHE, HIS DEVELOPING MILITARISTIC MIND AND THE FORCES AROUND HIM. It focuses on 3 slices of time: The Battle to over throw Batista, Che's U.N. speech and the Gorilla preparations in Bolivia. \"Motorcycle Diaries\" already told his young man side, and I applaud S. Soderbergh for focusing on other aspects instead. I keep referring to Jon Anderson's book and the film stays true. The only weak link for me are the casting (not the performance) of Matt Damon. In a film so loaded with true to life performances, an American, (Matt Damon) playing a Bolivian is a clunky stretch - he does well, but after so much care in the casting, this was an over-site. Small and completely forgiven. The reality that the rest of the casting gives you, and most notably Benicio Del Toro's amazing job, put's this film at the top of my list.The fact that this film went almost straight to video say's something about how the cold war ethics that would never allow the 'revolutionized Cuba' to become what it might have, are still at work keeping it's story quiet. If not out of clandestine muffling, then out of the effects of properly done propaganda that has prejudiced this topic.This is a must see film, and Jon Anderson's \"Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life\" is a must read if you want to start to get a grasp of the early effects on the global mind set regarding the expansion of international / political financial chess moves of the 40's, 50's & 60's that placed unfair pressure on our South American neighbors, and the effects it fostered.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3144a38b21ac4917933a72650eea9257",
            "input": "Having seen CUBE, I've been a fan of Vincenzo Natali's work. Natali seems to have this inept ability to take a storyline, and hardly wring it our like a wet towel for all the storyline he can muster. Instead, he lets the stories themselves unfold in natural ways, so much in fact, that you may in fact believe there is this Cube were people try to escape, or in the case of NOTHING, a large empty expanse where there is... nothing! The advert had me hooked instantly. It seemed so simple! Take two characters who no one likes, and send them to a world where there is nothing. Natali does this so simply that you forget the logic that a place where there is nothing cannot exist. In fact, the world of nothing becomes something of an irony within the film. There's nothing there, but also 'something' there.It might be a good time to point out that the trailer is highly misleading. I was fortunate enough to actually understand that the film leaned to a more comedic side than the trailer otherwise told so. Therefore upon watching the film, i laughed every now and again, whereas someone who the advert mislead may find themselves utterly confused.If i may take a minute to give the film some praise, where the film excels on is the concept. It is a genius concept to have a world of nothing, and to put two characters there, NOT two brilliant minded characters, who will philosophise and work out their surroundings, but two idiots who have absolutely no clue as to where the hell they are! Another strong point is the film's cinematography, though at first this may not seem it! Where each wall, north, earth, south, west, up and down is just a white plane, a perception of depth becomes faulty. It is hard to determine where things are placed in the Mis-En-Scene. The cinematography has many moments where this actually happens, but for the most part, the camera is placed so that two characters, or an object and a character are placed in the foreground and background, allowing a sense of depth to be realised.However, this film does lack in certain areas. The film is relatively short, but even so, after a while the novelty of this world of nothing becomes rather dull, and you wish to find some form of resolution within the plot. We can also argue that the acting is once again, questionable. These two characters are in a sense, unlikeable, therefore we feel no sympathy at any point for these characters. However, on a flip side of that, the chemistry and friendship between the two characters seems real enough, but there is something lacking.Even so, i do rank this as a thoroughly enjoyable film! Do not let the trailer fool you into thinking this is another science-fiction horror film. It is much more of a comedy than that! It is indeed worth watching though, purely for the concept itself!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b45fbe73d9424868a0440d308be3ff5c",
            "input": "This movie is about Tyrannus, a gladiator who is brought back from the dead to summon Tyrannus, a gladiator who must be brought back from the dead. Tyrannus, we learn after about an hour, is also called Demonicus. This adds much needed depth to the screenplay and calls into question our assumptions about identity, psychology and ourselves. The spirit of Tyrannus accomplishes his little to-do list (killing some people and saying repetitive phrases in Latin) by possessing the body of a college guy. He uses a magic mind-control helmet to do this, which the college boy willingly puts on his head, and then at several points in the movie, takes off and puts back on.Maria performs oral sex on a poor man's Sean Willian Scott, and Tyrannus wears the Rollerball glove. Tyrannus has his own green backlighting for no reason, and has apparently been sitting next to CG fire in an ancient concrete tunnel for centuries like this. Utter misfortune.This movie is empty and will hurt you. See it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-073857b0adef485b8a77bb20df70b844",
            "input": "Paris, JE T'AIME is a wondrous cinematic homage to the city of light and the city of love, a film so complex that it almost defies summarization and reviewing. Ask a large group of people their impressions of life in Paris and the result would be something akin to this film. Tied together by each of the sectors or Arrondissement of the city, the film examines love in all forms, native folk in their Parisian modes, and tourists interacting with the great city. Approximately twenty writers and directors, each with about five minutes of screen time, include Olivier Assayas, the Coen Brothers, Sylvain Chomet, Isabel Coixet, Wes Craven, ALfonso Cuarón, Gérard Depardieu, Christopher Doyle, Vincenzo Natali, Alexander Payne, Walter Salles, Nobuhiro Suwa, and Gus Van Sant among others less well known. The stories vary from hilarious, to humorous, to touching, to tragic, to banal, to tender.In one story a young Frenchman (Gaspard Ulliel) is attracted to a young lithographer (Elias McConnell), pouring out his heart in French to a lad who speaks only English. In another a separated husband and wife (Gena Rowlands and Ben Gazzara) meet in the Latin Quarter to finalize divorce proceedings while another couple in Père-Lachaise (Emily Mortimer and Rufus Sewell) approach marriage without connection until the spirit of departed Oscar Wilde intervenes. Steve Buscemi in Tuileries confronts superstition in a subway with his bag of tourist collections, in Bastille Sergio Castellitto (in love with mistress Leonor Watling) is ready to divorce his wife Miranda Richardson until she confides she has terminal leukemia, Juliette Binouche confronts agony about her son's fantasies and loss in Place des Victoires with the help of a mythical cowboy Willem Defoe, Sara Martins and Nick Nolte and Ludivine Sagnier display a keen tale of mistaken ideas in Parc Monceau, Fanny Ardant and Bob Hoskins 'play out' a strange relationship in Pigalle, Melchior Beslon plays a young blind man to actress Natalie Portman in learning how to see in Faubourg Saint-Denis, vampire love between Elijah Wood and Olga Kurylenko in Quartier de la Madeleine, Maggie Gyllenhaal is an ex-patriot actress stung out on drugs in Quartier des Enfants Rouges, and Margo Martindale is a visiting tourist letter carrier trying desperately to speak the French she has studied for her life's trip in a tenderly hilarious 14ème Arrondissement.The final few minutes of the film tries to tie together as many of the stories as feasible, but this only works on superficial levels. The film is long and there are no bridges between the many stories, a factor that can tire the audience due to lack of time to assimilate all of the action. But it is in the end a richly detailed homage to a great city and supplies the viewer with many vignettes to re-visit like a scrapbook of a time in Paris. It is a film worth seeing multiple times! Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e975b875ec64b53bed92a0ebd7438e3",
            "input": "Based on fact, this is the story of a teenager named Homer Hickam (Jake Gyllenhaal), growing up in a coal town in West Virginia where a boy's usual destiny was to \"end up in the mines.\" But Homer had his eye on the sky and a love for flying rockets, to the dismay of his mine-foreman father, and the consternation of the townsfolk generally. A misfit for sure, he and three of his equally outcast buddies begin making rockets, which they fly from a patch of barren land eight miles out of town, so as to no longer terrorize the community with their oft-times errant rockets. Unfortunately, most of the town and especially Homer's father (Chris Cooper) thinks that they are wasting their time. However, the people become intrigued and soon start coming out in droves to watch the 'Rocketboys' send off their homemade missiles. Only one teacher (Laura Dern) in the high school understands their efforts and lets them know that they could become contenders in the national science fair with college scholarships being the prize. Now the gang must learn to perfect their craft and overcome the many problems facing them as they shoot for the stars. Director Joe Johnston has always been a famous name for his movies such as Jumanji & Jurassic Park 3 & \"October Sky\" surely stands above all of his other films. Without any doubts, \"October Sky\" is his best effort & obviously his best film. It's not only a true story filmed extremely well, but even as a movie, it has every single thing, which is required for a top level cinema. And along with Johnston's extra-ordinary direction, are some exceptional performances. Jake Gyllenhaal was around 19, when this movie was released & he gives a beautiful & natural performance. He is a perfect actor. Chris Cooper as his father, also gives a very fine performance. The same goes for Laura Dern & also she looks beautiful. Even the rest of the performances are extremely well. The background score was fine. Highly inspiring movie, which lifts up your spirit sky high. One of those movies which definitely inspires you for all of your life. An amazing inspiring movie along with loads of entertainment. Not to be missed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3c8f335f2be4359981236ff29e95135",
            "input": "Another chapter in the ongoing question, whatever happened to Mel Brooks's sense of humor? It starts out nicely enough, with Mel as Trump-like mogul Goddard Bolt (\"You can call me God\"), who accepts a bet that he can't live on the streets for 30 days. But the moment the movie hits the streets, it turns into a pathos-laden mess, with occasional \"funny\" bits interjected (Mel sees a black kid break-dancing for money and tries to do a vaudeville buck-and-wing, yuk, yuk). Leslie Ann Warren is nothing short of wasted. The worst part is this movie's musical number, in which Brooks and Warren do a silent dance to Cole Porter's \"Easy to Love.\" Brooks's musical parodies are usually the highlights of his movies; here he plays the whole thing straight, like a dancing excerpt from an aging guest star on \"The Carol Burnett Show\" (on which Rudy DeLuca, this film's co-writer, began his career). Go rent Charlie Chaplin's THE KID, which covered the same ground 70 years before and did a lot",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5599b2fac76848e0bf4802f0d000587b",
            "input": "A lot of promise and nothing more. An all-star cast certainly by HK standards, but man oh man is this one a stinker. No story? That's okay, the action will make up for it like most HK action flicks. What? The action is terrible, corny, and sparse? Dragon Dynasty's releases up to this point are by and large superb and generally regarded as classics in Asian cinema. This is a blight. They managed to wrangle a couple of actors from Infernal Affairs, but they can't bring life to a disjointed script. There are scenes of dialogue where two or three lines are spoken with a cut in between each and no continuity in what the characters are saying. You almost feel like they're each giving a running monologue and just ignoring the other characters. Michael Biehn is made of wood, really? Sammo Hung uses a stunt double? No way. Yes way. Stay away.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f0f2b83f31147f5ab7803e798367803",
            "input": "The first 45 minutes of Dragon Fighter are entirely acceptable and surprisingly watchable. The characters are believable and interesting. The cloning lab looks really high-tech. After that, it all collapses. The characters start behaving idiotically, and a new subplot is introduced from nowhere about a fusion reactor (and this is supposedly \"present day\") going critical, the only plot justification of which is that it is required to kill the dragon - only it doesn't. The finish is incredibly weak. One wonders what made a movie that started out so well turn so wrong.All the characters except Dean Cain are played by Russians. This results in some weird situations and details, like the character being played by Vessela Dimitrova being called \"Bailey Kent\" despite her heavy accent (and despite her, on one occasion, inexplicably switching to *Spanish*!).Because of the decent start, I considered rating this movie a 5, but it really was more disappointing than that, so I only give it 4.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fed72ea90ed5481e831237e373c9a0c8",
            "input": "When I first saw this movie, I thought it was the typical \"love thy neighbour\" stuff....The more the movie was going on, the more I got involved. Acting is magnificent from both actors, direction was great, the story unusual. Cried my eyes off, first time in my life for a movie. A real must have in any serious videoteque. 11 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-314a193d9bd544fd97c74e5c18dc4c68",
            "input": "In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our reporter hero battles hindersome authorities, duplicitous co-workers, renegade UFO debunkers, and silent, skulking aliens. (Though capable of mind control and zapping objects from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The script clomps from event to event,leaving puzzlers aplenty. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese abduct the ugly photographer first instead of his model? Inquiring minds want to know! Writer-director Mario Gariazzo apparently researched his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics double feature. (The closing screen crawl boasts that it's based on actual events...just like \"Plan 9!\") Some may feel burned by the abrupt finale, but it should still appeal to conspiracy cranks.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-403c93e035584ac0a2cbff39db2347b1",
            "input": "Happened upon a copy of this. Not mine and if I had spent my own money on this I'd be finding those responsible and demanding it back! All I can say is this would be a terrible student film. Any understanding of the medium of film is absent. Acting is god awful, the story would have been rejected from the original Twilight Zone series as unoriginal and lame, and the change in tone of the lead character's reaction to the 'ghost' is laughable.I can only agree that the 'glowing' reviews of this film are from friends and family. I'm afraid it's not even entertainingly bad.Amateur in the extreme! Avoid! Avoid! Avoid!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35e83a9dbb324145b57ba95b4b6c0928",
            "input": "Who could possibly sympathize with these two obnoxious protagonists? What's intended to be a light, frothy comedy about neighbor children who can't give up their childhood game of dare even as they age well into adulhood, comes off more as an exercise in cruelty and petulant self-indulgence. As children, the pair are unbearably precocious; as adults they're intolerably immature. It's a bad combination.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec245b87acd34c53ace4346ff923c3c4",
            "input": "I liked this movie sort of reminded me of my marriage. It is very clean you can see it with family. Very nicely done. Songs are OK too. I think the writer director is great. The movie shows how marriages progress thru time. They have couples at different stages of life and relationships in their life the film beautifully depicts quite a few stages in parallel in the same story. Some of the dialogs are quite good. The movie depicts complex human emotion very nicely not with over dramatization. Also shows perfect is after all not so perfect. Shows very nicely the dynamics of arranged marriage when it is new. The movie is very well written and directed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-673db34ea2fc4b50b231f0b288eb4100",
            "input": "The reason why I say this is because I wrote the screenplay and knew very little about it being made until I was asked to see the film. I wrote it for some producers who sold it on without telling me. Because Alan Dobie was a friend of mine, I got to hear about it. I had only written a first draft so I was understandably worried when I heard that it was on the floor. I asked Peter Collinson, through my agent, whether he might like me to do another draft. I also asked if I could I see my original script because I had lost it. I was told, too late. So I did the only thing I could do under the circumstances and took my name off. I had no idea what they might have done to my screenplay. Then I was invited to see the finished film. I was so impressed that I very quickly asked to have my name put back on. It's a beautifully made piece, from a hurriedly written first draft, I expected to be asked to do much more work on it; perhaps if I had it wouldn't be so good. I would love to see my original script again if anybody knows where it is? I would also love to see the film again, I only saw it once in a little viewing theatre in Soho.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6283ac27484e43178b745d0e460d9ae9",
            "input": "The great cinematic musicals were made between 1950 and 1970. This twenty year spell can be rightly labelled the “Golden Era” of the genre. There were musicals prior to that, and there have been musicals since… but the true classics seem invariably to have been made during that period. Singin’ In The Rain, An American In Paris, The Band Wagon, Seven Brides For Seven Brothers, Oklahoma, South Pacific, The King And I, and many more, stand tall as much cherished products of the age. Perhaps the last great musical of the “Golden Era” is Carol Reed’s 1968 “Oliver”. Freely adapted from Dickens’ novel, this vibrant musical is a film version of a successful stage production. It is a magnificent film, winner of six Oscars, including the Best Picture award.Orphan Oliver Twist (Mark Lester) lives a miserable existence in a workhouse, his mother having died moments after giving birth to him. Following an incident one meal-time, he is booted out of the workhouse and ends up employed at a funeral parlour. But Oliver doesn’t settle particularly well into his new job, and escapes after a few troubled days. He makes the long journey to London where he hopes to seek his fortune. Oliver is taken under the wing of a child pickpocket called the Artful Dodger (Jack Wild) who in turn works for Fagin (Ron Moody), an elderly crook in charge of a gang of child-thieves. Despite the unlawful nature of the job, Oliver finds good friends among his new “family”. He also makes the acquaintance of Nancy (Shani Wallis), girlfriend of the cruellest and most feared thief of them all, the menacing Bill Sikes (Oliver Reed). After many adventures, Oliver discovers his true ancestry and finds that he is actually from a rich and well-to-do background. But his chances of being reunited with his real family are jeopardised when Bill Sikes forcibly exploits Oliver, making him an accomplice in some particularly risky and ambitious robberies.“Oliver” is a brilliantly assembled film, consistently pleasing to the eye and excellently acted by its talented cast. Moody recreates his stage role with considerable verve, stealing the film from the youngsters with his energetic performance as Fagin. Lester and Wild do well too as the young pickpockets, while Wallis enthusiastically fleshes out the Nancy role and Reed generates genuine despicableness as Sikes. The musical numbers are staged with incredible precision and sense of spectacle – Onna White’s Oscar-winning choreography helps make the song-and-dance set pieces so memorable, but the lively performers and the skillful direction of Carol Reed also play their part. The unforgettable tunes include “Food Glorious Food”, “Consider Yourself”, “You’ve Got To Pick A Pocket Or Two”, “I’d Do Anything” and “Oom-Pah-Pah” – all immensely catchy songs, conveyed via very well put together sequences. The film is a thoroughly entertaining experience and never really loses momentum over its entire 153 minute duration. Sit back and enjoy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8b103433db14ef5ad8aacc26081cc21",
            "input": "Former private eye-turned-security guard ditches his latest droning job and is immediately offered a chance to return to his previous profession. His assignment: to tail a mysterious French woman newly arrived in California...and apparently wanted by suit-and-tie racketeers. Unsuccessful attempt to update the film noir genre, without enough sting or wit (or involving plot dynamics) in the screenplay. Director and co-scenarist Paul Magwood (who later claimed the picture was edited without his involvement) doesn't give off the impression of having high regard for the '40s films his \"Chandler\" was borne from; his nostalgia is appropriately rumpled, but also bitter-tinged and somewhat indifferent. The handling is curiously, commendably low-keyed, and Warren Oates is well-cast as this '70s variant on the 'private dick' archetype, but the movie doesn't have any snap. Nice to see Leslie Caron and Gloria Grahame in the cast--though neither has much to do, and Caron's hot-and-cold running character is exasperating throughout. Vivid cinematography by Alan Stensvold, nice location shooting, but it fails to come to any kind of a boil. *1/2 from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1b1cf2043b64aeeb598d7af5b8732e5",
            "input": "Bedknobs & Broomsticks is another one of Disney's masterpieces. It was filmed with sequences of animation and the actors and actresses interacting with the animations. (A similar concept was used in Mary Poppins when the children and Mary disappear into the sidewalk art.) I am mainly rating this film through child's eyes because I have not seen it in years. Back then, it was one of my favourite films. It was magical and mystical, and the last scenes (the conflict beginning with the ghostly armour walking into battle) were my favourites. There was also a lot of stop-animation used with the spells (ie, people turning into rabbits), which may be a little dated and silly now. (Also, I believe that the film starts off slowly.) Through the eyes of a child, this is a fun film and it is easy for children to put themselves into the places of the children in the film. It is an imaginative film which is sadly largely-forgotten today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33cfe34c393a4d3bbef5248df0e540f8",
            "input": "Outlandish premise that rates low on plausibility and unfortunately also struggles feebly to raise laughs or interest. Only Hawn's well-known charm allows it to skate by on very thin ice. Goldie's gotta be a contender for an actress who's done so much in her career with very little quality material at her disposal...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32f376d57632468288d28773d4950d16",
            "input": "You spend most of this two-hour film wondering \"what's the story regarding the lead character?\" Will Smith, as a low-key \"Ben Thomas\" will keep you guessing. The last 20-25 minutes is when you find out, and it's a shocker....but you knew something dramatic was going to be revealed. Until then, Smith, plays it mysterious, almost stalking people. You know he has a good reason for doing it, but it's never really explained, once again, to keep us guessing until the end.All of it, including a on again/off again but touching romance with Rosario Dawkins (\"Emily Posa\") might make some viewers frustrated or wanting to quit this film.....but don't because the final long segment puts all the pieces of this puzzle together.This is a two-hour film and not the typical action-packed macho Will Smith film. In fact, the most shocking aspect might be seeing the drawn, sad face of Smith throughout this story. It almost doesn't even look like him in a number of shots. He looks like he's lost weight and is sick. Smith does a great job portraying a man carrying around a lot of sadness.Like a good movie will often do, this film will leave you thinking long after the ending credits.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62f684c6910048ccb7bc887cb8eab410",
            "input": "David Aames is a rich good-looking guy who lives in New York City. When his 'sleeping partner' Julie Gianni gets very jealous after David falls for Spanish beauty Sofia, she gets David into her car and tells him that he's the only guy she loves and wants to be with, but seeing as he's in love with Sofia, she decides to commit suicide with David in the car with her, by driving off a bridge. David survives the crash, but is left with a disfigured face. He is then charged with the murder of Julie. The thing is, David doesn't know what's real and what's not as he keeps having these strange dreams (Most of which are actually nightmares.) and flashbacks, some of which just don't make sense to him. Everything will soon come back to him though as he's begins to find out the truth.Well, there's an all star cast here, including Tom Cruise, Penélope Cruz, Cameron Diaz, Kurt Russell, Jason Lee and Noah Taylor who all give good performances in the movie. In the movie they all put off different things about there characters, like happiness, sadness, angry, etc. really well. There's also a cameo in the movie from the brilliant, Steven Spielberg.Vanilla Sky is a well made, different, interesting and original movie which will leave you talking about it a lot after it's finished. It's not just a thriller, but it's a real psychological thriller. The trailer for the movie is really good, but the movie is so different from what it might be made out to be. It's been directed very well and there were a couple of really great scenes here too. All in all, an enjoyable movie which should be really be paid attention too. They are sure making a lot of \"Are they dead, if not who is dead\" movies recently.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd5a2358f1584dbf973ff4ee779e3455",
            "input": "I was hooked from beginning to end. Great horror comes from disturbing imagery and organic shocks that are created not to make you jump, but to make you go \"What the f*ck did I just see?\" All the other commentators gave short summaries of what the film is about, so I won't rehash what has already been said. I was telling other people about this movie days after I had seen it just because it still haunted me. I even had a bad dream after seeing it, and I am a true horror fan, not easily spooked by tripe like \"The Grudge\" or even \"Silent Hill\". What gave me the bad dreams was the unease I felt about what I would do if I were in that cell with those guys. What would my personal horror be? my subconscious took me there, and it was not pleasant. That my friends is what a good horror flick does to you! The best part of this movie is that it is subtle. It's not about Bogeymen that jump out at you,alien invasions, or tons of gore. It's the opposite. The horror you create in your own mind. The irony for the four characters is that the horror comes not from an external force that asserts it's power over them. Simply, the men ask for the one thing they desire, and they get it...but not in the way they imagined. So on the one hand, they get what they wish for from an occult book, but may ultimately wish they hadn't. Sometimes being locked in a jail cell is the best place to be!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ef80d3672374a2b87cc6c08708d2413",
            "input": "the movie is far more sophisticated and intelligent is its exploration of sexual tension than such American attempts as 9 and a half weeks...the courtroom scene itself...with the couple copulating in the cage while the heroine pleads for their orgasm...is amazing...I have not seen this movie in 20 years...but it made indelible pictures in my mind...it is rich in texture and successful in creating a world where sex is the engine for all activity, and at its bottom is the yawning angst that lives in us all....the plot is European, and it meanders a bit, but so does life...especially when you are 17 and have a constant hard on....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad38affb3ad04e688669168fda4afb76",
            "input": "This film is absolutely stunning. A new Blade Runner - future noir at it's most gritty. The vision of Paris is superb, both recognisable and visionary, with sweeping vistas, grungy set pieces and futuristic virtual reality.The story line is quite simple, with few surprises, but that's not what I like most about the film. It is a visual treat. Done in 3D and rendered in black and white (no greys!) with only one short spot of colour, it is less hard on the eyes than it sounds. There are many \"arty\" camera shots - closeups and odd viewpoints - but that just adds to the temperament of the film. Overall you get the impression of a graphic novel in footage form.I was initially under the impression that the film had been rotoscoped, such was the level of animation and high detail in the character's facial expressions. But unlike \"A Scanner Darkly\" - which suffers from (or indeed is enhanced by) inconsistent character definition (just watch the way some of the hair changes shape!) - Renaissance is consistent and precise throughout. When the character is in close-up, added details and texture can bee seen, but when in mid-shot or further away details are omitted, but not to the detriment of character definition.For me, the only down side of the film is that in one commentary we are told that this is a one-off project. Such a shame, as I would like to see more of this futuristic film-noir storyline and especially in this cutting-edge graphic style.Oh, and the English dub is great too.All in all a great film and highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12c6235e724c4cd280309309544f3d4f",
            "input": "enjoyed the movie and efficient Confucian crime drama, the old order survives the threat posed by a brash young greedy man, no doubt representing modern society. I thought the final scene was strange and could not understand if we were to believe that big D was being punished for being greedy or it was part of the plan a long. I loved the scene and for once in a Chinese movie, the violence was not a choreographed martial arts fest. On thing that always amuses me about HK films is that the main influence the British seem to have had is to introduce 'yes sir' and 'sorry' into the local language and its amusing that long after we have gone, they are still there.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8a2954ef86a4831a4b4b5c3f7d33f78",
            "input": "After seeing this film months ago, it keeps jumping back into my consciousness and I feel I must buy it or at least see it again, even though I watched it at least 3 times when I rented it at that point.I fell in love with Hal Hartley's directing many years ago - I found that these films could make me laugh in an place that is rarely entertained. It is a strange feeling, granted, and I assume most people out there really just don't get it, or it makes them feel confused and somewhat uncomfortable - I guess I just really get it - its as if these films were made for me.Although I don't remember if I actually laughed out loud during this film, it remains one of the funniest films I've seen in many years. If you don't see the humor of the grocery bag Fay carries from the street to a church, to her brother's publisher's office, to her son's principal's office you may lack the intelligence to be highly impressed by this film. The bag is a silent character in itself, being dragged around as an icon of motherhood the usually brash, bitchy Parker Posey must carry before the international intrigue of the remainder of the film besets her.I consider \"Henry Fool\" my least favorite of Hartley's films. I honestly don't remember it very well - I think the character himself was so despicable I found it tedious. Hartley's forte seems to be feminine character development.Aside from Posey's brilliance, it was wonderful to see Elina Lowensohn, one of my favorite actresses, again. Her extravagant naiveté is perfect for Hartley's direction. His ability to make the outrageous seem banal helps define his style as a delicious chronic irony throughout.This film erupts into a highly relevant international intrigue story, explaining political situations in Afganistan. This is never suspected at the beginning. The complexity of this film's development is unparalleled.This is the epitome of a \"stand alone\" sequel. The less you know about Henry Fool the more mystery is spun around him, the less you expect his appearance toward the end of the film - as an alcoholic chain-smoking complaint machine, hurling insults at his Islamic terrorist caretaker who somehow seems to respect him. Its like finding out Santa Claus is actually a 12-year-old schoolyard bully.Although I was impressed and satisfied with Hartley's other recent films \"the Girl from Monday\" and \"No Such Thing\", \"Fay Grim\" goes far beyond what I expected, with a sense of humor and originality no Oscar winner would ever dare.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc6dc7fc9a454d4099d2083199a2d28e",
            "input": "\"The Groove Tube\" was one of only two Ken Shapiro movies, the other one being the equally zany \"Modern Problems\". This one is just a full-scale parody of TV. Aside from Shapiro - who apparently didn't do anything after \"Modern Problems\" - the movie also stars Chevy Chase and Henry Winkler's cousin Richard Belzer. The three cast members (plus some other people in smaller roles) appear in various skits. One of the funniest ones features Chase in a Geritol-spoofing commercial, in which he's describing the medicine as his wife strips, and it ends with her humping him. There's also a pornographic news program, an irritating cooking show, and the epic tale of some drug dealers.Anyway, the whole thing's just a real hoot. In my opinion, the three best TV-spoofing movies are this one, plus \"Tunnelvision\" and \"Kentucky Fried Movie\" (although I might also include \"The Truman Show\"). Really funny.I wonder what ever did become of Ken Shapiro.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-968f87944003449f88ddd94101b745bd",
            "input": "I have given this show (I have only watched seven episodes) four stars because most of her jokes/set-ups appear to fail. Some are not funny outright, but some are amusing -- in a 12 year old boy kind of way. She reminds me of that New York painter who throws paint upon a canvas, calls it art and sells it for a lot of money. Silverman throws out what she's got, including the kitchen sink, while she prays that a few things stick to the wall in her effort to be funny but different.However what she's \"got\" often times is not enough, as though she lacks the kind of follow-through a good comedian needs to succeed.The whole enterprise is like an under done potato.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82c0f8eafd7644ed916cdb4b76a00afd",
            "input": "\"De vierde man\" (The Fourth Man, 1984) is considered one of the best European pycho thrillers of the eighties. This last work of Dutch director Paul Verhoeven in his home country before he moved to Hollywood to become a big star with movies like \"Total Recall\", \"Basic Instinct\" and \"Starship Troopers\" is about a psychopathic and disillusioned author (Jeroen Krabbe) going to the seaside for recovering. There he meets a mysterious femme fatale (Renee Soultendieck) and starts a fatal love affair with her. He becomes addicted to her with heart and soul and finds out that her three previous husbands all died with mysterious circumstances...\"De vierde man\" is much influenced by the old Hollywood film noire and the psycho thrillers of Alfred Hitchcock and Orson Wells. It takes much time to create a dark and gripping atmosphere, and a few moments of extreme graphic violence have the right impact to push the story straight forward. The suspense is sometimes nearly unbearable and sometimes reminds of the works of Italian cult director Dario Argento.The cast is also outstanding, especially Krabbe's performance as mentally disturbed writer that opened the doors for his international film career (\"The Living Daylights\", \"The Fugitive\"). If you get the occasion to watch this brilliant psycho thriller on TV, video or DVD, don't miss it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75641ea0130243b08feb7d3a2ee405d1",
            "input": "I love this film. The noir imagery combined with Spillane's no nonsense character Mike Hammer works marvellously to create a mood and feel seldom found in low budget detective films of the early fifties. It may not be 'The Maltese Falcon' but this film makes it's own solid contribution to the genre. Spillane is often criticised for alleged misogyny etc, but his 'dames' are way above their male counterparts in terms of cunning and intelligence. Poor old Mike Hammer, as effectively played by Biff Elliott, is blinded by the beauty of the mysterious psychiatrist whom he meets when investigating the death of an army buddy. When the penny finally drops his face is a picture. Good to see that 50s censorship did not force the film makers to omit the famous last line. A bona fide low budget classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05ba91d4f99c491aa9039f7ce409e4dd",
            "input": "I LOVE Don Knotts, let me just say that up-front! He is an enormous talent and the best at what he does, which is portray a nervous, lovably befuddled loser thrown into a position of authority. He is fabulous in this role as Roy Fleming, the Reluctant Astronaut, but the film is pretty dull, really, even though as a kid my brother and I delighted in watching this and his other films. It's still worth watching but really it's a film that is best enjoyed by children. I'd categorize it as 100% family-friendly and something you could sit down and watch with your kids on a family night.As with all of Knotts' films, there's a great cast of beloved character actors and you can't help but smile when Knotts gives one of his shaky, open-mouthed stares, no matter how old and jaded you are.From an adult perspective, one thing I think that is great about this film is how it captures NASA in the 1960s -- all the new modern buildings, the hope, the optimism, the future! And I was surprised at how suave and studly Leslie Neilsen was back then. Only complaint about the story is Roy's love interest, a rather threadbare, unlikeable woman who can't give him the time of day until he becomes a big shot -- if you're like me, you'll be hoping that he gives her the shove-off at the end. Beware -- you'll be whistling the theme tune for days after watching, it's that catchy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a11bbd6cddc4d6493d49cbdf6fe6fc9",
            "input": "This film plays in the 60s and is about an Italian family: Romano, his wife Rosa and their two children Gigi and Giancarlo emigrate from Solino in Italy to Duisburg in the Ruhr area. I like this film, because I think it is quite realistic: it shows problems which many foreign families have when they come to another country: they have to get used to a new culture, a new environment and this can be difficult: especially if you don't know the language.... It is difficult for the family but they find a way: they open a restaurant which offers typical Italian food, and it is named \"Solino\", like their hometown. The film also shows different conflicts - Gigi and Giancarlo fall in love with the same girl, and although Rosa has to work very hard, Romano refuses to pay money to engage more workers, etc. etc. But stop, I don't want to tell you how it goes on. You should watch the film yourself, it's a nice one - I have also made a Referat about it and examined scenes which show different cultural attitudes. And there are a few...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d03ae0c97b214dbba1a2633dbbada69c",
            "input": "Elmer Fudd is laughing while lounging in his easy chair and reading his comic book, his dog comfortably nearby sleeping in front of the fireplace. All is peaceful until a flea comes bouncing by. (The flea is dressed in a farmer's-type outfit with a big sombrero and is carrying a satchel with the name \"A. Flea\" on it.) He gets out his telescope and spots the dog. (We see a big shot of the dog's butt and the flea whistles in excitement, screaming \"T- Bone!\" He then sings, \"There's food around the corner; there's food around the corner!\")That sets up the storyline of this cute-but-obnoxious flea tormenting the poor dog. The mutt is hilarious as he reacts to the flea. The drawings of his huge teeth chomping right next to the fleeing flea are clever and the dog's dialog made me laugh out loud a few times. This might be the funniest canine I have ever seen in a cartoon! The poor pooch, under a threat of having to take a bath, as to NOT react when the stupid flea causes him pain. It's almost painful to watch as the flea uses pickaxes, jackhammers and the like on the dog. He puts firecrackers in the dog's behind. It's brutal!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb1e608509d64ba7a6d9946aa175e180",
            "input": "In Iran, women are officially banned from men's sporting events. In June 2005, the Iran's national soccer team has an important game against Bahrain in the Azadi Stadium for the qualification of the World Cup. A group of Iranian girls and lovers of soccer dresses like boys and unsuccessfully attempts to enter in the stadium being arrested.Soccer (and Flamengo's team), beach and movies are my greatest passions; therefore I loved this little gem about a group of girls and their passion for soccer. The director Jafar Panahi, from \"The White Balloon\", \"The Mirror\" and \"The Circle\", shot this movie on the day that Iran defeated Bahrain and qualified to the World Cup in Germany. The dramatic and funny adventure of these Iranian girls is one of the most delightful movies I have ever seen. My vote is nine.Title (Brazil): Not Available",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a4655ed06de477ea2db1010bfa2aef2",
            "input": "Frailty is a non-gory horror film that achieves its chills by following the logic and impact of a man's delusion/obsession straight into depravity. Dad (we never learn his name) is a gentle man and loving father who's raising his sons alone after Mom died giving birth to the youngest son, Adam. The family's world flips upside down late one night when Dad rushes into the boys' room and tells them God has given him a vision. And what a vision – the entire family's job is to destroy demons, who, of course, are disguised in human form.Proceeding from this premise, the movie is unflinching in following it. Dad kidnaps people/demons whom God has told him to destroy, binds them, lays his hand on them to see a vision of their evil, then kills them – while making his young sons watch. Fenton, the older boy, is horrified, seeing only a father who's turned into a crazed murderer. Adam, the younger, is uncomfortable, but trusts that Dad is following God's will. Eventually, Dad takes his sons on missions to abduct the \"demons\" that God has put on Dad's list, and finally, invites them to fully participate in God's mission for the family.This is not, you understand, an abusive father. He loves his children. He is only following God's instructions: \"This is our job now, son. We've got to do this.\" When Fenton, terrified and convinced his father has gone mad, says he'll report him to the police, his father explains, \"If you do that, son, I'll die. The angel was clear on this.\" The pressure that the children are under is unbearable and tragic, and warps their entire lives.(1) The movie's structure is similar to the one used in The Usual Suspects: a story in flashback, told in a police station to a FBI agent. The moody lighting, the stormy weather, and the eerie calm in the present day add to the menace of the backstory. I wanted to believe the unfolding horror was just a story, until I remembered the real-life parallel of Andrea Yates, who believed she was possessed by Satan and could save her children by drowning them. Even then, I wanted to believe that I was watching a human tragedy, rather than a story of divine retribution.The movie gave me no such comfort, though, as it gave strong clues at the end about the veracity of Dad's vision. And this, as much as some plot holes, posed a problem for me. Regardless of the accuracy of Dad's visions, regardless of the evil that his victims may have committed, where does anyone derive the authority to act as an angel of death? (1) Roger Ebert review, 4/12/02",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-136e461b65a64131811b188d4dadb621",
            "input": "My Favorite part was when the credits started to roll. I wish I could give it a .0000000000001 out of 10. I really wish I had that Hour and thirty minutes back. Don't waste your money or time on it. I really could have watched grass grow and felt better after wards.Nadia was really pretty and I hope the movie didn't destroy her career. But she chose to be in it.All in all it sucked more than any other movie has sucked. More than Kazaam and Glitter combined. That's saying something.Don'tDoit!!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-500a5729caf4428eb0f750dc50883b7a",
            "input": "That's right, you heard me this movie is a freaking' ABOMINATION. First off, the band, who the hell is going to go see or listen to a band called \"THE NAKED BROTHERS BAND\"?!?! Not only is the name terrible but so are the musicians, they can't even play anything! Also, the lead singer sounds more girly than Geddy Lee, and even more his voice is horrible! Not only are they terrible musicians but they're terrible actors. Led by a crappy director and thin plot, this has got to be the dumbest movie ever. I wish this website would let you use a vote of ZERO OR BELOW out of 10, because giving this filth a 1/10 is being WAY too generous.I'm not sure that you can call this a comedy film. If you're looking for comedy with music, go to that \"Weird Al\" Yankovic guy 'cause he does it a whole lot better than these untalented tweens.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7da3c9736964b0d964ae2d02a5b949e",
            "input": "Not knowing what this film was about, I checked it out at the video store and after seeing it, I enjoyed it. Little seen multi-genre flick from director Bernard Rose (Candyman, Immortal Beloved). Great story and characters. As a fan of Glenne Healdy's, I was surprised of her british accent. The only exception for this film was the ending. However, it is worth the rent.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7f820cf411f4d5aa697978301c4f0c7",
            "input": "I'm surprised that no one yet has mentioned that there are two versions of this same film. The lion's share of the footage in both is identical, but here is where they differ: In one version (the version I have seen most often on broadcast TV), the group of clerics guarding the gateway consists of the \"Brotherhood of the Protectors\", a (fictional) splinter group of priests and brothers \"excommunicated\" by the Church. In the other version, which I've seen only once on TV, the clerics guarding the gateway are depicted as priests of the official Church, meaning the Archdiocese of New York (or perhaps Brooklyn). Also, in the former version, in most of the pertinent scenes, the clerics are referred to as \"brothers\" (and in some scenes, you can see where the lips say \"Father\" so-and-so but the dubbed audio says \"Brother\" so-and-so. In the latter version, I believe everyone is referred to as \"Father\".In any event, it seems that one of these two versions is more or less a partial re-shooting of the other, with all \"Brotherhood of the Protector\" scenes re-shot as \"Archdiocese\" scenes, or vice versa. (Kind of reminds me of the Raymond Burr cutaway scenes in \"Godzilla\"). I have videotaped both versions off broadcast TV, so no, I'm not imagining this. Can anyone shed some more light on the story behind these two versions of the film?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c3150290af8454abc61899c5124d80e",
            "input": "This highly underrated film is (to me) what good writing in a movie should be all about. Kasdan takes the search for meaning in our lives and lays it out for all to see and wonder at. The movie is about the divides people create to insulate themselves from the violence and hatred and bigotry of everyday life.  Along the way we are asked question after question about life. Davis (Steve Martin with a great beard) asks himself 'Is my making a violent movie (and by extension our enjoyment of it) causing the violence in society?' Claire asks \"What kind of world throws away something as precious as a human life?' Mack is not immune as he asks 'Is it possible to pass beyond the bounds of race and (an even harder step) finance? These are of course not quoted from the film, but generalities. Others ask their questions too, and to be honest it raises more than it answers. But that is the nature of life. We strive all our lives to find answers to questions we will never totally answer, and in certain cases have to make answers fit to our own needs and desires. As humans we thrive on questions we cannot answer. Some answers are real. Claire and Mack come to realize that even though they could take the easy road and let the state take the baby, their finding it placed the responsibility for her life in their hands. Some answers are not. Davis `Sees the Light' and decides not to make violent films, but the next day turns around and dismisses his epiphany as subordinate to his art. We all seek answers. This movie does not answer them for; it simply reminds you to keep looking for the answers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d030d5c138f74bb0b4e7ae2f01715bf0",
            "input": "Steve Carell comes into his own in his first starring role in the 40 Year Old Virgin, having only had supporting roles in such films as Bewitched, Bruce Almighty, Anchorman, and his work on the Daily Show, we had only gotten a small taste of the comedy that Carell truly makes his own. You can tell that Will Ferrell influenced his \"comedic air\" but Carell takes it to another level, everything he does is innocent, lovable, and hilarious. I would not hesitate to say that Steve Carell is one of the next great comedians of our time.The 40 Year Old Virgin is two hours of non-stop laughs (or 4 hours if you see it twice like I did), a perfect supporting cast and great leads charm the audience through the entire movie. The script was perfect with so many great lines that you will want to see the movie again just to try to remember them all. The music fit the tone of the movie great, and you can tell the director knew what he was doing.Filled with sex jokes, some nudity, and a lot of language, this movie isn't for everyone but if you liked the Wedding Crashers, Anchorman, or any movie along those lines, you will absolutely love The 40 Year Old Virgin.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9d49ff4ad724fb3896ba7c90902f0c0",
            "input": "This movie was lame, lame, lame. What a build up! What a let down. All form, no substance. A terrible waste of talent and time. Would not recommend it to my husband's dog, who will watch anything.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03759dcb729342faa69f541ed856c4ff",
            "input": "The 1930' were a golden age of Los Angeles with its film industry and great potential of various other possibilities to become rich and famous and happy. People were arriving there hoping to fulfill their dreams. Expecting open arms and welcoming offers there were only a few who managed to succeed and find their way to stardom, majority then condemned to live starving, disillusioned and unwanted, searching for a bit of respect in dirty bars and nasty hotel rooms. Young Italian-American writer Arturo Bandini arrives to LA on a similar quest - to spread his charms around to get one of those beautiful wealthy women and to write an excellent novel that would set him on a career path, having so far written a single short story published in an obscure anthology. Wishing to create a romantic masterpiece he seems to be unable to produce anything without experiencing it himself though, occasionally, he sends pieces of magazine stories to a local editor that helps him survive. He is proud to present himself as an Italian but deep in his heart he truly feels his Italian origin as a burden. The little money and the courage to conquer the world he once had are all long gone and watching his dream turning into a hangover he holds a last single nickel to spend. The coffee she brought him was cold and sour and spitting a curse on her triggers a never-ending relationship of insults, unspoken excuses and a love concealed beneath. Camilla being an uneducated girl trying to receive US citizenship through a marriage also carries her heavy cross of a non-perspective racial heritage. Though she is much of a stronger and life experienced person her situation as a beautiful Mexican woman is much harder to deal with than Arturo is able to realize. Is it obvious that Arturo eventually finds his inspiration to work on the novel? Is it possible that their love finally finds its place in the sun? Is it likely that their romance takes an unlucky turn?It is very surprising to find out that the chemistry between the two main characters, performed by Salma Hayek and Colin Farrell, does not work. The relationship lacks the raw and authentic feelings. Hayek though livelier a character compared to Farrell's forgot to arm Camilla with the passion and strength of her once brilliant character Frida. Also it is hard to have faith in a character which being intelligent but uneducated and illiterate uses quite difficult vocabulary and complicated sentences. A tougher character of a Phil Marlowe sort would definitely suit Farrell better, though he looks stunning in a period costume, he seems very lost trying to find the fragile world of a twenty-year old dreamer balancing between a hidden love and desire to be true to himself. Feeling embarrassed watching the two on the screen is not right. Their relationship might have been wild but it is more likely what a thunder and a lightning are without a storm, far from real passion, feelings just described not felt inside. It is very sad that such a potential of an interesting script and good actors was wasted, turned into a grey average of soon-to-be-forgotten.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f52ac7f32dce41a3bea074450a9aec80",
            "input": "Before all, I'd like to point out that I have not read the book, so there was no chance I'd be disappointed in that aspect. The major flaw I spotted was historical detail, with several cars, trains, clothes, etc. I think don´t belong at that time.***Possible spoiler*****The technical aspect of the film is ok, nothing to brag about. But the acting, I think, was terrific. I don't have no experience in acting, still I can't believe how people can consider this terrible! Maybe they've only seen two movies (ever), and the other one must have been very good indeed!I specially liked Jeremy Irons, and really understood his character, someone who crawled up the social ladder with very hard work, then fights against those who would take his life's work from him, only he gets so involved in this fight, he doesn't realize reason is no longer at his side, and he ends up a beaten, disappointed man. Irons made this so believable, I sympathized with the character despite his brutality.After Jeremy Irons, Winona Ryder is also wonderful as a romantic young women, who is drawn into the revolutionary ideals by her boyfriend (Banderas, he had an under-developed part, I think), and Glenn Close was also very good. Meryl Streep had an average performance, it was not bad, just not up to the standards of the other actors. Watch out for Miguel Guilherme, a fine Portuguese actor, between so many stars.In contrast to today's movies, here only the interpretations, only people matter, but at the same time, it is not a pretensious film, too worried trying to be intellectual. The best proof I really liked it, I'm writing a review 7 years later.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c29adb623c8f4011831a1a4250177611",
            "input": "SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!I watched half of this movie and I didn't like it. First reason: Boring. Barely anything happens, the women sit around and discuss how terrible their lives are and how they have no hope, they smoke weed, read magazines, care for their sick friend, and cut up the occasional dead body. BORING!!!!Second reason: There are too many things left unexplained. Many scenes are dedicated to a zombie hunter who kidnaps random men, restrains them in a chair and interrogates them. Who are these men? How do they know anything about illegal activity concerning the diseased flesh eaters? Why does he kill one and let another one go?Also there is this dude who at first I thought also had the flesh eating disease but he puts his fist through a wall with superhuman strength suggesting he's not quite what we originally thought-never explained! How frustrating is that? Conclusion: I found the women annoying, the story uninteresting, the duologue tedious, and the action non-existent. Also the cover art is misleading since it makes you believe this movie is going to be cool when it clearly isn't. I rented this movie based on some of the reviews made by other people on this website, and although I respect the fact that some people might have enjoyed this flick, I will from now on make sure I read more than two reviews deep into a movie so as to avoid renting another movie I regret seeing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a96e6aebed214ab68bca156c7ef2ed03",
            "input": "It is a rare occasion when I want to see a movie again. \"The Amati Girls\" is such a movie. In old time movie theaters I would have stayed put for more showings. Was this story autobiographical for the writer/director? It has the aura of reality.The all star cast present their characters believably and with tenderness. Who would not want Mercedes Ruehl as an older sister? I have loved her work since \"For Roseanna\".With most movies, one suspends belief because we know that it is the work of actors, producers, directors, sound technicians, etc. It was hard to suspend such belief in \"The Amati Girls\". One feels such a part of this family! How I wanted to come to the defense of Dolores when her family is stifling her emotional life. And wanted to cheer Lee Grant as she levels criticism at Cloris Leachman's hair color. The humor throughout is not belly laugh humor, but instead has a feel-good quality that satisfies far more than pratfalls and such.The love that is portrayed in this cinema family is to be emulated and cherished.It is no coincidence that the family name, Amati, translated from the Italian means 'the loved ones'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c9baf8239954b69ab17ed564e8b3b00",
            "input": "Without a doubt this is one of the worst films I've ever wasted money on! The plot is, erm sorry, did I say there was a plot? The scariest moment was when..., nope can't think of one! The best special effect that had me hiding under the bed covers was..., nope can't think of one for that either. You knew who the killer was right from the start. There was nothing scary about the whole movie, in fact the only two vaguely interesting bits were when you saw the kid sister, Misty, in the shower and when you saw Nurse Toppan take her top off. This film should only be watched to get an idea of how NOT to make a horror movie!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd6b4a05bb9c47ffa24f8eb61375c062",
            "input": "Filmed by MGM on the same sets as the English version, but in German, Garbo's second portrayal of \"Anna Christie\" benefited from practice and her apparent ease with German dialog. Garbo appears more relaxed and natural under Jacques Feyder's direction than under Clarence Brown's, and her silent movie mannerisms have all but disappeared, which made her transition to sound complete. The strength she brought to the character remains here, although it has been softened, and Garbo reveals more of Anna's vulnerability. The entire cast, with the exception of Garbo, is different from the previous version of the film, and Garbo benefits from not having to compete with Marie Dressler, who stole every scene she was in during the English-language version. In Feyder's film, Garbo holds the center of attention throughout, although the three supporting players, particularly the father, gave excellent performances.Feyder's direction was more assured than Clarence Brown's, and his use of the camera and editing techniques did not seem as constrained by the new sound process as did those of Brown. The film moves with more fluidity than the English language adaptation, and the static nature of the first film has been replaced with a flow that maintains viewer interest. Even William Daniels cinematography seems improved over his filming of the Brown version. He captured Garbo's luminescence and the atmospherics of the docks with style. Also, the screenplay adaptation for the European audience made Anna's profession quite clear from the start, and the explicitness clarifies for viewers who were unfamiliar with the play as to what was only implied in the Brown filming. However, the film was made before the Production Code was introduced, which made the censorship puzzling.Garbo's Oscar nomination for \"Anna Christie\" was always somewhat mystifying, and I suspected that the nod was given more in recognition of her relatively smooth transition to sound films than for her performance. However, some of the Academy voters may have seen the German-language version of the film, and they realized, as will contemporary viewers, that her \"Anna Christie\" under Feyder's direction was definitely Oscar worthy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4bc32c8ef7694aaea2093d515e2e03ae",
            "input": "The legend of Andrei Konchalovsky's towering 4 and a half hour poem to Siberia is not to begin at once, because it must hold back for space, because it takes its time in roundabout explorations of half-remembered childhood memories in a turn-of-the-century backwoods village, yet the movie goes on picking up steam building in emotional resonance as though even the sounds and images which compose it become imbued by sheer association with their subject matter with that quality of fierce tireless quiet dignity that characterizes the Soviet working spirit. Konchalovsky celebrates Soviet collectivity but in an almost revisionist way to paeans like Soy Cuba and Invincible the mood turns somber and reflective. News of the revolution reach the secluded Siberian village through the grapevine. The fruits of its labor reach it only when a world war calls for the young men to enlist. Through all this, Konchalovksy zeroes in on the individual, with care and affection to examine the bitter longing and regret of the woman who waited 6 years after the war for a fiancé who never came back, waited long enough to go out and become a barmaid in a ship with velvet couches and which she quit years later to come back to her village to care for an aging uncle who killed the fiancé's father with an axe, the irreverent folly of the fiancé who came back from the war a hero 20 years too late, came back not for the sake of the girl he left behind but to drill oil for the motherland, the despair and resignation of the middle-aged Regional Party Leader who comes back to his small Siberian village with the sole purpose of blotting it out of the map to build a power plant. The movie segues from decade to decade from the 10's to the 80's with amazing newsreel footage trailing Soviet history from the revolution to war famine and the titanic technological achievements of an empire (terrific visuals here! all kinetic violence and skewed angles and flickering cramped shots of crowds and faces) but the actual movie focuses on the individual, on triumphs and follies small and big. By the second half a sense of bittersweet fatalism creeps in; of broken lives that never reached fulfillment choking with regret and yearning. \"It can't matter\", seems like the world is saying, to which Konchalovksy answers \"it must matter\" because the protagonists keep on trying for redemption.Yet behind this saga of 'man against landscape' something seems to hover, shadowy, almost substanceless, like the Eternal Old Man hermit who appears in every segment to guide or repudiate the protagonists, sometimes a mere spectactor, sometimes the enigmatic sage; a little behind and above all the other straightforward and logical incomprehensible ultimatums challenges and affirmations of the human characters, something invisible seems to lurk. Ghosts of the fathers appearing in sepia dreams, repeated shots of a star gleaming in the nightsky, a curious bear, indeed the Eternal Old Man himself; Konchalovksy calls for awe and reverence before a mystical land of some other order. In its treatment of a small backwoods community struggling against nature progress and time and in the ways it learns to deal with them, often funny bizarre and tragic at the same time, and in how the director never allows cynicism to override his humanism, it reminds me of Shohei Imamura's The Profound Desires of the Gods. When, in a dream scene, Alexei tears through the planks of a door on which is plastered a propaganda poster of Stalin to reach out at his (dead) father as he vanishes in the fog, the movie hints at the betrayal of the Soviet Dream, or better yet, at all the things lost in the revolution, this betrayal made more explicit in the film's fiery denouement. The amazing visuals, elegiac and somber with a raw naturalist edge, help seal the deal. By the end of it, an oil derric erupts in flames and the movie erupts in a wild explosion of pure cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b941bd394ea04a2791063cda9c465493",
            "input": "As an old white housewife I can still appreciate that Laurence Fishburne is one of our finest actors. anyone who appreciates his work like in Deep Cover might enjoy watching the incredible acting range of this actor. Since I think this is his directorial debut it might prove even more interesting. All of the acting is quite good. If you can't take lower Manhattan junky worlds or the reality of crime life (not glorified action shoot-em ups) then this is not a film you would enjoy. It is Mr. Fishburne's usual contribution to incredibly subtle relationships. I would love to see Larry and Anthony Hopkins go at each other some day in a movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01e4e304db8c46008827dcaa6222314e",
            "input": "I watch a lot of films, good, bad and indifferent; there is usually something of interest to fixate upon, even if it is only set design, or the reliable labor of a good character actor, or the fortuitous laughter that emerges from watching ineptitude captured forever.However, I was quite pleasantly surprised by this film, one I had never seen before. Graham Greene has been translated into film many times of course, in such masterpieces as \"Thin Man\" and in lesser vehicles. \"Confidential Agent\" is one of those lesser vehicles, yet it manages to get me somewhere anyway, despite lackluster direction, the incongruity of Bacall and Boyer's depictions as (respectively) British and Spanish, and the almost complete non-existence of any chemistry between the two leads. In some ways, this last \"problem\" actually begins to work in the film's favor, for how can love really blossom in the killing atmosphere of fascism and capitalism meeting about one person's tragedy? The most compelling aspect of the film arises directly from Greene's complex and guilt-ridden psychology, which pervades the film. I know some see the deliberate pacing here as dull, and I can understand that. Yet I found that plodding accentuated rather than detracted from what is a claustrophobic world. I was compelled to watch, not by any great acting (although Boyer is marvelous as usual, managing to convey a rich mixture of world-weariness, tragedy, hope, and fervor with his magnificent voice and yearning eyes), but by the down-spiraling rush of one man's slim hopes against a world of oppression and money. What is a thief? What good is love in the face of death? Where does mere profit-taking end and exploitation begin? The film does not rise to the level of art, and thus cannot hope to answer such questions, but it is much more than mere entertainment, and its murders and guilts are very grimly drawn. The lack of glitz, of \"bubble,\" of narrative \"bounce\" help to make this movie very worthwhile.And there is no happy ending, for history wrote the ending.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45c76c5849594b178457fd336729ef07",
            "input": "This is a docudrama story on the Lindy Chamberlain case and a look at it's impact on Australian society. It especially looks at the problem of innuendo, gossip and expectation when dealing with real-life dramas.One issue the story deals with is the way it is expected people will all give the same emotional response to similar situations. Not everyone goes into wild melodramatic hysterics to every major crisis. Just because the characters in the movies and on TV act in a certain way is no reason to expect real people to do so. This is especially apt for journalists and news editors who appear to be looking for the the big sob scene that will pull the ratings. It's an issue that has to be constantly addressed.The leads play the characters with depth, personality and sensitivity. And they are ably supported by a large cast all playing based-on-fact individuals. Some viewers may be surprised to learn that many of the supporting cast in this story are people better known in Australia as comic actors. It re-enforces my idea that comic actors make some of the best supports in dramas because with comedy they know how to establish quick impressions of individuals.(Spoiler warning!)I have to say something very personal here; in that I am actually an ex-Adventist who was a practicing member in Australia at the time this incident occurred; so I have a slightly different impression of the story than most. I think it is handled with amazing creativity and personality, and emotional heart. I think the best scene is the one where the couple are hounded by the new choppers. It captured the themes of the story brilliantly.I once heard Fred Schepsi say in an interview that he told the actors to \"play the best case for their character they could\". While this is especially apt for this story, I think it is also a general principle that should apply to all acting as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fbffd6e2753349d49c7e06f2ad015513",
            "input": "This movie, which starts out with a interesting opening of two hot blondes getting it on in the back of a driver-less, moving vehicle, has quite the quirky little personality to boot. The cast of seven (although one girl doesn't hang around for the bodycount, which is unfortunate because the death toll is already so small as is) are all super-hot, as our story centers around teens partying way out in the desert (an odd but effective choice of setting), who are hunted down by a creepy man in black gloves and jeans who drives a black truck. It predates many of the vehicle-inspired slashers to date (\"The Trip\", \"Joy Ride\", \"Jeepers Creepers\") where the killer's vehicle itself becomes an evil antagonist. The killer himself is quite creepy, and we find solace in the extremely likable heroine in Jennifer McAllister (look at the interesting symbolic contrast of the evil killer in all black, while our benevolent heroine sports all white attire, as scanty and stonewashed as it may be). Director Bill Crain does some really great things with his camera, some neat tricks on screen, and the cast tries their absolute best. There's enough gore in the low bodycount to please the gore fans, and enough T&A from a couple of the girls to please T&A fans. Overall, this flick is highly underrated and widely sought out in the slasher movie world as it's proved quite rare to find on video. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7320e4962ff45e3b0129257ab6989f4",
            "input": "....because if I was, I may have wished it was me being crucified on a wooden cross! I'm still trying to determine the plot of this movie - and I'm being \"generous\" that there was even a plot to begin with. As previously mentioned, it's a misnomer on the cover of the DVD that Richard Dreyfuss is actually the star. He was barely in the movie. And if he was indeed \"frustrated\" as the back cover indicated he was, well, that's probably because he said YES to be in this disaster of a movie and couldn't get out of it! The movie really seemed to focus on Jared Martin, and what his role in the movie was supposed to be, other than the extreme close -ups, was not as big of a mystery as to what Gene Barry's role actually was - or wasn't. And speaking of \"big\"...whomever had the bright idea to fit Gene Barry in the Humpty Dumpty attire, which showcased his trousers literally pulled up to his chin, should be sentenced to hard time by watching this movie stoned sober. I could go on and on about how horrendous this movie was, from the dialogue not matching the \"actors'\" mouths (think Clutch Cargo), to the erratic jumping from scene to scene (again, being generous even calling the frames of pictures \"scenes\"), to the lack of a plot.... However, if you're into bad early 70s genre and if you're in a cottage in Michigan with nothing but this movie and a box of kid & cat pictures, I recommend having a good bottle of wine before you embark on this weird ride of a movie because you'll be thankful that you may not remember it the next day!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-684d4f2d0e554125afdca3ca5c2cb299",
            "input": "I won't mention any of the plot, because, although it would be highly predictable anyway, the one notable plot twist is given away everywhere, in the movie comments, in the plot summary here, and even in the synopsis on my Netflix envelope. I might have enjoyed it more if I hadn't known that. Maybe. This film has a deceptively good cast, most of whom did creditable acting with the rather limited material at hand, including Donald Sutherland, Lesley Ann Warren, and Tia Carrere and Rosemary Dunsmore in smaller parts. It was impossible to like William McNamara, but that was clearly by design. And there were a couple of quick nude scenes by the callipygian Lenore Zann. But none of this brings the slightest recommendation from me. Don't any of these fine actors actually read these scripts before signing on?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-501e6079d06c44d395deda1ba12ef16a",
            "input": "I have a high tolerance for the weird, but frankly some movies go way, way beyond weird--so far that they make your brain hurt. This is such a film. Trying to understand it or even explain it is impossible and I think the film is best understood while taking drugs--it's that incomprehensible.The film begins with some very cute Japanese animation involving a cat. However, out of the blue, tons of twisted and occasionally disturbing things occur--making me wonder if I am losing something in the translation. However, even if this is so, why did we need to be treated to images of a magic trick involving dismembering a lady with a clever, defecation, puking, lighting animals on fire, etc.. All this really seemed random and pretty awful. Oddly, and I don't know why, some see this as a work of genius. I just don't get that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17254ae04d2a495cadbcaf0c9d8b48da",
            "input": "Only the glandular secretions -- and please don't ask for any more details -- of young virgins can keep the rapidly deteriorating body and mind of the crazed old amateur horticulturalist's wife fresh and youthful. Since, like most people except those taking part in medical trials, virgins seldom give up their secretions willingly, Dr. Lorenz (Bela Lugosi) arranges for them to be abducted and preserved. He'll do the extracting himself. What a great cheese ball of a premise for a low budget horror movie. If The Corpse Vanishes turns out not to be the Havarti of horror, as a plain limburger it leaves an interesting aftertaste. Sure, the acting is almost awful except for the actors fortunate enough to be playing the crazed dwarf (Angelo Rossitto, who later played The Master in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome); his crazed brute of a brother, Angel (Frank Moran), who grunts a lot and has a fetish for the virgins' hair; the crazed mother of the two (Minerva Urecal); the crazed wife (Elizabeth Russell), who sleeps in a plush coffin and, of course, the crazed doctor (Lugosi). An enterprising young reporter, Patricia Hunter (Luana Walters) tracks down the doctor because of a strange orchid with a peculiarly sweet odor that had been worn by the victims. When the doctor and his wife invite Pat to stay the night, a raging storm immediately breaks out. That clue tells us some raging violence is about to erupt inside. Since it's well known that in Hollywood at this time all unmarried young women were virgins, Pat may have some unpleasant surprises to deal with. They include dark passages, a crusty laboratory where a near dead virgin is stored, a basement mausoleum and, later, a direct threat to Patricia's own glandular secretions. If she survives, what a story she'll have to give her editor. If you sample this moist slice of moldy Velveeta (and why not? Don't be superior), don't judge Bela Lugosi by the company he keeps here. He had a huge impact in Dracula (1931), but my favorite movie of his is The Black Cat (1934). As Dr. Vitas Werdegast he's a sad, ironic man protective of his two young friends. When he finally takes a scalpel to Hjalmar Poelzig (Boris Karloff) and begins to flay the man alive, ah, well, it's a great scene.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9fe58ef357ba4e7dae3353958745f26e",
            "input": "Tony Goldwyn is a good actor who evidently is trying his hand at directing. \"A Walk on the Moon\" appears to have borrowed from other, better made films. The present story takes place in the late sixties at a summer resort for working class Jews not far from Woodstock. The screen treatment by Pamela Gray doesn't have much going for it, so it's a puzzle why Mr. Goldwyn decided to tackle this film as his first attempt at direction.The Kantrowitz family is spending some time at the resort. We see them arrive at the small bungalow that is going to be their temporary home. Marty, the father, comes only for the week-end; he works in what appears to be a family small appliance business repairing television sets, mostly. In a few days the first man will walk in space, so the excitement is evident.The Kantrowitz women are left behind. Pearl, Marty's wife and her mother-in-law, Lilian, spend idle days in the place until the \"blouse salesman\" arrives. Pearl goes browsing and she finds much more than a shmatte; she gets the salesman as well. It appears that Pearl and Marty have no sexual life at all. After two children, Pearl, who appears to be sexy and with a high libido is ready for some extra marital fun.That is the basic premise for the film, which becomes a soap opera when the young daughter, Alison, decides to play hooky and go to the Woodstock festival nearby where, horror of horrors, she witnesses her own mom making out with the blouse salesman! What's a girl to do? Well, stay tuned for the grand finale when all the parties are happily reunited by the little son's bedside when he is stung by wasps and the salesman comes to apply some home remedy, and daddy is called from the city, after knowing about Pearl's betrayal with the younger stud.Poor Diane Lane, she went to make \"Unfaithful\" later on, which is the upscale version of this dud. Viggo Mortensen is the salesman who caters to his lonely female customers whispering little somethings in their ears! Liev Schreiber as Marty, the cuckolded husband, doesn't have much to do. Anna Paquin plays the rebellious Alison and Tovah Feldshuh is the unhappy Nana, who would like to have stayed in the city watching her soap operas instead of witnessing first hand one that is playing in her own backyard!Watch it at your risk, or pop the DVD in the telly when you have a fun crowd at home and you really want to have a laugh, or two dishing the film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf3a44a8d5f04bb2a323b9a188ba0869",
            "input": "I have three comments to make about this film, which I discovered hanging out forlornly in a lower shelf at Blockbuster. First off, it is interesting to see the approaches film makers take in trying to film essentially unfilmable works. Some have, as Kubrick did with \"Lolita\", gotten the original author to write a screenplay that is something like the original work. Of course that can't happen here; Kraft-Ebing is long dead. Some have used the premises of the original work as a launch point to go in a completely new, unrelated direction (the recent adaptation of \"Tristram Shandy\" comes to mind here). You can dumb it down - the film of \"Slaughterhouse Five\" is to my mind an example of that. Or you can simply take the format of the original and try to render it in cinematic vignettes. That would be the approach of Woody Allen's \"Everything You Wanted to Know About Sex\", and, arguably, this film. Upon consideration, it is probably the only thing one can do with a scholarly work like \"Psychopathia Sexualis\". The potential loss is that whatever cumulative point the original work had is obscured or destroyed. And so it is here.Point two is the cinematic style. Some would call it an \"homage\" to Murnau, Pabst, Carl Dreyer, etc., but I think it more crude than that. Its far too heavy handed and self-conscious to be effective for long. It is eventually just annoying.Point three is perhaps a less intellectual observation. How did the people responsible for this manage to make a film about wild sexual deviations and perversion that is so incredibly boring? I found the film impossible to pay attention to, and anyone who is not automatically drawn to depictions of sexual deviance will find it so as well. I don't want to be completely uncharitable and say the film is pointless, but I have to say that whatever point the film makers had is rather obscured by the nature of the source material, the overt copying of filmic styles, and the stubborn refusal to engage the audience on an emotional level (possibly for fear of being accused of titillation).The film is a dubious exercise from the start and doesn't really work for me, I'm sorry to say.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6c787bfc9d7474b94e35c6d1722f9bb",
            "input": "\"Three Daring Daughters\" is a sickly sweet, rose-colored look at divorce, remarriage, and single-parent living. Obviously, social issues and economic difficulty have no place in the picture perfect life of a single parent mother who feels exhausted, takes a cruise, and then dates and marries a band conductor. Even when the \"its just a movie\" phrase excuses the script from addressing real-life problems, 'Daughters' suffers from too many incoherent high-note songs, children whose personalities are not based on real children and band leader Hose Iturbi playing himself. Isn't it bizarre that any real person would star in a film in which their supposed real self gets married? Admittedly, this movie was released in the nineteen forties. Only a love for old style Hollywood romance and comedy could make 'Daughters' a tolerable film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b67e88213b894ed29b58f2b7fc7db7b3",
            "input": "This film is pretty poor. The acting is abysmal and completely forced. Furthermore, by shooting the film as a docudrama doesn't necessarily make it more believable, you can't get out of it that easily Mr Dir. Don't let my comments mislead you however, as i would recommend you watch this film, as it does shed some light on the psychology or non existent psychology behind the perpetrators of such crimes. However, the climax of the film is absolutely rubbish! There is no other way to put it! It pure and simply fails to capture any sense of atmosphere! What takes place does not translate to me any feelings of desperation, panic, fear or dread that one would surely experience in such terrifying circumstances. No instead it leaves you with jaw dropping \"Was that it?!\" spilling from your tongue, and by no means are you haunted by these boys actions. Rather you just feel embarrassed for yet another film that started with potential, but ended up falling flat on its face at the most crucial point.Zero Day indeed....zzzzzzzzzzzzz",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ce72fdddf044e02a11f0cdafc6c8a3b",
            "input": "The \"documentary\", and we use that term loosely apparently, summarizes that Muslims are trying to violently take over the world. Then states that any Muslim that doesn't admit this is either ignorant of their own faith or lying to your face! Also every person that is interviewed in the film has found a market for their ludicrous take on reality by selling claptrap to conservatives willing to let others do the thinking for them. What the West NEEDS to know is this is nothing more than propaganda aimed at mental midgets. If you are looking for an actual documentary on Islam and the current state of the Middle-East I would look elsewhere. Try something that provides multiple points of view from qualified sources.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e86da9855f647b1b945a929306efbb4",
            "input": "Huge, exhaustive and passionate summary of American cinema as seen through the eyes of Martin Scorcese. Needless to say, there is never a dull moment in all of its 4 hour running time. Many genres, periods and directors are all examined, discussed more from the perspective of cinephile rather than contemporary director. For anyone even remotely interested in American films, or cinema in general. A masterpiece, and the best of the BFI's Century of Cinema series.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8dea6f452331420e8332f2e87d0a271c",
            "input": "The first Cube movie was an art movie. It set up a world in which all the major archetypes of mankind were represented, and showed how they struggled to make sense of a hostile world that they couldn't understand. It was, on the non-literal level, a \"man vs. cruel nature\" plot, where the individual who represented innocence and goodness came through in the end, triumphing to face a new, indefinable world beyond man's petty squabbles; a world where there were no more struggle, but peace. I rated Cube a 10 out of 10, and it's a movie that was never meant to have any sequels.The second movie, Hypercube was a massive disappointment. Some of the ideas were kind of cool, but in the context of the original movie, both the story and the setting made no sense and had no meaning. Still, for being fairly entertaining, I rated it a 5 out of 10.The third movie, Cube Zero, while ignoring the second, plays like a vastly inferior commercial B-movie rehash of the first, sans the symbolism. There is no \"homage\" or \"tribute\" here; there is only ripping off. The same kind of plot, with some elements idiotically altered (like having letters instead of prime numbers between the cubes - an idea which shows more clearly than anything else that this is a rip-off with absolutely no originality and nothing to say).That we see something from \"behind the scenes\" means nothing, because the watchers are just part of the Big Bad Experiment, the architects of which we hear nothing of. And, in this movie, those who get through to the exit (like Kazan did at the end of the first movie) are just killed - where the *bleep* is the sense in that?! That's just flippin' stupid. I'm glad I didn't pay to see this.The production values and acting in Cube Zero are not too bad, but the story and the ideas are so utterly devoid of any inspiration that this movie can only get from me a rating of 3 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55d69cd736b242e494e023c19be5c887",
            "input": "I love the episode where Jim becomes the Greenman. It is great! When Jim tosses that little person through the window, the look on his face is priceless. Then when he starts to address the Priest in his wife's behalf only to find out that she has become the Pee-Woman? Great writing and great casting along with great acting makes this a must see. I am attempting to find a certain photo from that episode. I'd like to use it as my avatar on a message board because I think the Greenman is hilarious. Does anyone know where I can download a photo of Jim as the Greenman? Can anyone point me in the right direction to find such a photo?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b90ae9ecfd9047c096d0a6ca28da81db",
            "input": "\"Protocol\" is a hit-and-miss picture starring Goldie Hawn as a bubbly cocktail waitress who one night saves the life of a visiting Arab from an assassination attempt. The woman immediately becomes a celebrity, and gets a new job working for the U.S. Government. Will the corridors of power in our nation's capital ever be the same? Hawn is excellent as usual even though \"Protocol\" isn't as funny as her best film \"Private Benjamin\". But it's still a good movie, and I did laugh alot.*** (out of four)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98b148f282cf4dcfb2a04844dedebf08",
            "input": "Journey to the Center of the Earth is the story of some tourists of Hawaii, three of them siblings, and one of them a young British nanny babysitting a dog. When the siblings accidentally drive off in their jeep with the basket of dog biscuits, the nanny follows them (it might've just been safer to purchase more) all the way to the cave the siblings intended to explore (I guess). For some reason, they actually go in the cave and then, when the place starts caving in, they try to get out to no avail, except for the six-year-old sister who they tell to go get help. Meanwhile, the more they move around in the cave, the more they continue to plummet further and further towards the earths cavernous core. And behold, it is here where they find the City of Atlantis and its bizarre alien habitants who are living under the oppressive rule of one alien that doesn't want them asking to many questions about the worlds external to their own.I see that Rusty Lemorande, the named director of the film has provided comments on this film, in which he explains that part of latter half of this film is actually the sequel to Alien in L.A. Well, whatever it was, it was an amazingly cheap movie that I would rank only slightly higher than City Limits (a 1988 sci-fi film also made on a non-existent budget) because at the least ending of this dreadful piece of mostly incoherent film-making that cuts corners where it can aims for some humor and amusement in the last 20 minutes when we finally see what life is like in the alien world at the center of the Earth. I also give it a two star rating rather than one because it was at times, funny, even if only in its subtleties. For example, the aliens asks the British girl if she's an alien and she explains that the Ministry should be sending her work visa shortly. Or when the alien girl finds Bryan and explains that he is in the city of Altantis and he mistakes this for Atlantic City, New Jersey. Little things like that make the idiocy of the first hour or so tolerable. Imagine how great the film could've been though if they had 1) actually intended to make it, and 2) actually had money to make it.I do like how in the end, no one wonders what happened to the little sister who was sent away in the beginning to get help. She'd just be wandering around the Hawaiian caves and not too far from the erupting volcano, mind you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da7d7267b1aa427b882ecc1f47258f36",
            "input": "Oh God,what an idiotic movie!Incredibly cheap with fake special effects(the creature is played by one guy in lame costume)and stupid plot.All dialogues are unbelievably bad and these actors(HA!HA!HA!)...they're simply ludicrous.For example I have never seen so annoying characters like in this junk(these dumb kids or pregnant woman with his husband and many more).All in all,this is a great entertainment if you're drunk.Avoid it like the plague.Am I drunk?I don't think so...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-734217fe4ce84700bf3399182baee075",
            "input": "The Human Tornado is a campy 70's Blaxploitation movie starring nightclub comedian Rudy Ray Moore in perhaps his most endearing role to date. The movie tells the tale of Dolemite, a bad ass pimpin' hustler who gets on the wrong side of a white, racist sheriff by sleeping with his wife. Dolemite barely escapes, and journeys to sunny California to visit an old friend, a nightclub owner (and Madam to Dolemite's 'ladies') named Queen Bee. However, it seems that a rival nightclub owner with Mob connections is trying to muscle in on her racket, so Dolemite takes matters into his own hands. Rudy Ray Moore showcases many diverse talents in this landmark film, including strong dramatic skills, a mastery of Kung Fu, an impressive singing voice (he provides two of the songs on the soundtrack), a touching, compassionate side with the ladies, and an overall compelling charisma and keen sense of comic timing. This film has it all, people: A deep plot, blistering action, laugh-a-minute comedy, beautiful women in distress, a slam-bang ending...what more could you ask from a movie? Run, don't walk, to your local video store and rent The Human Tornado today. And be sure to share it with your family.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f22ce476addf4b968998a951fbbd7b8f",
            "input": "The excruciatingly slow pace of this film was probably the director's express intention, in order to convey what life was like growing up as a village teen in China. However, I found the combination of the glacially slow 'plot' and the general filming style so impersonal as to be totally alienating, particularly to a western audience. At times I actually had trouble telling some characters apart, as they were filmed from such a distance. Two hours in and I was totally past caring. As someone who is not only interested in music but is also very into the history and culture of China (and is by the way no stranger to Chinese cinema), I couldn't engage with a single character and found nothing to get my teeth into. It begs the question: If I disliked it, who on earth would like it? Give me Zhang Yimou, give me Chen Kaige. Give me the work of just about any other Chinese director I've ever seen. This sorry effort just doesn't measure up at all. I'd be sorry to see Chinese cinema judged against this benchmark.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02671e40b1c642c68cae9b231cf22368",
            "input": "This movie is rated a classic on sentiment not on any quality of movie-making. It moves from the unlikely to the unbelievable, from the unrealistic to the ludicrous.The unbelievable plot revolves around an attempt by two British soldiers and a Hindu gofer to rescue a third soldier who has been captured by insurgent Indians. In the later scene we see a full regiment with drum and bagpipes marching into an ambush. In the British army, a sergeant does not order up a rescue attempt, and if you get past that, he does not attempt it with only one other soldier and an Indian servant when there is a full regiment on hand. The Indian insurgents are so incredibly inept it is laughable...there are hundreds of them but they can't hold their prisoner or kill the two rescuers, of course not. At one point we see the British soldiers throwing blocks of stone down from the battlements at the insurgents, who are scattered around the mountainside in ambush...one would have to have an eggplant for a brain to think this would do any damage. After Cary Grant as the rescued prisoner is shot, he lies on the floor looking around at the water boy...hardly the actions of someone who has been shot in the back. The water boy bravely blows a bugle (which comes from nowhere) to sound the alarm...this he does by standing up high on a wall so he can be seen and shot by the bad guys, and we shed a tear as he keeps trying to sound more notes as he is repeatedly shot and the bugle call breaks up into feeble squawks...instead of blowing the bugle while hiding behind cover as anybody with half a brain would do. This scene has deservedly been parodied in comedy sketches. If they wanted to make a Buster Keaton comedy, they should have hired Keaton and done it better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19e94e16752d4f18b0094122ccc4bbf9",
            "input": "I saw the trailer for this film a few months prior to its release, and MAN, did it look scary, Especially how this film was based on a real life phenomenon. I was incredibly interested, and thought that this could finally be a decent horror/thriller film after years if crap. Well you know how movie trailers make a film look better than it is: maybe by showing all of the creepy parts or by overdramaticizing certain elements. The advertisements for the movie did both, which lead to my ultimate disappointment.By no means is this \"the most disturbing movie in years\". Hell, I doubt it was the most disturbing movie of that week's release. This movie takes the whole \"based off of fact\" thing too far.This movie wasn't complete crap. I must admit, it held my interest and Micheal Keaton was believable as a man searching for answers by supernatural means. Other than that, though, this film is one big cliché. After John's wife dies, he learns about EVP, which transmits the voices of the dead into everyday electronic appliances. He all of the sudden receives messages from his wife! My God! It's not just his wife reaching him, it's other dead people. Gee, imagine that. A movie about helping dead people. Come on, give me a break! The clichés don't stop there. There's also the obligatory clock-stopping-at-the-same-exact-time-every-night trick and three evil spirits that menace our hero. Not only was the movie cliché, it WASN'T SCARY. The film literally had two jump scenes, and those two scenes are almost identical. The ending is horrible, as it leaves the door WIDE OPEN for a sequel. There's also an ending message with a message saying how only 1 out of X voices heard through EVP are threatening, with a nice happy tune playing. Way to break the mood, you guys. Jeez! In the end, if you want another forgettable horror film, see White Noise. The only reasons I could possibly think anyone would watch this film for is that either that the person is a Keaton fan or that they are interested in EVP. Sure, the EVP aspects may be slightly interesting, but I don't like my movie concepts to be shoved down my throat and blown up in my face. This film tries to be scary, original, and disturbing, but it's just the opposite. You know you have a lame movie when the commercials use the ghosts to talk about there film. \"I WILL SEE THIS FILM NO MORE.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7b5c48d4d3d4bb7aa7c4de1b9d3c95a",
            "input": "for those of you who love lord of the rings and love special effects, watch this movie! this will be sure to keep you glued to the screen. you will probably even like it if you like watching people fight with magical stuff.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c18ca61e283b4d8ba3cf235ebcd9cc32",
            "input": "I question its importance to Queer Cinema as it seems to be more about having a homosexual encounter via violent behavior than making any clear statements regarding homosexuality and violence.Three tales are tangled together in a rather sloppy manner. I found myself trying to untangle the messy narrative in the first 15 minutes, that alone didn't sit well with me. Weak plot points were endlessly repeated as though we might not have gotten it the first 10 times.There was a feeling of padded dialog throughout the film. More like a 45 minute Boy's Brief short rather than a fleshed out full-length film. It had a certain erotic flair, male nudity and sex appeal but overall the sum did not equal its parts.The 1st part: Boxer/Stalker storyline was the strongest and yet it too felt like it had been pulled thin. Bob has been following Tim for four years and only now is he confronting him? I felt as though their cat-mouse game was not developed enough to merit its conclusion. We needed more information about them and less Parking Lot/Locker scenes with Tim relentlessly saying \"What do you want?\" The 2nd part: Danny wants his buddy, Tony, to beat him up while he jacks-off. Tony doesn't seem to mind, but he doesn't even appear interested in exploring the implications of his homo erotic hobby -- not even after they do it in the nude. This tale lacks the all-important transition from \"I'm a straight boy smacking my guy friend around for fun\" to \"I think I might be gay and hitting him because I'd like to spread his ass and do him S/M style.\" A very important thing to leave out.Clearly these stories each could have conveyed their points in half the time. The 3rd part with the man and woman slapping each other around adds to that thought. Furthermore, it was unnecessary and added nothing to the film. Yes, the actors did a fine job under the circumstances and the four male leads were very sexy. The make-up (bruises and cuts) however was on par with a grammar school talent show.There wasn't enough meat to this story to have any impact on the gay politic. The film made no statement, squandered time, and is not engaging or worthy enough for thoughtful investment. Its fatal flaw is its amateurish approach, that makes it ultimately impossible to take seriously.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc76f545f6dc4d9bba154c96048701cd",
            "input": "Caught this movie on the tube on a Sunday. I thought it was so bad I looked it up on IMDb to see what others thought of it. I was not surprised at the amount of silly people who enjoyed this fluff. I was however surprised when I looked into the comments to read the Hated It categories only to find that their were none. I was shocked at this; I always look at the hated it's as their are always those who hate a movie no matter how good it is. Somehow this movie made it through unscathed by the haters I say nay to that and proclaim proudly that I HATE THIS MOVIE! I know I should go into detail about why I hate this movie but to do so would only grant this movie more respect than it deserves.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-592254dd25414e71a127e7b46504306b",
            "input": "How can they from Joe Don Baker (as Bufford Pusser in the first sequel) to Bo Svenson (as Bufford Pusser in the second sequel).Why did they do that for.Just Because Bo Svenon look more a like to Bufford Pusser they still should'nt of changed it because the first sequel it was Joe Don Baker as Bufford Pusser and that one of the thing i wanted to see in the second sequel.I would've given this movie a 7 out of 10 and i would've given it a 1 out of 10 if the story did'nt have anything to do with Bufford Pusser's life but it did and that why i had given this movie a 3 out 10.I strongly suggest that anyone who is planning on watching this cheese i suggest don't and watch the first sequel instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2d9921b988a4f47826caab7891770ca",
            "input": "For Muslim women in western Africa, married life at the hands of abusive husbands can be very hard . The community may not explicitly endorse such behaviour, but equally, they may not yet be ready to see it as criminal, an attitude which of course enables it to continue. Fortunately, the letter of the Cameroonian law promises equality to all, and this documentary follows the real life exploits of various female practitioners in the Cameroonian legal system as they attempt to secure justice for a number of women and children. What is notable (apart from the uplifting central story) is how, in spite of their informality, the courts are actually pragmatically progressive, if a case is actually bought. The program also gives a fascinating insight the whole Cameroonian life-style, which (aside from the awful crimes committed in the featured cases) seems amazingly emotional and joyous compared with that enjoyed by inhabitants of Europe or North America. And while I concede that this comment may betray naiveté on my part, this attitude appears to be captured in delightful pidgin-English they speak. Overall, this is a terrific little film, and much more fun to watch than you might imagine.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e5dafa982a5483aa6c4625862e77872",
            "input": "If you hate redneck accents, you'll hate this movie. And to make it worse, you see Patrick Swayze, a has been trying to be a redneck. I really can't stand redneck accents. I like Billy Bob Thornton, he was good in Slingblade, but he was annoying in this movie. And what kind of name is Lonnie Earl? How much more hickish can this movie get? The storyline was stupid. I'm usually not this judgemental of movies, but I couldn't stand this movie. If you want a good Billy Bob Thornton movie, go see Slingblade.My mom found this movie for $5.95 at Wal Mart...figures...I think I'll wrap it up and give it to my Grandma for Christmas. It could just be that I can't stand redneck accents usually, or that I can't stand Patrick Swayze. Maybe if Patrick Swayze wasn't in it. I didn't laugh once in the movie. I laugh at anything stupid usually. If they had shown someones fingers getting smashed, I might have laughed. people's fingers getting smashed by accident always makes me laugh.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-605570c0c2d94c63b7ea8addda0a2658",
            "input": "i can't believe i actually watched this but i guess i just wanted to know if this movie would get unintentionally funnier and funnier towards the end. and it did. the climax was the poorest performance ever given by the defence lawyer - so out of real life that even for a fictional story it was far too weird. no way anyone on this planet can behave in front of a court like she did. and probably the worst prosecutor on earth. why was he in court anyway? he did nothing and absolutely nothing to prove her guilty. a simple search of her house would have resulted in the find of the rings. but no go. he preferred to say \"objection\" 2 or 3 times during the whole trial - that was it. the blonde lunatic was given a truth-drug to prove her innocent but not Brett. the lunatic almost had an altar of Brett in her home that could have proved her sick obsession. but again no go. during the court scene i felt the silent urge to take the needlepoint out of her hand and bang it several times against her head. even real weirdos do not look that silly fake \"i am innocent\" like she did. and what does this movie tell us? never marry a woman with a life insurance: as soon as she falls down the stairs her husband will be thrown into jail, guilty or not. evil, evil men.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3298ca065f1949e68faa8e5673745a95",
            "input": "Before starting to watch the show, I've heard it was great and aesthetically very interesting. What a deception, the scripts are so dumb that I am quite sure the authors are son and grandson of Scoobidoo writers. And what about the SFX and colors, they are so extreme that it is painful to watch, colors are not saturated they are over saturated, like scripts are overwritten and show is overrated. This show is like a bad pie in which a child would have put only sugar and butter thinking that because these ingredients are the best, they are sufficient. Unfortunately for this show, the only two ingredients of this show are finally vacuity and a total lack of credibility.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43f29f6c4f2b457b88654db1f21c2080",
            "input": "Undoubtedly the best heavy metal horror item made in the manically headbangin' 80's, which admittedly doesn't sound like much considering how utterly abysmal many other entries in this odd little fright film sub-genre like \"Hard Rock Zombies,\" \"Blood Tracks,\" \"Terror on Tour,\" and the especially ungodly Jon-Mikl Thor-starring stinker \"Rock'n'Roll Nightmare\" tended to be. That aside, this one still deserves props for downplaying the excessive splatter and needlessly flashy special f/x razzle-dazzle in favor of focusing on adolescent high school characters who are depicted with greater acuity and plausibility than the norm for a mid-80's teen-targeted scarefest. Moreover, the film's pointed sardonic parodying of both ridiculously overblown 80's heavy metal stupidity and the nauseating self-righteousness of the uptight killjoy conservative stiffs who claimed it was the devil's music are very clever and on the money funny (famed Greed Decade heavy metal god Ozzy Osbourne has a hilarious bit as a smarmy anti-metal TV evangelist!).Marc Price (the hopelessly dweeby Skippy on \"Family Ties\") gives a surprisingly strong and winning performance as Eddie \"Ragman\" Weinbauer, a geeky, socially awkward and severely persecuted heavy metal aficionado who's constantly picked on by the stuck-up jerk preppie bullies who make up the majority of the student body at Lakeridge High School (the cruelty and mean-spiritedness of the high school kids is nailed with painfully credible accuracy). Eddie's life takes a turn for the worse when his rock star idol Sammi Curr (an impressively whacked-out portrayal by Tony Fields) perishes in a hotel fire. Hip local disc jockey Nuke (KISS front-man Gene Simmons in a cool cameo) hooks Eddie up with Sammi's final, unreleased album, which when played backwards resurrects Curr's malevolent spirit back from the dead. Sammi encourages Eddie to sic him on all the vile scumbags who make poor Eddie's life the proverbial living hell, only to have meek Eddie prove to be a most reluctant would-be accomplice. It's up to Eddie, assisted by token nice girl Leslie Graham (likeably essayed by the lovely Lisa Orgolini), to stop Sammi before things get too out of hand.Ably directed with commendable thoughtfulness and sensitivity by character actor Charles Martin Smith (who also briefly appears as a nerdy school teacher), smartly written by Michael S. Murphy, Joel Soisson, and Rhet Topham, and capably acted by a uniformly up-to-snuff cast, this surefire sleeper even comes complete with a handful of nifty \"jump\" moments (an outrageous attack in the back of a car by a grotesquely lecherous long-tongued mutant thingie rates as the definite highlight), a rousing \"Carrie\"-style high school dance slaughter sequence, a neatly utilized Halloween setting, revenge being correctly shown as a truly ugly business, and a solid central message that you shouldn't make a particular over-hyped person your hero strictly because of the calculated anti-establishment posturing said fellow does to qualify for that special status.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1fdbd36cf61413a8ca2009ccf672cce",
            "input": "The spoilers in this review are offered as a public service, because the only way to enjoy this costume melodrama is to know that our protagonist, the Lady Barbara Skelton, gets raped and gunned down in the end. And not a moment too soon. I'd have shot the screen myself but I was afraid I'd hit James Mason.The original 1943 novel, called \"The Life and Death of the Wicked Lady Skelton\" (I guess people didn't whine about spoilers back then), was written by a woman, an English navy brat who was either troubled or cynical or both. Her heroine is devastatingly beautiful, and the author seems to think that if you have beauty, nothing else matters. But other things do matter, such as the fact that Lady Barbara's immediate and only response when someone gets in her way is homicide. She murders three men in five attempts. A serial femme fatale, she's got a case of dissocial personality disorder that should have landed her in either Bedlam or Newgate. Lockwood plays her as a narcissistic vamp, wearing so much makeup that I thought of her as a Restoration-era Joan Rivers (or a restoration-era Joan Rivers, ha!). Yet Lady B. is irresistible to all three principal male characters-- Michael Rennie, James Mason, and Griffith Jones, all of whom do good work, as does Patricia Roc. Of course, all three admirers realize in short order what a psychotic bitch Barbara is, but the plot keeps them all in her orbit until one of them finally does gun her down - accidentally, in what is meant to be either irony or just desserts. Given the dramatic death scene with a boom lifting the camera out through the windows and heavenward, I presume we're meant to give a damn about her death. But hers is the first corpse we don't care about.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8182a6ef44a463aa737da0627fb6715",
            "input": "Does anything at all happen in this movie. There are only the bizarre short scenes where I didn't know what the hell was going on so that doesn't count. This movie is sooo boring it hurts, and this is coming from a person who likes it when movies are about making movies. Confused?, well I was after watching this crap. What was Donald Sutherland on, because he missed it with this one completely. And what's with the \"pedofile\" scene at the beginning of the movie. Can put anyone to sleep! 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1696c946899486482ea13f4a60bcc3a",
            "input": "One of those el cheapo action adventures of the early 1980s that used to fill video rental stores solely to be taken out by adolescent boys in the hope of a cheap thrill.Woeful down market attempt to cash in on the Death Wish phenomenon by substituting a moderately attractive woman for the visually challenging Bronson. Acting is terrible, sets are cheap, the baddies are, well, bad. Identification with any of the characters is unlikely.Only redeeming feature is modest amount of gratuitous female nudity, a smattering of which is full frontal. Other than that, you can leave it...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6addf7f327ab4fd9afab2ca751cf4d2c",
            "input": "Cruel Intentions 2 is bloody awful, I mean uber-bad. Words can not explain how bad it is, but I'll give it a go anyway.The plot of Cruel Intentions 2 is very similar to the first film. Sebastian (Robin Dunne), is kicked out of a private school and is forced to move to New York. There he decides to make a fresh start and just a life a normal life and settle down. Unfortunately he has to deal with his step-sister Kathryn (Amy Adams) wants to drag him down. Sebastain starts to fall in love Danielle (Sarah Thompson), the innocent daughter of the Headmaster of the school. Kathryn wants Sebastain to just sleep around with the whole school which had been describe as a 'whore-house'. Kathryn also wants to get revenge with Cherie (Keri Lynn Pratt), who humiliated her during the school assembly. Kathryn wanted to make the freshman into the biggest slut in the school, a similar sub-plot to the first film.Cruel Intentions 2 is basically a cancelled TV-show, which was turned into a prequel. There are so many problems with the film. It is poorly written, unfunny, and badly acted. Luckily for Amy Adams that the show never took off because now she is a fairly big actress. Whilst Cruel Intentions had a sense of realism and can been seen to be set in the real world, Cruel Intentions 2 is set in sitcom land and as described on amazon.co.uk 'a randy version of Saved by the Bell'. There were some dark themes involving sex and drug use in the first film, but in Cruel Intentions 2 tried to make it funny and some of the ideas in the film shouldn't be, such as Kathryn having an affair with a teacher. Other ideas also don't work such as the secret society where all the popular kids meet to discuss the downfall of other students. The film also had a major problem of sexualised 15/16-years-old. I know that teenagers do have sex, sometimes a lot, but when done on film or television, is treated very seriously. One famous sense was when Daneille encourages Cherie (who is around 14/15 in the film) to simulate sex on the back of a horse to the point where she has a orgasm. The idea of turning a girl around 14/15 into a slut is just very wrong with me, and shouldn't be made into a subject of comedy. The jokes in the film fall flat, whether if it's a verbal gag like 'she goes all moist when she sees you' to a visual gag where Sebastian pushes Kathryn face first into mud.There is a lot wrong with this film, which I don't have time to go into, but I say it should be avoid. Just watch Cruel Intentions, whilst not a classic, still is a decent film and treats the subject matter well.This film is just a pervert's wet dream, having school-kids having lots of sex with each other.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48ea8f808dad4b5ca7aadd60e1339840",
            "input": "The movie had so much potential, but due to 70's technology constraints and also a weak script killed the main plot of the film. The book version of the film was much better, and well conceived. If it had been done right in the beginning with sources from the book, it could have been a very cool classic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4799f0374c34a558da0fb09a842d7b5",
            "input": "From the What Was She Thinking? file: Whoopi Goldberg plays a cop in the future who is teamed with a talking dinosaur (!) for a crime case involving a madman who wants to start another ice-age. Straight-to-tape oddity is embarrassing and ridiculous, a high-concept in search of itself. Apparently this was a labor of love for its writer-director, Jonathan Betuel (who also served as one of the producers); sadly, the end results are anemic, to be charitable. Goldberg's mere presence on-screen can often spark good will and laughter no matter how poor the script, but here she's drowning and you can see the unfunny results. NO STARS from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1f184dd5c6a4f6aa7c05b24abab2e08",
            "input": "I cant describe how terrible this movie is. Am i the only one here who finds the way its animated totaly disgusting? The Men of Rohan look 100% fake with their poorly colored hair, that doesnt even come close to matching what the actors look like. The orcs looked terrible. Why does gandalf walk with a bad limp? Why cant they pronounce things correctly? Saruman isnt Aruman. There were other what sounded like terrible pronounciation*sp* of Tolkiens characters. All and all im glad the studio who made this pulled the plug out from the sequal, it was just a terrible terrible adaptaion. Go watch the hobbit cartoon for a better cartoon of Tolkiens work. Hell, even the cartoon version of ROTK is better then this dribble. 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-29f80731b3934605834a9a4a739145f6",
            "input": "My all-time favorite movie. Oscar-caliber work by everyone involved, both in front of and behind the camera. The screenplay is perfect, and works out the relationship between Lady Caroline and George Briggs in a completely satisfying way, unlike the novel. The care with which the other leading characters have been drawn is a tribute to screen writer Peter Barnes, and the intense visual beauty should have won Oscars for director Mike Newell and cinematographer Rex Maidment. It is Josie Lawrence's best work by far, and transformed my opinion of Joan Plowright. Having watched this movie at least 50 times, I can find no fault in it. The music, by famed composer Richard Rodney Bennet is a marvel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-512346ba67454ee9acf185177b0be2b4",
            "input": "TV version of \"Twister\" springs a few leaks but manages to remain watchable. My sister bought this at a Wal-Mart a few years back when it was released, I saw it back then and thought it was okay. Later \"Twister\" with Bill Pullman and Helen Hunt comes out (or was it before? I think it was '97) and did a better job overall. But \"Twister\" was more silly fun; this is realistic with a message. It all depends on what you want from a movie with twisters: Twisters, or a low-budget character study?John Schneider and Devon Sawa (he's the reason my sister bought it) star, and Devon Sawa, who went on to \"Wild America,\" \"Final Destination\" and \"Slackers\" got his big break here. So in a way, I was one of the first people to see him really take off. I don't know if it's an honor or a shame, I haven't seen how he acts in recent films.\"Night of the Twisters\" all depends on personal taste, like I said, it all depends on what you want from a movie with twisters: Twisters, or a low-budget character study. \"Night of the Twister\" has the latter. So you decide.I give it a 2.5/5...- John Ulmer",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b621804388a6490a82e303ed4b245add",
            "input": "Okay, so the plot is on shaky ground. Yeah, all right, so there are some randomly inserted song and/or dance sequences (for example: Adam's concert and Henri's stage act). And Leslie Caron can't really, um, you know... act.But somehow, 'An American In Paris' manages to come through it all as a polished, first-rate musical--largely on the basis of Gene Kelly's incredible dancing talent and choreography, and the truckloads of charm he seems to be importing into each scene with Caron. (He needs to, because she seems to have a... problem with emoting.) The most accomplished and technically awe-inspiring number in this musical is obviously the 16-minute ballet towards the end of the film. It's stunningly filmed, and Kelly and Caron dance beautifully. But my favourite number would have to be Kelly's character singing 'I Got Rhythm' with a bunch of French school-children, then breaking into an array of American dances. It just goes to prove how you don't need special effects when you've got some real *talent*.Not on the 'classics' level with 'Singin' In The Rain', but pretty high up there nonetheless. Worth the watch!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d590466b4da5406fa4fbf94b79a37b8f",
            "input": "I'm a Jean Harlow fan, because she had star quality. I don't think her movies are good and I don't even think that she was a good actress, but she certainly was Great in comedies. Every bit of comedy in The Girl from Missouri is very good. But this movie is perhaps more like a love story. Jean Harlow is wonderful in this one and you can forget the rest of the cast - their performances bring nothing new. It always impresses me much to think that Harlow's beautiful body was that of an ill woman. Well, in this movie she does look beautiful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99b035aecebe4738a43db8682e592092",
            "input": "There are people claiming this is another \"bad language\" ultra violence Mexican movie. They are right, but more than that this film is a call to create awareness of what we have become. The awful truth hurts, or bores when you already have accepted the paradigm of living the third world as the only possible goal. One of the most important things of \"Cero y van cuatro\" is the open invitation to profound reflexion over our current identity. Is that what we all are? Is that all that we want to be? I am abroad and I realized how spoiled is the Mexican society when the Tlahuac Incident came to light. I still cannot understand viewers witnessing a mass broadcasted murder. I nearly puked when I saw some of the images. It was not Irak or Rwanda, just a tiny village near Mexico City when rampage was carried out with the indulgence of media and government. The recreation of a similar situation in this film shocked me deeply. The other stories were good portraying other situations of corruption, dishonesty, betrayal and violence, but I consider \"Tamales de Chivo\" the best one.The movie is deeper than some \"cabrón\" and \"pendejo\" screams. Those are meaningless compared with the actions of the people. With a few exceptions they are all perfect examples of human rubbish. Just like in real life honesty is becoming more the exception than the rule in our country. Moreover, honesty is only rewarded miraculously.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10ae753865a84ae08a1a934434f340aa",
            "input": "Based on Ray Russell's dark bestseller, this John (WATCHER IN THE WOODS) Hough-directed bust has little going for it.Though it does not lack gory violence, it lack narrative sensibility and \"characters\".The \"Incubus\" of the title is a demon endowed with a mammoth penis that shoots red sperm into vaginas during intercourse -- or, to be more precise, rape.John Cassavetes, moonlighting from his successful directing career, is convincing as a doctor who questions the circumstances of the bizarre attacks on young women.Horrific possibilities of the victims spawning demonic offspring are not considered -- and neither is the audience's tolerance for slow moving garbage.The script's reluctance to explore the dramatic repercussions of a fertile premise exemplifies the major problems with this vapid Big-Schlong-On-The-Loose exercise.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03a97100eaa94552afd31ae9b896f8e0",
            "input": "Halloween is a film I have to get out and watch every time it's THAT day of the year.I even watch it sometimes when it's not the holiday!!!This film is SO great.Jamie Lee Curtis is an actress I can never stop loving.This movie might be old,but the story line still gets me right there every time,and the acting was absolutely fantastic!!!Although I have not seen the remake,I feel already that it was TOTALLY unnecessary.I think Rob Zombie should have NEVER remade such a classic.What kills me though,is to know that there are some people out there who have seen the remake without even hearing of the original.I am getting furious just thinking about it!!!!!!This movie was great,and it will always be remembered in history as a classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5166484819ec4243a74a549bc524d677",
            "input": "Red Skelton was still another major star who made the transition from movies to television with ease.His shows certainly brought a laughter to the American households of years back.He would begin the show with an opening monologue. Afterwards, we would have a variety of characters. Remember Gertrude and Heathcliff in the monologue? How can we ever forget San Fernando Red? I remember one episode where as a king Red introduced his queen by referring to her as your fatness.Go know that Red would use his comedic talents to really hide from his tragic life. He lost a son to leukemia at age 11 or so. His wife, Georgia, died by suicide.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-648c9ac98eba4d21b41c7f5342b45be9",
            "input": "Though not seen in too many films prior, you have certainly seen the basic plot themes in too many films since. Not one of Grant's nor Loy's best films, they make an outstanding effort together. After all, with that much talent and very good supporting cast, you know the laughs will be there.The film is light, has some dramatic spotting but keeps the plot moving and gets you to smile the whole way through.A great example of classic American film fare that has stood the test of time.Definite Saturday afternoon fare, heavy on the popcorn.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9f2095791cb49658239591a7a24564d",
            "input": "LOL!!! delirious was so funny.. i was in tears. Eddie Murphys impressions are absolutely spot on. The best impression was of James Brown and Mr T> SO FUNNY!! Its weird how Eddie Murphy was back then and how he is now DELIRIOUS is a must see but if u don't like foul language don't watch BUT AMAZING AND SO FUNNY.. i have seen it 6/7 times and still pee myself every time.. This is Eddie Murphy at his prime and you can see where he got the humour and ideas of movies such as nutty professor from. He does impressions of his family as well, which is real funny.if only i was there...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb49ce9a57a24872bcbdbc8d40fa8289",
            "input": "I made the big mistake of actually watching this whole movie a few nights ago. God I'm still trying to recover. This movie does not even deserve a 1.4 average. IMDb needs to have 0 vote ratings possible for movies that really deserve it like this one. A 1.4 is TOO HIGH.I had heard how awful this movie was, but I really did not think a movie could actually be that bad, especially in this day and era. I figured all of the cheesy god awful movies were only from the 1950s and 1960s. My god was I wrong. Trust me folks, this movie REALLY IS THAT BAD. It is beyond horrible; it is beyond pathetic; it is beyond any type of word that I can think of for it. BATTLEFIELD EARTH looks like Best Picture of the Year compared to this movie. SNAKE ISLAND (which up until now was the worst movie I'd ever seen) looks like it deserves a few Oscars compared to this pathetic effort.I seriously can not believe that the makers of this movie thought this was a legitimate serious effort of producing a Hollywood movie. This has no business being called a movie. In the first 25 seconds of the film, I seriously thought I was watching some high school theater class attempting to make a short movie. Or better yet, I thought it was some Saturday night Live ripoff skit of the real thing. I mean, it looks exactly like that. The acting is horrible; the whole movie almost looks like it was shot with a 20 year old VHS video camera. the special effects.......well good lord Bewitched from back in the day had better special effects than this movie. The scene where he gets shot at the door is beyond laughable and beyond cheesy. I mean seriously, my Intro to Acting class from 4 years ago in college, all of us could have put together a better movie than this. And the worst part of the entire movie, where Arthur is naked in the bathroom. Oh my god I almost thew up right there. I have a strong stomach, but wow that was horrible. Some people should never be naked, and he's one of them. The plot of this movie just seems to go absolutely nowhere. They talk about legal issues that we never hear about again; Ben talks about getting into music that we never hear about again; arthur says he is looking for a job and money for college and the next thing we see is he's running a porn shop. Everything about the movie is just horrible.This really doesn't have much to do with my critique, but just so everyone knows, I am not a gay man. I DO however support gay rights and believe we should all be treated as equals. And I would support any gay person in my church, unlike the cruel priest in this movie, who by the way seems to cuss every other word. (WHERE IS THE F*(#*ing white out?) hahaha But I didn't want anyone to think I hated this movie just because of it being about two gay guys. It has nothing to do with that: This would have been just as horrible of a movie if it was Ben & Jill instead of Ben & Arthur.I just watched this movie to see if it really was as bad as they say. And yes it was even WORSE than I had read. Let this be a warning to everyone: ONLY watch this movie if you want to just sit back and laugh at how pathetic some movies in the 21st century can still be. If you watch this movie and are actually expecting a good movie or some entertainment, I have no sympathy for you whatsoever.On a final thought: How in the world are there 7 movies ranked BELOW this on IMDb? There is no way there are 7 movies out there that are worse than this!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-84086b8640a743de9b6f72d90a86485d",
            "input": "Police Story is arguably one of the best works by the master of action himself.Compared to other action films,Police Story makes Schwarzenegger and Stallone look like beginners.The stunt scenes are well cheorgraphed and the action scenes are superb.If New Line Cinema has any sense,they would release this in theaters.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ad7338bc55f45f6ab2eac043a909817",
            "input": "This could be a cute movie for kids My grandson watched it once. he was watching it a second time I was watching some of it with him.When the little bear gets lost on the ice burg and he is in the water he is trying to get to a piece of ice it says \"Come back stupid ass fool\".I don't want my 3 year old grandson watching movies with words like this in it.That is why its rated for children. Should be child friendly. That is what I would expect. put out by warner brothers and G rated I would expect this to not have cuss words in it. The words don't even fit the movie in most places as it seems added later. And the movie drags out in many parts.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45329b74a80a4a898f423bf43b4081b1",
            "input": "What the heck was this. Somebody obviously read Stephen King and Sartre in the same semester. We get existential angst mixed in with cheap horror. There were moments that were disturbing but each one was canceled out by horrible music, CGI, or acting.The problem with weird narratives like this is that it feels lazy. Even David Lynch's work feels like that at times, and just like his interesting shows and movies it runs far far too long. And sadly this is only 98 minutes.The cast was attractive, and that is about the limit to this. I suppose it touches on feelings of adolescents and the fear of loneliness we all have, but just doesn't make the characters likable enough for us to care about their fates...whatever they were. The final scene leaves the whole thing ambiguous.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b274385dcdc0454b96acae3678f33ad9",
            "input": "This is one of my favorites along with the Mariette Hartley and Robert Lansing \"Sandy\" and the Agnes Moorhead-and-the-tiny-spacemen episodes.It is an important take, from mid-1961, on the long Cold War that the U.S. was then embroiled in. The beaten-down city-scene, the near-starving characters' sparse dialog, their threadbare uniforms, and the minimal action \"says\" it all: the absurdity of an on-going conflict that threatens to destroy human life, modern civilization, and all that is sweet and redeeming about it.It is a \"fable\" because it was made in a time in which, had events turned out differently, such as the second Berlin Crisis (Spring 1961) and the subsequent Cuban Missile Crisis (Oct. 1962), it would have actually been a reasonable representation of one of the U.S.'s major cities, ruined and replete with a few miserable survivors. I also see it as a \"fable\" because it is not only a cautionary tale, but because it is the most redemptive of all our popular myths: it is a love story, set in an impossible situation, and involving two highly mismatched lovers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fed2a968da6843ea8227b75a46cb9a9a",
            "input": "At a time in our culture where reality exposed as narrative is overpowering fiction as we know it on the small and big screen, \"Apart From That\" is a film that exposes real life moments that feel more honest, fresh and innovative in there presentation than I have ever seen before. The usual spoon feeding conventions are non existent in this film, leaving a content audience to sit and watch these real life moments trickle one after the other on the screen. While watching the movie, and even upon post contemplation, it is hard to believe that these amazing performances where actually that, performances. Every moment with the large cast of actors felt like the truth being exposed in their daily usual lives. Even so, \"Apart From That\" does not feel like a documentary or reality television, but instead transcends into a category of its own, with its unique cinematography and direction. I look forward to watching this new category of storytelling continue with other films by directors Jennifer Shainin and Randy Walker.This movie must be seen.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce2016aedcc34d1bb277bc07b793aac4",
            "input": "Merry madcaps in London stage a treasure hunt, with one young woman inadvertently fixing up her married politician father with a strong, independent lady-flier who's never been in love. Intriguing early vehicle for Katharine Hepburn, playing an Amelia Earhart-like aviatrix who's been too self-involved to give herself over to any man. The director (Dorothy Arzner) and the screenwriter (Zoe Akins, who adapted Gilbert Frankau's book) were obviously assigned to this project to get the female point of view, but why are all the old clichés kept intact like frozen artifacts? Billie Burke plays the type of simpering, weepy wife who takes to her bed when thing go wrong, and Hepburn's final scene is another bummer. A curious artifact, but not a classic for Kate-watchers. ** from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ddfab54607a4ae8a72a2b271e5bb3dd",
            "input": "People who actually liked Problem Child (1990) need to have their heads examined. Who would take the idea of watching a malevolent little boy wreak havoc on others and deem it funny? The movie is not funny, ever, in any way, beginning to end. It wants to be a cartoon, but the writers don't realize that slapstick isn't funny when people get attacked by bears, or hit with baseball bats. It may be funny in cartoons, but not in a motion picture.The film's young hero is Junior (Michael Oliver) who, since he was a baby, has been placed at the front doors of foster parents for adoption. The families reject him, because Junior tends to give them a hard time.He is then thrown into an orphanage, where he terrorizes the nuns, and writes pen pal letters to the convicted Bow-Tie Killer (Michael Richards). He is soon adopted by Ben and Flo Healy (the late John Ritter and his wife, Amy Yasbeck), who are dying to have a child, in order to be just like every other parent in their neighborhood.Junior becomes a member of the Healy household, and \"Little\" Ben takes an interest in him, despite the fact that he destroys a camping trip by luring a bear onto the site, or throws a cat at his father \"Big\" Ben (Jack Warden), a bigoted politician.I think that we're supposed to care for Junior so that we can root for him when he gets his revenge on people. His new mother, Flo, is a bitch, his grandfather is completely selfish, and one little girl--who despises adopted kids--is such a spoiled brat.But what Junior does to get the last laughs isn't funny- -it's mean, cruel, and sometimes life-threatening.And what is the film's message? That kids should resolve problems with violence and vandalism? That they should seek friendship by writing to convicted killers? They definitely don't what it's like to be a bad kid. Junior isn't a one--he's just a sadistic, little twerp. There used to be a time when it was bad for kids to beat up others. Now, everybody's laughing when Junior beats up kids with a baseball bat.It's a shame that this movie has been marketed as a \"family comedy.\" What's worse is that Problem Child is rated PG. What was the MPAA thinking when they saw this? There's a lot of profanity and mean-spirited pranks here, that one may wonder about the dividing between the PG and the PG-13.Kids will enjoy this, but parents will be shocked at what is being depicted on screen. And to most people, Problem Child will be considered a \"guilty pleasure\" classic; a film that someone will shamefacedly admit to liking, even though the prevailing opinion, as put forth by more serious viewers, is that the movie is a piece of crap.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97700c4854cf44a882e7623c09234e4d",
            "input": "Generally I don't like films directed by Sydney Pollack (\"The Firm\" being somewhat of an exception) and I've never been a Robert Redford fan either. Still, I thought \"Three Days of the Condor\" must be good because of the number of praising comments it has received.Although the widescreen cinematography is quite pleasing for the eye and Max von Sydow does a nice job as the sinister professional killer, I found the whole affair tremendously disappointing. The film undeniably radiates paranoid atmosphere, but everything is ruined by the muddled plot which doesn't seem to make any sense.The film also contains one of the most unsatisfying endings I have ever seen which really leaves the viewer hanging in the air. And what can one say about that absurd romance between Redford and Dunaway? I'd much rather watch any of Hitchcock's films five times in succession than to sit through this piece of waste once more.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66bac7007a9c47b9b602bf0a99ae130a",
            "input": "When I first tuned in on this morning news, I thought, \"wow, finally, some entertainment.\" It was slightly amusing for a week or so... But we have to face it, these news reporters (if one can even call them that) have WAY TOO MUCH \"playing around\" time.At first, I thought Jillian was a breathe of fresh air. But seriously, this woman has got not the least bit of journalist in her. She is very unprofessional. She keeps on interrupting Steve when he starts informing the viewers about a certain news report. It's just really become annoying to the point that I can't watch it anymore.Jillian is NOT a good journalist. Hell, she's more of a celebrity who loves being a celebrity. Hence, she instantly transforms into a celebrity around celebrities whom she's supposed to be interviewing. She's not very professional and quite possibly perceives her relationship with celebrities more important than being a rightfully insatiable journalist- and that's all I can say about her.Also (disappointingly), this show has more entertainment news than necessary news reports about the world, the government, the US, or something that will benefit and/or serve the public's best interest. They're too focus on sensationalism that everything they talk about comes off as a commercial product. On the other hand, their field reporters are interestingly tolerable...I believe \"Good Day LA\" is for young teenagers and celebrities, and it is definitely not for people who actually CARE about the news.SIDE NOTE: (I'd really rather watch KTLA. However, they try so hard to be entertaining sometimes. They're still a bit dull though. Oh well, I'll stick to NBC's \"Today.\" ABC's \"Good Morning America\" is also okay... as long as Diane Sawyer doesn't become way too serious.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71269617c355489ea9853df3935c59ff",
            "input": "Sarafina was a fun movie, and some of the songs were really great. Sarafina was very entertaining. I don't normally like music things like this, but the singing was not lame like it looked like on the box. The movie was useful for learning about history because it was an interesting perspective of the Soweto rioting of 1976. It showed you things from the perspective of the students in the rioting and showed you that they were real characters. Because you got to see them as real characters this makes you like them more as an audience, and makes you more sympathetic to them as totally the victims of the white government, who you can not sympathise with. The singing of the students is correct because we know from accounts that the students in the riot were singing and dancing before it became violent. The clothing of the students in Sarafina is very similar to the clothing shown in photos from Soweto. They made the movie actually in Soweto, which is why it looks very accurate in many parts. All these things make the film more accurate for someone using it to learn about aparthied. As viewers we must be critical of the way the history of Apartheid was presented. As I said before, you become sympathetic to the students - this makes it potentially less reliable and objective. Also, it changes some of the details from other accounts. In Sarafina it turns to chaos when the policeman comes into their classroom and shoots the students. The police and army were very aggressive at Soweto, but this is probably an exaggerated event. The police and army did shoot students, but there is not evidence of them going into schools and executing people like this. The fighting was more in the streets and had looting and crime. This is done in the movie probably to make you feel more sorry for the school students. The movie would have been more useful if it had some different information about aparthied. The teacher was arrested for being against the government, and the mum goes to work in a white persons house. But there is not any information about the government and why they were doing it or any details about the racist policies and laws. -By George S, Chris and Finlay",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bef62ec539424d76a04d35b53a233f23",
            "input": "To begin with, I loved göta kanal 1, it had a lot of classic jokes including that unlucky guy in the canoe who always seems to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, he is still acting the same guy in the göta kanal 2 movie but in my opinion hes performance is not as funny as it was in the first movie, in fact you don't notice him much at all. A thing that made me think bad about this movie is the choice of boats, in this movie there are only race boats, they sure is speedy but those do not make waves like the big floating mansions used in the first movie, I liked the old ones better and these new boats makes one of the last scenes look ridiculous when the man in the canoe suddenly jumps out of it to evade the \"big waves\" from those small speedy boats. Truly a minus. You have to accept that we're not living in the same Sweden as in 1974 anymore. This movie also contains a bit more violence than the first one. Although the movie was great all in all. I've just concentrated on some cons that i was disappointed in but the rest of the movie were up to my expectations, so go see it! It's worth the money.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0562ba85bef9486d966d972be1c5144a",
            "input": "The feel of this movie was amazing. Adam Sandler's performance was very inspiring. As he played a very rattled and fragile character, he took his ability to the very edge and really worked the role. His character was really interesting. I can see myself reading the script for this movie and not being half as interested in the part as Sandler made me. For someone who plays primarily comedy roles, he pulled off a serious role with what seemed to be his own quirks and input. I especially loved the scene in which Adam and Don's characters rode the motorized scooter around the city. I familiarized with the moment, because it seemed like Don was witnessing one thing Adam does to get away from it all. With his video games, music, and many other things he does to keep him from thinking about the past, riding his scooter with his headphones on seemed like an escape from his thoughts. This movie is definitely worth the watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f38342b9b4884c15a0d48c2926181347",
            "input": "There is not much more I can say about this movie than all of the commentaries on page one, except - as Jesse says - \"it's the berries\". All of page one's commentators wrote eloquently - as almost so as the dialog is in this movie. This just may be one of those illusive things we hear so much about, but usually are made so by the actors who deliver the lines: a beautiful script. Maybe Robert Redford did hold strict sway onto the actors/actresses during the filming of this movie, so that the beauty of the story would not get lost.I, too, attended church when I was very young and into my late teens. The church's pastor spoke very eloquently and quietly as the Rev. Maclean did in his church. That, in itself, is a totally different picture that is portrayed of Southern Baptist churches - no holy-rollering in my church. It was a big church, with many different programs to keep its congregation busy - the most inspiring perhaps was the music-department with its huge choir and almost classical anthems. Too, the Sunday evening-congregation was almost entirely younger people. Are you even aware it was once safe to go to church on Sunday night? How I wish it still was ! Watching \"A River Runs through It\" is very much like going to hear a beautiful sermon in a church whose members are fully involved in life. As has already been so beautifully written, the sermon for this movie is the open-space beauties of Montana - yet, aren't there also missile-silos there, too? Fly-fishing or any other activity which draws family-members closer together for a happy life - and deep understanding of one another - becomes a blessing. Although you see some of the shadier aspects of life then, too, the simplicity of the story paints a lasting impression on your heart, if you let it. Speakeasies and prostitutes are counter-balanced by the simple gatherings of old-fashioned, community picnics as this movie contains - in heavy contrasts to modern families taking their kids to Disney Land for screeching joyrides and calling it \"a day together\". There is noting wrong with that, but as \"River\" demonstrates, some of its taciturn beauty could do nothing but make life richer. This is the third film I've seen in which Tom Skeritt (?) plays a father, all different styles and brilliantly acted.Brad Pitt, mostly an undiscovered talent except for \"Thelma and Louise\" and \"Meet Joe Black\", and all of the cast-members deserved many awards. Little stories superbly told will get 10-of-10 from me over any movie with violence, foul language, ugliness and \"action\". I am thinking particularly of \"Crash\" and most of \"Arnold's\" movies. What a savior for peace this movie is.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-398f34d8bc0f4d6080c8d57310332502",
            "input": "If you know the story of Grey Owl, you'll love the movie! Annie Galipeau is a great actress, and Pierce is better than never in Grey Owl. But in this movie there's no real scene of action. I think this movie should be nominated at the Oscars! Welll go see this movie, it's A CLASSIC!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e7a251b37bf4542b21bccfa87efb4a1",
            "input": "I disliked this movie for numerous reasons. Within the first ten minutes of the film, I grew extremely disappointed and came to the conclusion that if this movie was going to salvage itself, for me at least, that it was going to have to pull itself out of the enormous hole it had dug. Unfortunately, that did not occur. The two draws of the movie for me were to see Jane Fonda and Felicity Huffman. I don't know enough about Lindsey Lohan's work to have been interested in what she would bring to the film. Afterward, I just felt disappointed in and for all three of them even though there were \"moments\" in each of their performances. I imagine that for each of them to find their \"moments\" was a very difficult task given the fact that there was an amazing lack of character development and uninspired dialog. Although the plot is an interesting one, the movie on the whole is so poorly written, directed and edited that anybody's performance as an actor would suffer and be tainted by it. The disrespectful way in which it dealt with sexual abuse and the trite and insulting viewpoint of small-town America, I think, were the two main reasons why this film failed in hitting it's mark. As one reviewer has noted and I would agree, the movie is almost impossible to market given it's finished form. I suspect that, or at least hope that (for the actor's sakes anyway) there are some real gems on the cutting room floor. Sad for us but if that's true then the actors can take solace in that and feel somewhat good about lending their talents and time to such a flop. Oh yeah and another thing...I wished for just once I could go see an American movie which included the sadly disappearing but wonderfully bucolic settings such as the one in this film where the main characters weren't absentmindedly and/or disrespectfully littering the country side with pop cans, smashed CDs and, other such trash!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef75d60c1c044338b3eea1d46041d2c2",
            "input": "This is one very confusing movie. The film is very hard to follow and the plot just didn't seem to make any sense. The Fury of the Wolfman was made in Spain and I think that when any film is dubbed from one language to another, it doesn't translate exactly as it was first meant. Maybe this is part of the problem but I doubt if it can account for all the problems with this film. The dubbing is pretty bad and the voices don't match the characters very well. The scenes are choppy, there is an array of strange and irrelevant characters that do little more than confuse the viewer even more. What I did like about this film was the look of the wolfman himself and the scenes where he attacks. Now if they could have put it all together and had it make some sense, they might have had something. Don't waste your time on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-816a3b7f2b7e4e4e86b8776c72d8b351",
            "input": "Harvey Keital's best performance so far the new century. Very nicely photographed, a beautiful snap-shot of pre-Castro Cuba. The story revolves around the nephew of a local minor crime boss who develops a friendship with an American with Hollywood connections. It's really about the moment when a boy awakens to the fact that the small circle of people he knows actually live in a much larger, much more complex world that he doesn't yet understand.the script is strong and filled with humor, the direction is crisp. Over all, a really professional job that fits in well with the tradition of Latin American cinema. The one weakness is the decision to shoot in sync-sound English rather than Spanish - probably to improve sales in the US. Unfortunately, this just makes the film a little less convincing. But if you can see beyond this, you will find a heartfelt trip to another world. Recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8fa1f9a015184b18a8bd4f41957f59c6",
            "input": "A boring movie about a boring town in the 50's. How can anyone think this is a classic? The producer pretty much ended his career by pushing his girlfriend, Cybil Shepard, into several movies that were way above her acting ability. I think this movie gives an insight to how bad Peter Bogdonovitch's future movies were going to be. Cybil Shepard's career took a dive after being in several movies that Peter Bogdonovich produced. It wasn't until \"Moonlighting\" that her career started to come back. I thought the acting was poor rendition of the, \"Graduate\". I have noticed that this movie hasn't been shown in the US. The only place I have watched it was overseas in Europe late at night.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4cc9e59aa5e44318ae72388c5a3b3e8",
            "input": "This amazing Oscar winner (4 in total) and John Ford's first Academy Award winner, is simply spellbinding with a pounding score by Max Steiner. Called an Art film, because Ford had very little money to make this great story about guilt and retribution, and greed and stupidity. But what makes this movie such a classic, is the direction and astounding photography and use of fog and lighting, that was so different from the usual American film, and more in the tradition of German expressionism. And the Oscar winning performance by Victor McLaglen as the drunken Gypo is simply unbelievable. Basically the movie takes place in Ireland, and Gypo turns in a friend in the rebel movement to the English to collect 20 pounds to give to his girlfriend. But having all that money, he starts blowing it on an all night drunk and giving it away, while the leaders of the movement are trying to track down the informer. The whole movie is one night in a dark and foggy Ireland, and a cast of characters that are memorable but all along, the whole world of Gypo is closing in on him, both psychologically. If I had to pick maybe three directors to have ALL their movies on a deserted island forever, and nobody elses, John Ford would certainly be one of them. What a truly remarkable movie...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a800406d50cd46c7a8bcd668098601dc",
            "input": "Diego Armando Maradona was, and still remains as the best football player, the game has offered. Not just an athlete, but an artist. This documetary if the 1986 World Cup will forever live in the memories of every football fan around the world. Because of his tremendous and unbelievable goal, which he scored against my own country(england). There's absolutely no point of diminishing this star. Although I dont undersand spanish, I can appreciate the argentine narrator. He actually cries of happiness, and can barely express his emotion..... Anything I wrote can be senseless and difficult to comprehend, but readers.....you have to watch this to know what I mean.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5c20e97e2ad47c48c5d50f2b9e32467",
            "input": "This series got me into Deighton's writing and the genre when I was younger and I love this presentation of the story. I would however disagree with the above comment. From what I have read in the past, it is not Holm's performance that lead Deighton to refuse to have the series released but the butchering that all three books received in the translation to the screen. A great example of this is the rewrite of the boarder crossing that ended Samson's field career. The scene is not in the book, the character who dies in the minefield was never in any of the books and the crossing in Sinker was from East Germany to West Germany, not the Polish frontier. This whole storyline is cloth. The changes in Set similarly damage the integrity of the story. My perspective on Holm's performance was that he portrayed the disorientation of Samson during his wife's defection excellently and I believe comported himself well in portraying the aging field agent desperately trying to bridge the class divide. Samson both pays for his father's idealism and suffers due to its influence on his life. As Clevemore comments, had he gotten himself an education he would have probably been running the department. I think the true loss of performance is due to physical appearance more than anything. Holm is diminutive when compared to the Samson of the book - a physically impressive man capable of using his size to impose a presence.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f477960073b346cf8e958c3a83a7d7af",
            "input": "I absolutely LOVED this movie! It was SO good! This movie is told by the parrot, Paulie's point of view. Paulie is given to the little girl Marie, as a present. Paulie helps Marie learn to talk and they become best friends. But when Paulie tells Marie to fly, she falls and the bird is sent away. That's when the adventure begins. Paulie goes through so much to find his way back to Marie. This movie is so sweet, funny, touching, sad, and more. When I first watched this movie, it made me cry. The birds courage and urge to go find his Marie for all that time, was so touching. I must say that the ending is so sweet and sad, but you'll have to watch it to find out how it goes. At the end, the janitor tries to help him, after hearing his story. Will he find his long lost Marie or not? Find out when you watch this sweet, heart warming movie. It'll touch your heart. Rating:10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-538babfbf2424900b5b86d38814f9efb",
            "input": "Elizabeth Taylor never could act at all and she was just her usual annoying, untalented self in this film. This was before she got so fat but she still looked very short and dumpy. Rock Hudson was OK as Bick Benedict but clearly an actor with more range like William Holden would have been better. James Dean certainly proved he knew how to mumble his way through a movie. The whole film is incredibly slow and goes on for far too long. The actors were all too young and lightweight and none of them aged convincingly due to the poor make-up. Hudson looked ridiculous just being padded out and Dean and Carroll Baker were obviously the same age.0/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05a701c77da74fde86d2fc22f47cc2d2",
            "input": "Probably the two main significances of \"Elmer's Pet Rabbit\" are that the wacky leporid featured in \"A Wild Hare\" now has a name, and that he utters his famous \"Of course you realize this means war!\" for the first time. Mostly, the Termite Terrace crowd was still trying to figure out what exactly to do with this long-eared rascal. It's certainly a must-see for hard-core fans of this genre, but others will probably have little reason to take interest.But make no mistake, it's quite hilarious what Bugs Bunny does to the eternally gullible Elmer Fudd. Clear shades of things to come abound throughout the cartoon. I recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1987ad68bf1e4c548ab65213ace063b2",
            "input": "Christina Raines plays a lovely model in New York who seeks out a new apartment and begins to meet strange neighbors and reveal a secret about the building and herself slowly building up to quite a climax by film's end. This film has all kinds of neat plot elements from the Roman Catholic Church vs. the Devil, to the gateway to Hell, to bizarre rituals, to a growing conspiracy, and finally to a host of talented famous actors and actresses flooding the film. We get Ava Gardner, Burgess Meredith, Chris Sarandon, Jerry Orbach, Deborah Raffin, Arthur Kennedy, Jose Ferrer, Slyvia Miles, Beverly DeAngelo, Eli Wallach, Martin Balsam, Christopher Walkin, William Hickey, Tom Berenger, Jeff Goldblum, and who can forget John Carradine as the old priest. Many of these actors ham it up - particularly Burgess Meredith giving a fine comic/demented performance as one of the neighbors with a little bird and a cat. Meredith is memorable as is Balsam and Chris Sarandon. Some of the performers have virtually nothing to do like Jose Ferrer in a thankless role even if it is nothing more than a cameo. The Sentinel is a fine horror film with plenty of psychological elements and some truly terrifying scenes. The end scene is repulsive and yet chilling. I do find fault with some of the gratuitous sex and violence in the film, particularly that whole scene with DeAngelo and Miles. Was that really necessary? I think not. Also, the father/daughter stuff was a bit much as well, but overall the film works and has a winning pace. Director Michael Winner does a workmanlike job and is effective creating tension and scary movie moments. The scenes with Carradine are particularly effective.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ad7c5d7e6f74236a765e5b72ede543f",
            "input": "A film without conscience. Drifter agrees to kill a man for a mobster for money. Then they double cross him. Meanwhile he falls in love with the dead man's wife, and, without her knowing he's the killer, moves in with her. Then he \"accidentally\" kills her when she finds out. Then, in a WALKING TALL kind of heroism, he gets revenge on the mobsters who double crossed him. The first problem is that, by agreeing to take on the murder by hire assignment, the drifter loses all sense of sympathy, worthiness, and heroism. We can't accept any goodness in him and as a result the rest of the has no moral center. We just can't care about that kind of guy. And the wife (nicely played by the fetching Kari Wuhrer - the sheriff in EIGHT LEGGED FREAKS), a high class lady who runs a mission for homeless people, similarly loses a degree of sympathy by jumping right into bed with the homeless drifter (despite her evidently weakened state after the death of her husband). And, when she finds out he's the guy – what does she do? She locks him inside her house (as if ALL houses had locks you can't open from INSIDE) with her and proceeds to berate him. Stoo-pid. George Wendt, however, is terrific in a role as a beefy thug. Director Stuart Gordon did so much better with RE-ANIMATOR and DAGON.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56810279798f49739f25ac3bd834ac92",
            "input": "watch a team of bomb disposal experts in Iraq count down their time before they can go home.That in itself sounds boring. Every time that little caption came up telling us how long they had left, it just caused this film with no plot to drag on and on. hurry up and finish your time there so we can all go home.I must be missing something. I'm a great fan of war films if they are done well. This had \"jarhead\" syndrome. A film that at times was beautifully shot, but cinematography doesn't stop it from being totally dull and pointless.And get over the slow mo \"cartridges coming out of the gun\" shot already. they could have saved money and just got stock footage from any other film with a gun in it.I didn't have any empathy for the main guy in it, i was constantly hoping that his recklessness would cause him to die. In fact the film would have worked much better if he had.I read some reviews and seemed to get the feeling that those who had been in the armed forces disliked it, and everyone else loved it. I have never been in the forces, and I'm with them. It's pretentious drivel. the 3 stars are for the cinematography.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b9e4b96be8b433e81d8c2da8b9ff652",
            "input": "When you see Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi as co-stars, you expect to find a well done horror movie, but this was actually quite different, representing as it did what I would describe as an early effort at science fiction. Karloff and Lugosi both play scientists (Rukh and Benet respectively) - competitors to an extent, until Rukh wins Benet over with a demonstration that proves his great theory. The science here was - to say the least - a bit rough around the edges (thus science fiction, with the emphasis on the fiction) but somehow Rukh harnesses some sort of ray from Andromeda that allows him to look at the earth \"several thousand million years ago.\" In that pre historic time, a huge meteorite slammed into Africa, leaving deposits of a substance the scientists call \"Radium X\" - which can heal and destroy. A large portion of the movie is set rather tediously in Africa, on a search for the meteorite deposits, which Rukh eventually finds and harnesses to create a great weapon, unfortunately infecting himself with some sort of disease that makes him a great weapon as well.Karloff and Lugosi were both pretty good here. Lugosi pulls off a role in which he's the good guy pretty well, although I frankly found him a bit unconvincing - especially during the scenes set in Africa. The story also plodded along a bit, and while it held my attention it didn't captivate me. Given that this is really a sci-fi rather than a horror flick, and that sci-fi was in its very early stages, I suppose the movie needs to be cut a bit of slack. It was OK - nothing more, but also nothing less than that. 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65607119aff149dab95cb55f1eb103a9",
            "input": "Avoid this crap at all costs. Bad script, bad directing, bad acting, bad editing, bad sound, and bad music. Get the idea? This movie tries to be western flavored, it's not. It tries to be hard core violent, it's not. It tries to present a fresh look at an old genre, it doesn't. The actors try there best, and my heart goes out to them. But with such inane material to work with it's hard to make something shine. To me this has all of the looks of a \"fresh outta film school gonna set the world on fire\" first attempt. Freshmen film makers often bite off more that they, or their budget, can chew. The best thing they can do is to take a few steps back, reassess what is possible, and work within their limited budget the next time out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2c9577a981248f8b9fa248e63f11f4a",
            "input": "There is absolutely nothing to redeem this movie. They took a sleazy story, miscast it, miswrote it, misfilmed it. It has bad dialogue badly performed in a meandering and trashy story.As badly as it fails as art, it fails even worse as commerce. Who could have been the target market for this. What age group? What interest group?Someone should make a movie about how and why they made this movie. That I would pay to see.I've seen thousands of bad movies, and this ranks with \"Sailor Who Fell from Grace\" and \"Manos\" ... my choices as the three most unredeemably bad movies I've ever seen. Everybody associated with it should be forced to make conversation with VanDamme for all eternity.I challenge you. Watch this movie and perform an academic exercise - how could you take this and make it worse? I can't think of one way.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41b7efea4ac04de881c4326993433a1e",
            "input": "The dehumanising effect of war is a much-studied subject in the movies; as is the equally dehumanising, but potentially life-saving, dehumanising effect of military training. Joel Schumacher's 'Tigerland' follows the standard template, we see men treated like dirt but emerging as soldiers, with a degree of mutual respect for their commanding officers, and judgement is reserved on whether such an extreme process can be considered justified; as is judgement of the merits of the war for which they are being trained (typically, as here, Vietnam). But 'Tigerland' has an interesting take, by centring its account on a cocky dissident named Bozz (played outstandingly well by Colin Farrell), who understands that all power governs ultimately by consent, and the lack of awareness among the powerless of their own complicity. Around this character, a taught, gripping plot has been constructed, and it's also a plus that the action never leaves America (whereas Stanley Kubrick's 'Full Metal Jacket', to name just one other film of a similar type, lost focus once the action shifted to Asia). Although this is not a film of staggering originality, it's supremely well done and captivating viewing throughout: the best film from this director that I've seen, and among the very best of its genre.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c177cc046d0643cfb558981ebf157374",
            "input": "I'm all for the idea of a grand epic of the American Revolutionary War. This ain't it. (And for that matter, neither was the Emmerich/Devlin/Gibson THE PATRIOT. But I digress.)I saw this film at a publicity screening at the old MGM Studios (now Sony) just before it came out. The audience had high expectations for this expensive period piece, written by veteran Robert Dillon, directed by the esteemed Hugh Hudson (of CHARIOTS OF FIRE fame), and starring Al Pacino.But it didn't take long for people to start squirming in their seats, whispering derisive comments about Pacino's horribly misconceived accent -- he was supposed to be an American frontiersman of Scottish ancestry(!) -- and that of Nastassja Kinski, who was supposed to be recently emigrated from England(!!). Then the story started and it all went downhill fast.Motivations were muddled, dialogue was atrocious, events had no historical or political context. What there was of a plot lurched forward on absurd coincidence; by the second or third time that alleged lovers Pacino and Kinski stumbled into each other it had become a bad joke. Donald Sutherland gave an unhinged performance as a British officer/pederast. His accent was all over the map too. I guess there weren't any English actors available.Lots of people left. Those who stayed tried to stifle giggles, then openly guffawed. I stuck it out -- I figured that at least the battle scenes might be good. I was wrong. Inexplicably, Hudson chose to film them with hand-held cameras, not even Steadicam, the jerkiness giving a misplaced newsreel 'authenticity' which ruined the sense of scale.There was a semi-famous TV reviewer in the audience a few rows ahead of me: (the late) Gary Franklin of Channel 7 Eyewitness News. I could tell he was peeved by the behavior of the rest of us. And sure enough, on his TV segment the next day he gave the film a '10' on his notorious 'Franklin Scale of 1 to 10', while remarking churlishly about the louts who'd disrupted the screening the night before, who clearly didn't know art when they saw it. What a buffoon.After this disaster, Pacino didn't star in another film for almost 4 years. Hugh Hudson's career never recovered. You can't say I didn't warn you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7c59489a3df473589f2f9f7631e7f88",
            "input": "I just sat in the theater bored as hell, i wanted to leave halfway through the movie. The plot is simple 4 Samoan guys wreck weddings. So They have to bring a dates in order to get into the wedding. Yawn.The thing that peeved me off the most was the so-called crude jokes... They were highly UNfunny, clichéd and thrown in your face, to make you get into the already dull movie. The acting was below-average and i felt this movie just went on and on about nothing but a bunch of unfunny jokes and a predictable plot.All in all, one of the worse movies i've seen of 2006, unfunny, bad acting, just ugly.Well thank god a friend shouted me. Avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-658500417d574a3ca96f25149bd21ed3",
            "input": "The movie has a distinct (albeit brutish and rough) humanity for all its borderline depravity - the zippy/lyrical score points up the comic side of their misadventures, and even when they're at their most thuggish (like terrorizing the woman on the train), a semi-pitiful vulnerability lurks never far away (Dewaere sucks on her breasts like a baby). Blier cuts away from the scene where Depardieu may be about to rape Dewaere, so we're never sure how explicitly to read the manifestly homoerotic aspect of their relationship - either way, that incident is the start of their relative humanization (so the movie could certainly be read as pro-gay, although it could likely be read as pro-anything you want). The movie has many objectionable scenes and points of sexual politics and is probably best taken as a general cartoon on the foibles of both sexes, making a mockery of the whole notion of sensitivity and honesty, and hitting numerous points of possible profundity on the basis that if you fire off enough shots, some of them are bound to hit.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb68dcffa1ac489eb2b9ee07ff0df315",
            "input": "It appears even the director doesn't like this film,but for me I think he's being a bit harsh on himself.Sure it's not perfect, but there are some atmospheric shots,and the story is good enough to keep you interested throughout.It's shot in what appears to be quite a pretty village which adds to the atmosphere as well.If you like horror films shot in England, give it a go.I have just seen a trailer for this directors latest film 'The Devil's Chair' which looks quite amazing.There aren't enough English horror films for me, so any that come along deserve our attention, and this one isn't as bad as you may think",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-439d49ee33a645808537829947be3156",
            "input": "Producer Joel Schumacher who also directed \"Phone Booth\",'02, and many other great films showed in great detail how no one person can really be trained to be a killing machine with out destroying their own personalities and the real fears that a person has to face when going into COMBAT!! Colin Farrell(Roland Bozz),\"Intermission\",'03, gave one of his best performances and actually carried this entire picture on his back. Matthew Davis(Jim Paxton),\"Blue Crush\",'02, gave a great supporting role and Shea Whigham(Pvt.Wilson),\"All The Real Girls\",'03, showed his true acting skills in the role that he played. There was two brief scenes where the soldiers were able to find some hot romance on a short leave in the local town and had to pay for their love and sexual desires. One Army Veteran instructor from Viet Nam told the soldiers how to really torture the enemy by using electrical wires in all the wrong places on a human male body. Enjoyable and entertaining film to view.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e415ccd27485434bb75fac78c3348fcc",
            "input": "I'll admit I've only watched a handful of episodes, but each one seemed completely different from the next. It seems after the first season, the producers decided to completely retool the show, drop characters, introduce new ones, and rewrite the entire show dynamic.As you have probably surmised already, the show is about quirky, unpredictable teenager Holly (Amanda Bynes) who moves in with her high strung sister Valerie (Jennie Garth) in New York City. Decent enough premise: odd couple + fish out of water + high jinx.While I miss the sitcoms of yore, this show unfortunately misses the mark on funny repeatedly, and it's sad because they have some decent talent.On top of everything, they insisted on changing the show (Val was living with a cast regular bf one season, then he was suddenly gone, so she opens a bakery? what?) When things change that drastically, you get the feeling that even the *show* knows it's bad. I mean, completely new sets, characters written off and new show regulars!On a side note (this is just nitpicking), I know this is a television show and not real at all, but Val and Holly end up living in a HUGE loft duplex (there are stairs) with a terrace... in MANHATTAN! Are you serious!?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-013a85a6bea543ff9e5482d18e209690",
            "input": "If I could give it less that 1 I would. Do not bother to rent; if someone gives you the DVD burn it.This is horrible movie making. A total waste of even digital \"film\". I have seen better on Youtube made by 12 year old boys. Lommel claims to have written this, if that is the case he is a classic case of someone who is illiterate in two languages. The story line is none existent, the dialog is mainly screaming, the camera work is some sort of attempted arty flairs with nonsensical cutting of totally unrelated jumps to either industrial transportation scenes or some sort of odd angry young woman rift.I can usually follow a less than obvious plot or see the purpose in a \"creative\" film - I like David Lynch.This one is either so far beyond my limited powers of comprehension I missed it or it is totally pointless. I think this is a \"lets see if we can grab a title that will be coming out soon and do a weird rift on it and see if we can grab some of the bucks\" con job.I cannot see why Lionsgate even bothered with this. Totally worthless, it is so bad I will not rent any other by this same director.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0587b1e5c7134cc38648ed31ed927a38",
            "input": "Kenneth Branagh shows off his excellent skill in both acting and writing in this deep and thought provoking interpretation of Shakespeare's most classic and well-written tragedy. Kenneth plays the role of Hamlet with such a distinct emotion that provokes tears. Kate Winslet's performance is also of great note.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73dd7dc45fd946c7a63de2406ba6d0f3",
            "input": "This was recently on AMC's vibrant movie classics and I had to laugh. I had high hopes for this adventure that follows in the vein of \"Voyage to the Earth's Core\" and \"Mysterious Island\". I was sorely disappointed not only in the acting credentials but in the silly story line that reads from a five year old's comic book. Be sure to catch sight of the wires that are holding on to the Pterdactyl's wings when they grasp \"Ogar\" a half idiot pre-modern man who befriends the lost adventurers. The ending left it open for further rehashing of the same effects in \"People that Time Forgot\". Don't waste your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc07d1ce093f414eb2e3fd6eee80da96",
            "input": "I was electrified when I first saw this in 1983 or 1984. Steven Biko is gone half way through the film but the resonance of his courage and wisdom is not forgotten. I didn't when finally in South Africa in 1993. It is also largely a story about friendship and loyalty. When I was in South Africa and heard the audience at a dance recital in Natal sing Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika, my hair stood on its ends. There is a lot to learn from this story for all peoples.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-868e692a1aca40a3b040dbc9902ad411",
            "input": "A favourite of mine,this movie tells of two feuding New York \"characters\", Steve Brodie(Raft) and \"Chuck\" Connors(Beery),who both strive to be the \"Main Guy\" in the Bowery in the late Nineteenth Century.Brodie(1863-1901) and Connors(1852-1913),were real people,though this is a heavily fictionalized account of their antics(based on a play).Brodie's legendary(did he do it?- it's still a cause of argument!),jump from the Brooklyn bridge(1886),for which he became famous,is shown here as happening around the same time as the Spanish-American war(1898).Director Walsh clearly had a great affection for the period,so beautifully recreated here,and it includes a wild rumbustious ragtime number from saloon singer Trixie Odbray(a young Pert Kelton).Raft is at his slickest as Brodie,and Beery shows again what a clever actor he was,as tough, big hearted, and at times quite touching Connors.Pretty Fay Wray is the love interest both the boys are pursuing.Full of life and energy,\"The Bowery\" moves at a fast pace(unlike many early \"talkies\").It is not an easy movie to find,but is well worth looking out for.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f524873a11244cf4b737f1f65f965c29",
            "input": "For a movie with a plot like this I would normally smell \"tearjerker\" in the first ten minutes and turn it off, but this was very well made, with emotional subtleties, great acting, and some genuinely funny moments. It was also interesting to see a different culture - a vanishing one at that. My wife and I both dug it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b2d62b135a8407a8d1c4277609a5bac",
            "input": "With the advent of the IMDb, this overlooked movie can now find an interested audience. Why? Because users here who do a search on two-time Academy Award winner Glenda Jackson can find 'The Return of The Soldier' among her credits. So can those checking out Oscar winner Julie Christie. Fans of Ann-Margret can give the title a click, as will those looking into the career of the great Alan Bates. Not to mention the added bonus of a movie with supporting heavyweights Ian Holm and Frank Finlay. Any movie with so many notables in it is rewarded by the IMDb, given all the cross-referencing that goes on here. So, why isn't this movie out on DVD? Don't the Producers realize the Internet Movie Database is a marketing gift for such a film? And 'The Return of The Soldier' is definitely a gem waiting to be discovered. Get with it, people.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e98c676c54a4575a8150b46c9e86181",
            "input": "It's rare that I sit down in front of the TV specifically to watch a particular programme. It's even rarer when I actually enjoy the programme in the end, but Last of the Blonde Bombshells was one of the best movies I think I've seen.A remarkable cast, led by Dame Judi Dench and Ian Holm, and an excellent, witty and poignant script combined to make it a truly rewarding experience. I can't really express how good I thought it was, so I won't try, I'll just say, if you get the opportunity, PLEASE SEE IT!!!! I only hope it comes out on video.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8ce9d8928f649a9be11b9c499be0032",
            "input": "What a fun movie St. Ives is. It reminds me of the type of film made during the 40's. Classic story, rounded off by characters and a plot that is neither over dramatic nor overtly complicated. In fact it isn't over anything. Robert Lewis Stevenson's story - here adapted for the screen - reads like Jane Austen for men. We do get a tale that has a romance at its heart, but there is plenty of fun too: battle scenes (sort of), prison escapes, mistaken identities, swordplay, and the funniest line I've heard in years: \"Only in Scotland would guests be announced by name at a masked ball.\" There is much hilarity, hardship, and not a little heartbreak as St. Ives tries to fight and find his way back to a family and life he barely knew.The cast is absolutely stellar with the too infrequently seen Jean Marc Barr absolutely perfect in the title role. Anna Friel is a refreshing delight as the resourceful Flora and Miranda Richardson nearly walks away with the movie as her wise and worldly, been there and seen-it-all Aunt Susan. Richard Grant provides comic relief of the highest order.This is not going to be the greatest movie anyone has ever seen, but its charms are undeniable and the entire film fairly bristles with an energy that bursts with life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a920d4ecb8f4377a7664a39c1b07b82",
            "input": "I thought this movie was terrible. I'm Chinese, so I thought everything was totally wrong. Many of the facts were incorrect. The only thing right about Chinese history in the movie was when Wendy's mother explained to her husband about the statues that guarded ShiHuangDi. I also thought the fight scenes were very cheesy and fake. Many of the actors and actresses were not very great. Some of the jokes that were supposedly \"funny\" were really stupid. I think this movie should receive the worst possible rating it could get. Disney has really got to get more information about Chinese history if they want to create an extravagant movie. Mulan was quite accurate. Watch this movie if you want to waste some time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb18ffa6af364ac8b46824154659032e",
            "input": "I don't recall walking out of a movie theater except this once. Not only that, but I was with 7 friends, and we all wanted to go. An uninteresting plot, characters made of clay, violence with no point. I didn't care when the good guys died; I didn't care when the bad guys got it. The fantasy and magic was laid on thick as liver pudding and there was no coherency. In short, fine entertainment if you happen to be spending an eternity in Hell.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76da9b44cf2748b0917d899e913669b7",
            "input": "This is a bizzare look at Al's \"life\", back when he still a hyper 20-something. The (real) home videos of Al as a kid are great, and the commentary from his (real life) parents gives a nice glimpse of just how Weird Al wound up as screwed up as he is. This video is a must own for any devoted Al-coholic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a35fdb0d43ed4864a1973f0195768b70",
            "input": "Visually interesting, but falls flat in the originality department. This tedious excercise in technique wears thin after the opening battle. Jude Law has the charisma of burnt toast, but in his defense this film contains some of the worst dialogue I have ever seen on the big screen. In fact the script is so poor that it keeps taking you out of the film, and had me thinking about work, bills, my dogs, etc. There are many moments that scream bluescreen. Paltrow is as wooden as they get. This could of been saved by snappy film noir dialogue or over the top camp. My only complaint on the technique is that Black & White film (sorry, computer) would of helped because it looks like Turner colorized black and white. Just a big dull cliché mess. I would rather break my femur than sit through this endurance test again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf6fb30477bb4b5e81f8c922fd465668",
            "input": "The premise is amazing and the some of the acting, notably Sally Kellerman and Anthony Rapp, is charming... but this film is near unwatchable. The music sounds as if it comes from some sort of the royalty free online site and the lyrics as if they were written with a rhyming dictionary open on the lap. Most of the singing is off-key. I think they may have filmed with the singing accapella and put in the music under it... The dialogue is really stupid and trite. The movie works best when it is actually talking about the real estate but unfortunately it strays to often into stupid farcical sub-plots. I found myself checking my watch after ther first twenty minutes and after 40 wondering 'when is it ever going to end.'",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee5282bf08e64a098818a54b437f1b1e",
            "input": "This is exactly the reason why many people remain homeless . . . because stupid producers pay their money to make awful films like this instead of donating if they can bother!This film is even worse than white chicks! Little Man has a lame excuse for posing a character midget as a baby. Story is awful considering it was written by six people. The idea still wouldn't be too bad though, if it was original and not a rip-off of a cartoon episode. it has funny moments but some of them are way over-done and some are just stupid. The acting was very, very bad. So was the directing. Anyone involved in this film should be ashamed of themselves. it is racist and very offensive to midgets. I mean, instead of showing sympathy to them, the film-makers make fun of them! It really disgusts me how they do it. They see midgets being just like babies. And for a character who is a midget, pretending to be an abandoned baby just to get a diamond from a certain family. That is its lame excuse for showing something like that. It just was not worth it. Don't watch this film. It is a huge waste of time and money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2631ab0dfef448748236687a40ce0b2e",
            "input": "This movie stinks. The stench resembles bad cowpies that sat in the sun too long. I can't believe that so many talented actors wasted their time making such a hopelessly awful film. Whew!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c25b62341b124267ac255ce37203178f",
            "input": "The original Vampires (1998) is one of my favorites. I was curious to see how a sequel would work considering they used none of the original characters. I was quite surprised at how this played out. As a rule, sequels are never as good as the original, with a few exceptions. Though this one was not a great movie, the writer did well in keeping the main themes & vampire lore from the first one in tact. Jon Bon Jovi was a drawback initially, but he proved to be a half-way decent Slayer. I doubt anyone could top James Wood's performance in the first one, though... unless you bring in Buffy!All in all, this was a decent watch & I would watch it again.I was left with two questions, though... what happened to Jack Crow & how did Derek Bliss come to be a slayer? Guess we'll just have to leave that to imagination.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c078d5fe324c48a79eb2ab29dc377728",
            "input": "I wasn't sure when I heard about this coming out. I was thinking how dumb is Disney getting. I was wrong. I found it to be very good. I mean it's not The Lion King but it's cool to see another side from a certain point. It was very funny. Also it wasn't one of those corny disney sequels were the animation sucks, it was just like The Lion King animation. The only thing that eritated me was the whole movie theater thing through out the movie. Not to give anything way but you'll know what I am talking about. I also fun that it was cool to have most of the cast from the original to return. It was a very good movie over all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd15d3e2aebb4178bba599f5c01d7696",
            "input": "I sure would like to see a resurrection of a up dated Seahunt series with the tech they have today it would bring back the kid excitement in me.I grew up on black and white TV and Seahunt with Gunsmoke were my hero's every week.You have my vote for a comeback of a new sea hunt.We need a change of pace in TV and this would work for a world of under water adventure.Oh by the way thank you for an outlet like this to view many viewpoints about TV and the many movies.So any ole way I believe I've got what I wanna say.Would be nice to read some more plus points about sea hunt.If my rhymes would be 10 lines would you let me submit,or leave me out to be in doubt and have me to quit,If this is so then I must go so lets do it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db4e23ef32c64dc295c66199a8e2f5e6",
            "input": "I saw this in the summer of 1990. I'm still annoyed by how bad this movie is in 2001.Implausible plot. You'd have to be a child to think this could happen.I'm just really annoyed by it. Don't see this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22e71639369449e38cc3be9558f1242f",
            "input": "Let me confess. I found this video used and bought it because Guttenberg looked so sexy in his underwear on the jacket. But inside was another story. Besides the fact that the movie was basically a parody of \"invisible-man\" genre special effects (highly visible strings and other such paraphernalia), the script wasted no chance -- in fact it went out of its way -- in insulting all non-WASP races and real-or-imagined homosexuals. Every insult aimed at a person in the script was either homophobic or racist or both. It starts to grate on your nerves, along with the shaky sound, candid- camera style photography and melodramatic story. However, the end is somewhat of a surprise. But by the time you get there, you hardly care less. Too bad, it could been a reasonably good movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e05e739922004837870f6bb903cabb4e",
            "input": "What can I say??? This movie was so Dumb & Stupid I thought it was a Psychotic DRAG Comedy - They should rename it \"Bitching Pregnant Cat Fight!\" What a stupid waste of time , if you want to see(DIE DIE!!! \"I WANT YOUR BABY DRAG QUEEN) Jennifer Tilly being her Freaky self then just rent out one Of the \"Chucky\" movie, oh ya , \"The Bride Of Chucky.\" It's more fun watching the Two Ugly Plastic dolls (one of them Jennifer Tilly turned into the UGLY Female version of Chucky) having Squeaky plastic rubber sex then watching Daryl Hannah being pregnant , Dumb & stupid; & Jennifer Tilly Grinding up her Husbang in a Food Processor reminded me of my Mother trying to do House Work! OK it's just BAD!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f1641b9d96f41a798ebc514621daab6",
            "input": "This movie can be interpreted on many different levels. Don't listen to the other comments bashing the movie and saying that it is a played again story or w/e and that it is just about drugs. It has very overt superficial metaphors about drugs; however, the rest of the movie (and why I think it was personally made) is really not about that at all. It is really mocking psychology and the conditioning of society. It shows, for a split second, that the main character's brother is watching those sick videos online. Why? My interpretation is that it is to demonstrate that all of this gruesomeness that we are exposed to makes it easier for us to be mechanical in our professions instead of seeing people as people. As far as the scene about logic, it is also reaching out to the people who were in the federally mandated 1% smart classes who are confused and frustrated because life isn't as predictable and mathematical and logical as it seems on a macroscopic level. You have to apply Heisenberg's uncertainty principle (along with all the other laws and principles of uncertainty) not just to physics but to life and leave room to change your plans and adjust along the way. One of the best movies I have ever seen. It just might go way above your head; it isn't for you it is for those people who are are having trouble coping with life not working out like a math problem. When you are critically analyzing a movie or writing your critical review's try not reading the back cover first (written by marketers and parapsychologists)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b0f894fa4b040c094455405b3dd05d5",
            "input": "Six different couples. Six different love stories. Six different love angles. Eighty numbers of audience in the movie theater. Looking at the eighty different parts of the silver screen.I am sitting in somewhere between them looking at the center of the screen to find out what's going on in the movie. All stories have got no link with each other, but somewhere down the line Nikhil Advani trying to show some relation between them. I tried to find out a few lines I could write as review but at the end of 3 hours 15 minutes found nothing to write. The movie is a poor copy of Hollywood blockbuster LOVE ACTUALLY.My suggestion. Don't watch the movie if you really want to watch a nice movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c307fd9892ca4394abf5e21c8a7726ce",
            "input": "All I can say about the Necromaniac/Schizophreniac 2 series is... if you are even remotely \"PC\" or don't have a seriously messed up sense of humor, then you probably wont get it. As sick and disgusting as this movie is, it really is a comedy and not a \"horror\" movie at all. If you can appreciate somebody who pushes the bounds of good taste and political correctness to the most extreme limits imaginable, to the point where is becomes so out of hand that it's comical, then you must see this to believe it. This movie is so out of control that a major film studio couldn't touch this with a 10 foot pole (with a condom on the end). In my opinion though, the best, most extreme pieces of art come from way underground. If you don't stick to the same old formula that people are used to seeing, then they reject it.I have seen stacks of terrible, boring, z-grade, Indy movies that were just a waste of a perfectly good VHS tape or DVD-R. I have also seen stacks of stink bombs coming from the big named studios that were a complete waste of millions of dollars. When a NO BUDGET film like these two from Ron Atkins/John Giancaspro come out and blow all of the other \"shock\" films completely out of the water, you really have to take a second look at the whole Indy movie scene. After seeing this, you can really see how much freedom an Indy film maker can have when they work on their own.The funny thing is, even the other people who saw this movie and \"hated it\" admit to the fact that they laughed all the way through it. I don't think that is is possible for anybody to get bored watching either of these two. So if don't take everything that you seen in the mainstream media too seriously, and are able to laugh at a misanthropic, puppet wielding psychopath who has finally snapped, YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS. You may just be able to see it for the stand alone, cult classic that it is. Both Schizophreniac / Schizophreniac 2 are among the favorites in my collection of well over 1000 dvds.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5270657171c346e586d3f5ad0a8d392d",
            "input": "What the hell is this? \"Kooky drama\"? \"Lawyers in Loony Tunes Land\"? The world's thinnest, most duck-faced actress (even more duck-faced and anorexic than Michelle Pfeiffer) overacts her bony butt off, making cretinous grimaces that would shame Bugs Bunny, in one of the most animated non-animated TV series ever. This is also the most annoying one-hour-format TV show ever, hence the worst.All the men act like pansies, and I for one refuse to believe that even hip big-city shysters are all as delta-male-like as this sorry (short) bunch. Wuss Peter MacNicol manages to be even more irritating than Calista Flockofducks with his fake Hollywood \"shshshs\" speech impediment: it's the sort of pseudo-inability to pronounce the letter \"S\" by turning it into a moronic \"SH\" that the likes of Jon Shtewart and Christian Shlater also practice with zeal. Watching MacNicol talk, I always wonder how come his jaw doesn't dislocate... Human facial anatomy was never meant to support the pronouncing of the \"SH\" sound more than three times per second. He is a medical wonder.This badly conceived and written legal-drama/comedy hodgepodge also features some very 90s PC. It has POLITICAL CORRECTNESS written with huge, neon letters. Is there anything more unrealistic than a bunch of LAWYERS being full of ideals, high principles, and moral fiber? Laughable, but that's the way defense lawyers have been portrayed in Hollywood since its inception. After all, what is more noble than defending a murderer, a rapist, or a thief? When a TV series as retarded as \"Ally McBeak\" starts preaching to America about how it should run the country, then it must be time for Paris Hilton to become President. \"Ally McQuack\" is both a product of recent and large-scale Western dumbing-down and a perpetrator of it.Those supposed touches of \"eccentricity\", like the UNBELIEVABLY annoying musical numbers, are unconvincing and embarrassingly unfunny. This is no Monty Python. Whatever \"new\" the talent-free makers of this garbage were aiming for, they failed with honours. \"Ally McBeak\" is a highly commercialized TV venture aimed at indiscriminating yuppies, bored housewives, and bipolar lawyers. It's yet another dull \"objection overruled sustained your Honour may I call the witness\" legalistic baloney that the American audiences seem to eat up with relish for some strange reason...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6af66b382dee4f92955c1fee2c0561c6",
            "input": "I really like Richard Gere...I always have and it seems as of late that his status as a Hollywood star and money maker has slipped but it would appear to me that the reason is that he is taking very mature, intense roles and has been very successful at it just not financially because I have seen him in some truly great gems as of late including The Hoax, The Hunting Party (both must see films! See my reviews) and now this The Flock which apparently was meant to be a big release considering it's substantial 35 million + budget. It seems that some of the other IMDb reviews are very, very harsh because I thought the film dealt with a potentially very serious social issue in a very direct, violent and disturbing way and Gere just brings it all home. It's an action thriller drama that kept my glued to the Television with it's story. I think part of the problem that people seem to have with it is that it Hollywood-izes a very serious issue but I don't think it does it with disrespect but rather tries to take a different spin to make people aware that this exists. In fact it's much the same way that The Hunting Party dealt with war. Hong Kong director Wai-keung Lau did a decent job holding it together but I think the cast is what made it watchable.Richard Gere as you may have guessed from my previous comments is brilliant as a social worker of sorts Erroll Babbage who has kind of created his own style and laws when it comes to keeping track of his \"Flock\" who are registered violent sex offenders. He holds no punches in tracking these people, following them and making absolutely sure they don't re-offend and if they do he'll be the one to identify and stop them any way he can. Gere is so intense and looks drained from this job and he's become violent and angry at watching these monsters loose on the street. He is just fantastic. Claire Danes is also terrific as Babbage's new partner and his replacement who he has to train to do his job. Danes' character is far more typical social worker and is a little taken aback by Babbage's style and methods but slowly realizes what he is trying to accomplish and go up against. The two of them are brilliant together and have terrific chemistry with such vastly different characters. KaDee Strickland plays a disturbed registered offender who appears to be torn from the headlines as she plays a character very reminiscent of Karla Homolka (Paul Bernardo's wife who is now out) for those of you who follow Canadian serial killers. Her character goes a little over the top but she is convincing and horrifying all at once. Russell Sams has a small role as Strickland's new boyfriend and he would have been better probably given a bigger role. Ray Wise, who is a terrific character actor (check him out in Dead End as well as the amazing turn as Satan himself in the WB show Reaper) and he gets a small but good role as the head of the Public Safety department and Babbage's boss.The movie isn't perfect despite the terrific performances of it's lead cast. It takes liberties by really trying to make the film more entertainment than educational but it's just a different angle not unlike the Nicholas Cage dud 8MM. The Flock takes you into the underbelly of the sex trade, kidnapping, human trafficking and more and is just really something to watch. Perhaps it wasn't directed or written as well as it could have been but I am telling you that Danes and Gere together make this movie completely watchable and a really great thriller. It's disturbing but also something that isn't very complex and yet Gere's character in many ways is intensely complex with many layers and also opens social stigma and makes you contemplate about vigilantism in many ways when you see the people Gere deals with. I encourage you all to ignore poor reviews and see it for yourself because it's worth checking out!! 8.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-589e69f86fd74f9fa0370560f2c9967f",
            "input": "Apparently none of the previous reviewers,most of whom praise the film for its accuracy, have actually read a biography of Louis Pasteur.The most glaring inaccuracy is in the relationship between Pasteur and Napoleon III.Back in the 1930's the latter was invariably shown in a bad light.While far from an admirable character-he was an inept politician and a self-appointed \"military genius\" who allowed France to be dragged into a disastrous war,he was not the stupid reactionary depicted here. He had an intelligent interest in science,and like many other people in the 19th century saw a bright future because of the improvements it would bring.Far from exiling Pasteur, he was his PATRON,building him a laboratory and providing him with all the resources that he needed for his research.While the lab was under construction, Pasteur became gravely ill.A bureaucrat, deciding it was a waste of money to build a laboratory for someone who would soon be dead, ordered work halted on his own authority.When the emperor heard about this, his outrage shook the bureaucracy so that there was a flurry of buck-passing, and work promptly resumed.The Emperor personally visited Pasteur to comfort him and reassure him that he would get his lab.The emperor would often bring members of his court to admire Pasteur's projects,and it was obvious to everyone that Pasteur was one of the emperor's favorites.Pasteur's main worry concerning the Emperor was that Napoleon thought Pasteur was virtually a miracle worker who could do almost anything, and was constantly assigning him tasks outside of his previous experience.Pasteur, a very modest man, was always protesting this, but Napoleon would say that he had complete faith in him,and Pasteur despite his misgivings, always came through.They always had a close and friendly relationship,and after the Emperor was overthrown, Pasteur refused to say a bad word about him,grateful to the end of his life.The part about his daughter having the baby, and Pasteur sacrificing his principles to get a doctor, never happened.The part about the anthrax and rabies, for which he was famous, is generally correct, but the notion that the anthrax experiment raised him from obscurity to fame is false.He was famous and respected at the time this happened.This movie is OK from a dramatic standpoint,but very distorted as biography.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c123582499d473ab16853f242697b54",
            "input": "When watching this show you are not quite sure whether it is the story or the acting that is more annoying. First of all, the storyline of each episode is very predictable, the writers must have used every cliché possible, you can guess not only the general plot, but the arrangement of the scenes and also the lines of each character, making the show some sort of a collage of every police series out there. On the top of it all comes the \"message\" of the show, that the good are good and the bad are bad and that at the end of the day the good shall prevail and that we should all love each other, be better man and better citizens, all done in the most ostensible manner. The actors, as the vehicles of this message and nothing more than that, will use a limited set of acting skills: the \"I am a good carrying person\" smile, the concerned look and the \"victory is ours\" body posture, while the bad guys have the \"I'm a bad one\" frowning and the \"you caught me\" look, followed by the \"I'm good for nothing and I should be removed from society\" head banding (this kind of also sums up the general development of each show). True story or not, the show is garbage, yet another proof that producers don't give a s**t about viewers, that we are all thought to be idiots. Well this series makes every possible attempt to idiotize the living brains out of you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2acfb8b224b7437cadc21a10a67c362b",
            "input": "\"My child, my sister, dream How sweet all things would seem Were we in that kind land to live together, And there love slow and long, There love and die among Those scenes that image you, that sumptuous weather.\"Charles Baudelaire Based on the novel by Elizabeth Von Arnim, \"Enachanted April\" can be described in one sentence – it takes place in the early 1920s when four London women, four strangers decide to rent a castle in Italy for the month of April. It is the correct description but it will not prepare you for the fact that \"Enchanted April\" - an ultimate \"feel good\" movie is perfection of its genre. Lovely and sunny, tender and peaceful, kind and magical, it is like a ray of sun on your face during springtime when you want to close your eyes and smile and stop this moment of serene happiness and cherish it forever. This is the movie that actually affected my life. I watched it during the difficult times when I was lost, unhappy and very lonely, when I had to deal with the sad and tragic events and to come to terms with some unflattering truth about myself. It helped me to regain my optimism and hope that anything could be changed and anything is possible. I had promised to myself then that no matter what, I would pull myself out of misery and self-pity and I would appreciate every minute of life - with its joy and its sadness...I promised myself that I would go to Italy and later that year I did and I was not alone.Charming, enchanting, and heartwarming, \"Enchanted April\" is one of the best movies ever made and my eternal love. This little film is a diamond of highest quality.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c124af5426c41839913d5fc89de5a6d",
            "input": "I think I've seen all of the Grisham movies now and generally they're all very poor, except for The Rainmaker, but this one is so bad it's unbelievableWARNING SPOILERISHIt's one of those movies where the character does the stupid irrational things that no one would ever do. He's a lawyer for Christ's sake. Why when his children go missing does he not call the Police. Oh yes it's because all the Police hate lawyers so they're just ignore him and let him be attacked.When he's arrested for murder they just let him go free, he would be locked up in a cell pending a bail hearing. Why would you drag your kids halfway across the country when you could easily protect them at home.The Police don't bother to try and find an escaped mental patient, they don't bother to interview his daughter.As for the ridiculous ending….In summary, silly, very unrealistic and a complete waste of time.0/10 – One of the worst films ever made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61261c6568ff43acbf15ac44546f24cd",
            "input": "Honestly, I find this film almost too depressing for my own good. It is VERY depressing until pretty much the very end. There is no way I can justify passing judgement to any character who did things I didn't like (well, except for the disgusting character played by Fredrick Forrest). But it's still so frustrating to see people behaving this way, putting up walls around themselves when just a word or so could break the ice and promote healing.A horrible tragedy strikes a Montana family. They believe they've lost one son, but it turns out they've lost 2. The key is, if they just communicate and face their grief together, they won't end up losing their second son permanently.But they just can't. Something is blocking this family from sharing their sorrows. Some family retreat into silence and resentment while certain others point fingers of blame (and then go ahead and cheat on their poor pregnant wife by seducing the pretty girlfriend of the deceased...that Andy character truly is a snake!) The only member of the family that isn't threatening Arnold in some way is his Grandpa (Wilford Brimley). Grandpa seems to be able to speak to the boy without judgements or even kid gloves. He seems to know what the child is thinking about even though Arnold isn't saying much these days. It is truly a blessing for the poor kid to have that one someone he can turn to. No one else seems to grasp the fact that Arnold might be in shock, in denial, or that his way of grieving may not be the same style, or at the same speed, as they would expect. It's so easy to judge and to be angry and to feel someone is \"made of stone\" just because they don't grieve in a way we believe they ought.The story is very quiet and naturalistic. You're not going to get some spoon-fed narration or some Hollywood feel-good resolution. I was very concerned by the fact that this child was so burdened with guilt that he felt it necessary to hitchhike several hundred miles to apologize to that piggy Andy's wife, for something he should not blame himself for. Arnold may have accidentally killed his brother, but nobody is responsible for the end of that marriage, which apparently was a lousy one anyway, except for the two people in the marriage. It's only dumb luck Arnold didn't get into the car with a pedophile or a murderer.Robert Duvall and Glenn Close are frustratingly effective as the parents who somehow cannot find it in themselves to communicate with their son, to find out what Arnold is going through. Jason Presson, whom I've not seen anywhere else except for a childhood favorite called EXPLORERS and a creepy ghost story called THE LADY IN WHITE, did an incredible job as Arnold, a great performance from a child actor.Aside from being somewhat slow at times, THE STONE BOY is an excellent, and very depressing movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ddcbe81236744c394a77e33fd5acd3c",
            "input": "This film is great. As often heard, it is indeed very realistic and sometimes brutal, but unlike some other people I am clearly not of the opinion that it is depressing, negativistic or dismantling Austria as a proto-fascist society. Quite the contrary: While there are indeed some very heavy scenes in HUNDSTAGE and some characters are to be called very bad persons, at the same time you watch love, beauty and humor in Ulrich Seidls film. And that's exactly what distinguishes HUNDSTAGE for me from other films that try to show the lives of the 'ordinary people' in an intense, realistic way; their hustle, their wishes, their dark sides: Seidl clearly never tries to prove, that the lives of the working-class people are trash! In my opinion, viewers who come to this conclusion seem to be very afraid of admitting, that nearly nobody's live is as 'clean' and 'normal' as we would like other people to believe. And that every live has its dark and often depressing sides. The most beautiful scene: The old Viennese man, watching his old girl dancing 'the oriental way', as he is calling it. I think everybody who finds this scene ugly lacks a sense of beauty and should ask themselves what it is, that's proto-fascist: The characters in HUNDSTAGE or viewers, who are turned off by the body of a 70+ year old woman, dancing with all her charms for her lover.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a836f14e5633440ab369bce11e4503fb",
            "input": "Susan Seidelman seems to have had a decent career with a few top notch credits under her belt. I'm certainly glad she bounced back from this film which seems to have its admirers. I'm not one of them.I've seen better acting in high school plays than I did in Smithereens. The plot such as it is involved young Susan Berman who is ambitious to make it in the world of music and is willing to do just about anything to get there. She even rejects the sincere advances of a young artist who is living out of his van off the East River played by Brad Rijn.Young Mr. Rijn contributes the worst performance in the film, in fact one of the worst acting jobs I've seen in a long time. No wonder he's not gone anywhere.I will say that Seidelman's eye for the camera is a good one in capturing the familiar East Village locations where the film was mostly shot. But her work with her live performers didn't measure up. I'm not sure she had that much raw material to work with.Look fast and you'll see a very young Christopher Noth before Law and Order and Sex in the City as a street hustler.If you like punk rock, you might sit through this for the soundtrack. I'll stick to Bing Crosby.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87ceec30cbb8454b95ea17750a09cd2c",
            "input": "Even in a bad film, there is usually some redeeming feature, something that you can say yes it was terrible, but there was that performance, or that part of the script, or that special effect, this was just simply terrible all over. The acting was laughable, the script terrible, complete with many inexplicable Breakfast at Tiffany's references, and even the special effects were shoddy at best. This was a very bad film and one that even Drew Barrymore wishes was expunged from history. Watch it if you want to: a) Suffer harsh self inflicted pain. b) See just how bad a film can be. This is one film where I can use the cliché \"there's ninety minutes of my life I will never get back\" with some justification!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e54da841909d4b9fb256fa083a7c7b0e",
            "input": "2003 was seen as the year of the Matrix, with the release of two sequels and a computer game that actually linked to the plot of the film. Also released was a DVD of 9 short animated films, most written and made in Japan and made as Anime. Japan makes some of the best animation in the world. Sadly most of these shorts are disappointing. The best of them is the first part of a prequel to the first Matrix film.The Second Renaissance is made as a historical file. It tells how humans made machines in their own likeness. Humans live the high life whilst machines are the grunts, the workers of society, second class citizens. In the year 2090, a machine, BI-66ER was put of trial for murder, after killing his owners who wanted to deactivate him. The machine does not have a fair trial and riots start around the world. The governments of the world order to dismantle machines. Many machines leave human society and form their own country in the Middle East, O1. 01 has a productive economy and easily undercut the human nations, forcing them into economic crisis. The human blockade 01 and reject the machines requests for peace, thereby it was the humans who were responsible for the war that enslaves them.The Second Renaissance is a interesting watch, with excellent, traditional animation style and sets a compelling world. It shows how the machines were mistreated and that humanity sowed the seeds of their own destruction. There is a political and social world and the short tells a lot in it short running time. The short shares themes and a style to the classic silent film Metropolis, partly the beginning with the underworld. They are the themes of slavery, the mistreatment of the working class and racism. The short also has some religious themes and religious iconography. Mainly that men saw themselves as God and created the machines in their own likeness. Seeing themselves as the rightful masters of the machines. The machines too use religious iconography, mainly forming their nation in 'cradle of human civilisation' and the machines coming to the United Nations dressed as Adam and Eve, offering an apple.The animation style is beautiful, done in the traditional anime style (like Akira). The set designs are great, combine futuristic with historic cities, e.g. Washington D.C.. There is well down future scene, and surprising violence, which is key to the film. The director, Mahiro Maeda, also directed the anime sequence in Kill Bill Vol. 1, so has good credentials to Hollywood. He is willing to use violence and know how to keep a story going.The only real complain is a continuity error to the first Matrix film because Morpheus mentions that the humans have no historical records or know who started the war. But its a good watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-885bdf00fe454737999c2e0f35c8b8d6",
            "input": "This was a really funny movie.Every 1 in the movie was trying to be serious that is what made this movie so funny. I mean come on a shark's head on a human body. Can it get any funnier. Good job Sci-Fi keep the comedy movies coming. I never thought movies could get anymore retarded. If they keep it up they will have to rename the sci fie channel the comedy sci fi channel or something like that.I cant wait 4 the next blockbuster movie from sci fi.Ill be ready with a bowl of popcorn and a case of beer or a bottle of liquor and Ill be ready to laugh it up again!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb3dfb493fea4c5eb407ced3df2381c3",
            "input": "I am a big Beatles fan. My favorite Beatle is Paul and my least favorite is John. I already knew quite a bit about the Beatles music and the truth behind the breakup, as well as things like John Lennon's family and Paul's band Wings. I was curious to see how this movie would handle the relationship between John and Paul so many years after the breakup.I was not disappointed by this movie. Although the story itself is fiction, many of the references that the two musicians used were very accurate. These included how Yoko Ono would always be with John wherever he went, the Wings song \"Silly Love Songs\" being the number one hit that year and the concert on the roof of Apple Studios playing music from the album \"Let It Be.\"The actors did a very good job in playing John and Paul. The accents could had used maybe a bit more work, but they seemed to act a lot like I've read the two former-Beatles used to act like. I also liked the dialogue between them, which was basically what the entire movie was.The ending at first disappointed me, but the more you think about it the more you will appreciate it, especially since this was how it really went in real life. They also show the fantastic skit from \"Saturday Night Live\" in which the Beatles are offered $3,000 to perform on the show. (as compared to the $220 million others were offering them) Overall, I was not disappointed with this movie. It does really give you more of a feel for why the Beatles broke up and why they never got back together.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a04155c3d124d6ea1e862d54c12a143",
            "input": "A chemical spill is turning people into zombies. It's up to two doctor's to survive the epidemic. It's an Andreas Schnaas film so you know what the par for the course will be. Bad acting, horribly awful special effects, and no budget to speak of. The dubbing is ridiculous with a capital R and the saddest thing is that I feel compelled to write one word about this piece of excrement, much less the ten lines mandatory because of the guidelines placed on me by IMDb. My original review of merely one word: Crap wouldn't fly so I have to revise it and go more in to how bad it is. But I don't know if I can, so.. wait I think I may have enough words, or lines rather to make this review pass. Which is cool, I guess. So in summation: This movie sucks balls, don't watch it.My Grade: F",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f680543c27841d683189d4af07fb180",
            "input": "Cuban Blood is one of those sleeper films that has a lot to say about life in a very traditional way. I actually watched it while sailing around Cuba on a western Caribbean cruise. It details the life of an 11 year old boy in a small town in Cuba in 1958 and 1959 during the revolution. Not much time is spent on the revolution until the very end, when the Socialist regime came and took the property of the boy's father. The majority of the film is the boy's coming of age and the relationships that arise in a small town where everyone knows everyone else. There are some powerful scenes that everyone can relate to. A class A film with fine acting and directing. This is a film that tells a story with no special effects or grand schemes or real twists. It is a film about people and their lives, their mistakes, and their triumphs. A good film worth watching several times annually.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12a82ea8abcf4b00b5de90930377edc5",
            "input": "9/10- 30 minutes of pure holiday terror. Okay, so it's not that scary. But it sure is fun.The Crypt Keeper (John Kassir) tales a tale of holiday FEAR, giving us all Christmas Goose... GosseBUMPS That is. Bwahahahahha. You should really be careful what you AXE Santa for. Have a Scary Christmas and a Happy New Fear. Okay I'll stop.Okay, so in the story, a greedy wife (Best screamer in the world, Mary Ellen Trainor) kills her husband (Marshall Bell, the coach who gets towel whipped to death in ANOES 2) for the money. BUT, her plan is ruined when a crazy killer dressed in a Santa suit (Larry \"Dr. Giggles\" Drake) comes her way.If you look it up on YouTube, you can watch it for free, but most of you have already seen this (my third viewing). But if you haven't seen it, I suggest you do.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f030274eeb86462c82c219f2209ffb97",
            "input": "This is only a response to the yahoo who says this movie is more realistic than the classic, genre defining MASTERPIECE, Jaws. Yes, brainiac, great whites(and other species of shark, bull, black-tip, oceanic white-tip, tiger)have been known to populate areas where easy prey is found. Humans don't often make it onto that menu, granted, but the shark in the film was repeatedly pointed out to be exhibiting abnormal behavior. It's not like it's never happened. The odds of a killer whale destroying nearly a whole town, singling out a human nemesis, sinking several dozen thick hulled North Atlantic fishing boats and knowing when certain people, all friends of the aforementioned \"nemesis\", are close enough to the water for it to reach, are so slim as to be laughable. Much like this turd of a Jaws knock-off. Laughable. Great white sharks are also known to frequently chew on boats, protective underwater cages and people on rafts and surfboards, as they look like seals from below. A shark the size of Bruce(if you don't know, look it up)would be more than capable of sinking a boat like The Orca(hey! that's the name of the blatant rip-off we're discussing!), as it would weigh upwards of 6,000 lbs. I could go on, but I don't need to. Jaws is amazing(better acting, better effects, better music, better writing), Orca is crap(BLATANT rip-off of Jaws, lousy writing, abominable effects, most ridiculous plot this side of an Olson Twins flick). It doesn't take a masters from Columbia University to see that. Watch better movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01f1eeba7c9445d5be77f764ff175408",
            "input": "This is a story of the Winchester Rifle Model 1873 \"The Gun That Won The West\" To cowman, outlaw, peace officer or soldier, the Winchester 73 was a treasured possession. An Indian would sell his soul to own one...Winchester 73 is the first collaboration between director Anthony Mann and actor James Stewart, a duo that would go on to create a run of superior Westerns that added a new, psychological depth to the genre. The story sees Stewart as Lin McAdam pursuing the man who killed his father. Riding into Dodge City with his trusty friend, Johnny Williams {Millard Mitchell}, Lin runs into Dutch Henry Brown {Stephen McNally}, the man he wants. But with Wyatt Earp {Will Geer} having taken all the guns from those entering the town, both men are unable to have the shoot-out that they are ready for. The men instead square up in a competition to win a Winchester 73 rifle, a competition that Lin eventually wins. But before he can leave town with the magnificent prize, Dutch ambushes him, steals the rifle and skips town fast. As Lin sets off in hate filled pursuit of both man and rifle, the rifle will changed hands a number of times, with each time adding another dimension as the day of reckoning for all approaches.Very much a benchmark for what became known as the so-called \"psychological Western\", Winchester 73 is basically a story of a decent man driven to borderline insanity by an event in his past. Tho shot in black and white {the only one of the duos Westerns that was} the landscapes are still breathtaking feasts for the eyes. The tone is set with the opening scene as Lin and Johnny on horseback, and in silhouette, amble over a hillside as they make their way to Dodge City. It's just the starting point that would see Mann use his vistas as a way of running concurrent with his characters emotional states.Stewart gives one of his finest and most intense performances as McAdam, proving once and for all that he was one of Americas finest and most versatile actors. The support cast isn't too bad either. Shelley Winters is excellent as the sole female in amongst the machismo, while Mitchell, McNally, Geer and the always great Dan Duryea add further class to proceedings. There's even bit parts for Tony Curtis and Rock Hudson in here, tho the latter playing an Indian brave is a stretch too far.Originally the film was a project for Fritz Lang, who even had the script ready to run. But Lang walked away from it, something that proved to be a blessing for Western fans. For as great as a director that Lang was, with Mann directing {and with a new script from Borden Chase & Robert Richards in hands} it set the wheels in motion to alter the course of the genre. Not only with the further efforts that Mann & Stewart produced, but also in who they influenced. The likes of Budd Boetticher, Nicholas Ray and Sam Fuller were all taking notes, and gleefully for the Western purists, they followed suit and carried the psychological torch still further.A big hit at the box office back on release, Winchester 73 is a magnificent film that still packs a punch in the modern age. 9.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5084be21949c4ba19223d35eccfd20c4",
            "input": "Kimi wa petto is a cute story about a girl who one day finds a boy inside a box that is outside her apartment one day. She decides to bring him in and fix his cuts. She then leaves a note for him to eats some food she made then go home because she had to go to work. When she gets home however she finds that he is still there. He tells her that he wants to live there with her like a brother or cousin. In desperation to get him to leave she tells him that if he became her pet then he could stay. And as a pet she says that he would have no rights and do whatever she told him. (not in that perverted way!) To her surprise he agrees and from then on he is known as Momo, her pet.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7918479da544ea69874da4396479cc9",
            "input": "This is a haunting, powerful Italian adaptation of James M. Cain's novel The Postman Always Rings Twice directed by the great Luchino Visconti. What is so interesting about the film is that in every way it transcends it's source material to become something bolder and more original (interestingly Camus also credits Cain's novel as the key inspiration for his landmark novel The Stranger). The film has a greater power and intensity than the novel because Visconti is able to create the filmic equivalent of Cain's narrative structure but offer a more complex exploration of gender. Cain's very American novel is also uncritically fascinated with the construction of whiteness (the lead character Cora is obsessively afraid she will be identified as a Mexican and embarrassed that she married a Greek immigrant), which is not relevant to the Italian rural context that Visconti is working in. This allows the class antagonisms to take center stage and dance among the embers of the passionate, doomed love affair of the two main characters. This film is a complex, suspenseful, rewarding experience.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe85c2e647da46e4b5184cc71d4e9899",
            "input": "Those who love Elivra as I did in her late night movie hostess duties will love this movie - she is just plain cool - her car is great, and she is a bit of a Transylvanian Dolly Parton - she is so innocent and naive at times - and sexy all of the time - plus, more than a touch of Mae West -The sets are well done as well, and the comic cast is great, with Edie McClurg at her usual best - plus Sally Kellerman as Patty is hilarious. Any time I have to crunch something for a topping, I will think of how Elvira crunches the potato chips -This movie is one to be watched again and again - just for the fun of it. Now I have to get the sequel to it, Elvira's Haunted Hills, and see if it lives up to this one ----",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9eda6a600894ed199723eb36071b6ab",
            "input": "Waldemar Daninsky (Paul Naschy) travels to Tibet and is bitten by a yeti, which causes him to become a werewolf. He is accidentally killed after he attacks his cheating wife and her lover, and is later revived by a female scientist, Dr. Ilona Ermann, who uses him in mind control experiments. Daninsky later discovers an underground asylum populated by the bizarre subjects of the doctor's failed experiments.Upon hearing of Naschy's death from colleague Jon Kitley, I rummaged through my collection for a suitable film to watch. In my scramble, I found I own not one but three(!) copies of \"Fury of the Wolfman\". The film is of questionable video quality, the sound is dubbed in a mediocre fashion, the cinematography is sort of slapstick style at times. And the American versions have two love scenes removed. Quite frankly, without a remastered, uncut copy, I wasn't really getting the proper movie in all its glory.This film claims to be the fourth in a long series about the werewolf Count Waldemar Daninsky. I suspect this is true, but you wouldn't know this from the film itself. The plot is confusing at times, and there's really no indication that this is a sequel. If you read the plot summaries on Wikipedia and compare them to what is printed on the box, you'll see that I'm not alone in my confusion.Perhaps the film's shortcomings can be forgiven if we understand the production hell it went through. While floating around for years, it was only released in 1973, due to problems involved in finding a distributor. And Naschy said in his autobiography that the director, Zabalza, was an incompetent alcoholic, and that he hated working with him. Those really aren't light accusations, and I have no idea what Zabalza had to say on his own behalf.Chances are, sooner or later you'll come across a low-grade version of \"Fury of the Wolfman\". It appears in a variety of three-packs and box sets, so you might accidentally acquire it and not even know. What really needs to happen is an American uncut version, with a decent sound and video mix, and the love scenes thrown back in. As far as I know, this does not exist. Let us honor Paul Naschy's legacy and get his films to a wider audience in a level of quality he deserves.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-574769e53dc14ce69d0bb501ceffef86",
            "input": "This is one seriously disturbed movie. Even Though the boys deserved some of what they got.....the sadistic gruesome executions were \"slightly\" over the top. The only character showing some conscience early in the hunt was killed off before he could offer some help to the sad plot.At the beginning of the movie, there looked to be some promise of a mediocre affair, but this was just a ploy to lull the viewers into a false sense of security, before the joy of what was to come. The only thing that could have saved the movie for me was if Jack Nicholson had jumped out of the bushes and yelled, \"and, where is the batman?\". Kim Basinger could have screamed. Now that would have been cool!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bedbcaa935f44d7ebd09f6687f5cdc22",
            "input": "The late 80's saw an inexplicable rash of supernatural horror films set in gloomy penitentiary settings. Renny Harlin's superbly gritty and moody \"Prison\" got the whole haunted hoosegow ball rolling; it was immediately followed by the markedly inferior \"The Chair,\" John Saxon's enjoyably trashy \"Death House,\" the passable psycho picture \"Destroyer,\" and this hideously limp'n'lethargic exercise in hopelessly comatose tedium. Your usual annoying collection of horribly unsympathetic college student chowderheads lead by insufferably spineless tormented twerp Alex (the hugely unappealing Nicholas Celozzi) go to Alcatraz Island to investigate the bizarre circumstances surrounding the sudden gruesome death of up-and-coming rock star Sammy Mitchell (blandly played by Toni Basil of \"Hey Micky\" fame). Alex's brother becomes possessed by the evil demonic spirit of a vicious cannibalistic US Civil War cavalry commandant and goes on the expected killing spree, thus forcing wimpy Alex to overcome his passivity and make a stand against this ghoulish specter.Although slickly photographed by Nicholas Von Sternberg, with a few decent gore set pieces and a fair amount of spooky atmosphere (the film was shot on location in the dismal, rusty, rundown ruins of Alcatraz Island), \"Slaughterhouse rock\" nonetheless just doesn't cut it as a solid, effective fright feature. This is largely due to the uniformly obnoxious and unlikeable collegiate smartaleck characters, a tiresomely smirky bunch whose inane comic antics prove to be grating rather than amusing. The flat acting from a noticeably disinterested cast hurts matters all the more, with onetime \"Playboy\" playmate and undeniable blonde cutie pie hottie supreme Hope Marie Carlton doing an especially irritating Linnea Quigley impersonation as the token oversexed nympho bimbo. Dimitri Logothetis' direction displays a modicum of flashy visual style, but the tone is unevenly pitched between grim seriousness and goofy, horrendously sophomoric silliness, and, most damagingly, Ted Landon's sloppy, inconsistent, overly complicated and finally quite confusing script miserably fails to develop the necessary internal logic to make the far-fetched story even remotely plausible. In other words, this stinker sadly succeeds in making a scant 90 minutes seem like an excruciatingly drawn-out cinematic jail sentence.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccd547548081446da44408f897eaad30",
            "input": "I've watched this movie twice now on DVD, and both times it didn't fail to impress me with its unique impartial attitude. It seems more like a depiction of reality than most other Hollywood fare, especially on a topic that is still hotly discussed. Even though it sticks closely with the southern viewpoint, it doesn't fail to question it, and in the end the only sentence passed is that the war is lost, not matter what, and cruelty is a common denominator.What really makes this movie outstanding is the refusal to over-dramatize. Nowadays truly good movies (in a nutshell) are few and far apart, with mainstream fare being enjoyable (if you don't have high expectations), but terribly commercially spirited. I think this movie comes off as a truly good movie (without being a masterpiece), because it sticks to itself, and gives the viewer a chance to watch and analyze it, instead of wanting to bombard him with effect and emotion to blot out his intelligence. This movie is cool, observant, and generally light-handed in its judgement, which is GOOD.The story has its flaws, especially Jewel's Character comes off doubtfully, but then again the situation at the time was so chaotic, that for a young widow it might have been only logical to somehow get back into a normal life, even by liberally taking each next guy. Still she doesn't come off as weak, in fact I think she's one of the stronger characters, she's always in control of the relationships, with the men just tagging. And I take it very gratefully that she's not a weeping widow. I believe in the 19th century death of a loved one was something a lot more normal than now. You could die so easily of even minor illnesses and injuries, so the prospect of of someone dying, while surely causing grief, didn't traumatise people like it does now. People didn't seem to build shrines about their lost ones like they do now, and I like that attitude.My recommendation is for intelligent people to watch this movie, if they are in the mood for something different than the usual hollywood fare. Don't watch if if you want non-stop action or heart-renting emotion.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c17cc328fe584b318ca0ef7d76478168",
            "input": "This is the biggest insult to TMNT ever. Fortunantely, officially Venus does not exist in canon TMNT. There will never be a female turtle, this took away from the tragic tale of 4 male unique mutants who will never have a family of their own, once gone no more. The biggest mistake was crossing over Power Rangers to TMNT with a horrible episode; the turtle's voices were WRONG and they all acted out of character. They could have done such a better job, better designs and animatronics and NO VENUS. don't bother with this people...it's cringe worthy material. the lip flap was slow and unnatural looking. they totally disrespected shredder. the main baddie, some dragonlord dude was corny. the turtles looked corny with things hanging off their bodies, what's with the thing around raph's thigh? the silly looking sculpted plastrons!? If they looked normal, acted in character and got rid of Venus, got rid of the stupid kiddie cartoon sounds...and better writing it could have been good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e1046a52b6884fb9a92d61eb61bc14d6",
            "input": "Having not seen the films before (and not being able to stand Matt Damon), I was reluctant to go see The Bourne Ultimatum when we were asked to see it for AS Film Studies. However, I was pleasantly surprised that even a film with Damon in it could be enjoyable. Fast fight scenes, crazy motorbike chases and BIG explosions were what threw you out of your seat in TBU. The near-misses between the CIA and Bourne kept you on your toes and throughly entertained.Nevertheless, several things really grated my cheese.Firstly, the fact that the film was just a series of Bourne, CIA, Bourne, CIA, Bourne, CIA. This sequence got repetitive and ultimately dull. Although Damon did keep us entertained and seemed always one step ahead of the CIA, I was getting a bit annoyed with the constant survival of Bourne. He crashed a car and got out as if he had tapped it or something! Very unrealistic.And secondly (inevitably) - the SHAKY CAMERA. It was so shaky it was completely noticeable and made me and everyone who went to see it in my class (even the tutors) seasick. We were told by the tutors that if we ever used that in a film we made in class, it would automatically be wrong and we would be told to use a tripod. Fair enough if Greengrass wanted it to look like we were there watching Damon and Stiles holding a conversation, but surely we wouldn't be shaking our heads that violently!But all in all TBU is an enjoyable film and worth a watch. But I didn't think it was the best film of the year, despite being an entertaining piece of cinema.8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ce2294ffdc54c9fb71e306b0795032b",
            "input": "Before the Internet this movie could never have been made but the idea that the Web is full of evil is the idea behind it.Unfortunately thats all it was-the generally opinion that nowadays the Web in the wring hands can create as much chaos as anything in real life. Since the late 90s somebody found out that you could create a virus which would disable a computer.The point? Just to do something plain evil by remote control so its the cyber equivalent of robbery with violence.Which is basically what spam is without the violence-its conning you into parting with your money and has been going so long its a wonder anybody takes any notice of it nowadays so they get cleverer and use real names as doing something illegal isn't a priority, We see the Internet get worse by the week-the social networking sites or chat room which lead to evil and the child porn sites which ARE illegal. So the idea of a movie which invites people to click a name is just the same old thing-there actually IS a site called Horrorvision which is a porn site-but this one KILLS the people who enter its portals. The story though is so disjointed its boring with it and comes to no conclusion. The definitive movie on this theme of destroying an Internet Service Provider has yet to be made but clearly many DO need destroying as they won't be shut down when there's money to be made. Calling this a horror film is rather misleading as it bores not frightens",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0f5075a940443e48f12efffd24a1247",
            "input": "Another attempt by modern Japanese directors to redefine the chambara genre. Successful, and not, in varying degrees.Buddhist monk has a vision that he is to slay a legendary (and very active) demon at the Gojoe bridge in order to attain enlightenment. While not at the forefront, Buddhist thought is at the heart of this movie, much like Kurosawa's \"Ran\". It probably what made the movie the most interesting to me although it's nowheres near \"Ran's\" league. Stylish visual direction and excellent photography keep the movie mostly interesting throughout the two hour and eighteen minute length. The lead actors are uniformly excellent. The music is really good. The two weaknesses are the story and the fight scenes. The movie drags in the middle which could have been fixed by some prudent editing. And the fight scenes are mostly filmed in blurry close-ups. This works for most of the film but the finale feels like a cheat. Another recent film like this is Tsui Hark's \"Seven Swords\", great film but the promised fight scenes are disappointing. Asano really doesn't move like a sword wielding demon, his acting is great but he would be an extra in a traditional chambara fight scene.Good movie, you'll probably find it interesting just don't expect traditional sword fights.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b85e127e275541d0bae53949c4c49b07",
            "input": "If you have seen Dogtown and Z-Boys or have any interest in seeing the real, non-caricature, \"Real American\" side of America then Riding Giants will hit deeper than anything you've seen before.This film is \"unreal\", a facile term if ever there was one, but hugely appropriate if you can derive any form of literal meaning out of it - it is a 100% factual documentary, but with all the drama of an opera, and the completely apparent sense of love, expert and knowing instilled by Stacy Peralta's direction and narration, this film expertly leads you from swell to big wave while keeping you completely enthralled in everything you are being given the privilege of seeing.This film is a symphony, crafted as well as Beethovens 9th, beginning beautifully with its prelude in Hawaii, tugging deeply on human emotion in Santa Cruz and finishing with uproar, triumph and crescendo in Laird Hamiltons feats, again in Hawaii.Like classical music; like Beethoven's 9th, Ride of the Valkyries or Barbers Adagio for Strings, this may be the only piece you like, but it's worth it. Trust me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0029479a75c404e8c5a04b048cccdfc",
            "input": "Philo Vance had many affinities with Bulldog Drummond… He was a gentleman with the kind of polish and elegance only usually associated with the British upper classes and he was also independently wealthy…But there were vital differences… Drummond was an adventurer, charming, gallant, lively… Vance could be pompous, slight1y dull and self-righteous… There was a hint of fundamental cruelty in his manner…\"The Kennel Murder Case\" is the most impressive of the 14 Vance films made between 1929 and 1947… The story of a murdered collector of Chinoiserie, it has all the ingredients of the classic private eye mystery – exotic setting in the blue nose Long Island Kennel Club, three killings for Vance to solve including a baffling \"locked room murder,\" the key to the whole affair, and plenty of suspects… Usually, a detective story setting have proved too static and talkative to make convincing movies even though they work well enough on the printed page, but here Michael Curtiz's direction and the fine editing give the film a pace and urgency that make it altogether different from similar films of its type… William Powell's elegance and suavity made him the perfect Vance and although a year later he switched studios, he stayed in the same genre with the enormously successful and popular \"The Thin Man\" at MGM…",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a537098e20747e8b6efb41aa9bf6395",
            "input": "Early, heavy, war-time propaganda short urging people to be careful with their spending practices, in effort to prevent any runaway inflation.Using scare, guilt and patriotic jingoistic rhetoric, which was normal for the time, the government was concern that the sudden war-time production and therefore wage increase and subsequent spending practices if not checked could cause serious problems during and after the war.It truly is a window into the past, historically and culturally.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6fe3850c21674b6b8fe2ea1e8ffa5267",
            "input": "If I watch a movie and don't once look at my watch or clock to see how much longer it will be running or when I hope that the last scene wasn't the end of the movie, it's got to be pretty good. I'm not an movie internalist or cinema dissectionist. I watch movies and if they keep me interested till the end, then they are pretty good because some of the most critically acclaimed films bore me to death (The English Patient, Shakespeare in Love, Atonement, Crash. This movie kept me interested and absorbed beginning to end. Acting is great, story is absolutely original, flash-back technique very affective. There was a bit of Citizen Kane thrown in tho when Hoffman trashes his apartment after Tomei leaves him, but I forgive that cause I see it as a homage to, rather than a rip-off of, Orson.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3bc21c8640d4713920a6367ca908ba2",
            "input": "Having grown up in Texas, and less than 15 miles from what used to be Gilley's, I can tell you that this movie is nauseating. The majority of Texans do not live like this movie indicates. The plot is weak, and the fake accents are amusing, and it reinforces the stereotypical image that all Texans are beer drinking, honky-tonkin', rednecks. The horribly fake Texas accents is what kills it for me. True, there is a certain Texas twang to most Texans' accents, but these people overdo it. You can't get someone from New Jersey and Ohio to do Texas accents. It just doesn't work. John Travolta should have stuck to disco-dancing or the 50s. Debra Winger was more convincing as Wonder Girl than she is as a Texan.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8be7df4aae9d4021adbe159f5ae34ca9",
            "input": "Nicolas Roeg ? He directed the classic supernatural thriller DON`T LOOK NOW didn`t he ? Strangely the aforementioned movie was broadcast on BBC television at the weekend which did tonight`s screening of COLD HEAVEN no favours what so ever . You see it`s impossible not to compare COLD HEAVEN with DON`T LOOK NOW since they both have the same director and the same structure and for the first third of COLD HEAVEN I thought they also had the same plot except a dead husband had been substituted instead of a dead child , in fact my mind was set on this movie revolving around a grief stricken widow seeing her late husband running around Venice wearing a red anorak . This doesn`t occur but about one third of the way through the running time there`s a massive plot twist and despite being an essential plot twist it`s not explained in any great depth . In fact very little is explained in COLD HEAVEN which ruins the movie People have mentioned the rather poor production values of COLD HEAVEN and it`s impossible not to notice them . If I didn`t no different I would have thought this was a TVM since it`s got a made for television feel to it right down to white capital letters in the title sequence . Roeg also tries to inject art house pretentions via spoken thought processes but again this doesn`t help the movie at all . One can`t help feeling Roeg should have put all his effort into the plot twists which are totally flat on screen Cheap production values , disinterested directing and a really bizarre premise and screenplay make for a bad movie",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f4985f15cf54cde83486fcce759ae79",
            "input": "Okay, I absolutely LOVE Ben Stiller, although I am lukewarm about Jennifer Aniston. I do not think this girl can act in the least. Every movie or sitcom I've seen her in is very hard to get past her fake acting. It sounds like she is just standing there reading right off the script. This movie only had one good thing about it, and that's that Ben Stiller was in it. This plot is so used and abused it's ridiculous. How many movies have this same type of plot?? Can we say \"Forces of Nature??\" Not only is the plot so old, but the outcome is so predictable, it's boring. I knew everything that was going to happen before it did. It was a bore, but watching Stiller is always a delight!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4bc2fd24c69b4a6d902d9274c36b3688",
            "input": "I won't add to the plot reviews, it's not very good.Very improbable orphanage on Bala.Cushing and Lee at their height.Some nice scenery.Good for face spotting, and I quote, \"look at the mouth, that is Cassie from Fools and Horses\".Otherwise, a poor example of the British film industry.Fulton MacKay was far better in Fraggle Rock, Keith Barron was better in anything else and Diana Dors did what she did best.Redeeming feature? It was free to watch on the Horror channel prior to its going over to subscription. I won't be subscribing on this effort.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d1e07326e5c409eabdccf9bea45419e",
            "input": "I have never seen such terrible performances in all my life.Everyone in the entire film was absolute rubbish.Not one decent actor/actress in the whole film, it was a joke.Reminded me of drama at school...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3347a4c2c5214c8e990ef5ec1c6736af",
            "input": "This was a must see documentary for me when I missed the opportunity in 2004, so I was definitely going to watch the repeat. I really sympathised with the main character of the film, because, this is true, I have a milder condition of the skin problem he had, Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa (EB). This is a sad, sometimes amusing and very emotional documentary about a boy with a terrible skin disorder. Jonny Kennedy speaks like a kid (because of wasting vocal muscle) and never went through puberty, but he is 36 years old. Most sympathising moments are seeing his terrible condition, and pealing off his bandages. Jonny had quite a naughty sense of humour, he even narrated from beyond the grave when showing his body in a coffin. He tells his story with the help of his mother, Edna Kennedy, his older brother and celebrity model, and Jonny's supporter, Nell McAndrew. It won the BAFTAs for Best Editing and Best New Director (Factual), and it was nominated for Best Sound (Factual) and the Flaherty Documentary Award. It was number 10 on The 100 Greatest TV Treats 2004. A must see documentary!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2772d29fd948447683e4eddc08318661",
            "input": "After watching about half of this I was ready to give up and turn it off, but I endured to the end. This is a movie that tries to be a romantic comedy and fails. The acting is poor---much worse than the acting in 80s T&A movies.There are several attempts at humour that fail miserably and the movie is 100% predictable. Perhaps if you are a teenager this movie will hold some appeal, but for those that have seen many movies, you will know how the film turns out after the first 10 minutes. The rest of your time will be spent in agony waiting for the ending credits to roll.Don't waste your time watching this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d72e3e696bf448b1b03c81a803bdfd0f",
            "input": "Oh a vaguely once famous actress in a film where she plays a mother to a child . It`s being shown on BBC 1 at half past midnight , I wonder if ... yup it`s a TVM You`ve got to hand it to TVM producers , not content on making one mediocre movie , they usually give us two mediocre movies where two themes are mixed together and NOWHERE TO HIDE is no different . The first theme is a woman in danger theme cross pollinated with a woman suffering from the pain of a divorce theme which means we have a scene of the heroine surviving a murder attempt followed by a scene having her son Sam ask why she divorced ? And being a TVM she answers that the reason is \" That people change \" rather than say something along the lines like \" I`m a right slapper \" or Your daddy cruises mens public toilets for sex \" as does happen in real life divorce cases . And it`s young Sam I feel sorry for , not only are his parents divorced but he`s as thick as two short planks . Actually since he`s so stupid he deserves no sympathy because he`s unaware that a man flushing stuff down a toilet is a drug dealer , unaware that you might die if someone shoots at you , and unaware that I LOVE LUCY is painfully unfunny . If only our own childhoods were so innocent , ah well as Orwell said \" Ignorance is strength \" . Oh hold on Sam is suddenly an expert on marine life ! Is this character development or poor scripting ? I know what one my money`s on . And strange that Sam the boy genuis hasn`t noticed that if the story is set in 1994 then why do people often wear clothes , drive cars and ride trains from the 1950s ? But as it turns out during a plot twist it`s the mother who`s the dummy . Then there`s a final plot twist that left me feeling like an idiot for watching this",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77c1f74240dd4e74867eab9a8a173e52",
            "input": "Absolutely awful movie. Utter waste of time.background music is so loud that you cannot understand speech. Well if you really listen closely, whatever they speak is actually unintelligible.Camera work is bad, editing is not present, background score gives a headache, action is shoddy, dialogs are unintelligible, Acting is abysmal and well Kareena used to look like a wrestler, now she looks like a starved wrestler. Hell you can slim down but you cannot gain grace.After spending three hours watching a movie I want to like it, but this movie would not even allow me that pleasure. Please if you want to torture yourself, go ahead watch this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2da191c17381412bb2307d2e19c57307",
            "input": "Even though an animated film it really bored everyone under at least 6.As a grown up who grew up in an area with wild horses and native americans, it felt this was a combination of PC mixed in with too many fantasy films created by people who never lived in the area they filmed about. Talk to those who have lived on horse back, most treat their animals like family members, regardless of background. Regardless of background we have dealt with good and bad breakers of wild horses. I had to explain that was a real life issues to us vs the movie makers views to children who were surprised to see how PC showed a world different than what they knew in reality.This dreamworks break from the normal disney or dreamworks fare of cute talking animals burning up the screen was nice from the older viewer point of view. But if you live in an area similar to what is shown, you may end up answering questions.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f244e5518c648aeb18f9dc2f2aa2be1",
            "input": "very few chess movies have been made over the last couple of years ,but this one is more than just a chess movie its a story about the need to be loved and the need to win it,John Toturro plays a psychologically challenged man ,nothing matters to him accept 64 squares and 32 pieces ,the game validates him as a person ,when he looses a game he looses the one thing that makes sense to him and John Torturro expresses this in a beautiful fashion,even the love of a woman was not enough to save him from his sad existence.It makes you wonder if there other Luzon's out there who obsess about the game,i am sure they are,if you are a chess enthusiast it won't hurt to watch it.Its an intelligent piece of work laid out properly and executed well,it achieves its objectives,unfortunately i doubt if there will be sequel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-821cc865eb6c4a598ba89254a09927cd",
            "input": "I love Zombie-Movies and I love amateur-productions. And Meat Market 2 starts really promising with a nice homage to Fulci´s Classic \"Zombi\".So I leaned back and waited to be impressed. Okay, some of the makeups are great for such a no budget movie and some actors (the vampirelady and the cook) really stand out, but else there´s nothing.I didn´t expect a new Romero here but there is not one sequence in the whole movie which has even a little bit of suspense or shock value. The director sure knows how to stage body rippings and interesting eating habits, but now (after two parts) it´s time to learn something more.In MeatMarket2 Gore rhymes with bore - for me that´s not enough - sorry.** out of *****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f727d58459e84200bcf58c4d6040ac4f",
            "input": "In my mind the best of the Ealing comedies and one of my favourite films of all time. The theme of workers v. management (with lots of talk of unions and rights) perhaps dates the film a bit now as it's no longer a subject discussed all that much but that doesn't stop \"White Suit\" from being a show stopping classic.The plot, about a man trying to create a revolutionary new fabric which ends up putting the textiles industry into turmoil, doesn't sound exciting when written down but the film retains that essential spark of fantasy mixed with reality that marks it out as a true Ealing comedy. The fabric repels dirt and can never wear out! The titular white suit that Alec Guinness wears throughout the second half becomes the centrepiece for several iconic images and sequences, such as Guinness being able to use his indestructible thread to scale a sheer wall! The script itself is full of dry wit - \"Is he all right?\" \"Yes.\" \"Pity.\" - and characterisation is first rate. I'm always astonished by the wonderful direction in these films as well. Comedies of later eras would adopt a \"point the camera at the actors and let it roll\" mentality but the Ealing films always attempted interesting lighting and angles and innovations. This film is no exception.Of course, it's the cast that lifts the material to dizzying heights. Alec Guinness gives a fantastically understated performance, with eyes that convey wonder, joy and crushing defeat whenever the story demands it. Stratton is a man oblivious to everything except his work. Such an insular character could quickly have become boring or irritating but Guinness effortlessly makes him likable, so much so that the closing stages of the film generate a real sense of urgency as Stratton tries to come out on top in a world that wants to bury everything he's ever worked for. Joan Greenwood plays another of her strong female roles and is an absolute delight to watch as usual, as are befuddled Cecil Parker and slimy Michael Gough; everybody gets laughs without even trying to. It's comical British understatement at its finest.\"The Man in the White Suit\" is 81 minutes of sheer brilliance, with a great plot, great cast, sparkling wit and healthy dollops of cynicism. Absolutely top notch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8595281bdc4a4419b2cb100ffb35ca42",
            "input": "I'm basing this on my observations of one episode I saw last night (9/27/06). I don't think I'll be watching again. The acting was totally wooden, the plot completely predictable, the ending totally unrealistic -- I mean who would believe a 30 million dollar judgment for the death of a recovering drug addict with terminal cancer? The lead actor (Victor Garber) seemed so uncomfortable, almost embarrassed in his role -- perhaps he realized how bad the writing was!! I fully realize that the drama offered this season is pretty poor, but they can surely find better writers. Maybe they are outsourcing the writing to India or China!! I'll bet we won't be seeing this one next season!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8b0a7cb63174fb4b799598c32ab0cd5",
            "input": "Why bother seeing this movie, if you have great movies to see. It is a total waste of time and money. The movie is so bad that I felt bad for wanting to watching it. Everything in it is BAD. Actors were bad. Script was REALLY bad. The story is stupid. And the worst CGI EVER. The only good moments were the first 60 seconds of the movie in the strip club. One interesting thing that, there is a characther that we wish that he dies because, he is so stupid that we get enough of him.(I don't remember the name but was the BOYFRIEND of the \"Chosen One\".)NOTE:If you want to see a good movie, this movie isn't the right choice. 0-Stars out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb840f586d714372a13653751e034f39",
            "input": "A truly unpleasant film. While Rick Baker's special effects are quite impressive (if stomach-turning), it has no other redeeming features. Like many 70s movies, it leaves you feeling as if you need to take a long shower, and scrub the slime off of yourself. The characters are uniformly unpleasant, and plot makes no sense.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8e68a1e9a77401a8e3120ea850500b1",
            "input": "Ahh, the dull t.v. shows and pilots that were slammed together in the 70's to make equally dull t.v. movies! Some examples would be Riding With Death(the most hysterically cheesy of the lot), Stranded in Space(confusing and uninteresting), San Francisco International(horribly dull and unbelievably confusing), and this turgid bit of Quinn Martin glamor. Shot in Hawaii(although you wouldn't know it from the outside shots), it's apparently a failed pilot for a lame spy show. The real problem is that you don;'t like most of the characters, including the drab main character Diamond Head, who seemed half asleep for the entire movie; his boss 'Aunt Mary', who had a really weird delivery of his lines and shellacked white hair as well as the a tan that looked like it had been stuccoed on; Diamnd Head's girlfriend/fellow agent(hell, I can't even remember her name) a skinny, wooden woman with a flat way of speaking that is just not sexy or interesting; and the singing sidekick Zulu(again, i can't remember his character's name)who wasn't bad in small doses. The most interesting person in the whole production was Ian McShane, who sucked as a bad guy but still proved his acting chops. Alothugh the make-up jobs this so-called 'chameleon' used to disguise himself were just laughable. I have absolutely no idea what he was doing or what he was trying to steal from the lab that caused him to dress as a South American Dictator cum American General. Nor do I care. The plot simply wasn't interesting enough to hold your attention for even ten minutes at a time, let alone the hour and a half or so it goes on. Just call this one - Hawaii Five No!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e30cc84d24cf4841987e848863a17033",
            "input": "This movie was a fascinating look at creole culture and society that few African Americans are aware. My own two children are by products of a paternal grandmother whose father was a member of the gens de couleur libre and a black skin woman whose parents were ex-slaves. He married outside of and against his culture and was cut off from all of his family except for one sister who took pity on her brothers plight; raising 8 children during the great depression of 1929; providing the family with food whenever she could. Of course she clandestinely aided this family fearing for her own ex-communication. My daughter was fascinated by the movie. We have made it a part of our library.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-234d5fdc131442cc8fdb0c4b790f6334",
            "input": "First be warned that I saw this movie on TV and with dubbed English - which may have entirely spoiled the atmosphere. However, I'll rate what I saw and hope that will steer people away from that version. I found this movie excruciatingly dull. All the movie's atmosphere is lost with dubbing leaving the slow frustration of a stalker movie. I'm sorry, but the worst movie sin in my book is to be slow except when the movie about philosophy. I didn't see any deep philosophical meaning in this movie. Maybe I missed something, but I have to tell it like I see it. I rated it a \"1\". What can I say, U.S. oriented tastes, maybe.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d52bc402f2cf48faab3f8b5b81edf013",
            "input": "Cypher is a clever, effective and eerie film that delivers. Its good premise is presented well and it has its content delivered in an effective manner but also in a way the genre demands. Although one could immediately label the film a science fiction, there is a little more to it. It has it's obvious science fiction traits but the film resembles more of a noir/detective feel than anything else which really adds to the story.The film, overall, plays out like it's some kind of nightmare; thus building and retaining a good atmosphere. We're never sure of what exactly is going on, we're never certain why certain things that are happening actually are and we're not entirely sure of certain people, similar to having a dream – the ambiguity reigns over us all – hero included and I haven't seen this pulled off in such a manner in a film before, bar Terry Gilliam's Brazil. Going with the eeriness stated earlier, Cypher presents itself with elements of horror as well as detective, noir and science fiction giving the feeling that there's something in there for everyone and it integrates its elements well.There is also an espionage feeling to the film that aids the detective side of the story. The mystery surrounding just about everyone is disturbing to say the least and I find the fact that the character of Rita Foster (Liu), who is supposed to resemble a femme fatale, can be seen as less of a threat to that of everything else happening around the hero: People whom appear as friends actually aren't, people who say they're helping are actually using and those that appear harmless enough are actually deadlier than they look. Despite a lot of switching things around, twisting the plot several times and following orders that are put across in a way to make them seem that the world will end if they're not carried out; the one thing that seems the most dangerous is any romantic link or connection with Lucy Liu's character – and she's trying to help out(!) The film maintains that feeling of two sides battling a war of espionage, spying and keeping one up on its employees and opponents. The whole thing plays out like some sort of mini-Cold war; something that resembles the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. in their war of word's heyday and it really pulls through given the black, bleak, often CGI littered screen that I was glued to. What was also rather interesting and was a nice added touch was the travel insert shot of certain American states made to resemble computer microchips as our hero flies to and from his stated destinations – significant then how the more he acts on his and Foster's own motivation this sequence disappears because he's breaking away from the computerised, repetitive, controlled life that he's being told to live and is branching out.Cyhper is very consistent in its content and has all the elements of a good film. To say it resembles the first Jason Bourne film, only set in the sci-fi genre, isn't cutting it enough slack but you can see the similarities; despite them both being released in the same year. Like I mentioned earlier, there feels like there is something in this film for everyone and if you can look past the rather disappointing ending that a few people may successfully predict, you will find yourself enjoying this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7e4c935afec4ad2b09a57cbf1672e05",
            "input": "I saw it, I agree with him 100%, but I didn't care for his delivery. He just came off as an asshole in a poorly edited, contrived juvenile smear campaign. Edit cuts galore, etc... The camera would be focused on him, and you'd see 2 or 3 edit cuts just over the course of a minute or two of dialog. Add in the constant boom mikes in the camera shot, which is a film no-no.This documentary hits a topic with so many angles, so many interesting stories, that the movie is just so easily done. Picking on religious fanatics is like picking on the retarded kid. It is so easy it is just wrong. I mean how hard is it to make these people look like nut bags? To make them contradict themselves, you just let them recite more then a verse or two. I do like when he jumped back in forth between people of the same religion and showed them completely contradicting themselves.I just think he could have done something a little more creative. The part with the neurologist talking about brain activity was never fleshed out. It could have been interesting to show brain scans of people during religious fits compared to drugs, or sex, or ???? He could have played more on the women all rejoicing over the Passion play that looked more like a snuff scene in a new Rob Zombie movie. More could have gone into the history of John Smith, the Mormon founder who had quite the colorful past. Delve into science v.s. religion. One is a very methodical, very strict process for increasing the confidence in theories. It builds on itself from a solid bottom up, a new layer on top of a more proved layer. An enormous burden of proof is required each step of the way. The other starts at the top and comes down with unchallengeable claims. It is so, because well… I said so.Done right… I'd say turn it into an HBO original series… hit a different religion every week.It was an eye opener about one thing. I must have been blind. Good ole G.W.Bush... no wonder he got elected. He had the religious majority. And well... now that is the blind leading the blind.Bill Moyer.. Well.. what can I expect from a guy who hands out at Sutra in Newport beach?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90757b5d0c924303a2b7353cb4815dec",
            "input": "And I gave it a high 7.....Why? Because it bloody well rocked. At the time when there were so many OTHER shows on that were tied to toys/games this show was unique in that it had overlapping stories. As others have said here it was ahead of its time. Sadly this is why the show was doomed. They have released 4 DVDs with 16 episodes of the series so far. I am hoping that more come out. How does this compare watching it now 20 years after it first came out.. I don't know I still like it despite the sometimes clunky animation, and that IMHO is it's only flaw. The writing was almost top notch and way ahead of the competition........ I do hope for more DVDs or even a set of all the episodes in proper order... The DVDs are good but I don't think the stories are in their proper order, but despite this the show rocked.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9507072a1e364b4f90b852de8fc8a15d",
            "input": "I'm a fan of Columbo, especially on a rainy Saturday, and it was fun to see Oskar Werner after Fahrenheit 451, but this episode was very lacking. The original plot and plot twists were obvious and could be guessed way in advance, even years before the modern detective shows of today. But it was amusing to see the crazy couch patterns and \"modern\" electronics equipment and, of course, the mandatory suburbanite humor poking fun at modern art for sale. The high-tech home is a Jetson's or Disney version of Tomorrowland, and fun to think of writers inventing those \"way-out gizmos\".If its sunny outside, go play, as there are much better Columbo episodes. Still, we should be thankful for Cable TV that these episodes are being broadcast.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c1e82b9ce22440a9a4953f3a1285eba",
            "input": "As a study of the frailties of human nature in the context of old age, this film is without parallel. It is, quite simply, brilliant. Full marks to everyone - from the scriptwriter to all involved in the finished product. You can only marvel at the perceptions inherent in the characterisation of the two ageing performers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-175ed1ecaf194ed38b41499d38f20e0c",
            "input": "Have no illusions, this IS a morality story. Granger is the troubled ex-buffalo hunter, tempted back to the plains one more time by kill-crazed Taylor. Granger can see the end is near, and feels deeply for the cost of the hunt-on the herds, the Indians and the land itself. Taylor, on the other hand admittedly equates killing buffalo, or Indians to 'being with a woman.' While Granger's role of the tortured hunter is superb, it's Taylor who steals the show, as the demented, immoral 'everyman' out for the fast buck and the goodtimes. There's not a lot of bang-bang here, but the story moves along quickly, and we are treated to a fine character performance by Nolan. The theme of this story is just as poignant today, as in the 1800s-man's relationship to the land and what's on it, and racism. Considering when this was made, the Censors must have been wringing their hankies during the scenes in the 'bawdy house', Taylor's relationship with the squaw, and much of the dialogue. Although downbeat, this is truly a great western picture.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22df04426b504280984ff0911c9633ba",
            "input": "(Only minor spoilers except as noted).I've enjoyed a lot of Spanish cinema recently; both the actual Spanish cinema of people like Almodovar, and the Latin American cinema of directors like del Toro, whose superb \"Devil's Backbone\", set in Civil War Spain, was the finest horror film of the last decade. It's no surprise, then, that this film is both well-made, well-acted, and manages to sustain that distinctively different Spanish atmosphere. But it's also as nasty and pointless a film as one could hope not to have to see.What actually is the purpose of all this? We have no real idea what caused the creepy central character to embark on his killing spree, despite the fact that large amounts of narrative voice-over are drawn directly from his own narcissistic journal. In a routinely unpleasant opening sequence, set more than a decade earlier, we see the central character killing his girlfriend in a rage of jealousy and control-freakery (\"…if I can't have you nobody can….\"). Oddly enough, that is perhaps one of the best sequences in the film, but it has no discernible relation to his subsequent killing spree, which appears completely different in both motivation and execution. What happened to him in jail to cause this change? We have no idea, though we do later discover, as an absurd sort of afterthought, that he obtained a law degree while imprisoned.In Britain, in several of our notorious \"serial killer\" or \"sex killer\" cases, the terrible question arises; what about the wife? Did she know, or suspect what was going on? This is a question that this film could have asked, and indeed the wife does begin to emerge as one of the more intriguing characters. But banally, the answer to the question is quite clearly: \"No, she didn't\". Even when a dramatic opportunity like this is presented on a plate, the film still manages to bungle it. All we actually get, sketched perfunctorily out at the end, is her slightly amoral preparedness to cash in on the proceeds after the event. Compare this to the awful revelatory moment in Ten Rillington Place, where Christie's wife says \"you know what I mean….\" thereby sealing her own fate and allowing us an appalled glimpse into unimaginable chasms of suppressed knowledge and horror.(Major spoiler in this paragraph). In the meantime, we are supposed to believe that the killer himself is a criminal mastermind who comprehensively outwits the police, thereby securing the briefest of incarcerations in a mental hospital before being released so that he can kill again. How exactly did he achieve this? The plot gets extremely sketchy at this point; something to do with deliberately leaving certain clues for the police; but how this all works or why, or how the subsequent court case actually proceeds, remains a mystery.I actually don't believe serial killers are like this. The Silence of the Lambs may be comic book stuff, but – Lecter aside – it gets its serial killers right. They are deeply disturbed, deeply dysfunctional, deeply inadequate people; not the creepily charming mastermind presented here (closely related to the equally implausible suave killer of The Last Horror Movie, or indeed even Man Bites Dog, though it appears not to have been noticed that that was a satire).This film has little suspense, and bungles what little intrigue the plot might have generated. It has nothing useful to say about the motivations of serial killers, either generally, or in the specific cultural milieu of Spain. This is nothing more than a poorly plotted excuse to show some pretty misogynistic violence to women. And oddly, what makes that violence even more repulsive is a certain prissy failure of nerve even in how it is presented. The soft core character of what is actually shown just makes it seem even more repellently titillatory. Just one explicit shot, properly timed, would have been infinitely more shocking, and would have rendered all the rest completely unnecessary, freeing up more film time to flesh out the gaping holes in plot and characterisation. Instead we just get endless shots of young women vulnerably spreadeagled on a table in their pretty but slightly revealing underwear. Very, very creepy. I'm sorry to be rude; I love horror films, and can tolerate even the most extreme, to the extent even of worrying my partner. But I think anyone who finds this film good, or interesting, even I'd find myself edging away from. The purpose of a horror film is to scare you; this is just lascivious.It leaves a very bad taste in the mouth indeed. I have to give this film more than one star just because it's competently executed, but morally it deserves none at all and should never have been made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f036dafe019b46b586a705805d74fd3c",
            "input": "As someone who lived through,and still remembers that decade vividly,if the actual '70s had been half this funny and (semi)normal,they would have been so much more enjoyable.Actual kids in that era did not act or behave anything close to as bright-eyed and normal as these kids did.The country's youth was still under the influence of the hippies and the drug culture all that '60s rebellion that it spawned,especially in the behavior department;the petulance,the smugness,the self-righteousness,the childishness,the unreasonableness of them - none of the characters exhibit any of that.Someone compared to \"Happy Days\",and I can see why:They were both sitcoms that take place 20 years before the current time they were broadcast,and they both offer only surface ,cliched depictions of the actual eras,not even close to the full scope of it,just showing the obvious things - the fashions,toys,music,contraptions,etc,and that's it.For those too young to remember,or weren't born then,trust me,the '70s weren't like that,any more than \"Happy Days\" were like the actual '50s,as \"M*A*S*H*\" didn't accurately portray life at a US Army medical base during the Korean War,etc.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fb553105826425c8ccf9a1014cd7252",
            "input": "The film starts in the Long Island Kennel Club where is murdered a dog,later is appeared dead as a case of committing suicide a collector millionaire called Arched,but sleuth debonair Philo Vance(William Powell)to be aware of actually killing.There are many suspects : the secretary(Ralph Morgan),the butler,the Chinese cooker,the contender(Paul Cavanagh) in kennel championship for revenge killing dog ,the nephew(Mary Astor) facing off her tyrant uncle,the Italian man(Jack La Rue),the brother,the attractive neighbour..Stylish Vance tries to find out who murdered tycoon,appearing many clues ,as a book titled:Unsolved murders. The police Inspector(Eugene Palette)and a coroner are helped by Vance to investigate the mysterious death.The sympathetic forensic medic examines boring the continuous body-count .Who's the killer?.The public enjoys immensely about guess the murder. The picture is an interesting and deliberate whodunit,it's a laborious and intriguing suspense tale.The personages are similar to Agatha Christie stories, all they are various suspects.They are developed on a whole gallery of familiar actors well characterized from the period represented by a glittering casting to choose from their acting range from great to worst. Powell is in his habitual elegant and smart form as Philo.He's protagonist of two famed detectives cinema,this one, and elegant Nick Charles along with Nora(Mirna Loy)make the greatest marriage detectives. Special mention to Mary Astor as the niece enamored of suspect Sir Thomas,she was a noted actress of noir cinema(Maltese falcon). The movie is magnificently directed by Hollywood classic director Michael Curtiz.He directs utilizing modern techniques as the image of dead through a lock-door,a split image while are speaking for phone and curtain-image.The tale is remade as ¨Calling Philo Vance¨(1940).The film is a good production Warner Bros, by Vitagraph Corp.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4b0723e6523453f8e5cae5084261c33",
            "input": "Melissa Joan Hart shines! This show is amazing!! There is no match. Except for maybe Melissa in Clarissa Explains it All. She was marvelous in that, too. This is SO much better than Buffy, the Vampire Slayer. This show is WONDERFUL!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2847a97fabd345bdb45254a2c7fd9201",
            "input": "If you have never viewed this film and like old time veteran actors, this is the film for you. Seeing Frank Sinatra when he was very young and extremely thin with sunken in cheeks and a wonderful voice which sang some great old songs. Michele Morgan, (Millie Pico) gave an outstanding performance with plenty of dance and musical numbers. Leon Errol, (Cyrus Drake) gave a great supporting role along with Victor Borge, (Sir Victor Fitzroy Victor) who performed classical piano and no slap stick comedy like he did in his career. This is not a great musical, but Frank Sinatra was a great joy to see at the beginning of his career in the 1940's.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eedcfa881a4740c2b618b50559414dd6",
            "input": "Slow but beautifully-mounted story of the American revolution. Griffith's story-telling seems a lot less heavy-handed than in his earlier historical epics and his tableaux work is fully integrated into the action. Lionel Barrymore is an utter swine, Neil Hamilton is poor but dashing and Carol Dempster is.... well, Carol Dempster is most of what is wrong with Griffith in this period, but she doesn't show up often enough to slow the pace and drama.Note that the trivia for this movie says it came in originally at slightly more than 2 hours when first released, but that no cut exists that runs longer than 90 minutes. However, the dvd release has been presented at a slower fps rate that increases the tension and brings it back to a bit over two hours.Far better in terms of story-telling than sound versions, such as THE PATRIOT. While not quite in the league of Griffith's best, such as WAY DOWN EAST and BROKEN BLOSSOMS, an excellent way to spend a couple of hours.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76b90195002e4d3782746bc14b0446b4",
            "input": "First off, I'm a huge fan of 80s movies, and of Jennifer Conelly as well. So yesterday, I wandered into a local used book/movie store and found a VHS copy. I read the back and it sounded good and for $3.99, it was a good deal. So I took it home and popped it in the VCR. What a sweet movie! At my age now, I relate more to movies like About Last Night or St. Elmo's Fire, but still I remember what it was like to be 15/16 and in love with an older guy, etc. We all have those little crushes when we're younger. And if it doesn't work out, we're heartbroken and we think that we'll never get over it. But of course we do. Many times. It's that sort of sweet quality that I really got from this movie. The feeling of \"Oooh! I remember when something like that happened to me...\" is all through it. The characters are interesting and well-developed. I recommend it to anyone who likes 80s movies, teen films in particular, or to anyone who just wants to go back and remember a simpler time in their lives.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f15d6cbcff4e4434b2279d3386402054",
            "input": "What can I say? I think I have to write \"Spoiler alert\" and then \"reveal\" they used the F-word a LOT in this movie - like in every two sentences. I did not like this movie at all - too much hints on sexual perversions, sidesteps and cheating. And that swearing was totally out the window. I gave this movie \"3\" and two of those points are for Mira Sorvino's sexy movements on the dance floor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e410b8d10f145688426915c7928700f",
            "input": "This was a complete disappointment. The acting isn't bad, but the production was just so bad that at times I felt I needed to stop it, but I sadly made it through and was able to finish it a bit embarrassed by the whole poor movie. It is o.k. if you are o.k. with cheesy moral plots and don't mind watching a movie that vastly misconstrues Whitman. If you want a cheesy fictional story go for it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67fb172bcfa64a938eb406cff615b165",
            "input": "I had high hopes for this film, because I thought CLEAN, SHAVEN (Kerrigan's first feature) was absolutely terrific, the most assuredly cinematic low budget film I'd ever seen.But much of CLAIRE DOLAN is utterly pointless and flat. Scene after scene seems randomly tossed into the mix, without much thought for narrative or character.Is Claire trying to escape being a prostitute or not? Hard to tell. Why does she pick up the trick at the airport if she wants to escape that life? Why does she then not pick up tricks when she needs money in Seattle? Why do we have to see her dye her hair to what is virtually the exact same color? Why does Claire accept some johns and not others? The filmmaker doesn't seem to know.It feels as if everything is improvised (though I understand this wasn't the case) and the filmmakers just held a camera on it as if they were making a verite documentary.After the screening I saw, Kerrigan defended his lack of narrative choices by condemning film narrative as politically conservative. It sounded like learned rhetoric. I think it was a cop-out.I am saddened that the maker of a film as exciting as CLEAN, SHAVEN would go on to make such a lame film as this one and then defend it with tired old \"political\" cliches.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3d0be5b79ae457fb3cb354757284249",
            "input": "The movie and acting are not bad and Jay Hernandez does a good job playing Calito Brigante but the movie forgets it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit movie. The makers of this prequel clearly did not watch the original Carlito's Way or at least did not care about continuity. This movie is a prequel which means the original movie has already laid out some history for us and this movie should end where the original begins or at least lead up to it. Not one of Carlito's close old friends from the original make an appearance in this movie, they're not even mentioned. Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the original, is in the movie but he plays a completely different character. The original takes place in 1975 and the prequel takes place in 1969-70. Considering this movie takes place less than 5 years earlier, wouldn't you think one of Carlito's long time friends would make an appearance? In the original, Carlito start's out being released from jail after spending 5 years in jail. That's only a few month's between the end of the prequel and the start of the original! ***Semi Spoiler*** We know from the beginning of the original, Carlito has spent 5 years in prison so when the prequel gives us this Hollywood happy ending it's an insult to the intelligence of fans of the original. What happen to Gail? It's the lack of continuity that made this film go direct to video release.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c0beabbadcc4398835cf7e4d244694d",
            "input": "The only reason I saw this movie was for Jimmy Fallon, who I've had a crush on since 9th grade, which was his first year on SNL. I am a die-hard Yankees fan, and I didn't find the movie painful until the last 15 minutes, when they begin showing clips of the ALCS games. I had to cover my ears and make small noises so I wouldn't have to hear that which must not be heard, but otherwise it was completely bearable.I thought Jimmy played the role very well, because the character was supposed to be nervous and quirky, and he is a nervous and quirky guy. I know that it may not be a Academy Award-winning stretch, but the movie is just a light, fun, romantic comedy that is actually appropriate for both women and men to see.Jimmy and Drew worked well together, and they had much better chemistry on camera than other actors in the past. (Ed Burns and Angelina Jolie in that stupid movie? What?) I think Jimmy has a positive career ahead of him, and thank goodness, because Taxi could have killed it. I think Fever Pitch will help him out a lot. Everyone needs to stop being so critical of his acting ability because he is just starting out in movies. I imagine it must be difficult, and if you look at any of the other great actors of our time (Tom Hanks, Russell Crowe, etc) you'll see that they started off in some flops. Busom Buddies? Australian soap operas? Here's wishing Jimmy a successful career on screen. I never wanted him to leave SNL but what can you do?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45a2e04acfb44e38a07124986726be88",
            "input": "For a first film in a proposed series it achieves the right balance. It is done with style and class showing Modesty's early days as a refugee and the start of her rise to power in the criminal world. I think it is a very honest/true portrayal of her character exactly as the writer Peter O'Donnell intended. Alexandra Staden as Modesty is stunningly beautiful and an excellent choice. She acts very convincingly as the tough survivor with an exterior of cool/intelligent/innocence. And full marks to Tarantino for choosing an unknown actress for the role - much more believeable to have a new face creating the part. I'm looking forward to the next film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e919ab0e92842adba5b77d2365d69c7",
            "input": "This show is wonderful. It has some of the best writing I ever seen. It has brilliant directing by Dvid Trainer who also directed another smart television series called BOY MEETS WORLD.This show is with out a dought one of the greatest. Like THREE'S COMPANY, ROSEANNE, and the famous COSBY SHOW this will be on television for a long time to come.From it's perfectly crafted jokes to the great performances you would only dream of this is a wonderful show for people who lived in the seventies and the people who didn't. This show appeals to the young and the young at heart. A perfect show.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c864f5d265a41a4a20ecf64cbeaabaa",
            "input": "I'm not sure that this comment contains an actual spoiler, but I'm playing it safe, so don't read this if you haven't seen the movie.I adore this movie, and so does everyone I work with -- and that is the point. I spent a large part of my working life in cinema, without being an actor. Such people are the _sung_ heroes of this movie: the gaffers, the pullers, the on-air directors, the lighters and writers, the costume people etc etc, and the whole thing is told from their point of view, at least to a great extent. Most actors are nuts and self-absorbed to the point of absurdity, which is what this movie spoofs so well, but you have to have worked with actors to recognize that this movie is real-life drama! Possible spoiler alert: in one great scene, the two leads, both actors, are _discussing_ how to _discuss_ something personal, something entirely 'out-of-script', with another actor, and they start making up lines, rehearsing them, and critiquing each other's performance.Since this movie appeared in, what was it, '91, it has become fashionable to do this, especially on TV. But hardly anyone has done it so well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5bdced4454944129fef0668d9338e6c",
            "input": "Well this movie was probobly one of the funniest scary movie i have ever seen. The effects are so bad you just have to laugh, and the acting, well lets say its no mel gibson. But Gary Browning who plays an police officer is so damn bad, he becomes good. I dont know how but he him self makes this movie a 10. You must see it if your in to horror/slash movies cause its bloody and funny at the same time. Killer movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b975e37abf94d95ae66f1cba51b6c34",
            "input": "As said before, the visual effects are stunning. They're breathtaking. I personally use Blender and graphics like that are not easy AT ALL. But that's all this movie is. Not only is the plot confusing, but the overall conflict is not clear. For example, in the first scene, Proog and Emo are trying to run away from who knows what. The conflict seems to be between man and nature here. Later, when they enter the room of the bottomless pit, Proog explains that \"one step out of place and (you're dead)\". Here, there's a more precise conflict between the careless man and nature. As the movie progresses, it's clear that a conflict exists between man and nature. But suddenly, a conflict exists between man and man when Proog, out of nowhere, murders Emo. Proog immediately changes from being a caring guardian looking after a lost child to being a \"sick man\". He betrays us. Not only is this depressing, but we don't care because the conflict between the character's thoughts and actions is not developed. It's not a story about someone, through struggle, emerging stronger. It's depressing and has not point because there's no great truth about the human soul or about the world brought to light like a great drama does. In my opinion, the movie is severely underdeveloped in all aspects. However, the graphics are stunning, but a movie is so much more than mere eye candy. There's no truth, no struggle and a bad surprise ending. In conclusion, an underdeveloped movie without a point. ...but the graphics are good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac48eeb4216f4967916d1dee77a2f6fe",
            "input": "Had I checked IMDb BEFORE renting this DVD from Netflix, I'd have a couple of hours of my life back. I'm frankly suspicious when I see that a film's director also wrote it. In this case, according to the credits, the same guy was \"writter and director\" - unfortunately, an indication of the overall quality of this production. There were a few interesting moments (e.g., Judy Tenuta's scene reminded of her early comedy routines touting Judy-ism) which led me to rate this two stars rather than one. Those moments, however, were few and far between ... and I almost did not get to see them because the opening sequence was nearly incomprehensible to me, not to mention reprehensible in its violence. I admit I went back to watch that part again to see if I had missed something that would help me figure it out once I'd seen the whole thing. Nope, though I at least recognized who the characters were who would turn out to be important later. The \"spinning camera\" technique was overused and essentially pointless. I found myself talking to the TV screen: \"What?!?\" or \"For goodness sake, get ON with it!\" Not recommended.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f55f5b58f30c408e8c17fa2dbf774777",
            "input": "In what appears an attempt to mix drama and comedy, Manuel Gomez Pereira made this film, 'Things that make life worthwhile. \"It is not an original discovery, by many voice you have (quite off the pitch, by the way), but it departs somewhat from the norm in the Spanish cinema. The downside is that the elements forming the film are poorly combined, and while some points are not well developed, others are out of place. A day in the lives of two people close to the median age. It's basically what the movie Gómez Pereira. Jorge (Eduard Fernandez) is a stationary (parado) one which, despite load on your back with a drama major, seems willing to see things change. Only this explains his commitment to a minor could mean a turning point in its existence. In line with Audrey Tautou of 'Long dating' (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2004), Jorge says things like this to herself: \"if I find a coin before the corner that is now going to change my luck. \" Of course it finds it, begins to play 'Today could be a great day' (Hoy puede ser un gran dia)by Joan Manuel Serrat and in a few crosses on its way Hortensia (Ana Belen).She is another woman entry age, divorced and a little lonely. Take valeriana for sleeping, organizes birthday parties as an exemplary mother, said her belief in God and leads to a speed of homicidal mother. Hortensia is a woman of many contradictions in his behavior, life was going in his head driving data as \"70% of people fall in love only once in a lifetime\" and said although it is short of Jorge and unemployed and does not preclude the possibility that it is a \"sadistic\" sleeping in his shoulder in the cinema at the earliest opportunity. Later came a communion, a dance in the luxurious wedding banquet, the back of a car and other things that players seem to live unique experiences like that but end up doing quite heavy for the viewer. 'Things that make life worthwhile' debate between us is the drama of two adult persons who have no other that leads them to see where their strange relationship and, conversely, make us take the case as a comedy, focusing on things like a Chinese singing at a wedding (which seem to be amusing in itself) or the gait of a drunk person. The problem is that it does not leave us time to connect with the players, therefore we can not identify with the dramatic, and not give us a solid base comic too, leaving everything except pure joke. In the end, all mixed in a way that the viewer no longer know very well whether to laugh or mourn, and ends up not doing either. And it is true that something is not seen a thousand times, is not the kind of film that we find to bend every corner, but it is not sufficiently different or special as we want to do. Ana Belén (which apparently far less than the 53 years that has in this film) and Eduard Fernandez are two actors who are very enjoyable to see working, but this time it seems ready or comfortable enough in scenes that require him to break the calm that prevails in the film, so in moments like the \"accident\" with the children of the bar thing seems to be slipping from their hands. Perhaps a very dramatic change that has to do, but that is no excuse to lower our guard. In any case, both interpreters are erected easily the highlight of the function. 'Things that make life worthwhile' work only up to the modest level of entertainment. Any claim that is beyond that point has not been fulfilled, as a romantic comedy or dramatic as that, we presume, they wanted to do, can not afford to have little moments finished successful (beyond bad) as that in which one of the characters talk and laugh, lost drunk, compared to a boy who remains in a coma in part because of him. Neither do much for people like Rosario Pardo, making the typical friend launched whose biggest contribution to the film is the phrase \"must be screwed over,\" and songs from the soundtrack, though significant, not just fit. It is true that the film by Manuel Gomez Pereira has its hits (some of the moments involving Jose Sacristan), but the whole is a anodyne Story, a film with good intentions and a nice result when the better.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c2e0489394e4b72a24d43c294ae0d35",
            "input": "Warning: This review contains minor spoilers.Well the writers of the first Tremors are officially out of ideas. I'm a big fan of the first movie and the first two sequels are pretty good for straight to video fare. Tremors 4: The Legends Begins, however, is a very dull movie. Where the heck are the Graboids??? Due to the relative lack of Graboids through the first 90 minutes I'm convinced that this entry into the series is suppose to be a \"character study\". Unfortunately there isn't one interesting character in the movie except for Billy Drago's character who is given too few lines, too little to do and in the end too little screen time. What saved the 2nd and 3rd movies was the presence of Michael Gross as Burt Gummer. Whenever there wasn't any action on the screen you could rest assured that Burt Gummer was going to be interesting to listen too and/or watch. However in this movie Gross plays Hiram Gummer a very poor and boring substitute. On the plus side when the Graboids (Dirt Dragons in this movie) are on the screen they do look good but that is about as good as it gets.I was impressed when I saw that Tremors 4 was listed at 101 minutes long. Pretty good for straight to video. But after watching it I'm sure that this movie is a good 15 minutes too long. There are long stretches of dialogue that is boring and doesn't further the plot any. Was there a rush to get this movie made? I think not, more time could have and should have been spent on the script.I thought I had hit a gold mine when I saw Tremors 4 packaged for sale with....Tremors!!! What luck I thought, pay for #4 get #1 for free. Well after watching Tremors 4 I like to think I paid for the original and got this mess for free, I can't imagine paying a single dime for Tremors 4. For fans of the series it's best to forget that Tremors 4: The Legend Begins even exists.Tremors 4: The Legend Begins rates a 3 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7645c43618484b40a0acaef30226418f",
            "input": "Guys, you got to watch this awesome movie. At the end of this movie you will have a strong passion and profundity imbued into yourselves. The acting of the two characters, Billy Sunday and Carl Brashear deeply touches the heart from inside. This movie is about principles, dignity, patriotism and HONOR. You will hear Chief Carl Brashear say, the Navy has greatest tradition of all - Honor - practiced thoroughly by these two characters. Mere glances of these characters during the movie fills you with enthusiasm. Dialogue delivery of this movie is perfect. You can't find any flaws in the dialogues. What the Master Chief Billy says roams in and out of your mind for a long time after watching the movie. Please watch this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d994e973f42b4fc19d448609e02d45f3",
            "input": "The performance by Om Puri, Smita Patil, and Sadashiv Amrapurkar and the whole chemistry comes off nicely, along with the minimalist approach to story telling and direction by Govind Nihlani. The dialogues by Vijay Tendulkar is also great. I have not seen another movie like this. It is one whole, each piece so nicely fit in the plot. You cannot not be impressed by this movie. Amrish Puri comes off as the bossy husband and 'baap' of Om Puri. Om Puri is the young man caught between his sense of duty and his inability to fight the system. Sadhashiv as Rama Shetty gives just about the right touch to the movie with his smiling and soft speaking villain. The first meeting of Anand Velankar with Rama Shetty's at Sadhashiv's place is absoulely stunning. Smita Patil does not play a main role, but her part is also not distracting from the main plot. And to add to this all Kafi Inamdar plays the role of a cop who has come to terms with the system and its workings. Saying right things in the right places and knowing how to keep himself away from trouble. He is also the 'guru' of Om Puri and helps him whenever he gets into trouble.The movie not only brings to focus the difficulties faced by a police officer trying to do his duty but also the other side of brutalities in police custody. Om Puri captures hopelessness and the burning desire to break free in this exceptional performance in Ardh Satya. A treat to all avid fans of Indian cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eacad7e0342d42f98cf9351b61c64e2a",
            "input": "WOW. One of the greatest movies I have EVER - EVER seen.Absolutely LOVED it! Before the opening credits were done I was glued to the screen.It's a Sci-Fi thriller - AND edge of your seat Whodunnit. Incredible.I wish'd it would never end.Lucy Liu is a throwaway role. Anyone could have played it. The lead actor, Jeremy Northram was the perfect geeky guy. This movie appeals to me who loved War Games, Sneakers, and Track Down.Incredible!8-22-06. Walt D in LV",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38ad24ef58044d27bf29bcbec4be0ec0",
            "input": "I remember the original series vividly mostly due to it's unique blend of wry humor and macabre subject matter. Kolchak was hard-bitten newsman from the Ben Hecht school of big-city reporting, and his gritty determination and wise-ass demeanor made even the most mundane episode eminently watchable. My personal fave was \"The Spanish Moss Murders\" due to it's totally original storyline. A poor,troubled Cajun youth from Louisiana bayou country, takes part in a sleep research experiment, for the purpose of dream analysis. Something goes inexplicably wrong, and he literally dreams to life a swamp creature inhabiting the dark folk tales of his youth. This malevolent manifestation seeks out all persons who have wronged the dreamer in his conscious state, and brutally suffocates them to death. Kolchak investigates and uncovers this horrible truth, much to the chagrin of police captain Joe \"Mad Dog\" Siska(wonderfully essayed by a grumpy Keenan Wynn)and the head sleep researcher played by Second City improv founder, Severn Darden, to droll, understated perfection. The wickedly funny, harrowing finale takes place in the Chicago sewer system, and is a series highlight. Kolchak never got any better. Timeless.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e675fd24f96d44cbb137601c00f41255",
            "input": "Terrible film made on a budget of about $9.99. Very obvious miniature sets used, poor acting and an awful storyline concerning aliens who use discarded meat from a butcher shop as fuel for their spaceship. The film contains some blood (not enough to disturb) and a character with an eggbeater replacing one of his hands. (Yes you read that correctly.)One saving grace was a song performed at the \"talent show\" (how's that for irony?) by a punk/new wave band that I think was called \"I'm A Heat Seeking Missile\". Other than that, this is not worth your time, not even on a \"so bad it's good\" level. Watch if you are into cheesy alien films, but anyone else should steer clear. Rating: 1 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28394f2cf4be4074817896dfde99edd3",
            "input": "I had no idea of the facts this film presents. As I remember this situation I accepted the information presented then in the media: a confused happening around a dubious personality: Mr. Chavez. The film is a revelation of many realities, I wonder if something of this caliber has ever been made. I supposed the protagonist was Mr.Chavez but everyone coming up on picturewas important and at the end the reality of that entelechy: the people, was overwhelming. Thank you Kim Bartley and Donnacha O´Briain.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36ae79db52a946568b4084f52db532b5",
            "input": "I am guessing the reason this movie did so well at the box office is of course Eddie Murphy. I think this was his first movie since \"Beverly Hills Cop\" so at the time he was hot. Considering that one made over two hundred million and it was R and this one made about 80 million and it was pg does say it was not all that popular. I have never been a big Eddie Murphy fan, so that is probably another reason I didn't care for it much at all. This one has Eddie as some sort of finder of lost kids. He must find the golden child or the world is in terrible peril. The plot is very bad, but as bad as it is it does not compare to the special effects. I had seen better stuff done in the 70's than some of the stuff this one offers, Ray Harryhausen did better stuff. Still the main reason you see a movie like this is because of Eddie, unfortunately he is not very funny in this one at all and it just seems stupid to put him in the \"Raiders of the Lost Ark\" type scenes. I guess they were hoping for a fish out of water effect, but to me it just did not work.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1feb047ae77940178d8b1fbf53d4676d",
            "input": "Pointless boring film with charismatic Mercurio completely wasted. Released for a minute on a Thursday in maybe one local cinema and avoided by the entire population of Sydney except me and four others BACK OF BEYOND is a project seemingly created by a producer looking for a fee. Local actors like John Polson and Terry Serio deserve better (well Polson has morphed into a Director of lame thrillers like SWIMFAN and HIDE AND SEEK) and Terry Serio seems never to get a guernsey apart from thug roles. But Paul Mercurio should have become one of Australia's greatest exports on screen. Roles like this are major disappointments and films like this are just a waste of talent and time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d2a6fdf1a074d7d9638a4e3694601ed",
            "input": "This movie had some andrenaline kickers, but it's an old story that simply could never happen. Navy protocols could never break down that much that a crew much less an XO could ever go that far against the Captain. I'll take Dr. Strangelove any day if I wish to see this plot. Sidenote--the US Navy did not support this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fe6df3fd4b443e4a623295893559a74",
            "input": "The Straight Story is a multilevel exploration of the goodness and beauty of America. At one level a slow walk through the heartland, it's kind inhabitants, and amber grain, at another level about growing old and remembering what is important(and actively forgetting what isn't). David Lynch gives us time in this movie and helps me to remember that so much can be said with silence. A remarkable movie that will rest gently with me for some time to come.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8819172b616740cd99b027fa6eec8739",
            "input": "The saddest thing about this \"tribute\" is that almost all the singers (including the otherwise incredibly talented Nick Cave) seem to have missed the whole point where Cohen's intensity lies: by delivering his lines in an almost tuneless poise, Cohen transmits the full extent of his poetry, his irony, his all-round humanity, laughter and tears in one.To see some of these singer upstarts make convoluted suffering faces, launch their pathetic squeals in the patent effort to scream \"I'm a singer!,\" is a true pain. It's the same feeling many of you probably had listening in to some horrendous operatic versions of simple songs such as Lennon's \"Imagine.\" Nothing, simply nothing gets close to the simplicity and directness of the original. If there is a form of art that doesn't need embellishments, it's Cohen's art. Embellishments cast it in the street looking like the tasteless make-up of sex for sale.In this Cohen's tribute I found myself suffering and suffering through pitiful tributes and awful reinterpretations, all of them entirely lacking the original irony of the master and, if truth be told, several of these singers sounded as if they had been recruited at some asylum talent show. It's Cohen doing a tribute to them by letting them sing his material, really, not the other way around: they may have been friends, or his daughter's, he could have become very tender-hearted and in the mood for a gift. Too bad it didn't stay in the family.Fortunately, but only at the very end, Cohen himself performed his majestic \"Tower of Song,\" but even that flower was spoiled by the totally incongruous background of the U2, all of them carrying the expression that bored kids have when they visit their poor grandpa at the nursing home.A sad show, really, and sadder if you truly love Cohen as I do.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c2cea0553b245d999334b09b4dd86c4",
            "input": "I can't really condemn the movie because it does work. There is enough film noir elements to consider it a noir movie, but I think it's only just in the category.There's nothing sinister in this piece, and that's where the noir elements fail. Sure, the disease might be considered sinister, but I have a hard time seeing that. The movie hints at a darker side: Blackie may be trafficking human beings, the New Orleans police are only too willing to arrest a reporter, the specter of the plague hangs over all of the people in the movie... but those are really only hints.There's no attempt made to question Reed's motivations, as one with do with Marlowe or Spade, nor is there any attempt to bring a humans side to Blackie, which would make him even more contemptuous if the human trafficking was actually played out.That lack of depth is what fails the movie in the end.The story is decent, the acting is good, the writing and direction are well done... but there is nothing to make this a movie you should return to over and over. Worth watching once, maybe twice if you don't remember it from years ago, and then putting away.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b7c27b8f7c04d5aba9c4fee9d7fac52",
            "input": "This film would usually classify as the worst movie production ever. Ever. But in my opinion it is possibly the funniest. The horrifying direction and screenplay makes this film priceless. I bought the movie whilst sifting through the bargain DVD's at my local pound shop. Me and some friends then watched it, admittedly whilst rather drunk. It soon occurred that this wasn't any normal film. Instead a priceless relic of what will probably be James Cahill's last film. At first we were confused and were screaming for the DVD player to be turned off but thankfully in our abnormal state no-one could be bothered. Instead we watched the film right through. At the end we soon realised we had found any wasters dream, something that you can acceptably laugh at for hours, whilst laughing for all the wrong reasons. We soon showed all our other friends and they too agreed, this wasn't a work of abysmal film. This was a film that you can truly wet yourself laughing at. This was a film that anyone can enjoy. This was genius.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0719da831dfa4e5ea37e90eef4c518d2",
            "input": "This is something new.There's a coup d'etat and a couple of irish documentary filmmakers are right inside of it.A democratically elected president who uses his power to bring literacy to his people and encourages them to read the constitution is being slandered by the private media openly as dictator, mentally unstable, new hitler, etc. without repercussion from the governments side (like, say, silencing them via bullets and other traditional dictatorial methods). Oh, and they still claim that they are being suppressed, of course.See how the media gloats about their own role in the coup d'etat on TV after they toppled the government with the help of rouge generals (how much more stupid can you get?? ).And see how the people of Venezuela march to the palace, holding the constitution in their hands, and reinstall their elected government.This sounds like a Hollywood fairytale, but it happened for real, against the explicit wishes of the USA. The documentary is a historical masterpiece, shot from the center of the action, acute and totally embarrassing for the prime supporters of the coup: The good, democratic, freedom loving, benevolent USA (who still channel large amounts of money to Chavez' political opponents).Also highly entertaining and exciting. 10 points.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5294933b3f3f434ba5b8428159dfff66",
            "input": "Well, I can once and for all put an end to the question: 'What is the worst movie ever made...ever?' It is Flight of Fury, starring and co-written by Steven Seagal. Sure there are lots of famously bad movies, but this one takes the cake in that it takes itself so seriously.It is a Romanian-made film that speaks to just how far Romania has to go to catch up with Bollywood. It also speaks to just how utterly devoid of intellect and talent Steven Seagal has become. This movie is so bad that you literally feel violated after watching it and need to crouch in the corner of the shower and cry, knowing that nothing will make you feel clean again.It was released only on video (I can't imagine why) and I suspect the workers that had to make the DVD's had to wear protective gear and receive regular counseling.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b45bb32a8ebe4a378d68a5aa2a610796",
            "input": "Scotty (Grant Cramer, who would go on to star in the great B-movie \"Killer Klowns from outer space\") agrees to help three middle-aged guys learn how to 'dialog' the ladies in this bad '80's comedy. Not bad as in '80's lingo, which meant good. Bad as in bad. With no likable characters, including, but not limited to, a kid who's the freakiest looking guy since \"Friday the 13th part 2\"' a girl who leads men on and then goes into hissy fits when they want to touch her, and the token fat slob, because after all what would an '80's sex comedy be without a fat slob?? Well this one has two. This movie is pretty much the bottom of the barrel of '80's sex comedies. And then came the sequel thus deepening said proverbial barrel.My Grade:D- Eye Candy: too numerous to count, you even see the freaky looking kid imagined with boobs at on point, think \"Bachlor Party\" but not as funny, and VERY disturbing.Where I saw it: Comcast Moviepass",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa7af4bb928241888da44f01c2d6a756",
            "input": "All the bare chested women in the world couldn't keep me from hitting the stop button about a third of the way through this awful rubbish. With the derisory acting, equally terrible script plus the poor CGI FX to match; this movie is an insult to the Werewolf genre. It is supposed to be serious, which in itself would be funny if this film could even make it to the level of being a bad joke.This is one of those movies where the people behind the camera are obviously competent but are too lazy to make something even one quarter decent. Avoid at all costs and watch one of the classic Werewolf movies instead.0 out of 10!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56e876d34db14b23891a4493f7b4b8ff",
            "input": "As with all of Angelopoulos' films, \"The Suspended Step of the Stork\" implicitly demands a close and intimate participation on the part of the viewer, a fact that has certainly contributed to the limited popularity of his work. Dialogues are sparing, with no monologues or exchanges exteriorizing the characters' inner conflicts, doubts, or feelings. The filmmaker prefers to keep the viewers away from their own emotional responses, and instead forces them to explore and study the characters' identities for themselves. As a result, the acting is understated and implicit, as opposed to overt and explicit.The action scenes are set between long intervals of contemplation, where the viewer is asked to become a participant, to participate as an actor, by probing his or her own psyche. As in a novel, where the drama rests entirely on the author's writing to provide a template where the reader's imagination and/or past experience flourish, Angelopoulos' drama rests within his images: his uses of the long shots, the long takes, the leisurely pacing, the sparing dialogues that have become his trademark, inviting the viewer to experience the film from his or her personal perspective. Angelopoulos uses silence to capture moments of high intensity, reverting to the non-verbal language of gestures, gazes, sounds, and music, when he believes that words can only take us so far.The music, by Angelopoulos' long time collaborator, Eleni Karaindrou, provides more than just a discreet background, but becomes itself a dramatic element of the story. A large part of the film consists of exterior shots in subtle, subdued colors, recorded in a drab winter light. Angelopoulos presents us with an \"other Greece,\" one far different from the Greece of the tourist brochures, with ethereal blue skies and emerald seas, drowned in an eternal sunshine. Here, the skies are covered and gray, the air is cold and misty, and the sands of the pristine beaches have been replaced by the trampled, dirty snow of the village streets. Angelopoulos' genius through Arvanitis' camera is on display throughout the film.\"The Suspended Step of the Stork\" is above all else a political statement aimed at the socio-political situation in the Balkans at the end of the twentieth century. It is deeply concerned with the meaning of \"borders,\" and with those who are the victims of the confusion between nations. In the \"waiting room\" facing the Albanian border, the refugees, political or other, outcast by the rest of humanity, wait. They may be stuck against a political border, but unfortunately they still carry with them, and hang on, deeper ancestral borders: those of the languages, of the customs, and of the races. Although Angelopoulos' political views are well known, the film steers clear of any political discourse regarding the causes of the refugees' plights. In the process, Angelopoulos forces us to meditate on the concepts of geographical, cultural, political, and personal \"borders.\" Angelopoulos considers himself a historian of twentieth century Greece, and he likes to bring lessons from the Hellenic myths into his discussions. In this film, he does some border crossing himself between the Greek and Italian cultures, drawing from a combined Homeric and Dantesque tradition of Odysseus' travel. Alexander is a Telemachus, in search of a story about an aging Greek politician/Odysseus who disappeared, never to be heard of again. This political man, a brilliant orator, unexpectedly and inexplicably left the comfort of his bourgeois existence, his wife, and his brilliant career, to live anonymously in a refugee camp with the lowest of the low. He became a poet in exile wondering how to change the world. Of course, the \"politician\" is not Alexander's father, but the \"politician\" stands before Alexander like a father figure/Odysseus. As with Homer's Telemachus, Alexander grows as a person during his odyssey.Of course, it would be wrong to try and see in the film a retelling of Homer's Odyssey in a contemporary context. Angelopoulos draws on Odysseus's travels only as structuring and thematic elements for his film. In Angelopoulos' ending, \"Odysseus\" is more like the Dante's Odysseus: he does not leave for Ithaca but goes on, \"carrying a suitcase.\" And Alexander/Telemachus is \"suspended\" between returning to his home and his career, or embarking on a voyage to \"somewhere else.\" He states as much, in a voice-over at the beginning of the film, paraphrasing few lines from Dante's \"Inferno\": \"And don't forget that the time for a voyage has come again. The wind blows your eyes far away.\" Finally, although Angelopoulos is not a religious person, there is a Greek Orthodox religious theme introduced during the film in the form of the yellow-suited linesmen, who go around bettering things for their fellow human beings by reconnecting communications, and also the Christ-like figure of the \"politician.\" In the final scene, these men in yellow demonstrate once more the Byzantine iconography's influence in Angelopoulos' work. They appear like \"stylites,\" religious figures found in the Orthodox tradition, solitary and fervent men who took up their abode upon the tops of pillars, in a form of asceticism.The film ends without a resolution as to the true identity of the character played by Mastroianni. Angelopoulos does not give us any clues, and the wife's statement, \"It's not him,\" is far from convincing and left ambiguous enough. The important question of the film is not whether he is or is not the vanished politician, but that he could be the politician. But the film still ends on an optimistic note. Whereas the wires strung from pole to pole run only along the river, and thus communications across the border are still not possible, and it remains impenetrable, we note that this final scene is taken from a point of view across the river: the camera has crossed the border, and the reverse tracking shot is inviting Alexander and the viewer to follow beyond the boundary. On this account, Angelopoulos gives us hope that somehow, some of the borders will eventually crumble.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7484aa8ed4dd4ce8ab1258cec70ca8b8",
            "input": "(this may be a bit on the spoilerish side) I would like to start by saying I did not watch the entire movie, nor could I because it was evident from the first hour that I was going to be incredibly disappointed. That of course is the problem with taking, what many believe to be an amazing book, and turning it into a Disney Made-for-TV movie.A Wrinkle in Time should have been made into an amazing movie a long time ago. It's got a great storyline that could hook children and adults. Plus it's got built in quality sequels. But Disney-fying was not the way to go. The problem with the movie is that all the things they changed to turn it into a visual story dumbed down what was so great about the book. It is a complicated and emotional story for kids. There was no reason to make Charles Wallace purely \"psychic\", because that was the easiest way of explaining it. There was no reason to write a fight between the three Mrs. W's as added tension, there is enough tension in the story without that. There was no reason to remove Meg's glasses... that deprived us of what could've been a very sweet scene between Calvin and Meg that happens in the book.I could nitpick for days about little things, but I also think larger things, like the art direction was a off. Take for instance the way they made Camazotz look, with its strangely darkened skies. The creepiness that comes across in the book is that Camazotz could be Earth. It looks like earth. It has people on it that look like humans. The skies are blue, the grass is green, and there are children playing. But something is a little bit off. The directors chose to make Camazotz a complete other instead of taking the lesson in the book and applying it to the overall direction of the movie. The lesson of course is that Camazotz could very well be Earth, that is if we forget how to love. It would've been much creepier to have a beautiful afternoon as they're walking down the street with the kids bouncing the balls in the same rhythm.I unfortunately did not watch the end. Maybe someone can tell me how Disney messed up the end as well.Overall an artistic disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db9baffa2301478594cbdd8ef405a09c",
            "input": "I've read reviews that apparently you have to have been a student in a very strict, British school in the 1960's to understand this. Maybe that's true, if so, then this movie is outdated.*************SPOILER ALERT**************************************** The ending makes about as much sense as all the kids who're anti-government and anti-corporation without having any better solution that doesn't torch society to a Mad Max type cinder.Yeah, the main characters could leave, but they don't. The reasons they go about this don't make sense. There isn't enough character development to explain why. What shooting up a bunch of innocent people is supposed to mean is never explained or even hinted at. It is mentioned that war is the final creative expression, quite possibly the only revelation that any characters of this movie have, and it makes no sense.The characters who go on a murder spree aren't fighting the institution, they're just killing people. I thought they might've used all the explosives to blow up the place or at least the sanctuary at the end, that would've made greater symbolic sense, but they didn't.tl;dr - This movie is an adolescent's daydream of fighting against authority that plagues them, though in reality they need. It has no moral, symbolic truth, or meaning to it; this movie simply plays out the fantasy of killing teachers and people in \"power\" that annoy you.If you think a murder rampage/ school shooting similar to columbine or virginia tech is a rational and sensible way to deal with teachers and institutions you don't like, then I guess you'll love this movie. If you're like me and you're working towards making a life for yourself instead of just blindly (very blindly in this movie) rebelling against \"the man\", this movie is juvenile and boring.You can also tell in parts that funding was lacking, and the story seemed to have a touch of attention deficit disorder.All in all, this seems like a very rough draft of what could've been an okay movie, but no effort is put into the dialogue, character development, or moral so it's just... poorly done.If... only I could get my two hours back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2374c73a31574a8cbb82623d3df7a4d1",
            "input": "I was at the same screenwriters conference and saw the movie. I thought the writer - Sue Smith - very clearly summarised what the film was about. However, the movie really didn't need explanation. I thought the themes were abundantly clear, and inspiring. A movie which deals with the the ability to dare, to face fear - especially fear passed down from parental figures - and overcome it and, in doing so, embrace life's possibilities, is a film to be treasured and savoured. I enjoyed it much more than the much-hyped 'Somersault.' I also think Mandy62 was a bit unkind to Hugo Weaving. As a bloke about his vintage, I should look so good! I agree that many Australian films have been lacklustre recently, but 'Peaches' delivers the goods. I'm glad I saw it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75679433902d4c16828df96d5d73d510",
            "input": "i love this TV series so much. it contains animation that is interesting and beautiful. i cant believe that they cut it off TV, and also that i never found out whether cybersix and data7 die or not, apparently they survive, but I'm not sure. Cybersix was by far the BEST TV show ever. i know its to late to hope they will start the series over again so I'm really glad i got to watch it. I LUVED IT SO MUCH <3 its about a women by the name of cybersix, she is not human. She goes by adrian sieldman, a man teacher at a highschool. Now cybersix is actually a women, she is just disguised as a man in the day. By night cybersix patrols the city.A guy by the name of Von reichter is the one who created cybersix, and once he finds put she is alive he uses everything he can to capture her.IF u have never watched it before u should totally download it. It was the best TV show in the world. Why did they cut it off???? some people have issues. but I'm glad i got to watch the 13 episodes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46438f1f9215452e9a619b29e13d8389",
            "input": "Richard Dreyfus is not the star here. He has about three 20 second cameos and what is Gene Barry doing all over this movie? No idea, the director was probably his brother! This is a movie that makes no sense whatsoever. The inept writer/director (same dude) butchered up everyone's talent with his horrendous uh...work. I got the DVD for a penny so can't complain! But it's weird!And it makes you feel weirded out and in not a good way. This was the 70's and looks like the director was on a bad acid trip and wanted everyone to experience what it's like to be inside his head. It has a somewhat interesting and controversial concept, but like a scratched record, it quickly plays foul. It has that \"Manson family on acid\" vibe to it.I have no idea how the other reviewer got all they did out of this movie? Maybe they worked in it back when? At any rate, be prepared to lose 80+ min of your life you'll never get back. Yes, it's that awful!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5c91a0d0cab42dd831d8794afdf5eed",
            "input": "First off, I'd like to make a correction on another review of this film which said that the last musical to win the Best Picture Academy Award was 'Gigi' in 1958. That is misinformation as 'West Side Story' won in 1962, 'My Fair Lady' won in 1965 and 'Sound of Music' won the year after that. That said, this film is absolutely fantastic! The story from the novel has been somewhat altered, but that's more because of the limitations that they had on a stage that they just didn't change back for a filmed version. However, I don't mind. In fact, I rather think the whole production flows better than the novel does. I like Nancy bringing Oliver to the bridge with her and being killed there instead of later in the apartment. The subtle things in this film are the ones that make me laugh. I love the moment Mr. Bumble and Mrs. Bumble start coming out at the beginning from the governors office. The underscore for that moment is brilliant. My three favorite actors for this film were Jack Wild, who plays the best Dodger in any film version of the story, Ron Moody, a playful and humorous Fagin (this character is worked out much better than he is in the book), and Shani Wallis, who is the strongest, most distressed version of Nancy. The only reason I'm giving this film a 9 instead of a 10 is because of the two big production numbers which are 'Concider Yourself' and 'Who Will Buy.' I always hate when the choreography in musicals in meant to look like people doing everyday chores and jobs. It looks awful and cheesy, especially when they're dancing at the London Meat Co. They should've just done regular choreography for these scenes. However, this film is a rare treasure that will stay with us, hopefully, forever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f469eb880f664b8cb103c7dbc1af917a",
            "input": "I wonder who, how and more importantly why the decision to call Richard Attenborough to direct the most singular sensation to hit Broadway in many many years? He's an Academy Award winning director. Yes, he won for Ghandi you moron! Jeremy Irons is an Academy winning actor do you want to see him play Rocky Balboa? He has experience with musicals. Really? \"Oh what a lovely war\" have you forgotten? To answer your question, yes! The film is a disappointment, clear and simple. Not an ounce of the live energy survived the heavy handedness of the proceedings. Every character danced beautifully they were charming but their projection was theatrical. I felt nothing. But when I saw it on stage I felt everything. The film should have been cast with stars, unknown, newcomers but stars with compelling unforgettable faces even the most invisible of the group. Great actors who could dance beautifully. Well Michael Douglas was in it. True I forgot I'm absolutely wrong and you are absolutely right. Nothing like a Richard Attenborough Michael Douglas musical.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94588cd5481a46b0af1a9802bfb1cca4",
            "input": "What a crime...You forgot to brush your teeth...let's make a 30 minute show about it and have a couple of kids make some noise and then have the dad lecture them all because that's what he has to do.But, don't forget Uncle Joey has to make some weird noises and cooky faces, then Uncle Jesse has to show up with his black leather jacket and some jeans and look pretty for a few minutes while everybody discusses how Mother would have done things if she were around..Yep, full of zany little adventures about a whole bunch of nothing and an entire overlong story to build around it.Full House will not only bore you to tears, but it will make you age twenty times faster than you normally would.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8191a994c9fa4e4eac1a32bb07372aaa",
            "input": "Whatever you become in your life,you must never forget that you have roots.This is the story of true facts that was made into a beautiful and moving movie! I dare to say that this movie is well underrated.This shows us a reality of life...the more evil surrounds you ,the better person you become.Trust in your instincts and be aware that the ideal of life is to live it happy...without grudges,without living \"under a rock\" . The movie concept is more that interesting...connecting the storytelling with real life events...keeping us aware of everything..from facts to emotions! Bless these people and make everyone happy ! See it,i recommend it to all young people.it's not about racism it's about how to live your life !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21d90b20be204c2988782931e2c9859a",
            "input": "Having seen Charley Boorman in Long Way Round with Ewan McGregor, I was very interested to see how Charley would be in his own show. I thought Charley came across as a lovely guy who is very grounded and down to earth. Its nice to see that celebrities struggle with their weight and fitness, it just show's their human too! I don't know a lot about bikes, but this show gripped me right from the start. The preparation and organising for this event seems immense. The event itself seems very dangerous and I'm fascinated to see why Charley and everyone else is doing it and how far he gets. I love the pace of the show and the fast upbeat music. I can't believe he broke his collar bone, I really hope its not the end, I cant wait to see the next episode...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f68cf0a01d464a7390baed9c13baa76d",
            "input": "I had seen Marion Davies in a couple of movies and really couldn't understand her appeal. She couldn't dance for peanuts, she didn't attempt to sing and as for her acting - she seemed in a trance. But I hadn't seen her silent comedies and this film is wonderful. Rather than kidding her own image, as has been suggested here, to me it seems a satire on Gloria Swanson, who did start off in slapstick comedies, went on to highly emotional women's pictures and did end up marrying a Count. Marion, a top mimic, also did a funny rabbit imitation whenever she wanted to be seen as grand, that was Gloria Swanson spot on!!!Colonel Pepper (Dell Henderson) has motored all the way from Georgia to Hollywood, determined to prove that his daughter, Peggy, (Marion Davies) will be the greatest star ever. Their hope dwindles and they are down to their last 40 cents when they meet Billy Boone (William Haines) who works at the slapstick studios and promises to get Peggy a job. Peggy thinks she is going to be a great dramatic actress but the studio think she is a fantastic comic. They convince her to make the film and at the preview she is a great success. Charlie Chaplin asks for her autograph but she doesn't recognise him and treats him pretty rudely. \"Who was that short little guy\" - when she finds out she faints!!! Peggy and Billy get a call from High Art Studio but only Peggy is wanted and suddenly she is on her way. There is a funny scene where she sees a star she doesn't think much of - it's Marion Davies!!!She finally gets a chance of being a dramatic actress - but she can't cry!!! It is a hilarious scene as the director tries everything to get her to cry and when he succeeds, she can't stop!!! Her new leading man, Andre (Paul Ralli) convinces her to forget her comedy past and become elite and sophisticated - she even adopts a new name - Patricia Pepoire!!! She also seems to have forgotten Billy and her dad - she has developed a \"STAR\" personality!!! When the slapstick studio picks the same location as \"Patricia's\" movie, Billy is thrilled to see her but quite unprepared for her snobby attitude. When she calls him a cheap clown he realises that she is not the girl he once knew. After a studio luncheon ( a magnificent panning shot of some of the greatest stars of the day) \"Patricia\" gets a call from the Boss. It seems her films are a flop and no theatres want to book them - the public are tired of her mannerisms and want the old Peggy back. She and Andre decide to get married, she dreams of being a Countess (even though Billy says that Andre used to serve him spaghetti in a little cafe downtown and is no more a Count than he is). On her wedding day, Billy visits and after a hilarious custard pie fight she realises that Billy is the one for her.It was amazing to see all the guest stars - John Gilbert is seen going through the MGM gates, Lew Cody is talking to Elinor Glynn, who not only wrote \"It\" but several racy romances that were made into MGM movies. William Haines, another actor whose movies I had always wanted to see, was great - especially in the cafeteria scene , he had wonderful comic timing. Harry Gribbon was hilarious as the comedy director - there were so many hilarious scenes in this film and Marion was at the top of them all - I'm giving this film 10 out of 10.Highly, Highly Recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42e5b2fe2f7648ea865f5afbb2013dba",
            "input": "i liked this film a lot. it's dark, it's not a bullet-dodging, car-chasing numb your brain action movie. a lot of the characters backgrounds and motivations are kinda vague, leaving the viewer to come to their own conclusions. it's nice to see a movie where the director allows the viewer to make up their own minds.in the end, motivated by love or vengeance, or a desire to repent - he does what he feels is \"right\". 'will god ever forgive us for what we've done?' - it's not a question mortal men can answer - so he does what he feels he has to do, what he's good at, what he's been trained to do.denzel washington is a great actor - i honestly can't think of one bad movie he's done - and he's got a great supporting cast. i would thoroughly recommend this movie to anyone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b224ca715a55491cb4eb44fb0e89b897",
            "input": "This is the film in Antonioni's middle period that most critics dismiss quickly, as a 'flawed' look at 60s American youth culture/politics. For what it's worth, I found it more touching and memorable than his more acclaimed films like L'AVVENTURA, perhaps because he shows more emotion & empathy here than anywhere else. The story is simple, but it is used as a frame for Antonioni's brilliant observations of, and critique on American consumerist culture, student life, the counter-culture, and the whole anti-establishment, anti-war backlash that was so prominent then. Even from a purely technical point of view, it is a remarkably crafted film; from the opening credits sequence to the bizarre desert 'love-in', to the use of billboards, and right down to that jaw-dropping, cathartic finale that used 17 camera set-ups (in it's own way, as powerful as the climax of The Wild Bunch). Also, Antonioni chose one hell of a leading lady with Daria Halperin, one of the most beautiful ever to grace the screen. There isn't much 'acting' involved, as this feels more like a docu-drama, and so the use of non- professionals as the lead couple works quite effectively within that context. And the soundtrack is not only filled with marvelous music, its use is impressive as well (I can't forget the start of the film, mostly due to the selection of music - by Pink Floyd - that grooms the visuals so well).Contrary to popular opinion, this is quite an achievement in cinema, and one I would enthusiastically recommend to anyone with a taste or tolerance for the off- beat. Well worth seeking out, and one of those key films of the 60s that demands a DVD restoration/release.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8be77332bd3b4da6946786068f15ed92",
            "input": "This is one of the dumbest films, I've ever seen. It rips off nearly ever type of thriller and manages to make a mess of them all.There's not a single good line or character in the whole mess. If there was a plot, it was an afterthought and as far as acting goes, there's nothing good to say so Ill say nothing. I honestly cant understand how this type of nonsense gets produced and actually released, does somebody somewhere not at some stage think, 'Oh my god this really is a load of shite' and call it a day. Its crap like this that has people downloading illegally, the trailer looks like a completely different film, at least if you have download it, you haven't wasted your time or money Don't waste your time, this is painful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2fbed968411495581d272a8968ffd61",
            "input": "Raising victor Vargas is just a bad film. No amount of denial or ad-dollar supported publicity with change this sad fact.Maybe Peter Sollett saw he didn't have the money to do the movie he wanted to make and decided to take the easy way out by making a bad film that cynically apes the tenets of current \"edgy film-making\". Maybe he just doesn't know any better. It's hard to tell.What's not hard to tell is the result. Except for a few viewers who will intellectualize the bad film-making into an attempt at pseudo-realism, few will enjoy it.I know I didn't.Do yourselves a favor and pass on this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7403d556b7be4ba882498a2e2bfdcc24",
            "input": "Laurence Olivier, Merle Oberon, Ralph Richardson, and Binnie Barnes star in \"The Divorce of Lady X,\" a 1938 comedy based on a play. Olivier plays a young barrister, Everard Logan who allows Oberon to spend the night in his hotel room, when the London fog is too dense for guests at a costume ball to go home. The next day, a friend of his, Lord Mere (Richardson), announces that his wife (Barnes) spent the night with another man at the same hotel, and he wants to divorce her. Believing the woman to be Oberon, Olivier panics. Oberon, who is single and the granddaughter of a judge, pretends that she's the lady in question, Lady Mere, when she's really Leslie Steele.We've seen this plot or variations thereof dozens of time. With this cast, it's delightful. I mean, Richardson and Olivier? Olivier and Oberon, that great team in Wuthering Heights? Pretty special. Olivier is devastatingly handsome and does a great job with the comedy as he portrays the uptight, nervous barrister. Oberon gives her role the right light touch. She looks extremely young here, fuller in the face, with Jean Harlow eyebrows and a very different hairdo for her. She wears some beautiful street clothes, though her first gown looks like a birthday cake, and in one gown she tries on, with that hair-do, she's ready to play Snow White. Binnie Barnes is delightful as the real Lady Mere.The color in this is a mess, and as others have mentioned, it could really use a restoration. Definitely worth seeing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bc51c11fc224c0d8d3d44c96155b450",
            "input": "I saw this movie when Mystery Science Theater ran it in 1993. It is the worst thing I've ever seen. So bad in fact, that by sheer freakiness, this movie must get a ten rating because it has to be seen to be believed. Whoever wrote this script with children in mind should be beaten. I mean, really, the Devil vs. Santa? Visions of Hell? Creepy laughing wind-up reindeer? Forced Child labor with racial stereotypes? It ain't Sesame Street, that's for sure.As Crow exclaims during the MST3K showing, \"This is good ol' fashioned nightmare fuel!\" There's plenty of weird innuendo and screwed up theology. Merlin (presumably the Arthurian Merlin) hangs out with Santa in his crazy castle in the clouds (i.e. Heaven). Santa talks about baby Jesus and sends letters to \"Mr. Stork\" for children who ask for siblings. There are symbols around the castle that either look like pentagrams or RAF stars. My best friend and I have watch it every year since 1993 and we subject anybody we can hold down for 2 hours to watch it with us.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d6164f216564ad2a202860b76c8befa",
            "input": "What can I say that hasn't been said about \"The Haunting\"? It has everything that would make a great picture. Wonderful sets, moody music, and sound design to die for were all in place. The screenplay, though, sometimes boggles the mind in such a weird, surrealistic way. The entire team must have forgotten to read it through, maybe because they were too busy creating cg effects and building gothic sets to notice how weak the plot was. Each member of the cast gives a worthy performance, although with little conviction to the material at hand. Lili Taylor has the most to do while the others mostly react to her. But that's about it. All I can say is that it was a slightly enjoyable two hours, but you will definitely want more. A lot more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1253ac691f0749198aa16f73dd968a15",
            "input": "Based on one of the books by Gabriel Marquez and it might be brilliant literature, this cinema-adaption really sucks as it's more like fighting against sleep rather than enjoying some cinematographic delices. The story is about an old couple whose son died and living a life that is heavily dominated by poverty, and wherein the main character is a cock that hopefully one day brings some money for a forthcoming cockfight. I am in no mood to spill more words on this useless pretentious piece, just perhaps that you can see Salma Hayek in here, but sitting 90 minutes in front of your screen for just that? No gracias.....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03bd058ea84f47a29ebcc020246fad90",
            "input": "The only reason I watched this film was because I had recently read Robert Hough's less than perfect, but interesting, fictionalised account of the life of Big Cat trainer Mabel Stark. Beaty appears as a character in the book, in a less than flattering light.I hadn't realised until checking the movie out later on the IMDb that it was originally a serial. Whoever edited the original running time of 233 minutes down to the 68 minuted version available on DVD has done a hell of a good job. The shortened version plays just as well as any B movie of the period despite the many 'duh-what?' moments. For instance are we really expected to believe our hero dug that twenty foot deep tiger trap in a morning without even getting his jodhpurs dirty? Looking over the chapter titles I see that number five is titled \"Gorilla Warfare\" and number eleven is called \"The Gorilla\". There were no gorillas at all in the movie. I guess that's where some of the cuts were made.Historicaly interesting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45a9f7515d084a93a63710e3b14ed7aa",
            "input": "Sharp, well-made documentary focusing on Mardi Gras beads. I have always liked this approach to film-making - communicate ideas about a larger, more complex, and often inscrutable phenomenon by breaking the issue down into something familiar and close to home.I am sure most people have heard stories about sweatshops and understand the basic motives behind profit and capitalism, and globalism's effect on poorer nations (however people feel about it). Rather than expound on these subjects and get up on a soapbox (not that there's anything wrong with that, other than such documentaries typically preach to the converted), this documentary simply shows Mardi Gras beads, how they are manufactured, by what people, and under what conditions, and then how they are utilized by consumers at the end of the process. It openly and starkly investigates the motivations of everyone involved in the process, including workers, factory management, American importers, and finally, the consumer at the end of the chain.I felt a little sickened by this; equally by the Mardi Gras revelers, but also by the way the workers in China have accepted their situation as normal and par for the course (even if they have some objections to the details of how they are managed). The footage of the street sweepers cleaning up the beads off the streets at the end, made a particular impression. But that was just my reaction; I can see how someone else might read this documentary a little differently.Unlike other documentaries on this subject, I don't think you have to have any specific political opinion to be affected by this. This is ultimately a story about human beings and our relation to the goods we produce and consume. If you have ever bought a product made in the Far East, this should give you something to think about.Outstanding and highly recommended. Need to see more documentaries like this. Kudos to all of those involved in the making of this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53eeb0801a3848e28a82c88feff2c927",
            "input": "Must have to agree with the other reviewer. This has got to be the WORST movie, let alone western I have ever seen. Terrible acting, dialogue that was unimaginative and pathetic (let alone completely inappropriate for supposedly being in the 1800s), and oh, did I mention a battery pack prominently displayed on the back of one of the characters? I was waiting for the boom mike to fall in the middle of a scene. And the ending? The least I can say is that it was consistent with the rest of the movie...completely awful. And yes, it did contain every cliché in the book from the slow walk down the empty dusty road to the laughable \"let's remember when\" shots when a main character dies. Luckily I saw this on free TV. Don't waste your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26bb59b6d1864a0d87e7539a66818f5f",
            "input": "Hey everyone...There really isn't much to say for this movie at all. The basic plot is that a guy (Brandon) takes a few friends on a trip to his cabin in the woods for a weekend holiday away from work. After picking up a girl on the way there, things start going badly wrong for all of them.The storyline alone (written by the actor playing Brandon, I believe, although I could be wrong here) is unlikely and unconvincing, and is acted out accordingly. The \"Clown Killer\" himself is a rather a sad excuse for a psychotic killer. Far from being a dark, mysterious but most of all, intelligent predator, we are instead offered a rather clumsy, nursery rhyme-singing buffoon who appears to be going through a minor mid life crisis. The only thing that warranted the writing of this comment were the sex scenes and whatever gore there was in the film (the quality of the film led me to derive some enjoyment out of such things).In short, this film falls below every possible set standard. Admittedly, I was sharing a few beers with a close friend as I watched this, so we managed to scrape together some relative entertainment value out of this film and it is therefore only fair to mention that S.I.C.K did fall just shy of a two rating. However, in reality, (and with the benefit of hindsight) the one star rating is a more than legitimate score for this film.1 star out of ten.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb14fff2f3d5404bafc3eaf77a62a6b3",
            "input": "Sheesh! What a dreadful movie. Dodgy camera work, a script with more corn than Kellogg's, and acting so hammy you could open a pig farm with it. To cap it all, it doesn't know which audience to aim at - we have Cornel Wilde - or is that Corny Wilde? - getting on his soap box about the hazards of smoking any time someone lights a cigarette, dear oh dear, and in another awkward scene we have the baddie, Lobo, forcing his, ahem, if you will, 'male friend' to do a striptease dressed in a bikini. Try explaining that one to the kids...Throw in an overly contrived Treasure Island-cum-Jaws type storyline, and the result is a film so unintentionally funny, it's enjoyable - I shouldn't expect a Special Edition DVD any time soon, though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6b7cc14e35a409a86b173b73167ed99",
            "input": "Ugh, what can I say other than, ugh. I rented this film because it was labeled as a sequel to the original Vampires. This movie could not have been any lamer. Lacking not only in plot, but the acting is atrocious. Combined with some obvious plot holes makes this movie a very hard one to watch. Many times I questioned my own sanity at continuing to watch the film long after the plot had jumped the shark. Here's a sampling of the lamer aspects...***SPOILERS***Professional \"Slayer\" insists on sleeping outdoors by himself at night. He wakes up to a woman crying, sitting no more than 3 feet from him in the middle of nowhere. He immediately goes to comfort her without questioning her sudden appearance. She goes from crying to seducing him, and he lets it happen with obvious results...One of the main characters is Zoe, was bitten by a Vampire, but as long as she takes these \"experimental pills\" she got in Mexico City, she's fine, although her body temperature is below room temperature...Guard outside of monastery where hero is staying the night is killed by vampires, hero leaves the next day. He then returns a day later only to be surprised that the vampires attacked the monastery the night after he left......avoid this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41f24b004a474f77bde528e02ccc31df",
            "input": "In this Muppet movie, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, Rowlf, Scooter, Camillia, Dr. Teeth, Floyd, Animal, Janice, and Zoot are college graduates who decide to bring their successful college musical, Manhattan Melodies, to Broadway. Unfortunately, no producer will even meet with the Muppets. After being denied by too many producers, Scooter suggests that the Muppets decide to move on on their own. However, Kermit still believes that he can get his show on Broadway, but after he finally does and let's everybody know that he sold the show, Kermit get's amnesia and the others don't know where he is.This features many great scenes, including a live action sequence that introduced the Muppet Babies, a wedding sequence filled with Muppets, including the Sesame Street cast and Traveling Matt (from Fraggle Rock), Scooter as a movie theatre usher, and a scene where Rizzo and the other rats cook breakfast.My only complaint is that more characters weren't included more. Sure, many of them appear at the wedding, but there should have been some significant roles for Bunsen, Beaker, Beauregard, and Sweetums, and Lips should have been part of The Electric Mayhem in this movie like he was in The Muppet Show's last season and The Great Muppet Caper, and Miss Piggys dog Foo Foo should have been with her as well (after all, Rizzo The Rat, also performed by Steve Whitmire, had a big part in this movie, and he wasn't very well-known at the time).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92ef63d95dad4e7fbe90f0f582ed9f63",
            "input": "Don't let the title trick you into watching this movie. I read the title, saw that it came on in the middle of the night, and figured it was one of those soft porn movies. This movie is bad. If you like soft porn movies, then I'm sorry to say this isn't one. There are a lot of sex but nothing shown and they only last for 5 seconds or so.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a989e08a0d58442aa1f94e3939696167",
            "input": "Yes, Shakespeare would indeed have been proud. Laurence Fishburne was not at his best but certainly not bad. Kenneth Brannagh on the other hand was brilliant. His scheming was wonderful as was his toying with the audience. Very nice work.There were at times too little drama where more would have been expected. Cassio's slaying, for instance, was a bit clouded by too much happening to far apart, causing the spectator to twist his head to grasp it all.Did I mention Michael Maloney? His madness striken Roderigo was unusual; annoying even.If you haven't seen Othello before, see this. If you haven't read Othello, see this. If you haven't heard Othello, see this. You do, on the other hand, do yourself a favour by reading it, seeing it acted onstage and hearing it sung too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff8c81ec662d4d929ab3bf75657d0236",
            "input": "I found myself very caught up in this movie, at least at the beginning, and any credit I give to this movie, is Lacey Chabert, she was fantastic!! But thats where it ends. I seem to be very good at figuring out who the killer is, and I like it when a movie is able to completely baffel me, but I felt out and out lied to, they whole time they lead you in one direction and then suddenly they decided to go in a completely different direction at the end, they gave no hit to it at all, thats not misleading that very bad writing and planning, someone did not think at all!I felt the movie would have been much better if they had stuck to the plot that the lead you on, they also seemed to not answer anything, why did Jane(maria) burn down the professor's house.Its a great pity as I felt it started out as a relatively good movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2736d1bad73249c1b2fd82655d8c8369",
            "input": "In this installment of the series, Edmund Blackadder is stuck in the Regency period in Britain (during the later portion of George III's rule). This time, Blackadder's prospects are much poorer--as instead of royalty, he's a servant to the very, very thick George IV (the price regent). Unlike the historical accounts of George IV, this one is about as bright as a tomato and as a result, Blackadder's able to take advantage of him and scheme to his heart's content. The only major difference in style between this one and earlier ones is that the series ends on a very, very, very different note--you just have to see it to believe it. Other than that, all the usual story elements are there and the show is hilarious. The only reservation I have (as always) is that this show is not appropriate for the kids due to its crude language and adult situations.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-942db2d429e94df7b4bcdb7dac2b81a1",
            "input": "\"That '70s Show\" is definitely the funniest show currently on TV. I started watching it about two and a half years ago, and as soon as I saw it I could tell it was a great show. I like all the characters, but my personal favorites are Fez and Kelso. Leo was also an awesome character while he was there, I really hope he comes back because he's hilarious. It's classic when Fez goes \"you son of a bitch!\", and when Kelso yells \"burn!\", that always makes me laugh. They are both great characters and always have something funny to say. Jackie being hot is just another reason to watch the show; she started out being really good looking but damn, somewhere around season 5-6 she just got Really hot. I've seen most of the episodes more than once, some like 10 times, and there still hilarious. This is one of the few shows that I can watch over and over and still laugh at just as much as I did the first time I saw it. The cast is classic; almost everyone is funny, where with many shows there are only a few funny characters. I will be sad to see this show end next year, but it will be going off the air as one of the best shows ever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d10d7348c5a40c085e3bb2633f80017",
            "input": "I have screened this movie several times here at college, and every time I show it, the number of people watching with me grows exponentially... in addition to the virgins, anyone I've already shown it to NEEDS to see it again! It takes a little while to get into it, but by the end the whole room is screaming, shouting, yelling, rewinding scenes repeatedly, repeating dialogue, and just totally and completely engrossed in the moviegoing experience that is Pia Zadora in \"The Lonely Lady\"! Scene after scene after scene of the most ineptly filmed, poorly written, horribly acted TRASH is thrown at you in an all-out assault that ranks as the campiest thing I own (no small statement, friends). For me nothing compares 2 U, Pia... and I don't suppose I'm the only one who's ever felt this way!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3cf32dbd83e4b7db329ca2a723b519e",
            "input": "I remember seeing this movie when I was about 7; and at the time it shocked me. I had seen a violent movie before, but I never saw a movie with the consequences and reality of violence. This movie not only shows this, but it also shows how people can change their lives and choose happiness. What this movie did and crash failed to do was to be truthful. Crash tried to show how racism was bad (and Crash actually had a built-in anti Asian bias) and to come at it from a morally superior position. Grand Canyon came at things from such a raw and real perspective that it actually ends up on a higher ground than crash. Especially when you compare the endings. The ending of crash is this supposedly neat little ending that ties everything up. While Grand Canyon simply ends on a quiet note, where you know nothing much will change in the character's lives but that's because life just goes on too, there's no suitable ending. No matter how good...bad you are. There is no ending of a chapter to begin another.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb967e3451744b418d8b891971524a62",
            "input": "I wasn't sure how to rate this movie, since it was so bad it was actually very funny. I'm not a Gackt fan by any means, though he is talented, despite the weird pseudonym that sounds like a cat coughing up a hairball. I always thought Hyde was talented though, Faith is an interesting album.But on topic here folks. This movie is ridiculous. It's so over the top and nonsensical it's almost like a parody of supernatural action films.The movie has almost no plot here, except it's just about vampires with gangster friends. In a way, this film almost reminded me of Spider-Man 3, with how there were too many ideas, which resulted in not enough time to pay attention on one of them.The action scenes were laughable. Quickly edited, almost hard to understand, with choreography that's so laughably bad. Though Hyde looked very stylish during the action scenes, but that's this film's only such redemption. I'm a sucker for good action movies, but the action was horribly done. Though the final shootout was OK and the highlight of this otherwise depressing movie.It keeps jumping between genres, not a good thing. It wants to be a drama, or an action flick, or a horror, or a romance... what the hell.If this review is making you mad, why? Is it because Gackt and Hyde are your love? Don't fool yourself, this MOVIE IS BAD.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1a31ef84bf9b4f94831b1acb6376de75",
            "input": "I don't really know where to start. The acting in this movie was really terrible, I can't remember seeing so many 'actors' in one film that weren't able to act. Not only the acting was bad, the characters were incredibly stupid as well.Then there's the action. I believe that even children know that when someone gets shot, there's blood involved. But when someone gets shot in Snitch'd for ten (!!) times, there's no blood at all. Well, I guess that's just me.To make a long story short (because believe me, I can go on for hours about this film), this is without a doubt the worst film I ever saw. This film should be number 1 in the bottom 100 without a doubt.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cea3d65c7dc541bca74f67e1f644ed08",
            "input": "I am a huge, huge fan of John Cusack, Samuel L. Jackson, and Tony Shalhoub. I'm slightly less fond of Stephen King, but I like some of his work.This said, I should have LOVED 1408.***POSSIBLE SPOILERS AFTER THIS POINT**** I walked in eager. I walked out disappointed.This is not the fault of the actors. Shalhoub and Jackson both have very small roles because the premise of the movie puts Cusack in the \"guy in a locked room\" scenario.This wasn't a BAD movie, but I can't call it a good one either. It was a muddied mess that had moments of \"ouch, that's just WRONG,\" combined with moments of \"ouch, that's just painful,\" and moments of \"oh, now THAT'S just unfortunate\" with very little continuity-connectivity between them. Eislin's father shows up once, and there's no seeming connection to the rest of Mike's personal life that we see displayed while he tries to survive the room. A previous commenter described the Olin/Enslin argument as worth watching, and I very much agree. But other than that, aside from some clever musical cues (the room almost playfully torments Enslin a little bit, and gives him one chance to get out before upping the ante...at which point it gives him the one-hour countdown clock and the titular line from the Carpenters \"We've Only Just Begun.\") it's mostly \"stuff jumps out at you when you least expect it!\" type horror that was fun when I was fourteen, and surrounded by friends my age, clutching each other in the summer while Jason stalked Camp Crystal Lake.The rest of the movie was \"let's make him relive some of his most painful experiences\" mindgaming, with \"let's animate the paintings in creepy ways\" cliché cheesiness.******END SPOILERS***** I expected better from this movie with Stephen King's name attached to it, as well as the actors I mentioned above.We never find out the origin of the evil. We never get to see the evil defeated, though we can presume maybe it was defeated.And the ending was just a jarring \"What?!\" moment.Wait for it to come on cable. I wouldn't have minded paying for it as a matinée, but I'm feeling a bit shortchanged for having paid opening night prices for it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc8d30d471d446c3baa3f6ed8624753b",
            "input": "I do get irritated with modern adaptations of Shakespeare when the director can't make his mind up whether to use the original or to update it. If it's using the original words in an updated setting, that's particularly tricky if set in the 20th or 21st century although it can work OK in period styles, eg the Trevor Nunn Twelfth Night set late Victorian very effectively. It could work with the 30's setting if only there had been far less of the song and dance and far more of Shakespeare's text. Unfortunately, it just ends up being a pretty trivial though very pleasant show. Another problem is Branagh himself. I agree he's far too old to play one of the students but more important, he's such an experienced Shakespearean actor that in spite of all his efforts to be just another student, his strength of acting shows all the time. Of course he should have played the King - no problem in having a mature student King surrounded by younger students. Instead we had a pleasant but unimposing actor for the King, thus an unimposing so-called King with no Kingly attributes. The amount of song and dance, which I found tedious in spite of the nice songs and pleasant enough dancing, unfortunately meant the great Shakespearean dialogue had to be cut down drastically. So the whole thing ends up a trivial and mild confection, and I got very bored, including with the comic turns, and was glad when it ended. Branagh has not done Shakespeare justice in this production.Accolades however to Richard Briers and Geraldine McEwan, absolutely splendid as the older couple.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d972242c64804023b8db8180377c0641",
            "input": "A typical 70s Italian coming of age film, original and good music, but with some quirks, interesting but not fantastic photography, poor and at times confused storyline (e.g. the role of the wolf-dog, and where does the boy come from?) with poor dialogue, nice ambiance.The reason it is still (relatively) well-known and sought after is probably the nude scenes (including typical 70s pseudo-coitus) involving an 11 and 13 year old girl with an older teenage boy (Eva Ionesco and Laura Wendel) - it is interesting from a socio-political point of view to see how these representations of very young adolescents was considered acceptable and normal in the whole of Europe (and US) 30 years ago, whereas now it is more than taboo.The story revolves round bullying of one girl (Laura) by the other two characters, and her discovery of sex, a quite accurate representation of an aspect teenage life. The character of Eva (Silvia) does not evolve to the very end of the film and already appears very versed in the erotic arts - there is no \"coming of age\" for her: she is a very vain young girl who is already aware of her sexual charms, but ultimately is just used and ends the film crying like the little girl she really still is. The boy is an utterly despicable bully, while Laura comes across as a very naive and weak victim.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d15f8eaafb8a46e9a2ed86df3b7cb59c",
            "input": "It's not a terrible movie, really, and Glenn and Keitel are top-notch actors. Further, they do an acceptable job with the very weak script. The scenery is lush and the plot has some interesting twists. Further, I umderstand why these actors and the crew made the film, they are professionals and they get paid for it. But I do wonder why studios spend the time and money to make a film and then don't release it for theater audiences? Even if a film is a box-office flop, surely it makes some money. If you are a fan of Keitel or Glenn, rent the video or catch it on TV, as did I. Granted, the movie won't help solve the immigration quandary with Mexico, but the experience is far better than 90% of the standard TV fare of today.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3509d2dd67947799ef5dff941df0517",
            "input": "I was going to give it an 8, but since you people made 6.5 out of a lot better votes, I had to up my contribution. The river Styx was pure genius. Sure, Woody was his perennial stuff, but at least his role was appropriate. The first half hour was really hilarious, and then the rest of the movie was easy to watch. The dialog was clever enough, and Woody's card tricks at the parties, along with the reaction from the upper crust, were fun to watch. This was much better than the newspaper critics made it sound out to be. And a plus, a little Sorcerer's Apprentice to go along with it. And of course, did you notice that Johansen is getting a bit frumpy? Charles Dance is always entertaining, as was Hugh Jackman.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b05126d52104f5085f1d0780ac96641",
            "input": "I first heard about this film about 20 years ago when I was a kid in grade school(!), it just so happened that I was thumbing through the encyclopedias in the classroom one day, and under the entry for movies (or cinema, I don't remember), were several stills for different movies from mainstream to experimental, and one of them shown on the page was a still for OffOn. It really intrigued me, since it stood out the most on the page (it was a still from the film of the scene with the eye with other elements superimposed over it).About 18 or so years later, the public library here where I live had available for checkout the whole 4-DVD set of \"Treasures of American Film Archives\" released by the National Film Preservation Foundation. So when I was reading the notes on the DVD cases for the set, I was quite pleasantly surprised to see that OffOn was on one of the discs. After all these years, I could finally see the film! After viewing it, it slightly wasn't was I was expecting it to be (it tended to be a more organic-looking film, not that that's a bad thing, but I was expecting it to have a more electronic aesthetic), but it was still an impressive film, IMHO, considering the techniques Scott Bartlett used to make the film, including hand-tinting the film itself, and using video equipment for some of the film's scenes (filmed off of a video monitor), giving it a more distressed, lo-res look.Don't get me wrong, the techniques used in this film were quite ground-breaking for 1972. That's why it's still one of my favorite short/experimental films, and a creative inspiration for me as well...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-255e0f2b20b24d288d6bdc9954528706",
            "input": "Listening to the soundtrack at the moment, the images come back with a vividness that makes my longing for a dry eye very strong (in order to be able to type this). I've seen it twice thus far, and I should be ashamed for having seen it *only* twice.I've seen all Miyazaki & Studio Ghibli films, and they are invariably nothing less than masterpieces (except maybe for Nausicaa which was, even in the non-cut up version too premature compared to the nec-plus-ultra manga). Still, their strength sometimes becomes their weakness, as they tend to get too naive/positive (Chihiro), or, with more nuance, a bit too explicit/moralist (Mononoke). At least, compared to for example the other Ghibli master Takahata (Grave of the Fireflies / Only Yesterday / Raccoon Wars). But not this one.In Laputa, Miyazaki pours all the brilliant storytelling that tellers of tales have gathered and perfected over the ages, combined with a bit of morale, but nicely interwoven with not only a completely transcendental atmosphere, but also with the humor and amusement of for example Totoro. Every single main character is perfectly portrayed with their doubts and fears and their qualities that help them overcome difficulties. The pacing is so perfect that I know of nothing except a black hole that would be able to exert such a gravitational pull on your whole being. The story sets out as an action flic with mysteries hinted at, but when the girl falls from the sky, unconscious, floating with the stone, and the main theme kicks in, you get a glimpse of the grand mystery you're about to uncover, but the story then settles and gradually, over a number of carefully selected scenes of action and serene beauty, builds to an unforgettable climax of melancholy, hope, beauty - like, following days of sombre gloom, finally seeing the horizon on a clear morning, knowing the path walked, seeing the distance ahead, but smiling at the mere fact of being able to catch a glimpse of it.It is so like an exploding white light in your skull that if by the time the credits start rolling you have kept your eyes dry and your mind numb, you should see a therapist.Despite the fact that technically-image-wise some more recent Miyazakis might be more overwhelming, this to me remains his undisputed masterpiece. If you take a fraction of a second to realise that this was made back in 1986, you can only come to the conclusion that Hayao Miyazaki is a genius like a star that appears only once every 200 years. This of course has been suggested before, but to me this is his only film that can, on its own, fully illustrate that simple fact. If you miss this during your lifetime, you'll die with a huge gap - which would be a pity, as the coffin costs the same.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8a68854fee44ef5b9af3826c1364991",
            "input": "(aka: DEMONS III)Made for Italian TV although shot in English and was never meant to be a sequel to the earlier DEMONS films. It was supposed to be simply titled, THE OGRE, which is how director Lamberto Bava had released it.An American family rents an Italian villa for the summer. The woman (Virginia Bryant) has recurring dreams of herself as a little girl going down to the old wine-cellar of this villa an encountering this cocoon-like structure hanging down from the ceiling. It glows and is covered in cobwebs and has what looks like spider or insect legs hanging down from it. It drips what looks like green paint.Of course the husband doesn't believe any of this. The villa just is old and creaks and makes strange noises in the middle of the night and she should just ignore it.But then the OGRE itself appears in what looks like some kind of 16th Centaury costume with what looks like a wolf's head attached to it and it's attracted to the scent of orchids.The films isn't really that bad and at least the dialog is halfway intelligent without the ridiculous awkward phrases that dubbing would bring. There's no real gore other than some skeletons rotting in a basement pond that really looks like the bottom of a modern swimming pool. The OGRE itself just simply fades away after it is run over by the family's Jeep Cherokee. The copy of the Shriek DVD I watched was defective, with the picture going black for a few seconds about a half an hour into the film, a flaw I hope Shriek has since corrected. Extras include a short interview with Lamberto Bava where he explains how this wasn't a sequel, etc..etc...along with some trailers to other Shriek DVD releases. This is pretty standard stuff.3 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90ca35f972d5457ba69e195af24c077e",
            "input": "There is this private campground in Plymouth, Massachusetts, that's been around since 1959. My grandparents were among its founders, my parents had a site starting in 1965, and my two brothers have sites there now.(This doesn't have anything directly to do with the movie; bear with me.) I spent summers at Blueberry Hill from when I was five years old to when I was eighteen, and it is to people like me to whom this film speaks: the ones for whom a group camp in the woods was, as my fiancée tells of me, \"the good and happy place.\" If you've never experienced the lifestyle, Indian Summer will probably be lost on you; don't bother. It's not quick-paced, it doesn't have rapid cuts, the plots aren't in the least bit convoluted, it has no explosions, such dramatic tension as exists is mild, there aren't any A-list actors, there are no rapid-fire quips just to show off how clever the scriptwriters are (other than, perhaps, Kimberley Williams' killer line about how her fiancé shouldn't \"overwind his toys.\" That is not the least degree what this movie is about, any more than The Godfather is a slasher flick just because it has a lot of on screen gore.But Indian Summer is Godfather's polar opposite. If you have experienced the lifestyle, see this movie. Don't read any more, just do it.For me, this is a 9/10 film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc86894925664aee91fe24b3bc64e295",
            "input": "I agree with most of the Columbo fans that this movie was an unnecessary change of format. Columbo is a unique cop with unorthodox police methods. This movie looks like a remake of any other ordinary detective dramas from the past. And that is the disturbing point, because Columbo is no ordinary detective.There are two parts in this film that left me intriguing. First, I can't figure out the title of this movie. It is misleading. Maybe a better title would've been \"The Vanishing Bride\" or something similar. Second, Columbo hides a piece of evidence without offering the reason (to the viewers at least) why he does it.I don't feel betrayed, just disappointed. I'm glad Peter Falk went back to the usual Columbo.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2013bc028b4b427590803cbe135792aa",
            "input": "Advertised by channel seven in Australia as the \"untold story\", this miniseries undoes itself in the first five minutes by washing over the titular character's childhood and adolescence in less time than a good director will use to set up a single event. This cowardice and self-censorship for the fear of offending anyone permeates the series, and is ultimately responsible for its failure.Robert Carlyle puts in a valiant performance as the most hated man of the twentieth century, but he is hamstrung by two things. The lack of a decent dialogue coach on the series leaves his Northern-UK heritage shining blindingly through his physical appearance, and the dialogue is at times truly abysmal. Apparently, acknowledging the fact that Hitler was raised in a Catholic family is off limits, but insulting millions of Vikings and their descendants by having Carlyle spew the most ridiculous lines about Valhalla is quite okay. Well, here's a clue for the writers - any person familiar with Viking mythology will tell you that Valhalla is about the embodiment of honour and might in battle, two things that the Nazis quickly eschewed in favour of rat cunning and backstabbing. Until we can wake up to ourselves and realise that the reason Hitler has never been excommunicated from the Catholic church is because it would require the embarassing acknowledgement that he was once a member, we will never learn what this awful period of the world's history has to teach us.So now that we've managed to insult Vikings and the citizens of Scandinavian countries in this sham, you'd think the series would stop there, but it doesn't. Stockard Channing's listing in the opening credits was particularly eyebrow-raising, given that her voice is heard, and her face seen, for about thirty seconds at the most during the opening credits, making it patently transparent that more footage of Hitler's early days were shot, but not included because of a typical nanny-state fear of offending someone. It is also quite ironic that the films or miniseries which give a far better insight into Hilter's character do not feature him at all.Until we learn to stop sugar-coating the truth and realise that the citizenry of Germany was mostly unopposed to Hitler's views, and not necessarily through ignorance, we will never learn to deal with the fact that subversions of democracy (yes, Germany was a democracy pre-Hitler) can occur anywhere, we are doomed. That's the one thing this mini-series got right in portraying. Unfortunately, that element is lost in attempts to make Hitler's religious beliefs appear those of a much more valiant people, and the inability to scratch past the surface in any part of the subject matter. David Letterman's show had it pegged when they ran short satirical segments about the series. They really might as well have made a family sitcom with him as the star, that's how badly it was written.All in all, this politically correct farce of a bio-pic is worth no points, but I gave it two because Robert Carlyle definitely deserves better material than this, and he is about the only thing in it that works.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cbb2bf495114e44863abe2421d6c321",
            "input": "The Brain (or head) that Wouldn't Die is one of the more thoughtful low budget exploitation films of the early 1960s. It is very difficult to imagine how a script this repulsively sexist could have been written without the intention of self-parody. And the themes that are expressed repeatedly by the female lead, Ginny Leith - a detached head kept alive by machines, I-Vs and clamps - seem to confirm that the film was meant to simultaneously exploit and critique gender stereotypes. Shades of the under-rated Boxing Helena.The genderisms are plentiful, and about as irritating as an army of angry ants. The dialog is hyperbolic, over-dramatic and unbelievable, and the acting is merely OK (but not consistent). Why have I given this film a 4? Because some thought clearly went into it. I am really not sure what point the film was really trying to make, but it seems clear that it strives for an unusually edgy and raw sort of horror (without the blood and guts today's audiences expect).Another unique and interesting aspect of the Brain is that there really are not any heroes in this film, and none of the characters are particularly likable.All considered, this is a fairly painful and disturbing look at early 1960s American pop sexuality, from the viewpoint of a woman kept alive despite her missing body after what should have been a fatal car crash. Her lover is threatening to sew a fresh, high quality, body onto her and force her to continue living with him. She is understandably non-plussed by all of this and forced to befriend a creature who is almost as monstrous as her boyfriend. Oh, there are also some vague references to the 1950s/60s cliché about the evils of science run amok.Recommended for B sci fi buffs and graduate students in gender studies. O/w not recommended.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba9cdf0d10884dc1b400adf900bab2f5",
            "input": "Halloween is not only the godfather of all slasher movies but the greatest horror movie ever! John Carpenter and Debra Hill created the most suspenseful, creepy, and terrifying movie of all time with this classic chiller. Michael Myers is such a phenomenal monster in this movie that he inspired scores of imitators, such as Jason Vorhees (Friday the 13th), The Miner (My Bloody Valentine), and Charlie Puckett (The Night Brings Charlie). Okay, so I got a little obscure there, but it just goes to show you the impact that this movie had on the entire horror genre. No longer did a monster have to come from King Tut's tomb or from Dr. Frankenstein's lab. He could be created in the cozy little neighborhoods of suburbia. And on The Night He Came Home...Haddonfield, Illinois and the viewers would never be the same. There are many aspects of this movie that make it the crowning jewel of horror movies. First is the setting...it takes place in what appears to be a normal suburban neighborhood. Many of us who grew up in an area such as this can easily identify with the characters. This is the type of neighborhood where you feel safe, but if trouble starts to brew, nobody wants to lift a finger to get involved (especially when a heavy-breathing madman is trying to skewer our young heroine.) Along with the setting, the movie takes place on Halloween!! The scariest night of the year! While most people are carving jack-o-lanterns, Michael Myers is looking to carve up some teenie-boppers. Besides the setting, there is some great acting. Jamie Lee Curtis does a serviceable job as our heroine, Laurie Strode, a goody-two-shoes high-schooler who can never seem to find a date. However, it is Donald Pleasance, as Dr. Sam Loomis, who really steals the show. His portrayal of the good doctor, who knows just what type of evil hides behind the black eyes of Michael Myers and feels compelled to send him to Hell once and for all, is the stuff of horror legend. However, it is the synthesizer score that really drives this picture as it seems to almost put the viewer into the film. Once you hear it, you will never forget it. I also enjoy the grainy feel to this picture. Nowadays, they seem to sharpen up the image of every movie, giving us every possible detail of the monster we are supposed to be afraid of. In Halloween, John Carpenter never really lets us get a complete look at Michael Myers. He always seems like he is a part of the shadows, and, I think that is what makes him so terrifying. There are many scenes where Michael is partly visible as he spies on the young teens (unbeknownst to them), which adds to his creepiness. If you think about, some wacko could be watching you right now and you wouldn't even know it. Unfortunately for our teenagers (and fortunately for us horror fans), when they find Michael, he's not looking for candy on this Halloween night..he's looking for blood. Finally, Michael Myers, himself, is a key element to this movie's effectiveness. His relentless pursuit of Laurie Strode makes him seem like the killer who will never stop. He is the bogeyman that will haunt you for the rest of your life. So,if you have not seen this movie (if there are still some of you out there who haven't, or even if you have), grab some popcorn, turn off every light, pop this into the old DVD and watch in fright. Trick or Treat!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e57610ceb4a6495abba417f67726fccd",
            "input": "You know you're in trouble when the opening narration basically tells you who survives. It all goes downhill from there. Unnecessary, \"Matrix\"-influenced bullet-time camera work. Pointless cuts to video game footage. Crusty old sea captains and wacky seamen. Ravers who become skilled combatants in the blink of an eye. Even the zombies are boring.I was hoping for at least a \"so bad it's good\" zombie movie, but this one is \"so bad those involved with its creation should be barred from ever making a movie again\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cace03efbd644b49a4e00783fd6a4e48",
            "input": "It was 1 a.m. in the morning and I had nothing else to do. Don't judge me... please.We're back in time during the Spanish settlements. A group have made their way onto an island. It doesn't take too long before they encounter a large \"reptile\", which gobbles up their horse. Soon they're captured by the natives and in order to gain freedom they must kill the \"reptile gods.\" THE CG sucks; it reminds me of the CG of early console video games. The encounters were lame. The only positive thing I have to say about this was the hottie native running around in a skimpy outfit. Otherwise it's just a middling effort.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9988da0a3f9d41d680634dc02ef6285b",
            "input": "I'm into bad movies but this has NOTHING going for it. Despite what the morons above have said, it is NOT funny. I know comedy AND underground movies but this is so boring that the Director / Writer should be prohibited from EVER directing anything but local cable access EVER again! To love movies and comedy is to despise this film. I may never get over how unfunny and boring this work was. If you like this movie you ARE a pothead as sober there is NOTHING here. ZERO! If you need to compare underground movies, see \"Kentucky Fried Movie\" or early John Waters. The movie starts by defining satire and I defy anyone to show me the satire. The rule for comedy is THIS ... If it's FUNNY you can say or do ANYTHING but if it's NOT funny you are not satirical, you are not edgy, you are merely pathetic and this movie is simply not funny. ZERO!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55ab36ece5f849b1aafbd0f72260bb09",
            "input": "Without question, the worst ELVIS film ever made. The movie portrays all Indians as drunk, stupid, and lazy. Watch ELVIS's skin change color throughout the film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36240aeb23f947bdbc4c5dd5ecd97884",
            "input": "For a comedy this has a decent and inventive plot and Trey Parker and Matt Stone's comic timing is perfect. There are dozens of funny moments to this fantastic movie. I especially like the multitude of colors and the way the clash in the sports arena scenes. Robert Stacks Unsolved Mysteries spoof is also very amusing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c244585e3a704b2694142f8cba02ddcb",
            "input": "A new creative team emerged in 1950 when brilliant actor James Stewart teamed with the equally-brilliant director Anthony Mann to make a series of westerns that helped define that genre for the future. Until that time Stewart was mainly noted for an aw..aw..aw approach to family oriented comedies, dramas, and romances. Not that he wasn't already a multi-talented Hollywood star. One of his best screen performances ever and one of the best for anyone on celluloid was as Macaulay 'Mike' Connor, a sarcastic writer for a scandal rag in \"The Philadelphia Story.\" He had even done westerns before. His portrayal of gun shy yet expert shot Thomas Jefferson Destry Jr. in the comedy western \"Destry Rides Again\" helped make that film a classic. But to most movie goers he was the all-American boyscout type Mr. Smith or George Bailey. Seldom was there a dark side to any of the characters he played. Anthony Mann was associated with B flicks in the film noir mode. \"Raw Deal,\" \"Side Street,\" and \"T-Men\" caught the eye of James Stewart. So the two gifted men combined their resources to produce some of the greatest Hollywood westerns ever made. \"Winchester '73\" and \"The Man from Laramie\" were the best but the others were almost as effective. Mann became a successful director of A films as a result going on to direct what some critics believe to be the greatest western of them all Gary Cooper's \"Man of the West.\" Stewart became fabulously wealthy as a result of the partnership because he signed for part of the royalties in return for a fraction of the salary he was usually paid, a wise move indeed followed by many other actors from then on.Winchester '73 was also one of the first films, maybe the first, to tell a story from the standpoint of a traveling gun. Each owner is part of the tale being told and it all comes together in the exciting showdown at the end of the movie, which also holds a surprise for the viewer. Based on a story by Stuart Lake, the tale centers on revenge and the ownership of the Winchester '73. The year is 1876. Custer and his 7th cavalry have been annihilated by the Sioux and Cheyenne at Little Big Horn. The whites want revenge. The native Americans want their land and their way of life back. This conflict leads to a confrontation between native Americas led by Young Bull (young Rock Hudson showing his potential as an actor) and a small cavalry group pinned down in a canyon and joined by civilians Lin McAdam (Stewart), his partner and life-long pal High Spade ( the underrated actor Millard Mitchell), and a couple trying to find themselves, Steve Miller (Charles Drake) and Lola Manners (Shelley Winters), a soiled dove with a kind heart. Among the horse soldiers are newcomers Tony Curtis and James Best (late of the \"Dukes of Hazzard\"), whose part is cut short by a bullet.Wyatt Earp was in Dodge City in 1876. The movie has him as head marshal. The fine actor Will Geer (later of the Waltons) looks like an older Earp. In reality Wyatt was assistant Marshal in Dodge at the time just cutting his teeth on being a lawman. Lin McAdam wins the Winchester in a shooting contest, but has it taken from him not long afterward by outlaw Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally) and his henchmen. McAdam and High Spade are after both Dutch Henry and the Winchester for the remainder of the movie. An even more sinister character emerges along the way, Waco Johnnie Dean, played as evil personified by Dan Duryea who threatens to steal the show from the other members of a stellar cast.The Winchester passes through several hands during the course of the film, each time the transfer is intense. One involves a gunrunner played to perfection by John McIntire. Other swaps are intermingled with the scenario above. All this plus the action keeps the viewer glued to the seat throughout the entire show.As noted above, the cast is first rate down to the smallest role. Look for other familiar faces in uncredited parts, including the future sheriff of \"Bonanza\" Ray Teal and B western reliable Panhandle Perkins (Guy Wilkerson).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75335f73a1224c33810e43ff94208743",
            "input": "On second viewing of this movie, I like it even more than the first time. It is full of nuances and a perception of life as being quite ordinary and often fearful but what lifts this movie to a height rarely realized is its focus on the little incidences in our lives to which we normally only offer the briefest of attention spans. Here the movie spins into the celebration of these incidences, the meeting of a tow truck driver and client, the jogger hearing a baby's cry from the bushes. The dialogue, acting, casting and direction are superb. No two by fours, no grand revelations. What I did observe was how true the characters were to their basic natures and how enhanced their lives became when these were celebrated. Kudos to all involved in this, we need more \"Grand Canyons\" in our lives. 9 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0fd5c508609491fa7cc69e3371d2703",
            "input": "Paulie is a fantasy of a littler girl or perhaps her recollection of what her youth was like growing up.Tony Shaloub executes a flawless performance as an Russian Scientist (PhD) who cannot find decent work in America. He befriends an isolated parrot while performing meanial duties of a janitor at a behavioral science lab.The chief Doctor is a bitter man, as Paulie, who can speak and fully comprehend language and learn, embarasses the Doctor, who later banishses him to the lower levels of the building, where Mikail (Tony S.) finds him.Paulie recants his life with Marie and how they lost each other. The quest begins to reunite Paulie with Marie, only more than 20 years has passed.The movie ends, some will say predictably, with Mikail reuniting Paulie with Marie. The story closes with the three entering Marie's home, where you can make the final your own choice.Great family film!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9db82fddf7ce43e4a5ada70ebee2cb11",
            "input": "Wow! So much fun! Probably a bit much for normal American kids, and really it's a stretch to call this a kid's film, this movie reminded me a quite a bit of Time Bandits - very Terry Gilliam all the way through. While the overall narrative is pretty much straight forward, Miike still throws in A LOT of surreal and Bunuel-esquire moments. The whole first act violently juxtaposes from scene to scene the normal family life of the main kid/hero, with the spirit world and the evil than is ensuing therein. And while the ending does have a bit of an ambiguous aspect that are common of Miike's work, the layers of meaning and metaphor, particularly the anti-war / anti-revenge message of human folly, is pretty damn poignant. As manic and imaginatively fun as other great Miike films, only instead of over the top torture and gore, he gives us an endless amount of monsters and yokai from Japanese folk-lore creatively conceived via CG and puppetry wrapped into an imaginative multi-faceted adventure. F'n rad, and one of Miike's best!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-411ec4a62b8a44d5b13b67c1dc66e0a0",
            "input": "This is one of those horror flicks where twenty-somethings fool around with the dark arts around a camp fire, getting into a heap of trouble for doing so. A portal was opened containing a world of demons known as the Kelippoth of the Sitra Achra by a man whose daughter, Summer, gets kidnapped by something, taken into it. Summer is trained by a mysterious group whose identities are never revealed to battle the demon monsters. This is a portion of the plot which lends itself to scrutiny. Anyway, three wannabee witches, who went to high school together, Renea, the most enthusiastic, serious practitioner in the dark arts, and her lesbian cohorts, Jasmine and Marlene(..it's more or less a passing fad with them, though..) join up with buddies, Jason and Ricky, on a trip in the wilderness where Summer vanished from her home ten years ago. Opening the portal through a spoken text written in an ancient book, a demon is set free, as is Summer, now a warrior babe whose training has led to a very fit and athletic body and skills that have been needed to ward off monsters in the other world.Low budget contains a loopy, but ambitious story, restraining it into a confined setting. These young adults spend a lot of time running around in the woods hoping not to be fodder for a beast. As can be the case in these movies, the demon stands on the sidelines while the story develops as Summer attempts to remember how everything came to pass, while befriending Jason who wishes to help her restore the lost time. The action is shot mostly in the dark, making any violence hard to decipher. Brigitte Kingsley(and the rest of the female cast for that matter), is some mighty nice eye candy, dressed scantily clad as a female Conan, a gorgeous body we have to pleasure to gaze upon from the moment she appears until the closing of the movie. Some lesbianism(..some kissing and fondling)and nudity spice things up nicely, and the cast seem to be having fun with the goofy plot..it's so preposterous that the silly tone is probably appropriate for the material.Might be of interest for co-starring World Wrestling Entertainment's \"Captain Courageous\" Christian(real name, Jason Reso)as one of the group, spoofing his alter ego, as a chicken, quivering at the sound of a snapping tree twig. Landy Cannon is likable as unlikely hero, Jason, a lovestruck, naive young man whose ex-fiancé, Jasmine(Vanessa James)is now bi-sexual and in love with Marlene(..Jasmine's cruelty is in toying with Jason's feelings by hiding her affair with Marlene from his knowledge), while Ricky and Renea attempt to steer him away from this idea that he can rekindle a dead flame that gone out, never to ignite again. The Kelippoth demon is mostly darkly lit, I guess to refrain from showing how ludicrous/laughable it looks if presented in full. The lesbian antics of Jasmine and Marlene(Haley Shannon) is mostly tame, their love making, once alone in the woods up against a tree, is toned down and also lighted using the blackness of night. My rating is a bit favorable towards it, almost solely because of Kingsley, for purely superficial reasons, rather than the plot or film-making. The movie aims to please and is marketed to the boys(and girls who love hot women). I think, though, for the most part, the humor falls a bit flat.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f186d111744443369e55eeab0b5b4113",
            "input": "Any one who has seen Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ and was bothered by the gory violence would want to see this film instead. Though it wasn't a success in th box office or TV ratings, The Fox Movie Channel still finds a real good motive to show this anually. I liked the way that they trained Chris Sarandon and the men who portrayed his disciples to sing in Hebrew.Though Sarandon didn't have long hair like any other Jesus would in other films, his looks are pretty close to what a Jewish man would appear. What surprised me or startled me was the scene where Caiaphas told Jesus about Pilate \"And don't ever forget, that you are a Jew!\" Though that may have not been a racist remark,Colin Blakely was trying to make Chris Sarandon look like garbage in the eyes of the prominent men of those days.Keith Michell's portrayal of Pilate was hulking, comparing with his previous performances in \"The Story of Jacob and Joseph\" and \"The Story of David\". But if you compare his portrayal of Pilate with Telly Savala's or Hurd Hatfield, you can say that he really painted well the impression of a Roman procurator.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46ca448e59d94a7184522fae9f733d44",
            "input": "Recap: Doctor Markov has developed a new theory how to produce energy, knowledge that might unbalance the world. He keeps his knowledge coded and secret and desperately wants out of the Soviet Union. KGB on the other side desperately wants the new technology. So, they sets a scheme in motion. During a rescue attempt to free Markov, KGB steps in, takes Markov to a secret location and lures him to reveal his secret by saying they are in Sweden, and working for the UN. As a backup, KGB kidnaps Markov's estranged daughter. CIA now send their best agents, a team of (Swedish?) Ninjas to thwart KGB and rescue Markov and his daughter.Comments: A cult movie that despite not being very good needs seeing. The movie is quite ambitious but lacking in many areas. First off is that it is very dark, probably to conceal locations and bad effects, that some scenes are hard to comprehend. You can't see what is happening. The second thing that it is lacking is martial arts, despite being a ninja-movie. Sure there are some, of quite poor quality, but mostly the ninjas fires automatic guns or sets of explosions. The automatic guns pose a problem too as they seem to have a endless supply of ammunition. And the ninjas seem almost immune to bullets while Soviet guards die like flies.What does it have that speaks for it then? The idea and ambition foremost. Some actually, and especially for a Swedish movie, decent action-scenes albeit not of martial arts. Some nice slow-motion scenes and pretty much blood and gore. And some very interesting new weapons technology that makes the victims heart or brain explode. Mostly all parts that you look for in a B-movie.Because it definitely is a B-movie, no mistake could be made there. But if you expect it, and watch it like a B-movie, it is entertaining. But don't forget, it is not only a B-movie it is set in the eighties. Some girls, for example, besides wearing... lets say \"interesting\" clothes, have lethal doses of eye shadow and makeup.In all, see for the cult status and the ambition. Enjoy it, and then forget it.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-605d81e514ab45fcafaa33baa43b1a4c",
            "input": "The movie was a long awaited release, which where a bit disappointing because of the expectation's I had set up. When looking at it again I must say it is actually pretty OK. First of all is it very true to the original history (of course not completely) and is as such only made to keep the right for the movie. Modesty's history as a child is shown and is very true to the original. The acting is perhaps not the best around and the plot is a bit thin, but when you compare it to the 1966 Vitti movie is way better just because it is not trying to be a musical. Generally would I only recommend it to fans of Modesty Blaise or to someone who by catch it on the TV.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28536fd896fe42adbc36a3e7decc5498",
            "input": "I absolutely loved this film! I was hesitant to watch it at first because I thought it would be too painful. I remember how hard it was when John was shot. However, watching the \"Two of Us\" took me back to a happier time when he was still alive and there was hope and possibility. I think that the writer did an amazing job depicting what \"might have been.\" Aidan Quinn was adorable as Paul and met the challenge head on. I was impressed with his accent and mannerisms. Jared Harris is also very talented and was quite believable as John. My favorite parts were the scene in the park and the rooftop scene - which was so poignant. The film left me with both sadness and satisfaction, both of which I feel are appropriate, given the circumstances.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccc07ae16393406a94de56219f42c4bd",
            "input": "Everybody's got bills to pay, and that includes Christopher Walken.In Vietnam, a group a soldiers discover that the war is over and are heading back home when they spot a bunch of POWs, including Christopher Walken. Following a Mad Max 3 (!) Thunderdome fight, and a short massacre later. Walken and some Colombian guy split a dollar bill promising something or other.Cut to the present (1991), and Colombian guy is leading a revolution against El Presidente. He's successful at first, but after El Presidente threatens to crush folks with a tank, he's forced to surrender and is shot in the head on live television. This is shown in full gory detail as a news flash on American telly, which leads Walken to assemble the old squad (even though he wasn't actually part of that squad to begin with), in order to invade Colombia and gun down thousands of people.McBain is a monumentally stupid film, but for all that it's also a good laugh, and action packed too. This is one of those movies where logic is given a wide berth - how else could Walken shoot a fighter pilot in the head from another plane without suffering from decompression, or even breaking a window? Also, it seems that these guys can gun down scores of drug dealers in New York without the police bothering.There's plenty of b-movie madness to chew on here, from Michael Ironside's diabolical acting in the Vietnam sequence, to the heroic but entirely pointless death of one of the heroes, to the side splitting confrontation between Walken and El Presidente, and let's not forget the impassioned speech by the sister of the rebel leader, being watched on television in America (nearly brought a brown tear to my nether-eye, that bit).It's out there for a quid. Buy it if you have a sense of humour. See how many times you can spot the camera crew too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27515d9ebe7946f6853009c3bfc28ab1",
            "input": "Incredibly intriguing and captivating, I found it impossible to turn away once I began to watch. I am usually one of the harshest critics but to me this film was just brilliant, strange as this may sound I could almost smell the air and feel the textures of the locations. From a cinematographic I thought there was great use of light and texture. From the orange glow of the summer light, down to the plastic wrapped couch all had a distinct air of realism to me.From a character perspective I thought the notion of Victor Vargas as almost the glue that connects the story was quite inspired, each of the other members of the family having a more complete background simply caused greater intrigue in the main character himself.Beyond that, having known someone just like the grandmother and having been on the receiving end of just such a situation, I can say the situation felt particularly realistic. The awkwardness, the accent, the cooking and even down to the comments made felt so authentic to me.I think this film worked for me because I began to watch it with no expectations and found it completely immersing and brought back memories of teenage emotion, well worth a watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cf1fcd3633045e099dbfdd61f6ff456",
            "input": "I've seen Mystery Men cop a bit of stick in the press and with the general public ( take the imdb vote for instance), but my overall feeling is that Mystery Men is more fun than most films, definitely wittier than most so-called comedy films and very nearly 'clever'.The cast is superb; Greg Kinnear is excellent, as are Geoffrey Rush and Tom Waits. Kinnear's limo scene with Ricky Jay is perfect 'spoiled movie star' and he imbues his character with the right balance of comic book quality and realism to make him work.I will admit the pacing is a little off in places, and visuals are certainly very flash bang, possibly to the detriment of further characterisation, but at the end of the day, this is high concept film making - it's about the little moments \"What's Up Tiger Lily?\" - and there are so many great ones in this film to make it worth repeated viewing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7155cfe6b25427eb29f262312725f0e",
            "input": "The United States was still fighting World War II (the movie was released in between VE day and VJ day). Any studio worth its salt was either making fighting movies where fearless American soldiers beat the enemy, or Americans in general were singing and dancing. Technicolor Musicals were what America thrived on in the depressing days when everything was rationed. Most musicals of the day were simply a bunch of musical numbers strung together with the best available plot slipped in to fill time til the next musical number! I get the feeling now that the people reviewing this movie were all born after 1970. Depressing how quickly we forget.This film could've been called \"The Search for Jose Iturbi\" but now everyone wonders why. Allow me to explain. From 1929--his arrival in America--until his death in 1980, Iturbi was one of the finest pianists to grace a concert stage. He agreed to do a few movies in 1942, but Hollywood had been after him for nearly a decade at that time. Not only an excellent pianist, but a successful conductor as well, Iturbi was very much a household word for more than 40 years. The scene where Iturbi and 17 other pianists play one of Liszt's Rhapsodies was planned early on--and hasn't anyone ever noticed the other pianists were all children? Joe Pasternak, who produced that movie & many other MGM musicals, credited Iturbi with interesting America's youth in classical music. Grayson's wanting an audition with Iturbi in the movie was not unlike real life at the time. Everyone wanted Iturbi back then. The joke among soldiers was that \"GI\" meant \"Get Iturbi\" (he did a lot of concerts at military bases).Gene Kelly was a great dancer and Frank Sinatra an excellent singer, but at the time this movie was made Sinatra was barely 30 and had only been under contract to Columbia Records for four years. Kelly was already well-known as a dancer, but Iturbi had by then been a world-wide sensation for 20+ years.And as to the lack of a plot, Americans didn't need plot. They were tired of war, they were sick with fear for their loved ones, and worried about the future. They needed happiness and hope and the assurance that things would work out fine in the end. They needed music and smiles and joy and romance. This movie and others like it delivered just what was needed.Enough lecturing. Mouse dancing aside, the best scene in the movie occurs between Sinatra and Iturbi with each of them \"ignorantly\" complimenting the other's music.If you have any interest in Jose Iturbi, the Spaniard who conquered more of America than De Soto, Cortez, and De Leon put together, please drop by my website, www.joseiturbi.com, where you can find a plot summary, excerpts from movie reviews \"of the day\" and pictures from this and certain other MGM musicals of the 1940's, as well as a biography and discography of Iturbi.Trout",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3bcca2e3672741e5b9af21016cb0a79f",
            "input": "This film came out 12 years years ago, and was a revelation even for people who knew something of the drag scene in New York. The textbooks on drag performance say nothing of these vogueing houses. Anthony Slide's 'Great Pretenders' says nothing. Julian Fleisher's \"The Drag Queens of New York: An Illustrated Field Guide\" with its flow chart of influence that pulls together Julian Eltinge, Minette, the Warhol queens, and the 90s club scene - and postdates the film - ignores the houses completely. Even Laurence Senelick's \"The Changing Room\" - the closest thing that we have to a definitive book on drag performance rushes quickly past the film and does not give the background information that one would have expected from it.I understand from the film itself,and various articles I found on the web that this house system goes back decades. The major film performance by a house member prior to 1990 seems to be Chrystal La Beija in \"The Queen\", 1968. The historical context is the biggest missing part of \"Paris is Burning\".The film is valuable because it focuses on a scene otherwise being ignored. It is a valuable snapshot of life in 1989. The unfortunate fact that Venus Xtravaganza was murdered during filming provides a very dramatic ending, but this is not the only film about transsexuals to include a real-life murder. As we now know, Dorian Corey had a mummified corpse in her literal closet, but this did not come out until three years later.Of historical importance, but we still need someone to do either a book or a documentary film that provides more context.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce8a104238994da69c185b77e98ec760",
            "input": "A sentimental story with a sentimental sound track. It's about a little girl ( with a voice impediment ) who treasures her green parrot Paulie. The parrot thinks and talks like a human being and gives help and advice to his constant companion.The parrot is definitely the star of the film. At times mischievous and at times in fits of depression the bird captures the mood in a most remarkable and expressive way. The synchronised voice too is very well done and within a minute or two you can actually believe that this intelligent little bird exists.Early in the film her father gives the bird to a pawnbroker and the subsequent scenes tell the story of Paulie's constant struggle over many years to be re-united with his mistress. One of the many memorable scenes is when he falls into bad company and is encouraged to spy on people using the automatic teller machines. Paulie it seems has a phenomenal memory.The ending is predictable, but who would want it otherwise. Children will love this film and anybody who keeps a bird as a pet will delight in Paulie's antics.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2120fb1181de49378751dbf4b7d63cb4",
            "input": "This is a ripsnorting, old-fashioned adventure yarn. I understand that by today's political standards, the treatment of the Indians was unacceptable. But this moving isn't about politics. It's about action, dialogue, comradery, acting, direction, music, and photography, and it's marvelous on all these factors. Grant, Fairbanks, and McLaglen are electric together, and Jaffe is superb. This is the ultimate buddy movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9bdbd3bb35843bf91a2e5106d634052",
            "input": "*WARNING* Spoilers ahead... The writers of this story knew these men very well. The actors, likewise, portrayed them very well. The result is that by the end of the film you feel like you're actually watching John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The expected tensions are there, especially in the awkward first moments. But as the two begin to loosen up, the old camaraderie that made the Beatles work so well begins to show through. The bitterness is still there, and interrupts at times, but by the time John gets the idea to take Lorne Michaels up on his offer to pay the Beatles the gag sum of $3000 to appear on \"Saturday Night Live\", the two could be the same boyish pranksters that terrorized Liverpool together as teens, and survived playing the rough nightclubs of Hamburg to rise to Superstardom. But in the end, this wonderful fantasy grounds us gently. We are reminded why a Beatles reunion was most likely never possible even before Lennon's assassination: The two driving forces of the group outgrew each other.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2398ec2d75ab4437a2753563a46d4c21",
            "input": "I enjoyed this movie,and after watching it,it made me wonder just how many 'Caitlin Rose's' exist in the world.How many other girls have been subjected to this sort of sexual abuse,and torment by classmates and have been too frightened to open their mouth about it? Just how threatening and cruel can teenagers be towards one another,because as this film demonstrates,who's right is not foremost important,its who is popular,and feared which manipulates the minds of youths,and influences them to allow this sort of immorality to happen.Tiffani Amber Thiessen gives a powerful performance as the rape victim,and Brian Austin Green is convincing as the guy torn between the girl he thought he loved,and his best friend.This is the kind of film that doesn't get the exposure it deserves.Remarkable,and brilliant,too good to be just a film made for TV.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7913c23880f34a49ae2eee32fbc47320",
            "input": "This is one movie that will take time to get out of your head once you have seen it. The dialogs are close to perfect, which was to be expected as it has been adapted from a play. The actors are simply giving their best, the story is simple and attractive. 88 minutes of pure bliss!Yvan Attal is totally credible in his role, Sandrine Kiberlain is still the beautiful blonde (but not so dumb) providing as much pleasure to the eyes as to the ears, Jean-Paul Rouve is providing an excellent approximation of the total jerk (and proud to be such), and Marina Fois is the dumb friend who is always blundering when you expect it least.Thumbs up to Bernard Rapp and associates for adapting this excellent play, and all the best for future productions!I wish there were more of these in nowadays production. If you liked it, you will also probably enjoy: \"Un air de famille\", and \"Cuisine et dependances\". Both were written and played by the couple Bacri/Jaoui.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97598342ada343419454c8387012d851",
            "input": "Didn't care for the movie, the book was better. Does anyone know where it was filmed? *** this was my first visit to your site...just found the answer to my question. so now I look like a dummy, but I think I'll still submit my comments. and yes, British Columbia is lovely ***Or why they took it from its South Carolina Coastal setting?(this question stands) The place was essential to the fabric of the book and its change was part of my disappointment with the movie. Oh, I just read where I need to write at least ten lines. Here's my other main issue with the film. Kim Bassinger was too vapid and not at all what I pictured from the book. I know, the book was the book and the movie; well not so good. I found the character in the book much more empathetic. Also the book evoked rustic, almost primitive images of the monastery. While the \"castle\" in the film was much more visually impressive, it distorted the feel of the story and seemed at odds with the characters.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53a4ec1b3d974c989077c870a9a21ddc",
            "input": "From watching only the trailer to Theodore Rex, you would think this is a bad buddy cop comedy with Whoopi Goldberg and a guy in a dinosaur costume. That is true, but this is mostly a futuristic story, which looks a lot like Batman Forever with it's direction style and weird character designs. It was mismarketed, and should have been marketed as a futuristic tale, instead of just a lame cop comedy. Whether or not this movie is mismarketed, it's still a horrible movie.In the future, dinosaurs have been brought back to life through amazing technology, and they talk and walk around like humans. Teddy is a dinosaur detective who is never taken seriously, but after a dinosaur is murdered, he's given the case to work on, but he has to be partners with the toughest cop of them all, Katie Coltrane (Whoopi Goldberg). It's up to this mismatched duo to solve the murder, and it's up to the audience to stay awake long enough to make it through this piece of crud.Teddy starts the picture as a normal acting character, but by the end he is unbearable to listen to. For some reason along with being a detective, he's also a bad comedian and a bad impersonator. He does imitations of famous people and accents, and has some truly awful lines. Whoopi blames him for farting and he says, \"It's not my butt trumpet!\" Wow! What a puerile, immature line, even for a kid's movie of this caliber. Whoopi is also annoying and rude to everyone. I was hoping Teddy would bite her head off the entire length of the film.This movie never knew what it wanted to be. When the futuristic scenes and action occur, there is no comedy or humor. In any non-action scenes, the characters try to be as funny as they can, which just results in nonstop straight faced boredome. The action scenes don't work as they're too weird and not violent enough, and as stated earlier, the comedy is just a bunch of massacred jokes. Nothing ever works here.Having a dinosaur/human detective duo seems like a pretty original movie, if nothing else. Nope! This movie is a huge rip-off of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Just replace dinosaurs with cartoons, and set it in the future, and it's the exact same plot. A man is killed, a dinosaur is killed. A dinosaur and detective solve the murder, a toon and detective solve the murder. The bad guys in Roger Rabbit are Christopher Lloyd and weasels. The bad guys here are a guy who sounds like Christopher Lloyd and guys who act just like the weasels. The club scene in Roger Rabbit where Jessica Rabbit walks down the stage is imitated with dinosaurs. This is a huge rip-off of a much better movie!Overall, this is a bad movie, not even deserving of it's straight to VHS stature.My rating: 1/2 out of ****. 90 mins. PG for mild violence, language and crude humor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-76b40ceaea2f4f4faafaf3318bf08659",
            "input": "How strange the human mind is; this center of activity wherein perceptions of reality are formed and stored, and in which one's view of the world hinges on the finely tuned functioning of the brain, this most delicate and intricate processor of all things sensory. And how much do we really know of it's inner-workings, of it's depth or capacity? What is it in the mind that allows us to discern between reality and a dream? Or can we? Perhaps our sense of reality is no more than an impression of what we actually see, like looking at a painting by Monet, in which the vanilla sky of his vision becomes our reality. It's a concept visited by filmmaker Cameron Crowe in his highly imaginative and consciousness-altering film, `Vanilla Sky,' starring Tom Cruise and Penelope Cruz. At the age of thirty-three, David Aames (Cruise) inherits a publishing empire left to him by his father. His fifty-one percent controlling interest, however, has made him something of a marked man, as there are seven members of his board of directors, and each deems himself more worthy than the young Mr. Aames of the lion's share of the company. And fueling the fires of discontent is their perception that David lacks the focus the job requires.Admittedly, David likes to play; still, he's in control of the business and does what he sees fit, whether the board (he refers to them as the `Seven Dwarfs') likes it or not, and no one has ever had the courage to challenge him directly. But during a lavish birthday party in his honor, one of the corporate lawyers, Thomas Tipp (Timothy Spall) warns David that the seven are up to something behind his back. At the time, however, it's the last thing on David's mind; he's been having a casual affair with a friend, Julie Gianni (Cameron Diaz), but even that moves to the back burner when he meets a woman at his party that he can't get out of his mind. Her name is Sofia (Penelope Cruz), and after knowing her for only one night, she becomes a pivotal part of his life-- which is about to be turned upside down, as on the morning after his party he makes a decision that will change his life forever. And he is about to learn that sometimes, there is simply no going back.Director Cameron Crowe has crafted and delivered much more than just another film with this one; far more than a movie, `Vanilla Sky' is a vision realized. Beginning with the first images that appear on screen, he presents a visually stunning experience that is both viscerally and cerebrally affecting. It's a mind-twisting mystery that will swallow you up and sweep you away; emotionally, it's a rush-- and it may leave you exhausted, because it requires some effort to stay with it. But it's worth it. Think `Memento' with a driving rock n' roll soundtrack and a vibrant assault of colors proffered by the stroke of an impressionist's brush. There's darkness and light, and sounds that pound and drive until you can feel the blood rushing through your veins and throbbing in your brain. And all played out on a landscape of virtual reality swirling beneath that ever expanding vanilla sky. Simply put, this one's a real trip; it's exciting-- and it's a mind bender.As to the performances here, those who can't get past the mind-set of Tom Cruise as Maverick in `Top Gun,' or his Ethan Hunt in `Mission Impossible,' or those who perceive him only as a `movie star' rather than an actor, are going to have to think again in light of his work here. Because as David Aames, Cruise gives the best performance of his career, one that should check any doubts as to his ability as an actor at the door. He's made some interesting career choices the past few years, with films like `Magnolia' and `Eyes Wide Shut' merely warm-ups for the very real and complex character he creates here. And give him credit, too, for taking on a role that dispels any sense of vanity; this is Cruise as you've never seen him before. `Jerry Maguire' earned him an Oscar nomination, and this one should, also-- as well as the admiration and acclaim of his peers. Cruise is not just good in this movie, he is remarkable.Penelope Cruz turns in an outstanding, if not exceptional performance, as well, as Sofia, the woman of David's dreams. There's an alluring innocence she brings to this role that works well for her character and makes her forthcoming and accessible, yet she lacks any hint of mystery that may have added that special `something extra' to the part. But Crowe knows how to get the best out of his actors, and he certainly did with Cruz.He also knew what he was doing with Cameron Diaz, who is absolutely vibrant in the role of Julie. She's never looked better, and fairly sizzles on screen. But make no mistake, this is no `window-dressing' part, and Diaz delivers a complete package with this character. The quality of her performance can be measured, in fact, in the impact she makes with rather limited screen time. And it's the persona she integrates so fully with her innate beauty that makes Julie so unforgettable. Overall, a terrific job by Diaz.The supporting cast includes Kurt Russell (Dr. McCabe), Jason Lee (Brian), Johnny Galecki (Peter), Armand Schultz (Dr. Pomerantz), Noah Taylor (Ed), Mel Thompson (`L.E.' Man), Jean Carol (Woman in New York) and John Fedevich (Silent Ed). About half-way through, this one may have you questioning your own sense of reality; but rest assured, by the end of `Vanilla Sky' all will be revealed. It's a reality-bender, to be sure, and a wild one; but this is exciting entertainment that offers a satisfying-- and unique-- experience, one you have to see to believe. It's the essential, and absolute, magic of the movies. 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e593c1bbd5d4eb29867be7197350e05",
            "input": "A number of Richard Attenborough's films as director have been biographies of major historical figures- \"Young Winston\", \"Gandhi\", \"Chaplin\". \"Grey Owl\" is also a filmed biography of a historical individual, but in this case Attenborough's subject is a much more obscure character.Grey Owl was a Canadian writer of the 1920s and 1930s who promoted the ideas of environmentalism and nature conservation at a time when these causes were less fashionable than they are today. He was widely believed to be an American Indian; the story he told about himself was that he had been born in Mexico to a Scottish father and Apache mother and had emigrated to Canada where he had been adopted as a member of the Ojibway tribe. He lived in a cabin by a lake in a remote part of the Canadian wilderness, where he earned a living as a trapper. He toured Britain twice, in 1935 and 1937, to promote his books and to give lectures on conservationism, and achieved great success, even being introduced to the Royal Family. (During one of these tours Attenborough, then a teenager, saw Grey Owl at the London Palladium theatre). After his death in 1938, however, it was revealed that he had not been who he claimed to be; his real name was Archibald Belaney, and he had been born in the English seaside town of Hastings.The film departs somewhat from the facts of Grey Owl's life. In a scene set in 1934 he states that he is 41 years old; in reality, he was born in 1888 so would have been 46 in that year. (46 would have been Pierce Brosnan's age when the film was made, so I am not sure why this change was made). Numerous events are compressed into the last four years of Grey Owl's life (1934-1938). In the film it is during this period that he meets and marries Gertrude Bernard whom he called Anahareo; in reality, he met and married Gertrude as early as 1925. The film also omits the fact that they were divorced in 1936 and that Grey Owl remarried shortly before his death.The revelation of Grey Owl's true identity adversely affected his posthumous reputation, and he was dismissed as a \"fraud\". His supposed deceit was even used to discredit the causes which he had championed. Richard Attenborough, however, takes a more sympathetic view of his achievements. One of the themes explored by the film is the question of ethnic identity. Although the erstwhile Archibald Belaney was not a Canadian Indian by birth, there is no doubt that he had a deep knowledge of Ojibway culture and lore and that he spoke their language fluently. He was accepted by the Ojibway as a member of their tribe. It therefore seems unfair to describe his claim to a Native North American identity as being a fraudulent one, merely because it was an identity he had chosen rather than one he had been born into.According to the film, Grey Owl's wife Gertrude was herself of Indian descent, but came from a family which had been assimilated into white Canadian culture. Her marriage can therefore be seen as her reclamation of her family's original cultural heritage. She was clearly influenced by her husband, but she also had an influence on him, persuading him to give up his work as a fur trapper as she had moral objections to killing animals for their fur.One criticism made of the film is that Pierce Brosnan is \"miscast\" as the hero, a criticism which seems to be rooted in the preconception that Brosnan can only play action heroes in the James Bond mould. It seems to me, however, that Brosnan may deliberately have taken this role in order to avoid being typecast, the taciturn backwoodsman Grey Owl being about as far from the suave, sophisticated agent Bond as one can get. The original Bond, Sean Connery, also seems to have deliberately opted for contrasting roles when he appeared in films like \"The Hill\" or \"The Molly Maguires\". Brosnan is in fact very good in this role, although I would agree with those who found Annie Galipeau weak as Gertrude.Another frequently-voiced criticism with which I would not agree is that the film is \"boring\". Certainly, it is not an action film like the Bonds, nor is it a great epic biopic like \"Gandhi\", and it may indeed seem boring to those who were expecting it to be either the one or the other. It is however, likely to please anyone with an interest in the early days of the conservationist movement or the philosophical implications of national and ethnic identity. The scenes of the Canadian forests are also beautifully photographed. Richard Attenborough has done us a service by helping to revive interest in this half-forgotten but fascinating figure. 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-068a36c5ab68433aa16665d8230973c2",
            "input": "The Derek's have over the 1980s produced a few decent bids to acquire the title \"worst movie of all time\", and this is probably their prime achievement in these stakes. In fact, this film can be regarded as belonging to the \"so bad, it's good\" category, right up there with the products of the likes of Edward Wood Jr. or Doris Wishman. This explains the IMDb voting pattern for this film with some people handing out top marks.Anthony Quinn made the odd dodgy film in his time, but this performance as a randy ghost is so incredibly bad, it has to be seen to be believed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7c4770db1584f2eb70b1437483a61ed",
            "input": "Watching this movie made me think constantly; why are they making such a problem out of some broken brakes? There are a million options to slow down the car! In the movie Speed the writers a least thought of a good reason why the car wasn't able to stop...There aren't many good things to say about this film; all the usual narrative cliche's make their appearance, the actors are very bad, the story is as leak as a sieve etc. That makes this movie a waste of time and money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-178d84857b7a4801ada4adbe0f5fe02e",
            "input": "Despite much style, flash, and glitter, this French musical fails to speak. The tunes are repetitive, predictable, and tedious. The story is uninteresting, as are the many characters. People break into song and dance, without motivation or reason. Most of the cast wears phony looking wigs and hairpieces, and the sets look hopelessly studio bound.To be honest, this video of the restored version was stopped before the end, so negative an effect it had on me. Certainly a shame, to have such a multi-talented cast in so feeble a final effort. Goes to show, I guess, where followups (in this case, to the great classic, \"Umbrellas\") often do go awry. One cannot recapture, only recreate.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2fb4c90b072f4438b50d43f8f1d387ff",
            "input": "i should love this movie . the acting is very good and Barbara Stanwyck is great but the the movie has always seemed very trite to me . the movie makes working class people look low and cheap .the fact that the daughter is ashamed of her mother and that the daughter does not rise above it has always made me a bit uneasy . Barbara Stanwyck as the mother worships the daughter but the daughter forgoes a mothers love to find happiness with her well to do fathers family . i wonder how many others who have seen this film feel this way about it.again the acting was very very good and worth watching . i really don't like the story line . just a personal preference .thank you",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66e757b598544b6aaa821a67bbb116b4",
            "input": "I really felt cheated after seeing this picture. It felt like I sat watching this movie 101 minutes for nothing. I don't understand what they were thinking when they made this. It hardly gets into Jeffrey Dahmer murdering and it has no ending. It felt almost like they were leaving this movie open for a sequel. It was like watching a television episode of the Sopranos. It ends suddenly, and you know there's going to be another episode next week. It also felt like I just watched part 1 to a two part movie. There are many possibilities for what went wrong here; they got lazy, they ran out of money, they didn't know the rest of the story, they wanted to make a Dahmer 2. After seeing this movie they all sound very accurate. I was watching Jeffrey Dahmer walking through the woods. All of a sudden I hear this music playing, then writing comes on the screen and says how Dahmer served 2 years of his sentence and was attacked by a fellow inmate and killed at the age of 34. Wow, he goes from a walk in the woods to his death in jail. How about showing how he got there. How about showing Dahmer's trial. How about showing some more detail. I can't even explain what happened in this movie because it jumped all over the place. I actually found myself saying in disbelief, \"That's it, that's the end?\" I want to conclude this review by saying there is still a good Dahmer movie yet to be made. To the filmmakers I'd like to say, if you're going to do it, do it right.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b4262c593c54c14a8078d0c096675c6",
            "input": "First of all, the release date is 2009, not 2007 for this feature length nature documentary film. It should be more properly referred to as: \"Earth, 2009\". Secondly, allow me to address the complaints of some reviewers who have seen the \"Planet Earth\" TV series of 2006. I have not seen this TV series, but learned here, that this film is the full length version of this 2006 TV series. I judge any film, on it's own merits, not by it's source. I judge the results, on their own, and the results of \"Earth, 2009\" are indeed excellent. I dismiss this trivial complaint of some reviewers: that it's simply an expanded version of the 2006 TV series \"Planet Earth\". So what? It doesn't really matter.As a film buff and one who has viewed dozens of nature documentaries in my lifetime, I was astonished and highly impressed by \"Earth, 2009\". This is the debut film from the new \"DisneyNature\" division of Disney and follows in the footsteps of Walt Disney's pioneering and Academy Award winning nature documentary films of the 1950's and 1960's.Cinematography, film editing, music score, sound and narration are all excellent. There have been a few other nature documentaries that also excelled in these categories. What really sets \"Earth, 2009\" apart is its' scope. It literally covers the entire planet, covering all seven continents.After my first viewing, it was obvious this documentary film required a massive effort and amount of time and talent to create. Three production companies were required to make this amazing documentary film.\"Earth, 2009\" convincingly tells the stories of four species on their great migrations as it spans one year through the seasons beginning in January and ending in December, from the North Pole to the South Pole.Two special new high-tech cameras were used for this film: one camera has a 360 degree computer controlled motorized rotating lens and the other is a HD camera set to an amazing 1,000 frames per second. This filming technique really added drama and beauty to some of the scenes of \"Earth, 2009\" especially the cheetah chase and great white sharks leaping out of the water to catch sea lions and an aerial view going over the edge of the world's highest waterfall. There are many stunningly beautiful shots in this documentary.Via cinematography, music score and narration, there is drama, sadness, humor and great beauty in this documentary. With a great music score performed by the world renowned Berliner Philharmoniker, excellent creative and technical cinematography and James Earl Jones narration, I consider \"Earth, 2009\" as the greatest nature feature length documentary film ever made.Five years of hard work, patience, talent and dedication really paid off very well here. This film should be required viewing in all schools throughout the world. I predict an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature, among other awards. Truly, an amazing, astonishing, exhilarating and magnificent documentary film.Very Highly Recommended",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-972576642c5f461e96304793e8ca2317",
            "input": "This film breeches the fine line between satire and silliness. While a bridge system that has no rules may promote marital harmony, it certainly can't promote winning bridge, so the satire didn't work for me. But there were some items I found enjoyable anyway, especially with the big bridge match between Paul Lukas and Ferdinand Gottschalk near the end of the film. It is treated like very much like a championship boxing match. Not only is the arena for the contest roped off in a square area like a boxing ring, there is a referee hovering between the contestants, and radio broadcaster Roscoe Karns delivers nonstop chatter on the happenings. At one point he even enumerates \"One... Two... Three... Four...\" as though a bid of four diamonds was a knockdown event. And people were glued to their radios for it all, a common event for championship boxing matches. That spoof worked very well indeed.Unfortunately, few of the actors provide the comedy needed to sustain the intended satire. Paul Lukas doesn't have much of a flair for comedy and is miscast; lovely Loretta Young and the usual comic Frank McHugh weren't given good enough lines; Glenda Farrell has a nice comic turn as a forgetful blonde at the start of the film, but she practically disappears thereafter. What a waste of talent!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-180475a041a64536925186b64d22603a",
            "input": "Paulie was cute, cool, enjoyable and quite fulfilling. I went to this movie expecting to view a typical \"family\" movie, one that within moments would find me unconscious and drooling on the floor. My mindframe immediately changed when I was quickly captivated by the movie's wholesomeness. It is rare that you find a family movie that is thorough and can be coined \"wholesome\". Most are cheaply made, written and produced purely to attract young family members, who'll then drag the unfortunate elders to a mind numbing 65 minutes of overused sight gags and plots.Oh yes, Paulie had a plot. It told the story of a young girl(Marie) and her best friend Paulie the parrot, who unbelievably could talk and quite frequently held conversations with her. Marie's dorky jerk father found this unbelievable, and thought Paulie to be damaging to his 4-year old daughter's mental health, and quickly tore them apart. We follow Paulie's adventures (and misadventures) as he attempts to reunite with his beloved owner, meeting many memorable characters along the way. Oh yeah, Paulie really could (smart)talk and had a swift New Jersey accent. Cool. The plot held thick and entertaining throughout, keeping me attracted. Paulie is the best family movie I have found and wholeheartedly enjoyed. Ever. Seriously. Pick up a copy and sit back and enjoy a true family movie, with the whole family. No sleeping. I promise.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14801b46e98949389bc8a2779254fe23",
            "input": "This movie was disappointing. It was incomplete and dull. While Alec Baldwin tried to portray himself as the Perfect fair and just prosecutor (not to mention executive producer), the movie never showed any of the defense counsels or tried to challenge the audience with an actual meaningful debate on the subject of how a country could be led down such a terrible path.Sure, nobody wants to defend the Nazi's point of view, but THAT WAS THE POINT of the Nuremberg Trails! Four hours of simply bashing on the Nazi's.... c'mon! Thats been done already!I really think Alec Baldwin should just stick to being Kim Bassinger's husband.Right after the movie ended, TNT showed the 1959 movie, Trail at Nuremberg. That movie is FAR superior.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77ad7fc537e04d3ca0d7cd7e3d28fecb",
            "input": "Probably somebody heard of Alberto Tomba. A former policeman, a former sky champion, and, now, a TERRIBLE actor. \"Alex L'Ariete\" was planned to be a TV \"mini serial\", but the Italian television itself refused to show the movie on its channels. Now it's a, believe me, ridiculous movie. The script it's simply hilarious (it's supposed to be a dramatic movie), something like a 5 years old kid work. But what really blows you away it's the amateurish acting: Alberto Tomba, who actually was not believable as a policeman himself, plays terribly a totally silly character: a special operations italian policeman specialized in smashing doors open! (\"ariete\" is \"ram\"). This super-guy will try to save a young nice girl life (an actual italian \"little\" TV showgirl, married to the singer Eros Ramazzotti): nice but absolutely inept in the acting. Lose this one and make yourself a favour. A movie that is a shame to Italian cinema industry: only John Travolta in Earth Attack got close..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9dd63a7cc99f4be1a030ab7a25b25ca8",
            "input": "I've seen some crappy movies in my life, but this one must be among the very worst. Definately bottom 100 material (imo, that is).We follow two couples, the Dodds (Billy Bob Thornton as Lonnie Earl and Natasha Richardson as Darlene) and the Kirkendalls (Patrick Swayze as Roy and Charlize Theron as Candy) in one car on a roadtrip to Reno.Apparently, Lonnie isn't too happy with his sex-life, so he cheats on his wife with Candy, who's despirately trying to have a baby. Roy, meanwhile, isn't too sure if his sperm is OK so he's getting it checked by a doctor.Now, I had read the back of the DVD, but my girlfriend didn't, and she blurted out after about 20 minutes: 'oh yeah, she's gonna end up pregnant but her husband can't have any baby's'. Spot on, as this movie is soooo predictable. As well as boring. And annoying. Meaningless. Offensive. Terrible.An example of how much this movie stinks. The two couples set out in their big car towards Nevada, when they are stopped by 2 police-officers, as they didn't stop at a stop-sign. The guys know each other and finally bribe the two officers with a case of beer. Not only is this scene pointless and not important (or even relevant) for the movie, it takes about 5 minutes! It's just talk and talk and talk, without ever going somewhere.I still have to puke thinking about the ending though. Apparently, Roy ISN'T having problems down there so he IS the father of the child. How many times does that happen in the movies... try something new! The cheated wife ultimately forgives her husband and best friend for having the affair and they all live happily ever after. Yuck.Best scene of the movie is right at the end, with a couple of shots of the Grand Canyon. Why couldn't they just keep the camera on that for 90 minutes?One would expect more from this cast (although Thornton really tries), but you can't really blame them. Writers, shame on you!1/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2eb5713787a04774830e2d57e093dfd6",
            "input": "This movie tells the tender tale of a demented scientist who, after his fiance is decapitated, goes around ogling strippers so that he can find a suitable body to attach her noggin to. Everyone in this movie exudes more slime than a snail, particularly our protagonist.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-343dfab3a427484a89cec4691483d3ab",
            "input": "Seeing as the vote average was pretty low, and the fact that the clerk in the video store thought it was \"just OK\", I didn't have much expectations when renting this film.But contrary to the above, I enjoyed it a lot. This is a charming movie. It didn't need to grow on me, I enjoyed it from the beginning. Mel Brooks gives a great performance as the lead character, I think somewhat different from his usual persona in his movies.There's not a lot of knockout jokes or something like that, but there are some rather hilarious scenes, and overall this is a very enjoyable and very easy to watch film.Very recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5254348048846c7a246e6c5a6e0fc3f",
            "input": "This low budget digital video film has strengths in the right places--writing and acting. In addition the digital photography is the best of the lot so far. In low light conditions the characteristic video umber tone prevails but, surprising, it rivals film stock for brightness, clarity, and, saturation in brightly lit situations. This is grass roots film making at its best with snappy dialogue carrying a \"Midnight Cowboy\" kind of story about grifters doing whatever it takes to survive in urban San Francisco.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-186a992da55c442484d3cb35a546fe9c",
            "input": "My spouse & I found this movie to be very schlocky. It started out good, but quickly got unbelievable & ridiculous. Most of the acting was poor, with the exception of the little girl, Abbie, who really was terrific. In addition, the dialog was predictable & lame - especially Gideon, the Angel's. Also, without giving away anything, when one of the characters has a tragedy, she almost appears nonchalant. At first we thought it was 'shock', but then we realized that it was just a terrible script. We love almost all of the Hallmark movies & their heart-warming stories, but this movie doesn't rise to the occasion of being one. There are so many great ones - don't waste your time with this horrible movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a6aa781d4e94b948ad5b15125a3cc2c",
            "input": "Not only was he invariably annoying to listen to, but he had NO jokes. I swear, some fobby Asian guy telling yo momma jokes would've been funnier than Leary's crap. (Well, maybe funny for a couple minutes but at least I'll be able to laugh at least once!) Leary claimed he stopped taking drugs during one of his \"jokes\"... apparently he was still high on something; he was just some crackhead imprecating rants mostly drug related. One of his jokes was something like, 'I wouldn't use crack, especially having the same name as between my ass' - Oh man, how did he come up with that one?! I swear the only guy that needs to shut the f**k up is Denis Leary. Thank god I didn't have to see him live. This guy totally sucks.If you're easily amused by swearing, and \"jokes\" where you can come up with yourself, then waste your time with this junk.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1be81907f2b484a9cfae8795e152d64",
            "input": "How can anyone argue the fact that Urban Cowboy was, and still is, the best document of Texas life for the time period. Consider the following: men beat their wives, get drunk at bars nightly, get married to settle a fight, commit adultery, and compete on mechanical bulls. Try and name a movie that depicts real life so vividly. They dont make them anymore. It seems current films are always about people with lots of money, they live in huge homes, drive expensive cars and don't work. This movie has a celebration scene about getting a trailer for pete's sake !Anyway, I watch it at least once a week. No kidding. I have dissected this movie from end to end. feel free to email me to learn more about my reason for calling it a documentary. Consider the following scenes: Bud sees Sissy - they are split up - he amicably honks and waves, she flips him the bird - he returns half the peace sign honking his horn to add impact then tears off.Buds mom calls him approx. 18 hours after he gets into town, on a Sunday, to see if he has a job yet - all he has accomplished is getting drunk and laid(x2), with help from his uncle and aunt who cover for him.\"You all live like pigs\" Think about why this scene is needed. Think about it. Was it necessary ? Could we not figure it out without showing the filthy sink ? God I love that !Sissy allows Wes to help her ride the bull. Only a few days (or possibly the next day) after Wes just kicked the crap out of her husband. Steve asks - Hey Sissy, remember Wes ? Oh yeah, didnt you beat my husband up the other night, so let's get this lesson goin', to make no mention of the fact that she seeks solace in him later during one Bud and Sissy's many fights, which by the way all take place in public - in Gilley's !The Wedding reception picture taking session (oh the humanity !) could they at least arrange or move the chairs out of the way. \"My legs are sweatin' momma\"In conclusion, you don't put scenes like this in a movie to try and show insight into human psychology. It is a documentary of real life.I only wish there was a director's cut....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6ba8ac0c78b43a2978c705f9e5184a7",
            "input": "This was by far the best war documentary ever made. From the very beginning of the first episode when Sir Laurence Olivier described the horrific events in Oradour-Sur-Glane 'The day the soldiers came'. To the final days of the war when the mushroom clouds appeared over Japan, I never missed a second of this classic series and I remember it well even though it was screened way back in 1974. Each and every aspect of this tragedy was covered in detail. This whole series should be compulsory viewing for as many of the world's children as possible so that the tragedy of World War Two is not repeated and that bigotry, hatred, greed and intolerance are not confused with patriotism or religious zeal.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f9a3be58fe84e8ba386978fa6fcd8d8",
            "input": "My sincere advice to all: don't watch the movie.Don't even go near to the theater where this movie is being played!! even a glimpse of it is bad for health. serious. no jokes. it's 3.30 am in the morning. and i returned from this crappiest movie on this universe. FOUR HOURS DAMN!!! I am proud that i survived after all of it! If this is called survival.i am highly frustrated. annoyed. disappointed. it was sheer waste of time! money went in drain! no plot. Hope i wake up tomorrow sane and with no memories of this night!! RUBBISH MOVIE.Happy Republic day to one and all :)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d84a84b47b42495fbe5029e9256d546f",
            "input": "Oliver Gruner is totally unknown to me. My friend showed me this film because he had seen Gruner in, what he called a pretty good sci-fi film, Nemesis. So as we watched this, we found ourselves fastforwarding through the BS drama parts just to get to the unbelievable action sequences. Gruner loves to kick and kick and kick. And kick! hahaGruner character is a graduate student who is forced to stay in a ghetto close to the one that he grew up in. He finds himself watching after the boy who lives with him because he really wants to join in the Mexican gang that keeps tormenting his family. Instead of joining up, Gruner tells the boy to fight back (against a gang? too crazy). Gruner plays a typical Van Damme character who kills everyone (or maims them pretty bad) and works to rid his block of these gangmembers.The plot was very cheesy and easy to think of. Gruner is probably not very well known because of his script-choosing if this movie is anything to compare possible choices to. This ghetto is pure hell and I enjoyed seeing the motley crew of characters go through it as if they have a chance against Gruner's character. The music was typical action music (thumping pianos and timpani, swelling guitars) which actually wasn't as bad as I make it sound. The director really needed to keep the action going instead of taking a break every 5 minutes for a tense family moment.Ultimately, I gave it a 4/10 because it really tried to be an average action film for Oliver Gruner to star in, but the overall feel of the film leaves you wanting more closure on what you just saw.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c32664c9887443e88811609244f15f6b",
            "input": "If you like to be entertained, do not go see this movie. If you like to see heroics of war, do not go see this movie. If you like to see good acting and an excellent screenplay, do not go see this movie. If you like typical hollywood war films that end just in time to give a politically charged appeal to the public about the greatness and glory of war, GO SEE THIS MOVIE. Otherwise, don't waste your time. I am always interested in war movies because I think that if they are done well, they can TEACH us something about the paradoxical and worthless qualities of war. This film shows a bunch of guys running around the countryside, saying whorrible cliche lines, doing the most predictable things, and defending the oppressed with the same exact force and brutality that was being given to the oppressed. This film is a disgrace to filmmaking and to the United States of America! Can you imagine being a person from Europe or Africa, or any other country and watching this, being told that this is how Americans truly are? No wonder everyone hates us! Please, please, please, don't waste your time on this piece of junk; if you must, wait and rent it. 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-525539b0735745ea9033c6b4775ec507",
            "input": "This movie didn't really surprise me, as such, it just got better and better. I thought: \"Paul Rieser wrote this, huh? Well...we'll see how he does...\" Then I saw Peter Falk was in it. I appreciate Colombo. Even though I was never a big fan of the show, I've always liked watching Peter Falk. The performances of Peter and Paul were so natural that I felt like a fly on the wall. They played off of each other so well that I practically felt giddy with enjoyment! ...And I hadn't even been drinking!This movie was so well done that I wanted to get right on the phone to Paul and let him know how much I enjoyed it! but I couldn't find his number. Must be unlisted or something.This was one of those movies that I had no idea what it was going to be about or who was in it or anything. It just came on and I thought:\"Eh, why not? Let's see. If I don't like it - I don't have to watch it...\" ...and I ended up just loving it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f4121af9f614fa290481f69d739cff9",
            "input": "I couldn't believe I spent $14.00 on this. The only redeeming quality is the outrageous gore. The dubbing was worse than any I have ever experienced. It looks like it was shot with a VHS camcorder. I think every pfennig was spent on the special effects because there was a whole lot of blood and body parts everywhere. Its one of the worst movies I have ever seen but I do have to acknowledge the plentiful gore that wasn't as disgusting as it could have been because the whole movie is so silly and unbelievable",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c25dcddbffc4ea297a3e4243a13df75",
            "input": "\"All the world's a stage and its people actors in it\"--or something like that. Who the hell said that theatre stopped at the orchestra pit--or even at the theatre door? Why is not the audience participants in the theatrical experience, including the story itself?This film was a grand experiment that said: \"Hey! the story is you and it needs more than your attention, it needs your active participation\". \"Sometimes we bring the story to you, sometimes you have to go to the story.\"Alas no one listened, but that does not mean it should not have been said.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f19d74ed17e4fc6821f54f314096983",
            "input": "\"Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey\" is one of those wonderful old movies about house pets. Deserves a place among the great movies of its genre and even the cinema world in general, together with other animal movies like \"Old Yeller\", \"Napoleon\", \"Fluke\" and \"Air Bud\". This means it is more than just a movie about pets.Can this possibly be just a \"remake\"? It is too good to be a \"remake\"! I know this one by heart, since my early teen years (when I was 12).It's a family movie to treasure. It's emotional, thrilling, adventurous, exciting, entertaining, humorous, charming, sweet, nostalgic, beautiful, heartwarming and sometimes dramatic. It's one of those movies to put a smile on the faces of those who appreciate this kind of films.This movie does not lack qualities. It has a well thought story, enjoyable characters, excellent and relaxing instrumental soundtrack, dazzling sceneries/landscapes of the magnificent Sierra mountains (in Oregon). Speaking of the vistas, it's not all mountains: forests, trees, rivers, waterfalls, sunsets... in conclusion, all of pure nature's wonders - truly a full panorama. The main human characters are nice, well developed and well portrayed by respective actors. Robert Hays is awesome as the kind-hearted dad, Bob Seaver. Kim Greist is good as Laura Burnford. Veronica Lauren is equally good as Hope. Kevin Chevalia is conventional as the youngest and cute brother Jamie (his appearance actually reminds me very much of Kevin Corcoran in \"Old Yeller\"). Benj Thall is great as Peter Burnford.When it comes to our quadruped pals, Shadow is my favorite. Shadow is the loyal, wise, mature, beautiful, caring and loving old Golden Retriever (brilliantly voiced by Don Ameche). Chance, the American Bulldog, is the opposite of Shadow. He is carefree, silly, impatient, anxious, clumsy, hilarious and loves to play (voiced by the talented Michael J. Fox). Chance just can't stand still. Sassy is the epitome of cats's image: elegant, independent, very confident and self-proud, with a typical cat attitude but with a certain feline charm. Sassy is a Seal Point Himalayan cat, one of the most beautiful cat breeds. Sassy is voiced by Sally Field, who also does a good job.Our four-legged friends are, themselves, great \"actors\" by nature: Ben as Shadow, Rattler as Chance and Tiki as Sassy.It's an underrated movie, but a classic by its own right. Its sequel is clearly inferior.This should definitely be on Top 250.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-567d0f23afe64518aff4227d1da51854",
            "input": "Personally I think this show looks pretty cheaply made. Some of the actors are terrible. They over do it & seem fake. I can always tell how it's going to end within the first 10 minutes or less of watching because they make it so transparently clear. It's not very well written either. I love to watch it to laugh at it. You know the saying \"It's so bad that it's good?\" Well, that saying applies to this show. I also like to watch just to see if I'm right when I guess how it's all going to end. So far I've been right every time. It's like a little game that I play. It's nice when you are bored & you feel like laughing at something.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f7041c266a149c0854a182a132fc10c",
            "input": "(SPOILERS AHEAD) Russian fantasy \"actioner\" (and I use the term loosely) that I've been trying to watch for over a year. I've finally gotten to the end and now I wish I didn't put in the repeated effort.In an effort to save two hours of your life I'm going to tell you he plot- a guy who has the ability to project a long blade out of his arm returns home to see his mom. Things turn ugly after he is beaten up by the mafia boyfriend of an old girl friend. He takes revenge on the guy when he brings the girl home. The guys mafia mom sends her men out to get revenge while the cops begin looking for him as well.Very little is said. no explanation is really given for anything (like why they lock id girlfriend in an asylum) and the action, for the most part is all off screen. The film essentially consists of a guy who looks like Adrian Brody looking intense and not saying anything, killing people (off screen-most of the action happens off screen). It looks good, is well acted and had there been some form of reason for what is going on it might have been a good film. Hell, I would have liked some sense of real character development or back story (all we know is that the guy was picked on as a kid). The movie runs the better part of two hours and it feels like its six. If they weren't going to tell us anything they could have at least picked up the pace so it seemed like it was moving too fast. No instead we get the hero on a boat. The hero in a bus, the hero walking, the hero looking disturbed.Hero with his girl. It really annoyed me since I think this could have been a good film if they had simply done something or had someone actually say something meaningful other than give instructions to \"get this guy\".4 out of 10. Its about four hours (all my attempts to see this) I'll never get back. Only for those who want to see a brooding Russian action film with very little action",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8fb99ca8c1f540549d4af43e8badd64b",
            "input": "If any style of film could be called my \"guilty pleasure\", it'd be this generic fantasy type. Guilty is the wrong word for it, though, as I'm pretty pleased to be an escapist from time to time. \"Stardust\" is good stock fantasy, the likes of which one should expect from Neil Gaiman (or Gaiman adaptation, as it were). It isn't the visual dream-scape of Mirrormask, it isn't the adult pretension of Pan's Labyrinth, and it isn't the fun-loving classic The Princess Bride, but it contains just what the fantasy-lover is familiarized enough with to be completely comfortable during the entire viewing. Fantasy lovers should rejoice--special effects work has finally become good enough and cheap enough that this stuff is in regular production now.The story of Stardust involves a young man named Tristan who, in order to gain the love and approval of the most beautiful girl in their small town of Wall, goes on an adventure to retrieve a fallen star. To make things difficult, however, Tristan's fallen star is actually a woman named Yvaine, and he's not the only one looking for her... some witches have their greedy eyes on the immortality the star's heart can give, and a brother's feud over the magic kingdom leads murderous princes in her direction.From there it's all pretty predictable, but it involves some attractive fantasy elements, some warm-hearted commentary on the nature of love, and the best part, Robert DeNiro as a gay pirate. On that note, DeNiro's performance is spot-on... it's not the excessive lisp that most actors use to portray gay people, but a surprisingly effective one from someone used to being seen as a rough-and-gruff typecast character (thus the ongoing joke surrounding his character matching DeNiro's own opening up into alternate forms of acting). DeNiro hasn't been so unique to his own image since Brazil, and that's saying something.Stardust is the type of movie, perhaps, that will subsist on children's and fantasy-lover's shelves for a long time. I can't say it offers anything new, but it's not really there to. It's actually those most familiar with it's tropes that will enjoy it the most.--PolarisDiB",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cdc9654e13b54aaea5b4f672e4d59966",
            "input": "Hey now, yours truly, TheatreX, found this while grubbing through videos at the flea market, in almost new condition, and in reading the back of the box saw that it was somewhat of a \"cult hit\" so of course it came home with me. What a strange film. The aunt and cousin of former first lady Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy Onassis live in this decaying 28 room house out on Long Island (Suffolk Co.) and share the house with raccoons, cats, fleas (eyow!) and who knows what else. Suffolk Co. was all over them at one point for living in filth and old Jackie herself came by to set things right. Anyway, this is one strange pair, Big Edie and Little Edie...Edie (the daughter) always wears something over her head and dances, sings, and gives little asides to the camera that rarely make much sense. Big Edie (the mother, age 79) apparently likes to run around naked, and while we do get hints of what that might look like thankfully this was tastefully (?) done to the point where we're mercifully spared from that. These women talk and talk and talk, mostly about the past, and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, except to them. They live in absolute filth, cats doing their business wherever (\"Look, that cat's going to the bathroom behind my portrait!\"), and one bedroom appears to be their center of operations. If I close my eyes and listen to Big Edie's voice it reminds me very much of my own late aunt, who was from that area of the country and had that Lawn Guyland accent. One scene has Little Edie putting on flea repellent, lovely, you can see all the cats scratching all the time so the place must have been infested. The box refers to these two women as \"eccentric\", and I'd have to say in this case it is just a euphemism for \"wacked out of their gourds\", but this film is not without its moments where you truly feel something for them. This is equal parts creepy, sad, and disgusting, but I couldn't stop watching once I started. This is not my \"normal\" type of flick but I found it to be somewhat fascinating. It won't be for everybody though, guaranteed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bebc8fd34fdd47ffbe568538d041262d",
            "input": "when i saw the movie at first i thought that it was boring because nothing was happening but when all the scary things started to happen like when church dies and is brought back to life and also gage and his mom die and there idiot dad has to bring them back to life even though he nows the warnings and ignores Jud.this is not Steven kings best work. i thought that his best work was the shining. i don't think that people who see this movie and comment on how awful it was are wrong because all they think is that what were they thinking. as if that person can do a better job in making a horror flick. i mean making the gage evil and how he kills Jud is genius. making the most innocent most unsuspecting character into one of the killers is cool. people who didn't like the movie are dumb because all it is a scary movie and nothing all. don't expect something from a movie that it isn't. it still in a general area wasn't that good. i still recommend people to watch the movie",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c27501877944d33a5edab82d172194f",
            "input": "I don't'know... maybe it's because I'm Brazilian but all that stuff was too much. Too much love for the music, too much parties, too much contrast between the nice lives of the main characters (come on, it's not so sad) and the aspect of the city shown by the director. Everything looks too fake to me: the families, the relationships, the music, the \"happiness\". It simply sells a little taste of fake latinamerican culture. I must be honest: it did seduce me a little, but who would not be seduced by that fake lives made of nice music, sex and parties? I'm not that stupid: what kind of world is this one in which people do not suffer of diarrhea, profound sadness and STDs? I liked the scene with Caridad's mother phone call and the discussion about the contract with all the musicians and the Spanish people.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31387e63c2dd41af86ec69bed4138f3a",
            "input": "I thought this was a very clunky, uninvolving version of a famous Australian story. Heath Ledger and Orlando Bloom were very good in their roles, and gave their characters some personality; but the whole thing felt forced and mechanical.The beginning could have been a lot more involving; perhaps starting with a shootout, and then flashing back for a recap of how they got there or that sort of thing. And I felt like every scene was routinely predictable and signposted, like a very bad tv soap.I was really looking forward to this movie, and hoping for something a lot better. The only thing I can say in its favour is that it beats the Mick Jagger version, but not by much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a8109ef807814778b8ba9323e183556f",
            "input": "I remember seeing this film when it first came out in 1982 & loved it then. About 4 years later I had the privilege of seeing Luciano Pavarotti sing at the Metropolitan Opera house in New York (in Tosca) so seeing the ending of this film reminds me very much of that great night. What's not to like about this film? The music is brilliant and Pavarotti (Fini) was at his best and still looked great. The story is actually very funny in parts & the 'food fight' scene is still one of the funniest I have ever seen. The hot air balloon flight over the Napa valley was beautiful & so was the song he sang \"If we were in love\" (one of the few times Pavarotti sang in English). And hearing the duet of Santa Lucia gorgeous. Get real folks, this was a film about an opera singer called Georgio Fini who just happened to be played by Pavarotti. Kathryn Harrold & Eddie Albert were excellent in their supporting roles.I am VERY glad that I still have this almost worn out VHS tape of this movie but I would love this to be released on DVD especially now that Pavarotti is no longer with us because I think this includes the best performance of Nessun Dorma sung by him still on film today!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-037dbb059b75440c9a6a43ea60fdd283",
            "input": "I really have problems rating this movie. It is directed brilliantly, there is obviously a lot of money in it. Gere and Danes are intense (although her screen personality could use a bit more defining and spicing up), editing and cinematography are excellent. On the other hand, it is one of those really really sick movies where one cannot help but wonder whether the director himself likes to stage specific scenes, and, yes, one cannot help but wonder how many copycats will such a movie inspire.In purely artistic terms, it is a 9, but I really have to ask myself who these people are giving their money to produce such a movie ....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06bda98a124f46eca7a977a141c5d652",
            "input": "I'm grateful to Cesar Montano and his crew in reviving the once-moribund Visayan film understorey. \"Panaghoy\" is hopefully the forerunner of a resurgence in this vernacular (that claims more speakers than Tagalog). The dialect and lifestyle details are accurately reminiscent of this region of the Philippines. Downside: the corny and stilted acting of the American antagonist. The other item that I didn't appreciate was the lack of authenticity in the \"period\" costume of the same character, and above all, his bright red kit-car that I suppose was meant to pass for a 1930s roadster. Without those small yet glaring details, \"Panaghoy\" would've been at least a 9 out of 10 on my rating--daghang salamat, Manoy Cesar! Addendum: this film sure beats Peque Gallaga's \"Oro, Plata, Mata\", which provided a different view of the Visayas during the Second World War. Alos, there are some parts where the cinematography harks back to Spielberg's \"The Color Purple\" and the storyline begins to become reminiscent of \"Noli Me Tangere\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-799a0499ddae4e7fa46b4c47ecd746f4",
            "input": "I saw Brigadoon on TV last night (12 Sept 2009). I am 61 years old and have been watching films as long as I can remember. I can truthfully say that Brigadoon stands alone as by far and away the worst film I have ever seen. The accents were shameful. The local children's club would have produced better sets. The characters were so wooden that they probably contracted dry rot from the tears of the patrons who had the misfortune to watch them. It is to be hoped that the stars of this film had hides thick enough to protect them from the embarrassment which they must have suffered on seeing this film. The owners of this tripe should perform a great service to mankind and destroy all copies of this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c46acc1fed54de380b29b3cc1d1054b",
            "input": "Nothing is fantastic! Simple as that! It's a film that shouldn't work, yet does. Natali stays in the realm of Sci-Fi, however this film is also a comedy. Cypher it seemed was a big budget draining affair for Natali (at $7.5million! Woo-hoo Pa!) so with Nothing he scales down again. This is low budget, independent film-making at it's best. Simple, good old fashioned storytelling and an attempt at making a film for artistic merit as apposed to Hollywood's usual reasons for mostly financial gain. Nothing is a film about Nothing and before you ask, no it is not anything like Seinfeld! Basically Andrew and Dave are a couple of losers. They live in a strange looking house beneath two freeways. Andrew is a telesales travel agent who is agoraphobic while Dave is Andrews best mate who stays with him rent free to help him out. Dave is tired of it however and has a gorgeous girlfriend who he wants to move in with. By bizarre mis-fortunes however, Dave finds out his girlfriend embezzled a huge amount of money from Daves work-place incriminating Dave, and Andrew is wrongly accused of sexually assaulting a girl scout (Canadian humour people!). As it turns out Andrew's house is to be demolished as well and he can't stop it happening as the house was built on land it should not have been built on. Both Andrew and Dave are inside the house when the police and the demolition team come calling. They are desperate and can't escape, and in the panic and confusion just as the police burst in everything fades to white. What has happened? Have Dave and Andrew died? They wake to find themselves still in the house only it is quiet. No police, no demolition team, no angry girl scout mother! What happens is Dave and Andy discover they have the ability to \"wish or hate away.\" As it turns out they have hated away the entire outside world. They are left alone. The house is surrounded by nothing, which is portrayed as pure white. So what this means is that the films setting is a house set and then just white. The film is an interesting view on human isolation and the psyche and of course as they spend more time alone together with no food and no water, they begin to tire of each other. They discover they can hate away hunger, which is useful but obviously things get out of hand shall we say. I can't reveal much but I must say bouncing heads are quite a sight to behold.This film is quirky, funny, interesting. The effects are simple yet effective and Natali brings together two buddies from Cube, David Hewlett, and Andrew Millar to lead the film. They have chemistry and also work very well. They have to hold 90% of the movie by themselves and much of it in a pure white background, yet it works. Certainly I expect this to get the same diabolical treatment as Cypher did and it should appear on DVD in a year or two in the states. Nothing is a top quality and unique film and although not as good as Cube or Cypher it once again proves Natali as one of the best up and comers.Natali is someone who has really interested me in his three features so far and I cannot wait for his next feature. I prey to god he doesn't do the proposed Necropolis, written and directed by ADD sufferer, the ever crap Paul Anderson. Vincenzo old buddy if Paul comes round to your pad, RUN!!! RUN LIKE THE WIND!! I hope and prey this guy doesn't take to Hollywood like Alex Proyas did (with the enjoyable yet pussy-footed, sugar coated, helium light: I Robot!). Keep your eyes peeled for this guy. ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc3c841925bd41d7a86c532babf297bf",
            "input": "A scientist (John Carradine--sadly) finds out how to bring the dead back to life. However they come back with faces of marble. Eventually this all leads to disaster.Boring, totally predictable 1940s outing. This scared me silly when I was a kid but just bores me now. I had to struggle to stay awake! With one exception, the acting is horrible. Such expressionless boring actors! Hopeless.There are some good things about this: Carradine, despite the script, actually gives a very good performance. And there are a few mildly creepy moments involving a ghost of a Great Dane walking through walls. There's also one of the worst-looking knockouts in cinema history. Still, none of this is fun enough to sit through this. Avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4cc7ce8c948437694bcfbfb242b6424",
            "input": "This \"film\" is the culmination of everything that is bad about modern film. unnecessary slow motion, unnecessary flipping/jumping/somersaults, unnecessary characters, unnecessary dialogue.... basically unnecessity. (is that a word? well, it's just been invented by I, Robot.)What happened to practicality? (i.e. the car garage, the skin spray) the only tool that shows a combination of futuristic and realistic function is the card swipe at the coffee shop.What happened to showing respect for women? (i.e. smith's character does nothing but degrade the doctor for the better part of the film, and yet she still \"wants\" him. WHERE IS THE TENSION? I'll tell you where, good looks and not admiration or common ground)What happened to a detective that detects? Smith did nothing but sit around and feel sorry for himself, complaining to other people, and when they said something that sparked a thought he was off. this is such a lame way to get the story from point b-c-d-etc... it was OK once, but not several times in a row. (speaking of several times in a row, what was the \"I'm snoring and not listening to you joke? Twice In One Scene?)What happened to the small parts in a movie being somewhat meaningful and not just a tool to promote rescue scenes? Shia LaBeouf (the kid) is in the movie for a total of TWO SCENES, we know that A-he degrades women, and B-he knows Smith....... so of COURSE we should care about him and whether or not he comes to harm,What happened to Hero's? let's just forget that there are people, women and children everywhere getting attacked by robots and selfishly save the only person withing my view that I have an acquaintance with. and why did he have to ramp his bike through the air, showing off, while the doctor was somehow able to reach the same distance in a matter of seconds on foot.don't get me wrong, I'm all for spectacle. but I'm also all for a shred of realism and meaning.I have to say I've never laughed quite so hard at a film in a long time. so thanks Alex. I pray for the swing of the social pendulum back to simpler techniques, simpler stories and simpler everything else in films...... but mainly simpler techniques.Big Budget Action films: \"you so have to die\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2d7e9a61610409e9126a815e65b553d",
            "input": "An Italian/American co-production co-starring Linda Blair and David 'The Hoff' Hasselhoff: how could any fan of trashy horror resist such a treat?Well, based on the uneventful, extremely tedious, and utterly nonsensical first forty minutes or so, I would have said 'very easily'; thankfully, however, things do eventually get a tad more entertaining with the introduction of several inventive death scenes, and for those lucky enough to find an uncut copy, a smattering of nudity too (unfortunately, my copy was optically edited to remove such offensive material).The Hoff stars as Gary, a photographer who accompanies his beautiful girlfriend Leslie (Leslie Cumming) to a run-down hotel on a seemingly deserted island in order to take pictures for her latest project, a book about witches; whilst there, frustrated Gary also hopes to try and cure a bad case of blue balls by relieving Leslie of her virginity.His plans for nookie are scuppered, however, by the unexpected arrival of property developers Freddie and Rose Brooks (Robert Champagne and Annie Ross), their pregnant daughter Jane (Blair), son Tommy (Michael Manchester), pretty nymphomaniac architect Linda Sullivan (Catherine Hickland), and estate agent Jerry (Rick Farnsworth), who have come to inspect the island's hotel.After explaining their unexpected presence on the island, Gary and Leslie are welcomed by the property's new owners, and when a violent storm suddenly picks up, making it perilous to return to the mainland, everyone agrees to spend the night in the old building. Unfortunately, unbeknownst to the hotel's new guests, the place is also home to the spirit of an evil witch (Hildegard Knef), who requires human sacrifices in order to bring herself back to life. One by one, victims are pulled into a swirling red vortex (which is guaranteed to provide unintentional laughs), before meeting a terrible fate.None of this makes much sense, and the acting is atrocious (Manchester as Tommy is particularly bad, whilst Hasselhoff proves to be one of the better performers, which speaks volumes about the others), but those viewers who make it past the dreary first half are rewarded with some pretty decent moments of gore: Rose has her lips sewn together, before being roasted alive in a fireplace; Jerry is crucified and burnt alive; Linda is tortured by hags and impaled on a swordfish(!!); Freddie's veins pulsate and erupt in geysers of blood; and Gary gets stabbed in the back.Oh, and Leslie is raped by a guy with no lips and Blair gets possessed (again).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d4d1a2894834f8aa753b3b9ce7572a6",
            "input": "As a grownup in my mid-40s, I am not even close to any of \"Nancy Drew\"'s key demographics, but I was pleasantly surprised by the film this afternoon; so, I could tell, were the pair of sixtyish silver-haired ladies down the row from me. The older man who left the theater just ahead of me specifically praised the film to the 20-ish female usher (who said she'd seen the film the previous evening and quite liked it).More to the point, however: In the row just ahead of me, there were nine -- count them, nine -- ten-year-old girls lined up next to each other, passing popcorn and hot dogs and candy back and forth and giggling through the previews.Once the film began, they promptly settled down to watch........and didn't so much as peep till the closing credits began to roll.This is not a perfect film; it doesn't quite pay off its high school subplots, it's not quite confident enough of its own tone, and its thugs are just a hair too far over toward critically inept at times. But the adaptation of the source material is essentially respectful, the plot hangs together fairly well, and it treads deftly between the sins of excessive cheesiness and excessive modernization. Last but not least, Emma Roberts carries the movie with startling grace -- Josh Flitter's superb timing notwithstanding, this is Roberts' movie, and she pulls it off beautifully. Her Nancy Drew is very much the direct ancestor of Kristen Bell's Veronica Mars, and the film is also a lineal descendant of Jodie Foster's early and underrated \"Candleshoe\".In today's marketplace, it's a rarity: a family movie that respects its viewers' intelligence. As such, it won't be to everyone's taste -- but for what it is, it is the best movie of its kind in decades.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe3d9b84b672408bb36f97d64dfb5da6",
            "input": "Standard \"paint-by-numbers\" monster fare, filled with a bunch of routine plot devices from big-creature movies. It's like somebody had a deck of cards with plot ideas from other movies written on them, which were shuffled, and dealt. Whatever plot lines and characters came up in the deal were then tossed into the script. Characters are so cliché-ridden, that you can play a game of \"Guess who ends up as a monster meal\" after less than ten minutes into the movie, and probably get every single one right--including the order that they will get devoured. Many of the characters are so obnoxious, that you root for the creature to shut them up. Some of the main characters include: a Billy Idol clone who surfs with sharks, a loudmouth brat who flashes bankrolls, a Capt. Ahab guy with a vendetta, and Ahab's girlfriend who does sleazy dances at a bar. Oh, and a big, big beast in need of anger management therapy.Along the way, people argue a lot, pretty girls run around with wet t-shirts, couples make out on exotic beaches, explosions occur, ruins of a shrine appear, and greasy-faced pirates drop by. Amusing, for the most part, but one thing bothered me: the callousness by characters when other people were killed. After one violent demise, they make one-liner jokes. I could almost hear rim shots.Overall, OK, if you have 90 minutes to waste, and you want to laugh at a so-bad-it's-good-movie. Otherwise, you may want to skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfd389fecebb470d80136f360e21f34d",
            "input": "- A film crew is shooting a horror movie in an old, supposedly cursed house where over the years, seven people have mysteriously died. One of the crew finds an old book of spells and it looks like it would be perfect to use in some of the ritual scenes in their movie. It is reasoned that the spells in the book are better written than the script they are using. But as the book is read, the graveyard outside suddenly comes to life. Now the cast and crew are faced with real danger .- IMDb lists a running time of 90 minutes. For the first 60 of those minutes, nothing happens. Far too much time is spent on the movie within a movie. Are we supposed to be frightened by the horror movie that they are shooting? We already know that their movie isn't \"real\". These scares just don't work.- There are very few things to enjoy about The House of Seven Corpses. The acting is atrocious. Most of these \"actors\" would have trouble making a elementary school play. The score is terrible. It is very reminiscent of a 70s television series and provides no atmosphere. Speaking of atmosphere, other than a few moments at the end of the movie, there is none to speak of. Character logic is all but non-existent. Even in a movie, you expect characters to behave in a certain way. Here, I don't think I remember one scene where a character didn't choose the most illogical avenue available to them. And finally, there's those first 60 minutes of the movie that I've already mentioned. Can you say BORING? - I haven't rated The House of Seven Corpses any lower because of instances where the movie (probably by accident) actually works. My two favorite are the beginning and ending. The opening title sequence presents the deaths of the seven previous owners and may be the highlight of the movie. And, the ending scenes on the massive staircase as the zombie menaces the film crew are somewhat effective (what a ringing endorsement). Overall though, these moments aren't enough to make this a good movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1c4a81955404ff597f6ab47117a1dc4",
            "input": "An allegation of aggravated sexual assault along with some other unpleasant peccadilloes, including improper use of a broom, are made against half a dozen or so of the most popular high-school jocks in Glen Ridge, New Jersey, by a \"mildly retarded\" student (Heather Matarazzo). The investigation and building of the case are handed over to the DA's office, where Ally Sheedy and Eric Stoltz are put in charge.Rumors about the case spread through Glen Ridge, an upper-middle-class suburb where the jocks are adored by everyone in the community. (One of their fathers is a police lieutenant.) Nobody believes Matarazzo. \"Our boys would never take a slut like that down to the basement, rape her, and subject her to such sexual humiliation.\" The question is whether Sheedy and Stoltz will ever be able to shape a sufficiently cogent case that they can bring the jocks to trial. Matarazzo is not an ideal plaintiff. She's desperate for love and friendship, and that makes it easy for faux friends to mislead her into making false statements. A slimy reporter says, \"You can trust me,\" but it turns out the reporter can't be trusted at all. Another student, a very popular girl in school, pulls a Linda Tripp on Matarazzo, pretending to be her bosom buddy but all the while asking her leading questions about the incident -- and taping the results! As a consequence, watching this story unfold is like being on a roller coaster. At first it looks like a good case for Sheedy and Stoltz. But then, oops, the community organizes against the law. Then it looks good again. But then the reporter interferes. Then that obstacle is no sooner overcome, than Linda Tripp pokes her big nose into the investigation and makes public the tapes that seem to indicate Matarazzo was lying. (Well, actually, she WAS lying -- but she was lying to her interrogator in order to please her.) Then that's overcome, but Matarazzo objects to taking the stand because she doesn't want to be characterized as \"retarded.\" Eric Stoltz is fine in the part of the prosecutor. I say that for the simple reason that he and I lived in Pago Pago around the same time. (I hope he wasn't the kid I had that altercation with at the bar of the Seaside Club. If he was, I take back my compliment.) Ally Sheedy is a strange actress and hard to characterize. She did a marvelous self-restrained job in \"Fine Art\" but I didn't sense any particular effort being put into this role, which was rather formulaic anyway. I mean, neither she nor Stoltz nor anyone else could give a bravura performance in what's essentially a comic book story.The producers and director had the good sense to choose Heather Matarazzo for the role of victim. The very worst thing they could have done is cast an ethereally lovely, neotenous blond. Instead, Matarazzo, without being at all ugly, looks rather plain and this ordinary quality is complemented by her grooming and make up. Nor have the writers turned her wistful and gentle. She has a temper and is sometimes irritating to listen to, which is all for the good.Matarazzo's character is the best drawn in the film. The jocks are stereotypes. Pure evil. They think themselves above the law, barge in on some nice girl's party in East Orange, trash the place during a party far worse than \"La Dolce Vita's\" climactic orgy, and leave without explanation or apology. They deserve to get it in the neck -- and they do.I referred to this as a comic book story and that's pretty much what it is. It challenges none of our prejudices. It reaffirms out belief that the world can be divided into Good and Evil. And we don't have a moment's doubt about who's who. What I'm waiting for -- not really, that's just rhetorical -- is a movie almost exactly like this one and a dozen others, but in which the victim is LYING in order to get her name and photo in the papers and garner all those sympathy chips from right-thinking folk like the rest of us.The film is based on a true story, as are so many others we've all seen, and even more fictional features. (Eg., \"The Accused\".) Some are good, some are strictly routine. Okay. Fair enough. Now when do we get to see a film about the Tawana Brawley case, in which the teen-aged girl disappeared on a whim for a few days, then had her friends strip her, tie her up, and smear her with dirt, so she could claim she'd been abducted and raped by the police? Now THAT would be a challenge in a way this one simply is not.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6eb745eb0bb47d5b6d0a09bf309b6ae",
            "input": "Coonskin might be my favorite Ralph Bakshi film. Like the best of his work, it's in-your-face and not ashamed of it for a second, but unlike some of his other work (even when he's at his finest, which was before and after Coonskin with Heavy Traffic and Wizards), it's not much uneven, despite appearances to the contrary. Bakshi's taking on stereotypes and perceptions of race, of course, but moreover he's making what appears to be a freewheeling exploitation film; blaxploitation almost, though Bakshi doesn't stop just there. If it were just a blaxploitation flick with inventive animation it could be enough for a substantial feature. But Bakshi's aims are higher: throwing up these grotesque and exaggerated images of not just black people but Italians/mafioso, homosexuals, Jews, overall New York-types in the urban quarters of Manhattan in the 70s, he isn't out to make anything realistic. The most normal looking creation in looking drawn \"real\" is, in fact, a naked woman painted red, white and blue.In mocking these stereotypes and conventions and horrible forms of racism (i.e. the \"tar-rabbit, baby\" joke, yes joke, plus black-face), we're looking at abstraction to a grand degree. And best of all, Bakshi doesn't take himself too seriously, unlike Spike Lee with a film like Bamboozled, in delivering his message. This is why, for the most part, Coonskin is a hilarious piece of work, where some of the images and things done and sudden twists and, of course, scenes of awkward behavior (I loved the scene where the three animated characters are being talked at by the real-life white couple in tux and dress as looking \"colorful\" and the like), are just too much not to laugh at. It's not just the imagery, which is in and of itself incredibly \"over\"-stylized, but that the screenplay is sharp and, this is key for Bakshi this time considering, it's got a fairly cohesive narrative to string along the improvisations and madness.Using at first live-action, then animation, and then an extremely clever matching of the two (ironically, what Bakshi later went for in commercial form with Cool World is done here to a T with less money and a rougher edge), Pappy and Randy are waiting outside a prison wall for a buddy to escape, and Pappy tells of the story of Brother Rabbit, who with Brother Bear and Preacher Fox go to Harlem and become big-time hoodlums, with Rabbit in direct opposition to a Jabba-the-Hut-esquire Godfather character. This is obviously a take off on Song of the South with its intentionally happy-go-lucky plot and animation, here taken apart and shown for how rotten and offensive it really is.Yet Bakshi goes for broke in combining forms; animated characters stand behind and move along with live-action backgrounds; when violence and gunshots and fights occurs it's as bloody as it can get for 1975; when a dirty cop is at a bar and is drugged and put in black-face and a dress, he trips in a manner of which not even Disney could reach with Dumbo; a boxing match with Brother Bear and an opponent as the climax is filmed in wild slow-motion; archive footage comes on from time to time of old movies, some and some from the 20s that are just tasteless.Like Mel Brooks or Kubrick or, more recently, South Park, Bakshi's Coonskin functions as entertainment first and then thought-provocation second. It's also audacious film-making on an independent scale; everything from the long takes to the montage and the endlessly warped designs for the characters (however all based on the theme of the piece) all serve the thought in the script, where its B-movie plot opens up much more for interpretation. To call it racist misses the point; it's like calling Dr. Strangelove pro-atomic desolation or Confederate States of America pro slavery. And, for me, it's one of the best satires ever made.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c9a8b5aa7e74534affa5dd23bd57b13",
            "input": "The kids I took to this movie loved it (four children, ages 9 to 12 years; they would have given it 10 stars). Emma Roberts was adorable in the title role. (Expect to see more of this next-generation Roberts in the future.) After being over exposed to the likes of Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, and Paris Hilton, it was refreshing to see a girl who didn't look like she worked the streets. Also enjoyed seeing a supporting cast that included Tate Donovan, Rachel Leigh Cook, Barry Bostwick, and Monica Parker (with a cameo by Bruce Willis). Final takeaway: Cute film.(Note: I did not read the book series, so my comments are based on the merits of the film alone.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ee182b479564272bcc4eb896fd1c232",
            "input": "Pet Semetary (1989) 9/10 The Creed family have just moved into the small town of Ludlow. The family consists of a father, Louis, a mother, Rachel, a brother Gage, and a daughter, Ellen. They are greeted with kindness by Jud Crandall. Jud is 89, and could basically tell you about the entire history of Ludlow.Behind the Creed's new house, there is a path leading to a pet cemetery (spelled pet sematary). When Ellen wants to go up to see it, Jud willfully takes the family on a trip. That is the start of hell for the Creed family.When Rachel and the kids are gone, Ellen's cat Church dies. Jud feels that Ellen isn't ready for the death of her cat, so he suggests Louis follow him further up the path, past the pet cemetery.Jud tells Louis of this burial ground, once used by Micmac Indians. Louis buries Church, without Jud's help. A couple of days later, Church returns, alive, but from hell.This movie was one of two horror movies that could actually scare me, aside from \"The Exorcist.\" The greatest performance would ever be Zelda, Rachel's sister with spinal meningitis, or Victor Pascow, a ghost who tries to help the Creeds from making the mistake of bringing back things from the dead.The music in this movie plays an extravagant part. It is at the same time sad and mysterious. It goes along with the movie wonderfully.9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b64c9ef2d6e44d20a7e10c536cafb64a",
            "input": "After seeing the poster from the film Smother,I knew I was about to live one of those intolerable film experiences which make me want to take my eyes out.However,I felt a slight optimism because the movie had a solid cast which I thought it was going to rescue the movie.Unfortunately that did not happen.Smother is a horrible movie,but it is not execrable.That is the best I can say about it.The screenplay from Smother (written by the same guys from License to Wed,something which explains they have anything but talent for writing movies) is full of cheap and predictable humor.Seriously,I did not laugh even once watching this film.Besides,the solid cast I previously mentioned is absolutely wasted.After the big number of garbage she has been involved in (like the monumentally atrocious and execrable Because I Said So),some people may think the career from Diane Keaton is extinguishing.However,it is impossible for me to forget the excellent performances she has brought in previous decades,on films like Annie Hall or Baby Boom.On Smother,she makes her best effort with her performance,but her character is so horribly written she cannot do anything with it.Dax Shepard has left on me a good impression with his solid performances on the films Baby Mama and Idiocracy.However,he does what he can with his character.Mike White also makes a good effort,but he does not reach too far away.He is a very talented screenwriter (like he has shown on films like The Good Girl and School of Rock),so I would have liked to see he was one of the screenwriters from this movie,instead of only acting on it.Liv Tyler suffers from the same situation of all the previously mentioned actors : being wasted.The worst fail from Smother is being absolutely boring and unfunny.Its screenplay is nothing more than a collection of forced scenes and situations we have seen on sit-coms.Stay far away from this crappy comedy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c47fcb739a9642c983f83aa872ae6097",
            "input": "Fred Gwynne, Al Lewis, Sid Caesar, and Yvonne De Carlo star in this funny, funny movie. The late Fred Gwynne is truly wonderful as Herman Munster who lives with Grandpa Munster (Al Lewis), wife Lily (Yvonne De Carlo), and his son and daughter. Sid Caesar is hilarious as the owner of a wax museum that has a whole section dedicated to the Munster family. When the wax figures of Herman and Grandpa begin to terrorize the town everyone blames the two. The two now have to clear their names before it's too late. You'll laugh out loud just like I did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eea23f51c3234b969625e6e97689ce16",
            "input": "The premise of this awaited sequel was really good and after the huge success of the remake I expected a lot sincerely.The sad truth is that this movie is really absurd and inept. The situations are dumb and beyond reason and the acting is truly awful.This time there aren't likable characters or violins unlike the remake. Also, the gore is not that abundant and when it happens it's truly bad.The violence is minimal and it's a shame because there are many arguments that make you think that there's room for heavy violence. I mean, there's a SWAT team that is hunting a family of cannibal mutants. You surely expect something different! When I watched it on the movies I wanted my money back.Anyways this is a clear example of how rushed out movies turn out to be a mess and demonstrate poor quality on all aspects.A mess that let down the fans of the remake like me. That's why sequels are never welcomed; at least this movie isn't as terrible as the 1985 sequel to the original.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92640c6c59c64e6184ddf24588cca17d",
            "input": "I realize it's not supposed to be BSG and I can handle slow-paced shows if they're interesting but I find myself completely uninterested and bored with this series.The formula for BSG seemed to be: Action + Adventure + SciFi + Suspense + Mystery + Dramathe formula for Caprica seems to be: Bland Drama + Moderate ScifiMaybe it will get more interesting but as of episode 3 I can barely watch it. In fact, it's at the bottom of my to-watch list for the week. This is a sad state of affairs. The Syfi channel really destroyed their Friday night lineup. Whatever happened to the glory days of SG1, Stargate Atlantis, and BSG on Friday nights? They had a good thing there.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da3fa084db014cc49de4927f06316e37",
            "input": "] Haven't seen this film? Haven't even heard of this film? It wouldn't surprise me. One of the few truly \"independent\" films produced in the last ten years, no studio had faith in the picture and it was never picked up for major distribution. The independent company Kino Films, gave BOESMAN AND LENA a very limited run with virtually no promotion, and the majority of major film critics didn't even bother reviewing it. I guess a movie based on a one act, one set play about the apartheid and its affect on two individuals never really had a chance in today's market - and it's the intelligent film-lover's loss.For the record, both Angela Bassett and Danny Glover deserved Ocsar nominations (as did the cinematographer) but the film received such little fanfare that I can't even blame the academy on that one. This is a film that is challenging, thought-provoking, and heartbreaking, and it actually requires the audience to meet it on it's own terms. Taking that into consideration, it is definitely not a movie for mindless entertainment. Director John Berry wisely does not attempt to dress-up Athol Fugard's play. Sure, we're given a few fractured flashbacks and some breathtaking scenic shots, but the film version of BOESMAN AND LENA remains, on the whole, a story of two people living in inhumane conditions.Stripped of their basic human rights, Boesman (Glover) and Lena (Bassett) have no one left to attack but each other. A third character joins them for awhile (Willie Jonah, amazing in a largely silent role), but the film's focus never strays from the title characters and what they've become. Bassett and Glover give brave performances as the broken couple, performances that simply could not be improved upon. Vigorously and brutally stimulating, both intellectually and emotionally, BOESMAN AND LENA deserves to be rediscovered of home video. Hands down, the best film of the year 2000.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-814d1603756148b498190c8209745b5a",
            "input": "No message. No symbolism. No dark undercurrents.Just a wonderful melange of music, nostalgia and good fun put to-gether by people who obviously had a great time doing it. It's a refreshing antidote to some of the pretentious garbage being ground out by the studios. Of course ANYTHING with the incomparable Judi Dench is worth watching. And Cleo Laine's brilliant jazz singing is a bonus. This lady is in the same league as the late Ella. This goes on my movie shelf to be pulled out again anytime I feel the need for a warm experience and a hearty good natured chuckle. Just a wonderful film!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0416a8f9d71f4251b089131a18fb86c9",
            "input": "I just finished \"Dark Chamber\" aka \"Under Surveillance\" and I'm stunned. Stunned, not by the film, but by some of the rave reviews I perused which influenced my watching it. The story was so ravaged by plot-holes and the majority of the acting so flat, categorizing it as a comedy seems appropriate. Seriously, I found myself shaking my head and laughing in bewilderment as I endured this movie.Justin leaves the confines of living at home with a pain killer-addicted mom to go live with his cop father despite Mom's warnings that Dad is no good. When a young woman is found murdered, Justin becomes suspicious of the tenants who reside in the adjacent apartments. With the help of a couple pals, he installs covert cameras to keep tabs on these folks. As the truth begins to unravel, Justin uncovers an unexpected secret.One positive point is that Felissa Rose is HOT! I would have generously slapped an extra star or two on here had she peeled down a bit, but no such luck. It would have been the film's potential saving grace. Eric Conley played Justin very adeptly, I thought, and I wouldn't be surprised whatsoever to see more of him in the future. The general premise of the film, although plagued by clichés, might possibly have worked had it not been for the ridiculously hollow \"performances\" of key cast members, most notably Alexandra Eitel (Kayla) and David H. Rigg (Justin's father). The horror! (pardon the pun).I have nothing against low-budget films. Indeed, I believe independent film is our only hope for decent film making in the days to come. I'll cut low-budget films quite a bit of slack when it comes to special effects, lighting, even musical score and the overall picture quality. I don't give allowances, however, for stick figure acting and a swiss cheese lover's script. There are a vast number of competently-made low budget films out there. Sadly, this isn't one of them. I can't help but suspect that at least a few of the reviewers who have praised \"Dark Chamber\" here are in some way affiliated with its production.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f31a1b24714468fa80f0522d9ea5acd",
            "input": "I just saw this at the Toronto Film Festival, and I hope it gets wide release because I want to see it again! It is a character-driven film, and Andrew and David are more than up to the task. Any discussion of the plot might beconsidered spoilers, so I'll just say that the storyline is clever, the acting is superb, and the effects are amazing. Well-filmed and well-paced too. One of the best films I have seen in ages, and very refreshing in this summer of drearymovies. It had the audience laughing the whole time. See it if you can. (I particularly liked the \"Candy bar! Candy bar!\" scene.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e543ae4c0024fb2bfbedba16ae78128",
            "input": "The movie was totally Awesome and Cool. The graphics was superb and it was amazing, Especially, Flik was superb and awesome in the movie and he was funny and he was and sometimes he was intelligent. The circus bugs are colorful and they are superb in the movie. The grasshoppers were also superb and cool in the movie. Hopper was a pure and perfect villain. Even, Dot was cute. When, the bird comes to eat the bugs, that scene was superb and good. Even, the last scene was awesome and cool. Even, Flik's inventions was good. Building an artificial bird was a good idea to scare away the grasshoppers. When, the ants are building the artificial bird, that scene was good and nice I should really appreciate the creators of \"A Bug's Life\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d0f439463ef402b92c1dbabacc1fdbf",
            "input": "Interesting characters, lots of tension. As close to black and white without being black and white. I was turned off by how casually the supposedly sympathetic mainstream character, a quiet, near deaf secretary, was able to turn to crime to ruin colleagues, rough up people in her way and finally participate in a heist, and set up someone to be bumped off as a decoy to her own get-away. I'm a little put off by the trend for otherwise quality movies to portray criminals in a sympathetic way without addressing the injury they've done to others other than to portray their immediate opponents as jerks. In this film we never know who's money it really is they abscond with, or what happens to the innocent wife who the sympathetic deaf-secretary uses to set up the of the sleazy bar owner to take the fall for the missing loot. Too bad, the film could have been great.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e41d51631e184ca5bc2e70446aaad54a",
            "input": "In this send-up of horror films, 50's cold war paranoia, Reagan-era America, and high school films, Adam Arkin plays Tony, the star quarterback of Full Moon High in the 1950's. He and his father (Ed McMahon) travel to communist Romania and while he's lost in the streets one night, he is bitten by a werewolf. When he returns stateside, he cannot control his animalistic urges and goes on a killing spree. Frustrated, he flees town. Decades later, the immortal Tony returns to town and re-enrolls in highschool. He still can't control his transformations, and the townspeople, and his friends, realize he's not quite human. It all culminates during the schools big football game.I expected this to be one of those 'so bad it's good' films from the early 80's. But I was surprised that the film was actually, legitimately funny. The cast, including Kenneth Mars as a pervy coach, Roz Kelly as Tony's lusty former flame, Demond Wilson as a bus driver, and Alan Arkin as a oddball doctor, go all out, with hilarious results.While watching this film I was struck by how similar the writing and humor were to 'Family Guy.' 'Full Moon High' has that same anything goes attitude and never takes itself seriously.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c52d79f6f57b4564a1ea631043bbf7ca",
            "input": "This might be the poorest example of amateur propaganda ever made. The writers and producers should study the German films of the thirties and forties. They knew how to sell. Even soviet-style clunky leader as god-like father-figure were better done. Disappointing. The loss of faith, regained in church at last second just in time for daddy to be \"saved\" by the Hoover/God was not too bad. Unfortunately, it seemed rushed and not nearly melodramatic enough. A few misty heavenlier shots of the angelical Hoover up in the corner of the screen-beaming and nodding- would have added a lot. The best aspect is Hoover only saving the deserving family and children WHO had \"proven\" their worth. Unfortunately, other poor homeless were portrayed as likable and even good- yet the Hoover-God doesn't help them. A better approach would have been shots of them drinking spirits to show the justice of their condition. Finally, bright and cheerful scenes of recovery (after Hoover saved the country from the depression) should have rolled at the end. We could see then how Hoover-God had saved not just THIS deserving family, but all the truly deserving. Amateurist at best.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-190609ffa3e243049d0371f7a0ada984",
            "input": "I was adopted at birth and certainly did NOT have the problems Antwone fisher had in the movie, but I still share some of the emotions and this movie really helped to bring them out and force me to deal with them. It even caused me to realize that I do have a \"missing piece\" and I am going to seek out my birthparents now.I cried for almost a day after I saw this the first time. Antwone's confrontation with his birthmother juxtaposed with his father's family's reaction to his sudden appearance are powerful for those of us who don't know what will happen if we find our birth parents. And his self-confidence and self affirmations to his mother and against the abusers of his past were so powerful. I could really identify with this and my need to tell people \"yeah, I was put aside by my parents when I was born. BUT another set of parents picked me up and loved me. And now I am a success!\"It also helped my wife understand me and our adopted children, who did go through tragic experiences before they came to our home. And it helped me to realize just how messed up our social system is. If you remember reading the story last year about the foster kid in Florida who was \"lost\" AND then the \"Miranda & Ashley\" story in Oregon City where SCF ignored multiple sexual abuse complaints about the man who ultimately killed them AND the week this movie was released, yet another story in New Jersey of three kids who were ignored by the system. One died. The state apparently thought the home they were in was ok because the guardian was employed (as a stripper) and \"only occasionally\" used heroin!There are just so many issues that are brought out in this movie - and they are dealt with so well by the script and by the acting that Antwone Fisher should be a \"Best Picture\" nominee for sure. No matter if you are adopted or not, it is a heart-tugger that can't be ignored by anyone concerned about children in our society.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-965873f9c7f24400b9c8358920984913",
            "input": "This couldn't have been better. The strong restraints on Mike Sullivan's expressions couldn't have been portrayed in any other way. Tom Hanks delivers the best performance of his career. Young Tyler Hoechlin drives an emotional wheel; playing the basis character for the story. And veteran Paul Newman gives one of his best character performances in a long time.This film is based on a bold graphic novel by Max Allan Collins and Richard Piers Rayner. This is a father/son story which basically employs the two candidates solely unfit for the roles. Mike Sullivan had no father as a child, so John Rooney took him in. Although a generous man, Mr. Rooney involved himself in organized crime. Therefore, the debt of Sullivan was only to be paid off in involving himself in the business. Now, Sullivan has a wife and two children and is trying to keep his children safe, but at the same time pay back his boss. The events to follow, will test Sullivan's loyalty and embrace his family's fate.With a great adaptation by David Self, the dialogue comes out seldomly, but yet very virtuous. The story unfolds in a beautiful 1930's setting (Brilliant Art Direction by Richard L. Johnson & Nancy Haigh) covered with a dark rainy (snow on the ground) exterior. Driving the story, is Thomas Newman's wonderful Irish score, settling in only when necessary.But the most important technical element in the film is Conrad L. Hall's beautiful photography. This is some of the best cinematography I've seen; and I watch a lot of films. The scene when Mike and Michael are in the car, entering Chicago is quite impressive. The shot starts at the front of the car, revealing Mike(Hanks) through the windshield. It subsequently dollys around to the side of the car, to see Michael(Hoechlin) awakening and peering out his side window. As it continues, it trucks sideways and dollys back, completely around the car and reveals a gorgeous scenic 1930's Chicago.With a great cast and crew, the principle man creates a brazenly amazing film. I'm talking about Sam Mendes, who made his feature film debut in 1999 with American Beauty. (won him various awards) Before American Beauty, Mendes worked as a play director for the British Theater, but decided that he wanted to move on saying that there was nothing new for him in theater. With only two films, Sam Mendes has marked himself in my book as one of the great directors (In a list of about twenty-five).The film illuminates a brazen genre that has its hits and misses and expresses the true theme brilliantly. The photography, acting and story is phenominal. I'm still waiting for Scorcesee's Gangs of New York, but for now, I'm fully confident in saying that this is the \"Best Film of the Year\". Considering it's competition (Signs, Insomnia, Minority Report) thats a strong statement.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98719cbe02b742a9ab0aca687777a04f",
            "input": "I've seen the original non-dubbed German version and I was surprised how bad this movie actually is. Thinking I had seen my share of bad movies like Ghoulies 2, Rabid Grannies, Zombie Lake and such, nothing could've prepared me for this! It really was a pain to sit through this flick, as there's no plot, no good acting and even the special effects aren't convincing, especially the so-called zombies, wearing nothing more than white make-up and their old clothes, so their good set wouldn't be ruined by ketchup and marmalade stains. If you really want to waste 90 minutes of your life, then watch it, for all the others, don't do it, because you WILL regret it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf6759b77f304281a5e7361b9544e88f",
            "input": "... or was Honest Iago actually smirking at the end, as he died?Loved how the Bard's iambic pentameter just rolled of Fishburne's tongue, with excellent clarity and emotion.And how Branagh made Honest Iago seem to celebrate his own evilness...This is a wonderful film.I have often thought that Shakespeare is inherently not film-friendly: He uses words to create pictures in our minds, which creates a perennial battle with the camera, which only knows to show us what we need to think and feel. Every effort to film Shakespeare ought really to be celebrated. It is not an easy thing to do.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7caeaea1aa0b43d9993b04bf8e0f0435",
            "input": "I'm writing this because I somehow felt being led to believe Dark Remains was a good movie. Whilst it's not the worst I've seen, it certainly isn't good.A Weak script, weak actors, and weak directing. Even if they can't afford big name cast, would it be too much to ask for a more attractive lead actress? It was painful to watch a plain actress through out the film with her dull performance. The story was a cliché and poorly scripted. The special effects were minimal. The \"suspense\" tricks employed repetitively here were hard to swallow.To be fair, Dark Remains is no worse than quite some of the Masters of Horrors' episodes. But not quite on par with quality movies yet. Dark Remains is only recommended for the hardcore horror fans who don't want to miss any movie in the genre, even if it's a poorly made one. As for anyone else, time should be spent on something more valuable - which should be extremely easy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b09e3ff4fe1247eab884345cfda6e882",
            "input": "I stumbled onto this movie when I was eBay'ing Caesars Palace stuff, as I'm enamoured with its rich Vegas history as the last of the original luxury resorts still standing in good condition (unless you count Bally's, the original MGM Grand). In that respect, this movie delivers full-force. You're given a grand tour of the Caesars property,which in spite of all the renovations and additions they've done over the 40 years it's been open, looks alarmingly similar. As a film overall, the plot is somewhat difficult to follow, thanks in large part to the horrendous editing. And when I say horrendous, I'm not using that word lightly. There's a lot of spliced-in, second-long snippets of Vegas traffic, casino crowds, and even a scene where the Robert Drivas character is having a conversation with his father about how much he's grown up, and without any explanation, he (Drivas) goes (in those infamous snippets) from being himself, to a baby, to a little boy, and then back to himself while talking back and forth with his father. (That doesn't give away any plot details; if anything, one can be prepared for it and maybe they won't be as flabbergasted as I was by the editing.) The film has aged well otherwise, and has a good message about the inherent differences between a father and his son that most guys could relate to in some form or fashion.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d431671e91be44aea093d6fd8e37a1c3",
            "input": "A BDSM \"sub-culture\" of Los Angeles serves as backdrop for this low budget and shabbily constructed mess, plainly a vanity piece for its top-billed player, Celia Xavier, who also produces and scripts while performing a dual role as twin sisters Vanessa and Celia. A question soon develops as to whether or not some rather immoderate camera, lighting and editing pyrotechnics can ever reach a point of connection to a weak and often incoherent narrative that will not be taken seriously by a sensate viewer. Celia is employed as a highly motivated probation officer for the County of Los Angeles, while her evil natured twin has become an iconic figure within her fetishistic world largely because of erotic performances upon CD-ROMS, but when disaster befalls \"Mistress Vanessa\", virtuous Celia, determined to unearth her sister's vicious attacker, begins a new job as a \"sex slave\" at the private Castle Club where the specialty of the house is a \"dungeon party\". Two FBI field agents (whose deployment to the Vanessa case is ostensibly required due to her involvement with internet BDSM sites), in addition to a Los Angeles Police Department homicide detective, are assigned to investigate the crime, while endeavouring to provide security for Celia whose enthusiastic performance in her new vocation is avidly enough regarded by her customers as to have created conditions of personal danger for her. Flaws in logic and continuity abound, such as a homicide being allocated to L.A.P.D.'s Operations-South Bureau, a region of the metropolis that is far removed from the setting of the film. Direction is unfocused and not aided by erratic post-production editing and sound reproduction. The mentioned photographic gymnastics culminate with a batty montage near the movie's end of prior footage that is but tangentially referent to the scenario. One solid acting turn appears among this slag: Stan Abe as a zealous FBI agent.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81ceab6ef6f44c8c84b106b2c5a6ca71",
            "input": "As of this writing John Carpenter's 'Halloween' is nearing it's 30th anniversary. It has since spawned 7 sequels, a remake, a whole mess of imitations and every year around Halloween when they do those 'Top 10 Scariest Movies' lists it's always on there. That's quite amazing for a film that was made on a budget of around $300,000 and featured a then almost completely unknown cast of up and coming young talent. I could go on and on, but the big question here is: How does the film hold up today? And all I can say to that is, fantastically! Pros: A simple, but spooky opening credits sequence that really sets the mood. An unforgettable and goosebump-inducing score by director/co-writer John Carpenter and Alan Howarth. Great cinematography. Stellar direction by Carpenter who keeps the suspense high, gets some great shots, and is careful not to show too much of his villain. Good performances from the then mostly unknown cast. A good sense of humor. Michael Myers is one scary, evil guy. A lot of eerie moments that'll stay with you. The pace is slow, but steady and never drags. Unlike most other slasher films, this one is more about suspense and terror than blood and a big body count.Cons: Probably not nearly as scary now as it was then. Many of the goofs really stand out. Final thoughts: I want to start out this section by saying this is not my favorite film in the series. I know that's not a popular opinion, but it's really how I feel. Despite that it truly is an important film that keeps reaching new generations of film buffs. And just because it's been remade for a new generation doesn't mean it'll be forgotten. No way, no how.My rating: 5/5",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ab7e22c3dab499a9a0a3a41d5c3955a",
            "input": "\"The Thief of Bagdad\" is impressive in the shape of the evil magician Jaffar (Conrad Veidt). He plots with lies and magic spells to obtain the kingdom from its rightful ruler the young King Ahmad, and a gorgeous princess from her father...He falls victim in the end, as all tyrants do (in books and legends) to love and of the common man whom he ignored, here embodied by the little thief (Sabu).The armies of good and evil, black and white, are superbly realized in both visual and literary terms...The script is poetic, simply and very beautiful... The costumes of the magician and his men rising and falling like the wings of black birds, attacking suddenly in the night to inflict destruction and create terror...The radiant hero wears white turbans and robes, and his princess is dressed in pinks and pale blues...For spectacular scenes it matched all that had gone before, while through its use of color, it brought to life a world such as had not seemed possible before...With flying carpet and flying white horse, with a giant genie (excellently played by Rex Ingram), with evil wizards, and with the good acting of Sabu and Veidt, \"The Thief of Bagdad\" captures the quality and true atmosphere of the Arabian Nights... The 1940 version remains the screen's finest fairy tale!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62884cf9b91141e4809a5c3d49588056",
            "input": "I have to admit, this movie moved me to the extent that I burst in tears. However, I always think about things twice, and instead of writing a eulogy that would define the film as flawless and impeccable, I prefer taking the risk of a closer look.First what's first: The movie has an undeniable impact on the viewer simply because it starts out and continues as a slow-paced movie that doesn't try to blow you away with the actual scenes from 9/11. Thumbs up for this stroke of genius, because, unlike Stone's WORLD TRADE CENTER this film fortunately doesn't focus on the attack itself but on the fallout which, similar to the fallout of a nuclear explosion, is hardly visible but nonetheless dangerous and devastating. The psychological impact, the sheer devastation that 9/11 caused and the havoc it wreaked on the American people is almost palpable in this movie. I think Binder managed an astute observation of the American post 9/11 society and Sandler in my opinion sky rocketed from an average comedy actor to a real talent who delivers a performance worthy of an Oscar.However: In the film BLOOD DIAMOND, the Di Caprio character says and I quote: \"Ah, these Americans. Always want to take about their feelings\". Now, I don't want to belittle their sufferíngs, but I sure would like to make a comparison. Ever since 9/11 the entire world is confronted with mementos, memorials and commemorations of 9/11. The Hollywood industry and writers such as Safran Foer more than allude to 9/11 in their works. Now, this huge amount of cultural products, dealing with 9/11, turn the death of 3000 people into the biggest tragedy of this young century. The number of books written on the subject and the number of films directed on this subject, and I say this with all due respect, blow the importance of this atrocious crime somewhat out of proportion.Fact is: People die every day due to unjust actions and horrible crimes committed by bad or simply lost people. We have a war in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Birma and lots of other countries. On a daily basis, we forget about the poverty the African people suffer from and we tend do empathize with them to a lesser degree than with the American victims of 9/11 simply because they are black and because their lives don't have much in common with our Western lives. Africa neither has the money nor the potential to commemorate their national tragedies in a way America can. So, what I am saying is this: The reason why we feel more for the 3000 victims of 9/11 and their families is because we are constantly reminded of 9/11. Not a day goes by without a newspaper article, a film or a book that discusses 9/11.In conclusion: I commiserated with Charlie Fineman, but I wasn't sure whether I had the right to feel for him more than for a Hutu who lost his entire family in the Rwandan civil war.You catch my thrift?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57ae9db4f9b44f7288639110af1d093d",
            "input": "The latest film by the Spanish director Agusti Villaronga is a study on how children that experience violence and isolation within their remote community, develop into troubled young adults that need certain psychic tools to deal with their hidden mental frailty. Whether these tools are religion followed to a fanatical level, caring for others or simply putting on a macho image whilst engaging as a male-prostitute, Villaronga creates a successful examination of how these vices affect three teenagers living in Spain under Franco. The three witness the disturbing double death or their friends before they are teenagers and subsequently bury the emotions they feel with their peers frail corpses until they meet again once more at a hospital for those suffering form tuberculosis.The cinematic style of the text is typically visually opulent as you would expect from the Spanish auteur and is extremely reminiscent of fellow Spaniard Pedro Almodovar's work with themes dealing with sexual desire, both heterosexual and homosexual. An element that is different between the two directors is that Villaronga favours a supernatural undertone spliced with claustrophobic, gritty realism opposed to Almodovar's use of surrealism, although both styles are similar.The piece gives an insight into troubled young psyche and contains disturbing violence and scenes of a sexual nature. I highly recommend watching this film as it contains elements that will remain with the audience for a considerable period after viewing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e3d83b67b07493db4e54de8beb60bb1",
            "input": "We can start with the wooden acting but this film is a disaster. Having grown up in NY I can tell you that this film is an insult to anyone who is familiar with the community or the people. I'm not even a defender of the culture in any way and found this to be a Hollywoodized piece of trash to fit its own fictional, ridiculous culture presentation and language that anyone who watches Seinfeld knows is inaccurate. This is a colossal waste of time and, even worse, is not exactly interesting since the outcome is obvious and the scenes of confrontation are laughably bad. Who acts this way? Nobody.The writer's name sounds Israeli or something of that nature but it is clear he doesn't have a clue about the subject he is writing about. Looking at his bio, it is shocking he lived in New York and wonder how much real connection he had with the community. Even mediocre films like \"A Stranger Among Us\" are better and more closer to the truth than this dreck. Reading this guy's credits it's no wonder he has written scripts on all C grade films that somehow feature stars. shocking. Perhaps he knows someone because this script is even below par for a bad Dolph Lundgren film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b914063e58394b9d973af561c6e02af2",
            "input": "A hilarious and insightful perspective of the dating world is portrayed in this off beat comedy by first time writer/director Peter M. Cohen. The story unfolds as the four male protagonists meet weekly at the local diner to confer about their dating woes. We meet Brad: a good-looking, wall-street playboy with a quick-wit and sharp tongue; Zeek: a cynical, sensitive writer; Jonathan: a sexually perplexed nice guy with an affinity for hand creams and masturbation; and Eric: the married guy, who cherishes his weekly encounters with his single friends in hope for some enlightenment to his boring and banal married existence. The trials and tribulations of the men's single lives in New York are amusingly expressed, mirroring that of Sex in the City and HBO's new comedy The Mind of Married Man, and bring an astute light to scamming. The story takes a twist as the three singletons meet Mia--wittily played by Amanda Peet-and all fall for her. She seduces them each with her uncanny ability to conform to the personalities' they exhibit. When they come to realize they have all met and fallen in love with the same woman, they chose her over their friendship. Whipped is a realistic portrayal of the dating world, one that the critic's failed to recognize. In plain language, they missed the point. The protagonist's here are caricatures of real people. The exaggerations are hysterical, mixing satire and humility, and are not to be taken as seriously as the critic's disparagement suggests. See this movie, you'll laugh from start to finish.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a08c16ba0f5423a9ac0387d6d90f7f0",
            "input": "Gus Van Sant has made some excellent films. I truly am a fan.However, I can't help but feel that the cerebral edge of Tom Robbins book \"Even Cowgirls Get the Blues\" is lost in translation to the big screen. Alone, Tom Robbins and Gus Van Sant are incredible visionaries and towers of talent. Ultimately though this one just didn't work. It wasn't that the characters weren't well developed or the plot and content didn't come alive. It's just that our imaginations are much more powerful when reading a book like this. We're taken away to a different time and place and we sometimes think the worst and/or the best and it adds to the overall roller-coaster of the book as it neatly unfolds according to the author's precision. Movies however can leave one with less of the imagination and emotion roller-coaster detracting from the overall experience. This is what I believe happened here.I suggest reading the book!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5fffa5e9cca5487ba4742f4903b9ccbe",
            "input": "The acting is bad ham, ALL the jokes are superficial and the target audience is clearly very young children, assuming they have below average IQs. I realize that it was meant for kids, but so is Malcom in the Middle, yet they still throw in adult humor and situations.What should we expect from a show lead by Bob Saget, the only comedian in existence who is less funny than a ball hitting a man's groin, which is probably why he stopped hosting America's Funniest Home Videos.Parents, do not let your kids watch this show unless you want to save money on college. Expose your kids to stupidity and they will grow up dumberer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-788e595ee4ef41d88706f7a94257cd9e",
            "input": "What makes for Best Picture material? The Oscars have come in for a lot of stick for rewarding overblown spectacles that have aged poorly, and ignoring the \"auteurs\" who would be deified in decades to come. It wasn't because Hollywood was against art or creativity. The Academy Awards are the selections made by the industry itself, and that is why, at least in the classic era, they tended to reward the greatest collaborations, the most sensational meetings of creative minds.The Arthur Freed unit at MGM had been bound for Oscar-winning glory for several years by this point; it was only a matter of time before Freed, aided by his strongest director Vincente Minnelli and some the finest musical stars in the business, would land a Best Picture. Freed had arguably done more to raise the status of the musical than anyone else, crafting pictures which wove story and song together without losing the dynamic spectacle of the 30s musicals. The point about Freed musicals, is that the lyrics of the songs, unlike those of Hammerstein or Lerner, don't have to tell or even relate to the stories. What's important is that the tone of the song and the way it is presented fit into the structure of the film.An American in Paris was the first of three Freed musicals (the other two being Singin' in the Rain and The Band Wagon) which took existing classic numbers out of their original context and made them work in a completely unrelated story. The words don't fit the plot, but the routines fit the show. So, when Gene Kelly sings I Got Rhythm, he hasn't even got a girl yet, but the way it's done with the French kids joining in is a great bit of characterisation, and the upbeat tune and dance gives the movie the little lift it needs at this point. An American in Paris also uses the rule-breaking allowed in the genre to add little unconventional flights of fancy to tell the story, such as the series of dances which accompany the description of Leslie Caron's character.And what better director for this project than Minnelli, himself a painter and a pianist? At this time there wasn't really anyone who had a better feel for Technicolor. While some directors would saturate each scene in one colour or fill the screen with clashing shades, Minnelli's colour schemes are tightly controlled but never look forced. In the opening scenes the tones are fairly muted, but not drab, and in particular there is an absence of red. During Oscar Levant and Georges Guetary's meeting in the café, a few more vibrant shades are introduced. Then, during the first musical number, \"By Strauss\" Minnelli gradually brings in splashes of red – a table cloth, a bunch of roses – until it eventually dominates, as if the song has awoken the picture's colour scheme. For most of the songs, the colours are choreographed as intricately as the people. However, in some numbers, such as \"Tra-la-la\" he keeps the shades the same and instead opens out the space as the song swells up and the characters become more animated.The Achilles' heel of An American in Paris is its story. I personally find the romantic angle particularly unpalatable, playing as it does like a last hurrah for the misogynistic love stories that reigned supreme in the 30s; the headstrong, independent woman gets rejected while the meek, delicate girl is harassed into loving the hero. Even if you don't mind that, it is difficult to connect emotionally with the story because it is constantly overshadowed by the songs and dances. Compare this to Singin' in the Rain, which doesn't really have as many great routines or memorable set-pieces as An American in Paris, but it has a winning storyline. Singin' in the Rain was overlooked at the 1952 Oscars, yet it is regarded as a classic of the genre today. But I think people sometimes forget that cinema is an all-encompassing form of visual entertainment, not just a means of telling a story. An American in Paris is not deep or engaging or tear-jerking but, like a certain DeMille picture that won the top award the following year, it certainly is a great show.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-24e1d8fd36ae4eb7840cfc78ea7f5f0c",
            "input": "Hardly the stuff dreams are made of is this pursuit of the brass ring by a naive hustler (JON VOIGT) and his lame con-man sidekick (DUSTIN Hoffman), soon to forge a friendship based on basic survival skills.A daring film for its time, and a foremost example of the kind of gritty landscape being explored in the more graphic films of the '60s. Symbolic of the \"end of innocence\" in American films, since it was the only X-rated film to win a Best Picture Oscar.JON VOIGT is the male hustler who comes to the big city expecting to find women an easy way to make money when they fight over his body, but soon finds the city is a cold place with no welcome mat for his ilk. Befriended by a lame con-man (DUSTIN Hoffman), he goes through a series of serio-comic adventures that leave him disillusioned and bitter, ready to leave the confines of a cold water flat for the sunshine promised in Florida, a land his friend \"Ratzo\" dreams of living in.But even in this final quest, the two are losers. John Schlesinger has directed with finesse from a brilliant script by Waldo Salt, and John Barry's haunting \"Midnight Cowboy\" theme adds to the poignant moments of search and desperation.Summing up: A true American classic honestly facing a tough subject and daring to show the underbelly of certain aspects of city life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6626fd6f9b06431e9088e786d5b62407",
            "input": "Very sweet pilot. The show reeks of Tim Burton's better films...Edward Sissorhands, Big Fish, Charlie & the Chocolate Factory. The cinematography, the narration, the music, the external sets all scream Tim Burton. There has to be a connection, or a STRONG influence, I just haven't researched enough to know where it is.As I've seen in the forums, yes Anna Friel is playing a poor man's Zooey Deschanel. Every time I see her on the screen I see Zooey. Don't get me wrong, Anna Friel does a great job. Her character is very sweet and lovable and you easily get attached to her. It's more of a distraction that I keep thinking \"Why didn't they get Zooey Deschanel\".Lee Pace does a great job too. I kept trying to remember where I knew him from and just looked it up. Wonderfalls!!! Great, short lived series from 2004. If you enjoy Pushing Daisies you MUST go rent Wonderfalls, which is another Brian Fuller creation….hmmmm Loved seeing Swoosie Kurtz (World According to Garp) and Ellen Greene (Little Shop of Horrors) again. Two underrated character actresses that never fail to bring it with their performances.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9e0860b169946a782694ebe3ee21e94",
            "input": "The cover of box of this movie has Kyle Minogue's name on it, but she has the same destiny as Drew Barrymore did in \"Scream.\" That's the first thing that makes this movie lame; they are trying to market a movie with someone that's in it for 5 minutes.Of course, we have to have this movie feature young hip college kids that are oblivious that there's a killer going around. To top it all off, Molly Ringwald of 80's teen movie fame is the star of this beautifully written film. It's a good career move for Molly to get some money doing a crappy movie in Australia so she won't get ridiculed in the states.Either way, this dumb movie is about some dumb horror movie that was never finished because this dumb creature kills everyone that's in it. Throughout the movie, we're supposed to guess who's the killer. Long story short, remember our little friend Molly, she saves the day...or does she?This move is just plain bad, rent it if you feel like torturing yourself or just break it on the floor of your local video store if you see it on the shelf. Don't spread the horror.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12ad0d105139432e8267de92a0f91a45",
            "input": "The Shining is a weird example of adaptation: it has very little in common with the source novel, written by Stephen King, yet it is widely remembered as one of the best cinematic renditions of the horror master's work. This is due to two factors: Stanley Kubrick's masterful direction and Jack Nicholson's chilly acting.Nicholson plays Jack Torrance, a writer who accepts to take care of the Overlook Hotel in Canada during the winter period, unaffected by the gruesome stories surrounding the place: he claims a nice, isolated location is just what he needs to finish his new book. Therefore the Overlook becomes the new home of the Torrance family: Jack, his wife Wendy (Shelley Duvall) and their five-year old son Danny (Danny Lloyd). The boy in particular senses right from the beginning that something's wrong: he has been told by the cook, Dick O' Hallorann (Scatman Crothers) that he is endowed with a mysterious psychic energy, the titular Shining, which allows people like him and Dick to see flashes from the past and the future, among other things. Because of this \"gift\", the forces that inhabit the hotel immediately take an interest in Danny, even though he is quite capable of resisting them. That is not Jack's case, however, as he gets increasingly paranoid regarding his wife's affections and seeks comfort in the company of what can best be defined as ghosts, triggering a chain of insanity and dread which is very hard to break.The Shining works as a horror movie because Kubrick, though having never worked on this kind of film before, knew exactly what was effective and what wasn't, hence the larger focus on atmosphere and psychological shocks than gore and creative bloodbaths. King criticized the director for changing most of the story, omitting most of the Jack/Danny subplot (merely hinted at in the film) that led to the book's emotionally strong climax, and while his disappointment is valid, the omission was actually necessary: the novel dealt with redemption, albeit in an unconventional way, and redemption is a theme Kubrick, one of the most famous analysts of human decay, never had a soft spot for. What he is interested in is the mental, and subsequently physical, unbalance that threatens the characters, and he keeps the creepy tone even thanks to a very cold approach and expert use of the steadicam shot (Danny's encounter with two ghostly twins being the best example).Another criticism King raised was about the actors, especially Nicholson: in the writer's opinion, his trademark grin at the start of the movie seemed to indicate Jack already was insane, thus undermining the rest of the story. Now, it is true that Nicholson looks a bit goofy from the very beginning, but it is equally true that Martin Sheen (King's ideal choice for the role) probably would not have been able to deliver a performance as terrifying as Nicholson's: from the moment he starts grinning in a more unsettling way than before to the immortal \"Here's Johnny!\" scene, it is impossible to picture another actor playing that part, and even though the TV version of The Shining from 1997 isn't bad the Torrance character is indelibly linked to the One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest star. As for Duvall and Lloyd, both add terrific support, the latter especially deserving a place alongside Harvey Stephens (The Omen's Damien) and Haley Joel Osment as cinema's great horror child icons. One might complain about Duvall being completely different from the book counterpart (blonde and beautiful) and not having much else to do but scream and run, but two things ought to be considered: a) back in 1980 the \"scream queen\" cliché wasn't one yet; b) rarely has any actress looked so genuinely terrified on camera, making the book-movie differences secondary compared to the real fear that emerges from Wendy's eyes.Irvine Welsh, the author of Trainspotting, once said there is no such thing as a completely faithful adaptation of any literary work (and he should know, given the liberties Danny Boyle took when his junkie masterpiece was brought to the screen), yet that doesn't mean the movie is necessarily bad. The Shining proves said point to perfection: very little from the novel, approximately 5%, is included in the film, but in Kubrick and Nichlolson's hands this masterclass in loose cinematic translation becomes one of the finest, most original horror pictures of all time, which really is saying something given the genre's current poor form.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de7528fde294433ca091f79e8ced3396",
            "input": "- After their sons are sentenced to life in prison, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shirley Winters) begin receiving threatening phone calls because someone fells their sons got off easy. The pair decides to move to California to escape the publicity of the trial and to start a new life. They start a dance school that is soon very successful. One of the students has a rich unmarried father with whom Adelle quickly falls in love. In the meantime, Helen is busy raising rabbits and becoming a little too infatuated with an evangelist on the radio. It's only a mater of time before everything falls apart and the women enter a world of madness and murder.- I can't help but compare What's the Matter with Helen? to Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?, also starring Shelly Winters. Where that movie seemed almost restrained in its presentation of Auntie Roo's madness, there's nothing holding Helen back in this movie. It may take a good deal of the movie's running time, but once she snaps, Helen is one Bad Mad Mutha. You don't want to mess with her. Winters is so delightfully demented that it was impossible for me not to enjoy her performance. I'm not going to spoil the movie, but the things Helen is capable of are totally over-the-top.- As good as Winters is, Reynolds is totally ridiculous in her role as the gold-digging tap dancer. I got the impression that she thought she was in a movie that would get her nominated for some award. This ain't Citizen Kane! Quit acting so serious. Hey, Debbie, don't you realize that you're main purpose is to be a victim of Winters' insanity.- I just love these former-female-stars-in-the-twilight-of-their-career horror movies. What's the Matter with Helen? is as fun as any.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23ffb268986f496d98022323fbc5dbbc",
            "input": "Ok I will sum up this movie... A bunch of skanky British women have some disease that basically is turning them into zombies. The whole movie consists of these women talking, smoking, and rarely going out for \"meat\" Or humans to eat. I swear I had to MAKE myself watch this movie... UGH",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9f89118781a4c1ab8ed08b23f5a03ba",
            "input": "Title: Robot Jox (1990) Director: Stuart Gordon Cast: Gary Graham, Anne Marie Johnson, Paul Koslo Review: Stuart Gordon who we usually associate with extremely gory horror films such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, Dagon and Castle Freak, took a small detour here and did a little sci-fi flick. I stress the word \"little\" since this is a very low budget flick, and there in lies its main weakness.The story takes place in the future. A world in which the great superpowers (that according to this movie are the United States and Russia) duke out their differences not by going on a full blown world war...but by fighting gladiator style battles with gigantic robots. Our hero Achilles must go up against the evil Russian robot fighter called Alexander. Lots of cheap stop motion animation ensues.Well, the idea is awesome I guess. The great nations settleling territorial disputes with giant robots? Interesting premise and one that could have been handled properly if the proper budget had been available. Unfortunately what could have been a fun movie ends up being an embarrassment for an otherwise great director.I as a kid loved this movie, and I guess if you want any enjoyment out of this movie, you'll have to revert back to little kid mode to have some fun with it. I showed this film to some of my friends and as the movie progressed my friends where like \"what the hell is this piece of crap franco?\" And I'm like well this movie is a sci-fi by one of my favorite directors Stuart Gordon?\" But as the movie progressed into corny territory I almost felt like pressing stop and not having them go through that torture. I could go through it, cause I loved this film as a kid, and there's still a little nostalgia attached to watching it. But everyone else was just not going to get it.And I myself realized that the movie isn't really that good. First off. The movie is about giant robots kicking the hell out of each other. And in order to achieve this in a credible fashion you'd have to use some damn good special effects to make it work, expensive effects that would help us the audience suspend disbelief. But unfortunately this being a small scale movie, from a small scale company (Empire Pictures, which went bankrupt after making this film!)the effects only help us giggle and laugh at them. Heck even the sets and some of the wardrobe looks unfinished or half assed.OK granted, once you accept that you are watching a mixture of moderate stop animation and miniatures well you can sort of give in to the film and even enjoy the big robots kicking the hell out of each other. There are certain scenes when the robots are fighting that are kinda cool, and made me go \"thats why I liked thid movie!\" But every know and them, some crappy effect will take you right out of that protective little cocoon you were trying to hide in. And boom, your right back into realizing this film just doesn't live up to its premise.And heres another thing that sort of bothered me a bit about the movie. This movie is basically a movie for kids. You know, giant robots duking it out? Stop motion animation? Hello? But this movies dialogue had a lot of sexual innuendos and the violence gets a little bloody. So I kept asking myself is this a kids movie or not? After a while I just came to the conclusion that basically this was a kids movie with adult sensibilities, which really isn't a good mix.So for those of you who don't feel that certain naive childlike charm of watching two robots fighting each other and if you don't have a nostalgic connection to this movie (like I do) well Id suggest you steer clear away from this one. Gordons a great director, but this movie he made, just didn't do it for me. Well, at least not now that I'm a full grown adult.Rating: 2 out of 5",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86ee499d486441deafd0c4b59c15cc11",
            "input": "What a strangely wonderful, if sometimes slight and bulky, big-budget fantasy this is. Takashi Miike had already proved, by the time he got to The Great Yokhai War, that he could dip into other films aside from his supposed niche of the crime/yakuza genre (Visitor Q and Andromedia showed this, the former great the latter lesser). But here Miike, in his first and only co-screen writing credit no less, proves that he can deliver the goods on a post-modern soup of mythical fantasy conventions, and with it boatload of CGI, creature-effects and make-up, and an epic battle that is more like a \"festival\" than something out of Lord of the Rings. The comparisons can be made far and wide, to be sure, and the most obvious to jump on would be Miyazaki, for the seemingly unique mixture of kids-as-big-heroes, power-hungry sorcerers looking for the energy of the earth as the main source, machinery as the greatest evil, and many bizarrely defined, flamboyantly designed creatures (or Yokai of the title). But there can also be comparisons made to Star Wars, especially to the Gungan battle in TPM, and to the whole power-play between good and evil with similar forces. Or to anime like Samurai 7. Or, of course, to Henson's films. And through all of these comparisons, and even through the flaws or over-reaching moments, it's Miike all the way with the sensibilities of effects and characters. Here, Ryunosuke Kamiki plays Tadashi, the prototypical kid who starts out sort of gullible and sensitive to things in the world, but will become the hero in a world going into darkness. The darkness is from an evil sorcerer, who gets his energy from all of the rage and wretched vibes in the human world, and who is also starting to put to death the spirits and other creatures, the Yokhai, into a fire that sends them into gigantic robots that have only one mission- to destroy and kill anything in their paths. Tadashi gets as pumped up to fight Sato the sorcerer as the Yokai once Sato's main minion and cohort, Agi (Kill Bill's Chiaki Kuriyama, another great villainies) steals Tadashi's little furry companion, a Sunekosuri. Soon, things come to a head, in a climax that brings to mind many other fantasy films and stories, but can only be contained, up to a point, by Miike and his crew. I would probably recommend The Great Yokai War for kids, but in the forward note that it's not some watered down fantasy in American circles. This has creatures galore, including a one-eyed umbrella stand, and a walking, talking wall, not to mention a turtle, a fire serpent, and a woman who became cursed by Sato. So the variety is on high on that end, and one might almost feel like the creatures and effects- which grows to unfathomable heights when the \"festival\" hits with the Yokai reaching hundreds of miles in scope. But there's also a sense of fantasy being strong in both the light and the dark, and Sunekosuri becomes perhaps the greatest emotional tool at Miike's disposal (and not just because it's cuteness squared); where else to get an audience riled up than over a little furry ball of fury, who ends up in a tragic battle with Tadashi in robot form? Yet through all of this, the sense of anarchy that can be found in the brightest spots of Miike's career is here as well, which distinguishes it from its animated, Muppet and sci-fi counterparts. There's the bizarre humor as usual, including a song dedicated to Akuzi beans at a crucial moment in the climax, and more than a few flights of fancy with the creatures and fight scenes (I loved, for example, the guy with the big blue head who has to make it smaller, or the anxious turtle-Yokai). The biggest danger with Miike's access to bigger special effects and computer wizardry, which he flirts with, is overkill on this end. He's got everything down, I'm sure, with storyboards, and he creates some memorable impressions with some compositions (one of them is when all is said and done, and Tadashi and the 'other' human character are in the middle of the Tokyo rubble in an overhead shot), but the CGI is sometimes a little unconvincing with the robots, and the interplay skirts on being TOO flamboyant, and some visuals, like the overlay of the Yokai spreading the word about the big festival on the map, just seem weak and pat. I almost wondered if Miike might dip into (bad) Spy Kids territory, quite frankly.But this liability aside, The Great Yokai War provides more than a share of excitement, goofy thrills, and innocent melodrama that came with many of the best childhood fantasies. It owes a lot to cinema, as well as traditional Japanese folklore, but the screws are always turning even in its most ludicrous and veeringly confusing beats. It's not the filmmaker at his very best, but working in experimentation in a commercial medium ends up working to his advantage. It's got a neat little message, and lots of cool adventure. 7.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c482fae2af44094960a2f28e5cb7a47",
            "input": "Inspector \"Dirty\" Harry Callahan once again angers his superiors with his maverick approach to police work. Refusing to take a vacation he is given a simple case which takes him outside of San Francisco. However, he soon discovers a link between a recent murder in the city and a murder outside of the city, which leads him to the trail of a revenge killer.As an entry in the Dirty Harry franchise the film starts with some very promising moments, including the legendary \"Go ahead, make my day\" line that Eastwood delivers wonderfully through clenched teeth before single handedly foiling a robbery. Very badass and it just what fans can expect from him. However, the film soon shifts gears and focuses on the mysterious revenge killer. The problem is that this killer isn't all that mysterious as she is characterized as much as Harry is. This really detracts from the presence of the main character who ruled all of his previous film appearances with, pardon the pun, Magnum Force.On the bright side this new storyline does draw several parallels to Harry's own unorthodox methods and gives his character dramatic depth that was not there before, but fans that were looking for another badass Harry outing will more than likely be somewhat disappointed. However, a tense climax ends the film on an exciting note so if you don't mind something a little different, it is a good movie for fans. --- 7/10Rated R for violence and a rape scene",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-248aa4c793b04d29a2be3a18e84e044d",
            "input": "No one should ever try to adapt a Tom Robbins book for screen. While the movie is fine and the performances are good, the dialogue, which works well reading it, is crap when spoken. Or, to put it another way, no one would be likely to suggest that hearing someone else's name was like seeing it written in radium on a pearl.Overall, the movie feels like a badly-adapted Cliffs Notes to the book - most of the parts have been hacked down to a fifth of their size in the book, in terms of backstory and current story, and the ending is wildly (and unpleasantly) different from that of the book. Most of the plots from the book have gotten lost, including the one that makes everything make sense at the end, and there's more than one reference that makes sense in the book that makes the viewer say \"Huh?\" Not a worthy effort, unfortunately - the script should have been read, compared to the book, burned, and all the actors sent off to do something far better. I admire Gus Van Sant tremendously, but not even someone of his calibre could have made a decent movie of such a complex book without making a miniseries.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ec6cad0dc924b588b922f713563501f",
            "input": "Words can't describe how bad this movie is. I can't explain it by writing only. You have too see it for yourself to get at grip of how horrible a movie really can be. Not that I recommend you to do that. There are so many clichés, mistakes (and all other negative things you can imagine) here that will just make you cry. To start with the technical first, there are a LOT of mistakes regarding the airplane. I won't list them here, but just mention the coloring of the plane. They didn't even manage to show an airliner in the colors of a fictional airline, but instead used a 747 painted in the original Boeing livery. Very bad. The plot is stupid and has been done many times before, only much, much better. There are so many ridiculous moments here that i lost count of it really early. Also, I was on the bad guys' side all the time in the movie, because the good guys were so stupid. \"Executive Decision\" should without a doubt be you're choice over this one, even the \"Turbulence\"-movies are better. In fact, every other movie in the world is better than this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-329c6dadaaf94551842a4ebfed99776e",
            "input": "Olivier Gruner stars as Jacques a foreign exchange college student who takes on and single handedly wipes out a Mexican street gang in this obnoxious and racist film which is so horrible that it's laughable. Bad acting, bad plot and bad fight choreography make Angel Town a Turkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-904e303184824cf98f0d513a68453292",
            "input": "Joan Crawford had just begun her \"working girl makes good\" phase with the dynamic \"Paid\" (1930). She had never attempted a role like that before and critics were impressed. So while other actresses were wondering why their careers were foundering (because they were clinging to characters that had been the \"in\" thing a few years before but were now becoming passe) Joan was listening to the public and securing her longevity as an actress. The depression was here and jazz age babies who survived on an endless round of parties were frowned upon. Of course, if you became rich through immoral means but suffered for it - that was alright.This film starts out with a spectacular house boat party. Bonnie Jordan (Joan Crawford) is the most popular girl there - especially when she suggests that everyone go swimming in their underwear!!! However, when Bonnie's father has a heart attack, because of loses on the stock market, both Bonnie and her brother, Rodney (William Bakewell) realise who their real friends are. After Bob Townsend (Lester Vail - a poor man's Johnny Mack Brown) offers to do the \"right thing\" and marry her - they had just spent a night together when Bonnie declared (with abandon) that she wants love on approval - she starts to show some character by deciding to get a job.She finds a job at a newspaper and quickly impresses by her will to do well. Her working buddy is Bert Scranton (Cliff Edwards) and together they are given an assignment to write about the inside activities of the mob. Rodney also surprises her with the news that he also has a job. She is thrilled for him but soon realises it is bootlegging and he is mixed up with cold blooded killer, Jake Luva (Clark Gable). Rodney witnesses a mass shooting and goes to pieces, \"spilling the beans\" to the first person he sees drinking at the bar - which happens to be Bert. He is then forced to kill Bert and after- wards he goes into hiding. The paper pulls out all stops in an effort to find Bert's killer and sends Bonnie undercover as a dancer in one of Jake's clubs. (Joan does a very lively dance to \"Accordian Joe\" - much to Sylvie's disgust). The film ends with a gun battle and as Rodney lies dying, Bonnie tearfully phones in her story.This is a super film with Crawford and Gable giving it their all. Natalie Moorehead, who as Sylvie shared a famous \"cigarette scene\" with Gable early in the film, was a stylish \"other woman\" who had her vogue in the early thirties. William Bakewell had a huge career (he had started as a teenager in a Douglas Fairbanks film in the mid 20s). A lot of his roles though were weak, spineless characters. In this film he played the weak brother and was completely over-shadowed by Joan Crawford and the dynamic newcomer Clark Gable - maybe that was why he never became a star.Highly Recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-513618619dbe48c1a98703287b0b5095",
            "input": "While I don't consider myself a big fan of fairy tale movies, Stardust intrigued me based on seeing Michelle Pfeiffer in the trailers as a villain (especially since I was about to see her as the bossy Velma Von Tussle in Hairspray). Boy, is she so convincingly evil here as a witch, especially with her age-ugly makeup in the beginning and end! Robert De Niro is also great as the pirate captain who's forced to hide \"in the closet\" to protect his \"reputation\"! Just about all the actors like Claire Danes, Rupert Everett, Ricky Gervais, Peter O'Toole and many others do fine work here. While Danes and Pfeiffer are classic beauties, there's also stunning faces of Sienna Miller, Olivia Grant (as Girl Bernard), and Kate Magowan especially when we first meet her. Newcomer Charlie Cox is fine as the lead Tristan and he looked so much like his father Dunstan as a young man that I thought that was him in early scenes with Magowan (actually Ben Barnes). Many comments have compared this to The Princess Bride and while I can see some resemblances, the main difference was that with PB, you always knew it was just an imaginary tale as told by an old man to his grandson. Stardust makes you believe, for the most part, that what you're seeing and hearing could have actually happened even with all the hilarity that happens throughout. So on that note, I highly recommended Stardust.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28845b38c9094f9aa5b1c833ad317c1f",
            "input": "I grew up (b. 1965) watching and loving the Thunderbirds. All my mates at school watched. We played \"Thunderbirds\" before school, during lunch and after school. We all wanted to be Virgil or Scott. No one wanted to be Alan. Counting down from 5 became an art form. I took my children to see the movie hoping they would get a glimpse of what I loved as a child. How bitterly disappointing. The only high point was the snappy theme tune. Not that it could compare with the original score of the Thunderbirds. Thankfully early Saturday mornings one television channel still plays reruns of the series Gerry Anderson and his wife created. Jonatha Frakes should hand in his directors chair, his version was completely hopeless. A waste of film. Utter rubbish. A CGI remake may be acceptable but replacing marionettes with Homo sapiens subsp. sapiens was a huge error of judgment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c703c64cd624312815f6d14c6ee8186",
            "input": "As anyone old enough knows, South Africa long suffered under the vile, racist oppression of apartheid, which completely subjugated the black population. One of the most famous anti-apartheid activists was Steve Biko, who was murdered in jail. Following the murder, reporter Donald Woods sought to get Biko's message out to the world.In \"Cry Freedom\", Woods (Kevin Kline) befriends Biko (Denzel Washington) before the latter is arrested on trumped up charges. When Woods attempts to spread Biko's word, he and his family begin living under threat of attack, and they are finally forced to flee the country. The last scene gut-wrenchingly shows police firing on protesters.As one of two movies (along with \"A World Apart\") that helped galvanize the anti-apartheid movement, \"Cry Freedom\" stands out as possibly the best ever work for all involved.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22ada43bfaaa48349e48c91dbb411bec",
            "input": "I never like to comment on a good film but when it comes to a bad movie, I gotta come really hard on it. Talking about Vivah, this guy, Sooraj Badjatya, seems to have completely lost it. After success of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, he thought he can make money with cheesy wedding videos. Vivah is so so cheesy that Badjatyas have left Johars and Chopras behind.There was not a single moment during the movie where I can say 'Oh! at least this thing is good'. Aloknath does cliché in a role of Girl's father, Shahid kapoor looks fat and Shahrukhed, Amrita rao is another disaster in addition to ugly looking sets, bad costumes, hackneyed storyline, monstrous stepmother, trying-hard-to-act actors, cacophonous background music, cheap soundtracks.Now the spoiler, I'm warning you guys that as happens in all his other movies, after a calamitous incidence movie ends on a happy note.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fe11f6a79d347628b779bed0ed95391",
            "input": "Richard Attenborough is a director whose name is synonymous with the Academy Award winning 'Gandhi', back in '83. I didn't know of any other work of his till i recently came across 'Cry Freedom', released back in 1987. While it may not have been as popular as his Gandhi, it is every bit as gripping, if not more, and was released when South Africa still had not got rid of the shackles of apartheid. While most movies on social issues come out after the event had happened, i guess this one released during the time.The story is based on real life characters and events. The book on which the movie was based, was written by Donald Woods (Kevin Kline), a journalist who used to work in South Africa until the end of the seventies. It traces the origins of Woods friendship with the charismatic black leader Steve Biko, who is wonderfully portrayed by Denzel Washington. I cannot imagine a better choice for the role. Washington exudes a natural charm and screen presence, which Biko's character required.While initially, Woods was against what he felt was black racism being spread by Biko, after meeting the man, he could not help being drawn into his struggles and ideas. The bond between them grows stronger, and Woods and his family realise and become more sensitive to the plight of the people Biko represents.However, finally, tragedy strikes, and Woods must now concentrate on escaping from South Africa, with his book, so that he can get it published and let the outside world know what is going on. The second half of the movie is a gripping tale of his escape from South Africa, along with his family, and will keep you on tenterhooks.There are some deliciously humorous dialogues too. The scene between Biko and the lawyer in the courtroom is an example.Lawyer: Do you advocate violence? Biko: I advocate a confrontation. Lawyer: Well, isn't that violence, Mr. Biko? Biko: Not necessarily. You and I are having a confrontation now, but i don't see any violence.However, there are moments that bring you back to the horrors that pervaded the country before better sense prevailed. The scene where the army opens fire on a protest by school children is gut wrenching and heartbreaking.This is definitely a must watch. I would suggest those not familiar with Attenborough's work, do take time out for this. There are movies which make a lot of money. And there are movies which make lives. I would any day prefer the latter.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5be5a67cfc94a5983df8cb144f31202",
            "input": "I really hate this retarded show, it SUCKS! big time, and personally I think it is insulting to fairy kind (if you believe in fairies that is); I mean the people who had come up with such crap 'ought to have their heads examine huh? and also there is a LOT of craziness (the evil school teacher, which I think is getting really old) and also stupidity (the boy's parents and fairy godfather) in this show - two of the things that I dispised and loathe in the WHOLE world (especially stupidity).Overall, I say that this show is so f*****' annoying and should not be seen by prying eyes at ALL (it would make'em bleed to death)!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27acaa98424f4d7db76cc9aae7fc21e7",
            "input": "Tears of Kali is an original yet flawed horror film that delves into the doings of a cult group in India comprised of German psychologists who have learned how to control their wills and their bodies to the point that they can cause others to be \"healed\" through radical techniques (that can trigger nightmarish hallucinations and physical pain and torture) to release the pent-up demons inside them.The film is shown as a series of vignettes about the Taylor-Eriksson group--the above-mentioned cult group. The first segment is somewhat slower than the rest but serves fine to set up the premise for the rest of the film. The rest of it plays out like a mindf@ck film with some of the key staples thrown in the mix (full-frontal nudity, some gore) to keep you happy.I say check this out. May not be spectacular, but it's concept is pretty neato and it delivers in the right spots. 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-993b0222221640e4ad0549ea16147872",
            "input": "When I was a kid it was Lex Barker's time as Tarzan. I often heard from older people that Johnny Weissmuller \"was\" Tarzan and I wouldn't understand why since I saw a couple of Weismuller's last films in the character and I thought he was sort of out of shape. It wasn't after many years that I came across \"Tarzan and His Mate\", and then I understood. Weismuller is in shape in this picture and has the presence and rugged looks the character demands not matched yet by other Tarzans such as Barker, Gordon Scott, Jock Mahoney, Denny Miller, Miles O'Keefe and Cristopher Lambert.As for this film I was also surprised by the sensual presence of beautiful Maureen O'Sullivan a strong, self minded, active and \"no-inhibitions\" woman as Jane way ahead of the times in which the film was made (Tarzan pushes her into a pond naked as she is amused; one of the explorers kisses her by surprise and though she doesn't kiss him back she sort of let him do for a bit and makes no big deal out of it); such behaviors were unthinkable with the \"Janes\" to come such as Brenda Joyce, Vanessa Brown, Virginia Huston or Dorothy Hart, all playing sort of too perfect sweet vulnerable women making it hard to believe they could survive in a hostile place like the African jungle.O'Sullivan character's sparkling personality steals the show out of Tarzan himself, except of course when it comes to action and Weismuller takes the lead easily; the combination is perfect. Another highlight in the movie is Cheeta's secondary role and not as the main lead like in later Tarzan pictures where she often saves the day.\"Tarzan and His Mate\" stands as a fine product in its genre (Tarzan films) and perhaps as the best, though I have to admit that I also enjoyed \"Tarzan's Greatest Adventure\" (1959) made with a higher budget and a strong supporting cast (and in spite of the just acceptable Gordon Scott in the leading role with his too perfect \"all gymnasium\" physical looks that doesn't fit for a rustic ape man).Good for Jane and her mate!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-321c666e80674cb2b85a463d4e205eba",
            "input": "Seldom seen since theatrical release in 1970, MYRA BRECKINRIDGE has become a byword for cinematic debacles of legendary proportions. Now at last on DVD in an unexpectedly handsome package, it is as unlikely to win wide audiences today as it was when first released. Gore Vidal's 1968 bestseller was a darkly satirical statement. Most filmmakers felt that the novel's story, structure, and overall tone would not translate to film, and industry insiders were surprised when 20th Century Fox not only acquired the rights but also hired Vidal to adapt his novel to the screen. But studio executives soon had cold feet: Vidal's adaptations were repeatedly rejected and novice writer-director Michael Sarne was brought in to bring the film to the screen.Studio executives hoped that Sarne would tap into the youth market they saw as a target for the film, but Sarne proved even more out of synch with the material than the executives themselves. Rewrite upon rewrite followed. The cast, sensing disaster, became increasingly combative. In her DVD commentary, star Raquel Welch says that she seldom had any idea of what Myra's motives were from scene to scene or even within any single scene itself, and that each person involved seemed to be making an entirely different film. In the accompanying \"Back Story\" documentary, Rex Reed says that MYRA BRECKINRIDGE was a film made by a bunch of people who hid in their dressing rooms while waiting for their lawyers to return their calls.The accuracy of these comments are demonstrated by the film itself. The basics of Vidal's story are there, but not only has the story been shorn of all broader implications, it seems to have no point in and of itself. Everything runs off in multiple directions, nothing connects, and numerous scenes undercut whatever logic previous scenes might have had. And while director Sarne repeatedly states in his commentary that he wanted to make the film as pure farce, the only laughs generated are accidental.Chief among these accidents is Mae West. It is true that West is unexpectedly well preserved in appearance and that she had lost none of her way with a one-liner--but there is no getting around the fact that she is in her seventies, and her conviction that she is the still the sexiest trick in shoe leather is extremely unsettling, to say the least. But worse, really, is the fact that West is outside her era. Her efforts to translate herself into a hip and happening persona results in one of the most embarrassing self-caricatures ever seen on film.The remaining cast is largely wasted. Raquel Welch, a significantly underestimated actress, plays the title role of Myra very much like a Barbie doll on steroids; non-actor Rex Reed is unexpectedly effective in the role of Myron, but the entire role is essentially without point. Only John Huston and cameo players John Carradine, Jim Backus, William Hopper, and Andy Devine emerge relatively unscathed. Yes, it really is the debacle everyone involved in the film feared it would be: fast when it should be slow, slow when it should be fast, relentlessly unfunny from start to finish. It is true that director Sarne does have the occasional inspired idea--as in his use of film clips of everyone from Shirley Temple to Judy Garland to create counterpoint to the action--but by and large, whenever Sarne was presented with a choice of how to do something he seems to have made the wrong one.The how and why of that is made clear in Sarne's audio commentary. Sarne did not like the novel or, for that matter, the subject matter in general. He did not want to write the screenplay, but he needed the money; he emphatically did not want to direct the film, but he need the money. He makes it very clear that he disliked author Gore Vidal and Rex Reed (at one point he flatly states that Reed \"is not a nice person\"), and to this day he considers that Vidal and Reed worked in tandem to sabotage the film because he refused to play into their 'homosexual agenda'--which, when you come right down to it, seems to have been their desire that Sarne actually film Vidal's novel rather than his own weirdly imagined take-off on it.Although he spends a fair amount of commentary time stating that the film is widely liked by the gay community, Sarne never quite seems to understand that the appeal of the film for a gay audience arises from his ridiculously inaccurate depiction of homosexual people. When taken in tandem with the film itself, Sarne emerges as more than a little homophobic--and quite frankly the single worst choice of writers and directors that could have been made for this project.In addition to the Sarne and Welch commentaries and the making-of documentary, the DVD release includes several trailers and two versions of the film: a \"theatrical release\" version and a \"restored\" version. The only difference between the two is that the final scene in the \"restored\" version has been printed to black and white. The edits made before the film went into general release have not been restored, but the documentary details what they were. The widescreen transfers of both are remarkably good and the sound is quite fine. But to end where I began, this is indeed a film that will most interest film historians, movie buffs, and cult movie fans. I give it three out of five stars for their sake alone, but everyone else should pass it by.Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ffcfbc531394b13b605c1e03e096095",
            "input": "***Might not consider this having a spoiler, but I'd rather be cautious than careless*** I never saw this movie when I was little. I fell in love with it the first time I saw it with my three year old daughter. I can watch it over and over again.For the little acting Ilene Woods did in her lifetime, she was a wonderful voice for Cinderella; very appealing; very believable. The music really fit the movie perfectly. The acting was great; loved the mice!! You really \"hated\" Lady Tremain and the step-sisters; they were just awful. The cartoonists depicted the spoiled behavior very well.This is a wonderful movie, especially if you are into love stories. My daughter has seen the movie about 25 times and still gets excited at the end.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-015ef0c512c7419c80ee2bb015b35ea3",
            "input": "I agree that Capital City should be on DVD. I watched this show only by accident in 1994 and fell in love with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to see Americans who work abroad in London in the financial industry for a change. I loved Rolf in this role and loved every other role that he has been in. I can't believe the show only lasted 13 episodes. I liked William Armstrong as Hudson's flamboyant charming friend in the series. When they aired this show in the New York City area, it was always late at night or at off times. The show is less than an hour long. I felt this show should have gone on longer but the casting changes in the second season really made the show a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but missed the actress, Julia Phillips-Lane in the previous season. I felt this show took chances and often it worked. It showed Americans who loved and chose to live in London. The American characters were not arrogant or tried to outdo their British counterparts. I also liked the fact that they had tried to internationalize the cast rather than make them all British. I liked watching Julia Ormond in an early role. I felt this show should have lasted longer. I felt at times that the previews lasted as long as the show in less than an hour. They could have transferred the cast to New York City and it would have been a hit in America.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42429808ab1149138273c43c1f2c0a0a",
            "input": "Kalifornia came out in 1993, just as 3 of the 4 lead characters were up and coming to the levels of fame they now possess in 2006. This is a nice psycho-thriller that should appeal to all David Duchovny fans because of his dry and intelligent narratives that find their ways into his work, like with most of his episodes of the X-Files, Playing God, and Red Shoe Diaries.People who were put off by the heavy southern accent from Brad Pitt and Juliette Lewis' characters obviously have never spent much time in the south. For every \"Brian and Carrie\" in the south, there is an \"Adele and Early\" and in 2006, that's the real horror of this flick.Aside from that, I think the film was written with a cult film intention - like with Carrie's photography, it's not suitable for mass consumption. But if you have a copy of this in your personal library, I think it says something positive about your tastes for freaky movies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ae43531876247c2ac796183878cc3f9",
            "input": "Can it ever be said that there are some movies that have no redeeming features whatsoever? Answer: Yes, and this is one of them. After helming the appalling 'House of the Dead' director Uwe Boll has now cast his less-than-talented eye towards yet another video game adaptation. Don't these guys get it? To anyone who can't understand, here it is in block capitals for you: VIDEO GAMES DO NOT MAKE FOR GOOD MOVIES! The acting here is, at best, sub-standard. The set design and special effects are poor. Unlike the video game (which did have its scary moments) the movie has no atmosphere of impending doom, no sense of danger or menace. Pacing and plotting is confused and the paper that the script is printed on would have been better used as toilet paper. The main culprit is the director. Uwe Boll uses the camera with the grace and skill of a monkey using a paintbrush. Hackneyed zooms, swoops and pans are spliced into the whole dreary affair at unpredictable moments leaving the audience disorientated and bored. Why this guy was ever let near a movie set in the first place must stand as one of modern cinemas greatest secrets. Avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2effd1a48c4345b7827d05a1b6419418",
            "input": "The movie starts out with some scrolling text which takes nearly five minutes. It gives the basic summary of what is going on. This could have easily been done with acting but instead you get a scrolling text effect. Soon after you are bombarded with characters that you learn a little about, keep in mind this is ALL you will learn about them. The plot starts to get off the ground and then crashes through the entire movie. Not only does the plot change, but you might even ask yourself if your watching the same movie. I have never played the video game, but know people who have. From my understanding whether you've played the game or not this movie does not get any better. Save your money unless you like to sleep at the theaters.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44faf838ce3c4daf866165fdceb7f16a",
            "input": "Carlos Mencia was excellent this is hour special. He was working hard to show everybody he was the real deal. I know people have said he's stolen material in this special, but that is not true. Carlos brings comedy up front the way he wants it, not how anyone else wants it, that is why he is so good. People say he's not funny because he says Dee dee dee too much, and they still haven't realized thats part of his act, and they don't want it that way, but he brings it like that anyway, and succeeds in making people laugh. For all the haters out there, here is a message, Carlos is here to stay, you have no point in trying to bring him down.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90c5112c7de348f7a41fff9e31cd6fe6",
            "input": "I've seen the original English version on video. Disney's choice of voice actors looks very promising. I can't believe I'm saying that. The story is about a young boy who meets a girl with a history that is intertwined with his own. The two are thrown into one of the most fun and intriguing storylines in any animated film. The animation quality is excellent! If you've seen Disney's job of Kiki's delivery service you can see the quality in their production. It almost redeems them for stealing the story of Kimba the white lion. (but not quite!) Finally Miyazaki's films are being released properly! I can't wait to see an uncut English version of Nausicaa!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64acfb1d43f94a10b5de35406596f059",
            "input": "An axellent second installment that manages to be just as good as the first. Once again, the casting is just wonderful. I like how the first and second episode have nothing in common except for the wit and cleverness.The second episode is just very funny, very silly and very enjoyable. It is the very first Christmas episode, about a woman who is tormented by a serial killer dressed as Santa after having killed her own husband. Just like the first episode; karma.The most humorous scene is a tie between the murder of her husband and her phone call, first faking her fear until it becomes real.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b3a3cb8b8214b3b982dc0aa175addab",
            "input": "I was a huge fan of the original cartoon series, and was looking forward to finally seeing Gadget on the big screen -- but I never in my wildest dreams expected something so extremely extremely terrible. The pace was WAY too fast, there was no plot, and 'wowser!' - what the hell is that?? It was 'WOWSERS!!'.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e2445ffd4f74438a6692c4115829951",
            "input": "There is only one use for a film such as Bulletproof: it reminds you just how bad bad can be. We often see films which we describe as \"pretty awful\" or \"not much good\", but then you come across a film like this and you can see that although all those other films aren't \"good\" they are no way as stinkingly bad as Bulletproof. This was a birthday gift from someone who spent less than two seconds rummaging thru' the DVD bargain bin at our local superstore to fulfil an obligation (i.e. to give me a present). It could have been a serendipitous find but it wasn't: this is so utterly clichéd, so badly written, so poorly directed, so badly acted that I'm surprised everyone involved hasn't been arrested and sent down for 10 years. God, it's awful. I suspected as much from about 30 seconds in, but carried on because sometimes - sometimes - bad films are so bad they can be enjoyable. This isn't one of them. It is simply bad. I stopped watching after 45 minutes, and tomorrow I shall throw it in the bin.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa804788cce842b3a7d56f07df81ebe8",
            "input": "Lindsay Anderson was very much a European film maker , whereas the likes of David Lean , Ridley Scott and Alan Parker make spectacular movies involving visuel scope Anderson`s movie are more about social commentary and subtext , so much so that the message often ends up taking over the entire film whose primary function should be to entertain the audience What you think of IF comes down to what you think of British film makers . I`m very much of the view that cinema should be a universial medium ( The best Brit movie makes are those who try to emulate Hollywood in my opinion ) , if you want to send a message try pony express , and I find the movie dated , pretentious and too set in the 1960s . 1968 was the summer of love and the year of student rebellion in France . You can just imagine every single French leftist worshipping this movie especially the climax . French new wave film makers will also admire the abstract surrealism of some scenes but a mainstream international will dislike it , and many will dislike it intensely",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01d85f2fe6324de09f9182f3af9e29f1",
            "input": "The inspiring story of Carl Brashear (Cuba Gooding, Jr.), a black man who grew up in poverty in Kentucky and then joined the US Navy, aspiring to be the first black Master Diver in Navy history. We are shown the series of struggles from boyhood on that Brashear has to overcome to make his dream come true (and then to keep it alive.) Not the least of the challenges was Master Diver Bill Sunday (Robert DeNiro), the head trainer at the diving school the Navy sends Brashear to, who is not especially sympathetic to Brashear's goals, but who ultimately becomes an unlikely friend and supporter.This is a good movie; fast paced and with a lot of action, although not an \"action\" pic in the normal sense of the word. There's a very human story here as well, and an interesting study of racism and the struggle to overcome it; there's also a sense of the struggle that took place in the 1960's between older and younger naval officers (the \"old navy\" vs the \"new navy.\") The performances are quite good - particularly Goodings'. I thought DeNiro was perhaps a bit over the top in his portrayal of Sunday (although, who knows, Sunday might well have been this extreme kind of loose cannon) and the portrayal of Sunday's wife Gwen (by Charlize Theron) also made me question whether these parts were \"jazzed up\" to provide entertainment value.A good movie, though. I never once wondered if it was worth tuning into.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f411c972772e40288965e6612039ce0a",
            "input": "This engaging (which it shouldn't be) low-grade Spanish exploitation (quite tame I might add) looks good, but huh? Let me phrase that again 'huh?'. Actually the word 'huh?' would be going through your mind quite a lot. Nothing makes sense, nor does it try too. I just don't know if its complicatedly cryptic or just a convoluted muddle, but there's no denying how laconically uneventful, strange and wordy it feels.Unrelated sequences tied (like that nasty opening involving a little girl, dead cat and fire) in to a sparse story involving photographer Mario (played by a chest-puffing John Caffari, who's mustache is a dead ringer for Nintendo's iconic Mario. What's the odds?) that ditches his girlfriend at home and encounters a young lady (a gorgeously fixating Patty Shepard) who he asks to come with him on an photography assignment, where at this remote mountain retreat they come across some hooded witches.Look past the unhinged plot structure and wallow in what is simply a moody piece of atmospheric mechanisms and growing unease. Raul Artigot directs few jarringly unusual visuals and creepy passages, but for most part seems sporadically non-existent and unfocused just like his writing. Ramon Sempere's striking cinematography lenses the gracefully rich scenery as we take in the scenic views and let the time leisurely grind away. However there are certain areas where it was too dark to see what was going on. Fernando Garcia Morcillo's hauntingly bombastic and overwrought score blends terrifically with compulsively dense atmosphere created. The leads are capable, but there's also a sturdy bunch (the pick being Víctor Israel) of secondary performances.Slow with little in the way of interest, but this dreamy set-up (that seems to go on and on) manages to keep you watching until its closing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5d970eef06a4b43973bec168871cf6d",
            "input": "After seeing the trailer of this film in the cinema, i thought that it was an original concept for a thriller, setting it in the competitive world of computer companies. The all star cast was another message that this film would probably be good. But when i didn't go to watch it in it's first week of release then it disappeared by week 2 i feared something was a miss. Patiently i waited for it's DVD release, then bought it rushing home for an enjoyable evening's viewing. The anticipation on the way home was far better than the film. For a start the direction is appalling. There's no thought gone into it at all and the director just makes up a part for himself, so he can appear in the film. I wouldn't be rushing out to employ him in the future. Secondly the lead role is completely miscast as Ryan Phillipe. Phillipe normally the cool character as in Cruel Intentions and Way of the Gun but in this he's supposed to be a bumbling hero which he attempts to portray by slipping when he's running and having geeky friends, but he just doesn't look right. The female stars, Rachel Leigh Cook and Clare Forlani don't feature enough but when they do neither of the performances are close to their bests. The only highlight of the film is Tim Robbins in a role that could have been made for him and it's his fiery temper and mysterious ways that drag the film along. The final point is that this film is another one which fills the trailer with scenes you don't see in the film and instead feature only in the deleted scenes section of the DVD. Causing even more disappointment as although some of these scenes are crude they do fill in important gaps in the story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a241d617b67e4dc8b26fcc22a4095295",
            "input": "When the Grinch came out I was excited though I thought it was going to be a happy go lucky film and it was. Though it did have a little Nightmare before Christmas touch to it. You know kind of dark and spooky. I loved this film because it helped fill people with the Christmas spirit. So mostly the Grinch saved Christmas. And what happened then well in Whoville they say that the Grinch's small heart grew three sizes that day. MERRY GRINCHMAS!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3d998269b1f4da2941b3cc769b5b6c8",
            "input": "This film was not nearly as much of a chore as I expected it to be. There are a few seconds of brilliance in this somewhat idiotic hardcore UFO conspiracy paranoia-fest. Most of the acting is mediocre, but fairly typical for 1970s-style stuff replete with pregnant pauses. A photographer and a model witness some strange goings-on in the woods and soon fall victim to these same goings-on. Flying saucers are spotted, more people disappear - but is it the aliens or our own government's ultra-secret group of cover-up guys? Soon enough, a reporter and a \"UFOlogist\" (apparently modeled on the character of the writer-director) are drawn into this unraveling fiasco and become the target of the ultra-secret agents who are as menacing as they are improbable and witless. Then the fun really begins.The movie, predictably, makes about as much sense as the average UFO conspiracy theory, but should be commended for taking itself so seriously. The camera work is OK for a low-budget film, the pacing is pretty good, the script is silly and absurd, and there are continuity issues which are fun to look out for. What are the few seconds of brilliance I mentioned? Honestly, I can't say much you without writing a spoiler. Suffice to say that the end of the film is, at least, worth fast-forwarding to if you can't take the middle.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdc82445074b4e0189bec6577ffcb345",
            "input": "After having seen and loved Postal (yes, I actually loved Postal), I decided to try another Uwe Boll film and I picked out Seed because I happened to stumble on it in a local DVD-store and it's supposed to be one of his better films.While the first 10 to 15 minutes of the film were very promising and seemed like the beginning of a not too mainstream psychological thriller, it soon went downhill from there and eventually degraded into one of the most generic slasher films I've seen so far, including a massive amount of plot holes, unrealistic emotional responses and sub-par acting. It seems like Boll tried his best to come up with a decent plot but after a while just gave up on it. Maybe he should stick to comedy?! The few good things about this film is that he does manage to create an overall creepy atmosphere, that the special effects are better than I expected and the soundtrack does go well with the overall atmosphere, but the unbalanced pacing of this film combined with the utter generic nature thereof makes he last half hour quite tedious to watch, which ruined my experience altogether. There are a very fairly well done shocking scenes, but they seem to be there for the shock value alone. And let's not forget the camera work that was pretty nauseating at times.I hope Uwe Boll will one day learn what makes a good film, because between a lot of horrible films he does seem to make a decent film every now and then. Seed just isn't one of those.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13287e76ca1b4b6c8a6d38f42487be7b",
            "input": "It's not just the plot alone that makes this movie an instant turn-off for bored audiences. It's the terrible direction with a horrible script and mistakes left and right that makes this too agonizing to watch. I'm sorry but I do not see the 'fun' in this. Just the thrill of pointing the many mistakes and stupid one-liners. Well I'm wondering how dumb the directors think of their producing company when this movie was first introduced. Probably as dumb as that sheriff who dove into the pickup truck full of antifreeze with a gaping bloody wound. Oops! Did I forget to mention this sheriff's not only a poor actor but also can shrug off an impalement with a load of antifreeze drenching the exposed flesh? I guess he kind of forgot when he won a not-so-thrilling victory over the snowman.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62bc00fe722c4f8798d7d8093b03f9b8",
            "input": "Ching Siu Tung's and Tsui Hark's A Chinese Ghost Story, aside from being one of the greatest wuxia pian films ever made, is a beautiful and romantic love story as well as an impressively choreographed martial arts film that should belong in every film lover's collection. The sorely missed Hong Kong superstar Leslie Cheung plays a traveling tax collector who spends the night at a haunted temple. While staying at the temple, he meets a colorful cast of characters that include the swordsmen Yin (Wu Ma) and Hsiao Hou, the Tree Devil, and the beautiful ghost Lit Sin Seen, played by the lovely Joey Wong.To free her from the clutches of the evil Tree Devil, he must reincarnate her body and travel to the underworld to defeat an even more powerful demon.Enough good things can't be said about this film. The pacing is perfect, with a great combination of romance, action, fantasy and humor, and the feverishly paced finale should leave you with little chance to breathe. The chemistry between the wonderfully tragic Joey Wong and Leslie Cheung (whose legendary career ended much too soon) really allows the viewer to feel for both of them. Indeed the acting on the whole is so vivacious and full of life, I would say this is one of the most fun viewing experiences I've ever had. Much of the credit goes to Wu Ma in his portrayal of the mysterious Swordsman Yin. His over-the-top persona of a disillusioned swordsman hell bent on vanquishing evil leads to some great moments of humor and traditional HK drama. A wonderful score, lush cinematography with eye popping colors, and frenetic action pieces courtesy of Ching Siu Tung round out this wonderful film. Find a copy anywhere you can. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebf7bd36a51241ed981112cf046c9a4e",
            "input": "Run away from this movie. Even by B-movie standards this movie is dreadful. It is also insidious in it's theme. The main theme is that people who reject society and have no respect for anything are cool and worth admiring. People who treat others with respect are losers. Guncrazy is a movie that speaks for the disenfranchised a lot better than this movie, see it instead.No normal kid would do what Trent does. State Troopers do not work as they do in this film etc. Seeing this movie makes you realize why writers use the hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche. Mija is a completely unsympathetic hooker,who yes, has had a terrible life. However, she is such a terrible person the audience cannot identify with her.Usually there is one thing a movie can be recommended for, in this case there is none. It is such a ridiculous movie it insults the person who tries to identify with the main characters. The acting is adequate by B-movie standards and the direction presents nothing new or interesting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca6edfb3ea354c5f8fd784de98196b5f",
            "input": "Considering the lack of art with in African cinema (or Black American Cinema). The Idea offers a multidimensional look at a community assigned to hoods and dealers. But the funny thing is this is not at all the focus or even the subject of the short. But it is the unstated assertion of independence from these themes that is most sticking. The genre is unique and not the typical expectation. It is almost this departure which first catches the eye, so watching it twice is critical. The film has an aesthetic quality which lends its self to the true art of cinema.And it is this true art that with an African voice that is extremely rare. The film doesn't copy to attain its message, it innovates and provokes by pulling at subtle stereotypes (not racial but character based stereotypes), From a writers perspective the film is brilliant. It carries multiply messages which include a very rapid character development. It must be remember this film is less than 10 minutes and it manages to establish character very quickly. The usage of colour texture and music is also to be commended. But considering the director, Owen Alik Shahadah's last venture 500 Years Later, music is to be expected. But from a theme point-of view it seems like the idea is a departure but the satire eludes indirectly to a social problem—brilliant stuff!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c934947c5a594d89bb3e322b583077e4",
            "input": "In today's world of digital fabrication, there is no computer than can replace the actor and writer. Alas, this type of \"character driven\" film is far too rare these days. Duvall's performance as well as James Earl Jones are faithful to their audience's high expectations. I wonder if this movie was made for TV? It has a \"close-up\" personal quality to the narrative. It is an understatement to say that the performances are all Outstanding. The only thing that keeps it from being a cinema Masterpiece is the lack of a great Cinematographer, but pretty pictures are not everything. How can talent the likes of Jones and Duvall continue to produce such fine work in an age where actors pose for the digitizing?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26aeaaf738b7440184a04b80cff43eb1",
            "input": "This documentary was very thorough and exposing, and at the same time entertaining, which I thought was rather impressive. I felt as if they did a very good job covering the sport from its' origin until present day, but nonetheless, there is a reason why I do not give such a high score to this film...I felt as if at times the story focused too much on the 'proper nouns' of the sport, so to speak: too much on individual locations at which to surf, and especially too much on individual surfers. I felt as if the documentary had more to do with the nature of the sport, the ideology of the sport, etc. it would have been better (although this of course was covered, I do not think it got as much time as it warranted). And for many people who are not absolutely nuts about surfing, at times hearing them go on and on about specific locations and specific surfers could become boring. Although the video clips and the in-depth research is well-respected, it could have been presented in a way that would be better for those who are not avid surfers.Furthermore, my biggest disappointment was at times they spoke of how utterly amazing and miraculous certain events in surfing history were yet they did not have the actual footage of these events unfolding, and the whole time you are waiting to see on the silver screen this amazing, breath-taking event that these men are talking about as life-changing moments, and in the end all you get is a lot of men talking about it, and not the actual footage. It was far too tantalizing to myself to hear these stories, and then be unable to see them. I understand the difficulty of obtaining footage of everything, but please: do not brag an event up so much, and then not show it. Overall, a very fresh documentary that I enjoyed watching; not the best documentary due to the above reasons, but being very fresh and having some extremely exciting footage and a good soundtrack, it is a documentary that I would advise everybody to check out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-86c835eaa62f478889e05f0e69286334",
            "input": "I went to see this movie with a crowd that consisted predominantly of \"spiritual\" New Age types, who, quite unlike me, very much enjoyed this movie---although according to those that also knew the book (apparently there is a book that contains more of this nonsense), the movie is not quite as good. So, if you tend to think of yourself as \"spiritual\", believe in or at least can tolerate stuff like \"aura\" and \"astral body\", and don't mind the frequent use of the term \"energy\" outside of the context of physics or technology, you might actually like the movie, and will likely even more enjoy whatever book it is apparently based on.However, if you are mostly in touch with the physical universe, if your ability to suspend disbelief is easily exhausted by inane New Age nonsense and plots based thereon, if in addition to that you have a low tolerance for cheesy lighting effects to denote the happening of spirituality, and perhaps even expect reasonable non-wooden dialog an acting, then this is my recommendation for you regarding this movie: Stay. Away.Don't even think about it. Tonight, this movie displaced Dungeons and Dragons as the worst movie I ever personally saw in a movie theater (I do not count movies I went to see with the expectation of them being bad, such as Plan 9 etc.). At the same time, it raised the grand total of movies I almost walked out on to two (D&D being the other one). I do not walk out on movies, not even on this one, but I should've when I first saw the visual depiction of an aura, because the New Age BS keeps on getting thicker and thicker from that point on.The plot is about a group of people involving themselves with some old prophecies, in a quest for spiritual enlightenment and aiming at bringing mankind to the next step in its evolution. Or something like that. They actually talk about this spiritual stuff being the next step in human evolution, which should make anybody who has even the faintest idea of what human evolution is cringe. The movie is shock full with whoppers like that. Occasionally people beam to what they would certainly describe as \"another dimension\", or perhaps \"another plane\", only to become invisible to those around them who haven't yet reached enlightenment. Goodness.At the end the director patronizes the audience by rolling the \"insights\" making up the prophecy, painfully slow, presumably so that we can memorize them and leave the cinema as better, more enlightened individuals.Good things about the movie? Some very pretty nature shots, and some decent supporting performances by Elizondo and de Almeida.I honestly can say that it seriously affects my ability to take a person seriously if they consider this movie interesting or acceptable. It really is el cheapo spiritualism of the most naive kind, and unless that's your thing, you better do something else with your time and money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea8e04dc77da468f8b8baa037bce97a8",
            "input": "I've had a thing for this Kari chick for a while, and as far as how she looked in this movie, no complaints. But after catching it last night in HIGH DEFINITION, I am certain: that's the only thing in the movie that isn't substandard. The script is horrible, the acting is horrible, the direction is horrible. I saw in another comment someone commenting on how great the sex scenes were...what? Not at all. When a movie is this bad you might as well just turn it into softcore porn, but instead I get to see some pasty white dude blocking me from seeing Wuhrer's body and scenes that offer me nothing except a tease. They should have just gone cinemax so that the movie wasn't a complete waste of time, but no. With a script this awful they should've capitalized on Wuhrer's looks, since that's the lone pro of the movie. 2/10, only because she looked so hot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ef8f09d0bf14531a6a345ffb36ae054",
            "input": "This is the weepy that Beaches never was. As much as I wanted to love Beaches, it always seemed too hurried for me to \"feel\" for it (its soundtrack is one of my favorite albums though). Stella, on the other hand, moves at a slower (and occasionally too slow) pace and though it's somewhat manipulative in its tears-inducing tale about a self-sacrificial mother, it works because Bette and the rest of the cast turn in great performances. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-473a880000794ab4aa469e3e972232d6",
            "input": "Ah, the 1970's. A time when it was in to be a swinger. To be honest, today is also a good time to be a swinger but it just felt more daring then.Joe Sarno offers up a pretty good soft-core film. In fact, just like today, some of the actors are famous hardcore actors. Unlike today, these people were good actors and these films had a plot and character development.It's pretty much what you would expect out of a swinger's movie. Two couples with open relationships re-ignite the wanderlust out of the MILF of one of the women who has come for a visit. Not much more to it.Of course, when the MILF is Jennifer Welles then it is a different story. Not too many 40-somethings look as delicious undressed as Ms. Welles. It's worth the price alone to see Ms. Welles look at herself in the mirror as if she's Aphrodite. She's no \"Stifler's Mom\". She's way sexier.I also digged Chris Jordan's Anna. Jordan looks and sounds so much like Elaine Joyce that I thought she might be her \"separated at birth\" twin or even Elaine herself. Anna is always eating but must have incredible metabolism.Unlike 1990's soft-core porn, 70's softie porn retained the hardcore film's realism (something that 2000's soft-core has brought back on occasion, instead of the 90's music and canned orgasms) and it is here in full force. It's not real but it feels real.For those who enjoyed the Quebec produced \"Deux Femmes En Or\", you'll enjoy this one. Another classic film only on Drive-In Classics, the best $2.50 CAN a month you can spend.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-203e837d3d9142bd90a65c002f11434b",
            "input": "Tsui Hark's visual artistry is at its peek in this movie. Unfortunately the terrible acting by Ekin Cheng and especially Cecilia Cheung (I felt the urge to strangle her while watching this, it's that bad :) made it difficult to watch at times.This movie is a real breakthrough in the visual department. When I first saw this, my jaw dropped repeatedly and I thought to myself that I've never seen anything remotely like it but this is how it should be done in order to do full justice to the mythical world of Chinese historical kung-fu novels! Without a doubt this is one of the best-looking Chinese historical kung-fu epic ever made.But alas, Tsui Hark hasn't improved much in the writing department, and the story and dialog are rather juvenile (his apparent obsession with the silly and overly-long depiction of the evil guys didn't help either). To make it worse, this movie is very badly cast. They decided to use the \"hot\" popular Hong Kong idols as lead characters, but unfortunately both Ekin Cheng and especially Cecilia Cheung are totally unsuited for historical kung-fu dramas because they lack the nobility and mystique that such characters are supposed to embody. Adam Cheng Siu-Chow and Brigitte Lin in the 1983 version are infinitely better.I wish that someday Zhang Yi-Mou and Tsui Hark can join forces and produce a movie that has the visual artistry of Tsui but with the maturity and story-telling poetry of Zhang...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ca91cc94f944afbaadaeb8ea31b3bb7",
            "input": "If you want to learn the basics of quantum mechanics, spend your $9 on a used textbook, not this movie. I'm a little worried that the money I spent is being used to buy Kool-Aid for shipment to Guyana. I don't think the directors really got any point across, but it looks like maybe they were trying to make several: 1) Science can explain everything we do, meaning that our lives are deterministic; 2) Science can't be used to explain everything we do, meaning that we have free will; 3) Science is, like, really cool, brother; 4) We are God; 5) The world exists only in our minds; 6) Sarah Norman is a tough role to follow and 7) here, put this tiny paper square in your mouth and you'll see some really groovy stuff.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f526327bb24e402bb565a96e4e1a6451",
            "input": "I honestly have to say that I could not stop watching this movie from the second that it started. Simply for how bad it was!!! It's kinda like watching paint dry only a lot more confusing. I mean you sit there and just wait for something to happen, anything in fact, preferably something that makes the whole film make sense! At the end of the film I actually sat there wondering if there was any chance at all that I may have missed the first hour that explained everything or whether I may have inadvertently passed out during the film and missed the parts that glued the plot(if there was in fact one)together! The main thing that really confused me about this movie, is nearly at the end the main girl (if there was indeed a main girl) was in some sort of alternate reality, i mean what the hell was going on at this point?! all of a sudden she awoke and was in a mental institute, chained to a bed being drugged by doctors or something, then quicker than it would have taken me to slit my wrists, it flipped back and she was getting eaten out by some random vampire!it made no sodding sense! I'm tempted to email the makers and demand my time back, i mean i wasted 2 hours of my life watching this rubbish!i am kinda interested to know if the filmmakers themselves actually knew what it was all about! just seemed someone had edited out all the bits that could have made it make sense though i think the film would have had to have been 4hrs long to make that happen! I side completely with the other person who wrote the other review, i was duped royally with this film by its title, and that alone. I'm just so sodding grateful i didn't actually buy the film, no matter how many times iv seen it in the local pound shop. You would have thought that would have given me a clue that the film was a complete pile of steaming movie rubbish but to be honest I think £1 was way too much money to spend on this film!!!! what a sodding huge waste of time and a good razor blade, i mean i wish i OD'ed, its less painful than watching this film!!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d17dca5a1e34124a0efac3b5cc9f314",
            "input": "This movie is great, the music \"with the exception of the very first song in the movie\" was awesome. The story line is awesome too, it's just basically a wonderfull movie, for ALL ages. I found the last battle scene awesome! Basically this was a great flick!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d1754a806bd48ee9283b40bd265bc87",
            "input": "Going down as the most expensive film in Finnish history, to date, \"Dark Floors\" is a horror film with an extremely Lynchian narrative that recounts an ever increasingly decrepit series of \"Floors\" (ironically enough) in an abandoned hospital, in which our protagonists are trapped. Lead by an autistic daughter and her father, himself disenchanted with the hospitals apparent lack of medical progress with his daughter, make their way into an elevator debating the issue with one of the hospitals nurses. Accompanied by a security guard, a businessman and a seemingly intoxicated tramp the collective soon find the complex abandoned, but they are not alone. Directed by Finnish- born Pete Riski, more known for his television work, \"Dark Floors\" is filmed in English, using mainly English actors but has the notable inclusion of Finland's arguably most famous group \"Lordi\" (2006 Eurovision song contest winners) as themselves, i.e. in their on stage monstrous costumes, as the films antagonists, yet for all this razzmatazz the production fails where it is needed most, in convincing the audience.Any film that has their lead character use the phrase \"it's too quiet\" is already headed down a dubious path, and this Lordi influenced horror does not break that convention. For all the good ideas that are thrown into the mix there are a handful of ripe clichés alongside and worst of all, anything that is interestingly original isn't fleshed out enough for it to resonate. The concept of the degrading floors is initially highly ominous and does provide a sense of inevitable doom as the audience is aware those trapped in the hospital must progress ever further down in the mire. However, there isn't enough atmosphere created to scare and intimidate the audiences into the unknowing fear, the viewer is aware the journey will become ever more dangerous, as the levels degenerate from shiny white through to hellish black, but I don't think the characters are aware enough of this fact for it to be threatening. Also, the entire film taking place in what is essentially its own time bubble is again a very nice touch, a concept not often used in the horror genre, but the characters don't confront the situation with enough fear and trepidation when they stumble across this fact, they continue about their business far too readily and without enough genuine concern for the idea to mean anything to the audience. These initially good ideas are just left to go to waste, as if the director and/or Mr Lordi (who had many of the ideas used within the film) had these thoughts, but couldn't agree or decide on how to best use them and as such lose their purpose and point. Yet for all the frustration there are large quantities of comedy, yet not for the reasons the creators would have hoped for. Too much is clichéd, too much is recycled and too much is just simply ridiculous. While the lead is amicably acted by Noah Huntley, the characters are mere cardboard cut outs that have been pasted into the story from other films. We have a lead man doing everything possible to protect his daughter alongside a clunkily developed love interest. Accompanying the \"couple\" we have the traditional token black man as a hard-nosed security guard, with the nigh on infinite clip for his sidearm, and a weasely disbelieving businessman only on the look out for himself. Worst of all though, unfortunately, is the introduction of the cast of Lordi as the creatures of the night that torment our wandering band of misfits, but not for them appearing as themselves. What makes a horror film scary to the viewing audience is contextualising the fear. \"The Shining\" is scary because it's a member of your own family hounding you, in \"Dawn Of The Dead\" it's our fear of each other and the primordial cannibalism and irrational thought patterns the zombies possess, in \"Alien\" the fear is explained, the creature is rationalised and in \"Dark Floors\" there is none of that. Perhaps it's unfair to compare this production to these monoliths of the genre but when you do it shows it pales significantly and that it's aggressors feel like nothing more than demented Klingons where you can almost see the zip on the costumes they wear, without a build up of any atmosphere \"Lordi\" just aren't scary.It's infuriating because we all cheer for the underdog and hope they do well, you want the smaller productions to say that they can create the same quality of film as \"Hollywood\" churns out, much in the similar way that George A Romero started out, but it doesn't always materialise. I enjoyed the film and didn't feel as if I had wasted the ninety minutes I had just sat through, but I felt enjoyment on a completely hollow level as if nothing that had occurred mattered or affected me subconsciously, emotionally or critically. I felt the almost Lynchian narrative was a standout plus point, but it fades out into nothingness. Why did it happen? What does it mean? Will they go through this all again? Without even the slightest insight into what will happen the film is simply puzzling for the sake of trying to be arty. Was the entire sequence of events real or was it merely a dream sequence? Had the autistic girl watched the Eurovision Song Contest of 2006 and simply had a highly bizarre nightmare given the stress she was under? Who knows? And unfortunately I fail to work up the energy to even care. \"Dark Floors\" is an infuriating experience that while ultimately shallow hallmarks potential and at the very least shows a plethora of creative energies from Mr Lordi, who perhaps should look into working solo to fully develop his ideas. It's one that fans of the group or the genre should perhaps pursue but will leave you feeling left in the lurch for not having enough light shed on the situation.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6a07df55cdf494fa09ff8e41d744c6a",
            "input": "My boyfriend and I rented this because we thought it might be a good 'Halloween' take-off. A killer terrorizing young people, a white mask...you get my drift. We were dead wrong! No pun intended. We not only discovered one of the worst movies out there, but also that it is a cult classic! It is filled w/plot holes and makes no sense. The actress who plays Maddy is pretty, but that's about it. I do give credit for it being shot on a VERY low budget--I always support movies like that. Just not this particular one.This movie may be good to see if you're drunk or high; otherwise don't bother. Unless you want to lose your movie privileges like I did!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97d23924ec0843f0a86376ceac73fc40",
            "input": "A new way to enjoy Goldsworthy's work, Rivers and Tides allows fans to see his work in motion. Watching Goldsworthy build his pieces, one develops an appreciation for every stone, leaf, and thorn that he uses. Goldsworthy describes how the flow of life, the rivers, and the tides inspires and affects his work. Although, I was happy the film covered the majority of Goldsworthy's pieces (no snowballs), I do feel it was a bit long. The film makers did a wonderful job of bringing Goldsworthy's work to life, and created a beautiful film that was a joy to watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-995d632b29c841858a067b116d3aa190",
            "input": "A young solicitor in sent to a remote area to wrap up the estate of a recently deceased client. When he arrives he finds that he is made less than welcome by the local villagers and that his deceased client was not liked. To speed things up he decides to move from the local inn and take up residence in her home, a house that is usually fogbound and approached only by a causeway that is blocked off by the sea most of the day. Once there he sees visions of a woman in black, is she real or imaginary,he is also subjected to the blood curdling cries of a woamn and child apparently drowning in the marshes, these events take their toll on him and he soon becomes quite terrified. Atmospheric TV adaptation of a famous play by Susan Hill, that spends it first third building up its characters, before moving to the creepy country house, its poor colour contrast give away its TV roots immediately, this really should have been in black & white, but still as a ghost story it had a couple of unsettling moments, still though after waiting so long to see it I must say I was sadly just a little underwhelmed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b9761adbe1443d1b7fff4070fcdbae8",
            "input": "[***POSSIBLE SPOILERS***] This movie's reputation precedes it, so it was with anticipation that I sat down to watch it in letterbox on TCM. What a major disappointment.The cast is superb and the production values are first-rate, but the characters are without depth, the plot is thin, and the whole thing goes on too long. For a movie that deals with alcoholism, family divisions, unfaithfulness, gambling, and sexual repression, the movie is curiously flat, prosaic, lifeless, and cliche-ridden. One example is the portrayal of Frank Hirsch's unfaithfuness: his rather heavy-handed request to his wife to \"go upstairs and relax a bit\" followed by her predictable pleading of a headache, leads - even more predictably - to his evening liaison with his secretary (\"hey Nancy, I've got the blues tonight. Let's go for a drive\"), all according to well-worn formula. We don't feel these are real people, but cardboard cutouts acting in a marionette play. Also, the source of the obvious friction between Frank and Dave Hirsch is never really explored or explained. Dave's infatuation with the on-again/off-again Gwen is inexplicable in light of her fatuous inability to defecate or get off the pot. His subsequent marriage of desperation to the Shirley Maclaine/Ginny character is, from the moment of its being presented to this viewer, anyway, obviously doomed to fail, and it was clear - by the conventions of this type of soap opera - that it could only be resolved by someone being killed. The moment the jealous lover started running around with the gun I started a bet with myself as to who - Dave or Ginny - would get killed. The whole thing was phony with a capital 'P'. Having said that, Maclaine's performance and that of Dean Martin are the standouts here. But on the whole I find the movie's interest to be purely that of a period piece of Hollywood history.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23ce8a29aa8a40fd83552d33c13e6d41",
            "input": "If there was some weird inversed Oscar Academy awards festival this flick would win it all. It has all the gods, excellent plot, extreme special effects coupled with extremely good acting skills and of course in every role there is a celebrity superstar. Well, this could be the scenario if the world was inversed, but it's not. Instead it's the worst horror flick ever made, not only bad actors that seem to read the scripts from a teleprinter with bad dyslexia, but also extremely low on special effects. For example the devil costume (which by the way is a must-see), is something of the most hilarious I've ever seen. Whenever I saw that red-black so called monster on screen I couldn't hold my laugh back. And to top of things it looked like the funny creature was transported by a conveyor-belt.Do not do the same mistake as I did. Checking IMDB seeing that the movie was released in 2003, had less than five votes and thinking: -\"Well, it's worth a shot, can't be that bad\".Yes it could.I'm not even going to waste more words on this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3194618e322d4a0e8be28ab2aac244f3",
            "input": "This is it. This is the one. This is the worst movie ever made. Ever. It beats everything. I have never seen worse. Retire the trophy and give it to these people.....there's just no comparison.Even three days after watching this (for some reason I still don't know why) I cannot believe how insanely horrific this movie is/was. Its so bad. So far from anything that could be considered a movie, a story or anything that should have ever been created and brought into our existence.This made me question whether or not humans are truly put on this earth to do good. It made me feel disgusted with ourselves and our progress as a species in this universe. This type of movie sincerely hurts us as a society. We should be ashamed. I really cannot emphasize that our global responsibility as people living here and creating art, is that we need to prevent the creation of these gross distortions of our reality for our own good. It's an embarrassment. I don't know how on earth any of these actors, writers, or the director of this film sleeps at night knowing that they had a role in making \"Loaded\". I don't know what type of disgusting monsters enjoy watching these types of movies.That being said, I love a good \"bad\" movie. I love Shark Attack 3, I love Bad Taste, they are HILARIOUS. I tell all my friends to see them because they are \"bad\".But this.......this crosses the line of \"bad\" into a whole new dimension. This is awkward bad. This is the bad where you know everything that is going to happen, every line, every action, every death, every sequence BEFORE they happen; and not just like a second or two before, I mean like, after watching the first 5 minutes before.Every cheesy editing \"effect\" is shamelessly used over and over again to a sickening point. I really never want to see the \"shaky\" camera \"drug buzz rush\" effect or jump cuts or swerve cuts or ANY FANCY CUT EVER AGAIN EVER. This is meticulously boring, repetitive and just tortures the audience.But.......and let me be specific here, the most DISTURBING thing about this movie is that given the production, it appears that a somewhat decent amount of money was actually put into this excrement. I personally will grab the shoulders of the director if I ever see him and shake him into submission, demanding that he run home and swallow two-gallons of Drain-O or I will do it for him.If we ever needed a new form of inhumane torture for our war prisoners abroad, just keep showing them this movie in a padded cell over and over again. Trust me, I think they will become more extravagant with suicide methods after the 72nd time of sitting through this.Stop these movies, they are just the most vile of all facets of our society. Please. Stop. NOW.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbd62243407244f5a15bba50ed9e29ff",
            "input": "LL Cool J performed much better in this movie that I expected! He did a fabulous job acting as a \"renegade\" cop within a \"renegade\" department. From the very beginning, he does a great job of building viewer empathy for his character and the predicament he's in. He acts as a sort of \"gentle giant\" -- a person whose rough exterior can scare anybody, yet whose heart is clearly in the right place from the very start -- and he does an amazing job. He was quite clearly the best character in the movie.This was certainly a performance that will not win Morgan Freeman any awards. After starring in powerhouse films like the Shawshank Redemption this film was certainly a step down. His role in Edison simply did not allow him to show his true talents as an actor -- and in terms of the conglomeration of characters placed him sadly on a back burner. There are so many ways his character (Moses Ashford) could have taken a more pivotal role. That he didn't was disappointing and a true let-down. I was hoping to see more from him in this film.Timberlake ought to have stayed in the music industry. His portrayal of a young journalist was poorly acted and unpersuasive. This movie is a typical action movie that (at least initially) bears some resemblance to corrupt police affairs LA has experienced in the past. Being an action movie, it has its share of shoot-em-up scenes, blood, and guts. These scenes are typically unrealistic and painfully predictable. Watching the beginning of the movie there is very little suspense as to what will happen at the end -- think of what you would typically expect in a good-cops/bad-cops conflict -- and it bears little resemblance to a REAL police shoot-out.What irked me most was the way Timberlake's character behaved during shoot-out scenes. He starts out having guns and not using them. Then when he finally gets around to using one he fires it as if he's been firing a gun his whole life. Then he runs out of bullets and doesn't have a gun -- and 30 seconds later, without moving or anything -- suddenly has 2 more fully loaded guns AND extra ammo?! Little plot errors like this really ruined the movie for me.If what you are looking for is a blatantly fictional plot in a fantasy world where everything turns out okay, then you'll probably love this movie. Personally, it doesn't matter to me what KIND of movie it is as long as it is realistic. Make me believe that the story is true. This story was so obviously fictional in so many aspects that I came away feeling unsatisfied.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b78de0c2e0c401b96de4684f1d0b876",
            "input": "This really is one of the worst movies ever made. I consider myself a HUGE zombie film fan and usually tolerate bad acting, lame \"special effects\" a dumb story and whatever you may encounter in second rate movies, AS LONG as the film has a good atmosphere/story/suspension or whatever to offer. This one has basically no positive aspect to it and is third or fourth rate, maybe worse. Some friends of mine and myself made a small movie during a week´s holiday and definitely did a better job (no zombie film though).This flick is not even funny, not speaking of anything else. Really bad and redundant special effects, zombies that look like normal people (except for a white additional skin pulled over their faces), WAY TO MUCH fake blood (I like realism a lot, the combination of realism and Zombie films being debatable, but the presented gore is just plain silly). The camera stays quite long with feedings scenes, it gets boring and you cannot help but wonder, why the zombies use WEAPONS (!) to kill their prey. I will not go into the details of the dubbing (others have done so). Although I am from Germany myself and am at least a bit curious about the original version, I will NOT waste more of my time with this movie.Keep away from it, as far as you can.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99c7172c37b24a4098a2e8954a2489bd",
            "input": "Ben & Arthur COULD have been a 10. Sam Mraovich wrote, directed, stared, and produced this movie. Sam should have given his idea to a good writer, director, and left the acting to somebody who could act. this is a good example of one person controlling the whole production. there was nobody to tell him, \"Sam this is bad, really bad\".Jamie Brett Gabel's acting was the only good point, but he could have been so much better with a good director, and better actors to work with. This movie is so bad i think Sam Mraovich should be tied to a chair and made to watch this movie (twice). the acting and direction was so bad, this movie was turned into a comedy. you just had to laugh, and in the wrong places. A second good point....this would make a great date movie. after the first two minutes you would quit watching the movie and pay more attention to your date!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c9226dfef024aba82d80863a0d4e55f",
            "input": "This film was a disaster from start to finish. Interspersed with performances from \"the next generation of beautiful losers\" are interviews with Bono and The Edge as well as the performers themselves. This leaves little time for the clips of Leonard Cohen himself, who towers over everyone else in the film with his commanding yet gentle presence, wisdom and humor. The rest are too busy trying to canonize him as St. Leonard or as some Old Testament prophet. Many of the performances are forgettable over-interpretations (especially Rufus & Martha Wainright's) or bland under-achievements. Only Beth Orton and Anthony got within striking distance of Leonard's own versions by using a little restraint. Annoying little pseudo-avant-garde gestures are sprinkled throughout the film- like out of focus superimpositions of red spheres over many of the concert and interview shots, shaky blurred camera work, use of digital delay on some of Leonard Cohen's comments (making it harder to hear what's being said) and a spooky, pretentious low drone under a lot of the interview segments (an attempt at added gravitas?). For the real thing, see the Songs From The Life Of documentary produced by the BBC in 1988.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4d73e536c9442f1b2ff05a143d026d7",
            "input": "I first heard of this movie after purchasing the 1976 flick \"Snuff\". I was told that Devil's Experiment was much better so naturally I went ahead and ordered the Guinea Pig box set. I was really interested to hear that Charlie Sheen had come out trying to ban either this movie or the second one, so my interest was peaked.Devil's Experiment is a short film with no story, no character development. Just 3 men torturing a woman for about 45 minutes. They torture her in various ways like beating her, spinning her in circles over and over again then forcing her to drink alcohol, forcing her to listen to hi-pitched noise for 24 hours, smash her hand with a mallet, burning and putting maggots on the burns, throwing guts at her, and ultimately shoving a sharp needle through her eye.I must say that a lot of this movie was fake, like the beating scenes. But then, some of it was actually well done as far as grossing you out. The scenes in which the woman is being spun around in circles was making me dizzy watching it. Or the scene in which she is forced to listen to sharp noise for 24 hours is painful to think about. The worst is the eye scene. I didn't shutter when watching it but simply thought \"Damn, that looks pretty good for such a low budget movie\". I did enjoy the flick but I don't know if I can really recommend this unless you have seen most of what the horror genre has to offer. 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9d8a0f421b245f3a972b2cbd456211f",
            "input": "This film had a great cast going for it: Christopher Lee, Dean Jagger, Macdonald Carey, Lew Ayres -- solid b-movie actors all. But this downer of a movie didn't use any of them to any sort of advantage, with none of their characters even meeting on screen (though Christopher Lee does get to play opposite himself in several scenes).The motivations for the aliens in this movie seem to change at the drop of a hat. First, they just want to repair their ship and leave, then they turn on the main character by killing most of his friends and not releasing his wife after he gets them the crucial part they need. Then, out of nowhere, this \"peaceful\" race decides they have to destroy the planet because it causes too many \"diseases\" (though they do offer the main character and his wife a spot in their society).Most of the film is spent watching the man and wife drive or walk or stand around or sit at desks doing nothing. You almost wish they had gotten taken out with the rest of the planet at the end, just in vengeance for boring us to death.Unless you really like Chris Lee or seventies low-budget sci-fi, I'd give this one a miss. It falls into that narrow range of wasted celluloid between Star Odyssey and UFO: Target Earth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c60d6d9a033742919275b8d9fd78569c",
            "input": "Other than Susan Hayward's wooden delivery throughout this film it was as good as any biblical film made. Henry King handles this film with the respect of an epic in all of the small scenes, and Peck is, as always, impeccable. The stirring Alfred Newman sound score, with the stirring twenty-third psalm is unforgettable even after these many years. The scene with Goliath is a bit on the hokey side, but not all that badly done for the era in which this film was made. This goes well alongside the lesser bible epics of the day, \"The Song of Ruth\" and \"Esther and the King.\" It is worth watching, and Raymond Massy is excellent as the prophet Nathan. The film is rounded out by the always fine James Robertson Justice as Abishai and Jayne Meadows as Michol, David's estranged first wife.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50710518aea9476aa19f6c0032d30527",
            "input": "Frankie Dio (Lee VanCleef) is a high-ranking mobster who turns himself in to the police or illegal gambling (for reasons that seem unclear to me). Tony (Tony Lo Bianco) is a low-level thug who frequents a pool hall and spends his free time envying Frankie. By being in the right place at the right time, Tony gets arrested with Frankie and is sent to jail... where they form a bond that may not quite be friendship, but it will do for now.This film came to me under the title of \"Frank and Tony\", which is disappointing because I see an alternate name is \"Mean Frank and Crazy Tony\", which would have helped sell the film more effectively. I presume that's an homage to \"Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry\" but what do I know? I watched it shortly after another Italian crime film, \"Violent Professionals\", and I must say the two complement each other very well.Italians have always lagged behind Americans in their budgets and production values, which is a real shame with this film. It is considered a \"grindhouse\" film, which unfairly demotes it to a b-movie (or worse). With a cleaner sound and picture, this could have been a Hollywood hit, I suspect. I found the story very interesting, the characters (and actors) better than average and unlike \"Violent Professionals\" the plot is fairly clear -- not too many secondary characters.If you like Mafia movies or crime films you should give this one a try. A film about the mob that's actually from Italy (how much more authentic do you want?) is as much as you can ask. Sure, it's not \"The Godfather\", but it's not supposed to be. This isn't a drama, it's a light comedy, heavy action buddy film... like \"Die Hard With a Vengeance\" from the point of view of the bad guys. Well, okay, not really.If nothing else, this film made me want to check out other films from the director and the principle cast. Films besides \"Escape From New York\" (where VanCleef plays \"Hauk\") and the usual cult movies. What's more fun than discovering a lost classic?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d7ac670ca714730bb9fb94c69bdbf42",
            "input": "STRANGER THAN FICTION angered me so much, I signed up on IMDb just to write this review. STRANGER THAN FICTION is a surprisingly complex, touching and thought-provoking movie until the very end. Once you suspend multiple lapses of logic (why didn't Will Ferrell hear Emma Thompson's voice 10 years ago when she fist started writing her book? \"The phone rang. The phone rang again.\" How could she not know it's him calling? etc.), the movie challenges one's thoughts about mortality, fate, and sacrifice.The brief history of literary themes provided by Dustin Hoffman should especially entertain former English majors. And Maggie Gyllenhaal is always a pleasure, even though Will Ferrell might just as easily be an ax murderer as a bumbling soul. Her quick trust of him is a mighty big leap of faith.Ah, but the ending. Until the very end, I would have given 9 out of 10 stars to this movie. The movie as a metaphor for life's journey, as a tribute to the notion of 'writing true,' as a reminder that great literature is either comedy or tragedy, but not both, is outstanding. The entire movie leads the viewer to understand and accept the moment of Will Ferrell's fate. And no matter how endearing a character he may have become, we know full well why we will accept the ending. The last act occurs, the screen goes white, the credits roll. A profound and powerful end to an almost perfect film. An end that would have been debated for weeks.NO!!!!!!!!!! No credits rolled. Say it isn't so. Say Hollywood didn't tack on another 10 minutes of crap that completely undermined the integrity and heart of the movie. Dustin Hoffman got it right when he said, \"It's no longer a masterpiece; it's OK.\" An apt review of the movie. Except to me, it wasn't even OK. I was so offended about the betrayal of 'writing true,' about the decision to pander the film that I actually burst into angry tears explaining this on the ride home from the movie. I don't often cry. I could care less about most movies, but I am still angry about this one.My questions for Zack Helm, the writer, are this: did the original movie end when the screen went white? And were you forced by the vapid movie powers-that-be to tack on an ending unfaithful to the core of the movie? Or did you tack that maudlin ending on yourself? I've read you're brilliant. I hope your original script ended the movie the first time.I know Zack Helm will never see this review, and I've been unable to find a contact for him to ask myself. But, please, movie-goers, am I the only one who feels this way about STRANGER THAN FICTION? One good thing came from me seeing this movie: I doubly admire LOST IN TRANSLATION now.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6d9dfdd6b14454e92f315a48f80c244",
            "input": "I saw this recently on a faded old VHS tape, and remembered it dimly. Looking at it now, it seems charming.When it was first released, it was recognized by pretty much everyone as a spoof of coming out as a gay teenager. To hammer the point home, the mother is seen reading a paperback copy of \"1 Teenager In 10\", the most popular coming out book of the time. David Warner hams it up as the persecuting vampire hunter [= gay-hating evangelist], who is of course a self-loathing closet case. The list of sight gags and in-jokes that were included to make sure nobody missed the point would be too long to go into. The producers were having some good-natured fun, and hoping, no doubt, to lighten-up as well as to enlighten.But I have no clue how a teenage audience would look at this film, nowadays. In some places, where there is education and culture, the terrifying ordeals that gay teens had to go through are a thing of the past. But I'm sure there are plenty of dark, nasty corners of our continent where it's just as bad as it always was.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-932c6665a8b04d638a8fcd5a5204a062",
            "input": "If I had known this movie was filmed in the exasperating and quease-inducing Dogme 95 style, I would never have rented it. Nevertheless, I took a dramamine for the seasickness and gave it a shot. I lasted a very, very, very long forty minutes before giving up. It's just boring, pretentious twaddle.The last French movie I saw was \"Romance\" and it too was pretty dismal, but at least the camera was steady and not breathing down the necks of the characters all the time. I am baffled at the continuing popularity of Dogme 95 overseas -- it'll catch on in America about the same time as the next big outbreak of leprosy. (It's called Dogme 95 because that's the average number of times the actors are poked in the eye by the camera.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fca74e69bf6442a96ae7ef3aaf9fb4e",
            "input": "This is one of the worst things to ever come out of England, so that says a lot right there. The tension when we have to find out whether or not Lembach is staying is amazing though. The upside is seeing the nice secretary, Sheila, in her picnic table print underwear for awhile after being captured by Dr. Rat Face. This movie has several views of London too although none of them are good. There is also a point in which there is almost a car accident which gets your heart rate back to just below normal. There is also a watch that gets teleported away, and the fear of the woman not getting her watch back is parallel to the horror of \"The Sixth Sense\" only a lot more dull and British. Add on a furious gun fight between the British police and the Dr. Rat, which results in nothing, plus the electrocuting of a lot of people, plus a cat and you have yourself... ummm... A British movie. The MST3K version is pretty good although not one of there bests.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68fa2bb7b36a4c13b92a127038d06742",
            "input": "My 3rd-year French classes always enjoyed this film very much. In a multi-cultural, inner-city high school, the film provided many subjects for discussion (in French in class, but I know a lot of discussion went on in English after class). The most obvious is the relationship between Protée and Aimée compared to the one between Protée and France.I always mentioned that I felt this film had one of the \"sexiest\" scenes I had ever seen in a movie. One year, a 17-year-old African-American shouted, \"Yes!\" when he figured out the scene: the one where Protée is helping Aimée lace up her evening dress, all the while both are examining the reflection of the other in the mirror. Directors use the \"mirror technique\" when then want to focus on the inner conflict on the part of one or more character in a scene: this is a perfect example of the technique, and it is \"sexy\".Most students had trouble understanding the end of the film. One suggested that one theme of the movie was \"Africanism\", and that no matter how much one loved Africa or Africans, one cannot \"become\" African (like the driver tried to do): one must BE African.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e496ada20d244042b4fdecf3c8b67182",
            "input": "As a community theater actor who works hard at it but doesn't take acting too seriously, I'm always amused by those who treat it as Great Art. This movie skewers the \"Actor's Craft\" mercilessly while dishing up a lot of good laughs.A ham actor on location for a movie bears a resemblance to the dictator. When the dictator dies of a heart attack from too much drink and food, the actor is kidnapped and forced to play \"the part of a lifetime\" by the neo-Nazi head of the secret service. He plays it to the hilt, gets the dictator's girlfriend to fall in love with him and vice versa, and turns the tables on his captors beautifully.Lots of great shtick by the leads, lots of good work by some unknown supporting actors, particularly the household staff and two members of the palace guard, and fun little cameos abound. Sammy Davis Jr. makes light of himself, Jonathan Winters plays a semi-retired American businessman with something else going on, and Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, and above all Richard Dreyfuss are exceptional.This is a dumb movie, but it has lots of beautiful locations (in Brazil), a humorous script, and good actors doing their thing and looking like they're actually having fun and not going through the usual existential angst about what is only play-acting!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0d141b3a014453aafb29285a98bf64c",
            "input": "I found this to be the most enjoyable Muppets movie, because I felt it was the most light-hearted and had the best comic delivery on most of its lines. The Muppets try to go on Broadway to sell an original musical they've written, but along the way, they run into the usual problems, including Kermit's memory loss here. While there aren't as many great cameos here as in the original \"Muppets Movie,\" there are some including Joan Rivers and Dabney Coleman. Simply the timing and delivery of so many of the lines is great, and the situations the Muppets find themselves in are hilarious. The original songs are also good here, and the ending is satisfying. There is not much else to say about the film, but Muppet fans should see it for sure. It is the funniest Muppet movie and is sure to be enjoyed by all.***1/2 out of ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a62ebba27abb4172bd8e9235355d4302",
            "input": "I thought this move was very good. There were a few things that were less than perfect, but overall, I was quite surprised. The courtroom scene in the end seemed a little unrealistic, but was real enough to be entertaining. I found that the movie communicated the hardships of going though military training and the sacrifices that go along with it. Being a military pilot I could relate to many of these parts.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0af897a5c9a4a39aefc2d0645981fcb",
            "input": "I can agree with other comments that there wasn't an enormous amount of history discussed in the movie but it wasn't a documentary! It was meant to entertain and I think it did a very good job at it.I agree with the black family. The scenes with them seemed out of place. Like all of a sudden it would be thrown in but I did catch on to the story and the connection between the families later on and found it pretty good.Despite it wasn't a re-enactment of the 60s it did bring into the light very big and important landmark periods of the decade. I found it very entertaining and worth my while to watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-051202573933482b8ae99e27ec7f6731",
            "input": "The plot, character development, and gags in this movie are all extremely weak. Quite a waste of time. The conclusion of Saving Grace is supposed to make one feel warm and fuzzy as though the characters have grown through their struggles. There was no such development to make such warm fuzzy feelings possible. The drug gags are cliched and much of the movie doesn't ring true to life. The plot builds what is supposed to be tension but the characters aren't developed enough to care. Then it rushes through a resolution of all the outstanding problems in about a minute of screen time leaving the viewer feeling like they have just wasted their time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1bb40429a44e428db370627ab45b8ad9",
            "input": "Went to watch this movie expecting a 'nothing really much' action flick, still got very disappointed. The opening scene promised a little action with a tinge of comedy. It keeps you hooked for the first half coz till then you are expecting that now its time for the action to kick in. Well, nothing of that sort happens. The movie drags and the ending just thumps you down to a point that you get annoyed.Wonder what was the director thinking. Made no sense watsoever. The movie lacked in all aspects, had no real storyline and it seemed very hollow, even if \"Rambo\" was in it, I don't think he could have helped the rating at all. There is simply no logic to the movie. A perfect way to waste your time and money. By far the most irritating movie i have ever seen and i am sure there will b others who'll have the same viewpoint after enduring it. Definitely not for people who have a little movie sense left in them.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-391b50125a3247b19df537c622f99b8c",
            "input": "A good picture is worth all the words. This film has the most poetic scene ever dreamed of about people with Down's syndrome. And I won't spoil it by telling you. You'll want to see it yourself.Pasqual Duquenne is an amazing actor. I did not need to understand a single word he said to understand his meaning.The film has a magic of it's own. After watching it I understood better that we put too much value on achievement and not enough on the people we love. Passion and simplicity is all we need.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30d783623e9f4087835ea81c215738f1",
            "input": "Strange... I like all this movie crew and dark humor movies; but didn't like this one at all! It's awful, horrible and surely not funny at all. Pity cannot do a whole movie plot, disgust either. And it was really boring. Long empty moments fills the movie; it could have been removed. It should have been in another shorter format, surely. Maybe i expected too much from the crew - like saving the movie lol -. It's also filled with overused clichés of characters and situations... I don't get it why people liked it... \"Poetry\", \"hope\"; nope 'mam, didn't see anything like that! ^^ All in all, it's empty and crude, pitiful and hopeless. Oh darn this one........",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a92d52af90a423ca94cc383f8aa785e",
            "input": "hi.. I consider Just Cause one of my favorite Sean Connery's movies, it is a tense psychological thriller with excellent performances from the Cast, especially Connery..it also has one of the best lines i have seen in movies, so the dialog is pretty good in this one.. It also has one of the best scenes in movies ever, when Sean interviews Ed Harris's character in prison is just fantastic..i enjoyed this one a lot and i can not recommend this enough, really do not miss this one ! Do not pay attention to the negative reviews stating that the last 30 minutes suck, it was as intense as the rest of the movie, i really find Just Cause a very entertaining movie..",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c09f90c287084a57a3b67dab18a040b0",
            "input": "Herbet Clutter, wife Bonnie, and their teenage children Kenyon and Nancy were much liked and respected in their tiny town of Holcomb, Kansas--but in the early hours of 14 November 1959 all four were brutally murdered. Rather unexpectedly, the crime made an impression on author Truman Capote, who rushed to the scene and followed the course of the case to its conclusion. The result was the book IN COLD BLOOD. Controversial, shocking, and exceptionally well-written, it became an international best seller and it remains a touchstone for crime writers to this day.The 1967 film version of Capote's work is almost as remarkable as the book itself. Filmed in black and white in many of the real-life locations, it has a slightly documentary quality, icy and detached--and the overall cast is exceptional. This is the film on which Robert Blake's reputation as an actor rests, and deservedly so. As killer Perry Smith, Blake traps you between a profound distaste and the shock of unexpected sympathy; it is a masterful performance from start to finish. As Richard Hickock, Scott Wilson is no less fine.Like Capote's book, the film opens with Smith and Hickock as they travel to Kansas and brings them to the Clutter home--only to suddenly flash past the crime to detail the investigation that finally resulted in their arrest and conviction. The centerpiece of the film has always been the moment at which we at last see what occurred in the Clutter home; actually filmed in the Clutter house itself, it is a spinechilling sequence, horrific and deeply disturbing.Director and writer Richard Brooks guides the film with a very powerful sense of deliberation, erring only in the sense that he allows the film to become slightly preachy. Given the overall power of the film, however, this becomes a trivial annoyance. Strong stuff--and recommended.GFT, Amazon Reviewer",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1bf737fbd5ca4a91aed7e2687817db75",
            "input": "heres a fun fact, I was the baby in the movie, the one in the crib. :) I am 19 years old now. my parents took me to try out for the part, we lived in Texas at the time.I think I only made like 80 bucks for it, but i wasn't in it very long. My parents said i would cry when i was supposed to be happy and would be happy when i was supposed to cry. I was all mixed up. Strange and funny fact i suppose.. and no I am not a child actress. I am livin' in San Antonio, workin' at a walgreens. I graduated here in Texas but I lived in Maryland most my life. This Movie is a great movie, though, good concept. I have seen it several times in my short 19 years.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5144b43ba20442ab31f27b080d5f0d5",
            "input": "The Young Victoria is a beautiful film and has presented Queen Victoria in a different light to what everyone thinks about her. The films wipes away the \"I am not amused\" impression of Queen Victoria and shows she was a cheerful young woman.As I love history, particularly Victorian history, you can imagine my reaction when i first saw this film advertised, i was so so so excited and counted down the days until it came to the cinemas. I was a little worried that it wouldn't be historically accurate, but it was and I loved it. I found out new facts about Queen Victoria that didn't know before and it interested me greatly.Queen Victoria in many lights was one of our all time greatest Monarchs, and this film paints a picture of her real personality and what her life was like. She was treated so badly by her mothers adviser Sir John Conroy, because he wanted Britain to have a regency. This was what inspired Victoria to be a fantastic Queen, which she was! The romance between her and Albert was so deep and this was very well done by Emily Blunt and Rupert Friend, who were both brilliant! The Young Victoria is a heart felt love story but at the same time a great look into a major part of British History...I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!! 10/10 ... no doubt!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d50ba153d0545caab7cdbc6e490c37f",
            "input": "I had heard good things about this film and was, you guessed it, a bit disappointed. Reese Witherspoon is as promised surprisingly good, surprisingly confident, at a young age; really all the (small) cast are quite solid, in their simple 50s American setting. The reason I didn't rate this film higher is mainly that towards the end, the grief shown by the older sister didn't seem so real and this pulled me out of the film a bit. Perhaps we are expected to fill in the plot, or perhaps the film needed to be a bit longer. Maureen's character is quite underdeveloped I think. It is understandable that Dani (Reese W., the younger) would be traumatised and angry, but why is her sister shown to be more upset? Because she's a few years older? Hasn't the end rather undermined the rest of the film? The pacing of the movie makes it seem that Maureen and Court have only just met, when he gets tractored (warning: this scene is surprisingly brutal, in retrospect it seems like it might have been trying to shock a bit. well it works!). It depends what you want - if you want the girls' happy story of young love that it seems like you're going to get, you're in for a surprise. Man in the Moon is both quaint and dreamy and a harsh coming of age film – a rather awkward combination? I liked the character of Court though, I can see what girls watching this might be watching. And I loved that they had the courage to both let him hurt the younger sister (most men would, most films wouldn't) and get killed.7/10 on my pretty harsh ratings scale. For some reason I found Jason London on a tractor funny.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbdcd74fb5164ecfb5fd8a4b1f9a419f",
            "input": "A bunch of kids set up a theatre to have an all-night horror movie marathon. However, as the night goes on, there's somebody among them killing them off one by one. Who is it...and why? I saw this in a theatre way back in 1991. I was looking forward to it--but boy! It did not work at all. The premise is a good one, they have a very appealing young cast and some pros like Dee Wallace Stone on board...but it doesn't work. The story stops making sense halfway through (that could be because of some huge editing before the film was released), the killings are relatively bloodless (how this got an R rating is beyond me) and the unmasking of the killer at the end was boring and stupid.It's really too bad--this movie had potential. With a better script this could have become a great horror film. As it stands though it's mostly forgotten and the cast itself seems embarrassed by it (I heard Stone won't talk about this one). I give it a 3 and that's just for the cast.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2c162f0019d4366a94ff7f83e5928c9",
            "input": "Other reviewers here seem to think this is an awful film. That's simply not true and a little unfair.The acting is of a good quality and the direction moves on with a decent fluidity. I don't think there's anything wrong with the Tarantino-esquire way of interlocking stories together. Perhaps its just a new tool for directors to try. I thought it made the film much more interesting. Perhaps a few elements of the script need tightening, but that's about the only fault I can find. Nestor Cantillana gives a great performance as Sylvio, also Antonella Rios is stunning and worth the price of admission alone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c00e47ae5844a758adb19be7742e052",
            "input": "Hare Rama Hare Krishna was the biggest hit movie of 1971. Filmed almost entirely in Kathmandu, the capital of Nepal, the movie depicts not only with the theme of a broken family, but also a relationship between a brother and a sister, as well as drugs and the hippie movement, which made many people think that it involved the ISKON - the movement for Krishna consciousness.The movie begins with scenes of drugs and being informed that the woman dancing in front is the narrator's sister. Going back to the past the brother and sister are happily playing around the house only to hear their parents arguing. This soon leads to a split in the family. The brother goes with the mother and the sister with the father.As years pass, the brother goes in search of his sister and is informed that she no longer lives with the father and that she has moved to Nepal. Here, Prashant, the brother not only finds love, but he also finds his sister, Janice. But he finds out that she is not only in the wrong company of friends but is also on drugs as she wants to block all memory of her past. With help of Shanti, his love, the brother tries to get his sister away from all this but has to overcome many obstacles, including people who stoop to all sorts of levels to stop him This is a multi cast movie and is led by the director and producer himself, Dev Anand and also stars Zeenat Aman (her first movie), Mumtaz, Rajendranath, Prem Chopra, Jnr Mehmood, A.K. Hangal and Achala Sachdev. The music is superbly provided by the late R.D. Burman, whose last score was \"1942 - A Love Story.\" During the filming, Dev Anand asked Panchamda (R.D. Burman) to compose something special for this film. Days later Panchamda came back with the composition of \"Dum Maro Dum.\" The song was an instant hit.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-341b66d2dc9b44dfb52723c38ef19725",
            "input": "The original Thunderbirds earned a place in TV history. It was, and still is, much beloved - indeed, the entire first 10 minutes of the Wallace and Gromit movie (the Wererabbit) is a direct lift of Thunderbirds, down to a direct replay of the original Thunderbird 2 launching sequence (if you don't believe me, get the movie, and then get a copy of the original episode where Thunderbird 2 is launched).This movie was a crass attempt at making a kids' movie - when the original was loved and enjoyed by kids and adults alike! In the original, the Thunderbirds spent all of their time rescuing people who were often trapped when Mother Nature or Technology went horrible wrong (yes, there was also the occasional criminal act). The Thunderbirds put their own lives and resources at risk for no reward - the very essence of heroism and selflessness. There was little physical violence. The Thunderbirds challenged the imagination to a degree - how many of us would dream of someday building a Thunderbird 2? And don't underestimate the power of entertainment to do this - many Japanese attribute their fascination with humanoid robots to the old Astroboy cartoon.But this movie was a poor re-image of the original. This movie came across as a meld between Thunderbirds and Loony Tunes - I mean, we have Anthony Edwards as Brain imitating Porky Pig's stuttering????? Much of the action consists of Kung Fu/Power Rangers type fighting. Indeed, there were funny sound effects when someone got nailed on the head with a frying pan. The tech that fired our imagination was absent - instead we have these kids running around, using a plot device that was NEVER in the original series (having the entire team take off at once, leaving the base occupied by the kids and Brain). Then there was a dose of \"Use the Force Luke\" mysticism thrown in when TinTin would levitate something or another, coupled with the The Hood using aerodynamics that looked like they were lifted from \"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon\". About the only thing missing was for The Hood to go \"TinTin, I am your Uncle\" with a breath mask voice. The heart that made Thunderbirds unique was GONE.The only bright point was Ron Cook's portrayal of Parker - he caught it perfectly. But the actress playing Lady Penelope came across as a child - HUH???? And this is why we hate this movie. When someone puts out something that was popular to a fan base, and expects the fans to shell out money to watch, and then delivers something than wasn't even close to what the fans expect - well, I am sorry, that is just plain WRONG! OK, so if they were making a kids' movie - fine - next time distribute it straight to video, where many of these belong. But don't package something up in a familiar wrapper and change the innards.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bf7c0a095684e25b9503c109825069e",
            "input": "While I have a great respect for Disney's animated films, as of late they haven't really been what I would call \"must-see\". Atlantis looked intriguing from the first movie poster and trailer, and thankfully lived up to my expectations.Atlantis is a more \"mature\" Disney film in the sense that it lacks songs (a very unusual trait for a Disney film indeed), and is focused more on action and discovery than any other recent Disney offering. The world of Atlantis, hidden beneath the earth's core, is fantastic, presented as desolate caverns with ruins, and then slowly developing into actual ecosystems, which, while usually containing some reminder of harshness, become more and more intriguing until the tropical paradise itself is reached. The presentation of simply Atlantis' landscape and setting, without some expendable cheery song, gave the kingdom a much more beautiful and intriguing appearance. The inclusion of an Atlantean language, as well as attempts to connect it into the mythology of real-life ancient civilizations adds to this, and works fairly well.Also, with the exception of some scenes involving Mole's practical jokes, there didn't seem to be much of a \"childish\" element that I usually associate with Disney films. Instead, the main elements were the struggle to get to Atlantis, and the constant discovery that occurred at Atlantis, as Milo the outsider was able to learn all he ever needed to know about the place by helping the Atlanteans discover parts of their own history that they didn't know about. Part of this involves the Atlantean \"weaponry\", which is used in a very action-packed climax which is, for lack of a better word, quite exciting.Granted, not all of the story makes full sense, and the film doesn't feature any amazing new computer-generated visual effects, but, aside from the Toy Story movies, this is the most entertaining Disney film I've seen in years.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f00d0371c1274fe099d5fbd988b5f8a5",
            "input": "Fever Pitch has many of the clichés we have come to identify with Hollywood romantic comedies: a relationship between two people with little in common, the secret he's been hiding that she discovers, the inevitable breakup, and the very public – well, I won't go any further but you get the picture. In spite of its predictability, it works, especially if you love baseball as I do, though I'm not quite as obsessive as Ben Wrightman, a Boston schoolteacher played by Saturday Night Live comedian Jimmy Fallon.Adapted from a novel by Nick Hornby by veteran screenplay writers Lowell Ganz and Babaloo Mandel, Ben is a lifelong Boston Red Sox fan whose Uncle gave him season tickets when he was seven years old and he's been kind of stuck emotionally at that point all of his life to the detriment of his relationships with women. Ben is not just a fan but a \"fanatic\" who travels to Fort Meyers, Florida each winter for the Red Sox Spring Training games and never misses a home game during the regular season. His family does not consist of parents or siblings but the fellow groupies who attend each game with him and his bedroom is not a place to sleep but a Red Sox museum to visit.When he falls for business consultant Lindsay Meeks (Drew Barrymore), he is threatened with the possibility of having to grow up but Ben is not quite ready to do that. He would rather attend the Yankee series than go with her to Baltimore to meet her parents or to go to Paris with her and miss the Anaheim series. It takes his relationship being on the verge of dissolving, for him to stop and think about his priorities, especially when a pint-size Dr. Phil wannabe asks him, \"You love the Red Sox, but have they ever loved you back?\" While the premise of Fever Pitch is that some things are more important than baseball (perish the thought), you would never know it from the way things turn out. Of course, to any one familiar with the history of the Boston Red Sox, it is a team that will break the hearts of its most die hard fans -- but this is 2004, the year the curse of the Bambino came to an end and as the Red Sox move to a new level, Ben might just do the same. Both lead performances are excellent and the Farrelly Brothers even manage a pretty gross gag. While Fever Pitch will never be mistaken for an art film, it is a joyous romp that will have to go down as one of my guilty pleasures. Go Blue Jays!.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a37429ba7301415193ae22878b57ca39",
            "input": "Jeff Lowell has written & directed 'Over Her Dead Body' poorly. The idea is first of all, is as stale as my jokes and the execution is just a cherry on the cake.Minus Eva Longoria Parker there is hardly anything appealing in this film. Eva looks great as ever and delivers a likable performance.Paul Rudd looks jaded and least interested. Lake Bell is a complete miscast. She looks manly and delivers a strictly average performance. Jason Biggs is wasted, so is Lindsay Sloane.I expected entertainment more from this film. Sadly, I didn't get entertained.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e11e58997c54479ca55679fe3ba3f546",
            "input": "Unless the title is supposed to be some kind of spoiler for the wife's transformation (the fiends! ruining it for us). Anycase, if this movie wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so remarkably low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits every 70's cliche except disco. Nobody is likeable, and you could careless what happens to anyone in this one. Eminently forgetable except for the bad, bad performances.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e4ec544e5dd408cb7cb31b871d1fd6e",
            "input": "This is a reunion, a team, and a great episode of Justice. From hesitation to resolution, Clark has made a important leap from a troubled teenager who was afraid of a controlled destiny, to a Superman who, like Green Arrow, sets aside his emotions to his few loved ones, ready to save the whole planet. This is not just a thrilling story about teamwork, loyalty, and friendship; this is also about deciding what's more important in life, a lesson for Clark. I do not want the series to end, but I hope the ensuing episodes will strictly stick to what Justice shows without any \"rewind\" pushes and put a good end here of Smallville---and a wonderful beginning of Superman.In this episode, however, we should have seen more contrast between Lex and the Team. Nine stars should give it enough credit.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2d33d42e6e44f64b5c70aa0d37b4636",
            "input": "I loved this film when I was little. Today at 17 it is one of my all time favorite animated films. Beautiful animation and appealing characters are just two of the things to like about this film. Although many people might not enjoy some of the songs, most of them are well-done and go along with the story. It focuses on Charlie, a roguish handsome German Shepard who may seem unlikable to some at first... but eventually will win you over.Not a kiddie film by any means. Often very dark and frightening at times. A treat for Don Bluth fans and animation buffs. But do keep a tissue in handy. ADGTH never fails to make me cry and will do the same for those who are movie sensitive. Arguably one of the greatest non-Disney animated films of all time. Along with Watership Down and My Neighbor Totoro.BOTTOM LINE: A heavenly masterpiece.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04d7abee94404556bc5fd09c7f3ceb00",
            "input": "Basically what we have here is little more than a remake of the hilarious 1970's classic kitsch horror 'Death Line' which ironically was like this cobblers, also partly filmed at the disused Aldwych underground station.Making good use of the now disused Jubilee Line platforms at Charing Cross as well as the aforementioned Aldwych, this film contains basically the same plot - dodgy murdering mad zombie in the tunnels preying on the lost passengers who have missed the last train - originality is not this film's strong point.Indeed strong points are sadly lacking. The gore ranges from the poor to the unnecessarily over gory whilst the sub-Gollum nutter is never really fully explained as seems little more than an under developed plot device.Franke Polente has little to do with a thin script than run down a lot of tunnels and scream every so often, indeed she was like pretty much everyone else in this film, out-acted by a small dog and a pack of tame rats.If creepy films set on the London Underground are your bag, or you just want to play 'spot the tube location' them pick this up on DVD when it hits a bargain bin. If you are looking for classic horror, go and dig up a copy of Death Line (aka Raw Meat).If you are looking for a quality well written and acted film, you will need to change trains.....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03340377c78e4fe7bece0e89a3ba8069",
            "input": "I didn't feel as if I'd been raped like I did with THE ENCHANTED CHRISTMAS,but BELLE'S MAGICAL WORLD is still the antithesis of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST. Like CHRISTMAS,BMW hates its audience,although not to such an extreme degree. It's ugly,uncanonical,idiotic,and the writing is horrifically bad.None of the stories work. These are not the characters we loved from BATB at all,they're a bunch of pod people. I wanted to dissect it,but after a few minutes,I gave up,because no one in their right mind would take this claptrap seriously. What we have here are three stories. \"The Perfect Word\" is an overbearing,ponderous study of forgiveness. \"Fifi's Folly\" only works if you can accept that Babette's name is actually Fifi and that she's a closet James Bond villainess and that Lumiere is an idiot concerning women. \"Broken Wing\" (or \"Broken Wind\" as I like to call it) is probably the most heinous of the bunch. Beast hates birds? Since WHEN? Don't watch this crap- every copy of this video deserves to be cremated. BEAUTY AND THE BEAST is still a cinematic classic,a transcendent celebration of love,art, intelligence and the human soul.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e1bcf0052924ada8bc2f8ccbe5f4ba6",
            "input": "NYC, 2022: The Greenhouse effect, vanished oceans, grinding unemployment and scarcity of water, power and food.. and New York's population has topped 40 million. This is a little gem of a picture, not least because a resource-depleted future is a reality for us 21st Century citizens. The low-budget opening titles of this movie are great: set to music, a low-tech 'tape-slide' sequence composed entirely of archive stills from the dawn of photography right up to 1973, depicts an unspoiled American pastoral developing into a polluted and crowded Hell in less than 2 minutes. Succinct and unambiguous, it's truly memorable. Budget limitations are also behind rather unimaginative cinematography and other constraints, at odds with the story's brilliant premise. The police station sequences are like an episode of some 70's TV detective show, and the other interior sets look basic at best. The budget probably all went on trying to 'futurise' the Soylent Executive's 'Chelsea West' apartment with state-of-the art goodies, meaning the other costumes are perfunctory, some establishing shots are bizarrely underpopulated and the daytime exteriors seemingly all shot through a smoke filter.The memorable scene where Sol and Thorn (Charlton Heston) share a meal of expensive and rare food neatly summarises their society: They enjoy real bourbon, lettuce, celery, tomato, apple, and beef, and we really sense their lip-smacking appreciation of someone else's wealthy privileges.Robinson's pivotal death scene, in which his character is willingly euthenased at a place called 'Home', depicts him immersed in images of the world's once-beautiful flora and fauna as he remembered them, beautifully contrasted with the jaundiced Thorn's dawning realization that the future has been bankrupted, among other horrors.This is one smart film, and its core message is as pertinent today as it was in the early 70s. Yes, I know we're not eating the dead yet, but with our resource-sapping longevity, spiraling poverty gap, corporate global capitalism and unchecked habitat destruction leading to climate change, the lasting prediction of 'Soylent Green' may come to pass.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b7d0ce610764fdcbef710b1b229d1c1",
            "input": "I was in physical pain watching the eyes of the cast as they participated in this sham. Bad dialogue, worse (worst) acting, lifeless all the way, and the cast knew it. The two preceding movies which this attempted to copy had life, sparkle, and were captivating.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff47931e3a5041ccbfeb99a209cae360",
            "input": "Elisha Cuthbert plays Sue a fourteen year old girl who has lost her mother and finds it hard to communicate with her father, until one day in the basement of her apartment she finds a secret magic elevator which takes her to back to the late 18th century were she meets two other children who have lost their father and face poverty...I was clicking through the channels and found this..I read the synopsis and suddenly saw Elisha Cuthbert...I thought okay....and watched the movie.. i didn't realise Elisha had done films before....'The Girl Next Door and 24' Elisha provides a satisfactory performance, the plot is a little cheesy but the film works...Its amazing how this young girl went on to become the Hottest babe in Hollywood!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c46226f34b24c56bb949b77683180ef",
            "input": "with very little screen time and money, Dan Katzir manages to do so much. This movie, in its heart-warming simplicity, touches the beauty of love from a fresh angle. rejuvinated lust",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bcd72a64c8a34604b7d21dddb657bb85",
            "input": "Having the In-Laws over for the weekend? Then this is the film to hasten their departure, failing that it will induce a catatonic state to bring a welcome relief from constant nagging.The film is supposedly set on board a luxury cruise ship, which is more superannuated car ferry; the plot has more holes than the average colander and a cast dredged from the depths of the celebrity D list. An interesting piece of added amusement is playing \"Spot the Villain\" as passengers join the ship. You won't be wrong!!!! With a script that sinks faster than a brick, clichéd set pieces and copious amounts of raspberry jam doubling as blood this film attempts to encompass the genres of thriller, action movie and gore-fest and simultaneously fails to fulfil any of them.A must watch film, if only to laugh at how bad it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ce7b7820a03470cb5ec765cffc61aa2",
            "input": "Is Miike like Chabrol, alternating art with dreck, sometimes confusing the two? Does he match the fifty/fifty rate some claim for Chabrol? Do we see here too much or too little Miike? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. But I could easily fill ten lines just citing Chakushin ari's (One Missed Call's) steals, allusions, and clichés. Others here will hit on most of them, though not perhaps Ochiai's Saimin (Hypnosis) for the sleazy telecast taunting things supernatural. Only once, when Yumi takes the zombie-like mother in her arms, did One Missed Call startle me a little.One other point of interest: Renji Ishibashi (looks like Christopher Walken) as the detective. Ishibashi in Audition's abusive back story, and as Dead or Alive's Boss Aoki of the vat of excrement drowning and more, may be the most convincingly evil character actor I've ever seen. So here he's a cop.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4891e1eefd3f40e0a9907973ae20e7b7",
            "input": "I married a Japanese woman 14 years ago. We're still together.However in the 1950's it would never have been as easy.Life in the military had been mined for action, drama, and comedy for years by this point. Mined to death. The mixed relationships gave it new ground to cover. This is old hat today, but then...? Marrying an Asian back then meant you either owed somebody something or you were a freak of some sort. This touched on both possibilities along with the third. Maybe it IS love? Brando did his usual good job. Garner did a better job than he usually does. He's good, but this showed how good he could be. Umecki-chan had a helluva debut here and while I think she earned her statue, she didn't really stretch. It was a role that no one who hadn't been overseas would have recognized and the newness was the corker.The real scene stealer was Red Buttons. Red was the best thing in this film. Bank on it. And the Japanese lifestyles were shown in an admirable light as well.A classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a28161cabf54be69f2cfd849ad14298",
            "input": "What more could I say? The Americans totally hated it because the U.S. cut was so bad, although you could detect the underlying goodwill in it.Talking about the U.S. theatrical release(along with the newly released Blu-ray Disc version), it's faster and tighter than HK cut, the background musics were all changed from the dark, grim HK musics to Hip-hop musics; and there were a lot of gruesome scenes cut out. Though, the dubbing was a notable job given that they tried to capture the original actor's voice and tone. But, the problem is Hak Hap(Black Mask) the movie was designed and meant to be dark, grim, super-disturbing and totally gruesome. Very unfortunately the U.S. release just skimmed the cream they wanted, which in return completely changed the movie's undertone(HK release was rated 18+) to be even more comical and amateurish.Now let's talk about the original HK release. This movie is like a hidden gem, a prototype for the whole \"matrix\" tide and era. The fighting scenes are totally awesome even the camera works were a bit \"old-school\" among HK movies. However the style the movie created was a unique blend of Kungfu and pop culture. With all the leather, black costumes and decorations, this movie features a batman-like superhero in a black mask against a run-of-the-mill gang of multinational super-soldiers lead by a punk heavy metal rock star boss. Yes it sounds like imaginations of a retarded child, but it works. It's so impressive that the whole movie's gonna give you nightmares featuring foreigners fighting a bloodbath battle in leather coats. In year 2002 they made a sequel which had a PG-13 rating, but without Jet Li and Liu Qing Yun. And you know how bad that was because Li and Liu were the core characters in the movie and had strong personalities and an interesting friendship. And, did I happen to mention Francois Yip? Her roundhouse kick was totally cool, even cooler than the villain boss because she didn't use a stuntman for all the fighting. Did I mention she was also smoking hot? Anyway, there are a lot of things to like about the movie.However, the movie also suffered from a lot of problems. First off, it's a mediocre script made at its best potential, which means this production team deserved a better screen-writer. There are a lot climaxes in the entire 100 minutes but they often felt like far-fetched and don't totally make senses to the audiences(US version was even worse because all the character developments were cut). Anyway, you can't ask too much out of a comic-inspired action movie. Also, this movie is entirely improper for children. I won't recommend it to you if you are less than 20 years old. It's saturated with disturbing contents including blood, gore, sado-maso costumes, extreme brutal violence and so on. Along with the style of the movie, it can be called a wet dream for heavy-metal rock music fans and action fans. (the U.S. cut was milder, but if you want to see it, see the HK release for what it is.) 7/10. Status: inspiring, hidden, undervalued, adult.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac59354e49da4ddcb16fef13e1c1e0a9",
            "input": "Way back when I was renting videos for free I picked this one up. OOPS The things I wanted to mention outside the summary already given were these. 1: Someone who had a lot to do with making this movie had a strange and sick fascination for food, it was gross and unecessary. 2: There is some kind of a soundtrack in the background of the film that seems to be there the entire time and by the way I felt for days after viewing this trash I figure they had something subliminal going on in the track. Either that or it was just traumatisingly bad or both. Many times throughout the movie you can tell the writer and director did not have much experience or talent. And don't even ask about the acting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0260e332bb2e4a338eb0e60d5c67ece6",
            "input": "SLIGHT SPOILERS (but it doesn't matter anyway).An exercise in gobblygook of catastrophic proportions not even worthy of the l0 lines I need to put these remarks on the netwaves. This is the single worst episode of the Masters series to date and the first that qualifies for the defunct Mystery Science Theatre treatment. Even if it took me a full half hour to realize the intended ironic angle, it was still a very lame mess. Its sole value lies in the perspective that forces one to realize that in addition to gore and ugly masks the genre only succeeds when the classic cinematic notions of photography and lighting, dialogue and acting, editing and timing are put to use. Here they are absent and John Carpenter is no master. Period. And no trite analysis of the easy social comment herein will change that. Oddly, Carpenter never has been anything more than a B director, but at least such films as 'Fog' and 'The Thing' had terrific atmosphere (the latter is one of my cult favorites).Abominable acting. Camera angles stuck in cement. Tensionless rhythm. Yet perhaps the single most obnoxious element of the episode is the storyline which of course JC cannot really be blamed for (unless the writers were buddies of Cody.) The initial two minute slo-mo of a girl running through a forest only to be nearly run over by a would be Scully-Mulder duo is the first and last thing that works in the film. But come on, a girl hurtling through a deserted woods to nowhere in particular in desperate need of an abortion fortuitously rendez-vous with the fender of a pair of 'women's rights' MDs whose clinic just happens to be at the end of the road around the corner. Oh, and I won't even nitpick about how the doc whips the accidentee into the car and speeds away at 0 to 60 in six seconds. Does wonders for possible broken ribs or concussion.Then things fall apart real quick. The vacuous dialogue \"I just want to help you\", the interminably sluggish back and forth at the gate, grandiose battle tactics like cutting the telephone line (in the age of cell phones?) followed by the the shoot-out: a born-again Ramboesque clinic director vs Ron Perlman and the high school bullpen out for a few kicks at Easter break. Another lovely line: \"So what are we going to do?\" from the kid who had just been sitting on a pile of assault rifles in the back of the van. Er, no it isn't yet pheasant season. So who needs those teen boys anyway. What about the good old tried and true method of the lone lunatic who bashes his way through the gate with his all-American SUV?As for the exchange of bullets scenes themselves, the cuts here were as stiff as the staccato of a DC comics strip. All that was lacking were the Wham, Bam, and Whiz of the balloon titles. And all to the tune of a soundtrack worthy of an old Mannix episode.At one point we learn that Daddy isn't really the daddy, but at this point we haven't been led to care much any more either. This story's single source of drama is the conflict between the pro-life father and his pregnant daughter who is only thankful she's not having twins. Yet there is not a single scene, flashback or not, where they are actually ever found together. They remain mere abstractions to each other throughout.With the exception of the gatekeeper every single one of the characters is absolutely dislikeable. Bland, hysterical, dull-headed, macho. As perfectly flat as human wallpaper can be. None of the doctors seem to have anything medical about them. And there's that bickering Dad who rails at his pregnant daughter as though he himself were the stressed out boyfriend. He fortunately got his. There are two great MST-worthy comic moments: the gusher when Angelica's plumbing goes out and later the new-born lobster with a glued on baby's head. Also cute was Angelica's rugby ball belly before she finally popped the right-to-life little monster from Hell. As for that audacious male abortion scene...well, they should have retained Miike's episode and banned this one instead.In short, a 3rd rate Rosemary's Baby meets Alien set on the turf of a M.A.S.H. episode. This stinker alone, appreciable only to today's permissive under-16 generation, will assure as someone else said here, that this series will not be renewed for a third season. A real shame, since there have been a number of brilliant productions, including such really decent spoofs as Dante's 'Homecoming' or McKee's deliciously quirky 'Sick Girl'. Not to mention the superb imagery of Malone's 'Fairhaired Child'.Sorry John Carpenter, I believe your directing days are over. It's time to run for President.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9da06f6e8468437c83e14b0ae6e9effe",
            "input": "This film has to be the worst I have ever seen. The title of the film deceives the audience into thinking there maybe hope. The story line of the film is laughable at best, with the acting so poor you just have to cringe. The title 'Zombie Nation' implies a hoard of zombies when in fact there are six in total. This cannot be categorised as a horror film due to the introduction of cheesy 80's music when the zombies 'attack'. The zombies actually talk and act like human beings in the film with the only difference being the make up which looks like something out a La Roux video. If you ever get the chance to buy this film then do so, then burn the copy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4931dfdfe6144560ba21b21356c649bb",
            "input": "I'll give writer/director William Gove credit for finding someone to finance this ill-conceived \"thriller.\" A good argument for not wasting money subscribing to HBO, let alone buying DVDs based on cover art and blurbs. A pedestrian Dennis Hopper and a game Richard Grieco add nothing significant to their resumes, although the art direction is not half bad. The dialogue will leave you grimacing with wonder at its conceit; this is storytelling at its worst. No tension, no suspense, no dread, no fear, no empathy, no catharsis, no nothing. A few attractive and often nude females spice up the boredom, but this is definitely a film best seen as a trailer. I feel sorry for the guy who greenlighted this thing. Good for late-night, zoned-out viewing only. You have been warned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f62227ed40d14e509c9aa37dd98ef93c",
            "input": "Reed Diamond plays a man suffering from amnesia who's been in a mental asylum for over a decade after he was found wondering the back roads with blood on his hands. The doctors want to test out an experimental new drug that'll return his lost memories if it works. But when the drugs give him hallucinations of a demon, he chooses to escape instead. While outside he befriends a young boy whose stepfather (Greg Grunberg) mistreats his mother, won't let her near the darkroom in his basement & acts suspicious in general.While the general 'mystery' of the film is a tad easy to identify way before it's revealed, I found Mr. Diamond's acting to be enthralling enough to keep my attention throughout. (In the interest of full disclosure, I've been a huge fan of his since Homicide and his brief, but extremely pivotal, role in The Shield up through Journeyman & Dollhouse) Not a great film nor a good one, but serviceable enough. Although I did like it better than the previous films that I've seen from Director/writer Michael Hurst (Room 6, Pumkinhead 4, Mansquito)Eye Candy: one fleeting pair of boobs in a hallucinationMy Grade: C-",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-774b676d16404ee8a5e52671ea7cbe79",
            "input": "This is easily a 9. Michel Serrault, known more for comic roles in the earlier part of his acting career, does a stunning, even worryingly stunning job of impersonating Dr Petiot, a legendary French serial killer.He is just so believable at every and any moment in the film, that the actor completely disappears behind the character - only the very best ever achieve this feat, and when they do it is only in a handful of parts at best.The whole story (a real story which happened in 20th century France) is so powerful, so sinister - it makes for a very strong film that one remembers for a long, long time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-418af8d8fdbd47e6b339f5054d09bffe",
            "input": "This one probably does not fit in the bottom of the barrel of mediocre Slasher movies but it's surely a damn bad movie.The Holiday premise made it kind of interesting but after the first scenes the movie demonstrates it's poor production values and stupid plot. I mean, the sub-genre was at the moment all about an unseen maniac slashing teens for no apparent reasons but this one took it too far. There is absolutely no coherence in the events or nothing else to add.The clichès are more than boring, the gore is minimal, and so does the mystery.This is a fairly mediocre slasher entry that shouldn't be hyped even if it has a video nastie label.I am truly disappointed by this overrated piece of trash.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c0330b7b78d40fd853b35e634216fb9",
            "input": "I just want to say that I am so glad somebody finally spilled the beans on this movie. Bravo \"The Spaz\", Bravo! This movie is a ridiculous farce of film-making. Especially for a student film! I just want to give credit to the Spazz for taking the absurd amount of time a care to find such a rare picture, and then TO COMMENT ON IT! Most people I know don't have that kind of time, especially so few will end of reading it. Kudos to you sir! Anyway, the movie follows a thin storyline that is at the least unbelievable and just plain silly. I understand the idea behind creating a satire of Charlie's Angels but why hire such atrocious actresses! Also, what kind of director has himself act, write, produce and also edit the picture! Choose one job and put all your love into it man! It's such a shame because I hear he made a good movie about a killer toothbrush. Again, thanks to the Spazz for pulling back the curtain on this film, people like you are a rare find.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-793b14129926425581274e3a42599d95",
            "input": "I'm hearing rumors of an upcoming \"Leonard Nimoy Demonstrates the Blu-ray Disc\". With advances over the past 25 years ranging from Steady-cam to CGI, it'll be interesting to see if the franchise can be reinvigorated. I just hope it helps to remove the bad taste left in my mouth by that whole Magnavision demonstration fiasco.And yes... \"Leonard Nimoy Demonstrates the Betamax VCR\" was a brilliant milestone in entertainment history. After the tentative \"Leonard Nimoy Demonstrates the Compact Cassette\" and the downright tacky \"Leonard Nimoy Demonstrates the 8-Track Tape\", who would have expected such a glorious piece of cinema? I'm weeping right now just thinking about it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81b928c8798c441bbd125426863b4994",
            "input": "I've seen this movie, when I was traveling in Brazil. I found it difficult to really understand Brazilian culture and society, because it has so many regional and class differences. To see this movie in Sao Paulo itself was a revelation. It shows something of the everyday life of many Brazilians. On the other side, it is sometimes a little bit over-dramatized. And that's the only negative comment I have on this film. It's sometimes too much, too much sex, too many murders and too much cynicism for one film. The director could film some things a bit more subtle, it would make the film more effective.Despite this I liked the movie and the way the story unravels itself. The characters are complex, and very much like real-life people. Not pretty American actors and actresses with a lot of cosmetics, but people who could be ugly and beautiful at the same time. That makes the film realistic, even when the story is not that convincing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3375d096c3ff4de5ae1188903234cd34",
            "input": "I see quite a few positive reviews on this board, trying to revive this film from its lackluster status and starting a cult following. I see the usual ranting--\"I guess this movie is just not for the easily offended,\" \"This movie is not Shakespeare,\" etc. Guess what? Neither was \"Road Trip\"! And I laughed my a** off during that movie! There's a way to make a crude, tasteless comedy and deliver laughs; and there's a way to...just make it crude and tasteless. \"Whipped\" tries to be \"Swingers\" without the wit or intelligence. It seems to have been written through the puerile eyes of a 14-year-old boy. For God's sake, the characters in this movie are supposed to be white-collar, upright citizens--and they talk like some of the idiots I knew in freshman year of high school! The dialogue is laced--more like drowned--with four-letter words. You would think that people of their status would have SOME degree of intelligence--and a more extensive vocabulary. Just watch a Whit Stillman film and you'll see the difference. Not to mention the fact that the dialogue sounds totally unrealistic and downright cartoonish. If you know any successful, white-collar businessmen who speak like the characters in this movie--please let me know and introduce me to them. Their annoying sexual banter is equivalent to that of standard locker room chat among teens just arriving at puberty. There is absolutely NO insight into relationships, sex or...anything!!! It's just a poor excuse to showcase an array of extremely--and don't take the word \"extremely\" for granted, because I mean it with all my heart--crude gags. These are gags with no substance. Gags that are meant more for groans than laughs. The scene at the end between Amanda Peet and her girlfriends was totally un-called for and totally unconvincing. There are some movies that involve interaction among females that were written by (straight) men and play out wonderfully. This scene involves a barrage of sexual metaphors and gestures. It involves the kind of dialogue you can never imagine leaving a woman's mouth. It was one of those noticeably-written-by-a-guy scenes. I wasn't believing it for a second. \"Whipped\" is purely a sick male fantasy that's as flat as it is annoying. I got (very) few laughs out of this utterly forgettable comedy, and those were probably a result of desperation. When you're not laughing for a long period of time, you desperately look for humor in the most trivial things. So I wouldn't mark that down as a positive.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab5ef59333d04243bd629439c55c7974",
            "input": "It's hard to find an outright bad historical drama that's based on the life of any number of British monarchs. Just take a well respected British or Australian actor, make things look pretty, and you're guaranteed a formula for Oscar success.The Young Victoria is no exception, getting just about everything right, the cinematography striking and beautiful, with soft lights and lush colors and fabrics. Starring Emily Blunt in a role she can finally soar in, the film begins with Victoria's 18th birthday and moves through the intrigue and issues that surrounded her eventual rise to the throne and her famous marriage to Prince Albert (Rupert Friend). As the young Victoria herself laments, she's moved like a chess pawn by a variety of parties as she finds her footing and her voice as one of Britain's most influential rulers.While this moving around the chess board is fairly typical territory, it is the development of Victoria's relationship with Albert that makes the film slightly more interesting. I confess: I have a degree in history with a specialization in the Victorian era, so I'm a bit attached to these figures. Despite their many flaws as rulers, Victoria and Albert were some of the first leaders devoted to improving civilization for their people. They left their legacy in the arts, in public health and education, and in Victoria's conservative views and mourning culture after Albert's death. But these things are only briefly hinted at during the film.It is fairly well established that Victoria and Albert were not only madly in love, but held a level of respect for each other not usually seen between monarchs in arranged marriages. Even if it did occur behind the scenes, their's was certainly one of the best known. Blunt and and Friend have just the right type of chemistry to do the famous pair justice, the proper mix of restraint and desperation. It's a different love, not usually shown on screen, especially in this sort of film. It's encouraging to finally see a relationship in which man and woman are on a equal playing field.But we don't get to see that love enough. While the filmmakers try to fit the affair amongst the political trappings, it doesn't quite build up the sort of momentum needed to keep the tension high. Also, without delving into the more advanced important public work of the pair, things feel a bit in limbo, superficial instead of intimate, and sometimes confusing. It's not as big an issue during the film, but afterward, the effects wear off rather quickly and you find yourself trying to remember what you just watched, despite the perfect performances by the leads, most noticeably Blunt who even captures the famous monarch's expressions.For as much as it tries, Victoria succeeds on many levels but lacks that certain sparkle that would take it from solid to classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f2d0bdc49e14e6e932b6f5fa969b6ef",
            "input": "Watch on the Rhine is one of the best anti-nazi propaganda films made during World War Two. Paul Lukas was certainly deserving of his Oscar. Bette Davis shines brilliantly as the great actress and beauty she was. I would recommend this film to those interested in that era, and, of course, the fabulous films of the late, great, Ms. Bette Davis.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc9e19e3339c4d718f871e80ad7de4f2",
            "input": "I just watched this film 15 minutes ago, and I still have no idea what I just watched. Mainly I think it's a film about an internet S&M \"star\" of CD Roms that are about as realistic as flash cartoons online. She's murdered by someone, which causes her sister and a crack team of 2 FBI agents to investigate the death. The local homicide division of Big City, USA is also investigating, though most of his work comes by the way of oogling the CD ROMs which he claims are as realistic \"as the real thing\". I know. Wow.Michael Madsen is the only one in the film that has any kind of credits behind him. He's in the film for about 15 minutes, and half of that is him banging the main girl for seemingly no apparent reason. I won't even explain the ending, because quite frankly I can't make it out myself. But before the final scene, we're treated to a 3 or 4 minute montage of everything in the film. Honestly, they could have ran that then the final scene and it would have been the same effect with the cross eyed direction and all.All in all, stay away from this film. I got it because I love bad movies and I love Michael Madsen. I really could have used that 80 some minutes on something else and have been more satisfied. Like, playing that game with a knife where you jab at your hand repeatedly. That for 80 minutes would be much more entertaining.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2fbb9a7fd0d340648fe57eaf70e6b317",
            "input": "I'm fan of ART, I like anything about Art, I like paintings, sculptures, etc. This movie shows it, so I like it a lot, it shows how a woman wants to paint anything about Art, especially naked bodies, but she can't do it because of her strict family (father), at the beginning of the movie she painted herself naked, but she wanted a man for her paintings, but her family didn't let her paint naked men because it's against the moral. Even so Artemisia could paint her boyfriend and her art teacher completely naked. She falls in love with her art teacher, and it seems the art teacher is absolutely in love with her too, so at the ending he sacrifices his freedom for hers by lying. He said that he raped her, but it wasn't true. Artemisia fell in love with him, but if she says that she will suffer a lot, because in the trial in which Artemisia, her father and the Art teacher were, somebody was hurting her artistic hands to say the truth. I think this a great movie about ART, and an artistic love, It's worth watching. Valentina Cervi is great as Artemisia, she acts very well, I also like her performance in \"The portrait of a lady\" as Pansy Osmond. 8.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25709b3a0f9846fc97d5bd7068353e4d",
            "input": "The earlier part of the film was rather enjoyable but towards the end it became trite. Although Turturro is an actor I generally like, his Luzhin often resembled a bad Rain Man impression and the portrayal of the genius as a semi-autistic man was annoying. Overall it seems as if this film is trying to hard and ends up looking pompous in spite of mostly fine performances.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-24815996473c45f397dd58c27906db14",
            "input": "Entertainment Tonight has been going down hill for the last few years, but as of last night (Aug 17th 2006) they reached a new low.In an effort to try to hype up their broadcast, they decided to post actual photos of JonBenet Ramsey's body in their teasers last night ...saying \"Pictures from the case you have never seen before\". The two photos were graphic and very disturbing. One was of the side of her face and head/neck and you could clearly see the cord that was used to strangle her around her neck, and bruising on her face. This was so hideously awful, I could not believe it. How has this got to do with ANYTHING remotely related to Hollywood Entertainment?? Nothing!! They have dropped their level of dignity and values to a new low....and it shows. This used to be THE premiere show to watch...and it's just garbage now.I will watch Access Hollywood from now on.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7583c1394e84b20810cf44c7532fa0e",
            "input": "THE. WORST. FILM. EVER. MADE.After watching this supposedly gay made film, I suspect someone rounded up a brain damaged half blind neo-nazi and had him make the worst gay film ever, all in some deluded attempt to attack gay culture. I had to stop the movie and call a friend to come over just so I had someone to scoff at when I paused the movie out of shock, disbelief and outrage at such sheer stupidity.On top of all the horrible writing and acting and illogical and stupid plot, its just a poorly made film. A dog with a handycam tied to its tail could have churned out better.Seriously, after reading the few positive reviews this movie has here, I suspect the writer must have a half a dozen IMDb accounts. Anyone who says this film is even watchable as anything other than a joke, is a liar or being paid heavily to say so.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22ba594ee5ea44918405a435d2f5a804",
            "input": "There are too many new styles of the sitcom but the one that works best is the old fashioned way with an audience and indoor set. That 70's Show is a great example. When the show came on the air, nobody really heard of Kurtwood Smith and Debra Jo Rupp much less the adolescents played wonderfully by Topher Grace and Ashton Kushton (both of them are leaving the show this year to pursue other interests) I wish Topher would stay around because the show began about his character, Eric, and his close circle of friends. Ashton is already the John Travolta of our time. Remember when John was in love with Diana Hyland from Eight Is Enough, think of Ashton with Demi Moore. The cast of actors were never known to us which is a good thing because a celebrity cast member can spoil it. I miss Mo Gaffney who played Don's girlfriend Joanne. I miss Lisa Robin Kelly as the original Laurie, the replacement could not match her and I am sorry about that. I liked the casting of Tommy Chong as the wasted but beloved father figure to Steven Hyde. I loved watching Tanya Roberts besides Charlie's Angels. I loved Brooke Shields playing Jackie's mom. She really showed her acting talent before heading to Broadway. This show has been a delight with many surprises. I hope this show lasts longer even though 2 of their cast members are leaving but I hope they don't stay too far away too long. I wish the show's creators, Bonnie and Terry Turner, who also created my other favorite show, Third Rock from The Sun, is more successful on Fox than they were on NBC which sabotaged their show. The Turners are not dummies and I hope they create more shows like this in the future.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7f429e1b0d74e22916935aacdfbab06",
            "input": "DOUBLE EXPOSURE was a tremendous surprise. It contains outstanding acting (particularly from the underrated Callan), fine cinematography and a compelling storyline. In other words, it's one of the finest horror efforts to emerge from the 1980s.Callan plays a fashion photographer who experiences dreams of murdering his models, at a time when he is reunited with his psychologically volatile brother (who happens to be missing an arm and a leg). When the models Callan dreams about killing actually turn up dead, the photographer begins to doubt his own sanity... but there is more to the picture than he is seeing.This film never received the praise it deserves. Most critics and filmgoers lump it in with the horde of slasher films released at the same time, but it stands high above the bulk of that sorry lot. It's clever and unique, which isn't something one can comfortably say about most films of this genre, but it's also passionately crafted and performed. DOUBLE EXPOSURE is a gem of its kind.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e60c889f6cdf4d649874a5d794698759",
            "input": "just saw this exquisite 1982 movie Return of the Soldier, based on Rebecca West's novel. Its about a shell-shocked fortyish Captain who doesn't even tell his wife he has returned to British soil, but remains in a hospital in London. He's lost his memory and is a boy again, with a lingering yen for the lower class sweetheart he pursued 25 years earlier. Its a delicate story. He is lingering in his boyhood, while the reader discovers his wife is an unbearable, aspiring socialite who wants him to resume his place in society. Living with them is his cousin Jenny, who loved Chris Baldry the soldier, when they were growing up as playmates, but has settled into spinsterhood. The lower class woman, played by Glenda Jackson, is Margaret Gray. It is SHE who is notified that Chris is back in England. Chris' wife Kitty is shocked when Mrs. Gray comes to tell her that Chris is in a hospital in London. Kitty (Julie Christie) is vacuous and snobbish. Why, she asks herself, was this other woman sent a telegraph about Chris rather than her? Chris has forgotten totally about Kitty. He wants to renew his relationship with Margaret. The now married Margaret is reluctant to meet him, but then does and continues to meet with him. There is a psychiatrist (Ian Holm) who warns Kitty and Jenny that Chris' temporary happiness with Margaret will disappear if he 'cures' him. Jenny realizes how empty Kitty is for Chris and forms a secret loving alliance through Margaret. They both are in love with him. Jenny wants to help. Late in the film Kitty reveals that Chris and she had a boy who died five years ago. Telling Chris this, weighs the Shrink, will certainly restore him to 'normal.' But is this a good idea? Chris, barely aware that he and Kitty were ever married, is unaware of his child and the child's death. The psychiatrist, just learning of the child, believes such knowledge will restore Chris. Jenny and Margaret have Chris all to themselves because Kitty believes he is faking and refuses to accept Chris's illness in reverting to his youth in his forties. The film leaves her mostly out of consideration concerning whats to be done with Chris.But Jenny and Margaret, in the child's perfectly maintained bedroom- with Kitty too in the novel, but not in the screenplay- discuss what they believe should be done about Chris from their separate perspectives. Margaret is the critical one here, because, though married, she has half fallen in love with Chris again. Jenny's social stature, Jenny believes, will be threatened if Chris does not right himself. She does not reveal this to Margaret, however. Margaret decides, looking ahead, that Chris cannot maintain his fantasy over time, but must return to something like a real life. While Kitty and Jenny look on from the window of the house, Margaret approaches Chris outside and tells him of his lost son. The buoyant war victim's head sinks, his shoulders slump, he looks away. He walks dejectedly toward the house. FinI read some criticism of this first novel of Rebecca West. The novel was written something after the first war. The movie is never quite clear who Jenny is, his cousin or his sister. It would be more rousing if she were his sister, of course. The criticism doesn't make it clear either. I'm sure West in her novel, makes sure Jenny is her cousin, not her sister. West is no Henry Miller nor an Anais Nin, whose book Incest (about her relationship with her father as an adult to get even with him for molesting her as a child) I considered reading, but then decided against. Rebecca the author has a need to restore Chris too. She too has outposts in her head for the Society her novel excoriates first but finally embraces once more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4aaedc86d5974211a373209d794f00e7",
            "input": "I was in such high hopes of seeing an adaptation of a classic story like the Arabian Nights. Instead i was disappointed in a film that failed to keep my attention from the very beginning, even though i tried watching it twice!! It was a bonus that Caradine was in this movie but it didn't amount to much as the actors lacked likability. For something a little similar Zorro with Anthony Hopkins and Bandaras is much better for action, comic moments and overall enjoyability.OK, so Son of the Dragon has many possible fans out there, but if your looking for something to wow about in terms of martial arts and plot line you wont get it. If you just want the kids to settle down on a Sunday afternoon then maybe this it for you along with the 3 ninjas.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-324f6f8fed434c278a0bc4c943b987ed",
            "input": "The Finnish version of Robert Altman's \"Short Cuts\", set in the small rural town of Äänekoski. The episodes present a kaleidoscope of the eternal events, problems and emotions of human life: joy and love, deception and disillusionment, hopelessness and death. I was particularly impressed by two episodes. The first is the story of the young waitress, who tries to stir up a romance for his co-workers: she radiates an overwhelming joy of love and life. The other episode presents and old man dying in a hospital and his wife trying to help him die with dignity. Particularly striking is the way the old couple have to fight their way against the humiliating practices of the hospital and their loneliness contrasted with the \"routines\" of the hospital crew (despite the signs of occasional empathy). Compared with Altman's classic, this movie is perhaps less professional, but it is definitely a great piece of art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c496f274d824906a28f61aa0927bdf4",
            "input": "To quote Flik, that was my reaction exactly: Wow...you're perfect! This is the best movie! I think I can even say it's become my favorite movie ever, even. Wow. I tell you what, wow.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa140134568b49b1911a0c2334462768",
            "input": "At first sight, Who's Singing Over There just seems to be an absurd and excellent comedy… with only a kind of unusual, quiet and slow motion : what a mistake ! Beginning with two singers on a desert landscape, then a bus and a wonderful bunch of actors, it hides a gem !The folded story, and a false rhythm induces you to think, yes it is comic, but just lets you guess it will be a gentle kind of movie. Not at all : very funny by instant, dark subtle cynical on others, its development surprises you all along the story… Very ingeniously and cleverly presented, all the characters are important, and the actors give them full life.And what is astonishing, it's based on deep observation, great mastering of the camera work and has a great meanings, and really everything, the general direction and how also the details are presented, that it simply makes you forget it's a movie: it is like to watch a kind human society, you yet don't know,shot by a friend behind a camera.And you're the one behind him. It is simple, and simply exceptional !Don't misunderstand me; in no way that would means the script , the quality of picture, the music score have a kind of amateurish way, no, no ! It's great Art ! Because it flows like a river… From high up in the mountain, down to the sea, with all the different sort of grounds and peregrinations that a real river will face on its journey to the sea… from a tiny thing to a main stream.This metaphoric image I used is the very best way I can find to explain all the charm that has Who's Singing Over There. For me, again, I take the hammer : simply exceptional...I've seen that The Director is the one who made Chat Blanc/Chat Noir, which I know is quiet famous… But as I yet didn't see it, I had no idea about this gentleman.Others reviewers wrote dithyrambical comments on that film, I fully agree !European Eastern Cinema is not well know because seldom translated, but I am lucky to have this exemplar one in original language, with good English subtitles. All in all : deep, delicious and exceptional...For fast and empty exploding types and special effect buffs, avoid it at any cost, it may be too subtle and good for you !But if you're interested in different genres and/or classics, I guess you won't regret this one, and in case of buying, it will have good companionship in your personal DVD library, with such no less than merited big names like Billy Wilder, Lubitsch, or Sacha Guitry among some of my preferred directors . At least for this movie !***A film is never really good unless the camera is an eyes in the head of a poet Orson Welles***",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b392d4c2ce5b44fdb6e19d2f0492bb60",
            "input": "Imagine the worst A-team episode Add even more bad taste Remove humor and you might get an idea of how despicable this movie is ! Looks like a teenager stole Daddy's Camcorder and filmed the explosion of his little sister Barbie model house. Pathetic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f38fd4d6ecf942eaa50417b7c16b1d2d",
            "input": "I'm Irish and I've been living in Denmark for a while so I was looking forward to going home last week so I could see Intermission. And I will go on record as saying:THIS FILM IS AWFUL.It is not quite as bad a something like \"The Most Fertile Man in Ireland\" but it definitely does not stand up there with other Irish films such as The Commitments, I Went Down or Michael Collins.Some aspects of the film are actually quite funny, such as Colm Meaneys American-style garda. But the film itself is shot completely wrong. The bouncing around of the camera and the constant zoom-in, zoom-out tries to give the film an edgy look as if it were a gritty drama. But it isn't. This is an Irish Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and it should be shot like this. It should have smooth movement from one shot to the next. The film just looks sloppy and thrown together.The performances are okay, given the awful script. A friend of mine said to me like it was like they just followed Colin Farrell around Dublin for a week. He gives a decent display as a Dublin Dirtbag, but it no way compares to his performances in Minority Report, Tigerland or Phone Booth. The best performance was from Dierdre O'Kane who plays a sexually frustrated middle-aged woman who has just been dumped by her bank manager husband for a younger woman. I think she should leave her god-awful stand-up and focus more on her acting.All in all, its does in no way live up to the expectations put on it by the Irish press or deserve to be even considered as one of the best Irish films ever.I'm expecting a backlash from these comments because most people I have spoken to have said it was great. But before you reply, ask yourself: Would think so highly of this movie if it was set in England or America?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-520e5e7bf6d64bc59e0203eabc7b6212",
            "input": "STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning James Dial (Wesley Snipes) is hiding out on his ranch in Montana after failing to capture a notorious terrorist. Then he's approached by the agency again to travel to London to have another go. His target has been apprehended there and is under heavy police protection- but they don't want him merely to capture their man- they want him taken out. All goes well but then the mission gets botched and when a senior police chief, Windsor (Charles Dance) is killed, the blame falls at Dial's feet. Hunted like an animal, he takes refuge in a nearby house and befriends a young girl named Emily (Eliza Bennett) who's dealing with issues of her own and becomes his unwitting sidekick as he goes about clearing his name and working out who betrayed him.This latest Snipes straight to DVD escapade came out of nowhere, with a minimal of publicity even for something so small time (I don't recall seeing any advertisements or trailers for it anywhere.) With this in mind and after Snipes's history of duff DVD efforts, this might have seemed like one which Snoop Dawg would tell you to drop like it's hot. But I felt compelled to give it a go anyway. It doesn't rank among his worst, but it doesn't reach any higher than the standards of some of his better ones (The Detonator, 7 Seconds, says it all, really), either.This is, at best, mildly suspenseful, with a minimal of action, naff all in the way of cool dialogue and Snipes not exactly at his best in the lead role. Likewise, in a main supporting role, it's quite clear Dance has only showed up for the pay cheque as well and this is generally one that none of the cast are going to shout for the hills about on any of their CVs.It says a lot that by the end the only 'contract' that's keeping you interested is when Snipes's will end with Sony and with it an end to any further sub par EL DVD action films. **",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9095de891d934e5cb604199aa9f79c8d",
            "input": "Twelve Monkeys is an insane time-travelling, action packed movie that stars Bruce Willis who plays James Cole, a man who is sent back in time to collect information about the devastating plague that ensues in November of 1996. Unfortunately, he is sent back too far to the year 1990 where everyone believes that he is insane.This movie is thrilling and has great acting performances from Bruce Willis, Brad Pitt and Madeleine Stowe. Twelve monkeys is one of the greatest time travelling movies that I believe anybody can enjoy. Terry Gilliam has created a true masterpiece10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b49f1fd39714d87a8af460ba34de8c9",
            "input": "I felt this movie started out well. The acting was spot on and I felt for all the characters situation, even though the true family unit was not completely revealed. We never got enough info on the father to truly feel his pain for his whole involvement or the build up for his animosity with Tobe. I mean in one scene you see him admiring her for tensity and in another scene he just about takes her head off. Another problem with the movie was it just unraveled and lost all focus by the end, and I was begging for it to just be over with. Any movie with such a long drawn out , and painful ending should never get an automatic rating of 7 or above just for the acting. We are looking at the over all quality of the movie experience. In the case of this movie the end is so bad I seriously contemplated just walking out of the theater. This movie pulled me in then just spit me out.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd5e188c224149e59a0e183921e34abe",
            "input": "I was interested in the topic, and only fans of Drew Barrymore's dancing on David Letterman's desk will find anything remotely interesting in it. OK, she shows some breast (or maybe a body double does). The plot is slashed to bits and the acting is horrible. Neither lead has any material to work with, as the direction of the film leads nowhere. Don't waste your time. See Donnie Darko instead if you want a creepy Drew Barrymore film, and if you want to see another, skip this and see Darko again.The treatment of the Doppelganger legend is absolutely criminal as well. Refer to Charles Williams' novel \"Descent Into Hell\" for something worth considering instead. This is just an excuse to make a B film to go straight to video and suck some life out of people at Blockbuster.What makes any of these people think the acting here was praiseworthy? Give me a break.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f06c2b7b4490417bbff18f4d7e4c202c",
            "input": "Jeux d'enfants or how the film was wrongly translated into English Love me if You Dare is a film made by stupid people and about stupid people. I just don't know how I could expect something worth a look from a film with such plot: Two stupid ignorant kids make a bet that each of them will do something (certainly extremely idiotic) to prove to each other (wtf?) that they are \"cool dudes\". I know that i exaggerated some aspects but that is what the entire film is about. They grow older...and instead of realizing that they are just a couple of alienated weirdos continue to perform their crazy things, thinking that they are great people.One could expect such a film from Hollywood, but France? It is even more offensive to watch the film from the country which created Amelie a couple of years ago, which, btw, the film tries to look like but is far, extremely far away from.Avoid. Avoid. Avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf3cbebc85f84d9eb210c46b27ce25dd",
            "input": "As a former submariner, this was one of the worst submarine movies I have ever seen. First of all, a mutiny aboard any US Naval vessel, particularly a Nuclear Powered Trident submarine in unthinkable. These men are the best of the best and are dedicated to their mission. The responsibility they carry is awesome and they take it very seriously all the way from the Captain to the most junior crew member. I could never see a crew of any ship split their alliance between the Captain and the Executive Officer. An Executive Officer who acted as the Character played by Denzel Washington did would be relieved of his duties and Court Martialed, then drummed from the Navy. It is no surprise the Navy refused to send a technical adviser to help in making this film. Lastly, if any member of a submarine crew made the amount of noise made underway on this vessel they would be severely reprimanded. Submariners learn early in their career to be as quiet as possible to avoid detection. They don't slam doors and even speak quietly and wear soft soled shoes when underway. I was amazed at how loud they portrayed the crew while underway. Loud music would never be tolerated. I know portraying submarine life in reality would not sell movie tickets, but this is over the top to the point of being ridiculous. I would not recommend this movie to anyone.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47bfa3c235034cf0a1bda112ce1dddbc",
            "input": "Truly a disgusting, vile film, with only a small amount of real humour.The character of the father in particular is vulgar in the extreme (intentionally so, obviously), and portrayed in the most pathetic, seedy manner.My wife and I found this film horribly upsetting, with absolutely no redeeming features at all. Frankly, I wish I had never seen it.I consider this British effort to be a sick and gross embarrassment.Those who enjoyed this film have an ability I totally lack: that of rejoicing in a display of deep depravity and squalor.The producers should be ashamed of themselves.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e97cf5bc51346a097fd99c0a197fa1b",
            "input": "I can't imagine anyone would ever, in a million years, want to watch this movie. Not because it was one of the worst ever made (it wasn't), but largely because it's about 20 years old and oh-so-out of the mainstream. I was trying to find out where I saw an actor before and this popped up. So, yeah, a kid stops playing little league because he doesn't like nukes, this prompts major media attention and a quick resolution to the cold war. The end. A fantasy, to be sure, but one so cockeyed it would make John Lennon blush. Since terrorism has replaced communism as the -ism that scares the hell out of us, this movie really has no relevance, except as an (innaccurate) look back at those times. The writing, acting, and film craft are similarly undeveloped. The reason I rated it as highly as I did was because I watched this movie around 50 times while I was 5-6 years old and still have a little place in my heart for it, but I now realize that it doesn't quite cut mustard. So, if the law of large numbers holds true and someone eventually does decide to check out this movie, realize that there are much better ways to spend your time, but also much worse ones. (I will refrain from a John Q. tirade for now.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0c5d9827074403ba81dfd576082f544",
            "input": "Bottom of the barrel, unimaginative, and practically unwatchable remake of THE ROAD WARRIOR. This film follows the exact plot as the Filipino film STRYKER and is worse by far! Bad acting, dialog, effects, dubbing, pacing, action sequences... The list goes on and on. Italy made literally dozens of Road Warrior rip-offs in the early 80's, some good, some bad. This is the worst by far, no contest. Not only was the mood of the film completely bleak and miserable, the experience of sitting through this one is a bore and a half. There was 1 (one) good chase sequence towards the beginning of the movie, and a cool shot of a man holding a hand grenade exploding. But EVERYTHING else about this movie seriously reeks! For actual post-nuke fun, go track down a copy of ENDGAME, AFTER THE FALL OF NEW YORK, or ESCAPE FROM THE BRONX instead. They're much more enjoyable than this rubbish.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-466f5363884d4a96b59fbc279f5b45e2",
            "input": "Enjoyed catching this film on very late late late TV and it kept my interest through out the entire picture. This wonderful creepy, yet mysterious looking English home, with evil looking decorations and weired furniture and rooms that make you wonder just why anyone would want to rent this home or even own it. There are four(4)Tales concerning this house, and each resident of the home meets with all kinds of problems. You will notice the beautiful lake and pond around the home and also the sweet singing of birds, but don't let that fool you, there is horror all over the place. Peter Cushing,\"Black Jack\",'80 gives a great performance as one of the person's living in the home and even Christopher Lee,\"Curse of the Crimson Altar\",68 and his little daughter, Chloe Franks,(Jane Reid) make a wonderful exciting story together, his daughter for some reason loves to read WITCHCRAFT BOOKS! If you love creepy, horrible and mysterious films, with lots of surprises, this is the FILM FOR YOU!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7731cd897be4b82972b042d60760d6c",
            "input": "I haven't read a single IMDb comment for this movie that mentions how the Jewish character in this movie jumped up and down like a little baby as a gun is pointed in his face by a racist skinhead while the movie's lead black character looked in sternness down the barrel of a gun.I don't know how anyone could perceive this as a balanced account of university life. I agree universities are not bastions of tolerance like they are supposed to be and the title would be fitting if Singleton didn't make his characters such broad caricatures.On the surface he tries to portray Ice Cube's character as a bad guy, provoking Remy to become a racist skinhead. But who graduates at the end in the movie's redeeming epilogue? It seems Singleton points at white as either unable to empathize (I didn't say sympathize!) with his fellow black student OR only able to take the path of a racist skinhead. Many people who have been bullied by people of another race do not turn to extreme bigotry.Nor do women who have been raped immediately turn to lesbianism, which is portrayed more as a cult than a lifestyle. Quite honestly what was the point?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16621e07cb0247adacee2add6a07a99c",
            "input": "Every Sunday, a trio of buds get together at a NYC diner to boast about their sexual conquests of the night before. Sometimes they're joined by a newlywed ex-comrade and hoochie hunter who hangs on them like a puling barnacle. They're unabashed horn dogs/corn dogs and Mia, who witnesses them on the prowl, decides that they need to be taught a lesson, dammit. Ergo, she'll date and dump - why not? All three of them! Gasp. What a wild idea. What a radical, naughty gal. Women now have the right to date and sleep around as much as they want to. As much as men do, even! There is one solitary laughable element in \"Whipped\" - namely the fact that not once, during the amigo's detailed discussions of their bodily functions and the tantric talents of the bed partners they trash, do the other customers in the diner turn around and say, \"Dude, we're trying to EAT here.\" Indeed, a heh-heh gag has an older lady eagerly weigh in on the useful sexual properties of certain beverages. A big fat Kermit the Frog \"Sheesh\" to that.It's truly unfortunate that a buddy movie with a great setting, a smart, cute heroine and three possible pairings had to have such a cop-out ending.P.S. - 30 \"whip-oosh\" sound effects to the screenwriter for use of the phrase \"You go, girl\". It was tired in 2000, and it's tired now.Save your time and watch some \"Sex and the City\" reruns...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-972de4bb1cef431aa03e13297edcaaf2",
            "input": "This movie feels like a film project. As though the filmmakers picked out a cross section of society with no experience and got to work. Characters are kind of uninvolved and naive though. Despite this amateurish feel, the movie is effective. It's like a cross-section of life with neighborhood kids trying to realize or nurture their honest sexual feelings. Being raised by a grand-parent, of course from that generation there is shame associated with sexuality. This provides for some predictable but well done conflict. Probably most enjoyable was the way the main character grew a little bit in his Romantic relationship realizing a greater depth to sexual feelings. A good watch but nothing stirring....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4c83f1efe9f4b838c0b62b70086df7c",
            "input": "Ernest Borgnine was so wasted in this movie.There was no point in putting this great actor in this movie.One of the greatest actors in the world wasted,and for what reason, none what so ever,so america if you want to put classic actors in movies DON'T WASTE THEM",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca611dc96066459396821b0321ce89ae",
            "input": "I haven't seen this film in years so my knowledge is a little rusty. I do remember thinking that this film is twice the film of Braveheart. It is simply more realistic and has more believable characters. Ridb Roy looks like one would imagine Rob Roy to look like, messy hair and beard with simple clothing. Also the Liam Nesson has a Celtic look about him, he looks like a Scot and more importantly looks like Rob Roy. It's a comparison which angers some people but compare him to Mel Gibson as William Wallace. Gibson is supposedly playing a man who's legend has caused him to be described as a 6 foot 7 giant while Gibson is almost a foot shorter. The story contains a little romance, conspiracy and an underdog story. Sound anything like Braveheart? But instead of a film that cries out \"freedom\", liberty and nationalism we get a film which says honour, love and justice. This makes it a more interesting film. Much like Gladiator. The cast is fantastic and Liam Nesson is a very strong leader in this endeavour. The story is great with how it deals with heroism and humanity. The scene where Mary is raped and she walks out of the burning house with a look of true Scottish strength is followed by her washing the semen from her crotch in an extreme panic. This is something a heroine in Braveheart would never do. Overall this is a stunning and almost flawless watch. Go and see it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bba1ba80b6414828bf469284fedbbd0d",
            "input": "Saw this as previous viewer by accident, I have watched it twice now. I thoroughly enjoyed it, no silly thought provoking messages just plain good fun entertainment, good songs, good characters and a just a feel good film Highly recommended to those of us that just like to enjoy films and not dissect them Great Fun for all the family here. I didn't realise Rosie Alvarez is played by Vanessa Williams, she is excellent and very sultry. The songs like One Boy and One last Kiss are really enjoyable to listen to and to tap your feet to Jason Alexander is the complete contrast to his character in Pretty Woman ans is very good. Tyne Daley still sticks in my mind from Cagney and Lacey and her voice and accent still had that remembrance in it. Overall I just loved it and will be looking to purchase it if it is available",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f917aa899594c7ca2a6da55962b993c",
            "input": "A young boy sees his mother getting killed and his father hanging himself. 20 years later he gets a bunch of friends together to perform an exorcism on himself so he won't turn out like his father. All the stock characters are in place: the nice couple; the \"funny\" guy; the tough (but sensitive) hood; the smart girl (she wears glasses--that's how we know); the nerd and two no-personality blondes. It all involves some stupid wooden statue that comes to life (don't ask) and kills people. I knew I was in trouble when, after a great opening scene, we jump to 20 years later--ALL bad horror movies do that!The dialogue is atrocious, the acting is bad (except for Betsy Palmer--why Betsy?) and the killings are stupid and/or unimaginative. My favorite scene is when two people are supposedly having sex and the statue knocks the guy off the bed to show he's fully dressed! A real bad, stupid incoherent horror film. Avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c27ea177d194a8e86e36c907ae37269",
            "input": "This movie is painfully slow and has no plot. It conveys the lives of a group of laid off boatworkers. One of the older ones is sincere in his attempt to get a job. There may be some social commentary here, but, it is muddled as nobody is painted in a very sympathetic light.I do not understand why it had a 7.8 when I decided to watch it. I watched the whole tedious thing and built expectations for a huge redeeming payoff. No luck. The IMDb rating has always been such a good match for my tastes. Anything above 6.5 was worth watching.And my wife says Javier Barem does not even look good in this movie. He's not my type, so, my agreement does not mean much.Sigh. I give it a 1.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-740b1a964145492195f93bff310a6f86",
            "input": "I had never heard of Leos Carax until his Merde segment in last years Tokyo, and his was easily the stand-out the film's three stories. It wasn't my favorite of the shorts, but it was the most unique, and the most iconic. \"The Lovers on the Bridge\" was the first of his full length features I've seen, a virtuoso romantic film that uses image and music to communicate an exuberant young love that overflows into the poetic. Though he's classified as a neo-nouvelle vogue, his films owe as much to silent cinema as the 60's experimental narratives. His movies are closer to Jean Vigo in \"L'atlante\", Jean Cocteau, and Guy Maddin, than Godard and Truffaut.In Boy Meets Girl Carax's 1984 debut he uses black and white and the heavy reliance on visual representation to display emotional states. He combines the exaggerated worlds of Maddin, but based in a reality that never seems quite stable like Cocteau, but by virtue of its expressions it becomes more accessible, emotional, and engaging like Vigo's movies.The story of Boy Meets Girl is simple, and similar to Carax's two following films which comprise this \"Young lovers\" trilogy. A boy named Alex played by Denis Lavant (who plays a character named Alex in Carax's next two movies), has just been dumped by his girlfriend who has fallen in love with his best friend. In the first scene he nearly kills his friend on a boardwalk but stops short of murder. He walks around reminded of her by sounds of his neighbors having sex, and daydreams of his girlfriend and best friend getting intimate. He steals records for her and leaves them at his friend's apartment, but avoids contacting either of them directly. He wanders around and finds his way to a party, where he meets a suicidal young woman, and the film becomes part \"Breathless\" and part \"Limelight\".Later he is advised by an old man with sign language to \"speak up for yourself...young people today It's like they forgot how to talk.\" The old man gives an anecdote about working in the days of silent film, and how an actor timid off stage became a confident \"lion\" when in front of the camera. Heres where the movie tips its hand, but the overt reference to silent film is a crucial scene, since it overlaps the style of the film (silent and expressionist), with the content (a lovelorn young man trying to work up the courage to say and do the things he really wants to). Though Alex is pensive at first and a torrent of romantic words tumbling out of him by the end, he is the shy actor who becomes a lion thanks to the films magnification of his inward feelings which aren't easy to nail down from moment to moment, aside from a desire to fall in love.There is a scene in the film where Alex retreats from the party into a room where the guests have stashed their children and babies, all crying in a chorus that fills that room, until he turns on a tape of a children's show making them fall silent. Unexpectedly due a glitch the TV ends up playing a secret bathroom camera which reveals the hostess sobbing to herself into her wig about someone she misses. Even as Carax is self-reflexive and self deprecating of the very kind of angst ridden coming of age tale he is trying to tell (the room full of whining infants), he's mature enough to see through the initial irony to the lovelorn in everything the film crosses. Even the rich old, bell of the ball has a brother she misses. In another scene an ex astronaut stares at the moon he once walked on in his youth while sipping a cocktail in silence.Though indebted to films before talkies, Carax is a master of music, knowing when to pipe in the Dead Kennedy's \"Holiday in Cambodia\", or an early David Bowie song, the sounds of a man playing piano, or of a girl softly humming.In Boy Meets Girl, when someone gets their heart broken we see blood pour from their shirt, when a couple kiss on the sidewalk they spin 360 degrees as if attached to a carousel, when Alex enters a party an feels out of place, its because the most interesting people in the world really are in attendance; like the famous author who can't speak because of a bullet lodged in his brain, or the miss universe of 1950 standing just across from the astronaut. This film is the missing link between Jean Piere Jenuet, Michel Gondry, and Wes Anderson, whose stylistic flourishes and quirky tales of whimsy, all have a parallel with different visuals, musical, and emotional cues in these Carax movies.Every line of dialog, every piece of music and every effect and edit in this movie resonated with me on some emotional level, some I lack words to articulate. There are many tales of a boy meeting a girl, but rather than just explore the banal details of any particular event this movie captures the ecstatic truth of adolescent passion and disappointment. The other movies you want to watch can wait. See this first. If I were to make films, I would want them to be like this, in fact I wish all films were like this, where the ephemeral becomes larger than life, and life itself becomes a dream.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f9bafaa209d401c87aa6fbe3e745437",
            "input": "Nicole Kidman is a wonderful actress and here she's great. I really liked Ben Chaplin in The Thin Red Line and he is very good here too. This is not Great Cinema but I was most entertained. Given most films these days this is High Praise indeed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c8faa5f25534f56ac9d92b39d184672",
            "input": "Here's one more beauty in the string of beautiful films directed by Eytan Fox. The movie presents the story of star-crossed lovers (one Israeli, one Palestinian)in modern Tel Aviv. The film's effectiveness comes not only from its depiction of cross-ethnic conflict, but of conflicts personal and political within ethnic groups as well. For example, there's a telling moment when one of the secondary characters, openly gay, is visited in the hospital by his boyfriend who brings him flowers and tries to kiss him in front of his visiting family, and suddenly we see a wave of awkward discomfort wash through the room. Clearly the young man is not as open as he seems, and the family not as accepting as he might want them to be, while the boyfriend is confused and rejected. A good deal of complexity is packed into a fleeting moment. As we know from Yossi & Jagger, Fox is a master at efficiently packing emotional and psychological complexity into brief sequences. The film is also effective for the even-handed way it presents the mutual brutalities that Israelies and Palestinians inflict on each other. If you're not heartless, you'll cry through the last third of the movie. Though the plot is melodramatic, it's so intelligently written and acted that it reminds us of how satisfying good melodrama can be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25af3745ebdf4ff3a4ea53c1722736cb",
            "input": "This norwegian movie is so crap, the actors can not act cause they seems to be reading from a book and the story is so (wannabe) hollywood..the only actor who did a ok job was Haavard Lilleheie..3/10 If you want a really good norwegian movie watch Buddy, great actors and a feelgood story 9/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d5897c4ebfc47dfb003e26a8a789287",
            "input": "I'm a fan of both Shakespeare and MST3K, so I waited anxiously to see this episode. I'll comment on the movie first, then the MST3K episode. The recipe for this movie: take talented actors, rich and beautiful Shakespeare material, and a $1.25 budget. Mix well, then drain of all life and movement, until dull and lifeless. Serve cold in a big, plain stone cauldron. Movie, I give 3 out of 10, because the actors at least deserve a little bit of credit. Okay, now the MST3K episode. I'll admit it, the first time I saw it, I fell asleep halfway through. I understand that was the reaction of several other veiwers as well. However, when I watched it a second time, I realized that there was a whole host of intelligent references and good lines I missed the first time around. The trick with this episode is: listen carefully! It takes a couple of viewings to catch each line. Give it a second chance, and You'll see what I mean. MST3K Episode: 7 1/2 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9780503fb3cb49789f43b76a071a450f",
            "input": "I remember watching this film back in 86' when it first came out & what an awful film. The acting was atrocious the plot was so flimsy it would or is that should have blew away in a breath of wind. I think it put me to sleep on more than one occasion & i was not tired that i remember. Please avoid at all costs better still have all your teeth taken out with no anaesthetic cos that would be more entertaining. It's just a pity i couldn't give it a zero or a negative score. I wish i had not wasted my money getting this one from the video shop all i can say was that the tape it was on was still brand new practically hardly surprising as the film was so poor. If i remember right i sat & watched it with a girl i really wanted to go out with & the fact she was sat next to me was still not enough to keep me awake thats how bad this film was.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f84ae008ffc8454e8372ceecb8b4b189",
            "input": "Born Again the Limerick: If a man could come back from the dead And live in a little girl's head Revenge he would get For the murder he metBy the guy that's now in his wife's bed.For me Born Again is a highly under-rated, classic episode that makes up a part of what defined The X-Files for me before I started watching it. I saw a few segments before when the show first came on and I was much too young to watch it such as parts of The Jersey Devil, but I very specifically remember watching this episode as an 11 year old and being absolutely creeped out by the scene where they guy gets choked to death by the bus and then the hypnosis scene with the little girl. I tell you I couldn't sleep for weeks! For this reason the episode has a special aura about it now of the creepiness factor that I have since grown to enjoy. Its enough to let me look past some of the obvious flaws in the plot such as why the girl had to wait until she was 9 before her previous life spirit really began to exact his revenge. Or what she was doing just randomly sitting on a bus in the middle of the night. You'd think her parents would have been worried. And maybe they were we just don't really see that part of the story. And was was with the telekinesis? Other than adding the really cool Carrie factor to the already creepy story, there really wasn't any kind of good explanation for it. But even with its little flaws, in my mind this is a classic episode and has little to no reason for me to not like it. 10 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6855868e11324d0dbe4b1e768bf95acb",
            "input": "Even if you're a huge Sandler fan, please don't bother with this extremely disappointing comedy! I bought this movie for $7.99, assuming it has to be at least halfway decent since my man Sandler is in it and because I assumed some women would get naked (judging by the R-rating and scantily-clad women on the cover). Well, there are quite a few scantily-clad women, but none get naked. I'm not sure what point this was in Sandler's career, but I'm guessing it was even before his SNL days. I can be wrong. This is like watching one of his home movies. He might look back at a cheesy movie like this and reminisce about the good ol' times...but we (the audience) are left to dry. This is hardly a \"movie\"! Sandler does a lot of talking to the camera, and even admits at one point that this is \"no-budget\" movie (that's right, not a low-budget movie, a NO-budget movie). So our job is pretty much to laugh AT the quirky characters. There is no steady plot, it's like an extended sketch comedy show--but a crude and badly written one. That guy who played the nasty comedian was completely annoying and it was implausible in the first place that he would receive such a mass audience. And Sandler finds his comic inspiration by saying the one classic Henny Youngman line \"Take my wife, please\" and the audience is on the floor? I'm not even going to TRY to make any logic here. Sure, Sandler's current and recent movies are not known for making a lot of sense (the penguin in \"Billy Madison,\" the midget in \"Happy Gilmore's\" Happy Place) but the comedy works. This is a strictly amateurish work, and even if you're curious about Adam's early days in film--you still won't be interested. You're better off checking out his start on SNL or maybe his underrated role in \"Mixed Nuts.\" Of course, the Sandman is not the only actor wasted in this thankless vehicle. Billy Bob Thornton also makes a short appearance, Billy Zane (\"Titanic\") has a supporting role and the great Burt Young (from the \"Rocky\" movies) has a significant role. This awful comedy will most probably be collecting dust on the 99-cent rental section of your local video store--and rightfully so. My score: 3 (out of 10)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-219bfad169054b468bc8ee10f22e9513",
            "input": "When I saw the Exterminators of year 3000 at first time, I had no expectations for that movie. Although, it wasn't so bad as I was thought. It's kind of Italian version of Roadwarrior, with cast, that is almost famous in Italy, including Venantino Venantini. Behind the story is Elisa Briganti and Dardano Sacchetti, who are also responsible for story of Zombie flesh-eaters. You can also see other links to Italian horror movies: Luca Venantini plays the role of Tommy, and you can see that kid in Paura nella citta dei morti viventi (City of the living dead AKA Gates of hell) as John Robbins and in Cannibal apocalypse as the role of Mary's brother. Quite entertaining movie, with some dull parts.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cf2c8d16ca14297bb9db779bc99dc2a",
            "input": "My evaluation: 8/10I like a lot this movie. Compare to today brainless movie (just action and special effet and nothing new about ideas), \"Soylent Green\" ask to something that today doesn't exist anymore: To Think.Well it would not a big surprise a day human eat \"cookies\" which are create with body of human. With all what happen on this planet, and to see how people are so indifferent to all, this kind of future is possible.Sure this movie take some age but the idea behind the movie is actual again. Rich at Paradise, other in the hell. Well a luck today they are TV and idiocy like \"Reality Show\".TV is a good wash brain. It's pity to see that intelligence of human have not progress like technologies. Since writing all stop.If you like reality show this movie is not for you. If you believe all politician same too. If you don't like ask yourself question about now and future well never look this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-494d76b93ce4432b838e1722039fa271",
            "input": "I love this film 'Spring and port wine'. I was born in Leigh, a town about 7 miles away from Bolton, I moved to Bolton in 1965 when I was 20. My place of work was daily via Little Lever through Farnworth, sometimes on a bike but then by car when I could afford it.The film brings back all the memories of the working class neighbors who were almost always broke but who would always help you if they could. Fred Dibnah was round the corner from Bromwich St. were my bedsit was. If you didn't see the film when first released then you may be forgiven for comparing it to a soap such as Coronation St, well I agree it is a soap, but then, it was called 'Kitchen Sink Drama!' Watch this film for the talented cast who shortly afterwards became household names from frequent roles on TV, I watch mainly for the shots of the locality and the feel good factor of people being poor but happy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-732354efc25d4c03a2949c34e4edb96c",
            "input": "SPOILERSA buddy of mine said NEXT MOVIE was the best Cheech & Chong flick and went out of his way to have me borrow it and THE BLUES BROTHERS. NEXT MOVIE has no plot, has no pacing, really has no anything of what defines a movie ... but it is funny. And for what it is worth, Cheech and Chong show some heart.Well, in this little paragraph I put in the plot, but being that four-fifths of the movie, nothing happens that would usually start a story. I will just say that Cheech 's cousin shows up.Was there no other funnier moment when Chong made Cheech drink the pee twice? What about the rooster? Was that Pee-Wee Herman's first movie appearance? You would have to watch the movie yourself to enjoy it. I don't think NEXT MOVIE has strong enough balls to make it awesome, but the movie has heart and hey, my buddy let me borrow it so it gets a 7.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22f3daa926fb4a4f98ce6c3e9ee94634",
            "input": "This is a splendidly done simplistic film that explores a theme, and gives each viewer something different that they take from it. The premise is simple: an unnamed celebrity actor (Morgan Freeman) decides to research for an upcoming role by visiting a store and watching people. He takes particular interest in the cashier at the \"10 Items or Less\" lane (Paz Vega), who he finds an amiable, strong, and curious presence.Both actors play off each other brilliantly and bring solid dimension to characters in what is a character study. Not a conventional character study; they each represent entire worlds. The cashier's life is mired in a harsh and frustrating \"real world,\" while the actor is so enmeshed in his fantasy existence that he can't do simple tasks like remember phone numbers. He readily admits he's putting on a face when he talks to people, and the whole point of researching real people shows he's not one of them.But not only is the actor inspired by real people for his work; we see the reverse process as well. Several characters recognize \"Him,\" and make reference to how he has inspired them with his movie roles.The cashier's favorite song \"Al Pasar la Barca,\" about how a girl refuses to hide behind beauty and prefers instead to pay (ie: do honest work) for boat passage, couldn't have been chosen better. It parallels with the Vega character, the only store employee with any brains or ambition, who is willing to work hard to succeed. (That's quite an aspiration, for somebody who looks like Paz Vega.) It's an odd little film, probably made on a shoestring. If you don't mind slow pacing and a \"talky\" approach, this film will entertain. The characters are perfectly contrasted, and the effective acting makes them endearing. A nice watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a17035ff5e647fba46d470e8036e03f",
            "input": "I went to school with Jeremy Earl, that is how I heard of this movie, I don't really know if it was in the theater's at all. I don't recall the name. I have seen it, it is like one of those after school specials. The acting is OK, not great. The plot was kind of weak and the lines were pretty corny. So the only comment I can give this movie is \"Eh\" I borrowed the movie from Jeremy, if I was in a movie rental place, this is one that I would walk past and after watching it I wouldn't recommend it to anyone past middle school age. I've also noticed that many times when urban kids are portrayed, the slang is overused or just outdated. Many times I think thats what makes their characters unbelievable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b244cb5ac1342d4ae5ef28c0a869ce1",
            "input": "I loved The Real Mc Coys (1957-1963) It is too bad that Lydia Reed has decided to be forgotten and not appear. She was excellent in the show. Of course Walter Brennan was great as well as Tony Martínez. I loved it when he called Amos Señor Grampa.I have purchased Season I on DVD and I cannot wait to buy Seasons 2-6.If only there would be more shows on television like this one, everything would be better. This show appeared briefly in the summer of 1999 but then disappeared. God bless all the departed members of the cast and please,Llydia Reed, make yourself known again to the public. You are loved and respected. The Real Mc Coys will live forever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63212d1947f443c4933aa0ebc3a4dfb9",
            "input": "I'm not a big fan of slasher flicks as a genre, but even by the standards of low-low-budget exploitation, this one is really lame. Even on a nudity-and-gore level, it's incredibly boring (there is some of both, but it's all sort of...meh). Before the home video revolution, it might not even have been released theatrically (though it might have; after all, *Plan 9 From Outer Space* played in theaters). There is precisely one good (and competently-delivered) line in the entire movie; I assume they stole it from somewhere.The acting is among the worst I have ever seen. I mean, even Ed Wood had a couple of competent actors, and the rest tended to be ludicrously hammy, which can be fun to watch. Anyway, most of his actors could pretty much pass as literate. Here, those who don't read their lines like cigar-store Indians sound like they learned them phonetically. And this film does have one distinction: it manages to be badly underplotted for most of the movie, then laughably overplotted for the ending.(Update: I should have singled out the actress playing the receptionist as an exception. She is by no means wooden. Not that she's good, but she certainly isn't wooden.)Even the worst slasher flicks are generally good for a few Puritan meditations on their grotesque offensiveness, but with this one, there doesn't even seem to be anything there to work up a moral outrage about.And you know the funniest thing? They clearly expected to make a sequel!It's so bad and boring that it actually becomes fascinating in a weird way. I sat enrapt through much of the video wondering why anyone would go to the bother of making it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3bee95aaacaa4336905ced59b43a2778",
            "input": "\"Lost\", \"24\", \"Carnivale\", \"Desperate Housewifes\"...the list goes on and on. These, and a bunch of other high-quality, shows proves that we're in the middle of a golden age in television history. \"Lost\" is pure genius. Incredible layers of personal, and psychologically viable, stories, underscored by sublime cinematography (incredible to use this word, when describing a TV-show), a killer score, great performances and editing. Anyone who isn't hooked on this, are missing one of the most important creative expressions in television ever. It may have its problems, when watching only one episode a week, but the DVD format is actually an incredible way to watch this. Hope they keep it up (as I'm sure they do).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21ca224ab2c34435b51279ef6d2a8b75",
            "input": "In spite of sterling work by the supporting actors, and an intelligent script by Alan Plater, this film suffers from a fatal flaw - the lack of charm of the central character/actor. One of the characters describes Richard E Grant's character as \"a whining little turd\" and unfortunately this sums him up perfectly. There is nothing about him or his performance to make it credible that his girlfriend and upper-class publisher/friend would spend so much time and emotional effort on him. He is rude, arrogant, selfish, self-destructive and thoroughly annoying. The part called for an actor who can make you love him even when he is being a prate - a Ewan McGregor, for example.All of the witty satire on the class system etc was wasted, thanks to this irritating and thoroughly unlikeable performance. All I wanted to do was shake him and tell him to get over himself.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-98eaae06f69f40fa85843e9981278156",
            "input": "Although this is generally a cheesy jungle-adventure movie, it does have some highlights - the settings are quite beautiful, and the pacing of the adventure is good. You won't be bored watching it.Keith is as breezy as possible playing the eponymous lead, an unabashedly drunk jungle guide shanghai'd into escorting rich boy Van Hoffman and his gorgeous wife Shower on a hunting expedition in cannibal country. He never takes things seriously . Shower is there as decoration and Keith makes extensive use of her - she doesn't really have to act much. She's not the only female to show off her body and the prurient aspects of the film make it about halfway to a T/A picture.There's nothing in this film that would draw specific attention to it, or away from it. Produced to be shlock, it succeeds without too much fuss. A good 2 AM cable programmer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03fa89b97f534ab295e4f77b42c3440a",
            "input": "Pretty awful but watchable and entertaining. It's the same old story (if you've lived through the 80s). Vietnam vets fight together as buddies against injustice back in the States. A-Team meets Death Wish, my favorite!Time goes on, the soldiers go home, and years later a friend is in trouble. No, wait -- in fact, the friend is dead and it is his dad that's in trouble. Our first hero, Joey, is killed by an exceedingly horrifying (super pointy) meat tenderizer as he tries to defend his father's small store from the local \"protection\" gang despite being wheelchair bound from the war. Desperate for help, the father talks to Sarge, the leader of Joey's old unit from Vietnam, when Sarge shows up for the funeral.Well, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the old gang saddles up for the city. You can pretty much imagine most of the rest of the movie.The one thing that drove me crazy is that Sarge keeps haranguing his men about planning, and about how they're really good at what they do when they plan ahead. But Joey wouldn't have been put in a wheelchair by a gunshot in Vietnam in the first place if the unit hadn't been messing around! Then when things are going really well in the city as they battle the gangs, they do it again. For no reason at all, they completely bypass their plan and try to nail the gang without everyone being present. Phh!!!! I raise my hands in disgust. Foolishness!There is also a suspicious moment when all present members of the unit make sure to try out the heroin they snatch from the gang to make sure it's real. EVERY single one of them. Hmm....What are you going to do? Keep watching, I guess. The movie isn't too horrible to watch, but it IS a tease. There are all these climactic moments when nothing actually winds up happening. The most dramatic things that happen are those at the beginning of the movie -- the explosives in Vietnam, Joey's death battle, and the gang brutally kicking an innocent teddy bear aside (poor Teddy!).I guess my main beef with this movie is that I feel let down by it. Even the confusing subplots with \"mystery helpers\" and their bizarrely cross-purpose motives wasn't enough to save it at the end. But someday maybe it'll all come right and they'll make a sequel. Ha ha ha ha!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-973600d6e8f3461e96d81b02b5522c8c",
            "input": "This movie was a real torture fest to sit through. Its first mistake is treating nuclear power as so self-evidently a 'bad thing' that it barely needs to convince the audience of it. When it does stoop to putting in its argument, it has the participants breathlessly deliver barely substantiated facts ; all that's missing is someone crying \"when is someone going to think of the children!\". While watching this movie, I kept thinking \"where'd you hear that?\" or \"that can't possibly be true\" - yet little of the info was backed up by any reliable sources. And bless 'em, the 'regular folks' in the movie came across more like Luddites than people with any understanding of the pros and cons of nuclear power; to be fair, that might be the fault of the film-makers, but equally fairly, it's a condition shared by the movie's rock stars.As for the performers........... Now some of these people are highly respected musicians whose music I've enjoyed, and I'm sure a few of them really did believe in this cause. But they all come across as wheezing old hippies desperately searching for something to get worked up over, now that the 60s have passed them by. Particularly embarrassing are Graham Nash and James Taylor. Nash seems to be trying too hard - he looks like he can't possibly believe the things he's being told (not that I blame him), but desperate to feel noticed and included. James Taylor performs what has to be the wimpiest protest \"anthem\" ever, \"Stand and Fight\", in the most sickeningly cheerful way you can imagine. In fact, most of the performances are pretty bland when they're not being patronizing. Nobody seems worked up by this event, as if it really doesn't mean much to them at all. It's worth noting that the driving force behind this whole event seems to be John Hall, of the band Orleans, and responsible for some of the wimpiest MOR pop of the 70s. (Remember, if you dare, \"Dance With Me\" and \"Still the One\".) It's worth noting because that's symbolic of how the cause here fails to inspire any real passion in the music. The cause is supposedly life-or-death, but everybody sleepwalks through their numbers like they're playing the Catskills. Except maybe Gil-Scott Heron - his protest number \"We Almost Lost Detroit\" is on topic at least, but delivered with all the smugness of a high-schooler impressed with how 'controversial' he's being.Only Bruce Springsteen's performance raises a pulse; I've never been a big fan of the Boss, but he absolutely smokes, no question. Part of me thinks he was taped separately, at another event, and edited into this movie to give wake the audience. Compared to the general blandness and air of self-satisfaction here, it's no wonder Bruce was hailed as the savior of rock'n'roll.But even his performance is hobbled by the lifeless concert shooting. I don't expect a lot of flashy camera movement from a '70s film, but the shots are unnecessarily static, broken up only by split-second cutaways to a back-up singer's tonsils. Now, some of this may be because the performers are lifeless to start with; and *maybe* the film-makers are more skilled at shooting documentaries than concert footage - but all you have to do is watch \"Rust Never Sleeps\" or \"The Last Waltz\" to see a movie like this done with more skill. And with more exciting musicians. So really, there's only two things to watch this movie for: Springsteen's stellar performance, and as a sad snapshot about a counter-culture in decline.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f22192c576c41f6a1cb6f60ea3931a3",
            "input": "This is just a butchering of a wonderful story by Edwin Torres. This movie doesn't follow the storyline in the book. And, there are so many inconsistencies with the original movie that you have to wonder if the screenwriter had even seen the first movie.Al Pacino (the original and still the best Carlito) gets out of prison at the start of the original one. Here, Carlito retires with his woman in paradise. What happened to Gail from Lorain, Ohio? In this installment, she isn't mentioned, and Carlito retires with and presumably will marry some other girl.Also, where is Kleinfeld? I think he was in the first book.I also like how Mr. Guzman plays a totally different character in this film. He was Pachanga back in the Pacino days. Now, he is Nacho Reyes, a killer from Cuba. I remember that Nacho Reyes had a much bigger role in the book. It's been a while since I read the book, but where did Sean Comb's character come from? Also, I think this movie really glosses over the racial tensions in Harlem that Torres was writing about. And, the mob doesn't get the treatment that they did in the book. They are also wiped out in this movie. But, magically the Pleasant Avenue bunch is around for the second movie.The book told a great story. This movie could have told a great story. This is just a huge disappointment. Read the book. It's a better use of your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36be1fd5e0234a25af41af49b2a7adac",
            "input": "The filming is pleasant and the environment is keenly realistic. I liked that it boldly redresses conceptions of the many difficult moral and social morays of the 1930's Chinese-mainland countryside as well as more basic human questions - I felt I could get a real sense of the times, recreated even in splendid shots of traditional Chinese theatre and in purist depictions of street living. It seemed worthwhile to experience. The interwoven role which Buddhism plays is probably the most true-to-form - both in its menial and in its philosophic aspect, perhaps the most effective that I've seen in Chinese film. Casting is great. Images are memorable. Acting is solid enough. Thematically puerile but still rich enough to compliment the vehicle of its expression.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5cd9733c1584077949161ba2e16f37a",
            "input": "First of all I just want to say that I LOVE this show!!! But this episode...this episode makes a mockery of the entire show.I don't know what they tried to achieve with this episode but they successfully created the WORST episode in the entire series.There is no story line, everything is chaotic and the jokes.....are crap.The way they tried to answer some of the remaining questions in the game..... For example \"how do the furlings look like\" by creating that stupid \"previously on...\"......is simply embarrassing.Its clear that the writers are running out of ideas and that is really too bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d9a10d7cfc649b9a95bd8b223fb695d",
            "input": "This is a great movie for all ages. Its the story about three animals how have to find their way home. There is a bit of a twist at the end and mainly throughout the whole movie. You never know what is going to happen next. This movie makes you cry and makes you laugh. You just don't know what going to happen next. The trek home is all beautiful with all the wonderful wildlife scenes. They producers also spent a lot of money for this movie and it shows too. The animals in this movie were well trained and are great actors/actress themselves. Everything about this movie is great! 10 out of 10 the whole way! Rent or buy it today I can guarantee you will love it the whole family will!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-002da1268ac44f94a766a674f1c8837f",
            "input": "The premise was intriguing, but sadly this film just doesn't do any justice to it. The casting was quite good, and it was shot beautifully - but stylistically much of the direction was inconsistent (overstylized fast editing been there done that to no effect.... I was waiting for Steven Bochco to run in the credits followed by a commercial), characters were identified exclusively by on-screen coke usage (and pretty much everything else left to Boogie Nights for character development), and no personable characters to draw the viewer into the story. A very forgettable film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd09627b552c479797d4f4d64fb55f36",
            "input": "The true measure of any fictional piece of work is whether or not the characters grow from their experiences and emerge from the experience altered in some significant way (note that this change need not be positive or beneficial) at the end.By that measure, Enchanted April is a resounding success. As a film in general, it succeeds quite well-excellent ensemble cast, well-developed characters you come to care about, wonderful script and beautiful sets and locations. In short the film is, well, enchanting. Although all the performances are first-rate, three must be mentioned-Josie Lawrence, Jim Broadbent and Joan Plowright. It says something when Miranda Richardson does her usual fine work and yet is overshadowed by so many others in the cast. Most highly recommended, particularly if you are a romantic at heart. Further Deponent Saith Not.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e9aa3f210064116af9e6f1070c6b9da",
            "input": "This obvious pilot for an unproduced TV series features young Canadian actress Shiri Appleby as an amnesiac with some pretty incredible powers that must be put to use when a man-turned-flying demon is let loose on the world. The CGI is par for a TV job, and Appleby is OK as an amnesiac but hard to swallow as a superheroine. Familiar TV face Richard Burgi is along for the ride as Appleby's mentor, but he can do nothing to elevate this dreck above the mediocre level. We see way too much of the cartoonish flying demon right from the start, a bad sign. Also, the scenes where Burgi is training Appleby for battle are actually laughable. They are a bad copy of similar scenes in several other movies, most notably REMO WILLIAMS.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbd59f04e0ca4e02ab9b12e65a59c9e8",
            "input": "I don't know why some people criticise that show so much.It is a great, funny show - probably not the right material for mainstream prime-time, but still...The family dynamics are funny, and all in all the same you see in most comedy shows. The supporting characters are absolutely hilarious. The plots of the individual episodes and the frequent Siegfried & Roy jibes are only just above average, but ever so often you have sub-plots or one-liners that make you roll on the floor laughing.This show was well worth the 8 Pounds I paid for it.rating: 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7282407869ec457597edd42aae70f34e",
            "input": "In a poor village in Mexico, the Colonel (Fernando Luján) lives with his asthmatic wife Lola (Marisa Paredes) in an old house. Lola still grieves the death of their son Augustin some time ago. The colonel has been expecting for his pension of fighter in a war against Catholic church for almost twenty-seven years. However, for political reasons, the present government wants to forget this old fight. Without having any possession or money, but a valuable gamecock, they struggle to survival with the expectation of the acknowledgement letter from the government, recognizing the law and paying for the delayed pension. This slow and touching movie reflects the social and financial situation of most of the elder retired persons in third world countries. In Brazil, most of the retired persons has to survive with about US$ 80,00 per month. The debts of the colonel in the story were made to pay for a graveyard for his son, otherwise he would be buried as an indigent. Outstanding performance of the cast, in a very sad story that is reality in the poor countries. My vote is eight. Title (Brazil): (`Não se Escreve ao Coronel') (Do not Write to the Colonel)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eaeeefc8965e44eaaac6922b7f989949",
            "input": "I remember seeing this one when I was seven or eight. I must have found the characters round, because they left a impression in my mind that lasted for a long time after the end of the movie. And the ending, now that's sad, well... for a 7-8 year old kid.I had the opportunity of seeing this movie again lately, and found that the plot was too simple, the character, two-dimensional... I guess it's the kind of movie that you can only with the innocence of a young child... Pity...I recommend this one for all you parents with small kids... ( I saw it in its original french version, so I cannot tell you whether the translation is good or not.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d37fc35aaa08472eaec223ccd1f531d8",
            "input": "THE HOUSE THAT DRIPPED BLOOD is the third in a series of seven Amicus horror anthologies. If THE MONSTER CLUB is included as part of the series, this would make eight movies. Although, that movie is very different from the others.I look upon the Amicus anthologies with great memories as I used to love them when I was in my teens. My feelings for them today are just as strong.I spent many years trying to track down this movie. The synopses of the stories was so appealing that I went as far as paying a substantial amount for it when I eventually found a copy. As great as though the movie is, I did feel a sense of disappointment when I finally saw it. It wasn't quite as good as I was led to believe. Whilst better than its two predecessors, it's nowhere near as good as its four successors as I shall demonstrate.The linking story sees John Bennett as a police inspector tracking down a missing person who lives in a mysterious old house. His journey begins at the local police station where he learns the stories of previous occupants. The linking story later sees him visiting the estate agent who sold the house. Whilst this linking story seems enticing on paper, it is flat and lifeless in practice and easily the weakest of any Amicus anthology. I couldn't help but get the feeling that John Bennett is a poor man's version of Donald Pleasance or Ian Hendry. I would much rather have seen one of the two aforementioned actors in his role. We could have even had both here - one as the police inspector and another as the estate agent. They could, and I believe would, have brought this weak element of the movie to life much better.The movie contains four stories, each of which focuses on an inhabitant of the house.The first story sees Denholm Elliott as a writer of crime stories. He is absorbed into an exciting story about a strangler, even going as far as drawing a sketch to aid his writing. Soon after, he begins seeing visions of his own creation. Some excellent direction by Peter Duffell, particularly with the choice of camera angles helps to detract from the restrained script. Elliott's performance is superb as the tormented writer and he also helps to elevate the story. The story ends with a semi-twist but I couldn't help get the sense of a script which didn't allow it to live up to its potential.The second story sees Peter Cushing move into the house. He is a lonely man who is still pining for a beautiful young woman who once jilted him and who he keeps a picture of. Cushing's performance really brings this emotionally-moving story to life. He is helped by the director who chooses to include continual focus on Cushing's loneliness. This is taken further with a great hallucination scene that helps us to see inside Cushing's mind. Anyway, Cushing sees a figure at a nearby wax museum that looks just like his girl. Naturally his obsession grows but this seemingly romantic story has a disturbing twist at the end. Joss Ackland plays Cushing's rival but his performance is massively overshadowed by the late great Peter Cushing.The third story and easily the best sees Christopher Lee - my favourite horror actor of all time - move into the house with his daughter. Mr. Lee gives one his perfect ice cold performances here. He shows no love or attention for his daughter at all. He even brings in a school governess to educate her. The governess, played by Nyree Dawn Porter in another of her superb performances, tries to find out what is wrong. Without giving too much away, I can reveal that witchcraft plays a role. Christopher Lee's presence is truly electrifying in every scene he's in. Chloe Franks deserves special recognition for her massively underrated performance as the little girl who is easily the creepiest character in the whole movie. The movie is worth seeing even for the sake of seeing just this one story.The final story is played almost entirely for laughs but it certainly does entertain and that's what matters. Jon Pertwee plays a horror movie actor who moves into the house. He is very dissatisfied at the approach his producers take to movies, seeing everything as cheap and fake, particularly the costumes. So he decides to buy an authentic cloak for his latest vampire role. Geoffrey Bayldon has an excellent cameo as a dealer who sells Pertwee an ancient cloak. When Pertwee puts the cloak on, he starts developing fangs and basically transforming into a vampire. Pertwee's performance has to be seen to be believed. It truly is hilarious. Ingrid Pitt is also in this story but her talent is wasted in a role that should have been much larger.The linking story finishes with a loose connection to the final story. This is particularly fitting since the inspector was looking for Pertwee and naturally decides to visit the house. The rest you'll be able to work out for yourself. As weak as the linking story is, it does have a decent if somewhat unintentionally comical ending.I'm convinced that the blame for the shortcomings in what should have been a truly magnificent movie doesn't lie with Peter Duffell, the director, who really does his best with what he's got. I think the script was just too restrained and lacking the ambition that can be found in the four later movies.Overall, THE HOUSE THAT DRIPPED BLOOD, despite its flaws is a must-see for fans of the Amicus anthologies, fans of other Amicus movies or fans of portmanteau horror movies. If my summary provides the movie with enough appeal in your eyes, check it out. You'll enjoy it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34afa27b419e4f13ba9fdc78fdb27e44",
            "input": "There seem to have been any number of films like this released during the 70's. And the fact that I cannot recollect the title to a single one of them off-hand is a measure of their impact. These are what novelists would call 'pot-boilers'. They are scarcely more than a vehicle for keeping movie-stars in the public eye.We have Micheal Caine, Peter Ustinov, Omar Sharif, Rex Harrison and William Holden; more than enough names to get bums on cinema seats. Every taste in hero is catered for. Though one suspects that most of the audience still went away disappointed.Their talents are simply thrown away, and I wonder that stars with so much money and such reputation can be yet so desperate or lacking in good sense. This sort of movie hardly adds gilding to a CV. Sometimes maybe actors should choose their director instead of the other way round.It was pretty obvious that it would be crap even from the outset. That ludicrously mismatched jaunty-jazz theme music, which also percolated up every time some incidental noise is needed, had all the atmospheric conviction of elevator Muzak. Who imagined employing a jazz band when a scene depicted the steamy jungles of central Africa, or the endless Sahara with camels and palms as a backdrop? Definitely a serious goof-ball. Ennio Morricone would have known what to do; and his results would have oozed enough atmosphere and tension to raise my rating a good two points. This director should have taken the trouble to watch 'Lawrence of Arabia', or even Sergio Leone's westerns; he might have learnt a few things. But then again, probably he wouldn't.Alfred Hitchcock played the disappearing wife theme to good effect in his film 'Frantic'. It was later remade with equal panache staring Harrison Ford. In each case the confusion surrounding her loss and the tension of the chase was tangible. Here, when Michael Caine might be otherwise compelled to employ a little brain and bravado, Rex Harrison kept popping-up out of no-where like some wily old genii, to put him back on track whenever the narrative stumbled. At least the photography was rather good, with excellent use of the often beautiful environment. But then the dumb music must pipe-up and blow to atoms what little ambiance this created.Action scenes were also contrived and stilted, with such ineptly choreographed fight sequences that they might have been staged in a first-year drama class. And, of course, the players must fight to a jazz accompaniment - as you do.And that's about as much comment as this item deserves. Except to say that the script was pretty wretched as well.Stick with your hobby on this one. Even if it contained your favourite movie-stars, you're sure to be disappointed too.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9629c179a50245cbbdb5b87b8c2d29a0",
            "input": "Like many others have commented before me here, I have to say that this movie is bad, but not the worst I've seen. There will be no direct references to movie plots or sequences in this comment, because I hate spoilers.I got a feeling I was watching an episode of a TV show or something, where they had gotten a hold of some extra $$$ to spend on CGI (I've seen worse of those)... All in all, it is quite an insult to the viewer, at least if you have ANY knowledge about computers and/or technology at all. There are just too many of these moments of insults to make me feel comfortable, and I found myself just begging for it all to end - fast - halfway through. In addition, there are countless \"easy way out\" scenarios, which also is an insult to your intelligence as a thinking human being...This movie absolutely fades in comparison to the old \"Wargames\", and I think it's a damn shame they even got to call it a sequel.Two stars from me, because of one thing and one thing only: the actors' performances aren't half-bad, considering the regurgitated crap of a script they had to work with. Still, they should never have signed on to this movie. Not really a career-move, but I guess we all have bills to pay.To those of you who gave this movie top score...you have to be on the studio's payroll or something, that's my only explanation.To all who haven't seen this one: by all means, watch it and make up your own mind. But lower your expectations to the floor (and then some).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-abc73a4cb26244be9d5fc7a4caf5a9c8",
            "input": "I've just watch 2 films of Pang brothers, The Eye and One take only. When I watched The Eye, I was kind of disappointed about this two guys, who I had heard good words about them before. That film (The Eye) has a really bad script, especially the ending (childish,cliche and too coincident in my opinion) , but its still good in photography and experimental images. So I decided to see One take only and I didn't disappointed again. Still great photography, stunning image, MTV-style editing, cool music and this time,the story has a lot of indie spirit,logical and beautiful, you'll see some tiny plot holes, but it doesn't cause any trouble with the storyline. The only problem about this film is I get a bad DVD.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-753c29c0273149a2aac088469ac1de25",
            "input": "I enjoyed a lot watching this movie. It has a great direction, by the already know Bigas Luna, born in Spain. And it is precisely in Spain that the movie takes place, in Cataluña, to be more precise.Luna explores once more the theme of an obcession, in this case the obcession of a young boy for the women's milk. There are some psychological concepts in this story such as the rejection complex that the elder son feels with the birth of his brother. In the movie this is what leads to the obcession of the young boy who suddenly sees all his mother's milk go to the recently born son. So he starts trying to find a breast who is able to feed him. He finds it in a woman recently arrived and from here on the movie is all around this.This movie lives a lot on imagery, more than the story itself, the espectator captures certain moments (unforgettable moments) and certain symbols (the movie deserves a thourough analyses on almost everything that happens because it usually means something...). The surroundings, the landscapes, typical from the region as well as the surreal behaviors of the characters, also symbolic, and the excelent ambiguous soundtrack by Nicola Piovani transport us to another dimension, not parallel to the real world, but which intersects it from times to times... Worth living in that world, worth watching this movie, even though we may eventually and for moments get tired and a bit sick with the excessive obcession, which is perhaps taken beyond the limits...I also enjoyed the performance of the protagonist... 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68528c54e3db434b8dfc7156fcc16c9a",
            "input": "This foolish, implausible tale is redeemed only by the opening scene in which a hard-boiled police detective delivers some nearly-audible lines confirming our greatest fears: He is dead. Perhaps the film would have been saved had the director forgone the dazzling star power of A. Martinez in favor of this sadly-anonymous actor who filled the screen for a brief moment. That a no-name hack-tor off the street could salvage such a dishwater film is no less likely than a villain committing murder by dropping stones into a quarry for an unsuspecting diver. His moment is brief; his promise is immense. Perhaps we will be treated to more screen time by this obscure thespian if there is ever a sequel to this ill-advised film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-285541f78900451cb9d283071587f44c",
            "input": "i'm really getting old,,am in the midst of watching this 40 year old flick,and wonder what my grandchildren will be watching 40 years from now,,its an old saying,,but they don't make em like that anymore..it's not only the story,its the music,the acting both by young and old..the cast ,it would seem,were born to play their roles,,young oliver,,old Fagin..too many to mention them all,the role played by the judge oliver stands before,i've seen in other roles over the years..the artful dodger,,Ron moody as Fagin,,Mr and Mrs bumble,,the movie not only won 5 Oscars,,but took a few golden globe awards too..if you decide to see this film..do yourself a favor,,take a few if not all the children,to see this masterpiece",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70133d1934dc4a98965cbb9e0858a96e",
            "input": "i was intrigued to see how a little-seen 2008 film had somehow won the Oscar for best picture of 2009 and thus went to see The Hurt Locker. sadly, all i got for the two hours invested was the grim confirmation that this film had won awards purely for off-the-screen reasons.the direction and visual style of this film is some of the weakest you will ever see. when it's not busy being yet another Bourne Identity homage with dire, annoying \"shaky cam\" visuals, it shows off all the hallmarks of a second rate daytime soap opera in terms of lensing.the \"plot\" is threadbare, the characterizations are about as well developed as rejected Beetle Bailey comic strip ideas and the dialogue - on the instances where the film gives up on being \"minimalist\" and for no apparent reason turns one or two soldiers into right chatterboxes - is some of the worst ever recorded. in fairness, the actors do the best they can in the circumstances, just not enough to obscure how bad the project is.the whole film has the feel of it being intended as some kind of \"mockumentary\" that they clocked was bereft of humour and thus re-edited as best they could so as to pass it off as a serious drama.if you spend two hours on this film they are two hours you will never get back, and two hours wasted that you will regret for the rest of your life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf8da2b4f8be47fdb8674b9327c50f18",
            "input": "Holy crap this movie was bad. I watched it just as a joke. It isn't even so bad that it's good in an unintentional way. This film seemed to be designed to personally make me angry. It worked really well at doing that. It's as if the people who made this just took all of the really annoying stuff about the movie PRIEST, added in a bunch of ugly dudes, took out anything interesting, funny, or even remotely sexy and clever out of the concoction, and then added in a bunch of old rotten cheese. That's all this is. Cheese. There isn't a single person this film could possibly connect to. There isn't any universe this film could possibly take place in. Why can't a film like this just be about enjoying life and being happy? Why did they have to make this already stupid idea for a film even more ridiculous than it already is? Why couldn't they at least even tried to make it an okay film, or even a B-movie. Now that I think of it, what they hell were they trying to do with this film? I watched it expecting a campy love story and instead I got some boring student project about some idiot who has to find the strength and courage to marry his boyfriend while his annoying Christian brother tried to destroy it all!!! No, I'm not joking. That's what it's about. Does that sound good? This film is pretty ignorant against people of the Christan religion, with it's stereotyping of all Christians being loudmouthed, rude, and hellbent on making as many people as miserable as possible. A lot of Christian people I know would never speak or act like these freaks. The film, however, is just as unfair and ignorant to the gay community as well. These have got to be the most tastelessly crafted stereotypical gay men since the guy on the radio station on that ROADKILL video game. It's so nerve wracking and simply irritating to the point that I wasn't able to fully pay attention to this film. The makers of this train-wreck had no strategy for set design, acting, camera angles, lighting, script, authenticity, or an idea to make this entertaining or interesting. There isn't even a single sex scene, or at least not a believable one. Jamie Brett Gabel was the only guy in the film that looked any good at all, but his good looks were sadly put to waste. This is trash. In a perfect world, this film would get voted a 0.0. It's worth 0 as a film alone. A mentally handicapped nun who is blind, deaf, and has tiny little bones for arms and legs and whose face is located on her armpit could write, direct, and produce a better film, and she'd probably be a better actor as well. the fact that this film exists is a crime against the word \"film\" itself. This film is so bad that other films should be ashamed of being available in the same watchable format. I could put a broom in a chair and then record it with a camera and then stop the film and then replace it with a mini x-mas tree and then record that and I've already made a film that will always be better than BEN & ARTHUR by at least half. There are only two things worse than death. Torture and watching BEN & ARTHUR. I'm a homosexual and I will probably be the gayest person you will ever meet if you ever met me, and I don't think I've ever been more offended by an entire film than I was by the first five seconds of this film alone. If this movie was a mistake, I will personally find a way to change the famous phrase \"It's okay to make mistakes\" to \"It's okay to make mistakes unless that mistake was BEN & ARTHUR.\" You know how people always say things like, \"Good things come out of everything!\"? I think that BEN & ARTHUR was primarily invented so that there could be something on this earth that nothing good would ever come out of. To call this movie the worst movie I've ever seen would be giving it WAY too much credit. It's as if this film were designed just so that it could qualify in a category of it's very own. There are good movies, there are bad movies, and then there's BEN & ARTHUR. This is BEN AND ARTHUR.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfacf431d9624cba9972c1a8b421610c",
            "input": "A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child, the fifth installment in the Nightmare on Elm Street series and the worst sequel ever in the series, even worse than A Nightmare on Elm Street 2. I was lucky enough to get the Nightmare on Elm Street DVD box set for my birthday and I watched all the sequels. The dream child was the worst without a doubt, I was surprised too since they were doing so well with the last two sequels. But I guess they just lost the charm, the story was just ridicules and I wasn't happy with where it went. Alice just became more annoying, she's not Nancy or Kirsten, so her carrying this film on her own didn't work for me. Freddy is also loosing his scare, this was just getting a bit silly.Alice is back and she's carrying a child, she couldn't be happier with her life. But Freddy is also back and he's not going to be too light on her since she defeated him so easily in the fourth movie. But anyways, he wants her child and to be born into the world again. Did you ever wonder if Freddy had parents too? Well that's what A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child investigates and Alice soon finds out what Freddy's childhood was like and that maybe that's the one thing that can defeat him.A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child is just all in all a bad movie and an insult to the series. I don't think anyone could be happy with this sequel. Just the story was really silly, I mean it could have possibly worked, but once again, it was just executed the wrong way. I know that if you're looking to see the sequels for the Nightmare on Elm Street series, you should watch it, but I really wouldn't recommend it, it's not worth it, at least in my opinion.3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74c5cc95541a44b78dd1a9e15a459705",
            "input": "Some people say this is the best film that PRC ever released, I'm not too sure about that since I have a fond place in my heart for some of their mysteries. I will say that this is probably one of the most unique films they, or any other studio, major or minor, ever released.The plot is simple. The ghost of a wrongly executed ferryman has returned to the swamp to kill all those who lynched him as well as all of their off spring. Into this mix comes the granddaughter of one ghosts victims, the current ferryman. She takes over the ferry business as the ghost closes in on the man she loves.Shrouded in dense fog and set primarily on the single swamp set this is more musical poem than regular feature film.Listen to the rhythms of the dialog, especially in the early scenes, their is poetical cadence to them. Likewise there is a similar cadence to the camera work as it travels back and forth across the swamp as if crossing back and forth across the door way between life and death, innocence and guilt. The film reminds me of an opera or oratorio or musical object lesson more than a normal horror film. Its an amazing piece of film making that is probably unique in film history.This isn't to guild the Lilly. This is a low budget horror/mystery that tells you a neat little story that will keep you entertained. Its tale of love and revenge is what matters here, not the poetical film making and it holds you attention first and foremost (the technical aspects just being window dressing.) If there is any real flaw its the cheapness of the production. The fog does create a mood but it also hides the fact that this swamp is entirely on dry land. The constant back and forth across it is okay for a while but even after 58 minutes you do wish that we could see something else.Don't get me wrong I do like the film a great deal. Its a good little film that I some how wish was slightly less poverty stricken. Its definitely worth a look if you can come across it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f88858fb2f774521b247812a65ac6c7d",
            "input": "If I could give this film a real rating, it would likely be in the minus numbers. While I respect the fact that somebody has to keep making these terrible \"horror\" films, seriously, people, buying a ticket for this film is a waste of money you could be spending on something far more worth your time.Despite it being a horror film, there is nothing scary about it, unless the idea of seeing how many horror cliché's you can fit in one movie scares you. If the rating had been higher, it probably would have made for a better film in the long run.Whoever made this version of \"Prom Night\", you screwed up. The actors could probably have done a decent job if it weren't for the questionable scripting. This was a terrible waste of a cinema trip. I'd sooner go and see \"One Missed Call\" again, at least that had some plot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbbf7c77fffa4370a4b5377549e4c003",
            "input": "For what it is, \"Raising Victor Vargas\" is about as close to perfection as a film can get. Either sheer genius from a fledgling auteur or just one of those lucky mixes where everything clicked (probably some of each), this simple little slice-of-urban-life ethnic first love flick fleshes out its young characters with such depth you can almost read their minds. The film begins with a strong flavor of \"street\" but works its way into a Latino family affair and then focuses on a story which speaks volumes about the uncertainty of youth and the profoundly natural desire to love another. In my experience, never has so much been done with so little (cast of tyros, novice director, etc.). Praised by the critics but not for everyone, \"Raising Victor Vargas\" is recommended for indie lovers and realists into simple tales rich in humanness. (A)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fd75c8e064c45918bc02b916f40fc5b",
            "input": "This mini series, also based on a book by Alex Haley as was `Queen', tried to use similar formulas, that is, constructing a long history following the lives of a family over many years. Whereas in `Queen' the result was masterful, here in Mama Flora the inspiration was lacking. Firstly perhaps in the book itself, and most certainly in this TV production. Too much is put in with too much haste over the years, such that the unfolding saga is shallow, superficial, not nearly so authentic as in `Queen'. Full marks for the scenification in the earlier parts of the film, which was prepared with great care, but as the film progressed it seemed to degenerate into a kind of dallasian-forsythian unpalatable mix in the last third of its three hours or so duration. I had hoped for more; but evidently Haley was less inspired with this tale than his near-biographical `Queen', and Peter Werner III is no match for John Erman. Only recommendable for those who have an appetite for these lengthy tales of generations growing up.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cca2780693454f00825817d468f388be",
            "input": "For anyone that loves predictable movies with an awful soundtrack, lack of dialogue, clichés up the wazoo, and also stereotypes that just happens to be typical of an American film, look no farther. DreamWorks whether wanted to save money on acquiring voice talent, or really wanted to create an animated episode of National Geographic; either way, they succeeded in delivering a rather bland and boring movie. Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron is a bore fest that sends mixed signals to kids and adults, and also fails to entertain despite the oh-so-cutesy theme of animals triumphing over humans. After looking past the wonderful animations, what you have remaining is nothing but a big mess.Spirit is about a stallion that from the beginning of the film looks like quite a handful, as he is a horse that cannot be tamed, calmed, nor controlled. Because of this, he rises and becomes the leader of his group of high-spirited horses, which includes his mom. But, his life of freedom and running around comes to an abrupt halt as he is captured by a group of Americans in the process of connecting the Wild West with the rest of the country. During this, Spirit (never actually named that throughout the entire film almost) befriends a courageous Native American, and a fellow female horse, and also has a lot of run-ins with the cynical and cruel Army folks that apparently don't believe in giving up.Why must movies mix computer animation with traditional? It comes off looking rather meshed, something Spirited Away suffered from as well. Best example is when a train is chasing after Spirit; you see the hand-drawn Spirit running from a computer-animated train. It would look much better if it were one or the other, but not both; unless you can really pull off some nice effects. Beauty and The Beast's famous dance sequence uses computer animation, but it is nowhere near as obvious as the train or the snow in this movie. The opening sequence was the best-looking part of the film, kind of sad to see the rest of the movie slide a bit downhill in terms of quality. A little scene has multiple; I mean multiple similar shots of just a general's face, quite repetitive and annoying in my opinion.The kids might enjoy this flick, but with lack of dialog, song, and motivation, it might be a perfect technique in making hyper children fall asleep. While Disney becomes criticized for its animated musicals, they wind up becoming much more entertaining than a more realistic approach to telling a story like this one. Bryan Adams has no place in this movie, and why does Hans Zimmer stay away from using a Western theme in this movie, when it is a story taking place in the Old West? Soundtrack sounds a bit off if you ask me. At least they are using realistic noises of horses, two points for that. Yet, if you are going to refrain from making horses talk, why even have a narrator interrupt every so often, which just so happens to be the main character himself?Native Americans are nice, and the Western folks are evil, Native-killing, horse torturing, rowdy, psychopathic monsters that must be destroyed. More or less, this is what Spirit is showing us. It reaches a point in which they are trying so hard for the viewers to hate the travelers of the Wild West; they even had a scene of several horses pulling a huge train up a hill, and another scene of them destroying an entire village of Natives. Now, the person Spirit befriended happened to betray him, on more than one occasion, yet that is forgivable, apparently because he is not a soldier; that or because he has the sassy female horse.Spirit isn't exactly a victim we should feel sorry for; the viewer is supposed to sympathize with Spirit despite him putting his entire group of horses at risk, wreaking havoc, and even perhaps resulting in some off-screen deaths that are quickly shoved aside because oh no, Spirit is in trouble! This film gets quite rhythmic, as we see in multiple instances Spirit escaping from chains, kicking people around, destroying property, freeing horses, and then getting captured again---all in this same order too. The writers also seem to have an obsession with cliffs because they are sprinkled all over the movie; for an Old West film, they certainly have very little room to roam.Bottom Line: This is most certainly no Disney movie, as a matter of fact that is a bad thing, even though it was what they were aiming for. So, instead of the typical musical, we get a boring film that becomes predictable, dull and slow in multiple instances. Even the decent animation becomes inconsistent when the computer work gets thrown in. Everything about this movie was just wrong; from the ideals that back then Americans that were not native were evil buffoons, to the soundtrack and musical score that just seemed so far off. Kill Bill Vol. 2, which pretty much has nothing to do with the Old West, has more of a Western feel than this movie. Do yourselves a favor and totally skip this by all means necessary. Thank you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b41f5aabed804789a2050314e072572c",
            "input": "No spoilers here but I have been a fan since Waking the Dead started but the last series, of which only 3 have been on so far is awful. The stories bear no resemblance to the original idea of the series. I found these 3 in the last series jaw droppingly ludicrous. As a BBC licence payer, after the show I rang BBC complaints to pass on my disappointment. I'm amazed that actors of the calibre of Trevor Eve and Sue Johnstone didn't object to the story lines. These actors have been with these characters for 8 seasons, surly they can see it's lost all direction. It's a good job it is the last series or the next series may start with the team investigating the death of Father Christmas!Paul Bentley, West Yorkshire, England.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a5badbc62774ae8bd87156d703efaa9",
            "input": "This is a total waste of money. The production is poor, the special effects are terrible. In my country they had the courage to put this film on video named as \"The Mummy\" because of the success of Brendan Fraser`s film. I`m sure that you can find better horror movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db1e520152c04060a97c3c67f68eaff1",
            "input": "Welcome to movie 17 on the chilling classics 50 pack. Where we'll see, That's right. Another movie that makes absolutely no sense. Seriously, this movie had me so confused at the end, i thought i was rewatching \"At Dawn they Sleep.\" The plot seems simple enough....well that is until 3 seconds into the movie where a girl supposedly killed a cat and then...um.. explodes? i have no idea what happened. and that was BEFORE THE TITLE SCREEN. That's really sad when i can't even tell what happened in the first 3 minutes.Anyway it stars a photographer with a big mustache who finds this girl after dumping his other girlfriend on the way to take pictures of something somewhere. so we get there but not before somebody steals their jeep to drive it 200 feet out of the way towards a town. suspicious? nah. so they decide to stay at this deserted village with one old lady. and then blah blah stuff happens and blah blah talking. The guy with the mustache goes out in the fog for some reason even though the old lady tells him not to. He gets lost and then finds his way back.Oh, i forgot to mention this is all after an incredibly pointless 20 minutes of them staying in the house of a guy who looks like that buggy eyed guy from casablanca. Then they leave. There's really no point to this scene. It's really just padding. if you cut it out no one would have noticed or cared.But sadly, that was actually the best part of the movie. wait. let me rephrase that. REALLY sadly that was the best part of the movie. because the rest is so confusing that i had to look on IMDb to find out what happened. But of course no one else knows so i'm SOL. Seriously, the last 30 minutes of the movie were some of the most mindscrewing moments i've ever seen on film. They dressed her up in a dress, he gets kidnapped, then released, he runs back to the house, then at the end the witches are in the house and it ends? seriously. i have hardly ever been so confused in a movie. i mean, as bad as movies such as \"War of the Robots\" are, at least they MAKE SENSE. this movie doesn't even make the ATTEMPT to be coherent. the ending was as confusing as the end of \"At dawn they sleep\" and the plot was much more boring. This movie gets a 1 just for its sheer \"i have no idea what happened in this movie\"ness. \"Witches mountain\" gets 1 confused movie watcher out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04d7c3d0956a4a9a900d5923a7a4e187",
            "input": "I found it a real task to sit through this film. The sound track was not the best and some of the accents made it difficult to understand what was being said. There was little to move the plot along and often the action simply stopped and there was a prolonged period of conversations which seemed extraneous to the movie. These conversations switched between family groups and the observer was left to try and piece together what the common thread was that tied them together. It is rare that I rate a film this low and do so in this case as the entire viewing experience left me thinking \"so what\" and \"why did I waste my time watching this.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e50a0cbd42b46efbc3749bba8592ac6",
            "input": "I have a piece of advice for the people who made this movie too, if you're gonna make a movie like this be sure you got the f/x to back it up. Also don't get a bunch of z list actors to play in it. Another thing, just about all of us have seen Jurassic Park, so don't blatantly copy it. All in all this movie sucked, f/x sucked, acting sucked, story unoriginal. Let's talk about the acting for just a second, the Carradine guy who's career peaked in 1984 when he did \"Revenge of the Nerds\" (which was actually a great comedy). He's not exactly z list, he can act. He just should have said no to this s--t bag. He should have did what Mark Hamill did after \"Return of the Jedi\" and go quietly into the night. He made his mark as a \"Nerd\" and that should have been that. I understand he has bills to pay, but that hardly excuses this s--t bag. Have I called this movie that yet? O.K. I just wanted to be sure. If I sound a little hostile, I apologize. I just wasted 2hrs of my life I could have spent doing something productive like watching paint peel, and I feel cheated. I'll close on that note. Thank you for your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5da1903a634345dfaebcd4111b0f45ad",
            "input": "When it comes down to fairy tales, Cinderella was the one that made you cry the most. poor Cinderella is a girl who had her whole life stolen by 2 evil and ugly stepsisters and a slave-driving step-mother. and thanks to Mr. Walt Disney, We got to witness Cinderella in animation.Before the story begins, Cinderella and her father are lonely, and rich beyond their needs. to share his wealth and to give his daughter some sisters, Cinderella's Dad marries a woman, but then dies soon after. the stepmother, only seeing dollar signs in her eyes and slavery in her gorgeous step-daughter, Cinderella.So for many days, Cinderella is a slave to her step-mother and her step-sisters. she has hope however, thanks to her friends, the mice of the home (sounds like Cinderella wasn't playing with a full deck.) she has hope that one day she'll find her prince. the chance eventually comes when the prince of the kingdom needs a girlfriend.9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35cf3c97368c409b883f4857de394e50",
            "input": "I would not consider myself as one of Leonard Cohen's greatest fans. He does however feature as an important poet / musician in my literary / musical heritage. By far the most valuable element in this documentary is to hear Leonard's reflections on his own life and career. Warming and humble. Unfortunately the most of the musicians featured in the concert didn't converse the nuances of Leonard's musical / literary manner. Nick Cave, Jarvis Cocker & Beth Orton were the exceptions, even though Leonard highly values Rufus Wainrights interpretations of his songs.What particularly failed in this documentary was the ability of the filmmaker to allow the viewer to see who Leonard Cohen is and how these musicians connect to him. A lot is said in this respect, but the viewer is not drawn into the person Leonard Cohen. This failing is especially evident with the interviews with Bono and the Edge. They view Leonard as a special icon, but can't translate their exact value of Leonard Cohen. The collaboration with U2 is a farce. The entire live registration looks like a rushed job. And just as in the whole film, only Leonard Cohen remains his part and can tell about his own part.The entire montage and screenplay is much like a high school extramural project. The use of effects such as echo, slow-motion or flashed images are ill placed. Some of the camera-work is dismal. Part of the score hardly recalls any associations I may have expected. At times it seemed the filmmaker was adding psychotic elements to the film. Perhaps a reference to his once use of LSD.Some unintentional humor ... at some point Leonard tells how he influenced a musical genre. Initially he can't recall the genre's name, until eventually he says it was punk, the punksters really picked up on his music. The next scene in the film is a live cover of 'I can't forget' ...\"And I can't forget, I can't forget I can't forget but I don't remember who\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5601d4fea26e44e499e7fcefe7af3e9c",
            "input": "Deeply emotional. It can't leave you neutral.Yes it's a love story between 2 18 years old boys. But it's only the body of this movie. And it's been removed. You only feel what happened with these boys. You feel the soul of the movie. With of course some action, some sex, but this is no pornography, too many feelings.It was only a summer \"story\", and it became, from love to hate, almost to death, the most important time of their lives. I loved it, you will too, whatever your feelings are.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d851de27cfc14f188578a088165194e8",
            "input": "This review may contain some spoilers.The remake of the classic 1974 car chase movie Gone in 60 Seconds begins well. Actually it is well acted and the plot moves quite well. But even a big Hollywood budget doesn't change the fact that the original plot was more believable. For those who don't know, the original plot had the thieves working as insurance inspectors. Who would suspect them. But even with a change to nearly every aspect of H.B. Halicki's original, the remake is a very good movie, until we get to the final chase scene, the part of the 74 version that made it great. The one in this version is watered down, only 10 minutes, and it culminates in a monster special effect that takes all believability out of the chase. Where the original chase was very believable, the star was a stunt driver who did all his own stunt, the remake falls flat in the last 15 minutes. My advice, if you want to watch a classic car chase film, fine the original in the bargain bin at your local rental joint and stay clear of the new remake.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d7d1a87c03042778f0886c68095028a",
            "input": "I bought this a year or more ago for $2 (yep, $2), left it on the shelf for ages, now watching DVDs while holed up with a cold.This is a haunting movie. Brilliant performances by all involved, especially the 6yo boy (about the only smiles you get in this movie).Plot reminds me of perhaps my favourite movie ever, Grosse Pointe Blank, but obviously that's lighthearted, this is heavy hearted.As a psychologist, a clinical and forensic psychologist, a shiver went up my spine when the identity of the new contract was revealed. Scary stuff! Brilliant work all round.Pete",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f14a2b46735041aca3f7947ef7c5adae",
            "input": "Slow, Slow, Slow... There is no mystery or excitement in this film. If you don't figure out who the \"mole\" is in the first ten minutes you must be brain dead. The secret service must have been too, because it took them the whole film to put it together. There are no compelling characters in the movie (not film). The pace of the movie is slow there is no tension. The hired killer is an excellent shot unless he is aiming at Michael Douglas than all he seems to be able to hit is large panes of glass. The funniest scene in the movie is when the presidents wife says the code word at the anticlimactic ending. It is laugh out loud ridiculous. At least six people got up and left the movie early. I would have joined them if I were not sitting in the middle of the row. I would not recommend this film to anyone.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae143a3e47314b8eb24706fee75ae7a5",
            "input": "Its too bad a lot of people didn't understand this and the next episode.But don't worry! ill explain it too you :)This episode is split in 2 parts.first part is Tony's \"Dream\" in his coma. Second part is what happens in real life.now what people didn't understand is that Tony's dream is more then just a dream. in this episode its about his preparation for his Death. He loses his own identity and eventually even forgets himself, thus he disconnects all his bindings with this world. You will notice what I'm saying at the doctor scene, where tony says he has lost his briefcase which contains \"his life\". They makers really did a superb job of interpreting they're own thoughts of what happens when you die. If you understand the whole plot you will find this and the next episode an unique thing, with great spiritual meanings.Like every sopranos episode the acting and filming is superb. Only thing i didn't understand was what the role where of the monks. gonna re watch it till i get this.anyways this episode really touched me, and i don't think anyone else can make a better view of what happens in a almost death experience.10/10 no doubt.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99b98644373940ef90144274fd45a973",
            "input": "I saw this movie again as an assignment for my management class. Were to mainly comment on the different management styles and ideas on quality(of the product). I did rent this one back in the eighties and I remember it to be good(but not great)movie. I've always liked Michael Keaton's style and delivery. He was a perfect fit for the movie.I am surprised to see some of the low ratings for this movie. I grant you yes it's no Oscar winner but it does have decent comedic value. It's more of a subtle comedy rather than a all-out comedy farce. I also find some of those that felt this was an inaccurate film on cultural and business differences. I beg to differ. I grant you again that there are a lot of generalities and dramatizations but then again this is Hollywood film not a documentary. From what I've read about differences between Automakers on both sides of the Pacific at that time many of the principle ideas were accurate for the time.Some of the basic differences were that Japanese workers made to feel as part of the company as a whole. Teamwork was emphasized. They perhaps made the company above all else. Where American workers had more of a management verses labor type of relationship. The individual was more important than the company. I'll probably get some hate email over that comment I'm sure.Another difference was how quality was viewed and whose responsibility it was to fix. In many Japanese plants defects or problems are examined and fixed at the time it is discovered. Rather as one character in the movie put it \"it was the dealers(meaning car dealer) problem\".Many of these things are probably dated but I'm sure some are still around as many US car makers are still struggling to keep up with the Japanese. If one is more interested in the subject of American, European and Japanese automakers I can recommend a book that studies this subject in more detail and was done around the same time period. The book is called \"The machine that changed the world\" by James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos. It's about a study of automakers during and before the time period that this movie covers. Parts are bit dry but I think you'll find that it backs up much the movie also.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcddb282cc6c4c96b47f32a7ec65c2d0",
            "input": "What we have here is a film about how the pursuit of money & revenge can corrupt your soul... or something like that. Guy Ritchie, a director known for his reworking of the gangster genre, bites off more than he can chew with this one.His use of modern film noir to tackle the theme of a man setting himself free by swallowing his pride, being nice to his enemy & giving away all his money falls flat on it's face. When Jason Statham's character no longer fears Ray Liotta, it apparently drives Liotta crazy enough to blow his head off in the final scene. Why? Basically you cannot set up a mafiosi like the Liotta character, who has presumably got to his station in life by displaying the kind of ruthless behaviour evident throughout the film, only then to have him driven to suicide by nothing more than a pitying smile on the face of Statham's character.Before anyone starts to say I'm missing the point... I'm not. I get it OK? Opt out of the quest for riches & you'll find true happiness and inner peace. Be nice to your enemy and this will confuse him into self-destruction. This seems to be the gist of the movie and in itself this is not a bad premise for a story, although hardly original. The problem is that Ritchie simply doesn't have the skill as a movie maker to carry it off. At the moment when even Guy Ritchie realises this, he appears to get bored with the story and begins to insert red-herrings: The scene when Statham gets knocked over by a car - Why? The shooting of some scenes as Marvel comic animations... again, why?There are so many loose threads & unanswered questions left at the end of the movie you could get all 2001-ish about it and try figuring them out, or simply accept that there are no answers & each viewer will interpret things in their own way. Myself? I was so bored with the pompous tone of the film that I simply didn't care. Frankly the ending couldn't come too soon so that I didn't have to sit through any more of this pretentious psychobabble.A waste of two hours of my life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d05c0676d02e4f6cac7d0d26be47a212",
            "input": "If you're at all interested in pirates, pirate movies, New Orleans/early 19th century American history, or Yul Brynner, see this film for yourself and make up your own mind about it. Don't be put off by various lacklustre reviews. My reaction to it was that it is entertaining, well acted (for the most part), has some very witty dialogue, and that it does an excellent job of portraying the charm, appeal and legendary fascination of the privateer Jean Lafitte. While not all the events in the film are historically accurate (can you show me any historical film that succeeds in this?), I feel the film is accurate in its treatment of the role Lafitte played in New Orleans' history, and the love-hate relationship between the \"respectable\" citizens of New Orleans and this outlaw who was one of the city's favorite sons. Don't worry about what the film doesn't do, but watch it for what it does do, i.e., for its study of one of New Orleans', and America's, most intriguing historical figures.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-035714b67f22485b8a364255c931de95",
            "input": "\" Så som i himmelen \" .. as above so below.. that very special point where Divine and Human meet. I ADORE this film ! A gem. YES amazing grace !I was so deeply moved by its very HUMAN quality. I laughed and cried through a whole register , indeed several octaves of emotions.Mikael Nyqvist ís BRILLIANT as Daniel , a first rate passionate performance, charismatic and powerful. His inner light and exceptional talent shines through in every scene, every interaction ,in every meeting. I was totally mesmerised, enchanted and caught up the story, which is our collective story, the story of life itself.The film was also so inclusive of many archetypes, messiah, wounded child ,magical child, artist, teacher, priest, abuser, abused, victim, bully, divine fool - ALL the characters so real and true to life - all awakened great fondness and compassion in me. It is a real treat to see such a thought provoking yet thoroughly enjoyable, entertaining film. Oh ..mustn't forget the heavenly choir of angels and breathtakingly beautiful sound. THANK YOU ALL - This Swedish film will surely captivate people world-wide. BRILLIANT !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9918c78ca454275a7fd00dbb8210d45",
            "input": "The problems with this film are many, but I will try to mention the most glaring and bothersome ones. First of all, while the theme suggests a number of vignettes about Manhattan life, the reality was that everything, as usual in movies and TV, was about something bizarre, usually of a sexual nature. The story lines were thin or nonexistent, and virtually every scene, camera shot, line of dialog, and expressed emotion was absolutely, and totally fake. It finally reached a point after an hour of so of mind numbing garbage that I walked out (something no uncommon for me in recent years.) I would have guessed the fi9lm was directed by some wannabe auteur drop outs from some 3rd rate film studies program, but I believe the (at one time, pre-Amelia, talented)director Mira Nair took part in this disgusting travesty, so perhaps the directorial talent in America has descended en masse into the cesspool.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e1b351ddb06458582890bf44dc30cb3",
            "input": "I know that the real story of Little Richard is a lot more thrilling than this maudlin and thoroughly average biopic. But then producer Little Richard was probably too reluctant to bring to light any sordid details of his life and just gave us a forgettable facsimile of his career highlights from the 50s and 60s.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a03807f58704bcab1f893b1f07ae6db",
            "input": "This collection of eleven short stories in one movie is a great idea, and presents some great segments, but also some disappointing surprises. Based on the tragic event of the September 11th 2001 in the United States of America, eleven directors were invited to give their approach to the American tragedy. The result of most of them is not only an individual sympathy to the American people, but mainly to the intolerance in the world with different cultures and people.Ken Loach (UK) presents the best segment, about the September 11th 1973 in Chile, when the democratic government of Salvador Alliende was destroyed by the dictator Augusto Pinochet with the support of the USA.The other excellent segments are the one of Youssef Chahine (Egypt), showing the intolerance in the world, and the number of victims made by USA governments in different countries along the contemporary history; and the one of Mira Nair (India), showing a true story of injustice and prejudice against a Pakistanis family, whose son was wrongly accused of terrorism in USA, when he was indeed a hero.Some segments are beautiful: Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) shows the innocent Afghans refugee children preparing an inoffensive shelter against bombs, while their teacher tries to explain to them what happened on the other side of the world; the romantic Claude Lelouch (France) shows the life of a couple in New York nearby the WTC; Danis Tanovic (Bosnia-Herzegovina) shows the effects of their war in a small location and the lonely protest of widows; Sean Penn is very poetic, showing that life goes on; and Shohei Imamura's story is probably the most impressive, showing that there is no Holy War but sadness and disgrace.The segment of Idrissa Quedraogo (Birkina Faso) is very naive, but pictures the terrible poor conditions of this African nation.The segment of Amos Gital (Israel) is very boring and manipulative, showing more violence and terrorism.The segment of Alejandro González Iñárritu is very disappointing, horrible, without any inspiration and certainly the worst one.My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): \"11 de Setembro\" (\"September 11\")",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-397b4b63d4a549d583519460952b9ed3",
            "input": "Im still in doubt if this is just a horrible movie or the worse movie i ever saw. Actors are painful and its impossible to get into the text.Don't waist your time into this movie. By submitting this comment you are agreeing to the terms laid out in our Copyright Statement. Your submission must be your own original work. Your comments will normally be posted on the site within 2-3 business days. Comments that do not meet the guidelines will not be posted. Please write in English only. HTML or boards mark-up is not supported though paragraph breaks will be inserted if you leave a blank line between paragraph.By submitting this comment you are agreeing to the terms laid out in our Copyright Statement. Your submission must be your own original work. Your comments will normally be posted on the site within 2-3 business days. Comments that do not meet the guidelines will not be posted. Please write in English only. HTML or boards mark-up is not supported though paragraph breaks will be inserted if you leave a blank line between paragraph.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7c2f8851d24480abf0e3024d7781610",
            "input": "This is loosely based on the ideas of the original 80's hit . It's set in the modern day as we see a base in Afghanistan get destroyed by a UAV right at the start.And that's exactly where the movie jumps the shark. UAV's aren't armed. They could be but I don't think it's ever been tried for real. We get to see the computer that has masterminded this operation, called R.I.P.L.E.Y. We are introduced to \"hacker\" Will Farmer (he's good at chemistry & electronics which doesn't make him a computer hacker) & his love interest, Annie) & Will's 1st attempt at hacking is not only a complete failure his IP address is also logged and Annie guessed who it was. We also meet Wills mom who works for a chemical company.Wills taking money from his neighbours bank account (Mr Massude) isn't a hack (he helped him set up the account), we then get a nod back to the original movie where they decide against playing Global Thermonuclear War & they play The Dead Code. The trace the RIPLEY office are running is NOT on Will but on Massude's pc so all the evidence they were gathering was useless against Will.Exactly why RIPLEY shut Will's machine down isn't explained (he's only playing an online game?) & also why it felt the need to have to shut down all the electricity in the entire block he lived in as well. Why a counter terrorism agency would see this as a viable target is extremely questionable. As for RIPLEY activating his mobile phone? I think not, it wasn't connected to the pc and the message wouldn't play unless he actually answered the phone so there's more bad \"hacking\" science there too.RIPLEY agents arrive at Massude's home, take him away & Will is given a envelope which turns out to contain a lot of money. Will searching for the licence plate of the car that took Massude isn't a \"hack\" as you never see him break into the DMV computer. The RIPLEY agents who grab Dennis in the airport as he's looking for Will have no authority to arrest or detain him. Will's mother hadn't \"been stealing chemicals & Bio agents\" either. And even if she did they had no right to arrest or detain Dennis. Patriot Act or not.I don't know why Will was worried about being arrested for any crime in Canada as its a totally different country with different laws to the US.The computer has gone rogue and all the action its taken against Will, his mother & Dennis wasn't sanctioned by a Government agency. The phone phreak we see Will do is the 1st show of any hacking skill in the movie, we also get a hack into RIPLEY which seemed too easy for such a powerful system.The \"guy\" who ran into Annie at the airport & was also watching them in the street was nothing to do with RIPLEY & the laughable notion that RIPLEY could track a cellphone whilst underground was as stupid as the idea that a computer reads lips.Another reference to the original movie when they mention Stephen Falken as the designer of the system RIPLEY replaced, the Joshua Project. We discover that the \"guy\" who ran into Annie is Falken (not played by the original actor sadly) who faked his own death.We also get to see WOPR as \"what's going to help\" them beat RIPLEY and they kept the same voice used back then. Falken & WOPR are destroyed too quickly after being hardly used at all (the same explosion should kill Will, Annie & the Russian. It's also unlikely they'd create a self-contained computer system that has the ability to nuke or drop chemical weapons on the country it operates out of.The whole \"Decontamination\" plot & idea are totally unbelievable. Those kinds of orders would have to go through the President or Joint Chiefs Of Staff. So yet another laughable & unbelievable idea.The IP hacks against RIPLEY aren't done by Will, he just contacts one of his friends who suggests & implements the idea. It's excessively laughable that Will would get a login just from increasing RIPLEY's operating temperature. Having Joshua as a backdoor into RIPLEY (especially after it had been blown to bits) is an incredible cop-out and screams of a very desperate writer who had no ideas left and wanted to get this movie over and done with.There is an awful good where RIPLEY is playing Dead Code and we see a countdown (saying 17 minutes) then RIPLEY says \"Decontamination in 30 minutes\", how crap is that when they can't even keep up with their own timer? RIPLEY's attack mission against Philadelphia is halted (far too easily in my opinion) and it decides to attack Joshua in its internal circuits and reroutes the missile aimed a Philly to Washington where RIPLEY is stationed. The idea of the Nuclear exchange to make RIPLEY realise what she's doing won't work (surely she'd already know if she had Joshua insider her as he'd already learnt this lesson in the original movie?) is yet another nod back to the original movie.Their cop-out at having RIPLEY repeat Joshua's exact same words form the end of the original movie just goes to show how many original ideas they were unable to come up with.If you want to point fingers for bad & stolen ideas the men to blame are Randall Badat & Rob Kerchner. This is an awful movie and is best avoided.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac14eac134f5491aac4cf028c5b61733",
            "input": "Stephen King was raised on flicks like this. -Flicks NOT films.Movies like this and 'Jeepers Creepers' are \"throwbacks\" to the good 'ol day drive-in horror flicks. They are meant to be fun, cheaply made and hopefully: a few good scares.Anyone looking for a theory on the human condition should pass on this creature feature because that's all this is... all it ever will be.Stop trashing what has already deemed itself as trash. -Good, fun, trash!If you enjoyed this I recommend: 'Jeepers Creepers' 'Jeepers Creepers 2' '30 Days of Night' 'Scarecrows'('88) 'They Live' 'Planet Terror' 'Death Proof' and 'Halloween III: Season of the Witch'",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ce8fdec53ca4f46b7b433d3798648e2",
            "input": "An enjoyable Batman animated film. Not on par with \"Return of the Joker\" or \"Mask of the Phantasm\", but solid nonetheless. I liked how the movie kept you guessing as to who Batwoman was. There was nice twist. Nice action sequences. I've always been of the opinion that the Batman cartoons are better then any of the pitiful Batman live action film sequels. The trend continues here.7.5 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-edb13ab1e91d4485afe25852fe869ef8",
            "input": "The film is severely awful and is demeaning to rape victims. On the surface, it may be a daring film about rape but if you dig beneath the surface, what lies is a not-so-positive message about rape. Aishwarya the rape victim is shown to be a helpless victim who cannot cope all because she is a WOMAN. She needs a MAN to help her. When the society makes jibes about her and throws comments at her, she does not stand up for herself. It is all left to Anil Kapoor to do all the talking while Aishwarya does all the crying.The director (Satish Kaushik) went down the wrong path by portraying a rape victim as weak and submissive. What would have been more effective is portraying a strong woman who rebels against her enemies in a courageous way. The director is famous for being chauvinistic. His films are usually full of weak women but he tries to hide them in controversial roles. He needs to learn that just because the role is controversial, it does not mean that the character herself is strong.The most degrading scene in the film is when Aishwarya 'cleans' herself after just being raped. She does it to please her father who thinks that she is now dirty. Though it is commendable that Shah shows the stigma against rape victims in such a stark light, what he does not show us is whether Ash's father was wrong for making his daughter do such a thing. Thus we are left with a confusing message about rape.The comedy too is not needed in a strong subject film like this. Even more so, the comedy is simply not funny. Ash is wooden in her role while Anil Kapoor does nothing but shout. The music is mediocre except for the title track, which is beautifully picturised (the only bright point of this film). Sonali Bendre's role is disappointing and pointless. Overall, what could have been a great movie to remember ends up being an awful mish-mash that will give some viewers severe indigestion.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01ec1ac94e5b45f79830f5ac25787145",
            "input": "One of the best (if not the best) Stephen King's screenings. Dark as dark can be, surprising non-hollywood ending, terrifying atmosphere, amazing book adaptation, outstanding cast, educational (don't play with afterlife), in short - everything an excellent horror should be...My favorite horror movie, straight 10+.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f5f99345dc84bada825469ad4717b72",
            "input": "When great director/actor combinations are talked about the team of J. Lee Thompson and Charles Bronson is not usually mentioned. Probably because the output of nine joint ventures between the two of them runs the gamut from the really good action entertainment to the mediocre. Unfortunately Kinjite: Forbidden Subjects falls in the latter. That's sad because Kinjite could have been a whole lot better. But for the life of me I don't understand why it was necessary to make the father of the missing Japanese girl, a guy used to getting some cheap jollies because the romance in his marriage has run out. That might have been good for another film altogether, but it served no purpose here.A straightforward cop drama with Charles Bronson as a vice cop who's seen a bit too much in his line of work and has a strong prejudice against orientals. That part could also have used a little explaining as well. But he's going to have to overcome it if he and patient partner Perry Lopez are going to locate a captured Japanese school girl.Bronson's time in the vice squad have told him exactly where to look for the kidnapper. A stylish, murderous pimp played by Jaime Fernandez is the guy and he and Bronson have some history. In fact in the film's best scene, Bronson made him eat an expensive rolex watch and set his car on fire.At one point Fernandez happens to spot Bronson and Lopez in an all night delicatessen and this being after his rolex snack, he sprays the place with an Uzi killing everyone, but Bronson and Lopez. I really think that little incident would have had more than a couple vice cops from the LAPD after Fernandez. But that's another terribly big hole in the plot.Still there is a very rough justice in the end for Fernandez. I wish the whole film had been better though. This was the last film of the Bronson-Thompson team and J. Lee Thompson's last as a director. He should have gone out with something better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb3a80ab6683401e83c8a84f764fb967",
            "input": "TACHIGUI: THE AMAZING LIVES OF THE FAST-FOOD GRIFTERS Japanese title: Tachiguishi RetsudenDirector: Mamoru Oshii Featuring: Toshio Suzuki, Mako Hyodo, Kenji Kawai, Shinji Higuchi, Katsuya Terada Narrated by Koichi Yamadera ----------------------------------------Way back in 1995, Mamoru Oshii unleashed his dazzling animation feature Ghost In The Shell, which helped consolidate anime's international acceptance - and also burrowed itself into Andy and Larry Wachowski's overall concept for The Matrix.The movie's sequel, Innocence (2004), was the inaugural Japanese animated film to compete for the Palme d'Or at Cannes, and it left heads spinning as much for its style and innovative effects as for its oft unfathomable plot.Always the trendsetter, Oshii has now presented us with Tachigui: The Amazing Lives Of The Fast-Food Grifters – which has absolutely nothing to do with Ghost In The Shell, nor Japanese anime for that matter.Say hello to Oshii's creation \"superlivemation\": not quite animation, nor exactly live-action. Instead the cast endured somewhere in the vicinity of 30,000 snapshots, which were digitally processed and reconstituted in a deceptively simple paper cut-out fashion reminiscent of Balinese puppetry. The movement itself is a stilted, stop-motion style that echoes sequences from Shinya Tsukamoto's experimental Tetsuo: Iron Man (1988).\"I couldn't think of any method but this one,\" said Oshii in a recent interview with The Daily Yomiuri. \"I realized that this project was not suitable for traditional animation.\"The cast choice is equally enigmatic. Kenji Kawai - who also composed the superlative soundtrack - appears as a ravenous burger fanatic, while renowned Studio Ghibli producer Toshio Suzuki spends his screen time being murdered in bizarre fashion. Others include Katsuya Terada, who dabbled with Oshii on Blood: The Last Vampire, and Shinji Higuchi - a special effects whiz who's worked on Godzilla movies.Koichi Yamadera's narration sounds like the stuff of a dry NHK documentary – which belies the comic undertone here as well as Yamadera's extensive career voicing stoic anime characters like Spike Siegel in Cowboy Bebop.And the plot itself is a bizarre re-imagining of post-WWII Japan in the context of various fast-food off-shoots - from soba ramen shops to gyudon stand-up bars; American dogs in the heat-up trays of convenience stores to McDonalds- inspired burger-chain restaurants. \"Food is a primal root of desire,\" asserted Oshii, by way of explanation. Thrown into the mix is a new breed of consumer: the fast-food grifters of the title, people who don't like to pay for their tucker and are constantly fine-tuning their elaborate scams to score free munchies. Oshii said his ulterior motive was homage to the \"art\" of eating food on the streets – something still considered a bit of a taboo in this country, and which goes some way toward explaining the use of \"tachigui\" in the title.The director of live-action movies (Avalon, Stray Dog) as well as animation, Oshii has often blurred the definition between the two mediums. The celluloid result here is deposited somewhere in the grey area between both formats.At times the visual experiment here is as exhilarating as it can be irritating. Just don't ask what it's all really supposed to mean; Oshii's films, which are equal parts cerebral and innovative, are often not particularly clear story-wise. Where Oshii succeeds is via a liberal dose of black humor – here you'll find Kentucky Fried Rat, death by hula-hoop, the world's fastest samurai burger chef – and in the movie's very nature of surrealism.This is a man who defers to the influence of filmmakers like Godard and Truffaut, and perhaps owes as much to Andrei Tarkovsky as he does David Lynch. So it shouldn't come as any surprise that at one stage a B-52 bomber does a fly- through in a Yoshinoya look-alike franchise. The 54-year-old writer-director seemed to think this natural. \"The Japan I depicted in the movie may not necessarily be faithful to reality,\" he suggested.Of course. --------------By Andrez Bergen",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0993373319b46aaa2931b93baec9c9c",
            "input": "The plot is tight. The acting is flawless. The directing, script, scenery, casting are all well done. I watch this movie frequently, though I don't know what it is about the whole thing that grabs me. See it and drop me a line if you can figure out why I like it so much.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38a97298fcda4b93b0405d668a15c112",
            "input": "Had this film been put together a tad better, it would be up there with the best of Astaire and Rogers. As it is, it's a fine movie but overly long with a tedious subplot, i.e., Randolph Scott romancing Rogers' sister, played by Harriet Hilliard (that's Ozzie Nelson's wife to you baby boomers).Astaire and Scott are two Navy men. Scott meets Hilliard the first time when she looks like a stereotypical librarian, and later on after Ginger Rogers has asked her friend (a blond but unmistakable Lucille Ball) to glamor her up. Meanwhile, Astaire tries to pick up where he and his old dancing partner left off. The result is some wonderful dance numbers, with Astaire and Rogers as a team as well as separately: \"I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket,\" \"Let Yourself Go,\" and \"I'd Rather Lead the Band.\" Hilliard is sweet but a little lethargic as a plain Jane turned glamor girl, although she sings her two songs well, \"But Where Are You?\" and \"Get Thee Behind Me, Satan\" - one poster didn't care for that song, but I love the title. Rogers is vivacious, and a youthful Astaire is a dynamo.The highlight of the movie comes at the end with \"Let's Face the Music and Dance,\" one of the most achingly beautiful songs ever written and certainly one of the most brilliantly executed by Rogers and Astaire. In it, they epitomize '30s glamor and fantasy. It is truly to be treasured and watched again and again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-224df13d10bd4f149ccac0046611d39b",
            "input": "In the area of movies based off of screenplays from some other area (or whatever the title for that Oscar is), \"Holes\" has credibility. I think it is better to have the author create the screenplay because the author is the creator of the material. If the author can't write a screenplay to save their life, then have the author and someone fluently talented in the area of screenwriting create it. Aside from that, this review is about \"Holes\".The reasons start here and a spoiler maybe found within. (1) Louis Sachar is an excellent author and it turns that he can write a screenplay. I watched the movie and then read the book and both didn't reek incoherence or stupidity. Some people just have natural talents that can transcend mediums. (2) The best performance award goes to Shia LaBeouf for his portrayal as the main character. He \"dug\" himself into the role. I wanted to see his character vindicated before the conclusion. (3) To ratchet up the suspense a bit, Andrew Davis was brought in. This is the man that made Harrison Ford run hard and run fast. He also can make Steven Seagal smash some heads. As for this film, he made Shia and the rest of the boys dig some holes. In other words, he can make an \"action-packed\" movie and make it well even if \"action\" isn't the main genre isn't \"action\". (4) My second favorite performance goes to Jon Voight as Mr. Sir. Sometimes a goofy role brings out the best in a performer. When Voight uttered the line \"Once upon a time...\", I must have laughed for half a minute because it was so funny. He is capable of comedy and he should investigate a few more roles that let him to exercise that talent. (5) Tim Blake Nelson is very solid whenever he is given a solid script. This is probably the second best role I have seen him in (second only to 'O Brother Where Art Thou?'). (6) I love the choice of settings for the movie. I didn't know California was that dry or that barren. I guess population and land area figures both can be misleading. (7) The overall look of the movie made me want another bottle of water. One could only imagine digging a hole in that barren area for half a day. (8) The rest of the cast should deserve a box of Kudos bars as well. Sigourney Weaver, Henry Winkler, Khleo Thomas, Jake M. Smith and the rest of the bill were tapped because of their talents and it gelled very well. Great cast even though it was anywhere near ensemble. (9) I like a movie that doesn't explain anything right away. When Stanley got clocked in the head with those baseball cleats, it made me want to see how weird the events could get and that is a key ingredient in making a good movie. (10) Disney Pictures (not Touchstone, DISNEY!!) needs to make a few more of these mature juvenile films. It was palatable for me and I am a college student. The last mature juvenile Disney film I saw was \"Something Wicked This Way Comes\" and \"Holes\" possibly exceeds it (like the election in 2000, it's still to close to call). Disney can make greatness if they decide to expand on this genre and keeps artistry in mind over milking a cash cow when they see it. Ten reasons give a score of ten!All in all, \"Holes\" is one of my favorite Disney films and probably one of the best this year (granted this movie may not be Oscar material but whoever said Oscar material is the best material?). In terms of being a movie from a book I have read, this ranks behind \"Fight Club\" on my list (which is on top). For being a film I saw in 2003, this is in the top five (somewhere behind \"Mystic River\"). Compared against \"Harry Potter\", Stanley Yelnats easily takes a shovel to Harry's head and brings the final death blow with a smelly sneaker to Potter's nose. Everybody should see this movie because it both informs and entertains. Here ends my rant!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f04df32d14594df09045f3e109ea1fbd",
            "input": "Wow, what a total let down! The fact people think this film is scary is ridiculous. The special effects were a direct rip-off of \"The ring.\" The story? Was there one? Not in my opinion..Just a bunch of flashy imaging. The entire film was a boring, stupid, mess. I guess there is always a market for bad films with good marketing campaigns. However, this is the worst horror film I have seen in years. And that Buffy chick? Well, she's a bad actress! As plastic as Barbie and just as talented..No, wait, that would be an insult to the talents of Barbie! I suppose many kiddies helped this film at the box office as it was PG-13, and had it been rated R, it would have bombed IMO! Stupid movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5f58aa62b2548bd8ad52b35ad8ea7f9",
            "input": "It's hard to believe an \"action\" packed Jet Li movie could be so boring, but this was transcendant trash. The plot is an amalgam of other Hong Kong chopsocky flicks. The martial arts action is all special effects and no human talent. It's a comic book story about a group of super-human soldiers who are to be killed because they're mentally unstable, one of their number (Li) who holds off an incompetent army to save them and rebuilds a life as a pacifist librarian. The saved killers resurface with an Austin Powers quality plot to take over the world, and Li sheds his new life to save the world.The version I saw was dubbed, and that may have accentuated the cheesiness of the wafer-thin plot and comic-book 25 cent special effects. But I suspect even Ninja-Turtle-watching 8-year olds would have found this juvenile and hollow.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3892b235b2b04242a73309e52491cc77",
            "input": "There's no romance or other side plot to this movie, it's action and intrigue all the way, making it a real man's kung-fu movie.An aging master dispatches his last disciple Yan Tieh to stop his five former pupils who's styles represents five venomous animals centipede,snake, scorpion, lizard and the toad. Despite the word \"Venom\" in the title, none of these pupil uses venoms to kill their opponents. Yan Tieh told by his teacher that he's no match for the five former pupil, must find one he can form an alliance with to defeat the other four. How Yan Tieh and the others find each other is the intrigue to the story, with good kung-fu action spread out throughout the story.Recognized as a cult classic, this movie has already established itself in the annals of kung- fu action movies. It's known well enough that other movies make reference to the five styles depicted in this story.It's no artistic masterpiece, with the usual bad dubbing, and corny acting, but the movie is one of the best of its kind, because its so focused on the all the ingredients of kung-fu action movie of its time, and gives an extra concentrated dose of them.One movie you must watch if you are a kung-fu movie fan.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72c18fa00362400a81d1c60b8922d395",
            "input": "I saw this film at the Toronto Film Festival, where it received a standing ovation! This film tells a story that to my knowledge has never been told before--namely about the Rosenstrasse (a street in Berlin)uprising of German gentile women who were married to Jews at the end of the Second World War. As such, it is a unique story, and what's more, is the only film about the Holocaust that I have ever seen that shows that there were GOOD Germans (the helping family in \"Anne Frank\" for instance was Dutch) who did NOT support the Nazis, and, in fact, had the fortitude to stand up against their own country's immorality and brutality during the Nazi regime, at the risk of their very lives. The acting is great across the board, the framing story in New York interesting and intricate, the direction from Von Trotta masterful in every scene, and the production values, including the gorgeous cinematography, outstanding. Of course the family in New York could be speaking German. Many immigrants in this country choose to speak in their native tongue with their family--a common occurrence. So that criticism is unwarranted. To say more would spoil the experience. The film is long, but I did not look at my watch once. I am hoping this film gets some distribution is North America, for not only is this film a masterpiece, but it can actually help heal any animosity people have towards the Germans because of their support of Hitler. If this film is playing in your area, I URGE YOU TO SEE IT! You will be glad you did!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-551bb77a61384787a13942d34c53d0cb",
            "input": "Awesomely improbable and foolish potboiler that at least has some redeeming, crisp location photography, but it's too unbelievable to generate much in the way of tension. I was kinda hoping that Stanwyck wouldn't make it back in time because, really, she was saddled with the wet, in more ways than one, husband,and she had an idiot child as well..why NOT run off with Meeker? But the nagging question remains..what sort of wood was that pier support made of if a rotten piece of it pulled off didn't float? Stanwyck, always impeccably professional, does the best she could with the material but it's threadbare.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c1b34800ce845caa2e67efcceb4a4f8",
            "input": "Even for the cocaine laced 1980's this is a pathetic. I don't understand why someone would want to waste celluloid, time, effort, money, and audience brain cells to make such drivel. If your going to make a comedy, make it funny. If you want to film trash like this keep it to yourself. If you're going to release it as a joke like this: DON'T!!! I mean, it was a joke right? Someone please tell me this was a joke. please.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a09e130a9434f41b18707241683ca93",
            "input": "OK, so the Oscars seem to get hyped just a little more each year. And I was rooting for \"Gosford Park\" to win (come on, Robert Altman had deserved an Oscar for years!). That said, I guess that it was high time for an African-American to win Best Actress. Contrary to the previous reviewer, Halle Berry's role in \"Monster's Ball\" was far more original than Nicole Kidman's in \"Moulin Rouge\"; I never would have thought to nominate the latter for anything, especially in a year that saw \"Mulholland Dr.\".Among the things that I had predicted was the stuff about the September 11 attacks; I knew that they were going to say something about freedom. Yeah, yeah. Robert Redford should know better. But contrary again to the previous reviewer, Whoopi Goldberg is not the worst host (among the past hosts was Bob Hope, for whom I have no respect); I really liked her jab at John Ashcroft.So, although I wouldn't have given \"A Beautiful Mind\" Best Picture, \"The 74th Annual Academy Awards\" still pleased me (I have to admit, I enjoy the Oscars more than my own birthday). And the day after, as my parents and I were hiking around the dwellings in Bandalier, New Mexico - it was spring break - I was thinking to myself that when Jim Broadbent won his Oscar, that most people watching were asking \"Jim who?!\" I wonder whether or not Woody Allen will ever attend the Oscars again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-742ed67348a0479eabeb5844ee5eb851",
            "input": "A memorable line from a short lived show. After viewing the episode where that line was introduced my fraternity intramural flag football team started using the line to break our huddles on offense. Instead of Ready / Break, our quarter back said FOOTBALL and the rest of the squad responded YOU BET! A fun way to break the huddle that had our opponents scratching their heads as very few of them had watched the show. Using this line added a unique element to our season that I'll never forget. We had our best season during my time in college that year and in a small way it was due to the fun that we had using this line. The show was pretty much a stinker but it lives on in the memories of the 1977 Pi Kappa Phi intramural flag football squad at West Virginia Tech.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c25a0bda697644fcbb14198b7bc7cffb",
            "input": "I found this film to funny from the start. John Waters use of characters reminded of some of the down to earth characters from Fellini films. Christina Ricci has once again expanded her abilities in this film. If you are looking for a fun movie without preaching, I recommend this film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c0757c3e3f347e384da661408147c8b",
            "input": "This is a very exciting and romantic film. I have seen it several times and never get bored with it. Everything is realistic and it is a good plot. The actors are excellent Liam Neeson, Jessica Lange, Tim Roth and Brian Cox.I actually prefer this film to Braveheart as Braveheart contain so many historical misstakes. There is many exciting scenes - watch out for the Bridge Scen and the last fencing scene. This is really good and surprising scenes.The music are lovely...it really suits to the movie. The setting is amazing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c08e670d8f545da9318fe4bb1251395",
            "input": "I remember this film, exhibit in Barcelona (Spain) in 1970, for the time of a week. Although it could seems incredible, and I can't offer any explanation for it, this movie was exhibit in a theater dedicated to... movies of art and big quality (that, is, Bergman, Resnais, Malle, Buñuel, and... The Projected Man). Few people saw it (luckly people, no doubt) and no reference about this very boring SF movie can be found in the Peter Nichols Science Fiction Encyclopidie, or about the author of the original novel. Very indicative. I remember of it, after all this years, a no-story, a lot of special effects that seems ridiculous effects in fact, and no more. It seems that in some countries the running time is 90 mm. and in anothers 77 min. Well, it means only a little more of pain.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8c81b815c8d4c77b326b8285aa79caf",
            "input": "A group of friends decide to take a camping trip into the desert-and find themselves stalked and murdered by a mysterious killer in a black pick-up truck.\"Mirage\" is obviously inspired by Spielberg's \"Duel\" and Craven's \"The Hills Have Eyes\".Still this slasher yarn offers plenty of nasty violence and gore.The film's gory highlight is a sequence involving a man having his arm and leg chained together around a tree and then having his limbs dismembered when the chain is pulled by a truck.There is also a little bit of suspense and some exciting stalk-and-slash sequences.The acting is pretty lame and the script is quite weak,but the film is fast-paced and shocking.B.G.Steers who plays the villain is fairly threatening.The desert locations provide some atmosphere and the gore is rather strong.Overall,if you like low-budget horror films give this one a look.8 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c0f85022ea34983aa156753cd66274c",
            "input": "After hearing about George Orwell's prophetic masterpiece for all of my life, I'm now 37, but never having read the book, I am totally confused as to what I've just seen.I am very familiar with the concepts covered in the novel, as i'm sure most are, but only through hearsay and quotes. Without this limited knowledge this film would have been a complete mystery, and even with it I'm still no more educated about the story of 1984 than I was before I watched it.On the plus side...The cinematography is amazing, Hurt & Burton deliver fine performances and the overall feel of the movie is wonderfully grim and desolate. The prostitute scene was a fantastically dark piece of film making.Now for the down sides, and there are plenty...There is a war going on, (at least as far as the propaganda is concerned), but why & with who? Nothing is explained. There are a couple of names bandied about (Eurasia etc), but they mean nothing without explanation.Who is Winston? what does he do? where does he come from? where does he work? why is he changing news reports? why isn't he on the front line? Why doesn't he eat the food in the canteen? What is that drink he's drinking through the entire film? Why is he so weak & ill? Why isn't he brainwashed like the rest of them? What's the deal with his mother & sister? What happened to his father? A little back story would have been nice, no scrub that, essential for those like myself that haven't read the book. Without it, this is just a confusing and hard to follow art-house movie that constantly keeps you guessing at what is actually going on.The soundtrack was dis-jointed and badly edited and the constant chatter from the Big Brother screens swamps the dialogue in places making it even harder to work out whats going on. I accept that this may have been an artistic choice but it's very annoying all the same.Also, I know this has been mentioned before, but why all the nudity? It just seemed totally gratuitous and felt like it had been thrown in there to make up for the lack of any plot coverage.I personally can't abide the way Hollywood feels it has to explain story lines word for word these days. We are not all brainwashed simpletons, but this is a few steps too far the other way. I can only imagine that it totally relies on the fact that you've read the book because if this film really is the 'literal translation' that I've seen many people say, I would find it very hard to understand why 1984 is hailed as the classic it is.There's no denying that it was light years ahead of it's time and has pretty much predicted every change in our society to date, (maybe this has been a sort of bible to the powers that be?), but many sci-fi novelists have done the same without leaving gaping holes in the storyline.I guess I have to do what I should have done from the start and buy a copy of the book if i'm to make any sense out of this.All in all, very disappointed in something I've waited for years to watch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18cee81d43d14fcfb2f30bbf54e7f6b2",
            "input": "Hollywood does it again. Lots of money, no creativity. I'm sure the writers were on something other than oxygen when they wrote this one. Based on the previews, I thought that this would be a funny movie. But if you are not up on the latest stupid pop culture then you'll miss most of the silly humor in this movie. Why waste your time. You can sit on a log doing nothing and have more fun than this movie will provide.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d9ca3b0f73842c1b5d4face66171caa",
            "input": "Here's a rare gem for those of you that haven't seen or most likely not even heard of this. During the 80s, Dennis Quaid was a hot commodity, but in the early 90s, Dennis Quaid disappeared from the scene. In 1993, he burst back onto the big screen with three movies, all of which unfortunately bombed. Two of those films I liked very much, and let me elaborate on one of them.\"Wilder Napalm\" is a crazy flick about two brothers, Wallace (Quaid) and Wilder (Arliss Howard), whom are...fire starters: yes they have the power of pyrokinetics. Wilder has decided not to use his power anymore (for anything not useful anyway) after a fatal incident during his youth, where he and his brother blew up an abandoned house which killed a man who was inside unbeknownest to them. Nowadays, Wilder is a firefighter and is married to the wacky Vida (Debra Winger), who is under house arrest for, guess what, arson (see the movie to understand this better). Wilder also hasn't spoken to Wallace in 5 years, because Wallace set his hair on fire during his bachelor party.Wallace loves his pyro power and uses it for amusement. He also runs a Carnival and is the head clown. When the Carnival comes to Wilder's town, Wallace decides to reunite with his brother and also to see Vida, whom which Wallace has been in love with! Vida's house arrest sees its end, but Wilder is preoccupied. So, Wallace steps in and the fun begins. Brother vs. brother...fighting fire with fire! Some great fireball throwing in this flick...eat your heart out, Drew Barrymore!The film also has some really weird, yet funny elements, like Wilder's fire unit sings songs acapella during firefights and after wards. Jim Varney (globally known as 'Ernest') pops in as Wallace's redneck carnival buddy. \"Wilder Napalm\" is brilliantly shot...and cleverly put together...very off the wall and avant-guard.Give this one a look...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74ee83e98e0241d08045d356f896f421",
            "input": "Drawing Restraint 9. dir: Matthew Barney.How do you know when you're in the middle of a pretentious art film? Is it that there is only 8 lines of dialogue in 140 minutes of film? Is it when Bjork is wearing what looks like a giant furry pita on her head in a pseudo-Asian ritual? Maybe when mammoth turds and spinal columns are used in a whale blubber experiment. Or, when you're about ready to kill the composer for making a minimal, and still annoying, version of a Philip Glass score? In any case, Drawing Restraint 9 is among the most pretentious of the modern art movies. At 135 minutes, it adds to its pretension by being boring to boot. I would call the use of color stunning, and the opening sequence interesting, but the rest of the movie looked like it was filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary. That is until it looks like they were trying to film their version of P-ss Christ, but that will be coming up later.Actually, the documentary-esquire portions were the best parts of it. The surface plot is about a whaling ship, and then there is a ritual about making whale fat. Then, there are the guests in the form of Bjork and Matthew Barney who are welcomed on the ship by being put through a ritual of humiliation which includes passed-out head shaving (think frat boy pranks), nicotine patches, and giant furry pita hats. Then there is mutual evisceration, cannibalism, and lets not forget the giant turd.Matthew Barney has written that this is about \"the relationship between self-imposed resistance and creativity.\" That's almost like saying, \"if you don't get it, then you're not creative in your interpretation, so sod off because I'm an artist.\" Oh, wait, that's the POST-modern interpretation of that sentence and what the movie would be about if it was POST-modern. But, its supposed to be Modern art. Which is about the art itself.So, let's start this whole interpretation bit, shall we? The following lines are only 3/4 serious and should not be taken as any realistic attempt to interpret the movie.The first half-hour concerns pearl divers and the construction of a giant ramp. Obviously, the ramp is symbolic of the need for self-elevation to whatever standards you hold dear, and the pearl divers are looking for pearls of wisdom. Then, on a whaling ship, they build a crate that looks like it is in the crude shape of a whale. Obviously a crude element of foreshadowing.On the ship, they make whale fat inside the shape of the whale, and take out the fins portion. They replace this with a spinal column and later a giant turd. These are supposed to be the states of the movie itself. When its fat, its entertaining but bad for you. When it is the spinal column, its the \"important\" parts of the movie, or the backbone so to speak. Then, the giant turd is the bowels of the movie, or when the movie is crap.Bjork and Matthew Barney the arrive on separate ships, are put into strange humiliating outfits which AREN'T EVEN WELL MADE OR SYMMETRICAL, one suspects that they ran out of money and Barney was trying to quit smoking. SO, they put patches on his head. They go through a ritual and learn about the ship from a Japanese wise man, who tells them that the ship is scarred from when another ship hit it; a crash or intersection, if you will. This inspires Bjork and Barney, who are different on the outside, to start cutting each other's legs off and eat them so they could turn into whales themselves and be the same person. They intersect. Oh, did I forget to mention that this has been done in a Robbie Williams video? Then, the pearl divers come back with their mouths full of pearls of knowledge which they let fall to make a stupid Venn Diagram. Barney made it through 8th grade geometry, obviously. Or, maybe at least some social studies.Oh, and did I forget Bjork's ear-gouging I-want-to-kill-her score? At times it is hypnotic, but at others you just want to assassinate her.Art film is one thing, but when you just throw up all sorts of symbolism in the hopes of getting a reaction out of people, it becomes a self-destructive joke. When do you cross the line between becoming a joke in terms of art? Dali and Bunuel frequently made surreal pieces of nonsense but were more coherent and/or entertaining than this piece of trash. Un Chien Andalou had the sensibility to cram as much symbolism as it could into less than half an hour.So, can I recommend this? Only if you like dull HIGH ART films with lots of symbolism and flat imagery.D+",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-230f3bf09f4345629fc7235c5f22660c",
            "input": "Preston Waters, a 11 years old boy,has problems with his parents and brothers specially because of money issues. He is crazy to have his own house and his own rules,since his brothers always stole his saved money and his parents neglect his wishes. One awful day, Preston was riding his bicycle; It was the same day that the villain of the story,Quigley, was trying to scape from the Police and accidentally ran the car over Preston's bike. Needing to be far away from the police, Quigley gives in a hurry, a check to cover the damages of Preston's bike. The problem was: It was a blank check! Preston is a clever boy and decides to have a high price on that check: 1 million dollars! All that money gives Preston things that he always wished for, like a mansion with pool,lots of toys, and even a limousine! The problems start to begin when the FBI and Quigley wants to know where the money is, making Preston in a hard situation and facing many problems.This movie was one of my favorites during my childhood. :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87fea142ecd64e068c9bd5e2c2ff4dbb",
            "input": "This documentary makes you travel all around the globe. It contains rare and stunning sequels from the wilderness. It shows you how diversified and how fragile our planet can be. The polar bear's future is highlighted at the beginning and at the end of it. After all, its bleak future is closely linked with the consequences of global warming. This documentary is however a simplistic approach of such a serious environmental issue. It can nonetheless be easily seen by young children since it mainly remains descriptive. Scientists might well be disappointed as it is not a remake of Al Gore's documentary \"An inconvenient truth\" but frankly...what a description!!! A question may then arise: Isn't it worth preserving our world's beauty? Because this documentary proves that in 2007 such a beauty still exists despite the different pollutions. By living in towns and cities we tend to forget that we are part and parcel of this nature. All things considered this documentary reminds us that we own a common treasure called \"EARTH\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef81ca3bb61d4bfca01f6f63dbef6000",
            "input": "I have never commented on a film before. I watched this movie with my girlfriend last night. I've read comments saying this movie stays with you. It does. It's been almost 24 hours and I am still completely affected. This movie left me questioning my own self. How can I possibly compare myself to a character such as Ben who is totally selfless. I loved this movie. I love movies that keep me guessing and wondering until the end. I feel two emotions predominantly, happiness and sadness. An amazing feel good movie and a very sad one too. I so wanted Ben and Emily to be together, but in the end, they were, forever. If you haven't seen this movie, get it and watch it. Just make sure you have no distractions. You'll want to see every nuance in this picture. One for my library.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89c59ee48f444536b9bd29f9e674cbb1",
            "input": "Hint number one - read the title as \"the Time of the Mad Dog,\" or perhaps dogs. This is a pretty good ensemble piece (look at the cast and rent it - you know you're curious already), and first-time director Bishop gives them their chance, taking his time, letting the characters interact and chew the scenery as they wait - not enthusiastically - for the return of \"the big boss\" and whatever revenge ensues.For some of us, the highlight is seeing Christopher Jones after his self-imposed exile from films; he remains a commanding film presence. And yes, with Christopher Jones, Larry Bishop and Richard Pryor involved, this IS the \"Wild in the Streets\" reunion party!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a7cfcf2861c4f96aabaf37f567dd117",
            "input": "This movie is a lot like the movie Hostel, except with *BAD* acting and not much suspense. The gore elements are there, but you don't really feel anything for the characters, making the violence not very effective. Some parts are just strange... like forcing a snake down someones throat. What's up with that? Is that supposed to be scary or gory? It's just kind of stupid. As for torture, there really isn't any (except for the guy getting blow-torched in the beginning, which they don't show anyway). The main bad guy keeps saying \"make them die slowly\", yet the butcher kills them all very fast. The deaths are all relatively quick. Yes, I did watch the \"unrated\" version. So, overall, not the worst gore movie I've seen, but not at all good either. You won't miss anything if you skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b863b4cb2a04d84b5ea32c9150c4d99",
            "input": "I can't tell you how angry I was after seing this movie. The characters are not the slightest bit interesting, and the plot is non-existant. So after waiting to see how the lives of these characters affected each other, hoping that the past 2 and a half hours were leading up to some significant finish, what do we get??? A storm of frogs. Now yes, I understand the references to the bible (Exodus) and the underlying theme, but first of all, it was presented with absolutely no resolution, and second of all it would be lost to anyone who has not read the bible (a significant portion of the population) or Charles Fort (a still larger portion). As a somewhat well read person, I thought this movie was a self indulgent poor imitation of a seinfeld episode.Don't waste your time. It would be better spent reading......well anything to be honest",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88cb688a09784762953283cab192831e",
            "input": "It is like what the title of this thread say. Only impression I got from that movie is that Marlee Matlin's character was always angry, so cynical, and so pathetic. Her character's first date with William Hurt's character where they were dancing were dumb. All in all, I've tried to finish watching the movie four times, and of all four times I fell asleep. I would keep watching that movie with one intention... to beat my problem with insomnia, because all it do is to put me to sleep. Sweet dream.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecb078fd696f43428361e2fcb47a8ba7",
            "input": "I disagree with much that has been written and said about this supposed \"masterpiece\" of the German New Wave: 1) There are major flaws in simple exposition, in the basic communication of critical plot points, as relating to Maria's abortion and the secret contract between Oswald and her husband. How many viewers understood that the husband agreed, in exchange for substantial financial remuneration, not to return to and reclaim his wife until Oswald was dead?2) The ending is highly unsatisfying because arbitrary and accidental. The original screenplay called for Maria to commit suicide after the reading of Oswald's will, on finding out that her husband had in effect sold their marriage to Oswald. In the final version, however, Maria only runs water from a faucet across her wrist in a gesture of suicide. Maria is then summarily blown up, rather than having to confront and live with the consequences of her self-delusion and moral compromise.3) Fassbinder seeks to forcibly superimpose the public on the private, the political on the personal. Contrary to what the critics and \"experts\" assert, I don't think it works. Merely intruding historic radio news or the sound of the jackhammers of German reconstruction in the soundtrack on the dramatic events of the movie does not make those historical events integral to the drama. The selfish ambition of Maria's rise from poverty to prosperity is meant to parallel the so-called economic miracle of postwar Germany. Maria is thus intended to be a woman specific to and reflective of her time and place, but is in reality unoriginal and nonspecific. Women have been asserting their independence by using sex for self-advancement for ages. 4) Lastly, there are several instances of inexcusable sloppiness and amateurishness -- Fassbinder's drug addiction and consequent impatience and inattention have had their effect. Unknown people talk off screen without ever being seen; music is clumsily intrusive in places; and melodramatic posturing sporadically substitutes for acting.Strangely, for a movie condemning a country for willful collective amnesia of the holocaust, it itself never mentions it once.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c05daa4a06d8493dadef09928f48d18f",
            "input": "I recently rented this doc, having remembered hearing about it from IMDb.com and being intrigued by the premise. I knew very little about either of these bands, but I do remember hearing \"Not If You Were The Last Junkie On Earth\" by The Dandy Warhols ages ago and enjoying it. That being said, this is my perspective on the doc:One thing I found incredible about this film is there is no need to have any prior knowledge of either of these bands. The director (Ondi Timoner) wastes no time in engaging the audience and familiarizing them with the people in this film. I quickly became grooved to the lives both Anton and Courtney as well as their respective bands, The Brian Jonestown Massacre and The Dandy Warhols. I think that is part of what makes this doc so good, and what makes Ondi Timoner such a master documentarian.I also loved how the \"story\" of these bands was told. Most of what you see is of the bands on tour. Both bands start out playing small venues and struggling to make it in the recording industry. Throughout the film, each band strives to remain unique and uncontrolled by the norm. However it is this that makes the two bands similar, and thus the brilliant perspective on how two bands of a feather can go in such different directions.I would basically recommend this for ANYONE who likes film in general. You do not need to have a particular love for documentaries, or either of the bands. An appreciation for music helps, but the music itself takes a backseat to the love/hate relationship between The Brian Jonestown Massacre and The Dandy Warhols.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac5a1830282d4b16b5ae3c0e7c97f9da",
            "input": "This movie appears to have designed as a Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers film--the plot outline, dance numbers, zippy music and the entire formula is there...except for Ginger! Whether it REALLY was originally intended as a re-pairing of the team is uncertain but it sure has the look of one of these films. Instead of the usual sidekicks for Fred (such as Eric Blore or Edward Everett Horton), Burns and Allen are used--probably since despite being known as a comedy team, they COULD sing and dance quite well. This actually shocked me, but the team were a welcome addition and some of the traditional Fred and Ginger numbers were done with either Fred and Gracie or these two along with George. Only once, at the very end, does Ms. Fontaine dance with Fred but it's very brief and with a distant camera shot.And speaking of Burns and Allen, I think I owe it to the team to talk about them in the film. I have never been a fan of their show or their movies. In general, I find Gracie's idiot act very annoying and I have given some poor reviews to their movie shorts and full-length films. However, in this film I must admit that they were great--not only dancing competently but I actually thought they were funny and filled the hole left by Edward Everett Horton very nicely. They were on top of their game and the writers did a wonderful job in this department.Now as for the rest of the film, it's all a lot of fun and is entertaining. The problem for me, though, was that Joan Fontaine was not a particularly good choice for the movie--not just because she was acting outside her range (after all, she wasn't a singer or dancer), but because she had the screen presence of a ball of lint. Because of this, the usual balance and great boy-girl dialog was lacking. There was also a very charming performance by Harry Watson as a devilish little boy who did everything he could do to play cupid--all because he wanted to win a bet! And finally, I loved the Fun House and Tunnel of Love sequence--it is too hard to describe but is so much fun to watch! Overall, I did like the film quite a bit--it had a lot of charm and excellent writing. Unfortunately, it also featured a bland performance by Ms. Fontaine that knocks off a point--bringing my score for this film to 7.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa3da86d0035409786af0a76a92fd32c",
            "input": "Man On Fire tells a story of an ex-special forces guy with a drinking problem who accepts a job as a personal bodyguard of a little girl in Mexico during the wave of kidnappings for ransom. At first he's not to friendly, but then they befriend with each other, he decides to stop drinking etc., etc... then one day she gets kidnapped... and killed...And HE, won't stop at anything to get the revenge.That's basically the story of Man On Fire but expect some big twists at least a few times including the ending which is beautiful and will probably make you cry.That's also because of the great music Harry-Gregson Williams with Lisa Gerrard (Gladiator) composed.But the strongest part of the movie... wait... the thing is, everything here is perfect.First - acting. Denzel Washington is at his best, Mickey Rourke and Christopher Walken good as always, great Radtha Mitchell and AMAZING young Dakota Fanning. And that's not the end of the list...Then come the cinematography which is dazzling and along with superb editing, should have won an Oscar for sure.The story is... not just a revenge movie. The story is intelligent, the story makes you think... and is pure beautiful. Really.This is one of those movies you need to see in your lifetime, at least once!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e80ac5ca415d4bd7be74d3f4d206ecb5",
            "input": "A great addition to anyone's collection.12 monkeys is a movie you don't see every day. It has excellent actors to go with a excellent story. This is not a normal role for Bruce Willis but he holds the role like he holds John McClane.The virus-kills everyone on earth and leaves a few hundred survivors story is not a new one but the story takes a fresh new direction on it.A man(Bruce)is sent back in time to get information on a virus which has wiped out most of man kind.The actors in this were awesome. I must give a mention to Brad Pitt who was hilarious as the mental patient James Cole(Bruce) meets in a mental hospital.The director did an amazing job on bringing us a disturbing picture of a future devastated by a man-made virus.The animals seen in the virus world made it feel like they run the world when humans are driven into underground facilities.This movie was excellent and must see and also its a must own.I very much highly recommend it.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e13521dadb064ffb8f180d71aab8c7ba",
            "input": "\"The Groove Tube\" was initially shown on video, in the first \"video theaters\" here in Boston. In one room, there were TV monitors on high stands, with old movie theater seats, in small groups facing the monitors. There were old refrigerators stocked with Pepsi, and baskets of York Peppermint Patties. In a second, smaller room, there were no seats, just large pillows. That was the 'smoking' room, i.e., people got high in there. That act only added to the hilarity of the video.I was a 'frequent viewer'; the scenes I liked most and remember to this day are: Koko The Clown, The Kramp Family Kitchen (Kramp Easy-Lube Shortening), Safety Sam/ VD PSA, the Chevy Chase hitchhiker w/ nude runs through the woods, the Finger Ballet on what was eventually revealed to be the nude body of a woman. The last item was very reminiscent of the late, incredible Ernie Kovacs. Now, I've lost a lot of readers that are under 48 (\"who is Ernie Kovacs??\") but trust me, it's funny stuff.One reason I was a 'frequent viewer' was that I, and my friends, would bring other \"Groove Tube\" virgins to see it. We would sit and slyly watch the faces of the 'virgins' as the \"Safety Sam\" PSA would play. As the camera slowly zooms in on \"Sam\", we would wait for that \"OH!\" of recognition on the 'virgin's' face. Each time was more hilarious than the last. And then that 'virgin' would then bring a friend to see the show, repeating what we had done. To get this joke, you must watch the video.Yes, some of it is dated, but most plays, film, television, and now videos are. Just look at any video made in the 1980's.I did see \"The Groove Tube\" in a theater as a film, a grainy transfer from the original video. It had been cut, and was missing some of the original high-point scenes.The first \"Saturday Night Live\" show, featuring Chevy Chase, elicited instant remarks of, \"that's the guy from \"The Groove Tube\" \", so it was a precursor for Chevy.I can't look at a can of shortening without hearing the voice-over, \"coat your hands with a generous amount of Kramp Easy-Lube shortening...\" and thinking of the \"Kramp Holiday Loaf\" recipe. Always gets me laughing in the Baking Needs aisle in the grocery store.The early 70's were parlous times; \"The Groove Tube\" was fresh, new, and really 'got' the humor of the times. It offered a 'hip generation', humor that wasn't available in any other format/medium. MJH",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-520c08393448426885f29dd38ad9e79e",
            "input": "This is just about in the same league as `The Black Cat', although I'd give this a 9 rather than a 9+. That's praise indeed for a film that has been so badly underrated that it is amazing!`The Invisible Ray' is part horror, part drama and certainly part sci-fi. For a movie made in 1936 the sci-fi elements were a good deal ahead of their time. The mixture of horror, drama and sci-fi are a perfect blend, while the acting on the part of Lugosi and Karloff couldn't be better.Director Lambert Hillyer captures a lot of elements that James Whale did so often. What I'm saying is that this film is eerie and well shot. The scene with the gargoyles outside of Lugosi's room is a perfect example of the mood. It's a standout moment in the film, which is so sadly missing in today's movies of the genre.As with `The Black Cat' and `Island of Lost Souls', I can't understand why this film has yet to be released on DVD. When you consider some of the junk that's already been transferred to DVD it's that much more puzzling.Anyway, watch this film if you get the chance. When it's released on DVD grab it fast and put it in an honored spot within your DVD library.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dd1e24777f34674b9a14c1f8cd50987",
            "input": "this movie was definitely the worst movie i've seen in my entire life, and i've seen some pretty bad movies. i didn't like the way this movie was filmed. all of the actors are unknown, and it looks as though a bunch of friends got together and decided to film their own movie. but it's absolutely horrible. i've never seen a worse movie. the story is so fake, and i just found that it took a really long time to get to the end of the movie. there was no plot, it looked as though it wasn't planned out before they started filming. the story is too weird. i didn't like how slow it took to get to the point of the movie. there was no point in even filming this movie. if you're considering watching this movie, don't. you're just wasting your time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6678e5a205ad4679936f065212380087",
            "input": "Wow... what... a whirlwind. The 30's is a decade with plenty of movies of every type I can imagine, especially during the early talkies phase. There were movies which are painfully static and dull, like \"Dracula\" with Bella Lugosi, and there were those that just don't give it a rest, sometimes in a good way and other times not. This is one of the films that don't stop for a minute, and that is both a wonder and a pity. Lloyd Bacon, who also directed \"42nd Street\", must have been the king of the Depression Era musicals and he was probably excited with the possibilities sound brought to the world of cinema, for he filled this picture with it. There mustn't be a full minute or two without music or someone speaking. It's completely crazy! I was thinking the movie deserved a 5 (or a 6, tops) because the pacing was very poor, since it was insanely fast and I sometimes didn't know what was happening and what to think. The characters seemed to just running to and fro places, talking about things which didn't interest me and probably no one else. I thought I was just going to be rewarded with a small headache. I noticed Lloyd Bacon also cast the female lead in \"42nd Street\", Ruby Keeler, and \"42nd Street\" was a movie whose ending was the best part of it. And you know what? It happened the same thing with \"Footlight Parade\"! The ending is absolutely incredible! It has become, hands down, the most impressive musical I have ever seen. The final part presents us some musical numbers and those are, believe me, something that make seeing the other rest of the movie worth. The numbers are flawless! There are three big bits and the most impressive is surely the second one. Suddenly the screen was filled with gorgeous and inventive camera work, beautiful people and plain entertainment that made me forget my small headache.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6ad8133f0e646da8f7c1dadf036fe00",
            "input": "Before I comment on this movie I just watched on YouTube, I have to admit that the reason I checked this out was to rewatch something I first saw on the TV ads in 1980: Barbara Bach's cleavage. And since the movie received an R rating, I expected to see her nude. Alas, no dice for her or of the other gorgeous actress that appeared here: Stacey Nelkin who's supposed to be a teen but was actually 20 when she made this. Seeing her in a bra and panty and later in a belly dancer outfit was just as arousing as Ms. Bach. They provide some of the scattered laughs this movie provides. In fact, I don't blame Ron Leibman for having his name removed from the credits since his role as the tight-fisted Liceman is pretty embarrassing though I did like the \"seduction\" scene he did with Ms. Nelkin. This also happens to be the debut of Ralph Macchio who's the loner among the misfits sent to an academy school. The others are a black kid who really loves his stepmother and Ms. Bach, an Arab who worships motor oil, and a politician's son who loves his girlfriend Candy (Nelkin's character) so much, he risks sneaking in the middle of the night see her in the girls academy. Among the supporting cast, Tom Poston plays a swishy character named Sisson who I found partly amusing. With a screenplay by Tom Patchett and Jay Tarses and direction by Robert Downey Sr. (whose son Robert Downey Jr. has a cameo early on in a soccer scene), Up the Academy is uneven with the politically incorrect humor but unless you're really offended at the scatological and sexual content, this is actually a pretty harmless comedy that Mad Magazine and its trademark cover boy-Alfred E. Newman-shouldn't be ashamed of even though they once had their name and character taken off the picture...P.S. Another one of the \"misfits\" was Harry Teinowitz who was born in my birth town of Chicago, Ill. He played Rodney Ververgaert. He also says one of my favorite lines: \"I'm trying to come.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d991e7fce4564e1694134089a1972279",
            "input": "This anime was underrated and still is. Hardly the dorky kids movie as noted, i still come back to this 10 years after i first saw it. One of the better movies released.The animation while not perfect is good, camera tricks give it a 3D feel and the story is still as good today even after i grew up and saw ground-breakers like Neon Genesis Evangelion and RahXephon. It has nowhere near the depth obviously but try to see it from a lighthearted view. It's a story to entertain, not to question.Still one of my favourites I come back too when i feel like a giggle on over more lighthearted animes. Not to say its a childish movies, there are surprisingly sad moments in this and you need a sense of humour to see it all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17faffc341514d6b87549f526cdd9701",
            "input": "Råzone is an awful movie! It is so simple. It seems they tried to make a movie to show the reel life. Just like Zappa did many years ago. But unfortunately Denmark lacks good young actors. Leon are by many still the little girl in \"krummernes Jul\", and Laura is simply not good enough to play such an important role. several times in the movie she plays with out soul and this is destroying the movie!Even though i consider it a movie you ought to see. I do not agree that the youth are behaving like this, but i think it can show how it can end, if you are letting your child down. Also it is important to support danish movies and new companies like \"Film folket\"!all in all I think people should see Råzone. Not because it is a great film, but because it is a movies which is dealing with important themes. I also think it is important to point out that there are some violent scenes in it, and actually it is in these scenes, Laura is acting best. - like the ending where she is holding the gun!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a176d7d0934b448fa4c2c0531bf6a05a",
            "input": "Needless remake, and it can't come close to capturing the charm of the original. The extreme length causes more than a few yawn inducing parts. This version is ridiculously politically correct. The film lacks style, and mostly it lacks talent, not just with the acting, but the direction, sets, costumes etc. are all below par. It has a blatant disregard for period detail. Vanessa Williams is the only cast member that shows any flair, Tyne Daly isn't too bad. They should have left well enough alone. The singing ranges good (Vanessa Williams) to poor (everyone else). Watch the original 1963 version and skip this one. There is not much here to recommend.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d3f574c9cd94b6d96d115085bf4a1eb",
            "input": "What a GREAT movie! This is so reminiscent of the wonderful Disney classic family movies of the 60's and the 70's. I was so pleasantly surprised, after the past 20 years of absolute detritus Disney's live productions crews have churned out.This movie is an absolute joy. The child stars were just that; professional, quality actors. I am most impressed with the quality of this movie.Sigourney Weaver was a total sycophantic *insert hyperbole here* running a prison camp for wayward boys. Siobhan Fallon was wonderful as the star's mother.I won't recant the story here as there is little point in doing that yet again, but the story is wonderful, the direction was extraordinary and the acting quality was superb! This work reminds you what it's like to be a child, without going all sugary or being too grim. The deleted scenes featured on the DVD version were truly best left deleted. They were too harsh for this movie and would have taken so much from it. While the abuse was hinted in the finished product, it was not outright shown beyond a certain extent. It was best that way.This was an absolutely delightful movie to watch.It gets a 9/10 from...the Fiend :.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49d5d33a01cf4c72b1561dd846a5a683",
            "input": "SPOILERS (ALTHOUGH NONE THAT AREN'T REVEALED IN THE FIRST TWO MINUTES OF THE MOVIE)Robin Williams is actually quite good in this as the friendly, lonely, emotionally stunted loser Sy. He makes a very human, even sympathetic psycho, and really disappears into the character--no small feat for such a recognizable performer. Too bad the rest of the movie is such a waste. The supporting performances (and performers) wouldn't look out of place in a soft-core porno (it doesn't help that every character but Sy is made of 100% cardboard). At times, the director actually seems to be trying to frustrate suspense: we know from the very first moments a) that Sy is a complete whack-job, b) that he survives, and c) that he gets nabbed by the cops at the end. So all we're left to ponder is the hows and the whys, and the answers provided aren't all that interesting.The plot is plodding and contrived, and features some nonsensical moments (for instance, the husband berates his wife for her expensive tastes, even though she seems to spend all her free time at the local discount superstore). About two thirds of the way through, Sy does something so irredeemably stupid that it makes one wonder how much he actually cares about his grand revenge scheme. And the final clichéd explanation of his psychosis, right out of `Peeping Tom,' is a terrible copout.The dialogue is of the absolute worst sort. It's not overwritten, or awkward, or unbelievable, or bad in any other way that could be considered fun, even for bad-movie lovers. Instead, every line is purely, hideously functional--it's as if the director handed a plot outline to a newspaper copywriter and said, `Hey, I need a workable script on this--in an hour.' It made me want to scream, honestly.This movie seems to be a throwback to the suburban beware-the-help thrillers of the eighties and nineties (`The Hand That Rocks the Cradle,' e.g.), and while it's certainly unpleasant, it's never really scary. Sy's fetishism occasionally makes you feel uncomfortable, but on its own that's not enough to make the film work. In the end, lack of craftsmanship from everyone involved, except Robin Williams, sinks this one. 3 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55b7b2fbcabf4099b757784bbc85f75f",
            "input": "I wasn't sure what to expect but am I glad I went to see this. A smart, slightly twisted comedy that makes you think. I wasn't quite sure how a director can create \"nothing\", but leave it to Mr. Natali and the brilliant individuals at C.O.R.E. to create another low budget set that looks real (as real as nothing can be). Well worth your time and money, if you have the opportunity to see this, please go. You'll be glad you did.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-615abd2aee924d498e613444c6c97f19",
            "input": "This movie kept me constantly entertained. In comparing this to Serial Mom, Mr. Waters has gone back to his grittier side. This is not nearly as polished.There is a dark side here. A message about how success and fame changes a person -- but more importantly how it changes the people around you.There is not a false moment in this film.The characters are somewhat cartoonish... but I want to believe that is what Mr. Waters is trying to achieve.It is fascinating to watch how Mr. Waters has evolved... This is truly his finest work.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74982ad0b74c43389783b7656e525db6",
            "input": "I had no background knowledge of this movie before I bought it, but it sounded cool and I've been wanting to see a really kick-butt Viking movie for awhile now... alas, this film was not what I was looking for. I had hoped for the best, but instead, was delivered a boring Nordic soap-opera that seemed to drag on too long despite its 84 minute running time. The film's premise is intriguing enough: It's about a Viking warlord who defies his God and Odin is so enraged that he curses the warlord's son, named Barek, to death and rebirth as a Berserker. This Barek guy is then forced to live enraged, insane, and violent lifetime after lifetime. The movie is filmed competently enough, with some rich cinematography and quasi-good performances by the actors, but again, I found myself bored and questioning when this dribble would end. The filmmakers had a chance to make something rather entertaining and semi-unique but they dropped the ball. Perhaps it could've been improved with some cheap exploitation tactics thrown in such as gratuitous nudity and lots of gore... I mean, we are talking about \"Berserkers\" here, aren't we? Vikings were supposed to be BAD enough, what with all the raping and pillaging, so aren't Berserkers supposed to be even more extreme? All in all, unless you're a fan of The Young and Restless (etc...) or, are yourself, in fact, an insane Berserker who likes self torture, I'd probably steer clear of this drab piece of celluloid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe58533662c248a18d8ceb5f20d2d21a",
            "input": "Having enjoyed Mike Myers previous work (Waynes World and Saturday Night Live) my expectations of a 60s bond spoof were fairly high. It became plain after the first minute that this was an exercise in how to be as puerile and unfunny as possible. I swit ched off after ten minutes. I watched it the other day a second time to see whether I had been unfair the first time. I switched it off after ten minutes. I find it hard to believe how even a twelve year-old boy could find this funny. The dialogue is an e mbarrassment, Myers is painful to watch (as is Heather Graham) and the succession of characters including Fat Bastard makes matters even worse. Apart from the mildly amusing title and the psychedelic set design this is one of the worst films I have ever seen. I personally recommend you avoid this like the plague, though several friends of mine enjoyed it (maybe they were blindfolded at the time).º",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c1d1efd37cb4465812047dcd84f6527",
            "input": "Well I'm blowed, a Woody Allen film that I walked out of after half an hour (I'm aware of the moral fragility of commenting on a film of which I've seen less than half, but I hope you'll understand why). Basically, it became apparent very early on that we were going to be patronised from the screen with: a script that set out its conceit as if with bullet points; a cast that were all trying to be characters from Hannah and Her Sisters (with the exception of Chloe Sevigny), and were badly directed into doing so; and a camera that sat around portentously, only for there to be nothing to film but chat and the actor delivering it. Drama? None; it's partially pre-narrated, but the action does nothing to develop a dramatic situation.Maybe I did leave too early in this case, but by then I'd decided against another hour and a half of one-liner-Allen clones. The script has its funny moments – I went almost entirely on the back of Will Ferrell's excerpts in the trailer (trailer-hooked again, doh!) – but there's little pace to let them fly off nonchalantly, as is best. Worse than this there's no fluidity. Saying this film's wooden makes a forest look like a jelly: the opening café-bound discussion being the most abject case-in-point. The only thing that should be done by numbers is potted reviewing – 2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c2f747be1c64657a86c2522dad9ae52",
            "input": "The question, when one sees a movie this bad, is not necessarily, \"How did a movie this bad get made?\" or even, \"Why did I see this awful in the first place?\" but, \"What have I learned from this experience?\" Here's what I learned:- Just because the \"rules\" of horror movies have been catalogued and satirized countless times in the last ten years doesn't mean someone won't go ahead and make a movie that uses ALL of them, without a shred of humor or irony.- If your movie has to be described as **loosely** based on the video game, you have script problems.- The black character may not always die first, but the Asian character does always know kung-fu.- While you may be proud that you figured out how to do the \"the Matrix effect\" on a budget, that doesn't necessarily mean you should use it over and over again ad nausea.- Being Ron Howard's brother does not guarantee choice roles.- Whenever a scene doesn't edit together, just use some footage from the video game, no one will notice.- If your cousin's rap-metal band offers to write your movie's theme for free, politely decline.- Zombie movies are not about people killing zombies. They're about zombies killing people, preferably in the most gruesome way possible. That's what makes them SCARY.- White people who can pay $1600 to get to a rave deserve to die.- If you find an old book, it will tell you everything you need to know. Anything else you will figure out on your own two lines after someone asks, \"What was that?\" or, \"Where are we?\"- Bare breasts are not horror movie panacea.- A helicopter boom shot and a licensing deal with Sega magically transforms your movie from \"student film\" to \"major studio release\". Try it!- Just because you can name-drop all three \"Living Dead\" movies, that does not make you George Romero. Or even Paul W. S. Anderson.I've seen worse movies, but only because I've seen \"Mortal Kombat: Annihilation.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-774d3ae6c34140698b376c87a9af1b35",
            "input": "I saw this little magnum opus for the first time very recently, on one of those dollar DVD's that seem to be everywhere nowadays, and was so moved by it that I cannot contain myself. For those who have never seen this mesmerizingly miserable Mexican import, and wish to view it without being prejudiced by anyone else's jaundiced commentary, there are undoubtedly substantial spoilers in what follows. So if you are one of those reckless individuals, stop reading at once and go and watch it for yourself. If you get drunk enough in advance, you might be fortunate enough to pass out before it's over.Begin with the premise that a man may become a werewolf after being bitten by a yeti. No one in the film ventures an explanation as to how this sort of cross-species implantation could occur, and the rest of the movie is even more hopelessly nonsensical. But pour yourself another glass of wine (or whatever you're drinking), and let us proceed.Paul Naschy (our werewolf) has the look of a man fighting a toothache, in a town where the only dentist has traded his supply of Novocaine for a case of cheap whiskey, and has been drunk ever since. (Ain't he the lucky one?) Naschy's facial expression never varies, whether in or out of makeup, and apparently no one gave him any coaching on how to act like a werewolf. Occasionally he tries to imitate the Lon Chaney Jr. crouch, but most of the time he simply strolls around in his black mafia shirt, like just another cool dude with a tad too much facial hair. To be fair, the makeup is actually better than the actor inside of it, but the continuity is infinitely worse. Naschy's werewolf is the only one I can think of that changes shirts twice in the middle of a prowl. He goes from black shirt to red shirt, then back to black, then back to red, then back to black, all in a single, frenzied night. Interestingly enough, he always does the Chaney crouch while wearing the red shirt, and the cool dude walk while wearing the black shirt. And it's only while he is wearing the red shirt that we see much of the fury alluded to in the title. Presumably there's something about that red shirt that just brings out the animal in him.So anyway, after being bitten by the cross-pollinating yeti, the poor schmuck returns home from Tibet to learn that his wife has been sleeping with one of his students. The two illicit lovers try to murder him by adjusting the brakes on his car. He survives the wreck, and makes it home just in time for a full moon. Then, after chewing up his wife and her lover, he wanders off again, and somehow manages to get himself electrocuted. But is that enough? Can they let this tormented wretch rest in peace? Not a chance. He is resurrected by a supposed female scientist with a hardcore S/M fetish, otherwise known as \"The Doctor\" (and definitely not a new incarnation of Doctor Who). She digs him up and whisks him away to her kinky kastle, takes him down to the dungeon, chains him to the wall, and gives him a damn good flogging. Presumably such a string of indignities ought to be enough to put a little fury into any wolfman.After his two-shirted rampage, our wolfman spends most of the rest of the film wandering around the castle, trying to find a way out. (And who can blame him?) In the course of his wanderings, he encounters a bewilderingly incoherent assortment of clichés, including a man dressed in medieval armor, a curiously inept Phantom of the Opera impersonator (supposedly The Doctor's father), and a hard-partying cadre of bondage slaves.So what's it all about, one may reasonably ask? One gets the vague impression that it has something to do with mind control, and involves something The Doctor calls \"chemotrodes.\" (Best guess. I really have no idea how it's spelled, if there even is such a thing.) Mercifully, the experiment ends in failure, and most importantly, it ends...before one has time to gnaw one's own leg off.Of course, one doesn't really expect any sense from a film like this, but at least it ought to be good for laughs. This one isn't. Forget it, buddy. There is a creeping sort of anarchy about this film, from its patched-together, tequila-drenched ambiance to its atrocious cinematography and agonizing musical score, that defies even the most sozzled attempts to get any MST3K type laughs out of it. If it's not even good for that, what the hell is it good for? If Montezuma's revenge could have somehow been digitally remastered and put on a DVD, it would have looked exactly like this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80935f9b5ca64a3d82d074bcc6f44fed",
            "input": "In her autobiography,Laureen Bacall reveals that Bogie told her that she should not make such dud movies as this one or something like that.At the time,Douglas Sirk was labeled \"weepies for women\",actually,he was restored to favor,at least in Europa,after he stopped directing.And when he filmed \"written on the wind\" ,Sirk had only three movies to make:\"tarnished Angels\",\"A time to love and a time to die\",his masterpiece,IMHO,and finally\" Imitation of life\"(1960).Then there was silence. Actually Bacall and Hudson characters do not interest Sirk.They are too straight,too virtuous.Dorothy Malone -who was some kind of substitute for his former German star Zarah Leander-and her brother Robert Stack provide the main interest of the plot.A plot constructed continuously ,most of the movie being a long flashback.The instability of the brother and the sister ,from a family of rich Texan oil owners,is brought to the fore by garish clothes,and rutilant cars that go at top speed in a derricks landscape. Malone's metamorphosis at the end of the movie is stunning :suit and chignon,toying with a small derrick:she's ready for life,the rebel is tamed. Now alone,because she's lost Hudson (but anyway,he was not in love with her).This end is a bit reactionary,but melodrama is par excellence reactionary;three years later,in \"imitation of life\",Sarah-Jane (Susan Kohner) will be blamed because she does not know her place.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b7ed79d642240d7990c8c77429666cb",
            "input": "Very funny to watch \"Beretta's Island\" as kind of natural trash-film.It is like answer to Jess Franko's type of b-movie.Bodybuilders strikes back (!face to face!) to pushers.The very very very stupid strike!Action: unbelievably bad directed firing(shooting) scenes look even better than hand-to-hand fighting.Chasing scenes ridiculous.Saving beauties scenes incredibly stupid.Erotic scenes are very unerotic.The main luck of film is pretty landscapes and festival scenes.Don't miss:Arnold Schwarzenegger's joke at start of film and list of Franco Columbu's kin at the end. Special attraction: naked bosom.Almoust forgot - Franco can sing!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dac1ed3243df4104b878c8f52705b75b",
            "input": "First I liked that movie. It seemed to me a nice comedy with some silly moments. The costume designer Albert Wolsky did his best!!! The same as wonderful set decorator Robert R. Benton - this man really had a very good taste!!! But the script writers disappointed me extremely. The best ending would be the scene on the ladder, but instead of it, they decided that the father and his daughter should be together. Don't like the ending. The father becomes boyfriend of his own daughter and his ex-wife knows about it and finds it alright. It would be OK, if the scriptwriters would for example say that now there is a different soul in the body, but they did not, they only deprived him of memories. The actors were good, they were really funny. Cybill Shepherd was charming, Robert Downey Jr. was very funny in the dancing scene : )))... But some of the moments spoil even the impression of good acting. For example, Corinne Jeffries, played by Cybill Shepherd after the death of her husband was waiting for him 23 years (it's a long time!), she was true to him, she loved nobody but him, and when she met him and was just about making love to him, after a scene with her friend Philip Train (Ryan O'Neal), she very easily betrayed the man she was longing for so many years!!! It would be a good movie, if not the ending and some missed human psychology.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2a90a66f25048518e38438ced2f22dd",
            "input": "A very cheesy and dull road movie, with the intention to be hip and modern, shown in the editing style and some weird camera angles, resulting only in sleepiness. The cast is wasted, the writing is stupid and pretentious. The only thing worthwhile is the top-notch Lalo Schifrin's soundtrack, really cool and also the opening sequence, very original and interesting. Run if you can, the bad opinions and comments about this flick are totally deserved; it is really pure garbage. Of course that this has its charm, of watching a movie which everybody would not drop the beer glass on if it were on fire, but save it for a stormy day where you have absolutely nothing else to do.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd1c56daca5e4fb4b93a3118eba68d63",
            "input": "This programme bugs me! There is no humour to it and is far too serious to be called \"fun\"! It's just far too educational for my liking! The characters are very stereotyped and unappealing. The plots are redundant and the morals are just repeated over and over again. Where's the fun in it? Also I feel this has been on the BBC for far too long and is broadcast way too much. Does it really need to have a slot on T.V every 2 or 3 months when a brand new show runs out of episodes? I think it's time that the BBC starting bringing back some of their older shows like: Inspector Gadget, Bananaman, The Smurfs, Snorks, Moomins, the Raccoons and Count Duckula other than continually giving contracts to these newer shows! I thought the BBC where bring back Danger Mouse, so what's going on with that?! 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebc253d967114576a4f1f77df1d94f62",
            "input": "First of all, yes, animals have emotions. If you didn't know that already, then I believe you are a moron. But let's assume that none of us are morons. We all know that animals have emotions, and we now want to see how these emotions are manifest in nature, correct?What we get instead is a tedious and ridiculously simplistic documentary that attempts to show how animals are \"human\". The filmmakers search high & low for footage of animals engaged in human-like behaviour, and when it happens they say, \"That monkey is almost human!\" (that's actually a direct quote).Everything is in human terms. They waste time theorizing about what makes dogs \"smile\", but not once do they mention what a wagging tail means. The arrogance of these researchers is disgusting. They even go so far as to show chimpanzees dressed in human clothing and wearing a cowboy hat.I had been expecting an insightful documentary of animals on their own terms. I wanted to learn how animals emote in their OWN languages. But instead, researchers keep falling back on pedantic, anthropomorphic observations and assumptions. Add a cheezy soundtrack and images of chimps \"celebrating Christmas\", and this was enough to turn my stomach.But it doesn't end there. Half of this documentary is filmed not in the wild but in laboratories and experimental facilities. All the camera shots of chimps are through steel bars, and we see how these monkeys are crowded together in their sterile concrete cages. One particularly sobering moment happens near the beginning (though you have to be quick to notice it) where a captive monkey says in sign language, \"Want out. Hurry go.\"Obscure references are made to \"stress tests\" and psychological experiments which I shudder to imagine. Baby monkeys are separated from their mothers at birth and are given wireframe dolls in order to prove that baby monkeys crave a \"mother figure\". And after 40 years of experiments, the smug researchers pat themselves on the back for reaching their brilliant conclusion: monkeys have emotions.One chimp named \"Washoe\" has been in a concrete cage since 1966 for that purpose, and to this day she remains thus. We get a brief glimpse (again through bars) of her leaning against a concrete wall with a rather lackluster expression. Personally, I don't need to see any further experimental data. Washoe, I apologize for our entire species.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22d5d466f10548db9fe3dec0fdbb71ea",
            "input": "Loved this film. Real people, great acting, humour, unpredictable. The characters were believable and you really connected with them. If you're looking for a film about slightly offbeat characters outside the mainstream of society and how they help each other, this would be a good choice.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8780f5d3f1d6478c9321a4d804b32b86",
            "input": "These are excerpts from a nine-page \"Memo to Mr. Cohn from Mr. Welles\", written after Orson had seen studio mogul Harry Cohn's edited version of the picture (he took an hour out): \"...The preview title music was written by a first rate composer, George Antheil. Although not written for our picture at all, this temporary title music had an atmosphere of darkness and menace combined with something lush and romantic which made it acceptable...The only musical idea which seems to have occurred to this present composer (Heinz Roemheld) is the rather weary one of using a popular song--the \"theme\"--in as many arrangements as possible. Throughout we have musical references to \"Please Don't Kiss Me\" for almost every bridge and also for a great deal of the background material. The tune is pleasing, it may do very well on the Hit Parade--but Lady from Shanghai is not a musical comedy...Mr. Roemheld is an ardent devotee of an old-fashioned type of scoring now referred to in our business as \"Disney\". In other words, if somebody falls down, he makes a \"falling down\" sound in the orchestra, etc., etc...If the lab had scratched initials and phone numbers all over the negative, I couldn't be unhappier about the results...Just before I left to go abroad, I asked Vi (Viola Lawrence, the editor) to make a cut which would involve dropping the near accident with the taxi-cab and also quite a bit of dialogue. I am convinced that this would have been an excellent cut...saving much needed footage in the slow opening sequence (this was not done, accounting for the main weaknesses of the film's opening reel)...There is nothing in the fact of Rita's diving to warrant a big orchestral crescendo...What does matter is Rita's beauty...the evil overtones suggested by Grigsby's character, and Michael's bewilderment. Any or all of these items might have inspired the music. Instead, the dive is treated as though it were a major climax or some antic moment in a Silly Symphony: a pratfall by Pluto the Pup, or a wild jump into space by Donald Duck...There is no sound atmosphere on the boat. A little wind and water is sorely missed. There's no point in photographing a scene on a real boat if you make it sound as though it all happened in front of a process screen...At the start of the picnic sequence...in the temporary score, we used a very curious, sexy Latin-American strain...This has been replaced with a corny \"dramatic\" sequel--bad stock stuff...This sort of music destroys that quality of strangeness which is exactly what might have saved Lady from Shanghai from being just another whodunit...There is a big musical outburst after Grigsby's line, \"I want you to kill him.\" This is absurd...The Hawaiian guitar music which comes out of the radio...was supposed to be corny enough to make a certain satirical point. As it stands now, it's on about the same level as the rest of the scoring. Nobody in the audience could possibly suspect that we're kidding...The aquarium scene needs more echo. \"Please Don't Kiss Me\" is in again!...A bad dubbing job and poor scoring has destroyed the character of Michael's run down the pier. From the gunshot through to the phone call, a careful pattern of voices had been built up with the expenditure of much time and effort. For some reason, this has all been junked in favor of a vague hullabaloo. As a result, the whole sequence seems dull...The audience should feel at this point, along with Michael, that maybe they are going crazy. The new dubbing job can only make them feel that maybe they're going to sleep...The gun battle with the breaking mirrors must not be backed with music...The closing music again makes reference to \"Please Don't Kiss Me\"...This finale is obvious to the point of vulgarity, and does incalculable injury to the finish of the picture.\"All of these edits from Orson were ignored",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2bb2cde14ece413c9ae19cfdabda3d51",
            "input": "This had high intellectual pretensions.The main lead intends to give a \"deep\" \"meaningful\" rendering(with voice over for his frames of mind naturally) and he was certainly influenced by the fifties/sixties \"method \" -which,when the script and the direction were worthwhile did give stunning results (see Clift,Newman,Winters).But here the story is abysmal.Besides it moves too slow,you could edit at least 20 minutes -including pointless flashbacks-and the plot line would not be changed .At times ,it's very doubtful that Bruce Dern believes in his \"Uncle \"character and his portraying often verges on parody.An interesting side is only skimmed over:the relationship young boy/hero -if we admit that the hero is himself some kind of child- When he says to the young kid that he would let nobody do harm to him,some welcome tenderness emerges.But it's botched and only the final scene returns to it.Word to the wise:Take Foley's \"at close range\" instead:it has two great actors (Christopher Walken and Sean Penn together!),it's also an offbeat movie ,but it's gripping,suspenseful.Here my hitchcockometer points sullenly towards zero throughout.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-867446b56f3a41f09e3205a88ed410a2",
            "input": "For those who are too young to know this or for those who have forgotten, the Disney company went almost down the tubes by the end of the 1980s. People were NOT seeing their movies anymore and the company was not producing the usual wholesome material....at least no what people expected. A major problem: profanity.Yes, the idiots running the Disney movies during that decade would produce films with swear words - including the Lord's name in vain, if you can believe that - interspersed in these \"family films.\" In fact that happens twice here in the first 20 minutes! This movie, in addition to the language problems, has a nasty tone to it, too, which made it unlikeable almost right from the beginning. Thankfully, Disney woke up and has produced a lot of great material since these decadent '80s movies. (\"Touchstone\" is Disney, just under another name.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecfedc936511463fbd5088d929093655",
            "input": "This is one of my favorite films of all time. I read the book and liked it, but this movie expands on everything the book made famous. The acting is fantastic, especially from Jon Voight, who plays Mr. Sir, a very evil character. This film has a certain way of storytelling that keeps you hooked throughout, until the end where everything is pulled together for a great ending. I also love the way this is directed, by flashing back and forth between the modern day and Stanley's ancestors' stories. The story was written by Louis Sachar, yes, but it seems that this story is made for film, and Andrew Davis does a great job directing it. I definitely recommend this to anyone who enjoys good movies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ffca38573cd487fb660126751fa1311",
            "input": "Bob Clampett's 'An Itch in Time' milks seven minutes of crazy action out of a very small premise. Elmer Fudd tells his dog that if he scratches himself just once more that he will be given a dreaded bath. Unfortunately for the dog, a relentless flea makes it all but impossible to stop from scratching. The cartoon switches between the flea's progress inside the dog's fur and the dog's desperate attempts to cope with it. In a great sequence that really captures the frustration of an itch that can't be scratched, the dog changes colour from brown to blue to red to polka dotted to plaid! It sounds ludicrously surreal but it perfectly evokes the indescribable feeling of an itch in a way only Clampett could. There are several other elements which make 'An Itch in Time' pure Clampett. There's the grotesque concept itself, which leads to some graphic scenes of the flea munching on the dog's flesh. There's the unrestrained violence that rears its head in any scene featuring the cat. Most notably, there's the dirty jokes including a huge shot of the dog's behind which causes the flea to wolf-whistle and a hysterical sequence in which the dog attempts to scratch himself by dragging his backside along the floor. He momentarily breaks off to address the audience: \"Hey, I better cut this out. I may get to like it\"! With a very limited concept, Clampett manages to make 'An Itch in Time' a unique, minutiae-based cartoon. Like an early episode of 'Seinfeld', 'An Itch in Time' is practically about nothing but very funny with it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab6d0ad53fa24acdb201abfbdb94224b",
            "input": "James Stewart stars in a classic western tale of revenge which ties in with the fate of the films other star the Winchester Rifle. Stewart is it goes without saying excellent adding some cold hard obsession to his usual laid back cowboy. The story follows the fate of a Winchester rifle and its owners after being won in a competition by our hero and stolen by the man he is hunting.We meet a selection of gamblers, gun fighters, Indian traders and bank robers as we follow the rifles path through Indian battles, bank heists etc. The supporting cast are all solid with Dan Durya standing out as Waco Johnny Dean the live-wire gunfighter with an itchy trigger finger. Also as a trivia note a very early appearance from Rock Hudson as an Indian chief.The end showdown is a classic a tense rifle battle fought at long range in and around a rocky outcrop. Throw in some good old western action, fist fights, shootouts and horseback chases it makes for a rollicking western adventure. 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7965bf8b11e24a6a95260f102f68602c",
            "input": "I absolutely LOVED this movie when I was a kid. I cried every time I watched it. It wasn't weird to me. I totally identified with the characters. I would love to see it again (and hope I wont be disappointed!). Pufnstuf rocks!!!! I was really drawn in to the fantasy world. And to me the movie was loooong. I wonder if I ever saw the series and have confused them? The acting I thought was strong. I loved Jack Wilde. He was so dreamy to an 10 year old (when I first saw the movie, not in 1970. I can still remember the characters vividly. The flute was totally believable and I can still 'feel' the evil woods. Witchy poo was scary - I wouldn't want to cross her path.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6909bf175d664216af1d22d6a7c66fc3",
            "input": "This has to be one of the 5 worst movies ever made. The plot looked intriguing like that of Passenger 57. But with the latter movie it somehow worked a lot better. The plot has been worked out in the worst possible way. Just a few of the awful moments in the movie, A flight attendant is standing in the opened doorway of a flying 747 and trying to close the door without being sucked out by the 250 mile per hour winds?!? Thereafter the lands the aircraft from a few miles out starting at 8000 feet, thats impossible even for 747 pilots with thousands of hour experience. When on the runway (perfectly straight of course) she is instructed to pull on the flaps, HUH!! Come on flaps are there to ensure lift at low speeds, when on the runway you use thrust reverse on the engines and give maximum power! I can go on and on about little and mostly big mistakes in the movie, but then my reply would become the size of the English dictionary. This is a movie you want to miss, take my word for it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fb30724facc4f68958d279ce883a050",
            "input": "I think that, deep down in the darkest, slimiest part of their heart, everyone likes Jerry Springer just a little bit. While his show is undeniably offensive and stupid, it also gives us a chance to see that, relatively speaking, most of us have it real good. When you look at the trailer park livin', dollar whiskey drinkin', incest lovin' people on the Springer show, it makes even your worst day seem like a walk in the park. Jerry is performing a public service, and we should be grateful. He ditched a political career to host the show, just for us.What we should not be grateful for in any way is the piece of garbage movie \"Ringmaster\". \"Ringmaster\" shows what life is like for people who wind up being guests on the show, or so they would like us to think. The movie follows the pre-requisite Springer story line: Love triangles. One triangle involves Connie, her daughter Angel, and her husband Rusty. The other involves Starletta, Vonda, and Demond. When the two hapless groups meet up in LA, their lives intertwine and collide head-on, all culminating in an explosive episode of the Springer show. It's like what \"Short Cuts\" would be if Robert Altman had had a severe crack habit.\"Ringmaster\" is true to the show, as it is stupid and offensive from start to finish. It also makes me very glad that I don't live in the squalor it's characters do. But the movie has a problem. It's billed as a comedy, but it just isn't very funny. What laughs there are to be had are few and far between. Maybe some people watch this and laugh non-stop. If you think blow jobs and rape are funny, well then I guess you're one of those folks. Personally, I laughed two or three times and spent the rest of the movie in utter awe of the agonizing horrors of white-trash life.The Jerry Springer Show just isn't meant to make the leap from TV to the silver screen. What's funny in an hour long show (less, when you count commercials) isn't necessarily going to be funny in a ninety minute movie. Movies have to tell a story, and that's something else \"Ringmaster\" has trouble with. The story is threadbare. There are so many plot holes and continuity errors that any attempt at telling a cohesive narrative is quickly put asunder. And even if there weren't such problems, how much fun can you pull out of a story of stereotypical people in a stereotypical story? Even the Hollywood formula couldn't make this better. \"Ringmaster: is so bad, it even screws up the best part of the Springer show: the Final Thought. Somehow, even the smartest and simplest aspect of the show wound up blowing harder than the slutty women the film is built around.The worst offender in all of this is Springer himself. He's such a bad actor that he can't even play himself convincingly. Watching Springer play Springer is sad. It's like he was going for a 'What if Woody Allen played Jerry Springer' vibe, and he failed. Miserably. He went to the trouble of producing this disaster, the least he could do is try to make it just that much better.Not that I'm saying everyone else in this movie put in an award worthy performance. Just the opposite. They all suck. Not so surprisingly, no one in this movie went on to greatness. The best any of them was did was Molly Hagan landing a job on a Nickelodeon sitcom. Apparently, Nickelodeon has no problem with hiring a woman who starred in the most vile film of the '90's to star in a children's program. It makes you wonder what kind of things the other adults on that channel have done in their pasts.Here are my Final Thoughts: What we have here is a group of people with no self respect and a man with money to burn, who have met and put their resources together to produce a film that shows how much they hate themselves and how little they think of the intelligence of their viewing audience. Should we accept people who make movies that treat us like severely brain-damaged lumps of goo? I say no. Somewhere out there, in this crazy, mixed up world, there is a perfect movie for each of us. We just have to keep looking for it. Until next time, take care of yourselves and your loved ones. And don't ever watch \"Ringmaster\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a8eecd6ab594217b851060e362512f5",
            "input": "The Stock Market Crash of 1929 and the Depression following almost ruined the American Musical Theater, in fact it was the final death blow to vaudeville. Those behind the curtains were hit as bad as those in front.In an effort to stimulate the show business economy and his own personal economy, out of work theater director James Cagney comes up with a brilliant idea. Stage live relevant prologues to the movies that are being shown at the various movie theaters that are springing up overnight from the old theaters. Some other competitors get wind of it and the competition is on.Footlight Parade is my favorite Busby Berkeley film. It gives James Cagney a chance to display some of his versatility as a dancer as well as a tough guy. In his retirement Cagney said that while he screened his few and far between musicals a lot, he could barely be bothered with some of his straight dramatic films. He wished he'd done a few more musicals in his career and I wish he had.Of course the staging of these Busby Berkeley extravaganzas on the stage of a movie palace defies all logic and reason. But it's so creative and fun to watch. Dick Powell gets to sing three songs in Footlight Parade, Ah the Moon is Here, Honeymoon Hotel, and By a Waterfall, the last two with Ruby Keeler further cementing that screen team. Ruby sings and dances with Powell in the last two and she partners with James Cagney in my favorite number from Footlight Parade, Shanghai Lil. Joan Blondell is Cagney's no nonsense girl Friday at the theater. Like in Blonde Crazy, she's the one with the real brains in that duo and it's her quick thinking that bails him out of some domestic problems he has on top of his theatrical ones. One of Blondell's best screen roles.Look for Dorothy Lamour and Ann Sothern in the chorus as per the IMDb pages for both of them. John Garfield is seen briefly in the Shanghai Lil number. And in a scene at the beginning of the film, producer Guy Kibbee takes Cagney to a movie theater where they are showing a B western starring John Wayne. The Duke's voice is unmistakable. But what's even more unusual is that the brief clip shows him in a scene with Frank McHugh who plays another Cagney assistant in Footlight Parade. I think the brothers Warner were playing a little joke there. I've got to believe that clip was deliberate.Footlight Parade is Busby Berkeley at his surreal best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-96b37bf8f7a94517bb3b3eb548005014",
            "input": "I watched this movie for a project on love. please tell Nicolas Cage to learn what it would feel like to be his character, and then re-read the lines he's saying. My life cannot go on... i accidentally cut off my own hand...my brother was close by. Obviously his fault. And since when have happy endings included the nice guy who takes care of Mom sad and alone. No closure, bad script, and doesn't have enough extension of minor characters. Save yourself, unless your up for a good laugh. Costumes were done appropriately, and extras did a fabulous job. I'm sure it would have been a fun movie to make, but keep it more genre specific, I can't recommend this movie to anyone I know, because it is not an intellectual movie. It is not a chick flick. It is not a strict romantic. And I can't show kids because of the sex and questions to follow. All in all, just not a good flick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3bec1e8f1999441bbd01ca68ff43e160",
            "input": "With 'Twelve Monkeys' you need to pay attention, but if you do that you probably find a lot to appreciate. I know I did. The story is interesting and deals with time traveling. A virus killed a lot of people back in 1997 and a guy named Cole (Bruce Willis) is send back to 1990 and 1996 to find a cure for the virus. In 1990 he is arrested and put in a mental hospital. There he meets Jeffrey Goines (Brad Pitt), who probably has something to do with the virus. He also meets psychiatrist Dr. Kathryn Railly (Madeleine Stowe) who doesn't believe him in 1990. When Cole disappears from the mental hospital while he is chained and locked in a room and re-appears in 1996 Kathryn starts believing Cole's stories.The movie constantly plays with time. Cole makes a phone call and leaves a message in 1996, it is picked up in the future and \"they\" send someone. For Cole that someone appears only seconds after the phone call. Things like this happen throughout the movie and therefore you must keep attention. You could ask some questions but since you can't have an answer yourself it is better to agree with the movie.'Twelve Monkeys' works as sci-fi, with some great images and a dark atmosphere, and it works as a thriller. You are never certain of what will happen next and that helps the movie. May be it has some flaws in the story, but since it is about a fictional thing like time traveling, you should accept what the movie tells us and just try to enjoy. That was the easy part for me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7cb64252097b4828a20c580f2e8f9291",
            "input": "Bad acting. Bad writing. This was a poorly written film. It's too bad because it had some potential. It's not even close to American Pie or Something about Mary as previous comments might have you believe. Rent it at dollar night from you local video store if you're kind of bored.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a712067708b4d8da3ce005bdee1cd5b",
            "input": "I first saw this film when I was about 8 years old on TV in the UK (where it was called \"Laupta: The Flying Island\"). I absolutely loved it, and was heartbroken when it was repeated a while later and I missed it. I was enchanted by the story and characters, but most of all by the haunting and beautiful music. It would have been the original English dubbed version which I saw - sometimes erroneously referred to as the \"Streamline Dub\" (the dub was actually by Ghibli themselves and only distributed by Streamline) which is sadly unavailable except as part of a ridiculously expensive laser disc box-set.Unfortunately I feel that the release has been partly spoiled by Disney. The voice acting is OK but the dialogue doesn't have the same raw energy that the \"streamline\" dub or the original Japanese had, and I think James Van Der Beek sounds too old to play the lead. They have made some pointless alterations, such as changing the main character's name from \"Pazu\" to \"Patzu\", and added some dialogue. But worst of all I feel that they have ruined many scenes with intrusive music - the opening scene of the airships for example was originally silent but has been spoiled thanks to Disney's moronic requirement that there be music playing whenever anyone is not speaking, which I find annoying in many Disney films.This film still blows away most recent animated films, and I cannot recommend it highly enough. The plot is simple yet captivating and the film shows a flair which is sadly missing from most modern mass-market, homogenized animation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3acf9ebc61d4d7da7e832ec379d72ec",
            "input": "This movie is not only boring, it is also really badly done. The graphics are so bad, they are not even second rate - they are dreadful. The characters do not show any facial expresssions, the voice acting is empty and without any soul, and the plot absolutely lacks .... well... anything and everything. My 5 year old likes it - but thinks it's a bit boring. I agree with him.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f024891d9bb4a86b509901e7ab94bb2",
            "input": "A typical romp through Cheech and Chong's reality which includes drugs, singing, more drugs, cars and driving, even more drugs, Pee Wee, aliens, gasoline, laundry, stand up comedy, surprisingly more drugs and SPACE COKE !!. It is not as coherent or plausible as Up in Smoke but it still is incredibly funny, without becoming as strange as Nice Dreams. There are some classic scenes, which include the opening scene where they get some gas for their car and the drive to work. Also funny is Cheech's song (Mexican-Americans) and Chong's follow up song. Another notable scene is the welfare office scene with Jones (human noise machine), from the Police Academy series, and the old laughing man. All in all, this is a great follow up to Up in Smoke and is quite watchable when sober or not.-Celluloid Rehab",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-262ffd25dd8540a38b49dddf8403ee54",
            "input": "Being a big fan of the romantic comedy genre, and therefore having seen a large number of these films, it is rare that one strikes me as totally unique. For that matter, it is equally rare that I am gasping for breath through the laughter during several scenes. The love story is a little thin on the ground, but I'd say that's probably for the best, as this romantic comedy has the emphasis firmly on \"comedy\", and in any case it stretches the bounds of credibility just a little more than I like most rom com's to do. The four scientists provided some of the funniest moments not just in this film, but in any film I've seen in a long while. I hesitated for the briefest of moments before finally choosing a \"10\" over a \"9\" as a rating, as I believe that far too many people use it indiscriminately, and therefore the maximum rating loses some of its impact. I'm also a big Meg Ryan fan, which helps, but this is one of the few films I've seen in which I'd say she is comprehensively overshadowed. She and Tim Robbins are cast as the leads, but for me play second fiddle to the antics of the bumbling intellectuals. A genuine laugh-out-loud type film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cd5159a0b4ee4c699e9741c8512b7ab2",
            "input": "I had been looking forward to seeing this film for a long time, after seeing \"Return to Paradise,\" which I found to be gritty. I was so disappointed. The most realistic thing about it was the unpredictable ending which I think was partly stolen from \"Return to Paradise.\" Maybe I was expecting too much. On the positive side Danes, Beckinsale and Pullman were fantastic in their roles. Although I didnt like Danes's character and first and found her very annoying. I couldnt see anything realistic about the film. It could of been done so much better, for example there could of been more emphasis on the prison conditions and the sheer horror. It was too cheery a movie to be realistic. There could also of been more action and tensionThe best thing about this film is the \"tragic\" ending. I couldnt of predicted that. But by that time I really didnt care what happened to them.3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d56c49957b2e4d3e954742545fec992d",
            "input": "I was lucky enough to attend a screening in Stockholm for this elegantly expressed, enjoyable, and thought-provoking film. With romance as the heaviest weapon in its arsenal, Paris je t'aime boldly plunges into love in Paris, navigating the different forms in eighteen separate \"quartiers\" but without pouting Parisiennes and saccharine formulas. Its goldmine undoubtedly stems from frustration on the directors' parts – frustration over only having 5-10 minutes of screen time – thereby you are only presented with the best and most assured direction from each party.Debating whether or not I should review all 18 segments, I reached the conclusion that it would be merely redundant and long-winded. Instead simply rest assured that each director graces the film with their eccentric styles and skills, and certainly you'll find your favourite. Although Gus Van Sant cannot resist the temptation to be introspective, his LES MARAIS is one of the better contributions, even sneaking in a well-placed Kurt Cobain reference. The Coen brothers recreate one of the more accessible segments in Paris, a scene with a muted but emotionally transparent Steve Buscemi, deadpan humour and clever camera angles that surely generated the most laughter in my theatre, and perhaps rightly so. In this way, all story lines are exquisitely unique – filtered through the minds of different directors – but the one that deviates the most from the rest is Vincenzo Natali's QUARTIER DE LA MADELEINE, a dark horror-Gothic love starring Elijah Wood as a lost tourist in the backstreets of Paris in the night who meets a vampiress. With a black-and-white format but blood-red colour contrast that seems to incongruously bleed off screen, it nearly becomes a pastiche of Sin City – a refreshing eerie and visual turn in an otherwise fairly grounded film. Yet my single favourite segment was FAUBOURG SAINT-DENIS by Tom Tykwer but I think I was conditioned to think so, given that I went in the theatre with him as my favourite and nudged my friend in the side saying \"finally, that's my favourite director here\". Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that Tykwer delivers a lovely segment in which a blind boy picks up the phone, and hears from his girlfriend (Portman - for once not annoying) that she breaks up with him, and he reflects on their relationship. As is Tywker's style, the story is dizzyingly fast-paced, kinetic and repetitive, featuring screaming and running (Lola Rennt) making it the most adrenaline-pumping segment in Paris je t'aime and possibly also the most touching once Tywker starts wielding his most powerful tool – music.To fill the negative account, clearly not all directors manage as touching as Tywker, Van Sant, Cohens, Coixet and Dépardieu. Sylvain Chomet scrapes the bottom of the pile by carving out a truly disposable segment in which a little boy retells the story of how his parents met. They are two lonely mimes. This part is so in-your-face French and desperately quirky that it is insulting to international viewers. Suwa also directs a poor and fluffy segment with an unusually haggard-looking Juliette Binoche whom mourns the loss of her son. Nothing else happens. Finally, the wrap-up and interweaving of the 18 stories in the end feels somewhat rushed and half-hearted.Yet Paris je t'aime truly spoils you with quality, for all the other stories are well-crafted with crisp acting and amusing writing. It is certainly one of the highlights of 2006 (not saying much, I suppose) and a very personal film in the sense that it is unavoidable to pick a favourite and a least favourite. Highly recommended both to mainstream of \"pretentious\" (heh) audiences.8 out 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cdab4d6882f54de6a459641a63dd7a9e",
            "input": "White man + progress + industrialization = BAD. First nations + nature + animals = GOOD. Simple formula. Actually, in past days the same kind of propaganda was used to defend the status quo; now it is used to attack it. However, that being said, I think the movie does succeed in overcoming hackneyed politicization because it plays to the themes of freedom and original nature in a way that appeals to everyone. You may not be onside with the movie's rubbishy revisionism of how the West was won, er lost. But anyone can feel a sense of longing for the days when horses could run free on the Western plains. (The movie also conveniently sidesteps the fact that there were no horses in America before the evil white man brought them there). Anyway, I liked it. The quality of the animation - especially the opening shot - is incredible.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6dcd46771e43411f8db7103f78e06514",
            "input": "What reviewers and MST3K left out is the best part (and only memorable scene) of this otherwise dreadful movie: There is a very good rape-in-the-shower scene committed by the bad guy (Ben Gazzara look-alike) on Maria (as mentioned, killed later through T.J.'s ineptitude). Perhaps rape is too strong a word, \"prison mating ritual\" may be more appropriate. The background behind this chance, yet forced meeting is the mobster who is hiding \"Ben Gazzara,\" introduces him to the girls hanging out at his pool. The 30-ish blonde disses him, but our villain must be quite smitten by her, because the courtship is on at that point. His first move is to attempt drowning her, until his mafia don benefactor tells him to knock it off. Kind of like the girl in high school you didn't like, but still wanted to have carnal knowledge of anyway... Let's just say, he catches UP with her in the cabana later.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43ddede5deda4b5ba4bab4e35247723d",
            "input": "Although I have to admit I laughed more watching this movie than the last few comedies I saw.The budget must have consisted of pocket change from the actors. The production values are so low that they actual made it kind of fun to watch. Reminds me of the Robot Monster made up of a guy in a gorilla suit with a cardboard diving helmet on.In one scene a hapless victim gets their arm and leg cut off. Geez, hard to believe but the Black Knight scene from Holy Grail was more realistic. I kept wondering why the victim didn't start shouting \" None Shall Pass\" and \" It's only a flesh wound, I've had worse\". It was one of the funniest scenes I've seen in the past year.The \"gladiator/demon\" was a stitch too. Between the horribly cheap costume and the geeky look of the guy in it the end result was hysterical.Truly a movie that is bad enough to be watchable. Kind of like seeing a slow motion auto accident on film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c1a5c30243b474682d7eaeaedb9a7d1",
            "input": "I saw this film at a store in the cheap section. I actually vividly remembered seeing the commercials and trailer for it years ago. I thought \"What the hey' and bought it, basically because the plot sounded interesting and Claire Danes has always been someone of talent in my eyes (this was also before I became a huge Kate Beckinsale fan).So it's about two girls who sneak off to a vacation in Bangkok, get busted for narcotics (which they are innocent of) and then are sent to a Thailand prison. The film follows what will happen to them and at times questions their innocence.Both Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale give great performances, and the plot of this film wraps itself up unconventionally, and raises some nice moral discussion questions.I think this is a solid good film, but there could have been some improvements. It could have been longer...it would've helped to solidify these characters and more insight into the politics of Thailand's justice system would've helped.Nevertheless, other than that, it's a good film with some great performances.P.S. For all you pop-culture junkies be on the lookout for a two-minute role by Paul Walker. I didn't even notice him the first time I saw the film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-914173f846904030bf250f82f59c722d",
            "input": "After the superb AANKHEN(2002) which was a remake of a Gujarati play he comes with WAQT which too looks like a stage playIn stage plays, we have characters shouting, overacting here too the sameThe first half shows Amitabh almost kidding the 40+ Akshay Kumar who acts too funny like a small nerdThe film has a good message how not to spoil your son but sadly the way Amitabh wants to make Akki responsible is absolutely fakeEven his reason for hiding his sickness, his runnign from the hospital and the melodramatic speech by Akki is a put offSome emotions do touch you but most are too over the topRajpal's comedy is hilarious but too stretched in second half Direction by Vipul Shah is too overdone though some scenes are good Music is okayAmongst actors Amitabh overdoes it in the first half but is superb in emotional scenes Akshay Kumar too does his part well but looks umcomfortable in some too weepy scenes His chemistry with Bachchan is matchless Rajpal is a highlight, he makes you laugh without overacting and just his presence and his dumb behaviour and deadpan humour he is a riot Boman is good in some comic parts but too loud at places Priyanka is the heroine so nothing to do, this is her last film with Akki so far Shefali is awesome though she looks too young for Bachchan",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-def176dae02f4db7898f809d22e1c689",
            "input": "I went to see Fever Pitch with my Mom, and I can say that we both loved it. It wasn't the typical romantic comedy where someone is pining for the other, and blah blah blah... You weren't waiting for the climatic first kiss or for them to finally get together. It was more real, because you saw them through the relationship, rather than the whole movie be about them getting together. People could actually relate to the film, because it didn't seem like extraordinary circumstances, or impossible situations. It was really funny, and I think it was Jimmy Fallon's best performance. All in all... I would definitely recommend it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73d64e931d714c9395d061f3e496920d",
            "input": "When I started watching the show I said \"Oh, no! It's as corny as Elfen Lied and not even that bloody!\". And indeed, the setup is almost identical, with the single young boy living in a big house all by himself, then suddenly getting involved into a fantastic adventure while sexy young girls come live with him.But this is where the resemblance stops. The love story is almost as subtle and intense as the one in Inuiyasha, while the childish remarks and behaviors are very few. The magical setup is a bit corny, because it's about seven people, with seven servants, fighting for the Holy Grail, all servants being someone famous, half of all masters being from the same school, rules of engagement, etc. However, this soon dims and fades from the beauty of the drawing and of the script.I actually watched all 24 episodes in one day and, without comparing it with animes that I liked more, but were from other genres, I have to say that I was very pleased.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ddd86f8f8d73492488a0793998877b75",
            "input": "The Journey of Hope (1990) is about a trek that many nomadic and poor Turks make so they could live the good life in Switzerland. These people are so desperate to live like Westerners that they'll give up their life and lives in an attempt to reach the promised land. So many of them are swindled by greedy crooks who make their living off of charging huge fees for desperate people who are in a no win situation. One family braves the cold, the treacherous mountain range and predatory criminals only to discover that there's not always a shining white light at the end of the tunnel. This problem exists world wide, not just in America. Some people tend to forget that. A heart breaker of a film that'll leave you wondering why at the end.Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4742dd968e654914ba87841e8dc9f4d8",
            "input": "I decided to watch this serial after seeing the endless adverts for it on the BBC in the weeks prior to it starting. I watched it despite the fact that I don't like the pretentious kind of stuff that Alan Hollinghurst writes (sorry to his fans but I think we have a case of the emperor's new clothes with this author's work). I admit that the acting is excellent, it is beautifully shot and I was reasonably entertained by it - however- I found that the storyline was extremely thin and after watching all three episodes feel very unsatisfied with this rather empty production. The 'explicit' gay sex that the media droned on about has all been done before on TV - several times - so it was nothing very shocking I'm afraid. Full marks for production values but low ones for storyline/content I'm afraid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b4c446ae5b44aa2adc69a4dd0076411",
            "input": "There's enough star power in THE HOUSE OF SPIRITS to create another galaxy, yet the final product is pretty debatable. The film and its messages are very noble, and I think perhaps most would agree with them. (Liberal Democracy good, violent fascist regime bad; open-mindedness good, racism bad, etc). Unfortunately, we're battered from head to toe with these, and as much subtlety is used as I've described them. Ultimately, we are left watching very noble people without any flaws squaring off with nasty cretins who have no redeeming qualities. It radiates with all the suspense of a badly orchestrated \"pro\" wrestling match.Jeremy Irons plays the patron, a man of many contradictions. Meryl Streep as his gifted bride and Glenn Close, as her sister in law. When the camera stays with these folks, the movie tends to move, and is quite enjoyable. Unfortunately, THE HOUSE OF SPIRITS engages with simply way too many subplots, and characters pop up and out of the picture like shooting gallery targets. We don't get to know them, hence we don't get to care for them. The result is boredom. If Bille August, the director and screenwriter (from Isabel Allende's book) had either lengthened the film or snipped a few characters, this film might have worked completely. As it stands, it was a nice try, with nice messages, and a bonecrushing yawnfest.Not recommended.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e52ef1e53c4a4bcfb2fdf2bd6a439145",
            "input": "I decided to watch this because of the recommendations from this site. I would have to say it was worth the effort. However, you should take heed that this film will go on for 210 minutes. If you don't have the staying power, get it on tape and watch it over a couple of nights.Now to the film, what I say will contain \"spoilers\" and if you don't mind, here goes: Alexandre is a promiscuous bum, a womanizer and a gigolo. He lives with an older woman called Marie. Marie owns a retail shop and she provides for Alex. Alex spends his days at cafés and restaurants. The story reveals that Alex had previously impregnated Gilberte whom he used to live with. Gilberte dumped him for a less attractive man that she did not love because Alex had abused and battered her. At this point, Alex was willing to get a job and and help raise their child before he found out Gilberte had aborted it and planned to marry someone else. By chance, Alexandre meets a nurse nymph called Veronika and they striked up a relationship. Veronika fell in love with Alex for the first time after all the sordid sex she had with men in the past. Marie and Veronika struggles for Alex's affection and had a ménage à trois to boot. Finally at the end, it's revealed Veronika is pregnant with Alex's child and Alex asked her to marry him. We assume (as aforesaid with Gilberte's situation) Alexandre will even get a job and be the provider for his new found love and family. There is hope! With the title of \"La Maman et la putain\", I deduce Jean Eustache was relating to Françoise Lebrun's character of Veronika. She was a whore and then she became the mother. Hence, the mother and whore is the same person? Anyway, what do I know! French films are mostly (not all) very chatty, aimlessly political, preaching, theatrical, insipid, lamenting and full of quotes. Lebrun and Léaud played their obdurate characters well and held the film together as some part of the script became a little lost and disjointed. Not a bad effort. 7/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-548712ab1174483598603ad88a3bb2e3",
            "input": "It's hard to know what was going through Per Kristensen and Morten Lindberg's heads when they wrote \"Gayniggers from Outer Space\" - the movie is billed as a comedy, yet there are no real jokes beside the crude character names (Capt. B. Dick, Sgt. Shaved Balls). The rest of the movie is a (presumably) unintentionally funny affair with ridiculously unsynchronised voice-overs (with the 'actors' basically reading their lines with no hint of feeling), 'futuristic' computer displays filled with spelling mistakes, and a plot that makes almost no sense.Even though 65% of viewers have given this movie a perfect 10 out of 10, this is the complete opposite of what a good film is. It may be ENTERTAINING to watch with some friends, but this film only deserves about a '2' out of ten...slightly higher than the lower possible rating only because of the sheer fact that the writers somehow managed to get some black guys to star in this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-15f29fd7fbdd4311a589ce7c51c92236",
            "input": "I'm not sure it was the language or the poor acting, but everything about this movie feels and looks cheap and fake.After seeing Der Untergang this is a huge disappointment. There's no connection between different scenes, and the acting is so incredibly poor I couldn't even believe people could make such a mess of something that had great potential.And above all, everyone in Germany speaks English. Big mistake. The German language has a certain sound to it, and especially Hitler himself only sounds like Hitler when he's speaking/yelling German.The way the story is told made me believe it was improvised on the spot, the characters were empty and the movie seems to be a collection of random events that could have happened.Whether it's the English or the fact that I've already seen Der Untergang, everything about this movie was fake and ridiculous.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e5a5b3f5d7c43469f3e54b31dec4172",
            "input": "A surprising misfire from the usually reliable Larry Cohen (God Told Me Too, Q, etc.), Full Moon High tries so hard to be funny and fails miserably, even with decent turns by Ed McMahon(!) and Kenneth Mars. Alan Arkin looks embarrassed throughout his performance and son Adam simply looks numb. This makes Teen Wolf look like a comedy classic.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9c89310f4804f27bf0395afc36c1779",
            "input": "This is the magnum opus from the Swedish king of crap, Mats-Helge Olsson. Seldom has a movie of this magnitude been made in Sweden and it truly stands out as one of the most amazing achievements in Swedish film to date. Who pays for these things? The Russian nuclear scientist Markov wants to defect to Sweden. But his plans are ruined by the Russian military who kidnap him and tell him that he has arrived in Sweden. This trickery is their way of seeing to that Markov continues his work in nuclear physics that will revolutionize the energy supply for the whole planet. The CIA however is bent on getting Markov to the west and send their ninja to liberate him.The practice of having Swedish actors speaking English is something that Mats-Helge has perfected in his later works. The cheap b-movie feeling this creates is probably unmatched for performance. But besides this? Well the action is standard direct-to-video style. Machine guns firing huge clouds of smoke. Thousands of Russians dying. People running around in black ninja suits, trying to hide in the snow.What really stands out though is the insanely poor way the fighting scenes are choreographed. When they say \"Ninja\" in the title i expect martial arts, i expect close combat. But there are maybe two or three scenes of actual martial arts in this movie. And they are hilarious. It's so bad i lack the words to describe it. If the ninjas moved any slower their hearts would stop. And of course the whole movie ends in a bang that indicates a special-effects budget consisting of four food-stamps and a McDonald's voucher.So what's the verdict? Instant classic of course. Never before has a movie been made that is so obviously meant to be consumed along with huge amounts of alcohol. It's the ultimate party movie. Insert into video and laugh. One just has to realize that movies like these are not made any more. This is film history.Therefore the rating is 8/10 for entertainment, 1/10 for quality and 10/10 for accents.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecfb9e5d127140d0922ca89143d041ab",
            "input": "Never see this movie.It tries to be a spoof on scifi/thriller films of the 1950s and 1960s but all it succedes at is making you wish really badly that you were watching one of them and not it.It is very lame. A spoof has to have some aspect which has some above par quality to it. This movie does not have any such aspect.Save yourself. It's too late for me but... just don't watch it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd69c824c6574556bd423297de2fb231",
            "input": "I dug this out and watched it tonight. I honestly think it must be 20 years since the last time I saw it. I remember it being a seriously flawed film. I don't remember it being THIS bad!!!!!I am absolutely aghast that a project with this much potential should have been mistreated so reprehensibly. Who am I to blame for this? The 2 guys who wrote (and I use that word loosely) the script? The casting directors who so terribly miscast at least 3 major characters in the story? (Only 2 of them are among \"the amazing 5\".) The director, who clearly refused to take it seriously, and kept shoving awful music on top of bad writing & bad acting everywhere? (I LIKED the theme song-- but it should never have been used all the way throughout the entire film!) Don Black, who should be ASHAMED at some of the lyrics he wrote for that music?It figures that I should pull this out, less than a week after re-reading the comic-book adaptation. The first 15-20 minutes of the film more-or-less (really, LESS) parallel the first issue of the comic. As I watched it tonight, I kept wondering-- why was ALMOST every single detail changed? Doc showing up, then using his wrist-watch remote-control to open the safe, and the sniper's bullet missing him by 5 inches because the refractive glass, were just about the only things left the same. I mean, if you're gonna do an \"adaptation\", WHY in God's name change EVERYTHING???Once they leave Doc's HQ, virtually NOTHING is as it was in the comic (which, given Roy Thomas, I figure probably follows the book). I read somewhere they actually combined elements of 2 different novels into one movie. Again-- WHY? I've heard it was changed because they weren't able to secure the kind of budget they wanted. I look at the film, and think... LACK OF MONEY in NO WAY explains what I saw on the screen!!You know, when people complain about Joel Schumacher, they should really take a look at this thing. The best thing I can say is, I think it would make a great double-feature with the 1966 BATMAN feature-- and probably a great triple-bill with that and the 1980 FLASH GORDON. All 3 films are \"silly\". Maybe we can \"blame\" the 1966 film (and TV series) for this. Some fans have complained over the years that Adam West's BATMAN ruined the image of comic-books in the minds of generations of non-comics fans. I think the same could be said for Hollywood. I'm reminded of how many really, really BAD films based on \"classic\" characters have been made over the years, especially (it seems to me) in the late 70's & early 80's. Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu, Tarzan, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, The Lone Ranger-- all \"murdered\" by Hollywood types who think, \"OH, comic-books! So you know it's supposed to be STUPID!\" More like they're the \"stupid\" ones. What a waste of potential.Let me say some good things... Despite the script and the directing, Ron Ely is GREAT. When I read a DOC SAVAGE story, I don't think of the James Bama paintings, I think of Ely. Bill Lucking (who later was a regular on THE A-TEAM) is terrific. Eldon Quick (who I've seen somewhere else, but can't recall where) is terrific. Paul Gleason-- who I absolutely HATED with a passion and a vengeance in THE BREAKFAST CLUB (\"teachers\" like the one he played should be banned from ever teaching anywhere), may be the best of the \"amazing 5\" in the film. Pamela Hensley-- though her part was almost unrecognizable from the original story-- is terrific. Before she let her hair down, I also realized she looked a HELL of a lot like \"Ardala Valmar\" from those awful John Calkins BUCK ROGERS strips I just read the other day. She's got a big nose like Ardala-- only not quite as pronounced. The comics Ardala actually looked more like the 1936 movie Princess Aura-- or Cher. Or maybe Streisand. Take yer pick. (Ardala actually got plastic surgery in the George Tuska strips-- after, she was stunning!)Paul Wexler, funny enough, I saw just last week in a GET SMART episode. I wonder if he was anything like the character he was supposed to be playing? I don't know, because that character sure wasn't in the movie the film takes its title from.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8f11b4ccaa94beeaaccae386fd8b00c",
            "input": "I always enjoy this movie when it shows up on TV.The one scene that always stands out, for me that is, is the one with the Myrna Loy and the painters foreman, where she gives him very explicit instructions on the colours and as soon as she goes away he turns the his guys and says \"Did you get that, that's yellow, blue, green and white\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7efb06dd683f42678da0d2e4bf8ec7d9",
            "input": "1st the good news. The 3-D is spectacularly well done, and they don't go for the gotcha gimmicks. The film is based on the true story of the high point in human history, and even features one of the actual participants in that story: Buzz Aldrin.And now the meat of the matter: It's about FLIES, for krissakes! Flies with big, googy human eyes, true, but flies nonetheless. Remember when I likened the \"Underworld\" movies to rats vs. cockroaches? That wasn't intended as praise, and I never dreamed anyone would take it literally. This one's got even less empathy going for it. Baby maggots? Ugh. In one of those odd confluences of Hollywood groupthink, this flik was evidently on the drawing boards at the same time as \"Space Chimps\", also about critters in space.Go rent \"Apollo 13\" and see a 9-rated movie about the REAL space program (RIP).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b3d295c85434cb48fdd5d4554df592d",
            "input": "The Ladies Man is laugh out loud funny, with a great diverse cast as well as having some very stupid but excellent scenes (including the funniest love song ever written).Ferrell is his usual quality self in a brilliant side role.Tim Meadows plays an idiot surprisingly well and has written himself some of the funniest lines you'll find in any comedy out there.It is definitely worth a purchase as watching it every 6 months or so will lead to you still laughing as hard as you did first time round.I am distraught to think at the time of writing this that it has a meagre 4.7 /10 and i urge you to vote! And remember kids- \"Theres more motion in the ocean\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4b3b890b4f244fabc40f15500eefa50",
            "input": "The beautiful story of Stardust is written by by Neil Gaiman (writer of MirrorMask) and it's really a good story. I think it would appeal to any Labyrinth, Princess Bride or 10th Kingdom fan and yet it's totally unique and stands up on it's own. And I feel the film adaptation of this story has a far better ending than what was presented in the original novel by Neil Gaiman. I won't spoil it for you.The main character, Tristan (Tristran in the novel), is the son of a mortal and a faerie slave kept by a witch in the realm of faerie. The story begins in a town near a wall that separates the magical world from the human world. When there is a falling star Tristan promises to retrieve it for a girl he is infatuated with. He is unaware that the star has taken the form of a girl in the fairy world and that there are others after her too. Three elderly witches who want to use her heart to become young again, and some bickering princes.It's a really good story. It has humor and magic and beautiful, surreal scenes and visuals. It's charming and I feel it can be watched by children and adults of all ages. It's simply magical. It's a true classic fairy tale, the likes of which I haven't seen in cinema since the 1980s.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8fcab1d2af1641098401dfc27bd72260",
            "input": "When I was chairman of our college's coffeehouse, one of our jobs was to review groups and films for student activities. One of the best things to come along in 1972 was Groove Tube. The original premise was that it was being shown off-off Broadway in theaters where television monitors were being placed throughout the audience, so everyone had a great seat. The premise was that the skits would change on a regular basis-ala Saturday Night Live, keeping the thing fresh. They decided on making it into a film for general distribution.I believe the developers said it was the first time Chevy Chase was on film. Watching him run naked though the woods was a howl. Like many of the reviews before mine, it WAS Saturday Night Live before such a thing existed. I highly recommend this vid. I've told my 13 year old son about Koko the clown- He can't wait to get a copy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13f3ab743bc447fcbe1ef1d100252bab",
            "input": "As the 2000's came to a close, king Kong's adopted daughter went ahead and made a tearful announcement her show as coming to an end.While Miss Winfrey was tearing up, i was laughing and screaming like a wild Indian from the old west.So what does Oprah do? she takes famous people, and puts them on her show. what kind of famous people? people who've suffered (just like her, except these people have lost more than their virginity) they've suffered melted faces (true story), missing limbs (True story, see end of paragraph), and spousal abuse (too many to count). and somehow they come on the show and tell their story, as if we haven't heard it before tons and tons of times (Bethany Hamilton, i've heard your tale about losing an arm to a shark since day one, which was October 31st, 2003. don't tell me you have no hard feelings.) But the biggest thing probably on Oprah was Michael Jackson's interview in 1993, after being accused of being a child molester. sadly, Mr. Jackson has since passed away. but that one particular show told about Michael's personal life, something not many people knew about at the time.Oprah's Real influence comes from middle aged women and soccer moms. They seem to think she's like a personal Jesus sometimes. but all i see in Oprah is some big ghetto lady who made it big, and she's just showing off how rich she is.I'm glad her shows going to end soon. we need better television programs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8798934522514717a39c0f6d6df398bd",
            "input": "A lot of the user comments i have seen on the IMDB for this movie don't really do it justice. First of all, let me just say that this movie is not to be taken seriously. It's supposed to be a fun, yet stupid movie, that doesn't require one to think, only to enjoy it. If you watch this movie with the intent to see a masterpiece in either filmmaking or in humour, then you will be sorely disappointed. Yet, if you want to just watch a goofy movie with some talented actors/actresses, and some good catch-phrases, then you will enjoy it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aad60667c3974fa89d026aee20a919a7",
            "input": "i am 13 and i hated this film its the worst film on earth i totally wasted my time watching it and was disappointed with it cause on the cover and on the back the film it looks pretty good, but i was wrong its bad. but when i saw delta she was totally different and a bad actress and i really didn't know how old the 2 girls was trying to be i was so confused. the film was in some parts confusing and i didn't enjoy it at all but i watched all the film just to see if it was going to get better but it didn't, it was boring,dull and did i say BORING.and i don't think many other people liked it as well as me.boring boring boring",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94bc82f184134da897e9eaf1d7e5ebeb",
            "input": "Although I was in this movie playing the part of Sheriff Hodges, it still managed to make me jump in several places and believe me I'm NOT that easy. You might say that I'm biased about the film, and, OK, I am, but I didn't see the finished product until 12/27/2006 and was extremely pleased. I'm not a Horror film fan as such but love the old \"B\" movies and black and white Sci Fi films. This movie will make you \"think\" you know when something is going to happen, then it doesn't, then it does. It will keep you completely off balance. I would suggest watching the movie first then the director's notes and special features. It is so well written, directed and filmed and I can tell you personally that it was a real joy to work with this cast and crew. I sincerely hope to be part of Brian and Laurence's future projects.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8df5a8bc0ce40c6b62fc02cc7b82a55",
            "input": "Yes, this gets the full ten stars. It's plain as day that this fill is genius. The universe sent Trent Harris a young, wonderfully strange man one day and Harris caught him on tape, in all that true misfit glory that you just can't fake. Too bad it ended in tragedy for the young man, if only an alternate ending could be written for that fellow's story. The other two steps in the trilogy do retell the story, with Sean Penn and Crispin Glover in the roles of the young men, respectively. The world is expanded upon and the strangeness is contextualized by the retelling, giving us a broader glimpse into growing up weird in vanilla America. Recommended for anyone and everyone!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd795487b97a49679f45b631fc87a989",
            "input": "Been lurking for a couple of years or so. I have never been moved to post on here before, so perhaps this movie is worth a star for that, but I doubt it. I just watched it on DVD, having missed it in the movies due to illness and never got around to watching it till now. I had not read extensively about it, certainly not even thought about the movie in some months. It was just what the buddy picked up in the store, so it got watched.Bad mistake.The shot I spoke of in the the summary up top is in the trailer and on the poster. Right from the off, Jason Statham has hair. Like in no other GR movie. Or any JS movie that I've seen. At least not in the quantities on display here. And Ray Liotta in underpants SHOULD be advance warned. It's scary and funny but not in a ha-ha-humour way. Its more in an almost-TheOffice-but-slightly-mutated-and-so-failing-sort-of-humour way. They each say the same thing: \"This movie is not like anything you expect this movie to be.\"Now, based on previous, extensive, movie-watching experience, I expected this movie to be a few things. Like:() Coherent,() Interesting or engaging,() Not a complete and utter farrago of navel-gazing,() Something more substantive than a motley bunch of badly-realised fables from what is just a standard eastern mystic ideology dressed up as a \"cool, modern, self-aware art-form\",() Hopefully better than \"The Idiots\".As you may have guessed by my tone, it thoroughly failed to check any box above. Instead it was:(x) Badly edited {pace all over the shop, 70s-amateur high-8 style jump cuts, incomprehensible \"plot\" \"twists!!!\" delivered through hackneyed flash-back montages, I could go on...},(x) Shot as if by a depressed 14yr-old goth who'd just spent the weekend watching Truffaut and Godard with the drapes drawn(x) So up its own behind with the whole \"I'm really smart, me\" motif/ message, that it feels determined to repeat it every 20 minutes or so, just to make sure the dumb people (ie: everyone who doesn't like it) in the audience make sure they get the point,(x) A genuine waste of my time.As for the undoubted ability of some people to \"get\" something from this, fine. I'm glad you enjoyed it. One poster said something that caught my attention: under-25s probably understood it better because of the editing. Maybe, but editing is supposed to make your work more accessible, not less. As for the \"Genius is only recognised by the enlightened\" brigade out there, go suck an onion and grow up. There is nothing more presumptuous and self-serving than people who say the reason another person doesn't know great art is because they don't understand the 'craft /materials /moon cycle /filaments of supreme rational thought' which the 'auteur /poet/ artist/ palm reader/ idiot savant' is using to explain his or her 'vision /grand scheme /oneness with Gaea /great big bucket of dog-sick'.For me and many, many more people, its garbage. Movies, art, stories, poetry, anything designed to be viewed by another human is supposed to be engaging and moving. In some direction be it metaphorical, spiritual, emotional or whatever you're having yourself.The only way this moved me was forward in time, two hours closer to my own inevitable demise. \"The greatest trick He ever pulled was making You believe Any Part of this movie meant Anything at All\"And now, please, by all means, toast my buns for me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6de0fe428954a47be73295049136cc1",
            "input": "A movie you start watching as a late night cable porn..... It is hot in that department but it has even a lot more.... It has a sense of humor... some action in and out of the \"bed\" and it has reasonable acting as well as a story worth watching...A definite adult only movie but well worth watching...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-367c4e0e82b34c2297ec5613b12f9704",
            "input": "The championship game is only a couple of days away, but things in New Orleans aren't as they should be. From players with marital problems to drug overdoses to gambling problems to a killer on the loose, life is getting in the way of what should be a memorable, wonderful time. Can things be put back into order and a killer stopped before the big game is ruined? Despite what you might think when you first read about Superdome, this is not a football movie. In fact football is nothing more than a plot device and an after thought. Instead, Superdome is another of those lousy soap opera-ish 70s made-for-TV movies populated with Hollywood has beens and those that never will be. The cast sleepwalks its way through the thing with no one really looking good. The best (or worst) example is Van Johnson in a very small role looking generally lost as to why he's there. The plot is dull, uninteresting, and unbelievable. Donna Mills as a hit\"man\"? Yeah, right! It's about as believable as the affair she has with the liquor soaked David Jansen. The movie also lacks any pace. Trying to get all four or five story lines into the film zaps whatever flow Superdome might have had. With no drama or suspense in sight, Superdome ends up being a very poor example of a 70s made-for-TV movie. The lone highlight for me was the voice-over work from the late Charlie Jones - a sportscaster I miss listening to. The eloquent way he overstates the intrigue and over-hypes the atmosphere in New Orleans is pure cheese at its finest.Like most others who have seen Superdome, I also did so courtesy of Mystery Science Theater 3000. It may be one of the KTMA public access episodes, but it's one of the best examples of the shows early start. So even though I've only rated Superdome a 2/10, I'll give this episode a generous 3/5 on my MST3K rating scale.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3b7d5fd18cc48d1aa9f4516b112f9f2",
            "input": "A disappointing film.The story established our protagonist as Chrissy, a 'young', rather sullen individual drifting, not doing much. Actually she does very little to move the narrative along so it didn't surprise me to see the focus shifting on her relatives. It's a pity though, Chrissy seem like interesting character.Story was predictable and at times felt quite formulated. So the question now is, when are we going to see the Campions, Jacksons, and the Tamahori's breaking ground with compelling, cinematically-told stories that will inspire, rather than entertain for the toll of two hours?Technically, a disgusting shot film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c462230c2c974918af7ec327072c8c9b",
            "input": "The Master Blackmailer, based off of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's short story, \"the Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton,\" is the first feature length Sherlock Holmes story with Jeremy Brett that I have seen. The story is interesting and dark. The film has a somewhat dreary, sad feel to it, but it is quite entertaining (with some especially funny scenes).*Spoilers* Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson attempt to uncover the identity of an illusive blackmailer who has been ruining some of the most prominent families of England by publishing private letters that will, in one way or another, destroy their lives. They eventually find out that he is Charles Augustus Milverton, an \"art dealer,\" after the few tragic consequences for victims that could not pay up. Our heroes must next help Lady Eva Blackwell, who must pay a sum that is beyond her means or else her upcoming marriage will most definitely be called off. The scene in which Holmes and Watson burglarize Milverton's house are intense. Although the film has an essentially happy ending, the tone is sad and regretful.Outstanding performances by Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke (as usual), and Robert Hardy as the notorious villain (most audiences probably recognize him today as Cornelius Fudge in Harry Potter), Serena Gordon as Lady Eva Blackwell, Norma West as Lady Swinstead and Sophie Thomson as Agatha (the scenes involving her and Holmes are a riot). I give it a ***1/2 out *****. My only complaint is that there wasn't enough Inspector Lestrade. (I wish they would have added in the scene at the end of the short story where he gives the description of the two burglars, one of which matches Watson.)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38e141ef6a654cb8817e9329cfbcabda",
            "input": "This picks up about a year after the events in \"Basic Instinct\". Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone) is now in London. While having sex with a soccer player while speeding about in a car going at 110 miles/hour (don't ask) she goes off the road and ends up in the Thames. She survives--he doesn't. The police hire psychiatrist Michael Glass (David Morrissey) to see if she's mentally competent to stand trial. Naturally she starts playing with his mind instead and plenty of murders and sex follow.This movie was doomed before it even opened. It took forever to get a cast and director, script problems were constant and the cast was not happy (Morrissey complained about the movie often). Still it's not too bad. It's a lot like the first--there's a lush music score, beautiful locations, plenty of sex and nudity (this had to be edited for an R), a nicely convoluted plot and good acting--but there's no impact. It feels like a retread of the first. People are being killed here with a choker leash (I believe)...just like people were being killed by an ice pick in the first. In one cute moment Stone picks up an ice pick and looks at it longingly. She's also playing mind games with a man and might be getting him implicated in murders. The similarities are too apparent.This is also VERY R rated--there's plenty of explicit sex talk, male nudity (Morrissey looks a lot better nude than Michael Douglas), female nudity (Stone still looks great) and some bloody murders. The acting is good across the board. Stone is just fantastic here; Morrissey looks miserable but is OK; Charlotte Rampling and David Thewlis are good in supporting roles.So--this isn't at all bad but feels like a remake of the first. Still I recommend it. People just attacked this because Stone is not well liked and they thought it was stupid to do a sequel to \"Basic...\" 14 years after it was made.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ded378f550cd4bed80b58017862eff38",
            "input": "You know what kind of movie you're getting into when the serial killer main character is being transported to the electric chair (in what seems to be a bakery truck), only to have the prison vehicle collide with (and I'm not making this up) a genetic engineering tanker truck. The goo which spurts forth melts him, and fuses his DNA with the snow, creating our protagonist, the killer snowman.My favorite portion of the movie, however, is an over-the-shoulder shot of the snowman thrashing some poor schmuck, in which his hands look suspiciously like a couple of white oven-potholder gloves.Mmmmm, schlock...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3335419906d4dfead386010fab9ea9a",
            "input": "By 1955, five years after this one was released James Stewart and Anthony Mann had completed another six films together, four of them Westerns. Their rapport was obvious from the outset and what was intended as little more than a Universal progrmmer became both a cult and a classic. Buffs of the period will revel in the fact that the first ten names on the credits were all more than well known - and that's not counting Ray Teal or 'Anthony' Curtis, later to become Tony. Perhaps ten years later the 'psychological' western was well entrenched but in 1950 it was rare to throw Ahab into the mix with Cain and Abel, to say nothing of addressing several other issues along the way, and still furnish a conventional western on the surface and full credit to all concerned. One to add to the DVD collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69ffff0f92dd466aba7236e9d33efc9d",
            "input": "Horror is perhaps one of two genres where logic doesn't always win out over imagination. We all know that killers like Freddy, Jason, Michael and even Leatherface shouldn't be able to sustain the amount of pain they do and still live to fight another day. Most of us don't believe that zombies really rise from the dead to stalk people and eat their brains. And let's hope that at least some people know that when you enter places like Funhouses and old mansions that unspeakable crimes are not going to be perpetrated against them. This is where imagination wins out over fact. Horror, and most films in general, requires us to suspend our disbelief for a couple of hours and just go with the flow. This usually isn't a problem when I watch bouncing balls being hurled down the stairs at George C. Scott or when I see an unseen force stalking three amateur film makers in the woods near Burketsville. But what I do have a problem digesting ( without wanting to regurgitate ) is when a film has a killer like the one in this film. To give away who the killer is would actually be a huge spoiler and it would take away all fun of watching it for yourself, but just suffice to say that I actually enjoyed this film right up to final scene when the killer is revealed. There are too many events in the film that transpire for it to make any sense that the killer is who it is. But the 90 minutes prior to this point is a well done, suspenseful, blood soaked film directed with panache and skill by John Hough. If the film would have offered me a different killer, then I would actually be raving about it. This may sound like a completely asinine reason to discredit the film, but believe me, anyone who has seen the film is almost sure to agree with me.John Cassevetes plays Dr. Sam Cordell. He and his daughter Jenny ( played beautifully by Erin Flannery ) have just recently moved to this small New England town. Cordell is a recent widow and it is unclear how his wife died. We see several flashback scenes where a mystery woman ( one can only presume it is his wife ) is laying backside on the ground during a torrential downpour. Her face is bloodied and her eyes are closed. Again, I am not sure who this woman is and what relevance she has to the story but she is there anyway. Cassevetes, it has to be mentioned, is strange to say the least. Cordell is a loving father but his love for his daughter seems to be a little more than just parental. There are a few scenes that hint of incestuous possibilities. It never comes to fruition but it just seems to be omnipotent, but somewhere just beneath the proverbial rug. Thankfully the film never really explores this element of the relationship but it does make you a little uneasy. Casevettes seems like a cross between the porno actor John Leslie and screen great James Caan. He has a deceptive smile and a virile, commanding voice that makes you sit up and take notice. But he also looks like he is about to disrobe during a business luncheon in every scene. He just has that slimy, disingenuous, phlegmatic, uneasy way about him. He never really looks like he can be trusted in this film. I guess that is a credit to the writers, the director and to Cassevetes himself. There was always something that just bothered me about his character from the get-go. The story begins on an excellent note as two would be lovers are swimming in the local quarry. There is a rickety old changing shed near by and as we can see, something or someone is watching them. When the young man briefly disappears to get something from the truck, the young woman wanders into the shed, just to play a prank. Once she is there, she is attacked. The young man dashes to the shed to find her and he is impaled with a board and nail. Hough shrewdly sets us up for the payoff pitch when the young man comes in. He looks frantically scours the room and spots his would-be lover bleeding in the corner, and then smacko, the guy gets it. It is a very tense moment and it starts the film off on the correct note.Also introduced into the tangled wed of a story is a young man named Tim that seems to be having strange dreams of a faceless woman that is bound in a torture chamber surrounded by men with cloaks covering their faces. Tim seems to think that his dreams have something to do with the murders because every time a murder takes place, he has another dream. Toss in a quiet and turbid grandmother, a meretricious female reporter and a strong yet venal local sheriff and you have all the ingredients necessary to create the makings of an imbroglio in the small town of Galen.Throughout the film more people are massacred but most of the time, the males are slaughtered with extreme prejudice and the females are raped. This is my first feeble (and careful) attempt to tell you that this is what left me unconvinced with the denouement. It just didn't strike the right chord.The Incubus is a well done film. It is tense, tight and even most of the performances are very well done. I was intrigued by the dreams that Tim was having and I was anxious to find out what significance they had to the story and ultimately to the murders. But when you get through all that was good in the film, you are still left with that acerbic taste in your mouth. And bitter pills are always more difficult to swallow than sweet ones. 7 out of 10-- This could have been a nine. Too bad.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1281b2335b4d4c5090e6e327580fbf27",
            "input": "First of all.....What the hell? Why in the world are they trying to sell a low budget piece of crap on late night TV with the promise of disturbing, offensive sick garbage that any normal real human being with a soul couldn't watch. What the crap is funny about a dog being injured, a grandma getting her head knocked off...a guy getting his hand blown to pieces and two girls going to the bathroom? what in the hell has this world come to that people find comedy in some thing so completely sick. Anyone who thinks this kind of material is funny, should not even be allowed to walk the earth. But from what I hear its not even offensive...so...they promise comedy through demented piles of sick garbage...and they cant even pull that off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-576cfa61be7a49149f642285cb647752",
            "input": "Uggh! I really wasn't that impressed by this film, though I must admit that it is technically well made. It does get a 7 for very high production values, but as for entertainment values, it is rather poor. In fact, I consider this one of the most overrated films of the 50s. It won the Oscar for Best Picture, but the film is just boring at times with so much dancing and dancing and dancing. That's because unlike some musicals that have a reasonable number of songs along with a strong story and acting (such as MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS), this movie is almost all singing and dancing. In fact, this film has about the longest song and dance number in history and if you aren't into this, the film will quickly bore you. Give me more story! As a result, with overblown production numbers and a weak story, this film is like a steady diet of meringue--it just doesn't satisfy in the long run. To think...this is the film that beat out \"A Streetcar Named Desire\" and \"A Place in the Sun\" for Best Picture! And, to make matters worse, \"The African Queen\" and \"Ace in the Hole\" weren't even nominated in this category! Even more amazing to me is that \"Ace in the Hole\" lost for Best Writing, Screenplay to this film--even though \"An American in Paris\" had hardly any story to speak of and was mostly driven by dance and song.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1244d1b66ca24cce997e4b06127b4c1c",
            "input": "****MINOR SPOILERS*** As a bad movie connoisseur I must have viewed hundreds of bad movies and yet \"Hobgoblins\" stands apart from all others in it's own unique way. Classic baddies such as \"The Creeping Terror,\" \"The Mighty Gorga\" and \"Manos\" are uniformly bad from start to finish. \"Hobgoblins\" on the other hand, starts off bad and gets progressively worse as it goes. During my first viewing of the infamous rake fight scene I thought to myself that this was a truly bad film. I was blissfully unaware that I had just seen the best that this movie had to offer. The movie takes its most massive nosedive into celluloid hell during the painfully inept \"Club Scum\" sequence which is a continuous string of one unfunny joke after another. With just this one film, director Rick Sloane proves that he deserves mention alongside the likes of Coleman Francis and Bill Rebane as one of the worst directors of all time. How bad can a bad movie be? Watch \"Hobgoblins\" and wonder no longer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4cf03295b4094c53a165347cb2e8b3c0",
            "input": "'Cry Freedom' is a movie about how far people will go to find the truth.The first half is an interesting portrayal of an unlikely friendship between activist Steve Biko and Editor Don Woods (played fanatically by Dezel Washington and Kevin Klein). While the second half deals with Woods looking for answers on Biko's death.Although most people favor the first half of the movie which focuses on the unlikely friendship between Biko and Woods'. I found the second half about Don woods struggle to have Biko's story be heard around the world much more interesting.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f704d5fcb97c483181c53ebad604e2e5",
            "input": "Very low-budget police procedural film about homicide detectives trying to solve the murder of a woman whose body turns up in a stolen car in Central Park, and their only clue is a tattoo on her arm. Although released by RKO, this has the look of an independent production that was picked up by the studio for distribution. The cast and crew, with a few exceptions--among them a young and uncredited Jack Lord, director Edward Montagne and cameraman William Steiner--are comprised of complete unknowns, and it shows. The performances are universally sub-par and wouldn't pass muster in a high school training film, the direction is stodgy and choppy and, as mentioned previously, there's no chemistry whatsoever between the lead actors. However, despite the film's many shortcomings, it does have a few good points. The location shooting in New York City, and the film's ultra-low budget, gives it a gritty authenticity much like that of the far superior \"The Naked City\", a shootout in a dark basement is decently handled, and some of the investigating procedures are clever. Otherwise, it's not much to write home about. It is worth a look, however, for a glimpse at the seamier sections of New York City in the early 1950s, and old-car buffs will be ecstatic to see the legions of '30s and '40s cars in the streets..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f61f2a3ab5dd4860888dd30ec5e250e2",
            "input": "Anyone familiar with my reviews on the Internet Movie Database will know that I can be a grumpy bastard from time to time. There are a lot of films I don't like which, for some unfathomable reason, I've felt the urge to review. However, if anyone out there is curious to know the name of the worst film I've ever seen, look no further than Transylvania 6-5000. Without question, this takes the title of the all-time no. 1 awful film. I can't believe that I actually made it from the start of this clunker to the finish!It is clearly meant to capture the flavour of Mel Brooks's Young Frankenstein, but where that film was a funny take on horror movie traditions, this one is a desperately strained and misguided attempt to wring laughs from embarrassingly weak material. Jeff Goldblum and Ed Begley Jr look ashamed to be here as a pair of journalists in modern day Transylvania (perhaps they realised early on that they were doomed in this dud). During their research, they come up against all the chief monsters from past horror favourites, such as vampires, werewolves and mummies.Anyone who manages to brave this film right through to its end may pray that a stake be driven through their heart to relieve them from the agony of boredom. It marks a career nadir for everyone involved and proves that when comedy fails in a big way, it results in awesomely dire entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8d15fa2f3a042039bf3670c8bad56d2",
            "input": "For fans of Troma or the Cyberpunk genre mixed with a little blood shed then this film for you! There is a good amount of blood shed within the confines of this film, also the effects can be impressionable and awesome. The plot is ridiculous and refreshing, not being chained down to what we as audiences are expectant of from films these days.Also notable are the little aliens, who I found cute. All in all, it's a good film for fans of the genre. Also recommended are films such as Tetsuo:The Iron Man and Versus for that weird Japanese film approach, filled with wonderful obscurity and bloodshed. Of course, seeing this film you should already have knowledge of the two.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6feb3e5b7b9644efbd7aff2728a5ba7f",
            "input": "I first saw the trailer for Frailty on Yahoo Movies way back in the day, after hearing Stephen King praise it to high heaven. Not really a fan of either star, I still wanted to see it because I'm a huge thriller fan.I was not disappointed. The acting was superb, especially from the two young boys. Usually I loathe child actors, but Young Adam and Young Fenton were excellent. Bill Paxton really did a good job of directing it too. It was beautifully shot.One must also note the plot twists. The three twists at the end hit hard and fast, and I didn't see them coming. The final twist of the film, coupled with the gravity of what had just been revealed, gives me chills to this day, even though I've re-watched the film so many times.A true gem.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a24aaea8fee4cb493445e20481a1b8e",
            "input": "When I saw this film on FearNet, I thought it would be a scary movie. Apparently, it wasn't. I have no clue how this movie was allowed to be featured on that site. FearNet is a site that shows scary horror movies.The acting is wonderful from all the actors. I hated the story. The story was stupid. The movie starts out with a man with a scroll with a signia stamped onto it. He breaks the seal and certain disasters happen. The water turns to blood, the oceans die out, the moon turns red, etc. The female character was annoying as well. A lot of the stuff she did didn't make sense. Like when she sees a piece of paper with a date on it. Coincidentally, it's the date she's expected to give birth to her baby and she starts freaking out about it and starts researching it and asking religious people what it all means.*Spoiler Alert* The two worst things happened in this movie are the execution of a mentally retarded man who claimed that God told him to murder his parents and the end where Demi Moore dies after giving birth to her baby and transferring her soul into it.Here's what happens. The mentally retarded person gets shot and killed and the apocalypse begins. Demi Moore gets into a hospital in the middle of a massive earthquake and gives birth to her child. She touches her child's head, transferring her soul into the child and then dies. Then, the apocalypse stops.Why does God all of a sudden have a change of heart? He gets furious when the Governor allows the execution of a mentally retarded man then he's all about forgiveness once a lone woman transfers her soul into her baby? *End Spoiler* The movie is pretty stupid. It's another religious end of the world propaganda piece. The acting from Demi Moore and Michael Biehn and everybody else is excellent. That's about all there is.I give this movie 2 stars out of 10. Good acting with a lot of nonsense!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd4fcd8c2d22424db92cd42ed429cf65",
            "input": "Jonathan Demme's directorial debut for Roger Corman's legendary exploitation outfit New World Pictures rates highly as one of the finest chicks-in-chains 70's grindhouse classics to ever grace celluloid. Beauteous Russ Meyer starlet Eric (\"Vixen,\" \"Beyond the Valley of the Dolls\") Gavin gives a robust, winning performance as a brassy, resilient new fish who does her best to persevere in a grimy, hellish penitentiary. The always fabulous Barbara Steele offers a deliciously wicked portrayal as the mean, crippled, sexually frustrated warden (her erotic dream about doing a slow, steamy striptease in front of the lady inmates is a real dilly). Longtime favorite 70's B-movie actress Roberta (\"The Arousers,\" \"Unholy Rollers\") Collins delivers a hilariously raunchy and endearing turn as a cheerfully forward, foul-mouthed kleptomaniac felon who tells a gut-busting dirty joke about Pinnochio. Lynda Gold (a.k.a. Crystin Sinclaire of Tobe Hooper's \"Eaten Alive\" and Curtis Harrington's \"Ruby\") makes her lively film debut as uninhibited wildcat Crazy Alice. And the ever-cuddly Cheryl \"Rainbeaux\" Smith does a lovely, touching reprise of her fragile frightened innocent role from \"Lemora: A Child's Tale of the Supernatural.\" Although this picture does deliver the expected ample amount of coarse language, nudity, rape and violence, it's still by no means a typically crass and sexist piece of lurid mindless filth; the movie very effectively explores the many ways in which men cruelly exploit women and strongly asserts the pro-feminist notion that women can overcome any obstacles if they band together into a group so they can bravely face their misogynistic oppressors as one mighty fighting force. Demme's zesty, confidant direction comes through with a glorious abundance of astutely observed incidental details and delightful moments of engagingly quirky human behavior. Furthermore, both Tak Fujimoto's vibrant cinematography and John Cale's marvelously dolorous oddball blues score are 100% on the money excellent. Patrick Wright (Sheriff Mack in the uproariously awful cheap-rubber-monster-suit creature feature howler \"Track of the Moonbeast\") has a sidesplitting bit as a jerky cop who has his car stolen by a trio of prison escapees when he stops at a gas station to use the bathroom. Lively, rousing and immensely enjoyable, \"Caged Heat\" qualifies as absolutely essential viewing for 70's drive-in movie fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c810d4bb2aa74979bbb1d49e0eafeb1e",
            "input": "First things first! This isn't an action movie although there is a lot of action in it! I think you can compare it to American sports movies! Where a team of very bad players succeed in the unthinkable,winning a game or tournament beyond expectation! In this case it isn't about football or baseball,but Taekwondo! In the beginning these street thugs seem to be good for nothing! But soon we will find out that they don't want to be thugs and actually achieve something in life! It is nice to see them struggle and training! I was surprised how funny this movie was! From start till the end you will laugh your pants off! The young korean actors are very convincing! Go see this wonderful feel good movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d5b5bf57aba4f2db5151c58c8f7b54d",
            "input": "Like one of the previous commenters said, this had the foundations of a great movie but something happened on the way to delivery. Such a waste because Collette's performance was eerie and Williams was believable. I just kept waiting for it to get better. I don't think it was bad editing or needed another director, it could have just been the film. It came across as a Canadian movie, something like the first few seasons of X-Files. Not cheap, just hokey. Also, it needed a little more suspense. Something that makes you jump off your seat. The movie reached that moment then faded away; kind of like a false climax. I can see how being too suspenseful would have taken away from the \"reality\" of the story but I thought that part was reached when Gabriel was in the hospital looking for the boy. This movie needs to have a Director's cut that tries to fix these problems.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e10a1291b0d44cd94cb5454dda876e8",
            "input": "OK, here it is: \"Nazi mountaineer befriends the Dalai Lama.\" What we do is, first we get a major star with no idea whatsoever how to do a Germanic accent, and we let him flounder around between French, German, American, and British for over 2 hours. Then we concoct a series of wildly improbable events and space them apart very widely, so that the plot inches along almost imperceptibly. But just to make sure the viewer doesn´t fall asleep, we throw in details which are shockingly absurd, such as our hero smoking a cigarette at an altitude of 22,000 feet. Naturally, we must also remember that our target audience does not want to read too many subtitles, so we have every character, even the lowliest peasant in the forbidden closed-off city of Lhasa in 1943, speak perfect English, also with dubious accents. Of course, the trickiest part is how to handle the spiritual and political aspects of the story, so what we do is this: we have the Dalai Lama befriend the now-reformed Nazi because the latter is so good at fiddling with film projectors, radios, antique cars, and any other devices with represent the freedom of the capitalist west. In return, our hero learns from his young protegé a kind of vague, undefined Buddhism which is never really brought out or treated in a serious fashion. We also have lots of scenes with the hero flaunting all the marks of respects and protocol which the rest of the Tibetan society accords the Dalai Lama, even as we pretend that the hero has deep and profound reverence for these people and their spiritual leader. In other words, we just expect the audience to believe that this guy is now a Buddhist, sort of, in his own way, even though we ourselves don´t seem to know what his transformation entails or how far we want it to go. And last but not least, we hang a statistic onto the end of the film about how appallingly the Chinese have treated the Tibetans (which is certainly true), thus opening ourselves up to charges that we have made a \"political\" movie, even though it is nothing of the sort. So, zat ist my idea. Vat do you zink? Can ve make zis movie?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e1743d91b764156a8e016d9d2c1f3e2",
            "input": "Belmondo is a tough cop. He goes after a big-time drug dealer (played by Henry Silva, normally a great villain - see \"Sharky's Machine\"; but here he is clearly dubbed, and because of that he lacks his usual charisma). He goes to the scuzziest places of Paris and Marseilles, asks for some names, beats up some people, gets the names, goes to more scuzzy places, asks for more names, beats up more people, etc. The whole movie is punch after punch after punch. It seems that the people who made it had no other ambition than to create the French equivalent of \"Dirty Harry\". Belmondo, who was 50 here, does perform some good stunts at the beginning; apart from those, \"Le Marginal\" is a violent, episodic, trite, shallow and forgettable cop movie. (*1/2)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7af27132e7554b0bb200366244929ed9",
            "input": "Saving Grace is a feel good movie with it's heart in the right place. Grace is recently widowed and realizes her late husband left her with a lot of debts. She could lose her lovely house and sees no other solution to her misery than to start growing marijuana. She's living in a beautiful village where most viewers would love to live and the villagers are all wonderful people most viewers would love to have as neighbors. There's only one thing wrong with this picture and that is the way it portraits the effect marijuana has on it's user. It's obvious none of the actors or writers of this film actually ever did smoke the stuff. The way the villagers act after smoking a joint is ridiculous and only supposedly funny. It's precisely in those scenes that wit is replaced by English slapstick, and that is a pity in a movie that is none the less very enjoyable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d9235759643476faac8100f4921e750",
            "input": "This is possibly the worst fencing, sword-fighting, movie ever made. That is not just because the so called sports fencing is poor but because the plot, characters are so weak that they've got to throw in a semi nude sex scene and, later, supposed group dancing around a fencing scene in the fencing club trying, I suppose to maintain audience interest. What a waste of F. Murray Abraham's talents. You're better served with overblown swashbuckling movies like Zorro, Scaramouche, anything that has Basil Rathbone as the villain. As a fencer myself I recognize the near impossibility of capturing fencing as a sport on film, but if it ever happens it's got to have fresher, better drawn characters and a plot with more depth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d19f2a91ddb74c569347f1e623bca3e7",
            "input": "Red Eye is a good little thriller to watch on a Saturday night. Intense acting, great villain and unexpected action.Some might not want to see this movie because it goes for a very short 85 Min's and 88% of the movie is on a plane and just talking. Don't worry they pull it off very well with the smart and witty dialog.A PG-13 movie seems to be new grounds for director Wes Craven. But surely enough he has fit as much violence as he possibly can into this thriller.This movies strongest point is its cast. This film needed good actors to deliver the dialog and thrills. If they didn't have those actors the film would have been lost and boring. We had Rachel McAdams from Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers. Cillian Murphy from Batman Begins and 28 days Later. Rounding off this cast is Brian Cox from X-men 2.The pacing in this film was great. Just when your thinking its going to get boring they throw a twist at you. Luckily this isn't a long movie and doesn't feel like it either. Much better then the other flight movie Flight Plan. Not too long and not too shabby.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f982dce55fec4d70a1827a75459552d4",
            "input": "I have been waiting for this movie a long time. Especially because Juhi Chawla is in this, she's a great actress.This movie contains six stories. It's a new concept flew over from Hollywood. So it's not a new item.1. Khamini (priyanka chopra) is a dancer. She wants to get famous and makes up a boyfriend to let news reporters be interested in her. But then Rahul (Salman Khan) appears and he claims to be her boyfriend.Priyanka Chopra is still not a good actress. When she yells, I get annoyed. Salman khan cannot play comic roles. But in his serious parts he is marvelous.2. Vinay (Anil Kapoor) is married to Seema (Juhi Chawla). He gets in a midlife crisis and gets attracted to a much younger woman, with forgetting what he really has in life; his wife and kids.Anil kapoor en Juhi are natural born actors / actresses. They are great. But this story is to thin for them.3. Shiven (Akshaye Khanna) is going to get married to Gia (Ayesha Takia), but he gets cold feet and blows the wedding off.4. Ashutosh (Joh Abraham) is married to Tehzeeb (Vidya Balan). She gets an accident and suffers a memory loss. Now she doesn't know that she loves her husband anymore.5. Raju (Govinda) is a cab driver. He meets Stephani (Shannon Esrechowitz) who is a white woman who is in love with an Indian male but he is about to get married with an Indian woman. Raju has to bring Staphani to that man, but falls in love with her.I never liked Govinda's movies. He is very annoying, not funny. But in this movie I liked him very much, like he has been growing up the last years.6. Oh yes! There is Sohail Khan! He plays Ram Dayal who is just married to Phoolwati (Isha Koppikar). He want to get some serious action with her, but every time her family comes in between.Sohail Khan is not a handsome actor, but he is funny! I like his movies.Now here's the problem. All these stories aren't interesting. To make one story from six not interesting stories does not make the whole movie interesting! Here and there the stories touch each other, but is not significant for the characters.My conclusion; Priyanka cannot act! Loose that woman in the bollywood industry. Sohail Khan should make more movies, this role for him was too small. Salman Khan cannot act comic roles, but real serious movies. That's written on his life as an actor. This movie sucks, and is a waste of a cast of good actors and actresses like Anil Kapoor, Juhi Chawla, Akshaya Khanna and John Abraham.It's just like you have the ability to make a movie with Amitabh Bachchan, and you only let him sing a lullaby.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-041116c26d23457689c4ae03e9bb54f7",
            "input": "Would have better strengthened considerably by making it as a50 minute episode of the Outer Limits. Too much superfluous material and stuff like the chief bad guy looking like he'd escaped from The Phantom of the Opera didn't help. The whole 'Night of the Living Dead' sequence was extremely silly and quite unnecessary. After all, if the dead were to punish anyone for their sins, now remind me exactly who was killing everyone again?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9f082d57b3e458e80ba979b703d350a",
            "input": "I saw this movie the other night and I have to honestly say it's one of the worst films I've ever seen. The acting is fair, but the plot is totally ridiculous. A killer is born because of all the \"energy used to make the movie\" and if the film is burned the killer will die? How unbelievable is that? The characters were underdeveloped to say the least...for example, all of a sudden the man mentions \"Aren't you trying to complete the film because your mother couldn't?\" So we're supposed to go along with this? We had no idea it was her daughter until half way through the film. The movie really didn't spotlight on anyone, we didn't know anything about the main people who survived except Ringwald's character was a whiney actress, the guy was on the set when the people died and Raffy wanted to be a director like her mother. Not truly diving in to know who they are. Seemed things were rushed to just get to the killings. The whole plot is entirely too weak for my taste and I was extremely disappointed. Anyone who enjoyed this piece of crap, obviously needs to learn a thing or two about film making. I can't believe anyone would agree to star or even work on this picture. It's not funny, it was not scary and was cliche through the entire film. I found myself predicting what would happen before each scene, which believe you me wasn't hard at all to do. It's a disgrace and I'm deeply sorry I wasted an hour and a half watching the mess. 1/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0913ebb7505c4d8eb72270f95ace89b4",
            "input": "I saw this movie on the Hallmark Channel and thought it was wonderful, especially since it was based on a true man. Pierce Brosnan was very good as the loner English man who took on the persona of the half breed Grey Owl. The photography was beautiful.This movie made me do more research into this character Archie Belaney known simple as Grey Owl. I want to read as much as I can about him. At the time I did not know Richard Attenborough had directed it. But I am not surprised. I like all his movies whether he is acting or directing. I gave it the highest rating. However, I would have liked to have seen more in the movie about WHY he took on this persona as it only showed the two aunts who raised him and his room in their house.You can't go wrong with this movie if you are like me and enjoy a beautiful story without hearing foul language and contrived special effects every few minutes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fec2a8f7ddb452cb71c2fcb240bd93e",
            "input": "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.....There was a boy who was only two years old when the original \"Star Wars\" film was released. He doesn't remember first seeing the movie, but he also doesn't remember life before it. He does remember the first \"Star Wars\" themed gift he got...a shoebox full of action figures from the original set. He was too young to fully appreciate how special that gift would be. But years later, he would get what to this day goes down as one of the best gifts he's ever received: another box full of action figures, ten of the final twelve he needed to complete his collection. It's now legendary in this boy's family how the last action figure he needed, Anakin Skywalker, stopped being produced and carried in stores, and how this boy went for about ten years (until he got into college) trying to track one down and finally bought it from someone on his dorm floor for a bag of beer nuggets (don't ask...it's a Northern Illinois University thing).I can't review \"Star Wars\" as a movie. It represents absolutely everything good, fun and magical about my childhood. There's no separating it in my mind from Christmases, birthdays, summers and winters growing up. In the winter, my friends and I would build snow forts and pretend we were on Hoth (I was always Han Solo). My friends' dad built them a kick-ass tree house, and that served as the Ewok village. They also had a huge pine tree whose bottom branches were high enough to create a sort of cave underneath it, and this made a great spot to pretend we were in Yoda's home. I am unabashedly dorky when it comes to \"Star Wars\" and I think people either just understand that or they don't. I don't get the appeal of \"Lord of the Rings\" or \"Star Trek\" but I understand the rabid flocks of fans that follow them because I am a rabid fan of George Lucas's films.I feel no need to defend my opinion of these movies as some of the greatest of all time. Every time I put them in the DVD player, I feel like I'm eight years old again, when life was simple and the biggest problem I had was figuring out how I was going to track down a figure of Anakin Skywalker.Grade (for the entire trilogy): A+",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-661837801d134d409f785e10f9850929",
            "input": "I grew up with this as my all-time favorite film. The special effects are incredible for the era, and won awards. I can remember the dialogue as if I'd heard it yesterday. It is simply a great, timeless adventure. The music is by Miklos Rosza, who is cinema history's best. Sabu is the Thief. Conrad Veidt is the grand villain. I have a copy within reach, for the next trip down memory lane. Whoa there! Rex Ingram wants out of his genii bottle!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-576263995a4a49949286b8b75b5073ce",
            "input": "This film is a portrait of the half-spastic teenage boy Benjamin who has to visit a boarding school because of his lousy marks in Math. He didn't make the best experiences in life before and got serious self-esteem issues. After a rough start at his new school, he starts making friends, falls in love with a girl and does some American Pieish teenage stuff.Beside some comedy elements, the film is told in a very serious way, focussing on Benjamin and his problems.If you already don't like this story outline, save your time and watch something else. If you do, please be aware of the following:1) Benjamin is a total loser. Whatever he does, he does it terribly wrong and then he goes for self-pity all the time. For me he wasn't that kind of \"charming loser\" who you can feel sympathy for and laugh with. Instead he and his behavior really annoyed me and with my own teenage years not so far behind I could barely stand watching.2) The film hardly tries to be realistic and the story seems to be but from my experience the characters just aren't (except for Janosch maybe). And yes, I know this film is based on an auto-biography written by a 17-year old - but having some experiences with German schools and German youth myself, I don't believe him.3) Showing the sexual awakening really is an important thing for a film with this subject. But I doubt that teenage boys do an \"Ejaculate on the cookie\"-contest where everyone has to hit a cookie with his sperm during mass-masturbation in the woods and the loser has to eat the sperm-wet cookie afterwards. Although it kinda amused me in a contemptible way, it's nor funny neither underlining the serious attempts of this film.4) There's a sub-plot about Benjamin's family and his father betraying his wife - still, I don't know why it's there and where to put it. It just bored me.Well, I personally hated this film for having the character of Benjamin, being without a message, concept, scheme, whatever and it's failing attempts to be dramatic and serious. However, I can image that some people may find it sensible and touching. If you liked \"The Other Sister\" you'll probably like this one, too. I hated both.17-year old boys shouldn't write an autobiography and if they do, it doesn't seem to be the best idea to make a film out of it.2 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8944d7c4ebdf4da59010deb76719e7e7",
            "input": "The NSA, CIA, FBI, FSB and all other snoop agency in the world should watch this movie to gain information as to how to spy on people. (as MST3k Commentary states it...\"Sanata has the dirt on every! Santa's Tentacles reach far and wide! There is no hiding from the Klaus Organization\")From telescopes that can spy over millions of miles to ears that can hear everything. Its amazing that the CIA doesn't have Santa on the payroll. Satan's dance routine is hilarious. Pitch...he is so useless.The cheese factor in of this movie is tremendous. Very low budget but so fun to watch. I recommend watching the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 version for even more laughs.You even get a laugh at the missfortune of the good kids.I give this a 1 for production quality and a 10 for pure cheese and fun factor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a1a025b87814110a65d5f9aefcd7b85",
            "input": "A Frank Capra WONDERS OF LIFE film.Keeping the blood pumping through our veins is the responsibility of hardworking HEMO THE Magnificent.In the mid-1950's, AT&T and Bell Science teamed with famed Hollywood director Frank Capra to produce a series of CBS television science films to educate the public about the Universe around them. A far cry from the dreary black & white fodder so often foisted off on young scholars, the Capra films would both instruct and entertain with lively scripts and eye-catching visuals shown in Technicolor. The four films - OUR MR. SUN (1956), THE STRANGE CASE OF THE COSMIC RAYS (1957), HEMO THE MAGNIFICENT (1957), THE UNCHAINED GODDESS (1958) - quickly became schoolhouse favorites, where they were endlessly shown in 16mm format.The star of the series was Dr. Frank C. Baxter (1896-1982), an affable English professor at the University of Southern California. This avuncular pedagogue proved to be the perfect film instructor, genially imparting to his audience the sometimes complex facts in a manner which never made them seem dull or boring. Dr. Baxter, who won a Peabody Award for his achievements, continued making high quality instructional films after the Capra quartet were concluded.HEMO THE Magnificent, which was produced, written & directed by Capra, relates the story of the human heart and blood circulation system, using animation and gentle humor. Film star Richard Carlson appears as the Fiction Writer, energetically helping Dr. Baxter tell Hemo's tale.Movie mavens will recognize Sterling Holloway as part of the TV production crew, and the voices of Marvin Miller, Mel Blanc, June Foray & Pinto Colvig as various cartoon characters, all uncredited.The devotional Scripture which begins the film is completely in tune with the tenor & tone of the production.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec8ea4eeee854a34a2693175ea7ebc73",
            "input": "With the releasing of \"Farligt förflutet\" Swedish film industry has truly hit rock bottom. Stefan (Jens Hultén) has for the past years lived a calm life with his wife Marie (Regina Lund). One day an old friend of Stefan´s arrives with a favor to ask him. Stefan is to do a small courier job. He is supposed to bring a suitcase filled with heroine through the Sweden-Germany customs. Unfortunately things in Germany don´t work out as planned and Stefan is now in big trouble. It is always nice to see a Swedish film that breaks the traditional family-drama pattern. Unfortunately if the people involved in the production have no clue of how a movie is supposed to be written, filmed or cut the result can only be catastrophic. The content can be concluded with: bad acting, an incoherent plot and idiotic dialogs. The only highlight in the movie is the unprovoked sex-scene wit the incredibly beautiful Regina Lund. This lasts for only a few seconds leaving approxamitly 90 minutes of pure, let´s say what it truly is, crap.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50a582ead1a447e3b6b63a2ab7823500",
            "input": "Who doesn't have unresolved issues with parents? And which parents don't have unresolved issues with each other?I know, that sounds heavy. But this is played for laughs in the movie, making both the comedy better and the drama better. I've always like Paul Reiser and Peter Falk, and although I was a bit concerned that their star qualities might be too big for a small movie, I was enchanted from the very first scene.Especially entertaining were the discoveries that the son makes about his father as a person. And Peter Falk's monologue about being a hard-working, sacrificing father and husband was the perfect balancing point. Without that scene being acted so well, the movie would have seemed far less nuanced, and the character far less interesting.Nicely done, Paul and Peter!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a29c18ef08454297a63fe18cdd0ae1dd",
            "input": "One word can describe this movie and that is weird. I recorded this movie one day because it was a Japanese animation and it was old so I thought it would be interesting. Well it was, the movie is about a young boy who travels the universe to get a metal body so he can seek revenge. On the way he meets very colorful characters and must ultimately decide if he wants the body or not. Very strange, if you are a fan of animation/science-fiction you might want to check this out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec7f227764ee4927bf92a63256d7596a",
            "input": "Simon Pegg plays a rude crude and often out of control celebrity journalist who is brought from England to work for a big American magazine. Of course his winning ways create all sorts of complications. Amusing fact based comedy that co stars Kristen Dunst (looking rather grown up), Danny Huston, and Jeff Bridges. It works primarily because we like Simon Pegg despite his bad behavior. We completely understand why Kristen Dunst continues to talk to him despite his frequent screw ups. I liked the film. Its not the be all and end all but it was a nice way to cap off an evening of sitting on the couch watching movies.7 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a92f8b5bfb004b6fa3ace7e368ac3fc1",
            "input": "This is undoubtedly one of the funniest movies ever made. Amitabh as a country bumpkin, Arjun Singh, is hilarious. The best thing is the laughter never stops. The plot is a same-old same-old story where child is separated from mother who sacrifices everything for her duty - with a happy reunion at the end. There are villains (Ranjit) and there are brothers (Sashi Kapoor) and there are vixens (Parveen Babhi) and there are lovers (Smita Patil) and there is a blind brother and a grandfather thrown in for good measure. But this movie is about Amitabh and thats all you remember at then end.Amitabh comes to the city to make a decent living and his dialogue delivery and mannerisms are hilarious. Later in the movie he turns into the Angry Young Man he is famous for but the humour stays. Memorable parts include his walking, talking and speaking english, the song (pad gungaroo re bhand, meera nachi thi) and everything with his dadoo.All in all I was rolling with laughter throughout the movie. If you want 3 hours of entertainment with Amitabh at his absolute best - this is it. It will easily give it a 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4a4256ca17743b78fe22a7cf8c1532e",
            "input": "I watched 3/4 of this movie and wondered why it got such horrible reviews here. It was fairly easy to watch (at 3am). It had good casting - Kevin Dillon's role of the sociopath serial killer was very believable - he was both charasmatic and chilling. The rest of the main characters weren't so bad either.This is your typical stalker/suspense movie. A married couple cannot conceive so they go to a fertility clinic for help. A sociopathic \"genetic material\" donor fixates on the recipients and, in typical stalker form, intrudes into their lives.As I said, most of the movie was fairly good.. we see \"Conan\" grow more and more obsessed in raising his baby and creating the perfect family with the mother. Of course things don't work out for him the way he planned. Not a bad plot line.But, the last 15 minutes were just horrible. I am pretty tolerant with movies (especially at 3am!).. but, I was just amazed at how bad the ending was written. I actually scoffed outloud!All in all, not the worst movie I've seen, but I wouldn't be able to sit through it again (unless I skipped the ending). The only redeaming quality here was Kevin Dillon's role - - one of the best serial killers ever.Try looking around at the other channels before watching this.. But, if nothing better is on, I'd give it a try.. =)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b313bc3c8c748998a25425f67c258d6",
            "input": "This episode from the first season slightly edges towards controversy with the whole gender bending angle.I imagine there would have been a significant amount of editing before this was finished to appease censors.The story itself is original and well written and the directing is complemented by the fine acting.(Nicholas Lea makes his X-Files debut though not as Agent Krycek but as a victim called Michael) I especially enjoyed the built up to and the ending itself.Its different but enjoyable.Ignore any bad reviews you may hear.Watch it for yourself and make judgement then",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d68c1a7cb92546a28b8054cc669cdf05",
            "input": "When I saw this movie, I couldn't believe my eyes. Where these hilarious creatures, dustbin muppets with big pointy teeth, really meant to be scary? Or where they designed to have a good laugh (I sincerely hope so). If you watch carefully you can even see the strings operating them (better; dragging them across the screen). The whole was rather funny than scary and I had a good time watching the movie because I was amazed by its overall incapacity to have only one good part. It is one big joke from beginning to end and I believe this movie belongs into a new category: So unbelievable crappy you'll be laughing from beginning to end. (I'm not even gonna try to comment on the acting or all the other things)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a45b0a6d5ff4248976c8344e573c0c7",
            "input": "I saw this film in its premier week in 1975. I was 13 years old and at that time I found it adequate and somewhat fun. I then came to discover the WORLD of Doc Savage through the Bantam novels of the old pulp magazine stories. I had no idea before any of this of the realm of Doc, but I fast became one of the most avid Doc Savage fans you could ever meet. I read (and still own) all of the Bantam books, I started going to comic book cons (along with Star Trek and Doctor Who and all manner of geeky fat kid events) and had a wonderful time with each adventure I took with Doc and the ORIGINAL Fab 5. Philip Jose Farmer's Book - The Apocalyptic Life of Doc Savage became a bit of a bible for me and to this day I have very fond feelings regarding my Doc phase. In so saying I have to admit now years later that this film really missed the boat. It is a film that did not know what it wanted to be when it grew up. The screenplay was infantile and bore little resemblance to the pulp story. These stories from the 30's were short and if one looked at Lester Dent's (AKA Kenneth Robeson) outline for writing them, they broke down into PERFECT 3 act dramas that screamed for screen treatment. One would have thought that with George Pal and Michael Anderson at the helm, it would have turned out better. The spoof elements miss the target and the more serious moments almost get there, but then fall short. It is interesting to watch though in that they hired second-string character actors (guys that had really been only bit players and extras before this film) who all acquit themselves very well. Paul Gleason of course has gone on to be a fine utility player in all facets of entertainment and Bill Lucking is a television perennial. All the rest have fallen off the map sadly. I do wish to own a copy of this film as it is the only movie version of my hero, but I fear I will not watch it much as it is too painful. I would say 0 but I give it 2 out of 10 instead for some of the period art direction (Doc's answering machine at the end was a nice touch) and the cast of 3rd stingers getting a moment in the sun.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0c76963ae5d940909332f560184227df",
            "input": "This, the direct-to-video death rattle of the Tremors series, features sixty inspired seconds (sawblade: you'll know it when you see it) and more tedium and filler than you can shake a stick at. Tremors 4 was obviously shot on a cripplingly low budget. That means they only had enough special effects mojo for three or four minutes of precious worm-on-human violence, tops. The lackluster, cliche-spouting cast and hackneyed writing ensure that the remaining hour and a half of the Tremors 4 experience feels at least fifteen thousand years long. Only hardcore Tremors fans will be able to sit through, much less enjoy this film. If you aren't among them- don't bother.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d73d5867325b41dfa8aaf31f4ec62936",
            "input": "Sterling and younger brother try to survive on land, being squeezed by big cattlemen. When 'rogue' brother Preston arrives, a moral dilemma ensues. John 'Drew' Barrymore steals the show as the younger, impressionable brother-Barrymore shows signs here that he could have been an acting powerhouse. Moves at a nice pace to an exciting climax.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81ccb835c7a143de95478e6863eddd3e",
            "input": "I'm one of those people who'd crawl a mile through broken glass to see a Hal Hartley film. From TRUST and IRIS to HENRY FOOL and (my Hartley favorite) NO SUCH THING, Hal's unique brand of movies are an acquired taste. Infusing equal parts mystery/espionage with wispy comedy seems to be his forte. The comedy isn't in your face necessarily, and often runs throughout an entire scene before coming to fruition. And that's the case with FAY GRIM, the sequel to Henry Fool.Parker Posey stars as Fay Grim, abandoned wife of Henry Fool and mother to Henry's only son Ned. Fay lives a quiet life until she comes home one day to find a CIA agent in her kitchen. His name is Fulbright (Jeff Goldblum, MAN OF THE YEAR) and he wants Henry's notebooks. There are many Henry Fool notebooks and they were all previously believed to contain nothing but mad wanderings. Apparently there's much more to them. Secrets weapons research or paths to terrorists? Who knows but Henry. Agent Fulbright tells Fay that her husband is dead but this is quickly surmised as a ruse to get Fay out of her home and searching for Henry (and it works ...but not the way they think).Fay battles multiple spy rings to gather Henry's notebooks and to seek him out. She also makes a deal with the CIA to get her brother Simon (James Urbaniak) out of prison (he'd helped Henry escape the country in the original Henry Fool film.) Multiple overlapping events occur in rapid succession: spy rings shoot each other to death, Henry is discovered being held in \"safety\" by a jihadist, Fay frees her brother but unknowingly risks her son's life, and the CIA gets its comeuppance for putting Fay in danger.Hal Hartley obviously loves to play with themes. And he does so to the extreme here. Even character names (Grim, Fool, Fulbright, Fogg) have implicit meanings of their own that are quite funny. The over-the-top espionage films of ol' are given plenty of screen time, too, as guns blaze in stop-motion sequences, never striking our heroine even though she's right in the line of fire.Now that I've heaped praise on this creation, I will say that Parker Posey's excessive portrayal of Fay Grim isn't the best part of the film, which is a shame considering how much time she's on-screen. I realize this was probably what Mr. Hartley wanted: an uncurbed woman with hand gestures to the Italian extreme. But it was still painful to watch at times.Even so, fans will probably devour Fay Grim and beg for more. Though this wasn't my favorite Hal Hartley film, I know I'm ready.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61a8487e85954299923224d6924262ad",
            "input": "Written and acted by sincere amateurs, produced by some exploitation monger, this is dull and hard to watch.Not the worst movie ever, but at least schlock like _Plan 9 From Outer Space_ usually had a real actor or two. I'd recommend _A Thief In The Night_ only to hardcore ironists and hardcore Dispensationalists. I'm neither.Don't believe me? links added mostly to reach IMDb's 10-line minimum",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-307810f688be430a8a22eda364aa7ab9",
            "input": "I'll start by relating my first encounter with Prince's music. It was in a bar, on my 39th birthday and a girl was dancing bare breasted to \"1999\" playing on the speakers. I asked people, who is this singer? I was told it was Prince. It was so good that it distracted me from a beautiful, topless dancer. Later I started hearing other Prince songs and really \"digging\" them. When Purple Rain came out I still knew very little about this fellow Minnesotan. The movie blew me away. I instantly became Prince's No. 1 fan of the \"War Baby\" generation. Later I found out one of my cousins was his secretary, and she got me, and my nephew into a V.I.P. Prince concert where we sat next to his mother...how cool is that! Getting back to the topic at hand, I agree with Siskel & Ebert who called Purple Rain an instant classic. I have seen it over 17 times and absolutely love it. I thought Prince's acting was fine, Apollonia struggled a bit, but all in all the acting was fine. John Gielgud was not available to play 'The Kid' so Prince took the role. The film is visually stunning, brilliantly paced (it never gets slow), and terrifically directed. I rank it among the Best Movie Musicals of all time. The last time I watched it was after about a 7 year gap and it still delivered. I am so proud of fellow Minnesotan Prince Rogers Nelson and would love to tell him personally. He walked right in front of me during the above mentioned concert and said, \"Hi\", to my nephew but not me. He was chatting with his mom. I was a bit crushed but he's still No. 1 with me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f920eb5b746c4c19bd1b8aafee55305d",
            "input": "Having seen \"Triumph of the Will,\" I can only say this movie is ghastly, even measured against the historically low \"standards\" of the time. Naturally it's all totally fabricated and prejudicial. This is what one would expect of 1930's German propaganda. Unfortunately, the quality of the presentation, itself, is hackneyed and cheap. It's also so blatantly ridiculous that even contemporary Germans must've left the theater holding their noses. In a genre renowned for its base appeal, lack of originality and unapologetic wrong-headedness, this film doesn't even qualify as \"bad.\" It would have to improve significantly to attain that status!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1e9c279048b42469c81bbc9cf614e20",
            "input": "and this movie has crossed it. I have never seen such a terrible movie in my life! I mean, a kid's head getting cut off from the force of an empty sled? A snowman with a costume that has the seams clearly visible? This was a pitiful excuse for a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-107564c3d6354507b3be7bcf3fbc7973",
            "input": "I can't understand why they decided to release this film to introduce the American audience to the dynamo that is Jet Li. Fist of Legend would have been a much better choice. Anyway, Black Mask isn't terrible, but it certainly isn't great either. The final fight sequence is well staged by Yuen Woo Ping who went on to coordinate The Matrix. But the English release suffers from rough editing and dubbing. (I'm begging the Hollywood studios to release these films uncut with subtitles.)Jet Li shows his characteristic charisma in the title role and Francoise Yip has a cool but brief role as the female 701.Black Mask has a strange goth style that adds some interest but it is overloaded with gun battles and explosions. More focus on Li's fantastic physical skills were in order. Black Mask is a decent film but do yourself a favor and pick up Fist of Legend if you want to see a tremendous film that really shows Li's skills.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc22ee9543f745499ea4baf494633189",
            "input": "If you have seen Friends, the writing will feel very familiar. Especially the last 3 or 4 seasons of Friends often share the same comedy setups.The show is about a group of people whose connection is that they shared the same class when they were still rather young (about 10 years old I think). Now, they're in their mid-twenties, and they meet again on a class reunion. This is where the series starts.A typical episode deals with multiple story lines at once. They're usually not connected in any way. Each story line is cut up into multiple sections, which are then shown in a mixed order.The sketches is where my problems lie with this series. As in the later seasons of Friends, it's often a rather silly setting with hard to believe situations. One of the main characters does something really stupid that's hard to believe. The situation is then heavily exaggerated, as if it wasn't silly enough. If you're into this kind of in-your-face humor, then maybe you'll like this series. For me it is a great turn-off.The reason I started watching Friends is because of the first few seasons. There are interesting and especially credible story lines, with some romance in it that makes you root for the characters. The Class has none of this. The characters are simply too forced and stereotypes are pushed too far. It's therefore not possible to relate to them and like them.At least with friends, it took several seasons before it ran out of steam and the character traits were all milked out. But in The Class, it seems it has run out of steam before it even started.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-faf854ea4c5d4d06bceb82a658e3400e",
            "input": "'Chances Are' a big mistake to see. You could know director Emile Ardolino from 'Dirty Dancing' and 'Sister Act' and should expect something amusing from him. But I guess I have to disillusion you. He made a really, really bad movie.According to the story Christopher McDonald dies to reburn as a baby. The baby grows up Robert Downey Jr, and Jr returns his former home town where she meets his former daughter, Mary Stuart Masterson (complicated, huh?).They fall in love with each other. Then appears Jr former wife, Cybill Shepherd, and Jr falls in love with her too. I guess I don't even have to mention that she loves Ryan O'Neil.In one of his first roles Robert Downey Jr's on his worst. He copies Michael J Fox.After the 'Moonlighting' Shepherd proves that she's not suitable for acting in movies.Anyway, there's one thing this unfunny comedy can be used: as antidote to insomnia.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6890205ceabc4291aae12f0342488211",
            "input": "Caught the tail end of this movie channel surfing through the cable movie channels, and was so intrigued I sought out the next showing.I really didn't know what to expect after reading the program summary, but I came away from this movie feeling quite disturbed and distressed. It also gave me as adult who attended high school in the 80's, a little better insight into what our kids have to contend with these days.The fact that you don't see the shooting only adds to the chillness of the plot. To see both child and adult alike struggle to comprehend and come to terms with the senseless shootings was at times overwhelming. And will admit that I shed quite a few tears throughout.On the whole, not a movie that I would seek out to what, however I am sure glad I did see it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d6defde16e7491fabb8f8aafa52057d",
            "input": "People don't seem to be giving Lensman enough credit where its due. A few issues have been overlooked which are key to understanding the Lensman experience.The Year: For the year it was made in (1984) Lensman features some of the most stunning effects I've ever seen. As a person who watches a lot of early 80's animation Lensman is unique in it's use of what appears to be computer-generated imagery at a time when computers were extremely primitive. Kim's battle against the geometric cutter pods in the laser maze can be taken as an excellent example of this. Every time I watch that I have to keep repeating to myself that it was 1984 when it was made.The Soundtrack: Lensman has one of the most insane soundtracks that I've heard, and this mad hysterical beat permeates every corner of the film. Lensman borrowed heavily on two western mistakes and managed to somewhat deal with the first one - the need to fill in every second of silence in a film with music and the need for a heroine. While the music is attuned well and galvanizes scenes such as the motorcycle battle in the Thionite Factory on Radelyx, the heroine theme fails due to the sheer annoyance value of Chris. It's interesting to note that the constant music thwarted my attempts at noise removal when I was archiving lensman over from analog tape to digital format - since there wasn't a single second of silence available to use as a reference point.Western Influences: Helmut - sounds like \"helmet\" and has roughly the same voice as Darth Vader. Clarissa Fairborn - has the same hairstyle as the princess of SW and her name sounds suspiciously similar to Marissa Fairborn of Transformers. Takes over Han Solos role by flying the ship and having some technical expertise. Buzzkirk - a definite improvement on Chewbaka. The lens - a nice concrete copy of the force that comes across less as a chance to preach Christianity at the audience than in the original SW. While the force relied on belief far more than concentration, the lens is a pure concentration tool. Theoretically, anyone could wield the lens. The lens is far more limited than the Force - being purely a defensive/offensive weapon.Technology: The boskone alliance have interesting meatball sponge ships. They look like stormtroopers only with red uniforms instead of white. The idea of a DNA weapon was nice if only it had been developed. The Galactic Alliance looked like Starblazers (or whatever it was called - that 60's series where they were battling the Xylons). There weren't enough ship to ship battles for me - this is much improved upon in the second Lensman film.Finally a note on Worzel. This character is a unique and very interesting character-design who fortunately continues on to the second film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8478b5afbda84904b23ea6b2cec63a61",
            "input": "Hood of the Living Dead had a lot to live up to even before the opening credits began. First, any play on \"...of the living dead\" invokes His Holiness Mr. Romero and instantly sets up a high standard to which many movies cannot afford to aspire. And second, my movie-watching companion professed doubt that any urban horror film would surpass the seminal Leprechaun In the Hood. Skeptical, we settled in to watch. We were rewarded with a surprisingly sincere and good-hearted zombie film. Oh, certainly the budget is low, and of course the directors' amateurs friends populate the cast, but Hood of the Living Dead loves zombie cinema. Cheap? Yeah. But when it's this cheap, you can clearly see where LOVE holds it together. Ricky works in a lab during the day and as a surrogate parent to his younger brother at night. He dreams of moving out of Oakland. Before this planned escape, however, his brother is shot to death in a drive-by. Ricky's keen scientific mind presents an option superior to CPR or 911: injections of his lab's experimental regenerative formula. Sadly, little bro wakes up in an ambulance as a bloodthirsty Oakland zombie! Chaos and mayhem! I think it's more economical to eat your enemies than take vengeance in a drive-by, but then again, I'm a poor judge of the complexities of urban life. (How poor a judge? In response to a gory scene involving four men, I opined \"Ah-ha! White t-shirts on everyone so the blood shows up. Economical! I used the same technique in my own low-budget horror film.\" Jordan replied, \"No, that's gang dress. White t-shirts were banned from New Orleans bars for a time as a result.\" Oh.)A lot of the movie is set in someone's living room, so there's a great deal of hanging out and waiting for the zombies. But the characters are sympathetic and the movie is sincere-- it surpasses its budget in spirit. Zombie explanation: When man plays God, zombies arise! Or, perhaps: Follow FDA-approved testing rules before human experimentation! Contribution to the zombie canon: This is the first zombie movie I've seen with a drive-by shooting. As far as the actual zombies go, infection is spread with a bite as usual, but quite unusually head shots don't work-- it's heart shots that kill. Zombies have pulses, the absence of which proves true death. And these zombies make pretty cool jaguar-growl noises. Gratuitous zombie movie in-joke: A mercenary named Romero. Groan. Favorite zombie: Jaguar-noise little brother zombie, of course!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f102ff8bcc14747ac275a3aa8e27aff",
            "input": "Thankfully saw this on a plane to Singapore recently (thought I'd missed it at the Cinemalaya filmfest). Paris, je t'aime is a collection of 20 short films (about 5 mins each) by 20 directors showing love in various pockets of contemporary Paris.One of my fave segments is 'Parc Monceau' by Alfonso Cuarn (Great Expectations, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban), which was done in one continuous shot and features Nick Nolte.The Coen brothers' 'Tuileries' starring Steve Buscemi as a tourist in the metro was hilarious ! Juliette Binoche and Willem Dafoe in 'Place des Victoires' was haunting.For Maggie Gyllenhaal as an American actress/druggie in 'Quartier des Enfants Rouges' to have portrayed anticipation and heartbreak in such a short period of time was just brilliant.Elijah Wood as a vampire victim in 'Quartier de la Madeleine' was pretty surreal, while Emily Mortimer and Rufus Sewell played a cute couple in Wes Craven's 'Pre-Lachaise'.Natalie Portman was beautiful as usual as the actress girlfriend of a visually impaired French boy in 'Faubourg Saint-Denis'. But despite the many portrayals of young love, a more mature execution by Gena Rowlands in 'Quartier Latin' was equally aww-inducing.This movie is perfect for those with ADHD because each sequence is driven and carefully thought of.There are also a number of memorable quotes. One in particular is this one from a cheating husband who eventually leaves his mistress to stay with his dying wife in her last days: \"In pretending to be a man in love, he became a man in love.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7104ddef77c6493cad7f73de4b67c885",
            "input": "This is a complete Hoax...The movie clearly has been shot in north western Indian state of Rajasthan. Look at the chase scene - the vehicles are Indian; the writing all over is Hindi - language used in India. The drive through is on typical Jaipur streets. Also the palace is in Amer - about 10 miles from Jaipur, Rajasthan. The film-makers in their (about the film) in DVD Bonus seem to make it sound that they risked their lives shooting in Kabul and around. Almost all of their action scenes are shot in India. The scene where they see a group singing around fire is so fake that they did not even think about changing it to Afgani folk song. They just recorded the Rajasthani folk song. How do I know it because I have traveled that area extensively. They are just on the band-wagon to make big on the issue. I do challenge the film makers to deny it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-91cbc57da13b48959eeeaab81498df71",
            "input": "i think that new york is a big fake, i mean her whole guidelines of this show is stupid. i enjoyed flavor fl av more better, she acts like a slut, and a hoe put together. her mother is out of this world, i think she is the devils daughter. i mean what does she think she is doing these men already have girls and i believe once you have been with her you will be to ashamed to go back to your girl. she is nasty, spoiled and a big fat fake.the show is very interesting to watch, how much money is she getting to do this awful show, and whats up with her mother,i thought her and new york did not get along, but now it seems as though she is just as fake as her crazy daughter.and where is the so called husband, he is no where to be found,i would not to be with them either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54071cc187b64520ab5217c8813bfd1e",
            "input": "Intense actors like Bruce Dern, Jason Patrick and Rachel Ward combine to make this modern-day film noir a winner. Of the three, I don't know who was most interesting as all offer good performances and intriguing characters.Patric does the narration in this noir, playing an ex-boxer and mental patient. Wow, that alone makes for an interesting guy! He looks dumb, but he isn't. Ward is the slinky, attractive, cynical, intelligent and compassionate co- conspirator of a kidnapping plan that goes bad. Bruce Dern also is in the mix and Dern never fails to fascinate in about any film.The movie could be considered kind of downer to the average viewer, but I found it fascinating....and I don't like depressing movies normally. What I found was a kind of quirky crime film. Take a look and see if you agree. This is pretty unknown film that shouldn't have that status because it's simply a good story and well-done.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4a6d76fb7f5434b81f5237352d6709b",
            "input": "Shiner, directed by Christian Calson, centers around three \"couples\" and their relationships with obsession and violence. Pretty good start as far as I'm concerned. Interesting. The couples break down into a heterosexual couple, two heterosexual male friends and a straight guy being \"harmlessly\" stalked by a gay man.The \"het\" couple really don't have much of a role in the film. There are some scenes that show how they like to be aggressive when having sex or playing around with each other, but seem to have no real purpose since the are so marginalized. My assumption is that they represent a more day to day illustration of how sex/violence are integrated in a couples life. The couple aren't very aggressive and it's not even shot in any kind of erotic way. As characters, they don't add much to the theme or plot.The two male friends make up the bulk of the plot. They engage in some gay bashing of sorts by convincing a homosexual man to have sex with them in an alley. This escalates into violence. And the violence changes them. It becomes a means of sexual gratification. And their need for violence t release grows as the film progresses. The main problem I had is the violence is not convincing. Never once does it seem that any of the characters is in any real danger. It just doesn't work. Given that the whole theme of the film is about the characters' relationships with violence, this is a major problem. Unfortunately, the make-up doesn't help either. Sometimes, it's okay, other times it is very bad. In one scene, I really wondered why one of the characters had rouge smeared on his face. Confusing.The more interesting pair of the characters is the \"stalker couple.\" Here Calson seemed to have more to say and was able to develop a more coherent storyline. Perhaps it is because the characters seem to develop more and have resolution at the end. Shiner may well have been much better if it had stuck with these two.I appreciate that Calson wanted to achieve a lot with this film. It is admirable. Most low budget flicks don't aspire to much. I don't think Calson achieved want he was aiming for. Myself, I found nothing particularly controversial or unsettling. Shiner was unconvincing. This doesn't mean, however, that the director can't achieve something with his next film.He seems to have something to say.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d26872adcef47c392b5a58e5612d15d",
            "input": "I don't know what it is about Donald Sutherland's acting style, or vocal style, but he always seems to be acting from behind a massive wad of soggy Kleenex. He's just...I don't know, THICK? Somnambulistic? On meds? Weird.That said, I just saw the flick again for the first time since its original release, and frankly, I don't remember it ending anything LIKE that. A bad ending, too, because nothing gets tied off. What about the dead husband? The annoying child (and was the kid dubbed?)? The Scotland Yard and military pursuers? I would have liked something wrapping things up and giving some dramatic closure to it all, not just the big panoramic pull-away.And what woman sleeps with the man she knows just killed her husband? Even if she was trying to allay Needle's suspicions to protect her kid, she could always have had a headache. That last encounter made me feel way too itchy and uncomfortable...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c8c1830fbdb45adbeb666a3a0cba395",
            "input": "As a lover of bad movies, I definitely hit paydirt with this one. The plot isn't really that bad, but there are a few instances where you really have to ask yourself \"what the heck is going on here?\"There are many many things that make this the funniest bad movie ever. First off, Rudy Ray Moore had gotten so fat and slow when this movie was filmed that the special effects consist of speeding up the fight scenes to double time. There are also scenes where there is a slow-motion instant replay, jumping onto a ten foot high wall (by playing falling off of it backwards), naked men walking out of huge letters, and sex that literally brings down the roof (with the cable holding up the roof catching on fire).Of course, no Rudy Ray Moore movie would be complete without a completely gratuitous and random comedy club scene where Rudy makes fun of all the customers, interposed with people doing some odd dance. There are so many things bad about this movie, but they're bad in an entertaining way, and if you take your eyes off the movie, you might miss another mistake.Rating: 1/10 for actual value, 10/10 for cheese factor, 10/10 for picking out mistakes and goofs, averages out to 7/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58faff150599480bb741ff9592abd6c7",
            "input": "Any movie that has nude scenes of Karen Allen and I'm still so bored I walk out, that is a stinker! Karen gets stuck in Paris, and befriends a sissily-handsome French man with whom she is having sex soon. Of course he's married, (\"But, cheri, why should that be a problem?\") What could be an interesting clash of cultures is (believe it or not) just dull. I walked out. Maybe the movie got a lot better after I left; but it would have had to have gotten a LOT better to make up for a rotten beginning.My advice, if you find yourself in this, run, do not walk, for the exit. Save your time and your energy. Most assuredly save your money. It's a shame the production company didn't save its money.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f12ed7979744d25b4f0576bd2c794d8",
            "input": "The show had great episodes, this is not one of them. It's not a terrible episode, it's just hard to follow up \"The man that was death.\", \"All through the house\", and \"Dig that cat, he's real gone.\"This episode is about a couple that has just been married Peggy (Ammanda Plummer) and Charles (Stephen Shellen). In the first five minutes you find out that Charles only married Peggy for her money. The two go on their honeymoon and their car breaks down on a dirt road and they have to seek refuge in an old abandon mansion. Charles soon finds out a secret of Peggy's family...In my opinion you should watch this episode, but just don't expect the same feeling as the rest of the episodes in the first season.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b489fec1cc446ceb5b901bc4a555b4c",
            "input": "This apocalyptic zombie film tries to be vicious and shocking; but FEEDING THE MASSES comes off lame as some of the stiff-legged zombies stalking the streets. In Rhode Island, a zombie epidemic known as the Lazarus Virus is being played down by the government manipulated newspapers and television stations. A couple of brave, but dumb, souls at Channel 5 TV News feels its audience is being given false hope and no idea of the real danger at hand. An eager reporter(Racheal Morris)and her cameraman(William Garberina), with the aid of a military escort(Patrick Cohen), risk life and limb to present a 'live' broadcast to show the doom at hand. Do yourself a favor and don't watch. This thing is obviously very low budget and comes across with the feel of a high school play gone bad. Acting is atrocious and the flesh-hungry zombies are almost comical. Also appearing are: Michael Propster, William DeCoff and Brenda Hogan. FEEDING THE MASSES should be left to starve.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bbb04b586f24e39b8897a50551382e9",
            "input": "Well, Tenko is without doubt the best British television show ever, the performances, the directing, the casting, the suspense, the drama..... everything is fantastic about it.Although the show fell a little later in its final season, this ending movie picked up the threads nicely and wove a superb story for fans of the show and newbies. I cannot recommend this movie more, find it and watch it. But I do advise watching the series first, as the first 2 seasons are even better than this fantastic movie.An obvious (10/10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a303193a6b64d9492a1042dd2af8fac",
            "input": "The film is poorly casted, except for some familiar old Hollywood names. Other performances by unknown names (i.e., Jennifer Gabrielle) are uninspiring. I have seen other films by this director, unfortunately this is one of his worst. Perhaps this is a reflection of the screenplay? In a positive note, Kim Bassinger's and Pat Morita's performance saved the movie from oblivion. I enjoyed Pat more in Karate Kid, though. There are many good movies to see, and in short, this one is not one of them. Save your money and the celluloid. Jason Vanness",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f07cc7a63e3417196d4a0300aa4f53e",
            "input": "It took us a couple of episodes to \"get into\" Dark Angel as a story and a series, since we were transitioning from The Sopranos, a very different mentality framework. But, once we got with the gist of the series, we were very quickly hooked. It's a shame that the series ended just when it was just starting to past good into the excellent category: Dark Angelwas much more than your average TV series. It kicks ass and rocks as far as action goes, but the interactions of the characters and societal reactions to \"mutants\" reminds us of the constant prejudices that we face (and make) everyday. That the story is set in the future keeps the mood surreal and prevents the anti-discrimination message from being rubbed in our faces (hence not ruining the \"fun\" for those who don't like to be lectured during entertainment), but every event and human/societal interaction remains relevant to the present. We all make judgments, face our own prejudices, but, in the end, the question of who you are lies in: do you sit back and shut your mind to it, or do you get up and do something about it? For those who have no choice but to fight, for survival or justice, this series empowers them. For those who've never had to face the question, this series \"sneaks in\" that message under the guise of pure action entertainment. It is much more well-made and well-written than most TV series; I'm highly disappointed it ended before it could really kick into high gear.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e467b5e6612b46d590f11132ab6023fd",
            "input": "I did not intend to write this review, but having read the default review that shows up on this movie's URL, I felt compelled to write a rebuttal. The movie in a word is superlative. It does not deserve the slanderous review that the writer has written. I think the writer has totally missed the point of the movie to a large extent. In fact, I too was turned off by the excessive show of Evangelist devotions that occupied the middle of the movie to a large extent. However, I must beg to differ with the reviewer in that, this movie in the end is not a propaganda piece for evangelist action. I think, what the director has shown is that how religion is not enough to find all the answers, how religion is to a large extent incapable of providing answers to basic, simple questions that one may ask and all that religion has to offer is sometimes just banal platitudes of one kind or another. This does not demonstrate a value judgment on religion as we have to remember that religion is transmuted and expressed by ordinary, mostly well meaning, basically good people and they usually have no monopoly on truth and thus religion can not in the end provide the ultimate answers to some questions in life. Ultimately, it is a matter of faith. You have to take it on faith and that's all. And if you are given to faith, then you can appreciate any show of faith. And if you are not given to faith then any show of faith is tiresome. It is thus at the same time, instructive to note the reviewer reaction to the movie. In any case, the director shows us that one can choose not to accept the religious interpretation of events and answers to questions and in spite of that life goes on and there are 'secret sunshine' in this world that awaits all wounded souls, regardless of their religious orientation. And that's just the core message of the film! Please note the last scene of the movie, if you don't get this! In the end, the movie is a great one and very thought provoking and confronts you - the viewer with questions that you have to answer for yourself. Thus it is a work of art that is challenging to you personally. I do agree with the reviewer in that, the Evangelical stuff was a bit too much. However, given the above interpretation of religion as shown in the movie, I think the director was trying to balance the act whereby he might not be called an Evangelist – basher! The actor Kang-ho Song was great as always. He's so balanced and just perfect that he's just amazing. He's my favorite Korean actor no doubt. I know the actress Do-yeon Jeon got the Cannes award for best actress for this movie. However, I did not find any specialty in her acting. It seems that to get awards you just have to act really convincingly in crying and hysterical scenes and all… All in all a great movie. If you don't like it – please watch it again and see if you get it! If it leaves you dissatisfied or uncomfortable or asking questions then think, if that was not what the director was actually aiming at through this movie in the first place!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8146f4880921493a96bdcee04521b78f",
            "input": "***LIGHT SPOILER ALERT*** The story sounds good and if you've read the novel, then you're probably expecting a deep and intense movie that could offer some insight for some interesting and insufficiently explored human relationships.True enough, the script tries to do that, the director tries to do that, but the main cast fails miserably. Maria's acting is so dry that lacks any feeling whatsoever, her most intense moments seem almost comical. Sometimes she seems to be nervous due to the camera. Her only really feeling scene is near the end where she gets dumped by her girlfriend.Ioana seems even more tense than Maria and even worse, she doesn't seem natural at all. Maria had the attitude, even if it was artificially pushed towards being obvious, but she had it and her character received some credibility. And to make matters worse, we don't have an insight on her: where does she come from, how come she got involved in the lesbian relationship, how did the relationship evolve? We only get some bits from her parents and their relationship just seems to 'be' there: it has a content and and end, but no beginning. Just like her partner Maria, she has only once scene that is truly touching, the scene where she dumps Maria's character Kiki.Tudor is the only person in this movie (aside from the landlady, great acting there) who manages to prove some acting talent. He has his character's attitude and it fits him. Only once or twice he seems to falter (the scene at his parents' meal, he tries to be obvious when it wasn't necessary at all).I love the story, Tudor Chirila is OK there, the landlady actually acts and Puya delivers his couple of lines with style, but this doesn't save the movie. Too bad, the entire setting had huge potential and the Romanian cinematography could've used a movie on this theme.Oddly enough, the incestuous relationship between brother and sister seems to have more credibility than the no-background no-feeling (well, Maria's spoken interludes are a nice try in this direction) lesbian relationship of Maria and Ioana. I'm quite sorry for spending money on a ticket, I'd rather had watched it from the comfort of my room.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad90f7c837ad4a5a9fbe9e893f189b5f",
            "input": "hi for all the people who have seen this wonderful movie im sure thet you would have liked it as much as i. i love the songs once you have seen the show you can sing along as though you are part of the show singing and dancing . dancing and singing. the song ONE is an all time fave musical song too and the strutters at the end with the mirror its so oh you have to watch this one",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b134891ebe244968339b8376b937b67",
            "input": "\"CIA Codename:Alexa\" is an absolute horrible rip off of Luc Besson's classic film \"La Femme Nikita\"(1990). The film is basically about a woman who is taken in and trained by the CIA and is forced to do a secret mission for them. (Pretty much the same story structure of La Femme Nikita) The acting combo of Lorenzo Lamas and O.J. Simpson is perhaps the worst in cinema history. Lamas' \"acting\" is simply a bad Steven Segal impersonation. Watching Orenthal act in this film is an excruciating experience.The writing and acting is so poor in this film at times it is laughable. There are so many action movie \"conventions\" in the film it is ridiculous: unnecessary car explosions, people flying thru glass windows, terrorists, bad ponytails, etc. The musical score resembles David Michael Frank's score for \"Hard to Kill\" (1990), which furthers the Steven Segal theme of this movie. There is plenty of martial arts in the film, and it is pretty well done for a low budget American production. The mindless action and over the top acting never lets up, and I have to admit I was mildly entertained. Lorenzo Lamas had the look of an action star back in the early 90's but he is certainly no action star, that is why he is doing soap operas and not action blockbusters. My recommendation is that you skip \"CIA Codename:Alexa\" and check out \"La Femme Nikita\" instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9170d8ef808c4562a04f490a7ff06d00",
            "input": "Half Past Dead, starring Steven Seagal in the main role was a major B-hit. Half Past Dead 2 is just a direct-to-video sequel, an action movie with nothing lose but with no capacity to win something. It's less entertaining than the first one: in all aspects. But it's although worthy a look. If you like action movies or just something to watch during a popcorn session; if you also like to watch former WWE stars on screen or even if you love to watch sequels, even if they are direct or not.Kurupt did a good job, Bill Goldberg was below the average, I think he isn't made to the job. Kurupt is a good comedian, I say. The rest did the job, but nothing amazing, nothing far from alright.Technical details, well, a production made by Sony can't be great. Cinematography was a disaster but overall direction was acceptable. Whatever, just watch it if you want. If you watch, you won't lose anything. But if you don't... well, you won't lose either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc9c3175c0944f9fad002160b4adc54a",
            "input": "I had been looking forward to seeing Dreamgirls for quite a while...what with all it's raving reviews, nominations and media attention. And I must say, the first quarter of the movie was good! It really portrayed the black music scene back then. However, as the movie wore on, me and my whole family were bored out of our wits. The singing just kept coming, one after the other. I mean seriously, just one more music number and it would have broke even with RENT.Furthermore, I noticed hardly any character development in any of the characters; I just didn't care what happened to them! Even when Eddie Murphy's character died of a drug overdose, I knew I should have been sad, but I just couldn't feel any emotion for that character. The characters were given a flimsy background about singing in their childhood and whatnot, but there personalities were not revealed enough to draw me in.Finally, the conflict was simply not significant enough to make the viewer care, which goes along with the lack of character development. This movie reminded me of a copy-cat movie based on Ray, Chicago, and Rent (Ray and Chicago were wonderful movies in my opinion). Overall I think this movie would best suit someone who doesn't really care about an overall story, yet would enjoy two hours of entertaining and fun singing performances.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7958212b7946411e9a20db3e2f88487d",
            "input": "Priyadarshan's HERA PHERI was a nice situational comedy This film however actually lacks a story but is quite funny but illogicalIn fact they is no proper story yet it somehow manages a nice flow though it isn't anything greatThe first half has 2 funny scenes like the one where Akshay and John invite Neha for a lunch and another when Paresh entersThe first half gets boring slowly but the second half is funnier though they is no script The jokes are funny though one does wonder how they never hear each person's voices from inside the rooms?The climax confusion is treated like a stage play but it's quite funny But the film ends abruptlyDirection is okay Music is goodAkshay Kumar excels in his part which is now become his second skin, but this is his film completely and he overshadows everyone elseJohn stumbles throughout and fails in comedy Paresh Rawal is hilarious Rajpal is okay The girls are loud at times and awkward too Nargis, Daisy and Neetu(only Neetu is seen now) are good in parts but shriek too often Manoj Joshi is okay",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66f3a518ee564e178dadcd195032c49f",
            "input": "Vertigo co-stars Stewart (in his last turn as a romantic lead) and Novak elevate this, Stewart's other \"Christmas movie,\" movie to above mid-level entertainment. The chemistry between the two stars makes for a fairly moving experience and further revelation can be gleaned from the movie if witchcraft is seen as a metaphor for the private pain that hampers many people's relationships. All in all, a nice diversion with legendary stars, 7/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b6d4642bf9748fbb2242ca9091a71e7",
            "input": "This is one of the first and best Columbos, starring Robert Culp and Ray Milland. Robert Culp appeared on another Columbo, as did several other villains, including Patrick McGoohan, William Shatner, and Jack Cassidy. Ray Milland also made a later appearance.In this one, Ray Milland is convinced his beautiful wife, played by Patricia Crowley, is having an affair, so he hires Culp to investigate. Culp has a blackmailing business on the side, so he gives Milland a fake report and threatens Crowley with the real one if she doesn't pay up. They get into a huge fight in Culp's home, and she winds up murdered. Enter Columbo.Culp does everything he can to get Columbo off the case, including offering him a job, but Columbo is on to him from the beginning.Excellent episode.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-014c1e60a7df456eb79224653ca9efb0",
            "input": "Let's face it; some lame kid who dies and has his soul transfered into a scarecrow. Das no gonna happen neva! OMFG This stupid loser kid who can't stand up for himself gets his ass handed to him by some drunk bastard screwing his mom. Right as he dies, he looks up at the scarecrow and he let's his spirit go into the scarecrow. The drunk guy covered up his death by making it seem suicidal and thought he had gotten away with it. We later see he is tossed out of the trailer and later earns another encounter with the scarecrow. They had a brief encounter which includes the drunk calling him a loser and the scarecrow rebounding with \"Takes one to know one, loser!\" The scarecrow flips off the building, calls him \"daddy-o\", and then beheads the poor man. We can see how this awesome movie unfolds from that. He goes on to kill many people, afterward. He mainly kills the people who gave him a hard time in rl and goes off to kill some random ass people, just for some laughs. No laughing here. He adds a punchline to every kill, too. Every time he killed someone, he would do some karate flips and finish it all off with one of his signature punchlines. In the case of someone who was hard of hearing, he would say \"Here, have an EAR of corn!\" then shove it up their ass. OR we can actually take an example from the movie! He just got done killing a cop and was on his way to killing the only person who ever stood up for him. Her father, the sheriff, yelled to the madman to stop, and he said \"Hey, stay awhile!\" and threw a dagger threw his chest and stuck him onto some tree. In the end of the movie, he killed two guys and threw in the punchline \"Gotta split!\" and killed two guys by shoving a scythe into their heads. Wowzors, this movie made me want to cream my pants so bad. Maybe next time this guy makes a movie, it won't be gay.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad4d3d0dc6dd4145a41e45b332dd3be7",
            "input": "I watched this movie when I was a young lad full of raging hormones and it was about as sexy a movie as I had ever seen-or ever was to see. It may not have been a great movie. My guess is it wasn't. I don't really remember much about it, to tell you the truth. I only remember the sexual chemistry between Crosby and Biehn. No woman in ANY movie has ever done it for me as the unbelievably sexy Cathy did in this movie. I haven't seen it since that first time I caught it on TV in the 70s and I don't think I'd want to see it again since I'm sure it would be a disappointment-my hormones aren't as raging and I've become more jaded over the years. Still, when I think back on the shower scene I can still remember how great it felt way back when.Added later: After watching the movie again, I discovered that it's dangerous to go home again. What was once erotic is now pretty tame. The older woman-younger man thing still works for me, just not as much as it once did, probably because I'm no longer a 12-year-old. That older woman is now younger than I am. Also, the amateurishness of the whole thing wasn't perceived by my twelve-year-old mind. Moral: Sometimes it's better not to revisit the past.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44ed657314454d2db75e414b618087fd",
            "input": "Really, I can't believe that I spent $5 on this movie. I am a huge zombie fanatic and thought the movie couldn't be that bad. It had zombies in it right? Was I wrong! To be honest the movie had it's moments...I thought it was cool when the guy got his head ripped off but that was about it. Overall I think that it would be more enjoyable to slide down a razorblade slide on my bare nutsack into a vat of vinegar then watch this movie again. The movie could have been better if we could see some boob but I had to watch the trailers for the other movies produced by this company to see that. Buyer beware...unless you are into masochism.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c61715496ad4e188078c0a8cd702a4f",
            "input": "Otto Preminger, completing a noir cycle at Twentieth Century Fox, reunited his \"Laura\" leads for this stark, gritty detective drama. Dana Andrews again portrays a cop, but this time he's hardened, cynical and has been accused of police brutality by his superior - \"You don't hate hoods, you liked to beat them up!\". Mark Dixon (Andrews) despises criminals, as his own father was a crook. He doesn't want to be \"Sandy Dixon's kid\" so he became a policeman, but his methods are harsh and hated.One night, investigating a murder, he unknowingly punches a suspect, Ken Paine (Craig Stevens) so hard that it kills him. A shaken Dixon does his best to cover it up, intending to frame a hated thug, Scalise (Gary Merrill) for the crime. However, the blame falls on Paine's father-in-law, Jiggs Taylor (Tom Tully), whose daughter, department store model Morgan Taylor (Tierney) is estranged from her husband but keeps getting drawn into his gambling schemes. Paine had slapped his wife, enraging her father, who did show up at his son-in-law's apartment, but not until Dixon had departed with the body. With no better suspects, Jiggs is arrested and charged.Riddled with guilt, Mark falls for Morgan and offers money for an attorney. He decides to take on Scalise anyway but leaves a letter to be given to the department in the event of his death, confessing everything. In the end, he cannot live with the knowledge with what he has done, and he permits the letter to be read by his superior and by Morgan. Despite all the tragic circumstances, Morgan professes her love for Mark and will wait for him.It was great to find this film on DVD, after so many years of televised obscurity. Eddie Mueller, a film noir historian, provides the commentary and does a good job, but I find his assertion that audiences wouldn't have caught the significance of the casting of the two leads, since \"Laura\" had been made six years earlier. In that respect, he is mistaken because they had appeared in \"The Iron Curtain\" two years prior to WTSE and the film was a box-office success.Andrews and Tierney were fabulous together, and Ruth Donnelly is tremendous comic relief as restaurant owner Martha, fanning the flames between the detective and the dame.The night cityscapes give the film an air of menace. Gary Merrill is great as the low-life Scalise, who had a criminal past with Dixon's dad (\"Your father liked me,\" he taunts Mark). Karl Malden and a young Neville Brand are terrific also. And Tom Tully is just touching and funny as Morgan's unjustly accused pop.A watchable film noir with a fantastic cast.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97e315978c29468e85ec4c0446fded3e",
            "input": "Recap: Full moon. A creature, a huge werewolf, is on the hunt. Not for flesh, not for blood (not that it seem to mind to take a bite on the way though), but for a mate. He is on the hunt for a girl. Not any girl though. The Girl. The girl that is pure (and also a werewolf, although she doesn't know it yet). Three, well check that, two cops (after the first scene) and an old bag lady is all that can stop it, or even knows that the thing killing and eating a lot of folks around full moon is a werewolf. This particular powerful werewolf, Darkwolf, is closing in on the girl. If he gets her, mankind is doomed. Now the cops has to find the girl, convince her not only that there is someone, a werewolf nonetheless, that wants to rape her, and perhaps kill her, but that she is a werewolf herself. And then they got to stop him...Comments: This is one for the boys, the teenage boys. A lot of scenes with semi-nude girls more or less important for the plot. Mostly less. Well I guess you need something to fill some time because the plot is (expectedly) thin. And unfortunately there is little besides the girls to help the plot from breaking. One usually turns to two main themes. Nudity. Check. And then special effects. Hmm... Well there are some things that you might call effects. They're not very special though. In fact, to be blunt, they are very bad. The movie seems to be suffering of a lack of funds. They couldn't afford clothes for some of the girls ;), and the effects are cheap. Some of the transformations between werewolf and human form, obviously done by computer, are really bad. You might overlook such things. But the Darkwolf in itself is very crude too, and you never get to see any killings. Just some mutilated corpses afterwards. And there is surprisingly little blood about, in a movie that honestly should be drenched in blood.I'm not sure what to say about actors and characters. Most of the times they do well, but unfortunately there are lapses were the characters (or actors) just looses it. A few of these lapses could be connected with the problems mentioned above. Like the poor effects, or the poor budget(?). That could explain why there is precious little shooting, even if the characters are armed like a small army and the target is in plain sight (and not moving). But hey, when you're in real danger, there nothing that will save your life like a good one-liner...Unfortunately that can't explain moments when the Cop, Steve, the only one who knows how to maybe deal with the problem, the werewolf that is, runs away, when the only things he can be sure of, is that the werewolf is coming for the girl, who is just beside him now, and that he cannot let it have her. But sure, it let the makers stretch the ending a little more...But I wouldn't mind seeing none of the lead actors/actresses get another try in another movie.Well. To give a small conclusion: Not a movie that I recommend.3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d018ea85a81040a683fc6f7bbe4a2d1d",
            "input": "Most folks might say that if one were to spend a Saturday night watching a movie,you must be really bored. Actually,I had just gotten back home from being out and turned on the TV and there it was,\"Paulie\". I had missed the opening credits,so I didn't know the name of it but I saw that it had Cheech Marin in it,so I naturally thought I had tuned into \"Born In East L.A.\" When I saw him talking to a talking parrot,I was ready to dismiss this as the kind of flop movie they show late in the night.Happy to say,it was better than that. As you know,if you don't already Paulie is lost and trying to get back to his original owner. Seems it's taken years to find her. What should be Paulie's advantage is actually a dis-advantage in ways. People come across a literate parrot and all they see is a way to make money or benefit themselves. While Cheech Marin's character \"is\" making money from him,he's not mean to him. The dance sequences with the parrots are something kids will find cute,I found them amusing.Paulie,who's naive',learns quickly that not all humans are nice people. Especially the owner of an animal research lab. The man lies to him saying he'll help him find his owner as long as he helps in his animal communications research. Paulie is now stuck but decides to make a fool out of the man at a demonstration to others of Paulie's vocal ability.Throughout the film Paulie's telling his story to the facilities janitor who ends up freeing him,several other animals and finding the location of Paulie's owner. It's a touching reunion. 8 out of 10,the wing clipping scene should have been assumed and not shown. That part might bother younger children. Otherwise,it's a great movie for older kids and adults who are a kid at heart. (END)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd79fd6315864017836ec79aa2c43256",
            "input": "Maverick cop with family problems and fondness of using his gun – Check! Isolated location with valuable object which is begging to be stolen – Check! Tasty looking love interest – Check! Assorted band of dumb cardboard cannon fodder villains with dodgy European accents – Check! German sounding bad guy played by an English actor with a piece of corny dialogue for every occasion – Check! Corny one liners – Check!Deary me, does this film take the wee wee or what? The clichés come as thick and fast as an avalanche and most of the cast just stand around gawping at just how bad the script is!In a blatantly cheap and cheerful straight to video rip off of Die Hard only set on a mountain (complete with some nicked lines from the aforesaid) we have all the usual action move cliché's ticked off progressively as we go along with some good old fashioned violence and nudity thrown in to wake up anyone in the audience who may just have nodded off.Jack Wild is the cop in full on John McClane mode here who even manages time for the ye ancient bad guy with gun has used all his bullets gag at one point.In amidst this mess, there are a few well known recognisable faces who I can only assume needed the cash and/or were simply playing it for laughs right from the pointless opening scene that had nothing to do with the plot whatsoever through to the final implausible conclusion complete with ropey dialogue and even ropier effects.Looking up this three quid from the Supermarket bargain bin effort on IMDb I am astonished to find that this dud spawned not one but two sequels, I have got to find these gems on DVD! It looks like the first sequel is a rip off of Under Siege 2 and the second sequel, well goodness knows! One thing that is always a bad sign is that the actor playing Jack changes with each film and even the character's name seems to change for the third instalment.Still, blind purchases of cheap DVD's just would not be the same if studios didn't keep trotting out material of this awful quality!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2161863c5e56495fb62c617041a80774",
            "input": "\"Raising Victor Vargas\" is one of those light, family movies that you can watch and do the N.Y. Times crossword puzzle at the same time. And if you want to go to the kitchen for a taco and a Corona, you don't have to \"Pause\" the DVD. Just let it roll, 'cause you won't be missing anything really important. No twists, turns, or tension. It's not really an ethnic movie, it's a movie about a poor, struggling immigrant family that happens to be Latino. They could have been any ethnic group. It made very little difference. I've seen it all a zillion times before. Just plug in a Jewish family, an Italian family, a Black family, or an Irish family. Just the accents and names were different. If the Vargas family was named Bush or Clinton and were Presbyterians, the movie would have been a total snooze. It's funny that the critics here couldn't get the locale straight. Some said it was Spanish Harlem. Some the Bronx, and another Brooklyn. As a life-long New Yorker, I vote for the Lower East Side. And it seemed that the family never met up with anyone except other Latinos. They lived in an insulated/isolated little enclave. Some interaction with non-Latinos might have created some excitement, interest, or tension. Remember West Side Story?And now for the oft-criticized cinematography. I don't know if it was my TV or what, but all the indoor shots looked very ORANGE to me. The apt, the furniture, and the faces were all ORANGE. What was that supposed to mean? And the apt. did look pretty cramped to me. Somebody here mentioned that the old apt's/tenements had very big rooms. Well, maybe 50 years ago. What landlords have done is to break up one big apt into 2 or 3 very small ones and squeeze as many immigrants as they can into them. And another annoying thing ....This is the second family movie I've seen and criticized this week that featured a teenage boy \"jerking off\". Is this private sex act necessary for us to watch? Please spare me! What's up with these directors? So \"Victor Vargas\" is a pleasant little movie. It was nice for a change to see young Latino actors given a break and a chance to show their talents, which they did. But the writers let them down, giving them a flat, unspectacular script to work with. Enjoy the show, but keep your fingers near the \"fast forward\" button.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a511778501db4a62a3a8fb1154ed1860",
            "input": "What do you expect when there is no script to begin with, and therefore nothing that the director can work with. Hayek and Farrell, and Donaldson and Kirkin are good actors, they just don't have anything to say or anything to react to. Even the earthquake was pretty poor. And I don't know how closely the movie follows the novel, but two have the Jewish girl show up out of nowhere just so show that Arturo has a nice, warm heart, but some stereotypes don't amount to anything. And he even buries Camilla out in the desert, instead of bringing her back to L.A. for a nice Catholic burial where he could at least bring her flowers once in a while. Pathetic. And the L.A. set was ridiculously graphically created. Anything good? The window to his apartment felt real, the curtains, the sounds, the wind. And Donaldson is always great. Has been since the Body Snatchers or Night of the Living Dead, whichever it was.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db94fd006712475e8bbf651ca49da864",
            "input": ":Spoilers:I was very disappointed in Love's Abiding Joy. I had been waiting a really long time to see it and I finally got the chance when it re-aired Thursday night on Hallmark. I love the first three \"Love\" movies but this one was nothing like I thought it was going to be. The whole movie was sad and depressing, there were way to many goofs, and the editing was very poor - to many scenes out of context. I also think the death of baby Kathy happened way to soon and Clarks appearance in the movie just didn't seem to fit. It seemed like none of the actors really wanted to be there - they were all lacking emotion. There seemed to be no interaction between Missie and Willie at all.I think the script writers should have went more by the book. It seems like every movie that's been made so far just slips further and further away from Janette Oke's writings. I mean in the movie they never mentioned a thing about the mine and the two boys or Clark getting hurt because of it. And I think Missie and Willies reactions to Kathy's death could have been shown and heard rather than just heard.Out of the four movies that have been made so far I'd have to say that Love's Abiding Joy is my least favorite. I hope with the next four movies that more of the book is followed and if Clarks character is in them I hope he's got a bigger part and I hope his part isn't so bland. I also hope there is more of Scottie and Cookie and maybe even Marty but who knows what the script writers will have in store next.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-173ad7507a514a68b00d1a71bac4cf1e",
            "input": "The Comeback starts off looking promising, with a brutal death scene by a mask wearing killer. The mask itself is pretty cool too, and looks almost identical to the one used in the 1990's slasher film \"Granny\". From then on the film is mostly boring. We get a few more deaths, which again are good, but there's not enough of them. The reason the deaths are so good is because they are frenzied and bloody. The story behind the film is actually rather interesting and would have worked very well had it not been so boring for the most part. I would avoid this unless you're a die-hard collector - there's not enough here to even make it an average slasher flick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-351179da35dc4b80ae2da65bccd70ad7",
            "input": "Man, was I disappointed.1) Adam Arkin is more whiny than Ross Geller from 'Friends' 2) A great cast is wasted (Kenneth Mars, Alan Arkin, Ed McMahon, Pat Morita, Louis Nye) with this amateurish script.3) The movie suffers from horrible pacing. It jumps around through in a jumbled, confusing manner.4) The story doesn't even make sense. Why does he want to break the football streak? What about the stupid violin music? None of it is explained.5) It's not even funny. It's like a bunch of accountants trying to do improv, saying \"Lookit me! Lookit me I'm being funny!\" This was a bad attempt at making another \"Love At First Bite\".I like Larry Cohen movies, but man he failed here. I couldn't wait for the credits to roll. Horribly disappointed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2c3bf522cd24365a7951e945e55af6a",
            "input": "I ran across this several years ago while channel surfing on a Sunday afternoon. Though it was obviously a cheesy TV movie from the 70s, the direction and score were well done enough that it grabbed my attention, and indeed I was hooked and had to watch it through to the end. I recently got the opportunity to buy a foreign DVD of this film (oops, didn't notice a domestic one had finally come out a couple months prior), and was very pleased to be able to watch it again (and in its entirety).I don't wholly understand the phenomenon, but somehow the 70s seem to have a lock on horror movies that are actually scary. The decades prior to the 70s produced some beautifully shot films and the bulk of our enduring horror icons, but are they actually scary? No, not very. Likewise in the years since the 70s we've gotten horror movies that are cooler, more exciting, have much better production values and sophisticated special effects, are more fun, funnier, have effective \"jump\" moments, and some very creative uses of gore, but again... they aren't really scary! There's just something about the atmosphere of the 70s horror films. The grainy film quality. The spookily dark scenes unilluminated by vast high-tech lighting rigs. The \"edge of dreamland\" muted quality of the dialogue and the weird and stridently EQ'd scores. The odd sense of unease and ugliness permeating everything. Everything that works to undermine most movies of the 70s, in the case of horror, works in its favor.Specifically, in this film, the quiet, intense shots of the devil dog staring people down is fairly unnerving. So much more effective than if they had gone the more obvious route of having the dog be growling, slavering, and overtly hostile (\"Cujo\"?). The filmmakers wisely save that for when the dog appears in its full-on supernatural form. The effects when that occurs, while unsophisticated by today's standards, literally gave me chills. The bizarre, vaguely-defined, \"I'm not quite sure what I'm looking at\" look intuitively strikes me as more like how a real supernatural vision would be, rather than the hyper-real, crystal clear optical printer / digital compositor confections of latter-day horror films.While the human characters in this film are not as satisfyingly rendered as their nemesis or the world they inhabit, the actors all do a decent job. The pairing of the brother and sister from the \"Witch Mountain\" movies as, yes, brother and sister, is a rather cheesy bit of stunt casting, but they do fine. Yvette Mimieux always manages to be entertaining if unspectacular. Richard Crenna earns more and more empathy from the audience as the film progresses. His self-doubt as he wonders whether his family's alienness is truly due to a supernatural plot or whether he's merely succumbing to paranoid schizophrenia is pretty well handled, though his thought that getting a routine physical may provide an explanation for what he's been experiencing is absurd in its naïveté.The movie's The-End-Question-Mark type ending is one of the only ones I've seen that doesn't feel like a cheap gimmick, and actually made me think about the choices these characters would be faced with next and what they'd be likely to do and how they'd feel about it.Detractors of this film may say it's merely a feature-length vehicle for some neato glowing retina shots, but hey, you could say the same thing about \"Blade Runner\". :-)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bccd2683f29e448b9ad27f0b50319d20",
            "input": "My first review of 2010 is \"Into The Blue 2: The Reef\". The story is about two divers played by Chris Carmack and Laura Vandervoort who love to explore hidden treasures at a bottom of a local reef. One day after a day of exploring they are approached by a couple played by David Anders and Marsha Thomason. They tell the young divers that they want to hire them to explore the reef and find a rare artifact about Columbus' hidden treasure that is reported at the bottom of the reef.Next day the four dive to the bottom of the reef and of coarse after a whole day of diving they find nothing. A few more days past and the two hired divers found out that they a part of a major deadly plot in which they can't escape otherwise they will be killed. They were hired to find two big containers. One contains a nuclear reactor and the other contains a core.The movie also has a back story about another person (brother of the lead character) trying to patch things up with his girlfriend, I reckon this part of the story was a waste of time, this also includes a very steamy sex scene between the couple which to me is a complete waste and wasn't needed to be shown.However apart from that, this movie does have some good underwater photography and the colors blend in well which is why it receives 4 stars. Into The Blue 2 is a sequel only by name. None of the original actors or characters return, it has a dumb plot, stupid characters and a boring climax.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b093f8d9e0294c6ba89861d52ae18238",
            "input": "This is one of those movies where I wish I had just stayed in the bar.The film is quite frankly boring. What story there is is very flimsy and you pretty much have to guess at it. The film indulges itself with pretentious camera techniques that seem intent on causing migraines and makes it look like a student film. Did I say it was boring already? If all the characters had suddenly died at the end of the movie I would not have cared less as I had no emotional attachment to any of them.There are about 4 good minutes in this movie, but that was about it. This is the first time I have ever considered walking out of a cinema during a performance, but I held on believing that it had to get better. I was wrong.The sort of film you could threaten naughty children with.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2e06961b1e243359d7d27b9ecfd4bf2",
            "input": "Sometimes you wonder how some people get funding to create a movie as bad as this one. You can only stand about 5 minutes of this utter piece of garbage before you stomp back into blockbuster and demand your money back. I will now look at Michael Clarke Duncan with apprehension...why....he lent his name to this vermin.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0fd90e7c252410cb37e9a0e415d6217",
            "input": "I saw the movie with two grown children. Although it was not as clever as Shrek, I thought it was rather good. In a movie theatre surrounded by children who were on spring break, there was not a sound so I know the children all liked it. There parents also seemed engaged. The death and apparent death of characters brought about the appropriate gasps and comments. Hopefully people realize this movie was made for kids. As such, it was successful although I liked it too. Personally I liked the Scrat!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bfd748af23b44f7995272506cab3edb0",
            "input": "OK, so I rented this clown-like-Chainsaw-Massacre-esquire film, not expected much, but I did like the novel approach to a serial killer film. (from the back of the box is the following synopsis) \"At first, it was just a joke - a myth around the campfire - for five friends staying at a remote cabin in the Texas woods. But when they began to disappear one-by-one, replaced by scattered, bloodied body parts and voodoo effigies, the remaining few scramble for their lives. But he's out there. And he's sick. And all he wants is blood...\" So obviously from the get-go it doesn't make sense: why is this clown in the woods to begin with? Why a clown? Why are their dolls with the word \"food\" drawn on them? Why why why? Hardly anything gets answered in this 1 hour 30 min. bore fest except where this clown lives. The characters are dumb guys, dumb girls, and a hell of a lot of bitchiness. One in particular is a girl whom they brought from a restaurant up the road, whom they thought they should help because she was getting hassled by some guy she knew. What warrants that as an excuse to bring a girl into your circle of friends or their cabin? She, of course, begins planting seeds of jealousy, having the men have sex with her by feeding their dumb minds everything they want to hear.The music was an average affair (standard frantic keyboard music like in every horror film without differences). The actors seemed to be brought from some soap opera the way they complained and whined about everything. The idea that the main guy in the film takes this girl to the cabin as their first date makes for a horrible date, but of course, she unrealistically gives herself to him on the first night of getting to know him. There was hardly a budget spent of anything, it seems, but there was a clown outfit and plenty of cheap $1-store dolls lying around in the woods, which was a horribly bland place to shoot this whole movie (been done too many times). I was also waiting for the clown to jump into the house to kill the remaining 4 characters of the film (in through the glass maybe), but nothing exciting like that ever entered the film. I guess you were just supposed to like the clown being a killer or something.I had to give the film a 3. It was an interesting premise (clown as the Texas Chainsaw Massacre character, essentially) and I'll give them a star for acting serious all the way through when the movie could've totally been a B-movie-style video, but they opted for the more legitimate style of video. But ultimately, I probably would've felt like renting the Killer Klowns from Mars video again before going back to check this out. Ah, but that cover art...pretty awesome drawing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9bcf738967145129fd5c123032b9b66",
            "input": "I think if they made ANY MONEY make a complete turd bomb like this one. The I need to get into the movie industry. I wiped my ass on a piece of toilet paper and made a better script once. Watch when the guy is running through the tunnel, they used the same 30 feet of tunnel OVER and OVER and OVER again and never even changed the location of the stupid HANGING light.I think if i get the THRILL of meeting the director of this GEM of a MOVIE, I think i will pick a fight with him and start it by deficating on his LOAFERSI think I need to puke now",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e4e19b54e0d4b7f995eea7309d773e2",
            "input": "This is blatantly a futuristic adaptation of Jules Verne's \"Mysterious Island\". The sound editing is pretty bad. You hear the dialogue on set and you hear the voices being recorded on a recording booth at the same time! This is an amateur film with actors from Boston and shot around New Hampshire. For those living in New Engalnd and who is reading this comment will be wowed with a capital W. This film is full of flaws. You get to hear the director's voice giving directions and giving out directions to the actress. \"OK now stand up.\" As for the other characters. There is this guy who talks with his mind instead of his voice and this blue alien. The alien guy talks with a deep voice. When he is yawning or grunting when he is fighting you hear the actor's voice. As for the special effects, man! This was Brett Piper's early work for crying out loud! The creatures are good but the animation is jerky. Really jerky. Sort of like Karl Zeman animation in JOURNEY TO BEGINNING OF TIME (1955). The special effects are imaginative. Thge music is good. Bottom line, this film makes EQUINOX or PLANET OF THE DINOSAURS look like a Ray Harryhausen epic. Did you know MYSTERIOUS PLANET was a home movie and was on a shoes string budget? A must watch for aspiring film makers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26f6d793aba04d5b90b3ec6e86b7498b",
            "input": "This is a classic action flick from the '80s featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger in one of his most memorable roles. Set in a futuristic police state where the government controls everything, including the television networks. One of their most popular TV shows is \"The Running Man\", where convicted felons are hunted down and killed for the entertainment of millions. It's set up like a game show, where the audience votes for their favorite \"stalkers\", trained killers who hunt down and kill the show's unlucky \"contestants\". Audience members also win prizes for correctly predicting who will be killed by whom. And the host is played by none other than Family Feud's Richard Dawson, who's game show experience makes him well suited for this role. When Ben Richards (Arnold) is falsely accused of mass murder, he is forced to play this sadistic game.This movie is chock full of classic Arnold one-liners, such as his famous \"I'll be back\" right before he enters the arena. And he taunts a stalker armed with a flamethrower with \"How about a light?\" I could go on and on, but I don't want to spoil the movie. It's funny stuff!Whether it was intended or not, this movie serves as a great parody of today's \"Reality TV\" craze. Already there are numerous programs that show people enduring pain and humiliation for the entertainment of viewers, and even court cases are televised for their \"entertainment value\". Running Man demonstrates what would happen if reality TV hit rock bottom, and it is a scary picture. One can only hope that the networks have the common sense not to let it go that far.Overall, this is a fun film & I highly recommend it. 9 out of 10!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2e7f5de114d475194c9815155d3f163",
            "input": "This movie was beautiful. It was full of memorable imagery, good acting, and touching subject matter. It would be very easy to write it off as being too sentimental, but that is the sentiments this type of a movie is trying to achieve. I was totally involved in the story's unfolding and presentation. There were a few cheesy shots, but such is to be expected in a religious propaganda film. The only complaint I can conjure is there wasn't a ton of details. However, this movie wasn't created to explain every element of Joseph Smith's life, ministry, triumphs, controversies, failures etc.; it was designed for a quick glimpse at a few highlights of one of the most amazing American and historical religious figures of all time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e8ffed7b9504840998c7419e4e12102",
            "input": "...and not in a good way. BASEketball is a waste of film in all most every single way. It is offensive to all the senses. This doesn't necessarily bother me, I've seen plenty of bad movies, really bad movies before and will see them again. BASEketball though is a caliber film where you regret wasting ninety minutes of life sitting through it. The reason BASEketball offends me is that it stars Trey Parker and Matt Stone in a film they didn't write. Any respect I had for David Zucker has long since depleted. His recent spoof films are lazy messes that look and feel as if they were made by pre-pubescent boys snickering at penis jokes. \"Airplane\" was a revolutionary and very funny comedy, watching BASEketball you will be amazed to discover that they were made by the same person.I have so much respect for Trey Parker and Matt Stone. These men are the funniest and smartest comedians in mainstream entertainment today. Their pictures and South Park episodes are as relevant as they are funny. Every joke even the fart jokes have intelligence behind them. It's easy to forget that there is a mature way to approach immaturity. I imagine BASEketball was a major growing experience for them because they hate the film for all the right reasons. It is a stupid mess with no sense of dignity or class. Parker and Stone have essentially whored themselves out. The film plays like a 90 minute episode of Family Guy.Parker and Stone have never been great actors. They've been serviceable in their films. I can't really find a way to describe their performance in BASEketball, other than the fact that it feels like they are spoofing a spoof film spoofing a spoof film. Every line is delivered in such a silly winking way. It's like they are trying to make fun of the worst of these type of pictures and yet they become them in the same way. I am reminded of the South Park episode \"How to Eat with your Butt\" where Cartman sits in a movie theater watching a gross out comedy with no plot or plausibility except to gross out, Parker and Stone use the same voices they did in that scene for this entire picture. Really it's sad.And yet that is not my problem with BASEketball. My biggest gripe with the picture is that I sit there knowing that Parker and Stone are knowingly following this piece of crap script. I know that if they took the damn thing and rewrote it that this could have been salvaged to the point of being watchable. There isn't any indication that Zucker let them improv scenes either. Parker and Stone are merely tools to a bad director. BASEketball has some funny concepts and I think Parker especially if he were allowed to take Zuckers script could have elaborated on them more. Instead we get potty humor. Don't rent BASEketball you can get the same laughs watching a group of grade schoolers joking around",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8dfdb6855154d119ddbecd5ecf10fc0",
            "input": "If you don't mind having your emotions toyed with, then you won't mind this movie. On the other hand, if you enjoy British crime mysteries, following clues and seeing how they all logically fall into place at the end, you'll be very disappointed.Here are some of the logical inconsistencies that lead to that disappointment: * While the police utilize the CCTV cameras early on to gather clues about the mystery, the huge truck that stopped and blocked the children's view just before her disappearance doesn't get caught on camera. This is a critical piece of the mystery. It's inconsistent to have the car the children were in caught on camera and not the big truck that is so critical to the mystery.* The movie goes to great lengths to show the sophistication of the equipment in tracking down the children's movements but misses the opportunity to utilize the same sophisticated equipment is tracking down vehicles that may have entered the crime scene from camera-visible locations adjacent to the crime scene as part of developing clues.* In England, driving is on the left. The director goes out of his way to have the car at the crime scene park on the right, several meters away from the flower kiosk, when it could have easily parked immediately behind, or even on the side; as the huge truck did.* The police forensics team is so meticulous as to find a discarded cell phone in a sewer drain several miles from the scene of the crime, but can't find any blood evidence from the head injury right at the crime scene, even though they secured the scene just hours after the disappearance and with no intervening rainfall.* Search dogs were not used at all to find the missing children; this from the country that is well known for developing the hound dog for search and hunting.* It is illogical that such a highly publicized news story would not turn up the presumably innocent truck driver that stopped at the flower kiosk.* It is illogical that the mother would go to such extremes and expend so much effort to leave carpet fiber clues under her fingernails for her eventual murder investigators –even coaxing her daughter to do the same-- while she simply could not have crawled out of the unguarded mobile home. If she had enough sense about her to ask her daughter to get carpet fibers under her nails, she could of just as easily asked her daughter to call out for help or even leave the mobile home that was in a crowded residential park.* The suspect that abducted the little girl was portrayed as mentally slow/dimwitted --justifying his unknowingly drowning of the mother— but, he was smart enough not to cooperate with the police and also fully exercise his rights not to self-incriminate.There are more inconsistencies like this that will lead to a true sleuth aficionado's disappointment. 'Five Days' is a very weak British crime story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d7902c391444af0ac072b7364fbb601",
            "input": "This insipid mini operetta featuring a Eddy-McDonald prototype in a Valentino scenario is so bad it becomes an endurance exercise after five minutes. It's silly from the get go as this brevity opens two military men discussing the lack of manliness in the son of one of the officers. In under a minute he is packed off to Morrocco where he lives a double life as the Red Shadow; the leader of an Arab tribe that would rather sing than fight.Alexander Gray and Bernice Clare possess fine light opera voices (with little acting ability) and there's a decent bass in there as well but the acting is so haphazard scenes so ill prepared you get the feeling they are making things up as they go along.This two reeler was part of a larger stage production that lists six writers. With more room to spoof and warble the show may have had some entertainment values but this rushed quickie is little more than an insult to an audience waiting for the feature presentation.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c8d82d8a3ff4f64990e2f5be441973c",
            "input": "Let me be really clear about this movie. I didn't watch this movie because of the plot, I watch it for the saucy sex scenes. That being said, this movie is so god damn awful I flip between pure joy of seeing a godly body of Traci (Mandy Schaffer) and cringing my eyeballs out for the disaster of a plot.Spoiler Alert The first scene of the movie already had me cringing.. you see a woman painting something by the lakeside, in pure bliss and serene, then a beautiful girl approach and ask if she could paint beside her. When they both finished, they show each other what they had done... and the woman painted A VINEYARD WHEN SHE IS FACING INFRONT OF THE LAKE. What kind of screwball director would make this kind of mistake?? And in another scene, Traci gets to kill her teacher's lover by smash him with the sail pole, and then she swims away, and none of the town's police suspected her once. I mean HELLOOOOO? MANDY DID NOT WEAR A GLOVE DID SHE? HER FINGER PRINTS ARE ALL OVER THE GOD DAMN BOAT!! After that, it gets worst, whenever Mandy is around, there is the \"chilling\" sound effect played which sounds like a cat in hissy fit. It's also a real pity Rosanna Arquette's is in this movie. I feel real sorry for her to have to star in this super low budget soft-porn no brainer. Same goes for Jürgen Prochnow, who also has the misfortune to star in this movie. All in all, 2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc1fbd3d95924726a0f0acb0e0cc552e",
            "input": "I watched the pilot and noticed more than a few similarities between 3 lbs and House, M.D.. Tucci's character is brilliant but socially inept out of choice, similar to Laurie's character House, but without the acerbic wit that Laurie brings to House. Meanwhile, Tucci's 'straight guy', the emphatic doctor Seger, is not developed into a more interesting character, like the fallible 'straight guys' Cuddy and Wilson. Indira Varma's character Adrienne Holland is too similar to Jennifer Morrison's doctor Cameron to be a co-incidence.Someone at CBS obviously noticed the success of House, M.D. and told his staff to get him (her) a similar show, hoping that mimicry would prove successful. However, copying a show like House demands the same high level balance of wit and suspense and Tucci and company are just not up to the challenge.I didn't know the show was canceled until I read the comments on IMDb, but it doesn't come as a surprise to me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5922c015710c444f893720da3e4cec42",
            "input": "It does come out of left field, and REALLY isn't what you're expecting. But I love that. The most memorable movie experiences come from being surprised, if you ask me. If you haven't been tipped off about the mysterious \"thing\" that makes these brothers so odd...you're in for a treat.The cast is fantastic, but not stretching so much that it's palpable. The special effects come out of nowhere (seriously, it's like an oddly dark romantic comedy until they do -- then WOW) and they're great. The overall cinematography is easy on the eyes, the editing and sound are very good quality, and the twisted story unfolds without clichés. While none of these aspects individually make it a blockbuster, the \"what the hell?\" factor ALONE makes it a film treasure.The people who bash this movie make no sense. It's one of those often-overlooked flicks of the 90's that you've either never heard of, or love so much you jump at the mention of its title.I'm in the latter group.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78c68ec88bb747208dadcdb1fcde498f",
            "input": "Jimmy Dean could not have been more hammy or absurdly loutish. Hysterical if viewed through the eyes of Mystery Science Theatre 3000, which I rate as a 10. I mean, the sight of this obese, corn-fed hog trouncing around Malta should be enough to send you to the vomitory, if you make it that far into the film. This ugly, hysterical farce should be placed with the likes of \"Booty Call\", \"Pumpkinhead\", \"Swarm\", and \"The Smurfs Go To Bangladesh\". A -gulp- film like this proves that sometimes actors, writers, producers, etc. get behind on their mortgage, or get stoned to the point of insanity. It begs the question \"who was so stupid to finance such a whale?\" But then, had good judgment prevailed and \"Final Justice\" never was, then we wouldn't have the delightful spoof voice-over in \"Mystery Science Theatre 3000\"!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51b8d2784c8448c8a3cedadcf2f753f0",
            "input": "There is an awful lot wrong with this picture, beginning with a script that is both obvious and redundant. Courtney Cox plays a comic book artist who escapes to a small desert town after being raped twice in the big city. She immediately is stalked by a local who appears quite unhinged (Craig Sheffer), and who seems to be attempting a third rate Mickey Rourke imitation. D.B. Sweeny is a local cop, who is supposedly there to protect and serve. Meanwhile, the script manipulates the audience as to who's really the good guy? Logic flies out the window after the first ten minutes and never returns, and there are more unanswered questions than there should be. If you think \"Blue Desert\" might be saved by the wonderful Philip Baker Hall, you will be disappointed. His part is insignificant, just like the entire movie. - MERK",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7809e5bb9bc8466a970514d446758f81",
            "input": "Fairly good movie, but not a true story.Rubin \"Hurricane\" Carter was a notorius liar, a murder and was never found not guilty. New Jersey State just didn't go for it a third time as 20 years had gone. Carter got an offer in 1976: \"Pass a lie test and go free\". He didn't take it. This film should never have been made, but money talks. A lot of people have unjustly spend their lives in prison and undoubtedly more blacks than white. Why choose a fake story?Jens",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28ba2eb472fc4669bad667cbf6e21462",
            "input": "Absolute garbage, worse fight scenes than a 20 year old van damme movie or American ninja etc.Truly dire acting, not a skill in sight in the entire movie its like a cast of wooden sculptures.Watch it just for how truly bad this film is, it may have been acceptable in the 80s but this is a 2006 movie, i don't have much love for this movie as it wasn't born in the 80s.If you like real fight movies then check out tony jaa in ong bak and the protector, those are proper martial arts films.have a laugh and watch this today you may see the unintenional humour at how grim it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e9363ff64b04ae49608b2f96c32a571",
            "input": "Upon seeing this film once again it appeared infinitely superior to me this time than the previous times I have viewed it. The acting is stunningly wonderful. The characters are very clearly drawn. Brad Pitt is simply superb as the errant son who rebels. The other actors and actresses are equally fine in every respect. Robert Redford creates a wonderful period piece from the days of speakeasies of the 1920s. The scenery is incredibly beautiful of the mountains and streams of western Montana. All in all, this is one of the finest films made in the 1990s.You must see this movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fd860139568475a9df6b6b58f8318b3",
            "input": "What's with all the negative comments? After having seen this film for the first time tonight, I can only say that this is a good holiday comedy that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day. When I saw that Drew (Ben Affleck) might end up spending the holidays alone, I wanted to cry. You'll have to see the movie if you want to know why. Also, even though I liked Tom (James Gandolfini) and Alicia (Christina Applegate) after awhile, if you ask me, they were real snobs. However, this film did make me smile and feel good inside. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that Mike Mitchell has scored a pure holiday hit. Now, in conclusion, I highly recommend this good holiday comedy that is sure to brighten up any lonely person's day to any Ben Affleck or Christina Applegate fan who hasn't seen it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7dbcecdcf1bf4d2f9b61d458e7375123",
            "input": "Leonard Maltin must've been watching some other movie. (Though I find his Guide to be quite a valuable resource, please disregard his comments on this one.) He states \"starts off well then fizzles\" when it's really the reverse - \"starts off tepid then catches fire\". The plot is about as simple as it gets. Happy Mom, Happy Dad and Happy Son take a vacation at an isolated beach, Dad incapacitated in accident, Mom runs off to get help, meets up with dangerous escaped convict. Mom tries to trick convict into helping while Dad waits and hangs on for dear life.Good white-knuckler given an electric jolt by Ralph Meeker, appearing suddenly (the director, John Sturges, films it in a clever way that will make you gasp) around halfway through as the cunning, desperate criminal. Meeker is an unusually flippant, reckless actor (at least here and in the classic \"Kiss Me Deadly\") and he happily snatches the keys to the film's narrative and speeds off with the top down. His character has a habit of grinning childishly and saying \"Pretty neat, huh?\" when he's especially pleased with his misdeeds. There is a funny break in the action when they get a flat tire and he tersely instructs his hostage, Barbara Stanwyck, \"Don't go away\". She fires back \"Where would I go?\" (they're in the middle of nowhere) and he realizes sitcom-ishly \"Yeah, that's right\". The friction between them is a hoot.There are flaws, somewhat ridiculous ones. There's one scene where the police, who have been chasing after Meeker for some time, stop Stanwyck's car and to evade detection Meeker rests his head on her shoulder like a loving husband supposedly would, and pretends to be asleep as she's being questioned. A. He looks conspicuously un-masculine in this pose and B. I think it's safe to say that any adult who appears to be asleep during an encounter with law enforcement would certainly arouse suspicion.Still a sturdy thriller which builds to an exciting and edifying conclusion.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc99ec3a4f0c4136ae316b7353b265a3",
            "input": "I understand that this movie is made for kids and as a parent I have sat through many movies that don't particularly hold my interest, but I can appreciate from a constructive point of view in how it is being received by my children. Parents are supposed to be encouraged after all to take part in their children's activities and to monitor the quality of the entertainment that they view so there should be something that appeals to an adult audience on some level even in children's movies. Disney has always understood this which is why it is so hard to fathom how it could allow such a complete piece of drek to bear their name.Technically, the sound editing is horrible and all dialog sounds over-dubbed and unnatural. Personally I hate that, but it was doubly awful considering the dialog itself seemed as though it was written by a 12 year old for a school project. The \"acting\" reminded me of a school play and none of the child actors had any range of emotion in their voices. Thankfully it was a very short movie.Now, before I come off like a video-geek measuring a kids movie with an adult yard stick, the one thing that can save even the worst children's movie is a positive message. Far be it from me to determine how a message has to be delivered so long as the right one is. Let us take a walk through this film to see what messages are given: If you are lost, don't worry, you will inevitably find your way home.Approach wild animals without any fear.You can win any competition just because you \"know\" you can.and my favorite, the final message left in the film: It's okay to disobey authority figures and do what you think is right.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51d0b470371f48fbb81ededa1af0b8d5",
            "input": "I'm dumbfounded. Yes that's right. I'm really caught here. No way did I find it awful, but on the other hand it was a frustrating experience in macabre hysterical and murky incoherency. The idea behind such a trim, minimal low-budget Indie production isn't bad, but it's a confused muddle and in the end didn't do anything for me. It's amateurish and simple; it wants to exploit beyond reasoning and do so in that of-late fashionably rapid filming style. We have the documentary laced (hand-held) camera moving everywhere (despite never leaving the van), and sometimes feeling unfocused and blurry making certain details hard to figure out. Lately you kind of get use to it, but there are times when it does become too distracting and even nauseating. Keeping it still will help. The context has little groundwork (which has five teenage girls on their way home from a football game late at night and becoming lost on the back roads. At a road-side store they become involved in a minor accident which smashes an unoccupied SUV headlight. Scared, they flee and not too long that one-light SUV appears behind them. Soon to make their night an unforgettable ordeal in terror) spending most of the time playing out a drawn out, noisy and relentless cat and mouse game. As for being disturbing… I guess that depends. Some moments can make you squirm with its attention to pain, desperation and demented brutality (with good use of piercing sound FX that seem to be more favoured over the imagery and not forgetting the alienating background sound effects), but also I found myself snickering too. In passages it can be repellent and intense with a real gradual rush, but hardly believable. The injuries of random characters never seem as serious like you were to believe, despite obviously they should be. Watch how blood runs freely, but it's not entirely convincing and can get dull. The constant nocturnal car chase could only do so much before getting repetitive. We get screaming, spewing, bleeding, running, cursing, body fluids and so on. Quite unpleasant details followed too. With little really to do, it needed a much stronger script than the measly forced one that was penned up. Too many cringe-moments arose from it, and there was not much in the way of depth for the characters and situation they were in. It was about set-pieces, waiting for next torturous encounter and it drew it out long enough. Helping out is it had an unpredictable pattern. The performances; Jennifer Barnett, Angela Brunda, Danielle Lilley, Sandra Paduch and Mia Yi are workman-like with their distraught characters and draw an authentic chemistry to make up for the script's weaknesses in its character-foundation . Veronica Garcia's flipped-out, bug-eyed intensity as the loony driver of the SUV was something… yeah something. Her character's real motivation for terrorising the girls and her unstable state of mind is virtually non-existent. I guess being psychotic was good enough. Now probably the most unnerving thing I came across in the feature was that hideous soundtrack. Terrible techno music, to cheesy hard-rock and an overwrought closing score. It never felt overdone or got in the way, but it did stick out like a sore thumb. Co-directors Greg Swinson and Ryan Thiessen try to get the most out of their slight resources, but even with it edgy spirit it ends up being something quite ramshackle. Maybe it was enjoyable to make, but watching it just wasn't the case.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33796734419847a59c4a134d60b7524c",
            "input": "Thomas Archer (Ron Eldard) has his child killed and his wife viciously attacked in a home invasion. Dr. Heller (Christopher Plummer) tries to help him through the post traumatic stress. Then Archer finds himself confronted with a man (Til Schweiger) bound and gagged to a chair. He is told this is the man who killed his child and attacked his wife and he can do whatever he likes to him. And there's a large assortment of instruments there to help him...Film is interesting at first (and shows real restraint in terms of blood and gore) but gets stupider by the minute and has some highly unlikely plot twists and turns. It all ends in a final twist that was so old and stupid that I was shocked anyone would actually think of using it anymore. How such talented actors like Eldard, Schweiger and Plummer got involved in crap like this is beyond me. This gets three stars for the acting but the stupid plot and truly unbelievable twists make this a chore to sit through.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8633b45b55f14943af6efcdb7c568098",
            "input": "SPOILER: The young lover, Jed, is kicked out by the spinster, Kate (Andie McDowell), because she wrongly believes that Jed is having an affair with one of her two catty girlfriends. Kate thought she caught them en flagrante delicto. Kate throws Jed's shoes out the door. Jed reluctantly leaves, and then sits in the middle of the road to put his shoes on. Then he gets run over (\"Crushed\", one of the meaning of the title) by a truck. And dies.\"And then he gets run over by a truck.\" Can you imagine a screenwriter actually submitting a script with this plot element? Up to then, its a comedy that intends to be frothy, but lacks any real fizz. Everybody but Jed is just annoying. And then they kill Jed, and everybody's sad, until the end where the gals learn to love one another and be supportive, instead of destructive. I give it 2 ugh's.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43a22e4717354f2c80cebdba8d843ec0",
            "input": "Post-feminist depiction of cruelty and sadism.Spoiler alert! This underrated gem of a film tells the story of Flavia, a Fifteenth Century girl of Noble birth walled up in a convent after defining her father and indeed the whole of Medieval Christian society by viewing a fallen Islamic warrior as a human rather than demonic figure.Unable to accept the patriarchal rule of the convent (explicitly stated in a scene where the Bishop arrives flanked by soldiers and monks) Flavia begins to explicitly question the society in which she finds herself and, through butting up against a whole system of subjugation, repression and violence, inevitably brings a tragic end not only to herself but all those around her.Billed as a piece of nunsploitation this is far from the truth. This is a film depiction the consequences of violence, the effects of patriarchal dominance, the nature of rebellion and the corruption of the human spirit.I described it in the title of this piece as 'post-feminist' and in the end Flavia's triumphs must always be corrupted, compromised and perverted by men. Even Flavia's gruesome end is perpetrated by men for men (the women turn away and only the monks look on without horror.As to the much discussed violence: this is a depiction of the effects of violence and the horrors of a world driven mad by religious excess. To have shied away from the violence would have limited the film's impact, would have cheapened the film and allowed it to be assimilated within the Patriarchal discourse it is exposing. In addition it is a realistic portrait of medieval society.Beautifully filmed, brilliantly acted (notably by Florinda Bolkin and Maria Casares), containing a wonderful score by piovani and still challenging after all these years Flavia is a classic of European Cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5285781ed424f1da08b431694820619",
            "input": "I'm not a huge Freddy Krueger fan,but that doesn't mean that I don't like Robert Englund and his other Nightmare on Elm Street movies.I think that Robert is a very good actor.Nobody plays a better Freddy Krueger than he does.But,no offense Robert, this movie sucked.The acting is terrible,the plot is really weak,and Freddy Krueger is the only part of the cast that's even worth watching.Sometimes sequels can be better than the first,such as the Friday the 13th franchise(I thought the remake was the best in the series.)But this isn't one of those movies.The original was good,the 2nd in my opinion was better,the 3rd was okay but I haven,t seen the others.Whatever you do,don,t make the same mistake I did by watching this piece of crap.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c46ea9a59de54de1bc38591483f554f7",
            "input": "Revolution is a terrible movie, I don't care if you're a history teacher, news writer, Al Pacino fan, there's no way this movie can possibly earn a legitimate '10'.The key point to the plot is Tom Dobb (Al) trying to get money from a note he got for radical patriots taking his boat. Everything revolves around that note. Tom's son joins the army to make up for the note, making Tom join the army as well, they go on an adventure trying to get out of the army, years later the war is over and they can finally turn in the note for their boat. The End.It had a few battle scenes, and they were pretty mediocre at best. Transistions between scenes used \"five months later\" and magically put the characters in some famous historical battle. The love story is a joke, and the movie as a whole is just hard to follow. So save your \"Notes\" and watch the Patriot instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f546c4d0859b4d34a98d3a0e6a2767c8",
            "input": ". . . or type on a computer keyboard, they'd probably give this eponymous film a rating of \"10.\" After all, no elephants are shown being killed during the movie; it is not even implied that any are hurt. To the contrary, the master of ELEPHANT WALK, John Wiley (Peter Finch), complains that he cannot shoot any of the pachyderms--no matter how menacing--without a permit from the government (and his tone suggests such permits are not within the realm of probability). Furthermore, the elements conspire--in the form of an unusual drought and a human cholera epidemic--to leave the Wiley plantation house vulnerable to total destruction by the Elephant People (as the natives dub them) to close the story. If you happen to see the current release EARTH, you'll detect the Elephant People are faring less well today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8cb505136c104b49a2f63f2a9d692762",
            "input": "What we've got here is a Situation. A man is found to be in distress and people want to help him -- in contrasting ways. At the end they are forced to let it go. You can't fix people. And though in various aspects Reign Over Me is conventionally Hollywood, that message isn't.This story is not about Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler), a man who lost his wife and three daughters in a 9/11 plane who's gone into a nearly psychotic state of PTSS since. It's about what meeting Charlie does to Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle), a dentist in New York who was his roommate in dental school and, knowing about his tragedy, spots him on the street and reconnects. Charlie is riding around on a little toy motorized scooter -- a pretty fanciful contraption for negotiating Manhattan traffic -- with big headphones on over a mass of unruly hair. The hair is Sandler's chief prop to show he's deranged. And the use of music as an escape must hit home to every iPod-wielding subway rider.Charlie is a disaster, but paradoxically Alan, stuck with a controlling wife (Jada Pinkett Smith), soon begins to envy him. Charlie is living like an nutty adolescent boy with a huge trust fund (insurance money from the tragedy), and starts dragging Alan off to \"hang out,\" \"eat Chinese,\" buy records, or watch a Mel Brooks marathon at a rep house. Charlie lives in a nice big apartment protected by a mean landlady, redoing the kitchen over and over, collecting old vinyl of Springsteen, the Who, etc., and playing a video game called Shadow of the Collosus on a giant screen in a big empty living room.Charlie's in-laws are deeply concerned about him, but also somehow resentful, as we learn later. Alan has a new patient who is propositioning him. Charlie's desperation makes us see Alan's. Trying to help Charlie partly permits Alan to escape from his own stifling realities but partly just makes him more acutely aware of them.Cheadle and Sandler make an odd couple, but that doesn't matter, because it's convincing that they might both need each other. Charlie is desperate for the companionship of a friend who never knew his family, because to escape his loss, he is pretending he never had one. And so what if as a roommate Charlie slept naked and sleep walked and had terrible musical taste (no Motown)? Alan wants an escape from his tidy, emasculating life. He's under the thumb not just of his wife but of his dental partners, who lord it over him though it's he who set up the practice. They're white, by the way, and he's black.There's also the lascivious patient from hell, who seriously disrupts things at the dental offices, but starts looking different when Charlie comes by and notices she's a babe. His libido seems to be lurking ready to revive at any minute. He's also drawn to the breasts of Liv Tyler, a psychotherapist in the same building as the dentists who starts trying to treat Charlie when he admits he might need help.Sandler's mad scenes are a little too theatrical, as are a lot of the plot devices (in fact this movie feels like a play at more than one point), but he has several monologues where he expresses his sorrow in ways that are deeply touching.Charlie's not just delusional and sad, but dangerous and violent, and all these efforts to help him start to backfire. The movie is admirable in the way it conveys a sense that people can't be made right. This is an interesting movie -- sometimes a touching one -- and it's the first time 9/11 has been dealt with in terms of survivor suffering. But there is an element of comedy that seems tasteless at times, many of the people are too broadly drawn, and the overly grand Hollywood interiors have dreadful décor; only the Manhattan streets look real. There's a courtroom scene that is preposterous, and Donald Sutherland is a judge who's too good to be true. Alan's family problem is resolved too easily with a phone call. And yet this is worth watching for the acting -- the control and subtlety of Cheadle, and Sandler in a serious role almost as good as the one he had in P.T. Anderson's 2002 Punch-Drunk Love, though that's clearly a better movie, in fact a much better one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c9712615ce34dddacc0ebebb90cbcb5",
            "input": "The five or so really good westerns that Mann made are unequaled as an ensemble in Hollywood. Even John Ford never made that many with so much quality. The curious thing about them all is how uneven they are. Ford's My Darling Clementine is worth about two and a half of any of them. Or at least two. The real hero of them besides Mann and Stewart is Chase. Chase being responsible for the brilliant Red River. Chase wrote far country, bend of the river, and probably some others. But none of them are as finished as My Darling Clementine, but then very few films, western or otherwise are. Each of the five films of Mann have huge gaps, or is it six, lets see. Bend, Far, Man of the West, Furies, Winchester 73, and yep, six, Naked Spur. Each have magnificent scene after magnificent scene, with fairly glaring lapses. Yet so does Red River, which is still the single greatest western ever made. So perfection isn't everything. But The Far Country has huge, huge holes. It's mawkish, and really comes alive only when Stewart and Mc Entire are locking horns. The rest is pretty pedestrian, with the usual exception of Mann's camera. Mann's camera is a one man course in cinematography. It is about as good an eye as anybody who ever got behind a strip of moving film. It is almost never in the wrong place, never. The Far Country has one amazing moment. And as usual it comes from Stewart. Nobody in the history of cinema ever received physical punishment with the authority of that man. He is absolutely amazing: look at him in Bend, Far, Winchester, and Man from Laramie: in Bend has been beaten up and is hanging by a thread so believably and with such boiling hatred he looks like somebody displaced from Dachau, in Far he is shot off a raft with such violence, it looks so convincing that you wince, and of course when he is dragged through the fire in Man, well you find yourself looking for the burn marks. What an actor. Not to mention the moment in Winchester when he is beaten up early in the hotel room, also as well as anybody ever did it. But that was Mann's territory: look at Gary Cooper fighting with Jack Lord in Man of the West. As painful as any fight scene ever recorded. Cooper while not being quite as convincing as Stewart, nevertheless is somehow his equal in looking exhausted at the end of the fight. In short, nobody but nobody but nobody ever showed the human being in extremis as well as Mann. What a great, great director. See every western he ever made. They are his real monuments, even if all are scetchy. But so what. When he gets roaring with his great scenes they are as good as anybody, including Ford. And his six westerns as an ensemble are the best ever done by anyone, period.Thanks, Anthony.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-399555a3e768463d950f5e2220c75ee4",
            "input": "I sat through this movie this evening, forcing myself to stick with it even though I never cared about any of the characters or what happened to them, because the two leads, Gérard Philippe and Michèle Morgan, were major film stars of their era and I wanted to see them in \"something different,\" which this certainly was. They both gave fine performances, but of distasteful characters.Indeed, the whole movie is about a shabby little town in Mexico inhabited by almost uniformly distasteful characters (the doctor is, of course, the major exception). What Michèle Morgan ever sees in Philippe to fall in love with him is never explained.This is supposedly based on a work by Jean-Paul Sartre. All I could think was that, if Sartre's work is anything like this movie, it must be a very mediocre attempt at imitating Camus' masterful novel The Plague, which dealt with a plague in North Africa.A well-acted but uninteresting movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-396f3972ced244d3ae53317356ab6933",
            "input": "This movie was seriously awful. The acting was the worst! It was worse than a student film. Super cheesy, and I think the worst actor was the old lady. At first I thought to myself, well it's an old movie. Then I remembered that that is no excuse! I've seen older movies with way better acting and such.The music was terrible to. It was really choppy. The editing was poor (most of the dialog was out of sync.)Overall, this movie doesn't even deserve a 1. I only watched it because I was so bored, and the movie hardly entertained me. It was just laughable. My dead grandmother's left pinkie toe could make a better movie than this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8de9dd5f217d4a109fef7b976ce66911",
            "input": "I purchased this film on the cheap in a sale, having read the back of the DVD case and assuming that either way I can't lose, it if was rubbish then no loss, if it was any good then bargain...Then I watched it...I am normally a fan of Christopher Walken, but in this film he commanded very little screen presence, seeming not to do a whole lot, even the death of his friend near the beginning which sparks off the \"action\" in the plot seems to affect him very little, and his eventual revenge is just boring and undramatic.Normally a film which has themes as grand as revolution and revenge are able to capture the audience and snare them into feeling something for the characters, however watching this film felt more like seeing a series of confused, and almost random events that loosely tied together towards it's eventual conclusion...At this point I wept...I thought this film was the most horribly painful piece of viewing I have ever been subjected to, the scene where the pilot sacrifices himself by refusing to jump out the explosive laden truck due to not wanting to kill any civilians is not so much tragically sad as it is unnervingly horrible and painful, although not quite as bad as the emergency surgery on the wounded girl. The acting was poor all round, the script and story was weak, the \"action\" was even weaker, and the \"visuals\" were but bluntly not all that visual. To summarise there are films which are good, films that are bad, films that are so bad they are good, films that are terrible...And then on a whole new level is \"McBain\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fc1536c229cb4a8b934b9f04766bea50",
            "input": "This horrible! The acting, costumes, production values, editing, the script, everything about this film is as bad as it can get. It looks as if it was filmed with a video camera. Can you give a movie a negative rating? Watch The Ring instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-235160ad7862491abeaf4d402d182c71",
            "input": "A young scientist is trying to carry on his dead father's work on limb regeneration.His overbearing mother has convinced him that he murdered his own father and is monitoring his progress for her own evil purposes.A young doctor uses reptilian DNA he extracts from a large creature and when his arm is conveniently ripped off a few minutes later,he injects himself with his formula and grows a new murderous arm...Admittedly the special effects in \"Severed Ties\" are pretty good and grotesque,but the rest of the film is awful.The severed arm is behaving like a snake and kills few people.Big deal.The acting is mediocre and the climax is silly.3 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca0f48fe2a9a4b6ea22866d6f1d6c565",
            "input": "Joseph L. Mankiewicz's Sleuth didn't need a remake. It's a thoroughly well made film that stands up well to this day. However, given that the modern day remake machine is currently in full swing; I really can't say I'm surprised to see the film updated for modern audience. The plot remains identical to the original film and at its core we have the story of a young man, Milo Tindle, who goes off to see an older man, Andrew Wyke, to discuss a divorce as the younger man is having an affair with the older man's wife. From there, a game of cat and mouse ensues. Its clear right from the outset that director Kenneth Branagh wanted to add a different touch to this film and he does so by way of the central location, which has been changed from the charming games-ridden country house of the original to a technical marvel kitted out with layers of security equipment. I'm glad that the director chose to make this change as nobody wants to see a remake that directly copies of the original; plus there's the fact that the location is well used and always nice to look at. Unfortunately, however, the positive elements of Sleuth 2007 end there.The original film was over two hours long, while this remake is only just a shade over eighty minutes. Naturally, therefore, that means that this version has less about it; and unfortunately it's the characters that suffer. The plot is also rushed and we get into the first twist in the tale far too quickly and before we are given any chance to actually understand why and how these events can be taking place. The film does not build the characters, or the rapport between them, enough to make sure that their relationship makes sense. One major thing that has been changed about the older character is his obsession; in the original he was obsessed with games which turned out to be VERY important once the twists come into play. Here he has some kind of security fetish that doesn't really mean anything by the end. Kenneth Branagh's handling of the film allows for a classy score but the class ends there. The original thrived on it, but this film is happy merely to soil itself with expletives on numerous, and mostly unwarranted, occasions; which cheapen the whole thing. The final twist in the tale is completely different to how it was in the original and ensures that the film boils down to a really hideous conclusion. After spending two hours with the original I understood, respected and liked both characters presented in the film - after eighty minutes of this, I hated them both. I do have some respect for Branagh for not merely rolling out a carbon copy of the original film; but this is not a good adaptation of the great Anthony Shaffer play.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b8e163a1fd94026b4d3313eb661ad1d",
            "input": "An excellent example of \"cowboy noir\", as it's been called, in which unemployed Michael (Nicolas Cage) loses out on a job because he insists on being honest (he's got a bum leg). With really nothing else he can do, he decides that for once he's going to lie. When he walks into a bar, and the owner Wayne (the late, great J.T. Walsh) mistakes him for a hit-man whom Wayne has hired to do in his sexy young wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle in fine form), Michael plays along and accepts Waynes' money. *Then* he goes to Suzanne and informs her of her husbands' intentions, and accepts *her* money to get rid of Wayne! If that didn't complicate things enough, the real hit-man, \"Lyle from Dallas\" (Dennis Hopper, in a perfect role for him) shows up and Michael is in even more trouble than before.\"Red Rock West\" gets a lot out of the locations. Director John Dahl, who co-wrote the script with his brother Rick, was smart in realizing the potential of a story set in a truly isolated small town that may have seen better days and in which the residents could be involved in any manner of schemes. It's also an amusing idea of the kind of trouble an honest person could get into if they decided to abandon their principles and give in to any level of temptation. It's an appreciably dark and twist-laden story with an assortment of main characters that are if not corrupt, have at least been morally compromised like Michael. The lighting by cinematographer Marc Reshovsky is superb in its moodiness; even the climax set in a graveyard lends a nice morbid quality to the whole thing. Even if the writing isn't particularly \"logical or credible\", the film has a nice way of intriguing the viewer and just drawing them right in.Cage does a good job in the lead, but his co-stars have a grand old time sinking their teeth into their meaty and greed-motivated characters. Hopper, Boyle, and Walsh are all fun to watch in these parts. Timothy Carhart and Dan Shor are fine as Walshs' deputies (in one especially good twist, Walsh is also the local sheriff), and there's an entertaining cameo role for country & western star Dwight Yoakam, who also graces the film with an enjoyable end credits tune.It's quite a good little film worth checking out. It moves forward at an impressive pace, and if nothing else is certainly never boring.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7369061296884d70baa0eccf35d6ce8a",
            "input": "As usual, on IMDb, going by the majority vote instead of the \"weighted average\" is far more indicative of the movie's entertainment value. In this case, the majority gives it a \"one\". How right they are! To start my review, I'll first admit that I am completely clueless as to why this movie is titled \"Alien Intruder\". It does involve space and even an \"alien\" (I suppose), but there's no rhyme or reason (at all) for anything in the long run, at least, no actual plot basis or resolution that I can make out anywhere.There are quite a few scenes that are so atrocious (with regard to both the lines, the timing, and how they are spoken), that it far exceeds the weird feeling you get when watching similar really bad movies. I have no idea about that part near the beginning where an electronic Bugs Bunny seems to be ranting about something.The \"plot\" solely involves an area of space known as the G-Spot, sorry, make that G-Sector...and a virtual reality program infected with some sort of alien(?) virus. I think it is alien since the image of the otherwise normal Ariel appears as a photographic negative.For most of the movie, we see people getting shot with space weapons, falling out of lofts, and seemingly endless, pointless close shots of \"Where's Ariel?\", \"Can't find Ariel\" (pointless because most of the other shots INCLUDE interaction with Ariel, anyway - whatever) on a computer monitor. Commander Skyler (Billy Dee), sits and watches each fantasy of the convict's VR programs hoping to find this Alien virus and become one with it...??? Or maybe I missed something...Billy Dee Williams took a few courses on \"how to act in despair\" prior to the filming of this. We know this because he spends a lot of time moving his fingers down over his face and looking mournful.The docking scene with the nose of one ship going into the rear of the other was semi-hilarious at least, and provided for a laugh in addition to the early scenes where we see several shots of the ship as it is just spinning in a circle, looking much like a Lego experiment gone awry.It seems everyone dies in this movie, so why bother? Even the VR females get killed, as if that is supposed to mean anything (especially since everyone else dies anyway)...outrageous.Because of the money I save on groceries, I won't rant about wanting my money back that I paid for the DVD of this. The dollar that I saved on that bag of vanilla wafers paid for this reviewer's time.I'll just add that the story itself, at least as a novel, and with far more detail added, could probably be quite interesting with the right author.1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5d7db58e0a547c4b2cd7ed7106f5530",
            "input": "I've heard people who say this movie is dull dull dull. I don't think they were watching the right movie. This isn't the prototypical action movie, thank God.This is a psychological drama about the rookie and his mentor that just happens to be about killing people. In this way it works extremely well, with terrific performances from Berenger and Zane (who doesn't sleepwalk through the movie like he has in other roles - he actually looks like he's acting).I was disappointed with the action towards the end - a lot of it didn't make much sense and was unsatisfying given the buildup from the rest of the movie. But watch Zane's face as he panics, alone, while Berenger does the dirty work.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6b9e30b399a4724bf440202ccc9343d",
            "input": "I claim no matter how hard I seek I'll never find a better movie version of \"Othello\". If you love Kenneth Branagh's magnificent masterpieces \"Much ado about nothing\" (1993) and \"Hamlet\" (1996) as much as I do I'm dead certain you'll also find Oliver Parker's \"Othello\" irresistible. Laurence Fishburne has been in a various splendid roles during his career. He was quite terrific in \"Boys n the hood\" (1991) - I've always considered his amusing role of Furious Styles as his very greatest achievement. That was, of course, way before I saw this.He plays the part of Othello and he is probably in the most challenging role of his whole career but he does a brilliant, fantastic job. Irène Jacob is absolutely charming Desdemona and Kenneth Branagh is just simply phenomenal in a most fascinating role of the story's crooked, manipulate villain Iago. Marvelous \"Othello\" is part of the absolute elite among Shakespeare's ingenious works. It deals with his favorite topics: crookedness, envy, deceitfulness and jealousy. This movie adaptation is certainly one of the finest films I've seen that's based on William Shakespeare's plays.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c04151540b7141a6878ef079688d19cb",
            "input": "First of all my heartfelt commiserations to anyone who bought a cinema ticket in the hope of seeing a film in the same mould as the fantastic Gregory's Girl and Local Hero but ended up leaving the theatre feeling disappointed and vaguely cheated. While it's true that sequels are usually, bar a few notable exceptions, a mistake and exist merely to provide studio executives with an opportunity to cash in on the success of a previous film by offering us either a thinly disguised retread of the original story or a plot line so far removed from the intentions of the original that the resulting film makes no sense. In the case of Gregory's Two Girls, Bill Forsyth has the dubious honour of managing to commit both sins - on the one hand revisiting the plot of Gregory's Girl, while at the same time serving up a frankly incredible and moronic storyline involving Scottish arms dealers. Schoolboy Gregory is now a teacher at the same school where at the tender age of sixteen, he harboured a hopeless passion for the football playing Dorothy. Although now thirty five, Gregory still harbours a hopeless passion but now for the football playing Frances, also sixteen, despite the fact that music teacher, Bel has made it clear that she is attracted to him. His passion for Frances and his desire to impress her lead to his involvement in a scheme to expose a local arms dealer who also happens to be an old schoolfriend. There's no point in going any further as the rest of the story is forgettable and the ending makes no real sense at all. The main problem lies with the character of Gregory himself, in that there is no sign of the endearing and charming sixteen year old Gregory who actively and comically pursues Dorothy convinced that he would eventually win her over. At thirty five, Gregory is presented to us as a rather sad and friendless creature whose life is neither active nor comic. Outside of work his time is spent watching videos of Noam Chomsky and reading magazines about international injustices. As his friends and family from the previous film have seemingly vanished, save two pointless scenes with his younger sister, who no longer offers him advice or seems at all interested in his life, we are left confused about what it is Gregory really wants, who he is and why he is the way he is. Why for example is he friendless? Why does he never see his father, who is clearly still alive? Why has he returned to teach at the school he once attended? Why is he so interested in Noam Chomsky and injustice? Why has he become so apathetic? Why is he attracted to Frances? Why isn't he attracted to Bel until the last twenty minutes of the film? What in heaven's name do Bel or Frances see in him as he is neither drop dead gorgeous or even interesting? Why does he continue to try and impress Frances even after he and Bel have become an item and when their association threatens to completely disrupt his life? Are we really to believe that a Scottish arms dealer openly selling weapons of torture to oppressive regimes could manage to evade media scrutiny but fall foul of a couple of school-kids? Does Gregory really think that dumping a handful of computers into the sea will change anything? To make matters worse, actor John Gordon Sinclair attempts to rehash his performance as the adolescent Gregory right down to the facial expressions and awkward body language. Unfortunately on a thirty five year old it just comes across as odd and vaguely creepy. On top of that, it's hard to feel any sympathy for, or empathy with a teacher who has erotic dreams involving sex with one of their uniform wearing pupils while they both lie on a pile of gym mats. Rather than being amusing it simply smacks of paedophilia. It's hard to know what was going through Bill Forsyth's head when he wrote this script or why he thought fans of the original film would embrace a story so completely lacking in the charm, wit and warmth that turned the first movie into a classic. I can only assume that the plan was to craft a film about a man who was refusing to grow up and commit to adult life and perhaps whose happiest memory was of being sixteen and pursuing the best looking girl in the school but who by degrees is forced to accept that a life lived in the past is no life at all.That at least could have been the basis of a film which was thematically interesting and intelligent. As it is Gregory's Two Girls adds up 116 wasted and pointless minutes saying nothing and signifying even less. Gregory's Girl was responsible for launching Bill Forsyth's career, here's hoping that Gregory's Two Girls won't be responsible for sinking it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e9143eda15b47659f39dc20f25f6a11",
            "input": "This is a really well made movie. Sumitra Bhave has always made sensible cinema and this is my favourite film by her. This movie should have won the National Award and would have been my pick to represent India at the Oscars. It is at least a thousand times better than 'Shaaws', which is going to the Oscars, from India, this year.It is such a pity that the information about this (and all other Indian movies) on IMDb is lacking and sometimes even wrong. Sadashiv Amrapurkar played a very important character in this movie and he is not even credited on these pages. The rest of the cast and crew too are not mentioned at all. Awards and nominations for this movie are not given even when Sonali Kulkarni won the Indian National Award for this movie. There was not even a single vote cast for 'Doghi'.'Doghi' is not a Hindi movie. It is Marathi, and thankfully escapes the song and dance sequence, does not get tangled up in glitzy glamour and half-witted designer ware. It is a real life, soulful story that is made with a rare understanding and respect.'Doghi' which can roughly be translated as 'two women' is a story of two sisters, Gauri and Krishna. It is actually a very simple story, Sumitra Bhave does not venture into many sub plots, and that makes it a very difficult film to direct. The entire movie is set in a non-descript remote village in Maharashtra and the screen rarely ventures far from the house of the two female protagonists. No aesthetic sunsets in this one.The movie opens and we are introduced to the entire house, which is preparing for Gauri's wedding. Gauri and Krishna's father being a hard working farmer, the house is full and happy; there is nothing wanting in their simple lives. However on the eve of the wedding Gauri's to-be-husband meets with a fatal accident. Gauri's father cannot bear the tragic news and suffers a major stroke. Without a strong, working member the house could have fallen apart but Gauri's mother shoulders the responsibility. She works as and when she can, but cannot make ends meet. But her life still, is easier than Gauri's. Superstitions, that people half-heartedly try to forget, make Gauri an evil luck bringer. She is outcast from the society.Gauri's mother writes to her brother. Desperate for help she accepts his suggestion. He takes Gauri off to Mumbai where she is made to work in brothels. Gauri sends home the money she earns and their conditions improve. Gauri gives her life for that of her family's.However when Gauri returns home for Krishna's wedding, her mother does not come out to meet her. She does not allow Krishna near her and does not allow Gauri in front of the guests. She loves Gauri but fears for Krishna's life. This breaks Gauri completely and she decides to return to her unfortunate life. But Krishna runs out and holds Gauri. She begs her beloved sister to return. Krishna promises to stand by her. Promises that they would face the world – together.There is nothing that is not required in this movie. Everything is necessary and sufficient. Gauri goes off to Mumbai but what she does there is never told – the subtle dialogues tell us what there is to know. It just the bare story, which is profound in its simplicity.'Doghi' is responsible cinema. It is respectful to the subject it handles. It is respectful towards its audience – it does not think them to have the mental capability of a four year old.The acting is first rate. The direction is marvelous – the silences carry the story forward in a way, no words could have. The script is well researched.Anyone who appreciates good cinema is bound to like 'Doghi'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-24ab72cdf1b7405d99bdd295e8d3ed5a",
            "input": "i just happened to stumble on this film channel surfing. my first reaction was, 'oh god not again!'. it's so hip to play a retard these days it has become pretentious and frankly despicable. for some reason, though, i stayed and watched it 'til the end. maybe it was my faith in the actors, hoping they'd give me something to cheer about.and surely, ken and helena can act. also, the movie progresses into something better towards the end and actually does make a point.helena bonham carter also surprised me with her character. jane has a mean side that she uses to keep distance and repel pity. then again she has a soft side that's just looking for love. the only thing that surprised me even more was branagh's character...this was a triumph of acting, the movie itself is nothing unique.see if you are an acting student...if you're looking for pure entertainment you can skip this one. it's sean penn serious! oh my, that was a bit harsh it does feature a couple jokes...not for escapists though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59fe1547ee2741b78b41e3c00a8f8964",
            "input": "I was dreading taking my nephews to this movie, as I didn't think it was going to be well done. The kids, ages 6 and 10 were set on seeing it, so I caved. I must admit that it was not nearly as bad as I had thought, but was still a far cry from the book. The movie seemed right on with the 10 year old's understanding and sense of humor. I found that the 6 year old understood what was going on and he was presenting solutions to the issues that were taking place. I eventually had to explain that sometimes the movies don't show the best solutions to the problems because it is more fun to watch what happens if they make the \"silly\" or \"stupid\" choices.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-843956af2e6c41658e08dbff01161ffb",
            "input": "I don't think I've really ever given Walter Matthau his due as a comedic performer. He's certainly been wonderful in plenty of lighthearted roles, but I guess I always put his success down to his characters' grumpiness and ruthlessness, a gruff contrast to the flamboyant personality of his frequent co-star Jack Lemmon, and, I suppose, a natural extension of his earlier work in dramatic pictures. Watching Gene Saks' 'The Odd Couple (1968),' adapted from a popular Neil Simon play, the realisation suddenly clicked: Matthau is, in his own right, absolutely hilarious! Initially striking the audience as filthy, crude and generally unappealing, his Oscar Madison eventually manages to worm his way into our hearts, culminating in a hilariously overplayed confession of emotions that Matthau rasps out in a voice not entirely his own. At the same time, while holding his own as a comedian, his interplay with Lemmon is, of course, pitch-perfect; indeed, the film rightly belongs to both actors, who have never failed to light up the cinema screen by themselves, let alone together.Calling to mind Billy Wilder's screenplay for 'The Apartment (1960),' this Neil Simon comedy builds itself around around a rather morbid premise. Compulsive house-cleaner Felix Unger (Lemmon), having just been evicted by his wife of twelve years, attempts to commit suicide, but fruitlessly abandons the idea after he wrecks his back trying to open the hotel window. Dejected, he arrives at the house of good friend Oscar (Matthau), a divorced slob who lives alone on a diet of potato crisps and green sandwiches (that might contain either very new cheese or very old meat!). Oscar kindly offers Felix a place to stay, but is soon overwhelmed by his friend's finicky personality and constant insistence on absolute cleanliness. The pair form an unusual sort of marital arrangement, with Felix assuming the role of the effeminate and constantly-nagging wife, and Oscar as the sloppy, unappreciative husband who always comes home later than he's supposed to. This is a marriage that barely lasts three weeks, and, by the end of it, we can completely sympathise with Felix's ex-wife, who remains unseen.'The Odd Couple' is a terrific comedy, most of all because it has a lot of heart. For all their arguing, it's obvious that the two roommates have plenty of affection for each other, most movingly seen when Felix tries to launch into a furious tirade, instead – perhaps inadvertently – ending up informing Oscar how \"tops\" he his. The pair's four poker buddies (John Fiedler, Herb Edelman, David Sheiner and Larry Haines) are also constantly badgering each other about some obscure annoyance, but you can't deny that they've got the best of intentions. Their decision to treat Felix as though nothing has happened to him may have sounded fine in theory, but maybe being ignored wasn't quite the correct solution to Felix's gloomy feelings of inadequacy and inconsequentiality. Unlike some comedies based on popular stage plays {I was recently disappointed by Wilder's 'The Seven Year Itch (1955)}, this film doesn't simply strike at the same chord throughout, and the relationship between the two leads is progressively developed, through tears, laughter and much disagreement.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2721ef2c1a584d0e8e321ed80dd4a67d",
            "input": "While returning from a Christmas Eve shopping trip, an abused suburban housewife (Basinger) finds herself in a fight for survival after a disagreement with a group of delinquent youths takes a violent turn.Suffering the indignity of a straight to DVD release here in the U.K., Susan Montford's directorial debut will perhaps not be given the recognition it deserves. This is a shame, as the standard of the writing, directing and acting is very good indeed, and certainly surpasses the quality of your average straight to DVD flick.Kim Basinger gives her best performance in some time as the downtrodden wife of an abusive husband (Craig Sheffer). While Sheffer is not really given anything more to do than be a threatening presence, it is in their brief scenes together that Basinger connects - showing painful vulnerability yet hinting at the rage that will eventually boil over in her confrontations with the youths. It's a truly great, understated performance, her transformation from victim to aggressor is seamlessly played.Lukas Haas I initially thought was miscast, as he (along with the other three youths) just did not seem much of a threat. However, had all four youths been more physically imposing, the later scenes in which Basinger turns the tables against them would not have worked at all. The fact that these are four average men, albeit slightly unhinged, is the key to why the film works as well as it does.Apart from a few pacing issues during the latter half of the movie and a couple of cheesy lines here and there, what we have here is a great thriller that actually leaves the viewer with something to think about when the film is over. Some may be put off by the slow - burn nature of the opening scenes, or the abrupt ending. Others by the at times brutal violence. I say give it a chance, it's certainly more deserving of your time than Saw V.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53bb1b5a37844f3a9e344ebc3bd9b5c1",
            "input": "I grew up watching Full House as a child. I stopped watching it for years, but about two weeks ago I started back watching it again. Now my kids watch the show and they love to watch it as well. My kids can't believe that DJ , on the show, and I are the same age.I really love the show, because it is a show you can watch with your family. It has good teachings your kids can learn from. Also there isn't any drugs and violence on it. Also when the kids, on the show, have a problem they can always open up to their family for help. That's the message kids should be getting from TV now a days, turn to your family for help, not to drugs. Kids should be watching more shows like Full House instead of half the mess on TV now a days.I also love the show because it makes you laugh and it is down to earth. It talks about real life problems and family matters. There is always a lesson you can learn from the show.I vote the show a 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd0ab5de3a254bd3a291ebf23d6af1d9",
            "input": "Simply the best Estonian film that I have ever seen, although it is made by a Finnish director Ilkka Järvi-Laturi. Tallin Pimeduses is an entertaining thriller about a bunch of gangsters who are trying to steal a huge amount of gold, a national treasure that belongs to the republic of Estonia. But at the same time it is some kind of a summary of the conditions of many Eastern European countries at that time. In the early 90s Soviet Union fell into pieces and many countries, such as Estonia, became independent. Now the conditions may be better in most of those countries. But in the beginning of the 90s many of those new nations had to fight against corruption and organized crime that the Soviet era had left them as inheritance. (And many of them still do...at least on some level...) Tallinn Pimeduses is a very realistic film of that era with believable characters and with a well-written script. The actors are also very good, especially Jüri Järvet (perhaps the best known Estonian actor, plays Snaut in Tarkovski's Solaris), playing and old gangster who's slowly becoming tired of his way of life. But the most astonishing performance comes from Monika Mäger, a child-actor playing Terje, a boyish girl in her early teens, whose presence in the plot is quite essential. (and her name is not even mentioned in the IMDb-credit list!!!)wThere are not many films in the world that manage to be entertainment and artistic at the same time. But Tallinn Pimeduses does that. Unfortenately Järvi-Laturi's other films are far from this kind of achievements. His first one, Kotia päin was too artificial and his latest, History is Made at Night was just a weird mess.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44615ef5ab6a496da48aac5c084b54a0",
            "input": "Absolutely one of the worst movies of the year. The plot is ridiculous, the characters poorly developed, and the premise irritatingly stupid. It all begins when Michael Keaton, fresh off of doing nothing noteworthy since Batman, loses his beautiful author wife, Anna, to a car accident, possibly caused by her driving one of those convertible VW bugs even though she's supposed to be rich. In his grief, Batman moves to a new apartment and takes up a hobby: recording nothing and then watching it. He learned this from a really fat pathetic guy who got murdered by three tall shadowy fellows who lived in his TV. Pretty soon, he starts to see dead people, thanks to EVP, or Electronic Voice Phenomenon, which is evidently this deal wherein dead people can send messages to living people through tape recorders, video cameras, dead cell phones (\"Anna cell calling? But she's...DEAD!...Must be ghosts. Mhmmm. No other possible explanation. I'd better start messing around with this indiscriminately.\") etc. Why they can't just write something down on a piece of paper or knock over some stuff to form creative pictograms is never explained. ANyway, eventually Batman discovers that he's actually seeing the future, and he decides to go help this woman he doesn't know. He gets out of his house just in the nick of time, because the tall dark guys enter just after he leaves (\"D*mn it! Can travel between the living and dead using electronics, but I'll be d*mned if we can be on time! Am I right guys? (They nod in bemused agreement).\"). He tracks this lady to a warehouse and finds out that this character from the first ten minutes of the movie (look hard, or you'll miss him!) is actually a serial killer working for three tall shadowy demons, who in Raiders of the Lost Ark style swoop down and kill him, looking like the cartoons that they are. Just then some detectives show up and save the lady. After Batman's funeral, he decides to send a message from beyond the grave apologizing to his son for being an idiot, evidently feeling that the best way to protect his kid from the horrors of EVP is to expose him to it. The little kid just smiles. Nothing phases that dude, not even when his dad, Batman of course, starts talking to TV's. The high-point of the movie was when someone's phone rang and some guy yelled out, \"It's Anna!\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c52af494af624b28b57ccd72327c13bf",
            "input": "First of all, write the script on a napkin. Who needs more than that? After all we're not a Hollywood film.Then get amateur actors. It will be good for the festival hype. After all, who needs people who have spent years honing their craft? Then, hire a cinematographer who doesn't know how to light. You see, if it's well-lit, it won't look \"real\" and the festival people won't like it. Who needs to have professional level photography anyway? Then hire a ten-year old who has never held a camera to be your operator. It will give your movie that completely amateurish touch that festival screeners will mistake for \"reality\" and guarantee that even though you will empty the seats from real people, critics and a small sliver of the audience who over-intellectualize will scream \"genius\" because they won't believe this was just complete amateur-hour.Once you've done that, buy your ticket to the Festival of Bad Movies aka Sundance.What a sad waste.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e45c6d048dcf4425bcf32fecee4c2297",
            "input": "First of all, 'St. Ives' the film is only fairly loosely based on the Robert Louis Stevenson story of the same name, but for once, this is not a criticism. The original novel was a work-in-progress, unfinished at the author's death, and in freely adapting it and giving it an ending, the film-makers have brought to life some endearing characters who, although different from Stevenson's originals, would, I am sure, have charmed and amused him.It is 1813: Capitaine Jacques de Kéroual de Saint-Yves is a Breton aristocrat, orphaned by the Revolution's guillotine, now serving as a hussar in Napoleon's army. We meet him going out for the evening, claiming that since a hussar who is not dead by 30 is \"a blackguard\", he, at 34, is now \"on borrowed time\"! Certainly, as he faces a string of challenges to duels, our dashing hero seems in danger, but a surreal prank on his Colonel provides him a way out of the duels and into the bed of a beautiful courtesan/singer. Unfortunately, it also results in losing his commission... Further misadventures result in him being taken prisoner by the British, and sent to a POW camp in a Scottish castle.While carving toys and boxes, Jacques catches the attention of Flora, the young niece of Miss Susan Gilchrist, a well-travelled woman of the world who lives at Swanston Cottage. They fall in love, and most of the story concerns Flora helping Jacques to escape and to find his emigré grandfather, the old Comte. Of course, there is a problem. Jacques' older brother, Alain, a dissolute alcoholic, is - perhaps understandably - far from pleased when Grandfather disinherits him in front of the whole household, the very instant that Jacques has appeared... Cue treachery! There is also an entertaining subplot of the romance between the awkward, naïf but good-hearted Major Farquhar Chevening and Aunt Susan, who has travelled through most of the Ottoman Empire and been a prisoner of the Turks.Even allowing for a natural prejudice in favour of any film in which the heroines share my surname, 'St. Ives' is magic! It combines splendidly swashbuckling swordfights, a balloon-flight, comedy and romantic adventure. I would recommend it to anyone who loves 'the kind of film they don't make anymore' - Fairbanks, Colman, Flynn, & co. The acting is splendid. Anna Friel makes Flora a spirited and appealing heroine, and Jean-Marc Barr is delightful as Jacques, a genuinely lovable hero. Miranda Richardson and Richard E. Grant are already great favourites of mine, and have great fun as Susan and Farquhar, whose relationship runs as a comic counterpoint to that of the leads. As the rakish, scheming, but ultimately tragic Alain, Jason Isaacs shows, as he did more recently in 'The Patriot', that he has the classic swashbuckling style, besides the dashing good looks! Please, please will someone cast him as a *hero* in the genre?!!!My main quibbles with the film concern settings and costumes. In the book, the castle in which Jacques is a prisoner is clearly Edinburgh, but the film, shot in Ireland, Germany and France has 'Highlandised' the setting, making the retention of place names such as Swanston, Inveresk and Queensferry decidedly incongruous. The costumes too are a real hotch-potch, from 1780s through to the period in which it is set. While this would not be implausible with more down-market characters \"making do\", it seems odd for well-to-do ladies such as the heroines to be wearing 1780s gowns in 1813. Clearly, the costuming decision was æsthetic: these earlier styles are visually far more appealing and elegant than Regency fashions, and they work in the idealised world of the film. As a whole, 'St. Ives' is 90 minutes of pure delight.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ec8b67f783ee48509329d801b1b7c054",
            "input": "Story goes like this, Netflix was late sending me my dvds so I went on down to the the analog rental place known as \"Blockbuster Video\" They suck you know. Real bad, They have 150 copies of the latest lame movies for your viewing pleasure yet I never want to see any of those. So I saw BTK Killer there on the shelf, all by its lonesome self. I like seeing films based on serial killers. Its just a part of humanity that I will never understand, therefore I wanna see that kind of stuff. Anyways I put this DVD in and all the sudden from the very first second, it sucks. I'm sitting there with my b.f. and we are like, \"what is this kind of crap?\" Unsteady camera operation, horrible acting,- the first scene in which a woman gets killed you wonder if she would rather just calmly gab instead, Then a rat gets stuffed down her throat. I really wonder if the director has a hard-on for this crap. There is nothing decent about this \"film\". All I have to say to the director is \"do you own a freakin' tripod?\" Every shot was brutally unstable. The music was awful. It was like they just decided one day to make a movie. They were probably gathering people from WalMart to show up and \"act\" for them. Just plain awful. If you make a movie like this then directing is your hobby-NOT what you should be doing for a living- SHould not make it to the DVD renal outlets for movie buffs like myself. Better left at home for your friends when you are having a party and run out of interesting things to entertain them with.... Then you break out your BTK KIller film and say, \"Wanna see this crappy movie I did once?\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19b8beca9e05465fb163eafc667151c5",
            "input": "The best thing about this movie is that it is fun. It is full of humorous characters and interesting situations, starting with the blithe, innocent Pecker (played appealingly by Edward Furlong) who likes to photograph almost everything he sees in every day life. Other great characters include Pecker's friend Matt (\"he's a thief, but he's really a nice guy\"), Pecker's sister Chrissy (who is addicted to sugar), and Pecker's Catholic grandmother who discovers life in a statuette of the Virgin Mary in her room.The movie gently makes a point about how every day life has many riches to offer, and it succeeds in making this point without being too heavy-handed about it. There is always a risk, when making messages about the value and dignity of \"common people\", of sliding into a kind of reverse \"holier than thou\" - but \"Pecker\" avoids these traps, allowing the audience to get the point while allowing enough breathing room for viewers to compare this message to their own thoughts on the subject.I recommend the movie mostly because it is a lot of fun.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be55a7baa14746a6ac1c6b0e47d47284",
            "input": "This is my fourth Joe McDoakes short that I've seen and so far the funniest one. In this one, Joe takes voice lessons from a record impersonating Charles Boyer and Ronald Colman. When he goes to Warner Bros. Studio (the company behind this series, incidentally), he asks Jack Carson for directions which gets both confused. Then he encounters actor George O'Hanlon (who's also McDoakes) who speaks in his more normal voice that's not too far from his later Geroge Jetson and gets to the set where he automatically upsets the director. I'll stop there and just say how funny I found the whole thing and was fascinated by the movie star cameos provided near the end. The final scene was especially a hoot so on that note, go to YouTube if you want to watch So You Want to Be in Picutres!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1bfd824523f4324a3c0d61a00046943",
            "input": "First I would like to say how great this. It is astounding and sometimes shocking. And to say the least I'm 11 years old and this is my favorite movie, I can definitely stand a boring film, but this is anything but boring. It is like a trip through humanity. Its stark realism shows through this monumental masterpiece. It is a heart wrenching tale of two down and outers (VOIGHT AND Hoffman) who build a mutual friendship. Joe Buck (VOIGHT) a naive Texan stud comes to New York to make it rich by entertaining women. Soon he meets Rico 'RATSO' Rizzo (HOFFMAN), who is a poor man barely being able to pay rent. Ratso becomes Joe's 'manager' but soon both men can't find Joe a job which results in stealing food. As they try and survive on the streets of New York we realize how tough it is. They can't get Joe a girl until they meet a lady at a party. Joe makes some money and soon Joe takes Ratso on a Ratso's dream spot, Florida. The final five minutes are heart breaking yet some of the greatest moments in the film. From MIDNIGHT COWBOY we get a stark and sometimes disturbing urban view on life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b831dbba62e40a7b56816f5cf3b0c45",
            "input": "The longer this film went on-and it seemed to tediously go on for ever- the more annoyed I became, as quite frankly, what a waste of time sitting through this total nonsense. How on earth do people get to make films like this,or indeed receive finance for such rubbish? Don't be fooled by the relatively high ratings on IMDb as it just proves you can fool some of the people all the time. And in this picture the main players have an obsession with guns, so it is not difficult to work out the way this movie will ultimately unfold. America can never understand that the rest of the world finds it bizarre how society in the USA has such an obscene and fatal 'gun culture'. Anyhow:The lead actor portrays a loser who escapes into a fantasy world of being a cowboy in an Urban sprawl.He comes across a family with two spoiled brat children, a teenage girl and boy; taken care of by a strict single parent father who can barely cope. The cowboy is seduced by the teenage girl or vice-versa, and the impressionable boy is seemingly taken in by the lunacy of the loser.The cowboy spends the whole time in a state of unreality and depression.A total loser who prefers to go to the beach then work for living, and then commits a burglary on his family as he is too lazy to make money legally.Ask yourself:Who wants to watch either a sad failed loser in a fantasy world holding a death wish, or indeed view a poor family who are in effect not much better than white trash?!This film is pointless drivel.It only saves itself from getting the lowest mark possible by some half listen able music:2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f60073e1e034db1b1e7dd81e8b78f39",
            "input": "I have always wanted to see this because I love cheesy horror movies and with a title like this, I was sure \"The Incredible Melting Man\" would be a lot of fun.It really wasn't. I mean, the acting was entertainingly bad, the script contained some classic bad lines and the special effects looked like someone had sneezed all over the lead actor, so I should have loved it. Unfortunately it's really draggy between these highlights. I decided to watch the last half of the movie while doing my tax return. That's how boring this film is.Nevertheless, if you love bad movies you will enjoy the dramatic exit of the Fat Nurse, and the stellar acting of the guy who plays Dr. Ted. To be fair to the poor man, he does have to deliver some amazingly inept lines with straight face - like the conversation he has with his wife on tracking down the I M Man:\"I'll find him with a geiger counter.\" \"Is he radioactive?\" \"Just a little bit.\" Yes, the plot has Dr. Ted wandering about trying to find a superstrong zombie killing machine armed only with what looks like a mini-Dyson. He's a brave man. Unfortunately his plan fails when he finds a big lot of goop on a tree. \"Oh god - it's his ear!\" says Dr. Ted to the audience. I'm so glad he cleared that up. I realise I'm making this movie sound rather fun. It would be if it were only 10 minutes long, but unfortunately it goes on and on, and the Incredible Melting Dude just dangles about making a sticky mess when he should be eating more people in my opinion. I think if you were truly stoned you would probably love it, just don't have pop-tarts during the movie, because the lead actor really does resemble one near the end.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-454987ad4fbf4002a59c92fdda80e927",
            "input": "I bought this at tower records after seeing the info-mercial about fifteen hundred times on comedy central. I was actually really looking forward to watching this. My god where did i go wrong? Now before i give my review let me just say that i am a person who can pretty much find the good in all movies, hell i own over 1,500 dvd's! With that said, the underground comedy movie ranks up there with the worst film i have EVER seen. I tried to give it a chance, but not only was it not funny. It had no point, did not offend what-so-ever and was all around stupid. God who in their right mind thought these pieces of crap were funny? this is going right to the bottom of the bin...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2576320ac4e44922b5300485e190b16b",
            "input": "Michelle Rodriguez is the defining actress who could be the charging force for other actresses to look out for. She has the audacity to place herself in a rarely seen tough-girl role very early in her career (and pull it off), which is a feat that should be recognized. Although her later films pigeonhole her to that same role, this film was made for her ruggedness.Her character is a romanticized student/fighter/lover, struggling to overcome her disenchanted existence in the projects, which is a little overdone in film...but not by a girl. That aspect of this film isn't very original, but the story goes in depth when the heated relationships that this girl has to deal with come to a boil and her primal rage takes over.I haven't seen an actress take such an aggressive stance in movie-making yet, and I'm glad that she's getting that original twist out there in Hollywood. This film got a 7 from me because of the average story of ghetto youth, but it has such a great actress portraying a rarely-seen role in a minimal budget movie. Great work.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-165771924b7642bb88c7ebbb0eae7882",
            "input": "I just watched this movie. In one word: sucky! The story is bad, the acting is, if possible, even worse. The movie has one or two nice moments, but thats it and having those two small good moments, doesn't make up for anything in between, before or after those moments. A montrocity of a movie, not even worth watching on tv...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b5cf43b76c941cf82e498cfd6cbad01",
            "input": "Worst movie I have seen since Gingerale Afternoon. I suppose that this is a horror/comedy. I pretty much predicted every scene in this movie. The special-effects were not so special. I believe that I could come up with as good of effects from what I have lying around the house. I wish I could have something good to say about this movie, but I am afraid that I don't. Even Coolio should be ashamed of appearing in such a turkey. I do, after a little thought, have one thing good to say about this movie - it ended.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4557544095e249f99981aa6bb1474f20",
            "input": "The Three Stooges in a feature length western comedy-musical? Perhaps \"Rockin' in the Rockies\" was meant to combine the Stooges comedy short with the western musical, in a matinée; if so, this was a pleasant way to break up a Saturday afternoon. Jay Kirby (as Rusty) is a handsome young hero; and, Mary Beth Hughes (as the blonde June) and Gladys Blake (as the brunette Betty) are pretty women. The Hoosier Hotshots are a harmonious group; their songs are quite tuneful; however, this is the 1940s, not the 1950s, so the film doesn't exactly \"rock\". There are a few laughs; but the Stooges' brand of humor is more subdued than usual. The talking horse is also underutilized. **** Rockin' in the Rockies (4/17/45) Vernon Keays ~ Moe Howard, Larry Fine, Curly Howard, Mary Beth Hughes",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a8dbaa6807b466fa4440c8785d5f49a",
            "input": "In a little town in Montana two brothers grow up. One of them is Norman (Craig Sheffer), the other is Paul (Brad Pitt). Their father is Reverend Maclean and they grow up with his lessons that has to do with religion, and the lessons of fly-fishing. In this movie fly-fishing represents life, a little.The story is good and keeps your attention although there are some moments you need a little action. Probably the movie has this moments because it is not really about the events that happen, but about the message. Some things do happen though. Norman goes to Dartmouth to study. After six years he returns and gets involved with a nice girl named Jessie (Emily Lloyd) and he is invited to teach in Chicago. Paul has become a reporter and is known as the \"fishing reporter\". He is famous and it seems he has a nice life, but he drinks a little too much and gambles too much.The movie is very well directed, it has a nice score and all of the actors are good. The most beautiful thing in this movie is the cinematography. The mountains, the woods and the river all look very beautiful. If the movie was only made for these things it was good enough to watch. Fortunately there is more.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f98acbf194d74d38a5607dcd79a6d58c",
            "input": "Weak plot, predictable violence, only semi interesting characters. Like the writer (also one of the stars?) was fictionalizing his own screw ups and added an incredulous fantasies of drugs and murder to make it \"hot\". From the predictable rap and house soundtrack, to the family conflicts, it's poorly acted, stereotypical, and ultimately terribly boring. Even the title has been done before - IMDb lists FIVE movies with the same name released in 2007-2008!! Note: Saw it on Showtime, which listed the synopsis for one of the other movies. Was halfway thru before I realized no one was an undercover cop. Even tho another stereotype, would have made it interesting if it happened.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb08865aafb3457b8d0971d0760bd81a",
            "input": "This bogus journey never comes close to matching the wit and craziness of the excellent adventure these guys took in their first movie. This installment tries to veer away from its prequel to capture some new blood out of the joke, but it takes a wrong turn and journeys nowhere interesting or funny.There's almost a half-hour wasted on showing the guys doing a rock concert (and lots of people watching on \"free TV\"--since when does that happen?) Surely the script writer could have done something more creative; look at how all the random elements of the first movie were neatly tied up together by a converging them at the science presentation. Not in this film, which pretty much ended the Bill & Ted franchise. The joke was over.The Grim Reaper is tossed into the mix, for whatever reason. This infusion, like the whole plot, is done poorly and lacks sparks for comedy or audience involvement. There's a ZZ Top impression, hammered in for no reason. There's lights, smoke, mirrors, noise. But nothing really creative or funny.Skip this bogus thing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f2c2188389d4349a959ef62b6b5bcfb",
            "input": "One of my favourite \"domestic\" movies. I don't know if there is any person in our country who hasn't seen this movie! It's funny, and sad at some moments...I don't know how did people around the world (who had opportunity to watch it) accept this movie, because you have to know some moments in our serbian history and character of Serbs in the first half of the 20th century, to be able to understand it! But as I see here, there is somebody from Canada who watched it...and he liked it.I think that I'll try to put all good quotes from the movie on this site, but first to find out how to do that...Cheers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a2f0b3ee81ce4df29e3f303fbcba8eaf",
            "input": "\"Yes, Georgio\" is a light-hearted and enjoyable movie/comedy that contains beautiful settings and beautiful music. It's not my favorite movie but it is a movie I have enjoyed seeing more than once. Some reviewers suggested if one wished to enjoy Pavarotti, they would likely be better served by picking up an opera DVD. Although, a full opera might be a better representation of Pavarotti's operatic talents, oftentimes, an opera requires costumes and has story lines that completely hide the appearance and nature of the person. \"Yes, Georgio\" permits Pavarotti to use his speaking voice and to exhibit a personality and character in ways an opera would not.Many reviewers seemed to find the story unbelievable; I don't agree. Enormously talented people can be both self-centered and charming - charming enough to captivate intelligent and beautiful people. Additionally, people who are very different from one other often gain insights about themselves and grow in positive ways from interacting with people who stretch them or take them in directions they might not have chosen on their own. Both Georgio and Pamela become more open to unexplored parts of themselves in relationship with the other.Relax and let yourself go into a visually and aurally rewarding film with Pavarotti at the peak of his vocal abilities. The ending scenes from Puccini's Turandot alone are worth the time to get there.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1481c4d952af4b4a9b6d24cdec50f79b",
            "input": "Time and time again, it seems that the comedic actors of Hollywood are surprising me with their talents as dramatic performers: first it was Robin Williams {'One Hour Photo (2002)'}, then it was Jim Carrey {'Eternal Sunshine… (2004)' being one example}, then Will Ferrell {'Stranger than Fiction (2006)'} and now Adam Sandler. Yes, that's absolutely right: the guy who has based an entire career on making brainless, goofball comedies {I'm not complaining; I've always been a fan} has finally given me a performance of which he can be proud. Of course, some readers may be wondering whatever happened to 'Punch-Drunk Love (2002),' but I can only assure you that it's a film I'm currently taking measures to see as soon as possible, since I've heard it's terrific. My first film from director Mike Binder, 'Reign Over Me,' is an intelligent and respectful exploration of grief and friendship. Though it does occasionally stray into all-too-familiar territory, the somewhat predictable storyline proves surprisingly deep and moving, with both Sandler and Don Cheadle giving memorable performances.Alan Johnson (Cheadle) is a successful dentist with a good family, though he finds himself unable to communicate adequately with his wife (Jada Pinkett Smith) and so his marriage is a little shaky. Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler) is Alan's ex-college roommate, a man who lost his entire family in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and who is still confronting his overwhelming feelings of grief. A disheveled figure with messy hair and downcast eyes {often likened in appearance to Bob Dylan}, Charlie has abandoned his career in dentistry, and spends his time in solitude: listening to music with headphones that cut out all sound from the outside world, driving around Manhattan in his motorised scooter, immersing himself in fantastical video games and repeatedly redecorating his apartment kitchen in accordance with his deceased wife's final wishes. When Alan and Charlie meet for the first time in years, the latter doesn't even recognise an old friend, having completely abandoned any memories prior to his life-crippling experience. Indeed, at first he doesn't even acknowledge the existence of his family, and abruptly loses his temper whenever anybody suggests that he seek counselling.Initially, it may seem a bit exploitative for the filmmakers to be using the September 11 attacks as a storytelling device. Afterall, wouldn't it be just as devastating if Charlie's family had died in an ordinary, everyday car accident? However, if you consider that the director's intention was to demonstrate the enormous pain caused to ordinary citizens by the tragedy, then 'Reign Over Me' does a very good job. It's easy to get so caught up in meaningless statistics that you neglect the emotional costs of the terrorist attacks; this is the first 9/11-orientated film I've seen that truly dealt with the suffering of those who weren't even involved, whose only anguish was caused through losing those whom they loved. Adam Sandler shows surprising range in a difficult role, one which would have crumbled to pieces had he not been up to the task. Snapping instantly between cheerfulness, anger and depression, Charlie Fineman is a man with whom we can deeply sympathise, a hollow soul who, thanks to the companionship of an old friend, can finally glimpse light at the end of a dark, bleak tunnel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fbd9e84e62e45b7b1c9f6297c17b4c3",
            "input": "Fairly interesting exploitation flick in black and white written by David F. Friedman. The lead actress Stacey Walker is well-cast and strangely attractive. She resembles a deranged Renee Zellweger with a bad hair-do. This chick only made two of these films and then moved back to Texas. The music is terrible. One of her boyfriends is played by Sam Melville (from the TV show THE ROOKIES) using a different name.Best line in the film from Tony - \"Are you putting me on, doll? None of my chicks put me on\". Good B/W cinematography from Laslo Kovacs (EASY RIDER & TARGETS & many others). Good locales (cool swimming pool, also used in THE DEFILERS). Strange ending but fitting. A 4 out of 10. Best performance Stacey Walker.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19fedb78e54447b4873fabcb663ce524",
            "input": "I want to start by stating I am a republican, even though I don't agree with a lot of the things bush has done in office. And I love the daily show and Colbert report. They have to be two of my favorite shows on TV. I enjoy the bush jokes on Conan, Letterman, Leno, because I admit that W is not the smartest guy to ever walk the earth(I do believe he's not the dumbest either.) But it comes to a point when enough is enough and it's not really that funny anymore. I see where it can be funny and it is(hey he's making fun of our authority figure he's hilarious.). Comedy central though is just trying to hard to poke fun at him. I mean maybe one special episode, but an entire series is just dumb. It seems CC is just saying the same bush jokes that we've heard WAY to many times. I really cannot see this show going past 1 season.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-051e0653159f459a87baaaf94a7e552d",
            "input": "I'll keep this short; thanks to Greg for helping me to put this succinctly: Captivity is about a guy who drugs a girl's drink, imprisons and tortures her, then poses as a captive to have sex with her. That is the single twist and punchline of the film. It's torture as slow motion date rape. And, it's not even a good movie. It's not so bad it's good; it's just bad.It should also be mentioned that among critics, there is a \"spoiler code\" that they dare not break, even though some were tempted to on this one because it is so vile. Why NO ONE had the cojones to step up and say, \"this is garbage, and this is why,\" is beyond me.Don't give your money to these poop-peddlers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed41b9e439d54fb4af255a5d2bad4c2b",
            "input": "Understand i'm reviewing the film I have seen. I realize virtually all the nudity and gore was cut from this film, thus neutering it completely. When seeing names like Ginger Lynn and Jenna Jameson attached, I knew I wasn't going to get a horror classic, but at the very least I expected gratuitous boobies and bloodshed. But no, this has got to be the most butchered modern horror film, I mean it's easy to tell there is much more to certain scenes', but they suddenly cut away, or the scene just totally ends right as it begins. How does one screw up cannibals' and porn stars? I mean thats a winning formula, it makes me wonder if the director slept with some executive's wife or something, because it is literally amazing how much got cut from this. Reading about it a few years back in Fangoria, I was excited, it looked like a fun film, but unfortunately the true film is locked in a vault somewhere, and we must endure this piece of excrement retitled Evil Breed. Hopefully an unrated cut will be released someday, as I think a good movie exists in this mess, but until then best grab a twelve pack of Bud, cause thats the only way you'll make it through this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e823f3a17f254ad6b4022c78947b70fb",
            "input": "I saw this independent film when it was in Philadelphia and it was a pleasant surprise. I left the theater with a smile on my face. One of the things that made it so funny was that it was based on a true story -hilarious! It has some great character actors in it too. Mindy Sterling is in it and is very good. I loved her in Austin Powers. Howard Hesseman is also terrific. I remember him from Head of the Class. I am tired of all the dark edgy movies that keep getting made. This is fun and light, and I can watch it with my family and not be embarrassed. I keep checking to see when it will come out on DVD. I will definitely buy it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67d9765b31454e92871a5a359ae57d78",
            "input": "The movie opens up with a long single shot of aisles in factory crammed with workers. My, what we've done to the planet you might think. I hope we get to see other things like this.That's very rare. When you're not looking at a horribly filmed angle of the narrator at a lecture hall, you're watching him set up his camera to take pictures in different locations. It'd be nice if chose areas that were more fitting with his topic but he doesn't. So, then you'll hear some more narration, watch a few pictures go by and watch him set up his camera. Why not use the filming camera to show more of the landscapes instead? It really kills any sense of pacing and paints the guy as more of vain jerk.I could read tips on how someone set up their camera, fast forward through this whole movie and waste a lot less time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ae6cc19e68b481fb57066e71cc576ed",
            "input": "****Don't read this review if you want the shocking conclusion of \"The Crater Lake Monster\" to be a total surprise****A claymation plesiosaur rises from the depths of Crater Lake to wreak havoc on a group of local rednecks, not to mention your fast forward button. To call \"The Crater Lake Monster\" amateurish is to overstate the obvious. If you aren't a fan of low budget drive-in films, you probably wouldn't be looking here in the first place.The problem with the movie is that when there's no monster action going on, it really sucks and goes nowhere. The script is very Ed Wood-ish, in that it's utterly contrived in the way it sets up the main action sequences. Nothing is too outlandish for \"The Crater Lake Monster\". It explains its dinosaur by having a meteor crash into Crater Lake, 'superheating' the water to the point where it incubates a dinosaur egg that has apparently been resting at the bottom of the lake for millennia. Even if we could accept that the egg could have been lying there for so long and remained uncovered and viable, wouldn't \"superheating\" the water to such a high temperature cause most of the lake to evaporate? Other than some token fog in one or two scenes, we see no evidence of the water being hot, other than a few lines in the script.The script is padded rather obviously in a few sequences, and it will do anything to get the characters near the lake so that they can be menaced by the claymation dino. A couple just passing through experiences car trouble and while their automobile is being serviced, they decide to rent a boat and head out into Crater Lake. Hmmmm...do you think these strangers in the story could be there so they would run into our title monstrosity? In a sequence that's just plain bizarre, a drunk robs a liquor store and decides to murder the cashier and a bystander instead of paying four dollars for a bottle of booze. A car chase ensues, and wouldn't ya know it...they end up right by the lake. Snack time for Cratey! Yeah, it's not hard to figure out, and you're so far ahead of the script that you're irritated when it takes another ten minutes for these scenes to unfold.The shamelessness of it all is endearing, and I really want to like \"The Crater Lake Monster\". I just can't do it. There's not enough here to go on, and this is more of a movie to put on during a party, because you could talk right over it and it wouldn't matter. The film has a slim list of the things going for it, the most important being the dinosaur itself, which appears in three forms: a shadow puppet, a large model head that is dragged woodenly through the water, and a fully realized claymation insert that actually looks pretty good. There are also a pair of lovable hicks in it, and they carry the majority of the intentional humor in the movie. A downbeat ending leaves us mourning the death of both the monster AND one of our beloved hicks, so every good thing about this film is dead by the end of it. Why was I so affected by this conclusion? Was it the mournful song played over the closing credits? Or was I just weeping inwardly for the time that I waste watching films like this?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b4b90d4616640d692c31213e7e9f35b",
            "input": "A killer, wearing a plastic white mask and black overcoat, is killing the friends of Hollywood producer Shawn Banning(Danny Wolske)who inherited his position when someone sliced open his former employer from crotch to chest. Perhaps the psychopath is newly hired Maddy(Dabbie Rochon), an attractive, raven haired beauty with a troubled family past, plagued with nightmares. Shawn and his friends play a practical joke on Maddy, concerning a supposed Murder Club they started where each member randomly selected a victim to kill. When Maddy accidentally murders a woman in a parking garage because of a dent put into her car by this person, she finds that Shawn's pals were jerking her chain. But, Shawn and his comrades are concerned about Maddy's admittance towards committing the murder and contemplate turning her into the proper authorities. Deciding to wait on a definite decision, each member fall prey to the white-masked psycho with Maddy a suspect considering the fact that she already has killed before. Or, is someone else behind these murders? Low budget slasher, executive produced by Charles Band, with gore murders that fail to convince. Plenty of tits on display and Allen Nabors goofy character Chris might entertain those with low expectations. The murders include a stomach being opened with intestines showing, a neck sliced, an electrical cord thrown into a pool frying a female victim who had all day to escape, an ax buried into the back of a male victim, and, to top it all, a couple are strangled by a rope during their sexual climax(..for added effect, the killer uses the breaker bar of a socket wrench as extra leverage to twist the rope as tight as possible snapping their necks). There are enough plot holes to drive a truck through, such as why Maddy has nightmares of murders she didn't commit, how she could murder someone so violently(..with blood all over her)winding up waking in her bed without leaving something at the scene of the crime that would easily implicate her, and how Shawn could go so long, allowing her to continue working at the company despite what she told regarding the murder she committed, and a continual desire to join the supposed club that doesn't exist.What bothered me the most was the film's desire for having us somehow sympathizing with this female protagonist who wanted to join a club after killing someone, later proclaiming it to be an accident. The film builds Maddy as the potential psycho throughout because of her past. Her family disowned her for an abortion. She has black-outs and always appropriately winds up at the scenes of crimes after the fact. In a lot of slashers, the one who seems the most likely killer is often the red herring, but this film goes out of it's way to point the finger at Maddy. When the twist occurs, we're left rooting for Maddy, yet we know she's not right in the head. It's a tough sell caring for this chick. She does look great in a man's Army shirt, though. And, Rochon isn't afraid to let her puppies breathe, either. Low budget horror fans will get a kick out of seeing cult favorite Brinke Stevens as a religious fanatical mother who preaches against what Maddy did, calling her a murderer as beloved Troma producer Lloyd Kaufman is the aloof father who can not get in a word edge-wise to protect the daughter he truly cares about. Cult siren Julie Strain has a minor cameo, showing her tits(of course)as the opening murdered male's girlfriend getting her head crushed by a hammer. Oh, and check out the office for which Shawn works, you'll see a lot of Full Moon posters and art-work spread throughout the walls.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e952f0b6edd41d8945e38d3ef7aa428",
            "input": "now don't get me wrong, i do enjoy christmas movies. i love its a wonderful life and i really enjoy the versions of a christmas carol with george c. scott and alistair sim. but this particular movie is awful. i think the i love life song the ghost of christmas present sings is especially painful. albert finney sings fairly well in annie. i don't know whats wrong with him in this movie but it sounds as though someone is trying to sing through a mouthful of dead gerbils. the only thing that saved this movie for us was shutting the sound off and watching the dance numbers accompanied by the south park christmas cd.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9187d7d400f4c6a9e56130377e3ea14",
            "input": "Contrary to most other commentators, I deeply hate this series.It starts out looking interesting, with mysterious aliens and giant robots, and I kept my hopes up until the very last episode. At the end of it, I still didn't understand what the alien attacks were all about (maybe I missed something, who knows?), and realized that I had sat through 26 episodes consisting mainly of the characters' own self-hating, selfishness and self-pitying. It actually flips between alien/robot fights and these dark, depressing blinking-on-and-off scenes where one or more characters can just say or shout \"I hate me/you/it\" 10-12 times in a row.I can't really see either Shinji or Asuka (two of the main characters) showing growth or change. (Nor can I see any of the other characters learning or growing either, for that matter.) I wanted to kick them and tell them to get a bloody life during the first episodes, and the feeling didn't change during the last ones. Shinji truly possesses the kind of helpless hopelessness that makes people angry rather than charitable, and Asuka is such an infuriating know-it-all that I wanted to smash the TV screen every time she came into view. Oh, and more than anyone else, these two hate everything, and say it veeeeeeeery often.I'm otherwise a big fan of animé and manga, and never before have I disliked one so much. I read that the series creator/writer wrote this while suffering from a depression, and I can believe that; it made me depressed to watch it. Is that the aim of this series? I'm honestly asking. Is it designed to make the viewer confused and annoyed? And if suffering from a depression, why just not write a book or biography about it, instead of mixing it up with aliens and mecha's? This alien war plot, as far as I could tell, lead to absolutely nowhere.Finally, since I'm truly fascinated by how many people claim to love this patchwork of dead-end plots, I can't help but wonder how many of them actually find it good, and how many say they do because they've been told it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efa49f0db0b14a4e91291b603163bc83",
            "input": "It seems a shame that Greta Garbo ended her illustrious career at the age of 36 with this ridiculous mistaken-identity marital romp. Coming off the success of her first romantic comedy, Ernst Lubitsch's masterful \"Ninotchka\" (1939), where she was ideally cast as an austere Russian envoy, Garbo is reunited with her leading man Melvyn Douglas for a sitcom-level story that has her playing Karin Borg, a plain-Jane ski instructor who impulsively marries publishing executive Larry Blake when he becomes smitten with her. Once he makes clear that work is his priority, Karin inadvertently decides to masquerade as her high-living twin sister Katherine to test her husband's fidelity when he is back in Manhattan.It's surprising that this infamous 1941 misfire was directed by George Cukor, who led Garbo to her greatest dramatic performance in 1937's \"Camille\", because this is as unflattering a vehicle as one could imagine for the screen legend. Only someone with Carole Lombard's natural sense of ease and mischief could have gotten away with the shenanigans presented in the by-the-numbers script by S.N. Behrman, Salka Viertel and George Oppenheimer. MGM's intent behind this comedy was to contemporize and Americanize Garbo's image for wartime audiences whom the studio heads felt were not interested in the tragic period characters she favored in the thirties.However, Garbo appears ill-at-ease mostly as the bogus party girl Katherine and especially compared to expert farceurs like Douglas and Constance Bennett as romantic rival Griselda. Photographed unflatteringly by Joseph Ruttenberg, Garbo looks tired in many scenes and downright hideous in her teased hairdo for the \"chica-choca\" dance sequence. The story ends conventionally but with the addition of a lengthy physical sequence where Larry tries to maneuver his skis on a series of mountain cliffs that unfortunately reminds me of Sonny Bono's death. Roland Young and Ruth Gordon (in a rare appearance at this point of her career) show up in comic supporting roles as Douglas' associates. This movie is not yet on DVD, and I wouldn't consider it priority for transfer as it represents a curio in Garbo's otherwise legendary career. She was reportedly quite unhappy during the filming. I can see why.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6034906fe5ca4ec7bdd5e95439183e24",
            "input": "I was initially dubious about this movie (merely because of the subject), but the richly drawn characters, the fabulous scenes of the buffalo hunt, and the dramatic conclusion make it well-worth watching. I initially had trouble distinguishing between the two buffalo hunters but as the movie progressed they increasingly distinguished themselves. I am still haunted by the final scene.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63f8c03047f34978aa4ba6dcd2d92df6",
            "input": "Perhaps it's me and my perverted ways, or the fact that I tend to have a very sick mind, but I rented this film at random one very weird night and to my great surprise, I enjoyed it. Yes, I read the synopsis on the back of the DVD box and read that it had been banned for 25 years and figured I was prepared for anything it would offer. I was clearly deceived after seeing...well...everything, to cut a long story short. I can see why it was banned, not only for such explicit sex scenes, but for beastiality. Of course, as it is freely based on the classic fairy tale of Beauty and the Beast, a personal favorite of mine, it tells the story of a girl's sexual awakening over a dream about a duchess being chased by a whatever-the-hell-that-thing-was-like beast with an enormous erection and a substantial amount of ejaculation. Of course, the beast gets what he wants and the duchess decides she likes it and they continue frolicking in the woods. But that's not all. Oh, there is so much more! Not only do we get to see interspecial sex, but there's also humping horses, the babysitter who gets down and dirty with the slave when she's not humping the bed to get her...er...satisfaction and the daydreaming girl masturbating with rose petals. Creative and enjoyable, but it did take a while for my father to talk to me again after he watched it after I went to bed...I was 15. Words of advice when watching this film: make sure you're the only one who knows you have it and watch it with the curtains closed. It may be fun, but I doubt there are other porn films like this one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6b551517db344d928dfa3e9d32cb8cb4",
            "input": "Without a doubt, 12 MONKEYS is one of the best films of the Sci-fi genre and director Terry Gilliam is no stranger at pulling off such cinematic originality. An apocalyptic film that holds you completely spellbound, 12 MONKEYS never lets up and has you guessing all the way throughout. Excellent use of Philadelphia locales and netherworld sets create a gothic sense of tragedy and two people caught in time at the wrong place.Bruce Willis escapes his macho image and portrays a true loony who happens to be right about all that will happen. He is actually sane, but the people of the future (or present if you will) distort this guy's head so bad through time travel, no wonder he unravels. He gets sent to World War I just after beng sent to the wrong year to find out how the Army of the Twelve Monkeys pulls off the annihilation of civilization as we know it. They finally get it right and in what is truly a remarkable screenplay to match the performance, we get to see Willis, Madeleine Stowe and an ominous Brad Pitt cross-referenced over the course of 6 years.Stowe is sensual and solid as the risk-taking shrink who slowly starts to realize that Willis may not be as cracked up as he seems. A captivating element of the relationship between her and Willis is their sense of \"seeing\" each other before, in another place or time. 12 MONKEYS is essentially about time and the madness the futuristic people immerse into it and the times of the present, when killers and a psychotic genius can alter the world.The brooding city of Philadelphia is a dark and gothic backdrop for Willis' plight to complete his mission which is, against all usual Hollywood stereotype, NOT to save the world. He is gathering information. The film plays tricks on the viewer as well, placing Willis in a new setting at the drop of a pin. This must have been an extremely difficult picture to make but Gilliam seems to be the master of hard-boiled movie making. He even drops in some humor reminiscent of other great works like TIME BANDITS, and BRAZIL. The screen is this man's canvas and he knows how to paint a sometimes terrifying picture of the world and its possible future within the mainstream atmosphere of big-budget films. If you want sincere madness and ironic tragedy, see 12 MONKEYS.RATING: 9 of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dbc422f86f9b469da9821ef71678c4bc",
            "input": "Like too many recent British films, this one takes a great cast and gives them a flimsy, cliched script to work with. The performances save it from total disgrace, and it has some charm but it certainly didn't make me laugh. Where are all the great British writers hiding?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fa3136778774fb5b413c925e55c450a",
            "input": "Erotic cinema of the 1970's was tame compared to the triple X romps of today, which is good. Because there is a good story around the naked rituals and sex scenes. Of course, I wish that they had some vampire effects which they had at the time period and the sex did get in the way of the story a little. Plus some of the accents were hard to understand at time periods, but it's worth watching the unedited version then the edited up version which is titled THE DEVIL'S PLAYTHING. But if you don't care for allot of naked women dancing and having sex, then this isn't the movie for you. However, I did enjoy it and I give it...7 STARS.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95ffb5f6dfbf42d7be03dea7610219ab",
            "input": "The Color Purple is about the struggles of life and the love that helps those people strongly affected by the struggles of life. Every character had an element of the color purple in them. The movie touches on love, lost, hope, hate, and triumph. whether it be Celie having lived through hell and losing her sister, and Shug coming into her life to show her love again, Albert not being man righting his wrong toward Celie, Shug shunned by her father and confesses to him in the end, Sofia and her stubborness good and bad, and even Nettie, they had their emptiness and hardship through the film but was overcome in the end and that's the sign of a good movie. Good Job to all the cast and crew.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab281779e52e41c2bb9e689ca5ff6a4a",
            "input": "This movie is far better than the original The Jerk. I would highly recommend it to anyone who like quirky humor. We have incorporated almost as many lines from this movie into our daytime discourse as we have from Monty Python.The card game with the hobos and then with Mr. Suicide. The scene at the dinner table and his distaste for turtle soup. The original The Jerk was too choreographed ans staged. While I like Steve Martin, he seemed like he was trying to hard. The Jerk Too is a spoof and will be enjoyed by anyone. The Jerk Too is family friendly unlike the original The Jerk.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d5c77ba86fa4b10913c6fa5040d5f9b",
            "input": "Well, here we have yet another role reversal movie. There were many worth watching, despite the tired plot of gender reversal. However, this one is not. In previous reviews, I think I've made my point about the general decline of enjoyment for Haim movies that followed the late 80s. This is one of them.'Just One of the Girls' is about a high school kid (Corey Haim) who tries to avoid his bullies by dressing up as a girl and attending another school. He joins the cheerleading squad and makes friends with fellow cheerleader, Marie (Nicole Eggert). Obviously, he can't keep up the charade for too much longer.I thought this movie was utter crap, and it wasn't even funny. But, judging by a majority of reviews, it looks like fans of Alanis Morrisette or teen sex queen, Nicole Eggert, are the only ones who'd want to watch this. If you're looking for a good Haim feature (or role switching comedy), look no further than 1989. This is about the point that Haim's career tanked.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8057fcd0b8844415aea8d6ed8f6c35a3",
            "input": "1st watched 4/29/2007 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Mick Garris): Campy vampire-like Stephen King movie has so many strange and goofy elements that you start laughing over the extreme weirdness about 3/4 the way into the movie and you wonder if this movie might have a cult following for King fans. It's the story of a mother and son who are sleepwalkers(a shape-shifting feline-like, flesh eating, life needing, near extinct breed of humanoid) who move from town to town searching for virgins to feed on to keep themselves alive. They come across as pretty normal upper-class folk except they are secret lovers and cats hang around the outside of their home, day and night. Cats are deadly to them, so they set traps in their yard to try and keep the population down. We get to see them break a couple of their necks when they attack(which is also a first in my movie-going experience) --- hopefully no real cats were harmed in the making of the film. The boy is after a sweet girl that he has a crush on until he turns into a \"sleepwalker\" and then he just wants her body. There is so much campy uniqueness to this movie that it might have been better if it was an all-out satirical comedy on suburban life, but the director instead tries to scare you every couple minutes until you wish he'd just get over it and bring out the gore. Eventually that happens and the movie winds down to it's typical Stephen King downbeat ending. The movie is interesting because King's humor comes thru more than usual but his weirdness is also very present and what you have is a movie that his fans will probably like and should have in their collection, but as a worthwhile movie experience it really doesn't cut it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4a80f2b89a0438ca4428a25eb809596",
            "input": "Jackie Chan's classic directorial feature POLICE STORY (1985) is among the most influential and over-the-top modern day police actioners ever to come out from Hong Kong. Jackie wanted simply to make a movie which would include the usual kung fu and also fierce gun play and other \"urban\" action which would later become very popular and typical among HK directors like John Woo and Ringo Lam. POLICE STORY mixes these two action elements and styles and the result is as wild as it sounds.Jackie plays Chan Ka-Kui, a police who gets to protect an important witness (Brigitte Lin) who would soon testify against a powerful gangster boss and his ring of criminal activity. Jackie's girlfriend is played by young and sweet Maggie Cheung, who isn't as wild here as she would be in her subsequent roles like Heroic Trio (and the sequel) by Johnnie To, Savior of the Soul by Corey Yuen and David Lai and many many others. The plot in POLICE STORY is very simple but it is the action why this film was made in the first place.Jackie did of course all the stunts of his character by himself and also hurt himself pretty badly in couple of scenes, some of which are also in the completed movie like at the end in which Jackie hits his head (near the eye) through a very nasty looking sharp piece of glass. Also Jackie's stunt team members almost got themselves killed during filming of this film. The scene in which a bus stops right before Jackie, spitting the kidnappers through the windshield, went really bad as the bus stopped too early and the stuntmen didn't fly as they were supposed to. They were supposed to fly on the car parked in the front of the bus but their flight was too short and they hit through the asphalt with hospital level injuries. During the end credits, there is a behind the scenes imagery and images of these injured actors and it all looks really bad and almost tasteless, but fortunately no one got killed or injured too severely.The action is more than plentiful and imaginative as can be expected by (action) director Chan. The now legendary bus scene and shopping mall scene at then end are most likely among the wildest scenes any action film has been able to deliver. Jackie always tells how important editing is (which is true) and it really shows in his action scenes and their timing which is perfect and makes the films look so ultra kinetic when compared to Hollywood efforts, for instance. There's hardly any slow moments here and also those moments are interesting and the film never becomes boring or hard to watch.But there is again one negative point which I cannot stand in HK action comedies, which is this comedy itself. The comedy isn't funny especially when the errors and amateurish elements in the screenplay aren't there by accident but because of the writer wanted to add them there, without necessarily understanding that they are signs of bad script and stupid dialogue. I mean those scenes like the stabbing murder attempt at the beginning when the murderer just shouts and screams and makes faces and acts like a drunken clown from some slapstick nightmare, and he is there to \"murder\" that girl. This kind of acting is stupid and inept and I wouldn't like to see it in a film which is otherwise very great in its own genre. Characters also speak their thoughts which is also a sign of bad script because those \"loud thoughts\" are there just to make things clear even for the stupidest viewer and thus making things way too simple and \"light.\" Even if the film is comic and not so serious, these kind of stupidities should not be there and they cannot be forgiven too easily.POLICE STORY is a fast speed, full impact, balls to the walls action adventure miracle from Hong Kong and from the time when Jackie was very sad because of the bad result he got with the US produced The Protector as he didn't have the same thoughts about the film as director James Glickenhaus had and thus the result didn't please audiences and Jackie and he returned to Hong Kong to make more personal and inventive film. That he definitely did and the result is as wild today as it was back then in the 80's. This is among the most insane action films ever, and it would be somewhat perfect without the flaws I mentioned. 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb581b2f1ea04deda6558b1a8f2c6a88",
            "input": "Compelling and Innovative! At the beginning of this criminally underrated Whoopi Goldberg flick the writers draw a parallel between Theodore Rex and the 1941 Orson Welles classic \"Citizen Kane\". The writers are justified in drawing such a seemingly disparate parallel, but the viewing public is too often hoodwinked into seeing overly hyped Hollywood schlock to appreciate the subtle similarities between these two movies. In \"Citizen Kane\" Charles Foster Kane is feared and admired by his colleagues and his underlings, much like Whoopi Goldberg in this movie. This movie is about finding love in everybody's differences. It is an epic examination of the fear of abandonment and the need for love and acceptance in a society that is dominated by greed and self-absorption. Whoever paired Whoopi Goldberg and Theodore Rex formulated a dyad for the ages, with the only justifiable comparisons being Bogey and Bacall, Hepburn and Tracy and Hall and Oates. If you would love to watch an uplifting, celluloid philosophical examination of some of humanity's deepest drives; Bergman-esqe but not as depressing, Theodore Rex should be viewed immediately!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4008b971625b487298d3252ecf58afb4",
            "input": "With the current trend of gross out humor, this film is the granddaddy of them all. While some of the humor is dated, every skit will either shock, repulse, or make you laugh out loud. Most memorable is the sex games commentary and, of course, the VD commercial. It doesn't always work, but pays off when it does. I give this a 7.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-560c4581bd24485db4776c9ec7c70687",
            "input": "The main reason to see this film is Warren William, who is in top form as the shyster campaign manager. He is electric, constantly finding ways to fool the public and defeat the opposing party in the midst of the biggest disasters. William is a great actor -- I feel he never got his due. Bette Davis as his girlfriend also shines in an under-written role. Personally, I found Guy Kibbee not quite right as the lame-brained candidate that William and the others are trying to foist on the public. He seemed more like an empty canvas than a person. I would have preferred to see a real character emerge rather than a non-character. The story itself is implausible, silly and clichéd. But Warren William and Bette Davis are well worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88c6859ed1054e3f85cb3238c6698868",
            "input": "THE ZOMBIE CHRONICLES Aspect ratio: 1.33:1 (Nu-View 3-D)Sound format: MonoWhilst searching for a (literal) ghost town in the middle of nowhere, a young reporter (Emmy Smith) picks up a grizzled hitchhiker (Joseph Haggerty) who tells her two stories involving flesh-eating zombies reputed to haunt the area.An ABSOLUTE waste of time, hobbled from the outset by Haggerty's painfully amateurish performance in a key role. Worse still, the two stories which make up the bulk of the running time are utterly routine, made worse by indifferent performances and lackluster direction by Brad Sykes, previously responsible for the likes of CAMP BLOOD (1999). This isn't a 'fun' movie in the sense that Ed Wood's movies are 'fun' (he, at least, believed in what he was doing and was sincere in his efforts, despite a lack of talent); Sykes' home-made movies are, in fact, aggravating, boring and almost completely devoid of any redeeming virtue, and most viewers will feel justifiably angry and cheated by such unimaginative, badly-conceived junk. The 3-D format is utterly wasted here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8218e2b95da94ae0b7ca33cec5bb3e26",
            "input": "This stuffy melodrama is quite easily the worst film starring Ingrid Bergman that I've seen. Even her luminous screen presence can't save this insufferably slow and meandering movie that's nearly impossible to sit through without fast-forwarding a lot of it.Only for die-hard Bergman fans; others are very likely to fall asleep. I suggest you to watch \"For Whom the Bell Tolls\" instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afc01c8a35294d08a3748d488c483430",
            "input": "Pinjar by Mr dwivedi is an awesome movie. Its definitely the greaest and finest of 2003. There are very good performances in it. Dwivedi knows what he can extract from MAST Urmila. she is like u have never seen before. one true great performance. along with her is a fine actor Manoj bajpai, who has shown bollywood what he is with Bhiku Mhatre. The movie is about a girl(Urmila) living in Pre-partition pakistan. she is from a punjabi family livin in a small town. she is been kidnapped by a muslim guy as a part of a going-on-for-years kinda fight with the punjabi family. and then follows a series of twists and turns as urmila's arranged marriage is due in few days. this movie is truly a very good movie. the storyline is solid with an amazing screenplay. all the performances like lillete dubey, isha koppikar (u wont believ but she can act as well besides jus dancin on Khallas), kulbhushan kharbanda and many more. those sets with pre-partition pakistan, costumes, cinematography, sound, background score add to the positive points. from the start till the end u r stuck to u'r seat with the question whats next? this movie is not jus worth watchin but deserved to be a part of your movie collection. the ultimate scene is the end of the movie. i would suggest all those No-Kabhi-Khushi-Kabhi-gum-and-No-Dil-To-Pagal-Hai crowd to watch this amazing flick. my rating: 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-986d925efc894e2390cb93f2b8e618ad",
            "input": "What the hell was all that about? I saw The Matrix and was amazed. It was the most spectacular movie ever made. What ever possesed the Wachowski brothers to do this film is beyond me.There is no plot, you can't argue with that. Basically all this film was was a load of talking, and don't get me wrong, I have no problem with talky films, but all the talking in The Matrix Reloaded was a pointless load of drivvle. Then there would be a fight sequence which lasted WAY too long, then more pointless drivvle, then another fight scene that lasts too long and it all builds up to the biggest anti-climax ever. A little bearded bloke talking a load of uncomprehensible bull for 20 minutes.Also, Keanu Reeves gives his worst performance yet. I knew he wasn't a good actor but this was beyond a joke. If you watch his films in the order he was in them it would seem he got gradually worse as they went along. God knows what his performance is like in Something's Gotta Give! Keanu Reeves: The only plank of wood ever to become an actor.After the splendor of the first film this came as a massive dissapointment. If you haven't already seen the first film I suggest you watch it, but don't waste your time with this utter pile of turd.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cbc8fff8b13478fa8f98179dc44c8fd",
            "input": "I found this movie in the 'horror' section of my video store. That seems to make sense as most zombie movies have their place there. From Romero's 'Dead' trilogy to '28 days later.' However upon watching it, you can quickly see what this movie really is.It is actually a music video that goes progressively faster and gets more and more and more gory. There is no horror here folks. Just some half-way decently staged action scenes which soon grow tiresome because they last... and last... and last... and soon you get the feeling maybe you're DVD player accidentally skipped back 3 minutes, but no, this is how they actually made the movie. It's a pity. I think anyone could find a better use for $7 million dollars in the movie industry than make this lump o' crud. Though some of the 360 effects were cool, but once again, they were over used and grew tedious since it was the same stunt over and over again each time, just with a different character.Also what is ROYALLY annoying is the splicing on of footage from the arcade game. I've played the game. It sucks. So why did they put it in here? Oh that's right, this isn't a movie but a music video, and it's a poor one at that. 3/10Rated R: a lot of violence/gore, and profanity",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50988d7a0682477887792fcf00a9b974",
            "input": "This movie feels so EMPTY. IN every scene in the movie the maximum number of actors on the screen is like 10. Because everything was shot in front of a blue screen there are never really any extras and the movie just feels weird.The ACTING was HORRIBLE! It's so obvious this was in front of a blue screen because all of the action scenes you can see the actor/actress wondering around half running when they should be running for their lives.. Looking at the floor for their marks...Spoilers: Also you'll find yourself banging your head watching the movie. At one point at Sky Captain's home base they have like 100 planes sitting on the airstrip. They have advanced warning an attack is coming... So what do they do? nothing. All of the planes get blown up and yet again the ONLY person fighting back is the Sky Captain...THE ENTIRE world is under attack and he's the ONLY person ever fighting back. At the very end of the movie you see hundreds of plains taking off finally... but what do they do? Nothing... the movie is over...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c4c98d2c6d8b4e6eb2867bdcc360cced",
            "input": "I am a big-time horror/sci-fi fan regardless of budget, but after watching countless horror movies late night on cable and video, this has to be the worst of all movies. With bloody special effects (what looked like a roast covered in fake blood or ketchup that kept being shown over and over again) and people running around screaming from left, then to right, then back again. It should have stayed with the beginning convenience store scene and stopped there and been 15 minutes. Instead, it is dragged out very long. It is very, very x5 low budget. Many scenes were way, way too long. Narrator sounded very amateurish like a random person out of junior high was talking. This is the only movie to rate lower in my opinion than Manos, Red Zone Cuba, Benji,and Godzilla vs. megalon despite their higher budgets. 10 snoozes, try to stay awake through whole movie in one setting or better yet, avoid it like you would an undead brain-eating mob. The Why-Did-I-Ever-See-This-Piece-Of-Zombie-Dung-Blues. Epitome of nauseatingly bad made movies etc..ad infinitum. -infinity/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-488fb66587444e2a9309024415f9e10c",
            "input": "This movie was great the first time I saw it, when it was called \"Lost in Translation.\" But somehow Bill Murray turned into an eccentric black man played by Morgan Freeman, Scarlett Johansson turned into a cranky Latino woman played by Paz Vega, and Tokyo, Japan turned into Carson, California. Instead of meaningful conversations and silence we enjoyed in Translation, we get meaningless blabbering in 10 Items that verges on annoying. Instead of characters that were pensive and introspective as in Translation, we get characters that spew pointless advice on topics they have no clue about. How can a character that wears hundred dollar T-shirts and has never been inside a Target department store expect to give advice to a working-class woman on how to prepare for a job interview as an administrative assistant? Don't think that stops him. If he isn't giving her clothing advice, he's telling her what she should eat. The most annoying part of the movie for me was how supposedly they were in a hurry to make an appointment, and yet the characters keep finding time to run another errand, be it washing the car, stopping at Arby's, or just laying around to list off their 10 Items or Less lists of things they love and hate. I kept wanting to yell at them saying, \"Didn't you say you had somewhere to be? What the heck are doing? A minute ago you were practically late, now you're eating roast beef and pondering your lives!\" Until I saw this movie, I never truly understood how something could \"insist upon itself,\" but I think this movie does exactly that, and undeservedly so. The dialogue makes the characters cheesy and unsympathetic…with the exception that I felt sorry for both of the actors for having signed onto this project.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a506f72c5f348df849fbf821a4fced4",
            "input": "HORRID!!The special effects make the TV version of \"Tremors\" look real!No one in the cast can act.Kind of like the '62 \"Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea\" meets the cartoon ocean going electric eel cartoons.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a2826f99e4964763b3a9a99505a02d40",
            "input": "FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!! I've been waiting for this film to come out for almost a year, and finally saw it at the premiere in SB. I met a few of the actors, who were really nice and who were great in the movie. i watched the trailer so many times that i didn't know what to expect but got totally sucked in. the film was really beautiful to look at it and the music was good too. i recommend it to anyone who's a ryan donowho fan, and dominique swain was good in it too. the other actors were good also great. I hope it comes out on DVD soon!!!!!i first got into ryan from watching the OC and then saw him in a bunch of good indies like Imaginary Heroes. He is great in this film, and everything that he does that's indie. I also like Dominique but haven't seen her in as much. Hope to see them both in more soon!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c5bd231c2359408391a1fb99dd45d8ab",
            "input": "This is quite a dull movie. Well-shot with realistic performances especially a very good one from Depardieu as a cad and bad boy with realistic locations mood and art-house connotations all over, it fails because the director takes no position, stand or critical commentary on the topic he stipulates. One of France's revered and regular working partner on films with Depardieu - I believe they made 7 together - Pialat fails to engage. It seems to be a treatise on why women fall for the bad boy who will hurt when they have a ready caring boyfriend and good-hearted husband around. Isabelle Hupert who plays the philanderer with nonchalant distinction offers opprobrium answers like \"I don't know\"; \"I like his arms\"; \"I like the way he makes love\" to her inquiring husband who tries to kick her out of the house but palliates and reconsiders because... I assume he loves her. So he accepts and hope for what? That she will one day wake up and come to her senses. Things like this are not answered in Pialat's condescending docu-drama style with long speeches and even longer scenes that don't add up. I know the answers do not add up but please take a stand. Jules et Jim, this is not. The final shot as cold as the movie we have just watched is a heartache and headache only to the most forgiving.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38ba6635c2d64d66b37c1cf11ad9956c",
            "input": "Well I'm probably about to be lambasted by everyone on this site, but The Good Earth is one of the worst structured films I've seen in a long time. We have a 2 and a half hour film that feels like its three and a half because it has two films in one. The first film tells the story of a family that has to move form their home because of drought and famine. They have to travel south to the cities to find food or work of some kind. Conveniently they happen to find a bag of jewels and at the same time they find out that the drought has ended. Yeah OK. With this knowledge they return home with their riches and everything is fine and wonderful again. Well that takes about an hour and a half of film and while its incredibly lifeless at this point it does have a nice arc to it. You would think this would be a fantastic place to end the film. However, the film then continues on for a whole other hour. And in this remaining time, its takes a simple story about a family dealing with the hardships of the world and turns it into a sappy melodrama about betrayal and jealousy between lovers. Oh yea and the age old, money is the root of all evil blah blah blah. Just because you know your making an epic film doesn't mean that your story can go on needlessly for more than it has to. Also the main idea I would gather about this film is that the earth is good to this family and holds them together. Then why do we spend an hour telling a story about a rich man falling in love with another woman, and why is the final moment of the film dedicated to a wife that our main character hasn't even cared about through most of the film. Oh wait and the film isn't the only thing thats poorly written, the main characters wife makes absolutely no sense. She complains a lot about how she was a slave and she never wants to have a slave and yadda yadda yadda. Then why at the drop of a hat is she willing to sell her only daughter into slavery. Even if they are starving at the time of this idea, it still doesn't make sense when 20 minutes later in the film she is complaining about not wanting a slave again. There are other films from the thirties that should be paid attention to. The only thing this one has going for it is the cinematography. The land is shot beautifully, oh and the sequence with the locusts is quite impressive. Too bad that were in a film that had nothing to say. One last thing. I know that at this point in time Hollywood was focused mostly on stars and they figured that a good actor can portray anything. For most of the film Paul Muni does portray an Asian man to the best of his ability, but once it hits the half point where the film goes on for no reason he loses it and just becomes regular old Italian Paul, they even cut his hair so he looks like Tony from Scarface(also a better film than this). Of all the main characters in the film I think maybe three are actually Asian, the rest are just Americans being silly. Oh and please Ms. Rainer that was a really nice one note performance, not, if i could i rip the Oscar out of your hands, oh i would. The Good Earth is one epic waste of time. If you want something along this vain to watch on nice evening get The Grapes of Wrath, a film that truly deserves all the praise it gets. Mainly because it wasn't written by a monkey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-779e502a68aa4f4eb3e905505a34d4e6",
            "input": "Now isn't it? Considering all the good work done by danzel,Clive and Jodie, the movie never grew into something more than a horrible die-hard/heist movies copycat. Yes a couple of jokes, no absolutely no unpredictable twists, to be honest the only unpredictable moments are there because both director and editor made some stupid mistakes, it is a shame for them and a waste of time for us. IF someone can tell me why on earth were they digging a hole inside that safe, who the hell is the Rebe and how on earth did they know that the diamonds were in the particular cell, it could just make my day, but it seems that Spike asks us to take too much things in this one for granted, and do not raise our eyebrows when something looks stupid...its just another studio contract movie relax and enjoy...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f1f20b3f4ed4b79b29fc77e30f3907a",
            "input": "This was a truly insipid film. The performances are third rate, and the dialogue is so stilted that at times it seemed to have just rolled over and died. My reason for renting this was simple: Find a movie with scriptwriting. I needed a visual aid for my presentation, so I figured why not use a clip? Boy was I wrong. After searching my local video store, I came upon this, where it was suspiciously titled \"Starstruck\". I thought, \"What the hey\", and decided to give it a try. Well, I was very unhappy with my results. There was maybe one scene I could use, and meanwhile, I was practically falling asleep because of the sheer banality of the flick. So.....I took this back and picked up Ed Wood. There's a movie I can use as an example. Then again, anything would be presentable compared to the drivel that is \"Starfucker\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97685220bebc41bea857abdaec824a90",
            "input": "Kurt Russell's chameleon-like performance, coupled with John Carpenter's flawless filmmaking, makes this one, without a doubt, one of the finest boob-tube bios ever aired. It holds up, too: the emotional foundation is strong enough that it'll never age; Carpenter has preserved for posterity the power and ultimate poignancy of the life of the one and only King of Rock and Roll. (I'd been a borderline Elvis fan most of my life, but it wasn't until I saw this mind-blowingly moving movie that I looked BEYOND the image at the man himself. It was quite a revelation.) ELVIS remains one of the top ten made-for-tv movies of all time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13d86e3e189a44cb901a5b4485321f67",
            "input": "My comment is for the Russian version of Space Race named Bitva za Kosmos (Battle for Space) shown on Russia's First Channel on April 10-13, 2006. Bad translation could have ruined some details but I doubt it's the case. The number of factual errors is such that it's impossible to list them, especially in the first episode (the development of first missiles). Even the U.S. half of the film contains multiple errors and omissions. The audience is not told of any V-2/A-4 launches from the U.S. Three different Jupiter C rockets are launched with the same serial number 'UE' onboard. Apollo 1 is to be launched to the Moon, etc. In the Russian half, each and every person is ludicrous. Korolev is scared of NKVD, Glushko is saboteur and traitor, Mishin is alcoholic etc. Men as functions; no motivation, no life at all. Uniform and decorations are awful. Gagarin sings a frivolous song awaiting launch (I think this was added specially for Russian version).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74b00f2d070c4bb980777d4993dac71b",
            "input": "Zane and Beringer will keep you on the edge of your seats. I don't typically go for military/war movies, but this was worth my time.It was serious, but it was also humorous. Beringer's character proved to be heroic and honest. No matter what, you know that he's got your back.Zane's character developed throughout the film. He wasn't just a suit, he definitely proved that he could be a hero and handle a gun.The ending through me a little though. It didn't really go with the action throughout the film, but I'm glad that I saw it, nonetheless.It's worth checking out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-79da3d071ae640e08413d0fbc3739a45",
            "input": "Time spent watching this film was time wasted. I do not dislike science fiction. I do not reject any genre per se, since good work can be done in any genre. This film, however is not good work. I cannot fault the visuals (when not involving alien makeups), and the special effects are impressive. The story was not out-and-out BAD, for a trekkish comic book. But the fx visuals were obviously where all the makers' interest/attention/money went. The direction alternated between sluggish and confusing (one was not at all sure exactly who was doing what and with what and to whom at at least one crucial juncture). The \"acting\" was mostly very bad indeed. There was no basis to most of the line readings besides a hint of \"It was that way on the page and the director told me I was supposed to be mad/sad/scared/whatever. Okay, so it was a SF series pilot. Since when is that an excuse for correctable shoddiness in areas when should be regarded as essential to a dramatic medium. I'm astonished the pilot sold the series. Or is the money also in the hands of technerds?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e40b289c7137497e9ab54c7ef36c271b",
            "input": "A good deal of running around. A badly conceived adversary with very little complexity. A scientist who works in communications sending off signals into space and receiving them, gets caught up with aliens. Along with his pretty wife, he invades their territory and is given secrets about them. He becomes rather traitorous in the process. Granted, he is given little choice anyway. There is a scene where he gives them everything they want. This is a dull movie with lots of long stretches where little happens. The plot isn't technically bad. It's just that we are usually following a car, a trip through a woods, investigating a building. This is what editing is all about. I suppose the story wouldn't technically support much more. Not much here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dad71144e3c14c2faf7ac117bdc97b3b",
            "input": "This is one of the funniest movies that I have seen this year. The people that made it must be so incredibly whacked and twisted. It is a beautiful thing. There were a lot of quality one-liners. This movie blew Uncle Sam out of the water (it was made by tha same people, i think)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9317c6e23fd245c1b82ff39b9552730c",
            "input": "Nice movie with a great soundtrack which spans through the rock landscape of the 70's and 80's. Radiofreccia describes a generation, it describes life in a small village near Correggio (hometown of Ligabue, the singer who wrote the book that inspired the movie), it describes life of young people and their problems relating to the world. It reminds of Trainspotting, with a bit of Italian touch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-214c4cb6069f4092861b1915b639fa36",
            "input": "From the mind of Harry Alan Towers comes another piece of cinematic sludge. Supposedly based on the work of H. Rider Haggard, the only similarity it bears to anything Haggard actually wrote is that it takes place in Africa (albeit an Africa that has dinosaurs - which our intrepid adventurers use to pull their canoes!), and has some characters with the same names.Our heroes (David McCallum, Patrick McNee and John Colico) set out to seek treasure, armed only with a medallion, and end up precisely where the treasure is, purely by chance. On the way, they meet a motley assortment of extremely lame monsters, pick up a French chef, and McCallum has an affair with the Queen of Phoenicia.It's so ridiculous, it's a hoot. That's the only reason I didn't give it a 1.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ce1b3f0d9f540f19e15610c4d28aeb1",
            "input": "Like most people, i was drawn to buy this film because of the pictures of the mighty Bolo Yeung plastered all over the box, and the assumption (from the aforementioned pictures and the title of the film) that this film is all about the Beast from the East kickin' ass for 90 minutes.However, to my disappointment, Chinese Hercules is to Bolo Yeung what No Retreat No Surrender was to Jean Claude Van Damme and Fearless Tiger was to... erm, Bolo Yeung - maximum exposure on video box, minimum actual screen-time! Oh well! The storyline is pretty basic stuff, but it was well done - peaceful kung fu fighter (played by Chen Hui Min) accidentally kills a man and promises never to fight again. He then runs away to work as a labourer on a pier where he impresses his co-workers with his heavy sack lifting prowess, causing them to suspect him to be a formidable fighter (dont quite know how that works but never mind). Meanwhile, the corrupt boss of the pier does a deal with gangsters, giving them exclusive use of the pier. As a result, the workers are thrown out on their ear and forced to live on the beach, where they unite against their boss, the gangster boss, and his hulking henchman Bolo Yeung.While the film was quite watchable (mainly through waiting for the next glimpse of Bolo), i had a few problems with it - firstly, the bad dubbing, but of course thats a given in old kung fu films. But also, the film tended to drag between the various fight-scenes. And as for the fight scenes themselves, i found them to be over-long, badly choreographed (apparently by Jackie Chan!), badly shot and at times performed by people who didn't seem to have any martial arts ability.... in fact, most of the fights in this film weren't 'fights' at all, just people getting beaten up without offering any resistance!Finally, the hero - played by Chen Hui Min. I've never seen any other films with this guy in, but at no point was i rooting for him. Not only did he look wimpy and on the verge of tears at all times, but i found his insistence on not fighting infuriating! I understood his reasoning, but he could have saved a lot of people a lot of pain if he had done earlier what we all knew he was gonna do eventually, and fight! A bigger mystery was why this entire community of people were pinning their hopes on a guy they've never even seen fight! Really, the big saving grace in this film was the presence of Bolo Yeung. Not only is he as huge and brutal as ever, he has some great, funny lines and gives the rest of the cast a master-class on how to fight on film. The guy oozes screen presence and you can easily see how he became a star. The guy scares the life out of me, but i'm sure i wasn't the only person to have watched this film who was rooting for Bolo all through the end fight! All in all then, a below-average kung-fu film lifted several huge notches due to you-know-who. I've never met a person who didn't think Bolo Yeung was great. The man's a legend!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8d0eb12d4194947b41382595ac93cf6",
            "input": "Oh, Sam Mraovich, we know you tried so hard. This is your magnum opus, a shining example to the rest of us that you are certainly worth nomination into the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (as you state on your 1998-era web site). Alas, it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. With Ben & Arthur, you do just that.Seemingly assembled with a lack of instruction or education, the film's screenplay guides us toward the truly bizarre with each new scene. It's this insane excuse of a story that may also be the film's best ally. Beginning tepidly, the homosexually titular characters Ben and Arthur attempt to marry, going so far as to fly across country to do so, in the shade of Vermont's finest palm trees. But, all of this posturing is merely a lead-in for BLOOD. Then more BLOOD, and MORE AND MORE BLOOD. I mean, there must be at least $20 in fake blood make-up in the final third of this film.The film in its entirety is a technical gaffe. From the sound to the editing to the music, which consists of a single fuzzy bass note being held on a keyboard, it's a wonder that the film even holds together on whatever media you view it on. It's such a shame then that some decent amateur performances are wasted here.No matter, Sam. I'm sure you've made five figures on this flick in rentals or whatever drives poor souls (such as myself) to view this film. Sadly, we're not laughing with you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a303fe607ffd4613b35aae47c3a509cd",
            "input": "The only good thing about this movie was the shot of Goldie Hawn standing in her little french cut bikini panties and struggling to keep a dozen other depraved women from removing her skimpy little cotton top while she giggled and cooed. Ooooof! Her loins rival those of Nina Hartley. This movie came out when I was fourteen and that shot nearly killed me. I'd forgotten about it all tucked away in the naughty Roladex of my mind until seeing it the other day on TV, where they actually blurred her midsection in that scene, good grief, reminding me what a smokin' hottie of a woman Goldie Hawn was in the '80s. Kurt Russell must have had a fun life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36ef26f059e14261bf0b21833e2b7c38",
            "input": "Awwww....yes, it is heartwarming and all that some unlucky family gets adopted by ABC/Sears and has their home \"renovated.\" That's where the humanistic appeal ends. I liked it early in its run, but now this show has become disgustingly excessive.Ten needy families could be given relatively luxurious homes with lots of goodies for every one family that each episode of this show splurges on. The people at Habitat For Humanity must be shaking their heads in disbelief. For example, is it necessary for a healthy sixteen year old boy to have a jacuzzi in his bedroom, or have his bed tricked-out with \"Low Rider\" hydraulics? Does the mom really need her dilapidated, non-running and rusted out old pick-up truck restored and \"pimped\" by some of the best customizers in California? A new one would have done the job quite nicely, and probably for a third of the price. Do people really need a sixty-five inch plasma screen in every room of the house? And then there's the issue of who pays the increased property taxes and utility bills. Even after the zaniacs at \"Makeover\" leave, somebody still has earn a living. I doubt the friendly folks down at Social Services will see the humor in all of this largess.This show is nothing more than a ratings grabber for ABC, and a tacit commercial for its sponsors.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c75fcaf2f6345bd8ffb391a8f23bde0",
            "input": "The long list of \"big\" names in this flick (including the ubiquitous John Mills) didn't bowl me over to the extent that I couldn't judge the film on its actual merits. It is FULL of stereotypes, caricatures, and standard, set scenes, from the humble air-ace hero to the loud-mouthed yank flyer. The music track was such that at one point, about an hour before the end, I thought the film was over: loud, rising crescendo, grand flourish and finish then silence, but then the movie continued! I found no real storyline, haphazard writing, but smartly-pressed uniforms and the pretty Jean Simmons (pre-nose job) with a rousing little ditty. I cannot say that this picture has any of the ingredients which make a film great. I found it maudlin, mawkish and minor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e478d943af14610aa1abd71033cec82",
            "input": "SUcks. That's all I got to say about this sorry excuse for a film. Sucks. Sucks. Sucks. I mean, what the hell were they thinking? The idiots involved should never be allowed to make another films. The acting was so bad that it even failed to entertain on a bad level. The attempt at a \"lesbian scene\" was sad. I felt so bad for the ladies involved. This movie sucks! Sucks! Sucks!I heard rumors of a sequel.GodHelpUsAll",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a17648f88f5e4cd2bf4d19b70123f880",
            "input": "This could be well have been THE definitive film noir of all time, had not the Columbia Studios cut so much of Orson Welles's original. What we are left with is a flawed, yet brilliant film that showcases the overwhelming talent of Welles as an actor/director and Rita Hayworth as a serious dramatic talent.'The Lady From Shanghai' is film noir at it's most sizzling and confusing. Welles, with an uneven accent, portrays Michael O'Hara, a journeyman Irishman, who, after a fateful encounter with the seductive, dangerous Elsa Bannister (Hayworth, in a GREAT performance)finds himself virtually coerced into accepting a job as a crewman on her and her crippled husband's (Everett Sloane) yacht. Elsa, or 'Rosalie' as Michael likes to call her, plays the innocent, helpless doll very well, ensnaring O'Hara in her web. As the lovers conduct a not-so-secret affair at sea, Arthur Bannister's partner in his law firm, George Grisby (Glenn Anders)comes aboard. He is a weird, untrustworthy figure who offers Michael a unique proposal: He will get $5000 to assist Grisby in the faking of Grisby's death, so it looks murder. The plan is for Michael to get off a technicality, and run off into the sun with Elsa. But things do not go to plan.Hayworth delivers us one of the best femme fatales of all time in a very ambiguous portrayal. At times she seems genuinely vulnerable and child-like, at others brutal, world-weary and hard. Always she is brilliantly beautiful, whether he situation calls for her to be dripping wet in a swimsuit or dressed in black, brandishing a gun. Hayworth is beautifully photographed here, and she is a far-cry from her famous 'Gilda' role. Her then-husband Orson Welles cut off her trademark auburn locks for a dyed blonde crop (angering Columbia boss Harry Cohn). It was a terrific marketing ploy, and he change suits her changed attitude wonderfully. She is not the sympathetic femme fatale that 'Gilda' is, here- instead she is a predatory, black-hearted dame who sees murder as a very useful option.The Welles and Hayworth pairing came at a time when the couple were having extreme difficulties in their marriage. They would divorce after the film was made, so this is also a curiosity for providing some view into the complicated relationship. They are hateful, not romantic, lovers in this, so it's hard to gauge whether or not they had real chemistry on screen. Certainly every encounter is potent and filled with raw sexuality, with Welles as the 'fall guy' (he even admits it himself in the film!) and Rita as the double-crossing babe.Welles character is the typical noir 'drifter' with not much sense. As Welles voice-over proves to use, O'Hara indeed does not use his brain very much 'expect to be thinking of her (Elsa)'. Welles usually played intelligent, charismatic fellows, so his turn here as the dim-witted Michael is unusual and very interesting. Indeed, Welles was an actor of fine talent and he pulls off it well.Everett Sloane is suitably slimy as Hayworth's crippled husband. One wonders why he hires Michael. It is obvious that his wife is interested in him romantically, so why does he invite a 'threat' on board? One interpretation could be that Michael provides the 'service' to his wife that Bannister cannot in his crippled state. There is definitely something to that theory, with a lot of implications toward Elsa's behaviour before she met her husband (was she some sort of prostitute?)and Grisby's knowledge of Bannister's most intimate secrets being hinted at in several scenes.This is a jumbled, convoluted film with a plot that is ultimately flawed. We are more interested in the love triangle than the murder plot, as with most noirs. Welles provides us with many of his usual brilliant cinematic touches, including the justifiably famous 'hall of mirrors' climax. It's a terrific scene, one ending that can almost obliterate the faults earlier on in the movie and lift it into greatness. This fun house scene is visually stunning, with a Dali-like feel to the painted sets (apparently Orson painted them himself). Subtle visual imagery utilized throughout the film by Welles enhances the plot and makes this a thought-provoking experience.The dialogue is scorching and confusing, delivered superbly by Rita's alternately breathy low voice and helpless, high-pitched little-girl voice. Hayworth proves her acting capabilities in this one, and proves that SHE is the ultimate femme fatale of 'noir'. It's a pity (only a slight one , as Rita was a brilliant dancer) that she did so many delightful yet frothy and often forgettable musicals for Columbia in the 40's instead of darkly-themed noir like this. She was a brilliant actress when given the chance to show off her talent.9/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a795364fc7514d0a8ad198c95c86f8a4",
            "input": "I really enjoyed this episode. Seeing The Flash, Cyborg, Green Arrow, and Aquaman (even though all he did was swim) made my eyes widen. To see most of the founders of the Justice League trying to bring down Lex Luthor is what i've been waiting for. This sounds a bit off topic, but making a live action Justice League show would definitely make me have a reason to shove everything that i usually do during the week down the drain just to watch one episode. This is the thrill i got from watching this episode. I wish they had made this episode a little longer, like a two hour special, because i felt that one hour of the Justice League wasn't enough. Now before i bore you (unless i already have with my rambling) i just want to say, Smallville is cool again. It sort of lost its touch when the show started focusing on Lana. But i'm sure the writers will just fall back into that loop hole. :( So enjoy this episode. Who knows when another good one's going to come out. Catch it again this Thursday, Feb. 22, if you missed the first airing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f06056a6ac964697945e42a42b15bd2c",
            "input": "This is one of the best films I have seen in years! I am not a Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but she is excellent as Emma Woodhouse. Alan Cumming is superb as Reverand Elton, and Emma Thompson's sister, Sophie, is hysterical as Miss Bates. And check out the gorgeous Jeremy Northam as Mr. Knightley; what a gentleman! Whoever said you need sex and violence in a movie to make it good has never seen Emma. I think that is what separates it from so many others--it's classy.If you're looking for a film that you can watch with the whole family, or looking for a romance for yourself, look no further. Emma is that movie. With a beautiful setting, wonderful costumes, and an outstanding cast (have I mentioned the gorgeous Jeremy Northam?), Emma is a perfect ten!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e86264e8738b44d58ad2b8e34037b532",
            "input": "I simply never tire of watching FREEBIRD. My husband was an extra so I was involved from the start. Have kept in touch with Jon and have helped out with promoting the film both in Cinemas and now the DVD release. Even to the extent of distributing promotional postcards on cross channel ferries and various places throughout France. FREEBIRD was expertly written and directed with the perfect combination of fun and serious moments plus choice casting. Only Phil Daniels could fit the role of Grouch. Great privilege to meet Jon and the cast at the party following the premier in January. Anything else you want doing Jon just ask, either email or phone, you know how to get me. Sue xx",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a960dac2a26a432ca9c835d6233c3f3e",
            "input": "In the first one it was mainly giant rats, but there were some wasps and a giant chicken too. This one, however, is just giant rats period, well giant rats and one really growing little boy. This one is about this growing boy and a scientist that is trying to help him so he accidentally creates giant killer rats...you know how it is. This movie has some kills and its moments, but I find it to be on par with the original, I just prefer some variety in my giant creature movies. Well, that is not true...I actually like \"Empire of the Ants\", maybe I just do not care for giant rodents. All in all a rather drab movie though it does have one rather odd turn of events in this one dream sequence that is truly bizarre. I just can't recommend this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3bd79c8b77a943da9d99b61db511beda",
            "input": "Usually, any film with Sylvester Stallone is usually going to suck ass. Rambo: First Blood Part II was no exception to this. The only movies that Sylvester Stallone were in that were good were Rocky and First Blood. This film is extreamly unrealistic, and boring. It has action, but not very good action. I didn't enjoy watching it, and I would never ever watch this again. No wonder why it won the Razzie Award for Worst Picture. I would give this a 3/10, the only reason why it got the 3 was because it had somewhat good action, but not good enough.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-626d22049a1149908ce07f4811fcdac9",
            "input": "it's a lovely movie ,it deeply reflects the Chinese underground bands' current lives. if you chinese culture ,traditionaled rock n roll music, there you go, i will highly recommend this one .but one thing i am wondering is whether this movie has been showed in Mainland ? i sorta doubt it ,:D",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d93eb7398c9d4cb49fe6b34a59b5bfb8",
            "input": "I just finished watching this film and WOW was that bad. Actually the only thing that kept me watching was that it was SO MONUMENTALLY bad it was kind of entertaining. The action of the characters is hilarious, from the hyper-dramatic way they fall to gunfire, to their incredibly bad acting (were the bad guys all just pulled off the street, or were they actually actors?), to incredibly bad delivery of lines, to their inexplicable actions (if you are going to try and shoot someone through a doorway as they enter, obviously the thing to do is shoot directly at the doorknob!!). This film must break some record for worst written and delivered lines.The camera work was also really bad - you can hardly see what's going on in the fight scenes due to switching camera angles and shakiness.I would have voted \"1\" except that I do like Chiba and sidekick Sue Shihomi, and I was entertained by a couple of scenes: 1) breaking of a villain's arm so the bone pops out of the skin (that's gotta hurt) 2) a drug kingpin eating a brown-furred animal (a monkey??) by hacking away at the carcass with a meat cleaver 3) Sonny Chiba's performing some impromptu eye surgery on a guy with his fingers.I am actually a big fan of Sonny Chiba but this one is really not worth anyone's time. I've seen about 7 or 8 of his films and have come to the conclusion that the only ones worth watching (and they are great!) are the Street Fighter series, and The Killing Machine. I've also heard the Executioner and Golgo 13 are good. I recommend sticking to those ones.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d85f6ac9586a407e9227168f439d0548",
            "input": "Wonderful cast wasted on worthless script. Ten or so adults reunite at the summer camp they attended as juveniles. Could this ever happen in a million years? It's simply a fantasy, and a boring one at that. Do they become teenagers again? Do they reenact their pranks, games, good times? They may try but ultimately the answer is: No. Is there any intrigue? Any suspense? Horror? Comedy? None of the above. How anyone can be entertained by this drivel is beyond me. I wanted to like this movie; I tried to like this movie, but my brain refused.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ac5c6d293d041b5944eec7d6fa5736a",
            "input": "Quite possibly the worst movie I've ever seen; I was ready to walk out after the first ten minutes. The only people laughing in the theater were the tweeners. Don't get me wrong, I love silly, stupid movies just as much as the next gal, but the whole premise, writing and humor stunk. It seemed to me that they were going for a \"Napoleon Dynamite\" feel - strange and random scenes which would lead to a cult audience. Instead, it ended up being forced, awkward and weird.The only bright light was Isla Fisher and I just felt utterly awful that she (and Sissy Spacek) had signed up for this horrible thing.Thank gosh I didn't pay for it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d720b4f2eaa145a6b64a872d7da62f2f",
            "input": "Within the first few minutes of this Dutch thriller, we learn that Krabbe is a gay alcoholic writer who sleeps sans underwear, fantasizes about murdering his roommate, tries to steal a magazine from a news stand, and lusts after a studly young man he meets at the train station. And he's the hero of this nonsensical movie that is all dressed up (except for Krabbe in at least one scene too many) but has nowhere to go. The basic plot is very simple but is dragged out to nearly two hours before reaching a pointless conclusion. Verhoeven has a nice visual flair but resorts to scenes of wild hallucinations, overt symbolism, and gratuitous gore when he runs out of ideas.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5026b3fa221145368939fe7439f5bb79",
            "input": "I was gifted with this movie as it had such a great premise, the friendship of three women bespoiled by one falling in love with a younger man.Intriguing.NOT! I hasten to add. These women are all drawn in extreme caricature, not very supportive of one another and conspiring and contriving to bring each other down.Anna Chancellor and Imelda Staunton could do no wrong in my book prior to seeing this, but here they are handed a dismal script and told to balance the action between slapstick and screwball, which doesn't work too well when the women are all well known professionals in a very small town.And for intelligent women they spend a whole pile of time bemoaning the lack of men/sex/lust in their lives. I felt much more could have been made of it given a decent script and more tension, the lesbian sub-plot went nowhere and those smoking/drinking women (all 3 in their forties???) were very unrealistic - even in the baby scene - screw the baby, gimme a cigarette! Right.Like I said, a shame of a waste. 4 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88c347bb241244b49c2791c5cae481c7",
            "input": "In the future of 1985, a governmental committee headed by Howard Hesseman, is holding hearings on TV's first uncensored network. They sample it's programming, that play as a series of skits. I can name the good 'skit' movies on one hand, not using my thumb. \"Amazon Women on the Moon\", \"Kentucky Fried Movie\", \"The Meaning of Life\", and \"Mr. Mike's Mondo Video\". Notice how I didn't mention \"Tunnel Vision\"? The reason for that is that this 'movie' is death in cinematic form. None of the skits are even remotely funny, or even the least bit clever. It takes some sort of great ineptitude on the film makers' part to not even get one laugh out of me.My Grade: F Eye Candy: Dody Dorn goes full frontal",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b93780ad650146dc9f15c176b03c10be",
            "input": "\"The Last Wave\" is one of those movies that relies heavily on the mind. The title refers to the Aboriginal doomsday theory: there will be one last wave that wipes out everything.David Burton (Richard Chamberlain) is a Sydney lawyer hired to defend some Aborigines accused of murder. Around this time, there has been unusually heavy rainfall in Australia. While defending the Aborigines, David learns the last wave theory, and begins to wonder whether it's just mythology.The movie's last sequence is a metaphor for descending into the depths of one's mind. Peter Weir created a perplexing, but thought-provoking, movie. Aboriginal actor David Gulpilil (whom you may have seen in \"Walkabout\", \"Crocodile Dundee\" and \"Rabbit-Proof Fence\") provides an interesting supporting role as one of the defendants.If you get a chance, watch the \"making of\" feature on the DVD. Peter Weir explains some of the film's undertones, some of which relate to Richard Chamberlain's background.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-324e6645f50e41a595aae521acd38ce2",
            "input": "The number of times I've had tears in my eyes when watching a movie are few. And there is only one time when I have really cried and that was when I saw this movie. This movie has some kliches but I really don't care. I cry even as I write this and it was quite some time since I saw it. It is perfectly acted and all the production values are good, but what really matters is the simple and wonderful message. We all know it in our hearts, but it is not always easy to remember that the only thing that really matters in life is LOVE in all it's forms. It's only when we love that we're truly alive. I know how sentimental I sound and I promise I'm not usually like that. I'm quite a cynic. This movie has brought out stronger feelings of both sorrow and happiness in me than any other movies and it will probably always be the first movie I recommend others to see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9244c176170a4254bfb0118877b8b47e",
            "input": "I have heard about this novel a long time ago, many of my friends have recommend me to read it. I searched it in every place and finally found it. This is a book that every man should read, because it is genius and because of it's vision. I enjoyed every page.I knew about the movie and could not wait to see it. When I finally did I was very disappointed, many things that are in the book are not in the movie (I do not think that this is a spoiler) that just makes the movie not logical... Michael Radford might be a good director, but a bad writer. Especially as a book adopter. The movie is not dark at all, the writing is really bad, the only thing that is good, even great, is the acting. John Hurt is an amazing actor and the only face I myself could see as Winston Smith.What angers me the most are the people in IMDb that called this \"The Best Adaptation Ever\" without even reading the book! Or knowing anything about screen writing!You can only understand the brilliance of the story by reading the book, do not consider this as an alternative. As a fan of the book, I was very disappointed.The points I gave for this movie goes for the acting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dce2c7786f344aabb3913adf934676fc",
            "input": "I'm sorry but this is just plain pathetic. The little girl was a brat, their were no enjoyable characters and the plot sucked. Besides it wasn't even a gator as the film would like us to believe. If you check out any complete guide to reptiles you will find that it really is a Crocodile, not a gator. Obviously they didn't hire a real animal expert or they would know that the creature is a croc. It is a sad excuse for a movie. Especially the ending. I nearly fell asleep with this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ddf3233b3b434365a17c42c1c53f8f16",
            "input": "You sit there for a half an hour and watch a story, believing it all, then watch another half an hour of the same story utterly unraveling... and then put back together again. Brilliant.One of the most exciting feature films at the San Francisco International Film Festival is a documentary. I don't know if - other than Andrew Jarecki's \"Capturing the Friedmans\" - there has ever been anything like Anna Broinowski's \"Forbidden Lie$.\" It features, exposes, defends, reveals, and questions everything about Norma Khouri, author of \"Honor Lost,\" the acclaimed and lambasted 2001 bestseller about honor killings in Jordan.What is quite incredible and what makes the film so exceptional is that this \"exposure\" of Khouri is made with Khouri's full participation.For the initial portion of the film, Khouri presents her story about the supposed honor killing of a friend of hers in Amman, the story of the book. She sounds completely believable, convincing.Then her story is taken apart, exposed, by eminently believable and convincing people, such as women's rights activists in Jordan, investigative reporters there and in Australia, where Khouri lived for a while.Khouri comes back and denies the accusations, taking a successful lie-detector test in the process. There comes another segment of devastating exposures - not to be specified here because that would lessen the shock value... and then Khouri comes back and faces the accusations (not all, but the essential ones in the matter of the book).And the Houdini act continues, with round after round in this heavy-weight, seesaw prize fight, surprise after surprise - and there is no \"happy ending\" in the sense of resolution. Brilliant.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f0c38470e884576a37858780f0551dc",
            "input": "If you are a fan of Zorro, Indiana Jones, or action in general this is a must-see. Directed by Republic's ace team of William Witney and John English, and starring Reed Hadley as Don Diego/Zorro, this serial delivers! I won't bore you with the plot (who cares? less talking, more fighting); what really matters here is Hadley's superb interpretation of the character/s and the stunt work of Dale van Sickel and Yakima Canutt. ***STUNT SPOILERS FOLLOW ***You can see the influence this film had on Lucas and Spielberg -- Zorro gets caught in the original version of the Star Wars trash compactor in one chapter, trapped on a rope bridge a'la Temple of Doom in another, does a Raiders horse-to-coach transfer and even flees through a tunnel while the baddies knock over a huge water tank and flood the tunnel behind him, exactly as Mola Ram does to Indy in Temple of Doom. In addition to all this, the whip action is great as Zorro disarms villains, swings to safety, etc. with his trusty lash. Most of the sword work is fair to lame, except for chapter one, which features a terrific sword brawl in a cantina choreographed by sword/stunt legend Ralph Faulkner, who makes a rare screen appearance as the evil Rodriguez. This was the first serial I ever saw, on Matinée at the Bijou when I was a kid and I have been hooked on them ever since. Zorro's Fighting Legion delivers \"Z\" goods!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-693b9a09e55c49e8b90bad69764cffd9",
            "input": "Busy is so amazing! I just loved every word she has ever done- freaks and geeks, Dawson's creek, white chicks, the smokers. after the first time i saw home room i went and got it the next day. i am a big fan of her and she has a lot of fans here in Israel. if someone hasn't saw is excellent movie than don't waist more time and go see it now. i recommend to all of you to see all of her movies. i saw busy in the late night show with Conan and she was so beautiful and cute i just love her! everybody who saw the movie- in home room she looks very scary but in real life she is so beautiful! you have to see all her half nude pictures for stuff magazine (maxim) she looks so good there! ~DANIELLE~",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d537084f33043e2bb5a77437bbcc2a8",
            "input": "I was about 11 years old i found out i live 0.48 miles from the uncle house. the uncle house is on Westway Dr, deer park, TX. they have added homes since the movie was made. i don't know the house number but you can go look it up. i am now 21 and i enjoy watching this movie. the bar on Spencer is no longer their. Pasadena ISD wants to build a school their. I drove by the house last week the house still looks great. My dad and uncle would go to the street where the house is and watch the actors come in and out of the house trying to make the movie. where john cross over the railroad cracks they have made 225 higher. when i hear about john loesing his son i start thinking about when he made urban cowboy he was 26 or 25 at the time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03145a37d77441f8948cafdd4709103b",
            "input": "Maximally manipulative Anabel Sims (Betsy Drake) sets out to trap her ideal man, aided by her co-worker, Julie. Esteemed pediatrician Madison Brown (Cary Grant) goes from bemused to betrothed in the space of 90 minutes on film, but to the viewer it's all eternity. Can a movie receive less than one star? This one is a prime candidate.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68ea0ffc1a744e78b89fae82a3c442e3",
            "input": "An innocent man (Steve Guttenberg) has a one-night stand with his boss's wife (Isabelle Huppert). She spots a woman (Elizabeth McGovern) being attacked outside but she can't call the cops because it would blow her marriage to Gutenberg's boss (Paul Shenar). So Guttenberg, honest citizen that he is, when he discovers that another woman was attacked and killed nearby only half an hour later, comes forward and claims to have witnessed the first attack, merely intending to pass on the information given to him by Huppert. Well -- never bear false witness against thy neighbor, as they say.This simple attempt to help the police nab a murderer turns rapidly twisted. When he meets the first near-victim, McGovern, she immediately twigs to what happened, but agrees to keep quiet for the moment. But then Guttenberg finds himself in court, supposed to identify the heavy (Greenquist) and we discover through cross-examination that he is NEAR-SIGHTED and can't identify objects at a distance, let alone faces. (Not that it matters because, after all, he never saw the creep in the first place.) The plot gets practically labyrinthine. Guttenberg winds up the chief suspect when Huppert is murdered too.He barely escapes arrest and holes up with the now-sympathetic McGovern. Guttenberg and McGovern hatch a plan to trap the murderer. She will serve as bait. They'll follow the flagitious creep into one of his seedy haunt and McGovern will act like the doxy that the murderer is attracted to, just to get him to try to kill her. But everything will be okay, see, because not only will Guttenberg keep a close watch on her, and not only will he alert the police a few minutes after she enters this dive, but she will keep a can of mace handy -- just in case.I ask you, the alert viewer, does this scenario unfold as planned? Elizabeth McGovern has a quirkily interesting bone structure. She seems all mandible and tiny mouth at times, but she's vibrant. Steve Guttenberg has hair on his brawn and that's about it. Otherwise he's as helpless as the character he plays. If Isabelle Huppert can act, it isn't evident in this film. The killer is so formed and so groomed that he looks like he's wearing one of those masks of deformity in that Twilight Zone episode about greedy heirs.Didn't the director, Curtis Hanson, go on to make \"L.A. Confidential\"? That was a nicely done piece of work. Here, everything seems clumsy and contrived, down to the small bit parts. Just before the inevitable violent climax, a uniformed police officer is introduced to delay McGovern's rescue, and the scene is embarrassing to watch. Dick Olsen has a bit part as a late shopper. He's a neat guy and always reliable. Paul Shenar as the cuckolded hubby has a striking face that seems made for the stage and he does a fine job too.That louche joint where McGovern attracts the attention of the murderer, where she plays pool with a couple of hairy apes, was shot at a bar in Carolina Beach, in North Carolina, not far from where I lived. The way the interior is set up, it's clear that this is supposed to be a dangerous and dirty dive. Actually it appears rather more elegant on screen than it did in reality.Overall, this is Hitchcock territory and it brings tears to the eyes to imagine what he would have done with this story.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43587128d0d34be9bbd104a49a322cdb",
            "input": "Saw it first in 1975 on some German TV channel and was hooked immediately, afterwards I saw this movie around 12 times in cinemas and nowadays I have a videotape which I watch at least once a year - this movie is excellent in every aspect (direction, acting, cut, musical score...). The sets are outstanding and very impressive, the idea of a devastating world war starting in the late thirties seems like prophecy for a 1936 film, the dictator of \"Everytown\" is pure Mussolini and Raymond Massey is just charming, believable and ideally cast as \"the hero\". The positive tone towards technology and progress is quite refreshing by todays usually pessimistic standards - especially the finishing scene which always brings a tear or two to my eyes, even after watching the film so many times.This movie is good on TV but it was made for the big screen, so if you have an opportunity to see it in some cinema. please do, it's overwhelming.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-79b4efb74f024a5fba4cead87b22c957",
            "input": "A woman left alone after the death of her husband finds herself attracted to her son's friend and handy man. In a slightly twisted story, the woman begins sleeping with the handy man in an effort to revive herself. The twisted part? The handy man is also her daughter's on and off love interest.As if this wasn't strange enough, the mother manages to fall for this man and when her daughter finds out, she blames not only her dysfunctional relationship but also her messed up life on her poor mother.Though you may think badly of this woman, the truth is movie manages to portray her in a positive light. Beautifully played by Anne Reid, this character has dimension and portrays great emotion.A truly brilliant performance and an enjoyable film.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef3e9e8d9db54866a4a9fb7bffc65078",
            "input": "If you only read a synopsis of the plot, this movie would sound like quite a typical one of the 1930's. The story would seem quite contrived, the subject matter maudlin. The strength and beauty of this film is in the direct, earthy performances of the cast.I have seldom seen Jean Harlow display such a range of feeling, rich and subtle nuances float over her face. If you watch their faces during the wedding ceremony in the chapel, there is such an obvious depth of feeling between the principal characters. The raw emotions are so sincerely portrayed, so true. The final sequence is almost unbearably poignant: when Clark Gable looks down with such joy and surprise at his son, lifts him up and proudly says, \"My kid!\", I couldn't help remember that Mr. Gable's own son was born to him posthumously. This is one of the finest examples of Depression era cinema.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de2de80db3a848669f9aadd03ea08652",
            "input": "I've found the movie offensive for Americans which lost somebody in the towers, for American people in general. Pretending to be an homage to horrible facts happened last years, each director takes the opportunity to polemize with old facts (which have none to do with a terrorist attack), or criticize American's political behaviour, or compare different political situation as they have in own country having this nothing to do or to share with the atrocity of September 11. Shame on them.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d60ca5529ae241e4a4f726ead64fcaa5",
            "input": "The best Cheech & Chong movie so far!! Of all the Cheech and Chong this is most certain the best so far. I think I've seen them all about twelve times at least, and I love them all. But this is most definitely the best. Compared with the others this one covers a lot of themes and gives you a lot of good laughs. Part of the texts are still part of our language today, after 25 years. I hope that one day they can make another one, because they still are great comedians. I heard they are writing a new script so who knows... I guess these guys are the only ones who succeeded in making decent movies in this genre. I wonder if John Ashcroft ever watched one of them...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-650869014c754cbb9a7e0e3db2ff54f4",
            "input": "I saw this movie at a college film festival back in the 70's - I have been waiting FOREVER for this movie to come out on video (finally it's out). It was made in Brazil, so I assumed that was why it hadn't made it to video yet. I have been checking video stores for the past 15 years waiting for this outstanding movie to come out! It is one of my all-time favorites - but be warned, it is weird, like Werner Herzog weird - its weirdness stems from its super-realism.The movie is based on a true incident back a few centuries ago, in pre-colonial times, when Europeans were first encountering the tribes in the Amazon. A white man is mistaken by a savage tribe of cannibals as their enemy, so they intend to kill him. Before they dispatch him, though, they make him part of their tribe (their custom). The entire movie is like watching a National Geographic documentary as he becomes an accepted member of their tribe. That's it. Cosmic plotline? No. Intense insight into the variety of human life? Definitely.Oh yeah... be warned... this film has definite nudity - this is not some Hollywood schlock flick about noble savages... this film tells it like it was (re-read above: National Geographic, super-realism)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-91d79a98d80a4e68b5c3481fd5761756",
            "input": "Steve Carell once again stars in a light romantic movie about choices, family and pressure. By judging on the plot and cover art of the movie I was expecting a flat-out comedy, lots of laughs and unrealistic elements, but I guess I was wrong. Sure the movie had some comedy, but it felt much more of a light Drama to me and Steve Carell once again gave a great performance. The movie itself really tackles true observations and that was a strong element I found. But, the ending felt a little bit rushed and predictable. Through-out, the cinematography was great, the acting was great and the message it delivered was obvious but yet still very important. Though, it came down to old, flat and predictable ending. I'd reckon if different choices were made at the end of the movie (perhaps for the bad, even) this movie would get better publicity. Still a fun movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f40095351ba347bf962e4e9251e49b35",
            "input": "Kate Beckinsale is excellent as the manipulative and yet irresistibly charming Emma in this TV-adaptation of Jane Austen´s novel. When I read that novel I was sometimes quite doubtful whether the protagonist really deserved to be considered the heroine of the story: for honestly, she is so terribly self-righteous and scheming that one is tempted to dislike her seriously. Kate Beckinsale´s interpretation, however, saves Emma from herself so to speak: she is portrayed with all the innocence and generosity of her character in full view, and one can´t help but give in and like (not to say love) her in spite of her less amiable qualities. Kate Beckinsale is the main, but not the only, reason why this TV-series is so delightful; Raymond Coulthard is perfect as Mr. Frank Churchill, expressing this character´s personal magnetism to the full (which is all the more conspicuous because of this role being not very well handled by Ewan McGregor in the 1996-screen adaptation of Emma), and Mark Strong, Samantha Morton, Bernard Hepton, and Olivia Williams are all as they should be in their respective roles. This production is, in short, a great achievement and one to view many times with increasing pleasure.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c639247eb99412aaf49b6ede483e741",
            "input": "WOW! This film is the best living testament, I think, of what happened on 9-11-01 in NYC, compared to anything shown by the major media outlets.Those outlets can only show you what happened on the outside. This film shows you what happened on the INSIDE. It begins with a focus on a rookie New York fireman, waiting for weeks for the first big fire that he will be called to fight. The subject matter turns abruptly with the ONLY EXISTING FOOTAGE OF THE FIRST PLANE TO HIT THE TOWERS. You are then given a front-row seat as firefighters rush to the scene, into the lobby of Tower One. In the minutes that precede the crash of the second plane, and Tower Two's subsequent fall, you see firemen reacting to the unsettling sound of people landing above the lobby. It is a sight you will not soon forget.Heart-rending, tear-jerking, and very compelling from the first minute to the last, \"9/11\" deserves to go down in history as one of the best documentary films ever made.We must never forget.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38d8db6cc81145a4a00084752fabf1d4",
            "input": "As it is generally known,anthology films don't fare very well with American audiences (I guess they prefer one standard plot line). New York,I Love You, is the second phase of a series of anthology films dealing with cities & the people who live & love in them. The first was 'Paris,J'Taime', which I really enjoyed. The film was made up of several segments,each written and/or directed by a different director (most of which were French,but there is a very funny segment directed by Joel & Ethan Coen). Like 'Paris', this one is also an anthology, directed by several different directors (Fatih Akin,Mira Nair,Natalie Portman,Shakher Kapur,etc.),and also like 'Paris'deals with New Yorkers,and why they love the city they live in. It features a top notch cast,featuring the likes of Natalie Portman,Shia LaBeouf,Christina Ricci,Orlando Bloom,Ethan Hawki,and also features such seasoned veterans as James Caan,Cloris Leachman,Eli Wallach and Julie Christie. Some of the stories really fly,and others don't (although I suppose it will depend on individual tastes---I won't ruin it for anybody else by revealing which ones worked for me & which ones didn't). Word is that the next entry in the series will be Shanghai, China (is Rome,Italy,Berlin,Germany or Athens,Greece out of the question?). Spoken mainly in English,but does have bits of Yiddish & Russian with English subtitles. Rated 'R'by the MPAA for strong language & sexual content",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a96c9927ce0470ab2651b2809e94db5",
            "input": "\"Opening Night\" released in 1977, tries to be an ambitious production. It succeeds only in the truly stunning performance of Gena Rowlands. Her character of theatre actress Myrtle is not necessarily someone we would love in real life. She is self-absorbed, often obnoxious, and makes life miserable for those around her - in other words, not unlike some actresses! Myrtle is also a woman on the edge of collapse - we are not quite sure if the demons she is fighting are real or imagined, although we are let in on the secret early. Rowlands is obviously well directed with love by her gifted husband, actor/director John Cassavettes, who has a role in the film as well. This film is not without flaws - it is overly long, and the last part of the film where Myrtle goes on stage while very drunk seems almost cruel. The \"improvising\" in some of the dialogue - at least while on stage - goes on way too long. Some of the supporting characters give good performances, especially from Ben Gazarra, playing Myrtle's sleazy producer. Joan Blondell's character is never fully developed, and I never could figure out why she was in the film, except to placate Myrtle. See this film for Rowlands alone - she is fascinating throughout - and it is tough to take your eyes off her, although you will want to at times.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-225a517ad18a485ca88665b7f66927d5",
            "input": "This is one of quite a few cartoons with Bugs Bunny and Marvin the Martian - and a space dog called K-9 is included as well. This Looney Tunes episode is very funny, has reasonably good cartoon animation (Marvin's animation is very well done) and the plot is well done. The end is rather weird, so be prepared for it, it is slightly boring. In this episode, Marvin the Martian has been sent to earth to capture an earth creature and bring it back to Mars. With his trusty dog K-9, Marvin sets out and soon finds the tracks of no other rabbit but Bugs Bunny! He greets them with treats, thinking they are trick or treaters in their costumes. Little does he realise they are preparing themselves to take this rabbit to Mars...I recommend this episode to anyone who likes Bugs Bunny, Marvin the Martian and Looney Tunes in general. As far as the beginning and the middle of the episode are concerned, you are likely to like this. Enjoy \"Hasty Hare\"! :-)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4463dfb0378e4f26a66aa8f397990dae",
            "input": "Anna lives with her family in a new housing estate just outside the city. She has been with her husband Sebastiaan for years and they don't talk so much anymore. While on a working visit abroad, a female colleague commits suicide. Anna is deeply impressed by her death, even though she hardly knew her. Nobody seems to know why she took her own life. For the first time Anna realizes that one can be an unknown among your most dearest. Anna doesn't mention the incident back home and starts observing her husband and child. Guernsey is the story of a woman who suddenly starts looking at her own life. And she wonders how she got so drifted apart from the people closest to her.(This is my translation of the DVD cover text synopsis. I hope you find it useful, as this movie doesn't have an IMDb Plot Summary yet at this date.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ef4dd2208484e79acd687e77775f0fc",
            "input": "Vonnegut's words are best experienced on paper. The tales he weaves are gossemar, silken strands of words and expressions that are not easily translated into a world of Marilyn Manson or Jerry Bruckheimer explosions. His words have been treated well once before, in the remarkable Slaughterhouse-5.Mother night is probably one of the three novels Vonnegut has written I could take to a desert island, along with Slaughterhouse-5 and Bluebeard.The film version deserves a 10, but the books are so permanently part of my interior landscape that I just can't do it...some of the scenes left out of the film are part of my memory...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecea63a10d1041fa9f5e860697b854ce",
            "input": "A true story about a true revolution, 25 of April ; a revolution against a repressive regime of 41 years, that was imposing a colonial war on it's military's, for maintaining an empire (Angola, Mozambique, Guine-Bissau, Cabo Verde, S. Tomé e Principe; the first and the last of the great colonial empire's of Europe) of 600 years, since it's beginning in the conquest of Ceuta in 1415; a revolution by the army for the people, and for a democratic Portugal; the most's surprising fact in this revolution is that it were no people killed in it (except those that died in the hand's of PIDE, the political police of the State, during a brutal gunfire against an unarmed crowd protesting in front of it's headquarters in the day of the revolution, in 25 of April 1974, has it show's on the film).And has all revolutions it has it's heroes, one them of was Captain Salgueiro Maia, a returned soldier from the war, whose convictions along with the rest of the army, was that they were fighting (since 1961) a hopeless war, and that sometimes a soldier has to disobey it's country.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1286439bd3db47ae9a057dda5cbe5422",
            "input": "If you think \"Weird Al\" Yankovic is hilarious, you won't be disappointed by THE COMPLEAT AL. Not only does this rare mockumentary feature many of Yankovic's more memorable videos (\"Like A Surgeon\" and \"I Love Rocky Road\" among them), but they are inter-spliced with funny vignettes supposedly highlighting the parodist's rise to fame. Yankovic is not for all tastes, but his humor is harmless and imaginative enough that even non-fans will at least be lightly amused. Die-hard fans will love it not only for its content, but also for its relatively early look into Yankovic's now nearly three decade career. Suitable for all ages, kiddies will no doubt love the funny visuals.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2882c4c7918c4bf599cef5d814c5fe43",
            "input": "This cowardly and offensive film had me intrigued to begin with. The characters are the familiar dispossessed young males frequently to be seen hanging around bored in a sea side town. Robert is an outsider but he has his music which could have been his soul. Instead Clay makes Robert into a freak who embarks on a journey into cannabis and ecstasy and getting in with the wrong crowd. Clay seems to believe in \"reefer madness\" and Robert ends the film as a homicidal rapist. One wonders how much experience of real life this young director has. No one can save poor Robert. Clay leaves us with the message that young British men are out of control. A very unsubtle link is made to the Iraqi insurgents; during the needlessly graphic rape we are subjected to explosions and images of war. The film shows male peer group extremism pushed to it's limits. The young bombers in London draw a parallel with Clay's hateful depiction of modern male. Clay implies that men simply cannot help themselves from inflicting terrible acts of violence. It is a wonder the British film industry allows money to be invested in films which advocate such divisive propaganda, when in London we are still reeling from the recent attacks. This is Clay's first film, I would be delighted if it is his last.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4170d393e9da4b94b6fcaec5392e2cde",
            "input": "After having watched Koyaanisqatsi two or three dozen times and loving every second of it, I finally had a chance to see it's sequel Life In Transformation. I was truly dissappointed as it did not nearly stand up to the high standards of the first. 90 minutes of people with baskets on their head is not my idea of a good movie. The Philip Glass score for this one had neither the beauty nor the correlating strength of the first. Compared with Koyaanisqatsi this movie seemed slow and pointless. A watered down version of Baraka, which is the same idea but done better. I truly hope the third movie in this series will not follow the example of this waste.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64299bf0071d4cc0ad3442637b99b086",
            "input": "When anyone comes into a film of this type of film it's not without saying that an overdose of that great over-the-counter brain-medicine, Suspension of Disbelief, comes in mighty handy.Jeanette MacDonald plays two roles: Anna/Brigitta, the woman who Nelson Eddy has ignored since the beginning of time, but who also is -- an angel sent to Earth.My reaction when I saw this was a mute gasp of \"Hunh?\" Where have I seen this before? It turns out, I have seen it before, but in a movie made much later than this one. DATE WITH AN ANGEL, a forgettable pile of dreck made in 1987, cashed in on the ethereal beauty of one Emmanuelle Beart who had no speaking lines, also wore a blond wig, and made life hell for soap-actor Michael Knight. Much worse in every conceivable angle with ultra-low 80s values but more than likely an updated version of this 1942 turkey.Anyway, not to elaborate, this is not a memorable film and stands as a doorstop of information because it was the last time MacDonald and Eddy, neither very good actors but terrific singers, would be together playing up the \"innocence\" and \"clean-cut\" romance that they were known for. After that you may need a cold shower, not because there are any steamy scenes here, but to get rid of the memory.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7722edbd972d45f5ba20ba9efb4f7fe1",
            "input": "(Question) What do you call 100 film critics buried up to their necks in sand? (Answer) A good start. Well, I don't know Peter Mattei from Adam but if he is the budding auteur his filmography suggests, \"Love in the Time of Money\" is a \"good start\". A classy shoot with whimsical music box style music, this flick looks at a chain of tenuous relationships as it moves from person A to person B to person C...etc...and back again ending with persons A & B in carousel fashion. The film gently probes the unhappy circumstances of nine people with finely rendered shadings beginning and ending with a street whore and her client. The downside of this film is the lack of a story which may have something to do with the many critical slams it received. I watched the behemoth \"Angels in America\" last night and was bored at the end while this little concatenation of character studies kept me spell bound. Use caution. I may be the only person who really liked this flick. (B)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e2402dbf45444c4afaa55d55000e473",
            "input": "Working-class romantic drama from director Martin Ritt is as unbelievable as they come, yet there are moments of pleasure due mostly to the charisma of stars Jane Fonda and Robert De Niro (both terrific). She's a widow who can't move on, he's illiterate and a closet-inventor--you can probably guess the rest. Adaptation of Pat Barker's novel \"Union Street\" (a better title!) is so laid-back it verges on bland, and the film's editing is a mess, but it's still pleasant; a rosy-hued blue-collar fantasy. There are no overtures to serious issues (even the illiteracy angle is just a plot-tool for the ensuing love story) and no real fireworks, though the characters are intentionally a bit colorless and the leads are toned down to an interesting degree. The finale is pure fluff--and cynics will find it difficult to swallow--though these two characters deserve a happy ending and the picture wouldn't really be satisfying any other way. *** from ****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-96a990050acd42dfa10e0cadd287a2c1",
            "input": "I am partly a fan of Miyazaki's work. I say \"partly\" because most of his films fall into two categories: brilliant, and boring. Sadly this film falls into the later category.This film suffers from the same fundamental problems as Miyazaki's recent film \"Howl's Moving Castle\". An intriguing premise is set up, but then immediately reduced to little more than a backdrop for some unfathomable events that only serve to confuse the plot rather than explain it.The first third of the film reveals the post-apocalyptic world the story is set in, and actually looks like an very interesting story is about to unfold. From then on things go down hill. The middle part of the film is mostly made up of thinly-veiled eco-propaganda, and the ending is heavily marred by the reliance on the kind of impenetrable spiritualism which ruins a large number of Japanese animated films.Overall the film feels as though someone ripped out every other page from the script before passing it on the the animators. What is left is something which is visually stunning (although sadly the version I saw was an Nth-generation copy, with poor colour - which gives rise to the common myth that Nausicaa shows her bare bottom when flying), but which makes little sense and ultimately left me confused.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-635beabd3b95473a99a0f04f94701b45",
            "input": "OK, a slasher movie. a very, very stupid slasher movie.We got your stereotypical teenagers in a house thing going. We got a FBI agent that's seen Dirty Harry one time too many. \"So what's the secret....punks?\" We got about 4 different little camera shots and scene that make no sense at all. \"Hey man, i'm fixing the sprinklers\" ((that guy was my favorite part of the movie)) Suddenly there's a preacher tied up on a couch watching home movies, he gets killed.they follow the killer into the middle of nowhere, with no cops. suddenly she's in a church, wearing a wedding dress. i swear this is the stupidest slasher movie i've ever seen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a30758feb4c34b7d9a93626a90384448",
            "input": "The most hillarious and funny Brooks movie I ever seen. I can watch and re-watch the tape 100 times. I laugh my a** off and I cry on some moments. It is really good and funny movie, and if you like Brooks - this is a must! In short - Brooks (billionare) gets to the streets as homeless for 30 days in order to win the entire poor district from his competitor. The reality bites, but in the end - it is about warm relations between humans... Hightly recommend!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d05dc2a9d0847c7a01f481f66e312e4",
            "input": "This documentary (or I should say mockumentary) is the perfect example of how ridiculous can the people be, when they have full enthusiasm on something like that. Honestly, I hate Cryptozoology. It is unscience, it just destroy it. However, something positive in this was the visual effects (dragons were beautiful), but some of the information in this mockumentary was totally fake, and that is really disappointing because it was coming from scientists, so that is the reason why it deserves a 1 of 10 and not a 0. An example of false information would be the hydrogen idea: It is true that, according to Chemystry, the hydrogen is produced in the stomach but it is impossible to be produced in that proportions, so in that case, you need a good explanation of what really happens in a dragon stomach. There are a lot of substances whit hydrogen in the nature but not the necessary to aloud an animal like that to fly, and the hydrogen does not appear from nothing, so it is impossible. Anyway, there is actually something worse, the idea of the platinum: This element is more difficult to find than gold, and I cannot explain myself how dragons survive depending of that. It is ridiculous, they present dragons like creatures with low chances of conquering the planet Earth, but off course at least that explain why they got extincted. Probably cryptologist's call themselves scientists, but they are not. People like them say lies like in this mockumentary, and what is worst, some people buy them. But I do not think that a person who cares about Science would believe in dragons after watching this. Those fake scientists waste their time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e1c0d2d28d24428a93a9e556c60d1dc2",
            "input": "it is of course very nice to see improvements on Turkish movie industry, however, i would have expected something more creative from Togan Gokbakar. starting from the script, which i believe it was not a wise written one as some may think. especially the cheesiness of the dialogs, which were putting the audience in a position that, as if they were not smart enough to understand the situations, which, most of the times makes the movie unbearable. it also has an obvious ending; you can easily guess the murderer from the beginning. the weakest part of the scenario is that the impossibility of seriously mentally ill patients to act like normal people, like professionals right away!!!did they ever search for the possibility of patients who are on heavy medicals, to act like professionals and use all the medical terms that even normal people cannot use?????!!!!!!also in the scene where staff was searching for the most dangerous patient, with out any weapon to protect themselves was another weird point of the film. and that scene was so suitable for \"Dikkat Sahan Cikabilir\" title!! those are not the only weak parts of the movie. there were also a lot of preciosities in the film. the depiction of the most dangerous patient was an exact copy from Hannibal, also appearance of Togan in the very end is obviously the worst mistake that he could have done in his first movie! the fuss about the greatness of the movie and the interviews that actor's gave just made people to be curious and force them to see it. Gen is a total disappointment. i would have wonder, if Sahan was not this famous, would Togan be able to shoot this movie, with this much of budget amount?? i hope Togan would realize that it is not fashionable to play in a role as a director as he said in an interview. it was Hitchcock who did it wisely and Night Shyamalan continued it successfully! he should be aware of the fact that he is not Hitchcock nor Shyamalan yet!!!!hoping him to be more careful and creative next time in this big industry!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74538c9dfe8747dba1408689cc3da49d",
            "input": "She may have an Oscar and a Golden Globe, but this film shows why she also is a perennial Razzie nominee. To do a film that is so bad must be an indication that she needs money. She could do ads on why you shouldn't talk on a cell phone while driving, especially at night on the way to a crowded mall.Susan Montford should stick to producing (Shoot 'Em Up ) as she is not very good as a writer/director.She is accosted by four thugs in the mall parking lot, and the first thing they do is tell her they have a gun. What does she do? She starts pushing and cursing them like she knows martial arts or something. She manages to get away, but gets lost in the forest after crashing. Why didn't she run to someones house? We get four thugs with guns chasing a lady with a toolbox. Of course, their guns are no match for her wrench. Ha! Of course, she also has a tire iron and a screwdriver. Those poor thugs.Now, she's home for Christmas - and she brought a gun!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-838bbd2c5f6445e3a7e255841f8d0b3b",
            "input": "Yes, talk about bad sequels. Rick Moranis stars in this awful third sequel to the once-funny-and-entertaining \"Honey I Shrunk the Kids\". The concept basically plays the same way as the first film, but with the adults instead of the kids being shrunk and the inner house instead of the garden as the universe to explore. If you think this sounds interesting, think again. The movie is boring at best, right down an embarrassment at worst.First of all, the continuity of the series has been completely flushed down the toilet. The only remaining actor of the first movie is apparently Rick Moranis. The actress playing his wife has changed, the actors playing the kids have changed, the ones playing the neighbors have changed... you name it. They try to make us believe this is the same family, but the results are puzzling to say the least.Second, the story is a rehash of the first one, with not one bit of originality. All the few jokes (and there's barely any) and the dangerous situations presented in the movie are just copied straight from \"Honey I Shrunk the Kids\".Third problem, the special effects. I'm sure this has been done on a smaller budget, but they are pathetic, way way worse than the ones appearing in the rest of the series. You're supposed to admire in awe these tiny figures exploring the huge domestic area, but you'll probably end up cringing most of the time.Fourth problem, to locate the action inside the house is just boring. Only few things happen, and when they happen, they are not thrilling at all. The first movie was amusing because the kids were dealing with nature, the grass, and the bugs that live in it. In this one, the adults (which come up as rather boring, compared to the kids) deal with dust, a cockroach and a cockroach trap. Disgusting.I don't know why the idea of releasing such a trite sequel to the already moribund series appealed Disney's executives, except maybe because they needed to cash in without spending five minutes thinking about something new. I'm warning you: leave this tasteless cash-in garbage where it should stay: getting dust on the shop's shelves.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7af0d52469344f0fb3dfc71ac45e7833",
            "input": "So one person says, \"This movie is a beautiful, delicate exploration of West German life after World War II.\" And the other says, \"Former Nazis living in bombed out buildings, and the movie is 'beautiful, delicate'?\" And the first sits there nodding, takes another sip of coffee. \"I can't explain. Just see it.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-560cc1dcaff14f55916517529069e688",
            "input": "Bad acting, bad lighting, bad plot!! This had the quality of a porno movie. I have seen more interesting home video of a boring wedding than this movie...it sucked big time!! Don't waste your time or money on this crap! It's amazing that they allow this kind of smut to even be released on video, it should be a crime!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f364810f10d94ece8b8bcdf07d812d34",
            "input": "Right away, this film was ridiculous. Not that it didn't have redeeming aspects… For example, the best thing about this film was the beautiful background scenery. Anyone not living on the East Coast should know the South doesn't have beautiful mountains like those found in the West. I knew it was Utah right off the bat, but perhaps Dalton couldn't suppress his English accent, so they had to excuse it by saying this was a southern town. Subverting his accent into a Southern one was easier. Sure the film has plot twists, but its phony sense of place was something I couldn't get past. It's not like Utah doesn't have meth labs... so why the writers thought it necessary to pretend it was in the South is beyond me. One other thing in action pictures always puzzles me. Why do they always make the \"cocking\" sound effect when the character pulls out an automatic handgun? It seemed every other sound effect in this movie was a \"chuk-chich\" signifying a 9mm was loaded and ready to fire. Of course, the weapons already had rounds chambered so this was unnecessary. Lastly, the pyrotechnics were WAY over the top. But hey, this film was targeted to a certain 'market segment' I suppose... It's too bad. Each of the actors can act, but this film was lame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebb9317da9654666bba0fcdc60ace00e",
            "input": "This was a fairly creepy movie; I found the music to be effective for this. The photographs Mario took of the village were also unnerving. However, I had three problems with this film. One is that the lighting was very dark so some of the time it was hard to tell what was going on, but this may have just been my copy. The second is that the very beginning is not explained very well and I'm still not sure what was going on there. The third problem is that I didn't understand the ending, but apparently some people do. Of course there are also the usual problems of people doing stupid things, and the male lead is very 70s. All in all, watchable but not even close to being a favorite.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f071ee0771c4a1380fbbc3c607db7d6",
            "input": "I grew up watching this series. I was about seven/eight years old when it was on. I still remember the 1st episode which was called \"The New House.\" It scared the h*ll out of me! I can almost still hear that statue, laughing madly. And the ending, oh my God! The hooror spirit comes in the room for the child: Yikes! This was classic TV and it was a one of a kind series. I have found a DVD collection for sale on the internet: 2 actually. My question to any readers: Has anyone purchased this set? Its a bootleg. Both sellers claim to have very good copy. I have a sketchy and poor DVD of \"The New House\" episode, and a couple of other episodes that are a bit better,however, if anyone knows if these are much clearer it would be worth it to me to buy and share with my kids. A great series, clever, scary and daringly supernatural. Thanks in advance to any fans who have the low down on any of this- In fact, I'd love to discuss it. Chris Walker",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21a8f601c4cd4d1ca9f698646ce616eb",
            "input": "It's a good movie if you plan to watch lots of landscapes and animals, like an animal documentary. And making Pierce Brosnan an indian make you wonder 'Does all those people don't recognize if someone isn't indian at plain sight?'",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b56774f67723401a82094289199c492d",
            "input": "Her Deadly Rival (1995): Starring Harry Hamlin, Annie Potts, Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, Roma Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. Anderson, William Blair, Sean Bridges, Robin Dallenbach, Wilbur Fitzgerald, Dale Frye, Stan Kelly, Deborah Hobart, David Lenthall, Lorri Lindberg, Chuck Kinlaw, Amy Parrish, Melissa Suzanne McBride, Ralph Wilcox, Al Wiggins, Jeff Sumerel, Daria Sanford....Director James Hayman, Screenplay Dan Vining.Actor Harry Hamlin (of LA Law fame, Clash of The Titans and other films) seems perfectly cast in this \"Lifetime\" type film directed by James Hayman and released in 1995. He and his wife Lisa Rinna would later work on a film about sex addiction. \"Her Deadly Rival\" is, at first glance, similar to the better known Hollywood box-office hit \"Fatal Attraction\". In \"Rival\", happily married couple Jim and Kris Lanford move into a new home in the typically beautiful suburbs. They have the seemingly perfect marriage- they are deeply in love, despite a routine lifestyle. But then a mysterious admirer sets her eyes on Jim. Her identity is never revealed, despite an attempt by Jim and even investigators to discover who she is. She constantly harasses Jim through phone calls and letters. His marriage nearly flounders as his wife begins to think he's having an affair and trying to cover it up. While Harry Hamlin, Annie Potts and the rest of the cast - Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, Roma Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. Anderson, William Blair- each seem to be straight out of a soap opera. But this is a very suspense-filled drama and has its good moments. There is a twist at the end. Spoiler Alert. All I have to say is \"her deadly rival\" was only herself. Based on a supposedly actual case, Jim's wife Kris suffered from multiple personality disorder and that was what ruined her marriage. Even if the story is not terribly impressive, even if the acting is only a step above soap opera acting, this film has its moments. Especially moving are the intimate scenes between Jim and his wife and the final scene in which, when Jim learns the truth, he can't believe what he has just heard. The movie is probably a little too long and boring in some parts but it's the kind of TV movie that usually does well, especially on Lifetime, which continues to produce films of this kind, of the \"domestic thriller\" type, or seduction stories. Trashy but everyone likes trash.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee2ba5a5f4f24241b00cb9dcbf48d234",
            "input": "Ok, I first saw this movie like at 9:00 on Cinemax a few weeks ago and thought it would be award winning, boy was I 180d on that. This movie bit the big one. I mean, the mother of the monsters shows her true form only at the end of the movie. I'm going \" That's it? Why doesn't she show it briefly a little bit more earlier in the movie.\" The plot being the mother and son feast on the blood of young women. Wouldn't it be better if they just went on, you know, a killing spree killing like a couple of young women each, then having the sheriff or a cop find out about and get into the old find a way to kill the monsters,save the young woman/women, and have 1 or 2 more people killed in the process? I think it would be a hell of a lot better that way. It also sucks because the son is the main character and he gets killed first. Why not get rid of the mother first? Plus, how does she have that strength at the end of the movie when she starts killing people? She said it herself she was too weak. What the heck was wrong with Stephen this time? I can never, ever dis the acting on any movie by any actor, after all, they try their best. If it weren't for good acting, I'd have given this movie a 1/10. 3/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-913a4f17eb8d466199c02f19fefabea6",
            "input": "As a young black/latina woman I am always searching for movies that represent the experiences and lives of people like me. Of course when I saw this movie at the video store I thought I would enjoy it; unfortunately, I didn't. Although the topics presented in the film are interesting and relevant, the story was simply not properly developed. The movie just kept dragging on and on and many of the characters that appear on screen just come and go without much to contribute to the overall film. Had the director done a better job interconnecting the scenes, perhaps I would have enjoyed it a bit more. Honestly, I would recommend a film like \"Raising Victor\" over this one any day. I just was not too impressed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41a2f802669344048e0f6fb87063c555",
            "input": "Last year's remake of 'The Hills Have Eyes' was one of the better attempts to update the vaguely exploitational horror flicks of the 1970s for a new audience. Alexandre Aja allowed for an admirable degree of character development and when the violence started it was mean and savage and all carried out in a landscape of impeccable photography and production design. I was one of the few people who actually thought that it was better than the original and looked forward to a second visit to the particularly dark and cruel world of the savage desert mutants.'The Hills have Eyes 2', released just a year after the original, seems a rushed and ill-conceived attempt to cash in on the franchise with little thought to quality. Jonathan Craven's screenplay could have been written in a weekend, and given the speed with which this movie made it into cinemas, probably was. It falls back on every hackneyed genre cliché in the book while offering absolutely nothing new to the desert mutant mythology. I always let out a groan of disappointment when a sequel replaces civilian characters with the military. Soldiers are always so lazily written and never fail to thoroughly bore with crude caricatures of strutting macho bullshit. In my mind, 'Aliens' was the only movie to successfully make such a transition, due to James Cameron's talent, not simply for directing the best action sequences around, but never forgetting that an audience has to care about the people being butchered. He was also ably assisted by some genuinely talented actors. With 'The Hills have Eyes 2', it's clear that video director Martin Weisz is no James Cameron, and the cast of television bit-parters haven't the talent or even the inclination to turn their cardboard cutout characters into anything approaching living, breathing human beings.Needless to say, every character is a broad and generic cliché. They act in dumb and illogical ways, making dumb and illogical decisions that lead them to predictably dumb and illogical deaths. The latter half of the movie becomes just another tedious chased-through-dark-corridors scenario. 'The Descent' (on which Sam McCurdy, coincidentally, also worked as cinematography) proved that even this most derivative of sequences can still be carried out with genuine originality and suspense, but we see no such innovation here.'The Hills Have Eyes 2' is just a very lazy movie, devoid of any suspense, tension, or surprise, with not a single individual involved remotely interested in producing anything of quality. It's a tame and tired excuse for a sequel and deserves to spend the rest of its life in a Blockbuster's bargain bin.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0eeb2805ed1246e8829efd2839728d58",
            "input": "The film as entertainment is very good and Jimmy Stewart is excellent as Chip Hardesty, with well done co-starring turns by Vera Miles and Murray Hamilton. But the film, directed by legendary director Mervyn Leroy, was constantly vetted and script approval as well as every aspect of the film, down to clothing, was closely watched and controlled by J. Edgar Hoover. Not that J. Edgar Hoover didn't have something to be proud of. His management of the bureau from 1924 to his death crated on of the finest investigative services in the world. But by 1959 Hoover was already beginning to worry about being forced out and had already started to collect dossiers on powerful people to make sure and protect his little kingdom. And he was determined to make sure that no motion picture showed even a single wart about the bureau. The films shows only continued successes and glosses over the failures which occurred, and the bureau's part in the witch hunts of the early 1950's. Enjoy the story, but with tongue firmly in cheek.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8c99fb54ae14d2c84510b02892a1a08",
            "input": "One of the best love stories I have ever seen. It is a bit like watching a train wreck in slow motion, but lovely nonetheless... Big Edie and Little Edie seem a bit like family members after watching this movie repeatedly, and are infinitely quotable: \"It's a goddamned beautiful day, now will you just shut up?\" The opening explanation of Little Edie's costume only promises that the movie will live on forever, and so will Big Edie \"The World Famous Singer\" and Little Edie \" The World Famous Dancer.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ce90cce176e49d68baa3a19a9634b7b",
            "input": "speaking solely as a movie, i didn't really liked it. not because there were no FX or because we had a single cabin as the scenario for the whole film, actually that was what kept me watching it.i didn't like it because the acting was shady, his \"friends\" are all happy and then they're mad, but you have no idea why; then they take distinct roles, one is the believer, other is the antagonist, but they never really make the point! also, the lighting was terrible and i'm just mentioning technical issues.in a few words, i thing the movie could have just had a \"ok i'm outta here!\" from some characters. like the lady who doesn't want to hear his version of the bible.about the story itself, everyone is free to write about what they want, and the story is proof of some good writing and imagination. i credit the book author for that, hence, my 4/10.so, in the end, hear the man's story believe it or not, just don't spend the whole time acting like you believe him and being shocked at what he says, and at the same time moving around and making jokes like you don't believe him.Coherence.thanks for reading ;)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4f1d9c2fdd1432597539d0565c2f8ad",
            "input": "I have a six month old baby at home and time to time she fights sleep really bad. One morning she was having a particular difficult time getting to sleep when the doodle bops theme song came on T.V. She stopped crying almost instantly, and for the rest of the show was content. I sat her in her bouncy seat and watched her kick her legs, swing her arms, and actually laugh at this show. The kept her entertained and happy the entire time. I also got a video of them so that at times when my little one is flustered I have something to calm her. Granted, late at night if she awakes with colic to fuss the doodle bops are not her cup of tea, but they sure do come in handy when I need a little time to do housework,etc. The biggest surprise about the doodle bops is that my child doesn't even like watching T.V. She'd rather be in the floor playing with a toy or with our small toy poodle than watch T.V. yet, the doodle bops have totally captured her attention. I don't know if she will continue to like them in the future but for now she's attached.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf3e1f1838a64404a953aa7753b8bd68",
            "input": "First of all, this movie isn't a complete disaster. If you had never heard of the real story of Gram Parsons then it might seem a reasonably entertaining diversion. Johnny Knoxville can't really be criticised for his performance as Phil Kaufman - he's pretty good at looking laid-back and down to earth and you can sort of root for his long-suffering everyman. Michael Shannon is due credit for pretty much the same reasons, except he's a hippy stoner. There are some good individual comedic scenes - the hippy-hearse crashing into the airport hanger door stands out. But that's where the good things end, and we begin to see the aspects that make this movie so truly disappointing. The character of Robert Forster as Gram's actual father is an invention so disgraceful as to cast a taint over the entire film. We all know his real father committed suicide when he was young - something that could surely be compared to Gram's life on the edge by a better film-maker. Having Forster as his supposed real father, and not his step-father would be bad enough, if not for the well known difficulties Gram had with the man who actually flew to collect his body. It has been suggested that his step father had admitted to providing Gram's mother with alcohol as she lay dying and that this enraged Gram when he later found out about it. Also the controversy over where Gram's body was buried would surely be reason enough not to invent a benevolent made-up father who actually catches up to the duo and their hearse, but then allows them to go ahead with the burning. Whatever the truth about the man who Gram got the name Parsons from, he certainly bore no resemblance to Forster's character here, and it is hard to see why this role was written. Then there's the addition of Christina Applegate as a greedy chick (yet very pretty of course) who wants Gram's body back so that she can begin to cash in on his estate. Her character, and her acting are non-existent and one wonders why the director didn't just go the whole hog and include a lesbo scene between her and the chick who plays Kaufman's girlfriend(it wouldn't have lowered the tone a whole lot more). When you think of the ingredients that could have been used in a good movie about Parsons, the shortcomings of this film are easily apparent. Country music being changed by a young, polite, southern gentleman - who was also long haired, drug loving, popular with the ladies and ultimately self destructive. Real events like the hanger door crash and the painted hearse and friends like Keith Richards. Instead of these things we have to concentrate wholly on Kaufman's input into Gram's life. Kaufman is obviously still lapping up the cult status he received for what he did (he certainly is a little cult). From interviews it is obvious that he's delighted with the attention. Remember this is the man who made a remark about the genitalia of the naked corpse of Gram Parsons as he was preparing to set it alight. What he did was not an act of great loyalty, but a doped up alcoholic escapade. Looking at Knoxville and the director in interviews, a few things become clear also. It's obvious that they have no real grasp of the story of Gram's life, nor do they wish to have. They want a hit movie about an event that is infamous and crazy. It was an amazing life with a strange end. That the end is the only thing covered by this movie shows how limited an understanding of Gram Parsons the makers had.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-527587550df1423f8a99acb2279af5d5",
            "input": "It's the same old, \"If I can't get the funding for my project, I'll inject myself\" monster movie. There is nothing new here. It's a lot like the Jeff Goldblum \"Fly\" movie. The man manages to keep some semblance of sanity, but eventually succumbs to the effects of his experiments. The acting is pretty bad. There are people acting stupidly all along the way, putting their lives in danger for no apparent reason. The guy keeps going back to the lab he has been forbidden to enter. Then there's his relationship with a young woman and her son. Admittedly, he is good looking, but he seems like a lot of trouble. It's just a pretty big waste of time. Even his tyrannosaurus suit looks like it came off the rack at a Star Trek convention.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f54f92da7f8409280193c97f38694ac",
            "input": "Sure this movie wasn't like. 16 blocks, inside man, an American haunting. etc...But It was a great mystery that can happen to anyone of us.. i found this movie really great and scary.I live exactly where they filmed this movie \"san pedro, California\" And we have heard true stories based on incidents of this movie.I dunno if you've heard of the famous boat in long beach \"Queen Mary\" Well that boat is haunted. i believe in spirts, illusions, and parallel or however u spell that. is real. everybody's in there own universe.and the mind is a powerful thing.i recommend to watch this movie. it's great, and not bad directing at all.for those who rate it a 1. they don't understand the film. its meaning. its plot, its view. and how bad the ocean life can be for each and everyone of us.Ty.Victor",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52b361bd130242f0b91eae6fde4cb3ae",
            "input": "Sure, 65 years have passed since Thalberg's last production was filmed. But fellow IMDB members, come on, this movie is surely one of the masterpieces of the 30's! It is a 10.This was the first movie I saw at New York's Museum of Modern Art, around 1970 (I was a teenager). Expensive looking yet with scenes of such poverty, masterfully photographed, often thrilling, and always engaging, to me it was MGM movie-making at its best. What did audiences feel when they glimpsed a locust attack, the person by person destruction of a mansion, the horrific poverty and then the splendor of wealth.Last week, those watching the Academy Awards had a glimpse of the \"senior\" Oscar winner in attendance, Luise Rainer. How grand to see an actress who arguably delivered one of the most masterful, haunting performances in history electing to return for a celebration.Ok, so she should not have won the year before (Great Ziegfeld), but don't blame Luise. Talkies were only a decade old when this was released, and her dialogue limited. But as Olan, her use of visual and vocal is memorable.Large scale and touching, what more could a movie lover want!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04c83eeea7c84c47a385d61ecde0866b",
            "input": "Sexo Cannibal, or Devil Hunter as it's more commonly known amongst English speaking audiences, starts with actress & model Laura Crawford (Ursula Buchfellner as Ursula Fellner) checking out locations for her new film along with her assistant Jane (Gisela Hahn). After a long days work Laura is relaxing in the bath of her room when two very dubious character's named Chris (Werner Pochath) & Thomas (Antonio Mayans) burst in & kidnap her having been helped by the treacherous Jane. Laura's agent gets on the blower to rent-a-hero Peter Weston (Al Cliver) who is informed of the situation, the kidnappers have Laura on an isolated island & are demanding a 6 million ransom. Peter is told that he will be paid 200,000 to get her back safely & a further 10% of the 6 million if he brings that back as well, faster than a rat up a drain pipe Peter & his Vietnam Vet buddy helicopter pilot Jack are on the island & deciding on how to save Laura. So, the kidnappers have Laura & Peter has the 6 million but neither want to hand them over that much. Just to complicate things further this particular isolated island is home to a primitive tribe (hell, in all the generations they've lived there they've only managed to build one straw hut, now that's primitive) who worship some cannibal monster dude (Burt Altman) with bulging eyes as a God with human sacrifices & this cannibal has a liking for young, white female flesh & intestines...This Spanish, French & German co-production was co-written & directed by the prolific Jesus Franco who also gets the credit for the music as well. Sexo Cannibal has gained a certain amount of notoriety here in the UK as it was placed on the 'Video Nasties' list in the early 80's under it's alternate Devil Hunter title & therefore officially classed as obscene & banned, having said that I have no idea why as it is one bad film & even Franco, who isn't afraid to be associated with a turkey, decides he wants to hide under the pseudonym of Clifford Brown. I'd imagine even the most die-hard Franco fan would have a hard time defending this thing. The script by Franco, erm sorry I mean Clifford Brown & Julian Esteban as Julius Valery who was obviously another one less than impressed with the finished product & wanted his named removed, is awful. It's as simple & straight forward as that. For a start the film is so boring it's untrue, the kidnap plot is one of the dullest I've ever seen without the slightest bit of tension or excitement involved & the horror side of things don't improve as we get a big black guy with stupid looking over-sized bloodshot eyes plus two tame cannibal scenes. As a horror film Sexo Cannibal fails & as an action adventure it has no more success, this is one to avoid.Director Franco shows his usual incompetence throughout, a decapitated head is achieved by an actor lying on the ground with large leaves placed around the bottom of his neck to try & give the impression it's not attached to anything! The cannibal scenes are poor, the action is lame & it has endless scenes of people randomly walking around the jungle getting from 'A' to 'B' & not really doing anything when they get there either. It becomes incredibly dull & tedious to watch after about 10 minutes & don't forget this thing goes on for 94 minutes in it's uncut state. I also must mention the hilarious scene when Al Cliver is supposed to be climbing a cliff, this is achieved by Franco turning his camera on it's side & having Cliver crawl along the floor! Just look at the way his coat hangs & the way he never grabs onto to anything as he just pulls himself along! The gore isn't that great & as far as Euro cannibal films go this is very tame, there are some gross close ups of the cannibals mouth as it chews bits of meat, a man is impaled on spikes, there's some blood & a handful of intestines. There's a fair bit of nudity in Sexo Cannibal & an unpleasant rape scene.Sexo Cannibal must have had a low budget & I mean low. This is a shoddy poorly made film with awful special effects & rock bottom production values. The only decent thing about it is the jungle setting which at least looks authentic. The music sucks & sound effects become annoying as there is lots of heavy breathing whenever the cannibal is on screen. The acting sucks, the whole thing was obviously dubbed anyway but no one in this thing can act.Sexo Cannibal is a terrible film that commits the fatal mistake of being as boring as hell. The only good things I can say is that it has a certain sleazy atmosphere to it & those close ups of the cannibal chewing meat are pretty gross. Anyone looking for a decent cinematic experience should give Sexo Cannibal as wide a berth as possible, one to avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8497ba407b1442199b14e10d72eeb23e",
            "input": "The teasers for Tree of Palme try to pass it off as a sort of allegory for a fairy tale with actual meaning, then immediately start raving about the animation. I should have known what that meant.The main character, Palme, is a good example of the whole movie's problem. One minute, Palme is a humble hero in search of himself, the next a violent psycho with an unhealthy fixation on a girl he once took care of.Like all of the characters in the movie, Palme is poorly defined. You do not bond with the characters at all, although Shatta has acquired a couple of fan girls. It seems that the writer was more interested in cramming all the drama and complexity he could into this movie than actually exploring his characters' motivations and personalities.New, useless story lines were being introduced in the last fifteen minutes of the movie. The writer seriously needed to streamline his story. Perhaps he was trying to be epic, but it was simply too much information for a two-hour movie. However I can't help but wonder if a plot with so many dimensions and characters would have been better suited for a TV series or graphic novel.In the last five minutes of the movie, I simply could not endure the sheer lack of quality any longer and began laughing at how contrived the characters, the relationships, and the whole plot was. I touched my companion and he started cracking up too, as did a young man seated behind us. We tried so hard to control ourselves, but we simply could not take the terrible quality of this movie.On the bright side, the animation is incredible and viewers will find themselves admiring the lush backgrounds and charming character designs. The animation almost guides you; when you don't care about the characters, it tells you how to feel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c105c794ca34cc0a474c61676ba2b1a",
            "input": "Kol, space prisoner on space death row, manages to hijack a space shuttle and escape to the woods of America where he, along with some new found friend try to escape from the 'Alienator\" a female cyborg killing machine. Made one year after the best movie of Fred Olen Ray's career, \"Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers\", this one can't help but feel like a bit of a letdown. Just as low-budget as that earlier film, but not nearly as fun as I had with it. None of the actors really stood out at me. The film is alright for the undiscriminating viewer during a rainy Saturday afternoon, but that's pretty much all it's good for.My Grade: D+ Where i saw it: Showtime Thriller",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c2a95da7b1548deace58f5f7196fb29",
            "input": "The Twilight Zone has achieved a certain mythology about it--much like Star Trek. That's because there are many devoted lovers of the show that no matter what think every episode was a winner. They are the ones who score each individual show a 10 and cannot objectively evaluate the show. Because of this, a while back I reviewed all the original Star Trek episodes (the good and the bad) because the overall ratings and reviews were just too positive. Now, it's time to do the same for The Twilight Zone.While I have scored many episodes 10, this one gets a 3 simply because it was bad. The writing was in fact embarrassingly bad. Two people from opposing sides in a great war are seen wandering about through the entire episode. After a while, it's apparent that they are the only two people left on Earth--as you learn in the really stupid and totally unconvincing conclusion. Usually the twist at the end makes the episode great--this one killed it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cfaa53dd38954846858595cc3f49c2fc",
            "input": "My name is Domino Harvery. {EDIT *dizzying* CHOP} My--my--my name is Domino Harvey. {CUT, CHOP} My name is Domino Harvey. {EDIT. CUT. Playback}Never have I seen a director take so much flack for his style before. By now it is evident that most people do not appreciate Tony Scott's choppy, flashy, dizzying editing technique. If I have to choose between loving it and hating it, I'd say I love it. It was borderline distracting at times, but the end result was pretty good and it's nice to see a director with a creative edge to his style and some originality (even if it borrows heavily from MTV videos).This stylistic edge manifests itself as Keira Knightley plays the role of cocky badass bounty hunter Domino Harvey and even her dialogue seems strangely choppy. Otherwise she plays her poorly because I pretty much hated her character and did not sympathize one bit with her, no matter how much she suffered. We follow Domino through her life as she joins up with fellow bounty hunters Mickey Rourke, Rizwan Abbasi and Edgar Ramirez. The crew become tangled up in the FBI and suddenly has a reality show contract under Christopher Walken's TV production company (what is Christopher Walken doing in every film, by the way?). I guess that is a clever film technique, because now Tony Scott is free to use as much flashy MTV/Reality Show editing footage as he likes. It becomes a pastiche of MTV culture at this point.It followes then that the story is told at an amazingly rapid-fire pace, with lots of raunchy strong language and gun violence. There are some funny jokes; it's all very modern and surreal at the same time. It's a mess, but it's a rather enjoyable mess. It is ultimately flawed in so many ways (the actors try too hard to make their characters \"cool\", for one) but it works. I give it a weak 7/10 which may seem generous when compared to the general consensus of movie-goers who graded this film — but I feel it had some good ideas and executed them well.7 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d8068adb77134216bcc80a6d1b415f9c",
            "input": "This movie certainly proves, that also the good Americans can do terribly good propaganda. No questions being asked, no comments being made on power abuse or police terror, when James Stewart, solid and convincing as always, solves all the stories from Dillinger to 5th Column more or less singlehandedly. June Allyson as his regular love interest holds up the family values and E.J. Hoover is executive producer.And children or non guilty bystanders are never harmed, when the professionals execute. Not to speak of civil rights, which are never broken or homes, which are never intruded. And if the FBI service would not be enough, Steward also gives his son's life for the country in WW II. Perfectly made, if you wouldn't know better....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46256e603633447482c0c0178deb2f81",
            "input": "This film (along with Rinne) are minor gems amongst the retread homage pics that have passed for horror movies so far at the 8FTDF \"HorrorFest.\" And, yes, that's faint praise indeed. 'Cause there's not much worse in filmdom than would-be auteurs who think atmosphere is a substitute for a coherent plot.And that's all you get with The Abandoned. This is a film that was made almost entirely in the directors head. Sure, it would have been nice if he'd transfered it to film, but this happened instead. It's a very pretty film with a few genuine scares, but the last reel is strictly for the latte slurping cineaste crowd.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03255109869b483e936ee260be8e7e1c",
            "input": "Stewart Kane (Gabriel Byrne, VANITY FAIR) heads out with his local Jindabyne, Australia fishing buddies for a weekend of rest, recreation, and relaxation. But when Stewart discovers an aboriginal woman's body floating face-down in a river, things appear to have turned out for the worst. The largest casualty of the weekend is the men's commonsense. They don't hike out of the ravine, and instead finish their fishing weekend with some great catches. Then they head out and report the body.The town and the men's lives quickly turn into a mess. The local media swarms them, and accusations of aboriginal prejudices rear up from the local natives. Stewart's wife Claire (Laura Linney, THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE) senses the deeper meanings of what her husband and his friends did, but has to battle with it through her own mental illness.Amidst all this chaos is the life that was this young woman who is now a media spectacle, splayed out on a morgue slab. Her murder and subsequent dumping into the water are symbolic of what lay beneath the town of Jindabyne: a division of men and women, black and white, social and outcast.The only other people who seem to understand some of what is going on are two young kids: Stewart and Claire's son who is being led around by a half-breed Aussie who's mother was killed also just a few years before. The young girl lives with her grandparents and is trying to let go of her mother the best way she can, and the discovery of a new body seems — strangely enough — a method in which to accomplish this (again, the underlying current of Jindabyne is surmised).Everything and everyone in this Jindabyne township feels what lurks beneath its surface, yet none of them are willing to dive into the murky waters and take a look around (the symbolism here is seen when a nearby lake that is used for recreation and swimming is said to contain the old town of Jindabyne under its surface). None, that is, until Claire forces them to.The movie is interesting if a bit too convoluted. There are far too many story lines that needed exploring and it just doesn't get done; too many loose threads. The acting was okay, but the filming was terrible. Wobbly cameras, grainy or dark shots, and just a generalized sloppiness hurt the overall production.I enjoy symbolic films, NORTHFORK being one of my all-time favorites in that vein. But Jindabyne needed to peak its head above the turbid water so that it could see its own problems, which simply didn't happen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da2d0feceeaa4349bbdba4a75869d7ea",
            "input": "Deeply humorous yet honest comedy about a bunch of grownups (Bill Paxton, Julie Warner, Kevin Pollak, Elizabeth Perkins, Vincent Spano, Matt Craven, and Diane Lane) who are invited back to spend a week to Tomawka, a camp in (Ontario) Canada by their former consuelor (Alan Arkin). Writer/director Mike Binder drew upon his experience at the same camp as the main source of creating a gentle and understanding yarn that makes sense. Also, the movie has plenty of funny moments, some of which are completely bizarre like my favorite, the one involves using masking tape. Newton Thomas Sigel (\"The Usual Suspects\", \"Three Kings\") provides the film with some impressive shots of the Canadian wilderness. Among the cast, Sam Raimi, director of \"THE EVIL DEAD\" films and \"The Gift\", appears here as Arkin's bumbling right-hand man. One more thing, this film reassured me that a camp doesn't have to be a site of bloody murders.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-528d94c936e8464d955879b71ee8593f",
            "input": "\"8 SIMPLE RULES... FOR DATING MY TEENAGE DAUGHTER,\" is my opinion, is an absolute ABC classic! I'm not sure I haven't seen every episode, but I still enjoyed it. It's hard to say which episode was my favorite. However, I think it was always funny when a mishap occurred. I always laughed at that. Despite the fact that James Garner and David Spade were good, I liked the show more when John Ritter was the leading man. If you ask me, his sudden passing was very tragic. Everyone always gave a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, I hope some network brings it back on the air for fans of the show to see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-abd235a8cb9546d0b060ff436ef1a3de",
            "input": "In \"Anne of Green Gables\" (1934), Marilla Cuthbert (Helen Westley) and Matthew Cuthbert (O.P. Heggie), middle-aged siblings who live together at Green Gables, a farm in Avonlea, on Prince Edward Island, decide to adopt a boy from distant orphanage to help on their farm. But the orphan sent to them is a precocious girl of 14 named Anne Shirley (Dawn Evelyn Paris-a veteran of Disney's series of \"Alice\" shorts who later would adopt her character's name). Anne was only 11 in Lucy Maude Montgomery's source novel but the same actress could not credibly go from 11 to college age during the course of the story. The movie suffers somewhat from this concession, as many of Anne's reactions and much of what she says are more entertaining coming from an eleven-year-old that from a teenager. As in the book, Anne is bright and quick, eager to please but dissatisfied with her name, her build, her freckles, and her long red hair. Being a child of imagination, however, Anne takes much joy in life, and adapts quickly to her new family and the environment of Prince Edward Island.In fact Anne is the original \"Teenage Drama Queen\" and the film's screenwriter elected to focus on this aspect of her character. Which transformed the basic genre from mildly amusing family drama to comedy. A change that delighted audiences and that continues to frustrate reader purists. Since the comedy is very much in the spirit of the Montgomery's story I can see no reason to take issue with the changes, but let this serve as fair warning to anyone expecting a totally faithful adaptation. The comedy element is the strength of the film as it is one of the earliest self-reflexive parodies of Hollywood conventions. The actress Anne Shirley was one of Hollywood's all- time beauties and the film is in black and white. So much of the amusement is in seeing the title character's endless laments about her appearance and hair color contradicted by what is appearing on the screen. Anne regularly regales her no nonsense rural companions with melodramatic lines like: \"If you refuse it will be a lifelong sorrow to me\". Perhaps the funniest moment is when she corrects the spelling of her name on the classroom blackboard. Tom Brown does a nice job as Anne's love interest Gilbert Blythe and Sara Haden steals all the scenes in which she appears as the Cuthbert's pompous neighbor. Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2a52b592ebd4e818b79f252bd2d4484",
            "input": "So much is wrong with this abysmal little wet fart of a movie that it's hard to know where to begin.First of all, it's a remarkably un-scary scary movie, even by Amercian standards. The dialogue is cliché, the characters are two-dimensional, the writing is ho-hum, and what little story there is is neither coherent nor remotely interesting.We meet the following stereotypes in order: Balding Loser Guy (probably divorced, but who knows? This movie doesn't tell us) with a brave heart, the Young Hero (who doesn't do anything heroic at all), Brave Little Kid (with a homicidal streak a mile wide) and Black Bad-Ass Bitch (with more brawn than brains). These guys take up an ongoing fight with the Tall Scary Reaper Man and his evil Ewoks.Oh, and the film is full of wicked little metal orbs whoosing around menacing people. Given a chance, they perform impromptu brain surgery on those who doen't have the mental acuity to duck when they come at them. Booh! Actually, one of them is haunted by a good ghost (but then again, it might be a deceitful spectre) who seems intent on helping our Brave Contagonists retrieve their young kidnapped friend.There is no character background or even an introduction to any of the characters. It starts with some kind of recap of the ending of the previous movie, but this doesn't explain a lot. If you've seen the first two movies, fine. Otherwise you don't know who these people are, how they are related, why they aren't in school or at work, or why you should care whether they live or die. Consequently, you don't. The only point of interest becomes any splatter effects. And there aren't enough of those to keep you awake.Of potenial interest/amusement are the three Raider Punks, as stupid as they are evil, who menace Our Heroes. But they don't get much screen time. They are offed almost immediately. Then they are buried (why anybody should take the time is beyond me), then they appear again as Evil Raider Punk Zombies. Only to be offed again, literally within a minute.The rest of the movie mainly seems to consist of Caspar the Friendly Ghost appearing and disappearing, driving around looking for places, and Balding Loser trying to score som Bad Black Bitch Booty, using pickup lines that would embarrass a mentally retarded teenager. No dice there; not even some gratuitous sex could have saved this movie, so good thing there never is any.The head baddie, called the Tall Man, doesn't manage to scare anyone older than 3 years; howling \"Booooy!\" every five minutes isn't enough. Why he, with his amazing telekinetic powers and uncanny upper-body strength, doesn't simply squash our heroes like bugs isn't explained. Instead, he delegates the job to his inept retarded little minions, who never manage to kill anyone before being shot to hell.Filmgoers who like masterpieces like \"Friday 13th part XXXXVIII: Jason goes to college\" might find some entertainment. The rest of us, who have developed pubic hair, will be bored out of our skulls.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9fb3649b17b84cc6bee1208a7edcee8c",
            "input": "The movie starts out fine. Widower out with new girlfriend and the children.The movie is filled with stupid director's choices. Like \"lets separate.\" \"I am coming down to....\" do what? Stupid Stupid Stupid.Please do not waste your time hoping that it will get better.............. Not hardly.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c323de24c2748788f5a7d6cc6aced1c",
            "input": "The ghost of the Vietnam war has haunted the American psyche for thirty years now. If not because of the fact that tens of thousands of American soldiers went MIA in Vietnam, or the manner in which those who returned were treated, then because it was the first war that America could be said to have lost. Many men came home from the war a shadow of their former selves, and the original First Blood managed to provide a small insight into their problems as they attempted to rotate back into the world, as the saying goes. First Blood Part II, on the other hand, is little more than a fist-pumping mess that goes to illustrate how sore America can be, both in victory and defeat. Stallone puts in another sluggish performance as the titular Special Forces commando, while Richard Crenna attempts to hold up the serious actor quotient. Where it all comes undone is in the script, which didn't do any better when it was called Missing In Action and starred Chuck Norris. What little semblance of logic there was in the original is now gone, as the filmmakers decide to paint a big S on Rambo's massive chest.The film picks up a little while after the end of First Blood. The film, that is - the novel didn't allow for the possibility of sequels. In this mediocre follow-up, Rambo has been put to work at what appears to be some sort of open-air mine. As he is breaking rocks and working up a sweat, a prison guard pulls him away to go and have a chat with Colonel Trautman, who advises him that his government is willing to offer him an early release if he goes on a covert mission. Rambo, never one to back down from a hard day's violent work, accepts, and is promptly shipped off to a covert base in what appears to be Cambodia or Thailand (I forget which). From there, he is commissioned to seek out a camp where American MIAs are supposedly being held, and photograph them. His mission quite clearly specifies that he is not to make any attempt to secure their release. Rambo being Rambo, however, has other ideas in spite of their possible political implications.Of course, things go somewhat awry when it turns out that the people commissioning Rambo's work have more interest in making sure no American MIAs are found. It is the age-old conspiracy theory, and makes no apologies for exploiting the plight of many an American family that was left without a son during the ten years that the official Vietnam war had been raging for. Of course, with the Jingoism that was inherent in American society during the 1980s, they could not help but work in a plot tangent about the Vietnamese army being in bed with what appears to be a single battalion of Russians. Together, the two antagonists attempt to extract what information they can from Rambo, but it backfires upon them in an orgy of bullets, arrows, rockets, and destruction. About the only thing missing is the moment when Rambo drinks from a grail-like chalice and declares himself invincible.To be honest, First Blood Part II is a well-photographed, and well-choreographed, action spectacle. The hand-to-hand combat with the larger Russian commander is one of the few battles in the film that has any dramatic tension whatsoever. The rest is simply a case of the lead actor and the director building a fantasy for Americans to pump their fist to. Fortunately, this fad of America über alles action films soon died down when more introspective and intelligent war films such as Platoon began doing the rounds. Some of the kills shown here are quite creative, despite all the problems. The Vietnamese commander meets an end that many an action film villain would envy. The Russian commander bites it in a manner that is as spectacular as it is ridiculous. Only in a 1980s action film would one see a LAW being used from inside a helicopter. Sure, there have been action film clichés rooted in contradictions of fact, but never this ridiculous before.I gave Rambo: First Blood Part II a one out of ten. It is so bad it is ridiculous, and so ridiculous that it is often funny. One doesn't even need to have served in the military to know how stupid some of the action sequences are. The only risk it takes is in trying to make a stupid political statement with what is a heartbreaking subject for those directly involved. Keep the tongue firmly in the cheek, and it might be watchable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9fa939722044804a7c3650342fec148",
            "input": "The Scottish artist Andy Goldsworthy fashions natural materials into ephemeral artworks, assembling rocks into egg-shaped cairns, filling riverside rock-pools with fiery flowers and stitching thorns and twigs into intricate web patterns. An original work and a few photographs of his other creations are tucked away in a corner of Southampton art gallery (near where I live), but although I found these pieces intriguing, I only realised the wonder of Goldsworthy's work when I was lucky enough to catch a re-screening of Rivers and Tides.Thomas Reidelsheimer's film, accompanied by a beautiful instrumental soundtrack by Fred Frith, brings Goldsworthy and his art to life by showing the artist at work. The opening scene captures him fusing icicle fragments into a snake-like thread set atop a tree-stump. Working with his teeth and bare hands, Goldsworthy crafts a beautiful, ephemeral work. Before long this delicate sculpture melts away to nothing in the brilliant Nova Scotian sunlight. This scene is among the most beautiful in the film, but the breadth and inventiveness of Goldsworthy's work is remarkable. Reidelsheimer shows both the successes and the failures, capturing the frustration of pieces that collapse before they are completed as well as the glory of those that shine, even if for just a few hours, minutes or seconds.Goldsworthy himself provides the narration, speaking slowly but thoughtfully about the themes in his work. He makes plain his need to work with nature, to be alone in it and to further his understanding of it through trying to work with natural materials, even when they seem to be working against him. At times he is down-to-earth and humorous; at other times he struggles for the words to express his purpose – something which is quite understandable when witnessing his astonishing work first hand. The 'Rivers and Tides' of the title become increasingly pertinent as we see the natural materials pass through the artist's hands, flowing from one form to the next. The capture of the creation and dissolution of Goldworthy's work is in itself a striking piece of art.Although Goldsworthy works with widely varying materials and covers territory across North America and Europe, the presentation of artworks one after the other in this film is exhausting; it gave me the same feeling of fatigue that I get when I spend too long in an art gallery and struggle to take in anything new. A brief interval in which we are introduced to Andy's family and hometown is all that breaks the long succession of his artworks. Nevertheless, Reidelsheimer does a superb job in photographing Goldsworthy and his creations, locating them in their wider environments, from meandering Canadian rivers to rainy Scottish hillsides. Fittingly, the film ends with Goldsworthy casting handfuls of earth and snow into the sky. Fleeting patterns emerge from the dust particles even as they dissipate into the air; this is the purest expression of the beauty to be found in the work of this remarkable artist.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f23e0de7a115427aab64af0aff7643f6",
            "input": "This film has a lot of strong points. It has one of the best horror casts outside of the Lugosi-Karloff-Chaney circle: Lionel Atwill, Fay Wray, and Dwight Frye, plus leading man Melvyn Douglas. It's got all the right ingredients: bats, a castle with lots of stone staircases, a mad scientist, townspeople waving torches and hunting vampires, an \"Igor\"-type character, a beautiful girl, even a goofy-haired Burgomeister. The soft-focus camera work is moody and imaginative. There's even some good comic relief nicely spaced throughout the script.But it's not really a monster movie because there is nothing supernatural going on in \"Kleinschloss\" (\"little castle\"). The plot revolves around the generic crazy scientist (nicely played by Atwill) who values his work more highly than human lives.It's not top-tier material, because of a ho-hum resolution of the plot and some embarrassingly bad dialog for Dwight Frye. But it's worth a look if you like early b/w horror pictures.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95d104edb86b4ef8916e18b91d5a7e8e",
            "input": "This movie makes no sense at all, there are plot holes big enough to drive enormous NYPD vehicles through. The characters do not act in any plausible way whatsoever. I will put my comments in the chat board, but save your time and money, this is stupid. I can't stand when Hollywood spends millions of dollars on flash bang equipment and uses fancy editing and cool music, and does not bother to have a plot that hangs together at even the most basic level. But it is nice to see Denzel W. prevail over the Man, who comes in 3 flavors, Jodi Foster, Mayor Bloomberg and Capt. Von Trapp. There is even a sweet little kid with a video game who is nice.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43a1f73a1a3c4eee83555931edba54ea",
            "input": "You don't expect much from a PRC picture, and with rare exceptions--mainly from Edgar G. Ulmer and a few by Joseph H. Lewis or Lew Landers--that's exactly what you get: not much. This \"epic\" about Nazis in Africa trying to incite an Arab revolt against the British isn't much different. The script, by longtime PRC hacks Arthur St. Claire and Sherman Lowe, is trite, laughable, full of unfunny \"wisecracks\" and plot holes the size of Outer Mongolia. The direction, by longtime PRC no-budget specialist Al Herman, is semi-comatose at best. The performances, though--except for spectacularly incompetent and irritatingly hammy lead Walter Woolf King--aren't really half bad. Veteran comedian Parkyakarkus is actually the best thing about the film. He plays a guy from Brooklyn masquerading as a razor-blade salesman and brightens up the screen considerably when he shows up. He's got great comic timing, charm to spare and seems to be having a heck of a good time. Duncan Renaldo is fairly convincing as an Arab sheik--despite his Spanish accent--and veteran bad guy George J. Lewis as Renaldo's Arab rival does his usual fine job of villainy, even if he goes a bit over the top sometimes. Joan Woodbury is quite pretty and has a nice light touch, and she and Renaldo have great chemistry together, although--like the rest of the cast--she has none at all with King. H.B. Warner, whose career stretched back to the silent era, lends a shred of dignity to the low-rent proceedings, even though he blows his lines several times and, PRC being PRC, they weren't cut out. There's a great deal of stock footage spliced in from a big-budget silent movie with a similar Arab theme--although I have no idea which one it is--and, PRC being PRC, no effort was made to try to make it inconspicuous: I've seldom seen stock footage that was so blatantly obvious.\"A Yank in Libya\" isn't very good, of course--well, OK, it stinks--but it would be worth a look just to see Parkyakarkus in his prime. I had heard of him and knew that he was the father of actor/director Albert Brooks and Super Dave Osborne, but had never actually seen him in anything before. It was worth watching this tenth-rate PRC \"extravaganza\" just to see him in action. Otherwise, forget it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9fad8605d19e4080928bb47c2551046c",
            "input": "Almost from the word go this film is poor and lacking conviction but then again most people would struggle to show commitment to a script as uninspiring as this. The dialogue really does not flow and sometimes as in this case more is less (or should have been). This is also backed-up by odd scenes (e.g. the Cemetry slow-motion walk) that you think might lead somewhere but only seem to waste a few more seconds of your life.The plot is a strange combination of gangster / situation comedy which I am sure seemed a good idea at the time but if ever there was a case for someone needing to be honest with the scriptwriter then here was it.Martin Freeman is okay but then he seems to have one character which always plays so I am beginning to wonder if he was given a script or just filmed and told to react as normal.Finally - humour. This reminds me of the 'Python (I think) quote about Shakespere, of his 'comedies' - If he had meant it to be humorous he would have put a joke in it. Well I didn't see one.Don't waste your time - I did because I was watching it with a friend and kept hoping that it was going to get better.It didn't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8c0f5f9e422489aa4baa47b540bf99b",
            "input": "this movie is not good.the first one almost sucked,but had that unreal ending to make it worth watching.this one has nothing.there's zero scare,zero tension or suspense.this isn't really a horror movie.most of the kills don't show anything.there's no gore to speak of.this could almost be a TV,except for a bit of nudity and a bit of violence.the acting is not very good,either.and don't get me started on the dialogue.as for the surprise ending,surprise,there isn't one.i suppose it could have been worse,although i don't see how.but then again,it is less than 80 minutes long,so i guess that's a good thing.although it felt a lot longer. apparently this is the cut version of the film.i found it for a very cheap price,but it still not worth it.if you want the uncut more graphic version,check out the Anchor Bay edition.anyway,this version of Sleepaway Camp II:Unhappy Campers gets a big fat 1/10 from me. p.s.if you watch this movie,you will probably be a bored and unhappy camper.if you are a real fan,you might want to pick up Anchor Bay's Sleepaway Camp(with survival kit) three disc collection containing the first three movies uncut and with special features",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d8e255bcdd341db8ae10573c71baeb2",
            "input": "Although nothing can compare to Vampires Vs. Zombies...in any realm of film making i will attempt to judge this movie.Firstly, the special effects were breath-taking. When there was an explosion on the television screen i thought my entire house was going to explode, and when automatic machine guns were fired i thought the shells were landing on the floor right next to me. Simply stunning my friends.But the scene when the Jack Black sound-a-like is giving the worst monologue i have ever heard i nearly killed myself, but don't worry since he was getting blazed in the movie he can pass his awful acting off on \"I must be high\". Seriously, he must have watched himself mindlessly babbling about non-congruent thoughts that make absolutely no sense and just added that he must be \"high\" to justify his awful acting. Well if you can say that to excuse terrible acting then if you talked to the writers, directors, executive producers, sponsors you will probably get the same response...seriously.With a production team called \"Shock-o-rama\" i was shocked i didn't place a sawed-off shotgun in my mouth and ended my life after this shockingly terrible excuse for a movie was played.If you want to see this movie, then you should be murdered Yours Truly,The General",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82c8557112d54f69a6b986418250bf33",
            "input": "It's hard to praise this film much. The CGI for the dragon was well done, but lacked proper modelling for light and shadow. Also, the same footage is used endlessly of the dragon stomping through corridors which becomes slightly tedious.I was amazed to see \"Marcus Aurelius\" in the acting credits, wondering what an ex-Emperor of the Roman Empire was doing acting in this film! Like \"Whoopie Goldberg\" it must be an alias, and can one blame him for using one if he appears in this stinker.The story might been interesting, but the acting is flat, and direction is tedious. If you MUST watch this film, go around to your friend's house and get drunk while doing so - then it'll be enjoyable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a75078d8518e49a6926c29422eb80b10",
            "input": "St. Elmo's Fire has no bearing on life after university at all (for the majority of us common folk anyway). Why was this garbage even made? Who can really relate to this? Who lives like these characters? I truly feel sorry for the actors having to deal with such a terrible script. There are some talented young actors in this \"film\" that have done a good job elsewhere. It must have just been one whole joke to them on set.I actually found this \"film\" insulting to my intelligence. The only joy I got from this is hoping that Sir John Hughes had a good ol' laugh when he saw a screening of this the same year his masterpiece of The Breakfast Club was released.Don't make the same mistake I did of watching this because you enjoy 80's films. It really is that offensive to the genre.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a945e9fcac8c4df9b56cbf39e55a641f",
            "input": "No Strings Attached features Carlos Mencia doing stand-up that makes us both laugh and think. Not only does he poke fun at racial issues (like many haters claim), but he also talks about the best way to get illegal immigrants out of the country...what women mean when they say they want to be treated equally...why Americans are crazier than Arab terrorists...why nobody needs to pray for the pope - and what he hopes he's doing in heaven...a theory of how Easter (aka Big Ups to Jesus Day) traditions got started...his viewing of the movie Passion of the Christ - and his sub-sequential argument with a woman about whether or not he's affected by Jesus...how society should treat the physically handicapped...and even if you have the right to tell a joke or not.Also, he never stops reminding us that each of us has a voice. So we should use it to speak the truth, say what we think, and not be afraid if others are offended.Carlos is the bomb.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d5a1b159b194f4e8303087baa9d9780",
            "input": "Red Rock West is one of those tight noir thrillers we rarely see anymore. It's well paced, well acted and doesn't leave us with loose ends or unanswered questions so typical in this genre.Nicolas Cage stars as Michael, an unemployed Texas roughneck, desperate enough for a job to drive all the way to Wyoming for potential employment. He is honest to a fault, but always on the dark side of fate.After failing to obtain gainful employment, Michael stumbles into the Red Rock bar where the owner Wayne (J.T.Walsh) mistakes him for a contract killer he summoned from Dallas, hired to do in his lovely but lethal wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle).Wayne gives Michael the necessary details and a down payment for the hit on the adulterous Suzie. With no intent on following through, Michael accepts the money and then sets out to warn Suzanne of her impending demise. He also mails a letter to the local sheriff exposing the plot and splits.As fate would dictate, Michael is not going to be rid of the situation that easy. While leaving in a violent rainstorm, he runs down Suzannes lover. Of course Michael being Michael, he takes him to the local hospital where it's discovered that he's also been shot.The sheriff is summoned and as luck would have it, Wayne is also the local law. Michael manages to escape while being taken on that last ride and is subsequently picked up by the real \"Lyle from Dallas\" played with murderous glee by the quirky Dennis Hopper. After discovering that they're fellow marines, Lyle insists that Michael join him for a drink at, where else, the Red Rock bar. There Wayne realizes his mistake and soon he and Lyle are in hot pursuit of Michael who falls willingly into Suzannes waiting arms.As the pace picks up we learn that Wayne and Suzanne are really wanted armed robbers, on the lam for a multi million dollar theft. Getting the money now becomes the films central focus with a series of betrayals, double crosses and murders.The film was very well cast. Nicolas Cage was typically low key, Dennis Hopper and Lara Flynn Bolye assumed their respective roles with more than ample ability. The best performance was by the late J.T. Walsh who was menacing without appearing to be. Walsh was a great character actor who left us much too soon.Marc Reshoskys photography utilized many unique angles which added to the suspense and plot development. The film was further enhanced by John Dahl's tight directorial style and Morris Chestnut's rapid fire editing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d1c9cf120fe4f109e6f0ed82af69614",
            "input": "Jörg Buttgereit goes a bit too far with his movies and themes at times, even for my taste but his movies are always something special and hard to classify. They are artistically made, with also often deeper meaning to its themes. This movie is a perfect example of his work.It's also really hard to label this movie. It's not really a movie with a story to it, in a sense of having a beginning, middle and end in it. It also doesn't have a main character but instead focuses on 7 different suicides and killings, on 7 different days.All different stories are being told with lots of class, though some of them are of course more 'interesting' and realistic than the others. They are not necessarily connected but yet together they still tell a story. The movie doesn't feel disjointed at all. All different stories have a different feel to it and Buttgereit tells the story without hardly using any words (also typical for his style) but instead lets the images and obvious sensible emotions of the characters tell the entire story. It helps to make this movie an effective one to watch.Again, the production values all aren't too high and this might be something that might scare off some people. It however helps for this particular movie to set the right tone and atmosphere for the entire movie and its dark, disturbing and depressing themes.A Buttgereit movie that I 'enjoyed' watching.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc538cbe21c7469fa1ffff106873d9a5",
            "input": "Drew Latham(Ben Affleck)is determined not to be lonely this Christmas. Not only is Drew a millionaire; but also obnoxious and guilty of being very grandiose. Drew goes back to the home he grew up in and offers the family living there, the Valco's, $250,000 to be his \"family\" through the Christmas season. Tom Valco(James Gandolfini)is reluctant, but is greedy enough to take Drew's offer. Christine Valco(Catherine O'Hara)has little to say in the matter, but learns to like having Drew around...not exactly the same sentiment with daughter Alicia(Christina Applegate), but that too has room for change. Drew's girlfriend Missy(Jennifer Morrison)tracks down Drew and wants her folks to meet his family. Genuine fun is in store as a happy Noel becomes a hilarious dysfunctional nightmare. Other members of the cast: Josh Zuckerman, Bill Macy, David Selby and Stephanie Faracy. Affleck is comedic, albeit strange.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57897aaf91de4d62bbede57d23f0319b",
            "input": "I'm still trying to figure out if there was a point to this film.For content that's supposed to be so 'rebellious' and 'controversial' the things that Maddox distributes to the students are awfully lame. Students seem to be easily swayed by vague anti-authoritarian sentiments and snippets of words illegibly scrawled onto leaflets. Rebel, everybody.I suppose it would have been too much to ask to have a teenage rebellion film where a school fire alarm doesn't get set off.Apparently a 'huge fight up on the football fields' is a fight that consists of two people.Characters personalities seem to wildly vary at random. A football jock who Maddox was fighting (and who subsequently got a staple on the face) is all smiles and apologies the next day.The fact that it doesn't come to any real conclusion of the plot makes me feel that the whole thing could have been fitted into a half hour after school special. If they had cut most of the attempted pseudo-glitch soundtrack.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4ce31055a2e48a38275deba47e2bae1",
            "input": "The story of Cinderella is one of my favorites from Charles Perrault, with Sleeping Beauty which was also made into a Disney film in 1959; this film is a sweet, enchanting masterpiece from Disney.The film has a great soundtrack; that's one I like in a movie is a very good soundtrack, and I love the songs too; my favorite song is the romantic \"So This is Love.\" I love the mice from the film too, they are cute. My favorite scene is the scene after the narration, the little birds tried to wake Cinderella up in the morning; I also love it when Cinderella's animal friends (the mice and birds) fix up Cinderella's birth-mother's dress, so she could go to the ball...until Drizella & Anastasia tore it to bits, the b****es!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68c2f8bbacf1401295b56563cf5e1de8",
            "input": "When I saw this movie cover, the first thing I thought was that it was made for video. The second thing that came to mind was how similar this looked to another terrible movie \"Darkness Falls\", the tale of this dumb witch who killed people in the dark. Unfortunately, Darkness Falls was quite the masterpiece compared to this pile of garbage, and this movie should not have been made.The film starts off with a small back story for the witch, or, more like a pointless introduction of two little kids who are going to go meet the tooth fairy in hopes of her giving them a shiny new bicycle for their tooth. The opening is filmed poorly, and like the rest of the movie, it's certainly not scary. In present time, the movie is about Peter (Lochlyn Munroe). Peter's renting out his house, and his ex-girlfriend Darcy (Chandra West), and her daughter Cole come to stay there. Cole meets a neighborhood child, and they talk of the Tooth Fairy, and how you shouldn't lose your tooth, or she'll come for you. Unfortunately seconds later, it looks like the Tooth Fairy steals her bike and knocks her tooth out (How ironic). Will Cole survive the wrath of the Tooth Fairy, and will her mother and Peter be able to save her, and rekindle their romance...this is a bad movie, you could probably figure it out.One of the main problems with this idiotic film is how undefined the Tooth Fairy is. They say she kills you if you lose your tooth, but nope. She's more like a serial killer who kills at random, and if you lose your tooth, you're definitely going to go. She steals a bike, so apparently she's a thief too. I said earlier that the idea for this movie was based on Darkness Falls, but where did they get the inspiration for the Tooth Fairy's appearance? Let's see. She looks like a burn victim, and she previously went around the neighborhood slaughtering children. Hmmm...it's almost as though she's an exact rip-off of Freddy Krueger from the \"Nightmare on Elm Street\" films. And this is not the worst part of this awful mess, the climax is. This movie might have the most laughable climax (Not literally laughable because I found it more sickening than funny) I've ever seen. Don't see this.Just a little trivia. Lochlyn Munroe was in Scary Movie, and Jianna Ballard was in Scary Movie 3, and they both were in this, so apparently Scary Movie stars are forced to end out their career with bad scary movies.My rating: 1/2 out of ****. 80 mins. R for violence.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b0b491facfd41099a90ed304a60a31b",
            "input": "Another great movie by Costa-Gavras. It's a great presentation of the situation is Latin America and the US involvement in Latin American politics. The facts might or might not be accurate but it is a fact that the US was deeply involved in coups and support of Latin American dictatorships.Despite this though the spirit of the movie follows the typical leftist/communist propaganda of the Cold War era. Costa-Gavras is a well-known communist sympathizer and his movies are always biased. For example he presents the US actions as brutal and inhumane, while representing Tupamaros' extremist activities as something positive.As it turned out it was a blessing for Uruguay and the rest of the Latin America that the US got involved. Europe is filled with poor East European prostitutes. I never heard of poor Uruguayan or Chilean girls prostituting themselves en masse as it happens in most East European countries. The US was fighting a dirty war and god bless us all the monster of Soviet Communism was defeated. It is unfortunate the US had to do what it did in Latin America (and elsewhere) but sometimes you need to play dirty. This is not an idealistic world as Costa-Gavras and Matamoros like to believe. Had Matamoros come to power in Uruguay, we would've had another Ukraine in Latin America.All in all this movie follows corrupt and bankrupt leftist ideology of times past and tries to pass it as idealistic and morally correct.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d1a0a3cc0add4fbc9d9aadf45da639d1",
            "input": "Zero Day leads you to think, even re-think why two boys/young men would do what they did - commit mutual suicide via slaughtering their classmates. It captures what must be beyond a bizarre mode of being for two humans who have decided to withdraw from common civility in order to define their own/mutual world via coupled destruction.It is not a perfect movie but given what money/time the filmmaker and actors had - it is a remarkable product. In terms of explaining the motives and actions of the two young suicide/murderers it is better than 'Elephant' - in terms of being a film that gets under our 'rationalistic' skin it is a far, far better film than almost anything you are likely to see. Flawed but honest with a terrible honesty.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1667cac12b34a738355fc34bcebcdb5",
            "input": "Before I begin, I want to briefly say that this movie in and of itself is very well made and well acted by all involved, including Whittaker, who indeed deserves his nomination. It is highly entertaining, and . . . taken in the right context as a work of FICTION, it is a very good movie. For that, I give it the two stars.However, rather than wasting your time with what you can read a hundred times elsewhere, I want instead to point out the absolute fictional nature of this film and how dangerous it is to sell people a work of fiction as if it is truth. I stress that this film nowhere in the credits lets us know that the main character, Dr. Nicholas Garrigan, is a complete invention of fiction. Rather, it presents this character into a real historical setting, and allows the uninformed viewer to assume he was in fact real, and what they are seeing is the truth. I have no problem with the blending of fact and fiction - but to do so in such a dishonest matter is, in a word, reprehensible.There can be no doubt that Africa, along with most Third World Countries is rife with human misery and suffering. Hollywood has long attempted to capture the suffering of people in these countries on film. But Hollywood also has its eye toward making money. The only true way to capture the suffering that seems to happen everywhere but the West is to either experience it for yourself, or to at least have it captured in an honest documentary.But these depictions of fictional characters in real historical settings can only do so much. At the end of the day, they become less about presenting the facts for the viewer to decide for himself, and more about leading you from image to image and hitting you over the head screaming, \"SEE, WE TOLD YOU IT WAS BAD!\" The seminal example of this can be found by anyone willing to watch the documentary on the DVD after sitting through the movie. Arguably the most shocking image of the film is the viewing of the body of Kay Amin, Idi's second wife, whom he killed when he discovered her infidelity. In the film, we see that her limbs have been severed and reattached in reverse (arms for legs and vice-versa). This is the director making sure you understand that Amin is, as the Gungans say, Bom-bad! But watching the documentary, we learn that this is in fact nothing more than a myth, which the sitting Minister of Health at the time himself tells us is not true.So . . . what . . . they just MAKE UP these things? Why? Because Hollywood has a low opinion of our intelligence, that's why! They don't trust us to come to the right conclusion ourselves. Look, that she was murdered and dismembered is in itself enough for us to conclude that Amin was not the likable guy he portrayed to the media - we don't need this Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE inspired imagery to reinforce that! And this is just the tip of the iceberg. What is also not explained to the casual viewer is that lead character Garrigan is himself fictional. There was no young Scottish doctor taken under Amin's wing. As such, Garrigan is clearly present only for the sake of helping us dumb Westerners understand the African world. The producers seem to thing we won't be interested in a film about Africa unless there is a white face in it. (Ironically, even the titular character is portrayed by an American black actor!) The problem with this is that the movie is no longer an expose of Amin and his regime, but instead an exploitative thriller about a white Westerner coming to Africa for all the wrong reasons, making several horrible mistakes, and then \"redeeming\" himself, even at the cost of three other innocent lives. Honestly, I have to say it is nearly reprehensible to suggest that the real tragic death of Mrs. Amin was the result of a tryst with a fictional Scottish doctor - it almost seems to become a morbid joke for the sake of entertainment! I really wish Hollywood would stop jerking us around for our money. I first realized its propensity to do this with the woefully manipulative A BEAUTIFUL MIND, Ron Howard and Akiva Goldsman's sugary-sweet adaptation of the life of John Nash, which deleted the darker side of the man to present only the tortured hero that America just can't get enough of. The sad truth is that Hollywood has been selling us these fakes for years, and viewers, who are predictably and understandably too lazy or uncaring to investigate for themselves, buy these fake portraits hook, line, and sinker.Look, I'm certainly not suggesting Amin is being turned into a villain he wasn't. My point is, with the truth being so shocking enough to convince us of the brutality of the man, why must Hollywood then go to such fictional lengths? Why must Hollywood continue to insult us by holding our hands through these films? Why can they not trust us to think for ourselves!? Can we not just put the honest portrayals on screen and let the audience decide for themselves? I urge all who continue to watch Hollywood's purportedly \"true\" movies to do yourself the favor of ALWAYS investigating for yourself, and to NEVER assume that what is on screen is even close to the truth!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe6f55c32dde4a6e9ce5198951604b13",
            "input": "I saw Insomniac's Nightmare not to long ago for the first time and I have to say, I really found it to be quite good. If you are a fan of Dominic Monaghan you will love it. The hole movie takes place inside his mind -or does it? The acting from everyone else is a little rushed and shaky and some of the scenes could be cut down but it works out in the end. The extras on the DVD are just as great as the film, if not greater for those Dom fans. It has tons of candid moments from the set, outtakes and a great interview with the director. Anyone who has gone through making an independent film will love to watch Tess (the director), Dom and everyone else on the very small close personal set try to bang out this little trippy creepy film. It was pretty enjoyable and I'm glad to have it in my collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83f762a54e794899a3be571a6c6c1c38",
            "input": "Hail Bollywood and men Directors !Really this is the ultimate limit in utter sacrifice made by Indian Woman !!Viewing the current state of affairs in India where The wives are becoming more vicious day by day and are very possessive about their husbands - the Directors ..also can be called Uncle Scars (refer movie The Lion King) came up with a very new concept on how both the kept and the wife can live together happily ever after sharing everything between themselves ...including the spermikins !!Story line : Married couple - very happy - but accidentally a mishap happens and wife has a miscarriage - lost the foetus along with the capacity of ever becoming a mother !Now in in India, the in- laws usually drive away the daughter- in- law if she fails to give them an heir ! So the wife hits upon a major plan - surrogate mother...but the scientists intervened - \"Sure artificial insemination\" - NO said the artist (Director actually) - \"Neighbourhood will come to know that the daughter - in - law is barren so they are going for surrogate mother !!Neighbours ! society !! gosh the same ones who watch Fashion TV day and night - watching girls between the age group of 14 to 40 ...al in bras and panties - well those neighbors suddenly take an upper hand in family planning and decision making !!SO the wife sends away her husband to a beer bar where girls are dancing on the stage - all mostly uneducated and illiterate - but men love such women as they can satisfy their egos a lot !He hires the lead dancer in the pub - asks her to bear his baby - in exchange for money - she agrees - she comes home - becomes pregnant - wife and kept - both co-exist in the same house - in the mean time the prostitute also gets a taste of household life - so much caring people around - she misses them all and cries silently !! In the mean time - no one in the family comes to know that the real daughter in law is roaming around with a pillow beneath her petticoat !!- the mother or other elderly people never took her for check-ups - nor did they try to feel the baby's movements in the womb !!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed704c35dbeb43448004e6d9239b844b",
            "input": "I was very excited to see that they had made a movie out of my favorite book ever. I didn't realize it was Disney until it was too late. I was appalled by the many omissions of crucial parts of the story. It was as if someone made a movie out of a 4th grader's book report on the novel. Meg did well in school and neither her nor her father wore glasses. Mrs Murray (Meg's mother) was not portrayed as much of a scientist at all; they left out her kitchen laboratory and replaced it with the internet. And that's just the beginning. By halfway through the movie I found myself shouting at the screen, much to the dismay of the other people who were watching the movie who hadn't read the book. I wish I had more thumbs so I could give four thumbs down for this one. The only good thing I can say is that for a person who has not read the book, this movie is kinda alright.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-078bf31edec642249f1786ed8cccd7b9",
            "input": "I found Horrorvision almost unwatchable. While only 70 minutes in length I still found myself hitting the fast forward button again and again. The acting was of the `if I scream and say ***k a lot I'm intense' school. And the story was at best a scenario that had yet to be fleshed out.While I never go to Full Moon for great film making I have never seen them produce as bad a piece of junk as this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eda38abe00e94e4292d70fd1568445f2",
            "input": "WOW, finally Jim Carrey has returned from the died. This movie had me laughing and crying. It also sends a message that we should all know and learn from. Jeniffer Aniston was great, she will finally have a hit movie under her belt. If you liked liar liar you will love this movie. I give it 9/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac8b9a4a9e284d3eb12ce0fcd42d434c",
            "input": "Like with any movie genre, there are good gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of depression of disappointment about a week since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That film is \"The General\", unrelated to the 1926 silent film of the same name. This is a very dry, very slow gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather flimsy endeavor.Like \"Goodfellas\" (1990) and \"American Gangster\" (2007)—two superior mob movies—\"The General\" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to robbing museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous \"Goodfellas\" (1990) and the first two \"Godfather\" films, I was expecting too much from \"The General.\" But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a bad film had I not seen the aforementioned masterpieces before being swamped by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not even ones made in modern-day times. \"Schindler's List\" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. \"The General\", made just five years after \"Schindler's List\" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like \"Schindler's List\" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was \"okay…so what?\" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson character because the way the Cahill character is written is simply flat and dull. Gleeson just plays the common criminal and does not strike out with the impact the real Martin Cahill obviously did. If a character is killed off (as they always are in gangster films), we feel nothing. No remorse, no relief, no surprise, nothing. We just say \"so what?\" And that's all I did during the entire running time of this very flimsy, very poorly-made crime film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04cc6dc777ac4556a90b2e49d67a996d",
            "input": "A famous orchestra conductor, Daniel Dareus, suffers what appears a heart attack as he finished conducting a concert. Suddenly, we watch him as he arrives in the small town that he has left years before. Since he left so young, and having his name changed contributes to give him a new persona. He has bought the old school building where he plans to stay. The building needs a lot of work. One would expect a man in his position to have all the comforts of the world he left behind to be installed in his new abode, but no, Daniel puts up with the harsh winter in his own way.The local pastor, Stig, whose church has a small choir, comes calling to see if he can interest Daniel in helping, but the conductor has no desire to go back to music. Daniel begins to explore his new universe. The town's people leave him alone. He makes an impression on Lena, who works in the local store where he goes to get his food supplies. Little by little, he comes around and decides to involve himself with the choir. Lena will ultimately fall in love with Daniel.At first, the relationship between Daniel and the choir members is not exactly what he expected. As they get to know him better, they come around to accept him and make him one of them. His new position doesn't endear him to the woman who used to be in charge. The members of the choir are a motley crew, but they realize the change Daniel has made in the way they interpret different songs. The new piece composed for Gabriella, a battered wife, makes a great impact in her life and that of her fellow singers.Daniel's ideas for the repertoire clash with Stig's own. The vicar suddenly begins seeing Daniel in a new light; he is a tormented man who likes to read pornographic magazines before making love to his wife, Siv. His ideas clash with the dogma, as Siv points to him. Stig decides to try to put a stop to what he considers an unhealthy influence of Daniel by firing him as the head of the choir.The choir, which has been invited to participate in a competition travels to Austria. Daniel, who by now has fallen totally for Lena, has a chance to show for the first time in his life his feelings for her when she starts to gets doubts about their relationship. Daniel who is late for his own concert, gets to hear them making extraordinary music even though he is not in among them.Kay Pollak, the director of this enormously appealing film, shows he was the man to direct it. The story involves the viewer from the start. Great part of the success of the movie goes to the ensemble cast that was put together. William Nykvist, who plays the leading role is the best excuse for watching the film. Frida Hallgren, Niklas Falk, Ylva Loof, do excellent work for Mr. Pollak.Stefan Nilsson is the composer for most of the beautiful music one hears. Harald Gunnar Paalgard's cinematography makes the film look better capturing different seasons for the viewer in their beauty.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9d540b40232438e88ffd9e9edca7675",
            "input": "For Romance's sake, as a married man. The following two films are recommended.1. Brief Encounter by David Lean (1945), UKWell, when a woman goes to a railway station, something may happen. And it happened! How she longed to be there, in a little tavern waiting for the man of her dreams. But she was married... the man was a stranger to the fantasizing woman2. Xiao Cheng Zhi Chun by Fei Mu (1948), ChinaWell, when a woman goes to the market to buy fish, grocery and medicine, passing through the ruins of an ancient wall in a small town, there is much to think about, about the melancholy of her life, her sick husband in self-pity and lack of future...Just when a jubilant young doctor arrived, something happened... the doctor was a high school honey of the fantasizing womanIn both movies, from great directors of UK and China, the passion vs restraint was so intense, yet in the end the intimate feelings had not developed into any physical contacts. That leaves you with a great after-taste, sniffing it intensely without biting it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb1ea067927147d89257cdf99edc60c2",
            "input": "The latest Rumor going around is that Vh1 is starting casting calls for I Love New York 3 mid 2008. So does this mean Budah or Tailor made dumped New York or does this mean New York dumped the winner?I know Flavor of Love is coming up to it's 3rd season, so now with a Flavor of Love 3 and a I love New York 3.....will there ever be a true winner???I've also heard a few rumors that Chance WILL be brought back for the 3rd Season of I Love New York!!!! I have also heard rumors that New York will be Specially featured on Flavor of Love 3. Hopefully this was not too much of a spoiler for the ending of I Love New York 2....I'm just stating the latest rumor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-799c3bef284d4d93a6a0c49e820f5d76",
            "input": "Monika Mitchell's showbiz satire has some laughs and some premeditated violence. I wouldn't say blood-soaked; but there is insult and injury. Max Matteo(John Cassini)is a character actor that has a quirky adaptable presence on screen, but he has a terrible track record of being chosen for the parts he goes after. There is always a producer's nephew or seemingly trivial reason for his not being awarded the role he seeks. Well, the best thing to do is get rid of the competition...Max becomes obsessed with such thoughts. The rewarding career is just a swing, push and shot away. Other cast members: Rene Rivera, Molly Parker, Jennifer Beals, Frank Cassini and cameos by Eric Roberts and Sandra Oh. Well, that's show business...or is it?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d99db4af93dc4721ab351fac6a22b194",
            "input": "\"The Screaming Skull\" opens with a warning and an offer for free burial services if you should die watching it - Now there's a hook! The story itself has a fairly interesting premise for a horror flick: scheming husband marries a wealthy woman with a history of mental illness, then attempts to convince her that she's going insane with shrill noises, mysterious knocking and skulls that turn up at inopportune times. Add to the formula a sufficiently creepy gardener who still cherishes the memory of the man's first wife who he was devoted to. Maybe it's just that the 1950's didn't have the technology to pull off some of the scare scenes needed to juice up this movie, the techniques used here seem contrived and mundane. But then again, when I first saw \"House on Haunted Hill\" as a nine year old, it gave me the heebie jeebies in the same way I'm sure this film did for young viewers of the same era.Don't get me wrong, the film is not terrible, it just seems to get tedious at times. But there's some great atmospheric tension in the generally huge but unfurnished Whitlock home, and the gardens and pool are a nice touch. For me the best played out scene involves Eric Whitlock (John Hudson) going maniacal in the pond attempting to retrieve the hidden skull, he just wades right in clothes and all, in neat contrast to the mentally challenged gardener (director Alex Nicol in a dual role). It makes you wonder who the real dimwit was.In it's own good way, perhaps the most shocking thing about the film: how about that neat roadster the Whitlock's make their first appearance in - gull wing doors in 1958! That at least made me jump out of my seat!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f66cad4a3f8c4045a94dd790b1c4394c",
            "input": "What an absolute pile of pants. Having read Chris Brookmyre's books religiously since I came across \"Quite Ugly...\", I was delighted to find out that this drama had been commissioned.I obviously had too much faith. Nesbitt is probably the best thing in this show - and even he doesn't quite fit. How anyone can read the book, and then adapt it to this piece of dross is beyond me.Entire characters are changed, situations are dropped, and to see Parlablane's dramatic break-in reduced to Nesbitt doing a quick chin up and sliding open a bay window... it brought tears to my eyes.I dread to think what's going to happen with \"Country Of The Blind\" if this is the benchmark...Please, just avoid it...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1cd03b506d6244ec9fd30df22f350686",
            "input": "You like to solve mysteries? You like complex narrations? This is for you. Brilliant, clever movie by Francis Leclerc(son of a legendary french Canadian signer Felix Leclerc). Flashy photo and clever editing is the word of Leclerc, strongly helped by Roy Dupuis who's dythirambic in the lead role.The plot is about Alexandre Tourneur, veterinary in his 40's who just woke up from a coma after being unplugged by somebody unknown. Tourneur is struggling to remember who hit him as he was ending a deer's sufferings on the road. Throughout the struggling, he has weird behavior and it seems like something took over him.Not spooky, but very mysterious and well played movie. I have my hypothesis on the ending(I think the Indian caused the accident) but this ending was open to any explanations.I strongly recommend it 9.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d79253d33f84dd688b3e716a5c6389c",
            "input": "I've been watching \"Dick Tracy\" for years, and as a result it's become a vital part of my life - it was with me throughout childhood and I used to see it quite often. Seeing it now, as an adult, it's still a very good movie - dark, satiric and incredibly misunderstood. About the only thing that can be said is the Oscar nomination Pacino received - other than that it is rarely discussed and didn't make much of a fuss when it came out.Pacino is over-the-top but to good effect as he's clearly having loads of fun. Beatty is great as Dick Tracy and behind the camera manages to capture the atmosphere of a film noir comic book better than any other film, possibly, I have ever seen. Just taking a look at one scene from the film is breathtaking. The lighting, velvet overtones and smog/smoke combine to create a great effect.There are some really funny cameos including one by Dustin Hoffman as \"Mumbles,\" and I don't think there are any flaws at all in terms of acting - even the mandatory kid-character is far better than expected.Overall, a really fine movie that has become misunderstood over the years since its release and is incredibly underrated with only 5.7/10 average on IMDb. The critics' reviews are very positive (check out RottenTomatoes.com) and after seeing the film once again it's not hard to see why - this is a perfect example of capturing the essence of a comic book, from style to eccentricity.Highly recommended. 4.5/5 stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dee35029c48042918a0a03877232808e",
            "input": "One thing I always liked about Robert Ludlum thrillers is just when you think you have it figured out, it goes in a completely different direction. There are so many twists and turns in this film that I have a sore neck from watching.One thing I also like about director John Dahl (Kill Me Again, Rounders, Unforgettable) is that he can be depended upon to direct and, in this case, write (with his brother Rick) a good story.Now, add Nick Cage, Dennis Hopper, Lara Flynn Boyle, and J.T. Walsh to the cast and you have a story that will keep your interest even if they are playing characters that all of them have perfected. Dahl seems to bring out the best in folks, and this will keep you interested, and guessing, until the very end.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4c600ffbdea4a15b3bec759ee564f4d",
            "input": "Just when I thought I would finish a whole year without giving a single movie a \"Bomb\" rating, a friend brought this notorious turd to my house last night. I feared the worst knowing its reputation, and it was as God-awful as I'd anticipated. This is a Mexican-made mess, dubbed into English, and produced by K. Gordon Murray. It's got terrible sets and effects, and features a rather frightening Santa who doesn't operate at the North Pole, but instead from a cloud in outer space, and who doesn't have little elves helping him make his toys but rather all different groups of children from practically every country there is. The opening sequence, where St. Nick chuckles heartily as he observes monitors showing all these kiddies working hard while singing terrible holiday songs in a variety of languages, seems to go on forever, and with no story. Obviously, THIS Santa Claus doesn't observe the child labor laws!Eventually we get some nasty and slinky red-suited apprentice of the devil himself traveling from hell to Earth, just to make little kids naughty and turn Santa's Christmas Eve rounds into a nightmare. Watching this movie is a trippy and twisted experience, and it's bound to frighten little children and turn them off Santa Claus and the holidays forever. Oddly, the name of Jesus Christ is mentioned often in this Christmas film, which somehow makes it all the creepier in the context of all the bizarre things that are going on. This easily makes my personal list of the \"Worst Movie I've Ever Seen\", but I'm sure that's nothing unique.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b5f9a7ac4a024ef2ba3cff07022fb39c",
            "input": "Recreation of 1950's (London) Soho and the up-and-coming people. Based on a cult novel.Julian Temple is a video director. No more, no less. Give him 15 million dollars and he will make you a 15 million dollar pop video. Here he forgets that two minutes with people that can't really act is one thing - but two hours? What was he thinking of. Besides who are the audience? Who cares about a book that was well remembered way-back-when. The usual London story of the chancer taking his chance. What could really drag this film even further down? Oh I know, third rate songs that sound like they were made up on the spot. David Bowie crones the film title over and over a few times and that is the highlight. The soundtrack album is clay pigeon material.There is one good thing though. Good recreation of period Soho. Shame they couldn't think of anything to put in front of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7930ecec353440caa71eeb48a06db1a5",
            "input": "Simple story... why say more? It nails it's premise. World War 3 kills all or most of the human race and we're viewing 2 of the survivors. The message is that the 2 warring sides should not have been at odds in the first place. Distilled down to representatives from each side, we see they have everything to come together for:Security... Finding resources... food, shelter, etc... Survival... Love...At the end they've decided to pool their resources, (she finally does), so they will survive. Simple story, expressed in the limited budget of the early 60s television landscape. We see it in 2009 as somewhat old and maybe predictable. In the early 60s, no one had seen such stuff... I give it a 10...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad301ca203724be5bcfa34cb8145e446",
            "input": "So I rented this from Netflix because somebody gave me Roger Ebert's book \"I hated, hated, hated this movie\" and he gave this one a rare zero-star rating in the book and said at the end of his original review \"Mad Dog Time should be cut up to provide free ukulele picks for the poor\". So I figured from Ebert saying that I would see if it was really as bad as he said it was. I know most society says not to listen to critics and to judge for yourself but I could not express how much I hated this piece of junk like Ebert did and never since Ebert's review of Rob Reiner's \"North\" where he said he hated that movie ten times had I ever heard such a brilliant hatred movie review. Here we have Richard Dreyfuss as a gangster which I don't think it would be terrible to see Dreyfuss as a gangster if the screenplay for this movie were written well. But above all the other things that were awful about this \"movie\" I can certainly tell you the script was not written well at all. While the movie starts off with Jeff Goldblum saying that he enjoyed watching Dreyfuss's girlfriend while Dreyfuss was at a criminal hospital the movie starts off with some decent dialog after the opening credits. But after that first 4 or 5 minutes the other 85 minutes just consists of dumb characters talking pointless garbage for 30 seconds then someone gets shot. Then there are a whole bunch of jokes about Dreyfuss being mentally ill. Haha. Not funny. Then we get an unpleasant and unfunny scene parodying Frank Sinatra's \"My Way\" sang by Gabriel Byrne apparently to insult Dreyfuss. Of course because the screenplay was written on the level of a sixth grader Dreyfuss shoots Byrne over five times and Byrne just will not die. Are we as the audience supposed to even care or find that mildly funny? I can certainly tell you I did not care or find that funny. Not only am I disappointed in Dreyfuss (who I admire much as an actor) for producing and starring in this tripe but I am also extremely disappointed in Jeff Goldblum because this was released the same year that \"Independence Day\" was the top grossing film of the year and ultimately one of the most successful films in history. Did Goldblum feel that \"Independence Day\" would be a flop and then just take the next role that was offered to him to make some money if \"Independence Day\" were a bomb? What did an Oscar winner and the star of two of the biggest money making films in history find remotely enjoyable about this? The opening sequence of \"Mad Dog Time\" says that the movie is set on another planet. I only wish now that I have wasted 93 minutes watching this trash that it would have stayed and opened in theaters on the planet where it supposedly takes place so that way everyone on this planet would never here of this ridiculous waste of 93 minutes out of my life that I will never get back. Ebert saying the movie should have been cut up is not good enough I am afraid. Every copy of \"Mad Dog Time\" should have gasoline poured all over it and be lit on fire. I have yet to top a worst movie I have ever seen because this one has won it's honor as the worst movie ever.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af0d04c18c8848d48ef0176a1dfd3671",
            "input": "Emilio Miraglia's first Giallo feature, The Night Evelyn Came Out of the Grave, was a great combination of Giallo and Gothic horror - and this second film is even better! We've got more of the Giallo side of the equation this time around, although Miraglia doesn't lose the Gothic horror stylings that made the earlier film such a delight. Miraglia puts more emphasis on the finer details of the plot this time around, and as a result it's the typical Giallo labyrinth, with characters all over the place and red herrings being thrown in every few minutes. This is a definite bonus for the film, however, as while it can get a little too confusing at times; there's always enough to hold the audience's interest and Miraglia's storytelling has improved since his earlier movie. The plot opens with a scene that sees two young girls fighting, before their grandfather explains to them the legend behind a rather lurid painting in their castle. The legend revolves around a woman called 'The Red Queen' who, legend has it, returns from the grave every hundred years and kills seven people. A few years later, murders begin to occur...Even though he only made two Giallo's, Miraglia does have his own set of tributes. It's obvious that the colour red is important to him, as it features heavily in both films; and he appears to have something against women called 'Evelyn'. He likes castles, Gothic atmospheres and stylish murders too - which is fine by me! Miraglia may be no Argento when it comes to spilling blood, but he certainly knows how to drop an over the top murder into his film; and here we have delights involving a Volkswagen Beetle, and a death on an iron fence that is one of my all time favourite Giallo death scenes. The female side of the cast is excellent with the stunning Barbara Bouchet and Marina Malfatti heading up an eye-pleasing cast of ladies that aren't afraid to take their clothes off! The score courtesy of Bruno Nicolai is catchy, and even though it doesn't feature much of the psychedelic rock heard in The Night Evelyn Came Out of the Grave; it fits the film well. The ending is something of a turn-off, as although Miraglia revs up the Gothic atmosphere, it comes across as being more than a little bit rushed and the identity of the murderer is too obvious. But even so, this is a delightfully entertaining Giallo and one that I highly recommend to fans of the genre!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e83ba57405c04e6aa87e2a2ad97f0823",
            "input": "This is a great movie to see with your girlfriend. My friend and I both love dance and ran into this movie at the video store. We had to get it. With no violence and such a warming story its a great movie to relax to and just enjoy your night. I would recommend this movie to any family or just a bunch of girls looking for a cute movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9e649cb820c4f51aba6ff08d47480e2",
            "input": "I didn't even knew this movie existed until shortly after seeing Blade: Trinity, I was messing around on the Trinity board when I saw some user mention how the Wes Craven series is a lot better then the 'crap' that's Blade, So I did my quick research: Checked the scores on IMDb & RottenTomatoes for Dracula: Ascension, and somewhere along the search I found out that this is a sequel to Dracula 2000. I also noticed that within the Wes Craven Dracula boards there was a real strong following for this movie which is a big contradiction to the scores I was seeing.Now let's take a quick personal recap here. I remember seeing Dracula 2000, and I remember not liking it at all, and then seeing the scores of Dracula: Ascension just lowered my expectations even more, but then again, I'm the type of person that truly needs to watch the movie myself (any movie) so that I can form my own opinion.A couple of things I went in knowing when I started watching this movie was that it's low budget, so because of that, I'm going to have to ignore a lot of the v/fx and just figure it's going to compensated by story & acting, I was also slightly impressed by some of the casting in this movie (Jason London, Roy Schieder & Jason Scott Lee)Oh geez… This movie was CHEESY! But cheesy can be entertaining at least, I found it pretty fricken laughable, the bad audio synch from the re-recording of dialogue in a FEW scenes, the stupidity of the characters in this movie. Sure they all knew about vampires and some of the basic things, Luke even had a book on it, but did it prevent them from wanting to purposely get 'infected'? Nope, this is worst then slasher flicks where the girl has to get out of the shower and check out the noise she hears with nothing more than a towel on.I also must've blinked at some point, because I'm not sure how 'Dracula' got clothes on his body, especially since he's big wild and angry & I figure if I was in that situation, I wouldn't want to be the one dressing him.So the movie ends like any middle movie of a trilogy… it doesn't, instead it's a 'Cliff Hangar' where I now get to wait for the 3rd installment 'Legacy'. Oh the entertainment value of Cheesy movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b68413b5808b4bb490df798df7dcf8b9",
            "input": "In Iran, the Islamic Revolution has shaped all parts of life, including everyday things. But people still go on living their lives, generally just doing the things you'd expect, like go to soccer matches to cheer on the national team as it's in the running to qualify for the World Cup. Except women aren't allowed to go to the soccer stadium to watch the game.A frequently funny little film follows the small group of women that were caught sneaking into the soccer stadium and the little group of bored soldiers assigned to guard them in a holding pen just outside the stadium. The absurdity of the situation, the simple wish of these women to cheer on the team (nothing subversive there), and little human touches about the lives of everyone adds up to quite a fine comment on humanity versus the ideology.Amateurish acting, good script and dialogue, a really enjoyable film. Bend It Like Beckham, sort of - a warm heart and a joy in the daily interests and pleasures of people.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8ff994d40704df89e3823139417b41b",
            "input": "This wilfully bizarre adaptation of Borges short story is typical Cox. His strong visual sense is, as usual, undone by the appalling half baked acting of most of the cast. The film is definitely in the surreal tradition of Bunuel's Mexican period, and looks at times like a poor man's take on Lars Von Trier's Elements of Crime. Cox's apparent preference for single takes, jump cuts, and ambient sound recording all work against the film's effectiveness. Worth a look but ultimately disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d372fb43da9843c2ac1c5e098082e89c",
            "input": "Hearing such praise about this play, I decided to watch it when I stumbled across it on cable. I don't see how this \"elivates\" women and their \"struggles\" by focusing on the topic at hand. I guess if you have an interest in stories about women's private parts and how it affects their lives, then this is for you. Otherwise, it's rather dull and boring. If anything, I found it a bit degrading.I inquired with a female friend who also watched this and she thought it was horrible as well. So, it's not just a guy \"not getting it\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e8682f108214d55bad47abd88fbe549",
            "input": "This had a good story...it had a nice pace and all characters are developed cool.I've watched a whole bunch of movies in the last two weeks and this had to be the best one I've seen in the two weeks.Jason Bigg's character was the best though.Even though it was small, it was cleverly crafted from the very beginning.This may be a romantic comedy and I don't like most, but the writing, direction, performing, sound, design overall in all capacity just was really thought out pretty cool.This film scored pretty high out of all the movie's I've seen lately - and the rest were big budget or better publicized.Good job in writing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0405c850e67c430b8e29d38de9e0922d",
            "input": "I've seen this movie at least fifty times and after watching it last week for the first time in a long time I still FELT it.The story itself was incredible but came alive by Spielberg's expertise and the fabulous cast including Whoopi Goldberg, Oprah Winfrey, Danny Glover, and Margaret Avery. Akosua Busia deserved an Oscar nomination for her short but powerful portrayal of Nettie.You'll experience every human emotion while watching this film. I laughed, cried, and got angry. Like most great movies it was looked over by the Academy with a host of nominations but no wins. But this movie, without a doubt, is definitely one of the best films of all time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9511e19376f54f4da1c75bc23a3a7ead",
            "input": "This movie scared the crap out of me! I have to admit that I spent most of the film watching through my fingers but what I saw was really scary. I screamed out loud two or three times during the show.Film-making-wise my favorite aspects were the sound and photography. The sound was particularly great and the setting was really creepy beautiful. I read somewhere that it's some weird husband and wife team that made it. For some reason that makes this even stranger for me. If you enjoy the jumps and jitters of scary movies than this one is for you! Very suspenseful and a great movie to rent with a bunch of friends who love to watch movies curled up on a sofa screaming like little girls!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcd23655d6f14a33ad99cd33f274107b",
            "input": "I have to admit that I went into Fever Pitch with low expectations. It's no huge revelation for me to say that Jimmy Fallon's last movie (Taxi) was Catwomanly bad, and the trailers for Fever Pitch were all right but didn't mesmerize me. I was already preparing some cheesy baseball puns for my review...\"I like Jimmy Fallon, but Taxi was strike one in his movie career. Well, now we've got steeeeee-riiiiiike twoooooooo! One more strike, and it's back to SNL!\" or \"Buy yourself some peanuts and cracker jacks, but don't buy tickets to Fever Pitch. You'll walk out of the theater and never go back!\" Then the movie had to go and be way more entertaining than I was expecting. But hey, I couldn't let my puns go to waste, right? Another reason I thought I wouldn't care for the movie is that I hate the Boston Red Sox. My whole family hates 'em. The mere mention of Pedro Martinez' name sends me running to the bathroom. Oh man, hold on......All right, I'm back. Anyway, my mom, who is a St. Louis Cardinals fan, still believes the World Series was rigged last year. She refuses to believe the Sox won it legitimately. But I'm man enough to admit that Fever Pitch caused me to sympathize, albeit only slightly, with the plight of Red Sox fans.Anybody who has a passion for sports will be able to relate to this movie on some level. Unless you have a favorite sports team you can't fully understand the extreme highs and lows that a fan such as Fallon's Ben can go through. There's nothing quite so fresh as the smell of a new season and nothing quite so smooth as a clean slate. Well, figuratively speaking. It's the joy of being a sports fan. \"Wait 'til next year,\" becomes your mantra, your motto, your prayer - and Fever Pitch effectively captures that essence.I love the fact that the movie takes a fictional story and throws it against the real-life backdrop of the Red Sox' improbable World Series run last year. I don't love it so much that I want to marry it, but you know what I mean. I expected this to be handled in a fairly cheesy manner, and while some of the humor is a little silly, it's actually pretty realistic.You see, Ben's uncle took him to his first Red Sox game when he was 7 years old, and when he died he left Ben his two season tickets. Ben hasn't missed a game in 23 years. At the beginning of each season he has a draft day where he and his friends get together to figure out who gets to go to which games with him. He makes everybody dance for the Yankees games and whenever somebody complains he threatens them with tickets for the games with the Royals (sorry Mr. Shade) and the Devil Rays. It's a very good scene, and it works so well because I actually know of people who do the \"ticket draft day.\" I also must admit that I can relate to when Ben goes to dinner with Lindsey and her parents. The Red Sox are playing a road game, but instead of watching it live on TV Ben decides to tape it. One of the most dangerous things in life is taping a game and then being in public and trying to avoid hearing the result. Been there. It's a very tense and scary situation. Weeeeeell, Ben enters the danger zone when a guy shows up at the restaurant and mentions watching the game. Ben immediately covers his ears and starts shrieking like a banshee so as not to hear the outcome. Lindsey is embarrassed, and her parents don't know what to think. Yeah, sports fans can be weird, I don't deny it. But it's real.Now if you're expecting the crude, edgy stuff that the Farrelly brothers are known for then you could be disappointed. They do have their moments though, like when Ben says he likes how Lindsey sometimes talks out of the side of her mouth \"like an adorable stroke victim,\" but overall this is definitely a softer, more romantic side that the bros are putting on display.That's not to say that the movie ever gets way too sappy. Thankfully, when the sap starts to ooze a bit, the Farrellys know when to pull away. A romantic moment with Lindsey jumping on the field and running over to Ben to declare her undying love for him turns into Ben sincerely replying, \"You've gotta tell me about the outfield. Is it spongy?\" Jimmy Fallon proves that with the right material he can handle himself well on the big screen, and Drew Barrymore remains a constant source of romantic comedy charm. Fever Pitch is just good, solid entertainment that takes a somewhat fresh look at the romantic comedy genre. It's a movie that guys and gals can both relate to. Particularly the guys who practice sports fanaticism at some point during the year and the ladies who must deal with 'em.Now if the Red Sox fans could please shut up about the \"Curse of the Bambino\" I would appreciate it. My Memphis Tigers have NEVER won the NCAA basketball championship, so I officially declare my plight greater than yours.THE GIST Fans of Jimmy Fallon, Drew Barrymore, romantic comedy, the Red Sox, baseball, or sports fanaticism in general should consider giving Fever Pitch a look. I wouldn't go out of my way to rush and see it at the first available time, but it'll make a great matinée.Rating: 3.25 (out of 5)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4f1e135a4ed4991910bb7c7f34bc553",
            "input": "IN COLD BLOOD is masterfully directed and adapted by Richard Brooks. However, it's also so bent on being realistic, it's sometimes more clinical than entertaining. Recounting the brutal killing of a Midwest family, author Truman Capote focused on minutia, wrapping himself and the reader up in the subject AND subjects! Brooks departs wildly from that approach in favor of something closer to docudrama. Although he films on actual locations, he keeps his distance. The murderers are portrayed as depraved imbeciles, which surely they were. They're not seen as misunderstood souls (as in the Capote book) and the savagery of their act is horrifyingly blunt. Scott Wilson and Robert Blake are excellent as the killers as is the supporting cast, including John Forsythe and Paul Stewart as the reporter (the Capote \"character?\") The landmark photography is by the great Conrad Hall.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42768597dedd4a888caf4b9e6f6573c9",
            "input": "Max had the V-8, Trace (Wheels of Fires last and only hero) has a jet engine on the back of his car allowing him to make unintentionally humorous faces as he rockets around the halfway desolate wasteland. Be amazed as Mad Max 2 (aka The Road Warrior) is dissected and spliced back together as a new movie albeit filmed in a lackluster manner with bad actors and lousy stunt work.Why is WoF set in a post-apocalyptic wasteland? Simple, The Road Warrior was! Actually any questions can be answered by: it was that way in the Road Warrior! Except for the out of work mutant actors from the original 60's The Time Machine film that make a cameo appearance for sake of giving the audience some non-vehicular action to chew on for a few minutes.In typical 80's fashion, all cars driven by bad guys that are bumped or slightly jostled explode in a huge billowing explosion. Inevitably all car chases will happen near convenient cliff sides and cars will unavoidably fall off of them. Along with this 80's cinematic wild ride is the general rampant misogyny in this style of cheapie film. Generally I waited for Trace's rocket powered car to accelerate and shoot flames so there would be another shot of him scrunching up his face like he is supposed to be tough, which comes off more as him looking constipated. Badly choreographed action coupled with bad acting makes this film a true sinker. The unintentional humor value even manages to wear thin.Rats: Nights of Terror by Bruno Mattei is superior. And that in and of itself is saying a lot! By this count 2020 Texas Gladiators is a cinematic masterpiece compared to Wheels of Fire. A poor Road Warrior knock off that doesn't have near enough cheese factor to make the film watchable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a125ad13a8074da5b5c6487440a28658",
            "input": "This unpleasant film has little to recommend it. Dolph Lundgren gives a performance that is better than either this script or his other action films have allowed. And there are occasional snippets of dialog that suggest the film might have been able to provide some insight into a bizarre subculture.But no. Motivations are either murky or trite. Most of the acting is sub-par. The script creates needless confusion. And the director's needless fascination with focusing on gore is distracting.It's hard to imagine who the audience is for this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0778bbfabeba4ca19ba0d99ec97e88b3",
            "input": "After watching Revolt Of The Zombies starring future Academy Award winner Dean Jagger I was left with one burning question. How was a society that created these ultimate warrior fighting machines ever defeated in the first place? That's the question you'll be pondering if you take time to watch Revolt Of The Zombies. Towards the end of World War I, the French discover a cult from occupied Cambodia where these undead creatures who cannot be stopped with bullets form a brigade of monks who go over the top and dislodge the Hun.This scares the living fecal matter out of everyone concerned so an international expedition is formed to find out destroy the secret of these zombies so no nation can get their hands on it and rule the world.But we've got some dissent in those ranks. First is Snidely Whiplash villain Roy D'Arcy who murders the Buddhist monk who has the secret and second is Dean Jagger. Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac as we all know and he's determined to woo Dorothy Stone away from rival Robert Noland.I think you've got some idea how this comes out, especially since a race of zombies didn't conquer the world for one country. Dean Jagger as he got the Oscar for Twelve O'Clock High must have shuddered every time he thought about this film and the awful dialog he tried to give a spark of sincerity to.Moral of the story, you might make an ultimate warrior with the zombie potion and the zombie chant, but you can't make an ultimate love slave.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d503de08ded4e4c9913c511c56dbe90",
            "input": "First, I am not really a fan of the whole \"things eating flesh in disgusting new ways\" genre of film but I am a bad movie afficionado so my next door neighbor said he had the worst movie ever. This one. So we start watching it. First and foremost - it is recorded on a camcorder sans tripod! Second the voice of the skinny white doctor is dubbed by a large black man! Third, none of the dialogue makes any sense. Fourth, the zombie scenes, though unconvincing and chockful of poor makeup and tomato paste, lead me to believe the director (and my next door neighbor) are in need of psychological help. It's funny for about 5 minutes but it gets old fast. It's so amateurish it's like watching a poorly dubbed high school video yearbook.... with zombies. A note to anyone involved with this movie - I want the 20 minutes of my life I spent watching this, before I fell asleep, back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e65fe4cdfd849a38cf3aa0538db4e10",
            "input": "he is the quintessential narcissist and manipulator; in this case, portraying attorney (and murderer) Tom Capano.Kathryn Morris is sympathetic as victim, Anne Marie Fahey, but in the beginning is a bit too much the victim. We are sorry for the situation, but become simultaneously disgusted after seeing his victimization of several other women (including Rachel Ward) as well.The sad part is where she is actually getting help with her self-esteem issues, and Capano actually had her psychologist killed. Pretty hard to believe, but this was based on a true story.There is a cameo with Olympia Dukakis (excellent) as Capano's mother. All in all, an interesting story because it is based on a true murder, and you will want to read Ann Rule's book to get the accurate details. 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bfee2152a321454b9a08f29476c59f88",
            "input": "Fact: Stargate SG-1 is a cheesy sci-fi TV series.There's no escaping facts. How much you try to excuse yourself or explain it Stargate SG-1 remains a cheesy sci-fi TV series.Stargate SG-1 does borrow and steal ideas briskly. Special FX aren't nearly as impressive as they could have been and the action isn't going to blow you out of the chair. Or couch for that matter either.But, and this is where I really think Stargate SG-1 deserves all the credit it can get, for each and every episode or stolen idea I think you can count at least one cheesy sci-fi movie that's actually worse than a one hour TV episode.In fact some episodes actually could probably have been 90 minutes long and still have been better than most movies.And being able to keep that quality throughout the show and keep delivering and pushing the storyline further is what makes Stargate SG-1 special.I am very picky with my selections. I follow perhaps one or two TV series at most and I hold pretty high standards which made me even more surprised when I found myself caught.So for those who decide to brush of Stargate SG-1 as yet another tacky sci-fi show, don't. Stick with it and you'll see what I'm talking about.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e4d90cecca54810b0abd27361b9e0c4",
            "input": "Rock 'n' Roll High School was one of the best movies ever made! I think the only reason it was so awesome was because of The Ramones! You couldn't have made the same movie and put something like the Sex Pistols, or The Clash in place of The Ramones, it just wouldn't have been the same. dey young, clint howard, Vincent Van Patten, Mary Woronov, Paul Bartel, and the hall monters, just added to the movie. The whole entire movie is about The Ramones...especially Joey! So everybody showed see Rock 'n' Roll High School if your a huge fan of real PUNK. Not the sissy new crap...but the loud, and fast kind. The kind only The Ramones could do. R.I.P (Rest In Peace) Joey Ramone 1951-2001. Dee Dee Ramone 1952-2002!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f548ad387f1f422b828bd33ed112f7a1",
            "input": "I really must have caught a different film from the rest of the commentators on this site because at a screening of the film last night the audience was so mortified by the dialoge that (I'm not even kidding)half walked out. Shot as if the filmmaker thought he were approaching some daring new territory by presenting a homosexual coming-of-age story, the film utilizes David Lynch inspired visuals with Fassbinder inspired acting. The performances in this film are so dull and bored that I figured one of the actors was going to pass out by how uninspired they seemed to be by the script. What's worse is that it's colored like an episode of Miami Vice. I don't know who this director thinks he is; maybe he has pretensions of the surreal like Bunuel, Jordowsky, etc. But the problem is that all of the afore mentioned directors display a level of erudite sensibility that is sorely lacking here. I could understand the meaningfulness of this film about ten years ago, but when we've got masterpieces such as Bad Eduction, Mysterious Skin and Show Me Love why bother with this cinematic turd? There is nothing new to be seen here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6982b1c442d43ce81270f5c0df51f9b",
            "input": "Here's the kind of love story that I do enjoy watching. And mostly, it's for two reasons. One, it concentrates of young people, VERY young people. People who are still in their teens and are experiencing love for the first time, or at least think they are. All of us have been there in our lives and \"The Man in the Moon\" is a magnificent reflection upon our memories, maybe adding on a few more details and enhancing it further than any of us have experienced. The second reason is that is a love triangle. And I do believe that as teens, it's the most dramatic. And the story is so well developed that you believe the characters could really be in love, or are just so new to love that they just strongly believe they are and after a tragedy or so occurs, will believe it for the rest of their lives.The cast of \"The Man in the Moon\" is full of great talented names. It stars Sam Waterston, who is truly a versatile actor, well capable of playing tough district attorneys as well as strict, yet caring and wise fathers as in this film. Also there is Tess Harper, Jason London, and a young, young Reese Witherspoon. You look at the young, talented actress as she is at age fourteen and you think that about ten years down the road, she's going to win the Academy Award. All members of the cast pull off great performances and with the dialogue of the compelling screenplay, they are enhanced into looking like real people in real situations. As if it all really happened. This the kind of movie that I would like to see come out more often. Love story or not. I would love to see films that make everything look real and is not phony or disbelievable in any way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d370e00de42b4924bd32d0636e5880a2",
            "input": "Ok, first of all, I am a huge zombie movie fan. I loved all of Romero's flicks and thoroughly enjoyed the re-make of Dawn of the Dead. So when I had heard every single critic railing this movie I was still optimistic. I mean, critics hated Resident Evil, and while it may not be a particularly great film, I enjoyed it if not for the fact that it was just a fun zombie shoot-em up with a half decent plot. This however, is pure crap. Terrible dialogue, half-assed plot, and video game scenes inserted into the film. Who in their right mind thought that was a good idea. The only thing about this movie (I use the term loosely) that I enjoyed was Jurgen Prochnow as Captain Kirk (Ugh). While his name throws originality out the window, you can see in his performance that he knows he's in a god awful film and he might as well make the best of it. Everyone else acts as if they're doing Shakespeare. And very badly I might add. Basically the only reason anyone should see this monstrosity is if you a.) Are a huge zombie buff and must see every zombie flick made or b.) Like to play MST3K, the home game. See it with friends and be prepared for tons of unintentional laughs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-748893aaed3a497f94ca3f7729209d62",
            "input": "After the unexpected accident that killed an inexperienced climber (Michelle Joyner). Eight months has passed... The Rocky Mountain Rescue receive a distress call set by a brilliant terrorist mastermind Eric Quaien (John Lithgow). Quaien has lost three large cases that has millions of dollars inside. Two experienced climbers Walker (Sylvester Stallone) and Tucker (Micheal Rooker) and a helicopter pilot (Janine Turner) are to the rescue but they are set by a trap by Quaien and his men. Now the two climbers and pilot are forced to play a deadly game of hide and seek. While Quaien is trying to find the millions of dollars and he kidnapped Tucker to find the money. Once Tucker finds the money, Tucker will be dead. Against explosive firepower, bitter cold and dizzying heights. Walker must outwit Quaien for survival.Directed by Renny Harlin (Driven, Mindhunters, A Nightmare on Elm Street 4:The Dream Master) made an entertaining non-stop action picture. This film is a spectacular, exciting, visually exciting action picture with plenty of dark humour as well. This was one of the biggest hits of 1993. This is one of Harlin's best film. Lithgow is a terrific entertaining villain. Stallone certainly made an short comeback of this sharp thriller. This is probably Harlin's best work as a filmmaker.DVD has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an terrific-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has an running commentary track by the director with comments by Stallone. DVD also has technical crew commentary as well. DVD has behind the scenes featurette, two deleted scenes with introduction by the director and more. Do not miss this great action film. Screenplay by Micheal France (Fantastic Four) and actor:Stallone (The Rocky Series). Based on a premise by John Long. Excellent Cinematography by Alex Thomson, B.S.C. (Alien³, Demolition Man, Legend). Oscar Nominated for Best Sound, Best Sound Editing and Best Visual Effects. Panavision. (****/*****).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e2f1202902843cd8f09f0b22d3af745",
            "input": "A below average looking video game is turned into some sort of conspiracy to have the next terrorist discovered in the USA backyard. Welcome to the lunacy of cheaply made direct to video movies. Its full of no-name actors and actresses with little valuable plot.Anyway, this strange game goes on and our \"hero\" bets real money and does good at it. It is sort of like gambling, except the gambling part is gone and it sucks. Instead its an online game with little real value and you get authorities on your tail if you do good.What makes it even stranger is that two strange computer programs battle it out somehow and all is saved in the end. I will leave the viewer to see how it all comes to fruition.Overall, not even worth a $1 rental. Borrow it, please. \"D-\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69dde406490f498a876b68e5c3bb17ab",
            "input": "An excellent documentry. I personally remember this growing up in NYC in the early 80's. This movie is for anyone that wasn't around during that time period.This shows the one thing the African American Gay Underclass felt was solely theirs and the love and camadrie you see is real. The people are real and sadly few are still alive as this is being written. The balls are still held but not to the extent that they were in the the nineteen eighties. That time is gone forever. This is a good pre \"homo thug\" movie. When Queens were really proud to be extroverts. Goodbye to Storyville this is another era gone but greatly documented all hail film!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c00a9cd86eb146e39949249d42168f4b",
            "input": "I'm both amused and disgusted by the people who claim that this movie is so accurate about Vietnam, and WERE NEVER THERE. This movie is about as true about the whole Vietnam war as the Rodney King beating is true about ALL police officers. Yes, bad things do (and did) happen, but in general the people there are just like you and me. They have morals, they are not killing machines, they do not all do drugs. Atrocities were the exception in Vietnam, not the rule. They happened far more infrequently than the \"hype\" would lead you believe. Oliver Stone has a knack for making movies that show the Vietnam war as this brutal bloodbath, but are based as much in reality as Star Wars. If you honestly believe the stereotypes of Vietnam, do yourself a favour and learn the truth. Fact: the Viet Cong and NVA did far worse things to the South Vietnamese than ANY soldier in the US Armed Forces ever did. Fact: the soldiers in World War II treated the enemy far worse in general than the soldiers in Vietnam did, and they were WELCOMED when they came home. The fine Americans who served this country in Vietnam deserve our respect; though the war was badly fought from a political standpoint, no one could have asked for more from our soldiers, and it is a great disservice to assert that this kind of \"mostly true\" fiction is the way things really were there.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e912930f766c42e6a224f2bf6b08c866",
            "input": "As far as the movie goes, it's an OK science fiction movie. It has a lot of cool stuff in it, and some quality scenes. That said, it's not that good, and some of the stuff is pretty far fetched...As for calling this another cube-movie is utter and complete bullsh!t. This is the very definition of milking a great and inventive original movie... The whole feel to it can be somewhat translated into the core of the first, but the introduction of people/androids as part of the \"team\" behind the cube itself is somewhat a stretch...I gave this a 3*** because of the backstabbing of the original. This one should have been kept sterile in so many parts of the movie that there is no place or time to mention them all...Watchable for those who have not seen Cube & Hypercube, but not recommendable for fans of the series...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1643784c3bd4742b4c2bd3c783a4fdf",
            "input": "This movie is simply awesome.It was a very sensitive issue and movie was superb.This movie did not create any controversy in India (as far as i know) and its publicity was also kept low.Initially i thought that this movie would simply be a waste of time since most of the Indian directors and producers used to change the theme even though its very sensitive and adds a love story in original story and spoils the whole thing...most of the Indian viewers would agree on this topic if they remember Ashoka, Mangal Pandey,LOC etc..There have been so many movies in India which would have become milestone or mega hits if the love story part would not be unnecessarily added.But its treatment is pretty similar to Pinjar movie (also a must watch).If it counts then i would like to thank Anil Kapoor ( producer ) and Firoz Abbas Khan ( the director) for making such a great movie..",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1168fd3e5754bf49d7823c298ac2e7d",
            "input": "This film is about a family trying to come to terms with the death of the mother/wife by moving to Genova, Italy.The plot of \"Genova\" sounds promising, but unfortunately it is empty and without focus. The film only consists of a collection of scenes depicting the daily life of the family, such as swimming, taking piano lessons or cooking eggs. Most of such scenes are redundant and tiresome, completely failing to engage viewers emotionally. The ending is very disappointing as it is not spectacular, moving or emotional. I can safely say that I am disappointed and bored by \"Genova\" The only thing good about the film is the sunny weather and the beauty of Genova. \"Genova\" can serve as an extended tourism advertisement for the city, but not as a film to be enjoyed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48056f9334e04e37ba88103ec9213d9d",
            "input": "\"I went to the movies, to see 'Beat Street' / it wasn't bad, it was kinda' neat / 'Krush Groove' was a flick, that I didn't mind / but when it came to 'Rappin', I drew the line.\" Word to your mother.Want me to stop?That's just a small sample of the stupa-fly style of rhymin' on display in this waste of film and location permits. This movie is seriously wack (thats 80s-speak for just f*cking awful). As an emcee, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of an actor. And as an actor, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of a bodybuilder.Any film calling itself \"Rappin'\" had better deliver at that genre's highest standard of the time. So why were 6 year olds rolling in the aisles, even back in the day when standards were so knee-high-to-\"Webster\"-low? Because this rap is weak. So weak that not even B.E.T. or Comedy Central will touch it with a 10-foot gold-rope chain.Blondie's \"Rapture\" is def poetry next to this bit of Dr. Suess in the hood. So don't be a boobie, avoid this movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d324caf9ef854aafa7bc67eb112fa51a",
            "input": "When our local TV station first launched, it filled a lot of its schedule with old British programming. \"Lock Up Your Daughters!\" was duly aired, and I -- swayed by the opening few seconds of the film -- popped in a blank tape. Best thing I ever did.The actors are beautifully suited to their characters and bring them to delightful life, complete with appropriate accents (Christopher Plummer's Foppington will leave you in stitches, as will Hoyden and her family). Double entendres abound, plot-line wheels within wheels mix and match the characters, hilarious sight gags lurk in every scene, and risqué comments are made on a regular basis.I showed the film to friends a few years ago and they called the piece \"a lost treasure,\" as much for the cast as for the story. To this day I can crack up just thinking about the dialog. Should this gem ever find its way to a DVD release, I'll be at the front of the line.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-407ee3d655fb4cac94a3a2b8ed121b5b",
            "input": "A few months ago, I was involved in a debate with another IMDb poster (Hey, Kmadden) about this film. The poster insisted that if I gave 'Flushed Away' a chance, I would like it. Based partially on that argument, I agreed to watch the film.'Flushed Away' has good intentions (At least on Aardman's part), but lacks the strength to pull it all together. Its best asset is sewer rat/boat captain, Rita (Played by Kate Winselt), who, IMO, should have been the movie's main character instead of Roddy (Hugh Jackman). Rita's cool, tough, and interesting, while Roddy spends much of his screen time sniveling.One of the things that bothered me most about 'FA' is the repetition of jokes that aren't funny to begin with. When Roddy gets hit in the crouch, the film makes sure he gets hit five more times immediately. \"My name's Shocky,\" says one of Rita's brothers, who then electrocutes Roddy at least three times. My tolerance for cheap gags that involve pain is at an all time low.I won't waste time griping about Katzenberg's kleptomaniac tendencies toward Pixar (One similar film's a coincidence, five's a rip off.), but I will say I'm disappointed in Aardman. They can do (and have done) so much better. Try harder next time, guys.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4225327d38074f068722429c6638e865",
            "input": "I gave this 3 stars out of a possible 10 - because the stories are open-ended and left unexplained, and because of the nauseating scenes of someone eating in an extremely disgusting way, plus scenes of a decaying corpse. Neither of the above needed to be shown in such a graphic manner.The film's plot, such as it is, concerns three loosely interconnecting stories, none of which conclude satisfactorily.The bounty hunter, played by Bruce Dern, is the character that connects all three vignettes.First we have Dylan McDermott, looking darn fine, as a wanted criminal who is fleeing to Mexico to escape both the law and the bounty hunter, when he rides through a border town and spots a sad-faced saloon girl played by Helen Hunt.Then we have one of the Hemingway girls, not sure which one, playing a western wife out on the lonely frontier who goes over to see about a neighbor woman, an attractive redhead, whom we soon realize has been out in the badlands a little too long.The conclusion of the film returns to the bounty hunter and what happens to him, with the final scene in the film being completely beyond rational comprehension.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8cad9b4f0484a91b8129f46a0d3d27d",
            "input": "This is the worst documentary to come out of Canada ever!!!! I'm glad to see the guys haven't made another movie. All they want to do is get a movie made and it doesn't have to be the one they wrote. They keep changing the script to suite the person they're pitching. I could not get out of the theatre fast enough when I saw it at that year's Toronto Film Festival. Please never see this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e538d73fddc479885c612cea2cbe618",
            "input": "It's like a bad 80s TV show got loose and tried to become a soft-core porn movie. Oh my god was it bad. The plots of each character had little relevance. The plot itself wasn't anything to speak of. Something about a stalker, I guess. In the end he shoots himself? It's not really clear, but somehow there's a volleyball game involved. And the main character (Randy) sleeps around a lot. The only reason my friends rented this movie was because Casper Van Dien was in it, and they ended up wanting to fast forward to the scenes with him in it, which were barely watchable at that. Thank god I didn't spend any money on it, but I want that hour of my life back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-520fba13bdcd42bc91831193e07593d2",
            "input": "This is one of my favorite films of all time. Al Pacino acting is at its best and the story is excellent. Too bad it didn't do to well in the 80's when it was first released because people didn't get a chance to experience this classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be7ffff7399f4056bf63c9bf4e9ad4eb",
            "input": "Connie Hoffman is very pretty and is attractively topless at times.That's it, folks. The sole reason for even considering whether to watch this film or not.These 70s sexploitation period pieces are sometimes entertaining by virtue of their very datedness (flared trousers, big hair, Zapata moustaches etc.). This one isn't.The script is bad, the acting is bad, the direction is bad, and the idea of having a senior citizen romantic leading man is exceptionally bad.The title, hinting at a sex comedy, is grossly misleading.I heartily recommend avoiding this one like the plague.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6b96a958db84ed4a0de47abf962e8eb",
            "input": "I hate this movie! It was NOTHING like the book, and just thinking about it makes me mad. If you watch the movie before reading the book, then yeah, it's a good movie. But King's book was AMAZING and this movie was nothing like it. I mean, the general meaning might be sort of similar but most aspects of the movie are completely different. The ending for example! So in the book it is extremely intense and Danny and Wendy escape seconds before the hotel explodes. but in this horrible movie version jack like takes them through a stupid maze... yeah, there is no maze in the book and there is no reason for it. Another part that made me angry was that jack just kills Mr. Halloran! what the heck, he is basically the hero of the book and they just kill him off like he wasn't important. Overall, it was just bad that the movie was so extremely off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca38faa25acf47ebbae19f734d4c276a",
            "input": "We should all congratulate Uwe Boll. He's done the unthinkable. He may be the only director to have two movies in the bottom 100 on IMDb! He's like some kind of cinematic cockroach. No matter how little talent he has, and no matter how bad these movies are, he manages to keep making them. I know, he finances them all himself through some kind of bizarre German fund, but even so, his ability to keep making movies despite absolute, complete failure is one of the great mysteries of the universe.It wouldn't be so bad except that video game developers keep giving their best properties to this guy. I really enjoyed the Alone in the Dark series of games. Even the latest one, the New Nightmare, was good for a few hours of game play. There was a good movie to be made out of Edward Carnby's adventures, but this is not it. Now Uwe Boll has gotten his hands on Bloodrayne and Hunter: the Reckoning. What's next, Silent Hill? Doom? I can only imagine the swath that this guy is going to cut through game-to-movie adaptations if he's not stopped. Someone needs to take away his line of credit, or these video game publishers need to wise up and realize that when they make a bad movie out of a game that kills the franchise, no one is interested in that title any more.Think about it, is House of the Dead or Alone in the Dark a viable game title anymore? No way. A new House of the Dead game comes out for X-Box and nobody's gonna care. The title is dead, and all because of Uwe Boll. So if any of you out there work for a game publisher, or know a game publisher, or have access to a game publisher... please warn them. This movie itself is not even worth reviewing. I can't separate what I didn't like about this pile of dung from the rest of it. Literally, everything about it sucks. The writing, the acting, the music, the CG effects, the editing. I thought that if I waited until it came out on DVD and then rented it with low expectations, I wouldn't be disappointed. Boy, was I wrong. Never underestimate Uwe's ability to turn out a big, steaming pile of BOLL sh*t.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66051fd7cbfc4a898bd154f784844739",
            "input": "Eddie Murphy's \"Delirious\" is completely and totally rude, crude, crass and lude. This is indeed the only way to describe this appalling, trashy piece of stand-up. Eddie Murphy goes for shock value rather than laughs to try and win his following over. He does manage to be funny occasionally, but mostly loses the plot with obscene language and distasteful sex jokes.Forget it! Unless you happen to enjoy Eddie's foul style. I don't think I will bother with \"Eddie Murphy Raw\". I much prefer Eddie in the confines of a movie script.Saturday, January 17, 1998 - Video",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac9e440b30304a5096249a75ee7fd520",
            "input": "Maybe it's because I looked up the history of the Irish troubles in the 1920s and then the sad Civil War that engulfed the Free State after the signing of the treaty before watching this movie. Anyway, the sudden turn at the end brought tears to my eyes.Victor McLaglen isn't as famous today as he was back then, and he should be better remembered. In this film, I think he's playing himself as he would have been without his innate talent and brains. For example, the scenes where his buddy in the crowd is challenging men to fight with him is probably quite reminiscent of what McLaglen actually did in earlier years, when he was a world-class bare-knuckles boxer. John Ford is partly responsible for that; the IMDb trivia section shows how he tricked McLaglen into getting a really bad hangover for the trial scene. This director also could bring out a lot in his actors, even without such tricks. Mostly, though, McLaglen is firmly in control, especially when his character is almost totally blotto (which is difficult for an actor to do believably), and he also plays Gypo Nolan with a depth and emotional power that is surprising for someone who has only seen McLaglen later in his career, in \"The Quiet Man.\" I especially like the contrast between this role as an IRA man and the much more obviously controlled performance he gave as the IRA man Denis Hogan in \"Hangman's House.\" In \"The Quiet Man,\" of course, McLaglen is a country squire at odds with the local IRA. Victor McLaglen was big and bully, in the old-fashioned sense of the word, but he was a good actor, too, and capable of wide range and fine nuances of performance that we just wouldn't expect of a such a man today. It's a rather sad comment on our own set of expectations and prejudices.Ford, as usual, packs a lot into a little bit of film. All the characters are excellent (though the Commandant's mostly American accent is distracting) -- NOTE: There be spoilers ahead! -- Knowing that Gypo once drew the short straw and was ordered to kill a man but let him talk his way out of it instead, we really empathize with the man who draws the short straw for executing Gypo, and the humanity he shows, most notably when they go to take Gypo in Mary's room. John Ford really shows his genius here, taking what could have been a gruesome and yet expected outcome to the whole story and instead using it to set up a totally unexpected and yet very satisfying ending that makes us think not just of Gypo and the other characters, but of poor Ireland during that tortured time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51733fe64a894ec89463fe0e06fc82c2",
            "input": "This is one of the few episodes (if not the only one) with an indisputable error in its storytelling. While handling the Ralphie situation Christopher states that he has heard about Pie-O-My's death in the fire accident. This is an important detail because in this context it is quite obvious that Christopher knows from the beginning that Tony is the one who must have killed Ralphie. There is however no way Chris could have heard about the accident. Who should have told him and when? By the time he is torn out of his delirium by Tony's call nobody else was informed. Tony knows that - which makes it even worse! Hearing Christopher talk about Pie- O-My's death could therefore only lead Tony to the conclusion that Chris himself has set the fire. Given the impressively elaborate writing process as told by the writers themselves on the DVD I really wonder none of them realized the problem there. The story just doesn't work that way. Unnecessary to add that I'm a huge fan of the Sopranos. Otherwise, I certainly wouldn't care.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f81188ce1e241eb83e1e49cf1df5403",
            "input": "The movie \"MacArthur\" begins and ends at Gen. Douglas MacArthur's, Gregory Peck, Alma Mata the US Military Academy of West Point on the Hudson. We see a frail 82 year old Gen.MacArthur give the commencement speech to the graduating class of 1962 about what an honor it is to serve their country. The film then goes into an almost two hour long flashback on Gen. MacArthur's brilliant as well as controversial career that starts in the darkest hours of WWII on the besieged island of Corregidor in the Philippines in the early spring of 1942.Told to leave he island for Australia before the Japanese military invade it Gen. MacArthur for the very first time in his military career almost disobeys a direct order from his superior US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dan O'Herlihy. Feeling that he'll be deserting his men at their greatest hour of need MacArthur reluctantly, together with his wife and young son, did what he was told only to have it haunt him for the reminder of the war. It was that reason, his escape under fire from death or captivity by the Japanese, that drove Gen. MacArthur to use all his influence to get FDR two years later to launch a major invasion of the Philippians, instead of the island of Formosa, to back up his promise to both the Philippine people as well as the thousands of US POWS left behind. That he'll return and return with the might of the US Army & Navy to back up his pledge!In the two years up until the invasion of the Philippine Islands Gen. MacArther battered the Japanese forces in the South Pafific in a number of brilliantly conceived island hop battles that isolated and starved hundreds of thousands of Japanese troops into surrender. The General did that suffering far less US Military losses then any other allied commander in the War in the Pacific! It was in 1950/51 in the Korean War that Gen. MacArthur achieved his most brilliant victory as well as his worst military defeat. After outflanking the advancing North Korean Army in the brilliant and perfectly executed, with the invading US Marines suffering less then 100 casualties, back door or left hook invasion of Inchon Gen. MacArther feeling invincible sent the US/UN forces under his command to the very border, along the Yalu River, of Communist Red China. Told by his subordinates that he's facing the threat of a massive ground attack by Communist Chinese troops Gen. MacArthur pressed on anyway until that attack did materialized cutting the US & UN forces to ribbons. The unstoppable wave after wave of attacking Red Chinese troops forced the US/UN forces to retreat in the \"Big Bug Out\" of 1950 with their very lives, leaving all their equipment behind, across the North Korean border even abandoning the South Korean capital city of Seoul! This turned out to be one of the biggest military disaster in US history with the US forces losing a record, in the Korean War, 1,000 lives on the very first day-Nov. 29/30 1950-of the Communist Chinese invasion!Shocked and humiliated in what he allowed, due mostly to his own arrogance, to happened MacArthur went on the offensive not against the advancing Communist Chinese and Noth Koreans forces but his own Commander and Chief Pres. Harry S. Truman, Ed Flanders, in him not having the spin or guts to do what has to be done: Launch a full scale invasion of Communist China with nuclear weapons if necessary to prevent its troops from overrunning the Korean Peninsula! For Pres. Truman who had taken just about enough garbage from Gen. MacArthur in him running off his mouth in public in how he was mishandling the war in not going all out, like MacArthur wanted him to, against the Red Chinese this was the last straw! On April 11, 1951 Pres. Truman unceremoniously relived Gen. MacArthur from his command as Supreme Commander of the US/UN forces in Korea! Pres. Truman's brave but very unpopular decision also, by not going along with MacArthur's total war strategy, prevented a Third World War from breaking out with the Soviet Union-Communist China's ally- who at the time-like the US-had the Atomic Bomb! Pres. Truman''s controversial decision to dump the very popular Gen. MacArthur also cost him his re-election in 1952 with his polls numbers so low-in the mid 20's- that he withdrew-in March of that year- from the US Presidential Campaign!In was Gen. MacArthur's misfortune to be around when the political and military climates in the world were changing in how to conduct future wars. With the horrors of a nuclear war now, in 1950/51, a reality it would have been national suicide to go all out, like Gen. MacArthur wanted to, against the Red Chinese with it very possibly touching off a nuclear holocaust that would engulf not only the US USSR & Red China but the entire world! It was that important reality of future war that Gen. MacArthur was never taught, since the A and H Bomb weren't yet invented, in West Point.Back to 1962 we can now see that Gen. MacArthur, after finishing his commencement speech at West Point, had become both an older and wiser soldier as well as , since his retirement from the US Military, elder statesman in his feeling about war and the utter futility of it. One thing that Gen. MacArthur was taught at an early age, from his Civil War General dad Douglas MacArthur Sr, that stuck to him all his life was that to a soldier like himself war should be the very last-not first-resort in settling issues between nations. In that it's the soldiers who have to fight and die in it. It took a lifetime, with the advent of the nuclear age, for Gen. MacArthur to finally realize just how right and wise his dad a Congressional Medal of Honor winner, like himself, really was!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ceb80fd237644d6e9183c80d8a51fee0",
            "input": "Falsely accused, skirt-chasing chums John Wayne (as John Scott) and Eddy Chandler (as Kansas Charlie) change identities to become \"Alias Smith and Jones\". Mr. Wayne becomes \"John Jones\". Mr. Chandler's is supposed to be \"Rev. Smith\", but Wayne calls him \"Dr. Smith\". At no time are either of them as entertaining as Roger Davis, Pete Duel, Jonathan Harris, or Ben Murphy; although, Wayne can be considered infinitely more successful than any of them, career wise. Pretty blonde Mary Kornman (as Anne), grown-up from her days in \"Our Gang\", is a lovely interest for Wayne. She and Chandler have a couple of cute scenes with Wayne. If you're not a fan of low budget John Wayne films of the 1930s, this movie won't make you one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56ad402b152940af8f205d61bb5a323b",
            "input": "OK, this movie starts out like a cheesy Lifetime movie and doesn't get better till almost well through the movie. The script is full of 'cheese' and 'fluff' and cast is not well directed for the most part. For the first half of the movie the little girl grated on my nerves. I do not think this is one of her best acting jobs. The only reason I bought the movie is because it was on sale and had Ellen Burstyn in it. She's terrific but this is also not one of her best acting gigs. The story is based on true events and that helps the movie. Actually, I didn't even like the movie at first and was getting disgusted when I saw stills of the balloon traveling, I mean..let it get where it's suppose to go and be done with it! But all is forgiven by the time it does reach it's destination and the story comes to a close. If this doesn't bring a tear to your eye, nothing will! It's cheesy and predictable but also makes you feel good about the world again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc2341d0548b42aca5b1bddc82880f02",
            "input": "Peter M. Cohen has a winner satire on the mating game, twisted around and turned inside out. The critical bashing of the movie in mainstream media publications as \"offensive\" and \"raunchy\" only serves to underscore its intensity as a refreshing and concentrated dissection of people's sexual pursuits and passions. It is in the tradition of what I call \"reality based\" satire following in the footsteps of \"In The Company of Men,\" \"Chasing Amy\", \"Your Friends and Neighbors\" and \"Two Girls and a Guy\". Cohen's dialogue is hilarious and I was continually intrigued by how perfectly he captured the real pace of today's conversations. Brian Van Holt, Zorie Barber, and Jonathan Abrahams are three distinct, unrelenting sex-obsessed predators who along with the foil of their recently married buddy (superbly played by Judah Domke) are turned upside down on their own terms by a female predator (Amanda Peet). Underneath the satiric surface lurks a romantic comedy far more satisfying than most sugar-coated studio products.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4616a52314844d5badc0ccd018316bbb",
            "input": "This \"movie\" is such a bad work! Nothing seems to even try and be realistic. Plot is weak, acting - miserable, actors wondering around like in a 1st year production, trying very hard to act with no chance at all from the beginning. What a flop! What a waste of time, money and effort to all concerned including the audience. Well, as in any thriller, here too are murders, corpses and blood. Just imagine someone who 5 minutes ago, committed a murder with a knife, and came out calm and smiling, not to mention clean as a whistle, as if slashing one's throat is done by a virtual agent. Also, this murder was supposed to be done by a tiny fragile woman on a high strong male, and she cut his throat!!! Did she ask him, politely, to bend down for her? Much more stupidity of that same kind is going on and on leaving the audience wondering if this meant to be a joke which just turned out to be a bad one. Continuity is another huge problem as for instance: The eager-hungry groom is lying in bed, waiting for his virgin-bride to get out of the bathroom and after a long while, falls asleep(!?!). Next scene opens with the young couple entering the reception-area, asking for guidance to scenery spots! NOT A WORD ABOUT LAST NIGHT??? Such a waste of time even to try and write about this low-low supposed-to-be \"movie\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4f1e0a4771c4c51ae59eca13e1b263f",
            "input": "Another vast conspiracy movie that tries to blame the US government and the Armed Forces (especially the Army) for every disaster since the Great Flood. Anyone who has ever served time in the US military can see how bogus this film is. Uniforms, equipment, sets, and mannerisms are all wrong. (And of course, all Senior Officers are either corrupt criminals or total idiots.) Blatant propaganda with no attempt at objectivity. Most of the theories presented have been disproven over the past few years. Uses every cliche', rumor, and Urban Legend from the Gulf-all are presented as gospel. (The truth is, no one knows for sure why some GW vets are sick and others are healthy as horses.) PS This is not new. War is NOT fun and I know WWII, Korean, and Viet Nam vets with some pretty serious ailments, too. (And the government has the responsibility to take care of all of them.) Sensationalistic movies like this will not solve the problem!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9e2c6244de34720b818a97efb773d30",
            "input": "there are three kinds of bad films - the cheap, the boring, and the tasteless. the only really bad movies are boring and tasteless. boring films are just, well, boring - if you don't leave quickly enough, you fall asleep.tasteless films actually have their defenders; but the fact remains that they are masturbatory aids for very sick people.only the cheap bad films are really funny, because the filmmakers wanted to make their films so desperately, they way-over-reached beyond their abilities and available resources.Bo Derek is just naturally boring and tasteless; fortunately, fate and a lack of funds and skill redeem her by making her seem cheap as well. this film is hilarious and it may well be the last really funny-bad film ever made.i first saw this in a theater, may god forgive me; i was laughing so hard i was rolling off my seat, and so too with most of the rest of the audience.it's clear that Derek and her husband-promoter, conceived of this film as, partly, a satire; unfortunately, the dereks clearly lacked any of the necessary resources to pull that off; consequently, the 'satirical' element comes off as some school-girl's impression of some gay young man's impression of frank gorshin's impression of the riddler in batman trying to pretend he's robin - it doesn't fly over our heads, it has no clue where any human head might be.on the other hand, there are some supposedly serious moments in this film - it is supposed to be an action film, remember - that are so astoundingly cheesy, one wonders if someone squirted spoiled milk in one's eye.as for Derek's infamous tendency to reveal her breasts - i can't imagine a less erotic nudity photographic display, she is so weird looking with those broad shoulders, i can't imagine what any one ever saw in her.as for the plot - such as it is - well, it isn't; Derek chases around Africa, and god alone knows why. then her father - Harris - pretends to act in some maniacal puppet-show, and then of course there's the hunk'o'Tarzan that seems to have wondered in from advertisement without knowing that the subject's changed - probably because he hasn't seen a script - apparently no one has.negligible camera work, shoddy editing - if it weren't for the 3-way with the chimp, the film would be unbearable -as it is, it's a real hoot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58b94fe1f1cb47988e80ee3143ef912c",
            "input": "Why didn't Dynamo have any pants?! Where did they go?? It was never explained. That's why this movie was so awesome. Plus Starsky gave his kids the AIDS!!!! Great acting too. Richard Dawson deserved to win Best Supporting Actor! A I D S My favorite line from the movie was \"That hit the spot\" A I D S. This movie was for the \"birds\". I tried to give this movie the \"stinkeye\" but it continued playing. What am I doing wrong???!!!! I thought the \"HATEBOAT\" was funnnny lol ;) I would like that for a show. Why wasn't Dynamo wearing pants. I know his arm WAS skewered but... What's up with those crazy futur nets. Why didn't that family feud guy Ray Combs get a net?? He could have used one. AIDSSSSS",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f67d3eb2e8c446fda4dc794c8edf5a25",
            "input": "Sky Captain is possibly the best awful movie I've seen in a long while. Rife with amazing CG and special effects, studded with an A-list cast (Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and the infinitely likable Giovanni Ribisi) and racing along with an overused but Indiana Jones-esquire storyline, this should have been a great movie to watch.'Should have' being the key term here, of course.Jude Law plays Joe the Sky Captain with a dashing accent and plenty of over-the-shoulder, heart-melting smirks, but you can't make something out of nothing, and even his flippant deliveries and boyish good looks can't save the movie's stone dialogue. (If he had slapped Giovanni Ribisi on the back and said, \"Good boy, Dex,\" just ONE more time, I might have barfed all over the guy in front of me.) Gwyneth Paltrow, as Polly Perkins, is nothing less than nerve grating. Her nasal whining and not-quite-sarcastic comments get old in the first ten minutes of the movie. Perhaps she put too much effort into playing the stereotypical 30's comic book heroine- who knows? I expected more from her. An example of how a similar character was played (and played well) is in the late 90's flick \"The Phantom,\" starring Kristy Swanson and Billy Zane. Rent the movie and you'll know what I mean.Giovanni Ribisi and Angelina Jolie were the saving graces in the film. (Angelina Jolie was incredibly hot in that eyepatch. I'll admit it.) In just a few short scenes, both actors somehow managed to rise above the tired material and deliver a more riveting performance than their dry, two-dimensional castmates.The plot and steady story progression were old, boring, and basically just a monotonous combination of every good scene from an action movie in the past thirty years. The pace is rapid-fire in the first half of the movie, and a snail's pace in the second, giving the audience enough time not only to guess the eventual conclusion of the film, but to figure out who the key villain is as well. The pairing is rather clichéd, also- Polly Perkins and Sky Captain apparently reunite after several years of separation from a bitterly-ended romance, and their story isn't so much charming and eclectic as it is annoying and mismatched. When they finally come to terms with their mutual feelings towards the end of the film, nobody's surprised, and nobody really cares either.Props to the director for appreciating Bai Ling enough to dress her in skintight vinyl for the entirety of the film, and also for the intriguing sepia tones that served as coloration throughout. But Sky Captain, despite having all the essential elements of being a great movie, falls flat on its face. Not even worth the $2.75 I paid to get into the theater.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c57ff4bc7c4849c78118842d8d0fbf98",
            "input": "Final Score: 0 (out of 10)***Possible scene specific spoilers (but who the hell cares)***Yes, that's right: zero. And I rarely give 1's. Even for the lamest of movies I look for things like music, cinematography, imagination, it's humor, even a good pace to be as objective about the score as possible. Looking at it within it's own genera or subgenera. But there is absolutely nothing redeeming here. I can't remember another time a movie actually sent me pacing up and down the room when it was over. The only reason I made it to the end was because I couldn't seem to change the channel - I sat there simply aghast, watching to see what insultingly stupid bit it would come up with next. It was like watching a snake digest a rat. But let's have some fun and pull this baby apart, shall we. First of all, There is nothing technical about \"Whipped\" that works. The visuals are all sitcom style. The cut scenes all just pictures of the street traffic going by at night over and over. The music and score, not only doesn't contribute anything to the movie - it's obnoxious. Not to mention it doesn't have anything to contribute to anyway. The acting is as cardboard as it comes, all around and that goes for Amanda Peet (clearly the \"star\" that got this train wreck green-lighted) too. These guys, supposedly good friends, have no more chemistry or sense of purpose then if director Peter M. Cohen had rounded them up at a bus station minutes before shooting.On the creative side, there isn't an original bone in it's body. It has no imagination. It shows us nothing we haven't seen a thousand times before. The whole premise, or \"twist\", of this movie is based on male-bashing and the \"idea\" that an empowered women can play men \"just as they get played\". Anybody, that thinks this is somehow a twist or is in any way original has obviously never turned on a TV before. Twisted, shallow women are common. Male-bashing is the norm. It's not stealing from anything specifically, it's worse: it's stealing from clichés. I can't imagine a women making a movie that depicted other women based so much on stereotypes and with this sense of contempt. Makes me want to go rent \"In the Company of Men\" - or better yet, \"There's Something About Mary\". This movie wants to be a \"edgier\" version of \"There's Something About Mary\" so bad you can see the sweat. The movie has no insights into women, men, dating, sex, or really anything. Cohen is simply content to regurgitate myths he has been indoctrinated with from other sexist movies. On the other end, the movie doesn't work as a satire either, because even though it is ripe with exaggerations one could view as \"satirical\" it doesn't have that grounding in reality that satires need. It doesn't even know what it's satirizing. Then there's the dialogue, which is little more then the characters screaming obscenities at each other. Example: Character 1: \"F**k you\" Character 2: \"Oh yeah, well f**k you\" (repeat)And the bottom line, the thing that could excuse all the other discretions: There are a lot of movies without plots, without good acting, with morally repulsive characters and obscenity laced dialogue that have been funny and thus, been good. \"Whipped\" ain't funny. Not for a second. It has no comic skills or timing. The situations are all completely phony, not based in any shred of truth, especially enough to wring laughs out of us. The characters all broadly drawn so they will SEEM relatable to the lowest of the lowest common denominator. Just look at \"the marquee scene\", \"cult classic\" hair gel scene. One of our bumbling anti-heroes opens the medicine cabinet and sees Mena (Peet)'s vibrator. For some reason light shines down on it as if he's found the holy grail. Why Cohen thinks men react this way to vibrators I do not know. While he rubs it on himself, he drops it in the toilet and then attempts to fish it out with his bare hands when, oh my, Mena walks in on him. Oh, my sides. But strangely enough, people actually like this movie. Of course, people also like \"Friends\" and reality dating shows so I shouldn't be surprised. All of this has a common thread however. \"Whipped\" is big evidence to me that there is just a huge pocket of people in America that will laugh at any joke just because it is about sex. They will like any show or movie (or think they like it) just because it is about dating or relationships. It's lack of any quality has no baring on these people. Just as people are indoctrinated to want whiter teeth and thinner bodies to sell toothbrushes and weight loss programs, they are also indoctrinated to blindly lap up anything dating/relationship related to sell them cheap, empty, effortless TV, movies and any number of products. The only consilation will be that when I die, because I saw this movie, I've got a credit to get 80 minutes of my life back. ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7cd1da77ca0e4004a4874bae09f0db28",
            "input": "This movie took the Jerry Springer approach to super-human power. \"Wilder Napalm\" is the kind of theme-based movie that I love, addressing the idea that prodigies in America are defined either by their gifts or by attempts to hide them. At the same time, the movie points out that every prodigy is only human, and no more to be feared or worshipped than any other human being. This was a great comedy, fun and human with that slight satiric edge.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7423c268d8f245d9b4747b2f55cbc0c4",
            "input": "Quote: theurgist: Anyone with an I.Q. over 50 would have seen this film what it is, an intelligent well acted prequel to a modern day classic, yes it doesn't have a blockbuster cast or a huge budget BUT it is still very well done and had me hooked for the full duration.An I.Q. over 50 you say.. that most mean you have an I.Q. lower than 50.. its name is CARLITOS WAY: Rise to power !!! meaning it should have something whit the first one to do.. all and all its a OK movie if.. YOU CHANGE THE TITLE AND NO CHARACTERS NAMED CARLITO BRIGANTE!!!P.s don't comment on a movie if you don't know anything about movies. but i guess an I.Q. under 50,, you wont know what the hell i am yelling about...Peace out!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25891575c44844268991a4b04938ad1e",
            "input": "If you want to learn something about the Spanish Civil War and about all the political details and intrigues, let me tell you, you've chosen the wrong film.This is a vision of the war as it happened in Majorca, a small island off the coast of Spain. When a war like this happens in a small island that takes position for the traitor almost at once, there is no war in the open. The soldiers are sent to the front to fight, in the mainland, while another kind of war happens at home, on the small island. There, neighbours tell on other neighbours, sometimes because their political views are contrary to the new regime, but many people are told on because of old family fights, or maybe the silent introvert who has no friends is told on by someone who wants to \"earn some points\". And these things don't happen in the open. There were some trials, true, but many other times people would just be woken up in the middle of the night, taken out of their homes to the closest cemetery where they would be killed. And the next morning the bodies would be found, and people would have an idea of what had happened, but nobody would dare to speak or to do anything. We're not talking about soldiers killing someone they had never seen in their life. We're talking about people killing their neighbours, and probably saying hello to their widow the next day, and even attending the funeral for the guy they had killed. We're talking about villages with one or two thousand inhabitants, where everybody knew everybody.I am from that small island and I've heard the stories my grandparents told me, and I must say that this film upset me, oh yes, it did; but I also found it remarkably beautiful and moving. The initial violence is not something the director or the writer made up, that's how things happened during that war. A kid knowing that his mate's dad is in the fascist squad that killed his dad? Completely possible. All that happened later on? Possible too. TB was real too. At that time my island was not the holiday resort it has become. People were poor, illiterate, and worked in small farms. After the war there were times of hardship.So, you won't find a war story in this film, or at least not the kind of war story you expect. There are no battlefields, no soldiers, no political intrigues. This is the meanest kind of war, which happens when the space is limited (just check the size of the island), when neighbours fight with their neighbours, when members of the same family fight each other, and they live in a place where everybody knows everybody. You'll find a story about the damage that this particular kind of war can cause to people and the story of how they survive that damage, or maybe they don't.I must mention the excellent work done by the writers who adapted the novel and by all the actors, who managed to sound really Majorcan. That was remarkable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e2be65a16b6453e9974b9dfac5cc071",
            "input": "I'm not quite sure why, but this movie just doesn't play the way it should. It should be humerous and fun, but instead is just boring. I think a large part of it is because they way over played the \"gadgets.\" The old cartoon it is based on is much better.3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3b824f85b124bdc872ebbedde3c4c62",
            "input": "I first learned of the Wendigo many years ago in one of Alvin Schwartz's \"Scary Stories\" books: according to that story, the Wendigo - after calling your name in the wind - drags you along, and then pulls you up into the sky and pulverizes you. While it sounds like a pretty bizarre notion, Schwartz's story turned it into a fairly coherent idea.The movie \"Wendigo\" doesn't. It basically consists of every horror flick cliché: family moves to new house and strange things start happening, anyone who harms them is asking for it, and everyone had better listen to the old Indian guy. I've seen this stuff so many times that I no longer bother to count.Anyway, avoid it. Patricia Clarkson and Erik Per Sullivan (Dewey on \"Malcolm in the Middle\") have done far better than this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1425bcccaa45478c9216c8e7ccf22651",
            "input": "This film has good characters with excellent performances from the cast. David Strathairn is diabolically sincere as the child molesting salesman and Danny Vinson plays a perfect pussy-whipped southern husband. The slick soundtrack betrays the murder ballad tone of the film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-557893b712ad4c378434d16341479a3e",
            "input": "May contain spoilers.I say that, but anyone savvy enough to be reading this can probably figure out every plot turn right from the start.This is not a movie that I liked. I didn't hate it in the way of some movies that insult your intelligence, but it all felt too predictable on its trudge to the requisite happy ending. There were funny bits along the way to be sure, but few were original. At least it didn't go for the gutter.Christina Applegate looks fresh, and Ben Affleck works hard. Their scenes together are actually the only redeeming feature. Everyone else is a cardboard cutout, including, surprisingly, James Gandolfini, who must have made this as a favor to someone.All in all, it's a harmless, but not inspiring, 90 minutes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e5556bcbaeb4c228a0d36908c1a1a77",
            "input": "OK, I really don't have too much to say about this film, other than this: I have seen over 4,000 films in my life, and more than 2,300 of those were horror films. While I have some difficulty deciding which is the best (as opposed to my favourite, which I can tell you is George A. Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD), I can tell you without the slightest hesitation that Todd Sheets' ZOMBIE BLOODBATH is the absolute worst horror film I have ever seen.There is simply nothing positive I can say about this film. The acting, the dialogue, the directing, the make-up, the music... Every aspect of this film is simply so far below what is acceptable that it boggles my mind that this was ever even released.Even if you are a horror or zombie movie completist, please heed my warning and DO NOT waste your time on this garbage. There is no pleasure to be gotten from viewing this. You won't even get any laughs out of the utter ineptitude on display... Trust me. Please.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb43d00d948141078a119917fcd2dcfb",
            "input": "Ok, where do we start with this little gem? Mutant slugs begin to take over a small New England (?) town. Only one man can stop them... and that man... is Mike Brady! Now, if that wasn't laughable enough, stay tuned.The footage of the slugs is what's known as stock footage. No matter who the slugs attack or where they are, the same shot of piles of slugs oozing everywhere is shown. Keep in mind, this singular shot occupies at least half the movie.The acting in the movie was knock down, drag out, steal your wallet, punch your girlfriend, kill your dog, BAD. I'm sure there's worse, but you're going to be hard pressed to find it. The only gem was... you guessed it.... MIKE BRADY! He must have taken a few night classes at the YMCA, because he was the best in the bunch.As for horror? This film is not to be taken seriously. There isn't horror! They're slugs for crying out loud. The entire rising action could have been avoided with a salt shaker or two. Only watch this film in a MST3K type environment, otherwise I can see some major damage to the brain.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-572845a8d94a474da73c5822064a81b9",
            "input": "This movie is AWFUL! I don't even know where to begin, I'm speechless I can't even describe how awful this is. The blood is flourescent first of all, and the acting is AWFUL! The only good part was the biker chick that saves the day. This movie was rediculous, I don't see how it could even get a vote of 1 its so bad. It looks like it was made by highschool students.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb4bd5ad830044fcae90fbb2e8bf20f9",
            "input": "I liked this film very much. The story jumps back and forth quite a bit and is not easy to follow. There is no resolution to the story whatsoever, and you are left to wonder what really happened. Since I like that sort of film I enjoyed this. I especially like the \"dating\" scenes between the boys and I was drawn into their lives. And of course any film with a naked Staphane Rideau will get a couple of extra points. ;-)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20a6b40e705c46468c6bac2c62ebbdec",
            "input": "Film dominated by raven-haired Barbara Steele, it was seen when I was seven or eight and created permanent images of pallid vampiric men and women stalking a castle, seeking blood. Steele is an icon of horror films and an otherworldly beauty, and the views of the walking dead pre-date Romero's NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD shamblers, unifying them in my mind.I don't see the connection between this film and THE HAUNTING, which is clever but ambiguous about the forces present. LA DANZA MACABRE is a b-movie without pretention, daring you to fall in love with Barbara Steele and suffer the consequences. There's no such draw to HAUNTING's overwrought Claire Bloom. The comparisons to the HAUNTING are superficial.And no, this movie does NOT need to be remade. Not only is it a product of the Sixties, but the large percentage of talentless cretins in Hollywood cannot fathom MACABRE's formula for terror. That formula is based on one overriding factor: GOOD WRITING. Low-grade classics like CASTLE and Corman's Poe films with R. Matheson and Tourneur's OUT OF THE PAST share a commonality of strong writing. It's simple. Get a real writer like Richard Matheson or Steve McQuarrie and let them put a plot into today's cinematic mess. Besides that, let Hollywood attempt some original material for a change, and stop exploiting the obviously superior product of the past.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06740a80f4fd4636a89cc8ee111980f7",
            "input": "I am a big 1930's movie fan and will watch most anything that I see on Turner Classic Movies thats new for me. So I gave this a shot, after all it's the great Harold Lloyd who rivaled Chaplin as a great silent film comedian. I have watched much less of Lloyd's silent films then of Chaplins but I have to say I'm a much bigger Chaplin fan. Anyway this film fell so flat for me that I didn't finish it. I can understand why his sound career was so limited, he didn't get very good material to work with. After you've seen Chaplin, Abbott and Costello, The Three Stooges, Martin and Lewis, The Marx Brothers, and Laurel and Hardy do boxing spoofs (or violence in general), this one is very forgettable. I was also interested in watching Adolphe Menjou as I really enjoyed him in Paths Of Glory but his role here also did nothing special for me. Maybe they should have gotten into the boxing sooner because at least half the film (at least it seemed that way) is before he gets in a ring. I can tell there are a lot of Lloyd fans here and this wont be a popular review but I must rate this as compared to what else was out there at the time, 4 out of 10. Don't watch this with anyone your trying to get to like old movies as they may not watch another one with you again, very flat. For an alternative to anyone who really liked this or is looking for more little known comedies in general I recommend \"Kelly The Second\" made a few years earlier, another nobody becomes a boxer comedy with Patsy Kelly and in a supporting role Charles Chase. These have both been shown on the Turner Classic Movies channel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1743ba09956a4903893fa2d685e2a85b",
            "input": "ELEPHANT WALK may not be the acme of literature or of film, but it is great entertainment in the quasi-melodramatic mode. It is the story of love, both genuine and illicit, as well as overweening ambition, devotion, and the arrogance of personal tyranny. A previous reviewer, John Mankin, questions why the central focus of the film, the mansion called Elephant Walk, should have been built by the former owner, the \"governor\" the late Tom Wiley, right across the elephants' traditional path to the major source of water, the river. To miss this point is to essentially miss the point of the whole center of the film: the hubris of man. That his son, played by Peter Finch, should become enthralled by the super image and enigma of his revered father, is not unexpected, since the son was without a mother growing up in a foreign jungle with only his father and his father's rowdy 'boys' club' as his role models. The point of the father was that he was a self-made man who would tame nature to his liking, and that liking was not just a tea plantation upon the lands the elephants once dominated, but also that he would dominate even the large bull elephant that led the herd, and thus he would dominate his son and all around him, and so we join the tale after the elephants have been denied the crucial dry season access to their pathway to water. Who could know that this dry season would last so long and what the elephants would do in desperation to get water? This is the nexus of the film: what will animals do to get water; what will humans do to get power or love? Ceylon, today's Sri Lanka, is the huge island off the coast of India where the plantation is located and one quickly learns that it is the real scenery of the story, not just the expenses of Miss Taylor. Were it not for this exotic location (much of the film was shot in Ceylon), and the magnificent \"bungalow\" this would have been just another potboiler. One must recognize the atmosphere created here as integral to the time and place, as it illuminates the latter day wealth and power attained by the English immigrant 'conquerors' that were part and parcel of the British raj. It is only such wealth gained by the use of virtual slave labor that one could build so magnificent a residence of ebony, teak, and marble. Not to be overlooked are the wonderfully carved Jalees (grille work window and doorway borders) evidently specified by art directors J. McMillan Johnson and Hal Pereira and obviously made by the cheaper labor on the island. Such craftsmanship reveals the careful attention to detail that these men sought.For those immune to the blandishments of time, place, and architecture, there is always the allure of Miss Taylor, as she marries a man she doesn't really know and is tacitly wooed by a another man, against the background described, and under the overarching tyranny of the legacy of a man deceased. As I said, it is not great literature nor even great film, but it is great spectacle long before that term was debased by the special effects extravaganzas of today.This is one of those films made to be seen on the giant screen of an outdoor drive-in, not on the home TV, so arrange the largest screen to see it on to fully appreciate its fine camera-work and scope.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7281c54d2aec4d63b52dfa994beb3029",
            "input": "One of the best parts of Sundance is seeing movies that you would otherwise almost certainly miss. Unless you're a real art-house devotee, you probably don't catch many documentaries. Only a handful get any recognizable distribution. Fortunately, Sundance has increased its commitment to documentaries in recent years.Shakespeare Behind Bars is a powerful documentary about a dramatic production group at the Luther Luckett Correctional Complex in LaGrange, Kentucky. Every year a group of inmates present a Shakespearean play. Director Hank Rogerson and his crew follow the troupe as roles are self-selected, interpreted, rehearsed and ultimately performed.The movie is filled with fascinating revelations for those of us that have not been exposed to prison environments. Despite the labels we know them by (convict, felon, murderer, etc.) we soon began to appreciate and respect these men as thinking feeling human beings. Serendipitously, the play chosen for the year of filming was The Tempest, with its penetrating focus on forgiveness and redemption. The actors all grapple with the relevance of the play to their lives, finding patterns and parallels with their characters and the meaning of the drama.For a documentary film, like a book, the best that can be hoped for is that we experience something that changes our lives. Shakespeare Behind Bars was a personal revelation for me. \"O brave new world, that has such creatures in it.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a153d711434455885fb4d54af251f1e",
            "input": "This film is a huge steaming pile. I have no idea why anyone felt that the Garland/Mason version needed to be redone, nor why Striesand would have been a first choice to star.For that matter, I have no idea why our people (Gay Americans) tend largely to regard Striesand as some kind of treasure. At least in my opinion, she had peaked professionally with with Funny Girl, and Bogdanovich's What's Up Doc. Do yourself a favor and rent the Judy classic, or even the original (a fine film in its own right), but please, Please, PLEASE skip this stinkpot!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93aedeb61f3c4042bb96c6e44bc26338",
            "input": "In Joel Schumacher, you have one of the most inconsistent film makers of all time. But this is common knowledge; I think his main problem is the array of genres that he covers whilst at the same time, failing to develop any sort of certain style that might label him an auteur. Hitchcock liked his suspense and his horror/thriller; Chaplin liked his comedy; Scorsese likes his crime driven mafia stories amongst others and Spielberg likes his large scale, big budget adventure films that combine just enough violence for the adults and fun for the kids. Other more obscure examples include Kubrick and Welles who covered too much to write about here.But Schumacher is the sort of guy who makes a flawed film revolving around a great idea or a really quite enjoyable film revolving around a seemingly dull premise. Falling Down had a great idea behind it but I found it flawed and anticlimactic with too many scenes seemingly relying on comedy. Batman is a superhero; superhero films have been big hits recently so how he managed to make not one but two appalling superhero films is beyond me. Then comes 8MM; a film with a basic premise that is executed in an impressive manner before Tigerland which is Schumacher's best film from what I've so far seen, in my opinion. With the war genre, laughter isn't something you'd associate with it for most of the time. I can remember scoffing at the absurdity of the D-Day landings during Saving Private Ryan: at the time when I first saw the film, I had not much knowledge of the Second World War bar when it began and finished. My eyebrows were up, my mouth slightly open with a weak 'I can't believe it smile' on my face. Needless to say, it was because of that film I searched out learning a bit more on what that event was all about and the war as a whole. In Tigerland, you are invited to laugh at the absurdity of war through Bozz (Farrell), a tough and egotistical soldier training for the Vietnam War.But what's clever here is that there are no jaw dropping war scenes of fighting and death and destruction; just one man and his battle with the system for most of the time. The things he says and the audacity at which he deals with his predicament is reminiscent of a school child winding up a series of teachers at an extremely strict boarding school. Tigerland may borrow from Full Metal Jacket in the sense it is a training routine for the Vietnam War but egos and superegos play more of a part here, I think. The superegos that are the drill sergeants go up against Bozz whose ego is extremely large. There is also the third part of Freud's triangle that sneaks into Bozz: the ID. Compared to all the other soldiers who all have rather large egos, Bozz is the only one brave enough to show it in front of the sergeants thus suggesting he is allows what he shouldn't do to float to the surface and express itself: \"You are all dead in this situation!\" barks a sergeant. \"Any Questions?\" \"Yeah, if I'm dead how come I can ask a question?\" replies Bozz whose punishments such as push-ups and dirt eating seem to un-faze him in true ID style; that is he enjoys the punishments.Also regarding the superegos, Bozz at one point tries to command a group of soldiers in field training. This is something the existing captain of the squad cannot do thus suggesting he is lacking in both the superego required for the job and the confidence to tell Bozz he is in charge. What follows is an actual conversation between Bozz and an existing drill sergeant who gives him his Christian name. This is where Private Wilson's (Whigham) character steps in: His uncontrollable rage and anger at Bozz explodes at certain time all culminating in the film's only real scenes of a shootout which is in the form of a training exercise in a river. Wilson cannot control his impulses and dislike toward Bozz and acts out.What I also liked about Tigerland is that it's shot in such a way that is brave. While lacking in innovation, Tigerland seems to use lower grade film stock or lesser cameras to get across its gritty look. Make no mistake that this could have been a pretty looking film with lots of colour and attractiveness. But, we get a documentary approach in the final piece making everything look like it was shot on a typical everyday camera for TV; the emphasis on the hand held is also apparent but Schumacher is clever: he never allows the film to become too much like a mockumentry whilst at the same time suggesting the film's budget could've been half of what it was. It's worth saying here that Spielberg said he wanted Saving Private Ryan to look like actual reel footage or something along those lines and as if it was recorded from the war scenes.While being very funny and entertaining, Tigerland is still a great study of what makes people tick; not necessarily in war but in the closest possible substitute. Its study on one man and how much he hates the system that he cannot even take it seriously is fascinating as is the drive of each soldier. There are several memorable scenes and situations culminating in a happy, if not unhappy ending that'll open your mind and make you think about what it's perhaps really like in the military.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-036117f8cb614dc3a6ea20c2e71177d5",
            "input": "It is a great tragedy that both Richard Harris and John Derek are no longer with us. But that shouldn't blind anybody to the fact that in 1981, a pretty ugly blotch appears on both men's CVs. No doubt John Derek conceived this movie doing for his wife what 'Some Like it Hot' and 'One Million Years BC' did for Maryln Monroe and Raquel Welsh respectively, creating an iconic sex symbol for the new decade. Having run to embrace Dudley Moore on the beach in '10' Bo's reputation, an all-star cast and location filming in Sri Lanka meant that nothing could go wrong. Alas, as they say, Mortals plan and God laughs. It is said that when this film premiered in 1981, the Edgar Rice Burrows estate tried to take legal action against it. Bo Derek plays Jane Parker who sets off into turn-of-the century Africa to be reunited with her boozy, abusive Dad, Richard Harris. Daddy Parker is an explorer who has set out to find 'the Great Inland Sea' the stuff of local legend, whose existence has been poo-pooed by conventional wisdom. Harris is worth watching for a wonderfully hammy, tanked -up performance which includes singing an Irish ditty at an Indian elephant that somehow found its way into Africa (did it arrive at the same time as the Orang-Utan from Sumatra???) Furthermore, although Jane professes to despise Parker, Bo and Rich's relationship is creepily incestuous, testimony perhaps to the effects of the tropical heat. Before long, however, local legends start to circulate about a 'Great White Ape' and Jane hears the famous yodel. This is the movie's cue for Miles O'Keefe, a future B-Movie star, making a rather odd debut as the loin-clothed Lord of the Jungle. Unlike Johnny Weismuller with his pidgin English or Ron Ely who speaks the language fluently, the O'Keefe Tarzan is mute. Given some of Bo and Richie's dialog, though, this is probably not a bad thing. Harris and his caravan eventually reaches the Great Inland Sea, located atop a gigantic plateau that seems to run halfway across Africa....hang on, aren't seas, lakes and other watery places generally located in low-lying areas?? Nevermind, it is just one of many anomalies in the John Derek universe. The crew attempt to mount the cliffs and when the ropes snap, Harris roars echoing abuse at the hapless men who have plummeted to their deaths. On another occasion, Jane decides to take a nude swim by the Inland Sea, giving another occasion to see some gratuitous nudity. Out of nowhere a single male lion appears. Now lions usually travel in prides and never go near beaches but later on, Tarzan will be wrestling with a (venomous) boa constrictor. Zoology doesn't seem to have been one of John Derek's strong points..... This being a Tarzan movie, Jane becomes enchanted with the Lord of the Jungle and resolves to take his virginity. But having seen his closeness to some of those chimps, you do have to wonder...Speaking of which, it's not only the Edgar Rice Burroughs estate could have sued. It is highly probable that certain primates were on the phone to their lawyers: the chimps here make you miss Cheeta badly. Especially when they do ridiculous things like ride on the backs of elephants and clap their hands when Tarzan and Jane finally get it on! The climax of this film has Bo and Harris captured by some rather stereotypical cannibals who paint our heroine and prepare to sacrifice/eat/execute her. Suffice is to say that The Great Wooden Ape gets his girl and *SPOILER* Harris gets himself impaled on a huge elephant tusk! This doesn't stop the dying Parker from delivering a rambling monologue to Jane. As far as I am aware, the law suit from the Rice Burrows estate never materialized but 'Tarzan the Ape Man' was crucified at the box office (no kidding?) A pity. John Derek could have directed 'Tarzan the Ape Man 2' with Bo Derek and Miles O'Keefe living in domestic bliss and Dudley Moore as 'Boy.'",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-147710709b4249e4897aeafda0a12d52",
            "input": "I've noticed how all the other reviews of this film mention how \"wholesome\" and \"entertaining\" it is. These people need to get out of the house more often. I don't know why they're shilling for this vapid, insipid, brainless piece of fluff. Pat Boone has absolutely no acting talent whatsoever, and his ineptness is exceeded only by that of his co-star Pamela Austin, a former model (yet one more reason to outlaw the insidious practice of inflicting talentless models on an unsuspecting moveiegoing public, a foul habit that unfortunately persists to this day). A good supporting cast (Terry-Thomas, Edward Everett Hortyon, among others) tries hard to make some sense out of this, but to no avail. I noticed that two directors shared credit, although \"credit\" isn't the word I would use (neither is \"director\"). As for \"wholesome entertainment,\" there are plenty of those types of movies available without torturing your loved ones by forcing them to sit through this. Find one of those films, and skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55310624167746d4b7425295c382a786",
            "input": "Following the brilliant \"Goyôkiba\" (aka. \"Hanzo The Razor - Sword Of Justice\", 1972) and its excellent (and even sleazier) sequel \"Goyôkiba: Kamisori Hanzô jigoku zeme\" (aka. \"Razor 2: The Snare\", 1973), this \"Goyôkiba: Oni no Hanzô yawahada koban\" aka. \"Razor 3: Who's Got The Gold\" is the third, and sadly final installment to the awesome saga about the incorruptible Samurai-constable Hanzo 'The Razor' Ittami (brilliantly played by the great Shintarô Katsu), who fights corruption with his fighting expertise as well as his enormous sexual powers. As a big fan of 70s exploitation cinema made in Nippon, \"Sword Of Justice\" became an instant favorite of mine, and I was therefore more than eager to find the sequels, and full of anticipation when I finally stumbled over them recently. While this third \"Hanzo\" film is just not quite as brilliant as its predecessors it is definitely another great piece of cult-cinema that no lover of Japanese exploitation cinema can afford to miss. \"Who's Got The Gold\" is a bit tamer than the two foregoing Hanzo films, but it is just as brilliantly comical and crudely humorous, and immediately starts out fabulously odd: The film begins, when Hanzo's two assistants see a female ghost when fishing. Having always wanted to sleep with a ghost, Hanzo insists that his assistants lead him to the site of the occurrence... If that is not a promising beginning for an awesome film experience, I don't know what is. Shintaro Katsu, one of my personal favorite actors, is once again brilliant in the role of Hanzo, a role that seems to have been written specifically for him. Katsu IS Hanzo, the obstinate and fearless constable, who hates corruption and deliberately insults his superiors, and whose unique interrogation techniques include raping female suspects. The interrogated women than immediately fall for him, due to his sexual powers and enormous penis, which he trains in a rather grotesque routine ritual. I will not give away more about the plot in \"Who's Got The Gold\", but I can assure that it is as cool as it sounds. The supporting performances are also very good, and, as in the predecessors, there are plenty of hilariously eccentric characters. This is sadly the last film in the awesomely sleazy 'Hanzo' series. If they had made 20 sequels more, I would have happily watched them all! The entire Hanzo series is brilliant, and while this third part is a bit inferior compared to its predecessors, it is definitely a must-see for all lovers of cult-cinema! Oh how I wish they had made more sequels!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d921e941182c47df94331b698bb12b3e",
            "input": "\"I Am Curious: Yellow\" is a risible and pretentious steaming pile. It doesn't matter what one's political views are because this film can hardly be taken seriously on any level. As for the claim that frontal male nudity is an automatic NC-17, that isn't true. I've seen R-rated films with male nudity. Granted, they only offer some fleeting views, but where are the R-rated films with gaping vulvas and flapping labia? Nowhere, because they don't exist. The same goes for those crappy cable shows: schlongs swinging in the breeze but not a clitoris in sight. And those pretentious indie movies like The Brown Bunny, in which we're treated to the site of Vincent Gallo's throbbing johnson, but not a trace of pink visible on Chloe Sevigny. Before crying (or implying) \"double-standard\" in matters of nudity, the mentally obtuse should take into account one unavoidably obvious anatomical difference between men and women: there are no genitals on display when actresses appears nude, and the same cannot be said for a man. In fact, you generally won't see female genitals in an American film in anything short of porn or explicit erotica. This alleged double-standard is less a double standard than an admittedly depressing ability to come to terms culturally with the insides of women's bodies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b336c9c56ef24cfd8c16346f51791096",
            "input": "Mitchell Leisen's fifth feature as director, and he shows his versatility by directing a musical, after his previous movies were heavy dramas. He also plays a cameo as the conductor.You can tell it is a pre code movie, and nothing like it was made in the US for quite a while afterwards (like 30+ years). Leisen shot the musical numbers so they were like what the audience would see - no widescreen shots or from above ala Busby Berkeley. What I do find funny or interesting is that you never actually see the audience.As others have mentioned the leads are fairly characterless, and Jack Oakie and Victor McLaghlan play their normal movie personas. Gertrude Michael however provides a bit of spark.The musical numbers are interesting and some good (the Rape of the Rhapsody in particular is amusing) but the drama unconvincing and faked - three murders is too many and have minimal emotional impact on the characters. This is where this movie could have been a lot better.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1d27b0252983470882819042dfcdc184",
            "input": "Just watched the film for the 3rd time and enjoyed Lindsay Crouse and the rest of the cast just as much as before. It just keeps getting better and better. You simply have to marvel at the carefully measured way of speech, the slow deliberate action, everything being exactly in place.Truly one of the great ones and definitely my all-time favourite!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06611a78e6cd4fde843ea10fa4f097ad",
            "input": "This is one creepy movie. Creepier than anything David Lynch, and that shows what a great director Polanski is since this is not his usual type of work, and it is BRILLIANT.It all starts of with Trelkovski moves into a tenement block in Paris. He soon learns that the previous tenant, a young woman, committed suicide and he believes the rest of the people living there drove her to it. He also believes that they are trying to do the same to him. What results is a amazing and frightening look at paranoia.The whole production has classical horror written all over it: from the imagery to the music the viewer can feel poor Trelkovski's terror building up.Are they all out to kill him? Or maybe just drive him mad? Is there a difference? Find out for yourself. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a07fc8bea79743acb9be13c4e1be34a7",
            "input": "After the opening credits, there's a black screen for about a minute. A minute of nothing, then a girl wakes up and takes a shower.Then her and two college friends are driving to a rock concert, after much padding, they hit something and skid off the road. They awaken in a cabin inhabited by a wheelchair-bound old lady and her offspring.The killings are sadly very tame for a supposed Video Nasty. The twist ending silly and predictable. No one involved in the mess would ever make anything of note again. So there are still happy endings sometimes.Eye Candy: Sara Ansley gets topless, and Laurel Munson has full frontal on display My Grade: D",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cb5567d68c94685b0857d79feb4d98f",
            "input": "This film screened last night at Austin's Paramount theater as part of the SXSW Film Festival. We were graced with the presence of director Mike Binder and stars Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle who took audience questions after the film. It is a remarkable and powerful film about what it is like to lose yourself and begin to find your way back. The performances are phenomenal and the story manages to be both tragic and funny in a way that is all too rare. (The trailer for the film tries a little too hard to emphasize the comedic aspects.)This is a breakout role for Adam Sandler. While he has begun to transition to more dramatic roles with Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish, this role is a significant step forward for him as a dramatic actor. He deserves an Oscar nomination as he continues down to transition to more dramatic roles as Tom Hanks did and Jim Carrey is also doing. In this role, he seemed to be trying to channel Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man. Although playing an autistic man is certainly very different than Sandler's traumatized character, both characters for different reasons are trapped in their own worlds of child-like isolation and confusion.Don Cheadle's performance is less surprising, but just as good. After Hotel Rwanda and Crash, we've come to expect remarkable nuanced performances from Cheadle. He has the qualities of sincerity and honesty that comes through in this role. But he, too, is also broken and struggling if not in the such profound ways as Sandler's character. Cheadle is struggling with difficulties in both his marriage and in his professional life as a dentist. Together the characters played by Cheadle and Sandler struggle to heal each other in the way that true friends often do (in a way that reminds me of Matt Damon and Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting). They are both searching for that part of the themselves that they have lost and trying to find again.Reign over Me is one of the best major studio films to be released this year. The soundtrack, which is almost another character in the plot is wonderful. The filming in the streets of New York - a city that suffered a great tragedy and has also had to heal itself - is also quite beautiful. The supporting roles by Jada Pinkett Smith, Liv Tyler, Saffron Burrows (in a very odd role), Donald Sutherland, and Mike Binder himself are all quite good.Writer/Director Mike Binder has really delivered a story that so many will be able to connect with on numerous levels. This is a story about grief, family, healing, male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. Reign over Me does not disappoint. The film is almost hypnotic as it draws you into the lives of its characters. Hollywood would have a much better reputation if it made more character-driven charming films like Reign over Me.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9461300191ff459792838a9318cdc2fe",
            "input": "A young cat tries to steal back his brothers soul from death but only gets half of it and then has to go adventuring to get the other half... or maybe not. Frankly I'm not sure what happens in this film which is full of very strange, very surreal images some of which parents might find disturbing, (ie.the cats slicing off part of a pig who is traveling with them and the frying it like bacon which all three eat).This is a very strange film that some have likened to Hello Kitty on acid, I think its more like Hello Kitty as done by Dali. (Certainly this is more alive than Destino which was directly based on his work).If your up for a very off beat film that will challenge your perceptions of things then see this movie. Just be ready for some very strange images that will be burned into your memory forever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de9b7b219b994d94bfb2427bfc8b19bb",
            "input": "The '60s is an occasionally entertaining film, most of this entertainment is from laughing at the film. It is extremely uneven, and includes many annoying elements. Take for instance the switch between black & white, and color. If done right, this could of been fairly effective, but because it was done poorly , it turned into a nuisance and only detracted from the already bad experience; much of the film had an odd feel to it. The acting wasn't extremely bad for a made for TV flick, but then again it was downright embarrassing at other times. Many of the events were not coherent, and ending up being confusing. How did this family somehow end up being at many of the big events during the 1960's? The ending was much too sappy for my tastes; because it was hollywoodized, everything had to turn out right in the end. I would advise you to not waste your time on The '60s and do something else with your time. I'm glad I watched this in class, and not on my own time. I think I can safely say that the best part of the movie was the inclusion of Bob Dylan's music. Those are just my rambling thoughts on the flick. I hope you take my advice, and stay away from this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5fad7c8fe1543b8b235e00df4981bbb",
            "input": "i didn't enjoy this movie at all.for one,i just found it crude and vulgar,for no reason.i also felt it's misogynistic(against women.)also,the movie really doesn't appear to be about anything,and i didn't find any of the characters likable.really,the there doesn't seem to be any point to it all.maybe i'm missing something,but for me,this movie is pretty much a waste of time,when i could have been doing something more productive and enjoyable.like using my face as a pin cushion.James garner is in this thing,as are C.Thomas Howell and Shirley Jones,and James Cromwell.all are wasted here,and i'm sure this was a low point in each of their respective careers.Jennilee Harrison(from the later years of Three's Company)is also in the movie,and it is nice to see her in a non ditsy role.but other than that,she can't rise above the mediocre script.for me,Tank is a 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-990b43393a1d417cbd8e3ceb125ba0c1",
            "input": "I love Anthony Hopkins as an actor so I was very interested to see how he would do as a writer/director. I could not have been more disappointed by this move. The movie was so disjointed and the cinematography was so over done to the point I wanted to pull the plug out of the wall. The actors were very good but it was such a waste of talent. Not all actors are cut out to be writers or directors and clearly Mr. Hopkins falls into this category. Of all the movies I have ever seen in my 50 years, this is absolutely the worst movie ever. Please do us all a favor Mr. Hopkins and stick to acting, which you are excellent at, and leave the writing and directing to those who are talented in those areas. If I could give this movie a rating less than one I certainly would.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-edb076950f104747aa69e058701282f0",
            "input": "I was really excited about seeing this film. I thought finally Australia had made a good film.. but I was wrong.This was the most pathetic attempt at a slasher film ever. I feel sorry for Molly Ringwald having to come all the way to Australia to make an awful movie.The acting was terrible (especially that Australian guy who was trying to speak in an American accent), and the plot was also pretty bad.When I first heard about this film coming out, I thought that the title was pathetic (because it sounds like the cheesy film \"Stab\" in Scream 2), but I was willing to let it slide if it was a good movie.WARNING!!! MAJOR SPOILERS!!!Probably the worst thing about the film was the ending. I was expecting a big surprise about who the killer was.. but the killer wasn't even human.. which turned this realistic slasher film into an awful horror movie.Don't see this film.. you'll probably be disappointed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08b3b3a0b93c456db3435ac87b66728c",
            "input": "As romantic comedies go, this was a cute and winning one. I thought that the writing could have been stronger to build up the final connection a bit better, but that is not a huge tripping point. But, Amanda Detmer and Scott Wolf give nice performances and are as charming as ever. These are two of my favorite actors, and I was just glad to see them cast as romantic leads. I hope to see them cast in more projects soon.Overall, this movie won't change your life, but is is sweet, warm and winning. Not a bad thing to be at all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-450948d156d6437baa226a5f979d4d93",
            "input": "This movie is little more than poorly-made, fetish porn, and this is saying a lot considering the similar crap that was made in that era. This was recommended to me by friend as a \"unique film experience.\" He was right. I suppose he meant that as a joke. Not disgusting, not even that shocking. Just mediocre acting and poor attempts at shock art. A little bit of camp value, though I don't believe the makers of this film intended this. And yes, as a previous reviewer mentioned, it's sex with a guy in a bear suit. Don't spend a lot of money on this. Try to borrow it, if you must see it. Or contact me, I'd be happy to sell you my copy for half price.I may have to see another of this particular director's films, as he seems to have a certain following. But if it's anything like this, I will again regret another 2 hours of my life gone forever.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-384d558b03e94e8b8b821f9eea4a2f03",
            "input": "Only a handful of the segments are engaging here. A segment with a garage attendant from Nigeria is heartbreaking. One with Fanny Ardent & Bob Hoskins makes its point, twist by twist until the final shot overplays things. The problem with this movie is that only a few of the clips invoke Paris. The others are so scatter-shot in theme, tone, volition & production that you may as well be watching \"The Years Best Commercials, 2006.\" It's really all over the place. It doesn't develop over it's running time, and nothing reigns the directors in. No construct successfully joins the pieces... tedium sets in. I'm at the one hour, twenty minute point and Elijah Wood is in some dumb, over-commercial, overproduced vampire shtick. It has about as much to do with Paris as old ladies knitting in the Antartic. Fantasy shows up I think first in the Coen Brothers segment (Uh, thanks J & E for ruining another movie) and then makes way too many appearances. The point of being in Paris is that you don't need make-believe crap to make your days extraordinary. Why divide it by neighborhood if Quartier de la Madeleine is equated with vampires for some loser director? Has there ever been a genre more over-represented than the vampire film. Every three years we get the same lame vampire clichés.Making things worse is that the switch from segment to segment is pretty artless. The transitions get lost. This doesn't feel intentional, it feels sloppy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52b9db1449dd46fa87ff45970faf661b",
            "input": "I've waited to see this movie for a long time and at last I could manage to see it in Istanbul Film Festival. Maybe because I expected too much from this film and that's why i was slightly disappointed. I was not the best movie from Korea but still it is really worth watching.The subject was nice and the film makes you keep watching without getting bored though it is long. But there are gaps in the movie and you jump from one point to another. However, the acting of Jeon Do-Yeon is incredibly beautiful. It was was one of the best performances in the early cinema history and I think this movie wouldn't be that nice if she was not in the leading role.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb5c9c61268a49bc8f385ee098e78a2e",
            "input": "In the words of Charles Dance's character in this film, \"Bollocks!\" No plot, no character development, and utterly unbelievable.Full of stuff that just doesn't happen in the real world (since when were British police inspectors armed with handguns in shoulder holsters?). Full of mistakes (Bulgarian trains in London?). Full of dull and artificial dialogue. And the directing/editing is awful - wobbly hand-held camera shots that add nothing to the film except a vague feeling of seasickness; confusing jump-cuts; no structure.Wesley Snipes' character is totally unsympathetic - why should we care what happens to him? Direct to video? Direct to the dustbin!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ff9de0a29b34de684df06d9199ddc64",
            "input": "I loved \"The Curse of Frankenstein\" so much that I rushed out to get \"Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed\" to see Cushing at it again...even if it was without Chistopher Lee this time. To my great disappointment, this movie not only does without Lee, but it does without Frankenstein's Monster altogether! Was it a case of \"If we can't get Lee, we won't have a monster at all\"? Why would they do that? The monster is half the fun of the whole thing!! This film is dedicated solely to the study of Baron Frankenstein and his quest to finish experiments he had begun in brain transplants before ending up in an asylum. I found the script extremely weak, with the need to suspend disbelief forced upon the audience a little too much. I'm willing to suspend a fair amount, but this movie got fairly ridiculous, which took me out of the film rather than immersing me in it.Peter Cushing, though, is absolutely brilliant playing pure evil in this film. For being one of the most beloved actors and notoriously sweet men, he sure could play menacing and malevolent extremely well. The supporting cast is competent, but has little to do, even the young doctor and his fiancée blackmailed into helping Frankenstein. A bumbling police chief is introduced, along with his put-upon sidekick, to generate some comic relief, then they are completely dropped from the movie! Why? We are led to believe that the police chief will be the main nemesis of the Baron, then we are led to believe it will be the young doctor, and then it ends up being the victim of Frankenstein's brain transplant experiment. There was no tension, we weren't invested in the \"creature\", and the ending was left so ambiguous as to leave one unsatisfied because it is so clear they are setting up another sequel.Also, there are virtually no \"horror\" elements. Yes, there is a beheading in the beginning (off-camera), and we are treated to the sounds of Cushing cutting the tops of two men's skulls off (again, off camera), and there is the most unsettling and thoroughly unnecessary rape scene (90% of which is, again, off-camera). I understand that there is a love of \"letting the audience imagine it all, for their imaginations are far worse than what we can show\", but come on, if you're not going to give us a Monster, then at least let us SEE the few \"horrific\" elements you do choose to include. Showing us a skeleton in the lab lit with a green light is just not scary.On top of a weak script, I thought the directing was mostly flat. There were a couple of nice shots, but otherwise no excitement, atmosphere, or suspense was generated. The same director did \"Curse\" back in 1958 and I thought it was brilliantly directed...guess he was as uninspired by this film as I was.The movie gets a 4 out of 10 from me strictly for Peter Cushing's powerful, nuanced performance...beyond that, I found little in this movie worth recommending. Instead, my suggestion is to watch \"The Curse of Frankenstein\" and see a truly great Hammer horror film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6c1c6122b914d0f94a969570f4abea6",
            "input": "When a film has no fewer than FIVE different titles, it usually means several things and almost always means that the film has major flaws somewhere. Necromancy has major flaws and is just out and out bad. I saw the version on video called Rosemary's Disciples. Yes, I am sure it differs from other versions, but I am not inclined to think that in any way is any other version and the few more minutes it might have - going to be really any better. The story is perhaps the biggest problem: the film opens with Laurie waking up and her husband taking her to a town where he has a new job at a toy factory for occultists(yep, it gets bad this early!). The town is called Lillith and has some guy with a rifle on the bridge to make sure only those selected by the \"owner\" of the town are allowed in. Soon we find that everyone living in Lillith is a witch and all follow the directives of Mr. Cato - the head of this municipal coven who wants his dead son back(hence the name Necromancy). The people in the town do witch kind of stuff - have ceremonies, some like wearing a goat's head, and promiscuity abounds(not much really shown in this area), but none of these people are very good actors. Mr. Cato is played robustly by the figuratively and literally larger-than-life movie maverick Orson Welles. Welles is misused, but, make no mistake, he is the best thing in this movie. And that is really the saddest part of Necromancy as Welles gives a pretty poor and pedestrian performance with little directorial guidance. In one scene at a party, director Bert I Gordon keeps going back to Welles watching the action of the party using the exact same frames! It looked ridiculous. As did the scene that was repeatedly seen over and over again of a woman's arm centered in swirling flames after a car crash. It looked like the arm of a shop mannequin. The story is never fully utilized as we never really know what happens: many scenes are shot like dreams or hallucinations and never confirmed. This also applies to the corny, hokey ending. The lead Pamela Franklin is pert and pretty and has some talent. Other than her performance, real slim pickings from the rest of the cast sans Welles. The direction and story were both done by Gordon who obviously had little gas left in the engine. This is not a good movie in any way under any name.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3cd5647c53f543a3b13f91042750f312",
            "input": "I have never seen a movie as bad as this. It is meant to be a \"fun\" movie, but the only joke is at the start, and it is NOT funny. If you like this sort of movie, then you may just be able to give it a vote of 2. If it had the necessary votes, it would truly belong on the bottom 100.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-85d0b676f78d40b28d4d77390882b603",
            "input": "I am a back Batman movie and TV fan. I loved the show (new and old) and I loved all the movies. But this movie is not as great as some people were hopeing it to be. In my opinon, it is a big let down. I think the problem was it had no drama. Batman: Mask Of The Phantasm and Batman Beyond: Return Of The Joker had a lot of drama. and Batman & Mr. Freeze: Sub Zero had some drama too. Also, I think this movie is to light for Batman. The only scene that seems a little dark is the big fight with Bane at the end. Anyways, it's an ok Batman movie. But I would just rent it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20d17a2734304d13a73b15360d7e47e5",
            "input": "I love this show as it action packed with adventure, love and intrigue. Well some times love! It's so good see a show where all the characters work well together and they treat each other with respect. It's also very good to se Dick Van Dyke in a television role as I have only seen him in Mary Poppins. the mixture of the main characters, Mark, Amanda, Jesse and Steve is very capturing to the audience. This is a show you have to watch!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebbed7d566f04f1a8f47332fff577208",
            "input": "Weak start, solid middle, fantastic finish. That's my impression of this film, anyway. I liked Simon Pegg in the two films I've seen him in--- Hot Fuzz, and Shaun of the Dead. His role here, though, took a completely different turn. Shows his range as an actor, but nonetheless I really disliked th character as he was portrayed at the beginning.There's a kind of humour I call \"frustration comedy.\" Its supposed \"jokes\" and wit are really nothing more than painful and awkward moments. Much like the Bean character Rowan Atkinmson plays. There are a number of other comedic actors who portray similar characters too. I don't mean to bash them here, so will not.But do be warned that if you are like me, and you dislike smarmy and maddeningly bungling idiots, Pegg shows just such characteristics for the first third of this film. It DOES get better, however.I read somewhere that this is based on a true story. Hmmm. Maybe. The film's story stopped being annoying, and became kind of a triumph of the \"little guy\" in the final third. I don't need all films to be sugar and light--- but coincidentally, as this film got better, it also started to be more and more of a happy ending.It was also a pleasure to see an old favourite, Jeff Bridges, play a role so masterfully. I liked \"Iron Man,\" but was saddened by the fact that Bridges' character was a villain. Purely personal taste, of course, as his acting in that was superb. Nonetheless, he was a marvel here as the Bigger Than Life man of vision, the publisher of Sharps. It was nice to see him in a role that I could actually enjoy.Overall then, I liked it! I just wish I had come in 40 minutes late, and missed the beginning.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf85a0d27a9d40bba778bd21706e5051",
            "input": "I watched this because I thought there were going to be a lot of car chases and cool cars to gawk at. Guess I was lied to. This movie is very boring.The movie starts out Kip Raines(Giovanni Ribisi) sitting outside a Porsche dealership checking to see if they have the right car. When they confirm it's the right one, Kip gets a brick out of the trunk and chucks it at the window, shattering it. He gets the Porsche while his friend gets the keys. They start up the car and take off into the night. They deliver it to a warehouse only to have been followed by the police. So, the whole crew ditches all the cars and go their separate ways. Then, we get a glimpse of Memphis Raines. He is giving a little speech to a bunch of kids at a go-kart track. Then, he is confronted by Atlee Jackson(Will Patton). Atlee tells Memphis that his brother Kip is in deep *bleep*. Memphis is known as one of the most notorious car thieves in Los Angeles. Memphis heads to a junkyard and meets Raymond Calitri(Christopher Ecclesten). This guy threatens to kill Kip if Memphis doesn't deliver 50 cars within 72 hours.There are a few problems with this film: 1.Story: The first 48 in-movie hours take place when Cage and Duvall are looking for a crew and planning everything out. The last 12 in-movie hours are a waste! 2. The Cars: You see maybe 10 cars out of the 50 as the movie advertises. So, where are the other 40 cars? Why don't we get to see them? 3. The Chase: The chase at the end of the movie was a joke. It was not suspenseful at all.4. The Dog: Somewhere in the movie, the dog eats the burgers and swallows three keys as well. This is impossible. The keys were flipped open. The keys would have severely damaged the dog's esophagus, stomach, and large intestines. The guys suggest giving the dog laxatives to help him poop it out. This won't work. The dog will get a lot of diarrhea but no keys. It was stated in Jackass after Ryan Dunne stuck a toy car up his rectum. Take laxatives, lots of diarrhea, but no car. Same case with the dog.5. The Cop During The Chase: When Eleanor breaks down for a few minutes, Nicholas Cage tries desperately to start up the car. You see a police cruiser behind him who isn't looking at his car at all. But, right when Nicholas Cage starts the engine up again, the police officer jerks his head to the right, sees the car, and immediately begins to chase after him. It is stupid. So, right when he heard the engine start, and saw the car, he knew that was the car he was looking for. How does he know it's the right car? He only sees the back of it.Overall, the movie is boring. There is no action. There are very few cars. The movie is stupid. I have never seen the original but I plan to.I give this movie 1 star out of 10. Get The Fast and Furious instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9ec2077ed224cc3aab73fcb9215bc9c",
            "input": "Kim Basinger stars as Della, a housewife who has twin children (Terri and Tammi-played by Luke Gair and Erika-Shaye Gair) and an abusive jerk for a husband (Kenneth), played by Craig Sheffer.The movie opens on Christmas Eve. Kenneth is on his way home from work, driving a nice car too I might add. He is on his cellphone arguing with a business partner I would assume. When he gets home, he sees that the floor is a mess with shoes and toys spread all about. This angers him even more and he takes up with his wife, Della, asking her why the house is always a mess. He pins her up against the wall. The twin's watch from the stairs. He punches the wall, leaving a hole in it and walks away. She tends to the children, trying to comfort them. After that is all said in done, she needs to go to the mall to do some last minute shopping and because she is out of wrapping paper. She gets there and the parking lot is full because there is a lot of last minute shoppers there. While she is looking for a parking space, she notices a car taking up two spaces and this irks her. She finally finds a spot to park, makes her way over to the hoggish car and leaves a note under the wiper calling the owner a \"selfish jerk\". Then she goes in the mall to do her last minute shopping.When she finally does leave the mall, it is closing and many people have left already. Not the owner of the car she left the note on however and she notices this on the way to her vehicle. She also notices that the note she left under the wiper is no longer there. Odd. When she gets to her vehicle, she gets in to start it up. She notices a car coming up behind her and it blocks her from backing up. She gets out of the car only to be confronted by the owner of the car (Chuckie-played by Lukas Haas) she left the note on and a posse of his thug friends. Yelling ensues and a mall cop (no, not Paul Blart) makes his way over to them to see what the problem is, only to have his brains blown out of his head by Chuckie. While this happens, Della jumps in her vehicle, starts it and drives over the median in front of her. Chuckie and his posse hop in his car and give chase. Della ends up crashing her vehicle into a log pile at a housing development but she is unharmed. She manages to make it to the back of her vehicle, open up the hatchback and grab a toolbox before the thugs get there. With that, Della spends the rest of the night trying to outrun and out wit the thugs armed with only the tools that she has in her toolbox as weapons. The first kill, in my opinion, is the best. The first kill that Della performs anyway. The last one was probably the weakest and it should of been the best considering that this was the main bad guy she was offing. I will admit that there will be some that are put off buy the ending and I was let down a bit myself. As a whole though it was a fun flick and moves along nicely at it's 1 hour and 20 minute run time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c68aaa1026a3412da174890aef12c5cc",
            "input": "It is one of the better Indian movies I have seen lately, instead of crappy song and dance or slum dog movies. All the actors have showed the right emotions at the right intensity with right timing. It is the hallmark of a good movie, that it make the viewer go back and research the subject, which exactly what I did checking on Harilal. I always enjoy Akshay Khanna's subtle style of acting and interestingly he had rather a complicated relationship with his own father Vinod Khanna, albeit not as dramatic as Gandhis and wonder how it helped him essay this character. I was impressed by the direction and 2 thumbs up for Anil Kapoor for producing such a classy movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7258fd23f9e24ffd8f27dd1d9a6eda5d",
            "input": "Carla works for a property developer's where she excels in being unattractive, unappreciated and desperate. She is also deaf.Her boss offers to hire in somebody to alleviate her heavy workload so she uses the opportunity to secure herself some male company. Help arrives in the form of Paul, a tattooed hoodlum fresh out of prison and clearly unsuited to the mannered routine of an office environment.An implicit sexual tension develops between the two of them and Carla is determined to keep him on despite his reluctance to embrace the working week. When Carla is edged out of an important contract she was negotiating by a slimy colleague she exploits Paul's criminality by having him steal the contract back. The colleague quickly realises that she's behind the robbery, but when he confronts her, Paul's readiness to punch people in the face comes in handy too - but this thuggery comes at a price. Paul is given a 'going over' by some mob acquaintances as a reminder about an unpaid debt. He formulates a plan which utilises Carla's unique lip reading abilities to rip-off a gang of violent bank robbers. It's now Carla's turn to enter a frightening new world.The fourth feature from director Jacques Audiard, 'READ MY LIPS' begins as a thoroughly engaging romantic drama between two marginalised losers only to shift gears halfway through into an edgy thriller where their symbiotic shortcomings turn them into winners. The leads are excellent; effortlessly convincing us that this odd couple could really connect. Carla's first meeting with Paul is an enjoyable farce in which she attempts to circumnavigate his surly reticence and jailbird manners only to discover that he was, until very recently, a jailbird. Emmanuelle Devos, who plays Carla, has that almost exclusive ability to go from dowdy to gorgeous and back again within a frame. Vincent Cassel plays Paul as a cornered dog who only really seems at home when he's receiving a beating or concocting the rip-off that is likely to get him killed.Like many French films, 'READ MY LIPS' appears, at first, to be about nothing in particular until you scratch beneath the surface and find that it's probably about everything. The only bum note is a subplot concerning the missing wife of Paul's parole officer; a device that seems contrived only to help steer the main thrust of the story into a neat little feelgood cul-de-sac.It was the French 'New Wave' of the 60's that first introduced the concept of 'genre' to film making and I've always felt that any medium is somewhat compromised when you have to use a system of labels to help define it; so it's always a pleasure to discover a film that seems to transcend genre, or better still, defy it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4120e0bd928d43f590f3443ca4a13589",
            "input": "I didn't even want to watch this movie after reading Maltin's review and 1 1/2 star rating. I watched it anyway on the advice of my son and found it much better than I expected. I would give it 2 1/2 stars out of a 4 star system. You have to watch the movie more than once to understand it all. If you don't know much about religion, you will miss a lot. I graduated from high school the year the movie was made, so maybe I can relate to it better. Yes, there is some pretension in the movie and it's weird to some extent, but that was the 70s so what do you expect. I can see why people might not like the movie; however, I cannot understand people saying it is boring. The movie is anything but boring. You will either hate it or love it. If you find it boring, you are probably brain dead.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a654e1f30c54256ae9716d8ad74bf6e",
            "input": "Five across the eyes ain't worth one off the wrist, I must admit at one point i was really worried, for about 30 seconds nobody made a noise and i thought my speakers had blown or that i had gone deaf with the constant screaming and high pitch yelling, me and the speakers are OK now thanks for asking, funnily enough that was the best bit of the film.I won't waste your time telling you the plot, read the other comments for that.If you have bought this DVD but not yet unwrapped it Don't, take it back and demand your money back, i've wasted mine don't do the same.I was actually shouting at the telly \" they're over here in the car, look for the camera lights, and get the camera man first \", i have left the swear words out but you can guess where they go.If anybody would like to buy this film (it's really good) it's yours for a ten quid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36e69a4bb1c64c50b55a560cf6e1da5e",
            "input": "Fragmentaric movie about a couple of people in Austria during a heatwave. This kind of movie has been done more often, and most of all, better. The stories don't really have anything to do with each other, apart from the pathetic finale: 'people are cruel'. Ugly flesh, unpleasant people and a movie that goes on way too long without really making a point... Ultra-realistic? Hardly... Boring? Indeed. Not even gorgeous Franzisca Weiss can save this one! 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e369314152e4759bc2251459d08c133",
            "input": "This was one of the most boring movies I've ever seen… I don't really know why… Just your run-of-the-mill stories about guy who is about to get married, and starts to fancy someone else instead. Story has been told a thousand times. Nothing new or innovative about it at all.I don't really know what was wrong with this film. Most of the time when these kinds of actors/actresses get together to make a film that have already been made a million times before, it's really entertaining. There are usually little clever thing in them that aren't really in any other. For some reason, this one just doesn't hold your attention. You can pick out some funny parts, or clever ideas in it, but for some reason they're just not funny, nor clever in any way… I wish I new how to explain it, but I don't… Just don't waste your time on this one…",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8dc456e4a7d24245b00d2653d6d1633e",
            "input": "I can only believe that Garson Kanin must have been two people. The one who wrote the brilliant \"A Double Life\" and the funny \"Born Yesterday\" and co-wrote such excellent screenplays as \"Adam's Rib\" and \"Pat And Mike\" with his wife Ruth Gordon and then the one who wrote and/or directed such tiresome, sad drivel as \"Bachelor Mother\", \"Some Kind Of A Nut\", and this. The cast tries, but the script is so tired and clichéd that even the efforts of the always wonderful Brenda Vaccaro are defeated. The script sinks to it's nadir in the truly offensive sequence in which Janssen's character tests Drivas's character to make sure he's not gay. An ugly sequence, but sadly one which could easily play in a film today. \"Ethnic\" jokes are now totally verboten, but \"fag\" jokes are still \"good, clean, family fun\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0ed80589f1d4544a260369f279e00c3",
            "input": "Be warned: Neither Zeta-Jones nor McGregor plays the main part as the poster would have you believe. Their roles are in fact minor.The film stumbles badly between exaggerated comedy and realistic drama, with neither being really engaging. Especially I find it impossible to muster much sympathy for the main protagonist, not to mention his screwball friends and sex obsessed fiancé. The plot drags terribly, and I turned this one off after about 2/3 - unusual for me, as I like to finish what I start. The good acting and beautiful setting takes it from 1 to 2 stars.2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66da2ef163844592bc7e34190a1b789e",
            "input": "If you have read the book - do not set your hopes high, if you have not - go read it, and never watch the film. It is strange to learn that Toby Young was actually involved a lot in the writing of the script (as he claims himself in the post script of the book). Because the film is very different from the book.What the film seems to be aiming at - taking a rather thought provoking and entertaining piece that combines philosophical ideas with plain funny sarcasm and simplifying it so that everyone would understand it - it achieves with perfection. The film is full of bad and cheap jokes suitable for a sitcoms, and has lost any meaningful message that it could have had.You are better off not seeing it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6353002721a04a859b5a4a2e930db4fe",
            "input": "magellan33 said: \"You can only do so much when the two stars of the show can only be seen by one fellow cast member.\"I assume, then, that you never heard of \"Topper\".Which, in addition to the two stars who could only be seen by one member of the cast, had a dog, ditto.This was the kind of program that had \"Not Gonna Make It\" written allover it from the first episode - it was like an arcade video game where you actually have to read the instructions to play; no-one (well, very few of us, apparently) wants to watch a comedy program that has a basic premise that actually requires *thought* to grasp.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69ff3cd590974c949ab0744ce6006907",
            "input": "hi, im scott (A.K.A woody7739) i Love the film Twisted Desire, And i love watching Melissa Joan Hart on the t.v as i think she is fine. I am a real fan of sabrina the teenage witch too, so this helped my watch it (don't ask). i love the way that nicole plans out her parents murder very carfully, as she makes sure that someone else pulls the trigger and practices on the bottles, so she wont give away her fingerprints (a very well planned out idea), back i guess it all backfired on nicole as she got caught as her old boyfriend comes along and puts a hidden camera under his shirt. i give this film a nine out of ten, and put it in MY top 10 films list. And last but not least if anyone see's this film in the shops please tell me as i seen it on tv and didn't record it. bye",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40ca9bf5501a453bb8ceb6adbf91366b",
            "input": "The plot of this film might not be extraordinary, but what makes the film really special, are its characters (and the actors who play them – of course!). I won't go into the details of the plot of the movie, but I would certainly like to say this – This film is not just for everyone! The film is really witty and you need to be equally clever to get all the satire. If you're not alert even for a second, you'll probably end up missing one of the subtle points. The movie is full of such seemingly trivial but witty stuff - like the announcements going on in the background at Turaqistan, the advertisements on the tankers (which I almost missed) and it are these that make the movie hilarious throughout.Coming to the actors, John Cusack has played his multi-faceted role very efficiently (what with him being the co-writer and the producer too) and he plays his character – Hauser, the killer with a heart – exquisitely. Cusack's done a similar kind of role before in Grosse Pointe Blank, but his comic disposition in the movie is simply superb.However the actress who steals all the show is Hilary Duff! I have always been a huge fan of Ms. Duff. But to be honest I was a bit disappointed when I heard about the kind of role she's playing in the movie. But after watching the movie the disappointment gave way to great respect for her as an actor. Let's face it! The kid's growing, but yes, so is her talent! All those critics, who shouted hoarse that Hilary cannot act, will be silent for a while. Hilary had to play a really complex character – tough on the outside, yet a sweet child on the inside – and she's done complete justice to it. She makes you laugh, and she makes you cry – to cut the long story short ('cause I could go on raving about her for ever) she's BRILLIANT! Marisa Tomei and Joan Cusack have done a good job too. Especially, Joan's hysterics are uproarious! However, I was rather disappointed with Ben Kingsley being wasted in such a small role and his performance seemed lackluster.In general War, Inc. keeps you on your toes throughout with its intelligent humor, and ends with just the right amount of twists in the plot. I would highly recommend this movie to all (and more so to Hilary Duff fans)!!! P.S. - I am really glad to hear the movie is going to break free of its limited release and release at other places soon!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-609fe06010b64cd185229eb98f1ac191",
            "input": "Streisand fans only familiar with her work from the FUNNY GIRL film onwards need to see this show to see what a brilliant performer Streisand WAS - BEFORE she achieved her goal of becoming a Movie Star. There had never been a female singer quite like her ever before, and there never would be again (sorry, Celine - only in your dreams!), but never again would Streisand sing with the vibrancy, energy, and, above all, the ENTHUSIASM and VULNERABILITY with which she performs here - by the time she gets to that Central Park concert only 2 or 3 years later, she'd been filming FUNNY GIRL in Hollywood and her performing style has become less spontaneous and more reserved, more rehearsed (and, let's face it: more angry) - there's a wall between her and the audience. Live performing was never what she really enjoyed - she did it because she knew it was her ticket to Hollywood, and once she no longer had to do it she's done it as little as possible (and oh, that legendary stage fright provides such a good excuse!).Her vocals here and on her earlier Judy Garland Show appearance are incredible: Streisand could truly make an old song sound new again, and composers such as Richard Rodgers and Harold Arlen loved her for it. But by the 1970s Streisand was trying to be a \"rock\" singer, her albums pandering to the younger audiences, with over-wrought shrieking of songs that were unworthy of her effort or her voice. In the '80s she came back with that brilliant \"Broadway Album,\" but went on and on about what a struggle it was to get it done, how \"they\" told her not to do it, etc. Oh please - when has anyone told Streisand what to do? She could have been doing good stuff like that all along, bringing audiences UP to her level instead of stooping to what she thought the young public wanted. (The \"Back to Broadway\" sequel wasn't nearly as good, as Streisand seems to feel it necessary to improve on other composers' work: if he were alive at the time, would Richard Rodgers have even recognized his own \"Some Enchanted Evening\"? Rodgers, notorious for taking singers to task for playing around with his melodies, would undoubtedly have been after Streisand to sing what he'd written! She also blows Michael Crawford off the CD in their duet of \"Music of the Night\" - apparently reminding him just whose CD this is. Why does she insist on taking songs that are duets and singing them by herself, and songs that aren't duets and singing them as duets with someone else who she then goes on to diminish?)Supposedly Judy Garland took Streisand aside and advised her, \"Don't let them do to you what they did to me,\" advice Streisand wasted no time in heeding - despite her protestations to the contrary, surely it looks like it's always been her way or the highway. Just imagine - SHE told the CBS brass how her first TV special would be done - no guests, just HER.But nobody can argue with the results that are so evident here. Treat yourself to this brilliant musical phenomenon BEFORE she was a legend - you'll be absolutely amazed at the difference!PS - I watched this again last night (12/01) after not having seen it for many years - it was even BETTER than I remembered! The 1st Act begins with \"I'm Late\" and includes \"Make Believe\" and \"How Does the Wine Taste,\" and Barbra's homage to childhood, \"I'm Five\" - it climaxes as Streisand appears with full (and I mean FULL) orchestra to sing \"People\" - she wasn't bored with the song yet and although it's a somewhat shorter rendition it really soars - compare it to some of her later \"auto-pilot\" versions. The 2nd act (after Streisand's \"kooky\" schtick-patter, which hasn't changed much over the years) is the famous series of Depression songs set amidst the extravagance of Bergdorf-Goodman's.The 3rd Act is the stunner - call it \"Streisand, the Orchestra, and the Audience\" (although we never see the audience that supposedly witness this historic event). With her fear of audiences and dislike of such performing, this may have been the toughest part for her, but if so, to her credit it doesn't show. She tears through \"Lover Come Back to Me\" and the torchy \"When the Sun Comes Out\" (though I can't remember in which order!), the poignant \"Why Did I Choose You? (one of my all-time favorite Streisand performances) and offers a medley of FUNNY GIRL songs, including (of course) \"Don't Rain on My Parade\" and my favorite song from the score, \"The Music That Makes Me Dance\". Explaining that \"Fanny Brice sang a song like that in 1922, and it made her the toast of Broadway\", Streisand then sings \"My Man\", and it's almost a dress-rehearsal template for her later screen rendition in the FUNNY GIRL film (the main difference being that the black gown here is sleeveless - her film gown had long sleeves and against the black background all we saw were her hands and face), but the vocal here is more urgent and charged than her later film vocal. (Her performance of the song has everything to do with Streisand and nothing to do with Fanny Brice who, of course, never sang the song in such an all-out manner as Streisand does here or in the film - see THE GREAT ZIEGFIELD for a glimpse of Brice's more understated version.) The show ends with Streisand singing \"Happy Days Are Here Again\" over the credits.When it was over I said to the friend I was watching it with, \"She has NEVER, EVER, done anything better!\"And she was TWENTY-THREE YEARS OLD!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00e97ee0598642f5b95080a63aef9b03",
            "input": "Half the reviews were good so i took a chance for $10. Sure Priscilla Barnes had some sex talk but it wasn't much. The whole plot later that she may be the other actress mother & the documentary maker falling for the young woman is stretching it. Its not funny its not that raunchy its not much of anything but a waste of time. Boogie Nights was based on real people that were in the adult industry this is based on nothing that ever happened in the industry. It could have shocked with whats popular today in adult films mocking todays gonzo videos and that big orgy that they had 5 minutes to shoot what a joke a bigger orgy has been done bigger & better decades ago in the early 1970s.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b23e5cad059b4317ad313eee2b69f7a7",
            "input": "In 1972, after his wife left to go her own way, Elvis Presley began dating Linda Thompson. Miss Thompson, a good-humored, long haired, lovely, statuesque beauty queen, is charted to fill a void in Elvis' life. When Elvis' divorce became final, Linda was already in place as the legendary performer's live-in girlfriend and travel companion until 1976.This is a gaudy look at their love affair and companionship. Linda whole-heartedly tending to her lover's needs and desires. And even putting up with his swallowing medications by the handful and introducing her to her own love affair with valium. At times this movie is harsh and dark of heart; a very unattractive look at the 'King' and his queen.Don Johnson is absolutely awful as Elvis. Over acting to the hilt is not attractive. Stephanie Zimbalist lacks the classiness of Linda, but does the job pretty well. Supporting cast includes: John Crawford, Ruta Lee, and Rick Lenz. Watching this twice is more than enough for me, but don't let this review stop you from checking it out. For most Elvis fans that I have conferred with, this is not a favored presentation.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1cf57323dccf403b9dd852633eeb8efc",
            "input": "I stopped short of giving \"Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House\" 10/10 due to an aspect that makes us in the 21st century cringe a little bit: the fact that a black person is the faithful servant (somewhat reminiscent of Stepin Fetchit). But other than that, the movie's a hoot. Portraying middle class New York couple Jim (Cary Grant) and Muriel Blandings (Myrna Loy) trying to build a house in Connecticut, this flick has something for everyone.Grant is his usual flippant self, while Loy does quite well as merely a wife. But Melvyn Douglas adds some real laughs as Jim's and Muriel's lawyer Bill Cole, who seems to have more plans than he's making clear. As for the house itself...throughout most of the movie, you'll probably feel ambiguous as to whether or not you want to live there. The builders, contractors, and others also provide their fair share of laughs.All in all, a comedy classic. Also starring Louise Beavers, Reginald Denny, Sharyn Moffett, Connie Marshall and Jason Robards Sr.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7af7bc78362546008fa46384dd15c05c",
            "input": "When Marlene Dietrich was labeled box office poison in 1938 one of a handful of actresses so named by the trades papers, it was films like The Garden Of Allah. How a film could be so breathtakingly beautiful to behold and be so insipidly dull is beyond me. Also how Marlene if she was trying to expand her range and not play a sexpot got stuck with such an old fashioned story is beyond me.The Garden Of Allah, one of the very first films in modern technicolor was a novel set at the turn of the last century by Robert Hitchens who then collaborated on a play adaption with Mary Anderson that ran for 241 performances in 1911-12. It then got two silent screen adaptions. The story is about a monk who runs away from the monastery out in French Tunisia to see some of what he's missed in the world. He runs into a similarly sheltered woman who was unmarried and spent her prime years caring for a sick parent. She's traveling now in the desert and the two meet on a train.The woman is of course Marlene and the runaway monk is Charles Boyer. I'm not sure what was in David O. Selznick's mind in filming this story. Someone like Ingrid Bergman might have made it palatable for the audience. But you can bet that the movie-going public of 1936 when they plunked their money down for a ticket they expected to see Marlene as a modern day Salome rather than a saint with that title. The public still remembered Rudolph Valentino and you can bet that it was some desert romance and seduction that they were expecting.As for the monks you have to remember that they are self supporting in their monasteries and this particular one bottles a special wine of which Boyer happens to be the one with the secret. The monastery will have to rethink it's economics if Boyer leaves. The monks are a sincerely pious group, but from the head man Charles Waldron on down they've a right to be a little concerned with some self interest.Anyway a whole lot of religious platitudes get said here by a pair of leads that really are not suited for the parts. Most especially Marlene Dietrich. I would watch this film with an eye for the special color desert cinematography and forget the plot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c78bb550f6034a4c8de7abe9c6970ce0",
            "input": "I love the book, \"Jane Eyre\" and have seen many versions of it. All have their strong points and their faults. However, this was one of the worst I have seen. I didn't care about Jane or Mr. Rochester. Charlotte Gainsbourg (Jane) was almost tolerable and certainly looked the plain part, but she had no emotion in any of her lines. I couldn't imagine what Mr. Rochester saw in her. That brings us to Mr. Rochester. William Hurt had even less emotion than Jane, if that were possible. How two such insipid people could fall in love is a mystery, but it certainly didn't hold my attention. Perhaps the director (Zeffrelli) fell asleep during the production.The Timothy Dalton (too handsome for Mr. Rochester!) version is far more faithful to the book, but Ciaran Hinds plays the perfect Mr. Rochester in the 1997 A/E version (which is NOT all that true to the book).Trying to find something positive about this movie: Geraldine Chaplain was perfect in her role.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c1eb21adc2040e7b0b05407b9175ddb",
            "input": "Highly recommended!!A well written, funny film which will appeal to everyone out there with a sense of humour!!!. Give it a go, it's good to see an Independent British Movie more than holding it's own against the big established studios!! Definitely worth adding to any film collection. There are scenes in this film that I'm sure a lot of people will be able to relate to. You will laugh out loud at the antics and enjoy the great soundtrack. I especially enjoyed the Orb's version of Jimmy Cliff's Vietnam and The Tower of London's take on Freebird. Go on give it a go............ you won't be disappointed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d17cb95b29b740248cde51091d51cfcc",
            "input": "No,Basically your watching something that doesn't make sense. To not spoil the film for people who actually want to this take a look at the flick I will explain the story.A normal everyday to day women, is walking down a street then find's herself driving by in her own car. She follows her and many events take place during that time that include her and her family.I specifically made an account to comment on this film, of how horribly written this was. The acting was great, the events were great, but the story just brought it nowhere - it could of been added to tremendously and be made into a worldwide epidemic. I'm not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish by making this, usually at the end of films most of your questions get answers but this film has you asking, What just happened and 1 hour 20 minutes just passed for nothing.Spoiler Starts__They had this area between 2 dimensions (ours and behind the glass) that would come into our world and kill us. It was not elaborated on all during the film, and you never know how it was happening or why it was or when it happened. Nothing gets explained during the film. The main character shouldn't of even been the main character. At the end of the film the guy who finally figures it all out and runs away (her sisters boyfriend) should of been the main character but sadly the movie ends 20 seconds after. I bought this movie for $10, threw it out right after.. don't waste your time. I really hope nothing like this is made again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0e8e659787f49ae9e987aa0df189bfe",
            "input": "A lot has been said about Shinjuku Triad Society as the first true \"Miike\" film and I thought this sort of description might have been a cliché. But, like all clichés, it is based on the truth. All the Miike trademarks are here, the violence, the black humour, the homosexuality, the taboo testing and the difficult to like central character. Shinjuku is however, one of Miike's most perfectly formed films. He says in an interview that if he made it again it would be different, but not necessarily better. I think what he means is that the film possesses a truly captivating energy and raw edge which seems so fresh that although he might be able to capture a more visually or technically complex movie he could not replicate or better the purity of this film. As you might expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty beatings are supplemented by a fantastic scene in which a woman has a chair smashed over her face. (Only a Miike film could let you get away with a sentence like that.) The film has a fantastic pace, unlike Dead or Alive which begins and ends strongly and dips in the middle. Dead or Alive also deals with similar issues, Miike is clearly concerned about the relations between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar period and this emotive subject is handled well here, the central character really coming to life when you begin to understand his past. I cannot sing Shinjuku's praises enough. I do not want to give away too much. This is Miike before he began to use CGI to animate his films and is almost reminiscent of something like Kitano's Sonatine. The central characters are superbly realized and the final twist guarantees that as soon as the film has finished you'll be popping it back on again to work it all out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae19aff2936a46e18120af94832fa8d1",
            "input": "In spite of the great future-design touches, the clever Asimov premise, and Will Smith's dependable cool performance, this movie doesn't live up to expectations. The clichés come thick and fast; (waking from a recurring nightmare, maverick cop has his badge revoked by hardass lieutenant, to list more would be spoiling it - you can see the end a mile off). This movie is also stagebound - you never feel that you have travelled anywhere; what's supposed to be a global disaster never leaves an obviously CGI Chicago. The robots themselves are good in closeup, but the 'crowd' scenes look more like bad Disney -the CGI is overdone again and again. And if you can destroy the robots by smashing them, why do they need to inject 'nanites'? You know it's a duff movie when stupid questions like that start to bother you before the climax. It could have been great, but it's less than the sum of its parts, mainly due to the utterly predictable plot that could have come from any action film of the last forty years.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74c4b065e56e4cabb23d03f972d8e7f9",
            "input": "Let me be up-front, I like pulp. However it is like one of these \"easier dives\" that you see at the Olympics. It has to be marked down a little because it is easier to give a cheap thrill than drag you inside the world of, say, a late medieval painter.This is only a two hour ghost train ride and while often (or more accurately, most of the time!) ludicrous and unlikely it always goes forward and it always entertains. If not always in the right way. Check out the memorable quotes section for a chuckle.(However quite why it has been given a \"Worst Film\" Razzie is baffling - I bet there was a thousand worse films made in 2006, but this film got the treatment because it was viewed as a fashionable victim.) Head case and popular novelist Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone) is now over in London writing a novel, but death and destruction follow her around like flies follow a horse during a spot of hot weather. God heavens, she can't even visit the toilet without tripping over at least two corpses and I am sure if she opened the closet in her vast penthouse flat one would come tumbling out in grand Hollywood style.Yes, clearly a very dangerous lady to be circling around (if you like your pulse to be above zero), but is she personally responsible? I mean why would anyone put two-and-two together and start thinking she might be a murderer? Equally her reaction to such accusations seems very casual. However is this just a personality disorder (some form of b/s risk addiction) or further evidence of her guilt? For reasons I cannot fully understand or explain Stone is assigned to psychiatrist Michael Glass (David Morrissey) for evaluation rather than taken down the cells following another \"lover found dead in mysterious circumstances\". Thankfully (for Stone) he is far crazier than any of his patients and has a troubled home/working life of his own. In the blink of an eye the relationship changes from doctor to patient and then it is hard to tell because it all becomes something of a revolving blur.In to this heady mix comes Roy Washburn (a strange Welsh sounding David Thewlis) who tells the love struck doctor - in his capacity of policeman of many years standing - that the lady in question may be dangerous. I mean, hold the front page. However Glass is now too glassy-eyed to realise or care. Like a dizzy boxer in front of a prime-time Mike Tyson he ripe for the big take-down, however not before finding that Washburn might have a secret or two himself.Now comes Millena Gardosh (Charlotte Rampling) a fellow psychiatrist and a rare example (in this film) of someone who isn't barking mad or else a murder suspect. Presuming that she has actually watched the finished film she must look back with nostalgia when her underwear came off with the ease of Stone's - thankfully (for us at least) those days are long gone. Strangely she doesn't think Stone is quite as dangerous as everyone else - or else she doesn't think the script is good enough or her cheque large enough to do any proper acting.After several laps of the track roughly outlined above it comes to a climax that mixes provincial rep with a cliff-hanger/twist, that while as farcical as the rest of the movie, gives us enough elbowroom for Basic Instinct 3 - highly unlikely this may be at this point in time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9120eb2dda874c5f9cfaabe5cc2e8931",
            "input": "Detective Russell Logan(Lou Diamond Phillips)has a major problem on his hands. The serial killer, Patrick Channing(Jeff Kober), for whom psychic extraordinaire Tess(Tracy Griffith)helped him capture, has been resurrected with The First Power(..given to him by Satan after his execution in the gas chamber)and can possess the bodies of the weak. Somehow, Russell, who joins forces with Tess(..who has an understanding of what they are up against), will have to stop Channing or many women will continue to die at his bloody hands. They will seek help from Sister Marguerite(Elizabeth Arlen)who has tried to inform her superiors in the Catholic church of The First Power, but has been denied access to a weapon that can stop Channing..a cross with a blade that can penetrate the heart of Channing ridding the world of his evil. She'll take it anyway and lend a helping hand to Russell, who'll need all the help he can get when Channing kidnaps Tess preparing her for some sort of Satanic ritual/ceremony.In the film, Mykelti Williamson, always a reliable welcome supporting actor, gets the partner of Russell role..so you know what will happen to him. As in films of this type, everyone around Russell is dying, but when he attempts to kill Channing, he's merely murdering the weak host of some other poor soul he possesses.Pure occult rubbish..stupid from the gate to the finish line. Phillips and Griffith try, I'll give them that, but in a flick like this they don't stand a chance. Kober, who is normally often always effective as the heavy, is really handed nothing more than a goofy villain who leaps in the air and tosses rotten quips.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f42c4d4b31de4a1d8bda6b667959d0ee",
            "input": "Relentlessly stupid, no-budget \"war picture\" made mainly to show off the attributes of the spectacular Eve Meyer--not a bad idea in itself--but that should be an embarrassment to everyone connected with it. Laughable \"script\", performances that wouldn't pass muster in an elementary-school Christmas pageant, inept \"action\" scenes, confused direction by the normally competent documentary director Louis Clyde Stoumen--who is apparently not quite sure if he's making a comedy, a philosophical treatise on the futility of war or a leering T&A (by early 1960s standards, anyway) travelogue of Eve Meyer's magnificent body--and a general air of shoddiness and incompetence. Worth seeing in order to watch Eve Meyer strut her stuff, but that's pretty much it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-026ad9fd00d3464faa0e2b60d3920bb4",
            "input": "This is one of the worst movies I saw! I dunno what are the reasons for shoting suck a crap. Don't waste your time watching this. Good actors, but extremely bad screenplay and dialogues. Hope there'll be no Blanche 2 :-) Avoid this movie by all means!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e656ae4417c41ba95b8820b1fdd0f4e",
            "input": "I can appreciate what Barney is trying to achieve, but after sitting through this last night at a college movie house, I couldn't help but think...when is this gonna end? A very long and ponderous two hours and fifteen minutes. I had only seen a part of Cremaster 3 on DVD and thought I knew what to expect. That said, experimental films such as this are better digested in small increments. There are a couple of beautiful/horrible images...including the title sequence (no kidding), but if you go into this expecting any kind of plot or meaning, then you are in for a long, snooze-inducing ride. I managed to stay awake for the whole thing (if that's a compliment) but more often than not, I was waiting for some kind of meaning or narrative...big mistake. Among the collection of images are a very ornate gift-wrapping ceremony, the creation of a disgusting dish of what appears to be petroleum jelly slabs formed with a cookie cutter and sprinkled with shrimp (this is served to the crew of the ship which is shown throughout the film), a large blubber cheesecake with a large tentacle turd placed in the center of it, and the mutual evisceration of Bjork and director Matthew Barney which eventually culminates in some bizarre kind of communion, followed by their transformation into whale-like creatures. The soundtrack is at times beautiful and annoying...sometimes even maddening. At one time, there is a song being sung by Bjork to go along with the ephemeral rituals being played before us, and at other times there is just a constant droning of a high-pitched instrument, which we see a mysterious woman playing at the beginning and end of the movie. If this sounds like it doesn't make sense, that is because is DOESN'T! If this sounds like your cup of tea, then you will absolutely LOVE it! If this sounds like something that you probably won't like, then stay far away from it, because you will most likely walk out of the theater during the halfway mark like several people at the screening I attended. This is the very definition of an art film. You get from it what you take from it. But otherwise, there really isn't much there, other than a few oddities and constant construction and deconstruction rituals. I'm glad that there is a place for films such as this, but I can't say I would want to sit through it again. However, I can't say I wouldn't want to see one of Barney Cremaster films from start to finish and compare it with this. I think, perhaps now that I know what to expect I might enjoy something like this more. To give you an idea of what kind of comprehension factor this film has, I probably would've liked it better if I had gotten stoned. Then again, it could've felt twice as long as it was, and then it would've REALLY gotten ponderous. Definitely not for everyone.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87bde3dad9b94b848bd65e73f72fa432",
            "input": "Josef Von Sternberg directs this magnificent silent film about silent Hollywood and the former Imperial General to the Czar of Russia who has found himself there. Emil Jannings won a well-deserved Oscar, in part, for his role as the general who ironically is cast in a bit part in a silent picture as a Russian general. The movie flashes back to his days in Russia leading up to the country's fall to revolutionaries. William Powell makes his big screen debut as the Hollywood director who casts Jannings in his film. The film serves as an interesting look at the fall of Russia and at an imitation of behind-the-scenes Tinseltown in the early days. Von Sternberg delivers yet another classic, and one that is filled with the great elements of romance, intrigue, and tragedy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04aabb62fdaf42498fd3995f28733569",
            "input": "Kept my attention from start to finish. Great performances added to this tremendous film. Mr. Pacino once again gives us another brilliant character to enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7122d45a3e9b48dea92a8fcd25e2473f",
            "input": "\"Laugh, Clown Laugh\" released in 1928, stars the legendary Lon Chaney as a circus clown named Tito. Tito has raised a foundling (a young and beautiful Loretta Young) to adulthood and names her Simonetta. Tito has raised the girl in the circus life, and she has become an accomplished ballerina. While Chaney gives his usual great performance, I could not get past the fact that Tito, now well into middle age, has the hots for the young Simonetta. Although he is not her biological father, he has raised her like a daughter. That kind of \"ick\" factor permeates throughout the film. Tito competes for Simonetta's affections with a young and handsome 'Count' Luigi (Nils Asther). Simonetta clearly falls for the young man, but feels guilt about abandoning Tito (out of loyalty, not romantic love). The whole premise of the film is ridiculous, and I find it amazing that no one in the film tells Tito what a stupid old fool he is being (until he reveals it himself at the end). The film is noteworthy only because of Loretta Young, who would go on to have a great career. While I adore Chaney's brilliance as an actor, this whole film seems off to me and just downright creepy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3b12e7dbbe34474af64fb368a4e829a",
            "input": "This movie is exciting,daring and the music is very good.The movie Moonwalker was meant to coincide with the album Bad(1987).I have Bad.It is excellent(*****).The movie begins with Michael Jackson performing\"Man In The Mirror\"on stage.then,it shows a history of Michael,from his early days in the Jackson 5 right up to the Bad era. Oh,and Badder is good too(Badder is a music video parody of the music video for Bad the single).It then shows the Speed Demon video.The song and the video are very,very good indeed.Same for leave me alone,which appears after.Then it shows the movie Moonwalker.after a few minutes,he plays smooth criminal in a club called club 30s.like it when he does the lean.anyway,nice to see you.bye bye.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c014042f439d43ce950f8743eab41a3c",
            "input": "This is a very, very early Bugs Bunny cartoon. As a result, the character is still in a transition period--he is not drawn as elongated as he later was and his voice isn't quite right. In addition, the chemistry between Elmer and Bugs is a little unusual. Elmer is some poor sap who buys Bugs from a pet shop--there is no gun or desire on his part to blast the bunny to smithereens! However, despite this, this is still a very enjoyable film. The early Bugs was definitely more sassy and cruel than his later incarnations. In later films, he messed with Elmer, Yosimite Sam and others because they started it--they messed with the rabbit. But, in this film, he is much more like Daffy Duck of the late 30s and early 40s--a jerk who just loves irritating others!! A true \"anarchist\" instead of the hero of the later cartoons. While this isn't among the best Bug Bunny cartoons, it sure is fun to watch and it's interesting to see just how much he's changed over the years.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e8746a861994f9eaffcd916cfddc0e5",
            "input": "A young ( only 21 ) director with great talent, a powerful scenario, young and ambitious cast with all theatrical background...One of the first tries of a thriller in Turkish cinema, which seems in the future we'll have some more based on the success...Shot on high definition video, the movie is perhaps effected on world thrillers, especially the American thrillers. The technical and cinematographic character is quite well done, the scenes are all well worked on. Not too much blood but sufficient enough to make you think you're in a blood bath too...The scenario is quite wise but with certain clues, a clever audience can easily predict what's going on and at the end when everything settles down you're getting somehow weird to conclude the result.Well done Tiglon, one of the biggest DVD distributors in Turkey, it is not easy to decide for such a movie in their first try as a production company...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74c739a3a62f4583bee4b35406aa7108",
            "input": "To review this movie, I without any doubt would have to quote that memorable scene in Tarantino's \"Pulp Fiction\" (1994) when Jules and Vincent are talking about Mia Wallace and what she does for a living. Jules tells Vincent that the \"Only thing she did worthwhile was pilot\". Vincent asks \"What the hell is a pilot?\" and Jules goes into a very well description of what a TV pilot is: \"Well, the way they make shows is, they make one show. That show's called a 'pilot'. Then they show that show to the people who make shows, and on the strength of that one show they decide if they're going to make more shows. Some pilots get picked and become television programs. Some don't, become nothing. She starred in one of the ones that became nothing.\" Now to stretch on what Jules was talking about, there are BILLIONS of television shows/pilots that were never aired because they simply were not...well, good. Probably the most notorious pilot that comes to mind is \"W*A*L*T*E*R\", a spin-off to \"M*A*S*H\" with Gary \"Radar\" Burghoff as the lead. Hmmm, would somebody really want to be watching Radar for a half-hour trying to solve crimes? Hence, the show was never picked up. What many people don't know (or what they thought they knew) is that pilots are hardly ever shown on the air, for they are made strictly for the Television networks for them to decide. Some have made they're way past and got onto the air (The pilot for the animated series \"American Dad\" comes to mind, as the show's serial itself didn't begin until nearly four months later. However, there are times were we should all be glad pilots never make it to air, and this here is why.\"Black Bart\", a supposed tie-in with the Mel Brooks comedy classic, \"Blazing Saddles\", is a stale and bland \"sitcom\" with little heart and no soul. \"Saddles\" was a controversial comedy, nevertheless, with it's racist humor and vulgar comedy, which comes to mind \"what idiot decided this would make a great television show FOR PRIME TIME TV?!?\" I say \"supposed\", because none of the memorable characters from the movie, aside from Bart, on in this mess of a TV show. Mel Brooks wasn't even involved with the production of the serial and this was the first mistake in a long line (In a related story, I recently found out about an unaired TV pilot for a series based on the movie \"Clerks.\" that Kevin Smith was no involved in....you see what happens?!?).Set somewhere around the same time as the movie (or at all), the story circles around the only Black sheriff in the wild west, named appropriately 'Black' Bart, who is this time played by future Academy Award winner Louis Gossett Jr., obviously before his stint in \"real\" acting, whereas in this he is playing a \"G-rated\" Richard Pryor. Most of the other characters are carbon (if not, really bad) copies of the characters in the movie: Jim, The Waco Kid is replaced by a similar looking character named Reb Jordan, a former Confederate soldier who is quick with the gun. Lilian Von Schtupp is now Belle Buzzer, a more of a ripoff of the character being that she's a show dancer and a German with a Marlene Dietrich-type accent and personality. While that's pretty much the end in similarities, The lead \"bad guy\" in the story is Fern Malaga, played by Noble Willingham, who I assumed would've been Hedley Lamar if Warner Bros. secured the rights to the name (See trivia for \"Blazing Saddles\") and his son Curley...I dunno, Taggart I suppose? The story is a poor excuse for a sitcom, much less a pilot. Bart deals with the mayor's drunk son and he's out-of-control behavior which has caused the town to spin. Really, it's a story that tries to introduce all the characters in the \"series\" and doesn't focus on the variety and context that would make this an \"alright\" show. I can't really call it a sitcom (and even if I wanted to) and that's primarily the fact it was shot on the backlot at Warner Bros. Studios and later added a laugh track, so the show is set up almost exactly like \"M*A*S*H\" (complete with a bland and dull \"laughing\" that is identical to the series). The acting is so-so, but there's one part that always make me laugh, and that's when the actor playing Reb Jordan almost seems to forget his lines and tries really hard to remember them while trying to sputter out a piece of dialogue. HA! The script is rather dull and is attempts to make racism more humorous than it was in the movie (Surprisingly, they use the word \"N***er\" numerous amount of times through a 22-minute episode, rather touchy for it's time period and even for today) and it gets repetitive.If you ever get your hands on this unseen piece of sssss...surly interesting novelty item, watch it just for the sake of the feeling for watching pilots (It's on the collector's edition of \"Blazing Saddles\", God knows why). There, yourself get a first hand chance for the reason why many movie tie-in pilots never air.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28364fef4832419f85fcbb28ed5a510a",
            "input": "\"Home Room\" came as a total surprise. Not having a clue as to what it was all about, it paid off big time because it doesn't hold any punches and what we see is how lives are changed by the act of a disgruntled young man who decided to victimize his class mates, who are the innocent victims of his rash actions.Paul Ryan, the director, who is working and editing his own material, is a talented man who is rewarded by some amazing acting all around by his cast.Alicia Browning is an older girl who is trying to graduate high school. She has been away a couple of years and doesn't seem to be in the same wave length of the other students. For one, she is a rebel with a punk look, lots of makeup and a mouth that will cut anyone who dares to come near her orbit. Alicia was among the students in the home room where nine students have died, supposedly killed by her boyfriend. Alicia, we realize, is a wounded girl who has gone through a terrible ordeal in her life, but we are not given any clues to that effect.What follows is the aftermath of the tragedy, as it concentrates on a young woman who has survived it. Deanna Cartwright is a wealthy teen ager who shouldn't have been at the school, at all. When a ricochet bullet hit her, she is hospitalized with more than a wound. She is trying to get over this dark period in her mind but the nightmares don't let her forget.Alicia is made to go to the hospital by the school principal. Since she doesn't cooperate with the police, the head of the school wants her to see Deanna in her terrible state and perhaps she will soften up and will tell the authorities what she knows. Alicia dislikes Deanna, but in a matter of days, both girls will make peace. We don't realize until the last sequence what really happened that horrible day in school.Busy Phillips makes an excellent Alicia and Erika Christiansen is equally good as Deanna. Victor Garber, James Pinkins, Taylor Holland, and the rest of the cast play as an ensemble.The film has an intensity because it's not explicit in showing how the shootings occurred, which helps the tone that Mr. Ryan wanted to give this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cee3697defe644c4946533020c7f942b",
            "input": "The Little Mermaid is one of my absolute favorite Disney movies. I'm sorry to say, however, that Disney completely messed up when they made this sequel. I'll admit it has some good points to it. The songs aren't bad, and the animation is clean and clear. There is some humor, I'm sure--I don't remember, because after watching it I immediately banned it from appearing before my eyes again. The worst point of this movie is the plot. In this movie, Ariel becomes her father. She forbids her daughter to go near the sea (yes, out of fear), just as she was forbidden to go near the land. I personally think that, given her past, Ariel would maintain some of her headstrong ways and not treat her daughter like she herself was treated.Besides this fact, Ursula was replaced by a non-scary, pathetic sort of sea witch (the underfed, forgotten sister) who is more comical than scary. She, too, has some little underling to do her bidding--but she's not scarier or worse than Ursula. Ursula spoiled us with her believability for badness. This sea witch is a joke.To make matters worse, Flounder is a fat, deep-voiced father (no longer the cute guppy we all know and love) and Eric's voice is not even done by the same actor (something that always annoys me in a remake/sequel). (His voice difference was very obvious to me, by the way!) I felt that the only reason this movie was made was so that Disney could catch a few fast dollars, something I hate to think about a corporation I actually really do enjoy. I felt that this plot lacked imagination. I know that this act (child following in the footsteps of a parent) happens, but Ariel was different. That was what we loved so much about her. She had a dream, she fell in love, and she made that dream come true. Until she appeared in this movie, that is. Then she became just like the other adults. This isn't the Ariel I know. And I don't like her.I know of some children who have enjoyed this film, and I know some adults who didn't mind it, either. But for me, and for all of you out there who have the utmost love for Ariel, please don't see this movie. The Ariel we know dies within, resurrected only for a song or two and one final scene that actually isn't bad (where she accepts the water back again)--although she takes very little part in the ending, regardless.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdb6c9fcdbcb46aa831967a5f6daa7b3",
            "input": "The 1998 Michael Keaton kiddie comedy of the same title was roundly condemned for it's, um, shoddy special effects, but compared to what Screaming Mad George cooked up for this horror comedy they're positively mind-boggling. The killer snowman seems to be made out of styrofoam and his arms look like oversized oven mitts. Which they probably were. The cast lays it on thick in this parody of dozens of other (much worse) movies and Paul Keith as the town doctor is particularly memorable in a small but hilarious role.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5bbf6b8ba37947cf952d0cfbb8799733",
            "input": "This story is a complex and wonderful tale of the last Harem of the Ottoman empire, well told and provoking we see the inner workings of a world now gone, and learn about the people who lived there.I enjoyed the story, characters, acting and scenes. A few scenes suffered from quick editing and the sub titles sometimes disappeared too quickly, otherwise a wonderful piece.The main character Safiya is played wonderfully by Marie Gillain who I am pleased to say did a fantastic job without over doing it. The scenes with her and Alex Descas (Nadir) are charming and lovely.I recommend this film for anybody looking to watch something less Hollywood and more authentic to the world they are emulating.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7cc778dff4e64306a88f796edc1346dd",
            "input": "I can't recommend this film as a date movie. Gary Oldman's semi-autobiographical account of life lived on a South East London estate is a violent, Beckettian account of one of Dante's circles of hell, frankly. At the centre of it is Ray Winstone, who has done this sort of character before but never as well. The film opens with him ordering drinks at a pub bar - that's all - and you are already gripped with a sense of the frustration, self-loathing and barbarism that he exhibits in many different ways throughout the course of the movie. It's an acting masterclass.Of course the stymied and dispossessed need a foil in a drama such as this and Winstone is matched by Kathy Burke as his long-suffering wife, who absorbs and ultimately rejects his unbearable behaviour. Charlie Creed-Miles does an able turn as the fuse-lighting druggie son Billy although he must have wondered sometimes exactly what he let himself in for. Gary Oldman directs close up on the actors, maximising the claustrophobia of their council flat squalor. 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b065c59c7e134260abe2f3b54c48baa4",
            "input": "I rated this movie a 1 since the plot is so unbelievable unbelievable. Judge for yourself. Be warned, the following will not only give away the plot, but will also spoil your appetite for watching the movie.A computer virus, designed by a frustrated nerd, sends out a code through television screens and computer monitors. When the code - in the form of light - enters the eye it can access the 'electrical system' of your body. What it does is forcing the body cells into excretion of calcium. Within seconds after infection the patient reaches for his neck, develops tunnel vision, his skin will turn white of the calcium, after which he falls and his hand and scull will crack in a cloud of chalk. This virus is very intelligent. When it finds out that a blind computer expert is trying to disassemble the code with a braille output device - operated by hands - the device is set on a very high voltage, which causes severe burning wounds on the skin of the expert's head. The virus also senses aggression against remote controls and the keyboard of an ATM. Fortunately it could be stopped by throwing over outdated desktop pc's in a rack and electrocuting the nerd with his back on a broken computer and his feet in some spilled water.Oh dear...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94bcba52d24046ed923a77fbb8d59ee7",
            "input": "'Una Giornata Particolare' is a movie that has a title that sounds so familiar I thought I had seen it more than once. Now that I finally I have seen it, I am very glad. This is one of the better Italian movies I know, with one of the most wonderful performances by Marcello Mastroianni, who stars in other masterpieces such as 'La Dolce Vita' and '8 1/2', both from the great Federico Fellini. Directed by Ettore Scola, this is a movie that takes the time to introduce the characters and slowly develops a story on a special day, the day Adolf Hitler visited Rome.Marcello Mastroianni plays Gabriele, the neighbor of Antonietta (Sophia Loren). She is a member of Mussolini's party, pretty fanatic in her thoughts, and he is a member no more. The reason for that I will not reveal. On the day every person from their building, including her husband and children, is out to see Hitler, they are still in the building. Antonietta's bird escapes and flies to Gabriele's apartment, and this is how the two meet. Right before Antonietta went to Gabriele he thought of killing himself, again for reasons I will not reveal. How the story develops from here I will not reveal, but it is what happens between the two that makes this such a special day, not the fact that Hitler is in Rome.Like I said, Mastroianni has a wonderful performance. You see he is a man who desperately wants someone around him, although at first we don't know why. May be he likes Antonietta, may be he is in love with her, may be there are other reasons. Antonietta feels what we feel. What does this man want from her? She likes the attention anyway. We see how she does her hair to look attractive for the man. Loren plays the scenes very good as well. We understand her questions, although we can't be sure what her intentions are. The moments where we find out both their secrets, if that is what you can call it, is a great moment. How the story develops from there is even more interesting, but I don't want to spoil it for you. This is a movie you should see. Great performances and a beautiful cinematography, and the message it gives us still stands today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1bd3de6163944d93a89686435f92964c",
            "input": "Some may feel that the rating i have just given is a bit generous, but for what this film is i think the directors have done a good job with that they had available to them, this is also a film a film of an acquired taste! my immediate thought was the direct connection to the classic cult film 'The Thing' i.e the parasitical aliens from outta space, infesting human host to then reek havoc wherever possible!You can see how this film pays homage to such a film and others of the horror/gore genre, however cleverly maintains its own originality, well these things fight each other for one and then continue to eat then fallen rival! Only killing and picking a human when it needs a new host! To then pick another fight with another infected host! And this film even throws in a love story but i wont say no more otherwise it gives too much away.GREAT! But like i said of an acquired taste, so don't be surprised if you don't like the film. It is low budget and yes it is blood thirsty, with the creatures/aliens/things morphing their limbs into crude looking weapons, i.e saws, drills, blades and even the odd gun to all but decimate there opponent. I found myself cringing at what i was being shown but at the same time glued to the screen wondering what was going to happen next!So if you like gore, you like aliens, you like fighting and even maybe a little bit of love thrown in somewhere, then i must recommend this film as a must see. I just wish i came across this earlier then i did!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87bbbed816744dd48dd70303f5bcbe15",
            "input": "A super comedy series from the 1990s (Two series were made in total) that suffered in the UK ratings due to poor scheduling. When you are up against established comedies like 'Minder', even the best new comedies are going to struggle to get noticed.Luckily, I caught the series from episode one and followed it avidly. I mentioned it to friends and family at the time, but everyone seemed to have been watching something else. Very, very frustrating.Anyway, I loved both series and never forgot it.Then I looked it up on the internet and found that an ultra-fan was trying to get both series released 'on his own'.Well, both series are now available on DVD.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-675a8eb7dcb04a619ce5855338eb41c8",
            "input": "I rented this by mistake. I thought, after a cursory examination of the box, that this was a time-travel/sci-fi story. Instead, it's a \"Christian\" story, and I suppose is fairly typical example. If you are sold on the message you probably will overlook the awkwardness of the plot/acting/etc., but I found it rather painful. I have to admit that I'm bothered by the rewriting of history in this story. It paints the 1890's as some sort of paradise of family values and morality (a character is aghast that 5% of marriages end in divorce!), but it overlooks very unsavory sides of this \"highly moral\" society (rigid racial, sexual, and social discrimination were widespread, for instance). And at one point the hero complains to a clothing store owner about things that sound not all that different than the complaints of some Iranian leaders about women's clothing styles (as reported in a recent WSJ).Overall, thought, I suppose that it's the sort of thing you'll like if you like this sort of thing, and it's certainly wholesome...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-448c45be5c5e4b0daa9dd6f44c95bf62",
            "input": "In some ways, The Wrath of Kriemhild surpasses Siegfried's Death, but it also loses some of that film's greatness. The plot of this one is more cohesive than the first, which is quite amazing. The second half of the actual poem is a lot sloppier and a lot harder to tread through, until, that is, you get to the climactic battle scenes; only the Iliad's are better. Lang and Harbou embellished the Huns. The poet-compiler of the Nibelungenlied didn't know a Hun from his right ball, and as a result they are, more or less, the same as the Burgundians in custom. For example, although the poet clearly describes Etzel as a heathen (which is Kriemhild's main concern as Rudiger tries to persuade her to marry him), when she gets to Hunland, the first thing she does is go to mass. The Huns here are clearly heathens; they're almost like caveman. The depiction of them is hilarious, especially Verbal, the jester, who has two marvelous scenes. Etzel's character has been given more weight. He is much more formidable. All he does is bemoan his fate in the original poem. Lang and Harbou are masterful at building suspense, especially at the banquet scene, which is intercut with Verbal's second performance to an amazing effect. However, as is the nature of this half of the poem, the film's amazing technical accomplishments are missing in this one, for the most part, except for a dazzling sequence where Etzel's hall burns down with the Nibelungs inside. The one thing I do have to object to is the way Harbou changes the ending. SPOILERS: in the poem, after Hildebrand captures Hagen and Gunther, they are imprisoned. Kriemhild visits Hagen in his cell and demands that he reveal where he has hidden the horde. He refuses and she herself decapitates her brother. When Hagen still refuses, she decapitates him. Hildebrand (or possibly Dietrich) is so disgusted that a woman would presume to murder a great warrior that he, in turn, decapitates her, calling her a \"Devil Woman\". Etzel, who is much weaker in the poem than he is here, says something silly like: \"Ah me!\" I can understand why they would want to keep a unity of time and place as Hildebrand brings them from the castle; to retain the prison settings of the two deaths would make the film very anticlimactic. I also understand why they didn't have Hildebrand kill Kriemhild: his character is much reduced here; his name is only mentioned once. But, to have Kriemhild kill herself, adopting Brynhild's death from the Icelandic sources, is just catering to the audience instead of challenging them. The point of the poem is that Kriemhild's wrath goes far beyond it should into the realm of pure evil. Here, we simply have her die for her lost love. It's not as interesting.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75d15dc76aa545138395a855cbb0701d",
            "input": "Lots of reviews on this page mention that this movie is a little dark for kids. That depends on the kid. This isn't a movie for a 2-6 year old; it's more geared toward the 8 years and older crowd. I saw this movie when I was 10, I absolutely loved it. At the time most animated movies were a little too childish for my tastes. This movie deals with more serious issues, and therefore has a little more emotional impact. In this movie characters can DIE, and be sent to HELL! This gives a little more emotional weight to the scenes where characters are risking their lives. The good guys aren't always perfectly sweet and nice (like other cartoons). They have \"real\" motivations, like revenge, and greed, but also compassion and friendship; shows that things aren't always black and white.Excellent Movie",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1bee512f21d49818c9bc34ec945b054",
            "input": "I had the misfortune to watch this rubbish on Sky Cinema Max in a cold winter night. I am not a big fan of horror movies, because most of them are just trash. This one is even worse: it is one of the dumbest pieces of crap i've ever seen in my whole life. Horror movie? Yes, there are horrible things in this: the acting, the script and the special effects - Gosh, i laughed at this ludicrous attempt to make a flick for 90 minutes. Actually, had it been a comic movie i would've given it a 5. Don't you even think about renting this unless you want to mock at the producers.Vote: 2 out of 10 - didn't vote one because it made me laugh all the time ;-)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf118ccf30624871832676335952802e",
            "input": "This movie was made for fans of Dani (and Cradle of Filth). I am not one of them. I think he's just an imitator riding the black metal bandwagon (still, I'm generally not a fan of black metal). But as I was carrying this DVD case to pay for it, I convinced myself, that the less authentic something is the more it tries to be convincing. Thus I assumed I'm in for a roller-coaster ride of rubber gore and do-it-yourself splatter with a sinister background. Now, that is what I do like.I got home and popped it in. My patience lasted 15 minutes. AWFUL camera work and DISGUSTING quality. And that was then (2002), that it looked like it was shot using a Hi8 camcorder. I left it on the shelf. Maybe a nice evening with beer and Bmovies would create a nice setting for this... picture. After a couple of months I got back to it (in mentioned surroundings) and saw half. Then not only the mentioned aspects annoyed me. My disliking evolved. I noticed how funny Dani (1,65m; 5'5\" height) looked in his platform shoes ripping a head of a mugger apart. (Yes, ripping. His head apparently had no skull.) I also found that this movie may have no sense. Still, I haven't finished it yet, so I wasn't positive.After a couple more tries I finally managed to finish this flick - a couple of months back... (Yes, it took me 5,5 years.) So - Dani in fact was funny as Satan/Manson/super-evil-man's HELPER and the movie DID NOT make sense. See our bad person employs Dani to do bad things. He delivers. Why? Well I guess he's just very, very bad. As a matter of fact they both are and that is pretty much it.We have a couple of short stories joined by Dani's character. My favourite was about a guy, who STEALS SOMEONE'S LEG, because he wants to use it as his own. Yeah, exactly. The acting's ROCK BOTTOM. The CGI is the worst ever. I mean Stinger beats it (and, boy, is Stinger's CGI baaaaad). The story has no sense. And the quality is... Let's just say it is not satisfying. The only thing that might keep you watching is the unmotivated violence and gore. Blood and guts are made pretty well. Why, you can actually see that the movie originated there and then moved on. (Example - Dani 'The Man' Filth takes a stuffed cat - fake as can be - and guts it... and then eats what fell out. Why? We never know. We do know, however, that this cat must have been on illegal substances, as his heart is almost half his size.)You might think, after my comment that this movie is so bad it's good, but it's just bad. Cradle of Filth fans can add 3 points. I added one for gore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee9cdcabe94946be94fd77e7eb6a0d1b",
            "input": "This is one of those movies that I've seen so many times that I can quote most of it. Some of the lines in this movie are just unbeatable. I particularly enjoy watching him stumble and fall while drunk, go out to the fancy restaurant drunk and the part with the moose.I don't know how many times I have seen this sequence but it's funny every time. From the moment Arthur gets to Susan's Dad's place to the bit with the moose, you pretty much laugh the whole time. I remember watching the out-takes regarding the bit with the moose. It went down just like I'd imagined it'd be like. They were all laughing so hard it was difficult for them to film it.The late Sir John Gielgud was a wonderful addition to this. His demeanor, his one-liners and the way he handled Arthur were all equally hilarious. It's always a funny moment when he whacks him over the head with his hat or tells him he's a spoiled little ____. I laugh every time I listen to the \"I'm going to have a bath\" and the lines that follow.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08495c74e56f4d31914a8a95f3ba2a32",
            "input": "There were only two things that kept me interested in this film: I was waiting for Owen Wilson to die, and Catherine Zeta Jones.This was basically a one woman show. Catherine Zeta Jones was just there to provide eye-candy. Liam Neeson was totally wasted in this film. Like Jones, he had no role at all. The film was all Lily Taylor (Ransom, Ready to Wear). She was the only one that had any real part in this crappy script by David Self. OK, it was his first one and he did redeem himself with Road to Perdition.I don't know what director Jan de Bont's problem was. he did a great job with Speed and Twister. he really fell down on the job here. Maybe he was still recovering from the disaster Speed 2: Cruise Control. He should thank his lucky stars for The Wild Wild West, else this would be the worst picture of 1999.Avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52b6f828a94e4272a1ad3f017acca886",
            "input": "They had such potential for this movie and they completely fall flat. In the first Cruel Intentions, we are left wondering what motivated the lead characters to become the way they are and act the way they do. There is almost NO character development whatsoever in this prequel. It's actually a very sad story but this film did nothing for me. It was as if they left out good writing in place of unneeded f-words. And the end makes absolutely no sense and doesn't explain anything. The writing was just terrible. Another thing that bothered me was that they used at lease 3 of the EXACT SAME lines that were in the original. Such as \"down boy\", or the kissing scene, and a few others I can't remember. I was not impressed at all by Robin's acting, but Amy did a great job. That's about the only thing that reconciled this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab1cacf0326c48eb8ae36da941e1ac6d",
            "input": "Very possibly one of the funniest movies in the world. Oscar material. Trey Parker and Matt Stone are hilarious and before you see this I suggest you see \"South Park\" one of the funniest cartoons created. Buy it, you will laugh every time you see it. Pure stroke of genius. If you don't think its funny then you have no soul or sense of humor. 10 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04ca40d7f24449bea25194f0e5fa7d63",
            "input": "\"Blood of the Sacred, Blood of the Damned\" is the third installment of the Gabriel Knight games, a series of adventure games about the roguish writer/paranormal detective, Gabriel Knight. Gabriel and his companion, Grace, have been asked by Prince James of Albany to investigate a series of mysterious attacks by so-called \"night visitors.\" When the son of Prince James is kidnapped, Gabriel pursues the night visitors to Rennes le Château, where he begins piecing together a mystery relating to the Holy Grail.Despite the marketing, this game is not about vampires. Vampires have a token appearance in the game, but never command center stage, as did the voodoo hounfor in \"Sins of the Fathers\" or the werewolves in \"The Beast Within.\" Gabriel and Grace make no attempt to uncover the true nature of vampires, or to research lore on vampires. Although the vampires do murder three people during the course of the game, their victims are chosen at random and have nothing to do with the main plot.A large part of the charm of the first two Gabriel Knight installments was in the relationships which Gabriel formed with the villains. Through these relationships, the player could not help but sympathize with the villain, and thus the villain was transformed into more of a human and less of a monster. However, in \"Blood of the Sacred,\" Gabriel's only interaction with the villain is through a single, cheesy interview, which does nothing to endear the villain to the player.The roles that Gabriel and Grace play in this mystery are fairly futile. Gabriel spends his time snooping into the identities of members of a treasure-hunter tour group staying at his hotel, but what he uncovers amounts to nothing more than a red herring. Grace spends her time researching the mystery of Rennes le Château, but all her research is rendered superfluous by the presence of a perplexing ally who has known the answer to this mystery for centuries.The actions of this perplexing ally and his polar opposite --- the vampire leader --- are insupportable. The ally leaves hints about the mystery of Rennes le Château in broad daylight and expects Grace (and not the other treasure hunters from the tour group) to find them. However, he could have revealed the mystery to Grace in its entirety on day 1, instead of putting the kidnapped child at risk for an additional 48 hours. And in the end, he simply tells Grace the mystery in its entirety anyway.Meanwhile, the vampire leader fails to achieve the goals of centuries of scheming, because he chooses to refrain from action for two days after the kidnapping of the child. The only reason given for his decision to delay action is that he wants to savor his victory.The game would have been much better had it been purely focused on the Holy Grail. The kidnapping and vampires should have been omitted, replaced with a race against the Vatican to uncover the mystery of Rennes le Château. Since Gabriel is portrayed more than once as reluctantly Catholic, this conflict would have had many opportunities for character development.All in all, the game was a disappointing installment in the series, despite an improved interface and the return of Tim Curry as the voice of Gabriel Knight.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4004e83166e499baa2cd66459182afd",
            "input": "Well you take O.J. Simpson as a all american soldier turned all american bus driver who decides to rescue his passengers on his own just incase no one else is going to and Arte Johnson in an absolutely straight role as the tour guide who doesn't know what to do but doesn't want to admit they are in trouble and combine it with Lorenzo Lamas as one of three baby faced bad boys who intend to kidnap an heiress and leave a busload of people to die on the dessert and you have got to have action, plot twists and a lot of drama. Everyone was good but seeing Lamas as the baddest of the bad boys really blew my mind. He was much too believable as the overbearing bad guy who not only wanted to kidnap the heiress but rape the women and humiliate the guy who tried to stop him. This was evidently long before he cultivated his good guy image. And believe me a 20 year old Lorenzo in tight jeans you really don't want to miss!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ecc553baf4004c50b298b7cb53465278",
            "input": "I saw this movie about a week ago and still keep thinking about it. I was very moved by this movie. I found the characters very believable and likable almost to a fault. As in real life though sometimes people disappoint, as was the case with Leo, who even though I liked his character I could not have been more disappointed when he was willing to have unprotected sex even though fully aware of his HIV status. I was also disappointed with Leo for rejecting the medicine available to him, and the awful way he treated Marcel when he decided to ship him back home on the train. I think this movie showed in a very real way why HIV numbers are up in young gay men. This is in no way meant to bash gays (I am gay) and movie very well could have been made about a young straight person who makes bad choices and seems unaware of the consequences to himself and others. The only part of the movie I couldn't understand was why the (gay friendly) family was unwilling to include Marcel in Leo's illness to the point of not allowing him to go to the funeral.I think the biggest message from this movie is that whether gay or straight is DO NOT HAVE UNPROTECTED SEX!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6373a55bcc8c4eb8a69140e013e3f256",
            "input": "if you are like me then you will love this great coming of age teen movie.i think it is up there with mischief/book of love/high school USA/shout/calender girl/crybaby/ all great movies set in the lat 50s & early 60s and it has a wonderful soundtrack.not as many songs as in some of these type of movies but still great.it is all so very funny at times and has a great love interest.all the young cast are great.i wish there were more type of these wonderful movies.my favourite movie of all time is back to the future when Marty mcfly gos back to 1955 well in these wonderful movies it stays in the fab 50s(early 60s) there are some movies of this type better than this but not many.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca91f5eee63a488a853bae6fbde48622",
            "input": "First of all this movie starts out on a really dumb note: A 10-year-old girl, playing around in a moving vehicle, decides it would be funny to cover up her mom's eyes with her hands, and then causes a horrific accident which kills the mom....duh....I am sorry, there is positively no 10-year-old that dumb. The rest of the movie does not get much better. After the death of the mother by the apparent dumbest 10-year-old on the planet, the dad moves the family to Genova, Italy, where he is to teach at a local university, but here is the clincher: he does not speak a word of Italian! Then the little girl has \"visions\" of mommy (who she killed), and often subsequent night terrors which always, always end by the father holding and coddling her. Then we are forced to watch this family continually get lost and then found and then hug and then cry and lost and then found (followed by of course more hugging and crying) to the point that I was actually wishing for some sort of natural disaster to just wipe all of these vapid, ignorant people off the planet. Do not get me wrong, because I love indies, but an indie about dumb people (and I mean really dumb) is simply ridiculous and pointless. It is really a shame that this movie was based on such insipid characters wallowing in such retarded scenarios, because the locale was interesting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cda5ed3ee0c14cefac438564f75616ea",
            "input": "In the mid-1930s Hollywood was regaining its confidence after the difficulties of the talkie transition. Although all the technical problems of sound had been solved very quickly, it took longer to resolve the questions of how talking pictures should look, how they should be structured and how they should be acted. The Informer is a key picture in that it shows the extent to which wordless moments can convey story, asserting the power images without ignoring the necessities of sound and dialogue.This is not to say the Informer is truly a throwback to the golden days of the silents. For one thing, many silent pictures were not so purely visual in their narrative, and were overburdened with title cards. But what the Informer has is the self-assuredness to extend moments between dialogues, to focus on reactions more than speeches, and to let shots play out simply for atmosphere.Director John Ford, for all his capability, was a filmmaker who appears to have put in effort in proportion to how interested he was in the material. If he thought a story was silly, he just did it half-arsed. Luckily the Informer, with its depiction of community, honour, working class life and most importantly Irish setting, was everything Ford loved, and the result is one of his finest works. In it, Ford only really employs too kinds of shot. The first is of places – the Dublin streets shrouded in mist and darkness so their furthest depths cannot be seen; dingy interiors where the walls and ceilings seem to press in on us. The second is of faces, striking close-ups against plain backgrounds, usually without dialogue, focusing us upon the inner conflicts of these people.Lead man Victor McLaglen fits perfectly within this character and this manner of filming him. McLaglen's performance does not look like much, being as it is about 90% drunk act. But the other 10% is heartfelt emoting, as here and there his Gypo Nolan has what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity. With such performances are Oscars won. McLaglen is backed by a spot-on supporting cast, among whom there are no weak links. In particular it is nice to have Donald Meek and Una O'Connor, usually only seen in comic relief roles, playing straight dramatic parts for once (although Meek's appearance does contain one or two jokes, the tone of the scene and much of his manner is serious). Not only do these two deliver incredibly deep performances, their familiarity to most viewers as comedy players gives an added note of poignancy to their part in this tragedy.RKO, who produced the Informer, were perhaps the most adventurous and willing to take risks of all the major studios. Thanks to this, we are able to see a dismal story with a despicable anti-hero at its centre, which could easily have been a clunky, over-earnest mess, instead filled with a moody atmosphere and depth of character which keeps us watching and draws us into its world.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-318b8e36105243e39221228244e8c21b",
            "input": "A French film Ester Williams would love. But the synchronized swimming was only a hook for the story of three girls in a Paris exurbia finding themselves. No question where Sciamma's sympathies lie as all the boys are depicted as \"animaux\" but actually only the 3 girls are in focus, and for the entire time, with the few adults and the other adolescents being mostly in the background. Marie is a stick of a girl, unattractive, but determined. She wants to be a swimmer and forces herself on Floriane ( a Renascence quality beauty per one reviewer) and she is also a friend of convenience to Anna: not unattractive, but for her, the time of her body's perfection was short, and now she is an adolescent in a women's body. What ensues is a journey to self-realization without a road map but there is a glumness about the three that is un-natural: where is the gaiety and mindless chatter of youth? While the dénouement was breath taking, with Floriane's self-absorption beautifully portrayed, as well as the equally beautiful union of Marie and Anne, it all seemed abstract, Sciamma's puppets.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19f43a314db840c699fa784070f324f7",
            "input": "I had low expectations for this movie, but I was looking for something unchallenging for an evening. I walked out of the theatre totally delighted and somewhat surprised. This is a very fine baseball tribute film, and a nice lesson about pursuing your dreams. Dennis Quaid does a masterful job with his role, and I was touched by his performance. Definitely worth a full price ticket and a couple hours of your time!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7391764542f473ba72050f3315cf8f2",
            "input": "Rented a batch of films from Blockbuster last night, and this was the first one I watched (it was late on a Saturday night, wanted a \"horror film fix\")...Wow, this was awful, almost embarrassingly so... Stupid slasher-type story I really thought films like Scream had put an end to; amateur actors delivering clichéd' and insipid dialogue that is hard to believe was actually typed and read off a page; and gore scenes that are nothing to get excited about (especially when occurring in a film this poorly scripted).But I've always believed no film is 100% percent totally worthless. Here's the few good things I can say about this mess: #1 Bobbie Phillips: love this actress. She's the only member of the cast who displays any acting talent whatsoever. The only reason I took a chance on renting this is because her name was on the front cover. She acquits her presence in this dreck with professionalism, even though she looks bemused at times that she's acting in such a moronic story.#2 Unintentional Hilarity: This is the kind of film I can remember seeing back when there were still grind house theaters around the country and they used to include crap like this as the third movie on a triple-bill with some prestige thriller movie that was finally making it's way to the hinterlands. Unfortunately, in this direct-to-video age, most viewers have to endure these turkeys alone now without the communal experience of being part of an audience jeering and throwing stuff at the screen because the film is so terrible. Which leads to--#3 Porn Stars Trying To Act!: Mostly on hand because the producers don't need to cajole or plead with them to disrobe for extended sex scenes, but this trade-off usually means they actually get to speak some lines that are supposed to advance a story (other than \"ooh yeah baby\", or \"harder!\"). And, proudly, they all deliver expertly at looking foolish when trying to act. I'd almost exclude Ginger Lynn Allen from this group if her character wasn't supposed to be an Irish mom and she's actually attempting at times to do an accent, which just keeps the smiles coming.It's nice to look for the positive in all experiences, and that's what I took from this cesspool a.k.a \"Evil Breed\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b962e2b50c174b448c3716c5184353d1",
            "input": "A few summer space campers actually were accidently sent into space by a robot. And the oxygen in ship was running short. They had to sent someone to a space station to get the gas tanks, etc, etc.First of all, this movie's plot is not possible in real life. But it gives a warm feelings of anything is possible if you set your heart in.It is amazing to see those young actors who still look about the same after so many years. (I saw this movie for the first time in the year of 2000, it was filmed in 1986) There are quite a few people in that movie who are still working in Hollywood.The view was great from outer space. It does not look unreal. It is about 2 hours long, it runs so fast that you won't even notice. You know that it is not real, but you just get sucked into it until the end.Overall, it is a good family movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16da720162be42598f963a3503174833",
            "input": "Not really spoilers in my opinion, but I wanted to cover myself, nevertheless. As the executive producer, Morgan Freeman wants the audience to ignore the numerous absurdities of his character in 10 Items Or Less, a movie with an intentional indie-feel, and just be absorbed in the mentor/be-all-that-you-can-be theme. He plays a alternate universe, semi-washed up version of the real Morgan Freeman, who is chauffeured in an old Econovan by a kid all the way into Carson, CA from Brentwood to research his next movie role. Why Carson, is a mystery to So. Cal residents. He could have saved the trip and gone anywhere in the San Fernando Valley and found the same elements. Paz Vega is pretty to watch, a cross between Salma Hayek and Penelope Cruz, playing a disgruntled grocery checker at a large but slow local market that apparently is the ultimate source for Moragn Freeman's research. His character is only known as \"Him\" to allude to how actors are regarded when encountered in real life by average people-\"Psst, that's 'him,' etc. Unfortunately, I was too distracted that Him had all kinds of worldly wisdom and advice but had no reliable return back to his home in Brentwood, carried no cash or debit card, or had the wisdom to keep a cell phone with him. If one has such a high opinion of their self that they believe they possess an answer to everything like Him does, then I gotta see cash and a Blackberry which displays intelligence and good survival instincts to preserve that big ego which Him definitely has. Nothing really happens in this movie. I don't believe that either of the main character's were substantially changed by their encounter with each other. It flirts with the idea of adultery, but then that thought fizzles. This to me was similar to Steve Martin's Shopgirl, without the sexual affair. It was self-indulgent for Freeman and unconvincing to the audience.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebb1894be0e74e7b90b38b338a314a10",
            "input": "I read John Everingham's story years ago in Reader's Digest, and I remember thinking what a great movie it would make. And it probably would have been had Michael Landon never got his hands on it. As far as I'm concerned, Landon was one of the worst actors on earth, and his artistic license went way over the top, similar to his massacre of the \"Little House\" book series is proof. The acting, for lack of a better word, is atrocious, the screenplay sloppy, and there are more close-ups of Landon's puss than should be allowed.This movie reflects Everingham's story as much as \"Little House On The Prairie\" reflects the books is was \"based\" on. It's just another vehicle to show off Landons horrendous hair.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20cd1c9fe483446d9918501917d1114a",
            "input": "In 1988, Paperhouse was hailed as a \"thinking man's horror film.\" Wow, you might say, sign me up. This thing is a mess. It features a one time young actress who has a range of like 1 to 2. G. Headley with a bad British (dubbed) accent, and a story with no chills, thrills or spills.It isn't even interesting psycho-babble. One will only laugh at its cheap effects and long for a showing of Leprechaun 5.The story involves a girl with glandular fever who escapes in her dreams. WHat you get isn't good horror, art house or even a decent after-school special. I found myself after the two hour point saying..where did my two hours go.The direction is uninspired and I wished it could even be pretentious...something interesting..it seems like the producers were on lithium.Even in the dream world things are boring.A short no on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d631bade81cc4346b7e7194dd335e557",
            "input": "Robert Stack never really got over losing a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his role as Kyle in \"Written on the Wind\" to Anthony Quinn's 12-minute performance in \"Lust for Life.\" Stack plays the deeply disturbed, alcoholic son of an oil tycoon. He has lived his life in the shadow of the friend with whom he was raised, Mitch, played by Rock Hudson. They both love the same woman, Lucy, (Lauren Bacall), who becomes Kyle's wife. Kyle's sister, Marylee (Dorothy Malone), is a drunken slut who's in love with Mitch. Their story plays out in glorious color under the able direction of Douglas Sirk, who really dominated the melodrama field with some incredible films, including \"Imitation of Life,\" \"All that Heaven Allows,\" \"Magnificent Obsession,\" and many others.Make no mistake - this is a potboiler, and Stack and Dorothy Malone make the most of their roles, Malone winning a Best Supporting Actress Oscar. There's one amazing scene, mentioned in other comments, where she wildly dances to loud music as her father collapses and dies on the staircase. We're led to believe that Marylee sleeps with everyone, including the guy that pumps the gas, because she's in love with Mitch. Mitch wants nothing to do with her. He's so in love with Lucy that, out of loyalty to Kyle, he wants to go to work in Iran to avoid temptation. I doubt he'd be so anxious to get there today no matter how much in love he was.Hudson and Bacall have the less exciting roles here - Hudson's Mitch is the good guy who's been cleaning up Kyle's messes for his entire life, and Bacall is Mitch's wife who finds herself in a nightmare when her husband starts drinking again after a year of sobriety. Sirk focuses on the more volatile supporting players.In Sirk's hands, \"Written on the Wind\" is an effective film, and the big scene toward the end in the mansion is particularly exciting. The director had a gift for this type of movie, and though he had many imitators, he never had an equal.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9250cfc0458d40ba83fcd347753c2ae3",
            "input": "I really like this film... when I started to watch it I thought I would get bored pretty soon, but it surprised me... I thought it was a great film and have seen it a few times now. The characters are believable and I have to say that I fell in love with Brian Austin Green all over again (the first time being Beverly Hills 90210). I would recommend this film if you are a fan of his, but I do agree with another comment made earlier, that the ending is sort of disappointing. I would have loved it to turn out a little different! Never mind though, good gripping story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f66c0c5216ab43b5ba3243245c0e684c",
            "input": "I had never thought the standard of Yashraj films would ever degrade to such an extent! The film has a nonsense storyline which catches no interest.Saif has over acted. Kareena has improved her figure, but is not a good actress anyway. Akshay is good. Anil is also good. May I say the role wasn't good..Great deal of cheapness is filled in. Wondered if that was supposed to be the \"comedy part\" of the movie. Just because last few movies were flops does that mean Yashraj films should make this kind of rubbish? It has a history of so many good films. Overall, I was totally disappointed with the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b31105576ae4adf9d4daf04037174ec",
            "input": "Pretty incoherent movie about a man who belonged to and left a 1960s superficially hippie religious cult, who fights them sixteen years later. The man has a child with one of the other cultists, who during a raid by the police is hidden away, and taken by another man named Hawk who lives in a small cabin by the river. The cult kills some of its followers or some of the people in town. It's hard to keep track of who characters are, or what time period the scenes are supposed to be taking place. The leader gets paroled sixteen years later (I got that from the box - I missed the amount of time in the movie). Nobody is made to look any older, not noticeably, anyway.One murder is done with a large circular logging saw, others are done with knives or a crossbow. I never heard the title character's name mentioned in the movie, but he's the one who overacts the most, hooting and hollering.The movie is patched together pretty poorly, with voice-over helping (not much) to explain what is going on. Some of the sound effects were pretty bad. A man is getting punched, and we hear the sound of a whip cracking. A woman fires a gun, and we don't hear it fire, but hear a ricochet instead! It doesn't seem to have been done for comical effect.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f4aec93ef25497995fc196bfce8e19a",
            "input": "SERIES THREE- BLACKADDER THE THIRD \" If you want something done properly, kill Baldrick before you start\" Hot on the heels of the second series the show returned with the current owner of the famous name down on his luck and in service as butler to the Prince Regent, a vain and stupid foil for Blackadders venom, played by Hugh Laurie. Baldrick is still in tow as the other piece of the comedic jigsaw. The format is similar to the previous show, after all now they had found the winning formula why change things. We see Blackadder trying to get rich off of the back of the gullible regent in many more ingenious ways, trying to make Bladrick an M.P.or trying to woe a suitable bride for the prince. In many ways this is one of the most accurate of the series historically, the prince regent did take control of the throne during his fathers bout of madness and some of the characters lampooned tell a lot about the times. Samuel Johnson, William Pit and Wellington all pass through the events and all manage to steal their scenes, not an easy thing with such a stellar cast",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aefadd38277c42ae87ae92aae9700b2a",
            "input": "Seriously. This is one of the most stupid family shows of all time.Plot- A family without a mother and 3 \"dads\" raise 3 little girls in San Francisco, California.Characters- Neat freak Danny, cartoon loving Joey, hair obsessed Jesse, spoiled brat Michelle, stupid DJ, and almost normal Stephanie. The creators of this show really want you to hate the characters, don't they? Therefore, I do not think anyone should watch this show. I only chuckled at a few moments in the show's whole running, and I think that instead of lethal injection, all criminals should be forced to watch this show, a torture far worse than anything else.1.5/10 or: D",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f580f0cf1d947568dbbc900750a1dcd",
            "input": "I saw this film on television and fascinated by the beauty of Jennifer Mccomb. It was a neat film and you can watch it for the beauty of Africa and of course Mccomb. At that time I was thrilled watching this movie and from then onwards I am trying for VCD of this film but I am unable to find it. Huge African lions makes appearance int his film and we will be spell bounded simply by the size of those animals and grace of them. All section of audience can watch this movie particularly children will enjoy this film. But some scenes involving Mccomb forces parental guidance for this film. It is a enjoyable holiday movie for one and all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2976fe259bda43999ca91b28bdd65954",
            "input": "This short film that inspired the soon-to-be full length feature - Spatula Madness - is a hilarious piece that contends against similar cartoons yielding multiple writers. The short film stars Edward the Spatula who after being fired from his job, joins in the fight against the evil spoons. This premise allows for some funny content near the beginning, but is barely present for the remainder of the feature. This film's 15-minute running time is absorbed by some odd-ball comedy and a small musical number. Unfortunately not much else lies below it. The plot that is set up doesn't really have time to show. But it's surely follows it plot better than many high-budget Hollywood films. This film is worth watching at least a few times. Take it for what it is, and don't expect a deep story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20bed348e7f347ffb445fbf7186d730d",
            "input": "what kind of sh*t is this? Power rangers vs Freddy? It was watchable and as good as the first film in the beginning but from the part where the protagonists get super powers in theirs dreams, it started to become childish. This sh*t should have been rated PG or PG-13 rather than R. I expected to see some very mature stuff but it was only for the 1/3 of the film. The rest are for little kids. Plus it's focused too much on Christianity. I know Freddy's a demon but there are many religions that have different ways to fight demons. Why does it always have to be Christianity? This is total Orientalism and filled with white men/westerner's superiority. Don't' watch this, show it to little kids who loves power rangers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fcc531952d4f45c7b58feaebc27ecf5e",
            "input": "Found this flick in a videostore, it cost $2 to buy. The whole movie stinks really bad! The so-called colonel, who would the hero here if the cover could have been trusted, must be in his eighties and is barely able to walk. He nevertheless manages to shoot some of the dumbest ninjas in the world. Then the story leaves the colonel, which makes sense given the old man's inability to DO anything worth mentioning, a now two terrifyingly eighties-looking guys take over, in what must have been some sort of story. I got lost a hundred times but didn't mind, because the movie is so bad, it's real fun to watch. Zero-Budget trash with actors not deserving that name. Go check it out!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4eb5db5b517046f0a3178368e829fe0a",
            "input": "I watched the DVD of this movie which also comes with an excellent commentary track (in English). It seems in Cambodia (the subtitles in English say the character is speaking Thai but the movie says Cambodia)a very violent evil man is raising boys to be killers using starvation and training them to fight and kill. He sends Pang to kill some people in China and during the killings a cop's partner is killed. The cop Wai is a loose cannon who is worried about his father who is also a cop who was shot and is in a coma. Wai's chief is his dad's friend and is worried about Wai's erratic behavior. He doesn't know Wai was the one who caught his dad in dealing with drug dealers and shot him and put him into the coma. Pang escapes and hides in a squalid landfill shack where he meets a woman who came here to find her mother and keeps repeating her father won't let her leave (Pang doesn't speak Chinese and doesn't understand this but saves her from her father who appears to be having sex with her maybe this is the reason for Cat III). Wai becomes more and more obsessed with getting Pang but Pang is almost unstoppable. Even after Pang steals a boat and takes the woman to his home where they are married and she becomes pregnant Wai follows and joins the evil man (who's training the boys)making a deal to fight and train so he can get Pang. There is a big showdown between Wai and Pang with the terribly abused woman the major victim and leaving Wai dead and Pang cutting out his child from the dead mother only to die and leave him as the possible next boy to be raised as a killer. This film is beautifully photographed with an excellent soundtrack. There are many very brutal violent scenes. The woman having a long nail pulled out of her foot. Knives to the neck and torso. Guns fired directly to the head. And several very intense beatings. It maybe grim intense and downbeat but it is definitely worth seeing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c252a9ee97f247dabf391dc3b3f1b468",
            "input": "I saw the new redubbed and edited version yesterday and loved it. Then I went home and watched it with subtitles and I loved it. I am ready to watch it again.I am a sucker for the mild mannered secret identity and what could be more mild mannered than a pacifist librarian? The scenes where he reveals his super powers to his friends or absent mindedly forgets to be meek are my favortites.Of course the martial arts are stunning. There is really not much I can say about them if you are familiar with the HK style. However, if you are not... we paused playback briefly and Walker, Texas Ranger was on. We noticed that after every strike there was a cut. Not in Black Mask.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e66cb81b658d44fa8a128fa7e1a04b53",
            "input": "I remember watching \"Lost Missile\" (actually throwing a fit until my brother and several cousins at whose home I was an overnight guest agreed to watch it with me - I was, from time to time, the Eric Cartman of the 1960s - sorry, guys) and being somewhat embarrassed when the sustained wave of million-degree heat emerged as a plot device - even as a second-grader I knew that a mere missile just couldn't carry the energy around for that much heat or devastation over more than the duration and limited radius of a nuclear detonation. My inflicting that turkey on loving relatives was a self-punishing crime.The film's production values were very good. The acting isn't bad (apart from the Shatnerism of the actor who played governor's aide that someone else here mentioned).But the idea of a missile Easy-Baking the surface of the Earth by means of the heat of its exhaust... no.How'd the people at \"Mystery Science Theater 3000\" miss \"The Lost Missile,\" anyway? It's a great classic of unintentional comedy - watch it if you want something to drink beer to some weekend.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c998b6435afc424ab2865321ae617eaa",
            "input": "First things first: I'm not a conservative. And even though I would never refer to myself as a liberal or a Democrat, I was opposed to the war in Iraq from day one. I think it's safe to say John Cusack and I would probably see eye-to-eye on politics, in fact, I'm sure we'd become drinking buddies if we ever got to talking about how great Adam Curtis' BBC docs are. My point is this: don't discredit this review by thinking I'm not a part of the choir Cusack is preaching to in War, Inc. There's no question WI's politics are tailored to appeal to my demographic, but the problem is, the tailoring is substandard and the the film Cusack co- wrote, produced and stars in, fits worse than a cheap suit.As they say \"the road to hell is paved with good intentions.\" Cusack, his co-writers, director Joshua Seftel and even the actors involved, no doubt had every intention of making an anti- war film every bit as biting and funny as Robert Altman's M*A*S*H, unfortunately for the viewer, they ended up with one as unfunny and unintelligent as Michael Moore's Canadian Bacon.The current state of US politics, foreign policy and the war \"effort\" is already absurd and, as a result, tragic, pathetic and, regrettably comical -- just watch The Daily Show and see for yourself. The bottom line is: you can't write material as funny as what the Bush administration provides us on a daily basis, so why try to compete?The main problem with WI is that it feels it was put together in a hurry. To get it done, Cusack basically cannibalized Grosse Pointe Blank (one of his best films), changed the setting and crammed in a shopping list of ideas lifted from the collected works of Naomi Klein. Most of these ideas are rammed down your throat in the first twenty minutes of the film and what makes them so obnoxious is none of the jokes or gags or deliberately obvious references to Halliburton, the Neo-Cons and the US occupation of Iraq, are imaginative, clever or funny. The writers are so blinded by their own dogma they felt that by simply referencing these issues the film would be funny and subversive. The trouble is...it isn't. By now these ideas are yesterday's news and unless you've been living under or rock or are so blinded by ignorance, denial and sheer stupidity (read: a right-wing Christian), these jokes insultingly simple.Perhaps WI would work if it was more nuanced, subversive, offensive and fattened up with detailed research/insights into the Occupation. As it is, the jokes and sight gags are all surface and are so bad, with so little finesse, subtlety or satirical wickedness, they did little more than make me groan. Homer Simpson once said \"It's funny 'cause it's true\" and The Daily Show proves this every night; War, Inc. however proves that just because it's true doesn't make it funny. The bottom line: hyperbole isn't required when it comes to lampooning US/Neo-Conservative politics...it's already a big enough joke.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e11aa9205e584dd08bc46b36739f01d1",
            "input": "When watching little man , you'll spend its running time trying to figure out its many plot holes . And thats not a good sign because this film is supposed to be a comedy ! Your supposed to be laughing at it !! But will you ? Probably not. The main problem with little man is its concept- its far too ridiculous to accept (even as a cartoonish comedy ), so when the loud , laboured and over the top jokes kick in , they make the whole thing seem ten times stupider than it already is.\"But its a comedy \" some of you might be screaming. Thats true but thats no excuse for such a dumb plot.I mean come on , think about it if you saw a baby with A GROWN MANS FACE , wouldn't you be the least bit suspicious? And if calvin wanted to hide the diamond so badly, why didn't he put it in a nearby shelf instead of a random womans hand bag? And how can a qualified doctor NOT recognise that calvin is a grown man ? i mean seriously...what ? \"Its not about the plot , its about the laughs\" you might be screaming . Well heres the thing see, there are hardly any laughs in little man and that just make the dumb ass plot stand out all the more. If you really want to watch a wayans brothers comedy with a belief suspending plot, stick to white chicks because at least that had a few decent laughs.What ever you do steer clear of little man.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1768f7fe91d4b11b335a879c8c994fe",
            "input": "Okay. Look- I've seen LOTS and I do mean LOTS of these types of films. You know, the ones where the DVD cover just look SO good and scaarrryyy that you just cant WAIT to see it? Well, I got GOT again. And I'm getting' pretty tired of it. But I digress. It's pretty simple. It sucked(I know, rather juvenile) but it did. AndI SO agree with the other poster that if we had to sit through the boring thing, why oh WHY did the lead actress have to be so unnattractive?Distractingly so if I may add. And the scowl she used convey unresolved pain/grief over the death of her daughter did little help. I mean, Jesus.. Oh, but the crawling-on-her-back-demon thingee was pretty neat...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a85c47c25cb14609b6e83cc13f29b91f",
            "input": "Hollywood always had trouble coming to terms with a \"religious picture.\" Strange Cargo proves to be no exception. Although utilizing the talents of a superb cast, and produced on a top budget, with suitably moody photography by Robert Planck, the movie fails dismally on the credibility score. Perhaps the reason is that the film seems so realistic that the sudden intrusion of fantasy elements upsets the viewer's involvement in the action and with the fate of the characters. I found it difficult to sit still through all the contrived metaphors, parallels and biblical references, and impossible to accept bathed-in-light Ian Hunter's smug know-it-all as a Christ figure. And the censors in Boston, Detroit and Providence at least agreed with me. The movie was banned. Few Boston/Detroit/Providence moviegoers, if any, complained or journeyed to other cities because it was obvious from the trailer that Gable and Crawford had somehow become involved in a \"message picture.\" It flopped everywhere.Oddly enough, the movie has enjoyed something of a revival on TV. A home atmosphere appears to make the movie's allegory more receptive to viewers. However, despite its growing reputation as a strange or unusual film, the plot of this Strange Cargo flows along predictable, heavily moralistic lines that will have no-one guessing how the principal characters will eventually come to terms with destiny.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e74eb651ddfb498da96c3a86f339e827",
            "input": "First of all, really Kim Basinger? Your rich banker husband leaves you alone in your beautiful, most likely paid in cash for home, and you can't even put on a decent shirt? I'm a woman, and yes, I'm going to come right out say it--clean something, starting with your hair. And while you're at it, it's Christmas Eve. Buy your kids some presents...or at least a Christmas tree. Don't drive 40 minutes to the crowded mall, park your car 3 miles away and cry about it the whole walk in, and simply buy wrapping paper. Also, the next time you decide to leave someone a nasty note, don't sign your name. I refuse to feel sorry for Della. Obviously, due to the fact that Kim Basinger is this masterpiece's executive producer, she wants you to feel bad for the poor white blond woman. We get it. Alec Baldwin is a jerk, but seriously, don't model horrible films after your own life. Also, you're in you 50s. You definitely wouldn't have 8 year old twins. AND THOSE NAMES? Terry and Tammy. Way to let your kids grow up with any decent chance of ever respecting themselves. It's also pretty fantastic to hear the characters in the film constantly call her beautiful or refer to her as a \"girl\"...obviously Ms. Basinger had some say about what goes in the script. It's also pretty awesome how none of the criminals can fight back. Apparently, Della's magical ninja skills are impossible to beat. Her driving skills are pretty nifty too. This film is so cliché, it hurts. Wahhhhh! They spelled your name wrong on the tea cup. Or your husband put a hole in the wall but all you can think about is buying nail polish when you're at the mall instead of maybe some plaster and paint. Or the woman you went to high school with bought the teddy you were looking at. Boohooo! The fact that she refuses to take off that BRIGHT trench coat while running through the woods screaming and breaking everything in her path proves my point--this woman is a moron. Who thinks to grab the toolbox out of the car, but not their purse, full of identifying artifacts such as your ADDRESS. I have never wanted the \"bad guys\" to succeed as much as when I watched this film. And did anyone else happen to catch the \"African American\" shirt the black guy was sporting? Oh yes, rewind and feast your eyes on perhaps the most racially stereotypical prop in a film yet. Don't waste and hour and twenty minutes of your life. Instead, go do what Della couldn't figure out how to do...take care of your kids, and maybe brush your hair. That powerful ballad at the end though was pretty impressive. Singing \"I'll Be Home For Christmas\" in the rain while your bloody arm clings oh so tightly to your wrapping paper is about as emotional as it gets. Thanks Della!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7b0cc1252af45c5818daf9802121dc1",
            "input": "I heard so much about this movie how it was a great slasher and one of those early 80's movies that die hard fans of most slasher movies just had to see. Well, I rented it and I have to say that although it kept my attention as far as the suspense goes for most slasher films such as \"April Fools Day\", \"Friday 13th\" and \"Prom Night\", this film could have been right up there with the above mentioned only it lacked true enthusiasm and potential from the characters as well as the on going story. Characters that I found were unfortunate to be in this movie was the weirdo guy with the frizzy hair that kept creeping around the dorm and of course leading up to his true climatic role during the end with he faces the killer. Another would be the dirty scruffy looking guy with the jean jacket, he could have played more roles in this movie that might have made the movie more interesting, instead, the movie played this guy as just another loser out there making unknown calls while he sleeps with his girlfriend and then drops his part and cuts him off until the end which was a waste, I was disappointed in his part in the end. As far as the true identity of the killer goes, when the identity was released as to who he was, I just laughed, but it was all to obvious and he really made a true jerk out of himself as well as an annoying character after his true intentions were revealed. This movie should be one to at least watch once for all slasher fans but don't spend your hard earned money on it in some rare hard to find collectors inventory.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97c2841efbca4c46a8b359995c92180f",
            "input": "This movie may seem scary on commercials, but the actual movie was a reason to vomit. This is a below below average, (even lower than that) and has no plot. I mean every house can make you feel scared and sure, a dead Japanese woman would scare the poop out of you, but so what? Make a movie that would appeal to watchers and not just show images of scared people and some hair (dead Japanese woman). Can you say \"horrible rip-off of Samara (The Ring)\"? Don't get me started with the \"dead child\". Not even that scary! So what? He has a cat and he can imitate it, big freaking deal! Just bury the poor zombies and save some lives that have the potential of being harmed by the Grudge! 1/10! Yuck! >.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51db9b159486469bbaff313f6672a69f",
            "input": "While originally reluctant to jump on the bandwagon of watching \"Lost\", I accidentally caught one episode at the beginning of season 1—the one with the polar-bear—and it has had my undivided attention ever since. The show, that is. Not the polar bear. So bear (heh) with me while I throw out as much rambling, semi-coherent praise as I can muster.\"Lost\" takes a simple idea of a passenger flight full of people crashing onto a desert island, and gradually adds extraordinary depth to its premise by exploring each character deeply and unflinchingly—what drives them, who are they? Where did they come from? It soon becomes clear that the island upon which they are stranded acts as a common denominator for many things in their lives, whether they're running away from something (Sawyer and Kate among others) or getting in touch with spirituality (Locke, Claire). But \"Lost\" also zooms in on the island itself and the mysterious horrors that it houses... and they all seem to be strangely connected.While television actors are not exactly known for their subtlety or dazzling acting abilities, most of the cast of \"Lost\" are, in truth, spectacular actors for their respective parts, projecting heart and humour in their performances. There's also a multitude of eyecandy, but not generally of the plastic Hollywood kind as most TV shows. The characters all feel very real and they are extremely compelling to watch. Their interactions rarely fall prey to predictable sappiness, petty arguments or cheesy melodrama (although they are annoyingly secretive) – these people are first and foremost trying to survive and whatever relationship appears is treated secondary to action. The realism of these characters facilitate an already well-sculptured plot. About this plot... Imagine a tree as the template plot, then the branches as subplots (in this case, one branch for every character) – well, Lost adds twigs to each branch and then tiny twigs to those twigs as other story lines. If you're a brother/sister to one of the main characters in the flashbacks, you will get your own storyline. If you're a DOG you will have your own storyline. Unless the writers manage to weave them all together into some glorious culmination in the end, they are setting themselves up. I am more than a little worried there will be some disappointing cop-out to this show, as I'm sure most people are.But assuming the writers do pull this off, \"Lost\" is possibly the best show ever to hit television.9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f19137f8c192411186853520d1a0bd74",
            "input": "A warning to potential viewers: if you are looking for an adaptation of the classic story \"The Most Dangerous Game,\" look elsewhere. \"Seven Women for Satan\"only superficially addresses the original work by using the name of Zaroff and having said character murder people.Some of what follows might be considered by some to be spoilers. Or not.Boris Zaroff is played by writer/director Michel Lemoine. Whereas his ancestor hunted men because they were the only prey that were truly challenging, Boris' victims are usually in a position where they cannot defend themselves. The film rambles from scene to scene with a near-total lack of clarity. The director seems to have totally disregarded pacing and left the viewer with a suffocatingly dull film. A few individual scenes are mildly interesting (such as a torture rack sequence), but as a unit, the film fails to entertain. Viewers who are moreinterested in an assortment of attractive and semi-attractive actresses in various stages of undress might find the film watchable. Most will probably find their time is better spent watching Mentos commercials.In a side note, the DVD extras included a fair amount of information on the film's history. Apparently, it was banned for several years in its native France which pretty much ruined any chance it had for widespread distribution.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6184a86ceb3b412babdc929acde89ec8",
            "input": "I commented on this when it first debuted and gave it a \"thumbs in the middle\" review, remarking that I'd give it the benefit of the doubt beyond just the first episode. I've seen a total of six episodes now up to this point in June 2006. And as a lifelong Batman fanatic, I can say without hesitation: this show is utter crap.Everything's wrong with it. Everything. Getting past just the lousy animation and design, the stories are ridiculously convoluted and with no character development or apparent interest by the writers of this dreck to give any substance to any stories.And for God's sake...is it just me, or is the Joker in EVERY EPISODE?? Is Gotham that much of a revolving-door justice system? Or, again, is it just a complete lack of interest in the writers to put any effort into other villains (see \"no character development\", above).And to make matters worse, every single Joker tale is the same 3-part formula.1) Joker gasses people.2) Joker sets out to gas the whole city.3) Batman saves the day.Pfeh.There was one episode I saw that wasn't a Joker story. The title escapes me, but the villain was that nefarious Cluemaster...the \"Think Thank Thunk\" episode with the quiz show. That was the single-worst Batman story I've ever seen, heard or read. Yes, worse than \"I've Got Batman in My Basement.\" I can't really say what I feel this show is because it's probably against the ToS, but it starts with \"B\" and rhymes with \"fastardization\". Thank goodness for the existence of the Timm/Dini/etc. era of Bat-entertainment, back from the Fox and Kids WB days. Stuff that good, and I should have known this, just couldn't possibly have lasted forever, unfortunately.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9739c3e4d098475bb71de4134217622b",
            "input": "Horror fans (I'm speaking to the over 12's, although if you're under 12 I apologise for what you might deem an insult): In short, if you appreciate having your imagination disturbed by well written, original storytelling, punctuated by unpredictable well planted scares, and delivered via convincing performances, then I can heartily recommend - AVOIDING THESE STEAMERS - made by directors who have apparently long since past their sell by date. It's no accident that almost every episode feels as if it were made in the 1980's. Not to put blame squarely on the shoulders of some of these old boys (or indeed the 80's) because where would we be without certain movies from the likes of Argento, Carpenter, Landis, Dante and Barker (Actually Clive, WTF are you doing in there?! Glad to see Romero had the good sense to give it a miss as I'm sure he was asked to partake...). More perhaps we should point the finger at creator Mick Garris whose credentials include the logic defying and depressingly ill-advised TV remake of Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece 'The Shining'.Perhaps it is an indication of the state of television today. Are we so starved of good TV horror that we applaud any old sloppy schlock that the networks excrete onto our sets? Sadly, maybe so.Normally I wouldn't see the point of adding a comment that doesn't argue the faults and merits of a production, I'd just rate it accordingly. However, as this series is woefully lacking in any merit (with perhaps the sole exception of the theme tune) I write this as more of a warning than a review: DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME AND MONEY. If you disagree with me then it's more than likely that you haven't seen enough decent horror. Perhaps the earlier films of some of these directors would be a much better place to start, but if these 'Masters' of Horror were being assessed on these works alone, they'd never have been allowed to graduate with even their Bachelor's degree. Unless of course they were studying for a degree from the University Of S**t.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd804050f84d4f2bb3da4183f4b8243f",
            "input": "OK, I didn't know what to expect when I saw the cover to Fido, honestly when I came across it in the video store I was tempted to rent this movie, but nothing about it really grabbed my attention. But when I was looking around in Netflix, they were advertising this like crazy if I liked \"goofy\" scary movies, so I figured to just give it a shot. I'm so glad that I did watch it, this was just a great movie, it was absolutely hilarious and so charming to watch. Like I said, it's Pleasantville meets Night of the Living Dead, it's just a great concept, what does happen after a mega zombie attack? As we see in another zombie comedy, Shaun of the Dead, they have fun by making the zombies left over as \"handy\" citizens. This is a very overlooked horror/comedy movie, I think a lot of people were just so blown away with Shaun of the Dead that this got the boot. But it's a great story and the cast was perfect and made this into just a really funny movie.In a 1950s alternate universe where radiation from space has turned the dead into zombies. This radiation still plagues humanity, as all those who die after the original contamination turn into the undead. In order to continue living normal lives, communities are fenced with the help of a governing corporation named Zomcon. Zomcon provides collars with accompanying remote controls to control the zombies' hunger for flesh so as to use them as slaves or servants. In the town of Willard, a housewife ,Helen, buys a zombie in spite of her husband Bill's zombie phobia. Their son, Timmy, befriends the zombie, naming him \"Fido\". One day Fido's collar malfunctions and he kills their next door neighbor, who turns into a zombie. Timmy \"kills\" the zombified neighbor. When a pair of local bullies are blamed for the missing neighbor, they capture Fido and Timmy. Helen comes and rescues Timmy and Fido from the bullies and they try to forget about the whole thing. Several days later, the neighbor's body is found and the murder is traced back to Fido, who is taken away to Zomcon where the public is told he will be destroyed. Timmy learns through a friend that Fido is simply working in a factory at Zomcon. Timmy sets out to rescue him with the help from his neighbor with a zombie girlfriend in hopes to get Fido back.I really do highly recommend this movie if you get the chance to see it, it's so silly but a lot of fun. Billy Connelly did a great job as Fido and really brought, no pun intended, a lot of life into the character. I think the scene that made me laugh the most was when Timmy has to burry the old lady that Fido attacked and killed, his last words to her were so funny, \"you weren't really nice, but you liked flowers, so…\" and he buries her in the garden. Not to mention the neighbor with the zombie girlfriend, sick, disturbing, wrong, but classic laughs. I still love how even though this is like the Leave It To Beaver-esquire type of world, there still is a lot of gore in the movie. So if you do have a chance to see Fido, take it, I promise some good laughs.9/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e005cf3a63d7490989974350f5602d49",
            "input": "Watching the commercials for this movie, I was fairly convinced that I was going to loathe it. For one thing, it was one of those \"loosely based on the novel\" movies, which usually means that the book author saw the script, hated it, and refused to be associated with the film. Worse, the trailer showed only the most mundane slapstick imaginable (ex: kid gets squirted in the face with a garden hose...and falls over). So when my little brother got it into his mind that this was the \"must see\" film of the season (of course, he thought the same thing about \"Cars\", \"Over the Hedge\", \"The Ant Bully\", \"Monster House\", etc, etc), I was admittedly less than thrilled.But once at the theater, the film won me over for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, the writers capture 'kid dialogue' better than just about any other children's film I've ever seen. A prime example of this comes directly after the boys' principal accidentally eats a worm stuck in an egg omelet. The boys do a lame, over-exaggerated impression of the principal lecturing them, which makes it realistic since all little kids think (mistakenly) that they do great mocking expressions of their adult tormentors. Then one of the boys asks, \"Why did he say, 'alley oop'?\" Another boy responds, \"Maybe he's crazy!\" and the entire group laughs uproariously. Not an overly witty rejoinder, but exactly the kind of thing a young kid would come up with on the spot and exactly the type of remark other kids his age would find hilarious. As if to confirm it, my kid brother laughed right on cue when they were spoken on-screen; I could practically hear his voice spouting the same exact lines if he was placed in a similar situation.Another reason the movie works is that the writers manage to work in issues like bullying, sibling relationships, the new kid in school, and peer pressure/conformity without making any of them seem as though they were subplots for some after school special. For example, the bully (Joe) isn't stereotypical; he's definitely bad but not pure evil, and just enough of his home-life is revealed that the audience feels sympathy for him and understands his bullying origins. There's also no \"cue the dramatic music\" moment where Billy ('Worm Boy') realizes what a complete tool he's being to his younger brother Woody, and yet, by the end of the movie, some type of minor transformation has been made. There's some realism here in the way the characters resolve situations and in the way they relate to each other, and very little of it comes across as corny.The only drawback to the movie comes in the form of an absolutely laughable dance scene that even the creators of the infamous McDonald's dance party in \"Mac and Me\" would scoff at. Why oh why was it put into the movie?? Did Austin Rogers (Adam) pull a Macaulay Culkin and refuse to take the role unless he was given a vehicle to showcase his oh so impressive dancing skills? The entire sequence definitely did not need to be there and had slightly less comedic value than any given show on \"The History Channel\".Overall, though, this movie was excellent, and the length (about an hour and twenty minutes) was just about perfect. One of the best, most realistic live action kid films you'll ever see if you're ever around children or just remember what being a kid was actually like.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3872f457a7b414588a22ff94c7be79b",
            "input": "Fritz Lang's German medieval saga continues in Die Nibelungen: Kriemhilds Rache (1924).Kriemhild (Margarete Schoen) wants to avenge her murdered husband, Siegfried.Her brother is too weak to bring the murdered, Hagen, to justice.Kriemhild marries Etzel, the King of the Huns (Rudolf Klein-Rogge).She gives birth to a child, and invites her brothers for a party.Etzel and the other Huns should kil Hagen, but he is protected by his brothers.We see a huge battle of life and death begins, and she sets the whole place on fire.Eventually Hagen is dead, and so is Kriemhild.These movies deal with great themes, such as revenge and undying love.Sure we have later seen some better movies made of those topics, but this was one of the early ones.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14e6978b000042e6983bae92fe3d7457",
            "input": "Great acting, great movie. If you are thinking of building see this movie first. The dollar amounts may have changed but everything else is the same. The humor is true to life and emotions are those that anyone who has built has felt.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-454930e49ec74319bc2669ae20180cf2",
            "input": "Stephen King is generally known for the morbid, and that's fine, but this story is too morbid. Some movies, by the end you feel sad for the characters or the situations they were put through...here you just feel depressed. The movie has a nice feel to it (at first), with the family moving to the country, and creepy old Fred Gwyne greeting and warning them of the pet cemetery, but this plot leads nowhere. It starts with so much potential, but by the end, it loses the potential to be a good horror movie, and becomes corny, extremely stupid, and ultimately depressing.Louis (Dale Midkoff), his wife Rachel (Denise Crosby), their kids Ellie and Gage, and their cat move to a new home in Maine. They are warned by the loony farmer neighbor Jud (Fred Gwyne) about the local pet cemetery and how it is cursed. Louis thinks nothing of this and everything's fine until the family cat is killed. He bury's it in the cursed cemetery and it comes back to life, constantly hissing at the family and wanting to be left alone. One day, infant Gage runs out in the road and is run over and killed by a truck, and Louis knows he must bury him in the cemetery. When Gage comes back to life, he is changed and wants to murder.With many of Stephen King's works that don't translate well into films, I blame the directors and screenwriters. In this case, Mr. King was the screenwriter, but I'm going to blame him for his awful story. By the end it's so pointless, and though unfunny, the premise is laughable. A little boy comes back from the dead and manages to kill people with what looks like a tiny scalpel, and not only that, but he manages to lift their bodies and in one case, carry a body from the ground to the attic!(?) I know this isn't set in reality but seriously, how stupid can this get? The scene where Louis injects his deceased, now living again cat to kill it is strangely sad, because the cat did not deserve this. All it did was go around minding it's own business and he killed it. The scene where he injects his own infant son is almost unbearable. Not unbearably sad, but the whole situation is just awful to think of. After being injected Gage staggers drunkenly around before falling down dead....why did they need to make a movie ending with the death of an infant? But...even worse, the actual ending of them film involving Louis burying someone else (Not going to give away who) in the cemetery after Gage kills them....what did he expect? Why did Mr. King write this horrible story and why was it made into a movie? It's depressing and pointless!My rating: * out of ****. 90 mins. R for violence.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-821ce6c95c294ea883850c799fb527a8",
            "input": "Omen IV (1991) was a bad made-for-T.V. movie. Since the 80's were over, I guess the executives were experimenting in meth (the drug of choice during the 90's) because there is no other reason to explain this travesty. Why did they even bother making this? A t.v. movie? What were they mulling over when this one came up on the idea board? Did they even think for a second that this movie would catch on as. Perhaps they thought it could make it as a series? We'll never know. But I know one thing. This movie was the major reason why I never bought the Omen trilogy. They should have knocked off a couple of bucks instead of putting out this \"extra\" disc.Omen IV is basically a average American family remake of the first film. Instead of a snot nosed punk kid, we get the spooky girl who's a total brat to everyone around her. If the family had stronger parenting skills, then none of the demonic events that have transpired in the past films would have never occurred. These parents need to put their foot down and do some real discipline! Not recommended, best to avoid at all cost!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f878c3a67aaf488f8b26373d49edd382",
            "input": "The Ring was made from the only screenplay Hitchcock wrote himself and it deals, as many of his earliest pictures do, with a love triangle. At first glance, it looks like a more cynical update of the infidelity-themed morality comedies of Cecil B. De Mille, but more than that it is the first really competent Hitchcock picture. Even if he was not yet using the ideas and motifs of suspenseful thrillers, he was at least developing the tools with which to create suspense.As well as being a student of the German Expressionist style, the rhythmic editing style of Sergei Eisenstein had had its impact upon Hitchcock. But here he keeps tempo not just with the edits but with the content of the imagery. This is apparent from the opening shots, where spinning fairground rides brilliantly establish a smooth tempo. And like Eisenstein, the editing style seems to suggest sound – for example when a split-second shot of the bell being rung is flashed in, we almost subconsciously hear the sound because the image is so jarring.There is also a contrast, particularly with silent films from the US, in that The Ring is not cluttered up with too many title cards. As much as possible is conveyed by imagery, and Hitch has enough faith in the audience to either lip-read or at least infer the meaning of the bulk of the characters' speech. And it's not done by contrived symbolism or overacting, it's all done by getting the right angles and the right timing, particularly with point-of-view shots, as well as some strong yet subtle performances. There are unfortunately a few too many obvious expressionist devices (particularly double exposures), many of which were unnecessary, but there is far less of this than there is in The Lodger.Let's make a few honourable mentions for the aforementioned actors. First up, the stunningly handsome and very talented Carl Brisson in the lead role. In spite of his talent I was at first a bit confused as to why he got the role, as to be honest he looks more like a ballet dancer than a pugilist! But that just goes to show how much I know, as it turns out Brisson was in fact a former professional boxer and inexperienced in acting. Playing his rival is the competent Ian Hunter, who would go on to have a lengthy career in supporting roles right up to the 60s. The most demanding role in The Ring has to be that given to Lillian Hall-Davis, torn between two lovers. She pulls it off very well however with an emotive, understated performance, and it's a shame her career never lasted in the sound era. And last but not least the great Gordon Harker provides some comic relief in what is probably his best ever role.The Ring's climactic fight scene is among the most impressive moments of silent-era Hitchcock. Martin Scorcese may have had his eye on The Ring when he directed the fight scenes in Raging Bull, as his watchword for these scenes was \"Stay inside the ring\". The fight in The Ring starts off with some fairly regular long shots, but when the action intensifies Hitchcock drops us right in the middle of it, with close-ups and point-of-view shots. Hitchcock's aim always seems to have been to involve his audience, and this was crucial in his later career where the secret of his success was often in immersing the viewer in the character's fear or paranoia.The Ring really deserves more recognition than the inferior but better known The Lodger. It's a much more polished and professional work than the earlier picture, and probably the best of all his silent features.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03a3fb2ed4f242689be744a486d1f6bc",
            "input": "The DVD version consists of 2 episodes, the parricide of Caesar being the juncture. In addition, the language was Spanish without subtitles. Hence, it's hard for me to review in depth this movie because because i didn't understand what was said.Cleopatra being an historic icon, the part is very difficult and i found that for a newcomer, Leonor Varela just plays fine. She is strong-willed but also a very supportive, tender soul mate. Thimothy Dalton as Caesar is perfect and their romance is the main thing of the first episode. So, it is not really a documentary, nor a peplum but a great love story.After the parricide, a new lover comes (Marc-Antoine) but the flavor is gone: we remember always our first love. So, i found the second episode dull and their tragic fate isn't told powerfully.Nonetheless, the production is luxurious: the sets are big, tastefully decorated; the Moroccan live location exotic and the wardrobes splendid. The producers have a lot of money for sure, but they spend nothing on the special effects. They are so poor (blue screens, ships, Sphinx) that it's funny.Finally, I would like very much to hear it in french or English to make a definitive opinion about this two movies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef7a6b5b2b0d4f089b2856f81990f453",
            "input": "I've seen thousands of movies and have never written a review, but the Red Eye I witnessed is so at odds with the glowing tributes posted here that I'm compelled to offer my two cents in protest- and vote the lowest score possible just to bring the average closer to reality. This is a dull, boring stinker of a film that is memorable only for its apologist depictions of the terrorists' target (a John Bolton-esquire bully diplomat who's really a great guy, don't you know) and of the oh-so-handsome and popular Dr. Phil (whose bestselling book, one learns, is read by frequent fliers worldwide). The only real Red Eye I experienced was from rubbing my eyes in disbelief.Before you fork out $10 or so dollars for this B movie, read the selected 'Quotes (from trailer)' above, and ask yourself if you'll really enjoy a movie in which these were the cleverest lines to be found. Unfortunately, nothing else in this film is any better. The basic premise is goofy as hell; the acting is bland and uninspired, completely lacking in pro/antagonist chemistry; the potential for suspense is thwarted at every turn- except during the last five minutes- by poor directing and anticipatory editing; the script is riddled with incongruities like: early reveals of the heroine as a university lacrosse star are called into question when she later battles the antagonist with a field hockey stick; and the plot holes are wider than First Class (while character development is strictly Coach).And then there are the moments of extreme ridiculousness, like when the daughter of a high level public servant does NOT head straight for airport security, at her first opportunity, to warn them of an assassination plot against the both the head of Homeland Security and her father. Or when that same woman runs hell-bent-for-leather along slick airport linoleum, arms pistoning and veins in her neck bulging, while wearing 4 inch stiletto heels. Or when her pursuer chases likewise with a sucking wound in his trachea. Or when terrorists use a fishing pole to bring up their weapon from the freaking harbor bottom. I'm always willing to suspend disbelief, but I'm not going to leap from 30,00 feet without a parachute.The one good thing I can say of this movie is that it portrays women who are capable (even in bimbo form) of handling the most extreme emergencies- the kind of gender imaging sorely lacking in American movies. Other than that, this movie never really takes off, and is no more thrilling than the red eye flight from Boston to NY. Remember the last time you got suckered by deceptive trailers and glowing tributes- in this forum or elsewhere? This is one of those times. Wait for the Red Eye video, and don't watch it then, either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5022881f12f400ba3d71c455c277d7b",
            "input": "this was a fantastic episode. i saw a clip from it on YouTube, and i vowed that should it ever show on TV, i would glue myself to the set in order to watch. i wound up watching it with a friend of mine, who happens to be gay, and the two of us cried at the end. this was a truly well-written, heartfelt episode of the forbidden love between two cops who, i felt, really were (in Coop's words) \"the Lucky Ones\". it is episodes like this one that really make Cold Case one of the most captivating and much-loved works of television magic on CBS. i anxiously await more episodes, and a re-run of \"Forever Blue\" because i will always watch it again and again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfbed27ea63d48f4b5a32944529dccbb",
            "input": "I've seen this movie at theater when it first came out some years ago and really liked it a lot. But i still wanted to see it again this year to check if it is still good compared to movies coming out now, and i wan tell it's one the best movies i've ever seen in my life !!!!!!!!!!!!! What you need to know is that you don't have to miss any minute of this movie, if you don't completely follow the action you will get lost and you will not understand the end. The end is what makes this movie so good, you can't expect it.Congratulations to the Producer !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3da5827f81504350992404aaed5e9f01",
            "input": "It's depressing to see where Jackie Chan has ended up. He used to be an unstoppable hurricane of punches, kicks and incredible stunts. To be fair, he's now in his fifties and one would expect some slowdown. But with 'Rush Hour 3', where he takes a back seat to Chris Tucker (of all people!), and then there's 'Kung Fu Panda' where not only is he in a purely vocal role but his character barely has any dialogue... to say that Jackie Chan has seen better days is a colossal understatement.It's times like this when the only solution is to whip out a dusty old VHS tape and watch Jackie kick some arses in his younger, fitter, Chris Tucker-free days.Enter 'Police Story'. Jackie Chan plays Kar-kui, a policeman whose task it is to protect a witness before a major trial. He faces resistance from both the unco-operative witness and the numerous hit men sent by the mob to silence them both.But on the other hand, who cares? We don't watch Jackie Chan films for the story. We watch them to see Jackie Chan perform eye-popping stunts and generally punch and kick a whole lot of people who are less awesome than he is.And on that level, 'Police Story' doesn't disappoint at all. There is an awesome showdown in a shopping mall at the end that culminates in Jackie sliding down a giant, high-voltage chandelier. Seriously, if this sort of thing happened more often, no male would ever need coaxing to go shopping for clothes.There is also comedy, much of which involves Kar-kui inadvertently upsetting May (Maggie Cheung), his eternally suffering and apparently ever forgiving girlfriend. The humour on the whole is pretty unsubtle, but it works so I'm not complaining.The acting isn't too subtle, either. Indeed, I'm not sure there was anything subtle about 'Police Story' at all. Director Jackie Chan (yeah, he does that too) clearly has a deep understanding of why we watch his films, and knows that while we're waiting for the next fight to start, the last thing we want is to be looking for nuance and depth and inner meaning.So 'Police Story' is a blast. As is the case with most of his films, the fact that Jackie actually does the stuff you see on the screen puts it head and shoulders above the competition. I mean, when Jackie Chan really is hanging from a speeding bus by an umbrella, a whole new \"Wow!\" factor is added to the action.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01b9ec2d6a4446019d45a94d64ffdcbb",
            "input": "It started out slow after an excellent animated intro, as the director had a bunch of characters and school setting to develop. Once the bet is on, though, the movie picks up the pace as it's a race against time to see if a certain number of worms can be eaten by 7 pm. We had a good opportunity on the way home to discuss some things with our son: bullies, helping others, mind over matter when you don't want to do something.Of special note is the girl who played Erica (Erk): Hallie Kate Eisenberg. The director kinda sneaks her in unexpectedly, and when she is on-screen she is captivating. She's one of those \"Hey, she looks familiar\" faces, and then I remembered that she was the little girl that Pepsi featured about 8 years ago. She was also in \"Paulie\", that movie about the parrot who tries to find his way home.Ms. Eisenberg made many TV and movie appearances in '99-00, but then was not seen much for the next few years. She's now 14 and is growing up to be a beautiful woman. Her smile really warms up the screen. If she can get some more good roles she could have as good a career (or better?) than Haley Joel Osment, another three named kid actor, but hopefully without some of the problems that Osment has been in lately.Anywhozitz, according to my 8 y.o. son, who just finished reading the story, the film did not seem to follow the book all that well, but was entertaining none the less. The ending of the film seemed like a big setup for some sequels (How to Eat Boiled Slugs? Escargot Kid's Style?), which might not be such a bad thing. It was nice to take the family to a movie and not have to worry about language, violence or sex scenes.One other good aspect of the movie was the respect/fear engendered by the principal Mr. Burdock (Boilerplate). Movies nowadays tend to show adult authority figures as buffoons. While he has one particular goofy scene, he ruled the school with a firm hand. It was also nice to see Andrea Martin getting some work.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f06486746ca433b83b945cff299ff96",
            "input": "When a movie shocks you with it's disturbing, brooding atmosphere, and grabs you by the throat with it's stunning cinematography, you just know that you have stumbled upon a treat, masterpiece of a film. Although with most modern movies, extremely enjoyable as some are, those that really shock you into focus are the strongest, and are the ones that are most critically acclaimed and mostly, stick with you for a life time. I say, proudly, that I am a fan of movies that disturb, not just horror movies, but those that send a vibe laden with foreboding. Movies like Breakdown and The Missing, that send a chill down your spine, making you think \"holy crap, that could happen to me\", and visually entice you, are up there with some of my favorite aspects in a movie. Because I am only 21, I did not grow up with actors like Burt Renyolds, Jon Voight and Ned Beatty, albeit I am familiar with them, I didn't watch them grow and proceed as actors, as opposed to actors now like Shia LaBouf and Justin Long. I must say, after the long hype and witnessing Deliverance for the first time, I was so admired by these veteran actors in a movie made more than 30 years ago, and still lives it's terror up in competition to modern movies. Burt Renyolds plays Lewis, the macho self appointed leader of a group of four friends on a canoe trip down a fictitious river before a dam is made, filling the whole wilderness in water. Renyolds' character is an experienced adventurer, sort of no nonsense, and filled with machismo. Witnessing him portray the tough guy, made me think differently about him as an actor, as i have only seen him as a seedy old guy or an angry politician. The dialog the director provides for his character gives him enough malice to be proved as a strong and even intimidating leader. Ronny Cox and Ned Beatty play as the novice adventurers, Drew and Bob respectively, joining in for the fun of a canoe trip. The actor that i thoroughly enjoyed watching was Jon Voight, once again I have only seen him as an older actor, however, unlike Renyolds, I have quite liked Voight's acting (and i don't regard Anaconda when I say that), for example the national treasure movies. Voight plays Ed, whom, like Lewis, is experienced in adventuring but is seen as a more reserved character, a reluctant hero/ leader and definitely lacks Lewis' machismo. The film basically opens up with the four driving into a small town while asking to find someone to drive their cars to the bottom of the river whilst they canoe the rapids and camp along the riverside. You immediately get a creepy vibe from the hillbilly characters we are introduced to, like the imbred kid who plays the infamous \"Duelling Banjo's\" at the start of the film with Ronny Cox's character Drew; and more so the two mountain men in the films pivotal and disturbing rape scene. As with all atmospheric movies, from this moment on, dread and confusion fills the characters as well as the audience and it is here we see the characters take shape and change form. The canoe trip that follows is expertly shot and it is from here the men fight against both human and nature's odds for survival. The film's cinematics do not let up, and I back that comment up with the scene in which Ed fights one of the rapist mountain men with a composite bow. As Ed falls on to one of his arrows and notices his enemy approaching him, cocks his rifle, only to shoot the floor as he falls with an arrow in his neck; was possible the greatest piece of cinematic shooting I have seen in a film. In wrapping up, Deliverance is one film, who's dread and atmosphere carry the mood across and to this date, remains one of the best films in cinematic history.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-970e273f44b34aaab5201fced31e8172",
            "input": "Surviving Christmas (2004) Ben Affleck, James Gandolfini, Christina Applegate, Catherine O' Hara, Josh Zuckerman, Bill Macy, Jennifer Morrison, Udo Kier, D: Mike Mitchell. Dumped by his girlfriend, a hotshot yuppie doesn't want to be left alone on Christmas so he decides to return to his boyhood home, imposing on the dysfunctional family that now lives there and bribes them to pose as his family. An obnoxious and one-dimensional performance by Affleck, who mainly acts with a flashy smile, makes his character come off as a mentally unbalanced creep, but Gandolfini and O' Hara breathe some life into this mess. Even for farce, its silliness is lumbering, not much makes sense from scene to scene, and its sentimental messages are as phony as Affleck's grin. 91 min., rated PG-13. * ½",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6861e4ba7ad42a3acff4236cce93968",
            "input": "If you have trouble dreaming you may give this movie a low rating. But you just have to realize this movie was not made to please everyone,just people with a sense of humor.For those people the movie is great! It plays on old Science fiction movies and radio shows long gone, most of witch where B-rated themselves. Along the lines of Spaceballs and Airplane 2, you may need to stretch your imagination a little bit to get the jokes, but it is well worth it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2716fe21c66248f7a084aff8423abd9e",
            "input": "In her first nonaquatic role, Esther Williams plays a school teacher who's the victim of sexual assault. She gives a fine performance, proving she could be highly effective out of the swimming pool. As the detective out to solve the case, George Nader gives perhaps his finest performance. And he is so handsome it hurts! John Saxon is the student under suspicion, and although he gets impressive billing in the credits, it's Edward Andrews as his overly-protective father who is the standout.Bathed in glorious Technicolor, The Unguarded Moment is irresistible hokum and at times compelling drama.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5eeaf4ab6744806b744169c891f1030",
            "input": "This film is absolutely awful, but nevertheless, it can be hilarious at times, although this humor is entirely unintentional.The plot was beyond ridiculous. I don't even think a 2 year-old would be convinced by the ludicrous idiocy that the film-makers tried to slap together into a story. However, on the positive side, some of the horrifically inane plot twists provide a great deal of humor. For example, \"Wow, Lady Hogbottom has a giant missile hidden in her back yard!\" It gets worse (and even funnier), but I'll spare you.The acting is generally laughable. Most of the kids' roles are sort of cute, but not very believable. On the other hand, Annie is pretty awful all-around. The adults don't take their roles seriously at all, but this is largely a good thing. If they'd tried to be believable, the film would've been even worse. Which is difficult to imagine.Once you get past the overall crappiness of the movie, there are actually a few standout moments of almost-not-crappiness. The scene where Lady Hogbottom's son runs away with the maid is surprisingly hilarious, though it's an annoying letdown when they get caught by the police. The butler character, while very minor, is a ray of sunlight that almost, but never quite pierces through the gloom.Watching this movie actually caused me physical pain. Nevertheless, there were a few redeeming parts that made it almost watchable without beginning to hemorrhage internally. Judged on its good parts alone, the movie would be about a 5; unfortunately, the rest of the movie hardly deserves a 1. Thus, I give it a 3.That's being pretty generous, I'd say.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-193452c04d004ad4ae5f1f0e37630bfa",
            "input": "I'm easily entertained. I enjoyed \"Hot Shots\" and \"The Naked Gun\" and their many sequels, even when most people found them unbearable. I've even managed to enjoy most Pauly Shore movies. There is only one movie that I've seen that I can honestly say was bad...and this was it. It's been a while since I've seen it, but I do remember sitting in the theater thinking, \"This is a dumb movie. Why did I see this?\" It's honestly the only movie that I cannot recommend.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f30c92937c5644acb041171957093622",
            "input": "Lensman is a rather lesser-known Anime gem from Toho and MK studios.It's loosely based on the novel,but it reminds me more of the game \"Metroid\".If you want to see this,see it in Japanese with Subtitles or just plain Japanese.The English dubbed version was almost cropped and edited to death.There is not much new,despite the fact that it's the 1st animated feature to combine CG-graphics with hand-drawn animation,but it's fun to watch,nevertheless.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4cd23f5895fb47cc91110c7678ebf7fb",
            "input": "No mention if Ann Rivers Siddons adapted the material for \"The House Next Door\" from her 1970s novel of the same title, or someone else did it. This Lifetime-like movie was directed by Canadian director Jeff Woolnough. Having read the book a long time ago, we decided to take a chance when the film showed on a cable version of what was clearly a movie made for television. You know that when the critical moments precede the commercials, which of course, one can't find in this version we watched.The film's star is Lara Flynn Boyle who sports a new look that threw this viewer a curve because of the cosmetic transformation this actress has gone through. From the new eyebrows to other parts of her body, Ms. Boyle is hardly recognizable as Col Kennedy, the character at the center of the mystery. This was not one of the actress better moments in front of the camera. That goes for the rest of the mainly Canadian actors that deserved better.The film has a feeling of a cross between \"Desperate Houswives\" with \"The Stepford Wives\" and other better known features, combined with a mild dose of creepiness. The best thing about the movie was the house which serves as the setting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e81ea9afd48949afa65c4c9d7e98c372",
            "input": "Higher Learning says its OK for blacks to torment white people because they're all oppressors. most blacks in this movie are portrayed as ignorant savages. Stunning that this is supposed to be a positive movie about race. Incompetent acting, direction, and production values all contribute to this toothache of a flick. An appalling piece of trash. the perpetrators of this dreck should be ashamed. Higher Learning says its OK for blacks to torment white people because they're all oppressors. most blacks in this movie are portrayed as ignorant savages. Stunning that this is supposed to be a positive movie about race. Incompetent acting, direction, and production values all contribute to this toothache of a flick. An appalling piece of trash. the perpetrators of this dreck should be ashamed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-364acce4959740cf8816c7cf024776e6",
            "input": "This entry is certainly interesting for series fans (like myself), but yet it is mostly incomprehensible. The plot is confusing, as is the sequel continuity. Some striking effects, to be sure, but we never find out what it all really means.Try to see the \"NC-17\" workprint version which contains the gore that was cut to be re-rated \"R\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbd8cd4b2b7947e998b5aa36f73f7b0c",
            "input": "I love this movie and never get tired of watching. The music in it is great. Any true hard rock fan should see this movie and buy the soundtrack. With rockers like Gene Simmons and Ozzy Osbourne you can't go wrong.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46bf9209afff4edea4280e952f69f287",
            "input": "This is the best mob film ever made. It deserved more then what it got at the Oscars. Nominated for things like its score, art direction, supporting role (Newman), this film could have easily been nominated for Best Picture, Director (Mendes), Actor (Hanks), Supporting Actor (Newman and Law) and won!! Hanks gives one of his best performances, and the kid who played Michel Jr. was so good that I'm surprised i don't see him in more movies today. Critics themselves didn't give this film enough credit. But besides the incredible performances, another real star of this film is the incredible music. This was by far the best score of the year. It was nominated but didn't win. This is a great film that should be seen by everyone. My Grade-A+",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac50f76dc98e4d39b3b452f727556418",
            "input": "Offering a killer combo of terrible writing, terrible acting and terrible direction, it's a tossup whether Kinjite: Forbidden Subjects is offensively bad or just hilariously bad. It's almost as if someone ran a competition to make the sleaziest, seediest Cannon film. As if a glance at a cast list including characters like 'Lesbian Pedophile,' 'Perverted Gentleman,' 'Porno Actress' weren't enough, it's your only chance to see Charles Bronson's cop throw a lowlife on a bed and grab a dildo - but don't worry, it's okay, as the offscreen screams make clear he's only torturing him for information. After all, even if he is a bit overprotective of his nice Catholic daughter, he's a nice Catholic cop who regularly brings local Catholic priest William O'Connell a packed lunch and who believes in poetic justice - or at least ensuring that the bad guys end up in the slammer with the horniest inmates maximum security can provide to give them a taste of their own medicine. But then that's what you get for telling him \"Look, I think you're a little bit unstable.\" Still, when later offered a bribe, he may snarl \"I'd like to shove this up your ass, but I don't want to get my hands dirty,\" he's clearly learned where to draw the line: instead, he just makes him eat a $25,000 watch and sets fire to his Cadillac. The anal obsession even follows through to the film's title: despite the poster featuring a naked Japanese girl on a porn film set, the film's only direct example of Kinjite/forbidden subjects, as Alex Hyde White's English teacher explains to a group of Japanese businessmen, is, er talking about your bowel movements in polite society.Bronson isn't just too old for this, as the opening fight makes only too clear, he's too old for love interest Peggy Lipton, and she looks old enough to have grown-up kids. A better actor than he ever got the credit for when given the right material, here's he's given less a properly thought out character than a series of outrageous reactionary quirks. When he's not widening the circles of suspects he's accidentally dropping them to their death off the sides of buildings. He's definitely not a P.C. copper, with a special loathing for the Japanese - as if it wasn't bad enough that they're buying up American businesses, what's worse, they double-park on a public thoroughfare! No racial minority goes unassaulted, be they black pimp or Pakistani hotel clerk, no cop cliché unrecycled, be it a boss who bangs his fist on the table or a dead meat partner (Perry Lopez and his spectacularly bad hair dye that's so prominent it deserves screen billing all its own). The twin plot strands - Bronson's L.A. cop trying to take down Juan Hernandez's pimp who deals in underage girls and James Pax's porn-obsessed Japanese businessman – take forever to intertwine, and then in the most unlikely of ways: after copping a feel of Bronson's daughter on a bus (\"Some Oriental guy touched my holy of holies!\"), in the film's idea of poetic justice Pax finds his own daughter kidnapped by Hernandez. You half expect the writer to pop his head round the corner of the screen and say, \"How d'ya like them apples?\"Somewhere underneath all the laziness is the germ of a good idea even if it is too muddily developed to ever be clear quite what that idea really is, but the execution is pure Rising Sun: the Archie Bunker Version, shot like out-takes from an R-rated 80s music video with an outrageous and rather lazy dockside shoot-'em-up-and-blow'em-up finale that sees a small army of machine-gunning sidekicks suddenly appear to up the gratuitous body count. The last of Bronson's mostly bad to in different collaborations with J. Lee Thompson – and sadly Thompson's last film as director - it's a poor signoff for two undervalued players who increasingly never seemed to be that discerning about what pictures they said yes to.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4534a7fe3df543aca5c722a3aab96343",
            "input": "Some people loved \"The Aristocrats\" and others hated it, frequently walking out in the middle. Reactions to Eddie Izzard aren't likely to be that extreme -- if you can handle a transvestite comedian (who says he likes girls) and has a vocabulary that makes, shall we say, enough use of the \"f\" word that his program would be one long beep if presented on network television. Many of Izzard's fans are so devoted that they see no flaws whatsoever in his performances. On the other hand, I thought this show was occasionally flatter than Izzard's chest but also more often than not funny and, in spots, absolutely hilarious. He has a way of connecting references from routines early in the show to his later routines. He's not a story teller. He's not a joke maker. He's not a frenetic fantasist like Robin Williams. He plays around with ideas, some of which work and some of which -- a routine with the San Francisco cable car and Alcatraz, for instance -- are completely unfunny. He has a way, however, of moving gracefully past the flopped routines and extending the ones that connect. I gave this performance a 7 and might be persuaded to raise it to an 8. But a 10? No way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b88a55c9dd364524bb1ea0515fb608c6",
            "input": "This movie has great stars in their earlier years: Ingor Stevens never looked prettier; Yul Brynner was a very convincing Jean LaFitte, conflicted about his piracy and desiring to keep neutrality with the United States. Charlton Heston did a pretty good job as Andrew Jackson, but some moments were a bit stilted. It's really a good flick for students to learn that part of our history, AND it shows that all happy endings do NOT include the lovers getting together with each other--sometimes the happier ending is that they sail away and find partners of similar background who will understand them better in the long run. I have viewed it every year at least twice for 16 years now; and though it is not the best movie I've ever seen, I love it every time!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-727dbe90699945b696f5d9c01c4468fb",
            "input": "SPOILER WARNING: There are some minor spoilers in this review. Don't read it beyond the first paragraph if you plan on seeing the film.The Disney Channel currently has a policy to make loads of movies and show one a month on the cable channel. Most of these are mediocre and drab, having a few good elements but still being a disappointment (`Phantom of the Megaplex,' `Stepsister From Planet Weird,' `Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century'). Every once in a great while, they make something really, really great (`Genius,' `The Other Me'). But once in a while The Disney Channel makes a huge mistake, and gives us a real stinker. This month (December 2000) The Disney Channel featured `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' which I thought was terrible due to poor writing and worse acting. Apparently, `The Brainiacs.com' was rushed out a few days before Christmas to get a jump on the holiday, because the plot has to do with toys. They even paid for a feature in the TV Guide, so I thought it must be better than the norm. I was in for a complete shock. Only Disney's `Model Behaviour' has been worse than this.The plot was more far-fetched than normal. I usually let that slide, but here it just goes too far. Matthew Tyler gets very sick of his widowed father spending most of his time at work. His father owns a small toy factory that has taken out large loans at a scrupulous bank to stay afloat. Time and time again, his father has to skip out on the plans he makes with his son and daughter. Matthew decides that the only way he can spend time with his dad is if he becomes the boss and orders him to stay home. He gets a hair-brained idea to create a website where kids all around the world can find and send him a dollar to invest in a computer chip that his sister is inventing. That whole concept is full of fallacies. When kids send in millions of dollars, Matthew opens his own company's bank account and buys up most of his dad's business's stock. He is the secret boss, but he doesn't reveal this to his dad, but instead presents himself at board meetings as a cartoon image through a computer. That image itself is so complex (and ridiculous) that it isn't possible for someone to create it at home, much less someone who comes across as stupid as Matthew. To make a long plot short, Matthew orders his dad to spend more time having fun and doing stuff with his kids, but a federal agent shows up inquiring about Matthew's company, as it is fraudulent.There's so much wrong here. As mentioned, the stuff they do here is impossible even for true geniuses, which these kids are not. The website, the cartoon image, the computer chip, even the stuff they are being taught in school, are far too advanced for these kids. The acting by most of the cast, especially Kevin Kilner, is terrible. Some familiar faces are wasted. Dom DeLuise plays the evil bank owner, but his part is a throwaway. He has one good scene with Alexandra Paul (who shows she has the ability to act) in which he explains his motives, but nothing more. And Rich Little is wasted in a small role as a judge. There's even some offensive and uncalled for anti-Russian jokes. But the greatest atrocities are the hard-hammered themes. These themes show up in many of The Disney Channel's films, but never before have these ultra-conservative messages been pounded so strongly. The typical `overworking parent' idea is really pushed hard, and after delivering it inappropriately in `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' seeing it again sours my mood. Family relations are important, but Disney must stop this endless preaching, because working is important to maintaining a workable family, too. Except for cancelling activities thanks to work, the father didn't come across as that bad, but I found it offensive when the grandmother told him `I don't like what I see.' Just as bad is the preaching of the idea that all single parents MUST marry if they want to raise their kids right. Enter Alexandra Paul, whose character, while important to the plot, is there solely to be the love interest for the father. This offensiveness only proves that the Disney brain trust lacks the brains to avoid scraping from the bottom of the Disney script barrel. Instead of letting this movie teach your kids how to commit serious fraud, wait for the next Disney Channel movie. It has to be better than this. Zantara's score: 1 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b1e7b2e4a5144afae8b180404d4a911",
            "input": "This Italian film from the '70's is NOT even in the class with Dog Soldiers, The Howling, or even that awful American Werewolf in Paris, BUT...it is fun to watch. I'm talking about watching the lead actress, a stunning blonde, run amok in her birthday suit. We're talking about graphic, complete nudity...it's obvious that she is a real blonde...humma humma humma!! The story is a hoot, the SFX are childish, and the acting (for the most part) stinks. The only redeeming value of this movie is all (and there is a LOT) the nudity & sex scenes. Tame by HBO standards, but still fun to see when you find yourself without a date on Saturday night. OK...HERE'S THE SPOILER...There is NO werewolf (except in the opening scene of the heroine(??)'s ancestor. The girl just imagines that she's a werewolf...in other words, a clinical Lycanthrope.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60952ef1edf841849d822ad97d94b89b",
            "input": "I enjoy watching people doing breakdance, especially if they do it as well as in the best scenes of this movie which takes you to a disco club called \"Roxy\". Especially at Christmas time, because there also appears a \"MC Santa Claus\".Even if this is an old film, and even if I have videotaped it from TV, when the State Movie Archive of Finland showed this in the summer of 2004 on their own big screen, I went there to check it out. It's much more enjoyable on big screen than on TV.Even if many people here think that watching this on big screen is a waste of money for the ticket cost, I disagree with this and I think that when I paid my ticket, I got the money's worth by seeing this, as it is on big screen, especially seated on front row of the cinema, an unforgettable experience, and much better than just on video.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-626421ba3b6c4dee84177c90db270530",
            "input": "I actually like the original, and this film has its ups and downs. Here's just a few:Ups: Most of the original voice cast returned.Downs: I didn't like the voice of Timon's Ma. I know she did a voice in The Simpsons, but that show is just plain stupid. Ups: We get to see Simba as a \"teenager.\"Downs: They wasted it with a slug-slurping contest between Timon and Simba. Ups: It was Rafiki who told Timon about \"Hakuna Matata.\"Downs: How did Pumbaa find out about it?Ups: Songs again. (some of the original songs were there, but they were just background music.)Downs: But stupid songs. (a.k.a. Timon's solo.)Overall, this is a pretty good movie. I'd recommend it for fans of the original. But if you don't like the original, chances are you won't like this one.My Score: 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4df6ba4966e245c3bdd8c01f0aa06bb7",
            "input": "OK, I admit I watched this movie on Mystery Science Theater 3000 (which I am a huge fan of), but I am not one of those people who automatically gives an MST3K movie a 1/10 rating. Although I hate many of the movies they play, and some are among of the worst movies I've ever seen, I have actually been able to enjoy some MST3K movies. That being said, this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. (It is no wonder, in fact, that the MST3K writers themselves commented that this one was one of the worst. Don't believe me? Check out their site.)To me, this movie is a good example of what NOT to do in filmmaking. The dialogue is very bad, the acting is worse, the cinematography is pathetic the direction (while perhaps being the best thing in this movie) is bad.The pacing is the worst part in this movie. A few times in this movie, the viewer had to wait literally minutes for something to happen. While minutes may not sound like a very long amount of time, it can be in a movie, particularly in this one. I'm sure it was meant to create a mood, but I was just very bored. It truly felt like ten minutes.If \"suspension of disbelief\" means \"almost falling asleep during a movie\", then this has plenty of that. But THE SCREAMING SKULL is just so horrible, there is no way I could have possibly even gotten interested in anything that was actually going on in the film, and thus the \"suspension of disbelief\" was indeed non-existant.One of the worst, and probably the most boring movie I've ever seen.1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9f665ba9e3a42ed8d8782ba04cf46c2",
            "input": "Unbelievably awful film. I watched part of this on T.V. recently. My jaw dropped as I watched a horrendously conceived plot and listened to mind-numbing drivel. Not a single line from the master of one-liners could come close to producing anything resembling a chuckle. It was so bad it made me want to exhume Rodney Dangerfield's body, slap him around and scream, \"How could you?\" I know many films are done in haste, hoping to cash in on the popularity of a given actor or theme. But please, Hollywood, show a little respect for your audience. It's sad and scary that people were expected to pay to see such tripe. The bottom of the cesspool, even by Sunday afternoon television standards.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2e40d69bda84578a60de22c51acbdbf",
            "input": "I loved Long Way Round and wasn't even aware of Race to Dakar until i saw it on the shelves of my local supermarket. I bought it and after a slightly 'hmm will this be as good' first episode i decided that it was. Charlie Boorman was great as were the other members of the crew. Great to see him with Ewan again. There was a fair bit of swearing in it but that didn't bother me. As for their being no mention of it on the package. Thats more to do with the silly Excempt from Classification certificate that the BBFC have. They should have given it a 15 just for the language alone.Highly recommended series, i want more!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2c4d9ecbdb24098a405f7afa6685c1d",
            "input": "It is projected that between 2000 and 2020, 68 million people will die prematurely as a result of AIDS. The projected toll is greatest in sub-Saharan Africa where 55 million additional deaths can be expected. Beyond the grim statistics are personal stories that we rarely hear about. Christophe Honoré describes one of the most moving in Close to Leo, a film produced for French television as part of a series dealing with issues facing young people. Though fictional, it deals with a situation that is unfortunately too common -- the effect of a diagnosis of HIV on a loving close-knit family.When twenty one-year old Leo (Pierre Mignard) tells his parents and two teenage brothers, Tristan (Rodolphe Pauley) and Pierrot (Jeremie Lippmann) that he has AIDS, the family is devastated. Out of concern for his youth, they decide to withhold the information from his youngest brother, 12-year old Marcel (Yannis Lespert) but he overhears the conversation and begins to sulk and act erratically. When Leo goes to Paris for treatment, he takes Marcel with him but the young boy confronts Leo and demands to know the truth. Leo tells him that he is ill and Marcel is sad but accepting. When he brings Marcel along to meet some former gay friends, however, tension between them boils to the surface, setting the stage for a riveting conclusion. Although I was uncomfortable with scenes in bed involving physical contact between the brothers, I feel that the sincerity of Close to Leo and the brilliant performances by Lespert and Mignard more than tip the scales in its favor. Seeing events unfold from the young boy's perspective gives the film an authenticity that reminded me of the Quebecois film Leolo and Truffaut's The 400 Blows. Unlike some American films that dance around the anguish of AIDS, Close to Leo tells a harsh truth but does so in a way that is tender and wonderfully real.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e3e76c12d7f42eda5662bc37846dac1",
            "input": "I honestly believe that ANYONE considering film-making be subjected to this mind-boggling failure. Like the \"films\" of Edward Wood, Jr. in the '60s and '70s, this film is a shining example of why real filmmakers expend so much energy rewriting scripts, re-editing their films, and reworking their special effects until they finally look right. This movie is also a decent argument FOR the studios' pre-screening process. If Mr. Hines were forced to endure the honest reactions of an impartial audience, perhaps he would have cut 75% or the walking/running/strolling scenes and edited this movie down to a more bearable 90 minutes.Film students should view this movie as an example of just how dangerous thinking their work is \"good enough\" can truly be. Every performance, every line of dialog, every digital effect, every filter effect, indeed every frame of video expresses the danger of striving for mere mediocrity. A beginning filmmaker may find himself/herself tempted from time to time to think \"At least I accomplished SOMETHING\" or \"Just finishing this will be an accomplishment in itself\". This movie will help them understand just how badly a film can turn out.Critics might also benefit from seeing this movie before they dub the latest summer entertainment \"the worst movie ever made\".Beginning writers can learn from this film just how important rewrites are, and perhaps understand the necessity for rewrites. Also, beginning directors can learn the importance of a GOOD screenplay, and some degree of respect for just how hard it is to write a script that causes the audience to feel emotionally compelled through the story. Writers and directors who watch bad made-for-cable movies of the week and think \"I can do better than THAT\" can see get an idea from this movie how difficult it really IS to produce even mediocre results.I sincerely believe this movie can serve as an educational tool to beginning filmmakers. Particularly those entering the craft in this current post-Lucas and post-Spielberg environment. There is a reason filmmakers such as these are hailed for their ability with special effects. The War of the Worlds illustrates clearly that not everyone can pull it off. Some can't even come CLOSE to it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9cb0deca6824f959f36120d6650fc3b",
            "input": "SPOILERS ALERTHomeward Bound: The Incredible Journey is an important film from my life because it's the first film I remember seeing in the cinema of my home town as a 4-year old scamp. The story is based on the Sheila Burnford novel, and is a reason why it's not possible to write this one off as a brainless Lassie clone.The basic story: Two dogs and a cat happily live in the Seaver family when the new husband to the mother of the three children, gets a job in the city and they have to temporarily move into inner San Francisco while the animals are sent to a ranch to live for a couple of months. The bonds between the animals and the children they watch out for are especially strong, and Shadow the golden retriever and Sassy the Himalayan cat are heartbroken as the children are, though the young and happy-go-lucky American Bulldog known as Chance is a little less concerned and somewhat cynical (due in part to his voice-over explaining his being abandoned as a pup, picked up to an animal shelter, and being bought by the family), though his growth as a character during the story provides much of the important storytelling.The three pets escape the ranch and head off into the wide and dangerous wilderness (fantastic wilderness settings by the way), driven on by Shadow's instincts of direction. They meet several perils along the way, hoping to make it home, while the family and the ranch hosts are suddenly concerned about the animal disappearance. There are funny moments all the way through, great dialogue between the three animals and hilarious lines (see - memorable quotes), and a touching comradeship that grows between the main characters during the course of the storytelling, punctuated by moments of sadness (such as when Sassy's arrogance of trying to cross a river without getting wet causes her to fall in the river and get washed down a waterfall, leaves a moment of loss that is felt deeply by the viewers).Somehow though, I fail to see what the inclusion of saving the girl lost in the wilderness adds to the story and the journey they take. Somehow, it seems a little unnecessary as part of the story.The ending cranks the stakes higher when shadow falls into a pit in a trainyard and having hurt his leg, finds it hard to get out and gives up, exhausted, followed by Chance climbing in with him to persuade him to climb out, telling him how important he is to him and how he's pushed them this far so he shouldn't throw it all away so easily. The way that this scene (brilliantly done) isn't concluded leaves an ambiguity that carries on into the final scene when Chance and Sassy return home, but Shadow is nowhere to be seen. Then just as all seems lost, he slowly appears, and is reunited with the family. Chance's conclusion at the end speaks of the comradeship that has developed between he and his fellows on the journey, and the realisation to what home really is from his long journey to get there, leaves a fine epilogue to demonstrate how much his character has grown, but also how the other two have as well. Hang on a second, I think I'm going to cry...Anyway, I haven't read Sheila Burnford's book, so I don't pretend to know where the differences between book and film lie. But this is a film that all the family can watch, and while the tots will love the talking animals, older viewers will understand the plot line better (as I found when I watched the film again after several years without seeing it). This film is a masterpiece in cinema, and I suggest that if you haven't seen it you go out and get it!And please avoid the sequel (see my review for Homeward Bound II!)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a863788cdca4811a3676c5cdf1a5c49",
            "input": "1936 was the most prolific year for Astaire and Rogers. Their second film for RKO that year is the third film in this collection – Mark Sandrich's 'Follow The Fleet.' This time out Astaire is painfully uncomfortable as Bake Baker, a seaman on leave who just happens to stumble into the seedy waterfront café where Sherry Martin (Rogers) is warbling romantic sweet nothings in everyone's ear. Yep, you guessed it – they're hot for each other once again. Only this time Sherry's spinster sister, Connie (Harriet Hillard) threatens the whole fine romance by falling for Bake's robust seafaring buddy, Bilge Smith (Randolph Scott); a sort of use 'em up and toss 'em out kind of guy, thus forcing Sherry to reconsider her opinion of all sailors in general. Irving Berlin lends immeasurable class to the proceedings with his classic, classy score, including standards 'Let Yourself Go', 'I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket' and 'Let's Face the Music and Dance;' the latter a divinely inspired skit about suicide that turns into another immediately recognizable and thoroughly sublime pas deux for Fred and Ginger. The transfer on 'Follow The Fleet' is a tad weaker. The gray scale remains nicely balanced but now it's a tad thick looking with not nearly as much tonal variation as the previous titles. Grain is still present. So are age related artifacts. Once you've settled into to the slightly dense and sometimes more softly focused image quality, the overall impression is more than acceptable for a film of this vintage. The audio is Mono but very nicely balanced. Extras include a featurette, theatrical trailer and short subject, but oddly – no audio commentary. Considering the importance of this film in the overall canon of Astaire/Rogers this is an uncharacteristic oversight from Warner Home Video.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dde50bfb68b749b8aa5af7f1cf283dbb",
            "input": "This has the absolute worst performance from Robert Duval who sounds just like William Buckley throughout the entire film. His hammy melodramatic acting takes away from any dramatic interest. I'm not sure if this was deliberate scene stealing or inadvertent but it's the only thing I can recall from a truly forgettable film. This picture should be shown in every amateur acting class of an example of what not to do. Thank God, Duvall went on to bigger and better things and stopped trying to effect a cultured accent. He is a good character actor but that's about it. Klaus is so much better. His performance is muted and noteworthy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51892c1245f948b28e525fa41e8be1cd",
            "input": "Another review likened this troupe to a cross between Monty Python and Twin Peaks, also aptly. Yet another review expounded on the differences between the comedy we enjoy non-critically and black comedy, also well worth consideration.Watch the whole thing, all three series. At the end, all the characters are tied up and the puzzle pieces fall into place just as well as a Douglas Adams novel. The detail and intricacies are staggering. Thoroughly post-modern. Wickedly funny, and startlingly tragic. Not for kids. Not for those with thin skins or who lack objectivity. Thought-provoking. At once literal, figurative, and surreal in disturbing ways. The blackest comedy I can recall.And very possibly the most wonderful thing I will ever see.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25076fc5423d450db547d71924581541",
            "input": "This is an early film \"Pilot\" for the hit Canadian tv show Trailer Park Boys. It was played to executives at a few networks before Showcase decided to sign them up for a tv series. Great acting and a very funny cast make this one of the best cult comedy films. The movie plot is that these two small time criminals go around \"exterminating\" peoples pets for money. If you have a dog next door whos barking all night these are the guys you go to! But they get into trouble when they come across a job too big for them to deal with and end up in a shootout. Watch this movie if you want to understand the beginning of the tv series. I highly recommend it!Rated R for swearing, violence, and drug use.Its not too offensive either (they dont actually show killing animals)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea49542a4a2f4c3d91c43aa554633f74",
            "input": "\"La Furia del Hombre Lobo\" forms a completely stand-alone storyline which doesn't seem to fit in at all with the previous Waldemar Daninsky movies. Some have commented that this movie is supposed to take place before the events of \"Werewolf Shadow\", although it was released afterwards ... they may be right, I'm not sure. Anyway, in this movie Waldemar Daninsky is bitten by a yeti-like creature in Tibet (great dialogue here -- \"It was a yeti. But that's impossible. I'm a scientist and these things don't exist. It was a hallucination. That's all.\") and although marked with the sign of the pentagram, he is able to prevent the change into a werewolf until he discovers that his wife has been cheating on him. Changing into the beast one night, he kills both her and her lover before running out into a storm and being electrocuted. It's not long before he's resurrected by a dominatrix university professor who is conducting some kind of unfathomable experiments with mind control. He is taken to the underground cellar of a castle where the subjects of these experiments live like chained animals.First of all -- Jacinto Molina, Paul Naschy, whatever you want to call him, he's a fine actor and cared passionately about his work. No matter how flawed these movies are, you can always rely on him for a decent performance. The rest of the cast seem good enough, but it's hard to tell when they have a half-assed voice-over dubbed over all their lines. And that was really the main problem for me ... many of the voice-over artists they used were just awful, awful, awful. Whenever I chuckled during the movie it was at the inept way that they delivered their lines (they seem to constantly refer to the hero as \"Waldeman\"). But unfortunately it's almost impossible to find subtitled copies of Naschy movies, although they're sometimes available in the original language without subtitles.The directing of Jose Maria Zabalza seems sort of hit-and-miss ... there are some great visual ideas in some scenes, while others are badly constructed and poorly edited, particularly in the final scenes when it really counts. The reason for this, was that Zabalza was apparently drunk most of the time while on set. He allowed his fourteen year old nephew to rewrite Molina's dialogue, used extras without his permission, and spliced several shots from Molina's earlier movies. All of this pretty much ruined any chance this movie had of being one of Molina's best works, and it's no surprise that the two of them never worked together again.But it's not all bad news, as there are some good ideas here. Some aspects of the storyline make an interesting psychological drama with the werewolf as a metaphor for jealousy and rage. The 'werewolf as a yeti' idea is one that returned in Molina's later work. Some pretty horrific and surreal stuff goes on down in the cellar, and there's also a very memorable sequence about half way through the film where Daninsky runs from house to house through a village, slaughtering or molesting innocents as he goes -- one scene is particularly intense, but it's actually lifted straight from Molina's first movie, \"La Marca del Hombre-lobo\" along with a few other shots. I actually found the movie on the whole to be very entertaining, although there are some problems with the Front Row Entertainment version, such as pretty obvious cuts (although some of it may simply be due to the director's lack of continuity). Gods knows what omissions there are -- I'll probably try to get my hands on the uncut version at some stage in the future.This is a overall a decent piece of vintage Naschy which experienced fans might enjoy, but it could have been much better and so probably wouldn't make a great introduction.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1297d978ea3a4d758082462d444516bf",
            "input": "Featuring a few of Hammer's all-stars, this highly effective slice of British horror revolves around a house and the fates of it's previous tenants, whose stories are all told to a Scotland yard detective, in search of a missing actor.Story number one, which is probably the least impressive of the four, deals with a writer and his wife who've just moved in the house and plan to stay just for a short time so that he may write one of his horror novels. He creates a demented character named Dominic, who's a very creepy looking strangler, and soon finds himself going mad as he starts to seeing this beastly looking man everywhere he goes. After his wife convinces him to seek psychiatric help, a sub-plot is introduced which frankly, didn't really work for me. I won't spoil it for you.The next story (the best in my opinion) stars the wonderful Peter Cushing as Philip Grayson, a man who's moved into the home for his retirement years and soon makes his way to a nearby wax museum(that deals in the macabre) where he's very startled to find a wax figure that looks exactly like a woman from his past. Soon thereafter, an old friend(who also has a history with this woman) is in town for business and drops by to see him. The two men are in for a rude awakening as they soon discover that there was more to this woman than meets the eye.Story three stars one of my very favorites...Christopher Lee, who plays John Reid. After moving into the home with his peculiar daughter Jane, the nanny that he hires becomes awfully suspicious as to the way Reid suppresses his daughter. Well come to find out...if she knew what Lee did, she would have certainly understood.The final story is a rather light-hearted vampire tale that stars John Pertwee and Ingrid Pitt. After buying a cloak from a mysterious merchant, actor Paul Henderson finds himself turning into the very creature that he's portrayed several times in his career.Overall, the pacing and direction were very good, as was the most of the performances. There were nice Gothic touches here and there and an effective score to complement the ambiance. This one's a keeper, and comes highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a52d19656db4d1688cac54868908a83",
            "input": "That word 'True' in this film's title got my alarm bells ringing. They rang louder when a title card referred to America's Civil War as the 'War Between the States' (the circumlocution preferred by die-hard southerners). Jesse James -- thief, slave-holder and murderer -- is described as a quiet, gentle farm boy.How dishonest is this movie? There is NO mention of slavery, far less of the documented fact that Jesse James's poor widdered mother owned slaves before the war, and that Jesse and his brother Frank actively fought to preserve slavery. According to this movie, all those Civil War soldiers were really fighting to decide whether Missouri is a northern state or a southern state ... that's ALL. (Missouri: It's a candy mint! It's a breath mint!) Black people are entirely absent from this movie, except for two glimpses of a pair of beggars, one of whom wears a \"HELP THE POOR\" sign that's very implausibly typeset instead of handwritten. (Some shots of 19th-century newspapers are inaccurate too, with 20th-century type fonts.)This film has a weird flashback structure. There's some very impressive stunt riding (and some fine work by stunt horses), and one excellent montage. I savoured one line of dialogue: 'Some of those boys will never taste beans again.' The movie gets a few facts straight: Agnes Moorehead, as Jesse's mother, conceals her right arm in the scenes following the raid by the agents of Pinkerton (here called 'Remington') in which Jesse James's real-life mother suffered injuries requiring the amputation of her lower arm. Some errors here are pardonable: during his bushwhacking days, the real Jesse James accidentally shot off part of his left middle finger, but Robert Wagner (in the title role here) does not have a stumpfinger. I've seen a photo of Jesse James's real wife; if she had looked half as glamorous as Hope Lange looks in this movie, Jesse James might have stayed home more.There's plenty of revisionism here, and most of the male actors wear 1950s hairstyles. But many of this movie's errors were avoidable. Jesse James's mentor William Quantrill is mentioned several times, but all the actors mispronounce his name. We see Jesse and his wife moving into an elaborate two-storey house (where he will soon die) after paying a rent of $18. Actually, Jesse James's last residence (at 1318 Lafayette Street, St Joseph, Missouri) was a simple one-storey cottage, renting for $14. There was no upper storey ... so, when Jesse James is killed, his wife could not come running from upstairs as Hope Lange does here. (She was actually in the kitchen.)One continuity error: Robert Wagner (with no stunt double) does an impressive job of taking a slug to the jaw and falling over while his hands are tied behind his back ... but when he gets up, the rope binding his wrists has vanished.The screenplay does some weird and unnecessary juggling of dates. Following the Northfield robbery attempt, Jesse says he expects to get home by his birthday. The actual Northfield bank raid by the James Gang (7 September, 1876) was two days AFTER Jesse James's birthday. (Maybe he meant next year's birthday.) Later, we see Jesse and his wife moving into their St Joseph home on a fine summer day, while Jesse tells her what he plans to do when Christmas Eve arrives ... but in real life, Mr and Mrs Jesse James moved into that house on 24 December, 1881 ... so this scene should *BE* on Christmas Eve! These errors were entirely avoidable.Some of the fictionalisations here don't make sense. According to this movie, the Northfield bank raid failed because one (fictional) henchman was late in cutting the telegraph wires. If this had actually happened, it would indeed have hampered the James Gang's getaway ... but it wouldn't have affected the robbery itself, which failed for other reasons.There are good performances here by Jeffrey Hunter (as Frank James), Moorehead, Alan Hale Jnr (as Cole Younger) and by stage actress Marian Seldes in a rare screen role. I was disappointed by Robert Wagner, normally an under-rated actor. Elsewhere, Wagner has proved his impressive range by convincingly portraying heroes, villains and morally ambiguous characters. Here, he can't seem to decide whether to depict Jesse James as a goodie or a baddie ... so he doesn't much bother. John Carradine phones in his performance in a brief role as a fictional jackleg preacher who baptises Jesse and his wife at their wedding. In fact, Jesse James was baptised in childhood by his uncle, a Methodist minister ... but perhaps this second baptism is a topping-up.Jesse James was no Robin Hood. (I doubt that Robin Hood was Robin Hood either, but that's another story.) There is not one single documented instance of Jesse James ever sharing his loot with anyone beyond his own family. After some of his hold-ups, he didn't even split the swag with the rest of his gang. In this movie, Jesse gets gunned down right after he vows to give up his bandit ways forever. In reality, the night before his death, Jesse James and the Ford brothers stole horses that Jesse planned to use the next day in a robbery of the Platte City bank. As preparation for most of his robberies, Jesse James stole horses from local farmers ... the same poor folk who (in the inaccurate legends) were supposedly the beneficiaries of his largesse. I cringed at one scene here, in which the fictional Jesse James is so gol-durn refined that he disapproves of an oil painting which tastefully depicts nudes.'The True (not much!) Story of Jesse James' is wilfully dishonest about a thieving murderer, and likewise dishonest about the Civil War. For the very impressive stunt work, one good montage and a few fine acting turns, I'll rate this obscenely dishonest movie 2 points out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74e5562c12904c46bf8904cb1f17aba3",
            "input": "I'm really surprised this movie didn't get a higher rating on IMDB. It's one of those movies that could easily get by someone, but for romantic comedy \"Moonstruck\" is really in a class by itself. It's setting and ethnic charm are things people seem to take for granted. The casting alone makes it a nearly perfect movie. Few movies in the 1980's were as good as \"Moonstruck\"and it's funny too. **** out of *****",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02ab77ebd729418fbda09ba35e86266a",
            "input": "When I heard about \"Hammerhead\" being released on DVD and finally found it at my local DVD store, I thought \"well, just another cheap monster movie from Nu Image\". Those guys around Boaz Davidson and Avi Lerner produced cheap but very entertaining B - Pictures in the past few months but also some very disappointing movies. So I didn't expect much, especially after having watched the rather disappointing \"Shark Zone\" just a few days before. But \"Hammerhead\" turned out to be an excellent revival of the 1950s monster movies. We have a mad scientist, a group of people in a dangerous situation, screaming women and damsels in distress, man-eating plants and of course we have the creature, a huge mutant mix between a man and a hammerhead shark. Everything you need for an entertaining monster movie. The only thing missing are graphic sex scenes and nudity which you expect in movies of this kind, but since the movie was made for TV it's understandable why these scenes are missing. And it doesn't matter anyway cause \"Hammerhead\" is action and horror entertainment at it's best. There are two reasons why I gave it seven out of ten points, though: First of all, the monster isn't seen very often and the showdown with the destruction of the creature is too fast and poorly done, and secondly, William Forsythe just isn't the right guy for the \"hero\" part and for falling in love with gorgeous Hunter Tylo. Other than that, I can highly recommend this movie for any monster movie fan out there. Grab yourselves a cool drink and some popcorn, watch this movie and have fun. Jasper P. Morgan",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-775569f827c940f190e80fd89032f5f7",
            "input": "Forgive me for stating the obvious, but some films are good and some films are bad. Of course, there are extremes within those two broad categories. Films such as The Godfather, Saving Private Ryan, and Star Wars slot comfortably into the good category. At the other end of the spectrum there are those films that simply don't deserve to be mentioned by name. Occasionally however, someone produces a truly woeful film. A film that should be singled out as a demonstration of how awful a film can be. A film that is more than bad. Such a film is Maiden Voyage.Briefly, Maiden Voyage is a story about a luxury cruise ship that is hijacked by a gang of evil criminals who demand a ransom from an equally evil, scheming ship's owner. Of course, there is an all American hero on board, complete with chiselled jaw and sculptured chest, who saves the day.This is a production that plumbs new depths. Everything about it is bad. The acting, the direction and the so-called plot are breath-takingly poor. In short, it is an insult to the intelligence of any unfortunate viewer. Even an American viewer would be annoyed by its shortcomings.Yes, it's that bad.I will resist the temptation to compose a list of things that angered me about this film. However, its dumber-than-dumb conclusion should serve as an adequate example of what I mean.Imagine in your mind that you are an evil hijacker and you are stood in an open lifeboat on a calm sea. You are in company with the hero who holds a ticking bomb. Said hero throws the bomb to you and dives overboard. What would you do? I don't know about you, but I would throw the bomb as far as I possibly could into the sea. Not this guy. He watches as our hero swims away and then he tries to disarm the bomb with unfortunate (for him) results. Enough said. Such a demise would merit a mention in the Darwin Awards website and might also be a suitably apt conclusion to the production team's lives.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fdc9838b50448d5bdbdc2ddad0e268b",
            "input": "Now this film isn't going to scare anyone, but it was interesting for two reasons - two big reason and a smaller one- well, that's three reasons, isn't it.The first reason this is interesting is the special effects. I found them to be quite interesting and somewhat spectacular. To see the hair growing on Marsha A. Hunt and Sybil Danning was creepy, especially when they were participating in a ménage à trois.Of interest, is the fact that this Marsha Hunt is the famous \"Brown Sugar\" of the Rolling Stones song, and that she was in the infamous nude scene in the London cast of the rock musical Hair.Besides the special effects, there were two other points of note in this film, and they were brought out repeatedly during the closing credits. I lost count, but i swear that Sybil Danning bared those points for us in the closing credits at least a dozen times and maybe many more. Theyu were the most outstanding feature of the film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca88ae5604ec4dbab2f1755b1154fc7f",
            "input": "Not exactly a new story line, but this romantic comedy makes the concept work. A young man(John Cusack) and a drop dead gorgeous woman(Kate Beckinsale)keep meeting by chance and wonder if they are meant for each other. Although both are promised to others...oddly enough they still feel that their soul mate is out there somewhere. A little sappy in some places, but viva la love. Being a romantic I am almost obligated to be riveted. My favorite scene is where Cusack is on the ground and snow starts falling. The finale is almost too sweet, but most deserving. This is not one of Cusack's deeper roles, but who in the hell could not be smitten by Beckinsale. Notable support is provided by Jeremy Piven and Molly Shannon. John Corbett plays the worst role I've ever seen him in. On the other hand Eugene Levy is quirky and funny. Watch this with your soul mate.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50ae17039a7044c68eeaf045bc239dd4",
            "input": "I enjoyed this movie and I had very low expectation due to all the negative reviews I read before going. I went because I was curious as to what all this fuss was about because some of the postings were so angry with this movie and with the Koreans. Oh and it's from Korea which has put out some of my favorite movies. I liked Host but not my absolute favorite. Some of my favorite sci-fi /fantasy movies so you can have a sense of my taste: Mirrormask, Stardust, Serenity, Gattaca, Willow, Matrix, Resident Evil series, LOTR, Stargate, Dark City.It wasn't confusing like everyone said and the monsters looked good and the battles great. There are some holes in the story but didn't really matter. I sort of tune out stuff like that and stopped asking why long time ago when I see summer blockbusters. The Korean legend was interesting, the reincarnation stuff was different, and I thought the main characters suspiciously dressed like Korean actors in other shows. Ethan's(Behr)hair looked so Asian.Yes, it could be better and I hope in the future that Korea, with its unusual quirky sense of life, intense emotions, and unexpected humor, can bring some diversity to the blockbuster genre. Maybe a combination of Host and Dragon Wars in the future?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad9a2852c45146f5b43c80e7c5867311",
            "input": "Many people see this as a classic, but I obviously must have missed something. Life in Anarene, Texas in the early 50's is pretty dull - which means that a movie about life in Anarene, Texas in the early 50's will be pretty dull too! What is it that so many people see in this? Once the last picture show in Anarene closes there really won't be anything to do in town. Duane (Jeff Bridges) makes that point at the end of the movie. But even before it closes there isn't much to do, so basically everything revolves around sex. High school students make plans for how to lose their virginity - sometimes with each other and sometimes with some of the equally bored adults in town. You see, there's not much for them to do either - except to have sex (sometimes with each other and sometimes with the bored teenagers) or to whine about the local high school football team. Three times something happened that I thought was going to add some spark of drama to the movie. Sam (Ben Johnson) dies unexpectedly, but nothing really happens because of that, Sonny (Timothy Bottoms) and Jacy (Cybill Shepherd) elope, but nothing really happens because of that, Joe Bob (Barc Doyle) kidnaps a little girl, but nothing really happens because of that. The only thing that added anything of dramatic value to the movie came at the end with the death of Billy (Sam Bottoms) which really points out the emptiness of life in this pathetic little town, as the men stand around looking at the body debating where to go for breakfast.Peter Bogdanovic filmed this in black and white, which is intended I suppose to point out how grey this town is, but the only thing I found interesting was the early look at actors like Bottoms, Shepherd, Bridges and Randy Quaid. (As an aside it was terrifying to see how much Quaid - in 1971 - actually looks like his character of Cousin Eddie in the National Lampoon Vacation movies.) Classic? I don't think so! 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28d4590ea99947f2b67e896f5eb89c4d",
            "input": "I saw this movie on the BIFFF Festival in Brussel, spring 2004. What a surprise! This German production, a stylish and imaginative shocker, is one of the scariest flic i have seen. Be warned: this is not a joke! This terrorizer has a big cast of good actors (as an example:Peter Martell as a European guru has a strong presence), excellent direction, nice production design, a very good soundtrack and a lot of heavy gore sfx like Italian horror movies in the eighties. Flesh ripped clean to the bone...and the blood runs red ...this savage Heart Stopper will grip you...and give you some dark dreams ... A must-see!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81366591db314a589e78f20580feeeb0",
            "input": "This film is available from David Shepard and Kino on the Before Hollywood There Was Fort Lee, NJ, although that is a shortened version with just the \"behind-the-scenes movie sections. I'm not sure if Blackhawk Films only had a film print of these parts, or they edited out the other scenes. The original Blackhawk version was retitled A Movie Romance. The complete feature does survive, but the preprint for this version had some nitrate decomposition, and a couple of sections looked bad, so that may be why Blackhawk's version was edited.Directed by Maurice Tourneur, the film has Tourneur playing himself, or more likely a caricature of himself. Supposedly, director Emile Chautard and future director Joseph von Sternberg also can be spotted.Country lass Mary (Doris Kenyon) longs for a romantic man to sweep her off her feet. She dreams of a troubadour that will woo her, but is constantly interrupted by the only available local boy, Johnny Applebloom.Meanwhile, a film company from New York (actually New Jersey) is filming a western in the countryside. Mary sees an Indian (in full headdress) and raises an alarm -- spoiling a scene that the movie company is filming. She is immediately attracted to the dashing film star Kenneth Driscoll (Robert Warwick). He encourages her to leave her home and try to become an actress in the big city.When she arrives at the studio, she discovers that everything about the movies is fake. The doors and walls are just flats that are hastily assembled for the set. That lanky walk of the western hero or the happy skip of the heroine are just acting too. The sets are on a big revolving stage, so the angle of the sun can even be manipulated. The black attendant at the studio signs all the movie stars' \"autographed\" photos. The signs on the wall say \"Positively No Smoking\", but everybody smokes anyway. Even the titles of the film (which are illustrated nicely) emphasize everything fake about the movie-making life.Movie star Driscoll is just as disenchanted with the ho-hum of everyday film-making. He makes a temporary split from girlfriend Vivian (June Elvidge) to pursue this \"exciting\" country girl. His plans are dashed when Mary's screen-test is a stinker. We don't get to see the actual film, but only the audience's pained reactions to it.Mary is devastated, but she doesn't want to admit to everyone back home that she was a failure, so she continues to see Driscoll and we she has lunch with him in the studio cafeteria along with other extras dressed as policemen, soldiers, cowboys, etc.Mary decides to stay with Driscoll. At a party with their movie \"friends\", she agrees to marry him although there is not much love between them. Surprisingly, her mother appears, with a cake especially for Mary's birthday. This causes Mary to re-evaluate her future.This film has all kinds of fascinating scenes of studios, movie sets, dressing rooms, editing rooms, etc. If you've always wondered what went on behind the scenes when a silent film was being made, this movie peeks behind the curtain.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-522de1daba614ccc86ba06af9e366226",
            "input": "This movie was on British TV last night, and is wonderful! Strong women, great music (most of the time) and just makes you think. We do have stereotypes of what older people \"ought\" to do, and there are fantastic cameos of the \"sensible but worried children\". Getting near to my best movie ever !",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db601341d1a648e38860f445ca1b424b",
            "input": "Prison is set in Wyoming where work on a new prison has hit a problem so the state board decide to re-open an old state penitentiary that has been closed for 20 years, Warden Eaton Sharpe (Lane Smith) is put in charge. 200 odd prisoners are shipped in & they are put to work fixing the rundown prison up including Burke (Viggo Mortensen) who is ordered to break into the old execution chamber, he duly obliges but when he penetrates the bricked up door an intense beam of light shoots out & all the electrics, gas & fire around the prison goes crazy for a few minutes. Burke has unwittingly unleashed a deadly evil force which is in the mood for some killing & no-one is safe...Directed by Renny Harlin I thought Prison was a poor late 80's horror flick that seemed to forget about the small point of having a story. The script was by Empire Pictures regular C. Courtney Joyner who was responsible for writing such 'classics' as Class of 1999 (1990), Puppet Master III: Toulon's Revenge (1991) & Puppet Master vs. Demonic Toys (2004) amongst other low budget horror crap that even I haven't heard of & seems to take itself very seriously. The biggest problems I have with Prison are that it's far too slow, it's over 30 minutes into the film before the 'evil force' is even released although the pace does pick up towards the end but by then it was too little too late as far as I was concerned, then there's the fact there's no discernible storyline here at all. For a start it never tries to explain why there's an 'evil force' bricked up in the old execution chamber, it never explains why this force decides to kill random inmates when it's supposed to be out on a revenge mission or why it just doesn't kill Warden Sharpe straight away, no explanation is given to where Burke fits into it even though he looks exactly the same as the prisoner who was electrocuted & has come back, there's no real explanation as to how the Warden is connected to everything that's going on apart from two early nightmare sequences in which he seems to be remembering something although it's never revealed what it is or why. To be honest I couldn't really give you a plot synopsis as the film doesn't have a rigid story which it follows all the way through. The character's are dull & forgettable, the murders are few & far between, the pacing is way off, the whole film is a mess & even ghosts can't shoot straight when it comes to trying to shoot the hero. A less than satisfactory way to spend 100 odd minutes, there really are better things you could be doing.Director Harlin's full American flick debut he does a good job & there's a decent atmosphere but after over an hour of constant drab, dull, dark prison cells & corridors I started to get bored. I just think the look of the film is far too repetitive, bland & frankly lifeless. I didn't think it was scary & the gore is pretty tame apart from the best moment in the entire film when a police guard gets killed when a load of barb wire wraps itself around his body & face with a nice close up of his throat being torn open. Other than that there's a burnt corpse & a mangled body which falls from the ceiling & very little else. There is a scene when the Warden burns all the prisoner mattresses in front of them & then makes them stand all night in their underwear in the yard, I was watching this scene & thought that you'd never get away with doing something like that. Over here prisoners have rights & if the Warden did something like that there would be a national outcry from all those humanitarians & every prisoner would sue the Warden, the prison service & the Government for everything they had & they'd win!With a supposed budget of about $4,000,000 Prison actually had a pretty healthy budget although it doesn't really look like it on screen, sure there's a decent cast & the few special effects that are included are good but overall it's set in the same location with limited ambition. Prison was actually shot in a real Wyoming state prison so it certainly looks the business. The acting is alright, Prison proves that sometimes Hollywood stars not only have one crap horror film skeleton in their closets but in the case of Mortensen he has two with this & the awful The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1994) both of which I'm sure he'd like to forget about...Prison is a dull, lifeless, colourless & humourless waste of 100 minutes, despite one good gore scene I didn't like it at all as I actually prefer my films to have a story rather than seemingly random events & incidents cobbled together with no narrative sense.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d252d19056b4a4dafc2e64455b4d40e",
            "input": "Think Pierce Brosnan and you think suave, dapper, intelligent James Bond. In this movie, Brosnan plays against type - and has lots of fun doing so (as does the audience). This is a film about a hired assassin who befriends a harried businessman... and it works!This is a fun movie, with very good scenes (a riveting, on-the-edge Brosnan and a good, compliant \"off\"-the-edge Kinnear have some good lines). My only cavil is that Hope Davis, playing the oh-so-tolerant wife (\"Can I see your gun?\") doesn't appear more often: she could have been a marvellous foil to these men.This movie is like a matador: it plays with the audience, while \"going for a kill\". The ending is awesome because a storyline (with a positive moral!) emerges: this is a frenetic, frantic and fun movie, which does deserve a wide audience.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a43179ea2e664f2c93f0cbf88eaf8772",
            "input": "After too many years of waiting, Anne Rivers Siddons' noted 1979 book \"The House Next Door\" has finally been filmed. The result veers a bit from the novel which, especially in the first story of the trilogy is understandable if unsatisfying as it's a TV film, the whole of which is absorbing and actually very good, just not as great as the book, one of Stephen King's favorites and one of mine as well.With more running time and fewer constraints as a theatrical release, all the richness inherent in the original three-part story of the ominous ultramodern house could have been explored and nurtured, especially the climactic revelation near the very end.Still, the whole cast does well in this thoughtful tale of mindless malevolence. There are a few unnecessary cheap shocks but the growing atmosphere of dread is well developed. Actually, one of the most disturbing scenes involves an abstract painting of the house by its next-door amateur-artist neighbor who is trying to visualize its corruption on canvas.Be sure to read the great novel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9da6c76fb1e242b9ad9215c51d8a7630",
            "input": "I would almost give it 10 out of 10. However, there are some confusing parts as well as sections that are miss-leading which hurt the flow/continuity of the film. The story line is great and well composed; you will definitely want to watch this quietly to fully understand it. The characters are complicated and so is the story line, expect to be given only enough information to stop scratching your head, it's a film where all is explained in the end. The animation is great and the combination of femme fatal and film noir result in a great film that is unlike anything else I've seen in animation. It is a black and white film and its quiet dark in a few scenes so it's worth watching it on a good T.V, or plasma. The character voices do save this film in its English version, but it would have been more convincing if there were some French accents to emphasize that its happening Paris, I enjoyed it more in French with English subtitles. One the whole its well worth buying on DVD or BlueRay if they have it! And personally if you enjoyed this film you might also like; Waking Life & Ghost in a Shell 2 Innocence, this is just a personal suggestion.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-828ccb3b031b422d8e58f66c674db66d",
            "input": "I bought this cheap from the rental remnant at our local store. It was in almost mint condition, and I'd never heard of it before. Clearly nobody else had either.I can't believe my luck. You go through the whole realm of emotions and it attempts to get over a complex message - the very moral and non-triumphalist stance of the Mandela Party, undoubtedly. Despite its enormous length (I had to watch it in two sittings) - it was like a book one couldn't put down. Perhaps the songs are not all that memorable, but the spirit of the thing glows on forever. I cannot understand comments that a musical (clearly designed for stage) is not realistic! I've seen \"South Pacific\" and read the book too, and can guarantee that musical is not realistic compared to the book. I'll treasure this little find until it wears out. One day they'll make this again on a better budget.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea5e2daf93eb43ff954ab099f08320bb",
            "input": "In Cold Blood was one of several 60s films that created a new vision of violence in the Hollywood film industry. Capote coined the phrase \"nonfiction novel\" to describe the book on which this film is based, and the spirit of that form was carried over into the film script, which he co-wrote. Despite the fact that we were well into the era of color film, Richard Brooks elected to present this film in black and white to underscore both the starkness of the landscape and the bleakness of the story. This is the first problem with the TV remake --color changes the tone of the story. In addition, the confinement of shooting a film for TV makes reduces the options of how the shots are framed and focused. As a result, we lose the dramatic clash which makes the second part of the original film (police interviews, trial, imprisonment, and execution) so claustrophobic. On the small screen, it's just another version of Law and Order spin-offs. Hollywood's search for scripts continuously takes it back to movies that were successful in another age. Usually, that's a mistake, and this is no exception.All of the actors are competent. The script is OK. The directing doesn't get in the way. It's just that the movie doesn't work as well as the original precision instrument. It doesn't hook the viewer into the ambivalence toward Smith and Hickock that the original film provokes. At the end of the TV version, we are left with the feeling: \"Ho hum, who cares?\"See the original first, on as large a screen as you can, then watch the TV version simply to understand why the first one was such an important film in 1967.Wouldn't hurt to also go on line and read a bit about Capote and the original book. It will help you to understand the extraordinary effort he put into the material, and also some of the controversy surrounding both the book and the movie.I actually only gave this a 4 because I save the bottom 3 rankings for true bombs--the kind that enrage you about having been sucked into spending an",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a662e6ce6704331af74cc04bd4237ce",
            "input": "I think that most of the folks who have posted comments on this movie don't understand how to watch a movie and/or have little sense of elegance. First, to assess a movie you need to understand the extent to which everything in the film works together. Modern sensibilities demand great drama. No, I don't mean great setting of characters and plots, but they seem to demand emotional trajectories that are greatly tragic or greatly comedic. This is a subtle movie. Its beauty lies in its subtlety (not to be confused with simplicity). Neither the story nor the characters are simple in this movie. It is a beautifully filmed movie that makes the most of combining sensuousness, politics, human weakness, venality...you name it. The world it's set in would be alien and not understood today...a world where if you have it you have to flaunt it NOW and LOUDLY, even if you only think you have it.Many people today don't understand that Victorian society wasn't really Victorian as people understand that term today.This movie helps set the record straight.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e46110bb09345cd89345e13ade44e24",
            "input": "Despite being a huge fan of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers' movies, it wasn't until about 6 years ago that I first saw 'Follow the Fleet'. I knew all the songs from an old Astaire/Rogers record (yes, vinyl) but knew nothing of the plot.Unfortunately, while the songs are catchy and Ginger Rogers' character is sweet and funny, you just can't like 'Bake Baker'. While trying to make up to his longtime partner, he continually sabotages her career. His character doesn't have the usual humour and elan of the other films' Astaire characters.Worth watching for the songs and a great solo tap routine by Ginger Rogers.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5cbebfd3fae44b54986b529065ebe460",
            "input": "As is well-known among long haired youngsters who are incredibly interested in this Herr Graf's silent rants, during summertime aristocrats like to travel to exclusive and distinguished places in order to avoid the heat as well hordes of coarse people taking their ease. Such bizarre travels around the world also happen in \"Three Ages\", a charming and elegant piece of silent work directed by old hands, namely Herr Buster Keaton and Herr Eddie Cline.Obviously this German count liked most the first segment focused on the Stone Age due to the affinity that this aristocrat feels about that ancient time. preferring that to the second segment which takes place during the glory of Rome (It should have included the cause of the fall of the Roman empire, that is to say, Barbarians, or the same thing, Germans). Of course, the third segment takes place during modern times but this Teutonic aristocrat thinks that even 100 years ago should qualify as modern.The leitmotiv that moves Herr Keaton and his companions to travel and endure the strange and hilarious happenings during three different ages, is the search for love, a very complicated subject to understand for aristocrats who prefer the search for money and self interest. Every time that \"Three Ages\" is shown in the Schloss theatre, it is always a pleasure to watch a funny, witty silent film (even for a serious German count), an oeuvre full of gags and gadgets, puns, pratfalls and acrobatics, visual and astounding technical tricks, an absolute silent delicatessen that is perfect to allow one to endure the various and coarse summertime severities.And now, if you'll allow me, I must temporarily take my leave because this German Count must flirt with an old Teutonic heiress who doesn't look her age.Herr Graf Ferdinand Von Galitzien",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af410cb554c044b99f04cbe833d36f20",
            "input": "THE CHOKE (aka AXE in the UK) is a slasher produced supposedly as a straight-to-DVD movie. I say \"supposedly\" because the title of the movie does not have the \"V\" in brackets to indicate that it was a made for DVD movie (even though it does have the appearance of one).The plot is simple – a band is holding a gig in a former meatpacking factory and they are killed one by one.I think most would agree that the movie was never going to be a masterpiece, but this does not excuse the faults here. Even straight-to-DVD movies such as BACHELOR PARTY MASSACRE (which has a very low IMDb rating) have a lot of redeeming qualities and sometimes come off as being one of the so-called \"so bad, they're good\" movies. However, THE CHOKE falls far short of being either a serious slasher (such as HALLOWEEN) or being a \"so bad it's good\" movie (such as THE NAIL GUN MASSACRE).The movie does start off good with a character killed using a drill. The blood effects were very cheesy but understandable given the very low budget. But, from there onwards, it's downhill all the way.There are so many faults in THE CHOKE that I could spend all day talking about them. But, a few obvious ones stand out and I'll go into them.The aforementioned gig that the band holds seems to start off with around 50 people present but after the music stops, there seems to be only around 8 people left (and yet they're all meant to be locked in!).The characters in this movie are not likable at all. Most of the band members are aggressive foul-mouthed morons or just downright weird. No one really cares about what happens to them, and even their supposed friends forget about them when they've been dispatched. The highlight of the movie is the presence of a homeless man who seems to regard the meatpacking factory as some kind of church (seriously!). He spouts some really funny lines for no apparent reason. But sadly, even his presence can't save the movie.There are too many scenes of people walking around and talking without any characterisation. Around 65 minutes of the film is spent watching characters walk around talking. Characters disappear for long periods of time without explanation. As in other straight-to-DVD movies such as CROCODILE and GRIM WEEKEND, the characters spend a lot of time swearing at each other aggressively without any provocation at all. There are plenty of over-the-top outbursts (mainly from the male characters) and one nearly results in a full-blown fight. In fact, the format could be said to go as follows: characters walk around--murder takes place--characters walk around--murder takes place. You get the idea.The dialogue is terrible and it seems that few lines are spoken without the f-word being used. Perhaps this was meant to be funny, but it just comes off as sad. And more to the point, we have all seen this done a thousand times before (usually to much greater effect).The movie is totally devoid of any suspense at all. The dead bodies serve to provide the only indication that the characters are in danger. A maniac is running around loose and yet the characters just behave like total morons. They make little attempt to get out of the factory or find a weapon with which to protect themselves. And much of the time, they don't even pretend to be scared.In the same vein as DRIVE-IN MASSACRE, the killer is not seen at the time the murders are being committed (with the exception of the final murder when the killer's identity is revealed). A random weapon appears out of nowhere to kill the victim in question. There is no one seen stalking the characters at any time. In DRIVE-IN MASSACRE, this served to make the film funny (unintentionally of course), but here it is not funny at all.And, as another reviewer has pointed out, the soundtrack includes music that is very bad, even for those who like punk rock. The extras look uncomfortable dancing to it. The score (at the end, there is no music at the beginning!) consists of a band of Sugarbabe wannabes singing some very bad song that is completely unrelated to the movie.Don't misunderstand the points made in this review. This reviewer likes bad movies (such as THE NAIL GUN MASSACRE and BACHELOR PARTY MASSACRE) as much as the classics (such as HALLOWEEN and Friday THE 13TH). But, it seems that THE CHOKE tried too hard to fit into one of those categories without fitting into either. And even as straight-to-DVD movies go, this is a poor effort.On a positive note, the film does contain some fairly good gory murder scenes. But, when the surviving characters do not take the situation seriously, these scenes lose their importance quickly as the intensity they provide disappears into oblivion.Fans of the traditional 1980s B-movie slashers should take steps to avoid this movie. And fans of the classics such as HALLOWEEN and Friday THE 13TH should do everything in their power to avoid it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-96c39e32077a4f97a6e241d88b5b4d7a",
            "input": "JUDAAI was a bold film by Raj Kanwar at it's time In 1997 when such a topic was damn out of the boxTo give him his credit he does succeed in showing how greed changes a person and to what extent the person can go to get what she wantsThe film however is damn melodramatic, many places ridiculousOne wonders why Anil doesn't buy a TV for his wife? when he earns so much Just to show how poor he is?The twist is well handled but the handling is straight out of 80's The Johny- Paresh comedy which entertains here and there stands out as a sore thumb as it doesn't fit in the storyEven there are several cringeworthy scenesDirection by Raj Kanwar is adequate though at times too melodramatic Music is okay but most songs look forcedAnil does his part well Sridevi is excellent in her part Urmila is decent Amongst rest Kader Khan is as usual Johny Lever is funny, Paresh irritates Farida is decent",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e564ed118094c259a8c54ef50570ef1",
            "input": "This movie is S-L-O-W. Spent most of the movie actually waiting for it to 'begin'.The setting was bleak, the script was bleak, the cinematography was bleak, the plot was bleak, the budget was low (not that all low budget movies are bad, but this one had no redeeming features).The plot was more consumed with a vengeful, slightly deranged hunter than the actual Wendigo which made a very brief appearance toward the end of the movie. This in itself was disappointing as this 'Wendigo' was just a bizarre mix of a tree and a stag. Everything about the movie was uninspiring.The parents of the little boy appeared to be rather aloof and at times seemed completely detached from their son. Whether this was down to bad acting or a bad script I'm not sure, but it only heightened my disappointment and boredom levels.There was no food for thought, nothing to pique an interest. With no real intrigue or chill factor, this movie creaked along so painfully, you just couldn't care less what happened by the end.Wendigo's ambiance reminds me of the dull movie shown at the awards ceremony toward the end of 'Mr Bean's Holiday': a movie which is artistic and nonsensical, trying too hard to to be deep and meaningful, but coming across as pretentious and boring.I would never want to watch this again. I only watched it to the end in the vain hope that something interesting might happen ... but it didn't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ee596fe4221842128b4c1e36e12aa58d",
            "input": "Dressed to Kill (1980) is a mystery horror film from Brian De Palma and it really works.The atmosphere is right there.The atmosphere that makes you scared.And isn't that what a horror film is supposed to do.All the actors are in the right places.Michael Caine is perfect as Dr. Robert Elliott, the shrink with a little secret.Angie Dickinson as Kate Miller, the sexually frustrated mature woman is terrific.Keith Gordon as her son Peter is brilliant.Nancy Allen as Liz Blake the call girl is fantastic.Dennis Franz does his typical detective role.His Detective Marino is one of the most colorful in this movie.There are plenty of creepy scenes in this movie.The elevator scene is one of them.There have been made comparisons between this and Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho (1960).There are some similarities between these two movies.Both of these movies may cause some sleepless nights.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d632940fe22145ecbf30511deec77ccd",
            "input": "This is definitely one of the best kung fu movies ever, and may be one of the best movies ever... It's got a great plot that functions like a puzzle, with lots of intrigue and suspense. This film is full of cat and mouse games and deceptions, with people hiding their identities and their natures. The characters in this film live and breath much more than your average kung fu movie characters. They are all interesting and compelling and the movie does a good job at giving them scenes to show their personality's and desires.The fight scenes play out like little stories and many of them are very original and exciting. It has cool training sequences and martial arts skills that are so awesome they enter the realm of fantasy. There are 5 members of the poison clan each one with his own style that mimics the special skill of a venomous animal. The styles of each of these characters are fun to watch and you can see the techniques they use in training applied during the film... When this happens, The director uses quick cutting back to the training scene to draw a parallel. These cuts are accompanied by music changes and sound effects and the whole thing really works nicely.One thing about this movie that is very original is the way it treats death. The director Chang Cheh was obviously very concerned that the film not trivialize death. This makes some of the scenes in the movie much more effective. We actually care when people are killed in this film. This is because the camera lingers on the horror of death even when the bad guys are killed. Some of the sequences in this movie are truly gut wrenching. When characters go in search of vengeance you really feel their anger and pain.At the same time, this is also a fun movie. It has all the typical things you expect from a traditional kung fu film. There is bad dubbing, The characters are willing to fight at the drop of a hat. Some of the sound effects are hilarious and at times the behavior of the characters is incredibly unrealistic... all this just adds to the greatness of the film.And lets not forget that this director was a visual stylist much more gifted than most of his contemporaries. If you watch this movie closely you will notice that the technical prowess on display is virtuostic. Everything goes by so fast (because of the quick cutting style and the rapid camera movements of the genre) that it is easy to overlook how beautiful the movie really is. The lighting and composition are spectacular at times. The camera work and movement is extremely sophisticated along with very interesting fast paced editing... In the scenes that portray suspense and intrigue for example, imagine Hitchcock moving at about twice the speed. Chang Cheh was truly a master craftsman and artist who knew his genre and was able to produce important material while working within it's confines. He doesn't rattle the boat of the kung fu genre film, but in a subtle way his skills permeate every scene and every shot and they add greatly to the quality of the work. He is an important filmmaker who continues to influence many people.This is the real package A kung fu movie that delivers on every level. It's art, it's trash, it's emotionally moving, and it's fun, it has a true sense of morality, but doesn't allow that morality to get in the way of delivering good action. I recommend it to everybody whether you are a fan of this genre or not.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fdc239b15cf4118b3013462d806da43",
            "input": "When I spotted that Noah Wyle and Ricky Schroder were in the same movie, I was like, score! I admit, I was eager to see the movie. And I have to say, the first fifteen minutes or so were nostalgic in a way. Then it went all down hill. I didn't expect it to be a dump of politically correct civil rights mumbo jumbo. They took every possible controversial topic and threw it into one stupid story. I was appalled that Noah was involved in anything of the sort, especially his role. Nobody with a fully functional brain would actually accept all that crap about the Vietnam War. If anyone really wants to know how Communism was like, sit down and read a book on it. And not one that praises it or is against it, just the cold hard facts.I only watched a few scenes here and there only because I wanted to see Ricky's body, but that was all that interested me. Everything else about this movie irritated me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-56bd46b5cc604e5fbebdf6b7d27e8df9",
            "input": "FORGET CREDIBILITYYou must not expect credibility with action movies where the superhero has to perform an endless string of unbelievable feats, being trodden upon in the process but recovering at lightning speed, and transforming innocuous gadgets in lethal weapons... especially when Renny Harlin is directing.\"CLIFFHANGER \" is no exception. But the movie has numerous assets : breathtaking scenery gorgeously photographed, stunning special and visual effects ( the first five minutes are gripping and give the tone of the film ), excellent musical score, welcome attempts at levity to relieve some of the tension, and a solid cast : two heroes ( Stallone, star and cowriter, has the lion's share of the footage, but the excellent Michael Rooker more than stands his ground ), a charming heroin ( Janine Turner ), and one of the most darstardy bunch of villains ever ( priceless John Lithgow and deceivingly feminine Caroline Goodall, but also Rex Linn - in a longer than usual part and who makes the most of it, Leon, Craig Fairbrass ) Good, solid entertainment then , if no credibility.As Roger Ebert wrote ( about another film )\"It's the kind of movie you can sit back and enjoy as long as you don't make the mistake of thinking too much.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18c0f9449e8d4945886a4f3db44ad44c",
            "input": "this movie has no plot, no character development, and no budget. it really sucks to put it in short terms. Since there is no development for the movie, it really can't even be looked as trying to be artistic or trying to make a statement against torture. Which leaves two other reasons to possibly watch it. To be shocked or to get off on it like a sick little freak. Well it falls short here too. The girl's reactions just seem dumb. it's extremely easy to tell that it's fake (honestly professional wrestling looks more realistic than the crap they try to get by with in this movie. They throw innards on her, but she's asleep for most of it, so it's just kinda dumb. The only really kind of worthwhile part is the end when they quickly cut from scene to scene just before the needle goes into her eye. But honestly the girl is extremely ugly and everything is incredibly fake, with the exception of the eye. if you want a good movie about torture, go watch Hostel and Hostel 2. Not only do they both contain realistic violence, but there is also an actual storyline that draws you in and makes you care about the people. Plus the tow movies really work on a deeper level considering themes like American fears of foreigners, issues of morality, testing how far a person can go, human instincts vs. civilization, and many other things. Plus they are carefully written and contain some good humor when the story isn't focused on the violence. These are much better choices over this piece of crap",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ceb1e868cfd4afe827f11a6c014d30e",
            "input": "This might be unbelievable, but this movie has grossed $878,138 in Russia! It's shown in almost all cinema theaters and still running! Well, I have no idea why distributors put their eye on this particular uh \"movie\", which had almost no screening around the world. That's some kind of enigma! Haha! Maybe it was based on the fact that another movie, \"Pledge This\" with Paris Hilton, which was as well released only DVD almost everywhere, had major screenings in Russia and grossed more than 1mln$. Besides, both movies had a lot of promotion, like there were the banners all over the city, TV commercials and etc. Speaking about movie, I'd say it's dull and absolutely boring. It could be better, really. Even if it has Jessica Simpson.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7a6cafde6a04f96839e93c21adf18c3",
            "input": "Have just seen the Australian premiere of Shower [Xizhao] at the Sydney Film Festival. The program notes said it was - A perfect delight -deftly made, touching, amusing, dramatic and poignantly meaningful. I couldn't agree more. I just hope the rest of the Festival films come up to this standard of entertainment and I look forward to seeing more Chinese films planned to be shown in Sydney in the coming months.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48b167c1f67e4982b0386a12d636bdea",
            "input": "My first exposure to \"Whale Music\" was the Rheostatics album of the same name, that I bought around 1993. I was reading the liner notes and the band said the album, which remains in a prominent place in my collection, was inspired by Canadian author Paul Quarrington's book.I picked up the book a few months later and devoured it! An amazing read! I have since re-read the book numerous times, each time finding some new element to Desmond and his desire to complete the Whale Music.I found the film in 1996, on video. I haven't had a lot of good experiences with Canadian film, but this one worked for me. The role of Claire could have been cast differently, but overall I think that Paul Quarrington's vision was transfered nicely from the book to the screen.Maury Chaykin gives a moving performance as the isolated genius. The movie deals with family relationships, love, and finding someone who understands. I would strongly recommend \"Whale Music\" to not only music fans, but anyone who has ever lost something or someone, and tried to find their way back to the world.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-44c0bcf986ae4886a2de6e2dbe6378a1",
            "input": "Sometimes it takes a film-making master like Kubrick to bring that extra little something, that unique, untractable and elusive ingredient that transforms a great movie or a great script into a masterpiece, one for the ages.It's not just that Stephen King's story has enough meat and potatoes making it difficult for even the most workmanlike of directors to miss. Heck, even King himself didn't fare so bad. It's how Kubrick perceives King's universe, how he transforms the page into screen time, that renders THE SHINING both a visual feast and a compacted masterclass in directing.Kubrick's miss-en-scene is, as usually, terrific. The movie progresses with a brisk, sharp, lively pace, even though it's neither fast nor heavily edited and it clocks at no less than 160 minutes. The camera prowls through the lavish corridors of the Overlook Hotel like it is some kind of mystic labyrinth rife for exploration, linear tracking shots exposing the impeccably decorated interiors in all their grandeur. There's a symmetry and geometrical approach in how Kubrick perceives space that reminds me very much of how Japanese directors worked in the sixties. As if what is depicted is inconsequential to how all the different elements are balanced inside the frame.Certain images definitely stand out. The first shot of Jack's typewriter, accompanied off screen from the thumps of a ball, like drums of doom coming from some other floor or produced by the typewriter itself as though it is an instrument of doom all by itself, later on proving to be nothing short of just that. A red river flowing through the hotel's elevators in slow motion. Jack hitting the door with the axe, the camera moving along with him, tracking the action as it happens instead of remaining static, as though it's the camera piercing through the door and not the axe. The ultra fast zoom in the kid's face thrusting us inside his head before we see the two dead girls from his POV. And of course, the bathroom scene.Much has been said of Jack Nicholson's obtrusive overacting. His mad is not entirely successful, because, well, he's Jack Nicholson. The guy looks half-mad anyway. Playing mad turns him into an exaggerated caricature of himself. Shelley Duvall on the other hand is one of the most inspired casting choices Kubrick ever had. Coming from a streak of fantastic performances for Robert Altman in the seventies (3 WOMEN, THIEVES LIKE US, NASHVILLE), she brings to her character the right amounts of fragility and emotional distress. A terrific and very underrated actress.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-596f28d6d2694d179fcda28ece157bc2",
            "input": "THE SEVENTH SIGN has a great opening hook as the Israeli defence force come across a terrorist base . This is the type of hook that is a must when writing a script , it grabs the reader / audience and the introduction of David Bannon as he rents a room from Abby and Russell Quinnn telegraphs the point that this is a man who`s not who he says he is . However after the great opening third I found the rest of the movie confusing and uninvolving with a large number of plotholes and isn`t all that different from umpteen other supernatural thrillers that I`ve seen",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4dd881f706c4eefafb2fa1720699b75",
            "input": "I went to the cinema with two of my friends, and picked this movie out of hat, totally not knowing what to expect. And it turn out into a very enjoyable, die-laughing experience! It's an excellent movie with very unexpected story, very good dialogs and crazy humor. All characters are obviously made in \"Alan Ford\" (italian satiric comic) style, but that haven't bothered me for a second. In fact this kind of loser-bums line-up made a movie quite unique and interesting. Sam Rockwell gave very good and convincing role, Willian Macy too, Clooney is hardly recognizable and brilliant. But real star is actually Guzman. He made a role of his life in this movie! The scene when his character Cosimo dies in the movie, is so hilarious that it made me choke and almost die with him! Highly recommended for all \"Alan Ford\" fans!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63e06e258b814acdac7b235d3cef0384",
            "input": "Many people like this movie and many more love it, but it seems that it is all for the wrong reasons. Scarface should be liked and loved but not in the way it has been or is.Many people say the acting was over-the-top, but who better to do an over-the-top character than Al Pacino. To say that Pacino went over-the-top in here would be an understatement. Yet he does it so well, he just brings the inner devil out of you so well. His character Tony Montana was not such a great guy to begin with but his thirst for power just bring his sickness of greed to another level; an inhumane level. Sure at times Pacino seems to be a bit cartoonish and surreal but that does not at all to me seem to be a liability at all. The supporting cast served its job very well. Michelle Pfeiffer was not really at her best but she certainly fit the role she played. On the other hand Steven Bauer was at his best, still he is Steven Bauer. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio was good and like Michelle Pfeiffer fit her role very well. Robert Loggia I have always enjoyed watching in just seeing him yell. Other than Pacino they were not really any standout or memorable performances. Everybody just seemed to fit their roles by being there. They did not fit in perfectly but were convincing enough.Brian De Palma did a very good job directing this movie. Whenever an actor is able to become larger than life with his performance some credit should be given to the director and I will certainly give De Palma that. Brian De Palma, though not given the respect, is a very versatile director by my count. He knows how to direct movies according to their genres, but that at times has not turned out well. In here it does, this is by all counts a gangster movie but few are much better than this one because of De Palma.The writing was great it was just pure Oliver Stone. When I saw the credits at the end of this movie and saw that Oliver Stone had written this I was not the least bit surprised. That is a testament to him though. I have always though of him as a great writer and to me he proves this once again with Scarface. Nobody knows how to write a surreal reality for a movie than Oliver Stone.The music was good but not that great. It is certainly not my favorite from Giorgio Moroder. The music was a little bit too 80s-ish for me but it didn't annoy me. The cinematography was good, not amazing but really who cares with a movie like this.This has probably been one of the most influential movies in the past 25 years but as mentioned before it is for the wrong reasons. People should realize that the character of Tony Montana is no hero, he is a monster. He is not inspiring in anyway. He is greedy, bloodthirsty, uneducated and self consumed. Yet he is a role model to many people because he is in some way or another a rebel but probably most of all because he is a deluded gangster. A vigilante would be like Mother Tereasa next to Scarface.The good thing about this movie though is that it shows that the Tony Montanas' are not the real problem. If we or the people of authority would want to shut people like him down we could do it but we don't. In a freaky twisted way he is a necessity of our society. He is somebody you could blame everything on and fell better about yourself doing it. The Tony Montanas' of this world are the scapegoats of our society. This in no way excuses people like him. Instead it is more of a reminder that we shouldn't excuse or allow ourselves to do bad things just because we measure up or think we measure up compared better to a gangster or drug dealer. I love this movie because it is more than a corruption movie, it is a movie that in a strange way makes you self reflect.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ca32ea8dcbf407cbc0b5ce3273b4f42",
            "input": "A gave it a \"2\" instead of a \"1\" (awful) because there is no denying that many of the visuals were stunning, a lot of talent went into the special effects and artwork. But that wasn't enough to save it.The \"sepia\" toned, washed out colors sort of thing has been done before many times in other movies. Nothing new there. I can see there were some hat-tips to other old, classic movies. OK. No problem with that.But a movie has got to be entertaining and interesting, not something that would put you to sleep.The story line and the script of this movie WAS awful, the characters two dimensional. Slow moving. Some of the scenes were pretty to look at, but ultimately, as a whole, it was quite boring, I couldn't recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ab284f96cd14d8dadbf7fe155ac938c",
            "input": "I always follow the Dakar, so when my husband bought Charlie's 'Race to Dakar' DVD home I couldn't wait to watch it! Of course we'd seen the broadcast of the race when the actual race was on, but that never gives the background and specific teams.If you watched Long Way Round then you won't be surprised by the language which frankly I find more amusing than offensive.I think the only thing that annoyed me about the DVD was Charlie's hair, but he had it styled before Dakar so my feminine need for neatness was assuaged; tho' I could have lived without the 'flame' undies lol As with LWR, the preparation was every bit as interesting as the race itself. I nearly cried when Charlie broke his hand, and winced at every bruise he sustained while training....and of course the death of Andy Caldicott...that was an appalling tragedy, but then every year there's something.Russ drives me nuts, although his attitude has improved a thousand times from the argumentative cynic he was in LWR. It's great to see him get along so well now with Charlie.What I learned from this odyssey was - 1. never let Scorpion prepare your vehicle for ANYTHING! - they had months to prepare the X5, and still the day before the team left for Lisbon, Scorpion had only done half of things that needed to be done, and the vehicle was a pain throughout the whole race; 2. the Dakar organizers need to put a lot more work into their rider/driver retrieval plan - leaving Matt (and presumably a large number of other riders/drivers out to dry the way they did was nothing short of culpable negligence; 3. Charlie has an endearing enthusiasm for 'rough and tough' adventure but needs to toughen up a lot to really perform as he'd like; and finally, 4. Charlie and Ewan are planning another of these epos called the Long Way Down in 2007, and I can't wait to get my hands on it! :D If you love bikes and/or genuinely nice blokes 'having a go', you have to watch this, I guarantee you love it. It's very entertaining.In conclusion, to Simon Pavey - you sir are a hero, I was so impressed by the your 'quiet achiever' manner and the fact that you actually finished.....just incredible considering what an monumentally difficult race it is. And to Charlie, Matt and the rest of the team - full marks for pulling it off. To think that a relatively green team could have achieved so much is truly admirable. You're all wonderful.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae1e26f4f1c34b62afb977de4cd40b67",
            "input": "Hm. While an enjoyable movie to poke plot holes, point out atrocious acting, primitive (at best) special effects (all of which have caused me to view this movie three times over the past six years), Severed ranks among the worst I've ever seen. I'm never sure who the protagonists are, all I know is that the killer uses a portable guillotine, as seen in the dance floor murder scene. All in all, I don't really like the movie, because only the first 30 minutes are enjoyable, the rest is a mishmash of confusing dialog and imagery that fail to progress the story to a logical conclusion (which I can't remember anyway).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4583fb767c564ca4a455ed1aa7904d0b",
            "input": "This movie starts out with a certain amount of promise; but, in my view, begins to lose it when the protagonist kidnaps the good Samaritan who comes to his aid when his car breaks down. That this well-meaning stranger begins to fix his car while he is away making a phone call is implausible enough, but that she is one of the few people in the country who can help him put his family's life back on track is the type of coincidence beginning writers are warned against using in their stories.I found this movie average at best. Art direction could have been much better, as could have been cinematography. The acting was good, and so was Eva van der Gucht's singing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72bed352c83544ecba4b96c67660babc",
            "input": "This is what makes me proud to be British. This is by far the funniest thing on TV. The league consists of Jeremy dyson, Steve pemberton, mark gatiss and the lovely Reece shearsmith. Totally underrated, this horror-comedy is perfection. The characters are iconic and the catchphrases bizarre, \"Hello Dave\". It is a comedy that everyone simply must watch.The best thing about the league of gentlemen is that it is always fresh, and always pushing the boundaries. It does not need to rely on catchphrases(unlike little Britain) for it to be funny. the fact that the league are willing to kill off arguably their most famous and iconic characters, shows us that they've got balls of steel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aafeb6f4a5934f359492da4c1c4b4330",
            "input": "It's like what other Dracula movies always do, the minions of Dracula always on Dracula's side, which is what disappointed me at the ending. Regardless the person wants to stay a vampire or not, I would like to see something like in the first movie that the minion fights against her master. It is much interesting (since you can almost predict how the story goes) than just either the priest or D. win the game (we need some surprising plots!).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01dd761a6c6e4259baae985e0e1529ee",
            "input": "If the very thought of Arthur Askey twists your guts, don't worry, you can still watch and love The Ghost Train, like the equally marvellous Back Room Boy, it is a film that is simply too damn good to be sunk by a single performance, even that of the lead actor. Personally, I love Askey, perhaps it's because I go into his world, rather than unreasonably expecting him to come into mine, which is a mistake too many people make. The Ghost Train is so intensely atmospheric that you couldn't conceivably watch it without being amazed at the deep, dark world it transports you to, it is immersive in a way that few cheap and cheerful flag-wavers managed to be during the desperate early '40s and it's a film that I would imagine few people have ever watched just the once. The cast are, without exception, extraordinarily good, perhaps Linden Travers lays it on a bit thick, but against the backdrop of a lonely railway station in wartime, she could hardly play a nutter and not stand out. The sad passing of the lovely Carole Lynne earlier this year broke the last link we had with this incredible film and now it really is in the past, but waiting patiently for us to press play.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f293f723282943a082064bb679c146e6",
            "input": "This film was amazing. It is an inspiring piece of cinema. The characters are fully developed through the truth in which Director, Lucy Walker brings to the film. I highly recommend this to any one looking for that special film that shows the humanity in the human condition. Lucy Wlaker showcases the landscape beauty. This film id a true example of man vs. nature and sometimes man vs. man. The inner turmoil and triumph is tremendous in its subject matter. The subject of how the Tiebtans view blindness as a sign of demons is interesting. This film sheds light on a particular culture that has never been showcased. Lucy Walker has given Erik Weihenmayer a voice when he would have not normally been heard. Thank you Lucy for being true to your vison as a filmmaker.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0d0d2f8b8b04d799de1fdcca7d4dd90",
            "input": "I borrowed (slightly modified) title from some other comment. I have to say, that as i usually don't like relationship series, I really did liked this one. Great characters, interesting and not cliché story, good acting, good and again not cliché (which in case of dialogs is rather rare) dialogs ... It is really interesting, how the characters cross paths with each other, and sometimes knowingly, sometimes more or less at random influence each others lives. But unfortunately, as we say in our country - do you know how do you recognize a good US series? It is the one that got canceled before the end of the first season. Sure, it isn't always true, but ...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e5c0971f6404e9ebb0eca8d3b16780b",
            "input": "Despite what a lot of other people thought about the first movie, I really liked it. This one however. How to sum it up in one word?: This movie is (and here comes the word): CRAP!But let's look at it part by part: Here is the plot: Finally the old queen has been removed from her castle, but her successor: Snow white has problems of another sort: The Court-Jester, Father of her son, has gone astray, as the super, Spliss, goes to the extreme, to battle his gray hair and sells the royal offspring for some blond and full hair. In her desperation Snow white seeks the help of Bubi (Otto Walkees),who must first find his other six dwarf companions and then try to find the royal offspring or at least try to find the name of Rumpelstiltskin.The whole plot seems to have been written on a weekend, where the writers were very drunk but were just under pressure from the studio to write the screenplay. Yes, there are some good jokes. Even for fans of the first part, or for fans of any of the other actors, it's really not worth buying the the DVD. Believe me. The only thing, that at least kind of saves the movie from complete oblivion, are the performances of some of the actors. That's why I gave the move 3/10. Sadly, the script is so bad that none of the actors or all of them combined can make up for the bad story.For example, at one point, they even cross over in our reality, and sadly.. they don't do anything funny while being here. Still, a lot of great actors in this movie: Otto Waalkes, Ralf Schmitz, Martin Schneider, Nina Hagen, Cosma Shiva Hagen, (Especially funny): Rüdiger Hoffmann as the mirror, Helge Schneider and many more but sadly all these comedians aren't able to bring this really bad script to life. Maybe it is a treat for some hardcore fans but for regular movie goers or by now DVD Renters or buyers it's not worth the money. I even regret renting the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e27a0f935bf45259ec59a7809837efa",
            "input": "This movie took my breath away at some points, I simply loved it! I admit that the character dialogs and storyline could have been done a bit better, but hey, this is just a simple (short) story of a couple of guys trying to slain a dragon, there's nothing more to it!The overall design, atmosphere, the beautiful landscapes... it's all just magical! They've put a lot of love in this movie. Character designs were great and funny. A bit Tim Burton-ish if you like. I can recommend this movie to anyone interested in great design, displayed in a simple small, but lovely story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aec3a66302674da09593c887167bc780",
            "input": "This show had a lot of hype but I didn't know about it until the midseason (season 1). Someone even recommended the show to me. But I decided that if I was going to watch it, I was going to wait until the end of the season so I could watch it in bulk. Due to the show's format, I'm happy I waited. I imagine it would have been fairly annoying have nearly every episode end in the middle of some cliff hanger then have to wait another week to find out what happens in the next second of the story.Somehow, this show has managed to throw in too much sex. Jason will have sex with pretty much anything that moves. Right after he finds out that one woman he had sex with was killed, he's in bed with another woman the next night! Then Tara and Sam get it on, despite each of them knowing that Sam is in love with Sookie. And for some reason, Sookie gets mad when she later finds out about it--even though she's sleeping with a vampire. One of the problems with the show, is that it doesn't do a good job of making you care about the characters. I really didn't care for Jason at all. Along with his endless pursuit of tale, he was rude to the people who actually were concerned for him. After a few episodes, I wouldn't have minded if he got killed somehow. For that reason, I was for the most part uninterested in the murders until Sookie's Grandmother became a victim (since the first two were more closely involved with Jason).Then once Sookie and Bill have sex, the story gets a few more subplots. Tara's mother wants an exorcism, then the exorcist lady tries to convince Tara that she should have one to remove her own demon. I wasn't so much bothered by the whole exorcism thing as I know there are some people who really believe in that stuff. However, they waste little time in showing that is it a farce right after Tara spends about $1300 on exorcisms for her and her mother. At other points, some of the developments happen too fast. Jason continues being a jerk, trying to sell his Grandmother's stuff to buy vampire blood, which apparently is the new crack or something. In his search he finds this girl who will do V (vampire blood) with him. They get high, and within three days fall in love with each other and kidnap a vampire for a constant source of V. Another example is when Bill has to go to a vampire tribunal. He's only gone for two days before Sookie starts to feel abandoned and start to wonder if he thinks \"vampire politics\" are more important than her.Subtlety is not this show's strong suit. It doesn't take a genius to figure out something is going on with the local dog. Although my assumption wasn't dead on, it wasn't that much of a surprise. But the finale two episodes was where it really got annoying as it just shoved all the developments in your face as if you couldn't possibly figure the out for yourself. When Tara gets into the car accident, the naked lady's face with the pig is clearly shown, and was easily recognizable when she shows up at the jail for the bailout. As if that wasn't enough, they later show the lady again with the pig at her house. Then it's time to wrap up the murder story. At the end of the penultimate episode, it's revealed that Renee is not who he says he is and most likely is the killer. In the final episode, they shove Renee being the killer in your face. Sookie remarks that it's odd that Renee's thoughts don't have an accent. I thought that was fine, as it adds to Renee being a fraud. But the next scene is full of incriminating evidence against Renee. They show that Renee has the tape of Maudette with the vampire and his fiancée finds a tape in one of Renee's boxes about how to fake a Cajun accent. At this point it was just ridiculous. I mean WE GET IT!!! So blah blah blah stuff happens. Bill almost kills himself while failing to save Sookie, who still manages to kill Renee. They start to set up season 2 by leaving unfinished issues. The naked pig lady and Sam have a history, Lafayette has gone missing and might have been killed. Jason is in the process of being brainwashed into being a religious nut by some anti-vampire church--which makes me care about him even less.It's almost surprising to see how many people absolutely love this show. I think I just expected this show to be better. I'm interested in seeing what happens in season 2, but if I watch it, I'll most likely wait for the season completion.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd71bf2426c84784bdd2d08c032a675a",
            "input": "Even the first 10 minutes of this movie were horrific. It's hard to believe that anybody other than John Cusack would have put money into this. With a string of anti-military/anti-war movies already being destroyed at the box office, it's almost inconceivable that a studio of any kind would want itself associated with this script.At first, it may have seemed like some kind of politically motivated derivative of Grosse Point Blank with Akroyd and Cusack(s) all over again. But only about 90 seconds into the movie, it becomes obvious that this is a talentless attempt at DR STRANGELOVE.I liked so many of Cusacks movies that I thought I would risk seeing the DVD of this one. I have to say that I don't know if Cusack is sane enough for me to even watch another feature starring him again unless somebody else can vouch for it. Cusack seems to be so irreparably damaged by his hatred for George Bush and the Iraq war that he is willing to commit career suicide. Tom Cruise was never close to being this far gone. Not even close.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7713029953c647109c6def0ca194ad99",
            "input": "They must issue this plot outline to all wannabe filmmakers arriving at the Hollywood bus station. They then fill in the blanks and set their story in whatever hick town or urban ghetto from which they just arrived. You know exactly what this movie is about from the opening shot, four young boys playing in grainy slow motion, accompanied by voice over narration. Next stop after the bus station must be to buy stock footage of four young boys playing in grainy slow motion. Once they're grown, it's easy to spot the writer/director among the four. He's the quiet, contemplative, long-haired one who is never seen without his composition book tucked in his pants. This means that his superb writing talent will be his ticket from Hickville to Hollywood. Only there's no writing, or directing talent on display here. And if you still can't figure out which one he is, here's a hint: The auteur and his character have the same middle name. It took over an hour to figure out that these twenty-something men were supposed to still be in high school. What looked like a prison was apparently a high school, the warden turned out to be the principal. Once more, the poor, misunderstood rebel can pound everyone in the movie into the pavement, murder and pillage, but is powerless to stand up to his alcoholic father. How about hitting back, kid, like you do everyone else? Numerous fist fight scenes for no apparent purpose. Howlingly bad dialogue. Many scenes badly out of focus. Cartoon characters keep popping up as bit players and extras, drawing unintentional laughs from the premiere audience. Overacting in the extreme. And if you don't quite get the self-important speeches, or the slow-motion scenes, just listen to the overbearing music. It will clue you in and what you're supposed to feel. Poor Marisa Ryan must be racking up lots of frequent flier mileage as she travels around the country working in these amateur regional films. The biggest sin is that the audience is supposed to feel sympathy for kids who gun down old ladies, run over puppies chained to a tree, rob and steal, all the while complaining about their sad, sorry lives. But if only we could get out of this hick town and go to college. Yeah, that's the ticket. Why is it that every twenty-something filmmaker believes that his life so far is so important, so interesting, that the world can't wait to see it onscreen? If this movie is as autobiographical as it seems, then the auteur better be looking over his shoulder for policemen bearing fugitive warrants.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bc80949baf940f8a7316da71c2b239d",
            "input": "I absolutely adore the book written by Robin Klein, so I was very excited when I heard that a movie based on the book was in the making.But I was severely disappointed with the movie when I did see it because it didn't capture what I loved about the book - the absolutely ridiculously funny Erica and the interesting way in which she views the world.From the start of the movie, I realised that things weren't the same as I had imagined in the book. So, I just went along for the ride. It wasn't all that bad, I guess. Miss Belmont was totally different to what I had imagined her to be! I didn't think she would be one to smoke and drink - Jean Kittson, who plays her, is hilarious!On it's own, I thought the movie and it's actors/actresses in it did a good job, but alas, I'm such a fan of the book (one of my all time favourite books) that I couldn't help but feel disappointed =P",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33026cdb54ab4d5bb1543a91f97d128f",
            "input": "This film is awful. The screenplay is bad, the is script mediocre, and even the sex scenes are worthless. The thrill and intrigue of the original film are completely lacking. This movie was shot in a dark, shadowy and monochromatic style (a la \"War of the Worlds\"), which is so disappointing after the beauty of the original film. Greg Morrisey's brooding character displays one facial expression throughout the film. The twists and turns of the original plot are woefully lacking here; the few that do exist are simply anticlimactic. The only highlight is Sharon Stone's performance as Catherine Tramell, faithfully continued in this sequel, but it isn't enough to make up for the other shortcomings. The only circumstance under which a \"Basic Instinct 3\" should be made would be if Michael Douglas agrees to join the cast.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-498ea8610e334fda8fef57a2aa2caee4",
            "input": "Larry Buchanan. Yep, same guy who did \"Attack of the THE Eye Creatures\" and two (count 'em: TWO) conspiracy movies about Marilyn Monroe. He's to blame, here.Adding onto his ever-growing pile of folders left over from Oliver Stone's \"eh-I-grew-out-of-it\" conspiracy drawer, here's \"Down On Us (i.e.- \"Beyond the Doors\") which is the working definition of historical inaccuracy.Forget everything you THOUGHT you knew about Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin and Jim Morrison, says Big Lar', cuz this is the real deal! Y'see, the three big names in rock of the '60s were KILLED BY THE GOVERNMENT because they were subversives or counter-productive to Truth, Justice and the American Way, or sumpthin' like that there. I knew it all along.Anyway, three people (Chatman, Meryl, Wolf) who look eerily like their real life shadows (that is, if you completely close your eyes, turn your backs and walk five miles away from them) show that instead of their recorded deaths, the good old US of A put hits out on them! Yep, it's the truth!Man, I cannot believed I watched this movie. It's facts, when not stretching credibility to the snapping point, are ludicrous; the acting makes TV commercials look like high drama and if you honestly watch it through to the end, you deserve the \"twist\" ending. You really, really do; I swear. Genius.But like the man said: \"Rock and roll is dead - long live rock and roll.\"Not this flick, though.No stars for \"Down on Us\". And that's the movie audience describing the film, by the way....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cef3049fc26f4a1681500523da75ad54",
            "input": "\"The Haunted World of Edward D. Wood, Jr.\" is the definitive documentary on the life of the man who brought us such movies as \"Glen or Glenda\", \"Bride of the Monster\", and, of course, \"Plan 9 from Outer Space\". This exquisite film far exceeds where other documentaries, such as \"Look Back in Angora\" and \"The Plan 9 Companion\", failed. It rounds up his surviving entourage, many of whom have passed away since filming, and gives an honest examination of Ed Wood and his work. Nostalgic in the fact that it looks back at the darker corner of yesteryear Hollywood, sentimental in its treatment of the director (down to the haunting music), this documentary is an absolute must-see for anyone who loves the director who so failed in his day. The entire two hours of the film lovingly and retrospectively pieces together Ed's life and untimely death for the viewer. Best watched at 3 am while wearing an angora sweater.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1623900a334a494399e249b9e5853603",
            "input": "Sort of family parody blending \"An Officer And A Gentleman\", \"Heartbreak Ridge\", \"Full Metal Jacket\" (and without doubt other movies I am not able to remember now) into a rather dull movie, with some bright spots. The gags are always there where you would expect them, and Damon Wayans's lines are, well, predictable. As I said, unfortunately this movie never surprises you...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d986a5505a68431f8f38d5fe45318c3d",
            "input": "This show will succeed because it appeals to all adults no matter where they are in their relationship. As a man married for 26 years, I empathize with Patrick Warburton's character: he loves his wife, but he assumes she knows that. I also enjoy his monotone delivery; never gets too excited or too low. A nice ensemble of characters. This will be a nice addition to the Monday night line-up.I don't know how David Spade will be in his role. He is best enjoyed in small doses. He also seems a little old to still be trolling for women.I enjoyed the pilot and I look forward to seeing how the series develops.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9875b8081ce4b7099520b0d9ebd7eb0",
            "input": "The only previous Gordon film I had watched was the kiddie adventure THE MAGIC SWORD (1962), though I followed this soon after with EMPIRE OF THE ANTS (1977); he seems to be best remembered, however, for his sci-fi work of the 1950s.Anyway, I happened upon this one in a DVD rental shop: hadn't I noticed Orson Welles' unmistakable figure on the sleeve, I probably wouldn't even have bothered with it – since I know the film under its original title, NECROMANCY! I'd seen a still from it on an old horror tome of my father's: the actor's presence in a film about diabolism seemed like a great idea which couldn't possibly miss, but the end result – particularly in this bastardized edition – is a disaster! I honestly felt sorry for Welles who looks bored and, rather than in his deep and commanding voice, he mutters the inane demonic invocations almost in whispers!! The plot is, basically, yet another retread of ROSEMARY'S BABY (1968): a couple is invited to a remote community under false pretenses and soon discover themselves to be surrounded by diabolists. The girl, played by Pamela Franklin, ostensibly has supernatural powers (passed on from her mother, who appears intermittently throughout to warn her – though, as delivered in an intense manner through clenched teeth, the latter's speeches end up being largely incoherent and the fount of immense hilarity every time she appears!) and is expected to revive Welles' deceased young son from the dead!! For what it's worth, Franklin – a genre regular, right down from her debut performance in THE INNOCENTS (1961) – isn't bad in her role (which requires some nudity and experiences several semi-eerie hallucinations during the course of the film); hubby Michael Ontkean, however, isn't up to the challenge of his John Cassavetes-like character. Some of the other girls look good as well – notably Lee Purcell, whose belated decision to help Franklin in escaping from town eventually proves her undoing.Events come to a head in an incredibly muddled climax, which sees the Satanists ultimately turning on Franklin and have her take the revived boy's place in the coffin (that's gratitude for you!). While the added scenes do stick out (the hilarious opening ceremony and other would-be erotic embellishments), the overall quality of the film would have still been poor without them; then again, this particular version is further sunk by the tacked-on electronic score – which is wholly inappropriate, and cheesy in the extreme!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fdaefcf29dc4176bb42cca0464d1ea4",
            "input": "In the Hollywood west those trail hands were a rough bunch who when they came to town, partied pretty hardy. After all trail driving was a lonely business back in the day before railroads got to all parts of the USA. The drovers who worked for trail boss Gil Favor as played by Eric Fleming were no different. But Fleming was a man of all business, he had a job to do and hired a top crew to do it. With the long run of Rawhide and the fact that the regulars stayed with it for the most part, we got to know all the drovers at some point. A some point story lines were focused around all of them, though the bulk were with Fleming and Clint Eastwood's character Rowdy Yates, the number 2 guy with the herd.Clint Eastwood's western image was molded by Rawhide, it's a shame that these are not shown more often. Probably because they were done in black and white. Had this been an NBC show, this would have been done in color like Bonanza and be running as often as those shows are. We'd get to see a lot more of a man who became a move legend.Ironically enough it was Eric Fleming who left the show before it closed to do films. He did a few them and was hoping the show would give him a bankable movie name. Sadly he was killed on a movie location doing an action film, drowned in a river. Had he lived he might have become a name like Eastwood's.Clint took over as trail boss in the last season and then the show completed its run. And he of course became the icon he is today and not just in the western genre.Rawhide was a tough western who had some tough guys in it. No frills in this one, these were working cowboys just doing a job and battling the elements and whatever situations they were thrown into every year.They really don't make television series like these any more. What a pity.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cbbe6c265ea34375b2250ddad8237a25",
            "input": "Why me? Why should I be subjected to such slaughter of what could have made an interesting plot?! At least if I can warn other people off, it will have been worthwhile.I had to watch this horrible movie for a college course. Otherwise, I would have looked at the synopsis on the back of the thing and steered clear. The movie was slow, had PAINFULLY little character development, and centered around the idea that a creepy little white man can become cool if he hangs out with an LA-style token black man.If you want to experience the stereotypical LA feeling of dizzying superficiality - watch the movie. Note, though, that this movie does not DEPICT what we have come to think of as an \"LA lifestyle\", it is a wonderful example of the products that ARISE from it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66e7f765dcbf44ccaa919aa7a8c21ded",
            "input": "I adored this movie. Not only because I am a big fan of Moritz Bleibtreu, although he is in practically all German movies that count. But also because he is NOT the main actor. The lead is taken over by Barnaby Metschurat, who was the only reason to watch 2001's Julietta, and who really carries this movie on his shoulders.A family moves from Italy to Germany seeking \"the German dream\" (this is my own invention and ironic...) of cheap labor in steel and coal industries. However, they end up opening a restaurant and the journey the movie takes to this point alone is so poetic and at the same time funny and charming. From this point onward, the story told is mainly that of the two brothers of this family, Giancarlo (Bleibtreu) and Gigi (Metschurat). Gigi's dream to become a filmmaker is threatened by rivalry with his brother and his mother's determination to return to Italy. What follows is a great - and totally neutral - look at what life can become formed by the choices you make.In the end, this movie doesn't say which life (Gigi's or Giancarlo's) was more successful or fuller or more interesting. It merely gives us a rewarding glimpse at what it must be like to search for identity when two countries and mentalities are involved. and this look is not driven by bitterness or disdain to either country, which makes it such a great film for any and every country dealing with the tensions resulting from immigration. The fact that director Fatih Akin's moved to Germany from Turkey in the 70s also lends this movie a large measure of its credibility and emotional accuracy. The icing on the cake are fantastic performances by the entire cast, especially Metschurat and - this I really need to stress - the little boy who plays young Gigi. That kid's performance would be a hard act to follow by just about anyone! Great movie, go see it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94a7683c7f3a4f10a76c21048f5730be",
            "input": "WARNING: REVIEW CONTAINS MILD SPOILERSA couple of years back I managed to see the first five films in this franchise, and was planning to do an overview of the whole Elm St. series. However, just two years on and I find I can't remember enough about them in order to do it – I guess they couldn't have made much of an impression. From what I do recall, some of the sequels – Dream Warriors in particular – weren't as bad as is often made out, though even the original was no classic. Generally, the predictability of the premise (if people fall asleep they get murdered in their dreams) doesn't lend itself to narrative tension. But while I cannot recall much of the first five films, I do know they never plumbed the depths of Freddy's Dead.An indication of how sick of Freddy the public was at this point can be judged by the fact that the film was promoted solely on the character's demise. The fact that the movie's conclusion is not even hidden, but in fact the entire purpose for the film's being goes to illustrate how vacant, soulless and cynical this venture was.Taking the morally questionable idea of having a child molester as the charismatic villain, Robert Englund's in-no-way-scary interpretation booms with laughter. I always thought Freddy's mockery of the teenage victims was less aimed at the characters than at the teenage audience that could ever watch this tripe. It's like Englund's crying out \"we know this is garbage – but you're paying to see it, so who's the one laughing?\" And I'm sure victims of child abuse would be disheartened to see such an insensitive depiction of their plight. Was Freddy's appearance in the films always so rudimentary? All he gets to do here is a few \"haaaaaaaaaaaaaarr – har – har – hars\" and that's it. If this was the only Elm St. film you'd ever seen you wouldn't get to know the character at all. Even as the character pre-death in a flashback Englund plays him as a boo-hiss pantomime villain with a slop of Transatlantic (ie. overstated, misplaced and not at all funny) irony.Acting is almost universally poor. Just look at how many times Breckin Meyer overacts with his hand gestures and body language. Only Kananga himself, Yaphet Kotto, keeps his dignity. And when Roseanne, Tom Arnold and Alice Cooper show up, you can almost visibly see the film sinking further into the mire. The script, too, is absolutely lousy, almost wholly without merit. Carlos (Ricky Dean Logan) opens a road map, upon which the Noel Coward-like Freddy has wittily written \"you're f**ked\". When prompted for the map, Carlos responds \"well the map says we're f**ked\". Who wrote the screenplay, Oscar Wilde?Or how about the scene where Carlos is tortured by Freddy, his hearing enhanced to painful levels? So Freddy torments him by threatening to drop a pin – a potentially fatal sound, given that all sounds are magnified. Oddly, the fact that Carlos shouts at the top of his voice for him not to drop it seems to have no effect. \"Nice hearing from you, Carlos\", quips Freddy, hoping some better lines will come along. It's also worth noting that dream sleep doesn't occur instaneously, so being knocked unconscious wouldn't allow instant access into Freddy's world. Though as part of the narrative contains a human computer game and a 3-D finale plot logic isn't that high on the list of requirements.The teenagers heading the cast this time are really the most obnoxious, dislikeable group in the whole series. Tracy (Lezlie Deane) is the only one who gets to greet Freddy with \"shut the f**k up, man\" and a kick in the scallops. And was incongruous pop music always part of the ingredients? Freddy's Dead. No laughs. No scares. No interest. No fun.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-008adab51fb34acc867de5817de600f4",
            "input": "In a near future, the ordinary man above any suspicious from the suburb Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam) is hired by Digicorp, a huge corporation, to be assigned as a spy and steal secrets from their competitors, Sunways. Along his training, Morgan is brainwashed, assumes a new identity of Jack Thursby and travels to boring lectures. In one of them, he is approached by the beautiful and mysterious Rita Foster (Lucy Liu), who advises him that nothing is how it seems to be. Morgan acknowledges a new reality, where he does not know who can be trusted.The unknown \"Cypher\" was a great surprise for me. This movie has not been released in Brazil, but the engaging and exciting story is quite complex, with many plot points, and with great screenplay, direction and performances. In the very last twist, I recalled Arnold Schwarzenegger's \"Total Recall\". This movie certainly deserves to be watched more than once, and I really did not like the last scene, when the independent spy disposes the disputed disc in the sea. In only know the director Vicenzo Natali from the fantastic \"Cube\", and this second work I see is also stunning. My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): Not Available",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cdeeff97e5e14189b0e228b8a6d86892",
            "input": "The Dereks did seem to struggle to find rolls for Bo after \"10\".I used to work for a marine park in the Florida Keys. One day, the script for \"Ghosts Can't Do It\" was circulating among the trainers in the \"fish house\" where food was prepared for the dolphins. There was one scene where a -dolphin- supposedly propositions Bo (or Bo the dolphin), asking to \"go make eggs.\" Reading the script, we -lauuughed-...We did not end up doing any portion of this movie at our facility, although our dolphins -were- in \"The Big Blue!\"This must have been very close to the end of Anthony Quinn's life. I hope he had fun in this film, as it certainly didn't do anything for his legacy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49f69bb7061a4db990cbc12051966ffb",
            "input": "This film was just absolutly brilliant. It actually made me think. During the whole movie I was confused as hell. I loved everything about it...it was just so confusing and so twisted and weird, it was hard not to love it. All of the actors were phenominal, and no one could have done a better job...This is one of my favorites of the year...it deserves an ocar.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fd0707b342843d8891da63842ae012d",
            "input": "Jack Black's character, Tim Dingman the \"Dreamer\" in Envy, finds wealth and success in the idea of a aerosol spray \"Vapoorize\" that when sprayed on doggie dung, makes the poo disappear into thin air. For a moment I was hoping that Vapoorize was a real product so that I could spray it on this \"stinker\" of a movie and make it disappear into thin air as well.Although Envy is not the worst movie that I have seen in the past 12 months (that honor goes to The Cat in the Hat), it does get the honor of a close second.Not funny, not sad, not anything. A real \"Stinkeroo\"!!!!!A 0.2 out of 10!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7398144465a24d2faeb7f48b20ec2328",
            "input": "The first mistake you make in titling a film is to use \"of the living dead\" without really having a budget for real zombie FX. Sure, this was a low budget zombie flick - really low budget. I thought it was a film school project. Amateur actors and amateur effects.It was really not too bad considering the above, and it presented an interesting twist to the zombie genre. If you are going to get an \"R\" for violence, you might as well give us some good shots of the babes being attacked. The women were so little used in this film that it could almost be classified as \"gay interest.\"And, I am staying out of Oakland. There was a heck of a lot of shooting going on and no cops in sight!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff8fbb97c92b49c39ee013f61b6ddc6e",
            "input": "There is good. There is bad. And then their is The Sentinel, a bottom-barrel political \"thriller\" that ranks among the worst movies I have ever seen. The plot of a mole in the Secret Service is a good one, but never has a movie with so much potential been so utterly butchered. Directed with ham-handed \"edginess\" by Clark Johnson, every actor in this film seems to be working on autopilot. Even the great Michael Douglas looks bored here. I can honestly say I have NEVER, in all my life, viewed another film with so many glaring plot holes. The twist is predictable from square one, and the character's motives are so utterly ridiculous that they inspired laughter from the audience. Avoid this at all costs. This is a catastrophe of a movie with no redeeming value.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c755ed0501f499eafcf51155c181ab6",
            "input": "I approached this film with low expectations but was very pleasantly surprised. It is very well done and it beats hands down the ballroom dancing movies of recent years, especially \"Strictly Ballroom\". While the music is nice and the dancing colourful, for me the movie is not about dancing. It is about the very Japanese institution that gives male office workers long commutes to work and free time after work for entertainment that does not involve their families. Here we have the man with the complete family and the large mortgage and a flagging zest for life. He is drawn to the attractive image of a young woman in a dance studio he passes during his commute and this leads him to try ballroom dancing. Also Japanese is the fact that the lecherous motives that initiated his new passion are made plain but somehow accepted, at least eventually, by family and audience. Attitudes to ballroom dancing, as conveyed in the film, are definitely non-Western, though the discipline and the music are clearly cultural imports to Japan. The cultural contrasts are thus intriguing. Even without the cultural insights, the colour, the dance and the enthusiasm of the players all make this a fun film to watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-46d3cbfee1fd43babdef95e097e817fa",
            "input": "The plot and characters are ridiculous and barely qualify AS \"plot\" and \"character\". The biggest problem is the fact that everything is dark, out-of-focus, and blurry. The fact that Fulci filled the whole movie with mist doesn't help. On the other hand, the whole thing is completely bizarre and filled with sex and violence. The inconsistencies are pretty entertaining, one of the main characters says he has no friends, yet he latches onto the new guy in a minute of screen time, and has a whole gaggle of women on the side. Though he does show his anti-social tendencies by randomly putting an arrow in some poor b*****d who's just minding his own business!Images of blood or gore flowing get more attention than the characters but what do you want from Fulci. Maybe it ruined his career, but it wasn't really much more stupid than Zombie. Worth a rental if you like gory Italian flicks or are desperate for sword and sorcery or something bizarre. How do you sleep through someone getting sucked into a pit 2 feet from your head and screaming for help?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c24c651ca7d498d89c37543256a5354",
            "input": "Trawling through the Sci Fi weeklies section of the local Video Rentals store I was losing hope of finding any good movies I hadn't yet seen. Renting Cypher was like a punt on a possibly very lame horse. My son is so jaded with current \"B\" Science Fiction that he hasn't bothered seeing this yet.It must be noted I didn't see anything about Cypher when it was released in Australia. It must have been very quiet or I just missed it.Well this WAS a really pleasant surprise! This is also no B movie. It's not a \"blockbuster\" of the epic variety and doesn't try to be - more a quiet movie that needs to be seen several times for it's plot to be fully savoured.The special effects are powerfully presented when they are used - my only complaint is the super helo is a leetle obviously CGI at first view, but they get it right at it's 2nd appearance, & that aside everything else is top notch. In any case the affects are secondary.I won't give anything away about the plot. The plot structure has a Russian Doll aspect a little reminiscent of Basic Instinct (though with very different content).Just I will say that Choosing Jeremy Northam for the lead was a master stroke. The actor was born in Cambridge ENGLAND, and his accent for this film hits the ear as a sort of extremely forced New England dialect, it's a tad off key. See the final twist of the plot and you'll see why that is such a brilliant choice! And Lucy Liu is also just right with her \"will she kiss me - will she shoot me\" edge.I rarely watch movies several times within days - this is one of them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-accdfe9600134dd1ae7ab650d97e7778",
            "input": "A powerfully wonderful movie. You are held in a death-grip once you let yourself get involved with the story. A successful dentist, Alan Johnson(Don Cheadle), is torn in a life crisis of balancing his career with his family. He notices his former college roommate Charlie Fineman(Adam Sandler)and wants to touch base. He finds that Charlie, who lost his wife and family in the 9-11 attack on America, is no longer in touch with reality...choosing to involve his mind with his favorite music from the past and video games. The former roommates rekindle their friendship and strengthen their former bond. Johnson has his friend Angela Oakhurts(Liv Tyler), a psychiatrist, to try and bring Charlie out of his grief...but it is Alan that accomplishes in getting his friend to emerge from his deep darkness. Jada Pinkett Smith plays Johnson's wife. Writer and director Mike Binder plays the role of Charlie's attorney/guardian. Also in the cast: Saffron Burrows, Donald Sutherland, Adell Modell and Robert Klein. Outstanding soundtrack featuring the likes of Bruce Springsteen, Graham Nash, Pear Jam and The Pretenders.NOTE: I have never been a Sandler fan; but I found him outstanding in this role. In some of the scenes, I thought out loud...why has he never been approached to play singer/songwriter Bob Dylan in a biopic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f50f0f6a3944d54a268143e5ff19490",
            "input": "With a Bo Derek movie, the audience get just what they expect. A paper thin plot and a few shots of Mrs. Derek in no clothes. 'Ghosts can't do it' is just that. The first fifteen minutes is ordinary TV drama, as long as Scott [Anthony Quinn] is still alive. He is a very good actor with long experience in a lot of different roles, but it seems as even a famous actor need to work just for money sometimes. Bo Derek is the opposite, always playing a strikingly handsome young woman with or without clothes. The movie is a complete waste of time. If you want to see Quinn, rent Lawrence of Arabia or La Strada. If you want to see nude women or bad acting, rent any porno movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49ef907d37ec4684bdde9f20ee359372",
            "input": "One of the best comedians ever. I've seen this show about 10 times and will probably watch it at least 100 more. My friends and family quote from this DVD so often, you'd think we did nothing other than watch it. The beginning part about Alcatraz is a little bit slow, but either wade through it or zip on through to the part where Eddie is on stage. Watch for the \"Cake or Death\" part (Joking about the Church of England) and the \"Hitler/Pol Pot\" part (Hard to explain, just watch it). The best part of the show may be Eddie's facial expressions. He can really say a lot with his eyes. (Mascara, eyeliner, and eyeshadow probably help, huh?) Fair warning: Eddie does have a tendency to throw a lot of four-letter words in.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11abb13c7e134a0282ed76884c2ccf3a",
            "input": "You've been fouled and beaten up in submission by my harsh statements about \"femme fatale\" / \"guns n' gals\" movies! Now comes another breed in disappointing rediscoveries: ninja movies! Many of these I've seen before, and let me tell you, they aren't all that's cracked up to be! They usually don't stick to the point. This, among all others, suffers from no originality! What's a ninja got to do with preventing a nuclear holocaust in Russia? And isn't this supposed to be a \"martial arts\" movie, too? Does plenty of gunfire sound like an incredible action movie to you? Is blood the number one reason to love this to death? Will you waste some of your hard-earned cash over a lady singing in her see-through tank top? The answers to these important questions are found in THE NINJA MISSION, which should be in the martial arts section of your video store. For even more nonsense ninja fun, try checking out those Godfrey Ho movies put out by Trans World. You get what you deserve, and that's a promise! Recommended only for hardcore ninja addicts!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9efd195b79d4a24b0e4e084fc72d67b",
            "input": "This film offers absolutely no imagination in it's premise nor in it's execution but these are just two things that come to mind after watching this so-called comedy that has no energy to speak of. Story is about nit-picky over analytical insurance risk manager Reuben Feffer (Ben Stiller) who finds his new wife Lisa (Debra Messing) cheating on him with a scuba instructor (Hank Azaria) after only one day on their honeymoon. Upon returning home Reuben and his best friend Sandy (Philip Seymour Hoffman) go to a party and run into Polly Prince (Jennifer Aniston) whom they went to school with years earlier.*****SPOILER ALERT***** Polly is forgetful and sloppy and lives carefree which is the opposite of who Reuben is as a person but they start to date and Reuben starts to change as a person as he starts to try out new things such as salsa dancing and eating spicy foods. But one day Lisa comes back and wants to remain married to Reuben but he really doesn't want to but Polly decides to leave as she doesn't believe in marriage to begin with.This film is the second directing effort by John Hamburg who wrote two generally unfunny screenplays in \"Zoolander\" and \"Meet the Parents\" but those two films seem like classics compared to this stale piece of drivel. It's very easy to say something is not funny but I think with this film it's even easier to figure out why. This film is totally and utterly predictable from start to finish with every scene looking as if it's only happening because of the ridiculousness of the script. Hamburg who also wrote the script seems to have written this without any thought of trying something different and at times he seems to be trying to generate the same energy as \"There's Something About Mary\" but instead the events seem incredibly forced. Did anyone really think the blind ferret was funny? If you do, your easy! A few times during the film characters would inexplicably have these emotional speeches that are supposed to summarize everything but all they achieve is overstating the obvious. Stiller works a lot but maybe he should work less and just wait for the better scripts to come his way because this film doesn't work as a comedy or as a romance.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83ce009775774bb7956465112a39bad3",
            "input": "Spoiler alert – although I think this one was spoiled coming out of the can… It's hard to even imagine that a film with these stars, from this studio, made at this time period, could be so awful, but it is. It is the film's biggest flaw by far that it just doesn't make any damn sense.Rich widower American aristocrat Penn Gaylord leaves his small daughter \"in charge\" and goes off to World War I where he is killed. Then we flash forward to present day (1942) and total confusion. The three sisters are in court where they are said to have spent the last twenty years, and some jerk named Barclay is trying to take their home away from them. This is just the beginning of an endless series of unanswered questions that comprises the script, more holes in it than The Warren Report. What happened to the Gaylord fortune? If the will is worth half a billion, why has the family home gone from an opulent palace to the house on The Munsters? Who the devil is this Barclay clown? And why is he able to take someone's home away from them? The questions just pile on top of more questions.The usually affable and charming George Brent is playing Barclay, who is inexplicably a total sod tromping all over everyone, taking whatever the heck he wants no matter who it belongs to and without a twinge of guilt; yet no one besides Fiona (Barbara Stanwick) seems to particularly dislike this cretin. Why? None of these questions are ever answered. We instead just follow Fiona's life from one train wreck to another, the evil Barclay takes away her home, her fortune, and even her child. What does she do? Shoot him? Set him on fire? No, too logical. In a completely improbably wrap-up, this woman, who's only prior romantic involvement with Barclay was, save for the technicality of marriage, rape, suddenly decides mid-sentence (literally) that she does not hate him, she loves him. And they're going to live happily ever after. All of a sudden for no reason in the world, this early female role model of independence and authority is transformed into the usual helpless ankle-twisting twit more commonly found in films of this era. Yeah, sure, steal everything in the world that belongs to me and I'll fall in love with you. On what planet does that happen? I can only guess the reason I never heard of this film before I happened to catch it on Turner is that it was as lost on contemporary audiences as it is today.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4cb0e0294bfd4b29b18c45fb4e189e57",
            "input": "First of all, I have to say I have worked for blockbuster and have seen quite a few movies to the point its tough for me to find something I haven't seen. Taking this into account, I want everyone to know that this movie was by far the worst film ever made, it made me pine for Gigli, My Boss's Daughter, and any other piece of junk you've ever seen. BeLyt must be out of his mind, I've only found one person who liked it and even they couldn't tell me what the movie was about. If you are able to decipher this movie and are able to tell me what it was about you have to either be the writer or a fortune teller because there's any other way a person could figure this crap out.FOR THE LOVE OF G-D STAY AWAY!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0df560efd50b455681a8940522803d8e",
            "input": "This film is a pure failure. I am a Steve Martin fan, but even he can't save the tired idea and swiss cheese script. Think \"Police Academy 7\" and apply it to a military parody. Yuck.I DO NOT feel the other user comments reflected the poor rating this film received (and rightfully deserved!). It is extremely misleading. I have often seen this film marked down to $3.00 in the grocery store and now I certainly know why.If only I could get my 90 minutes back...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e987c3f22a1427d9c78b4ba9a417494",
            "input": "If you're a layman interested in quantum theory and string theory, read \"The Elegant Universe\" by Brian Greene of Columbia University, and \"The Universe in a Nutshell\" by Stephen Hawking of Cambridge.Recipe for #$*!:3 parts bombastic New Age pontificator, 2 parts pseudoscientist, 2 parts real scientistMix together until ingredients are indistinguishable from each other and spread on celluloid thin enough that there is no discernible substance.Serving suggestion: barf bags.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5d0882beb2ae4a7c984a4da46f7bebb4",
            "input": "What a surprisingly good movie this one turned out to be. This is the type of film that I've been looking for ages. Particularly important for me was the fantastic-looking Chicago, which I still keep thinking about. The back cover doesn't do this film justice, it's superb, and in my top-5 for sure.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f1ce18b69274219bc730c9df00747c2",
            "input": "This western is done in a different manner than most others. Realism is the key here. Conchata Farrell comes to Wyoming to work for Rip Torn on his ranch. How this is presented makes for a most interesting slice of Americana. I would have preferred to see this on the big screen rather than on tape, but it's worth a look to see just how life was back in the real west. Cinematography is excellent. Solid 9. Torn & Farrell excel in this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a27bf3ca2524ecab60e774e44685038",
            "input": "Taped this late night movie when I was in grade 11, watched it on fast forward. I sugest you do the same. I though it would be and action film, but went to a cort tv type movie. In the end it fits in with the early 70's social activest type films. Glad I missed that era. 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-246d3787af0541babb03c3ff682e0709",
            "input": "Based upon the recommendation of a friend, my wife and I invited another couple to this film. I really apologized to them--all 4 of us hated it and spent the whole time looking at our watches waiting for the film to finally end. Half the vignettes are bizarre, with very little entertainment value. There were few scenes of Paris--for example, I was looking forward to seeing some pictures of the Latin Quarter, but I couldn't really recognize anything. Most of the scene was inside a bar. No one in the theater laughed at anything, or reacted in any way. If you like bizarre, pretentious, pseudo-intellectual films, don't miss this. If you are down to earth like me, you will be sorry you saw it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3fdd6a10f754baf8eb528c5716fe679",
            "input": "The Japanese cyber-punk films have never really done a whole lot for me, but of the handful that I've seen, most have been at least visually interesting and at least mostly entertaining. MEATBALL MACHINE is no exception.The storyline is about a species of parasites that take over human hosts, takes control of their bodies, turns them into \"necroborgs\", and causes them to fight each other with the sole purpose of eating each other - apparently as a \"game\" for the enjoyment of said parasites. The film mainly revolves around a shy guy and gal who fall for each other, but whose love-affair is cut short by both being infected with the parasites, and are forced to fight each other. It becomes a test of human-will vs. the parasite's control over their physical bodies...MEATBALL MACHINE will invariably be compared to TETSUO (as most cyber-punk films are), and for good reason. There are definitely some thematic parallels, though the films are definitely different. There's plenty of fun, splattery moments in MEATBALL MACHINE, and the creature/borg FX are definitely the high-point - a mixture of TETSUO-meets-GWAR that are both elaborate and inventive. Depending on your taste for these types of films, MEATBALL MACHINE may or may not be your thing. If you enjoy hyper-kinetic cyber-punk films with a healthy dose of splatter - this one's for you...7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a78efcfd8e14927a22b4d453d0b9e95",
            "input": "In this documentary we meet Roger, the rich manager of a factory in China that makes beads and other trinkets sold and traded at Mardi Gras in New Orleans. Roger claims the factory girls love their work and are grateful for the opportunities it provides, but interviews with four of them tell quite another story. The girls' bleak lives are shown in stark contrast to the bizarre excesses of Mardi Gras itself. Filmmaker David Redmon should be lauded for getting excellent and rare footage of everyday life inside a Chinese factory compound, and for landing a revealing on-camera interview with the head of the U.S. company that imports and sells the beads. The movie is compellingly told and clearly serves its purpose as a window into what lies behind those ubiquitous \"Made in China\" labels.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fb083856c554ed88b2f04a46567c175",
            "input": "This is easily one of the worst martial arts films I've ever seen, and that's saying something. The chant of viva Chiba, viva Chiba is heard at the title, soon you will be chanting to yourself stupid, stupid. The basic story is that the mafia is running drugs into Japan and one man vowels to stop them, of course that's our man Sonny Chiba. The Karate master offers up his service to anyone who can provide information on the drug lords. A woman comes forward and he becomes the bodyguard, but what are her true intentions? Let me say at this point who cares? Soon we are treated to or tortured by a series of poorly choreographed fights and a lame storyline that becomes more and more laughable at every moment. Sonny eventually wipes out the bad guys with his karate skills, end of story. Oh yeah the woman was corrupt too. Congratulations you may have just watched the funniest film ever.As stated already this is one of the worst martial arts films I have ever seen. What makes it semi watchable is to see how badly made a film can be. Some have already mentioned the infamous American intro put into the film. That's probably the most entertaining part of the film and it's beyond funny. I would agree its worth watching just to see how lame the 70's karate scene was at the time. Watch as Aaron Banks leaves a guy hanging by his nuts then flips a fat student (bad editing) punching him in the throat. But everything is badly done in this film. Terrible unbelievable fights, fake I mean fake blood, bad acting, dubbing, wardrobe, and let's not forget the story. One man to take out an entire drug problem in a country? I bet. Fight after fight is laughable. This was the 70's when people still believed karate was effective in a fight, but Chiba brings it to new levels with some of the nonsense put out in this movie. Let's see he kicks a gun in half, kicks a guy so hard what looks like his dentures fall out and of course chopping the bottle scene, give me a break. Not to mention the fact that it's very hard to tell what happens in the fights because it's filmed so poorly. One part that was amusing was when he broke the guys arm through the door giving him a compound fracture. OK. As the action goes on we are treated to gobs of blood, really fake blood. Too say it looked poorly made is and understatement. The acting is totally non existent in this film. I don't expect much from a film of this caliber anyway as long as the action is good, but it wasn't and as expected the dubbing is extremely poor. Was it my imagination or did they dub the Asian go go dancer with a black accent? As expected from a 70's wardrobe you'll be in stitches laughing at some of the trends and nasty women put forth for the gratuitous nudity that comes with these flicks. Also why would the mafia be so obvious and all where black trench coats and hats all the time? Don't try and hide it now. The characters were stupid as well. The pimp club owner's one of whom is decked out in a Japanese pimp suit and the other who has a taste for bores head looks like fat hippie. Also one last thing that bothered me throughout the film was the awful music with some woman whaling. It was very annoying.Overall this is a terrible film by both martial arts standards and good movie making. That doesn't mean that it's not entertaining. With a film made so poorly it's hard not to laugh through most of this film, if you can stomach it. This was an old favorite watch with my best friend. If it was purely bad I would give one star, but the laughs it delivers bumps it up. 4 out 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f24d73725e23496f86c9170f072c6157",
            "input": "An absolute steaming pile of cow dung. It's mind-blowing to me that this film was even made. Hip-Hop and old westerns just don't seem to mix. What target audience were these people thinking of when planning this trainwreck.Not only is the concept and plot a joke, but the acting is atrocious and the fact that some decent actors were even in this nightmare of a film makes their entire careers a laughing stock. The chick from clueless should never be forgiven and she is stripped of any remaining dignity she had. After reading the first ten pages of dialogue she should have been asking which one of her friends was playing this sick joke. After some research, I actually found a list of some other actors who passed on this film: Jada Pinkett-Smith, Denzel Washington, Brandy, Monique, Kim Kardasian, Jenna Jameson, Oprah, and finally Marge Simpson.Simply put, I would rather stare at a blank TV than watch this movie again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97fbea0c695040168c6b797494b6b9d4",
            "input": "Being a big fan of Corman's horror movies I expected from his western a bit more than I got. Well, I was entertained all right. I had almost as many laughs as watching Mel Brooks' Blazing Saddles.See the spectacle of mobile tire tracks on the prairie of the old west. You can kill time by counting them if there happens to be an otherwise boring scene going on. And the horses seem to have gears in them too, considered the fast-forward chases. See also the swinging bar room queens of the traditional wild west saloon doing a number that reminds of a certain fashionable dance from 1920's, here decades before the style was invented. Hope the saloon around them won't crumple.In the middle of all this mayhem the main actors do a decent job. Ireland, Garland and Hayes are all truly fine. A special praise for them for doing the best they could with the material that seems mostly having been lifted from 'Johnny Guitar', but doesn't quite impress the same way. But there is really nothing wrong with a laughable western like this. Just like a really bad old horror movie, it might fail one way but succeeds to give joy anyway. That is one of the reasons Corman's work appeals to me and that is why I dare to recommend you to experience this movie if you get the chance.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b2b2ce80b004bdbacddc7ccdb11dbd1",
            "input": "I found this movie to be very well-paced. The premise is quite imaginative, and as a viewer I was pulled along as the characters developed. The pacing is done very well for those that like to think--enough is kept hidden from the viewer early on, and questions keep arising which are later answered, producing a well-thought out and very satisfying film, both cerebrally and from an action standpoint.It seems some people were looking for a non-stop roller-coaster ride with this film--one of those that comes charging out of the gate. This would be more analogous to one of those coasters that first takes you slowly up the hill--creating a wonderful sense of anticipation--and is ultimately, in my mind, more fulfilling for the foundation initially laid.Excellent film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-92d52579c1f14343b5f4f53da4d3bee8",
            "input": "It was a bit bizarre and evil and i enjoyed it a lot, the characters in the show were great as well, and complimented one another well. I was sorry to see it cut off.. I would have loved to see where it could have went.You found yourself leaning toward Lucas Buck the sheriff who had more secrets than anyone. Lucas was frightening and alluring. And I would have liked to have seen more of him and how his character became. I will however buy the show just to enjoy, it was great to something different on TV. And Paige Turrco who was Caleb's cousin, she was a big mystery as to where and what she meant to Lucas. Its a shame it isn't around still.. or was never finished, i would have loved to see what would have happened.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4fc37af5660d4c24835254290e42318b",
            "input": "I went to see this film with fairly low expectations, figuring it would be a nice piece of fluff. Sadly, it wasn't even that. I could barely sit through the film without wanting to walk out. I went with my two kids (ages 10 and 13) and even they kept asking, \"How much longer?\" After lasting until the end, I just kept wondering who would approve this script. Even the reliable Fred Willard couldn't save the trite dialogue, the state jokes, and the banal plot. I'd suggest that whoever wrote and directed this movie (I use the term loosely) should take an online screen writing class or drop by their local community college for a film class. At the least, there are many books on directing, screen writing, and producing movies that would teach them something about structure, plot, dialogue and pacing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf54df2877154ca8b9197ff424460738",
            "input": "This is yet another bad movie that you should probably avoid watching. The plot could be a lot \"thicker\" than it actually is and would be better made as a blockbuster type movie.The acting leaves something to be desired, though you can not quite place your finger on what it is.This is one of those that you watch on late night TV, perhaps on USA, simply because you can not get to sleep. Watch it if you want but do not expect too much from it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ffd0bc6d5c144aefa75bebde2ba67263",
            "input": "Really an amazing pile of pap! A predictable, slow moving, soul destroying, mind numbing movie to which, slitting your own wrists with a rusty bread knife seems... well, almost necessary.The acting is over done for the thin dialogue, every scene is at least twice as long as it needs to be, the intricate details of how this career is collapsing or that career is rising is just far too dreary and mundane for words. The music would be good if you didn't have to sit through the movie, but really, three good songs is not enough reward for the effort required to watch the movie.Watching this film I prayed to God for narcolepsy or for someone to shoot me.Never, ever, ever again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0ebd40b7cb447e2ae27b5d2f84e2456",
            "input": "This is a very funny movie! I have no idea whether it translates well into other languages or not. However, I do think men all over the world can identify with \"Frank\" and his thoughts to some extent! These thoughts are hugely entertaining and women will also enjoy this movie I'm sure!All cast members perform well, and this film could have been a tremendous hit all over the world if it was made in England or the US. But for those of you who are fortunate enough to understand Swedish, you are in for a treat!Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f9d5a99174f4c8b98cdb71089e225cc",
            "input": "OK so there's nudity, but hey, there's free porn on the internet for whomever likes it. And its just silly how they forced tits into every frame. I mean i was embarrassed, not from the nudity but from the far-fetchessness of the producers/writers of this piece of crap.The movie is NOT funny at all, its just extremely predictable all the time. There is no plot, no dramatic content at all. This is way waay worse then the other pie-films and they arnt that great either:) If you're really drunk or maybe a 13 year old buy who are really obsessed with tits this might be acceptable, otherwise not. May it forever roth align with crap of the same magnitude with regards Erik the questmaster flash MC",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2ceb19076b0b4883930808c20a3190a5",
            "input": "Why do people who do not know what a particular time in the past was like feel the need to try to define that time for others? Replace Woodstock with the Civil War and the Apollo moon-landing with the Titanic sinking and you've got as realistic a flick as this formulaic soap opera populated entirely by low-life trash. Is this what kids who were too young to be allowed to go to Woodstock and who failed grade school composition do? \"I'll show those old meanies, I'll put out my own movie and prove that you don't have to know nuttin about your topic to still make money!\" Yeah, we already know that. The one thing watching this film did for me was to give me a little insight into underclass thinking. The next time I see a slut in a bar who looks like Diane Lane, I'm running the other way. It's child abuse to let parents that worthless raise kids. It's audience abuse to simply stick Woodstock and the moonlanding into a flick as if that ipso facto means the film portrays 1969.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0e7e3a9c27c45b3b34baf990cb7653d",
            "input": "Kudos to Cesar Montano for reviving the Cebuano movie! Panaghoy sa Suba is very good -- it has the drama, the action, the romance, and scene that will make you laugh.While the story is not that original (a love triangle -- or make a four-cornered-love, Japanese occupation, rebellion, American as lord), its presentation is something cool, especially it uses it original language -- bisaya for the Filipino, nipongo for the Japanese and English for the American.This movie will go as one of this year's best Pinoy movies.Go watch this!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf11ebbebc524ac1b8670d7201965fea",
            "input": "This is absolutely the worst movie I've seen all year.First, I will say that the acting was very good, and by all of the cast.This was apparently meant to be very offbeat, and in that regard it succeeded. By the same token, the story revolves around a self-centered wannabe, who is a clueless, talentless chronic liar, whose source of self confidence comes from a pair of leather slippers.This was worse than watching a car wreck.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c53cea593d174035b0157310623f12d9",
            "input": "My thoughts on the movie, 9It was not good, not good at all. Visually, it was great. I was pleased with the pacing, the camera angles, etc. However, the characters? eh, kinda bland. Plot? It sucked.This movie seemed more new age crap than anything else. Organized religion is presented as cowardly and fearful. Science isn't portrayed any better. It creates a monster weapon that kills everything... but \"souls\" have the power to destroy monsters and bring life? Really?That's something that bites my ass a bit too. Here we have a CGI movie... created with science... and they're using it to give us the message that science will destroy the world while promoting the idea that spirituality will save us? At least they had the decency to have one of the characters ask,\"Okay, so now what?\" (or something similar). I couldn't hear it too well because of the crowd immediately getting up and making a break for the exit. It was a \"okay... it was just barely entertaining enough to sit here for the entire movie but now let's get out of here as fast as possible!\" type of exit.This is one of those movies where you can't think if you want to enjoy it. Just look at the visuals and nod your head prettily. Any thought as to, \"what's the point of that?\" will suck you out of disbelief and make you eye the exit sign with longing.Okay... SPOILERS follow.So, basically, a scientist creates \"the Machine\" that is capable of creating other, intelligent, robotic life. Evil humans use it as a weapon. However, the scientist realizes that he is also at fault. He gave the Machine his intellect, but didn't give it his heart. The Machine goes Skynet on humanity's collective ass and wipes out all life on earth, finally slowly powering down. However, the scientist manages to survive and create walking sock-puppets. Each one, containing a piece of the scientist's soul.The last one, #9 wakes up not knowing anything about the world. He sees a strange device nearby and picks it up. He meets up with another like himself, #2. Well, #2 gets captured by a last surviving robot of the Machine. #9 finds more like himself ands sets off to rescue #2. They succeed.#9 notices that there is a matching hole that fits the device perfectly. He inserts it and the Machine comes back to life... pulling out #2's soul in the process.The movie then continues with action scenes with #9 trying to rescue his soul-yanked compatriots. They eventually succeed and destroy the Machine. They release the souls of their fallen friends, who go up into the clouds. It then rains and we see life returning back to the planet.Hunh?!?That makes no sense. None at all. Why the heck did the scientist want to split his soul into 9 homunculi? What did it accomplish? Were they created to stop the machine? Everything is dead! The machine was dead! Why bother?!?Why did he expect nine little critters to succeed when nothing else had? Why not create a second intellectual machine, but with a \"soul\" to fight the first.. at least that would have seemed like it would have had a reasonable chance at success.Why did they have to have their souls sucked into the device by the Machine and then destroy the Machine and then release the souls in order to bring life back to earth? Why not just wait for the machine to power down and bring life back without all the rest of the insane steps?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a09d92082c5b4f02ad40169a7e4bb8fe",
            "input": "I've read all the comments on this film. I am a great admirerof the Dalai Lama. As such, I read the book upon which thisfilm was based. The movie is an ugly and demeaning fictionalization of the truth. I do not criticize it foraltering small details or events for dramatic purposes; it isnot a documentary. But the script CHANGES the impact, reaction,realities, and changes in EVERY main character. It vastly altersthe real relationship between Harrar and the young Dalai Lama. From the ridiculous rivalry for a Tibetan woman (which demeansthe culture of Tibet) to Harra's music box gift, to Harrar'schange of heart, everything about this movie is false - exceptfor the amazing photography. I understand that the shots of thePotala (the palace) were smuggled out of Tibet. However,changing a real story about the relationship between two people,one of them very important to this world, in order to build up amovie star is sad",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce70f3fe1f8d49b2aa08693e23704e9d",
            "input": "...but I regret having seen it. Since the ratings on IMDb are relatively high (and they must also have been relatively high on Netflix), I guess I put it in my queue because it is advertised as a gentle comedy from the UK, a category that has produced many films I liked immensely. \"Saving Grace,\" on the other hand, falls into the category of laugh-less comedies usually populated by Hollywood movies produced and directed by the talentless. Brenda Blethyn is a capable actress, and I have liked her in other movies. The concept -- a gardener growing marijuana to overcome the penury she finds herself confronting after her husband's death -- does not offend me. Notwithstanding the strenuous efforts on the part of the cast to produce humor, the film falls flat on its face (falling flat on its arse might have been funnier) as far as I and my wife were concerned. Be forewarned, oh gentle reader, not all offbeat British comedies succeed. This one is a dud.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60e5d77a54484c6da2a658bc950fbddd",
            "input": "this movie probably had a $750 budget, and still managed to surpass Titanic. i rented this the day i crashed my mom's car, and it was the only thing that cheered me up beyond belief! it has to be tied with 'The Assult of the Killer Bimbos'. Things to look for are: 1. The drive in blow job chinese girl scene 2. The bleach blonde in the sassoon shirt who never changes 3. The Flinstone-like screech out driving 4. The clashing ensemble worn by the redhead right before she gets killed (don't worry, i'm not ruining any surprises, for it's soooo predictable) 5. The guy who finds it necessary to howl. 6. The mental patient who plays a convincing job of being insane by poking out the eyes of a maniquen. 7. The hour long chase at the end involving the teacher and the priest. 8. the womman writing grafitti on the bathroom wall. 9. last, but not least, the wonderful special effects--especially the stab in the boob that made a... heaven help me... popping noise.enjoy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b669c31037fb487d826231130881a619",
            "input": "I might not be a huge admirer of the original \"Creepshow\", but its trashy sequel makes that anthology look like perfection! And to think I was going into this expecting to like this one more. Five years after its predecessor, George Romero gets back on board the EC Comic style trail and on this outing pens the screenplay for Steve King's three stories. Though, the direction is handed off to Michael Gornick. The film mostly falters in that aspect with uneven brushes by Gornick. But most of the blame would have to go to Romero's dreadfully static and unbearably cringe-like script (especially in those dialogues streaming through the first and final story). Moralistic messages (that came from mostly a sour bunch of characters) simply took over the black humour. Oh it was painful and the same can be said about the lively rotten music score accompanying the picture. Loosely linking the three tales (Old Chief Woodenhead, The Raft and The Hitchhiker) together is a mildly curious and effective wraparound story done in nostalgia (80s) animation form. I rather liked this segment and the wisecracking Creep character was a glowing light. # The first story \"Old Chief Woodenhead\" sees two elderly proprietors (George Kennedy & Dorothy Lamour) of a general store in a dying native community, Dead River. Get robbed and eventually killed by a couple of punks dying to live it up in Hollywood. In front of the store is a wooden statue of an Indian Chief that comes to live to avenge their deaths. -Listen to George Kennedy waffle.. And waffle on for 10 minutes about how he's committed to his 'great' community. What a nice touchy feely time. Well, just like Kennedy's speeches, this is one monotonously colourless and overdrawn item that never makes good of a fine premise. The overbearing script is plain inane and the performances are suitably so. These two factors really added to my headache. When the Indian comes alive and turns avenger, the goons meet a very quick (though grisly) death in the proper fashion. The effects were commendably done, but what about that free flowing hair. How could Hollywood knock that lock of hair back? Ugh! # Second story \"The Raft\" follows a group of dope smoking and yahoo teens heading up to a secluded lake. After swimming to the raft in the middle of the lake, they get trapped on the platform because of an ominous looking creature lurking in the water. -Now this is much better, MUCH better. What starts of as your basic teens run afoul turns into a mysteriously creepy set-up that's full of tight and claustrophobic tension. And it doesn't even cop out on the flashes of nudity or spiteful splatter. Quite morbid it is and that goes for its sense of humour too. The surprisingly ironic ending has a beautiful touch to it. The performances from the nobodies are acceptable without making a huge mark. Gornick's direction sticks to the nasty and rather gooey side. While, the alarming music score on this occasion pressed the right chords. The sludge-like creature in the lake (like many have mentioned) looks like an icky black tarpaulin (yeah you're reading that right!) floating on the water. # Finally number three concludes with \"The Hitchhiker\". A wealthy, but sexually lacking woman is on her way back home after being with her male gigolo, but she's is running late. Thinking of some ideas to explain for her lateness if needed, she skids off the road and accidentally hit's a hitchhiker. Instead of checking or getting help, she drives off in the hope getting home before her husband. Soon enough she's being terrorised by the mangled corpse of the dead hitchhiker.-Not awful, but I really didn't get into this laughably ludicrous exercise at all. Compared to the first two this one was so different in tone and tried to tickle the funny bone instead. Lois Chiles was okay in the lead role, but that constant assuring and the little conversations she has with herself became pitifully aggravating and downright tired. The vivid make-up effects are well-displayed and dripping with vision. When she hit's the hitchhiker that's when it becomes hectic, cheesy and over-the-top in its execution. From there onwards we endlessly hear our supposedly dead hitchhiker repeat and repeat… and repeat the line, \"Thanks for the ride lady!\" This happens every time she decides to run over him. Have a little courtesy for the dead darling. In all, the second short story \"The Raft\" and the unpleasantly, well-conceived effects is what lifts this extremely inferior sequel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b081702c23d9406cb29a0c587391b6c4",
            "input": "To say this film is simply a demonisation of Catholics and a misrepresentation of history is untrue. That is not what this film is.What this film is is a comment on the abuses of the Church (although this could be substituted for any powerful body), the ways that this abuse affects people and families and the way so many people choose to simply allow and often participate in the abuse without thinking for themselves. The fact that it is the Catholic church which is in the wrong is simply because of the nature of the true story the film is based upon. To label this as propaganda against Catholics seems to miss the truth about what the Catholic Church has done at times; its history is often not great and is something that films like this highlight and that needs to be highlighted. Yes we should comment on the abuses committed by other organisations but that is not for the remit of this film.It is an amazing film which brought me to tears and well worth watching - 'if we do not study the past, we are bound to repeat it'",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5d5503f0b464296b0c74f560f2f5f3e",
            "input": "Anyone who thinks anime is nothing but sex and violence will be silenced forever after watching this movie. This is a fine movie that tells about Tetsuro's quest to avenge his mother's death, but also grows up in the process. The journey on the train sort of represents Tetsuro's journey from boyhood to manhood. The music and visual styles of the movie are a bit dated (you can tell it's a 70's movie) and the animation is only slightly better than your average \"Star Blazers\" episode. But the story and the characters are so strong, it really doesn't matter. A must-see for any animation fan!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7774d66556a64411b3eea35560db8e77",
            "input": "SPOILERS THROUGHOUT: The Gettaway is mostly an action movie. And what action there is to!! Shootouts, chases, dumpsters and much much more. It stars Kim Bassenger and Alec Baldwin as the Mc Coy's.This is a remake and I have not seen the original but really didn't care for this one at all although Bassenger and Baldwin have some nice screen chemistry. But the movie itself didn't do it for me.The Gettaway became really tiresome really quickly. The plot is overshadowed by one fight/chase after another and as the violence keeps piling up, Bassenger and Baldwin retain their great looks no matter what perils they maybe in. In fact, by the end of the movie they almost look BETTER then in the beginning. I don't think Bassenger's eye makeup moves once during the whole picture.This isn't the worst movie I've ever seen, certainly not, but it isn't very good and unless one is an action movie purist I can't see really enjoying this movie because there's just not a lot here. The Gettaway isn't terribly original either, and goes every way from unnecessarily brutal to rather dull. It really could have been better I think.Bassenger and Baldwin give OK performances but they don't have a lot to do except get chased and run for their lives. Sometimes less is more, after seeing the same thing over and over again it gets stale. Didn't enjoy this one to much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5212a10255ae4027bd29ec532d9466be",
            "input": "Being a genre film fan, a child of the 80's AND a fan of hard rock music...this movie holds a special place in my heart. It has everything you could want in a supernatural movie: action, great special effects (for 1986) and a guitar wailing glam- rock soundtrack. It certainly was THE movie for all the heavy metal fans at the time. I didn't see this at the cinema because it was never released theatrically over here...but it's popularity on video during the mid to late eighties secured it's cult status and eventually led to a (sadly, mediocre) DVD release in 2002. If you're not a fan of creepy movies or rock music then this probably isn't your cup of tea...but, trust me, there are worse films of this type out there...and, despite average acting and some outrageously ridiculous situations, Trick or Treat is most definitely a wailing riff above the usual horror fare. You'll never look at your stereo the same way again. Or should I say MP3 player?TRICK OR TREAT TRIVIA- Marc Price (Eddie) played geeky Skippy Handelman on the popular long running comedy sitcom 'Family Ties.' After a string of direct to video flops including, 'Little Devils''Killer Tomatoes eat France' and 'The Rescue' he gave up on acting to pursue a career in stand-up comedy. Recently, he has been considering a TV comeback.Glen Morgan (Roger) is now a major Hollywood producer/ screenwriter. He has written and produced several major films and TV series, including: 'Space: Above and Beyond''The X-Files''Final Destination''Jet Li's The One''Willard' and most recently 'Final Destination 3'.Tony Fields (Sammi) started his performing career as a dancer on the TV series 'Solid Gold'. He appeared in several low budget films and TV shows before landing his breakout role as the devilish Sammi Curr in 'Trick or Treat'. Sadly, Tony passed away on February 27th 1995 of AIDS related cancer.Doug Savant (Tim) is probably best remembered for his pioneering role of homosexual twentysomething Matt Fielding on the popular sitcom 'Melrose Place'. Since then he has had a long and varied acting career, appearing in such films and TV series as: 'The One''Godzilla''CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and the short lived Joss Whedon sci-fi series 'Firefly'. Currently he can be seen as Tom Scavo on the smash hit series 'Desperate Housewives'.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a633328a7614ed09ca4c32427c41357",
            "input": "Never saw the original movie in the series...I only hope it was a much better movie than this or the sequel made in the 1980's as if it is not how were these two terrible sequels even justified. This movie had a really good lead in when they were advertising it to be shown on one of those old independent stations that are a thing of the past now. Anyways it looked like it would be a pretty good scary movie. It was, however, a movie that would make some Walt Disney movies look dark. Really, this movie was just a bunch of light fluff with virtually no boggy creek creature to be seen. The only real sighting is near the end when you see its shape during a very heavy rainstorm, other than that there is virtually no sign of the creature which was really disappointing as a kid. The story is basically the old evil hunters must kill anything they see and are after the boggy creek creature and kids are out to help it or just some random hairy guy in the woods that likes to pull random boats through the water. Not really worth watching I would however like to see the original, granted the maker of that would make the also bad boggy creature of the 80's, but he also made a very good slasher movie in the 70's \"The Town the Dreaded Sundown\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-465bf46eed504312ae13eafb96456349",
            "input": "This movie is deeply idiotic. A man wants revenge for a crime- but when he enacts his revenge- there is a video camera pointed right at him the entire time. What man with a brain cell in his head would sit there and do this for so long in front of a video camera?Just the fact that this script could never even happen except with someone unable to dress themselves destroyed it for me- but it got dumber!!!I am thinking the script writers have some serious habits that are cooking their brain cells and making them miss plot holes you can drive an battalion of armored tanks through.PLOT: a man seeks revenge for the death of loved ones, but in the middle of the plot something goes totally wrong, and then the unexpected unfolds.If only these people writing this story hadn't been so dumb as to write totally unrealistic plot turns that could never happen this way. To the writers I say- seek help for your serious mental problem.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71ed43d22054455fa63b6fbc8318acc9",
            "input": "By 1976 the western was an exhausted genre and the makers of this film clearly knew it. Still, instead of shelving the project and saving us from having to watch it, they went ahead and made it anyway. Apparently in need of an interesting thread to get the audiences to come and see the film, they decided to make it as blatantly violent and unpleasant as possible. Hell, it worked for The Wild Bunch so why shouldn't it work here? Of course, The Wild Bunch had the benefit of a superb script but the script of The Last Hard Men is plain old-fashioned rubbish. It's hard to figure out what attracted Charlton Heston and James Coburn to their respective roles. Heston plays a retired lawman who goes after an escaped bunch of convicts led by a violent outlaw (Coburn). The hunt becomes even more personal when Heston's daughter (Barbara Hershey) is kidnapped by the convicts and subjected to sexual degradation. This is a bloodthirsty film indeed in which every time someone dies it is displayed in over-the-top detail. It's tremendously disappointing really, because the star pairing sounds like a mouth-watering prospect. There's no sense of pace or urgency in the film either. It takes an eternity to get going, but when the action finally does come it is marred by the emphasis on nastiness. All in all, this might be the very worst film that Heston ever made. I'm sure it's one of the productions he is loathe to include on his illustrious CV.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f54c3626cba4461a48b558954d70402",
            "input": "Thanks should be given to the Hong Kong VCD/DVD distributors that I only paid US$1.4 and I could have such a surprisingly delightful enjoyment.Adultery? How common in our modern days. Eva grabbed her two children and kidnapped Nick to chase after Luis and Charlotte to Italy. She wants her revenge done but at the end, she also commits the same crime of Luis: she had sex with Nick.In this small indie production, Vivian Naefe dealt with the teething problems in modern marriage with a light heart. How can one dare treat marriage seriously in this fast-food time where people are now of higher mobility in physical, mental and technology areas? Conjugal commitment asks for too high a price that most people would choose to succumb to circumstances. Nick once trusted Charlotte but he fell for Eva after that kidnap journey which forced him to experience much growth.Most viewers may feel happy about the ending because Eva and Nick come together, well, this should be the greatest retribution to the unfaithful act of their spouses. However, I want a sequel, I want to see how the four would develop after this exchange. Perhaps they may exchange back, how can one be so sure about the shaky love relationship.Good acting and good scenery. The two little child-actors should not be neglected especially the boy when he cries at the reception of the hotel in Venezia. And of course, how can we forget the \"bella, bella\" scenery of the city.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a144324286664a3b861170f25bfc106a",
            "input": "The 1960's were a time of change and awakening for most people. Social upheaval and unrest were commonplace as people spoke-out about their views. Racial tensions, politics, the Vietnam War, sexual promiscuity, and drug use were all part of the daily fabric, and the daily news. This film attempted to encapsulate these historical aspects into an entertaining movie, and largely succeeded.In this film, two families are followed: one white, one black. During the first half of the film, the story follows each family on a equal basis through social and family struggles. Unfortunately, the second half of the movie is nearly dedicated to the white family. Admittedly, there are more characters in this family, and the story lines are intermingled, but equal consideration is not given to the racial aspects of this century.On the whole, the acting is well done and historical footage is mixed with color and black and white original footage to give a documentary feel to the movie. The movie is a work of fiction, but clips of well-known historical figures are used to set the time-line.I enjoyed the movie but the situations were predictable and the storyline was one-sided.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1634f42311c84963b1ae34b98754f384",
            "input": "This was quite possibly the worst film I've ever seen. The plot didn't make a whole lot of sense and the acting was awful. I'm a big fan of Amber Benson, I think she's usually a wonderful actress, I can't imagine why she decided to do this film. Her character, Piper, is drunk for almost the whole film, with the exception of the opening scene. On the plus side, there was several points in the film where the acting was so bad, I actually laughed out loud. But despite that, I would not recommend this film to anyone. It's only 80 minutes long, but that's 80 minutes of your life that you will have completely wasted.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f576a0d72f4496cace7bb76b4868927",
            "input": "In the autobiographical coming-of-age tale \"Romulus, My Father,\" Eric Bana, of \"Munich\" fame, plays an impoverished German émigré struggling to raise his son, Raymond (Kodi Smit-McPhee), in rural 1960's Australia. The major obstacle to the family's stability and happiness is his wife, Christina (Franka Potente), who flagrantly violates her wedding vows by shamelessly shacking up with other men. Despite her highly unconventional behavior, Romulus refuses to grant her a divorce, masochistically torturing himself in the vain hope that she will one day return to him. It is, unfortunately, the good-hearted and good-natured Raimond who must bear witness to all this marital turmoil - and it is his memoir that serves as the basis for the movie (Raimond Gaita would later grow up to be an author).Even though I admire \"Romulus, My Father\" for what it is trying to do, I can't honestly say I enjoyed it, for while the film has some fine performances and serious intentions going for it, these simply aren't enough to counteract the dour storyline and funereal pacing, which leave the audience as despairing and depressed as the people on screen. A serious slice-of-life drama is one thing, but this unremittingly downbeat wallow in adultery, insanity and multiple suicides (let alone attempted suicides) is something else again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8b6191f0d6c4699b265355b22fc925b",
            "input": "I caught this movie on FX last night, and as I was sitting there watching it, it occurred to me that it could quite possibly be the worst movie ever. Bad acting, bad cinematography, bad sound, totally unbelievable fight sequences, stupid characters. All these made it up to be the most laughably bad movie I've ever seen. It was so bad, I was enthralled by it's sheer lack of anything semi-competent that I had to keep watching... and they made a sequel!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14d327ba25bc49aebcb56634acde13b9",
            "input": "I'm a big fan of 50s sci-fi, but this is not one of my favorites. While the concept behind the movie was a natural vehicle for a classic teeny bopper sci-fi flick, the director counted too heavily on it to carry the movie. It's clear he was working with no money, because the entire movie is loaded with bloated dialogue that goes on and on forever. I have *never* seen so much time-killing in a movie.There are probably less than 60 seconds of \"blob footage\" in the entire movie, and most of the rest of it is people engaging in a lot of poorly-written, run-on dialogue. It was fun to see Steve M. and Anita C. together, but good heavens...how could casting have thought anyone in their right mind would believe them as teenagers?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e24b74758bf4a219024b8bac90e3185",
            "input": "It would require the beauty and eloquence of Shakespeare to do justice to this outstanding cinematic feat. Nevertheless, I'll give it a go.As far as adaptations of Hamlet go this one is already at a better starting point than all other versions since it encompasses the entire play. Still this is no guarantee for a first-rate movie, or even a good one. Usually I'm not much for movies that are overlong and the trend that seems to be prevalent in Hollywood today, namely that movies should be at least two hours long, preferably three, is one that hopefully won't last long. Few stories are strong enough to withstand such extensive exploration and could do with some cutting. Making a four-hour-long movie and keeping it interesting is no small undertaking, but Kenneth Branagh pulls it off with flying colours. He has managed to make a very long movie seem no more than any average movie. I was completely engrossed from start to finish.The cast is excellent with Kenneth Branagh himself as the tormented prince giving a strong and memorable performance. He manages to convey his feelings admirably through his voice and one does not have to be an expert on Shakespearean verse to catch the myriad of emotions that are waging inside him. Kate Winslet was a positive surprise, I must say. I didn't know what to expect really. I've always liked her well enough as an actor, but wasn't sure she could pull off playing Shakespeare. Well, she certainly eradicated all doubts with her performance. She is the best Ophelia I have seen and lent such depth to the character and was simply wonderful. Other brilliant performances are Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Richard Briers as Polonius and Nicholas Farrell as Horatio to name but a few. I liked the fact that Branagh used some internationally more famous stars to play in some of the minor roles; I especially enjoyed the sparring between Hamlet and the gravedigger played by Billy Crystal.The setting of the play in the 19th century gives a welcome change to the usually gloomier Gothic settings. It is overall much lighter than other versions I've seen, more colourful and lavish, but this does not distract from the tragedy of the play. It is exceptional, stylish and aesthetically pleasing, a definite delight to the eye and other senses as well. The music by Patrick Doyle is as always magical and thoroughly in tune with the movie. One can only feel a deep sense of satisfaction after having seen this. I am shocked and appalled that this exquisite work of art did not win an Academy award for best picture, even more so that it wasn't even nominated. There is no way there was a better movie made that year, or any other year for that matter. This is as close to perfection as you can hope to get.To sum up, a stunning work of pure genius and I cannot see how anyone could top this. My hat's off to you Mr. Branagh.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d61b8c6a34244da5ac536aa9c5528b05",
            "input": "This makes the third Errol Morris movie I've seen, and I'm increasingly not liking his style. He seems to find very interesting and varied characters, great personalities to create documentaries for, and then with tongue-in-cheek editing make fun of everything they are about. It's never really a direct caricaturation of them and Morris seems most of the time to be saying, \"But no, no, these people are really fascinating, really!\", but there's always these subtle little canted angles and not-so-subtle editing techniques that show that Morris seems to be mocking them behind their back.This movie tracks four people who break the traditional boundaries of organic separation... a man who studies African hairless molerats to find that they are amazingly ant-like, a lion tamer, a man who keeps a garden full of animal-shaped shrubbery, and a robot designer. The general theme of the film seems to revolve around the question of what designates animal, human, and life features? So the title of Fast, Cheap, & Out of Control doesn't really seem to mean anything in terms of the movie... right? Except of course Morris seems just a little disturbed by these individuals' passions (he might call them \"obsessions\") making synthetic designs on life. I share not that fear and honestly don't appreciate some of the connections Morris makes in the film.But I stress his subtlety. With no voice-over narration and leaving the words entirely to the interviewees, it's not as if Morris ever pounds that anxiety onto the spectators' collective head. Instead he mixes circus footage and ant footage together often at times when they're taken out of the context of the circus and the ants, showing a sort of collective absurdity behind what all of these people are talking about. I don't find them absurd, I find them all very neat and interesting individuals.Unless, of course, he didn't intend such juxtapositions, which means he's just a bad craftsman instead of a silent subverter. Considering none of this films I've seen so far have particularly impressed me, I don't really care to find out what he's trying to do.--PolarisDiB",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7996d0438edf460ea63fdc70236c3545",
            "input": "I was shocked by the ridiculously unbelievable plot of Tigerland. It was a liberal's fantasy of how the military should be. The dialogue was difficult to swallow along with the silly things Colin Farrell's character was allowed to get away with by his superior officers.I kept thinking, \"Hey, there's a reason why boot camp is tough. It's supposed to condition soldiers for battle and turn them into one cohesive unit. There's no room for cocky attitudes and men who won't follow orders.\" I was rooting for Bozz to get his butt kicked because he was such a danger to his fellow soldiers. I would not want to fight alongside someone like him in war because he was more concerned with people's feelings than with doing what was necessary to protect his unit.--",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdb78c6bd9614e908612a9e4cf9cc602",
            "input": "I joined this site to see what comments people would make about this absolute disaster of a film. I wasn't drawn in for even a second. The characters were all one-dimensional. They threw every topic they could think of hoping something would stick. I would bet (and hope) that everyone involved in Teachers looks back with embarrassment. There are some great actors here but you would never know it. Thank God it didn't destroy Morgan Freeman's or Judd Hirsh's or Nick Nolte's or Laura Dern's careers. There was no vision, no labor of love here, only a horrible effort gone wrong. BTW I don't think the writer ever set foot in a real school.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8ecd19f8a394eb9ad46444a6f3671f2",
            "input": "I totally disagreed with those comments which said this is a good movie. This is a totally SUCKED movie. I mean SUCKED - S.U.C.K.E.D. The story development is strange. Mia Kirshner changed from an innocent girl to a party-fun seeking chick for no convincing reasons at all. In addition, all the actresses looked way too old for being college students - College students looked like about 30 years old - you figure out the rest. I watched only about first ten minutes and started fast forwarding to look for sex scenes. all the sex scenes are lame, hasty and, most importantly, no frontal at all. All the sex scenes are laughable, considering how many clothes they had on. Do yourself a favor - put it down and save yourself a few bucks. Conclusion: Story - 0, Sex - 0, Acting - 0, Score - 0 out 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efd2a4de290b4114aed253807a5e406b",
            "input": "A sad, sad sight indeed is The Munster's Revenge. The Munsters are brought back one last time(Fred Gywnne received a huge paycheck to come back to the role of Herman Munster)in this made-for-TV movie about a pair of wax replicas of Grandpa and Herman that are robots \"terrorizing\" the city as preparation for a robbery of a mummy's stash at an exhibit. With the police on their heels, the two elderly television icons try to find out who is actually behind the crimes in order to clear their names. We get to see them dress in drag as waitresses(a minor highpoint in the film), grandpa turns into a bat with attached wire a couple times(one time even flying to Transylvania with Herman somehow invoking his frequent flyer miles I guess), and a most annoying relative \"the Phantom\" constantly sings and breaks glass ad nausium! What is most sad is hard to pinpoint: is it that Gywnne(especially) and Al Lewis look so haggard in every scene and so indifferent to the material. Is it the hokey costumes of the robots that have that school production values look about them. Maybe it is the ridiculous script. Sid Caesar's crazy, mostly unfunny antics. Or perhaps it is seeing something which brought me joy and fond memories as a child being treated to a super K-Mart fashion makeover. At any even, the result is decidedly disappointing and silly even for Munster standards. As for the rest of the cast, Yvonne De Carlo is adequate in a most vacuous role(though showing more cleavage than usual for a woman of her years and experience). K. C. Martell makes an ever-so-not affable Eddie Munster. Jo McDonell is an attractive Marilyn. Bob Hastings as the aforementioned Phantom looks and acts and speaks in the most absurd manner. The film has a real cheap feel about it even for a made-for-TV movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f5b02795b92849c3adf3950d3878bf15",
            "input": "Divorced lawyer Rick Magruder (Branagh) stumbles drunk out of a party hosted by his firm one night and has a chance meeting with a woman named Mallory Doss (Davidtz), who was a waitress at the party and seems to have lost her car. Rick drives the woman to her home and there they discover that her car has been already parked there, seemingly by her father, Dixon Doss (Duvall). Rick and Mallory walk into the house arguing about the situation when Mallory carelessly undresses in front of Rick, and he then spends the night with her.Rick wakes up in the morning and Mallory encounters him later in the day, asking him to file suit against her father because of his dangerous behavior. Rick, now obsessed with Mallory and willing to do anything for her, is successful in having Dixon put on trial and sent to prison, but when he is freed by his local friends, Rick finds himself in a trouble, trying to protect himself and his children from the danger he has unknowingly brought to life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33c3ac7a25704306af0aa26f1b135abc",
            "input": "You know all those letters to \"Father Christmas\" and \"Jesus\" that are sent every year? Well, it turns out that they are not actually delivered but dropped off in a half-forgotten corner of the post office to rot unless some bright spark figures out a way of posting them. As bizarre settings go, it's a winner and one which perfectly fits the strange movie that is \"Dead Letter Office\". Having said that, this is obviously an Australian film as opposed to a British one. If it was Royal Mail, most letters get this sort of treatment anyway. I haven't been in this flat for two years and we're still getting letters for a Mr Wang, some female priest of the Church of Latter Day I've-Never-Heard-Of-You and various catalogues for industrial equipment addressed to a plumbing company.\"Dead Letter Office\" (the name given to the place where undeliverable mail ends up) follows the story of Alice (Miranda Otto) who grows up in a seriously divided home. Writing to her absent father, she only learns in adulthood that her letters haven't been delivered for one reason or another. So, logically, she gets a job at the D.L.O. and finds herself working alongside other social rejects including the brooding Chilean immigrant Frank Lopez (George Del Hoyo). Slowly, she finds herself drawn to him but can she find out where her dad is without bringing the self-contained world of the Dead Letters Office to its knees?Nothing against this film but I was reminded of the god-awful Heather Graham film \"Committed\" while watching this. However, this is so much better than that pile of horse crap but then again, that ain't difficult. For a start, this film is much more logical. True, the metaphors are somewhat blatant and the underflowing symbolism quickly becomes a flood. But at least this is cohesive and quirky without being complete drivel. It is also well acted. Both Otto and Del Hoyo are very good as the lovers looking for something they know they'll never find while other characters are peripheral at best. Part of the trouble is that it seems to wrap up far too quickly, leaving this viewer somewhat disappointed. The other part is that when you consider Australia's draconian immigration policy (i.e. if you don't speak English, rack off!), such a story is unlikely to take place in reality. The other characters, sadly, also help to destabilise the realism by proving to be little more than odd-ball stereotypes.Despite that, \"Dead Letter Office\" is certainly something a little different. It might not be to everyone's taste but I liked it. Yes, it was hackneyed and predictable but sometimes, it's nice to watch a film without guns or violence or heavy-duty swearing and nudity (no chance of that in an Australian film). There ain't any major laughs, there's no Bullet Time and the characters are usually one-dimensional. But it's the story that counts here and while it's not earth-shattering in its magnificence, it's a pleasant enough way of passing the time. It's the movie equivalent of a Sheryl Crow CD - nice to listen to now and again but you wouldn't really miss it if it wasn't there.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b30f6d8214a446f8f88e9dde57ec351",
            "input": "This film is a very funny film. The violence is bad, the acting is...Well Dani, stick to singing or screaming or whatever the hell it is you usually do. The random chicks wearing hardly anything is just to catch sexually-frustrated goth lads in. Personally, i think this movie really does suck. The story and characters COULD be very good, if say the directing, the actors and other little nibby things were made better. But the film is just bad, the only reason why people like this piece of crap is because it has Danni in it. This film is possibly the worst B-rate film ever. And, believe me that's hard to achieve, especially when you're competing with Def by Temptation and over crappy excuses for \"serious\" horror movies. I'm not a CoF fan, and so i just see this as another rubbish movie...A really bad one. If Dani made this as a comedy then, good going him. Very well done. Over than that though, i rate it low, for it's crappiness. Watch it when you're in a happy, happy, joy, joy mode so you can laugh at everything or if you're high on multiple different types of drugs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4e05212f4dea41dcbd39e6151fd3a9ca",
            "input": "Awful dreams, wild premonitions, blasphemy and homosexual fantasies permeate Paul Verhoeven's (arguable) masterpiece of a true femme fatale who loves her men then kills them. Filled with blood and occasional gore, The Fourth Man is truly neurosis inducing. Men will literally leap when Renee swings out her scissors......",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6cb26213434b42dd87c9622b76fdf932",
            "input": "When I look for new cars, I expect not to be shown boats. When I drink fountain Coke, I should expect that the drink contains Coke. When I watch a movie that embellishes itself with the name of en excellent scientist, I expect that it is in some way relevant to that person or their work. This could have been people discussing my grannys' diary. The material covered is relevant only in that they vaguely tirade science. I fell asleep the first time I tried to watch it, & the second time I stopped watching it.I love science & documentaries. I would rather watch them over the latest blockbuster. However this falls far short of providing anything worth your time – Avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62c74646eb2e41d08ce3d60a2d8cf83e",
            "input": "I really enjoyed this. I got it thinking it was going to be a documentary, but it revealed itself as a good piece of tongue in cheek fun.I think this has been well done, pretty much an extended TV show into a film, but due to the characters or rather original actors willingness to have fun and be made fun off helps this work in a great old style Innocent way.If you are a fan of the original TV series then i am sure you will enjoy this.Q",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66af458b84434420bffd9b31e927f8c8",
            "input": "Was this meant to be a comedy or a serious drama? This film starts with a light-hearted banter between three women. Fine. It moves into a conflict between the women when one of them meets a man. Fine. There are a few antics between them. Fine. But when the plot thickens and finally becomes black I started to wonder whether I had misinterpreted the first part of the movie. It continues in this vein for a while until, in the end, it tries to go back to the original light-hearted banter. But by now it's too late. It's hard to see why these women would still be talking to one another and the finale is unconvincing. Truly a lesson (for British filmmakers anyway) of how not to make films. Difficult to see how the producers ever convinced themselves this film would work. And the box office proved it to be a real flop, because I'd never heard of this film until this weekend (four years after its release).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e151f032d9534cedb4bf7021f0c2ab72",
            "input": "Major Payne was really not very good at all. Despite being funny here and there, the story was ridiculous and the acting was poor. Major Payne's voice and temperament were especially annoying. The idea was ridiculous and the things that the boys had to do in that film were even more ridiculous. I would not recommend this film to anyone.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c6ec0c52c84c46b88619c3b77e17257a",
            "input": "This episode is a bit confusing. Some people say that you have to start from the very beginning but I have to say I was a bit confused from the beginning!Clark gets a blow to the head and wakes up on the floor of Fairview Mental Institution and is made fun of for believing that he's a superhero. Clark is told that the life that he knew was all in his head. Delusional. He also find some things that are unusual: Martha's married to Lionel; Lex is bound to a wheelchair with his limbs cut off after his accident on the bridge; and Lana is devoted to Clark. But he finds one familiarity; someone else who's devoted to Clark: Chloe. He also finds that a mental patient is also from the known world of Smallville. And the doctor is an escapee from the Phantom Zone.This episode reminds me right back to a Buffy episode called \"Normal Again\" where Buffy begins to have vivid-daydreams about a mental asylum. The doctor tried to convince her that all that she knew was a figment of her imagination and that she was, in fact, crazy. Her parents were still married, they still lived in LA, her friends didn't exist, Angel was never her boyfriend and she didn't have a sister called Dawn. Demons and vampires also didn't exist. Both episodes are a bit sad because doctors aren't just telling the characters that it's all a figment of her imagination but it tells us what it really is: fiction, and it brings us back to reality. It's nice, though, to have a sense of reality every once in a while, but we watch these shows to escape from reality. It's again nice because the characters have to overcome new challenges.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c60b339113e24468abeb5f9d55b60a68",
            "input": "This can't be Mandy Schaffer's last film. Somebody, do something! :-(Argh.What little life this one might have had, the directing finished off. Don't blame the cast; they did OK. Even the winemaker's younger brother was pretty well done, and he didn't even get into the movie until halfway through. And please, please put Mandy in some more movies! She's too beautiful to bury her career at such a young age. Ya' breakin' my haht, heah....Two specific criticisms, in case anyone cares (apparently nobody liked this movie very much). First, the way Traci kept popping up at just the right melodramatic moment, in order to see whatever she was supposed to see, and never got seen in return, was very annoying. Hollywood: please stop giving villains perfect timing luck which runs out exactly when the climax arrives. It's dumb. Write better scripts so you won't have to use that lame plot device any more. If your script isn't good enough to stand up without that, then don't produce it.Second, Carmen wouldn't have fallen for that fake injury trick that Traci pulled. She already had Traci fingered. More bad writing/directing there.I could trash this movie further but mercy forbids it. Actually I didn't hate it as much as the others seem to have. It just didn't have much of a reason for being made, unless it was purely a vehicle to show off the lovely Mandy. Oh, and to whoever didn't think she was sexy... the character wasn't very well written, but how can you say she wasn't sexy?!? One or the other of us needs glasses, and I don't think it's me.MORE MANDY. (Not to be confused with \"Moore, Mandy\" -- although I'd like to see her again too. ;-)P.S. Did I mention I hope Mandy makes me more movies? ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd9133b3f19548ebb6db65d9ffac91c2",
            "input": "Two kinds of movies we like are (1) westerns, and (2) movies from 30 or 40 years ago. We ought to have liked A Man Called Sledge; BUT.....BUT... this picture is disagreeable, annoying and stupid from start to finish. Since there is nobody in the story (good or bad) to warm up to, there is nobody to motivate the necessary suspense to keep the viewer interested. No camaraderie among the guys trying to steal the gold, and no camaraderie among those trying to protect it. Sledge has a pretty girl friend, but there's no reason why she slobbers all over the guy or why she wants to be in the same room with this no-account pig.The film also suffers from an intrusive and gawdawful musical score, and from extremely bad writing and direction by Vic Morrow.Of the last 30 older movies rented from Netflix or Video Vault, this was the rock bottom, the only true dud in the bunch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28e6394816ae4301ad0478585d6ff15f",
            "input": "I got a good laugh reading all the idiotic comments for this film,as it's obvious that those people who criticized the movie never seen it, or were stupid enough to pay to see it.The best reason to watch was on the Elvira show a few years back. Elvira delivered the movie with as many laughs as one can.It's an ok monster flick, compared to the hundreds of horrendous American flicks made. Way better!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc2b0570abcc425b84a96e2527676519",
            "input": "I finally got myself set up on mail order DVD rental so I could find movies not available to me in the stores. I chose The Souler Opposite because I love Christopher Meloni, and also like small, often ignored films.This one is such a treat! Meloni has such charm in this part. It's easy to pigeon hole him is you only ever see him as his alter ego Elliot Stabler (LOSVU). In this film, Meloni is an out of step unattached mid-lifer who is hitting the skids in many ways, only to find a path to happiness in someone unexpected.The relationship drawn between Barry (Meloni) and Tim Busfield's character is realistic and not over done. I haven't seen Busfield since 30something, and he was fun to watch. But it was all Chris' film. I became such a fan girl all over again.It is a bit slow in the beginning, I will admit. I thought some of the \"flashbacks\" could have been edited down. But overall, this film will delight you - male or female - as it has an honest, refreshing view of relationships today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2d91db74aeb4144bad4ee966ca277f6",
            "input": "I turn on 700 Club once in awhile and only agree with some of the statements made- I'm one of many believers that is considered liberal by most Christians and conservative by most non-Christians. I vote my mind, and its usually not rep. or dem. - i don't believe 700 club tells people what to believe, but that it represents many older christians that grew up in very conservative backgrounds. i think many folks misunderstand what is said on 700 club. it bums me out to hear name calling either direction. i think 700 club folks really do love Jesus but are so busy trying to get people to vote conservatively that they've forgotten to show love to certain people and promote peace like Jesus did. Please don't judge Jesus based on ignorant individuals that believe on Him and let's also not be as ignorant with our comments about them. Why ARE people so mean to each other?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c967997c78943cab481d53f87e157ed",
            "input": "Where to begin? #1 Amitabh's son, played by Akshaye Khanna, is 30.Amitabh's been in prison for 33+ years... heA) Telepathically transmitted the sperm home?B) Asked a nice Pakistani guard to mail it for him?C) They allow conjugal visits in secret Pakistani JailsD) All of the aboveE) The producers were having a little too much bhang atthe time they approved the script?#2) Amrita Rao (Yummm!) wants Khanna - he's yum, yum, yummy... and apparently he wants her - who wouldn't, right?!... But, when her dad gets ratted out, and then killed (I hardly think this is a 'spoiler' as you'd have to be brain-dead and blind not to see this coming in the film) he's pretty emotionless towards this catastrophe and with the tip (metaphorically) of his hat, leaves her behind to save his dad, never mind her loss, and says (paraphrasing) \"If god wills it, we'll meet again\"... Basically meaning, \"I'm gonna get my dad and MY job done, sorry for your loss - CYA! Buh Bye!\" - callus beyond even low-life Hollywood standards...#3) There are so many holes in this horrible waste of time called a movie, that you can drive all the jeeps, trucks camels and any extra stuff through it. Pass - really, complete and total waste of time - Oh! There is a great dance sequence (yes, only one - as in dance sequence - regardless of quality) great belly dancing - but NOT worth watching just for this.Rent Veer-Zaara or Lakshya (will Hrithik Roshan ever take acting lessons?) for better Indo-Pak conflict movies... In fact, Veer-Zaara is pretty damned good - 7.5/8 I'd say!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-655ead78db954d17823d7eee057a45ca",
            "input": "I only today, picked this up at the 99 cents only store today, and I still think I got ripped off. \"Dream to Believe\" is a pretty boring and unrealistic gymnastics drama and $1 is just too freakin' expensive for this. This film is probably only notable for 2 things: 1. It has a young Keanu Reeves. And 2. It's directed by Paul Lynch, the man who also did Promo Night. Now onto the movie. It's about a girl named Robin (Played by Olivia D'Abo) who is badly injured from a car accident that also cost her father's life. So the accident prevents her from competing in gymnastic tournaments, she is often picked on during her classes and eventually she meets some wild kid named Tommy (Played by Keanu.) Robin, when not in training, works part-time, along with her mother and stepsister, at a Laundromat owned by her abusive stepfather. Eventually she is chosen to compete. Overall, Keanu alone and some catchy 80s tunes are what prevent me from giving this 1 star, and it's also not one of the worst movies ever, but still far from good. The DVD itself is not getting any medals either as it appears to be sourced from an old VHS and towards the end, the sound goes out of sync and when the end credits are almost over, it fades to black, even though sound can still be heard. So this can probably be passed as a bootleg. The DVD artwork makes no sense either as it has what appears to be recent photos of Keanu and Olivia and the background has nothing to do with the movie, as it's also not in the movie itself, so the cover's obviously photoshopped. In any case, avoid at all costs, unless you're a Keanu fanatic. I probably won't be hanging to it any longer. I'm probably gonna give it to The Cinema Snob, who's a great YT critic btw. Hey, if any of you have any crappy movies that they no longer want in their sight, feel free to donate to him to keep his show running.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aac4081202cc4b9a9cc59034cffff93c",
            "input": "They filmed this movie out on long Island, where I grew up. My brother and his girlfriend were extras in this movie. Apparently there is some party scene where they are all drinking beer, (which they told me was colored water, tasted disgusting, and was very hard to keep swallowing over and over again, especially in the funnel scenes). Yet none of us ever heard of the movie being released anywhere in any form. It never came out in the theaters (obviously) and it, as far as I knew, was never released on video, and I'm sure wasn't released on DVD. Yet it looks like it was seen by some people, albeit it probably very few. So there must be something. I would absolutely love to purchase this for my brother, yet there is no way I can find it anywhere. Does anybody know anything about when/where/how this movie could be purchased? And which format that would be?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77b523920661463f8d4b44913262e17b",
            "input": "This is a quirky little movie, and I have to agree that there is some quirky acting in it as well.It follows the adventures of a young man who decides that he wants to become a famous Las Vegas illusionist, and is partly about following his dream, partly about the dreams of others, and all about the travails of showbiz. I thought the movie was charming, and it has a moment or two of real magic that make the whole thing worthwhile.Alan Arkin is terrific as the magician who never was, and his mentoring of Max makes for a funny and touching relationship.Not for everyone, probably, but if you like movies about the journey, then I think you'll like this one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e88af83c98a4cd6892202da6bf74697",
            "input": "I am sorry to say that this film is indeed bad. It reminds me of a c-grade porn movie with one major difference: no porn.The story and dialogue needs a complete overhaul. Maybe then the bad acting would not have been as noticeable. At the very least, the pacing should have been picked up.While I accept that this had a low budget and the director did a good job visually given what little resources he had, he should have spent more time on the story or better yet, get someone else to write it. Many of the action scenes were just pointless.It was a complete waste of my time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8abd4699f1745348b49160f371d07d8",
            "input": "Is there anything that happens in this movie that is NOT predictable? I think not. Basically the movie is cliché after cliché and really nothing ever comes as a surprise. It makes the movie extremely predictable and because of that the movie is also seriously lacking in tension. So for a thriller it is not tense and unpredictable enough but also as a drama it's a failure. This is because the movie its story is highly unlikely. I mean, no way this could ever happen in real life, as in the same way as the events occur in this movie. So the movie has a real suspense and credibility problem.But it truly are the clichés that killed the movie. It was cringing stuff at times. Everything is so formulaic in this movie. The predator is portrayed as a cool heartless, almost psychopath like sexual frustrated boy and the victim as a naive young woman, who acts like she didn't see any of this coming. Everything that happened in the movie was so obvious and all seemed to happen for a reason. Such as the sequence in which the 'predator' fixes the 'victims' broken car. That has got to be one of the oldest clichés out of the book. I knew what the movie tried to achieve after that point. I tried to look as if the teacher and the student were really growing toward each other trough the eyes of the other persons around them. It was so incredibly obvious and cheap that I almost wanted to stop watching the movie after that point. The movie is filled with moments like these.The title might suggest that this is a cheap porn movie but this in fact is a sappy made for TV movie. Which means that everything is slowly happening and the movie spends halve its time on character development and unnecessary sub-plots to make the movie even more drama like.I'll admit that Elizabeth Berkley is pretty good acting in this movie. She makes some of the clichés and events look even almost realistic at times. Her Hollywood career is as good as over after appearing in the Paul Verhoeven movie \"Showgirls\", so unfortunately she will probably only still appear in movies- and television series like this one. It's a waste of her talent and she surely deserves better. All of the other characters are a disappointment. Corey Sevier plays the cliché pretty 'untouchable' rich boy and the way the husband of the main character is portrayed is even worse. He looks more like a sexual frustrated predator than the true predator of the movie. He basically tries to have sex with his wife in every sequence. He wakes up, he wants sex. Before he goes to sleep, he wants sex. He gets home, he wants sex. It might be a realistic thing but I don't know, it just didn't feel right for a movie like this one and the story in general.A cliché filled movie and I can't think of any reason why anyone should ever watch this movie. It's predictable and therefor also lacks in suspense and credibility. Not an 'horrible' movie and it certainly is a watchable one at times but all the weak and cliché elements in the movie also make this far from a recommendable one.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-136f9045acd44b41b79e2779501b8624",
            "input": "You do realize that you've been watching the EXACT SAME SHOW for eight years, right? I could understand the initial curiosity of seeing strangers co-exist on an Island, but you'd think that after watching unkempt, stink-ladened heroes run roughshod through the bush with an egg on a spoon for half a decade would be enough to get you to commit to something a little more original (and interesting).And I'm not even speaking of the shows validity which for the record I find questionable. It's just hard to suspend disbelief for \"Bushy Bill\" eating a rat when the entire crew of producers and camera people are housed in an air conditioned make-shift bio-dome sipping frosty mochcinno's with moxy.What's the appeal here? I don't care about these people or their meandering lives. I just don't get it. But if you DO find yourself being captivated by hairy, unwashed people, I suggest you turn off your TV and just take a trip to your local bus station where you can see people like this in their TRUE habitat. They call them HOMELESS PEOPLE, and free of charge, you can sit back and marvel in their uncanny ability to retrieve various cigarette debris from a plethora of garbage canisters, eventually striking \"pay-dirt\" and fashioning a homemade Dr. Frankenstein-styled cancer-stick, all the while begging people for change for food when the stink of \"Aqua Velva\" on their breath is enough to suggest otherwise. And the best part? Much like Survivor, every week one member of the tribe \"Leaves\" the \"Island\" when they are unceremoniously sent packing to the local Institution when the frightening unmedicated state of full-blown schizophrenia kicks into gear! Now THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed6d05843b8b47ef8dd47ebf39bbd63f",
            "input": "This movie is just great. It's entertaining from beginning to the end, you're always gonna be at the edge of your seat throughout the entire movie. In my opinion this movie is highly underrated by the critics.Sly suits perfectly into the role of the well trained mountain-rescue guy Gabe Walker. Together with him Michael Rooker makes a great appearance as Hal Tucker. And then, John Lithgow, one of the best performances I've seen of him as a villain.And the fact that 75% of the movie takes place at a mountain with a whole lot of bad guys on it makes way for a lot of action! Brilliant movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7370f80ed6b42c381615d43b12ae883",
            "input": "*** Spoilers*My dad had taped this movie for me when I was 3. By age 5, I had watched it over 400 times. I just watched it and watched it. And I still do today! It has a grim storyline, a lamb's mother is killed by a wolf--a very emotional scene--and wants to become a wolf, like him. After years of training, the lamb is made into a really REALLY evil looking thing. He and the wolf travel to his old barn, but he cannot kill the lambs, no matter how much he wishes to. He ends up killing the wolf, but is no longer seen as a lamb by his former friends, and can't return to his previous way of life.The art is beautiful, the songs are..well, okay, and the voice acting is better than some things today.All in all, you just *have* to see this movie, it is a great masterpiece. Although, it's very hard to find today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ddfee5a9d414dd29b4ddfff7aec11ac",
            "input": "I had seen this movie when it got released, and when I was 12 years old :) And I still vividly recollect the wonderful scenes of how the hero/heroine escape every time when faced with danger :) And the best feature of the movie was the portrayal of the villain! I think many so-called action movies copied a lot many \"escape scenes\" from this movie!! And not only does it never impress me when I see such copying, it always increases my appreciation for this masterpiece! :) The lead actors have acted wonderfully. The slow and realistic development of the chemistry b/w the hero and heroine was extremely natural and wonderfully portrayed. As children, we felt that the love that developed b/w them was very natural :) The way they face and overcome all their trials and tribulations together was something that can make even kids realize the value of true love, sacrifice and caring. I recommend that every person see this movie when given a chance!! --Vijay.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bb02a2672e44faeaad10d936e64e865",
            "input": "Sadly, the print of the film we were going to watch burned in the fire at Universal Studios last week, so we were stuck with video. That could even be a metaphor for this second-rate King Kong movie from Toho studios' stalwart director Ishiro Honda. Essentially it's a warm up for \"King Kong versus Godzilla\". It even uses the idea of a Mecha-Kong, like Mecha-Godzilla. Of course the movie climaxes with King Kong fighting Mecha-Kong on top of the expo tower in Tokyo, but if you didn't know that already then maybe you're in the age group that this movie was intended for.The cast is headed by a guy named Rhodes Reason who we had never heard of... glancing over his list I see mostly a lot of scattered American TV credits, so it's interesting that they dragged him all the way to Japan so that they could have a nominal American hero. The real hero of the movie is the more sensitive Japanese commander played by Akira Takarada, who I recognized from Hiroshi Inagaki's iconic version of \"Chushingura\" (47 Ronin) and also from the original Godzilla films by Honda. I'm sorry Rhodes Reason whoever you are, but this guy has way more screen presence and you can bet that everyone wants him to end up with the cute little blonde, played by Linda Miller. We laughed at the way Reason would always find a way to interject himself between Miller and Takarada, who it seemed like she kind of preferred. Of course like all Kong leading ladies her primary relationship is with the King himself. She discovers a nice trick: if you talk to a giant ape really..... really.... slowly..... he'll understand what you're saying. And if you're a blonde gal, that means that he'll do whatever you tell him to do. That fact is not lost on Dr. Who (Eisei Amamoto) and Madame Piranha (Mie Hama) -- representing a \"nation which shall not be named\" -- who plan on using her as bait to get Kong to dig up mineral deposits that are trapped at the North Pole.Yes, this is truly the plot of the whole movie -- apparently only a giant ape is going to be capable of digging out these minerals which can be used to make super powerful weapons. Dr. Who builds Mecha-Kong to get it but the circuitry gets in the way, so they decide to go for the real Kong. Kong himself seems momentarily infatuated with Mecha-Kong, a story element that might have made the film more interesting but wasn't followed up on.By the end of the movie, the cute blonde has shouted \"Kong\" or \"King Kong\" in her chirpy voice so many times that when the two heroes tell her to let him go at the end they're speaking for all of us. Basically this movie squanders whatever majesty was possible in the Kong character by making him a heroic and friendly figure much too early, just like the newest version of the story. Kong is just a guy in a suit in this movie, and they show quite a lot of him to the point where the goofy face becomes impossible to take seriously. It's a nice looking movie, I'm sure it satisfies the demands or desires of fans of this type of thing, which is really more of a wrestling film than a monster film in a lot of ways. The monsters don't ever really scare in these films, they just jump around and push each other around a lot. It's not a worthless movie, but it's extremely predictable and formulaic so for anyone under the age of 10 or so it probably will only be entertaining as comedy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0df3498cce3f414a8f42193ef9f56623",
            "input": "I watched this film alone, in the dark, and it was full moon outside! I didn't do it in purpose, it just happened in this way. So all the elements were there for this film to scare the hell out of me!! Well, it didn't, in fact i wanted to shut off the DVD player after only 8 minutes, but i thought come on give it a chance, unfortunately i did. The acting was awful, the only one with some decent acting was Samaire Armstrong. The plot is not original, if you are a horror fan then it is just the same stuff you have seen many times before. Some scenes didn't make sense at all, and you just get the feeling that the director wanted to make the movie longer! The monster was the biggest disappointment of the movie. The (scary) scenes looked like they belong to a horror movie from the 80s when there was not enough technology, yet some good movies were made back then! I was surprised to see the name of a major production company at the beginning of the movie, i thought couldn't they put some money in this and make it decent?!! I couldn't agree more with the ratings that the movie got, it is also my rating for it, 3 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25bf53b52507468393b3980c139d378b",
            "input": "What a master piece. To take the cold war conflict and transport it to the future. This film is satire of the highest order. In my humble opinion it outranks Dr. Strangelove.The clever naming of the two superpowers, as the Confederation and the Market. Cons being commies and Market, The west! outstanding. The Clever use of gen Joxs, was ahead of its time. only are we really seeing the dangers of genetic engineering. Robot joxs tackled the issue head on in 1989.The message of this film is about the comradeship of the humble man and how it can overcome the wishes of government. This movies screams DON'T DO IT YOU FOOLS YOU'LL KILL US ALL.EXCELLENT 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5d9857c380041cd924c76ac93384783",
            "input": "The original title means \"The Birth of the Octopuses\". I must confess that I do not quite understand this title. The English title is \"Water Lilies\". But after having written this, I read the comment by another user: \"The title in French is also suggestive: \"prieuve\", or octopus, suggest an individual having to juggle many pressures simultaneously.\" Thanks for your explanation.The basic theme is the first sexual emotions of girls, when it is not clear if they are directed toward the same or the other sex. It is no different for boys. I think that both Floriane and Marie will eventually have heterosexual feelings without any admixtures.Much of the movie is water ballet. Sometimes the girls will have their heads downwards, and nothing above the water except their feet and lowers legs, with which they will wave and kick in the air. To people like me who had never seen such things before, it was fascinating. - Floriane is the leader of one team of \"water lilies\". Marie tells her that she would like to see when Floriane is training. This seems to be their first contact that is not just ordinary. Soon they will walk together. Floriane takes Marie to a garage where a boy is waiting for her, and then goes away with him for an hour, while Marie is waiting for her to return. I took for granted that the couple slept with each other. But we will later learn from the movie that they do less than that. I can supply some information which few users will find elsewhere. There is a scene in which Marie secretly steals Floriane's garbage bag. In it she finds an apple, mostly eaten. And Marie proceeds to eat the rest. – There is a parallel scene in another movie, \"Kazetachi no gogo\" (Afternoon Breezes) by Hitoshi Yazaki (Japan, 1980). This is about adult young females, and a clearly Lesbian woman is vainly in love with a heterosexual woman. She also steals a garbage bag of the beloved, and also finds a more or less eaten apple and eats the rest. Later Floriane tells Marie that she would like to have her first orgasm from her. Marie says she cannot do this. But still later Marie says that she is indeed willing to do it. And she masturbates on Floriane. There is no nudity in this scene. Probably only a female director could have made such a fine psychological show or study of – I would like to quote Baudelaire, \"Les amours enfantines\".Floriane is played by Adèle Haenel, who made the excellent performance as the autistic girl in \"The Little Devils\" by Christophe Ruggia (2002) – a very underrated movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca576394e8ff4acb8ace62fe36cc0ea2",
            "input": "This 1997 film-blanc classic tale of smoldering passion has achieved its well-deserved legendary status as one of the screen's greatest sagas of a doomed and hopeless love. The pervasive, ongoing and progressive magnetism between Judge Reinhold and what's-her-name is sure to set many a viewer's heart a-flutter with memories of one's own first crush. The brilliant screenplay dangles this embryonic affair-to-be in front of the enraptured audience, sitting transfixed as the abstract, almost-expressionist cinematography deep-focuses on the just-under-the-surface desires that ebb and flow between the principals. You can cut the sexual tension with a dull tire iron. A tiny drop of perspiration on the end of a nose catches the bright sunshine, and leaves no doubt as to its significance. Scenes like this abound and bear watching again and again. As with \"Jane Eyre\" and \"Rebecca\" (to which this masterpiece is so often compared), the closeups of the actors' faces as they experience the slow dawning of the great love-that-is-not-to-be will haunt you forever. The now-classic RC soundtrack score, with its creative and unique use of solo synthesizer, emphasizes the emotion that drips throughout like a leaky crankcase.If I had any criticisms at all by mentioning what I consider a minor flaw (and dared to risk the wrath of the millions of fans who hold this classic so dear to their hearts), I would say that the hallmark of \"Runaway Car\" - its sense of mounting sexual tension - is briefly broken by the highway scene, which now after repeated viewings seems just a bit overlong (and probably even unnecessary?) to the eternal, bittersweet tale of Love Interrupted.Dare I advance what I perceive as the tiniest of flaws in this critically-acclaimed triumph of modern cinema? 'Citizen Kane' had its 'Rosebud' . . . 'Runaway Car' should have its catchword as well. Perhaps the film could have opened with an extreme closeup of Judge Reinhold saying something such as \"A car is an extension of its owner!\", and the rest of the storyline could then be dedicated to parsing every syllable, subtlety and nuance of that phrase. Had that plot line been done, this film could have topped \"Titanic\" at the Golden Globes that year, I'm convinced.My one regret? That I didn't read the novel first.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e7d09f4d68349a0b1a8ac564a8196d6",
            "input": "It felt like I watched this movie thousand times before.It was absolutely predictable.Every time the story tried to get a bit twisted,every time I awaited something interesting to happen, I saw nothing but what I expected. Like \"The bread factory opened up another facility,because there was not enough bread\". In two words:Flat story,that has become a cliché,bad acting,bad special effects...Only the dumb Russian cop,Vlad, was a bit funny while punishing around the bad guys.The pile of muscles was so incredibly STUPID,that it made me laugh at him for a moment. I wonder why i waste my time spitting on that shame-of-a-movie... It won't get worse (because it is not possible) :D",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17ca0d7444b9490493b5215f3c8cedc6",
            "input": "Ugh! Where to begin ... first, Campbell Scott's non-stop angst becomes a real turn-off after awhile (a very short while) as he internalizes his mounting anguish, curiosity and anger. Only we don't care! These characters as presented by the writer and director are wholly unlikable, and therein lies the key. They haven't given us anything to make us care if they are adulterous and whether or not they are still in love with one another. When Scott quietly tells his wife, \"I could kill you\" before their three daughters at the dinner table, after the shock of his selfishly poor timing wore off I almost wished that he had--and then done the same thing to the smug, wisecracking apparition of Denis Leary before being hauled off the the looney bin. An utter waste of time and perhaps--only perhaps--resources.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c69877af191459298b5306911890102",
            "input": "There should be a rule that states quite clearly that movies like Resident Evil are supposed to be made in the spirit of the game, not in the spirit of blowing up everything possible. RE was a survival horror game, and a damn effective one at that, yet Paul WS Anderson managed to make it like any other video game movie to come along. Alone in the Dark is essentially the same kind of a spirit as Resident Evil, so of course, there is the slight hope the director will manage to have some piece of a brain enough to make a horror movie and not an action movie. Instead, Alone in the Dark just proves that there is no longer hope for video games becoming movies.The plot, despite the fact that it obviously isn't supposed to matter, is the largest of many problems with the movie. The movie starts with what can only be described as five minutes of scrolling text that may or may not be important, as after a minute passes, the audience stops caring and just sits through the rest hitting the object closest to them. Then there's something about an orphanage, some artefacts, an ancient tribe, some bureaucracy and some demons, all of which get so jumbled together that the viewers really can't follow with what is going on. Characters move in and out of the plot like candy, some having huge build-ups for meaningless deaths. Basically, what I can understand is that some demons got released, and Edward Carnby (Slater) has some link to them thanks to some operation given to children in his orphanage which has failed on him. He finds an artefact involving the demons and brings it to an ex-girlfriend anthropologist (Reid), who of course he manages to have sex with right away for no good reason. Then, out of nowhere, all hell breaks loose, and the pair end up with a military team led by some asshole commander (Dorff), who apparently has a mutual hatred for Carnby.It's all ridiculous, and the reason I don't really understand it isn't just because it's complicated and jumbled, but it leaves no room for anyone to really care. Instead, I highly recommend that, if you must see this film, bring a tennis ball or something to occupy yourself when the plot manages to bore you into confusion.The action scenes in a movie with a plot as terrible as this should at least bring it up a little, right? Too bad, this movie is like any other ruined crap ever made, with enough quick cuts to behead a coop of chickens. Considering that this is based on a horror game, not an action game, it is especially annoying.The first action scene involving a man chasing Cranby from a taxi is among the worst I have ever had to witness, and the rest isn't all that great either. The demons look somewhat cool, though the fact that they turn into powder when killed takes away all that effect. Scenes involving lots of guns which should be cool to watch instead involve the muzzle fire as the only source of light and the camera zooming and panning faster than the head of a crack addict. It's all the kind of seizure inducing crap that keeps children in bed at night.The acting is what I like to call taking actors and making them do nothing. Slater does nothing but sound important for the whole movie, though he does seem to have more talent than he is letting on. The same is true of Dorff, who gets a thankless role despite actually having some talent (something that has happened to him a lot). Reid is pretty much exactly what she should be, background sex appeal, as whenever she tries to act it is a disaster (as is the incredibly bad scientist look she has in the beginning).In all, this is the type of movie that worries me about future video game movies. If they keep ruining the spirit like this, it's only a matter of time before Samus Aran is killing Middle-Easterns with an AK-47 and Tommy Vercetti is fighting a squadron of aliens. Unlike Resident Evil, however, this one doesn't deserve a second chance, as I don't think anything could possibly help me forget just how terrible this movie is. It's bland, uninteresting and unexciting. This is the movie equivalent of diarrhea; it's all thrown together, nothing really fits and, in the end, you're just glad it's over.TOTAL: 4%",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53d756c8d7b346859d4543ebf3886ebc",
            "input": "Okay, the story makes no sense, the characters lack any dimensionally, the best dialogue is ad-libs about the low quality of movie, the cinematography is dismal, and only editing saves a bit of the muddle, but Sam\" Peckinpah directed the film. Somehow, his direction is not enough. For those who appreciate Peckinpah and his great work, this movie is a disappointment. Even a great cast cannot redeem the time the viewer wastes with this minimal effort.The proper response to the movie is the contempt that the director San Peckinpah, James Caan, Robert Duvall, Burt Young, Bo Hopkins, Arthur Hill, and even Gig Young bring to their work. Watch the great Peckinpah films. Skip this mess.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-559e19edd69647988681d8024ed81f49",
            "input": "I saw this film about twenty years ago on the late show. I still vividly remember the film, especially the performance of Robert Taylor. I always thought Taylor was underrated as an actor as most critics saw him as solid, almost dull leading man type, and women simply loved to watch his films because of his looks. This film, however, proved what an interesting actor he could be. He did not get enough roles like this during his long career. This is his best performance. He is totally believable in a truly villainous role. From what I have read, he was a very hardworking and easy going guy in real life and never fought enough for these kind of roles. He basically would just do what MGM gave him. This film proves that he could have handled more diverse and difficult roles. The other thing I remember about this film is how annoying Lloyd Nolan's character was. Nolan was a great actor, but this character really aggravated me. The last scene of the film has stuck with me for all of these years. This film is definitely worth a look.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b3a2f1f951634cb4ad2a7c39dfc84c42",
            "input": "Well, what was fun... except for the fun part.It's my second least favorite so far, I even thought it was worse than 'Lazarus' and 'Ghost in the Machine'.Let's start with the good. The teaser, it was incredibly well done and also emotional. Being the great animal lover that I am, it was fun seeing so many beautiful animals in this episode.But then there's all the bad, and believe me there is a lot of it. Little made sense, so those animals were being abducted by aliens and impregnated? whaaa??? the dialog was also pretty awful. There were about one or two quotable lines. and worst of all, having pretty much all those animals die was very unpleasant for me. In the end... what's the point? they all pretty much died. We didn't learn anything, we weren't entertained, and I couldn't even find Sophia's death sad... just very frustrating.* star. shame because Season 2 was doing so well.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38ca4578af594fa2af15ce435debafb0",
            "input": "Mario Lewis of the Competitive Enterprise Institute has written a definitive 120-page point-by-point, line-by-line refutation of this mendacious film, which should be titled A CONVENIENT LIE. The website address where his debunking report, which is titled \"A SKEPTIC'S GUIDE TO AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH\" can be found at is :www.cei.org. A shorter 10-page version can be found at: www.cei.org/pdf/5539.pdf Once you read those demolitions, you'll realize that alleged \"global warming\" is no more real or dangerous than the Y2K scare of 1999, which Gore also endorsed, as he did the pseudo-scientific film THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW, which was based on a book written by alleged UFO abductee Whitley Strieber. As James \"The Amazing\" Randi does to psychics, and Philip Klass does to UFOs, and Gerald Posner does to JFK conspir-idiocy theories, so does Mario Lewis does to Al Gore's movie and the whole \"global warming\" scam.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-239023b06bff4612ae225be72be352a4",
            "input": "First off, I knew nothing about 'Mazes and Monster' before I watched it. I had no knowledge of the Role-playing controversy behind it or the fact that it was a Made-For-TV movie. When I looked at the cover (the updated DVD one) I seriously thought it would be another Fantasy adventure like 'Legend', with Tom Hank as the nerdy hero from 1980s earth entering a mythical world to save a princess from an evil maze filled with monsters. Sounds exciting, right? That is what the cover suggests to you at first glance. I was given this movie as a gift, obviously under the same premise because my aunt knows I'm into action movies with a medieval myth theme. And it has Tom Hanks, one of my favorite actors. So I popped this movie in, expecting a feel good movie with Tom Hanks in a 80s special effects world that would be good for a laugh.No! None of this happens. Now before I continue I will confess, I am a nerd but I have no interest in Role-playing games. That is all this movie is about so my interest in the content is lukewarm at best. And M&M (copyright infringement?) is not even a feel good role-playing based movie with lovable geeks that uses their imagination to enter a world of awesomeness. No! This is an Anti-Role-playing movie that must have been made by some Religious folk (the same people who also think Barney is the work of Satan.) I understand, Satan is a crafty fellow but I don't think he is desperate enough for soul to lull RPG lovers into worship him. This movie is THEE anti-gamer movie. This is what I get from this movie: it hates RPGs and not only does it make fun of the people engaging in Role-playing but it makes poor Tom Hanks a mental patient.Tom had an excuse to talk to a volleyball in 'Castaway', poor guy was alone but Tom somehow made his insanity fun and you literally saw the Volleyball as a lovable character through Tom's good acting. I wish I watched that movie instead of this. In this movie, Tom is attacked by a make believe dragon creature (it looks like a poorly made mascot for a RPG team) and has a split personality that is creepy at best. Tom's acting only exceeds to make you feel bad for his character and nothing else. I get that the poor guy lost his brother and is not right in the head because of it so the movie does win points for being intentionally tragic. I am not one for films that exploit mental illness and the ending to 'M&M' made me feel like cr*p. Luckily I watched 'Hudson Hawk' afterwards and got a good laugh before my soul was crushed any further. Yah, 'HH' surpasses 'M&M' by . . . a LOT! This is not one of Tom's better films. In fact it is thee most depressing movie I've ever seen him in (Even 'Saving Private Ryan' is not this depressing). I walked in hoping to watch a feel good movie and I ended up feeling the exact opposite. If you want to watch a sad (both emotionally and visually) movie then by all means watch this. If this movie is to convey a message, it is this: \"Don't play RPGs if you are Cuckoo for Coco-Puffs.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9796bc51a8c4f96b07d391033e6a6c1",
            "input": "This was a very brief episode that appeared in one of the \"Night Gallery\" show back in 1971. The episode starred Sue Lyon (of Lolita movie fame) and Joseph Campanella who play a baby sitter and a vampire, respectively. The vampire hires a baby sitter to watch his child (which appears to be some kind of werewolf or monster) while he goes out at night for blood. The baby sitter is totally oblivious to the vampire's appearance when she first sees him and only starts to put two and two together when she notices that he has no reflection in the mirror, has an odd collection of books in the library on the occult, and hears strange noises while the vampire goes to talk to the child. She realizes that the man who hired her may not be what she thought he was originally. She bolts out the door, the vampire comes out looking puzzled and the episode is over. I don't know what purpose it was to make such an abbreviated episode that lasted just 5 minutes. They should just have expanded the earlier episode by those same 5 minutes and skipped this one. A total wasted effort.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-adfb67ba57e3420fb784667455f4354b",
            "input": "This movie could be used in film classes in a \"How Not to Script a B-Movie\" course. There are inherent constrictions in a B-movie: Budgets are tight, Time is precious (Scarecrow was apparently shot in 8 days) and the actors are often green and inexperienced. The one aspect you have complete control over is writing the best script you can within the limitations set before you. Scarecrow's script seems to have been written in a drunken haze. I could go through about fifteen examples of the nonsensical scripting of this movie, but I'll just mention one: The Gravedigger. The character of the gravedigger is introduced about an hour into the movie. He seemingly has no connection to any of the other characters already in the movie. He is shown with his daughter, who also has no connection to anybody else in the movie. The gravedigger is given a couple scenes to act surly in and then is killed to pad out the body count. Why give the Gravedigger a daughter? Why give the daughter a boyfriend? Why introduce them so late in the movie? Why not try to make them part of the ongoing storyline? Scarecrow doesn't seem to care.The \"story\" of Scarecrow goes something like this: Lester is a high school kid (played by and actor who'd I'd peg to be in his early 30's) who is picked on by the other kids. He is an artist who draws birds and has a crush on a classmate named Judy. His mom is a lush and the town whore. One of her reprobate boyfriends makes fun of his drawings (by calling him a \"faggot\" for drawing birds instead of \"monsters and cowboys.\" If you have a high school student still drawing cowboys I'd think him to more likely be gay than a high school student who draws crows) and later, kills Lester, in a cornfield, under the titular scarecrow. Magically, Lester's soul goes into the scarecrow. Somehow, this transference changes Lester's soul from that of an artist into that of a wisecracking gymnast (I know some reviews have called the scarecrow a Kung-Fu scarecrow. I disagree. The scarecrow practically does a whole floor routine before jumping onto the truck during the climax of the movie). The scarecrow then goes on to kill those who tormented him, those who smoke pot in the corn field, those who dig graves, boyfriends of daughters of gravediggers, pretty much anyone who showed up on the movie set.The bonus feature on the DVD should be mentioned. The director (a Frenchman) does an impromptu version of rap music, admits he enjoys not having executives around on set so he can screw his wife while working and gives a quote to live by (and I'm paraphrasing): \"Life ez a bitch, but et has a great ass\"Number of Beers I drank while watching this movie: 5 Did it help: No Number of Beers needed to enjoy this movie: Whatever it takes to get to blackout drunk level.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d7ede46e872440d8203f0a37485ec77",
            "input": "Famous was \"famous\" for their tension and release style of cartoon where the semi-main character is in terrible peril, only to be rescued by the hero at the last second. This particular Casper is the only one I can remember where death actually takes a hand. But even in death, there is still a happy ending.The constant in Famous Studios cartoons is that \"virtue always triumphs\". Popeye always gets to his spinach in time, Baby Huey always out-foxes the fox, Little Audery always \"learns her lesson\". And some FS cartoons ARE really dark and depressing.You have to give them credit. as much as I love Looney Tunes and \"Tom and Jerry\" I don't think anyone was putting out a better cartoon product at that time than Paramount. Color, animation, music (the great Winston Sharples), editing, voices. They were consistent and a glowing example of the best that the art form had to offer.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-722ad6881d034b058d85a859dd0f4aff",
            "input": "This is one of those movies that apparently was trying to ride the martial arts wave craze. Kind of like Billy Jack I guess. However, whereas Billy Jack did have one notable martial arts scene there are none in this one unless you consider some gentlemanly grappling and roughhousing as such. We are introduced to the star who is described as having learned Judo in the marines. I was in the marines and while they are pretty established in boxing, I really don't remember any emphasis on Judo. As a result the antagonist, James Macarthur, makes reference to the Judo when he offers an excuse for why he, a state champion wrestler was so easily defeated. Lame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a07b02165d5445728d856ea1c33d6f84",
            "input": "I liked this movie because it basically did more with less. It could have been made more interesting if they had kept it confined to the studio even more (though some of the plot elements would have been harder to develop).The guy playing the DJ did a good job of showing someone spooked out and haunted by his memories. I also found his dialog with the callers pretty funny.While parts of the movie you can see coming a mile away, other parts you do not expect to turn out the way they did.I thought it was a pretty minimal ghost story for the most part, concentrating more on the living side of the equation. The last 5-10 minutes were pretty well done as everything is being revealed.While it was a shorter movie, it felt to be just about the right amount of time to tell the story. Any more and it would have started to drag.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f61e3a21cc254fe3bf1944c0773ca51b",
            "input": "Well I don't personally like rap, but I still found Fear of a Black Hat hilarious. I'm sure I didn't get some inside jokes, but some I knew, and it was funny enough to make me laugh just after I'd stopped laughing. I'm a big fan of Spinal tap, so naturally I had to check this out. It was deriviative from This Is Spinal Tap, sometimes blatantly, but this film still stood on it's own as an original, intelligent, and funny satire. My personal favorite: \"Back in the time of slaves, they didn't have hats to protect them from the sun, so at the end of the day they were too tired to revolt. Now we have hats.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf3370af46d04e279593d78e13896813",
            "input": "The only thing I remember about this movie are two things: first, as a twelve year old, even I thought it stunk. Second, it was so bad that when Mad magazine did a parody of it, they quit after the first page, and wrote a disclaimer at the bottom of the page saying that they had completely disavowed it.If you want to see great sophomoric comedies of this period, try Animal House. It's so stupid and vulgar it lowers itself to high art. Another good selection would be Caddyshack, the classic with the late Rodney Dangerfield and Bill Murray before he became annoyingly charming, with great lines like greens keeper Carl Spackler's \"Correct me if I'm wrong Sandy, but if I kill all the golfers they'll lock me up and throw away the key.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e5d9f1c9b72499abaf61fe383bded43",
            "input": "I already loved \"How the Grinch Stole Christmas\" when it was released and I'm still loving it now, 5 years later. Still lots of people seem to disagree with my opinion and this movie never really had received much love at the time it came out.Sure, the movie is over-the-top and campy but that at the very same is also the reason why this movie is so charming and fun to watch. All of the sets, costumes and characters are done perfectly over-the-top in a fun way, without ever becoming truly ridicules. It's a visually spectacular movie to watch. It's a campy movie making at its very best! Director Ron Howard really surprises with this fun little Christmas movie.Main reason why the movie works and why it's so much fun to watch is Jim Carrey as the Grinch. He truly carries the movie with his good and fun role. He is of course helped by the convincing make-up, which also received an Academy Award. Of course if you're a Jim Carrey hater you shouldn't even think about watching this movie. This movie is really his movie and he makes it all work and so much fun to watch. Other fun and memorable roles are being played by Jeffrey Tambor, Clint Howard and Josh Ryan Evans as the young Grinch.The movie has a good morale but it is all a bit sappy to me. Perhaps it's because I'm Dutch and we don't really celebrate Christmas that enthusiastic and big here, as in the United States or England. For me the movie was simply fun and entertaining and the morale just left me quite cold to be honest.The musical score by James Horner is good and fun, even though it's your average every day Horner stuff, it still all works perfectly for the movie and helps to make some of the scene's work.Perfect Christmas entertainment.8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d6a1d1a0b2742a98062f1499748bd9a",
            "input": "I wanted so much to enjoy this movie. It moved very slowly and was just boring. If it had been on TV, it would have lasted 15 to 20 minutes, maybe. What happened to the story? A great cast and photographer were working on a faulty foundation. If this is loosely based on the life of the director, why didn't he get someone to see that the writing itself was \"loose\". Then he directed it at a snail's pace which may have been the source of a few people nodding off during the movie. The music soars, but for a different film, not this one....for soap opera saga possibly. There were times when the dialogue was not understandable when Armin Meuller Stahl was speaking. I was not alone, because I heard a few rumblings about who said what to whom. Why can't Hollywood make better movies? This one had the nugget of a great story, but was just poorly executed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3353c7d027649298cb7656823c385b3",
            "input": "Underneath the dense green glop of computer graphics there gleamed the astounding art and skill of Ichikawa Somegoro. Alas: it got lost in all the goo. The scenes of Old Edo -- with the courtesan, drifting on the Sumida, rehearsing and acting in the Nakamura-za -- were all exciting and engaging, taking you back to an interesting and rich era. The action on the Kabuki stage, in which Somegoro excels and excites, was more enriching than any of the absurd high jinks that followed. The skill, the energy in the audience, the colors of the sets, were far more satisfying than all the nonsense that took over plot and performance. What a wasted opportunity! One of the best kabuki actors alive, and he gets lost in the dreck.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c5878c82f4c47939f8f43d3d3ec6563",
            "input": "This one-minute film is arguably the first movie ever made. Other inventors had previously filmed actions - like Edison's motion photography of a sneeze - but the Lumiere brothers developed equipment that tremendously advanced the medium. At the time, of course, their `cinematograph' must have bewildered their peers, including their subjects. In this first instance, the brothers record employees leaving their factory, some of whom understandably struggle to hide their awareness of the camera. The Lumieres attempt to make the film more entertaining by introducing animals and a bicycle, but `La Sortie Des Usines Lumiere' doesn't nearly match the ingenuity of their later films. The most interesting aspect of this short film is the brothers' selection of a familiar working class ritual as their subject. Their choice is the initial evidence of their curiosity about all of the world's people, a quality that makes viewing their experiments immensely rewarding and fascinating today.Rating: 8",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6903fa9c45f4a319ecab6f74dd13043",
            "input": "This movie was pretty absurd. There was a FEW funny parts. Its goes right in to the bin of movies in my memory where I think, \"Hmm.....that movie had a few funny parts, but overall, pretty ridiculous plot (or lack of).\"I thought it seemed like Ben was trying a little too hard to be a cooky funny guy. And I didn't understand how he was a self made multi-millionaire and still such an idiot. Anyways, I like Ben Affleck. He makes some crap, but hey, I can forgive him. I mean, I liked Jersey Girl, I didn't think Gigli was all his fault, I like him overall. I guess he's kinda like the kid you feel sorry for cuz he just can't seem to get it right.My advice would be to avoid this flick. It didn't really develop in to a workable plot and Catherine O'hara and Jimmy G. weren't used as well as they could have been. They deserved better. Overall, this movie is NOT Home Alone, it's NOT A Christmas Story, its NOT Christmas Vacation or any of the other classics. Forever Forgettable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc7b5f158c704c0c8a592b3df6069af9",
            "input": "This is even worse than the original Game of Death. A jumbled, incoherent storyline leads to \"Billy Lo\" falling from a helicopter to the ground below, killing him, as we're left to follow his younger brother, Bobby Lo. So not only do we start out following some Bruce Lee clone, the film kills that one off and has us follow another one thirty minutes into the story. The main reason to watch this one is when Bobby Lo fights a lion, which is quite obviously a guy in a lion costume. Jang Lee Hwang is also the villain, who is usually pretty awesome but his screen time is significantly small. Mainly watched this and the original Game of Death because they're a part of the Bruce Lee boxed set. It's no wonder they're included with Lee's finished works. No one would buy them otherwise.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ddf15dbcf0b041d0b02defc592786237",
            "input": "As this happens to be one of most favorite novels , I was very excited to see the move. I was not disappointed! Yes of course there are a few things that I could pick on , but I think that the movie stuck true to the book, and was a really good movie. It seems that Stephen King films mostly get a bad review , but this is one of the good ones. It is such a dark story , which I guess is why I like it .. and what is better than the dead coming to life.. and something about animals returning from the grave is quite creepy too. If you have seen the movie do yourself a huge favor and now read the book!! It is a well written screen play , the actors could have done a better job ( I only say this for Rachel , and Ellie .. she was so whinny ) I liked everyone else a lot.. and most important to me .. it stuck true with the novel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19abb62b9d384eb6918cf1f46ad2861f",
            "input": "I think Micheal Ironsides acting career must be over, if he has to star in this sort of low budge crap. Surely he could do better than waste his time in this rubbish.This movie could be far better, if it had a good budget, but it shows repeatedly through-out the movie. There is one scene at a outpost, which looks like, its outside the front of a railway station, and i bet it was.There is one scene which made give this movie a 3, and it shows the space craft landing and taking off over a lake, surrounded by forests. This was well done, but the rest of the movie, forget it.There is another scene, which looks like a engineering plant, which i bet it, and does not look like a space outpost as the character say it is.This movie is stupid, has a serious low budget, makes no sense and God Help Micheal Ironsides.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02817e97ce6547868b4e74a6382b3aad",
            "input": "The simple hand camera both gives some almost documentary feeling to this film, and also relates to the dogma films.Did you ever get bored of those hollywood-style cop flicks with brawny guys who get assignments james bond would be envious of? Fed up with the married-living-single cop, the divorced-but-family-man, the personified doughnut and the tough hunter? Ever wondered how the real police work is like?Well, for germany, this film shows you. Set in the north between west germany and east germany, former DDR, an laid off post office clerk starts her job, fresh from policeschool. She quickly finds her way around the usual customers, and becomes accustomed to life as a policewoman... but this is not much fun.Other german crime films like Derrick, Der Alte et cetera have dignified officers talking calmly with suspects. These cops here have to deal with the lowest on the social ladder. Good dialogue and realism makes this an interesting view, even more if you know that part of germany a bit.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0aa26bf01db4a08b4d1c7aacff70a86",
            "input": "You know, Robin Williams, God bless him, is constantly shooting himself in the foot lately with all these dumb comedies he has done this decade (with perhaps the exception of \"Death To Smoochy\", which bombed when it came out but is now a cult classic). The dramas he has made lately have been fantastic, especially \"Insomnia\" and \"One Hour Photo\". \"The Night Listener\", despite mediocre reviews and a quick DVD release, is among his best work, period.This is a very chilling story, even though it doesn't include a serial killer or anyone that physically dangerous for that matter. The concept of the film is based on an actual case of fraud that still has yet to be officially confirmed. In high school, I read an autobiography by a child named Anthony Godby Johnson, who suffered horrific abuse and eventually contracted AIDS as a result. I was moved by the story until I read reports online that Johnson may not actually exist. When I saw this movie, the confused feelings that Robin Williams so brilliantly portrayed resurfaced in my mind.Toni Collette probably gives her best dramatic performance too as the ultimately sociopathic \"caretaker\". Her role was a far cry from those she had in movies like \"Little Miss Sunshine\". There were even times she looked into the camera where I thought she was staring right at me. It takes a good actress to play that sort of role, and it's this understated (yet well reviewed) role that makes Toni Collette probably one of the best actresses of this generation not to have even been nominated for an Academy Award (as of 2008). It's incredible that there is at least one woman in this world who is like this, and it's scary too.This is a good, dark film that I highly recommend. Be prepared to be unsettled, though, because this movie leaves you with a strange feeling at the end.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7916538f0819437b8f21885f44b87bee",
            "input": "After watching this on the MST3K episode, I have to wonder how many movies this film borrows from. It seems to combine elements of Logans Run, Farenheight 451, Final Sacrifice and at least several others. At one point I was really expecting Cris Makepease to call Lee Majors ROWSDOWER. I wonder if the director has any clue how many holes there are in the plot. like the fact that, even though gas is unavailable, there is plenty of it in abandoned gas stations, and the stations are located close enough together to keep an F1 race car going all the way across the country.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-624d9b71ce3d42bba0c0d93eaa2265c1",
            "input": "\"Kolchak: the Night Stalker\" is a hugely entertaining TV series in which a pushy, sarcastic, forty-something reporter is repeatedly drawn into mortal combat with supernatural (and occasionally extraterrestrial) forces. Based on a very popular pair of TV movies featuring the Kolchak character, this series died a quick death in the mid-1970s due to low ratings, but it nevertheless maintains a strong cult following today. But will the average modern-day viewer be able to dig Kolchak and his weekly clashes with the undead? That's actually a tough question to answer fairly. Detractors of this series tend to argue that it's formulaic and hopelessly dated. On the other hand, fans argue that it's cleverly written, well-acted, and sometimes genuinely spooky. And me? I've got a foot in both camps. I thoroughly enjoyed watching all 20 episodes of Kolchak on DVD recently, though I can plainly see that the series has major flaws.I'll address the question of Kolchak being \"formula\" fiction first. Now, I think we can all agree that most TV shows have formulas - just about every episode of Columbo unfolds according to the same pattern, for example. Repetition is not necessarily a bad thing in itself; in fact, critics have long recognized that audiences often enjoy, and actively seek out, repetitive entertainment. However, the problem with Kolchak is that its formula is simply TOO rigid - it's too repetitive even by the most generous standards.In almost every episode, Kolchak investigates a murder, and figures out that it was committed by some form of monster. He tries to publish a story about said monster, but his editor Vincenzo blocks him, always on the grounds that Kolchak doesn't have sufficient evidence to support his claims that supernatural forces are at work. And, alas, Kolchak is also obstructed by the police. So, in the end, Kolchak does some independent research on the monster, figures out how to kill it... and then kills it. Without ceremony, or reward, or writing a big story about it.You can see where this ever-so-strict formula might get tiresome, right? I'm particularly mystified by Vincenzo - if Kolchak's always raving about monsters, and Vincenzo never believes it... well, then, why doesn't Vincenzo fire Kolchak, or have him committed? That's what any normal boss would do. But the series eschews such realism and prefers to keep Vincenzo and Kolchak as comical antagonists. As a result, many of their scenes together are profoundly unbelievable - though they are also quite funny.The very best episodes of Kolchak manage to vault over the limitations of this formula, however, usually because they contain some kind of unexpected twist. These select episodes are good enough that I think they're largely immune to typical criticisms of the series. Some of my favorites include: Horror in the Heights - an episode that's noteworthy for being grimy, inventive and socially aware. Kolchak's dialog has an unusually sharp and cynical edge. Though it adheres closely to the Kolchak formula, the script (written by Hammer Studios veteran Jimmy Sangster) is remarkably literate, and it delves deeply into the monster's backstory.The Devil's Platform - a possible inspiration for the \"Omen\" films, this episode stands out to me because the villain - a very young Tom Skerritt - tempts Kolchak with a satanic contract full of goodies (and, in so doing, reveals a lot about the reporter's character.) Firefall - this episode appears to have a bad reputation among fans, but I enjoyed it because it's got a great red herring and a really creepy, almost unstoppable-seeming monster.Though I've singled out these three episodes for praise, I'd say that most of the stories are entertaining at the very least. For my money, there are only two complete turkeys in the 20-episode run: Primal Scream, which is about monkey-men running rampant in Chicago, and the Sentry, which features the dumbest-looking creature makeup in the history of filmed entertainment (and this assessment is coming from a lifelong Doctor Who and Godzilla fan!) On balance, then, this is a good series. A little repetitive, a little cheesy perhaps, but it has elements of greatness. Even during the weaker episodes, Darren McGavin's wonderful performance as the caustic, world-weary, endlessly funny Kolchak truly shines. He carries the series effortlessly, in a way that, for example, Sarah Michelle Gellar never managed on \"Buffy.\" McGavin was one great character actor, and this series is worth watching for him alone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4914b6d19fd342b89faf1ed37c2e564b",
            "input": "I just watched this movie on Starz. Let me go through a few things i thought could have been improved; the acting, writing, directing, special effects, camera crew, sound, and lighting. It also seemed as though the writers had no idea anything that had to do with the movie. Apparently back in 2007, when the dollar was stronger you could buy a super advanced stealth bomber that could go completely invisible for $75 million. Now-a-days those things cost about $3 billion and they cant go invisible. Apparently you can fly from the US to the middle east in an hour. There was a completely random lesbian scene, which I didn't mind, but it seemed like a lame attempt to get more guys to see it. The camera would randomly zoom in on actors and skip to random scenes. Oh yeah, since its a Steven Segal movie, its predictable as hell. All in all I rank it right up there with Snakes on a Plane.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0df6b5aa30da4ddaaf633947b19e73fe",
            "input": "In what is arguably the best outdoor adventure film of all time, four city guys confront nature's wrath, in a story of survival. The setting is backwoods Georgia, with its forests, mountains, and wild rivers.The director, John Boorman, chose to use local people, not actors, to portray secondary characters. These locals imbue the film with a depth of characterization unequaled in film history. No central casting \"actors\" could ever come close to these people's remarkable faces, voices, or actions. I don't recall a film wherein the secondary characters are so realistic and colorful. As much as anything else, it is this gritty realism that makes this film so amazing.Another strength is the film's theme. Nature, in the wild, can be violent. How appropriate that the setting should be the American South. Very few places in the U.S. are, or have been, as violent as redneck country. In a story about Darwinian survival of the fittest, the film conveys the idea that humans are part of nature, not separate from it.\"Deliverance\" is very much a product of its time when, unlike today, Americans expressed concern over a vanishing wilderness. The film's magnificent scenery, the sounds of birds, frogs, crickets, and the roar of the river rapids, combined with the absence of civilization, all convey an environmental message. And that is another strength of the film.At an entertainment level, the tension gradually escalates, as the plot proceeds. Not even half way into the film the tension becomes extreme, and then never lets up, not until the final credits roll. Very few films can sustain that level of intensity over such a long span of plot.Finally, the film's technical quality is topnotch. Direction and editing are flawless. Cinematography is excellent. Dialogue is interesting. And the acting is terrific. Burt Reynolds has never been better. Ned Beatty is perfectly cast and does a fine job. And Jon Voight should have been nominated for an Oscar. If there is a weak link in the film, it is the music, which strikes me as timid.Overall, \"Deliverance\" almost certainly will appeal to viewers who like outdoor adventure. Even for those who don't, the gritty characterizations, the acting, and the plot tension are reasons enough to watch this film, one of the finest in cinema history.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75a10cde0577426cb5d6bd0f00114e01",
            "input": "I, like many die-hard Trekkers (or Trekkies, i don't care!) suffered through seven seasons of \"Star Trek Voyager\", dreaming of a better show when it was over, lamenting the end of \"Deep Space Nine\" in 1999. prayers, answered. \"Enterprise\" is fantastic. Fresh perspective, radically different characters, stunning new visuals, a pop-song for the intro. (I was shocked!) I can't think of anything I didn't like. sign me up for 10 seasons of this show. \"Star Trek\" is back - \"Voyager,\" nobody misses you! Keep on Trekkin'!>",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e1a7514ebc2438fb29b7f764f519dd8",
            "input": "My girlfriend once brought around The Zombie Chronicles for us to watch as a joke. Little did we realize the joke was on her for paying £1 for it. While watching this film I started to come up with things I would rather be doing than watching The Zombie Chronicles. These included:1) Drinking bleach 2) Rubbing sand in my eyes 3) Writing a letter to Brad Sykes and Garrett Clancy 4) Re-enacting the American civil war 5) Tax returns 6) GCSE Maths 7) Sex with an old lady.Garrett Clancy, aka Sgt. Ben Draper wrote this? The guy couldn't even dig a hole properly. The best ting he did was kick a door down (the best part of the film). This was the worst film I have ever seen, and I've seen White Noise: The Light. Never has a film had so many mistakes in it. My girlfriend left it here, so now I live with the shame of owning this piece of crap.News just in: Owen Wilson watched this film and tried to kill himself. Fact.DO NOT WATCH",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0a6ced7248a49188c743d226f4e8541",
            "input": "This was a watershed event in my movie watching life. I went to see this in the theater when it came out. I was completely amazed at just how bad it was. Movies like this make you wonder who put the money up and who owed whom a favor - a very, very large favor. The special effects are absolutely first grade level, as in any first grader could have done them. Toy rubber bats on strings with no attempt to hide the strings, arrows that appear to be drawn on the film and look to be the shape of an arrow you'd find on a street sign, and a laughable story line. Ed Wood made masterpieces compared to \"Conquest\". Every film student should see this thing just so they'll know the very definition of a bad movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21d00f5da9574e7fbf36017aa345b9a7",
            "input": "I only saw it once. This happened in 1952, I was seven, the movie 13.We were so young... But I kept in mind, forever, the strong moments of Gunga's sacrifice.I realized that time how much a people can be hardly submitted and used by a foreign nation. Under these historical circumstances, in the movie, the personal relation of friendship, a kind of friendship that ignores itself, the one raised between people who share daily life, who see each other faces, who knows each other names, but belong to different worlds, can only make appears. Then, in the most critical moments a troubling question emerges: \"Whom are we, in first, supposed to be loyal?\", which People, family, motherland, the person you know close to you?. You do not have time to give a perfect answer, urgency is there, and it is for life or death. Gunga-Din gives his answer with sacrifice of himself. Somewhere, in a confuse manner, a problem remains unsolved, the emotion grows with the rhythm of the movie until somebody dies, just one life, nothing compared to so many other fictions or realities we can see today, because this death, this unique vanishing life I lived it, I shared with my child unconditional friendship. It was lived by the spectator I was. That day I loose Gunga-Din for ever. As I left behind, later, my pretty childhood, as I left from then so many worlds I lived in. I left all that for good and these lines are today a short visit I didn't expect to do this morning when getting up.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-606196e0884f415e87fe156116b368b0",
            "input": "First, the CGI in this movie was horrible. I watched it during a marathon of bad movies on the SciFi channel. At the end when the owner of the park gets killed, it's probably one of the worst examples of CGI I have even seen. Even Night of the Living Dead had better animation.That said, the movie had almost no plot. Why were they on that island in particular? Well, it wasn't stated in the movie. And, why would the people keep coming into the cat's area? Makes no sense.One thing that stood out in this movie was moderately good acting. In what could be called a \"B made for TV movie\" movie, the acting was very good. Parry Shen stood out in particular.If you have absolutely nothing to do on a Saturday, watch this movie. It may be good for some memorable quotes.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-440c561e05974f2f85c65ed354035e4b",
            "input": "A worn-out plot of a man who takes the rap for a woman in a murder case + the equally worn-out plot of an outsider on the inside who eventually is shut out.With such an outstanding case, one would think the film would rise above its hackneyed origins. But scene after scene drones by with no change in intensity, no character arcs, and inexplicable behavior.The homosexuality theme was completely unnecessary -- or on the other hand, completely unexplored. It seemed to be included only to titillate the viewers. When will Hollywood learn that having gay characters does not automatically make a more compelling picture?A regrettably dreadful movie. When will Lauren Bacall pick a good one? I expected better of her and Kristin Scott Thomas. This one is definitely one to miss.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e83b7b80c2d845a7bcbe43bccf914a24",
            "input": "What seemed as a good premise for a movie...unfortunately it fails to deliver on nearly every level. Very hard to follow at the start of the movie I actually found myself fighting the urge to turn it off the biggest problem from a visual aspect is the fact that the camera work is simply over the top with so many \"arty\" splicings and semi-subliminal cuts throughout the movie that actually distracts you from the from the overall story. It really tries too hard to immerse you in the moment and build to a suspenseful ending but the movie just has so many half conceived characters and non relevant script it just leaves you feeling disappointed and confused as to why they tried to go so deep with it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ded7ba370abb434d877e1841a7b4ce40",
            "input": "Spoilers! Classic 70's sex trash! The Swedish gal (Helga) was what made this movie so great. She was beautiful, but what really got to me was how sexual she was. She exuded massive quantities of sexuality throughout the film. Her best scenes were when she was, er, stimulating herself. Whenever she was on screen, I became transfixed.Also, the Doctor Julia (sister of the dimwitted male focus of the film) was very interesting visually. Although most 12 year old girls have bigger breasts than Julia, she knew how to use what little she had and her scenes (especially the scenes with the silk blouse and black skirt) also grabbed my attention unmercilessly. You also got to love the major hoaky scene where the bats stripped her nekkid; I don't know if I've ever seen anything more ludicrous yet sexy at the same time. Classic stuff!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-349bc9d4eca14840a40649313fc012c7",
            "input": "First of all, I ain't American or Middle-Eastern. Second of all, I don't have a religion. The closest thing to a religion I have are sports and movies. Henceforth, I believe I would be best served to supply an opinion of neutrality and free from bias.Most of these short films are an utter disgrace. This dreadful event should be used to commemorated all those innocent people whom were murdered by \"some\" barbaric and uncivilized morons. Instead, most of what I saw in these short films were conceited attempts to score varied political points. Examples:1) Ken Loach's segment. Sure, we are all sad that this dude had a hard life in his country but what has that got to do with the innocent victims of 2001? Two wrongs don't make a right?! Whatever! This film should have a subtitle for those who have trouble listening to a partially incoherent Chilean-English accent.2) Most disturbing is Youssef Chahine's segment. It is obvious that he has trouble with logic. He justified the murders due to - America being a democracy and because some Americans voted the politicians in power, then all Americans in the end are responsible for the actions and decisions made by their leaders on the Middle-East. Helloooo! Is this guy for real?? Some Americans don't even vote! Some Americans don't even know where the Middle-East is; some don't even know what religion is practiced there; and majority don't know the real political issues that are played behind the scenes. ### Mr Chahine, the reason why we have all these problems in the world is because there are too many people with your kind of logic. The innocent victims in the Twin Towers came from around the world. The murdered firefighters, rescuers, office workers, by-standers and flight passengers have nothing to do with politics. And yet, we are not allowed to go about our lives because \"some\" people think everyone has to choose a side or a religion. We are perceived as fair game for the extreme politics.3) The Israeli segment showed their own bombed victims. Another filmmaker using this event to push their own political agenda. Sometimes, it is not about you. Some people always think about the \"me, me, me.\" Sometimes, it is about other people.4) Idrissa Ouedraogo's segment is a joke and another political point scorer. They obviously want money from the international community by highlighting their poverty. Blah, blah, blah.This movie denigrates the memory of \"Sept. 11th, 2001\" victims.The best thing for it is the TRASH CAN.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b85704606f54034a18d750844b0677e",
            "input": "Cedric Kahn's films have been character-based, rather than action-based (I'm thinking of L'Ennui and Feux rouges) so it is jarring to see this series of really expert car chases interspersed with some plodding attempts to give character to Succo. I don't find Stefano Cassetti to be an interesting actor; he reminds me of pro athletes who are coaxed into movies, like Bret Favre. That blank stare looks like a really vicious deer caught in the headlights. A real actor would have forced us to reflect more on Succo's personality, rather than admiring his skill at carjacking.The little acting there is comes mainly from Isild le Besco as the needy schoolgirl Succo takes by storm. The interview at the police office is a marvel of bland obstinacy with a little fear of the future blended in. Le Besco apart, there is little to recommend this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-226dfcfceede420eb1e6e691db57f24c",
            "input": "Want to watch a scary horror film? Then steer clear of this one. There's not enough beer in the world to make this film enjoyable.However, there is enough scotch. Single-malt, if you can manage it.If the previous comments weren't enough to keep you from watching this film sober, allow me to assist. NASA sends one man and two unpaid extras into space to orbit Saturn. A really big solar flare causes Colonel Steve West to bleed from the nose. Things go downhill from there, and wackiness ensues.I actually read the book adaptation, which was published and released only in the UK. MILES better than the film, and the book was dreadful. At least some pretense is made towards suspense, and some sort of explanation of events is pulled out from the author's (rhymes with 'gas').Not to say that the film is completely without merit. Rick Baker learned that he really ought to read a contract before signing on to a film, and Jonathan Demme found that he's really better suited to direct.Yes, there is an MST3K episode featuring this flick, but it is, of course, edited quite a bit. Without the obligatory flashing of the breasts, not even the healing power of scotch can save you.Please, just go watch Raiders of the Lost Ark if you want to see a guy melt. See Space Cowboys if you feel the need to see astronauts. I can not, in all good conscience, recommend this film to the sober film-going public.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-989d41db04f94c2bb916ced40dc9ccfd",
            "input": "I had been looking forward to How to Lose Friends & Alienate People for months, particularly due to the fact that Kirsten Dunst and Simon Pegg were starring. Simon Pegg is a comedic genius and Kirsten Dunst has always been a favorite actress of mine. How to Lose Friends & Alienate People hit the spot! Of course not perfect, but very enjoyable and funny. How to Lose Friends & Alienate People follows the life of Sidney Young, a smalltime, bumbling, British celebrity journalist, who is hired by an upscale magazine in New York City. In spectacular fashion Sidney enters high society and burns bridges with bosses, peers and superstars. After disrupting one black-tie event by allowing a wild pig to run rampant, Sidney catches the attention of Clayton Harding, editor of Sharp, and accepts a job with the magazine in New York City. Clayton warns Sidney that he'd better impress and charm everyone he can, if he wants to succeed. Instead, Sidney instantly insults and annoys fellow writer Alison Olsen (Kirsten Dunst). He dares to target the star clients of power publicist Eleanor Johnson (Gillian Anderson). He also upsets his direct boss Lawrence Maddox (Danny Huston). Sidney finds creative ways to annoy nearly everyone. His saving grace, a rising starlet Sophie Maes (Megan Fox) who develops an odd affection for him. In time, Allison's friendship might be the only thing saving Sydney from his downward spiraling career. The storyline is very interesting and the acting was top notch with what the actors were given. Simon Pegg is still hilarious as ever! He makes Sydney bumbling, obnoxious, and annoying as real as it gets, but later in time making Sydney not just likable, but also a real character who you root for in the end. Kirsten Dunst and Jeff Bridges were brilliant! Kirsten had some very wonderful acting and hilarious scenes, and Jeff Bridges is just Jeff f*cking Bridges! How can you not like him?! He makes Clayton a very humorous character with some wit and overall you just love the guy. Gillian Anderson, Megan Fox, and Danny Huston were great as the supporting cast. Each had their own personality that were overall pretty unlikable, but that's what just made the film work. One thing I didn't enjoy was how one dimensional some of the characters were. I understand that most were the supporting cast, but some of the cast was underused and could've given the film some more spice to it. How to Lose Friends & Alienate People will never be on anyone's top 10 films ever, or even top 10 comedies ever, but it has a very high entertainment level and some scenes may even charm you as well. How to Lose Friends & Alienate People is definitely one of the better romantic comedies of the year! 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f9547c217044247ba04fe4a59825057",
            "input": "I was interested in seeing this movie because I knew it was Christian based. The director had a good idea/intentions when making this movie but it could have been better. I can understand why someone would still have feelings for who they believe is the greatest love of their life. However, I didn't understand why the director made his friends so insensitive, mean and rude. The main character kept apologizing to his friends when they were the ones mean to him. They weren't understanding at all and they used God as a reason to explain their behaviors. The main character, nor anyone else didn't know if the ex-girlfriend was divorced, still married etc but they were against him resolving old feelings that needed to be dealt with. His friends were suppose to be Christians and should have been portrayed as being supportive whether they agreed with his decision or not. So many times we do things in life where we don't apologize to those we have hurt in the past and when he was trying to do this they were all against him. The ironic part was his new female friend accused him of having stalking behavior for simply looking up an old friend, when she did a really odd thing to get a hold of his name, address and phone number...she seemed to be the stalker!. she didn't seem like a friend at all but was only looking out for herself. God is love...and I think God wants people to be with the person they were meant to be with and i feel the movie did a terrible injustice by making it seem like God doesn't care about true love...only that you stay with someone you made a bad choice with. We all make mistakes...it's all about what steps you take to make amends. Like I said the movie had potential but I was tired of the one-sided point of view being constantly repeated and jammed down the viewers throat by his so-called...well-meaning friends. This movie didn't hold true to the Christian belief of love but i give it a C for its effort.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1c801b5ebdc74250bc655f04ebf6e431",
            "input": "I would rather have 20 root canals than go through this film again. The Prince of Annoying, Myles Berkowitz, has wasted nearly two hours of my life with this piece of cynical pseudo-cool. The only amusing thing in this whole mess is Mr. Samaha's obnoxious off camera patter about tits and ass. Berkowitz takes a great concept and grinds it into the dust. It is choppy and badly done, in an apparent effort to make it seem edgy or funny. It is neither. I seldom feel that a movie was a waste of film (or tape), but this one qualifies for that distinction. If a date suggests seeing this film, run.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-637a5896fcda477a80a47583cfa43c1a",
            "input": "This movie should not be watched as it was meant to be a flop. Ram Gopal Verma first wanted to make this a remake of classic bollywood movie \"Sholay\", but after having problems with the original makers decided to go ahead with the project and... i guess leave all the good parts of the movie (acting, script, songs, music, comedy, action etc) out and shoot the movie just because he already happen to hire the crew. Waste of money, waste of time. After making movies like Rangeela, Satya, and Company he pulled a Coppola (Godfather) on us; What were you thinking RGV? Anyways, the story is, though hard to follow, is almost like the Old sholay. Ajay Devgan playing Heero (Beeru, sholay) and Ajay, new kid on the block playing Ajay (Jay,sholay). Both \"bad yet funny\" friends help a cop capture a bad guy first. Later in the movie, now Retired cop hires them as personal security and safeguarding from the hands of a very most wanted Bubban played by Amitabh Bachan. In case you haven't been watching Bollywood movies, the Good guys win in the end. There I just saved you 3 precious hours of your life!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7231df8685a844a3b6859c0c2f8e0f30",
            "input": "What is really sad, shows like Six Degree's and Brothers & Sisters are the true reality TV, not that garbage that are nothing more than glorified game shows. I think the ground swell of discontent has been there for the past few years with very premature cancellation's of numerous shows with a cult following. But with the more vocal backlash the fans of Jericho (which I also enjoy) and other shows, networks may start to reverse this trend. I am like others, I will not support ANY new shows until they have been given a second season. I'll then possibly make a decision to watch and catch up via DVD's and online viewing. Until then ABC, you have lost me as a viewer to ANY new show.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38797d1611b140ca9521e5ea9c39f4d1",
            "input": "this video is 100% retarded. besides the brain cell killing acting and plot, it's way too long. don't waste your money at the video store. i actually was mad that i sat through this garbage and spent money on it. just absolutely awful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-95168553d014485bba019b4dabeab421",
            "input": "this one is out there. Not much to say about it except that it deals with a rarely touched topic in films of beastiality. I can see why this film was banned for so long, the topics dealt within the film are still a little taboo for most of the world will say the eroticism in the film is well deserved and fits in with the mood of the film. It's a good film that is well acted and serves a purpose ...to shock the viewer and cross boundaries that we don't see to often in films. I came across this film on the net that I thought I might check out. I enjoyed the film as it is thought provoking and somewhat erotic at the same time. Something you don't rarely see in films today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-356bf065778c4e329fc7af776b2e1deb",
            "input": "This movie never made it to theaters in our area, so when it became available on DVD I was one of the first to rent it. For once, I should listened to the critics and passed on this one.Despite the excellent line up of actors the movie was very disappointing. I can see now why it went straight to video. I had thought that with Bloom, Ledger, and Rush it could have some value. All have done wonderful work in the past. The movie was slow moving and never pulled me in. I failed to develop much empathy for the characters and had to fight the urge to fast-forward just to get to the end. I do not recommend this film even if you are thinking of renting it for only for 'eye candy' purposes. It won't satisfy even that.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-716ef1650fa64d4f8c5a10027e44b67f",
            "input": "I'm getting a little tired of people misusing God's name to perpetuate their own bigoted view on the world. Well I don't dismiss the idea of Armageddon, or the coming of the anti-Christ, I do dismiss the idea that only certain people who live truly good lives(They seem to be mostly white Christian children) will go to Heaven, while the rest of us must suffer through a millenia of Hell on Earth, just because we weren't good enough. God may be a judge, but I don't think He is going to measure every level of goodness. Give the Creator some credit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6fa9a1d24d97435bb5637246aae63277",
            "input": "This is one of those movies - like Dave, American Dreamer and Local Hero - that holds a viewer's interest time and again. Lightweight movies seldom win Oscars, but whoever did the casting for Soapdish deserves one. Even after one has seen the movie and knows what is coming, it's still enjoyable to watch how the various plot facets develop. True, all the drama is melodrama; but that's entirely fitting for a movie with a soap opera background. My favorite line comes from Whoopi Goldberg: \"Now why can't I write sh*t like that?\" I think it's unfortunate that the TV and website censors insist on all this unnecessary sanitation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fe575c40a60412894175bb202d4a5b2",
            "input": "I recently (May 2008) discovered that this childhood favorite was available as a DVD. Although I've seen a great deal of high quality movies since then (late 70's (I was 10 in 1978)), this three-episode, low budget thing still stands strong.What's fun is that I now watched it with my 10 year old daughter, and she experiences just the same as I remember from back then: The creepy music (she had to hold my hand, even though she's been raised with watching LotR and Resident Evil), the ever changing theories of who the culprit actually is, and also complaining about the theatrical voices from an era before Norway discovered the difference between stage acting and movie acting.This is the one and only good science fiction movie (or series) ever made in Norway. And it's still worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-889baec4598e4230aa62940777685105",
            "input": "The Tooth Fairy is about the ghost of an old deformed witch that lures children to her house to get a prize for their loose tooth and then takes their lives. The first few minutes introduce you to the 1949 beginning of the legend of the tooth fairy and then switches to present day. The worn out horror plot is pretty much saved by the solid acting. They could have done without the Hammond brothers and a few other scenes, but overall the gore scenes were bloody but quick which had a minimizing effect. The eye candy is pretty good for both genders. Camera work is good. Dialog is fair but cheesy. I expected the film to be a bare bones, low budget, slasher with very few redeeming factors. I was surprised by the quality of the film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac86f51732f94239bc15cc0114d2bf4d",
            "input": "We purchased this series on DVD because of all of the glowing reviews we had seen here. I gave it three stars because there can be little doubt that sometimes the acting, directing and writing are brilliant. In fact they are so brilliant we did not see the propaganda that was being transmitted so smoothly on the series. If one watches it with discernment, one will see the entire litany of the radical right wing beliefs being promulgated by the Fox (Faux) News Network. To avoid giving away any spoilers I will refrain from pointing out all of the dozens of specific instances. A brief look at the plots found here on IMDb will disclose that everything from torture to gun control to the right of a network to provide \"Infomercials\" and call them news is justified with cute plot twists and impassioned speeches given by some of the best actors in the world. We watched many shows and finally gave up in disgust when they justified torture using Attorney General Gonzales as a shining example of why all kinds of torture should be used in the name of protecting all of us. The series also manages to demean male and female gays in subtle ways by using them as plot devices depicting evil people. All in all the complete litany of the radical religious right wing.No doubt the popularity of this program will be used by future historians as proof that America lost its way in the early part of the this century. As a student of history myself I would characterize this program as being in a league with the propaganda produced by Goebbels for Hitler and some of the propaganda produced by Hollywood for the American audience during WWII.So if you want to use this as a teaching tool to help your students understand how subtle propaganda can be then by all means do so. Just be sure to purchase an inexpensive used copy so you can avoid enriching the ultra right wingers at Faux Network who produced this travesty.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c34e5832d90e42f5976dd1282f8f69fa",
            "input": "The movie that i am going to review is a little television movie made in 1996 and it starred Melissa Joan Hart and Daniel Baldwin.The main protagonist/antagonist Jennifer Stanton (Hart) is a typical all American teenager who is feeling the pressure of having such a controlling father (Baldwin). However, when she meets an ex con called Nick Ryan (Jeremy Jordan \"Never been kissed\") they instantly 'fall' for each other, but Jennifer has a different idea on where to take their relationship. she manipulates him to kill her parents, to protect their 'love' but she just used him to get rid of her parents so she can be with Brad (David Lascher future 'Sabrina' cast mate for Hart). Melissa Joan Hart actually really surprised me with her role as an evil manipulator and she carries the movie well by using her friends and Nick so she can literally get away with murder. The rest of the supporting cast work well and they each hold their own when they have screen time. I also found it interesting that this film was made and released the same year, Hart, began portrayed Sabrina, the Teenage Witch and this shows she can act in my genres of film and television.Although the film has dated somewhat it stills stands out as some of her best work that involves drama or thriller and i am looking forward to 'Nine Dead' that comes out in November because it shows she can seen as other people that are not called \"Clarissa Darling \" or Sabrina Spellman\"I recommend this film to anyone that is a fan of Melissa Joan Hart or Sabrina. You can watch this on the internet, so i suggest check it out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c15cbcc2af14645b351ea3471796357",
            "input": "While some performances were good-Victoria Rowell, Adrienne Barbeau, and the two Italian girlfriends come to mind-the story was lame and derivative, the emphasis on the girlfriend's racial background was handled clumsily at best, and the relatives were mostly portrayed as stereotypes, not as real people. I found myself wincing uncomfortably at many moments that were supposed to be funny. I can hardly comprehend why the local paper here in SF said this was a good movie, and wonder WHO posted the glowing review here on IMDb. Very disappointed in this movie, and mad I actually went to a theatre to see it, based on the faulty connection to Garden State, which is a far funnier, more inventive, and touching movie than this one. I must especially mention the emotional climax in the church, which was so wooden and by-the-numbers that I nearly left, and some in the audience actually DID. THAT was followed by a silly climax at the graveyard, which I saw coming 10 minutes before it happened. I really don't like being misled to spend my money so uselessly.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f15f63de0fc4029869d4397587d035e",
            "input": "This movie is bufoonery! and I loved it! The \"dragon lord\" (Jacky Chan) and his buddy, \"cowboy\", totally made the movie fun, meaningful, and just plain silly. The movie is a rare blend of a good vs. evil fight and (somehow) the wonders and fun that is growing up. Long Shao Ye takes the viewer through the daily activities of the young \"dragon lord\" (so named because he is the son of a wealthy family) and \"cowboy\", which include implementing clever, elaborate ways to escape studying (with the help of the entire household, including the tutor), competing in rather boyish (and idiotically interesting) ways to gain the affection of a local girl, competing in \"soccer\" (you will see what i mean) and the list goes on. Somehow they find themselves in the midst of a fight to save the a shipment of valuable antiques and the lives of several people.The movie has its serious moments. But they do not depress, but rather inspire. The playfulness of the boys are not lost in this exchange, but is actually employed against evil. What I really loved about this movie is how it ends. Not the typical confrontation (which in itself was awesome), but well, you'll see. Let me just say it truly captures the spirit of the movie.silly, witty, meaningful, and nostalgic. great movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-653e7efcf48d4b559cc694bad61bad5c",
            "input": "The Running Man is one of those films that if overwatched, would become boring and depressing even.My advice is to watch it maybe once or twice a year with a couple of mates and a few drinks.In todays climate of TV Media domination and the capitalist mode in society it really does work as a revisionist social commentary, post 1980s-boom. Forget that though! There are other brilliant and better reasons to watch this film.Schwarzenegger is on top form as Ben \"The Butcher of Bakersfield\" Richards, and the inclusion of Bond-belting one liners was completely inspired-thety are truly leg-end-dary (with his rant to Killian over a camera the main highlight).The design of the stalkers is authentically American, and mirrors the characterizations seen in the PC 'Gladiators' TV show, and the WWE as well. Buzz-saw's grisly end will chill any viewer to the core (as a foot note, why does his death stand out as particularly disturbing in what is ostensibly an upbeat actioner with a bitter sense of humour?)Jesse Venturer and Sven Ole Thorssen are great as backing muscle (and are Arnies buds in real life), and its even got Mick Fleetwood in it too! What more could you ask for?I highly recommend the Running Man if you're looking for a great piece of entertaining action, with a glossty finish and some great characters. Just don't expect an education from it (at least on surface value).Quality, I bloody love it actually. You will too unless you're a thesp. 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80e36321f05e4f27b800b530f285f121",
            "input": "I sometimes enjoy really lousy movies....those that occasionally result when people (even talented people) get together with good intentions to produce a movie and for whatever reason it turns out to be a disaster. Movies like \"Attack of the Killer Tomatoes\", \"Plan 9 from Outer Space\", \"Manos-Hands of Fate\", and \"Heavens Gate\", etc.So, when I heard that this movie, \"Rachel's Attic\", was considered by many people to be the single worst film of the decade, naturally I just HAD to see it.Boy, do I regret that decision. This movie is beyond bad....it is SO bad that it is not even as enjoyable as the usual bad movie. The acting, filming, script, etc. are even worse than a low budget porno film: the sound is utterly horrible, the \"plot\" is completely incomprehensible, the \"acting\" is laughable....it is a complete waste of everyone's time and money. At least the porno film has porno to break up the monotony, while this ridiculous nightmare has a guy squeezing a rotten apple, and a \"mad hatter's\" tea party.The lighting is non-existent...many \"scenes\" take place in semi or complete darkness, which is probably just as well. The \"writer-director\" (I use the terms loosely), David Tybor, tries to get kinky with bondage scenes...but the results would be laughable, if they weren't so pathetic. There is some nudity, but it is of such abysmal quality that it actually acts as a sexual suppressant. I could go on forever and not do justice to all the flaws and shortcomings of this truly awful waste of film.For the love of god, avoid this train wreck. I know that despite (or perhaps because of) my negative comments, you may still be tempted to see if this piece of trash is really as bad as I claim it to be....but trust me on this....it's even worse than I have said, and you will absolutely, positively regret the experience (and expense, if you waste your money on a purchase or rental).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e49f01e2181d4adcb561f35969f53c12",
            "input": "Airwolf The Movie, A variation on the original 2 part pilot, Yet the movie although shorter, does contain extra footage Unseen in the 2 hour pilot The pilot is much more of a pilot than the movie Where as a pilot movie is normally the same (2 parter combined) But the movie is actually a different edit with extras here and cuts there.Worth a look, even if you have the season 1 DVD set, I'd still pick up a copy of the \"movie\" It's still in some shops like virgin, Woolworths and the likes of mixed media stores, although it generally needs ordering, But it saves needing to buy online (as many of us still don't do or trust online shopping) but if you look around airwolfs in storesAirwolf was truly 1 of the 80's most under rated shows.A full size Airwolf is currently being re-built for a Helicopter Museum :) Info and work in progress pictures are available. Also with Airwolf Mods for Flashpoint and Flight Sim Games It seams she's finally here to stay :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-879c8f2c34e84bd5991cb493cdc332cc",
            "input": "What else can you say about this movie,except that it's plain awful.Tina Louise and Adam West are the reasons why to see this,but,that's it,but their talents are wasted in this junk.I think that they used a double in some of Adam's scenes,like when he's running because you can't see his face.If Adam was embarrassed in being in Zombie Nightmare,just think what he must've felt about appearing in this??? If it was before or after,I'm not sure,but,still,Zombie Nightmare is a classic(check out the Mystery Science Theater 3000 version first and last)compared to this.The gang is very annoying and over-acting by some of the actors.A rip-off of The Wild One starring Marlon Brando,of course.Tina looks stunning though.I hope her and Adam got a good paycheck!! Pass!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a50ee8033837473db824cf8368ae6cef",
            "input": "I have to say this is an awful movie, for the mere fact that when you see this movie on the guide, it is listed as a documentary. As I watched it, I started laughing, thinking to myself, does this guy actually expect me to believe this is real? So I had to look it up, and now see that it is a movie, but now since it isn't a documentary, it is now a movie with bad acting. SO, either way, it is pretty bad. I actually didn't make it to the end. I had to shut it off. I am a NYC Police Officer, and felt that someone was trying to mislead people into thinking this is a documentary, with the intentions of making money off of a terrible day for me and my coworkers. So, I took it a little personal. Maybe I was blinded by that, and it isn't as bad as I personally think it is. Everyone has their own opinion.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7662f6a435734650bbe63e9d03a26f14",
            "input": "I have become quite fond of Laurence Olivier in the past few weeks, and was thrilled when I discovered this gem. I have always found it wonderful when I run across a film where I do not have to have my finger on the remote control in case nudity rears its ugly head.The Divorce of Lady X is charming till the final scene, and must have been a true delight for viewers back in 1938. I only wish people today could accept and love true humor instead of the horrid trash talk people now call funny.The Divorce of Lady X is well worth anyone's time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-daca2812fad5488ebd4286aa0415e378",
            "input": "This is a great movie from the lost age of reactionary made-for-television drama. My all-time favourite actor, Robert Culp skillfully plots a trajectory through uptight liberal fairmindedness and faith in the system, kneejerk conservativism and fear of crime, and homicidal psychosis. The teens are a collection of pure sneering evil stereotypes, and the eventual message of this film makes episodes of Dragnet look evenhanded by comparison. But what really shines in this is the great pace of the movie, building the fear and paranoia by degrees, as well as the feel of the whole California setting. The cars are really great as well, as I recall. I give this film a 10, and I defy anyone to watch this film and not enjoy every minute. Remember, just because it's made-for-television doesn't mean it isn't great art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4291ad97608475daa52f72fbca931fe",
            "input": "Greta Garbo's American film debut is an analogy of how our lives can be swept off course by fate and our actions, as in a torrent, causing us to lose a part of ourselves along the way.Greta plays Leonora, a poor peasant girl in love with Ricardo Cortez's character Don Rafael, a landowner. Ricardo is in love with her too, but is too easily influenced by his domineering mother. Leonora ends up homeless and travels to Paris, where she becomes a famous opera singer and develops the reputation for being a loose woman. In reality, part of her attitude is bitterness over Rafael's abandonment.She returns to her home to visit her family and eventually confronts Rafael. Surprisingly, no one knows that she's the famous La Brunna, and Garbo acts up her role as the diva she truly was and re prised with such cool haughtiness in her later portrayals.Ricardo Cortez reminds one a lot of Valentino in looks in this part, and he was groomed to be a Valentino clone by MGM, though he never thought he could be in reality and he was right. He is believable in an unsympathetic part as a weak willed Mama's boy, and allows himself to age realistically but comically at the end of the movie. He fails to win Leonora when she returns home, and later when he follows her, his courage is undermined.This movie is beautifully shot, with brilliant storm sequences and the sets depicting Spain at the time are authentic looking. There are also some fine secondary performances by old timers Lucien Littlefield, Tully Marshall, and Mack Swain.Although this is a story of lost love and missed chances, I don't think Leonora and Rafael would have been happy together, as he needed a more traditional wife and she was very much a career woman, and I don't think would have been happy in a small village. The ending is true to life and pulls no punches.See this one as Garbo's American film debut and a precursor of things to come",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f5459a404cf4b4aa15b7c5f2686f652",
            "input": "\"Tintin and I\" first of all struck me as a masterpiece documentary. The photography and the editing are truly breath-taking (almost anti-Dogma).We follow the life of Tintin drawer Hergé through an open-hearted interview from 1971. The Tintin series was drawn on the background of the great ideological fights of the twentieth century. In the midst of these Hergé has his own demons to fight with, and much of his drawing activity seems like an attempt to tame these and to escape into a world of perfection.Even though there are spectacular photographic panoramas of drawings from Tintin albums and also some reconstructions and reading of passages from the albums, the story of Hergé is told entirely through interviews and archive material, and never through reconstructions.Hergé lived the turbulent life of a true, suffering artist. But the fantastic world that came of his imagination will continue to amaze readers again and again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2129b55a79474d2195fd8c5fcb7b7e36",
            "input": "The second alternate Gundam universe tale (G-Gundam being the first), Gundam Wing is yet another different view into the Gundam verse. The familiar elements are found but Gundam Wing is actually different then its counterparts. The biggest being the Gundams are nothing more than terrorists combating one lone organization. In truth, the series doesn't really become a show about war until episode 7 but in truth the real conflict, the Eve Wars, don't happen until the later episodes. The greatest positives of this series are it's characters. All the main characters are fleshed out throughout the 49 episode run and you can really sympathize with each of the roles their put in. Another great plus is the fantastic character and mecha design of the series. The designs put some of it's other Gundam counterparts to shame. One of the biggest criticism of this series is how many die hard UC fans claim rip off of the original UC saga. Why Gundam Wing gets this rap when the more apparent UC clone of Gundam Seed is out there is beyond me. True there are many moments lifted but their told in new ways and there are distinct differences as well.Take for example, the usual comparison of Zechs Merquise and UC Icon Char Aznable. Throughout the series, Zechs is more the outcast in the Alliance and in ways OZ as well, while the Red Comet was shining symbol of Zeon. Another big difference is the fact Zechs loses a lot soldiers under his command hence the other nickname he's given in the early episodes: \"Killer of his own men.\" Char isn't given this label. The problems with this series isn't the philosophy mumbo jumbo but two problems. The first is the reused animation footage of the Gundams attacks. Sure it's fun seeing Heavy Arms attack tanks, MS, and planes the first time. But on it's fourth re-use scenes like this do get old. The second problem is that the entire series is supposed to take place during an entire year. If you really think about all the events springing in the series, a lot happens in just one lone year. But I guess you can easily dismiss this fact when ignoring the intro's first lines every so often. As it ranks, this is probably the best of the Alternate universe Gundam tales and a great introduction into the Gundam world. After all, this was the very first Gundam anime to air in the US television.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc77eee5607b400eba1b46f25109c1ee",
            "input": "I got a free pass to a preview of this movie last night and didn't know what to expect. The premise seemed silly and I assumed it would be a lot of shallow make-fun-of-the-virgin humor. What a great surprise. I laughed so hard I cried at some of the jokes. This film is a must see for anyone with an open mind and a slightly twisted sense of humor. OK.....this is not a movie to go to with your grandmother (Jack Palance?) or small children. The language is filthy, the jokes are (very) crude, and the sex talk is about as graphic as you'll find anywhere. What's amazing, however, is that the movie is still a sweet love story. My girlfriend and I both loved it. Steve Carell is terrific, but (like The Office) the supporting cast really makes the film work. All of the characters have their flaws, but they also have depth and likability. Everyone pulls their weight and the chemistry is perfect. I can't wait to get the DVD. I'm sure it will be up there with Office Space for replays and quotable lines.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6b8604c8df94a5da546e9bded879109",
            "input": "Well I must say this is probably the worst film I have seen this year! The jokes were extremely crude (wasn't expecting it from as PG movie)(Rated PG in Canada) and they weren't funny! With this great cast I at least expected some good acting but I didn't even get that. I am a huge Rainn Wilson fan and this is the first time I was extremely disappointed by his performance. Neither Luke Wilosn or Uma Thurman's characters are the least bit likable and i really could have cared less what happened to either of them. I didn't expect this at all as in the past I have really liked other movies by this director (Six Days, Seven Nights for example) This movie was NOT worth the $10 it cost me and i strongly encourage you not to see this movie. I guarantee that you will be like me begging for this movie to be over.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ed0ca713c784b239bf8c306e4102648",
            "input": "I remember seeing this when it was released, in a theater in Palo Alto, and not expecting much. I mean -- an Australian movie? But it finally got to me. Here's a scene. Richard Chamberlain is sitting cross legged on the floor of a shabby apartment in Sidney, facing an Australian aborigine elder named Charlie.Chamberlain: \"You were outside my house last night. You frightened my wife. Who are you?\" And Charlie at a deliberate pace replies, \"Who are you? Who are you? Who are you? Who are you? Who are you?. . . . Are you a fish? Are you a snake? Are you a man? . . . . Who are you? Who are you? Who are you?\" It's a stunning scene, shot all in close ups, with Chamberlain's blandly handsome face filling the screen in opposition to Charlie's black, broad-nosed, bearded visage.The two guys couldn't be more different and this film is the story of how Chamberlain accidentally stumbles from his humdrum lawyerly existence into the inexplicable, almost unspeakable, mysteries of Charlie's world.I don't think I'll go on much about the plot. It's kind of an apocalyptic tale. But I must say, whoever did the research on Australian aboriginal belief systems should get an A plus. They've got everything in here, from pointing the bone to the dream time, a kind of parallel universe in which dreams are real. It's an extremely spooky movie without any musical stings or splendiferous special effects. Charly's world simply begins to intrude into Chamberlain's dreams, for reasons never made entirely clear.If there's a problem with the script, that's it. Nothing is ever made entirely clear. Does Chamberlain, who seems to have some extraordinary rapport with the aborigines, die in the last wave? Do the aborigines? Does the entirety of Sidney? The basic premise is a little hard to accept too, though granted that this is a fantasy. The aborigines are invested with the kind of spiritual power that Americans bestow on American Indians, whereas the fact is that mythology is mythology and while one may be more complex or satisfying -- more elegant and beautiful, if you like -- mythology is still an attempt to transcend an ordinary, demanding, and sometimes disappointing physical existence. The mysticism of Charlie is more convincing that the miracles of Moses in Cecil B. DeMille's \"The Ten Commandments,\" but they're brothers under the skin.But I don't care about that. Taken as a film, this one is pretty good, and it's especially important for marking the celebrity of the director, Peter Weir, and the Australian film industry. This was the first of a great wave of films from the antipodes, some of them raucous, like \"Mad Max,\" and some subtle and dramatic, like \"Lantana.\" I like Weir's stuff, which resembles Nicholas Roeg's in being pregnant with subliminal dread. Try \"Picnic at Hanging Rock\" for an example of how to make a truly chilling movie with not a drop of blood.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3359e9608b074fddbe9c84d248053eec",
            "input": "Who in their right mind does anything so stupid as this movie?Accidental killing of a security guard... characters that are so two dimensional that a two year old could have painted drawn them... and better...A red toolbox of death? Please....Hypothermic weak thugs...Acting from hell...Stylistically this movie shifts between teen comedy, thriller, voyeurism and... female ... (uhm) Rambo?Unbelievable and it's an insult to any thinking person. Do not watch, walk away it's more horrible than you may imagine...And on top of it all it's trying to be hip by being overly graphic in it's violence...Mrs Montford: Shoot 'Em Up was fun and funny, this is just pathetic and terrible. Good luck next time. :-(",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7fd52caf0784920aa19e6349afd9222",
            "input": "PRC which was the lowest of the low actually struck gold with this moody little thriller. They did the same thing a year earlier with \"Detour\" which is probably one of the finest low-budget films ever made.\"Strangler\" is basically a one set film, filled with mist and shadows, a technique used by most poverty row studios to hide the sets, or lack thereof. But here, it works well. The ghost of Charles Middleton (better known as Ming the Merciless) lurches around the swamp killing those involved in his wrongful execution for murder and generates some sympathy from the viewer. His final victim is to be the daughter of the ferryman.....he concentrates his wrath not only on those directly involved in his fate but their relatives as well.Rosemary LaPlanche does her usual imitation of someone in a coma that passes for her acting style. She offers herself up to the strangler in order to put a stop to the killing but as a sop to the audience, the strangler sees the goodness of her gesture as a sign that his mission is complete and he returns to the hereafter, somewhat chastened. If Ulmer(who directed \"Detour\") has directed \"Strangler\" she would be hanging from the nearest tree and the strangler's job would be done. But who's complaining? It's not the story that is the major attraction but the shrouded sets, lighting and the general moodiness of the piece. It stands, right behind \"Detour\", as PRC's finest hour",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ad2418293f74a0995a227c2d4d36816",
            "input": "My friends and I walked out after 15 minutes, and we weren't the first. Afterwards, we tried to get our money back. Movie theater management wouldn't allow this, but they did agree to let us see another film. The only time that worked for us was to see Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star. As you can tell, this wasn't a memorable night. Probably one of my worst movie nights. Close second has to be when I saw a double header of Domestic Disturbance and Heist. In conclusion, for the sake of humanity, please don't see The Order.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a7e6d8200f44cc488e3cc7f52b8eb20",
            "input": "i would like to comment the series as a great effort. The story line although requiring a few improvements was pretty well, especially in season 1. Season 2 however became more of a freak show, and lost DA's original charm. Season one story line was more interesting, a light side to the life at Jam pony while a focused serious plot with manticore chasing down the X-series. i was looking forward to new seasons, in fact i still am. I hope the FOX guys and DA production crew realize that a lot of ppl still wait for DA to make a comeback. Even after 2 yrs of it being cancelled, DA can make it big if worked on properly, and i think a name like James Cameron should take on this challenge.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-502c27098cd34adeafc341432eec9cb0",
            "input": "I am a 11th grader at my high school. In my Current World Affairs class a kid in my class had this video and suggested we watch. So we did. I am firm believer that we went to the moon, being that my father works for NASA. Even though I think this movie is the biggest piece of crap I have ever watched, the guy who created it has some serious balls. First of all did he have to show JFK getting shot? And how dare he use all those biblical quotes. The only good thing about this movie is it sparks debates, which is good b/c in my class we have weekly debates. This movie did nothing to change my mind. I think he and Michael Moore should be working together and make another movie. Michael Moore next movie could be called \"A Funny Thing Happened on Spetember 11th\" or \"A Funny thing happened on the way to the white house\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ad6da8909d64613bc61713a17b2f698",
            "input": "I downloaded this movie yesterday through an internet site the Quality was kinda good! I was watching the movie with high expectations (though i knew it was a flop), especially as the film has superstar Amitabh Bachchan playing the role of a villain.I though at least actors like him would have done some worth to their roles.But unfortunately Mr Bachchan failed to impress as villain this proved that nobody can compete AMJAD KHAN's magic Rgv's trial to re-kindle the past backfired royally! Sholay, the old one is a milestone in Indian cinema with an all-star cast, cult dialogue, stylish cinematography and a brilliant soundtrack which is still a hit with present generations too.A good actor like Ajay Devgan's TALENTS ARE wasted and his performance was average.Prashant Raj, a newcomer doesn't know what acting is . Nisha Kothari proved she is one of the worst actresses we have I don't know how she is still in RGV's crew Urmila & Abhishek seen in a song with no excitement and passion Mohanlal tried his best and Susmitha Sen's work was good i somehow liked her work in this movie It was a Total carnage of the original Sholay",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb6db0fabc3e4150b1371376217b412b",
            "input": "I find it hard to believe that anyone would put this movie in the same context as the Exorcist. Where the Exorcist was subtle and creepy, Stigmata was blunt, clumsy, and way too formulaic.This is one of the most visually beautiful films I've seen in a while, but the imagery does not make up for the downward spiral of patronizing exposition that makes it unbearable. My interest in this movie was peaked when it was compared to The Exorcist, and my visit to the official web site increased that interest. The web site had many tales of \"actual\" stigmata throughout history. However, scene by scene, the movie is so obsessed by its quest for \"genuineness\" that it becomes comical at first, then outright hard to watch toward the end. I began getting suspicious when the priest charged with investigating potential miracles walks into the beauty parlor where our would-be heroine cuts hair and, evidently, flirts with priests.The plot: A woman without faith in God begins receiving the wounds of Christ (the Stigmata) and is baffled and upset about the ordeal. A priest is sent straight from the Vatican to investigate the case. Is Frankie possessed by Satan, or a vessel for Jesus Christ?The only miracle in this film is that it finally ends.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a98bdd02fe6b4bd2bfb1a8b268c1b818",
            "input": "I am not going to lie, this is a great movie. I saw it about 4 months ago at my local theatre. I saw it a second time, and I was somewhat bored in the slow scenes. Sid (the sloth) is not all that flattering, but Diego (a mountain lion, I think) is really good in the movie. The animation is outstanding, and the story has a touching ending. It is worth taking kids 10 and under to, but teens would probably find it a tad bit boring. Also, the uniqueness in the characters is so interesting. Like I said, it is a pretty good movie, but I would rate \"Toy Story 2\" or \"Shrek\" higher. 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2768dffc7fed4e5d9e0480a89c69ce96",
            "input": "In New York, the family man dentist Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle) meets his former roommate and friend Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler) by chance on the street. Charlie became a lonely and deranged man after the loss of his wife and three daughters in the tragic September 11th while Alan has problems to discuss his innermost feelings with his wife. Alan reties his friendship with Charlie and they become close to each other. Alan tries to fix Charlie's life, sending him to the psychologist Angela Oakhurst (Liv Tyler), but Charlie has an aggressive reaction to the treatment and is send to court.\"Reign Over Me\" is a good drama about loss, friendship, family and loneliness. The September 11th is irrelevant to the plot; it could be a car accident, a fire or any other tragedy, as well as the sexual harassment of Donna Remar, played by the gorgeous Saffron Burrows, to Alan. But the family drama works, supported by the great performances of Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. Liv Tyler is quite impossible to be recognized, I do not know whether she is using excessive make-up to look older, but her face is weird. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): \"Reine Sobre Mim\" (\"Reign Over Me\")",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5fd16c52c774f3798a968159fcb7557",
            "input": "The name Uwe Boll is automatically linked to bad horror/cult cinema and every new movie he releases – which is about two, three per year – immediately always receives negative ratings and harsh criticism. You're actually almost tempted to think this is just a contemporary hype. You know, like it's popular to hate Uwe Boll whether you liked his movies or not. Let me just assure you that this is NOT the case. Uwe Boll is a terrible writer/director and quite frankly a menace to the entire film-making industry. \"Seed\" is another most unfortunate of proof that. In here, Boll tries so desperately hard to come across as controversial and shocking that he overlooks numerous other elements that any movie essentially needs to exist, like a plot, a narrative structure, character development, tension building… \"Seed\" is a hideous movie, full of gratuitous filth and incompetent padding footage. I once read that \"Seed\" was Uwe Boll's interpretation of the nowadays popular horror trend of Torture Porn flicks, but that's not even close. The film inarguably does borrow some influences from \"Saw\" and \"Hostel\", but basically it's just another umpteenth dull slasher with an indestructible killer and video game violence. The first 45 minutes of \"Seed\" are beyond boring and actually just confirm all the obvious things you already knew were going to happen. For you see, Boll was stupid enough to begin his film with a (hyper- fast) scrolling text explaining there's a federal US law claiming that death row prisoners have to be set free if three attempts to electrocute them fail. So you know this will happen later on, but still the first three quarters are wasted on catching a serial killer and bringing him to the electric chair. Seed is a mute serial killer who supposedly slaughtered 666 victims (exaggerate much?) who wears a bag over his head. He watches real-life animal cruelty footage (and thus WE watch real-life animal cruelty footage; thanks for that Mr. Boll) and videotapes people as the slowly decompose in their cellar (including a crying baby which is really sick and twisted). When he's finally captured, during the most amateurish and implausible police manhunt ever filmed, and put on death row, the film even becomes more retarded. After being buried alive because the electric chair couldn't fry him, Max Seed crawls back to the surface and goes on a brand new killing spree; this time mainly focusing on the people who arrested and executed him. The senseless plot twists and complete lack of story depth of this movie go way past being just bad; they're downright infuriating and insulting the intelligence level of the average horror movie fanatic. Multiple twists and sub plot in \"Seed\" are simply impossible to accept by the reasonable functioning human mind because they're just too dumb! Nobody believes that cops and prison staff members will just bury a mass murderer alive without shooting a few bullets through his head first. Nobody will accept that a fugitive convict cannot be found for another six months even though he went straight back to the exact same hideout place where they first caught him! \"Seed\" is full of retarded little things like these and the movie gets dumber with each minute that passes. Personally, I refuse to accept that the cast & crew members didn't notice this as well. It really makes you think that Uwe Boll simply neglects all advice and criticism, and just stubbornly shoots his movies the way he wants to. I imagine his yelling stuff like \"shut up and do as you are told\" to his actors whenever they remark that the scene they're shooting doesn't make a lick of sense. Just for the fun of upsetting people, there's a gigantically overlong sequence where Max Seed smashes an elderly lady to death with a hammer whilst she's tied up to a chair in the middle of her own living room. Instead of shocking, as Boll intended it to be, this sequence masterfully epitomizes how pathetic and wannabe controversial the whole film in fact is. \"Seed\" is horrendous, it's disgusting, it's pitiable, it's … Boll.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd9217b977ce49429bafd880eb31c9ef",
            "input": "I didn't really know what to expect when going out to watch the film, apart from the slightly surreal basic plotline that a lonely man orders a Russian bride over the internet. That and it had Nicole Kidman in it. I absolutely loved the film though, and came out thinking 'wow'.Refreshingly down to earth, the film moves along nicely, with a few suprises at each corner. The relationships in the film are believeable, with Nicole and Chaplin working against each other beautifully. The humour is subtle, with some great 'Office'-like scenes at the bank, and the thriller element add tension without being Hollywood.Overall the film is about real people in an unusual situation. It's less about heroics and more about delicate relationships. Brit-filmmaking at its best...(9/10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7aa278e6c54242b1bf98c388537e8354",
            "input": "First off, I would just like to say what a big fan of Bette Midler's I am. Stella is a very good movie with a wonderful cast (Bette Midler, John Goodman, Trini Alvarado, Stephen Collins, Marsha Mason) This is one of my favorite films of all time. It deals with a mother raising a child on her own, she goes through a lot of things that are out of her way to bring up her daughter Jenny played wonderfully by Trini Alvarado. This movie is very good and I suggest that you pick up a copy to watch it. Roger Ebert gave is 3 1/2 stars! And it deserved 4! WONDERFUL! I give it 4 out of 4!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-daed2878ddff4d37b01398c7b050931f",
            "input": "I just saw this film yesterday.My girlfriend wanted to see it only because of Richard Gere.I feel I wasted my time and money and told my girlfriend it's the last time we go to see a film just because a certain actor/actress is in it. I hope she learned the lesson because I had trouble keeping her in her seat. As of me, since I paid already, I wanted to see the end at least, just in the hope something good would turn up, but I didn't hold my breath, and luckily so cause I would have been a victim of the film just the same.This is not a black and white film, it's a black and black one. The main character (Richard Gere) is almost as bad as his registrants, and all sex offenders are portrayed as unredeemable hard core criminals and the bad ones among them were really very very bad. Speak of a cliché and the exploitation of a typical US phobia.Richard Gere's acting was good as usual but the blond girl that's supposed to replace him was wishy washy at best. Totally unconvincing for the job.The film tries to exploit a popular theme and gives it a cheap, dramatic, and sensational turn that just is unreal. They just use sex offenders as an excuse to indulge in cheap violent acts of murders, vigilante beating, rape and torture - something that almost seems gratuitous. They even have a wolf attacking people in the film - how low can you get.I gather the film won't come out in the USA and will go straight to DVD. That's were it should have stayed in other countries too, but because it's Hollywood and Richard Gere they just had to show it. Believe me, without Gere, the film is not even worth a B-series movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41be6d075bab4b38b5094ce68521ab69",
            "input": "DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE IF YOU LOVED THE CLASSICS SUCH AS TOM WOPAT, JOHN SCHNEIDER, CATHERINE BACH, SORRELL BOOKE, JAMES BEST, DENVER PYLE, SONNY SHROYER, AND BEN JONES! THIS MOVIE WILL DISSAPPOINT YOU BADLY! First of all, this movie starts out with Bo and Luke running moonshine for Jesse. Bo and Luke would not do that ever on the real series! This movie portrays unimaginable characters doing things that never would have happened in the series. In the series, Uncle Jesse was honest, and law-abiding. In this movie, he is a criminal who is making moonshine and smoking weed with the governor of Georgia. Plus, if this was an extension adding on to the Dukes of Hazzard Reunion! and the Dukes of Hazzard in Hollywood, I have one question: HOW COULD UNCLE JESSE BE MAKING MOONSHINE WHEN HE DIED BEFORE THE DUKES OF HAZZARD IN Hollywood MOVIE? AND HOW IS BOSS HOGG ALIVE WHEN HE DIED BEFORE THE REUNION MOVIE IN 1997! MOVIE AND ROSCO RAN HAZZARD? IT SEEMS MAGICAL THAT THESE CHARACTERS CAME BACK TO LIFE, WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN DEAD FOR 11 AND 8 YEARS? If Hollywood really wanted to make a good movie, they should have brought back James Best, John Schneider, Tom Wopat, Ben Jones, and Catherine Bach like they did in 1997 and 2000 and made a family friendly movie with the living original characters that made the show what it was and still is compared to this disgusting, disgraced movie! If you want to see good Dukes movies, either buy the original series, or go out to walmart.com and buy the DVD set of 2 that includes the Reunion, and Dukes of Hazzard in Hollywood movies! They both star the original cast, and are family friendly! Don't waste your time on a movie that isn't worth the CD it's written on!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f30b11a12e64f82ba1148b5007d4ba0",
            "input": "The surprise nominee of this year's Best Animated Feature race at the Oscars. It's an Irish film by heart, but it was co-produced by Belgium and Brazil, with, I'm guessing, animators working in all three countries. The product is one of the most beautiful and unique films in recent memory. The character design is a little reminiscent of the French animated film Persepolis from a couple of years back, with very simple characters with thick, black outlines. This film is not in black and white. Oh no. What makes this film great is its use of color, simply some of the most outrageous and startling use of colors I've ever seen. The general design of the pictures is also a lot more geometrical, with characters who are basically rectangles or ovals. Much of the film can be spent playing find the circle - a major aspect of the visual design is a circle in the center of the image. All of these geometrical designs have a purpose - the story is about a young boy who is learning to be an artist working on illuminated manuscripts (the Book of Kells is a real illuminated Bible; the art of the film is based on the drawings in it). The story of the film isn't especially deep, but it's a pretty good fantasy tale. Brendan is a young boy in Kells, a city surrounded by enormous walls, built by his uncle to keep out Vikings. A newcomer to Kells, Brother Aiden, inspires Brendan to take up illustrating. He also inspires him to do things like leave Kells and explore the nearby forest, within which lives a nymph. Bruno Coulais provides a fantastic score, almost as good as the one he did for Coraline, which I consider the very best of the year.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04a6b601c8684e66a47bd93d7364bf70",
            "input": "This is the 2nd time I've seen this movie in about 12 years. These remarks come from someone who finds Kane and Ambersons to be amazing, worthy films. But the remainder of Welles career is, unfortunately, squandered on material unworthy of his talent and too flimsy to withstand his filmic embroidering. And when he makes a potboiler like Shanghai, the lack of anything substantial to hang his filmic tricks on, is just kind of sad. I couldn't tell you what he was exploring here. It's all as mannered as Welle's godawful Irish brogue; which takes a lot of effort, but adds absolutely zero to the film. Several Welles projects became this overdeveloped and baroque. Mr Arkadin (pick a version, any version) is a similarly belabored project. The material is inconsequential. It just can't bear the weight of all this noodling. For a director trafficking in reality-based drama (as here), he never feels any pull to tie his bundle of conceits back to reality; or to a coherent story. The murder-for-hire scheme is ridiculous. Kudos to Welles though, for having Hayworth cut her hair, and getting that performance out of her. The camera loves her. She's the classiest, most upscale, sultry and ravishing femme fatale ever put on film. But her treachery comes so late in the film it feels like some desperate decision, made so the movie will have some genre it fits into. The movie can't be saved by a noir convention deployed in the last 60 seconds.When all is said and done in L.F.S., the convolutions are all for what?; to convince you you've seen something thoughtful? to give Welles more to do? to make you roll your eyes? Welles has no sensitivity to the scale of a story, or to telling a story directly. One wonders what Shanghai has to say to anyone who isn't a crippled billionaire, arranging a quadruple-cross murder-for-hire scheme, or a fanboy in love with filmic conceits devoid of meaning or substance. Overwrought, preposterous, unengaging.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d4d35554a894e539b443b322a4f6aaf",
            "input": "This Is Pretty Funny. \"Saturday The 12th\", a?... Great Work... I Laughed Every Minute of the movie... This Is Like \"Scary Movie\" for the 1980's. great STUDENT BODIES-styled gags...Too Bad This Isn't On Video... But You Can Still Watch It on FLIX...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-886dcc6997e342139d4c71f4d603f92c",
            "input": "The greatest games of Kasparov or Fischer can be a mess for a total rookie. This is a great movie. There is no special agency involved in the plot. This is the clue! This is a PRIVATE plot, built as a PRIVATE enterprise. This is a self-destructive and a self organized plot. As a conclusion, the scenario described the perfect professional plot: private, self –organized, self-destructive, with no trace at the end. Anyone can be behind the plot: a smart \"director\" with some money. All can be done just by delegation. The \"director\" must be just trigger. If the normal viewer cannot see the essence of the plot in the explicit sequences of the movie, a real plot has fewer chances to be discovered. All the actors' performances are well done , with some special mention for Gene Hackman and Mickey Rooney.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-265f153682094cc5ad25570bc519c87f",
            "input": "Good lord, whoever made this turkey needs to be buried alive. I'm sorry, but the other reviewer must not have seen this movie, he must be watching something else, or have never seen a movie before... 9 out of ten stars? He's saying what, this is as good as Ben Hur or Gone With the Wind? Unintentionally funny, massively unbelievable characters, absurd situations, looks like it was shot in Griffith Park (which works out pretty well--MASH was shot in Griffith Park), crappy script, just about everything that could possibly be wrong with a movie all rolled into one package. Should be required viewing for all prospective film makers as an example of how a movie could be horribly wrong. It reminds me of something a USC student may make for a film class. Give this one a pass unless you do drugs and are into high camp.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0763705355a4f7db14fd181b4cb1d86",
            "input": "Greenaway seems to have a habit of trying deliberately to disgust his viewers. This film opens with incest--and purposeless, meaningless, casual incest at that. That's Greenaway's big problem. He prefers parlor tricks to shock over actually doing anything meaningful. Technical skill isn't enough. He's just a bit perverse for the sake of perversity.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b4057f293c340bbb46c548f329c0a00",
            "input": "First-time director Tom Kiesche turns in a winning film in the spirit of cutting, dark comedy. Shot on a shoestring budget, yet had the flavor of the early Coen brother's film Blood Simple ... and throw in some Monty Python flavorings to boot! Needs to seen more than once to appreciate all the elements that carry one scene to the next. Expect more good things to come from this writer-director-actor.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01b12a6f126a4d199a170002d2680dd9",
            "input": "The movie has several story lines that follow several different characters. The different story lines don't feel like one whole complete piece which makes this comedy a very incoherent one and gets even annoying to watch at times.It may sound weak and cliché but it's true; You're way better of watching the Crocodile Hunter series on the Discovery channel with Steve and Terri Irwin. It's more fun and even more hilarious than this movie is. I'm sure both cast and crew had lots of fun making this movie but the movie doesn't give us the viewers much pleasure. For a comedy it simply isn't funny enough and Steve and Terri Irwin just aren't good actors, not even when they play themselves! Their antics are simply not good enough to make an entire movie around and their scene's feel long, distracting and unnecessary and even annoying at times.The movie had quite some potential, I mean Steve Irwin is one character that in a strange way is both intriguing and hilarious to watch, so when I first heard that they were making a movie about 'the crocodile hunter' my first reaction was; brilliant! The movie however heavily suffers from its weak story and the incoherent story lines with uninteresting and unfunny characters. The movie does has a certain entertainment value, at least enough to make this movie watchable for at least once but still, I must certainly wouldn't recommend this movie.Watching this movie felt like a waste of time. Still this movie might be watchable just once, when it gets on TV, on a rainy afternoon. It does has some good moments but the story lines really completely ruin the movie and its potential.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-831c686d8793437ebe31bc56c146d23c",
            "input": "I have seen \"Miracles Still Happen\" now at least four times. I never tire of this fantastic movie. From the very beginning, it holds a person's interest. As the movie progresses and the plane crashes the story becomes very intense as we watch this young girl trying to survive alone and frightened in the Amazon, following a plane crash in which she was the only survivor. Losing her mother in this plane crash as well makes this movie even more dramatic as we see the perils this young girl had to endure during her ten days in the Amazon. To think this really did happen is just unreal and to think that anyone could actualy survive this is unspeakable as we see the wild animals, snakes and other reptiles, the enormous forests and wildlife as well as countless insects. As the movie progresses we see the many dangers this girl has to face as she tries to follow the river in hopes of it leading her to a town. Remembering what her father told her about how a stream will always lead to a river and then into an even larger river and this means it will eventually lead to a community, this young girl keep track of the tiny stream which eventually lead into a huge river all throughout the movie. At times having to swim in dangerous waters, alone, frightened, injured, she always managed to keep going. Towards the end of this movie it was obvious she would not have been able to continue much longer as she had not eaten in ten days and only had water to drink and was very sick and tired from her perils. Eventually as she sees a canoe, she realizes there has to be a village and men find her and they take care of her and then take her to a hospital where her father comes to see her, after fearing she was dead along with the many other passengers. Such a dramatic movie and so heartwarming to see her father's face when he sees his daughter is actually still alive after all this time in the Amazon! Movies like this aren't made much those days. I will still see it again and I know I will never tire of it! To think this girl was the only one single survivor of this airplane is just unspeakable! Also the fact she only maintained a few very slight injuries was even more remarkable, whereas everyone else on this airplane perished in the horrific crash into the wilds of the Amazon. A brilliant movie, superbly acted out indeed and one I will treasure forever and love to continue watching! Strongly recommended by me for sure!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9031a34ed0a84f2b8528268a9e7f5e13",
            "input": "WARNING! This review will reveal the ending of the movie, \"Scoop.\" If you don't want to know how the movie ends, don't read this review!\"Scoop\" is so bad you'll think \"Annie Hall\" was a fluke.It gets one star because you get to see Hugh Jackman's naked chest. That's the only thing \"Scoop\" has going for it.Woody Allen's misogyny, and his fixation on women young enough, at this point, to be his granddaughter, has crippled any ability to make movies he may have had at any point.The plot seems promising: a ghost, Ian McShane, directs a fluffy headed student, Scarlett Johansson, to investigate whether or not an English Lord, Hugh Jackman, is the notorious Tarot Card Killer of prostitutes. A magician, Woody Allen, helps the girl.Promising plot notwithstanding, the movie completely lacks charm, or humor, or atmosphere. It's an amazingly leaden, amateurish effort for someone who has made even one previous film, never mind dozens. Perhaps Allen has had a stroke that has gone unreported in the press.Much is made of the fact that unlike in his previous films, Woody Allen, now a septuagenarian, has FINALLY allowed a younger male lead to get the girl.Not so. In fact, the plot is constructed in such a way so that the girl gets no one.There is an early scene where Johansson, for no reason central to the movie, allows herself to be gotten drunk, and seduced, by a powerful, older director. \"Seduced\" is a euphemism for what happens. It's a \"slam, bam, I've gotta go\" kind of moment. It bears no relation to the plot whatsoever, and it cheapens Johansson in the viewer's eye. Why did Allen add that unnecessary scene to the movie? Because it shows a powerful director - like Allen - having sex with the female lead. Allen gets to have his cake and eat it, too.Johansson is not yet an actress. She doesn't know how to command the screen except by wearing a tight, low cut top. She imitates Allen in a couple of scenes, and that just looks weird and sad.It doesn't help that her character is scripted as a doll who can't function without a ghost, or an elderly and less than awe-inspiring magician, telling her what to do at every turn.She is approximately half Jackman's age, and she comes across as a very vapid screen presence in their scenes together.Audience members not obsessed with breasts deserve better in their heroines, and Jackman deserves better, too -- a script that gives the heroine some intelligence and agency, and an actress who can convey those qualities.Hugh Jackman is similarly cheated by the script. Allen apparently can't stand it that Jackman is so stunningly good looking and young, and so he gives Jackman nothing to say or do. Like Johansson, he is used merely for his good looks. This is a shame, because, as Jackman has shown in any number of productions, from \"Oklahoma\" to \"X Men,\" he CAN act.Here's the big plot twist -- Jackman, suave, charming English Lord, really is a killer. So, though the movie says it is all about letting someone else, other than Allen, get the girl, she doesn't get anyone. Jackman, the man she's been making love to, is a man who murdered a prostitute. Nice, Woody. Nice way to punish your heroine for being beyond your grasp.In a passive aggressive touch, Allen deprives his heroine of his own presence, as well, killing off his character, the magician, leaving Scarlett Johansson all alone at the end of the film.A final note: at my screening, not a single audience member laughed at any point during the film. Always a bad sign when a film is advertised as a comedy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b42c0cfe9ee24f7292247b5fcc8747b1",
            "input": "The only way this is a family drama is if parents explain everything wrong with its message.SPOILER: they feed a deer for a year and then kill it for eating their food after killing its mother and at first pontificating about taking responsibility for their actions. They blame bears and deer for \"misbehaving\" by eating while they take no responsibility to use adequate locks and fences or even learn to shoot instead of twice maiming animals and letting them linger.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45868964d9544e2fa19736c18c7a9cf0",
            "input": "Rohmer strays from his usual portraits of french middle class to tell this costume drama about the difficulties of an aristocrat lady during the french revolution. What's more attractive about \"La Anglaise...\" (apart from the story itself) is the fabulous aesthetics that Rohmer has achieved. The images have been digitally decorated too make them look like baroque pictures. In some moments you can't really say whether your watching a movie or a series of pictures in Louvre Musseum. Every shot is like a piece of art.*My rate: 7.5/10------------------------------ --------------------------------",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a746583019845f3b1811988c6ab19b2",
            "input": "Twenty five years ago, I showed this film in some children's classes in Entomology and can still remember the excitement of the kids; they were spellbound! It is not just about the termites who have built and live in the \"Castles of Clay,\" but also about the other animals who use the mounds. There is a fantastic scene in which a cobra fights a monitor lizard while a colony of mongooses watch. It is a not only good for entomology classes, but also for teaching about ecology since there is so much about the interactions between the termites and other organisms and the whole ecology of all of the organisms that live in and around the mounds. I wish it was available on DVD, so that I could watch it again and show others.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0cddefaac2c84e95bb32fa8abfdf8cf1",
            "input": "There's so many things to fall for in Aro Tolbukhin. En la mente del asesino (Inside the killer's mind), that it's very hard to talk about it without giving any kind of warning. Let's just say that this movie is like an exercise in cinema but really, really great done. It´s made with super 8, black and white shots, 35 milimeters, color, interviews, flashbacks. Aro Tolbukhin it´s like a movie made a documental or viceversa, which most peculiar aspect relays on the doubt that leaves you wondering, did he really ever existed? The movie follows the later life of an hungarian sailor that arrived in Guatemala, worked in a religious mission and then killed some people. An act for which he got caught and death penalty sentenced. The movie starts because some french documentalists got interested in this character so they interview him prior to his death. Nowadays, some more people got involved and make a deeper research of the character. The one we are witness of -the movie.For the main part in the history we are guided by a semi slow phase to go look inside Aro´s mind, mainly in order to decode why he did what he has done. Nevertheless, the important thing is that the filmmakers never gives us a sided point of view; they left the judging for all of us and even as we may understand his actions, we clearly never justify them. So, the first half is based upon recollecting information; later things turn into Aro's childhood, giving the movie such an incredible new force (even tough never got weak or boring).I don't mean -and don't want- to spoil anything; so the only thing left to say is that if by any chance you get this movie near you, believe me, the trip to see it is more than worthy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99ce6f7135dc447284b6e2ecf5705686",
            "input": "I just want to make one thing clear- I love Michael Vartan! But this film really lets him down. His acting is still superb, he's still as charming as ever, and he still looks great. But the film itself is a load of rubbish! Natasha Henstridge, I'm sorry to say it, comes over bit manly... you're constantly waiting for her to run off with her best friend, who's own sub-storyline is a little weird. Myself and my family (who sat down and watched the film with me) were also put off by the soundtrack to the film; at times the music just didn't fit with what was going on in the scenes. However, even this was not the worst aspect of what I found to be a very disappointing film. I could forgive the leading lady's butch-ness, I could forgive the freakish characters that were thrown in to the mix, and I could forgive the poor choice of musical accompaniment, but whose choice was it to cut out the whole middle section of the film and skip straight to the end??? The ending was obviously planned from the beginning but how it gets there is left untold. If you're a Michael Vartan fan skip this film: buy yourself a poster instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6fb8ab06dd144b719b0be5c6eab76bc0",
            "input": "If this movie were more about Piper Perabo's character and less about the bar, this might have been halfway decent. Piper's Violet Stanford and Karen Friendly (Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle) both have a virgin kindegarden teacher quality to them that's endearing. Here's hoping she'll find a better movie to be in.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01fb4a9956dd4d5ead5b6ff754470567",
            "input": "Since the day I saw this film when it came out in 1981, it has been one of my top 3 favorites. The blurb I wrote for Amazon is below, and I'm just thrilled that it's finally coming out on DVD on 10/17/06 - the film's 25th anniversary.The last credit in this film explains its appeal - \"Thank you to the people of Manhattan on whose island this was filmed.\" A charming and witty romantic comedy, it is a love story written to New Yorkers (Peter Bogdanovich is a native) who can identify every location (West 12th Street, the Ansonia, the old FAO Schwartz, the Plaza, the Roxy, Chez Brigitte, and City Limits which was a country & western club). One gets the impression that the entire ensemble cast clicked as well off-screen as they do on, and this intimacy is clearly communicated. I laughed, I cried, it was better than CATS. Not only an ode to Dorothy Stratten, it was also Audrey Hepburn's last feature appearance (she had a cameo subsequent to this film) and her inner beauty seeps from the screen. Buy it, make a big tub of popcorn, and curl up with someone you love.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2203dc0c2d214e3091a9e73659207962",
            "input": "Jason Bourne sits in a dusty room in with blood on his hands, trying to make sense of what he's just done. Meanwhile, a CIA chief in NYC outlines the agency's response to what's just happened on screen. An American flag stands proudly on the centre of his desk in the foreground of the shot, but as he speaks, it slips out of focus as his plan veers into morally dubious territory, as if it doesn't want to be associated with the course of action the government man decides is necessary in the interests of national security.This shot effectively captures the mood of the film. As well as portraying Bourne's quest to find out how he became Jason Bourne, Ultimatum is also an examination of the human costs of the measures taken to protect us in the interests of stability and security.It is also probably the best film you'll see in the cinema this year. It's just so intense. Bourne says to Simon Ross (Considine) \"This isn't some newspaper story, this is real\" and in the audience you almost believe him. The camera shakes, but remains steady enough for you to see everything and feel like you're there with Bourne as he tries to elude his pursuers, and the performances are so good that these guys seem as though they are the characters they're portraying, instead of just being actors performing well-written roles. The action scenes are so brutally fast-paced and well choreographed that they seem instinctive instead of planned to the minutest movement; the stunt-work is nothing short of amazing.The pacing is just incredible. It keeps driving forward towards its conclusion, but not so fast that it leaves you struggling to piece together the plot; the script delivers the information you need as quickly and clearly as possible before moving on to the next tense action set-piece. While they're often simple (the Waterloo sequence is essentially just a man on a phone being watched by a man on a phone) they're charged with such dramatic intensity that you can't take your eyes off them. The film is just so focused on powering forwards that you can't help being swept along by it.With its intense action set-pieces, brilliantly paced storyline, and intelligent examination of the decisions made in the name of national security, the Bourne series is one that accurately captures the ambiguities of our age. Ultimatum is its peak.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8675cf0e656847c89f98a8bf840baa0a",
            "input": "Some moron who read or saw some reference to angels coming to Earth, decided to disregard what he'd heard about the offspring of humans and angels being larger than normal humans. Reinventing them as mythical giants that were 40 feet tall, is beyond ridiculous. There was some historical references to housing and furniture in parts of the world, that were much larger than would be needed for standard humans. These were supposedly built on a scale that would lend itself to a 10 to 14 foot human, somewhat supporting the \"David and Goliath\" tale from the bible. There is no mention in any historical references to buildings or artifacts that would support the idea of a 40 foot tall being. If I was rating this movie on my own scale, it would have been a negative value instead of a one...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2e1d59aa89e407aab1f505e26e6b963",
            "input": "A remake of Alejandro Amenabar's Abre los Ojos, but this time with a living, breathing mask as a lead. For the dubious advantage of an English sound track, we endure Tom Cruise's soulless performance, as usual, with zero depth. Yes, the character is identified with his persona, but we usually are given some character underneath that to hold our interest. His empty posturing negates any erotic energy that could have been between his character and Cruz or Diaz.There is an acting exercise that involves using masks to free the actor to enrich his presentation of character by verbal and body language means. Cruise's masking only painfully emphasizes his inadequacy as an actor. Do see the 1997 original Amenabar Open Your Eyes!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3b89b734a0e4d51849a24c01d40c5f9",
            "input": "This is actually a groovy-neat little flick, made on absolutely no discernible budget with shot on video crinkliness . It takes a little while to warm up to it. The acting is so bad that it soon acquires a zen-like charm. After a few scenes, you stop noticing the awkward lines or rehearsed sound of some deliveries. The characters all develop a quirky charm, especially \"Richard\". Forget Anthony Hopkins, Maidens is the guy I'd hire to play a raving psychopath. He just seems to enjoy it so very much! Mixed in with the scenes of mad-slasher gore and zombie infestation are some truly visually effective shots of the title character, \"The Midnight Skater\" zooming through the campus in a black hoodie, looking for all the world like a cross between the Grim Reaper and, say, The Silver Surfer. These shots make the sometimes ludicrous things the characters say about the Skater seem almost ominous. The soundtrack features some very fun Garage-Punk tunes and the raspy, raucous meanness of it meshes well with the film's mood. Thumbs upish, I say.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d49648c9fb54b03880a31b1c40bbe89",
            "input": "If they could get Ed Asner why didn't they get other actors instead of people who go to the same church as the producers? And why did the protagonist throw the wise old sage character to the ground when he was never in danger. It forced the old guy to mask the injury out of pride and so the young guy would feel guilty leaving him with a life long disability. I guess thats why the main character refuses money though and why the old guy works him like a dog even when he volunteers for extra work. If the d-bag boyfriend is a bad guy because he is long-distance boyfriend then why is a soldier any better. He has good reason to be jealous, good reason to get her away from her hometown and over protective, controlling manipulative father. All the characters that are meant to be likable aren't and everyone else is the 'bad' boyfriend. How did they meet anyway, a wine broker and a saw mill worker?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb38982c949f4d38ae9d9c9336dd16fc",
            "input": "Here's another movie that should be loaded into a satellite, fired into space and pointed in the direction of the galaxy Andromeda to show distant possible civilizations the best of humanity. This movie is so endearingly stupid and revealingly honest in being little more than a rip-off of the already bad movie classic KING KONG from 1976 that it not only manages to upstage that film in terms of sheer belly laugh idiotic goofiness, but successfully predicted much of Peter Jackson's miserable 2005 computer cartoon bearing the same name, as far as a \"romance\" between the giant (here a Yeti) and a gorgeous human female (Antonellina Interlenghi of Umberto Lenzi's CITY OF THE LIVING DEAD, who is very easy on the eyes).The film was made for kids so aside from some innuendo over fish bones and a bizarre nipple tweak to say goodbye you can forget about sex -- the Yeti even has a sort of giant jock strap to cover up his monstrous package, the result being even more amusing than anatomical correctness. But as a trade-off you DO get a wacky old scientist, two inquisitive kids, Tony Kendall in a rare turn as a duplicitous bastard of a villain, a helpful intelligent collie dog who gets to have her own adventure (Dog Adventure movies were big in Europe for a while) and of course emerges as the hero at the end for saving the Yeti, who turns out to be the good guy, glorious stuff like front end loaders decorated to look like giant ape hands, a monster who's size literally changes scale from shot to shot, some inappropriately horrible deaths that will make the carnage in GODZILLA VS THE SMOG MONSTER look tame by comparison, crowd reaction shots a-plenty made up of either Spanish, Italian or Canadian extras depending upon scene (you can sort of tell where they were shooting from how the extras are dressed), and some of the most enthusiastically staged but inept special effects work ever in a giant monkey movie.It's here that the film won me over: It's enthusiasm just for being made. Frank Kramer is actually the same Gianfranco Parolini who brought the world SARTANA in 1968 and GOD'S GUN the year before this & was a very important director in the Spaghetti Western and action/adventure genre film scene from the 1960's/1970's and by the time of YETI he was probably delighted to get the work. I would say that this is his most adventuresome movie ever, or rather the one he took the most chances with, and may have felt more comfortable taking those chances with the film aimed at kids & families. The movie has a kind of reckless abandon to the way it was made that renders the technical errors or inconsistencies totally meaningless. Or rather they are part of the fun, and if the movie had been played seriously it wouldn't have worked -- WHICH IS EXACTLY WHY PETER JACKSON'S MOVIE SUCKED. He forgot to have fun with the material and let it dictate the outcome using his army of stupid Power Macintosh pod people animators, and with all it's faults + clunkiness, Kramer's YETI is actually closer to the spirit of why we watch movies like this, which is partly to see actors in ape suits tearing apart miniature sets on sound stages, not seamlessly animated vapid hours of nothing other than hard drive space. I'd rank this up there with KING KONG VERSUS GODZILLA and IT! CURSE OF THE GREAT GOLEM as one of the most enjoyably improbable giant rampaging monster movies ever. Because the movie looks so \"fake\" you can get over the story and just have fun watching stuff get wrecked, trampled, tossed about and smashed. Knowing that and armed with a fertile, energetic enthusiasm for having the chance to make the movie, Parolini pulled out all the stops and delivers a full bodied adventure that might get a bit rough for some of the small tykes but is the first movie I will ever share with the grandkids someday when their stupid parents leave them with me for a weekend. This is stuff for the ages and one of the most telling expressions of humanity to ever be committed to celluloid.10/10, it's about ten minutes too long but who cares, you only come around once and I'd rather go out with a smile on my face.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0f39a8cef23248b7af36d8e2aa58d0e4",
            "input": "Having set the sitcom world alight with 'Father Ted' Arthur Matthews and Graham Linehan's next creation was a forgotten gem for the BBC called 'Hippies' Although created by the pair- the six scripts were written by Arthur Matthews alone.Set in London in 1969- Ray Purbs, a hippy, is the editor of an anarchist magazine. His friends are his flat-mate, the very laid back and cannabis smoking Alex, his 'girlfriend' is feminist Jill and the none too bright Hugo.Simon Pegg was superb as Ray, but he is superb in everything he is in. This sitcom had a feel of 'Citizen Smith' about it. Ray was very much like Wolfie Smith, trying to beat society, but failing miserably. At last this sitcom is going to be released on DVD in March, I can't wait to buy it. As it was on in 1999 and has yet been repeated on terrestrial television- my memories aren't too good of the sitcom, yet I remember two episodes really clearly, the first being the opener 'Protesting Hippies' which I thought was a great start- where Ray goes on a protest against sandpaper and the other episode was 'Hippy Dippy Hippies' which I think was episode 4, again quite a clear memory about the Police. Sadly, the sitcom got a negative reaction from viewers (I can't think why). The BBC commissioned another series, but Arthur Matthews decided against it because of the negative reaction. Oh well, I can't wait for the DVD.Best Episode: Hippy Dippy Hippies- Series 1 episode 4.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d5cf65a1df44ba28706f75f426c9cb2",
            "input": "While essentially a remake of the original Chinese Ghost Story, this third installment has higher production values and greater subtlety in both the acting and the story. Tony Leung is particularly good. CGS III is a gorgeous, moving film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f910649bd4b441091ab15177a2d9af2",
            "input": "I'm a nice guy, and I like to think of myself as genre-tolerant. And, I guess by that, I mean I try to consider a movie in the context of the genre that it resides in. If nothing else, that saves me from feeling like I should be saying really nasty things about people or films, which I don't like doing.The plot in this one was patently obvious, the production values very low and sets, uhm, simplistic. The acting rose into \"good for a high school play\" territory from time to time. My feeling was this was filmed in a day -- please tell me it was.Worst of all, the sex , while reasonably plentiful, was fairly mundane, hampered by, at least in my copy, a \"sound-over\" that was inconsistent with the action (climatic moans and shrieks while lying on a bed undoing a bra???). There was definitely no \"edge\" to it at all--nothing distinguishing or interesting, and with surprisingly quick cuts.My vote is a \"1\" then, with the following summary statement: would have been better if the filler stripper material at the club was expanded, and the rest of the movie condensed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4d998e2e6d34a12950565d05253b7ec",
            "input": "I got this in the DVD 10 pack CURSE OF THE DEAD. You gotta love those bargain packs. For even if they don't feature true remastering, restoration and all that hoo-ha, and the films are generally in full-frame pan and scan format, there's no denying that there are always a few gems included. And by \"gems\", I mean there's always some good crap to be seen, especially if the films are from the '70s as The Mansion of Madness is.My copy is called Mansion of Madness, but when the title screens roll it's Poe's Dr. Tarr's Torture Dungeon. Doesn't matter, really, as crap is crap is crap, no? Yes! But saying this film is completely worthless is not true at all. There are some funky elements here and there, and obviously the flick did have a decent budget.The opening title sequence is cool with its colored negative run through a cheap TV look. The dialogue is always hilarious. Near the beginning of the film, the horse and buggy driver gets out to move a dead tree stump in the middle of the road. \"WHAT STRENGTH!\" says Our Hero. Funny, then, that this dude should later not be able to fight off the wacky woodsmen when they come to make freaky fun. You'll completely forget that this guy was even in the movie until he crops up again later near the end. That's how memorable these characters are.The best part about Mansion of Madness, however, has to be the wacky music and screwball hijinks that the good guys have to endure. It's like bad cartoon music that a three year old would find enjoyable. And why all the weirdo slapstick, anyway? I'd say my fave moment had to be when the horse and buggy is ambushed by the forest freaks when they pull a stupid looking homemade ghost up by a stick in the middle of the road and make the buggy stop. What the hell? Oh yeah, there's plenty of boobies to be seen, too, for those of you that dig such things. Boobies, bad dialogue, and wacky music. That best sums of Mansion of Madness for me. It's well worth at least one viewing, and may be a lot better if you've had a few to drink or whatnot. I can't say I was ever bored watching it, but I can't deny that it's also a barrel of poop. Kinda like Magical Mystery Tour but with a plot, but not. Hmm.And Mr. Chicken PWNZ.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12f5b3aa73c24af6b1ffee04ec59939d",
            "input": "Elephant Walk (1954) Starring an early Peter Finch as lord of the manor in some God-forsaken plantation where there is always the danger of elephants or mad Englishmen, staying out in the midday sun and going berserk. Well eventually they do, after the typhoid or cholera outbreak, of course, and much mayhem ensues. Taylor replaced an ailing Vivien Leigh in this pot boiler/adventure flick. When the elephants storm the house and trap Liz on the grand staircase I still get goose bumps. Thank goodness Dana Andrews is around to save the day. One of my favorite guilty pleasures. In color too!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f05d33c89a10457a81ef22df54a05277",
            "input": "The horse is indeed a fine animal. Picturesque depictions of wild horses and their grace could never have been more majestic in an animation flick.The animation is simply stupendous. The fine animation forms the backbone of the beauty that the horses embolden across the flick. More so when the stallion traverses diverse terrain, jumps across cliffs and braves waters. Soundtrack too is very impressive. The wonderful instrumental music lures you to appreciate the movie. \"They say the story of the west was written from the saddle of a horse . \" huh? Well ,The story of a fine horse sure was written from the saddle of the west .All in all, this movie is clearly up there with the best .It is one of the best animation flicks i have watched. Would be a very fine choice on a lonely night. An easy 9/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81b08d7246ab42b6910b138b5a9db273",
            "input": "Let's be honest shall we? Al Gore no more TRULY cares about the environment than most folks care about contacting foot fungus. It's a hook! Make no mistake, Al Gore is a POLITICIAN! Three years ago he was busted/ticketed in his home state doing 70 mph in a 55 mph zone driving NOT a hybrid, a Yugo, or even a GM Metro but a LINCOLN (go google it if you like)! Or how about the fact that Mr. Gore & his Hollywood buddies continue to use a private fuel-guzzling jets to attend the premiers of \"An Inconvenient Truth.\" So much for conservation huh, Al? Anyway, it takes a mere minute to subjectively look at \"An Inconvenient Truth\" & discover the main fundamental flaw. While the film parades out many seemingly impressive scientists to tell the audience the EFFECTS of supposed \"global Warming\" there is not one scientist to tell us the supposed CAUSE of it. For example: I can take a hundred folks out to a parking lot & they can point out an automobile which is not running right. BUT can they tell you with any degree of certainty WHY? Generally not! A second flaw, just how accurate were the weather instruments 100 years ago (the toilet wasn't even invented yet)? What did they have, a June bug in a match box? Hell, even 50-60 years ago? Therefore, how do we know with ANY degree of certainty that the planet is \"getting warmer\" when the records of yesteryear are highly questionable at best? Or that man is THE sole cause of it? The answer is we don't & Science is NEVER a consensus. Thirty years ago, Time Magazine did a cover proclaiming a \"New Ice Age\". The truth is that any 6th grade science teacher well versed in Earth Science will tell you that Volcanic Erruptions, Solar Activity & El Ninos have more to do with our eradicate changes in climate conditions than supposed \"Global Warming.\" Finally, what Al Gore fails to adequately address is; even IF America decides to follow the global gospel according to Al & implement everything he recommends, how are we going to get the rest of the world to follow suit when we can't even get them to agree on something so obvious as terrorism? Answer: It's wishful thinking, Mr. Gore & you being a former VP of the USA know it! If the folks who produced \"An Inconvenient Truth\" were really honest, they would have titled their film \"Al Gore Wants Attention.\" But what I'd really like is for someone to ask the former VP this; why were two of the planet's biggest polluters (AKA China & India) EXEMPT from abiding by the Kyoto Accords? Anyway, I hear the producers of A.I.T are working on their next film entitled \"Gnomes, Fairies & Elves: Our Endangered Friends.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b7f3a9a4f764c74bd549ca1ceeb6739",
            "input": "Falls into the film category of \"Way too ridiculous in the dialogue and execution departments to be taken seriously\". Whereas Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the Thirteenth or My Boyfriend's Back know they are bad, Scarecrows doesn't. Evil Dead set such a high standard for the comedic horror on a budget genre, that Scarecrows is simply out of place. Suspicions of inexperience are immediately at play as there are no hints of noise or vibration in the hull and cockpit of an airborne plane. The repeated display of a picture of 3 men just screams for a story arc, but nothing comes. Although the men are obviously the scarecrows, there is no explanation.Knowing this film is too serious for it's own good may produce some grins. I don't recall if Joe Bob Briggs ever previewed Scarecrows, but I believe that he wouldn't stoop this low. However, with an IMDb rating of over 6, there are many people that disagree.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08aafa31670a4f329b224656635eed9f",
            "input": "You can call it a mystery, perhaps a small thriller, or an intelligent film.The story takes you through the life of one person who has lost his life and is looking to regain it.I have to say I was quite surprised that I truly did enjoy this film. It is not usually the genre I care for however the characters quickly became people to me and I wanted to know what they were about and what was going to happen to them.Just like many french films over English made, we are able to learn much more about the character and the affect of their surroundings on their person. This film is character driven and will not disappoint!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd392918b88649c8b81c1a6e730614d5",
            "input": "Cute and playful, but lame and cheap. 'Munchies' is another Gremlins clone to come out from the 80s. I'm not much of a fan of the imitations.First it was the excellent 'Gremlins'.Then came the very average 'Critters'.Lets not forget the lousy 'Ghoulies'.But the complete pits would have to go to 'Hobgoblins'.Is there more?? Now 'Munchies' for me would have to fall somewhere between 'Ghoulies' and 'Hobgoblins'. Actually I probably found it more entertaining than 'Ghoulies', but I preferred thst one's darker tone. From the get-go it plays up its goofy nature (which it's better for it), but due to that nature the hammy acting (Alix Elias and Charlie Phillips), can get rather overbearing that you rather just see the munchies running amok. That's where the fun occurs. Mostly light-hearted fluff though, as the story mainly centres on the munchies (who are either hungry, horny and destructive) in a whole bunch of supposed comical encounters (some moments do work) in the small desert town as a couple of people are on the chase. It's silly, but strangely engaging thanks to the zippy pacing. The creatures themselves look rather bland and poorly detailed, as they're basic dolls being chucked about. Where their personalities arrived from is that they can actually speak... and with attitude.Charlie Stratton and a feisty Nadine Van der Velde (who was in 'Critters') were fair leads. Harvey Korman was acceptable in two roles. Robert Picardo also pops up.Amusingly low-cut entertainment for the undemanding.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4244fc681d334038b58565e6619e4fe2",
            "input": "..Oh wait, I can! This movie is not for the typical film snob, unless you want to brush up on your typical cinematic definitions, like \"continuity editing\" and \"geographic match\". I couldn't tell where I was in this movie. One second they're in the present, next minute their supposedly in the 70's driving a modern SUV and wearing what looked like to me as 80's style clothing. I think. I couldn't pay long enough attention to it since the acting was just horrible. I think it only got attention because it has a 3d which I did not watch. If you're a b-movie buff, and by b-movie I mean BAD movie, then this film is for you. It's home-movie and all non-sense style will keep you laughing for as long as you can stay awake. If your tastes are more for Goddard and Antonioni, though, just skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6befd87f88e54ea48d6dff79e1ca2bf9",
            "input": "Mind, my friends and I saw the movie based off it's title alone. It's cute, though obvious in it's plot and direction-- you know where the movie is going within the first five minutes. My main contention with the plot is that while it remains tolerably consistent, they never explain a lot of the things behind the characters. An alcoholic father, overworked mother, stressed-out sister... that's a bad family, but aside from the occasional mention from the sister, there's not any resolution. I was also confused as to the scene with the bottles... it seemed pretty random.The writing is a secondary concern... the kids weren't bad actors, but their script left a lot to be desired. Unfortunately, what could have been a cute niche movie was pushed aside for a single, blah special effect, lame scripting, and a glaringly obvious plot.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d22fbf3c8e604aea81132f54047765c3",
            "input": "If the term itself were not geographically and semantically meaningless, one might well refer to \"Ned Kelly\" as an \"Australian Western.\" For the people Down Under, Ned Kelly was, apparently, a folk hero bandit akin to Robin Hood, Jesse James, Bonnie and Clyde, and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. The descendant of Irish immigrants, Kelly became a fugitive and an outlaw after he was falsely accused of shooting an Australian law officer, a crime for which his equally innocent mother was put into prison. To get back at the government for this mistreatment, Kelly, his brother Dan, and two other companions, became notorious bank robbers, winning over the hearts of many people in the countryside while striking a blow for justice in a land where Irish immigrants were often treated with disrespect and disdain by those who ran the country.Perhaps because we've encountered this \"gentleman bandit\" scenario so many times in the past, \"Ned Kelly\" feels awfully familiar and unoriginal as it pays homage to any number of the genre's stereotypes and clichés on its way to the inevitable showdown. Ned is the typical heart-of-gold lawbreaker who kills only when he is forced to and, even then, only with the deepest regret. He also has the pulse of the common folk, as when, in the middle of a bank robbery, he returns a valuable watch to one of the customers, after one of his gang has so inconsiderately pilfered it. What movie on this particular subject hasn't featured a scene like that? It's acts of selective generosity like this, of course, that earn him the love and respect of all the little people who come to secretly admire anyone who can get away with sticking it to the powers-that-be and the status quo. Geoffrey Rush plays the typical bedeviled law enforcer who feels a personal stake in bringing down this upstart troublemaker who keeps getting away with tweaking the establishment. There's even the inevitable episode in which one of the ladies being held up goes into the next room and has sex with one of the robbers, so turned on is she by the romantic derring-do of the criminal lifestyle. And the film is riddled with one hackneyed scene like this after another.Heath Ledger fails to distinguish himself in the title role, providing little in the way of substance to make his character either interesting or engaging. It doesn't help that he has been forced to provide a droning voice-over narration that underlines the sanctimoniousness and pretentiousness of both the character and the film.\"Ned Kelly\" might serve a function of sorts as a lesson in Australian history, but as an entertainment, it's just the same old story told with different accents.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-53fc5b3b717e4865915f2d5f6c07f2ff",
            "input": "My first attempt at watching this ended in 8 minutes, roughly after the TV report scene, which I couldn't handle. It went approximately like this:Reporter 1: Hmm, there's a pyramid in our skies. Reporter 2: I think it's aliens. *awkward silence* Reporter 1: In other news...A few days later I watched it to the end, and it wasn't as horrible as I've imagined, but there are serious problems with this. About half of the plot can be easily discarded. And the other half should be expanded to explain the background story or something.What use are the detective, the eugenics people, and the monsters which are disposed of momentarily by Horus? More amusing was the monopoly scene. \"We're all powerful \"Gods\", who have lived for aeons, and of all the games in the multiverse we happen to play monopoly.\" Monopoly? Monopoly?! Even Erich von Dainiken looks coherent, compared to that.The other half is terribly lacking. What did our protagonist do to get himself cryo-frozen? Why was there no big event when he was released at the end? He had those pesky followers, remember? What happened to normal humans? What's the deal with the masked guy? How did the blue-haired girl appear? What's with her eyesight? Etcetera, etcetera.Visually it's OK, more or less, if you disregard the Egyptian Gods looking like walking turds with rotweiller heads.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0131193ae31464ca78d1a38494d93b5",
            "input": "The day has finally come for me to witness the perpetuation of Azumi's fate as an assassin, fruition of her character and the ultimate attempt to draw me deeper into the world she rampaged through so mercilessly during the first saga.That's as poetical as I'll get when talking about Azumi 2: Death or Love, because when I cringed over the heavy sentimentality of House of Flying Daggers and complained about the credibility of Aya Ueto portraying a blood-driven assassin, after watching Azumi 2 I started to appreciate the previously mentioned shortcomings more than ever before.Not only does the determination of each assassin feels sluggish and uninspiring but also many important elements are omitted from the entire experience. In Azumi 1 we saw the assassins use various stealth tactics (which is their number one priority) as well as logic to make easy work of their marks with swift executions and quicker abilities to escape. But I won't hold that against this movie too much since the story is slightly tweaked this time around and many more obstacles are planted in Azumi's way to prevent her from reaching the warlord and displaying any signs of charisma. By the way, Chiaki is foolishly shelved for the most part of the film and is basically playing a toned down version of Go Go, minus the cool weapon and sense of menace.This brings me to the final blow which is the action, simply disguised in the title as the 'Death' side of the epic. In the first half of the film we see the debut of many promising adversaries with flashy looks and even flashier weapons. To no one's surprise they meet their end one way or another but the film falls short when each of them start dying too fast and too easily. In Azumi 1, the young assassins were mostly overpowering the opposition with quick but somewhat satisfying battles and the final showdown between Azumi and Bijomaru in comparison to the fights in Azumi 2 was at least climaxed and worthwhile. Some interesting effects were introduced but they were unable to achieve innovation due to the shortness of each encounter. I am in no way knocking down the conventional style of samurai films with their quick and realistic battles but characters in both Azumi films were so imaginative and straight out of anime that the rules could have been broken and the action should have been further enriched.The romance side of Azumi is there to fill in time between the fight scenes and unfortunately at the end it serves no purpose nor provides a much needed resolution.As a fan with an open mind for wide variety of movies and animation, I won't lie and I'll admit to my neutrality and unimpressiveness towards the first Azumi film, but I'll step right up and say that after watching Azumi 2, the original was made to look like a flawless masterpiece. For what it's worth, Azumi 2: Death or Love could have gone straight to video, with its invisibly richer budget and a failed potential to add or even expand on the bumpy journey of desperate assassins, doing their best to restore the peace, with an unwavering courage to die trying.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9925ac7d88784ed4be35aa67f1874813",
            "input": "but Thomas Ian Griffith just doesn't have the polish that a big bucks actor has, granted this was made 5+ years ago. Some of the humorous lines could have been timed to make this not only action, but comedy. And how do you get KC out of Katia Koslovska anyhow? Plummer's character was so corny, he would have fit better in a Bullwinkle toon. Personally, if action flicks are going to show skin -- I'd have liked to have seen equal time between female/male, otherwise don't show any.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a9a1a63c60e49a2a7ee4d70817976c2",
            "input": "Early Hollywood at it's best!! A classic Kipling poem is transformed into an epic adventure featuring memorable performances by a stellar cast. I think the measure of a good film is how many times you can watch it and still genuinely enjoy it. I've seen it a dozen times and still cry at the end and, admit it, you do too!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-612ea88d65b440519175d55195419b1a",
            "input": "fulci experiments with sci fi and fails. usually in his non horror films we still get sum great gore, but not here. Sum very funny scenes like when the prisinors are forced to hold onto a bar for 12 minutes and if they drop they are electecuted. the guy falls and and has some kind of fit on the floor for about two minutes until his friends who were struggling to hold on anyway lift him off the floor. The city is an obvious model but not a bad one. and the end explosion is at best laughable. And dont get me started on the terrible battle scenes.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d8391db4d534d8fb14ecf9eb065dce6",
            "input": "I found this movie to be a great idea, that didn't deliver. It seems they found a way to build suspense, but couldn't stage their payoffs very well. In one case the police, are on the clock to find the hideout of the kidnappers. They painstakingly go from dentist to dentist to match a dental record. At the same time, the kidnapped man (Mason) escapes through the elevator shaft. After all the build up, the police arrive at the same time he gets free, which is very anti-climatic to say the least. There are also large narration scenes that take us \"inside the thinking\" of the terrorized husband and wife, which detracts from the suspense rather than adds to it. We are fully aware of their tension, and the voice-over is an insult and robs the viewer of any chance of a personal experience with the fear, as Hitchcock proved time and again, is far more effective. The greatest disappointment, is to sit through the whole movie, and the get the quick, rather bland ending. I mean it just...\"ends\" in a snore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d87a66c169194a958fe3fe2a9019adc9",
            "input": "A very tired looking Burt Reynolds plays a mercenary battling his former employers for some gizmo these non-heroes plan to sell to \"the Iranians.\" Low-rent video nonsense by the producers of \"Silk Stalkings\" offers some decent action footage and a lot of ineptly staged \"drama\"...a lack of logic and truly dreadful dialogue are the defining aspects, although the final twists and allegiance shifts could've been a nifty end to a better movie. Burt still has presence, although it also means you notice more when he mouths insultingly half-baked \"one-liners\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b4a414dae84443c8aa55109610df791",
            "input": "Previous commentator Steve Richmond stated that A Walk On The Moon is, in his words \"not worth your $7\". I ended up paying a bit more than that to import what is one of the worst-quality DVDs I have yet seen, of this film or any film in existence. Even when you ignore the fact that the DVD is clearly sourced from an interlaced master and just plain nasty to watch in motion, the film has no redeeming qualities (save Anna's presence) to make watching a top quality Blu-Ray transfer worthwhile. Not that this is any fault of the other actors. Liev Schreiber, Diane Lane, Tovah Feldshuh, and Viggo Mortensen all score high on the relative to Anna Paquin acting ability chart. Far more so than Holly Hunter or Sam Neill did in spite of an equally lousy script, anyway. Director Tony Goldwyn's resume is nothing to crow about, but Pamela Gray's resume includes Wes Craven's most dramatic excursions outside of the horror or slasher genre, so one could be forgiven for thinking this is a case of bad direction.As I have indicated already, the sole reason I watched this film is Anna Paquin. In her acting debut, she literally acted veterans of the industry with a minimum of twelve years' experience above hers under the table. While she is not as far ahead of her castmates here, her performance as a girl that starts the piece as a brat and grows into a woman whose world is crashing down around her proves her Oscar was no fluke. For some time I have been stating to friends that she would be the best choice to portray the heroine of my second complete novel, and a dialogue seventy-three minutes into this film is yet another demonstration of why. This woman could literally act the paint off walls. Anna aside, only Liev Schreiber comes close to eliciting any sympathy from an audience. Sure, his character spends the vast majority of the film neglecting a wife with an existential crisis, but he plays the angered reaction of a man who feels cheated brilliantly. I should know, even if it is not from the same circumstances here.Viggo Mortensen also deserves credit for his portrayal of a travelling salesman, although perhaps not to the same extent. In a manner of speaking, he is the villain of the piece, but he successfully gives the character a third dimension. Yes, his actions even after the whole thing explodes are underhanded, but not many men would act any differently in his situation. Nobody wants to be the other man in this kind of messed-up situation, so Viggo deserves a lot of credit for giving it a try here. Unfortunately, these are all participants in a story about a woman who feels trapped in a stagnant marriage where Tovah Feldshuh tells us that the Mills And Boon archetype of women being the only ones who feel life is passing by simply does not exist. Either writer Pamela Gray or director Tony Goldwyn thought they could just put this line into the film without thinking of how the audience might receive it. Anna even gets to speak the mind of the audience when she asks Diane who she is to be lecturing anyone about responsibility.That said, the film does have a couple of things besides Anna going for it. Mason Daring's original music, while not standing out in any way, gives the film a certain feeling of being keyed into the time depicted that helps where the other elements do not. Roger Ebert is right when he points out that while Liev is a great actor, putting him alongside Viggo in the story of a woman forced to choose between her marriage and her fantasy is a big mistake. He is also very correct in that when the film lingers over scenes of Lane and Mortensen skinny-dipping or mounting one another under a waterfall, it loses focus from being a story of a transgression and becomes soft porn. The film seems terminally confused about the position of its story. No matter how many times I rewatch Liev's scenes, I cannot help but feel he has been shortchanged in the direction or editing. One does not have to make their leads particularly handsome or beautiful, but taking steps to make them the most interesting or developed characters in the piece would have gone a long way.Ebert also hits the nail right on the head when he says that every time he saw Anna on the screen, he thought her character was where the real story lay. Stories about the wife feeling neglected and running into the arms of a man who seems interesting or even dangerous are a dime a dozen, to such an extent now that even setting the story in parallel with an event as Earth-shattering as the moon landing will not help. In spite of feeling revulsion at the manner in which her character's story is presented, Anna might as well be walking around with a neon sign above her head asking the audience if they would not prefer to see the whole thing through her eyes. While I am all too aware that it is difficult to control exactly which character your audience will find the most interesting from your cast, it is very much as if they did not bother to try with Lane and Schreiber. Fans of these two would be well advised to look elsewhere. Hopefully by now my ramblings about the respective performances will give some idea of where the whole thing went wrong.I gave A Walk On The Moon a three out of ten. Anna Paquin earns it a bonus point with one of her best performances (and that is saying something).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d4e5597ac08943f2be7e944816625353",
            "input": "This is the most depressing film I have ever seen. I first saw it as a child and even thinking about it now really upsets me. I know it was set in a time when life was hard and I know these people were poor and the crops were vital. Yes, I get all that. What I find hard to take is I can't remember one single light moment in the entire film. Maybe it was true to life, I don't know. I'm quite sure the acting was top notch and the direction and quality of filming etc etc was wonderful and I know that every film can't have a happy ending but as a family film it is dire in my opinion.I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who wants to be entertained by a film. I can't stress enough how this film affected me as a child. I was talking about it recently and all the sad memories came flooding back. I think it would have all but the heartless reaching for the Prozac.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c92217820fe24183b785ece2a8305351",
            "input": "The bad news is it's still really dreadful. I gave it a 2 because occasionally some of this kitchy slapstick parody actually seems funny.It's supposed to be better than \"Mulva, Zombie Ass Kicker\", and progress should be rewarded. Or maybe I was drinking heavily when I watched it and felt generous. Whatever, \"2\" it is.Maybe the best thing about this movie is that it's over pretty quick. It takes elements from most of Kill Bill I & II's key themes and fight scenes, hacks them up, dumbs them way down, dirties up the dialog, and squishes the whole mess into about an hour of truly awful amateur video.You'd best smoke a lot of something powerful if you want to enjoy this one. And get this DVD back to the video store on time! You'll really hate yourself if you have to pay a late fee.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f18a1719bbe48baae28fd9c6b2146cb",
            "input": "I totally hated the movie. It was so retarded. They need to get some acting lessons....no, wait, that won't help because the Naked Brothers Band people a retards. You know why I am here even though I am a Naked Brothers Band hater? To warn people before they watch the dumb movie so that the NBB doesn't get any money from it so then they can't make any more amateur stupid songs that are so retarded that any old guy could go and write it in 10 seconds. Not only are the song lyrics retarded, they sing badly. Okay, I'm kinda getting off the movie here.....anyways, it was boring and they acted horribly. It was NOT funny at all even though they tried really hard for it to be. I guess they deserve some credit for that...well, the movie isn't worth your time. Just look at its rating. The movie (and the series) is very painful to watch for anyone who has even half a brain. Seriously, if you liked it, you need to go watch movies where the actors actually act, not babbling their lines in a monotone. I am on the drama club at my school and some people there are actually BETTER than those Nat and Alex guys. Hurry before it's too late! I seriously thought that Herbie Fully Loaded was better than this piece of poopie. I don't even know why I went through even HALF of that film. I don't think it even deserves to be called a film...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5edafe98ee740468b349214ec3ecfe8",
            "input": "This was the worst MTV Movie Awards EVER!!! I barely laughed, none of the presenters were funny, the hosts really sucked, and the parodies weren't so great either. Why can't we go back to the good olden days when the show was a riot?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9ffe9cd9caeb4d7ca22dd1ea68dd5a6a",
            "input": "The film's design seems to be the alpha and omega of some of the major issues in this country (U.S.). We see relationships all over at the university setting for the film. Befittingly, the obvious of student v.s. teacher is present. But what the film adds to its value is its other relationships: male v.s. female, white v.s. black, and the individual v.s. society. But most important of all and in direct relation to all of the other relationships is the individual v.s. himself. I was amazed at how bilateral a point of view the director gave to showing the race relations on campus. Most films typically show the injustices of one side while showing the suffering of the other. This film showed the injustices and suffering of both sides. It did not attempt to show how either was right, although I would say the skin heads were shown a much crueler and vindictive (quite obvious towards the end). The film also discusses sex and rape. It is ironically this injustice that in some ways brings the two races together, for a time. Lawrence Fishburne does an over-the-top performance as the sagacious Profesor Phipps. He crumbles the idea of race favortism and instead shows the parallelism of the lazy and down-trodden with the industrious and positive. Other stars that make this film are Omar Epps, Ice Cube, and Jennifer Connelly. Michael Rapaport gives an excellent portrayal of a confused youth with misplaced anger who is looking for acceptance. Tyra Banks make her film debut and proves supermodels can act.Higher Learning gets its name in showing college as more than going to class and getting a piece of paper. In fact, I would say the film is almost a satire in showing students interactions with each other, rather than some dry book, as the real education at a university. It is a life-learning process, not a textual one. I think you'll find \"Higher Learning\" is apropos to the important issues at many universities and even life in general. 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83ccab9d37c5449eb751d63833b72eb5",
            "input": "First of all, let me comment that the audience LOVED it from the first moment. Perhaps current events in the Middle-East led people to take the attitude, \"I came for a comedy and by George I'm going to enjoy it.\" but for whatever reason, everybody seemed really into the comedy of it. The last few times Woody has tried to do a straight comedy (Small Time Crooks, Curse of the Jade Scorpion, Hollywood Ending) I've felt like the one-liners felt strained and a bit antiquated. I remember thinking at one point, \"That would have been funny in the early sixties.\" So going in to this movie, I was afraid Woody was becoming tone deaf, however, in this one his comic sensibilities were in perfect tune. Admittedly, there were plenty of my fellow AARP card carrying folks in the screening, but there were also plenty of 20-somethings and 30-somethings as well, and they all seemed to get it and give up the occasional belly laugh in addition to numerous guffaws, chuckles and the like. In many instances, the throw-aways had people laughing so loud you missed the next line.Thematically, Woody was traipsing familiar ground. As I suspected from the trailer, this film had a lot of Manhattan Murder Mystery in it, but then again, there was more than a smidgen of Oedipus Wrecks (New York Stories), Alice, and even a little tribute to Broadway Danny Rose at the very beginning.Even with Woody in the movie, Scarlett, as Sondra, was, at times the Woody-proxy, but her character was far from the Nebbish that, say, Will Ferrell gave us in Melinda and Melinda or Kenneth Branaugh attempted in Celebrity. Instead of archetypal ticks and quirks, Sondra's nerdishness comes directly from the family history which she shares early on. On numerous occasions the \"family business\" leads her to malapropisms that we get as an audience, while the characters on the screen can only perceive them as strange non-sequiturs. Since we are all in on the joke, we can't help but laugh. But the laughs don't come from recognizing the Woody nebbish, but truly from the character. To a great extent, unlike Farrell, Branaugh, Cusack or even Mia Farrow before her, Scarlett is not required to use the Woody voice to evoke the Woody role. Thus, we don't find ourselves ripped out of the narrative as a Woody's voice suddenly emerges from someone else' face.As my friend commented on the way out, Sid, the character played by Woody, is a supporting role, but more center-stage than I was hoping going in. However, this time Woody seems to have written a character that truly fits his current persona. Unlike his Ed Dobel sage character in Anything Else, or his blind director in Hollywood Ending, this time the character is a comfortable fit. Perhaps more importantly, this time the character works in the story. Within the elevated circles they find themselves in, he is even more fish-out-of-water than Scarlett, which is used to great comedic effect throughout. Sid is a declining, itinerant magician playing to small audiences, but the fact that he is from another era is placed front and center for our enjoyment.But what about Jackman? What about Ian (Swearengen) McShane? I liked both of them to the extent that they are used in the piece. I particularly liked McShane's short but effective turns. Jackman is charming with the ease of \"Old Money\" that was so often portrayed in films from 50 years ago. (Class echoes from Purple Rose of Cairo?)So what did I think? Short answer, maybe his best straight comedy since 1994's Bullets Over Broadway. Less stylized than Mighty Aphrodite. Less caustic than Deconstructing Harry. Less forced than Small Time Crooks or Hollywood Ending. Woody has finally found a comic voice that works in the 21st century.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ec688a404854ca1a5e5ff2ba2d18967",
            "input": "Marvelous James Stewart, Vera Miles vehicle. What makes this historical film dealing with the FBI so good is the family element that is involved during a 35 year career as depicted by Stewart in the film.The film shows a history of the great investigatory agency. It deals with airplane bomb plots, killing off of Indians in Oklahoma for real estate gain, fighting organized crime, Nazis and Communists in that order. The human element is never far behind as Stewart weds Vera Miles. They raise 3 children as Miles' heart goes out each time Stewart goes out on assignment.Look for a brief but memorable performance by Murray Hamilton. Years later, he appeared as Mr. Robinson in 1967's \"The Graduate.\"The film has nothing but praise for J. Edgar Hoover. He certainly brought the FBI up to par.True, this could be viewed as right-wing propaganda, especially with Stewart's real-life Republican views, but it's well done, historically informative, and the view of the family so well depicted.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-441ebbe1e3864683b6f1823fc396e393",
            "input": "Grand Canyon is a very strange bird. It's a completely unique urban piece, where relating the entire plot would fail to convey much.It's central theme seems to be the inherent uncertainty life holds for people of every race, background and station. But to proclaim that THE theme of the film would be to horribly understate its scope. Similarly, to pigeonhole it in a particular genre is futile.The film has volumes to say, though likely different volumes for every viewer, and says it all in such a non-preachy way from so many angles, that in the end, i can't even define its central message for myself.Nevertheless, it does it's business with such laser precision; every prop, line of dialog, and bar of background music contributing to it's pervasive mood and powerful message, that i'm pleasantly surprised, and come away very thoughtful after every viewing. Still it doesn't feel at all stuffy. A sparkling film with a great cast and everything working.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fb8dbf1a4684128a3f68ad5b6311dd3",
            "input": "An OUR GANG Comedy Short.The Gang coerces Spanky into watching their younger siblings. Caring for these FORGOTTEN BABIES turns out to be quite a chore, leaving the little nipper with no choice but to come up with some ingenious solutions to the baby-sitting problem...Spanky is in his glory in this hilarious little film, arguably his best. Highlight: Spanky's retelling the plot of the TARZAN movie he's recently seen to the audience of infants. Movie mavens will recognize Billy Gilbert's voice in the radio drama.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d75e3c838bc240e2b70d1f3f98097fc8",
            "input": "Trapped: buried alive brings us to a resort that has just opened, and is soon to close.We start with a guy in gear blowing up drifts, to avoid the possibility of avalanches. somehow, that doesn't make sense. anyways, he's about to blow away one particularly big one, when he notices the resort is open. despite his best efforts, higher authority tells him his day is over.soon, as everyone expects, an avalanche hits.Look, i'm not gonna reveal any more, all i can say is this was a B-movie designed for the family channel (which i just saw it on, and the fact it had no commercials proves it's a B-movie) anyways, it's a pretty decent film, but it's partially unreal.firsthand, when people are buried by ice and snow, they're buried. not just traced by powder. or, what about a CD for a screwdriver? it's not possible. and finally, what i can't stress enough, is that an explosion cannot stop a avalanche, guaranteed.furthermore, it's worth a rental or a TV viewing, but not owning. 7/10.The movie is rated PG, but maybe it should have received something a little more strong. a boy nearly loses his foot in an elevator, but his leg is cut around the ankle, a guy is toasted by electricity and diesel, and in the weight room, dead people are laying around.enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-709add020bc94eed96d41b1e9fdf6814",
            "input": "Canadian filmmaker Mary Harron is a cultural gadfly whose previous films laid bare some the artistic excess of the Sixties and the hollow avaricious Eighties. With \"The Notorious Bettie Page\" she points her unswerving eye at Fifties America, an era cloaked in the moral righteousness of Joe McCarthy, while experiencing the beginnings of a sexual awakening that would result in the free love of the next decade. Harron and her co-writer Guinevere Turner, are clearly not interested in the standard biopic of a sex symbol. This is a film about the underground icon of an era and how her pure unashamed sexuality revealed both the predatory instincts and impure thoughts of a culture untouched by the beauty of a nude body. If the details of Bettie's life were all the film was concerned about, then why end it before her most tragic period was about to begin. Clearly, Harron is more interested in America's attitudes towards sexual imagery then and now. Together with a fearless lead performance by Gretchen Mol and the stunningly atmospheric cinematography of W.Mott Hupfel III, she accomplishes this goal admirably, holding up a mirror to the past while making the audience examine their own \"enlightened\" 21st Century attitudes towards so-called pornography. As America suffocates under a new conservatism, this is a film needed more than ever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0dbe87e3b6114c4ba2936ccf10c4d5f9",
            "input": "Brief summary: This movie demeans everyone it touches. That means you.First off, let me say I'm not a purist, and this might have been funny for a few minutes. The impersonations are not bad. But overall it's just dull and excruciatingly not funny. A few simple jokes are repeated over and over again.It's clear that this movies only exists to squeeze the last few dollars out of the now-trademarked Laurel and Hardy. The producers cannot have any real regard for their place in film history, or their talents. This is what offended me the most.Of course, my daughter liked it, so I'm also a failure as a parent ;)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-029aa1bac2c84aee93cee5c96bd3ec33",
            "input": "I made a special effort to see this movie and was totally disappointed with the outcome. On paper, the script seems hopeful, and the choice of actors leaves one with hopes - I liked Pacino in Scent of a Woman and have seen Anny Duperrey and Marthe Keller in several French and other films of the 70s/80s. But I had forgotten how important a part dialogues can play in a film, and in this film they are absolute ..... trash ! The filming locations were also attractive but the hopeless, pretentious and forced dialogues pulled the whole thing down to sub zero level. In addition to that, I am pretty allergic to the world of motor racing and find no interest in this sport. Even the inelegant dialogues in \"Love Story\" were better than the ones in this film (and that's saying something !!). I was really expecting better from this film and was very disappointed to have been let down so much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22b28c57194243ca9bb66db8e9142f09",
            "input": "A superb and compelling drama about the hunt for the notorious Russian serial killer Andrea Chikatilo. Magnificent performance from Stephen Rea as the forensic scientist put in charge of the investigation, who finds the biggest obstacle to his progress is the Russian government, in particular the old communist party members who want to maintain a closed society.The film is has an underlying theme about the decline of the communist society, and progress in the hunt for the killer is reflected by progress in social and political change in Russia, which is subtly put across. There is a conflict of old ways and new ways, and these are represented by the two viewpoints of Rea's superior (played by Donald Sutherland), and Rea himself . These are at first polarised, with Sutherland 'high' in system looking down, and Rea 'low' on the ground, looking up. However, they have a common cause – to catch the serial killer.Throughout the film the relationship between these two develops, and the tension gradually eases until at the end of the movie Rea and Sutherland and Rea and Sutherland have mutual respect for each other, the killer is caught, and Glasnost symbolically comes. Excellent script.Further credits go to Sutherland's performance, which is superb and sympathetic, Jeffrey DeMunn as the killer whom we despise but can't hate, and Max Von Sydow, who is thoroughly convincing as the humble psychologist who risks his reputation to help.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10663f955dd24fdb851bf010e96f0da5",
            "input": "Yeh, I know -- you're quivering with excitement. Well, *The Secret Lives of Dentists* will not upset your expectations: it's solidly made but essentially unimaginative, truthful but dull. It concerns the story of a married couple who happen to be dentists and who share the same practice (already a recipe for trouble: if it wasn't for our separate work-lives, we'd all ditch our spouses out of sheer irritation). Campbell Scott, whose mustache and demeanor don't recall Everyman so much as Ned Flanders from *The Simpsons*, is the mild-mannered, uber-Dad husband, and Hope Davis is the bored-stiff housewife who channels her frustrations into amateur opera. One night, as Dad & the daughters attend one of Davis' performances, he discovers that his wife is channeling her frustrations into more than just singing: he witnesses his wife kissing and flirting with the director of opera. (One nice touch: we never see the opera-director's face.) Dreading the prospect of instituting the proceedings for separation, divorce, and custody hearings -- profitable only to the lawyers -- Scott chooses to pretend ignorance of his wife's indiscretions.Already, the literate among you are starting to yawn: ho-hum, another story about the Pathetic, Sniveling Little Cuckold. But Rudolph, who took the story from a Jane Smiley novella, hopes that the wellworn-ness of the material will be compensated for by a series of flashy, postmodern touches. For instance, one of Scott's belligerent patients (Denis Leary, kept relatively -- and blessedly -- in check) will later become a sort of construction of the dentist's imagination, emerging as a Devil-on-the-shoulder advocate for the old-fashioned masculine virtues (\"Dump the b---h!\", etc.). When not egged-on by his imaginary new buddy, Scott is otherwise tormented by fantasies that include his wife engaged in a three-way with two of the male dental-assistants who work in their practice. It's not going too far to say that this movie is *Eyes Wide Shut* for Real People (or Grown-Ups, at least). Along those lines, Campbell Scott and Hope Davis are certainly recognizable human beings as compared to the glamourpuss pair of Cruise and Kidman. Further, the script for *Secret Lives* is clearly more relevant than Kubrick's. As proof, I offer the depiction of the dentists' children, particularly the youngest one who is about 3 or 4 years old, and whose main utterance is \"Dad! Dad! Dad! Dad! Dad! DAD!!!\" This is Family Life, all right, with all its charms.The movie would make an interesting double-bill with *Kramer vs. Kramer*, as well. One can easily trace the Feminization of the American Male from 1979 to 2003. In this movie, Dad is the housewife as in *Kramer*, but he is in no way flustered by the domestic role, unlike Dustin Hoffman, who was too manly to make toast. Here, Scott gets all the plumb chores, such as wiping up the children's vomit, cooking, cleaning, taking the kids to whatever inane after-school activity is on the docket. And all without complaint. (And without directorial commentary. It's just taken for granted.)The film has virtues, mostly having to do with verisimilitude. However, it's dragged down from greatness by its insistence on trendy distractions, which culminate in a long scene where a horrible five-day stomach flu makes the rounds in the household. We must endure pointless fantasy sequences, initiated by the imaginary ringleader Leary. Whose existence, by the way, is finally reminiscent of the Brad Pitt character in *Fight Club*. And this finally drives home the film's other big flaw: lack of originality. In this review, I realize it's been far too easy to reference many other films. Granted, this film is an improvement on most of them, but still. *The Secret Lives of Dentists* is worth seeing, but don't get too excited about it. (Not that you were all that excited, anyway. I guess.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05ce7845284f4adca9c07d21b675b4c5",
            "input": "I have only recently been able to catch up with the films of Marilyn Miller since they are not shown on TCM in the UK.I have been much intrigued over the years because this was one of the superstars of the 20s.What was she really like.To some stars of this era like Jolson some of the magic still shines through,but alas not for Miller.Her dancing seems awkward and poorly choreographed,her singing somewhat limited and as an actress she makes Ruby Keeler seem like Hepburn.Even worse in this film as the public had grown tired of musicals virtually all of the musical numbers have been deleted.So we are left with a comedy of that period with little real appeal.She was being paid $500000 for this!So i have only two conclusion.Either she was poorly served by the cinema or she had no talent at all.I think that the truth is nearer the later than the former.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9698278e0da64c9e913c9c5180b03ef7",
            "input": "This adaptation of Pearl S. Buck's film is certainly a classic. A true Hollywood epic, it has all the things a great Hollywood film has: Birth, death, happiness, sadness, exhilaration, despair, and so on. There is only one thing that irks me. I know it was a sign of the times, but neither of the two main characters are played by Asian actors. Paul Muni was a great actor, and he does an admirable job as Wang Lung, the owner of a farm in China. Luise Rainier plays Olan. She does not even look Chinese! I think she tried to get the role, but they should have put Anna May Wong in the role. I know why they didn't, and Ms. Rainier is very good in the film, but they hardly tried to make her look \"authentic\". Stillm its a great film, especially if you read the book (I did in high school, decades ago). Its a must see, just look beyond the casting. I think you can.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8327d3e9c5664dfc9adc2abf5e5122b2",
            "input": "WOW! What - a - movie !!!!!!!!!!! I'm not at all a fan of contemporary Italian directors. Usually I don't like dramas. I am not a Will Smith super fan even thinking that he is a very good actor......but this movie ! It is such a great movie with a such original script and so good direction and so well acting...wow...it is stunning. This movie captured my attention minute by minute and I even did not like \"The pursuit of happiness\" (maybe also because i did not like the acting of Will's son who is a very bad actor while children usually seems all natural born actors, I saw him also last night in \"The day the earth stood still\" and I confirmed my sensation that Jaden can't act). I don't want to write spoilers and so i don't talk about the story but what I can say is that this movie talks about Love, Death and other feelings which i don't like to watch in movies....but THIS MOVIE is such a super great movie. If you have a minimum of heart you'll don't regret watching it",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0a898e86ffd041d9865902e3233af58c",
            "input": "When you see this movie you begin to realise what a drastically under-utilised asset the late Dudley Moore was. There should be a dozen movies like this in our archive.He was already top-notch talent before he went to Hollywood, both as a comedian and a musician. But mostly he is remembered for his pairing with Peter Cook, on television and in one or two indifferent British movies. Perhaps the best of these was 'Bedazzled'. He always tended to be eclipsed by Cook, who's jealousy and meanness rifted their partnership and enabled Moore to realise his true potential in America. 'Arthur' is the result. This is a truly splendid movie. Moore's clownish comedy as a drunkard is undeniable. The script is perfectly suited to his manner with lot's of hilarious, almost surreal conversational digressions. There is something so British about him that I'm actually surprised he found such an appeal to American tastes. Tommy Cooper, an anarchic comedian after the same fashion tended to draw a blank. It is Moore's almost childish vulnerability that is so endearing.Liza Minelli and John Guilgud tend to play straight roles against him, but still have some excellent one-liners. John Guilgud in particular delivers his with a sarcastic and acerbic authority that is a treasure to watch. He invariably steals any scene in which he features and thoroughly deserved his Oscar. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he has never played any other comic role.There is a follow-up movie called 'Arthur 2 - On The Rocks'. It never attains the same sublime levels of fun that this one reaches, but it is still rather good even so. Guilgud only gets a cameo appearance at the beginning and as a ghost. It is darker. And there is some interesting soul-searching. It will disappoint if you watch 'Arthur' first.Hollywood seemed to loose interest in cuddly Dudley after these two outings. He eventually returned to Britain, dejected and apparently dying.But 'Arthur' is a sample of what might have been. We can only imagine the other great movies he should have made.Your're sadly missed, Dudley.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40128c7b74984f8da22cddfd3b634fd1",
            "input": "This movie was a really great flick about something that affects us all. I know I've personally run into this many times. Thank goodness Will Smith has jumped onto the societal issue of text messaging while driving. People, don't do it. An hour and forty five minutes is not enough time for this cause. Personally, I wanted to throw away my cell phone after the movie. I was glad to see other people in the theater saw the message and dumped their phones with the empty bags of popcorn. I decided to disable all text messaging on my phone and would encourage others to do the same. If you care about your family, make them watch this vital Public Service Announcement on text messaging while driving or they could kill seven people. Thanks for showing us the way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e032ac6698e445a4a7b00fa9f8a6e0d2",
            "input": "Ah yez, the Sci Fi Channel produces Yeti another abominable movie. I was particularly taken by the scenes immediately following the crash where, as the survivors desperately searched for matches, at least a half dozen fires burned – with no apparent reason – at various points of the wreckage. Fire seemed to be a predominate theme throughout. They searched corpses for lighters and matches, and finally finding a box built a fire every day for, apparently, 12, but no one ever gathered wood. Then when the vegan (hah) burned the bodies, what did she use for an accelerant? I mean these guys were frozen – well maybe not. Despite the apparent low temperature everything the yeti ate, bled. Maybe it's just me, but even in a totally unbelievable tale (none of the survivors had ever heard of a yeti, or an abominable snowman, until the very end), if you take care of the little things the bigger deals become more acceptable. Oh, what did the prologue (1972) have to do with the remainder of the movie? And the revolver, warm enough to hold in his hand, froze up and wouldn't fire. Gimme a break. Well, at least we have Carly Pope, another eminently lovely Canadian lass. And, with little irony, Ed Marinaro as the coach.Well I might as well add, the rabbit they ate (despite it looking like chicken) is not a rodent, but a lagomorph. Now if it had been a squirrel (or a rat) it would have been a rodent, but it still looked like chicken. And the writers missed a real chance to have someone note \"It tastes just like...\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b987ca5a79c491fb2d1891d572ecd5c",
            "input": "question: how do you steal a scene from the expert of expert scene stealers Walther Mathau in full, furious and brilliant Grumpy Old Man mode? answer: quietly, deadpan, and with perfect timing as George Burns does here.I know nothing of Vaudeville but this remains a favourite film, the two leads are hilarious, the script funny, the direction and pacing very fine. Richard Benjamin is very funny as straight man - trying to get at Burns through the window etc. Even the small parts are great.There are so many funny scenes, Mathau messing up the commercial, Burns repeating his answers as if senile...A delight.Enterrrrrr!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e97a12a7313a4a268467b03b67952e37",
            "input": "Well I gave this movie a 7. It was better than \"Thirdspace\" but not as good as \"In the Beginning\" as far as the B5 movies go. I really think the television series did a much better job overall with the special effects and character portrayal. Let's hope the producers and cast get the next series \"Crusade\" up to the standards of B5.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0f16d96950e4e9492d607a8746bfa40",
            "input": "I have seen this movie many times and each time i watch it i can't help but be entertained by it. Gunga Din is one of those Classic movies made in Hollywoods Golden Years when the actors themselves had to draw the audience into a movie without relying on fantastic special effects and man made \"monsters\" to carry a scene. The onscreen charisma and comraderie demonstrated by Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. is suberb and very entertaining to watch. The tongue and cheek attitude in which the three actors play their roles works beutifully and flawlessly. Some might consider it \"corny\" but i consider it \"classic\" filmaking and acting at its best. One must remember when watching this film that Europe was involved in a War with Germany and audiences went to the movies to escape from the horrors of war and to be entertained and taken away to a place where people were larger than life and did heroic deeds and good would always conquer over evil. Gunga Din accomplishes this perfectly by letting the audience laugh at and with the actors during their harrowing escapades. In short, its a classic film that doesnt take itself too seriously and doesnt want the audience to either.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3bcf6abb643e475ea8b133759923cc9d",
            "input": "I actually quite enjoyed this show. Even as a youngster I was interested in all sports and that included horse racing. It was always going to be difficult to make a series based on racing corruption and at the same time get permission from the race tracks to record filming about this controversial subject. One episode I particularly remember centred around a horse expected to win a big race that looked a bit off colour. A syringe was found on the stable floor and everyone thought it had been drugged but nothing showed up in the blood tests. All too late they realised the horse hadnt been doped but had had its knee cartilage removed. Like running a car with no oil and the engine seizing up, the horse broke down with tragic consequences.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2010beebebcc416ea2e46de4025833b4",
            "input": "I'm a 53 year-old college professor. I went with my wife and 12 year old daughter. We all enjoyed the movie. The film is original, witty, fast-paced and totally charming. The plot was easy enough for a 10 year old to follow, but twisty enough to keep an adult interested. I thought Emma Roberts did a superb job and the rest of the cast was just fine. My only criticism is that the Los Angeles sets were not as interesting as they should have been. They were functional, but nothing stood out. On the other hand, make-up, costume, lighting, cinematography, editing and directing were excellent. Altogether, I thought it was a totally enjoyable experience. I am disappointed that the professional critics (almost all adult males) savagely attacked the film. Apparently, they have something against films that portray strong, intelligent and independent young women. Their writings reveal more about their own sexist natures than anything about this wonderful family film. I recommend it strongly to every child and every parent.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-624dfd0d8ef542d186f004400aed6d42",
            "input": "Robert Duvall is a direct descendent of Confederate General Robert E. Lee, according the IMDb.com movie database. After seeing this film, you may think Duvall's appearance is reincarnation at it's best. One of my most favorite films. I wish the composer, Peter Rodgers Melnick had a CD or there was a soundtrack available. Wonderful scenery and music and \"all too-true-to-life,\" especially for those of us that live in, or have moved to, the South. This is a \"real moment in time.\" Life moves on, slowly, but \"strangers we do not remain.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17c900333a2c42b8b360662a09488173",
            "input": "This installment of Masters of Horror was terrible. Apparently, Mr. Carpenter needs to learn a thing or two about pacing and decent, plausible dialog. There were times when I literally shouted at the TV for something to happen. Maybe he thinks he building suspense, but Carpenter needs to trim back that overdone, over-simplified musical score of his (or his son's) and advance the action a little bit. How many times did the girl say, \"Oh no, I can't have this baby!\" and \"Oh, no here it comes\"? Carpenter takes elements from much, much better films (Assault on Precinct 13 and The Thing) and throws them in here as if we are supposed to acknowledge and appreciate his trademark style. What is lacking here is genuine suspense and energy. It's as though he's sleepwalking through the process of movie making. For better Carpenter films, stick to the tried and true classics-- The Thing, Halloween, and They Live. For better masters of horror episodes, check out my personal favorites: Family, Jenifer, and Dreams in the Witch House.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12f1c8e424dc451f9bc571b20d22fe94",
            "input": "A huge hit upon release with Australian audiences, it can still be funny today, but its over-the-top political incorrectness and blunt, unsubtle humour can make it a bit of a cringer. It goes on far too long; some of the content could have been saved for the sequel, Barry McKenzie Holds His Own, which desperately needed some new stuff anyway. Granted, his ocker Aussie attitude is funny, but also becomes annoying as the film drags on. Some say Crocker's songs are the best bits, and they are certainly original, but \"hilarious\"? The Adventures of Barry McKenzie will go down as a landmark in Australian cinema, but we should do everything in our power to make sure that overseas audiences do not see the majority of Australians as Barry McKenzies (or, for that matter, Mick Dundees!). Rating: 5/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd478c604662407aafdf3f7bfd567af1",
            "input": "I had to endure teen-aged, high school angst and family conflict for almost all of the show. I really do not care about high-school girls fretting about their relationships. I've spent my time in Hell dealing with such issues and I care nothing about fictional teenies going through \"lite\" versions of the horrors I endured. I want science fiction. That's the only reason I'm here. There were a few seconds of science fiction late in the show. We FINALLY see a proto-Cylon. It was good but with one problem. Its red eye-dot would lock onto an object of interest. We all know that Cylon eyedots always scan back and forth, giving the machine a map of the world. The red eye-dot does not ever stop moving back and forth.I really hope the writers fix this abuse before the second episode.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6d2c7960cb5425583f275e4b31b30f0",
            "input": "SPOILERSTom and Jerry is a classic cartoon, with a flawless idea, and almost every single short is a gem. While I must say that this is definitely an inferior short compared such other classic Tom and Jerry shorts, there is not way you can hate this cartoon. Sure, it is understandable to say that this is one of the worst of the first Tom and Jerry episodes, and I can say that I agree, but the fact of the matter is that all Tom and Jerry episodes are great, but some are just better than others. Well, this would fit into \"others.\" Here is the plot of Fraidy Cat. Tom is listening to an old scary radio broadcast, and becomes easily frightened. Jerry observes how scared he is, and tries to scare him even more than he already is. He creates scary dilemmas for Tom, and Tom becomes scared out of his wits, and his lives. Jerry then puts a sheet over a vacuum cleaner and controls it, thus making it look like the vacuum is a ghost. Tom finds out that Jerry did all of this, and chases him. Tom then accidentally bites the house maid. However, at the end Jerry ends up the one becoming scared after he sees his reflection in a flour cup.Overall, this is far from the best Tom and Jerry short out there, but this is still a fun and entertaining piece of time. It makes me wish that there was more cartoons like this. The slapstick and gags in this that make Tom and Jerry famous are as good as ever in this short, but it felt like something was missing in this. It felt slower than most Tom and Jerry shorts. Anyway, this is a good short that does not quite live up to some other Tom and Jerry cartoons, but it is still nice.7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb3342a2838b4c669b324ca3b5f0aa45",
            "input": "Those individuals familiar with Asian cinema, as a whole, are aware that Japan is renowned, or notorious, for it's hyper-violent films and Korea is now garnering a reputation for viciously brutal films. Dog Bites Dog, while not necessarily getting as hyper-violent as the craziest Miike film, nor is it as unapologetically brutal as some Koreas more ambitious efforts, it is a perfect in between with its own brand of brutality all it's own. The greatest strength this film has though, like the greatest of the Japanese or Korean efforts, is that the brutality, rather than detracting from the film, actually develops the characters, if not, pushing the story forward. The two main characters are both incredibly vicious individuals with their own motivations and emotional underpinning for being as such. Sam Lee's character, for instance, is on the edge from the very start and slowly and surely, amidst various encounters with Chang's character, it is revealed why he is. Without spoiling this part of the story too much, it involves the morally ambiguous nature of his father. Chang's character, on the other hand, has his most primal instincts honed to, if not perfection, brutal efficiency. Surprisingly, Chang's story arch, while not necessarily revealing a more human side, actually reveals a side to our animal nature which many forget about which is the natural ability to recognize a fellow broken animal (and no I am not talking about Sam Lee, rather Pei Pei's garbage dump girl character). Ultimately however, for the first 80 minutes or so, it is a, more or less, straight forward cat and mouse, or Dog chase Dog, film in which every encounter ends in at least one death (seriously, once Sam Lee and Chang Square off, some one will die) and the fun part of movie is you never know who hands will commit the act. Which brings us to the film's one weakness. Unforunatley to delve into it would be yet another spoiler but, to put it simply, it is guilty of pushing one of the main points of the film since, rather then letting the point be made as is 80 minutes into the film, the film goes on for another 20 minutes or so to further emphasize it. Don't get me wrong, if transitioned better from the 80 minute mark to the climax and if the final act wasn't filled with sweet music (in fact if it, like the majority of the film, kept the music to the barest minimum and let the disturbing sound effects do their job), it still could have worked and not detract from the film. As it is though, despite the third act having the most vicious and bloody of the encounters, the way it was handled made it feel tacked on, and almost, insults the viewers intelligence since it felt it had to go this far to get it across. Nevertheless, it is still a breath of fresh air from Hong Kong cinema since even the most bloody of the martial arts films never reaches the level of viciousness and brutality while keeping the the character archs in tact.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-961565404e814741bd8bcd101fa59ddd",
            "input": "This movie captures the absurd essence of an overbearing American patriot actor -- one that believes his work (and politics) are as crucial to the American people as the opinions of the President himself. Alan Bates captures this mindset perfectly as Michael Baytes, and I will immortally remember Bates as this character. This is a movie for Canadians and Americans alike. It is a valuable piece of cinema, that which is able to take its audience through the magic of making a film and reveal just how easy it is for the producer and director to lose complete control to the will of the actors and innumerable outside forces. Wonderfully, \"Hollywood North\" does not suffer from the subject that it portrays: Peter O'Brian directs with precision and complete control, and commands both the serious 'behind-the-scenes' portion of the movie, and the movie-within-the-movie, \"Flight to Bogota\" with clarity and insight. If you are at all interested in the wit and strength of Canadian cinema, \"Hollywood North\" is a great place to start.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-26d9a8174f0449ac86ea30c3e102ed54",
            "input": "A man brings his new wife to his home where his former wife died of an \"accident\". His new wife has just been released from an institution and is also VERY rich! All of the sudden she starts hearing noises and seeing skulls all over the place. Is she going crazy again or is the first wife coming back from the dead? You've probably guessed the ending so I won't spell it out. I saw this many times on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid. Back then, I liked it but I WAS young. Seeing it now I realize how bad it is. It's horribly acted, badly written, very dull (even at an hour) and has a huge cast of FIVE people (one being the director)! Still it does have some good things about it. The music is kinda creepy and the setting itself with the huge empty house and pond nearby is nicely atmospheric. There also are a few scary moments (I jumped a little when she saw the first skull) and a somewhat effective ending. All in all it's definitely NOT a good movie...but not a total disaster either. It does have a small cult following. I give it a 2.Also try to avoid the Elite DVD Drive-in edition of it (it's paired with \"Attack of the Giant Leeches\"). It's in TERRIBLE shape with jumps and scratches all over. It didn't even look this bad on TV!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-040eaaa89c4b4f589726dff6d2ce5c62",
            "input": "I think this is almost all I need to say. I feel obliged to explain my actions though. I've basically never seen such an armature production, and I mean that in all senses of the word. Although he physical camera work, boom MIC operation and other technical aspects of this film are laughable, unfortunately its not the only areas. Unlike some classic independent films that have been saved by their scripts great characterization and plot, this unfortunately has an awful script, awful acting and worst of all, awful annoying characters. It's a crime that for the every independent film that gets, distribution like Haiku Tunnel, there's a 101 other indie films that died silent deaths. I don't know who the Kornbluth brothers know at Sony, but that can be my only explanation as to how this amateur family production ever got distribution. I'm quite bemused as to why they picked this up.The ONLY part of this film that holds out any intrigue is its title. However, the reason for that is even a let down. I hope this review will save a few people that may be intrigued by this films title from going to watch it. I've seen a lot of films in my time, and I'm very forgiving when in the cinema, but this was too much. I'll never forget 'tunnel', for marking an important point in my life experience of cinema. Shame it's such a low point.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2eaa3cbd30504a628a6a11b5eef9d7fd",
            "input": "[WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS]I have this adult friend for whom the notion that her parents have sex makes her terribly uneasy. She came to mind when I reflected on the audience's reaction to \"The Mother.\" People gasped when May (Anne Reid) writhed passionately in bed with her younger hunk lover, Darren (Daniel Craig) or later saw sexually explicit drawings by May. I doubt the audience was aghast at the nudity or the drawings' content as much as feeling uneasy at seeing a woman in her 60s rapturously enjoying sex.Screenwriter Hanif Kureishi (\"My Beautiful Laundrette,\" \"My Son the Fanatic\") again proves why he's among the most trenchant storytellers on either side of the Atlantic. His story's not easy to take. This searing family drama isn't a film you can claim you enjoyed watching because it's raw, complex, and often makes us very uncomfortable. Nevertheless, it's powerfully good stuff.Kureishi and Roger Michell (who directed \"Notting Hill,\" of all things) craft an unsentimental, wrenching and superbly-acted portrait of an older woman who realizes, after all these years, she can and should still enjoy all of life's pleasures. In a wonderfully epiphanous moment, when her son, Bobby, asks her not to be difficult, May shoots back, \"Why not?\"Why not, indeed.Anne Reid deserves an Oscar nomination for her turn as May. It's subtle, restrained, powerful and sad, often all at the same time. Watch Reid when May observes Darren and Paula (Cathryn Bradshaw) in a seemingly passionate clutch in a pub. Or, when she begs Paula to open the front door after a disastrous date. Reid's eyes and face reveal all of May's anguish and despair. In the film's most devastating moment, May drops to her knees before Darren, willing to do anything for him, only asking him to be kind. This is a tremendously gutsy performance by a remarkable actress.I enjoyed Michell's use of natural sound, especially when May and Toots first arrive at Bobby's place. It perfectly illustrated the cacophony around May and Toots, the flippant manner in which their own family welcomes them.This film, at times, reminded me of the honesty and rawness of Mike Leigh's work, except \"The Mother\" hangs on to a slight sense of optimism to keep afloat.My one quibble: Michell's decision to give May and Darren's first love scene an almost cheesy sensibility. The lovers remain out of focus while, in the foreground, a white curtain flutters gently in the breeze. And the only sound is of May in the throes of passion.The problem with Michell's approach is that both Reid and Craig, who completely envelops the role of Darren, plough their way so fearlessly into these roles that it's unfair to hide their characters' almost primitive energy from the audience. Especially since Michell has no qualms about making later sex scenes visceral.This film doesn't have immensely likable characters. We sympathize with May, but she, too, causes her daughter's suffering. But I doubt Kureishi intended to people his story with likable folk. His point, I believe, was to unmask a family that's already cracking when something emotionally cataclysmic happens. It's unflinching in its candor and ultimately unforgettable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-36fe4c92d91143b9bac8ea4230fa9c9f",
            "input": "An MTV-style film crew consisting of American T.V. programme producer Zack Zardine (Matt Borlenghi) his camerawoman, the Australian Cecily (Kate Fisher) and two surfer 'dudes' named Bog Hall (Dax Miller) and Jeremy (Joel West) arrive on some nice looking island somewhere, it's not actually revealed where. The crew plan to shoot an expose on 'bloodsurfing' which is apparently the latest craze in extreme sports. Surfers throw bait into the sea and cut themselves to attract sharks, just to see if they can out-surf them without being eaten. Once there they are greeted by Sonny Lofranco (Cris Vertido) and his wife Melba (Susan Africa). Their search for the perfect location leads them to the shark infested waters of Lilo-Cay. Sonny, Melba and their daughter Lemmya (Maureen Larrazabal) take them in their boat. Soon after arriving and having already shot some 'bloodsurfing' footage Sonny, Melba and Lemmya are all killed by a 30 foot saltwater crocodile that some say 'owns' the island. The boat is sunk. Zack, Cecily, Bog and Jeremy appear stuck on the island until such time a rescue party arrives. However, after a run in with some, erm well I don't really know what they are. Pirates? Drug smugglers? Revolutionairies? Fat ugly people who just don't like being with other people? Who knows? And more importantly who cares? Not me that's for sure. Anyway, after escaping from these guys who look like pirates, they are picked up just off the coast of the island by Captain John Dirks (Duncan Regehr) and his girl Arty (Taryn Reif as Tara Reif). The film crew believe they have been saved. Little do they know that the crocodile and Captain Dirks go way back and he has a score to settle and four members of a film crew aren't going to stop him. Captain Dirks heads back to Lilo-Cay for a final showdown with the giant man-eating crocodile.Directed by James D.R. Hickox this is one awful film, but it's still not as bad as Tobe Hoopers Crocodile (2000). Everything about this film sucks. The script by Sam Bernard and Robert L.Levy is terrible, extremely slow as the crocodile isn't even seen or mentioned before the 30 minute mark and by that time I was seriously bored and annoyed with the hideously unlikeable characters thought up by Bernard and Levy. The whole film is also frustratingly predictable as well, within the first 10 minutes anyone familiar with horror film stereotypes and stock characters will be able to guess who dies and who will survive. The crocodile effects are awful and seem to be repeated over and over, there is a small puppet head that obviously has someones arm stuck inside it controlling it's movements as the water splashes become huge! The CGI shots of the crocodile are just plain embarrassing to watch. There is no gore apart from when a character is bitten in half which is achieved using CGI to digitally remove the actors legs, again it looks terrible. There is also a brief scene when someone is impaled on wooden spikes when they set a trap off. There is a reasonable amount of nudity and sex, plus the female actresses are nice and easy on the eye. There are basic continuity and logical errors in the film too, in one sequence Cecily is filming Bog and Jeremy 'bloodsurfing' but from the angle and distance she is at it would be physically impossible to obtain footage of both the sharks and surfers at the same time, and surely that is the whole point of her shot? When Dirks manages to harpoon the crocodile the angle of the wire changes dramatically between shots, in one shot the angle of the line looks like it's coming from the sky, in the shot straight after the angle is completely different and it seems as if the line is coming from below the surface of the water when in actual fact the harpoon is attached to the back of the boat and the line should be almost level with the surface. I could carry on, like why does the crocodile jump off the edge of a cliff if it's so smart as this film tries to make out? But I would probably exceed the 1000 word limit if I listed everything that was wrong with this film, so I won't. I hated this film, but rather scarily it's still not as bad as Tobe Hoopers effort at a giant crocodile film. Definitely one to avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-261d01c338574fb4a83683688bef8e3c",
            "input": "While not as bad as his game-to-movie adaptations, this hunk of crud doesn't fare much better.Boll seems to have a pathological inability to accept that he doesn't make good movies. One of these days he'll run out of money and stop inflicting the world with his bombs.The acting was sub-par, the dialog sounded like they were reading TelePrompTers and Boll's special little 'touches' were seen throughout the whole thing.Like all Uwe Boll movies, this one just shouldn't exist.Plain and simple.Just like Uwe Boll himself shouldn't exist. >_>",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b0c81b3c62d4430bfc63545b9fcc879",
            "input": "this movie was horrible. I could barely stay awake through it. I would never see this movie again if I were payed to. The so-called horror scenes in it were increadably predictable and over played. There was really nothing about this movie that would have made it original or worth the $7.50 I payed to see it. Don't go see it, don't rent it, don't read about it online because any of these things would be a complete waste of your time. Sarah Michelle Geller gave a lackluster performance and really should be ashamed of herself for sullying her good name with this movie. Shame on you Sarah for being associated with this horrible, horrible movie. Horrible movie, no need to ever see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72b5f122800b491d81e80c3d6a212b3e",
            "input": "Ever since I was eight years old I have been a big wrestling fan. It didn't matter what federation I watched. WWE,WCW,USWA. To me the action is all I watched it for.May 23rd 1999. That was my 19 birthday. I ordered Over the Edge and I was just expecting another pay per view. But this time. I was wrong. Instead that was the night one of the best wrestlers to come out of Canada a true human being fell to his death due to a stunt gone wrong. Not much you can do to change the situation. But what happened affter Owens death made me very mad.Rather then ending the pay per view and doing the right thing as human beings the WWE decided to protect what comes first and that was the money by keeping the pay per view going as if Owens death never happened.I gotta tell you. Vince Mchmaon has made some stupid decisions in his life but this was by far the stupidest decision he ever made.And this crap with saying Owen would have wanted the pay pew view to keep going. Give me a break. When someone dies on a pay pew view its comon sense to stop it. Thats like a police officer shooting a robber or a mugger with a run and then just leaving the man to die so he can go home and call it a day as if the mans life never mattered.But no matter what happens. Owen will be missed and thanks for the memories for all the times you gave us.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3407d6dcc5d34a21b73bcbd839aba0b9",
            "input": "This appalling film somehow saw the light of day in 1988. It looks and sounds as if it had been produced 20 or 30 years earlier, and features some of the worst songs ever included in a major motion picture. I weep for the parents and children who paid top dollar to see this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8823ad8d57a44fb89ed39a5c8fe1b416",
            "input": "And maybe, as Fred Sandford used to say, \"one across the lips\". That to those who released this film on an unsuspecting public. And perhaps to the person in \"Rue Morgue\" who called this a \"Fender Hellbender\" and said it was good.Five young girls, apparently taking a short-cut home from a high school football game, become lost and stop to ask directions at some small store in the middle of nowhere. While there the driver accidentally hits a parked SUV & knocks out a headlight, but the girls all decide to just leave & not go find the driver. But the driver does come to find them, and it's not just that the headlight on her vehicle got dinged, it's for another reason that the girls do not yet understand. When the driver does first catch them she (yes, it's a she) brandishes a shot gun & makes them strip down, and keeps screaming at them, \"how much did you see?\". Of course the girls are scared to death & don't know what she's talking about.As the night rolls on the girls end up in a cat and mouse game with the driver of the SUV, who manages to inflict all manner of injuries on the girls, who are remarkably resilient to shot gun blasts and screwdrivers where they didn't want them. Eventually they come to find that something happened back at that store after they left that is the reason for this woman's psychotic rage. And eventually they have a chance at revenge and take it about as far as they can go.There are elements of this film that are rather disturbing and scary, but unfortunately, those moments are undermined by bad acting, bad dialog, and huge lapses of credibility. One girl is hit by a shot gun blast and appears to be mortally wounded, and she's feeling cold, her life is passing before her eyes, but she got better? And how far can a mini-van run on an almost empty gas tank at speeds of 80 miles per hour? I need one of those things, it apparently gets GREAT mileage.There should have been an ending when the girls got their revenge, but the film goes on for a bit after that, which is an anti-climax, but they at least learn some of what set the woman off, and the driver is still worried about \"messing up her mom's van\", which is obviously the least of anyone's worries.So this isn't the worst film I've seen, but it's too amateur to be good and yet a bit too scary and gruesome at times to be completely terrible. But it does take the cake for plenty of shrill hysterics and you'll want to put two across your ears if you watch this. Which, by the way, I don't necessarily recommend. 4 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f886f37ef484437a5bd29d3f903c256",
            "input": "This is an unusual Laurel & Hardy comedy with something of a split personality: at times it feels like two movies made in different styles spliced into a single short. Happily, each portion is funny in its own right, and the boys' seemingly effortless clowning carries the day and synthesizes the film's disparate elements into an entertaining whole. While I've never heard a fan cite DIRTY WORK as his or her favorite Laurel & Hardy comedy, it's nonetheless one that everybody seems to like.Our story is set in the home of Professor Noodle, who represents one key element of the story-line: a wildly over-the-top parody of Mad Scientist scenarios. This marks a rare venture into sci-fi territory for L&H; Abbott & Costello and The Three Stooges tangled with mad doctors far more often than Stan & Ollie. In any event, the professor is obsessed with creating a rejuvenating serum that can make people younger, while his sarcastic butler, Jessup, expresses the viewer's skepticism with rolled eyes and the occasional dry quip. Meanwhile, Stan & Ollie are chimney sweeps who show up at the Professor's home the very day he perfects his solution. \"Their\" portion of the film consists of characteristic (but first-rate) slapstick involving the chimney, the roof, shovels, and a number of unfortunate mishaps. If you don't enjoy watching these guys screw up a task then you probably won't like DIRTY WORK, but for fans of the team this movie is a feast. The highlight comes when Ollie plummets through the chimney, lands in the fireplace, and is then pummeled with bricks that fall onto his head with maddening rhythmic precision, one by one. I also like the shot of Ollie tumbling off the roof into a greenhouse; the process work is so slapdash I suspect it was something of an inside joke, the way W.C. Fields' movies would feature the world's worst rear-projection screens.The slapstick stuff is great fun, but it's the mad scientist motif that makes this film offbeat, and two supporting players deserve a tip of the bowler hat: prolific character actor Lucien Littlefield is terrific as the professor, delivering his overripe lines with relish and cackling with hammy glee, while Sam Adams is a stitch in the less showy role of Jessup the butler. As great as Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy were in their prime, it's always worth noting that their supporting casts at the Hal Roach Studio gave their films an enormous boost. So too, usually, did the background music of Le Roy Shield, but DIRTY WORK marks a rare occasion from this period that a Roach comedy has no musical accompaniment at all after the opening credits. Mood music might have enhanced the proceedings, but no matter; this is a highly enjoyable comedy anyhow, and a prime example of what made Laurel & Hardy so popular in their day.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bbe4c8cdf714e6eb33d879adb113d01",
            "input": "For me,this is one of the best movies i ever saw.Overcoming racism,struggling through life and proving himself he isn't just an ordinary \"cookie\" ,Carl Brashear is an amazing character to play ,who puts Cuba in his best light,best performance in his life.De Niro,who is a living legend gives THAT SOMETHING to the movie.Hated his character in movie,but he gives so much good acting to this film,great performance.And appearance of beautiful Charlize was and as always is a big plus for every movie. So if you haven't seen this movie i highly recommended for those who love bravery,greatness who seek inspiration.You must look this great drama. My Vote 9/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7469ddbdeb047d5ac763eed25dbe7f8",
            "input": "This is te cartoon that should have won instead of Country Cousin. Visually well-done and much more entertaining and memorable. Worth watching just for the music alone! Although there are elements that undoubtably will bruise the sensibilities of some these days, the cartoon has to be given a bit of perspective. It's over sixty years old and it is, after all, just a cartoon. I'm disabled and if I were as hyper-sensitive as the folks who look at things like this cartoon and take umbrage, I would have long since curled up in a fetal position and faded away. Sometimes you need to lighten up, put your head back and float! Caricatures of celebrities in cartoons were common in the 1930s and 1940s and were almost never terribly flattering. Bing Crosby reportedly hated it when he was used on more than one occasion. *SIGH*",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1dc055a937804b4181b115b9d006fd10",
            "input": "I saw this movie years ago, and I was impressed... but then again I was only 12 years old. I recently re-watched it and want that time back. This film is pretty bad. While I like Lee Majors, Chris Makepeace (watch My Bodyguard (1980)if you would like to see a GOOD movie that he was in... of Meatballs (also starring Bill Murray) for some laughs), and Burgess Meredith, this role does/did nothing for their careers.Anyway, Lee Majors character, Franklyn Hart, is an ex- race car driver who plans on driving his race car (which he had in storage) across the country to California. One Problem: The government has outlawed all private transportation. I thought the concept was OK (not the worse I've heard of), but the execution failed horribly.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e3f52dc72c540708b22284f3fb7bcca",
            "input": "This is, in my opinion, a very good film, especially for Michael Jackson lovers. It contains a message on drugs, stunning special effects, and an awesome music video.The main film is centered around the song and music video 'Smooth Criminal.' Unlike the four-minute music video, it is normal speed and, in my opinion, much easier to watch.The plot is rather weird, however. Michael Jackson plays a magical 'gangster' that, when he sees a shooting star, he transforms into a piece of machinery. Throughout the film, he transforms into a race car, a giant robot, and a space ship.The robot scene in particular is a bit drawn out and strange. I found it a little out-of-whack compared to the rest of the film.A child is kidnapped, Michael tries to save her, is tortured and beaten, and suddenly turns into a giant robot that blows up all the bad guys. A little weird? Yeah.But besides the bizarre robot scene, it's a very good movie, and any Michael Jackson fan will enjoy both the Smooth Criminal music video and the movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e32840de9c63474990ac38d0de967c56",
            "input": "This would have to be one of the worst, if not the worst, movie I've ever nearly seen. (I couldn't watch it all the way through). Purely and simply it's gratuitous violence just for the sake of it and the ridiculous story line only adds to the lacklustre and incompetent filming. Sick. And only suitable for those with a love for manic mutilation. After murdering several hundred men, women and children, Seed is finally caught after effortlessly killing several more police officers that finally get a tip as to his whereabouts. He's sentenced to death by electric chair and miraculously survives! Buried alive, he digs his way out and plots revenge against those that put him away and flicked the switch. Needless to say, more gruesome murders ensue...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8537dfa92bba4b7eb774ff20a2b45c9f",
            "input": "Offside is the story of teenage-girls who tried to sneak in the stadium to watch final world cup qualifying soccer match in Tehran that may lead Iran to the 2006 world cup in Germany. Females are forbidden to go to stadium by law in Iran, although many of them dress like boys and sneak in. Stadium guards search every one at the entrance to make sure no one carries fireworks and of course; no girl gets in.Like most of Panahi's work, his armature cast's performance was superb. You actually think that you are watching a documentary. The dialogs between the girls and the privates were executed delicately and astonishingly believable. The film depicts the interactions between captives and the drafted guards who themselves are serving mandartory away from their family and friends in a funny sort of way. At the end, the audience realizes that there is not such a difference between the girls and the guards who were just following orders.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c98b7f51b60844c1aa811719b31b7300",
            "input": "What's Good About It: Some inventive and genuinely creepy little effects that will get under the skin of even the most seasoned horror fan. Doesn't rely on the hackneyed soundtrack stabs for its \"gotcha\" moments. Even if you've seen everything, there's still a few things in this film that will make your jaw drop.What Could Have Been Better About It: The acting was, at times, flat and unconvincing. It had a \"shot-on-video\" quality in some places (though,it mostly achieved the atmosphere it was striving for), and the camera work is full of needless close-ups of meaningless actions. Though the effects are genuinely creepy, I think they may have gone to the well a few too many times with some of them. The ending seemed rushed, and glossed over what could have been more impactful moments. The viewer is left to figure out a lot of things for themselves, not as a challenge by the filmmakers, but because they just missed it.Still, a good little indie horror film that is easily several steps above the average. Well worth the rental.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4cf5af02efed472283f6a79d41fe48bb",
            "input": "This story was never among my favourites in Christie's works so I was pleasantly surprised to quite enjoy this adaptation. The mouse motif was effective if a little overdone, the bones of the story are there although more emphasis is placed on the 'crime in the past' subplot. The students were all pretty much as I imagined them although its a pity they weren't a more cosmopolitan bunch - perhaps the revised thirties setting didn't allow for that! I thought some very daring risks were taken with the filming; perhaps its because I've not long re-read the book but it seemed pretty obvious to me who the murderer was from their appearance in some reveal shots quite early on.Humour was much more prevalent in these early Poirots. Sometimes it works but I found a lot of it rather heavy handed in this episode (though I did smile at the 'Lemon sole' throwaway line). Altogether though, a solid entry in the series though not one of the best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b6797c144a34ac7b4eca5f8eb69230c",
            "input": "This is the most confronting documentary I have ever seen. It was a simple and breathtaking view of a beautiful idea. Based on photographs of the hidden industrial landscapes centred around the modern industrial growth of China, Edward Burtynsky brings to life confronting issues that we so easily chose to ignore.Taking no political sides, this movie is a neutral moving picture of realities that our western societies chooses not to educate us about - the by-products of economical growth, the externalities paid by citizens of the lesser-developed communities, the source of our comforts and the wastes of our consumer lifestyles.Amazing, heart-breaking, impossible to ignore. This is a challenging journey but one worth taking - please stop staying ignorant and at least see these photographs of truth without feeling any pressure to take a standing to these issues. 10/10 definitely!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e5ebca9886e4eb580c5538706b7972c",
            "input": "This was a weird movie. It started out pretty good. A solid sound track behind flash images of gore and mayhem as our psychopath did his thing.Next comes his \"down fall\" Here i could tell I was in for a real cheesy \"B\" movie. Poor acting , I mean how hard is it to hold a gun and act like a cop? These guys could not. After the death scene of our psychopath we get the opening credit and the movie starts...From this point on it is bad acting big boobs, the occasional bucket of blood and poorly done death scenes.That said I gave the movie a four because in spite of its flaws it did maintain a sort of creepiness that I just could not quite shake off.I do not recommend this movie but I have to admit I have seem worse.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-342317b3d1ec42e29502904aca55dcf2",
            "input": "Despite an overall pleasing plot and expensive production one wonders how a director can make so many clumsy cultural mistakes. Where were the Japanese wardrobe and cultural consultants? Not on the payroll apparently. A Japanese friend of mine actually laughed out loud at some of the cultural absurdities she watched unfold before her eyes. In a later conversation she said, \"Imagine a Finnish director making a movie in Fnnish about the American Civil War using blond Swedish actors as union Army and Frenchmen as the Confederates. Worse imagine dressing the Scarlet O'Hara female lead in a period hoop skirt missing the hoop and sporting a 1950's hairdo. Maybe some people in Finland might not realize that the hoop skirt was \"missing the hoop\" or recognize the bizarre Jane Mansfield hair, but in Atlanta they would not believe their eyes or ears....and be laughing in the aisles...excellent story and photography be damned.So...watching Memoirs of a Geisha was painful for anyone familiar with Japanese cultural nuances, actual geisha or Japanese dress, and that was the topic of the movie! Hollywood is amazing in its myopic view of film making. They frequently get the big money things right while letting the details that really polish a films refinement embarrassingly wrong. I thought \"The Last Samurai\" was the crowning achievement of how bad an otherwise good film on Japan could be. Memoirs of a Geisha is embarrassingly better and worse at the same time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38fdaa0ff825492493060446358ea656",
            "input": "Wow, I can't believe people consider this a 'good' movie. Now, I have seen much worse, but there are much more romantic/funny comedies with John Cusack.This is a mediocre film at best. While the acting wasn't terrible, but not great, for a romantic comedy, there was little passion, little romance. There were many loose ends that don't show up or are not addressed. Unfortunately, the main characters do come off as complete cowards. They don't know themselves well enough to realize that they don't love the people they are engaged to. How do we know they aren't in love? By the utter lack of remorse both characters have for leaving their finances. I can think of few things more romantic than the continual escape from commitment that these two show.The movie doesn't even end with a wedding scene, more than likely both will get cold feet and drop each other like hot potatoes once a commitment is nearing. This movie is really about two people who can't commit to anything, unlike Cusack's previous characters, who were more than willing to make a deep commitment (Loyd in Say Anything, Martin in Grosse Pointe Blank, etc.).The greatest failure of this movie was the complete lack of any twists turns, or anything of interest. When the movie ended, I felt like they had failed to include a climax to the story, which basically fits the whole movie: boring. No suspense about whether the two will end up together, no joy when they do, no consequences to their actions.It is sad that people are so blind to the shoddiness of this movie, that they simply rebuke any criticism with 'Everyone is too Cynical!'. Criticism of this movie is not cynicism, simply unbiased examination. There are many other better romantic comedies, even ones with Grace Kelly, or Eva Marie Saint.If you think this movie is great, try these movies, you hearts will explode: The Princess Bride, Say Anything, Grosse Pointe Blank, High Fidelity, Keeping the Faith, Charade, Rear Window, North by Northwest, or There's Something About Mary (which is a good examination of idealized romance vs. today's society).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11dc3456b2664e74a7a076e13688ae0a",
            "input": "This is a weak sequel: it lacks the interest and light touch of the magnificent \"Man Called Horse\" in nearly every aspect and when compared to each other they hardly seem to be the same genre.The Return is almost a parody of the first and tries to evoke different Indian ceremonies but comes across as trying way too hard to bottle the magic of the first. In this film the tribe is lost and abandoned, having lost their homelands, modern life has encroached on paradise and they are living in abject misery and poverty. Perhaps this is the point: the first film took us to a place where we would want to be, a simpler time. This takes us to broken Indians in a miserable world and the White Man is the hero and savior which rather negates the whole idea of the film.The beauty of the first lay in the fact that the white man learnt and discovered that real civilization lies in values rather than western materialism. In the second film this is all but lacking and so we end up with a weak film.A huge disappointment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4173ac299b54423bb82cd2cb044286f5",
            "input": "If I hadn't read his name on the DVD cover, I never would have suspected that this rather gushy and old fashioned musical was made by a man so closely associated with the French New Wave. In fact, the film is so far from that, that I wonder if back in the 50s and 60s, New Wave auteurs would have absolutely hated this type of film--it's so...so...unreal. And, it seems to have little to do with so many of his previous films. This isn't necessarily a bad thing--just a very surprising thing.What I also found a bit surprising was the amount of praise some of the reviewers gave this film--especially when there are so many better French musicals out there. The songs in this film were simply not particularly interesting and the characters all seemed so bland and stereotypical. If I had to see another rich person who fretted about how hard it is to be rich or get a good sale price on a designer outfit, I was going to puke.The bottom line is that like American musicals, not every French musical is gold. This film is not another \"Les parapluies de Cherbourg\" (UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG or \"Huit Femmes\" (EIGHT WOMEN) and despite the presence of Audrey Tautou, I can't see much reason to recommend it as anything other than a dull oddity.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2c7036493cd44320afeaf1166805e4fe",
            "input": "One of the unsung gems of the 1980's, Scenes... features razor-sharp satire and outstanding performances from Arnetia Walker (how did she not get a ton of roles after this?)and Wallace Shawn. It's a delicious send-up of class warfare and the people in those classes. The writing is hilarious and the characters, while not subtle, are nuanced. And, sorry, but the Asian gangs (if you can call one Japanese guy extorting one of the other characters a \"gang\") were not put in for \"sociological value\" as another review implies they should been. The value here lies in what the movie is making fun of and in the sparklingly wicked way it does it. I found it creative, funny, and idiosyncratic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3892dd6daccc4b829e5a2a55eeb39e93",
            "input": "Carnosaur 3 is bad... awfully bad. Bad to the point where it is funny. How matter how much I try to convince myself, I just can't believe anyone in this world could find this entertaining for serious reasons. I mean, come on, even the cover is bad! OK, the special effects are absolutely ridiculous. Those \"Carnosaurs\" are really ridiculous. A scientist tells the soldiers that they move incredibly fast, yet when you see them run, they run at the speed of... an actor in a rubber suit trying to run as much as he can. And the explosions are funny(there is no other word to describe it). At the beginning, a bullet hits a Jeep AFTER a guys says \"What was that?\"... And the other explosions are also laughable. But the worst thing is the screenplay and the so-called story. You don't expect a good story(or, I don't think anyone renting this movie expects a good movie) but at least the story has to try to make sense. I mean, how hard is it to make a story about dinosaurs killing people at least coherent. Incredibly hard if you look at this. Oh, and if you think that it's easy to makes believable commandos as your characters, tell it to the writers of this awful, awful piece of crap. I mean, what sick human being would make cheap jokes after one of his buddies is dead? And they do lots of it. And if you think that a movie about dinosaurs killing soldiers can only be at least action-packed, WAKE UP!!! This movie is incredibly dull. The carnosaurs(who invented this lame name anyway?) attack(in boring action sequences where you don't see much happening). The soldiers think of how to beat them(in incredibly funny scenes where they try real hard to be serious but can't seem to convince even just one second). So, then, they attack the carnosaurs, but their idea doesn't work(another laughable action sequence). Back to planning(with a few lame jokes thrown in) in another ridiculous scene. And this goes on, and on, and on. And let's not forget the acting which is about as convincing as the special effects... and the story... Oh OK, this movie simply sucks from A to Z.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30f8a2d66d214bb797eff34f408885fa",
            "input": "I watched the film recently and it poorly resembles the book is based on. I blame this on poor screenplay and direction. Some parts were forcibly introduced (the gay rape scene) for no apparent reason. I actually read the book after watching the movie and some 20 years or so after reading it for the first time. I found it hard to read and somewhat clumsy. Too many disparate ideas introduced for no benefit at all... other than sensational parts for the time. As it covers stuff that was deemed 'sensitive', to say the least, during communism, I can see the fascination it produced at the time. That isn't the case anymore though or maybe I see things differently now or a bit of both. The film tries too much to cover many aspects from the book, the result being a concoction of scenes that may make some sense to someone who read the book. Even so this is a film that is difficult to watch and maybe should have never been made.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25c442e21481445a8cdd4579a123b612",
            "input": "Back in 1997, do I remember that year: Clinton bans cloning research, the unfortunate death of Princess Diana, the Marlins won the world series and a woman gave birth to septuplets. This was also the big year in the release of Titanic, one of the biggest films of all time: a tale about the ship of dreams, about a boy and a girl who fall in love but are torn apart by their social class and at the height of their emotional commitment the ship meets with disaster. I don't think anybody could have expected Titanic to be as HUGE as it was, the movie was bigger than life and had millions of fans, 85% of them being teenage girls, I was 12 years old at the time, and of course saw the movie multiple times. It was the film that made me believe that the love that Jack and Rose shared was so real and beautiful. At the time I felt that Titanic could do no wrong, of course I grew up and didn't watch the film since I was 14, a couple years ago I saw the film on DVD for 5.99 and figured that it was a good price and to see what I thought about the movie now. Was it worth the hype? Was it really the best movie of all time? Was that Leonardo's real nose? OK, I know that's silly to say, but I did re-watch the film. Being completely honest here, Titanic is a great movie, best movie of all time, no, just depends on your idea of a good movie, but Titanic delivered in romance, humor, disaster, emotions and never let us go on this maiden voyage.The film starts with Brock Lovett and his team exploring the wreck of the RMS Titanic, searching for a necklace set with a valuable blue diamond called the Heart of the Ocean. Unsuccessful, they instead discover a drawing of a young woman reclining nude, wearing the Heart of the Ocean, dated the day the Titanic sank. 101-year-old Rose Dawson Calvert learns of the drawing, and contacts Lovett to inform him she is the woman in the drawing. She and her granddaughter Elizabeth \"Lizzy\" Calvert visit Lovett and his skeptical team on his salvage ship. When asked if she knew the whereabouts of the necklace, Rose Calvert recalls her memories aboard the Titanic, revealing for the first time that she was Rose DeWitt Bukater. In 1912, the upper-class 17-year-old Rose boards the ship with her fiancé, Cal Hockley and her mother, Ruth DeWitt Bukater, both of whom stress the importance of Rose's engagement to Cal since the marriage will mean the eradication of the Dewitt-Bukater debts: while they have the outward appearance of the upper-class, Rose and her mother are financially broke. Distraught and frustrated by her engagement to the controlling Cal and the pressure her mother is putting on her to go through with the marriage, Rose attempts suicide by jumping from the stern. Before she leaps, a drifter and artist named Jack Dawson intervenes. Jack and Rose strike up a tentative friendship as she thanks him for saving her life, and he shares stories of his adventures traveling and sketching; their bond deepens when they leave a stuffy first-class formal dinner of the rapport-building wealthy for a much livelier gathering of Irish dance, music and beer in third-class. But after Cal's servant informs him of Rose's whereabouts', Rose is forbidden from seeing Jack again. However, after witnessing a woman encouraging her seven-year-old daughter to behave like a \"proper lady\" at tea, Rose defies him and her mother, asking Jack to sketch her nude and wearing only the Heart of the Ocean, an engagement present from Cal. After a beautiful moment together in the very first backseat fun time, they go to the deck of the ship.They then witness the ship's fatal collision with an iceberg. After overhearing the ship's lookouts discussing how serious the collision is, Rose tells Jack they should warn her mother and Cal. Meanwhile, Cal discovers Rose's nude drawing and her taunting note in his safe, so he frames Jack for stealing the Heart of the Ocean by having Lovejoy plant it in Jack's pocket. Upon learning Cal intends to leave Jack to die below deck, Rose runs away from him and her mother to rescue him. Jack and Rose return to the top deck. Cal and Jack, though enemies, both want Rose safe, so they persuade her to board a lifeboat. But after realizing that she cannot leave Jack, Rose jumps back on the ship and reunites with Jack in the ship's first class staircase. Jack and Rose return to the top deck, the lifeboats have gone, and the ship finally goes down into the freezing Atlantic taking Jack and Rose down.So does Titanic live up to it's hype? I still say that this is a great movie to watch, I think that there were and still are quite a few haters that for some reason just want to trash the movie because it had won a ton of awards and everyone was in love with the movie. But it has great acting, amazing effects, a well-written story and still looks flawless. Love it or hate it, you have to admit this movie didn't get a lot of hype just because of Leo's baby face or Kate's amazing ability to cry on sight, this film is something special. It will always hold a special place in my heart, it has too seeing that I saw this film 8 times in the theater when it was released. But all that aside, I do recommend this movie, it's a great one and sure to go down in the classics one day.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf1a138de2c84ba39036d0b917b2b5cd",
            "input": "....CAUSE IT'S CRAP! The kind of movie that makes you want to go and smack the movie maker and say \"WHY?\". Horrible camera work...count the times the camera tries to remain steady on one person and can't. The dialog is ridiculous. The acting is comical. It looks like they took over a ghost town in the west to see if they could make a movie on the least amount of money possible. I'd bet $10 they used home video cameras to make this. Either that, or most of the cameramen were drunk. Truly the trailers are more entertaining than the movie. If you ever want to host a \"Worst Movie Party\", bring this one. Want more entertainment...stare at a wall.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7af4afb99f934bce8b99b79ef4ad7c7e",
            "input": "Today if someone mentions the name Victor McLaglen the response most likely will be \"Who?\" or perhaps \"Why?\" Well, believe it or not, Victor McLaglen won the Academy Award for Best Actor in this film, which is about a poor, desperate man who is willing to sell out his best friend for \"carfare\" to the United States. It's an interesting movie which shows how low even the most well-meaning shnooks will go just for a few bucks. The movie takes place in British-dominated Ireland and while all the other characters are either directly or indirectly fighting for the political independence of Ireland, all Mr. McLaglen's character is concerned about is getting money and getting drunk. The movie makes one wonder whether political activism is worth all the trouble because while the activist is struggling to make a point, many others not only do not care, they don't even know what the fuss is all about. The morale of this movie is: look out for the friend, he may sell you out for a dime.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a374ff2db9884928bd11eccd4af5c1f4",
            "input": "I was lucky enough to catch this movie while volunteering at the Maryland Film Festival. I've always been a fan of classic horror films and especially the gimmicks of William Castle, so this was definitely a must-see for me.This is about the life and work of William Castle, who in my opinion was an underrated director. True, he made some cheap budget schlocky horror films, but he added something to these films: real live theater gimmicks that you don't see anymore. For example, he had nurses in case someone had a heart attack at his movies and put vibrators at the bottoms of chairs in THE TINGLER.This is truly a well-made documentary and brings this rather shadowed director into the light, and celebrated his contributions to horror cinema. It also paints Castle as a larger than life character, who was very well-liked and had a smile on his face.Unlike most film documentaries that mostly show testaments from film historians, SPINE TINGLER! shows interviews mostly from his family members and directors who were influenced by his work, such as John Waters, John Landis, and Joe Dante. A must see for classic horror and sci-fi fans.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34d46333058a4b62958da6641fcaa461",
            "input": "I'd passed this title 15 or 20 times while in Blockbuster, looking for something halfway decent to watch. All I can say is that they were all out halfway decent films the night I chose to rent this.I will give it credit for being leaps and bounds better than \"Dracula 3000\", but in actuality that's pretty easy to say since this one DIDN'T have Caper Van Dien in it. The other things it lacked in spades were: an interesting cast, interesting story, good dialog and originality, but I suppose you can't have everything.***SPOILERS AHEAD*** The misfit crew of vampire hunters (one of which was a vampire... go figure) flew around from mining colony to mining colony trying to wipe out all the vampires it could find. The crew consists of: the cocky, ne'er-do-well captain (who dies early on), his by-the-book, yet inexperienced first mate, the aforementioned vampire vampire hunter (not a typo), a wannabe cowboy and a REALLY, REALLY butch Asian commando, \"tough guy\" female... it almost sounds like the cast for MTV's 'The Real World'. After the captain dies in a violent confrontation with a mob of bloodsuckers (and as it turns out, lovers of the finer parts of human anatomy) his first mate takes over... blah, blah, blah... everyone hates him... blah, blah, blah... I could go on, but as I said it's the same storyline used in about a hundred other 'films' of the genre.The effects were cheese and why Michael Ironside was in this movie is beyond me. The vampire vampire hunter (still not a typo) was pretty hot, but of course if you're waiting for her to expose more than just her cleavage, look elsewhere.I can't say that it was the worst film I've seen, as I actually rented 'Starship Troopers 2', but wait for this one to come on the Sci-Fi Channel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f1b3e9b449a4296931820fe48dd9bb0",
            "input": "\"The Invisible Mouse\" is a delightful and different Tom & Jerry's cartoon. It features the usual cat/mouse chases and battles, but in a different way this time. Jerry accidentally falls in a bottle of invisible ink and is obviously very glad about this because he realizes that he can prepare lots of \"surprises\" for Tom, scare him, torment him and confuse him.As much as it is weird, it's also very cool and funny to see what we can't see: Jerry invisible. It's amusing to see things lifting up in the air without seeing who's doing it (we know who, right?) - it's like those things had a life of their own or even almost like a matter of ghosts. It's equally amusing to see Jerry eating some candies and fruits while he's invisible. I really like that instrumental music which plays when he's not visible.Some of the best jokes on this short are when Tom sees Jerry's shadow and slams him and even when Tom tries to slam him with a frying pan and Jerry writes \"Missed me\". I also like when Jerry drinks Tom's chocolate milk, becoming visible again and with a happy look on his face.Overall, this short has the basic ingredients needed for a classic cartoon: humor, entertainment, fun and some nice artwork too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab19b5e83d474ffa9e013d448f9228a6",
            "input": "11 Oscar nominations and zero win!!! Am yet to understand why - its not like the actors in the movie did any better thereafter that you can make it by giving them awards for trivial roles like it was done with Halle Berry and Denzel Washington - Whoopi, Oprah, Margaret Avery, Danny Glover etc- were all amazing - i am curious to get scripts of the discussions at the Oscars that year...... it should go into the Shoulda-woulda-coulda category for the judges.... Its an amazing book - but true to Alice Walker's style of writing she has a way of seeming like she is exaggerating her characters - so I am so glad that they screen adaptation took a few things out. The cinematography was amazing - the African scenes live much to be desired - the African part in the book is supposed to be set in Liberia - somewhere in West Africa - BUT oh no! Steven Spielberg thinks the world is so dumb that they cant think of Africa outside of the Safaris - so yes there had to be a complimentary Zebra and wildlife scene when we all know there are none West Africa ---- and most of all why get the people to speak Swahili --- who in West Africa speaks Swahili?? I just had to get that out of the way.......But as a story - amazing, film-making - out of this world - CLASSIC yes!!I own it and I watch it when my soul needs some rejuvenation.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-75d25502427a4cf09b7597f21fea1953",
            "input": "The case is the best part of the movie but it alone is not worth the purchase price. I expected a \"Based on the true story\" movie only to find a shot on home video hodge-podge of poorly shot clips tied together with pathetic acting and non-related slaughter house scenes. The video scenes had numerous rewind situations which were used probably to extend the length of the feature rather than for effects. I started this review before I was even halfway through the movie and waited till it was over just in case it had a better ending but, low and behold it only got worse. If I could mark it any lower it would have been a negative ten. Learn from my mistake and save your money and time with this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4dbb75e9dc4745d39627c7f96bce89c0",
            "input": "As always, controversial movies like this have mixed reviews. You either love it or you hate it, and not everyone will like this movie. This shows the perspective of the killers, which is something I personally feel is something important to consider. You may hate them, you may claim to understand them and feel as though you can relate, but regardless this movie will make you think about school shootings from a different perspective.The movie is shot entirely using a hand-held camera, something that I think works quite well as it makes it more realistic. It is told completely from the killers point of view, from their \"missions\" to family outings, all leading up the big day \"Zero Day\" in which they are planning on a massacre at their school. Zero Day does not offer answers, but merely presents a glimpse at the lives of two troubled young boys and lets the audience decide for themselves. Our feelings towards the boys are something mixed between sympathy and hatred, but yet we are left confused as to why two ordinary young boys would do such a thing. They are shown to be surprisingly normal, typical teenage boys leading ordinary lives, and if we didn't know what they were planning we wouldn't expect a thing (They make it clear throughout the whole movie that no-one else knows about their plan)The acting is extremely good considering the two actors are complete unknowns. We can only hope to see more work from the both of them in the future. Despite how this is a fictionalized movie, one cannot help but notice the obvious similarities to Columbine. Calvin and Andre are scarily similar to Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, (not so much in looks, but in manner) As someone who has researched Columbine very extensively, I could see the similarities and it is almost certainly based on it. The actual massacre is shown through surveillance cameras at the school and is one of the most chilling things I have ever seen. I was completely in shock after seeing it, and its a feeling that stays around for a while. It is very realistic and well-done, and it is very difficult to watch.All in all Zero Day is an excellent movie, and I think everyone should at least check it out. In the past, we have always simply branded killers \"psychopaths\" and assumed that either they were biologically wired for disaster or had media influence, but as Zero Day shows sometimes the motives are deeper than that, and we can never truly understand why tragedies such as school shootings happen until we have seen it from the perspective of the killers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d2b9807477548388394ef34e6fff30d",
            "input": "I must pat myself on the back for watching this movie all the way through because it truly was painful. An incapable painter becomes a fully capable hit-man? This movie was rife with absurdities of which if I mentioned them all I would be giving away the movie. Norm Peterson aka George Wendt must really be in a rut to have agreed to do this movie. The acting was deplorable and the story was even worse. As a sane minded and rational individual, I could not understand where the writer came from nor where he was going with this movie. There was ineptness on the part of every main character, there was a string of hapless and ridiculous events, then the movie ended. One absurd act after another with dialogue doesn't make a movie, it only makes a talkative train wreck.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2238b45477e41d7b365b595d3bc739d",
            "input": "I bought the video rather late in my collecting and probably would have saved a lot of money if I bought it earlier. It invariably supersedes anything else on those \"Cosmo's moon\" nights. Cher and Olympia certainly deserve their awards but this is really a flawless ensemble performance of a superb screenplay. What? You don't know what a \"Cosmo's moon\" is?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57f5f11805a74a648c82874b19635f8d",
            "input": "First let me say that I am not a Dukes fan, but after this movie the series looked like Law and Order. The worst thing was the casting of Roscoe and Boss Hogg. Burt Reynolds is not Boss Hogg, and even worse was M.C. Gainey as Roscoe, If they ever watched the show Roscoe was not a hard ass cop. He was more a Barney Fife than the role he played in this movie.The movie is loaded with the usual errors, cars getting torn up, and continues like nothing happened. The worst example of this is when the the General gets together with Billy Prickett, and the General is ran into a dirt hill obviously slowing to a near stop, but goes on to win the race.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7a1b443dbcf446d8cc77a1750143629",
            "input": "One night I stumbled upon this on the satellite station Bravo.Initially out of curiosity i decided to watch it.To be perfectly honest i wasn't disappointed.The main character is beautiful and her body is shown off well.You would think her talents would be wasted as a executioner but apparently not after watching the whole film!My only real gripe is the acting of the supporting cast particularly the actor who plays Melnik.Christ its bad!The prison guard Hank is woeful too.All he ever does is get drunk and make ill attempted passes at his co-guard Wanda though fortunately for us the viewer and for Hank he gets down and dirty with Wanda near the end. The music used is pretty tense and creates the perfect atmosphere for the executions. This movie is well watching alone for the beautiful,talented and very sexy Jennifer Thomas",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57aa08d19260445a8330a69fc138f13d",
            "input": "I actually didn't start watching the show until it came on FX. I was bored and had nothing to watch and saw that the show's reruns were premiering so i decided to watch it. I was so upset that I had not watched the show when it first aired on t.v. I loved the show so much!Finally a show for everyone to enjoy. I remember Full House and Family Matters and Step by Step and they were okay shows but just not funny enough. They would make dumb jokes and laugh over things that were just plain stupid, but not That 70s Show. That 70s Show was hilarious, smart and so real. I think it was the best show ever made and I'm very sorry that it ended. Although I love this show, I do think it should have ended on the seventh season when Eric and Kelso leave. The last season was just not right, Eric was the main character and the show should have ended when his character leaves. I still love this show and I hope TV starts making more shows like this one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-462e67f4e45b4b439869415f25fc47d6",
            "input": "I came to NEW PORT SOUTH expecting a surrogate movie about the Columbine school massacre similar to Gus Van Sant's ELEPHANT and certainly the synopsis in the TV guide stating that a student sociopath rebels against the system did give me that impression but this is a very boring movie where little happens so consider yourself warned The story is about Maddox , a Chicago high school student who decides to strike back at what he perceives to be an authoritarian regime . The major problem is that the character is underwritten and the actor who plays him Blake Shields is unable to embellish any script deficiencies . You have the gut feeling that Maddox should have the evil charisma of Hitler , Saddam or Bin Laden but he never comes across as anything more than a petulant truculent teenager and it's impossible to believe he could rally any disciples . The subtext of you overthrow one manipulative authoritarian regime only to replace it with another manipulative regime is too obvious which means NEW PORT SOUTH is an entirely unconvincing drama that's not worth going out of your way to see",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3a3473d96dc44cbaff7388fea54d712",
            "input": "I couldn't believe some of the horrible dialog coming out of people's mouths, and the end reel of bloopers attached to body of the film was a real hoot. And we get titty shots of Angelique Pettyjohn (sort of) and Loren Crabtree to boot.A teleportation device activated by psychic Angelique Pettyjohn brings an alien container to an underground lab out in the desert. According to director Fred Olen Ray, they were leftover sets from the Klaus Kinski film, ANDROID which gives the film an increased value beyond how cheap it looks.Inside the container is a midget alien (played by Ray's son) who starts clawing people to death. It was pretty funny watching this little 'creature' in a black reptile suit with what looks like large beetle shells attached to it, running around in the dark. We even get to see the little thing stamp and tear at a poster of ET, which I thought was hilarious.And then there's what looks like a snake that also comes out of the container that gets hammered to death by William Fair, after the mini creature chews into Frank McDonald's neck in the kitchen. A low budget take on ALIEN, I suppose...The whole thing ends abruptly, looking like they ran out of film at the end before the blooper reel comes in with the end credits. Talk about a lack of funding...Fred Olen Ray also mentions in the director's commentary that they also weren't sure if Aldo Ray would make through the shooting and remember his lines. He barely did.Low budget cheese sneeze. It's fun to watch, I'll grant ya that. 4 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8327097ae30b4c6abad7ebca3acba359",
            "input": "I had to register for IMDb just to post a comment on just how awful this movie is...my cats and a ball of string have a better storyline than this. Not the worst acting I've ever seen, but when you wipe out almost the entire cast of the movie within 5 minutes, it leaves a bit to be desired. There wasn't a single 'scare' moment in the movie, with the exception of when they were watching the movie 'Halloween' on the TV. All around, it seems like it could've been a good story, rolling the credits and saying that Chasey Lain was in it was a bit of a loss as I didn't recognize her right away and her scene was already over before I could've said 'oh yeah, there she is'. I'm so glad I saw this in a hotel and didn't pay for it as I'd be real ticked if I had payed a cent to see this. I normally like or can at least find a redeeming factor in a movie, but this one is an exception. It's so bad that it's not even that amusing so-good-it's-bad....it's just plain bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12a10e6d1ecf4d1bb898c4f17e5315e5",
            "input": "Let's start this review out on a positive note -- I am very glad they didn't decide to wimp out with Tony being shot and do a retrospective season like some people were rumoring. Actually, creator and writer of this episode David Chase did quite the opposite. We don't actually know if Tony will live or die. He's in a coma and his chances of recovering are very slim to none. This episode seemed to move very slow, and the coma induced dream Tony was in involving mistaken identity and robed Asian monks slapping the sh*t out of him was absolutely, flat-out weird. After 45-minutes I got a little sick of everyone grieving, but that shouldn' t be a reason to slam this episode. It was a weird and unpredictable episode, but it was still well-written and intense. Edie Falco gave an astounding career-defining performance in this episode as the conflicted wife having to face with her husband's could-be demise. I also found it interesting AJ dropped out of school and swore a vendetta against Junior, which AJ most likely won't have the balls to pull off. Silvio is now acting-boss which opens numerous doors to problems in later episodes. There were a lot of great quips in this episode, also, and I think Vito 'Pole-Smoker' Spadafore may meet his demise if he keeps being a greedy S.O.B.This wasn't a great episode and disappointed only because even though Tony kills people, we as an audience adore him and feel he is our hero of the show. This was a necessary episode for the series, even though it was a little snore inducing towards the conclusion. Kudos to Edie Falco's performance, and David Chase and the writers for creating this wholly original and unpredictable plot twist. This is the only season of 'The Sopranos' where I haven't a f*cking clue where it is going to go. I can't wait for next week's episode. My Rating: 7.5/10 Best Line of the Episode: (Paulie to AJ): \"Let's go, Van Helsing!\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d645005d03064bb1ab5db3cf56e90b1b",
            "input": "I was lucky enough to see Zero Day last night. It's an amazing movie. A very disturbing one at that.In a way, Zero Day is very comparable to \"The Blair Witch Project\". It's shot completley with handheld camcorders. It's about 2 kids. Just your average kids. Andre and Calvin. They start a campaign against there High School entitled \"Army of 2\".The whole story is told in Video Diary form, from the 2 kids. It shows there relationships with there parents, amongst other people, showing that these are just normal kids, just like people we know or who have bumped into. We find out The Army of 2's last mission will be entitles Zero Day. They plan to shoot up there High School.You see how they get access to there guns, how they plan it out, everything. They stress that the media has not affected them at all, and there is no reason for doing this. Like I said, this is all told in Video Diary form, and then they store the tapes in a safety deposit box to be seen after Zero Day.The actual shooting is shown through Survillence Cameras throughout the school. Chilling indeed. The movie is very chilling. Some of the things they say, how they plan it out, you'd just have to see it for yourself. One quote that I remember is the only time Calvin is byhimself. He says \"Andre thinks were just gonna leave in some getaway car, doing this to numerous schools across the country. I don't know what he's thinking, but the only way I'm coming out of the school is in a black plastic bag\".I'm probaly not even giving you guys the proper idea of this film. You really need to see it yourself. It's going around festivals right now.A+.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8846496e223469e96d5787b36c69434",
            "input": "Some nice scenery, but the story itself--in which a self-proclaimed Egyptologist (Lesley-Anne Down) visits Egypt and, in the course of doing Egyptologist things in the most un-Egyptologistic of ways (e.g., flash photography in the tombs, the handling of old parchment, etc.), uncovers a black market turf war and somehow (in the span of two days, no less!) becomes that war's jumpsuit-wearing epicenter--is more puzzling than any riddle the Sphinx ever posed. Down is simply awful as the visiting British scholar (that she seems to know absolutely nothing about the culture of Egypt and even less about antiquities is the fault of the writers, certainly; but that she's annoying as all get out is her own fault entirely), and the rest of the cast, including Sir John Gielgud and Frank Langella, seem as downright confused by the proceedings as I was. In short, not what you'd expect from Schaffner (Planet of the Apes, Patton) and co.Worth watching for a laughably dated scene in which Down rails against all male scholars, blaming them for her failure as an academic, while bathed under the softest light Hollywood could muster. To top it off, she spends the next hour of the film shrieking and harried and running into the arms of any dude she can find. Wow, talk about your performative irony!*Note to would-be Egyptologists: take a year or two of Arabic in grad school. It'll really help out in the long run...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aed8cb72f8fc49ec93ed3659efc0df3f",
            "input": "I'm not sure what. I just couldn't laugh at it. I had an open mind. I didn't want to be a tight-@ss about it. But I seriously just couldn't laugh at this film. It was just not funny to me. Some parts it seemed like Ben Stiller and Jack Black tried too hard. Just because you put two very funny men together doesn't mean that this is going to be an excellent comedy. Some movies just shouldn't be made. This is one of them. Because it does a lot of old jokes and the acting was just stupid. I know, I know it's a comedy. Sort of at least. But I was just not impressed. I'm sorry, but I cannot give this anything lower than a two. And that's all I'm giving. 2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9175970922434457beb2584b84e62e8f",
            "input": "This is a good adaptation of Austen's novel. Good, but not brilliant.The cinematography is inventive, crossing at times the border to gimmickry, but it certainly avoids the trap of making this look like a boring TV soap in costumes, given that the entire story is dialogue-driven.The acting is competent. Ms Paltrow is aloof, as her character requires, but the required distance from the other characters is accompanied by a much less appropriate detachment from her own actions. In other words, she does not seem to care enough of the results of her match-making endeavours. Some of the supporting cast is guilty of over-acting - very much in the style that is appreciated on stage but out of place in motion pictures. Personally, I had problems accepting Alan Cumming as Mr Elton - to no fault of his own, except for having left such an impression as a gay trolley-dolly in \"The High Life\" that it is now difficult to accept him playing any serious part. Acting honours go to Toni Collette who manages to radiate warmth, and Jeremy Northam who pitches his character at just the right level.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8d8b975166344a89014608c2f1a6020",
            "input": "What a good movie! At last a picture revealing a unknown side of rock: illusions of fame. Well-known Rockers are getting old and forgotten, not the music. And with a good sense of humour. Have you ever danced on Bill Haley's Rock Around the Clock?Anyway, Still Crazy is probably the best movie about rock n'roll I have ever seen. Far much better than Spinal Tap for instance. Why? Because in Still Crazy, people are mature. They have a different point of view about rock, about love and about life. They want to catch up with their crazy youth they miss so much. Beyond the story itself, we see characters with their own personality, weaknesses and dreams. Like anyone of us.Spend a good time watching this (listen to the awesome soundtrack! )and finally thinking of your own future.Bye!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-812817256ed94e749341fc51d4b18d92",
            "input": "Miraculously, this is actually quite watchable. I mean, it's bad. It's really bad. But whereas the original was so-bad-it's-ruining-my-life bad, this is so-bad-it's-mildly-entertaining bad. Right, that's enough faint praise. Production values are rotten across the board, the acting is excruciating and the Romero-wannabe satire can't make its mind up which side of the ecology fence it's mocking. Internal logic takes a back seat to heads propelling themselves out of fridges, virus incubation times fluctuating as the 'plot' requires, bullets working against the zombies or not, zombies having the power of speech or not. Gore is the draw, obviously, but the framework is so slapdash it's annoying. The dialogue sounds like it's been translated by the same computers that mangle instruction manuals, and the scale of the zombie infestation is implied with none of the ingenuity of Romero's films. It's all topped off with a horrendous synth score. Absolute rubbish.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be511e5309324905a863a1b828816885",
            "input": "I love Monte Carlo and thoroughly enjoyed this movie. I thought everyone was very good. I was not familiar with Richard Lewis, I thought he made his character (Julian Peters) very personable, funny and attractive. Sean Young was very good as the befuddled rejected girl with a heart of gold. George Hamilton was charming and the perfect Italian gigolo. John Candy has a field day as the bon vivant. James Belushi is hysterical as a total jerk. Cybill Shepard gave a very sweet performance as a nice vulnerable ignored housewife. Delightful ensemble cast. Lots of talent, clever script, lots going on and beautiful locations. Just a nice pick me up for a dreary day. Especially in the winter when a trip to Europe is not anywhere on your horizon.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f26ed03883cf4cc6aaf20d028aba1a02",
            "input": "I love a good war film and I fall into the \"been there, done that\" category. So I would like to think my review is an accurate one (IMHO). Having just watched this film on DVD I can safely say that it was a pile of rubbish. There is no way I can recommend this film to you.It started off with me shouting at the TV saying \"you wouldn't do that\" etc...but I soon realised that having a bit of job experience would be a hindrance so I chilled a bit. But on the opening scene when the trailer wheel fell off I got a nasty feeling that this film would be a predictable dud...I was right.There simply wasn't any logic to the EOD scenes. I just know that the army team had some of the most patient insurgents ever at the other end of the command wire or remote trigger. So much so I was left scratching my head all the time. Then just when you think you know where the story is going the guys in the Humvee are off out on their own driving around the desert. One of the most valuable assets in theatre out on a jolly bumping into some SAS wannabe contractors.The sniper scene was just so laughable. It just made no sense at all and made me want to switch off there and then. Then for them to drag it out so long really did test my patience.It started with the \"Contact Right\" and went down hill fast. If you had a Brit accent then you got shot but if you were part of the EOD team then suddenly you were a great shot and saved the day. Then just as you thought it was over it stretched on for an inexplicably long period without adding anything to the story at all. You are just left watching and asking why hasn't it ended yet?Then we had the booze scene where they just hit each other for a laugh..another scene where you just wanted it to end. It added nothing to the film.Then just as my life seemed very dull the main star went outside the wire to hunt someone down. This most be the most ridiculous scene I have ever watched. It defied all logic and ability to write a good storyline...it was senseless and awful. I still don't understand why they wasted time on it. Then to watch him just jog through the busy streets heading back to camp had me rolling on the floor with laughter. Pure comedy :)The sad fact is that this storyline is all over the show without really deciding what it wants to be. I thought it was going to be stupid illogical EOD scenes but then it kept going off on tangents trying to be something different. But as hard as it tried it just bored me to death. All I wanted was for it to end. It was a messy compilation of stupid scenes mixed into a batch of stupid, senseless, action(ish) scenes.There is no way I can recommend this. Maybe my work experience compromised the enjoyability but even the naive must realise this just doesn't make sense. The only thing more stupid than this film is the artificially high IMDb rating...which must be the 24/7 work of the box office PR team who seem to use this website as a way of making everyone think it is good. Sorry folks...it just ain't!Not recommended...it will just bore you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25bc9435b7c040bb9040437a890846f6",
            "input": "Sequel to \"The Kingdom\" is bloodier and even more twisted. I only saw half (I was exhausted and couldn't sit through all 5 1/2 hours) but I loved what I saw. Ghosts, blood, murder, poisoning, mutated babies, voodoo...this has it all! If you have a strong stomach and like weird movies this is for you.Also, you don't have to see Part 1 to understand this...you'll figure it out!Does anyone know if Kingdom 1 and 2 are available on DVD? Sitting through these marathon movies in a theatre is tiring. Sadly, there probably won't be a \"Kingdom 3\"--Ernst-Hugo Jaregard (Sig) died a year after this was filmed. But you never know!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4da4b7741bd840e48c1c2b5c9eb4ae31",
            "input": "You'd better choose Paul Verhoeven's even if you have watched it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-904a651a1c3e4922a392f4ba240a1ccb",
            "input": "\"A Guy Thing\" tries to capture the feeling of \"There's Something About Mary\" or \"Meet the Parents\" but comes off more like it was edited up out of cutting-room rejects of those two films. Thankfully I rented it on a 5-day rental because I couldn't sit and watch more than 20 minutes at a time.The premise is decent and I liked the scenes where other guys automatically cover up for Paul's missteps (the checker at the Save-mart was great) but the script-writing is absolutely horrible. The dialog falls flat most of the time and just when you think that things are finally going to get on track some needless sight-gag is stuck in for no good reason. Plus how many toilet jokes does one movie really need?Don't get me wrong, slapstick humor is great when it's smartly done as in the other films I mentioned, but this movie simply misses the mark. Too bad as I love Julia Stiles (Ten Things I Hate About You was great) but even that couldn't help me sit through this terrible movie. Save your dollars and go rent \"There's Something About Mary\" one more time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab4e4a9fa7bd4eda9e2fcb490c5bb25e",
            "input": "Watching \"The Fox and the Child\" was an intoxicating experience. The lush visuals, integrity of point of view, and utter beauty of the setting and characters left me in a swoon of pleasure.The plot is uncomplicated. Deceptively simple. Within the container of that simplicity a world unfolds that draws you in and leaves you breathless.I laughed. I wept. I learned.This is a movie you can trust yourself to -- give yourself over to. Dare I say it is an act of love intended for any innocent heart. It reaches to the heart of the viewer--of any age--and reveals the world through new eyes, as if seen from the heart.Adi Da Samraj once said that true Art draws the viewer beyond point of view into ecstatic participation in Reality. I feel I have been privileged to watch--no, to participate in--this film, a work of true Art.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89b04582b3c3414d916227bac60d27cf",
            "input": "Without \"mental anachronism\", this film which I would like to find in DVD offer an extraordinary diving in the vital and mental context of thought of the people before the \"disenchantment of the world\". That, there is thirty years, a director and a scenario writer could test one such empathy and such a romantic truth to do it of them masterpiece leaves me astounding. It would be necessary to be able to see and re-examine it film for better seizing than the temporal and cultural distance us to make lose of capacity to be included/understood, analyze and finally to accept of such or such example of \"primitive thought\". Because this thought maintaining almost impossible to feel in the secularized world however contain certain keys of our behavior, that only them future generations will be able to analyze with sufficient relevance. If somebody knows where I then to get a numerical copy or VHS to me or DVD… thank you in advance.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40c83ced833f4e38a45704df95a6e254",
            "input": "This is a perfect series for family viewing. We gather around the TV to watch this on BBC America. It is an up-to-date version of Robin Hood and it appeals to children and adults alike. Our teenager and tween-ager both enjoy sitting with mom and dad and watching Robin's next exploits. We can't wait for the next episode to air each week and are glad for the free \"On Demand\" viewing.The wardrobe has a spot of current fashion. There is a moral to each story. It is entertaining. The violence is not over-the-top or needless. The soundtrack is absolutely fantastic with a John William's feel to it. It is an old world tale that is brought to life again with a new world flair.There is so much garbage on television from brain rotting \"reality\" TV to senseless violence. You should take this for what it is and that is an updated \"Robin Hood\" not to be compared with the movie exploits of Errol Flynn. This is a gem to be enjoyed by all. Parents that are concerned about their children watching too much violence will enjoy that Robin has lost his taste for war and bloodshed. He is a Robin Hood that would rather attempt to reason his way out of a disagreement than fight. Maid Marian is also an appealing role model for young girls. Rather than stand by and do nothing, she takes her own role in helping the poor by being the \"Night Watchman.\" The Sheriff of Nottingham is deliciously over the top wicked, just as the Sheriff should be and looks like a cross between Billy Joel and Tim Curry. Guy Gisborne is played by an extremely handsome actor, one that makes most women wish he didn't have portray the role of a bad \"Guy\". The only question we have is \"Where is Friar Tuck?\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-949ddbbd8b1047328f8743dd62e843cd",
            "input": "This film was the recipient of the 1990 Academy award for Best Animated Short Film. Over the last few weeks, I have seen dozens of the nominees and recipients of this award from the last 30 years and I really think that this film might just be the worst of them all--yet it wasn't just a nominee but it won!! I assume that 1989 must have just been a horrible year for the genre.The film shows a group of characters that look a bit like super-skinny Uncle Festers. The appear to be simple articulated figures who are moved using stop motion animation. All are identical--with the same faces, bodies and clothes. The only difference is that each has a different number drawn on their backs. They are all standing on a large platform that is suspended, as if by magic, in space. Each has a pole and their is also a box on the platform. The platform begins tilting slightly and in response the men move about in an effort to balance the platform. This goes on and on and on and on for the longest time. The only relief from this tedium is when one of them acts rather nasty towards the end, but it just isn't enough to make this fun to watch in the least. Aside from passable stop motion animation, this short offers nothing of interest to me....NOTHING.By the way, the great short KNICK KNACK also came out in 1989 and I have no idea why it was not among the nominees. It was a GREAT short and was far better than any of the nominees that year or the year before. Perhaps Pixar's success in previous years resulted in a bias against them, but KNICK KNACK is so clever and so funny it seems almost criminal to have ignored it. Could Pixar have not entered it? This seems unlikely.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bd744ea407c461db11af32b8d53df22",
            "input": "The plot intellect is about as light as feather down. But the advantage here is the boy and girl classic refusal we have become accustomed to in \"The Gay Divorcee\" and \"Top Hat\" is now absent. Instead of the typical accidental acquaintance, the dancing duo are the former lovers Bake Baker and Sherry Martin, who are still in love since their dancing days.Of course, being a 30s musical, there's the problems of misunderstood romance, classy courtship and the slight irritation of a sabotaged audition with bicarbonate soda has costing Ginger something rather special. And then in the grand tradition of dwindling finances, there's nothing better for Hollywood's best entertainers than put on a show.Delightful numbers from Irving Berlin are sprinkled throughout the show. Top hats and evening dresses are saved right until the end, which remains a refreshing change. Fred and Ginger are out again to charm the world...and charm the navy. Everyone and everything is once again just so enjoyable.Pure classic silliness at its best. But with Astaire and Rogers, we just know it's got to work.Rating: 8.25/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-170e062cbd1a482596e035cbc0072336",
            "input": "When an actor has to play the role of an actor, fictional or factual, the task becomes much more difficult than playing a role. In A Double Life,Ronald Coleman surpassed himself as Anthony John, the tortured double personality. He put into that character all his talent and sincerity. The facial expressions, mannerisms,gait and stance spoke eloquently of what Anthony John was going through while playing Othello on stage. Coleman also did extremely well as a Shakespearean actor in those short scenes as Othello that were part of this gem of a movie. Closups of Coleman's face as Othello tortured by doubts about the fidelity of Desdemona were in themselves scenes worth watching.Add to that, his character's off stage desperation and only someone with Coleman's depth of acting perception can achieve. It was like watching Spenser Tracy as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, except this double role was much more profound and poignant. Shelly Winters looked so sweet, vulnerable and gorgeous at the same time and added her talent to the movie. It is believed that Ronald Coleman liked his role in this film above all others he played and went on to win the Oscar for Best Actor in 1947. I would see this movie repeatedly and never feel bored.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-83b8ed135b8f4722a0a6addd144adb18",
            "input": "Cannot believe my eyes when read quite a bunch of other comments and reviews. As if it were a mediocre movie of some run-of-the-mill dudes.The movie is great, funny, crazy, over-the-top violent though with minimum gore, and all the way energetic to the core. Loved every single bit of it. Can't remember anything insane like this made for laughs and martial art showing off. And now the most important thing (at least to me): it is computer effects free. When I watch some Hollywood actors duking it out on screen in modern high-resolution and damn high-budgeted action \"fuflo\" (a Russian word that means \"bull*beep*\"), I understand that any *beep* child can do it - you can adjust the wires to the body, add some cute PC effects, and stuff it into the action film. Here it is different. I don't think that there will be even a dozen of physically advanced action stars worldwide, who can repeat the brawl that takes place at the end of the film or the \"Chinese football\" play. And it is just a little Hong Kong cinema made for fun, not pretending to be \"Star Wars\".Having a DVD with English soundtrack is not a problem with this movie. It does not spoil the atmosphere to me.Can't help mentioning a very neat theatrical play. Some of you, suppose, won't like it. As to me - it's amazing. Have a look at the Dragon's friend who is talking in a brave manner to the criminals and all of a sudden gets a fist punch in his left side of the head. His face expression changes into something whimsical and he comes up to Dragon with a baby expression. And take a look at the menacing size of his mouth - it's nearly from one ear to the other long when he makes grimaces.This movie deserves a higher rating and a thousand comments from people all over the world. Very thankful to our Russian industry for the releases of classic Jackie Chan movies. His modern ones are much weaker in my humble opinion and do not deserve much hype.Total 10 out of 10 - a legendary movie in its genre. Thank you for attention.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8d3d9b8f38b4250b613c888ee00ad17",
            "input": "An absurdly hilarious and strikingly human tale of the jealousies and infidelities surrounding a beetle marriage, Russian animation pioneer Wladyslaw Starewicz's \"Mest kinematograficheskogo operatora\" (\"The Cameraman's Revenge\", or \"The Revenge of a Kinematograph Cameraman\") is a delight of early animation, brimming with highly-effective stop-motion puppetry and no shortage of imagination.Mr. and Mrs. Beetle have a completely uneventful marriage, and both yearn for more excitement in their lives. Mr. Beetle's desires can only be satisfied by the beautiful exotic dancer at the \"Gay Dragonfly\" night club, whom he visits whenever he takes a \"business trip\" to the city. She is the only one who understands him. A fellow admirer of this dancer, an aggressive grasshopper, is jealous that Mr. Beetle has stolen his lady and, as fate would have it, he is also a movie cameraman. The devious grasshopper follows Mr. Beetle and his acquaintance to a hotel room, where he films their exploits through the keyhole.Meanwhile, Mrs. Beetle has, likewise, acquired a friend to add excitement to her life. He is an artist, and he brings her a painting for a present, before they both settle down on the couch for some intimacy. At that moment, however, Mr. Beetle returns home and witnesses the entire spectacle. As Mr. Beetle bashes through the front door, the artist friend clambers up the chimney, but he doesn't escape without Mr. Beetle first venting his anger and frustration upon him.There is a certain irony in the statement that follows: \"Mr. Beetle is generous. He forgives his wife and takes her to a movie.\" He is generous enough to forgive her, and yet he had been equally unfaithful just minutes earlier. At this point in time, however, we still haven't forgotten the jealous movie cameraman who had been plotting his revenge, and it is no surprise when he turns out to be the projectionist for the film Mr. and Mrs. Beetle are attending. Suddenly intercut into the film they are enjoying is the footage of Mr. Beetle's disloyalty, and the angry wife hits him across the head with an umbrella, before the frightened and angry husband dives through the theatre screen in search of the grasshopper.In the final scene, both Mr. and Mrs. Beetle, now somewhat more appreciative of each other, are serving time in prison for the fire that broke out when Mr. Beetle sought his final revenge. We do, indeed, hope that \"the home life of the Beetles will be less exciting in the future…\" This film may appear to be a mere story of the comings-and-goings of a miniscule insect species, but Starewicz is communicating so much more than that. This isn't a story about beetles – it is a story about us. And it's startlingly accurate, isn't it?!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b539ed491a44243a276297d1282883c",
            "input": "The Underground Comedy movie is perhaps one of the worst comedies I've ever seen. I should have known it was going to be bad when the box had the phrase \"guaranteed to offend\" written on it... meaning that the filmmakers were going to focus more on grossing you out than making you laugh.This movie is an amateurish jumble of childish skits, bad characters, and worse jokes... from the pathetic Bat-Man sketch to the painfully unfunny Arnold Shvollenpecker skit, they just aren't funny. The few skits that are a little funny are few and far between - watching Micheal Clark Duncan play a gay virgin, for example - but even they go on too long and get ruined from Vince Offer's ineptness at comedy.Keep The Underground Comedy Movie underground... bury it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ac92a5b29084cf9903d7b083492a2b2",
            "input": "This film is something like a sequel of \"White Zombie\", since it is made by the same man (Halperin) and features zombies. Halperin, the George A. Romero of his day, fails to deliver with this one, though.We have a man who can control the minds of people in Cambodia, and a search to destroy the source of his power so the zombies can be sent free. Also, a love interest for the evil man.Where this film really excels is in the imagery. The Cambodian temples and dancers are very nice and the zombie look very powerful in their large numbers. Unfortunately, we don't really get to see much of the zombies in action and the love story seems to play a much too large role for a horror film (though this has a valid plot reason later on).I would have loved to see some 1930s zombies attack helpless city folk, but this film just did not deliver. And no strong villain (like Bela Lugosi) was waiting to do battle against our heroes. And the use of Lugosi's eyes? A nice effect, but misleading as he is never in the film... why not recreate this with the new actor's eyes? Overall, a film that could be a great one with a little script re-working and could someday be a powerful remake (especially if they keep it in the same post-war time frame). Heck, if they can fix up \"The Hills Have Eyes\" then this film has hope.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-665db01ef8f44acf8e3de2c6d6f0ae09",
            "input": "First off I'd like to say that if I had to honestly rate this movie from a 1 to a 10, then I'd give it a -4. It's not that I'm a tough critic, it's just that this movie is THAT bad. Everything from the story, to the directing, to the editing is awful. The story is not even halfway decent to begin with (you can't expect much since it is based on a video game, something I was not aware of going into the movie) but the directing and editing made it even worse. The movie cuts at awkward points and goes to scenes that are completely unrelated to the previous ones; some, like a quick sex scene in the middle, don't even make sense being put into the story seeing as how the characters don't show any feelings toward each other. You could go into this movie expecting to see a pile of crap on the screen for an hour and a half and you'd still be disappointed. Honestly, if you pay to watch this movie then you are wasting your money, and if you don't pay anything then you are still wasting an hour and a half of your life. So do yourself a favor and don't watch it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ebf101577c84eaa9e8a241bea146cd9",
            "input": "Just got through watching this version of \"Samhain\", and even though I still like it, it's nothing like the \"rough cut\" version I have. If you check the message board, you'll see an apology from the director for this cut down version, 79 minutes., and he says he had nothing to do with this R-rated trimmed down edit with a completely new screwed up ending. Christian really doesn't need to distant himself that much, because the basic gore elements still stand up, even though highly trimmed down. This is a damn shame, because this had the potential of being one of the goriest and best gore films in years. It still has the porn stars, and the inbreds, and some of the extreme gore can at least be partially seen. I'm just glad I have that \"rough cut\", because to me, it's a jewel for any gorehounds library. Christian Viel definitely has the skill and vision to deliver the goods, and hopefully his next project will be better produced. The idiots had a near classic in their hands, and screwed it up for everybody. \"Samhain\" may be one of the most controversial and mishandled horror movies ever, and too bad gorehounds didn't get to see what the director intended.********************************************* Just so you know what you missed, this is my review based upon the \"work print\" of SAMHAIN.The movie runs a little over 90 minutes and has no chapter stops. There is absolutely NO music soundtrack, and some of the scenes have no audio on the dialog, because I think they are meant to be looped in later. However, most of the movie does have audio with sound affects, and when an effect or scene is missing, a message appears as a cue for insertion when the movie is completed. It's exactly as it says, a \"Rough Cut\", BUT the only uncut version of \"Samhain\" you are ever likely to see. Reason, because the gore is extremely graphic, much more than even an NC-17 would allow. Yes there are a few porn stars, but they are just there for the killing, and to add a little sugar and spice. The story is pretty standard, American tourists on a vacation in Ireland and end up staying in a home in the middle of the woods. An area that is heavy on folklore, involving the ancient Druids and the celebration of Samhain, or as we call it Halloween. (spooky)The movie starts off with a HUGE dose of gore, as a camping couple is attacked by one of the local inbred mutants. This is a great gore scene, as the guy find his girl hanging from a cliff, with her crying for help. All he sees is her head, arms, and shoulders hanging in front of him and when he pulls her up, she has been completely sliced in two. This is what I would call EXTREME GORE, with entrails, blood, and severed limbs all over the place. We are in Herschell Gordon Lewis territory here folks, except the effects look much more realistic. I'm going to just skip the story, because it's your standard stalk and kill plot.The next gore scene is something to behold, as the boyfriend from the first killing is taken to a cave like location (TCM-2 stuff), and bound to a table. This geek then cuts all of his limbs off (off camera, with a cue to insert a scene), and then we see his torso on a barbecue pit, turning slowly over a fire, and the torso has a hard-on (if you can believe that). Yes, very bad taste, gross, gruesome, you find the right word, and it will probably fit too.Then later Jenna Jameson, her beautiful body and all, is cut from neck to crotch, and all her entrails are pulled out in graphic glee, and her blood drains into a pot. Yummy, a real turn on huh?But the best gore scene happens inside the house, and I have to admit, this is one of the best gore scenes I have seen. This guy (doesn't matter who) is caught from behind from a geek, and cut open at the ass hole. The geek then puts his hands in and rips out all the guys entrails, intestines, and what the hell ever else there is, right from his asshole. This goes on FOREVER, as the guy is screaming and more and more innards are pulled out laying all over the bathroom floor. This is so extreme, so over the top, that I found myself laughing all to hell. Obviously, you will NEVER EVER see this scene on a proper DVD, IMO, along with most of the other really extreme gore scenes.So, what to think of all of this. Well, first of all, even though I doubt this movie would ever be released in this totally uncut presentation, it makes this \"Rough Cut\" a rare jewel for gorehounds. Yes, it's a little difficult at first, with no soundtrack, a few scenes to still be inserted, and credits that have missing names all over the place. But that's what makes this so unique, and I wouldn't trade it for anything right now. Extreme gore, yes yes, extreme extreme gore. This makes \"Haute Tension\" look like a Disney movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c5654c31b6745b0b9f7b42df85c277f",
            "input": "This was one of the most ridiculous and badly directed movies I've seen in a very long time. I've never liked Spike Lee, but thought I'd give this one a try: bad mistake. The movie is supposed to show how the Son of Sam real life murders affected a neighborhood in the summer of 1977; what it really did was center around the most boring characters that I doubt anyone cared for as far as their drug problems, marriage problems, and so on, etc. The scenes that depict the murders are just that, and nothing more; a shooting and then it's back to Saturday Night Fever! What's even more ridiculous is Spike Lee's choice to show up as a reporter in the movie: Spike, trust me, you're no Hitchcock, stay out of the movies, it makes them even worse off. The most silly scene had to be the dog speaking in a goofy voice, which was depicted in a scene before it where it was supposed to have been shot??? Spike, what were you thinking when you made this film? Not thinking at all is my guess. People who think they'll see a crime drama, take my advice and do not waste your time or money on this loser. You're better off watching Jerry Springer in this case! Waste of film, I gave it a 1 out of 10: awful dud.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-512178c3002648018a76c5975bc9b8c2",
            "input": "It's got Christopher Lee, it's got huge banks of 1970s computers that make Teletype noises as letters appear on the screen, it's got radioactive isotopes that not only glow in the dark but emit pulsing thrumming noises, it's got volcanoes! evil aliens disguised as nuns! tidal waves! earthquakes! exploding cars! exploding coffee machines! and as a climax the entire planet blows up. How on earth does this film managed to be so incredibly, mind-numbingly DULL? The answer, my friend is because 90% of this movie is made up of establishing shots, most of them involving long tracks, pans, or zooms in combinations, or occasionally all three, that do nothing except give the crew something to do. There are endless shots of our protagonists driving, getting in and out of cars, driving again, walking around looking at stuff, getting in cars and driving... I just sat there watching endless parade of nothingness in stupefaction muttering \"Say something, please somebody, just say something... DO something... anything!...\"The dialogue, when it does come, is terrible.\"Maybe their minutes are measured on a different scale than ours.\" was a typically meaningless line. The script culminates in the destruction of the world by stock footage, justified in this speech from Lee as the head alien:\"The planet Earth has emitted an over-abundance of diseases, they are contaminating the Universe. All the planets light years away from here will suffer unless it is destroyed!\" This is is Neanderthal SF script writing. This is the sort of motivation you find in the sort of 1950's Japanese monster suit movies aimed at 7 year olds. It is, and I collect such things, the most god-awful line from an English language SF movie since Buster Crabbe retired. It beggars belief that this movie was released in the same year as Star Wars and Close Encounters.Lee, who always struck me as a smart, useful actor with a sure knowledge of his limits, delivers his lines as if he is going to kill his agent for getting him into this pile of drek. I don't blame him.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b90c4c6b722a4678ac005954d256637e",
            "input": "\"The house of the spirits\" is quite awful. I live in South America, in a country that suffered a military dictatorship just like the one the movie tries to describe, and even though everyone knows movies may be far far away from reality, this particular movie treats viewers as both ignorant and stupid. Things are not so simple and linear as appears here, and of course political process are much more complicated and interesting that the plot in \"The house...\". If you can't show that complexity on screen is better not making a movie at all. There are a lot of examples of how can politics be seriously taken in cinema, without so many commonplaces. In some parts I felt that Carmen Miranda may appear within parrots and palm trees. When you talk about certain things you must be not only careful but respectful to your public's intelligence.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2bc461bdcc644370bc1f7312f55d9be1",
            "input": "Takashi Miike's incursion into kiddie territory won me over almost immediately because he demonstrates nerve and bravery in dealing with fantasy elements. This is a fairy tale that dares to be dark. Even as a kid, I thought that there was something sinister about most fairy tales; horrible things happen to people in most children's books. Miike understands that these classic tales are a bit scarier (and more disturbing) than what they appear to be at first glance. The filmmaker takes the archetypical story of a kid on a wondrous quest out of the preschool classroom. He accentuates the very real fears of a world filled with never-ending hazardous missions. Westerners like to downplay the seriousness behind bedtime stories written specifically for kids. I appreciated the fact that Miike was more honest than most American filmmakers. He goes for the jugular of the story but he also shows signs of restrain. But a self-possessed Miike is still stranger than most filmmakers. I thought it was a great film. Highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-28d032f4408f4e5a9ab5ecc419ad937d",
            "input": "I can not believe such slanted, jingoistic material is getting passed off to Americans as art house material. Early on, from such telling lines like \"we want to make sure they are playing for the right team\" and manipulative framing and lighting, A Love Divided shows it's true face. The crass manner in which the Irish Catholics are shown as hegemonic, the Protestants as peaceful and downtrodden, is as poor a representation of history as early US westerns that depict the struggle between cowboys and American Indians. The truth of the story is distorted with the stereotypes and outright vilification of the Irish Catholics in the story; a corruption admitted by the filmmakers themselves! It is sad that people today still think that they can win moral sway by making a film so easily recognized for it's obvious intent, so far from attempting art. This film has no business being anywhere in any legitimate cinema or library.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06239a7f16ca465fbd1d62b0ea8302e5",
            "input": "Farrah Fawcett gives an award nominated performance as an attempted rape victim who turns the tables on her attacker. This movie not only makes you examine your own morals, it proves that Fawcett can excel as a serious actress both as a victim and victor.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62a1e3ee8d544915adade4ad01c7d4a4",
            "input": "What made the French Connection work so well was the relationship between Doyle (Hackman) and Russo (Scheider). In this catastrophe directed by Frankenheimer (who also brought us such gems as Raindeer Games and the Island of Dr. Moreau) the movie focuses on Doyle and his singular obsession of capturing Charnier (Rey). The fictitious idea that the NYPD would allow Doyle to travel to Marseilles to find Charnier with the help of the French local authorities is laugh out loud funny. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Charnier skip town with 65 pounds of pure smack!!! A street value of 32 million but yeah, let's send Doyle to find this guy, it was his pinch after all. Please!!! The story was weak. The acting was terrible (with the lone exception of Hackman, who completely overplayed his part). The direction was all over the place. Even the cuts between scenes were terrible. Do yourself a favor and watch the first installment twice and skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6717750b5b014d658558139f78e5635e",
            "input": "Midnight Cowboy made a big fuss when it was released in 1969, drawing an X rating. By today's standards, it would be hard pressed to pull an R rating. Jon Voight, who has been better, is competent in his role as Joe Buck, an out of town hick wanting to make it big with the ladies in New York City. He meets a seedy street hustler named Ratso Rizzo, who tries to befriend Buck for his own purposes. The two eventually forge a bond that is both touching and pathetic. As Ratso, Dustin Hoffman simply shines. Hoffman has often been brilliant, but never more so than in this portrayal. He is so into character that all else around him pales in comparison. Losing the Academy Award to John Wayne is one of the most ridiculous decisions ever made by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Director Schlessinger has a deft hand with his production, but this film has a grungy underbelly that leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the viewer. Worth seeing for Hoffman's performance alone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aa0c09c4a7c747a7a189ab331e8d57f9",
            "input": "Chan Wook Park is nothing if not inventive. I'M A CYBORG BUT THAT'S OK is chock full of amusing little technical flourishes with some ingenious ideas sprinkled in between. Attempting to walk in the footsteps of the likes of Marc Caro and Jeunet (CITY OF LOST CHILDREN, DELICATESSEN), Park embarks on a fanciful, lighthearted tale which is a radical departure from his usual morbid fare. Hardly one to be faulted for his ambition or his vision, it is genuinely unexpected, then, to see all Park's effort add up to so very little.I'M A CYBORG BUT THAT'S OK seems astonishingly to subtract from itself as it goes along, with the the end result being a fraction of the sum of its parts. The premise is promising, gags are copious and offbeat humour abounds but it all fails miserably to create any meaningful connection with the audience. The characters are cute and quirky and played with gusto by the cast, but, try as i might, i could not bring myself to care for any.SYMPATHY FOR LADY VENGEANCE was a misstep, indicating perhaps that Park was overindulging himself a little bit, but it still managed to showcase some of the director's unique flare and in the wake of an impressive filmography, was readily forgiven. None of the assured confidence that commanded JOINT SECURITY AREA or SYMPATHY FOR MR. VENGEANCE is evident here. I'M A CYBORG BUT THAT'S OK left me so utterly unengaged i caught myself instinctively fast forwarding from time to time (more regularly as the film progressed). I gave LADY a 5/10, and by that measure, this probably deserves no more than a 3. For old time's sake, i'll be generous: 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a3fbda7052844c6ad1f3cd31fa9a521",
            "input": "Artistically speaking, this is a beautiful movie--the cinematography, music and costumes are gorgeous. In fact, this movie is prettier than those directed by Akira Kurasawa himself. In this case, he only wrote the movie as it was made several years after his death.So, as far as the writing goes, the dialog was well-written and the story, at times, was interesting. However, the story was also rather depressing yet uninvolving in some ways--after all, it's the story of a group of women who work in a brothel. It's interesting that although prostitution has been seen as a much more acceptable business in Japan, the women STILL long for a better life. This reminds me a lot of the movie Streets Of Shame, though Streets Of Shame's characters are a lot less likable and more one-dimensional.So, overall it gets a 7--mostly due to everything BUT the writing. It's too bad that the weakest link in this movie is the story by the great Kurasawa.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc3c3232ce7c4dbbaf698c88eb8cad9e",
            "input": "This movie is rich with action and gore. The story line is strong enough to support the action sequences. The English version needs a tad bit of help in the dubbing department but it was still enjoyable. This movie ranks among my personal favorites next to \"Hard Boiled\" ...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1026be2ad1b140d9bb7475973b67170d",
            "input": "It took me time to really appreciate John Carpenter's Halloween. As a kid, I remember I really enjoyed the sequels, especially The Return of Michael Myers, which I still think is the best Halloween sequel. But I thought the first one was slow and took way too much time to get to the point­. I watched it a couple of times recently and I know now I was wrong. Today I truly understand this film, the meaning it has, the whole feeling of this horror masterpiece. It's not about blood and gore. It's not about naked chicks and lame jokes. It's about the worst night in Laurie Strode's short life. It's about the night his demented brother comes back home to finish what he started 15 years ago. This movie is meant to be scary and I think it succeeds very well. It's also one of the first slasher movies, a horror sub-genre that I always loved. Halloween has a very dark atmosphere, creepy music and talented young actors, such as Jamie Lee Curtis in her first role. Need I say more? Anyone who's never seen it, horror fan or not, should do his cinematic homework right now. Very highly recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bd1402562fe4aa19e9fcf5ac776dc76",
            "input": "Jean Claude Van Damme tries to rescue his career by making the sequel of Universal Soldier. But, did that movie saved him? I think he goes to hell, after he dies. In the first minute, we see the inside of a facility, where you can see the bad guy of the film. Scary, huh? But not as scary as the acting (details are following). Then, we see Van Damme with a black girl (do not remember the name....well it doesn't matter anyway), trying to escape from some muscle-men. Of course they are the new Universal-Soldiers. More muscels, less brain (just like the movie). After a while, Van Damme fights Goldberg but then the \"mission\" gets aborted. It was just a test (Is this movie a test for our nerves?). It turns out that Van Damme works for the government on the new Universal Soldier project (Who has seen the first movie may think that this is the most unlogical thing, that yould Van Dammes character could do). But it is a sequel. And a \"story\" has to come up. Ah, I forgot. He has a daughter. Very important for the \"story\".Well, after about 20 minutes, a super computer hears a conversation about shutting it down and quitting he project. Of course the cube gets angry and activates all soldiers to kill everyone. Van Damme escapes from the facility BUT the computer sends some soldiers hunting him (It wants Van Damme as a soldier - because he is the best (really?)). And guess what, Goldberg is one of the hunters, who was always a silly sentence for the audience before he gets asskicked. Funny? Yes, just like the rest of the film. After some \"story\", Van Damme tries to rescue his daughter (of his wife - the reporter in the first movie). It comes to a final show down where Van Damme fights the Bad Guy and you can see the most expensive scene of the whole movie (please see for yourself. It is just too funny to tell).You'll see that this movie is a waste of time.So do not watch it. But if you do, keep a sixpack with you!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4b0531af722e421481aef2c1cc86008e",
            "input": "Much like the comedy duo of its title, \"The Sunshine Boys\" has become a forgotten classic 30-odd years later. It's hardly mentioned alongside other great film comedies of the 1970s. This makes no sense given the singular specialness of this film, perhaps the best Neil Simon ever wrote.Walter Matthau plays Willy Clark, once half of a legendary vaudeville comedy known as Lewis and Clark, now a bitter 73-year-old solo act who can't get a job in a potato chip commercial. His nephew and agent Ben (Richard Benjamin) is sure he can get work if Willy will only agree to reunite with his estranged partner Al Lewis (George Burns) for an ABC-TV celebration of show business nostalgia.Nostalgia is what \"Sunshine Boys\" has going for it in spades, right from the start when a series of 1920s film clips showcasing various entertainers from long ago flickers before us to the accompaniment of Cole Porter's \"Be A Clown\". Then there's the film's present-day setting in Manhattan, where flared trousers and wide polyester ties abound. The periods collide in Willy's glorious mess of a Manhattan apartment, where framed photos and cartoons of long-dead celebrities stare out from the walls at lurid tabloid headlines and empty Zabar grocery bags. If you were alive in the 1970s like me, you might even feel like you were in that apartment.Willy clearly has been living there too long. He's sleeping in front of the television when the kettle in the other room boils. Willy wakes up and picks up the phone.\"Hello, who is this?\" A pause. \"Never mind, it's the tea.\"Old men living alone can be sad material in almost anyone else's hands, but Simon's deft wit and unerring feeling for character turns this adaptation of his 1972 stage hit into comedy gold. The amazing thing about \"The Sunshine Boys\" is how much it rubs your noses in Willy's almost existential condition without turning you off at all. \"89 years old and just like that, he dies of nothing'\" Willy says of one old songwriting friend, before deciding the man probably died from writing a song that rhymed \"lady\" with \"baby\".Burns won an Oscar for his understated performance as the gentle but steely Lewis, but it's Matthau who brings this one home, his make-up and proud but ragged bearing really selling you on the idea he was already 73 when he made this. Willy is obnoxious in the extreme, fully deserving Ben's description \"crazy freakin' old man\", but you root for him throughout, enjoying his small victories even when they come at the cost of others' patience. His lines kill you, too, especially when he's trying to kill Lewis, for whom the TV reunion turns out to be a bad idea.\"You're out of touch!\" Willy tells Lewis at one point. \"I'm still in demand. I'm still hot!\"\"If this room was on fire you wouldn't be hot,\" Lewis replies.Director Herbert Ross shoots everything in a very casual and understated way, with low lighting and mid-range shots even in emotional moments so as to leave room for the comedy and the film's overall zen message of grace through quiet acceptance. You never get the feeling you are watching a movie, one of \"The Sunshine Boys\" many charms, and Ross's direction, like the acting of the three principals, goes a long way toward achieving that end.Comedy is hard, especially when the subjects are people watching life pass them by, but \"The Sunshine Boys\" makes it all seem a pleasure, because, for us watching, it is.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-214d3461e86e4e7d8f20bb66fb807fe5",
            "input": "Election marks the 2nd trial society theme movie directed by Johnnie To.To marvellously casted Simon Yan and Tony Leung Kar Fai as Lok and Big D, as the two trial members who were chosen as candidates for the position of chairman for Ho Sing society, a 100 year old trial society.While Lok is a man who keeps his cool at all times, Big D is not only impatient, but also thinks that he is on top of everything. Lok was chosen as the next chairman for 2 years. To have the total control of the gang, the newly elected chairman must be passed down with a Dragon Baton, which represents power and authority. Big D was extremely unhappy with the results that he was not chosen to be the next chairman after paying a handsome figure of bribes to the council members. He ordered his man to get the Baton before it falls onto the hands of Lok.While Big D is getting the Baton, Lok has other plans for him.This is one of the trial society theme movies where not much bloodshed is needed. Johnnie To puts the greed of the human beings in the movie, where bloodshed is commonly used in other trial society theme movies to show how the greed of human beings can caused the death or the downfall of one. However, no single bullet is used, hardly any gangfights are involved in Election. It's the battle of the wits that makes Election stands out of the rest.Apart from Maggie Shiu, the only actress in Election with less than 5 lines to talk in the whole movie, masculinity rules the whole movie. Louis Koo and Nick Cheung, who was seen in To's previous film, are casted as an undercover cop and a gangster who sold his life to the gang respectively. Together with some of the veteran actors making their appearance in the film and the excellent script, it makes the only HK movie to represent Cannes Fil Festival 2005.Election has hardly failed any critics who wants an different trial society theme movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57600de2a82449c38184f03348c2b3c2",
            "input": "I was never a big fan of television until I watched 24 for the first time. I got into the series very late. Season 5 ended before I even saw my very first episode. It was an episode of Series 3 that was on my parents DVR (digital video recorder) box while I was house sitting for the weekend. It took that one episode for me to be hook line and sinker into the world of Jack Bauer. And boy was I hooked!! I watched the next six episodes without blinking an eye. The next day I went to Blockbuster and signed up for an unlimited month pass for twenty something dollars and needless to say it has been the greatest blockbuster money I've ever spent. I watched the first three seasons in three weeks. That's 72 forty minute episodes!!! I will say that finding out what happens next is easier on DVD than waiting an entire week. I can only imagine the anticipation of watching Season 6 week to week!! I find it mildly torturous and cruel but I'm going to give it a try and watch it just like the rest of America!! The DVR is set and you can bet I'll be chomping at the bit!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6c3181b8c6e94a6886e7290d26e71755",
            "input": "Currently on METOO's new schedule at 4 pm on weekdays, right after \"Maverick\" and right before \"Wild, Wild West\" (followed by \"Star Trek\").Don't know if I ever actually saw an episode of it when it was originally on, but I'm really captivated by it. Offbeat, unusual, surreal stories set in a mythical West. Kind of the \"Naked City\" of Westerns.And the guest stars are there: Dan Duryea, Lyle Bettger, Brian Donlevy, MacDonald Carey, Rick Jason (as a treacherous Mexican), a young Dick Van Patten, Jack Lord, Noah Berry, Jr. (as a colorful Mexican), Martha Hyer, Marguerite Chapman, even Ann Robinson (\"War of the Worlds\"), Gloria Talbott (\"I Married a Monster from Outer Space\")It ran for EIGHT SEASONS, over 200 episodes, from January, 1959, to December, 1965.Eric Fleming is quite remarkable as trail boss Gil Favor, the most stolid man that's ever lived, with the code of honor of a Samurai, and just the right balance between toughness and open-handedness. I would vote for him for President any day. (P.S. He had a very interesting biography)And a young Clint Eastwood is quite striking as his impulsive right hand, \"Rowdy\" Yates. Also, veteran Western actor and country music figure (the immortal \"One-eyed, One-horned, Flying Purple People Eater\") Sheb Wooley is there as seasoned scout Pete Nolan. And Paul Brinegar makes the most cantankerous character of a cook you could ask for as \"Wishbone\".And then there's that great theme song, performed by the immortal Frankie Laine. (Between that and the \"Maverick\" theme, I've got Western theme songs running through my head all day.)I look forward to every episode; I'm collecting the whole set. A good time (not to mention a moo-ving experience) is always guaranteed, as one waits to see if the boys will get their difficulties straightened out before the commercial.\"Rollin', rollin', rollin' . . . \"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d77dadff6494f06ac843c6f529ae5b6",
            "input": "Pier Paolo Pasolini, or Pee-pee-pee as I prefer to call him (due to his love of showing male genitals), is perhaps THE most overrated European Marxist director - and they are thick on the ground. How anyone can see \"art\" in this messy, cheap sex-romp concoction is beyond me. Some of the \"stories\" here could have come straight out of a soft-core porn film, and I am not even so much referring to the nudity but the simplistic and banal, often pointless stories. Anyone who enjoyed this relatively watchable but dumb oddity should really sink his teeth into the \"Der Schulmaedchenreport\" soft-porn German 70s movie series, because that's what \"Decameron\" looks like to me.Besides, the movie is sloppy on nearly all levels, from start to finish: 1. Editing. An example: at 1 hour:15 minutes:45 seconds there is a chasing scene that is put quite clearly in the wrong place. It was supposed to be placed about a minute later, but I guess that Pasolini must have hired boozed-up editors who have little time for the \"fine details\" of movie-making. Pee-pee-pee's fans would probably counter this by saying that it was placed there intentionally - which I very much doubt. Besides, even if that were true, that would be even worse, because that story gains absolutely nothing by making it harder to follow. (This isn't exactly \"Eraserhead\" or one of Tarantino's broken-form films...) 2. Acting. Vey sloppy. Triple Pee's fans (all 8 of them) proudly declare how 3P-O uses \"real people instead of actors\". (Aren't actors people? Or are they Martians? Sure, many actors have sub-par IQs but does that mean we should treat them with contempt...?) Other directors have used amateurs and succeeded (such as Alan Parker or De Niro), so why are PPP's amateurs so utterly awful in his movies? The answer is once again appalling sloppiness. Pasolini is sloppy in everything, and that includes trying to get as much out of his toothless amateurs as he can. He is a lazy director, an IMperfectionist if you like. The anti-Kubrick, I suppose... Pee-pee-pee's principal goal when casting must have been to find as many toothless old people as possible (and young men that are to his liking). In Pasolini's world there is a simple formula: lack of teeth + strange face = realism. It's all well and fine to have them toothless, but at least try to eke out some at least semi-decent performances out of these inexperienced neo-thespians, otherwise you're an amateur yourself - an amateur director, in Pasolini's case. Whether 3P-0 wasn't capable of this feat or simply didn't care doesn't change anything. (Who knows... maybe he didn't even notice the awful acting?) 3. Audio. The synchronization. If 3P-0 felt that microphones are too much of a hassle when filming a movie, then he ought to have at least made a concerted effort in post-production, i.e. getting all these bum actors to say their lines on cue in the studio, so that we the viewers wouldn't have to watch mouths move while the elusive dialogue floats elsewhere in the movie.4. Lack of concept. We have close to a dozen stories which aren't connected in any meaningful way. Some are anti-Church (more on that later), while some are merely sex yarns i.e. cheap male (sometimes gay) fantasies designed to titillate and nothing else. The stories and characters are not amusing (if at all) on an intelligent level, but on the basest level. 10 year-old kids can laugh here... And there is nothing wrong with that, but then don't call it exalted, intellectual art! 5. As a result of point 4, there is also a lack of logic in the order of the stories. That goes without saying. Pee-pee-pee could have arranged the order in any other way, and we would have had the exact same movie. This also means that you can feel free to start from the middle then go back to the beginning, etc. \"Decameron\" is like a bowl of spaghetti that way: when you start eating it you can begin with any thread you want, it makes no difference at all.6. The pointlessness of the stories' resolutions. Most stories end with a cheap gag/joke, i.e. some damn dumb punchline straight out of a porn comic-book, whereas some stories don't even have a conclusion: they merely end. Finito. At best, the stories are watchable semi-anecdotes, barely any deeper meaning there - unless you find \"deep\" meanings in a porno. There is, of course, nothing easier than looking for and finding \"meaning\" where there is an absence of it. Hence even any hardcore porn film can be philosophized/mused over endlessly. It's easy and fun. Try it, oh ye 8 PPP fans! As for the Church-bashing... Some viewers get all excited about his attack on Catholicism and what-not. In principal, that's all well and fine - after all, I'm an atheist myself - but what those people ignore is the simple but essential fact that Pasolini was a Marxist. It's like the pot calling the kettle black. A Marxist criticizing the Church for hypocrisy and stupidity? Where does he get the nerve? Besides, Pasolini wasn't an atheist, hence his high-and-mighty and self-righteous stance isn't justified. After all, Marxists are believers: they merely substituted the accepted god with the idea of a Utopia, which is merely another supernatural wishful-thinking fantasy. Hence I cannot get excited about PPP's anti-religion antics.This sophomoric humpdorama anthology ends with Pasolini saying rather pretentiously: \"I wonder... Why produce a work of art when it's nice just to dream about it?\" He wasn't actually referring to this silly little movie as art, was he...? In case he was - the poor deluded man - then I have to wonder why he didn't just leave it at dreaming, and NOT make all those bad movies...Wanna read my altered subtitles of Bergman movies? E-mail me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-284b760980184c9dad5dd2089279bf12",
            "input": "I read a small ad in some horror magazine in the early nineties about Liebe des Totes (the love of the dead) or something similar. This of course awoke my curiosity so I ordered Nekromantik 1 & 2 and Der Todesking (The Death King). The Nekromantik movies are Ok, even kind of interesting and unique in their approach to the subject Necrophilia (even if they obviously are horror-opera entries rather than intended to invoke fear in the viewers mind, they are actually quite funny.)TODESKING, on the other hand is, in my opinion, one of the best films ever made. It consist of a series of scenes depicting the many facets of death. Death as an enemy; Death as a reliever, Death as the very fysical decomposition of the body. The film is a metaphor over life. It shows how fragile life is and how short our lives are. It reduces its viewers to the childs they (we) actually are. The fact that we cannot really understand the nature of Death, and hence neither the process of dying, is the core message of the film. This is a most realistic film. Never does Buttgereit try to hide death behind white roses or whatever. No matter what moral standards you set up, death is unevitable, and will sooner or later be not a fiction but YOUR reality. This applies to YOU, Dear Reader, like it applies to the viewers of the film. Some juvenile reviewers seem not to grasp this, which is fully excused, since they of course will live forever...This is no exploitation movie. Why? Because death does not exploit us humans. It harvests us. We grow for seven days, then we are brought back to the schopenhauerian state of pre-birth, that is Death. Buttgereit gives us his version of the oldest of tales. Whether you choose to regard it as \"optimistic\" or \"pessimistic\" is up to you. At first glance it may seem very dark. Consider though, that in order for something to live, something else must die. \"Who wants to live forever?\"I believe that when Buttgereit shows a body, that are being consumed by maggots, he shows not only decomposition, but GENERATION of new life. Is it not better to die and give life to maggots and then birds and eventually become soil, than to remain the living dead zombie that is one of the the favorite pets of the genre?When you realize this, you see Der Todesking it its right context.Sieben Tage hat die Woche, siebenmal letzte Stunden. Seven are the days of week (weak, mortal !), seven times the last hour.Dont fear the Reaper, Buttgereit tells us, because the Reaper takes only what is ripe. And apples that are not plucked for food will rot!Have a good life, fellow IMDB'ers !(And watch this film, that compares only to Ingemar Bergmans \"The Seventh Seal\" in terms of depth and universality)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8a66858d58f40a6ba5904227a466482",
            "input": "Three part \"horror\" film with some guy in a boarded up house imploring the viewer not to go \"out there\" and (unfortunately) gives us three tales to prove why.The first story involves a young couple in a car accident who meet up with two psychos. It leads up to two totally predictable twists. Still, it's quick (about 15 minutes), violent, well-acted and well-done. Predictable but enjoyable.The second involves a man on the run after stealing a large amount of money. His car breaks down, he's attacked by a dog and stumbles into a nearby clinic. VERY obvious, badly done and extremely slow. Even at 30 minutes this is too long. Good acting though.The third is just barely a horror story. It involves a beautiful, lonely woman looking for Mr. Right. It has beautiful set designs, a nice erotic feel and a nice sex scene. But (again) predictable and not even remotely scary.It ends very stupidly.All in all, the first one is worth watching, but that's it. Tune in for that one then turn it off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b0aa6d36d5d4cf29c2f4a58416d8f49",
            "input": "OK, I overrated it just a bit to offset at least one of those grumpy reviews. But I did enjoy it. I didn't laugh out loud, but it held my interest and pulled me along without dropping me at any point. The story built. Yeah, you knew it would have an happy ending--this genre always does. Meantime, it was quirky with sight gags you could miss, so pay attention when you watch. Stiller and Black delivered expertly yet again. Good team. They should work together more. Don't know that it will be a cult classic, but it was certainly a fun ride. Not as good as WHAT ABOUT BOB, or DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS but what is? It is still worth going out of your way a little to get and watch this movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33731ca8a4b44372a85910724dfecc54",
            "input": "AKA: Mondays In The SunI have no idea what I just watched. Three men wander aimlessly and drink, grousing about everything and at everyone in their path. This is supposed to be a drama, but what it is, is a total waste of film, without a single redeeming quality.I have read reviews touting the performances herein as \"wonderful,\" \"beautiful,\" and \"heroic.\" I'm afraid I cannot agree, unless these men were supposed to come off as the dumbest most ignorant proto-humans who ever walked.All in all? This was not a movie. It wanders throughout and loses everyone but the audience. I've watched this three times, and cannot for the life of me see what anyone sees in this garbage. There is nothing profound here, whatsoever. It's crap.It rates a ZERO/10 from...the Fiend :.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0dd6ed0a513b4e1a845610d524c5a5cd",
            "input": "In Le Million, Rene Clair, one of the cinema's great directors and great pioneers, created a gem of light comedy which for all its lightness is a groundbreaking and technically brilliant film which clearly influenced subsequent film-makers such as the Marx Brothers, Lubitsch, and Mamoulian. The plot, a witty story of a poor artist who wins a huge lottery jackpot but has to search frantically all over town for the missing ticket, is basically just a device to support a series of wonderfully witty comic scenes enacted in a dream world of the director's imagination.One of the most impressive things about this film is that, though it is set in the middle of Paris and includes nothing actually impossible, it achieves a sustained and involving fairy-tale/fantasy atmosphere, in which it seems quite natural that people sing as much as they talk, or that a tussle over a stolen jacket should take on the form of a football game. Another memorable element is that Le Million includes what may be the funniest opera ever put on film (O that blonde-braided soprano! \"I laugh, ha! ha!\") Also a delight is the casting: Clair has assembled a group of amazing, sharply different character actors, each of them illustrating with deadly satiric accuracy a bourgeois French \"type,\" so that the film seems like a set of Daumier prints come to life.The hilarity takes a little while to get rolling, and I found the characters not as emotionally engaging as they can be even in a light comedy (as they are, for instance, in many Lubitsch films.) For these reasons I refrained from giving it the highest rating. But these minor cavils shouldn't distract from an enthusiastic recommendation.Should you see it? By all means. Highly recommended whether you want a classic and influential work of cinema or just a fun comedy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8b8aed84b4244cc9066d9d75580ea11",
            "input": "This is probably one of the worst films i have ever seen. The events in it are completely random and make little or no sense. The fact that there is a sequel is so sickening i may come down with a case of cabin fever (I'M SO SORRY). I describe it as bug being smooshed to a newspaper because it seems to be different parts of things mixed together. e.g Kevin the pancake loving karate kid is just freakishly weird on its own, then there's the cop who is slightly weird and perverted, then the drug addict, then there's the fact that they attack some random guy who clearly needs help. then all of a sudden the main character is having sex with his friends girlfriend just because she says something stupid about a plane going down. then at the end some good old family racism followed by a rabbit operating on Kevin the karate kid. Its actually pretty despicable that they can use racism as a joke in this film. There is no reason for anyone to enjoy this film unless you love Eli Roth, even that did not make me like this film. Hate is a strong word but seeing as it is the only word i am permitted to use it will have to do. BOYCOTT CABIN FEVER 2!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38925238c32041fda430cd7b66c0aedf",
            "input": "About 1986 I saw this movie by accident on TV one night. I was 6 years old. It was similar to my accidental viewing of the terrifying ending to Don't Look Now in 1987. I went to Venice on holiday the next year in silent terror, hoping to god that my parents wouldn't find out I'd watched it! Would I have minded if my parents knew I'd watched Les Valseuses when I was a kid? I'd probably avoid the subject with my dad even nowadays, and my mum's probably disapproving in the afterlife. I don't know if they'd want to see it anyway. From the stalking and trapping of a woman at the block of flats in the first scene to sliding down the mountain roads with glazed satiated eyes I'm never sure whether this film is an insensitive piece of trash that disregards the sexual revolution or if it's a sexy liberating movie to watch as it dawns on you that you could never be so offensive yourself. It's definitely violent. It has a violent view of sex, virtually no acknowledgement of love. Even suckling a young baby mutates into a greedy sexual act of exploitation. But the scenario IS very erotic and (god I'm so British) arousing! Do they suck her breasts for her own good? That is exploitation. So why am I getting a woody?The fellows go in search of an experienced older woman, find an ex-con, mother-figure? I don't know. It ends in a truly gruesome suicide. I described it to my friend JB Nelson, who has Cannibal Holocaust-guts, and he went eeuurrgghh! No motherly love for this movie, quite the opposite. Mutilation of where the boys began. Why do they shoot the girl in the leg? Why does she come back to them? Do women need to be punished so that they learn what is right from men?I'm thinking of two movies, one of which I wish I'd never seen, the other makes me wish it wasn't such a harsh world. Swept Away/Madonna what a pile of insanity doesn't compute never been so offended that a woman punished for being a woman becomes slave to man and its maybe madonna saying everybody respect guy ritchie im so enraged i cant use punctuation! Once Upon A Time In America/Leone god why does Noodles do it? Destroys the path to joy we've been following him on his whole life. So close to finally finding love with Deborah. Now they are both destroyed. Why Sergio? Why?There is no rape in Les Valseuses but lots of sex and nakedness in abundance, of both sexes. Very honest, no titillation. No fantasy shags, no perfect Hollywood smooth moves. Jokes, yes. But there's too much darkness and jealousy and trickery in here to call it a sex comedy. Forget Carry On Shooting A Naked Hairdresser In The Leg Cos She'll Come Back & You'll Hook Her Up With Your Ex-con Lover's Vengeant Son & She'll Learn How To Cum From Him.Two things I can't stand are rape movies and prison movies. Les Valseuses isn't a rape movie! God nobody's going to want to watch it now! It is a brilliant movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0a7063455c542e6b38f2a02fd2c2c78",
            "input": "Did Sandra (yes, she must have) know we would still be here for her some nine years later?See it if you haven't, again if you have; see her live while you can.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa1097ad8af840cbaa80bae2be503089",
            "input": "We went to the movie with a group because the play we were going to was cancelled. It is without doubt one of the worst movies ever. It is not that i don't like cult-movies I do. But nothing happens in the film. One does not feel any connection with the characters whatsoever. endless times without dialog. And the car. How do thay carry a huge tent and beds chairs and clothing for every day in that car? It is a two seater! I have to say however the scenery is beautiful, but not in a movie, the director should have made a photoshoot of the movie, so that we could skip about 80 minutes of useless time in with nothing happens anyway. I would not recommend it, as it is a waste of your time",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a0e6f66c8fd4da1a0a83e8f546b0c31",
            "input": "Why did I go to see this film? Honestly, because Jim Carrey was in it and in the past he has made hilarious movies that have made me cry with laughter, so do you really blame me for expecting that again? Additionally, the premise, the funny trailer, his co-star Jennifer Aniston's involvement, and the fact it was a massive hit stateside encouraged me.However, as my \"one line Summary\" suggests, I was Disappointed. For various reasons;Reason 1: It wasn't funny. In a 2hour movie, I laughed for about 5-10minutes...all together, the rest of the time I sat thinking \"I really should have got some ice-cream\". I admit that maybe it is wrong to judge Jim Carrey on his previous films, but what does he really expect when he makes Gem's such as 'The Truman Show' , 'Liar Liar' , 'Me, Myself and Irene' , 'Dumb and Dumber' , 'The Mask', and the 'Ace Ventura' films then produces, in Bruce Nolan's own words, such a mediocre film?Reason 2: Jennifer Aniston's role was criminally underwritten. I mean hello! She's been around in the public eye for about ten years now, and in this film she gets about four lines to say. Wrong.Reason 3: One word - ClichéReason 4: A casual deployment of specifically American References - Jimmy Hoffa, Walter Cronkite 'sweeps week' - is a clue to the film's specifically home-grown appeal. \"A teenager says no to drugs and yes to an Education - that's a miracle! Want to see a miracle soon? Be the miracle!\" God tells Bruce, a heavy handed sentiment that seems to have gone down a treat in the US, but might face tougher resistance in markets that retain an inkling for subtlety. Additionally, I still go to school, and that statement suggests me and all of my friend's are miracles...or maybe it just means we have brains?In this film there are enough funny Carrey moments to make you chuckle and prevent Bruce Almighty from being a total calamity, but you are advised to start revising your expectations downwards.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccb76163052d43df97a069b6943c87ba",
            "input": "i've discovered that this film gets rented based off of the packaging. the zombie on the front of the DVD looks cool and scary. then you get to the movie and it's women with raccoon masks on. zero special effects...and even the fight scenes you can see them miss punches by 2 feet. the funny thing is that Lommel acts in the movie briefly himself and is worse than the rest of the crap actors in the movie. the only thing i can think is that Lommel is just trying to make such a bad film that people dub it a \"cult classic\"...however, i can't possibly imagine anyone thinking this is anything but one of the worst movies ever made. the real horror in this film is how bad it is. i'm embarrassed i rented it and vow never to see another Lommel film again!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f3de83f9bd0a4ff4bf9552b1eebcc52a",
            "input": "Four best friends young male chauvinist pigs (with the emphasis on pigs) meet weekly at a NYC diner to recount their dating sexploits in this misanthropic and visceral comedy. Peet is the common denominator who dates the three bachelors in the group which leads to conflict and the inevitable \"whipping\". Although the film's premise has potential and there are some funny moments to be had, overall the flick doesn't work especially in the end where the girls are made to appear no better than the guys which runs contrary to the crux of the story. One of those one-man band flix with a dozen producers, \"Whipped\" is likely to be enjoyed only by the kind of young males who think \"The Man Show\" is Emmy material.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a287e2017f74c7faa4d486efa736436",
            "input": "Geordies...salt of the earth characters...bricklayers...beer...Geordies...happy go lucky...adventures working abroad...salt of the earth characters...warm wonderful people...Tyne Bridge (tear in the eye)...brown ale...salt of the earth characters...cute little Red Indians children in Newcastle United tops...emetic...Geordies...salt of the earth characters...etc etc etc....Please. This is so poor. And you should know better Timothy Spall. They can't have paid you that much.As for Jimmy Nail. Well the kindest thing that can be said is that he is every bit as good an 'actor' as he is a singer and writer. Come on Jimmy, the joke's over. 'Crocodile Shoes' and 'Spender' were very funny, unfortunately I don't think they were supposed to be. With 'Auf Wiedersehen Pet' the opposite applies.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8131a7873b7c4755a2d23f07b5f89e63",
            "input": "A cannibalistic backwoods killer is on the prowl and two bickering couples might be his next source of protein in this bargain basement Friday the 13th-clone cheapie. There s literally nothing of interest to see in this one, the killings are surprisingly sparse and when they do happen, completely amateurish. It also adds ghosts into the mix for no reason what so ever. I felt drained after watching it as if my brain was liquefying and draining out my nose. And it remains without a doubt Donald Jones' worst movie. If you're thinking of renting it because of Code Red's snazzy new DVD re-release Don't botherMy Grade: F",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-74840a2bd47244ad874a7386e842ae95",
            "input": "I just saw a press screening of this film and I was pleasantly surprised. Not often is it that I get to see all of my favorite actors in one film at one time.I really enjoyed the pick pocket scene and it was good to see Rachael Bilson and Hayden back together. I think their chemistry on camera is a direct result of their time together off camera. My favorite scene was by far (surprisingly so) Bret Ratner's piece... Without giving too much away, I'll just say that there is a surprise that leaves you hanging...The old couple were really good together and you actually got the impression that they had spent a lifetime together. Both the Chris Cooper and the Ethan Hawke segments packed a punch with surprises that seem realistic and similar to experiences that I've had in the big apple. Over all the film is a great place to take a date... especially if you're already fond of the city itself.I can't wait for the next in the Cities of Love.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d41c7fc66be5495291b4d65bc398540d",
            "input": "Citizen X tells the real life drama of the search for a serial killer dubbed \"The Rostov Ripper\" This great film shows the long journey it took to try to apprehend a killer. The film shows how politics may haver helped the killer to continue his rampage for over 12 years. (Possibly over 50 victims, mostly women and children) The performances of Stephen Rea as the lead detective and Donald Sutherland as the overall investigation lead was superb. Jeffrey DeMunn as the Ripper Andrei Romanovich Chikatilo. This is the type of film which will mesmerize you and immediately have you on the internet researching the real case. This a film not to be missed. It debuted I believe on HBO and never did get a theatrical release to my understanding. Great film",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38419d8d03fb4f33974c29ba94ecf85f",
            "input": "I'm among millions who consider themselves Cary Grant fans, but I can't think of a single reason to recommend this movie.I don't understand the casting of Betsy Drake and it appears no one else did,if we're to judge from the small number of films in which she played afterwards.Most fans will agree that Katharine Hepburn was superb at chasing and catching Cary Grant in Bringing Up Baby.Here the director or writers try to rehash the idea,but it fails miserably.I've read comments about how \"creepy\" Drake was,but I thought that was far too mild a description. Franchot Tone walked through this one as if he were hungover.A casting disaster is one thing.This film is a total disaster.This one doesn't deserve 10 lines of comments and I don't know why that's a requirement.Too bad this one was preserved when so many worthwhile films lie rotting in vaults.Unless you want to torture someone,give this one a wide berth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f85a608e8e1a462b8e1a045bc7b0156c",
            "input": "Featuring a fascinating performance by Will Smith and a story that tugs at your heartstrings harder than a rock guitarist mid-solo, \"Seven Pounds\" races past the director's previous collaboration with the actor (The Pursuit of Happiness), a flick which I also loved. Remember Gabriele Muccino's name because some of his movies may skip by unnoticed if the actor attached to the project isn't quite so high-profile. Too bad I figured out Will Smith's scheme early on, I put two and two together when he calls in his own suicide in the first scene and the scene when Rosario Dawson's character is introduced as having an incurable heart-disease.However, I still think the writer/director made the right choice putting the bookends (bookends are the first and the last scene) in that way, it's the source of urgency and tension in the movie, finding out gradually how exactly a man can be driven to that ultimate sacrifice, and it was heartbreaking to see the relationship between Smith's and Dawson's character flourish and develop, knowing in the back of the mind always what was in store for these unlucky two.One of my friends with whom I saw the movie thought Smith's character could have a divine gift, and I understand why: his performance is almost angelic when in the presence of his seven elected ones, yet at other times he could be harsh and scary, and when he's alone the full weight of his situation got too much for him and he breaks down completely. It's quite a versatile performance.Lastly I can't forget to mention the crash scene re-enactment, which was really quite stunningly done in terms of cinematography paired with music. Put this on your list.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d595cfa1bf414b40b62d94ed1d92ad39",
            "input": "Probably one of the prime examples of following a suspenseful, dramatic episode (in this case, the superb Balance of Terror) with a lighter affair, Shore Leave is the first true attempt on behalf of the Star Trek writers to produce a more entertaining piece of sci-fi, and while the formula isn't quite right yet in this entry (the true triumph is Trouble with Tribbles, in Season 2), the laughs come pretty fast as long as the viewer is willing to allow for all the silliness.Diverting from the show's tradition, the Enterprise isn't on any proper mission in this episode. Instead, Kirk has found a perfect planet for his crew to spend some time off duty: a well deserved break after three months of incessant work. The Earth-like planet (a budget-related fact) is very appealing, but it only takes a few minutes before something weird happens: Dr. McCoy starts having visions of a white rabbit that seems to come straight out of Lewis Carroll's work. Soon, other people begin experiencing similar things: a woman meets a Don Juan-like character, Sulu has a run-in with a samurai, and Kirk faces a double encounter with the past, in the shape of almost love and the guy who used to pick on him at the Academy. Throw in a freakishly real-looking tiger, and it's easy to see why Kirk and Spock are determined to figure out what's going on before anybody gets hurt.The idea is a classic one: idyllic place turns out to be far from heavenly. The episode's humorous take on the topic is rather successful, weren't it for a dark turn of events that doesn't sit well with the rest (of course, everything works out fine again come the end) and the cast's general unwillingness to show a funnier side of themselves (most notably, and ironically, the otherwise hilarious William Shatner). And yet Shore Leave deserves recognition for being another good example of the writers trying new, previously unseen things: the definition of Star Trek's success.7,5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-221d4f4669574a50bfc0bb878f9e665c",
            "input": "108: Tarzan and His Mate (1934) - released 4/20/1934, viewed 8/6/08.John Dillinger escapes from prison and robs a bank in Iowa. Bonnie & Clyde kill two highway patrolman in Texas. BIRTHS: Ralph Nader, Gloria Steinem, Alan Arkin, Richard Chamberlain.DOUG: After we were rather disappointed with the original 'Tarzan the Ape Man,' we discovered among fellow users and historians that the second film, 'Tarzan and his Mate,' was the best in the series. It's true. I got a huge kick out of this movie. Johnny Weismuller returns as the titular vine-swinging, animal dueling wild super-hero, and Maureen O'Sullivan reprises her role as his entirely fantastic lady love Jane (who sports a two-piece outfit for the first and last time here). In my review for 'Ape Man,' I stomped on Jane pretty good for her obsession with clothes and her incessant screaming, but she's redeemed herself for me here. Make no mistake: O'Sullivan is the star of this movie, and Jane is the most capable character in the entire cast. She acts as the ambassador between Holt and Tarzan, she can function perfectly in the jungle and get along with the animals, and she knows how to hold off an angry pride of lions when she's out of bullets. She's even got her own jungle scream now. The chemistry between Johnny and Maureen is irresistible. She's totally got him trained. Cheeta is quite charming as well, taking drags off of Martin's cigarette. The plot is mostly an excuse for Tarzan to do battle with the jungle's most vicious animals, especially lions, crocodiles, and rhinos. The effects, though always visible, are much more dynamic and cool and complement the action nicely. Oh, and you can't talk about this movie without talking about the nude swimming scene. All I can say is: yes, she is naked. Very exciting stuff.KEVIN: Wow. Just wow. When it comes to down-and-dirty pre-code action/adventure, nothing holds a candle to 'Tarzan and His Mate.' The inevitable sequel to Tarzan the Ape Man is a kick-ass, violent and risqué jungle epic. I doubt there will be another Tarzan movie in the future that takes no prisoners the way this one does. You'd be hard pressed to find a full scene in this movie that would be Code-approved, or Animal Rights-approved for that matter. The gruesome violence doesn't even wait for the happy jungle couple to show up before it pushes even the limits of today's adventure movies. And after T&J enter the picture, there's plenty of early morning cuddling and ass-naked afternoon swims. See it for yourself if you don't believe me. I love Maureen O'Sullivan most of all in this film. In the first film, Jane seemed like a walking contradiction, like the writers back then just didn't know how to portray a character like that. But here she is a great precursor to kick-butt females of later cinema. Although she still requires Tarzan's assistance in getting her out of most jams, she does a lot more than just waiting around to be rescued. Her personality is perfectly believable for a woman who has been living (relatively) comfortably in the jungle for a year. I watched this with my Mom, and I enjoyed pointing out to her just how much Jane has Tarzan \"trained,\" as Jeff Foxworthy put it. She totally has the ape man at her every beck and call. Although there is a host of dated optical effects throughout the film, there is still plenty of hair-raising Tarzan vs. predator battles that are performed (mostly) for real. That and the men-dressed-as-apes are a lot more convincing this time around. **SPOILER** The film climaxes as the jungle erupts with a shocking orgy of animal kingdom violence that leaves Tarzan and Jane the only two humans still breathing. Although the couple rides off into the sunset reunited and victorious, I can't help but imagine how this story will seem to the next safari who will hear about the previous bunch of humans who went to find Tarzan and Jane and were never heard from again. **END SPOILER** One of things that still bothers me is Johnny Weissmuller's smooth, hairless bod and over-styled coif. Other than that, this is pre-Code action-adventure that is absolutely not to be missed.Last film: It Happened One Night (1934). Next film: Twentieth Century (1934).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4956468d2b8640aab7209580ea7587a7",
            "input": "Many of the American people would say...What??? to my opening comment. Yes I know that my comparison is without doubts an insult for the fans of the Master Akira Kurosawa, but if you analyze this movie, my comment is right. We have the peasant who goes to the town searching for help against a band of grasshoppers who wants to steal the harvest of the village. The great difference is the way that the story takes. Our samurais, a band of circus performers as in the original are a very complex mixture of personalities but at the end are what the village needs, HEROES. Please watch again this incredible movie (the Seven Samurai, obviously) and find another movies who has stolen the story and tried to get the same magic effect than the Masterpiece of Akira Kurosawa. A tip is The 13th Warrior with Antonio Banderas, Michael Crichton copied the story to wrote his Best seller's, but he didn't found the third foot of the cat.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1e23d28a8df47e0a8c907f08939be0f",
            "input": "I really wanted to like this movie, but it was just imposable. The acting was ultra hammy, the plot was annoying, and the pace was SLOW, sooo slowwwwww. The whole time sitting in the theater i wanted the movie to end. Twenty minuets into a films and I'm praying for an ending. Sure some of the visuals were nice, but c'mon guys, I mean really! And for a movie about a guy tuning magical instruments there really wasn't much music to speak of. The music there was was annoying, and boring. There were sound loud shrill sounds at times too, those were also annoying. Mainly this film managed to bore me, and creep me out at the same time.I'm glad its over. I need to go see \"Tideland\" and wash this bad taste out of my mouth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bdbb96d40999434680c73aacff1581e3",
            "input": "Since the advent of literature, people of all nationalities have been fascinated and easily touched by accounts of unhappy love. Even more fascinating have always been the tales of impossible love, love that cannot be. The Israeli filmmaker Eytan Fox' latest film „The Bubble\" is about that. And then it is also not. The title of the film refers to the „bubble\" that is Tel-Aviv set against the background of the political realities of Israel. The country's cosmopolitan and unofficial capital city doesn't have much in common with Nablus, a city in the Palestinian West Bank which also features in the film. It doesn't have much in common with the tense and hateful atmosphere at the Palestinian checkpoints. Actually, it doesn't seem to have much in common with anything surrounding it. The „bubble\" of Tel-Aviv allows people to have a lifestyle which isn't much different from what you may expect in any Western city. Teenage girls looking for Britney Spears' records, a lifestyle magazine editor looking for a sexy cover for his next issue, trendy people sitting in trendy cafes discussing trendy things over cups of cappuccino and other similarly trendy drinks, while those at home are watching the local edition of Pop Idol. It is this „bubble\" that also has the potential to lull one's mind into a false sense of reality.The film evolves around the lives of three young Israelis who share a flat and, for the most part, try to stay out of politics. Yelli, the camp owner and manager of „Orna & Ella\", a hip cafe, rarely leaves the city and prefers not to think about the „crap that surrounds them\". Noam, a soft and easygoing employee of a slightly avantguard record store, seems to be equally unwilling to engage in long political discussions and contemplations. Lulu, the only female of the lot, is on the contrary linked to the Israeli Left, although her political activities seem to be confined to „raves against the occupation\". Yelli and Noam naturally don't object to participating in these. Lulu and her political friends make t-shirts with the rave's logo, put up posters and hand out booklets advertising it in the neighbourhood. Their main concern seems to be that there are never any actual Palestinians participating and that the police might come and spoil all the fun for them again. The closest they come to an actual confrontation is when they get into a scuffle with some not so Palestinian-friendly locals who try to prevent them from handing out the leaflets. In other words, predictable products of the „bubble\".The opening scenes of the film take us to a checkpoint on a road to Nablus where we also find Noam doing his reserve duty. A group of Palestinians is being thoroughly checked before entering Israel, among them a pregnant woman who suddenly goes into labour and gives birth to a stillborn child despite the best efforts from Noam and the doctor who eventually arrives in an ambulance. The woman is comforted by a young man who later turns up on Noam's doorstep in Tel-Aviv with his ID which the latter obviously dropped during the ordeal on the border. His name is Ashraf, he's Palestinian and he's gay. And he hasn't just come to hand back the ID, he has come to see Noam. Without a permit to live in Israel and despite the initial hesitation from Noam's flatmates he stays. He soon gets a Jewish name and a job at Yelli's cafe. Having grown up in Jerusalem with Hebrew, he doesn't have an Arabic accent which makes it possible for him and his newly found friends to conceal his identity. The sky is light blue and the air is sweet. But it cannot last. For he has become part of an equation which was never meant to be.At one point, Noam and Ashraf watch a play called Bent about two prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp who have a love relationship which can never become physical or visible to the surrounding guards. They find a way of being together on another level, a metaphysical one, a level where no one else has access. This is also where our couple arrives in the end. And it couldn't have been much different for them, not in today's Israel.„The Bubble\" is a political statement about the bubble that bursts when confronted with the political realities of today's Israel set against the background of a beautiful and awkward love story involving an Israeli and a Palestinian, the impossible love story in a divided world where no such things as compromise or other colours than black and white exist. „The Bubble\" is also a beautiful film about people, gay and straight, inhabiting that strange city, Tel-Aviv, shown through the eyes of people who really care about them. The film's premise may have its flaws and the fatal chain of events may seem somewhat construed, but its strong message and emotional impact will not leave you untouched.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f2ff100a24545bdbbe19085bb150c52",
            "input": "The H.G. Wells Classic has had several Incarnations. The 05' Speilburg Version and the classic 53' version But only this one stays completely true to the book. Nothing is changed nothing is removed.Originally Released as a 3-hour film. The director Re-Cut the film down to 2-hours of pure excellence. Its got a chapter by chapter visualization of the novels pages that \"Wells would be Proud Of\" The story is as everyone remembers. Martians Invade the Earth with Capsules containing an army of Tripod walking War Machines. The people of 19th century earth are ill-prepared to repel the alien forces and fight back with canons and guns who mes shells bound right off the Walkers and when humanity is no longer a world wide power they are saved by the smallest of organisms on earth.The Film is an excellent accomplishment for director Timothy Hines who has great potential as he brought this vision to life with a meager 5 Million budget. Today B-Movies have larger budgets.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b261da4fcb0743a8b9c0aa52f2bbe33c",
            "input": "This is a feel good film, about one person's dreams and the drive or push to realize them. It is a beautiful and inspirational film. Why do some people have to try and find fault with every film that comes out, especially the good ones. Dennis Quaid gives a good solid performance in this true story of Jim Morris, a science teacher and high school baseball coach who is pushed by his team to take one more shot at a professional baseball career. With excellent supporting cast, including Brian Cox, as the crusty old ex navy officer who has let so much of his son's achievements go by without his support. It was good to see him as something other than a villain in a film. If I have one complaint with this film it is this: Don't ever let Royce Applegate sign the national anthem again. Seriously, this film belongs to that handful of great baseball films like \"Field of Dreams\" and \"The Natural.\" It rates two thumbs up and a big \"well done.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-904595bc40f949cda9ff0a44d9717277",
            "input": "Friz Freleng's 'Speedy Gonzalez' was the second cartoon to feature the title character after Robert McKimson's 'Cat-tails for Two'. In that cartoon, Speedy has been an ugly little creature with a big gold tooth but by his second appearance the famous design had already been adopted. Despite looking significantly more handsome, Speedy never developed into much of a character. A big hat, tremendous speed and a bad Mexican accent do not a classic character make and that's pretty much all Speedy ever had going for him. Nevertheless, the cocky little mouse proved enormously popular and went on to star in many shorts including some truly abysmal films from the studio's latter days. While these early Speedy shorts are better than those later atrocities in which he was frequently (rather oddly) paired up with Daffy Duck, they still leave much to be desired, relying on predictable gags usually based around a similar chase formula. In this self-titled episode, Speedy is recruited by some other mice to steal cheese for them from the local factory which happens to be guarded by Sylvester the cat. Although he brings the extra weight of a star turn to the cartoon, Sylvester's role here could just as easily been filled by any other generic cartoon cat. His personality is sapped by his being forced into the predictable. undemanding role of pursuer. This was always a problem in the Tweety cartoons too but Speedy makes an even duller adversary thanks to his detestable cockiness and the blatant impossibility of his capture. Poor old Sylvester would be forced to appear alongside Speedy for many years to come. Despite it following a pretty basic formula and featuring minimal laughs, 'Speedy Gonzalez' won an Oscar and a thoroughly undeserving star was born.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10b08073c798498fb99ffb37d2669ae7",
            "input": "I almost made a fool of myself when I was going to start this review by saying \" This movie reminded me of BILLY ELLIOT \" but then I looked up the resume of screenwriter Lee Hall only to find out that he was the guy who wrote BILLY ELLIOT so it's Mr Hall who's making a fool of himself not me Am I being a bit cruel on him ? No because Lee has something most other aspiring screenwriters from Britain don't have - He has his foot in the door , he has previously written a successful British movie that won awards and made money at the box office and what does he do next ? He gives the audience more of the same Young Jimmy Spud lives on some kitchen sink estate . He is bullied at school and no one loves him . The only thing keeping him going is that he has aspirations to be a ballet dancer . No actually he has aspirations to be an angel but considering his household he may as well be a ballet dancer . He has a macho waster of a father who thinks \" Ballet dancers are a bunch of poofs while his granddad says \" Ballet dancers are as tough as any man you could meet . I remember seeing the Bolshoi ballet ... \" Yup Ballet is a main talking point on a run down British council estate those days - NOT . Come to think of it neither is left wing politics which seems to be the sole preserve of middle class do gooders who live in nice big houses , so right away everything about this set up feels ridiculously false Another major criticism is that this is a film that has no clue who it's trying to appeal to . I have often criticised Channel 4 for broadcasting movies at totally inappropriate times ( THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT at 6 am for example ) but they showed this at 2 am and for once they've got it spot on . Considering the story involves politics , ballet dancing ( Gawd I hate it ) lung cancer and poverty there's no way this can be deemed suitable for a family audience but since the main protagonist is an 11 year old child and features angels and ballet dancers ( Don't blame me if I seem obsessed with the subject - there was no need to refer to them ) there's not much here for an intelligent adult audience either . Of course if Lee Hall had been told at the script development stage by the producers that he should write a story featuring a schoolboy and an angel and had flatly refused saying that he wanted to write about other themes and stories then I will apologise but throughout the movie you do get the feeling that once the film was completed it was going to be marketed to the exact same audience who enjoyed BILLY ELLIOT",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47a551a86b3b4080af67e76004a0ab36",
            "input": "Twenty years ago, the five years old boy Michael Hawthorne witnessed his father killing his mother with an axe in an empty road and committing suicide later. On the present days, Michael (Gordon Currie) invites his girlfriend Peg (Stacy Grant) and his best friends Chris (Myc Agnew), Jennifer (Emmanuelle Vaugier), Lisa Ann (Kelly Benson), Ned (Brendon Beiser), Mitch Maldive (Phillip Rhys) and Trish (Rachel Hayward) to spend the Halloween in the country with his grandparents in their farm. He asks his friends to wear costumes that would represent their greatest innermost fear, and together with his Indian friend Crow (Byron Chief Moon), they would perform an ancient Indian celebration using the carved wooden dummy Morty (Jon Fedele) that would eliminate their fears forever. The greatest fear of Michael is to become a serial killer like his father, but something goes wrong and Morty turns into his father, killing his friends.\"The Fear: Resurrection\" is a disappointing and pointless slash movie that uses the interesting concept of eliminating the greatest innermost fear of each friend before it grows, but in a messy screenplay full of clichés. There are some exaggerated performances, like for example Ms. Betsy Palmer; others very weak, but in general the acting is good. Unfortunately there is no explanation why the dummy is brought to live; further, in spite of being surrounded by close friends, the group does not feel pain or sorrow when each one of them dies. The low-pace along more than fifty minutes could have been used to built a better dramatic situation. In the very end, Michael shows a charm that his father was interested that I have not noticed along the story. I do not know whether the previous reference was edited in the DVD released in Brazil with 87 minutes running time. The special effects are very reasonable for a B-movie. My vote is four.Title (Brazil): \"Fear 2: Uma Noite de Halloween\" (\"Fear 2: One Night of Halloween\")",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8514da4c5cf842518205ddc20f0c143b",
            "input": "I thought this had the right blend of character, plot, futuristic stuff and special effects without going over board. It will take a while to get going, but the acting was good and I was intrigued by the angel who is not to hard to look at. I like the attitude too! Certainly not like other attempts at futuristic stories.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13780a7da7a34c7698f24f45efbf259a",
            "input": "Nine minutes of psychedelic, pulsating, often symmetric abstract images, are enough to drive anyone crazy. I did spot a full-frame eye at the start, and later some birds silhouetted against other colors. It was just not my cup of tea. It's about 8½ minutes too long.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-341aabb672254fd38955bff29849fb25",
            "input": "Kudos to Fawcett to taking on roles that, at the time were considered controversial. To my recollection, rape was still a taboo subject in the 1980's, and women's rights and emotions were rarely so deeply examined during that time.Fawcett is simply a woman who is followed, then stalked by actor James Russo. He is adequate as the obsessed psychopath, but at times a bit transparent.Diana Scarwid has a bit role, as does Alfre Woodard as the house mate. Woodard worries about the legal consequences when Fawcett, the rape victim, takes revenge on the culprit. The scene where she throws a frying pan of hot oil at Russo is classic, and as the rapist he deserves it. She then keeps him in bondage, and the consequences must be faced.A very real story reflecting the emotions and rage of rape victims who have been violated, physically, and mentally. Highly recommended. 8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3542973eb6234a6f82d978b8fd04741c",
            "input": "This is movie is very touching. I don't care what people say about this movie, this is a very good movie. The performances by Amitabh Bachchan's role has the dying father is great, because he wants to teach his son how to handle life in case something happens to him and Akshay Kumer was great in his role as the spoiled Aditya Thakur. The supporting role of Shefali Shetty who played the role of Sumitra Thakur was magnificent. Priyanka Chopra was good in her small role she had in the movie. Ragpal Yadav as the brain-dead servant and Boman Irani as the show-off father-in law have a very good connection and the comedy scene's were hilarious. The direction is very good.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7bf39d6693874e1f9dcaf78faea3b0be",
            "input": "I went to go see this at the Esquire Theatre in Cincy, OH, and - I hate my life now.Christopher Reeves would have been a more believable boxer.As a film it was painful, but seeing Bret Carr in person was to see desperation at its pinnacle.My favorite part of the movie was seeing BC slammed in the face with what appeared to be a \"C\" battery. The jury is still out on this. It was from a dildo and it was in slow-mo. Yep.\"Shoot the left side of the face only...people become famous by demanding things!\" - Bret Carr B. Carr donned a Chicken Suit for a bit of reverse psychology, roaming the streets of Clifton bashing his own film. He should. This is correct to bash the film.My soul felt chafed after this movie.Bret Carr is not charismatic enough to be the leader of a cult, or smart enough for that matter. That is the feeling you get from the What the Bleepesque trickle of brainwashed, impressionable neo-yuppies that came to see this Bret Carr Piece of Work.It's an emotionally draining experience just thinking about writing about this film, so goodbye.-Anonymous",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d69e27fe66064aa28ef80a1ae88000bc",
            "input": "Maslin Beach is a real nudist/naturist beach south of Adelaide, on the Fleurieu Peninsula, in South Australia. It is also the name of an Australian film that used the beach as a location.Maslin Beach is labelled a romantic comedy. This could be slightly misleading, as it is not a 'hilarious' film, nor is it really romantic in the traditional sense, but it does have light-hearted moments. Much as life itself, there are also moments of sadness too. It is also entirely shot at the nudist beach mentioned above, and nudity runs throughout the length of film. The viewer quickly learns to accept this as normal, and concentrate on the plot, not the copious amount of flesh.Simon and Marcie (Michael Allen and Eliza Lovell) arrive by car at a beach-side car park. They take their belongings to the beach, and while they are walking, a voice-over from Simon talks about his confusion about what real love is. The rest of the film is an exploration of this, framed by one complete day at the beach. The basic story is of what happens to Simon's love life, but there are also many other characters highlighted in several separate vignettes.When they arrive at the beach, both Simon and Marcie appear bored with each other. Marcie sees them as a 'Romeo and Juliet' romantic couple. Simon is just bored with it all. Next, we are introduced to Gail (Bonnie-Jaye Lawrence), Paula (Zara Collins) and Jenny (Jennifer Ross). They are walking down the beach together discussing Gail's chances of finding the 'perfect' man, aided by the 'powers' of a necklace that brought good luck to her Grandmother. However, there are many more interesting people on the beach, not all of them 'attractive' and young (part of the realism of this film).To service the beach's patrons there is a flatulent, short-sighted ice-cream salesperson with a van. This is Ben (Gary Waddell), who is a friend of Simon, and is also his unofficial counsellor. I would think that this character is the main comic element. It is hard to say though, as there is nothing about Ben that would make you laugh aloud, unless you were intoxicated, male and very young! Maslin Beach does have a major redeeming feature though, and that is that it does not dwell too long on any one subject. As the quality of acting is variable, the script is suspect and everything about Maslin Beach is cheap, the lack of continuity is a positive boon. In fact, there is something about this film (not the nudity) that I find appealing. It is hard to define what it is, but it could be something to do with its bluntness, and downright 'Aussie' attitude to carnal matters.The camera work in Maslin Beach deserves a mention. Sometimes it is very good, with some stunning static shots and 'pans' of the beach, cliffs and a sunset. As nudity is a major factor in this film, framing is an important aspect of the camera work. There is no sense of gratuity in the framing, meaning that the framing is done so that the camera does not dwell on 'private' body parts. This helps to ease any sense of viewer discomfort from being within the subject's 'personal space', and makes the film more tasteful. Not an easy task, given the location for filming.Maslin Beach is neither a 'skin flick' for post-pubescent, testosterone charged males, nor a 'Mills and Boon' romance for under-appreciated women. Maslin Beach does not seem to fit anywhere in genre. The actors are not 'attractive' in the Baywatch sense, and are just 'normal' people that you would see on the beach anywhere. It does not have a message to put across and it would not even act as a tourism advertisement, other than perhaps to Naturists. Apart from the Australian accent, the filming could have been in any sunny country. What makes this film distinctly Australian is the fact that it is pointless (cinema verite?), and only Australian Cinema, and other medium sized National Cinemas, could consider such a rash option. At the same time, these medium sized cinemas have room for experimentation in the quest for identity, and a 'flop' is not going to damage their reputation too much. It is always possible, given that Maslin Beach is now a collector's item, that the film might become internationally popular, but it is very unlikely.During this critique, I have been sounding highly negative, at times, about Maslin Beach. This is not the real position, as I found the film very easy to watch. I enjoyed it as a reflection of near reality and real people (and problems). The problems confronted in the film are those of the everyday, and a little low on spectacle. This does it no harm in my view, and I wish that more films dealt with the everyday like this. There is a connection here with the cinemas of Europe, and with French film in particular. They rarely deal with major disasters or catastrophes, but with the everyday. Hollywood is in direct opposition to this, and rides the crest of the hyper-real action/drama/angst wave. The pace too, is much faster in Hollywood, but it is not reality. Maslin Beach is not exactly 'Jacques Tati' either, but it is on the right track, even if it does ignore issues of multi culturalism, equality, gender orientation and so on, that are of such importance in current cinema. I am sure that you will either love or hate this film, with little room for a middle ground.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-680d614fb000443ea045aa19c0e8a989",
            "input": "In order to stop her homosexual friend Albert (Perry King) from being deported back to Belgium, Stella (Meg Foster) decides to marry him. The only other problem with that is that Stella herself is a lesbian. The two have their separate lives when one night after Albert's birthday party, they fall into bed and then into love. Later in the film after falling in love, Stella suspects Albert of cheating and shows up at his job one night late after closing. What she finds will leave the viewer stunned. This is a great film, very original. Perry King and Meg Foster are so good in their roles that it is amazing that they were not better recognized for their work here. Very controversial upon its release in 1978, the \"R\" rated film is now \"PG\" in this much more liberal time.Recently released on DVD, the disc contains a \"Making Of\" segment on the special features and in it it's stated that the film was based on an actual story so the viewers who say the film is not \"real\" are mistaken. Everyone is an individual and different people fall in love for different reasons-these are the issues explored in this wonderful film for everyone who has ever loved!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-346897ce205745b0bfd2631fa06c0aa4",
            "input": "What an appalling piece of rubbish!!! Who ARE all these people who blubber on about how good this is? Yes, it's \"arty\"; and yes, it's \"foreign\", but .... that's not enough. The plot is boring and disjointed, like a reality show but not so slickly made.The people are intrinsically uninteresting; but as characters they don't have enough depth to feel empathy for them. If they are based on real people then I feel very, very sorry for them.The violence (and some of it is very violent) seems quite ostentatious and gratuitous. It's like the producer has visions of being Quenton Tarantino. Not that I think very much of him, either.And oh yes: if I had neighbours like these, I'd move!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf491ae0e47047a48ee3258e6208a2d6",
            "input": "... but I enjoyed this show anyway. I've been reading some of the comments prior reviewers have had to say about this show, and I'm having a hard time completely nullifying all the criticism in my own head (except one: that the show was stale; this program was ANYTHING but stale). A lot of the stuff people take issue with about this show is on the money: pretentious; forced; overwrought; desperate for attention; self-satisfied; annoying ever-present narration. But you know what? I really liked it. It was different, it was original, it really, really TRIED; and that made up for all the minuses. The show was bright, verbal, quick, witty, interesting, fun to look at ... you know, it was only on once a week, I could take it once a week and look forward to it and enjoy it. I will mourn its passing. But I guess nobody will be bringing this back to life.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9c8e5c4ec73442eb17415fe8188286e",
            "input": "Cliché-ridden story of an impending divorce - or is it? - through the eyes of a 6 year-old child. Corny dialogue, cardboard characters, stock situations, a red herring zombie sub-plot and, worst of all, absolutely no payoff, either emotionally or dramatically.Does no-one teach creative writing any more? The true sign of a weak storyteller - when you cannot create any kind of satisfying denouement - just end the story. I'm compelled to ask, \"what made you think this was a story worth telling in the first place!?\" Good, but wasted, debut by child actor Anthony De Marco - the rest of the cast was, at best, forgettable. And they wonder why no-one watches indie films! This is ninety minutes of my life I will never get back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5691973897404d49b95ac6ed46fa5f58",
            "input": "Have you seen The Graduate? It was hailed as the movie of its generation. But A River Runs Through It is the story about all generations. Long before Dustin Hoffman's character got all wrapped up in the traps of modern suburbia, Norman Maclean and his brother Paul were facing the same crushing pressures of growing up as they tried to find their place in the world. But how could a place like post WW1 Montana be a showcase for the American family, at a time when the Wild West still was not completely gone? Just what has Maclean tapped into that strikes so deeply at who we all are and what we have to go through to find ourselves? As the movie opens, Norman is an old man, flyfishing beside a rushing river, trying to understand the course his own life has taken. The movie is literally a journey up through his own stream of consciousness, against time's current and back to when he was a boy. He and his younger brother Paul were the sons of a Presbyterian minister and devoted mother. The parents fit snugly into their roles. Mom takes care of house and home. Dad does the work of the Lord. The boys ponder what they will be when they grow up. Norm has it narrowed down to a boxer or a minister like his dad. Given the choice, little Paul would be the boxer, since he's told his first choice of pro flyfisherman doesn't even exist. The boys grow up and get into trouble with their pranks, fight to see who is tougher and do the things brothers do, all the while attending church and taking part in all other spiritual matters like flyfishing. They are at similar points in their lives before college. But when Norm returns from his six years at Dartmouth, things are very different. Paul is at the top of his game. Master flyfisherman. Grad of a nearby college and newspaper reporter who knows every cop on the beat and every judge on the bench. Norman is stunningly well educated for his day but has little idea what to do with his life, even as his father grills him about what he intends to do. You're left feeling that at least to Pops, God will call you to your life's work. But you have to stay open and ready to receive it -- all your life. Father has always taken his boys to reflect by the side of the river and contemplate God's eternal words. \"Listen,\" their father urges. It's both Zen and Quakerly. Pretty radical for a stoic clergyman. But with all the beauty and contemplation, and even though the Macleans are truly a God-fearing, scripture-heeding household, how is it that Rev. Maclean's family is unraveling? Paul is true perfection as he fishes the river, but he's feeling the pull of gambling and boozing, while his family doesn't know how to keep him from winding up where he seems to be headed. Mom, Dad and Brother all seem to have the same quiet desperation of not knowing what they should be doing and why they can't seem to help. Pauly just waves it all off with a grin and his irresistible charm. But the junior brother is losing his grip. Norman starts getting his life on track, finding love and career, but Paul continues to slide. The family that loves him watches helplessly. Mother, Father, Brother flounder in their own ways trying to help, but none very effectively. How can a family that loves each other so much be so ill-equipped to handle this? How can someone be so artful and full of grace when out in God's nature, yet be somehow unfit or unwilling to fit into the constructs of society that God's peoples have made for themselves? These are all questions Norman will ponder his entire life. The eternal words beneath the smooth stones of the river forever haunt him, yet keep their secrets. The movie is beautiful to watch. This is certainly God's country, and filming it won an Oscar. Director Robert Redford plays with the story from the book and teases the narration a bit to follow the emotional pattern he's presenting, and it works well. But do go back and read the book, too. You'll see Norman made connections with his old man even deeper than the movie can suggest -- and you'll see the places where the storyteller's very words gurgle and sing right off the page with an exuberance of a river running through it, leading into the unknown.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18cb82f8563641eb97944490dd096435",
            "input": "This movie is a bad attempt to make original fans feel complete. The one thing people have forgotten is the fact that the reason the original won such acclaim, was strictly do to the fact that it was supposed to make you feel incomplete.This movie makes me want to go to the washroom. I am not a negative type of guy, but man the acting in this flick is.... no comment. The plot was a bad reflection of the life of Carlito Brigante and I am sorry to have had two hours of my time and my money wasted on this flick. I still love the original and will do my best not to let this movie ruin my opinion about it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-832da281053b4c278b8b9a124a2adc4f",
            "input": "Mother Night is one of my favorite novels and going to see this I was expecting a huge disappointment. Instead I got a film that perfectly portrays the irony, humor, elequence, and above all else the crushing sadness of Vonnegut's novel.This is certainly Nolte's best preformance to date. He captures the defeat and selfloathing of Howard Cambell Jr. consistently from the subtle intonations of his speech to the held back tears behind his eyes.Alan Arkin is absolutly hilarious as George Kraft. Sherryl Lee is haunting in her detachment from reality as Cambell's young lover. John Goodman is understated and more than effective as Cambell's \"Blue Fairy Godmother.\"This Pinnocioesque story of Cambell trying to be his own ideal hero and unwittingly becoming his ideal tragic villian is a mature and vivid look into what we are as people. And aside from that, it is one of the most deeply romantic films I have ever come across. Cambell is the incarnation of both foolish and wise love. And at the films sastifyingly painful conclusion, he finally learns what it means to be a real boy as his Blue Fairy Godmother grants him his wish. And he realizes that...well, watch the movie and you'll see.Mother Night is without a doubt in my mind one of the best films ever made. It is a beautiful poetic story that digs deep within our emotions and is completely faithful to its original author.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0386c01e9fd43e0ab3f44a88eb2fd7f",
            "input": "Another very good Mann flick thanks to the father/son combination of Walter Brennan and Jimmy Stewart. Brennan (Ben Tatum) is often the comedic conscience of either Stewart or Wayne (Red River/ Rio Bravo). He's there to see that the younger man takes the ride fork or bend. \"You're wrong Mr. Dunston\". Jeff Webster(Stewart) gives off the impression he cares only for himself but it is clear he cannot desert Brennan. John McIntire is excellent as the law of Skagway with due respect for the trappings of justice over the reality of it. Another key theme is helping people and in turn being helped by people. The loner can do neither and suffers for it.The caption above plays on Tatum's assertion that he can't live without his coffee. This nicotine addiction proves fatal. Probably the first and last time on the screen.I recommend this film and now own the DVD.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b56bce4b48a643daaa4c0cb775c5445a",
            "input": "The word \"1st\" in the title has more ominous meaning for the viewers of this film than for its crime victims. At least they don't have to stick around and watch this interminable film reach its own demise.1st should refer to: 1st draft of a script; 1st takes used in each performance in the final film; 1st edit in post production; etcetera, etcetera.The movie is not cast too badly, it's just that everything about the film come off as worse than third rate, from the goofy script, to the wooden performances. And while suffering through this cobbled together film, by the 2 hour mark you want to be put out of your misery. At 160 minutes long it is readily apparent that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.Going into details concerning the lame script and acting serves little purposes. Even in the equally awful, Lake Placid, at least the performances Bill Pullman and Bridget Fonda constructed out of an extremely weak script, were nuanced enough to make you laugh at the movie. In 1st to Die, one ends up grieving only for the time lost in waiting to see what happens after the opening scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.The editing is so bad one is never introduced to one of the main characters, who I think (were never quite told) is a D.A. She just appears in one scene in the middle of a conversation. Obviously the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was dropped on the editor's floor. And no one realized that a character appearing out of nowhere was an unusual film ploy.In a word, don't waste your time with this one. My wife and I wish we didn't. But at least we created our own diversions by commenting in various places in the film like it was Mystery Science Theater. \"Meanwhile, in Cleveland . . . .\" !!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9784f49311874ed19c700dde20070da8",
            "input": "This movie was the most horrible movie watching experience i have ever had to endure, and what is worse is the fact that i had to watch it, and didn't have the opportunity to stop it because it was for school! Admittedly, the storyline was decent...but i found the acting terrible! The exception was Marianne Jean-Baptiste, i thought her performance was wonderful. She was the only highlight, without her, i doubt i would have been able to bear watching the film. Every time i hear somebody say \"daarling\" i cringe! i nearly attacked a customer the other day because they said \"it\". It made me remember one of the worst one and a half hours of my life!(i apologise if this has offended anybody, i am only expressing my opinion)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01f15e23697f40c5b9e6d0ec17a0a49b",
            "input": "As a cinema fan White Noise was an utter disappointment, as a filmmaker the cinematography was pretty good, nicely lit, good camera work, reasonable direction. But as a film it just seamed as predictable as all the other 'so called' horror movies that the market has recently been flooded with. Although it did have a little bit of the 'chill factor' the whole concept of the E.V.O (Electronic Voice Phenomena) did'not seem believable. This movie did not explain the reasonings for certain occurrences but went ahead with them. The acting was far from mind blowing the main character portrayed no emotion, like many recent thriller/horror movies.Definitely not a movie I will be buying on DVD and would not recommend anyone rushes out to see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39e0ac4d9a4a45e9b7abfc1b1433f4c0",
            "input": "Well, maybe not immediately before the Rodney King riots, but even a few months before was timely enough. My parents said that they saw it and the next thing you know, the police got acquitted and LA got burned to the ground. It just goes to show the state of race relations in America. The plot has white Mack (Kevin Kline) and African-American Simon (Danny Glover) becoming friends after Simon saves Mack's life in the black ghetto. Meanwhile, movie producer Davis (Steve Martin in a serious role) thinks that gratuitous violence is really cool...until he gets shot. There's also some existentialism in the movie: Mack and his family come to realize that they aren't living as they really want.It seems that \"Crash\" has somewhat renewed people's interest in race relations, but this one came out much earlier. Maybe we'll never be able to have stable race relations in this country. But either way, \"Grand Canyon\" is a great movie. It affirms Kevin Kline as my favorite actor. Also starring Mary McDonnell, Mary-Louise Parker and Alfre Woodard.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f5ced2335a84461bc04819a2643589c",
            "input": "This movie was absolute torture. First of all, it's a whopping 4+ hours long! True, the Kargil war may have had several points that were captured and fought for, but every single one of those battles need not have been shown. So maybe this is a documentary, not a commercial film as advertised. Sure didn't seem like it, as enough background information was not given and there were some flaws. The battle sequences were so poorly executed. I am terribly disappointed from the man who gave well done sequences in Border. Each battle was the exact same as the previous. It was so predictable. (This might be a spoiler.) The whole army marches uphill, five or so soldiers curse five thousand times each (they also use the same cussword every time), one of the lead actors is shot, someone yells for a stretcher, the actor says, \"No, don't get a stretcher. That will take 6 men from the battalion,\" and then an actor dies. That exact same thing happens over and over and over again. Oh, and the songs are so bad and so long. The cast of the movie is too big for its own good. Despite such a long movie, none of the characters were well developed. The actresses had the most miniscule roles. They all are dressed and portrayed to be the same. Two of them were weeping synchronized. It was so comical. They moved their hands and heads at the exact same time and then bit their dupatta together.The list just goes on and on. I know I'm still forgetting something . Anyways, I think I have bashed the film enough that you get the picture.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e4469a92dee9435e91b4d1af1a7b4ba3",
            "input": "I've always liked Fred MacMurray, and—although her career was tragically cut short—I think Carole Lombard is fun to watch. Pair these two major and attractive stars together, add top supporting players like Jean Dixon, Anthony Quinn, Dorothy Lamour and Charles Butterworth, give them a romantic script, team them with noted director Mitchell Leisen and you get…a mediocre movie experience.Skid Johnson (Fred) and Maggie (Carole) \"meet cute\" during her visit to the Panama Canal, and spend the next few weeks falling in love. Skid's a great trumpeter, so he embarks on a musical career, which is predictably meteoric in both its rise and fall. During his climb to musical stardom, he neglects Maggie, who later inspires him to start over after he's hit rock bottom. Ah, yes…it's the true Hollywood happy ending, which comes none too soon.Stars and a director of this caliber should guarantee success, but this movie is so predictable and slow-paced that it's difficult to watch at times. The early scenes set in Panama are so draggy that they seem to go on forever, and later an alcoholic Skid just wanders endlessly in New York. Fred and Carole try their best, but the tired script and S-L-O-W direction just don't give them a chance. Even the final scene, in which Maggie encourages Skid to rise from the ashes of alcohol and disappointment, just doesn't ring true.This movie should be seen once to watch some early performances from stars MacMurray and Lombard. However, I guarantee that watching it will seem to take about 48 hours.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90a48f8b6bc8435e9d6e228b03d080df",
            "input": "When you go at an open air cinema under the Greek summer night you usually don't care what the movie is! Edison started really good with some good effort from the singers-who-want-to-be actors and a once again great Morgan Freeman but... (In a movie there is usually a good start to catch audience,done, a bit boring yet story filling middle of the movie that is more about characters and less about action ,done, and the third part is something really good so that you can remember the movie...) when you see 30 elite police officers (packed with weapons that can demolish a building) shoot at a guy behind a car, fail to hit him even once while he kills all (but 3) and then the guy takes out a flame thrower (to kill the rest 3) ,you realise that the Greek summer sky filled with stars is way too good to be distracted by a movie like this!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b06ce45e87b480baf0ddc4fd560c05e",
            "input": "Reading through all these positive reviews I find myself baffled. How is it that so many enjoyed what I consider to be a woefully bad adaptation of my second favourite Jane Austen novel? There are many problems with the film, already mentioned in a few reviews; simply put it is a hammed-up, over-acted, chintzy mess from opening credits to butchered ending.While many characters are mis-cast and neither Ewan McGregor nor Toni Collette puts in a performance that is worthy of them, the worst by far is Paltrow. I have very much enjoyed her performance in some roles, but here she is abominable - she is self-conscious, nasal, slouching and entirely disconnected from her characters and those around her. An extremely disappointing effort - though even a perfect Emma could not have saved this film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8595a8f5f152424589e58195abef3977",
            "input": "I agree with those reviews I have read here, and I have no words to define such a turkey like this, but despite everything, I still can find a reason for movies like this to exist. Do you remenber those happy days in which video was a prosperous business, and a lot of movies were made with the only reason of filling the shelves of the video stores? this movie comes from that period and I can imagine that was the only reason for which it was produced and the same happened with many, many, many other stinkers. Do you remember \"Rambo\" imitations? and so many slashers of Z grade?, I still feel nostalgia for that period.About this movie I can say I didn´t waste my time watching it because I pressed the fast forward button after the first fifteen minutes, just to find a very funny scene in which a guy was pushing an axe against heads which exploded because, as you perfectly notice, they were made of plastic. And about the end, well, it was so badly filmed I could not understand what happened. That´s the same, I had not followed the non-existing plot at all. But boy, Video-age was a great age despite movies like this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3f8f14932724bb08f60ae2a7dba0e5f",
            "input": "In terms of the arts, the 1970s were a very turbulent era. In literature and the visual arts, it was the closing of a great fifty or sixty year period of creativity that has yet to be restarted. In music it was a decade that many see as a low point, due to corporate rock and disco. On television it was a Golden Age for situation comedies, from The Odd Couple to the Mary Tyler Moore Show to M*A*S*H to All In The Family, but in film it was even a greater period of creativity, in all genres, that saw the rise of the American auteur- directors like Robert Altman, Francis Ford Coppola, and Martin Scorsese- from the ashes of the old studio systems that had dominated Hollywood for over half a century. These directors wanted to craft literate, arts films for the masses, of the sort that had been staples in Europe since the end of the Second World War. Yet, the studios were trying to keep pace, with socially aware films of the sort not seen since the 1930s.But, unlike the films of the 1930s, starring actors like Jimmy Cagney and John Garfield (usually co-starring the Dead End Kids), that dealt with social issues in a gritty realistic way, or as realistic as one could get on a sound stage, the social consciousness of the late 1960s and early 1970s manifested itself most in science fiction films, which allowed the Left Wing of Hollywood to preach to the masses under the guise of what most considered little above comic strip entertainment. There was precedent for this approach, for several of the flying saucer films of the 1950s dealt with the political zeitgeist of the McCarthy era- most notably The Day The Earth Stood Still and Invasion Of The Body Snatchers. And the early 1960s saw Rod Serling constantly subverting the political conservatism of the time by casting social issues into science fiction settings on his classic sci fi television anthology show The Twilight Zone. Among the studio offerings of this time were the ecologically sensitive Silent Running; George Lucas's first film THX 1138, which dealt with consumerism, group think, and existentialism; and Logan's Run, which hammered away at Communism and state control versus the rights of an individual. Some of the film's references are quite heavyhanded- and reek of the then current Arab oil crisis and rampant inflation. A few jarred strawberries cost $150, and Soylent rations its assorted colored foods- Soylent Yellow, Soylent Red, and the new Soylent Green, reputedly made from 'the finest undersea growth,' in a manner not unlike the gas rationing of the time. Scenes of food riots are eerie echoes of the oil riots at many gas stations during the year of the film's release, and the scenes of crowding, and bodies, live and dead, lying all about are still chilling, as well as influential. A later film like Escape From New York is an obvious progeny. The rest of the script, by Stanley R. Greenberg, however, is rather pedestrian, and fairly standard for a dystopian flick, but Fleischer and cinematographer Richard H. Kline do a great job of filling the screen with interesting images and sounds, to spice things up. The use of soft, dimly lit visuals, murkily filtered, add a Stygian feel to the New York of the film, almost like a colorized version of Carl Theodor Dreyer's Vampyr. The only light in the film comes from artificial sources, and were it not for the fashion faux pas the film could truly seem timeless.The end of the film, where Thorn sneaks into the processing plant where human corpses are made into Soylent Green wafers, is both chilling, and oddly drama-less. In the end, the Soylent minions hunt Thorn down, but he survives long enough to utter the film's catchphrase to Chief Hatcher. Yet, one does not know if it is enough, for Hatcher has already been co-opted, and has a track record of taking the easy way out. Yet, that fact, and its ambiguity, shows that the film does not recapitulate its characters' dilemmas, and has a depth many later, better made films, sci fi or not, do not have. It is also why Soylent Green is still a film worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e36de406349e4971ade4e77bf7704ccd",
            "input": "I watched this movie when I was almost quite a kid, and, naturally, was moved to tears by this story of a fox family. The fantastic scenery at Hokkaidô, the excellent storytelling and last not least the wonderful soundtrack provide a rare intimacy with the protagonists. I am still searching for some copy of the gorgeous soundtrack. To German viewers it might be useful to know that the DEFA-dubbing is the only one worth listening to. I taped both (DEFA and BR) but I keep viewing the first one only.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-400727e2cd00421ebf2d792d5441751f",
            "input": "This is the kind of movie that leaves you with one impression.. Story writing IS what movie making is about. Incredible visual effects.. Very good acting, especially from Shue. Everything is perfect.. Except.. The story is just poor and so, everything fails.Picture this, if you had the power to be invisible.. What would you do? Well, our mad scientist here (played by Kevin Bacon) could think of no other thing to do but fondle and rape women.. This is all his supposedly \"genius\" mind could think of. Does he try to gain extra power? No. He doesn't even bother research a way to get back to being visible. The guy is basically a sex crazed maniac.Add to that, the lab atmosphere, you have all these young guys.. Throwing around jokes like they were in a bar.. If it wasn't for all the white coats and equipment, you would think this is a bad imitation of \"Cheers.\" Very shallow and poor personalities and very little care is put into making you think these guys are anything but lambs for the Hollow Man's wolf.Even as a thriller, the movie falls way short because most of the \"thrilling\" scenes are written out so poorly and are full of illogical behaviors by the actors that are just screaming \"this is just a stupid thing I have to do so that the Hollow man can find me alone and kill me.\"If you read the actual book, while the Scientist (Cane) goes after women, there is a lot of mental manipulation and disturbing thought that goes into his character. In the movie, Cane is just the sick guy who goes to a crowded marketplace to rub his body in women and get off on it. Just sad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01b5977006774d168d3044cbcef3ee26",
            "input": "I suppose I always felt that Hotel du Nord was studio-bound, the movement of people cars and camera were just too effortlessly smooth and stagey to have been filmed on location. But no problem - it's still a much underrated lovely composition from Marcel Carne. The plot seems a bit choppy at times, as if they were making it up as they went along, but because it is unpredictable holds the attention to the bitter end. The money shots when the 2 lovers are alone in their room are saddled with some rather stilted dialogue, but it's all so lovely to fall into any inanity can be accepted. Are these 2 young people symbols of a cancerous hopelessness in pre-War France or simply idiots? Suicide pacts are fairly common; if the suicidees are young and healthy with their lives before them untrammelled would you think anything other than that they were just misguided fools?Arletty played the part of prostitute well - she kept that zipper on her dress busy throughout anyway! I've only seen a few films with Jouvet - he is the most impressive invention as pimp in HDN - my trouble is shallow: every time I see his face I think of Sonnie Hale in Evergreen!A remarkably atmospheric, well acted and photographed film with so much happening it needs a few viewings to get it all in place. Annabella and Aumont made an exceptionally beautiful couple; Francois (Heurtebise) Perier in his 2nd film had a small amusing part as a gay man. All in all: wonderful.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bfa56e8ab944e6389c3d66ba579ff14",
            "input": "This is one of those unique horror films that requires a much more mature understanding of the word 'horror' in order for it to be appreciated. The main thing people may fail to realize that this story is told through the point of view a little boy and, as with most younger children, he gets frightened easily. Mainly because he simply doesn't understand things, like why his father is hardly ever there for him. From watching the film you can see the husband arguing with his wife the balance between work time and family time and you can easily understand it, but the little boy doesn't. Also one can imagine the boy being afraid of the woods, as it is established early on in the film, that the family is from the city. Also, in the beginning as the family is traveling to the house they hit a deer, then get held up, then they argue with the locals about it, and the little boy surely didn't find this introduction to the woods pleasant at all.The \"Wendigo\" is ultimately what his young, innocent mind fabricates to explain all of this. There is the American Indian legend, but when looking at the scene where the young boy hears about about it, it is explained to him like bluntly and simplistically. Not because that's what the Wendigo actually is, but because that is how he understands it. When you look at the film from this point of view you can really begin to appreciate it. Obviously it was low-budget and shot cheaply, but the jumping montages, use of light, and general eeriness more than make up for it. And the final question the film asks is: is it all in your head, or is it really out there? 8/10Rated R: profanity, violence, and a sex scene",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc450ca29540407c89c22af493c1b1a5",
            "input": "Titanic has to be one of my all-time favorite movies. It has its problems (what movies don't) but still, it's enjoyable.When I stumble across someone who asks me why I like Titanic, I suppose my first reaction is \"wait a minute, you don't?\" I know so many people who don't like this movie, and I'm not saying I don't see why. \"The love story is too cheesy\" well, yes but isn't it enjoyable and moving? All right, the love story between Jack and Rose is very unrealistic, everyone knows that love like this doesn't actually exist. But this is a movie, doesn't everyone enjoy watching a beautiful story that lets us slip slightly into fantasy for a while? The next complaint, DiCaprio and Winslet are terrible actors. Well, OK, in this movie, I agree that they do not perform to their full potentials. However I think it's unfair to say that they are terrible actors. I personally think they are both very talented actors who unfortunately are very famous for a movie that they are not amazing in. But the roles they are given are simple, and the characters seem real enough that you can care about them quite a bit, but I agree with many people that they did not do as well as could have been expected.And finally, if one is going to complain that they don't like this movie because they hate romance, or because they hate history, or tragic movies, then I'm sorry but why on earth did they go and see a movie that is so clearly all of these things. It's like people who complain The Dark Knight is a bad movie because they hate action movies. Simply for being a movie, not because you dislike the genre, this IS a good movie.Well deserving of its Oscars, in particular, Best Cinematography, which I find to be the best I've ever seen in a movie save maybe the Lord of the Rings trilogy.I know some of the writing fails, such as the constant screaming of each other's names throughout the movie. The flashback portion of the story can be quite weak at times, but overall it's an amazing achievement in making the Titanic look so real, and the sinking feel so epic.I understand why a lot of people dislike this movie, but for the most part it boils down to them disliking the fundamental idea, such as it being a love story, rather than them thinking the movie in and of itself is poorly constructed.I can tell you that I have read more than five books about the Titanic, including memoirs form the day it happened, and this movie is extremely historically accurate save just a few faults. The only main ones I can find is that the piping should be threaded copper, not steel, and the iceberg looks fairly unrealistic as is the scene where they hit it.I give this movie 10/10, not because I like romance movies, but simply because it's an outstanding cinematic achievement, that leaves one feeling horrified by the realistic adaptation of events.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-147b61ba96ec498cb350eadf7e400ce7",
            "input": "I work with children from 0 – 6 years old and they all love the Doodlebops. The Doodlebops are energetic, vibrant and appealing. Once they start singing, ''We're the Doodlebops We're the Doodlebops We're the Doodlebops Oh yeah Come and join the fun because we're laughing and we're singing all day\" it is almost impossible not to join them in song. The Doodlebops brings the viewer into a world of color and fun. Each show is an adventure, the Doodlebops do not try to change the world with preachy messages all they do is have fun while sorting out everyday life challenges that the young child may relate to. The Doodlebops is an refreshing, high action alternative to regular children's television programs.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d9159de982b4235abc94585b0070aac",
            "input": "Went to Wal-Mart and found this film on DVD and had no idea whether I made a bad purchase or a good one. It is the later outcome to my viewing the entire film from beginning to end. Michelle Rodriquez,(Diana Guzman),\"BloodRayne\",'05, gave a great performance and her looks are beautiful, sexy, and at the same time a real study in the art of how acting is really performed. Diana did not like her home life and especially her own father for the abuse he gave her mother. She decides to get boxing training in a local Brooklyn Gym and is not really well accepted by the male boxers. In her high school there is plenty of friction between her female classmates and guys. There is lots of action in the ladies bathroom and references as to private parts of guys. If you like boxing, and seeing a hot sexy gal do wonders in the ring and knock the boys on their you Know What, this is the film for you.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f1316e017a54fa68edccdcf44819f2c",
            "input": "Beautifully filmed, well acted, tightly scripted suspense movie. Had me on the edge of my seat. I liked the lead actress very much, and thought the villain was very well done. Not much to chew on here in the way of a theme, but if you just get in your seat, turn your brain off, watch the fancy camera work, and enjoy the plot, you will have a great time. The plot is well worn, and regular movie goers will probably know more or less what to expect by about ten minutes in. But that didn't bother me, as I enjoyed watching it unfold. In the old days, they might not have focused so tightly on just two characters, and there were some enticing moments when I hoped they were going to let some other people have a few lines. But these folks were probably right to keep the movie so tightly focused. The plot got me by the throat fairly early on, and never let go. It's not a good idea to think too much either during or after the movie. as I'm not sure it makes a great deal of sense. Just sit back and enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-045aafd5041d496b849dd31daa16655a",
            "input": "Allison Dean's performance is what stands out in my mind watching this film. She balances out the melancholy tone of the film with an iridescent energy. I would like to see more of her.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e73f6278f6814b199a13d1f506a38c18",
            "input": "There are some good things about the movie. The music and cinematography is great. Alex Wilson is hot and gives a great performance. Ryan Bauer is also hot. The production was very lucky to have casted them because they really give production value to the movie. Jonny Vincent (Sean) and a lot of the boys in the movie that don't speak are cute too. Why isn't the actress who plays Amy listed in the credits? Brandon Alexander gives a great comedic performance as Clitarissa Pink.The worse thing about the movie is probably the star, James Townsend. He can't act. He's also very scrawny, not nice to look at at all. His arms are like spaghetti. It's disgusting. They have no muscle tone at all. It's no wonder he has to make his own movie and cast himself in it. No one else would cast him in anything.James Townsend is not believable as someone who would even have a girlfriend because he acts so gay. They should have casted someone else as the lead if they wanted what's best for the movie. Then again, maybe he just wants to use this movie as a vehicle to launch a career in soft-core porn, definitely not real acting because he would have taken some acting lessons. Plus, anyone who does porn is blacklisted in Hollywood.The most ridiculous thing about the movie is probably the casting of a tan-skinned Latina as Devon's mother. Sonja Fisher does not seem like an actress at all. All in all, this movie is soft-core porn and is no better than something you would see on Skinemax. I think even Alex Wilson, probably the best thing about this movie, is embarrassed by it and doesn't want to be associated with it. There is no photo on his IMDb page and nothing else listed, so Alex Wilson is probably a disposable stage name. Plus, I ran into him in West Hollywood one time recently and when I mentioned this movie, he just turned around and walked away. I understand. If I had worked on this movie, I would be embarrassed and wouldn't want to be associated with it either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-496598dfd4094f25b02520e92a033393",
            "input": "\"Dance, Fools, Dance\" is an early Crawford-Gable vehicle from 1931. Crawford plays a Bonnie Jordan, a wealthy young woman whose life consists of parties, booze, and stripping off her clothes to jump from a yacht and go swimming. This all ends when her father dies and leaves her and her brother (William Blakewell) penniless. Bonnie gets a job on a newspaper using the name Mary Smith; her brother goes to work for bootleggers. The head man is Jake Luva - portrayed by Clark Gable as he plays yet another crook. Later, of course, he would turn into a romantic hero, but in the early '30s, MGM used him as a bad guy. Not realizing that her brother is involved in illegal activity, Bonnie cozies up to Luva.Gable and Crawford made a great team. Her facial expressions are a little on the wild side, but that, along with her dancing, is one of the things that makes the movie fun. Look for Cliff Edwards, the voice of Jiminy Cricket, as Bert.It's always interesting to see the precode movies, and \"Dance, Fools, Dance\" is no exception.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13e36721118d4d54b0a064d206ef873a",
            "input": "\"Valentine\" is another horror movie to add to the stalk and slash movie list (think \"Halloween\", \"Friday the 13th\", \"Scream\", and \"I Know What You Did Last Summer\"). It certainly isn't as good as those movies that I have listed about, but it's better than most of the ripoffs that came out after the first \"Friday the 13th\" film. One of those films was the 1981 Canadian made \"My Bloody Valentine\", which I hated alot. \"Valentine\" is a better film than that one, but it's not saying much. The plot: a nerdy young boy is teased and pranked by a couple of his classmates at the beginning of the film. Then the film moves years later when those classmates are all grown up, then they're picked off one-by-one. The killer is presumed to be the young boy now all grown up looking for revenge. But is it him? Or could it be somebody else? \"Valentine\" has an attractive cast which includes Denise Richards, David Boreanaz, Marley Shelton, Jessica Capshaw, and Katherine Heigl. They do what they can with the material they've got, but a lackluster script doesn't really do them any justice. There are some scary moments throughout, however. ** (out of four)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d7b161db5f6459dbd801b0548d54b56",
            "input": "If my expectations weren't exceeded, they were certainly met. \"Nancy Drew\" works both as a mystery and a comedy. It pays homage to the books it was based on and spoofs them at the same time. The movie starts with a close-up on a book shelf and an animated credit sequence resembling illustrations from the books. It then begins lampooning the books immediately. Writer/director Andrew Fleming seems to realize the idea of a teenage girl regularly breaking up crime rings in a small town is ridiculous, so he doesn't treat the idea religiously. He pokes fun at Nancy Drew's ability to do anything, such as ace every class in school, know which baked treat is perfect for converting any enemy to her side, make a bird house with twelve flying buttresses, and even perform an emergency tracheotomy at a party. Nancy'd always be in perfect style, if she were living in the wholesome 1950's instead of present day L.A. And she carries around a \"sleuth kit\" complete with fingerprinting dust, flashlight, compass, and magnifying glass. Preposterous, of course, but I seem to remember the Hardy Boys' access at any given moment to CSI equipment being a little too convenient as well. And if the perky pipsqueak private eye is a little younger than her literary counterpart, it's just more comedic exaggeration on the movie's part.The mystery of the movie is handled more seriously. Nancy and her lawyer father move from their small town to Los Angeles, where Nancy digs into a cold case involving the murder of a Hollywood movie star who lived in her new house decades ago. Nancy searches for clues in some pretty practical ways, such as surfing websites like Google and this one and watching old videotapes of the victim's movies. When she does something more out of the ordinary, you have to admire the girl's resourcefulness. Emma Roberts, an undeniably cute kid, plays the pint-sized amateur sleuth beautifully. She makes the too-perfect girl completely lovable, if not completely realistic. Tate Donovan is also great as the too-perfect girl's father, Carson Drew. He's an ideal father figure without being unrealistically perfect, and he shows reasonable concern for his daughter as she gets into danger. Less likable is Max Thierot's take on Ned Nickerson, Nancy's boyfriend. I much preferred George O'Hanlon Jr.'s portrayal in the 1970's TV series starring Pamela Sue Martin as Nancy Drew, in which Ned was a gawky, awkward kid with a little crush on Nancy. The character of Corky (Josh Flitty), a twelve-year old with a crush on Nancy, is much less annoying than Max Thierot's Ned. Amy Bruckner and Kay Panabaker seem appropriately cast as Nancy's gal pals Bess and George, but they only make brief cameos at the beginning of the film.Speaking of cameos, Chris Kattan (SNL), Eddie Jemison (\"Ocean's 13\"), and Bruce Willis all make surprise guest appearances, which just proves you never can guess which movie Bruce Willis will pop up in next.The movie does fail to live up to some potential. It's mentioned early on that the Drews' new house is heavily booby-trapped, but Nancy and her father are done with tripping over booby traps a few minutes after that. Also, Nancy describes the cold case she's about to investigate as a murder taking place at an extravagant party, which should yield plenty of potential murderers, but she only encounter a handful of suspects. And while there's some moments of real suspense during Nancy's adventures, the solution to the case comes out of nowhere, and in the end all possible plot threads are tied up too conveniently and who-cares-who-done-it. Ralph Sall's score adds to the movie's suspense, but the contemporary teenybopper songs woven into the soundtrack are lame. Still, I really enjoyed this film, and while the movie is aimed primarily at tween girls, people of any age and gender can enjoy it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63685898764f46a394495e0283cfd857",
            "input": "I love and admire the Farrelly brothers! How come I only got to see this great movie 3 years after it's release? It made me laugh, it made me cry and it reeeaally warmed my heart. Big Time. It's hard to describe in my rotten English - but I have to try anyway:The cast is excellent throughout - from the lead- to the supporting roles, the acting is great, the dialogs are great and the film is perfectly directed and edited.I think that the Farrelly brothers movies are often underestimated - they are not light comedies - they're deeeeeep! They talk about what life is all about (I won't tell YOU!).In my case, this movie affirmed to me what relationships are all about:If you love somebody: Set them free, let them be - try to share the passion and the pain and always be true to each other.I'm not a sports-hater, but definitely a sports ignorant. But in this movie - the vibes get you. I could smell the atmosphere of Baseball. Finally, this movie explained to me what being a sports-fan can mean to you and what cool fan-families there must be out there.Thanks so much, Pete & Bob!P.S.: If you haven't seen it - please check out KINGPIN!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14480e94fe48475b90d78a6d48b175f4",
            "input": "Got to this show late - believe it was the 3rd, and final episode, when first watched it - and was blown away by a social commentary that hasn't been seen on American TV since 'All in the Family'.Was very surprised CBS would even run this in the first place.Which is merely to say the last time CBS 'had a set' - if you know what I mean - was back in the day of 'All in the Family'. The most controversial decision they're willing to tackle today is how much eye make-up to put on Katie Couric.If you want to make a bunch of folks really, really mad - let them discover the truth about themselves. And if you want them willing to pull strings, make calls, and get a work of Art removed - let them discover that truth by hearing their own words spoken from their own mouths.The Aardman folks have always been WAY ahead of the curve. And this show is no different. Somehow it snuck under the CBS 'corporate/social/political/censor radar' to get it onto the schedule (perhaps the 'big brass' never really watched it till it finally aired?), but once good 'ol middle 'merika heard and saw themselves being themselves - well, can bet the farm that message, or the messenger, won't last long.Now, if only the 'missing episodes' can find their way onto Usenet or bit-torrent ;-)Thank You BC Kelly Tallahassee Fla",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b9d31d4ab3bf4187af5665a2f6277d73",
            "input": "This film is a complete re-imagining of Romeo and Juliet in Tel Aviv and Nablus. The lovers are one from Tel Aviv et the other from Nablus. There is a border between them, and a constant state of war with the Israeli army ever present everywhere and the Palestinian militants everywhere else with their bombs. The situation is bleak enough. We can imagine love in that enormous loveless trap. But the film goes several light years further by imagining the two lovers are gay, Noam from Tel Aviv and Ashraf from Nablus. To be gay is accepted in Tel Aviv. It is off limits in Nablus. The conflict between the two peoples, the two communities is thus doubled with a conflict between two cultures, two ethics. But this could even be livable if the war did not bring some extra dimension. Ashraf's sister is going to get married to a militant activist in Nablus. Ashraf finally tells his sister about his being gay. She cannot accept it but accepts to speak about it later. From the wedding itself the newly married husband sends a commando into Tel Aviv to set up a bomb attack. It takes place in a café in Tel Aviv and one friend of Noam's is severely wounded. Bad enough. The Isareli army sends a commando to Nablus to arrest the person responsible for this attack, but it turns sour and the newly married wife is shot dead in the street. The funeral follows the wedding. The husband and widower volunteers for a suicide bomb attack. Ashraf volunteers to take his place. The exiled lover comes back to Tel Aviv to die and kill a few people to avenge his sister. He arrives at a diner managed by some friends of Noam's. But Noam sees him and gets out to speak to him. Ashraf has moved back to the middle of the street and he detonates his bomb when Noam reaches him in the street. The vengeance reunites the two lovers in death. We thus have the dual conflict but we do not have the Prince of Verona, a neutral character that can impose peace, or even worse the Prince seems to have chosen sides and to be on the side of Israel. The game is entirely false and death is sure on both sides. But the dimension of impossible love is all the stronger because it is redoubled by a play in the film, a play that shows love in Auschwitz, between two prisoners, one wearing a yellow star and the other a pink triangle. This is both strikingly strong and breathtakingly shocking: gay love in Auschwitz. What comes out of the film is that over there in Tel Aviv or Nablus love is impossible. The film is thus a denunciation of the conflict in Palestine that cannot but continue though it has no reason to even exist though it has thousands of reasons to go on. We should never have let Great Britain deal with the region a long time ago. Today we have to find a solution in which no one will be humiliated. This will only be able to succeed if everyone comes together in order to find a lasting solution. But so far everyone is trying to avoid that general confrontation and discussion preferring bilateral manipulations. So suffering will go on and love will be forbidden, of course not sex since children are needed for the war to go on: so let's procreate more and more little soldiers. But love is just an extra-terrestrial concept.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine & University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-026f010c25654a87b804313cc77b3f43",
            "input": "This is a film which had eluded me thus far but, now that I've watched it, emerges as one of the major entries in the noir style. As usual with the DivX format, the viewing was far from ideal – marred by the occasional video and (mostly) audio glitches – but, given that the film is still unavailable on R1 DVD, this will have to do for the moment. Since the film's reputation is quite high within the genre itself, I assume that the reason behind this oversight is because it does not have a well-known actor in the lead.Anyway, the belated entrance of the film's nominal star – Franchot Tone – packs quite a wallop (especially as he is shown to be the villain from the first)! Tone was a underrated actor – he was rarely given meaty roles, and this may well be his best (making his paranoiac both fascinating and believably dangerous). The female lead – Ella Raines, who would later feature in BRUTE FORCE (1947) as well as Siodmak's own THE SUSPECT (1944) and THE STRANGE AFFAIR OF UNCLE HARRY (1945) – is quite lovely and capably takes on the role of the distraught secretary out to prove her convicted boss (Alan Baxter) innocent of his wife's brutal murder. Other key supporting parts are essayed by Thomas Gomez as the initially bullying but ultimately sympathetic police investigator, and Elisha Cook Jr. – the genre's quintessential fall guy – as an ill-fated \"ladies' man\" of a percussionist.Like BRUTE FORCE's Jules Dassin, Siodmak was on a noir roll at this point in his career and this film definitely benefits from his superb direction – all tilted angles and terrific set-pieces, including the justly celebrated jazz sequence in which Cook manically beats on his drums in a sexual frenzy brought on by the sluttishly-attired Raines (who is putting on an act to get his attention and eventually drive him to confess that he withheld evidence at the inquest which could spring her resigned lover from jail). Another great, lengthy sequence is the one in which Raines follows a bartender (another uncooperative witness) around the streets of New York – which results in his being mowed down by a car! Notable, too, is the trial sequence – which is entirely depicted through the audience's reaction so that judge, jury, witnesses and D.A. are never actually seen (although the judge's voice is recognizably that of veteran character actor Samuel S. Hinds). The centerpiece of the film is the scene in which Gomez and Tone discuss the nature of the criminal involved, with the inspector's put down of the latter as mentally insane giving the initially smug Tone \"dizzy spells\". The suspenseful climax finds Raines alone with Tone in his apartment, where she discovers evidence of his guilt – and he confesses to having had an affair with Baxter's wife, but killed her when she wouldn't desert her husband for him.By the way, I hit upon a little goof in the film: while the story is clearly set in 1943, I noticed that during the taxi cab ride towards the beginning of the film – in which Alan Curtis escorts the titular lady to the theater – the establishing shot of New York (comprising clearly of stock footage) features a marquee promoting Laurel and Hardy's 1938 musical comedy, SWISS MISS! Incidentally, famed mystery writer Cornell Woolrich wrote the original novel on which this was based using a pseudonym.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-653bddd99e0843458767269213a5ebdf",
            "input": "Actually, this flick, made in 1999, has pretty good production values. The actors are attractive, and reasonably talented. There aren't a bunch of clowns running around blasting away, expending hundreds of rounds, but never hitting flesh. Nor are there wild car chases/crashes where thousands of dollars worth of beautiful machines are uselessly trashed.The interiors look respectably modern, architecturally, and the equipment looks up to snuff. Well, there is that high tech computer room furnished with what look like leftovers from a '50s electronics lab. And the pancake make-up on the corpses cracked me up. Not pancake make-up in the conventional sense, but what looks like dried pancake batter slathered over their exposed skin. This is supposed to support the idea that the bodies have calcified -- though how the virus would accomplish this transmutation is an exercise left for the student (viewer).Ah yes, the virus. I would like to tell you that this is not the absolute worst premise for a sci-fi, horror flick I know of, but I can't. A computer virus that is transmitted via a television (or computer monitor) screen and becomes a lethal biological pathogen? Gimme a break. Warp drives a la \"Star Trek\" are one thing, but photons becoming viruses? This is so silly the desired \"fright factor\" just isn't realizable. The flick could have used one of those awful dream sequences where the dead come alive, or have a cat jump out of the closet, or something, because the viral thingamajig isn't doing it. One presumes Robert Wagner has the same excuse for playing in this inanity that Lord Oliver gave for some of his later, trashy venues. He needed the money. No other comparison between the two should be construed,however.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05c4802b6a144bfba03938763fff1fff",
            "input": "Surprised to see the rather low score for this movie. Just saw this film for the first time in 10 years, and was reminded why I like it.Come back with me, children, to a time when Michael Keaton was a straight-up comedy guy, and you might find some joy in this film. It's a gentle comedy -- the kind Ron Howard specializes in -- but if that's your thing, you should check this out. Keaton's low-key charm is just right for this project.\"Gung Ho\" is a bit dated, because it takes places in the last stage of the pre-global economy world, when it still mattered what country a business was based in. That said, it delivers laughs as well as a lesson on how people can learn from each other, to great benefit.You could watch this film and enjoy it without remembering one scene in particular you really liked, but that's because the whole movie provides a slow but constant stream of laughs. It's like an I.V. drip. And I mean that in a good way.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fdccf650367434fbe52f5b2b181e3c7",
            "input": "'The Rookie' was a wonderful movie about the second chances life holds for us and also puts an emotional thought over the audience, making them realize that your dreams can come true. If you loved 'Remember the Titans', 'The Rookie' is the movie for you!! It's the feel good movie of the year and it is the perfect movie for all ages. 'The Rookie' hits a major home run!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da296bf471cc49a9bfcef52764958079",
            "input": "\"Zu:The warriors from magic mountain\" was and is an impressive classic! You never would have guessed it was made in 1983. Tsui Hark's use of special effects was very creative and inventive. (He continued doing this in the Chinese Ghost Story trilogy and later productions.) Even now it can measure up to other movies in this genre. \"Legend of Zu\" is connected to \"Zu\"warriors from magic mountain\"! It is not necessary to have seen this movie to understand the plot of this one. The plot is a bit hard to follow. But to be honest it doesn't matter. It is all about the action and adventure! I always was wondering what Tsui Hark would do if he got his hands on CGI. Now we know,he made this movie. Maybe it sometimes is too much but the overall result is so beautiful that I am not going to be critical about that. There is so much happening on the screen,you simply won't believe! I think it is a big shame that this movie wasn't shown in theaters here in Holland. Because this movie is screaming for screen time in cinemas! This movie easily can beat big budget Hollywood productions like \"Superman Returns\" or Xmen 3. The only thing I do have to mention is the lack of humor! In most of Tsui Harks's movies he combines drama,fantasy,martial arts and humor. Somehow it is missing in this movie. Again I am not going to be picky about these small matters. \"Legend of Zu\" delivers on the action front with the most beautiful special effects you will see. A true classic!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-431b0ce2f1e24fbbb42f6c898c7923d4",
            "input": "The tenuous connection between this film and the first Grease is established right at the beginning of the film when Didi Conn one of four cast members repeating their roles approaches young Maxwell Caulfield who is a British exchange student. Although in the previous film Olivia Newton St. John's foreign speech pattern is not explained, it's explained here Caulfield is her cousin. What's Conn still doing in school, I guess she just likes hanging around Rydell High even though now she's a beautician.Caulfield's a smart kid, so of course the hood types led by Adrian Zmed have him labeled as a nerd. And that's especially bad when Zmed's girl friend decides she likes Caulfield. But being a nerd just isn't going to cut it.That's when Caulfield decides to put on a modern day Zorro act. He gets a junked bicycle and puts it back together and teaches himself to ride. He gets himself a leather biker outfit with a set of goggles to hide his face. If getting Michelle Pheiffer is not in the cards, Caulfield won't have any trouble making friends at any gay male leather bar the way he's outfitted.Grease 2 introduced Michelle Pheiffer and Maxwell Caulfield and started them on the successful career paths both have enjoyed. If you saw the first Grease film, a much better film, than you definitely have an idea how this film will turn out.In addition to Conn, Eve Arden, Sid Caesar, and Dody Goodman, all faculty members from the original Grease return in their roles. The music score isn't remotely as good as the songs that come from the original.It's not that Grease 2 is bad, it's just not all that great.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c3825c45ad2d439cae018f35d5cc468e",
            "input": "A most awaited film of the year 2002. After three and half years of hibernation,Rajini has acted in this movie. The hype for this film was toooooo high..This is not a typical Rajini film, in this film he gives some spiritual messages also. But it also includes typical Rajini actions,style,songs etc. Its a good entertaining movie and gives good messages also.I will rate this movie as Good instead of Excellent because of the screenplay. Its a must watch movie. Dont miss it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33d8b8f08bda4186812f187c32c9c08b",
            "input": "The Hamiltons tells the story of the four Hamilton siblings, teenager Francis (Cory Knauf), twins Wendell (Joseph McKelheer) & Darlene (Mackenzie Firgens) & the eldest David (Samuel) who is now the surrogate parent in charge. The Hamilton's move house a lot, Franics is unsure why& is unhappy with the way things are. The fact that his brother's & sister kidnap, imprison & murder people in the basement doesn't help relax or calm Francis' nerves either. Francis know's something just isn't right & when he eventually finds out the truth things will never be the same again...Co-written, co-produced & directed by Mitchell Altieri & Phil Flores as The Butcher Brothers (who's only other film director's credit so far is the April Fool's Day (2008) remake, enough said) this was one of the 'Films to Die For' at the 2006 After Dark Horrorfest (or whatever it's called) & in keeping with pretty much all the other's I've seen I thought The Hamiltons was complete total & utter crap. I found the character's really poor, very unlikable & the slow moving story failed to capture my imagination or sustain my interest over it's 85 & a half minute too long 86 minute duration. The there's the awful twist at the end which had me laughing out loud, there's this really big sustained build up to what's inside a cupboard thing in the Hamiltons basement & it's eventually revealed to be a little boy with a teddy. Is that really supposed to scare us? Is that really supposed to shock us? Is that really something that is supposed to have us talking about it as the end credits roll? Is a harmless looking young boy the best 'twist' ending that the makers could come up with? The boring plot plods along, it's never made clear where the Hamiltons get all their money from to buy new houses since none of them seem to work (except David in a slaughterhouse & I doubt that pays much) or why they haven't been caught before now. The script tries to mix in every day drama with potent horror & it just does a terrible job of combining the two to the extent that neither aspect is memorable or effective. A really bad film that I am struggling to say anything good about.Despite being written & directed by the extreme sounding Butcher Brothers there's no gore here, there's a bit of blood splatter & a few scenes of girls chained up in a basement but nothing you couldn't do at home yourself with a bottle of tomato ketchup & a camcorder. The film is neither scary & since it's got a very middle-class suburban setting there's zero atmosphere or mood. There's a lesbian & suggest incestuous kiss but The Hamiltons is low on the exploitation scale & there's not much here for the horror crowd.Filmed in Petaluma in California this has that modern low budget look about it, it's not badly made but rather forgettable. The acting by an unknown (to me) cast is nothing to write home about & I can't say I ever felt anything for anyone.The Hamiltons commits the cardinal sin of being both dull & boring from which it never recovers. Add to that an ultra thin story, no gore, a rubbish ending & character's who you don't give a toss about & you have a film that did not impress me at all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e144394e080445399a0310b0bd9e9313",
            "input": "This movie re-wrote film history in every way. No one cares what anyone thinks about this movie, because it transcends criticism. Every flaw in the movie is easily overcome by the many amazing things the movie has going for it. It is an extremely beautiful movie, and I doubt many of us will see anything like it again. I've seen it more times than I care to count, and I still become transfixed every time, with a feeling which is hard to describe. One for the ages.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f4e6ca2a1cb4255aab52e5601cd93c6",
            "input": "One of the worst movies I ever saw. My only thought was: \"how can I get my money back from Hollywood Video\". This is no way worth four dollars, or any dollars. I think it was an attempt to rip off The Mexican, or Vin Diesel's movies, but it failed miserably to do this.The acting was terrible, I felt sorry for the actors that they couldn't find something better to do with their time. The story was ridiculous. We were calling out the lines ahead of the actors, it was so predictable. The Mexican accent of the leading lady was insultingly exaggerated, worse than a cartoon. Skip it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a4270b006b2480b8fe6642d1652e34b",
            "input": "Americans have the attention span of a fruit fly and if something does not happen within the span of a typical commercial, we tend to lose interest really fast.I found out an exciting fact from this film: someone has to paint high tension utility poles and do it on a schedule! And guess what, they really would like to be doing something else (the viewer has similar feelings).Surprisingly, when I was bored watching late night infomercials and decided to actually watch this film, I found the characters to be interesting and highly engaging.I just don't usually watch that much late night TV, so I can't recommend this film, unless watching paint dry is your idea of an exciting two hours out of your life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e93c3fde006543c4a0d7aa19bb04554c",
            "input": "Russell, my fav, is gorgeous in this film. But more than that, the film covers a tremendous range of human passion and sorrow. Everything from marriage to homosexuality is addressed and respected. The film makes the viewer realize that tolerance of other humans provides the route to saving humanity. Fabulous love story between Lachlin and Lil. I replay their scenes over and over again. Anyone who has ever been in love will empathize with these people. All characters are cast and portrayed excellently.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe7a6e001ee34ebb9b1e3f23d42cbfbb",
            "input": "Will Farmer (Lanter) plays a computer game that simulates a terrorist attack, and Ripley, the super government computer, designed to profile potential terrorists, tracks him because Will borrowed (by hacking) some money from his next door neighbor's bank account to pay for a class trip to play chess in Philadelphia. The next door neighbor whose computer Will was fixing, has relatives in the mid-east who thru their bank send money to the neighbor's bank , and Ripley sees a terrorist connection. Ripley has the power to call up missile strikes. Oh, oh!This version of War Games has a much faster pace and more aggressiveness than the War Games movie in the early 1980s. Well, the electronic industry has so much more to work with these days. Makes sense. So the movie dazzles us with fantastic CGI on computer screens, and once Joshua, the forerunner to Ripley, is found operational, we are left with watching computer against computer and the humans are cringing, hoping, praying….sort of, oh-oh-ing, OMG-ing, and more cringing hoping things will go their way. In other words we are now experiencing a made-for-TV type movie, and it's Oh Hum Time. Go back to the 1980s and watch the original War Games movie. It's much better. But, we really have to ask ourselves: are we making computers too intelligent where one day, in time, they will rule us? Hmmm………..Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: No.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d0fb488021a435ab9101c2221131163",
            "input": "Normally the best way to annoy me in a film is to include some reference to Orson Welles. But here is a sci-fi comedy quoting the War of the Worlds broadcast.... and it is gold! The very concept of a small bunch of diminutive,aggressive and stupid aliens being mistaken as kids in Halloween dress is magnificent. Don't be fooled by the notion that because it seems like a kids' movie it is unsophisticated - it isn't, there's a lot of hidden treasure... A gem!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd7ae85c8adb4270ba013cc1af9660a6",
            "input": "Oh, dear lord.... They've turned what was a fairly thought provoking movie into a swaggering testosterone fest.The original 1971 version of this movie was beautifully vague about our hero Kowalski. He was a man trying to drive from Denver to San Fransisco to win a bet. Why was he willing to risk his life for the price of a handful of uppers? We're not really sure.We had a few flashbacks that gave us the picture that he was an adrenaline junkie, and presumably he had led his entire life trying to make it to the vanishing point. That point you see off in the distance where the left and right shoulders of the road come together, and the road itself vanishes. He lives only to be free, and means no ill on anyone. We saw several times when there were accidents he stopped to make sure the other driver was okay before moving on, even the cops that were chasing him.When he saw the futility of his quest he took his life rather than be arrested and live a life of captivity. He died like he lived, running wide open.In the remake Kowalski has a whole history (including a first name, even.) He's trying to get to the hospital where his wife is suffering from complications to her pregnancy. He is a devoted husband, and excited expectant father. He comes to the decision to take his life after hearing his wife died in delivery, but they even leave THAT in question when they suggest that he may have jumped out of the car before it ran into the bulldozers. They even gave the part of \"super soul,\" the blind DJ (brilliantly portrayed by Clevon Little in the original) to JASON PRIESTLY?!?!?!?!?!? Give me a break.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bbcac0ebe6e8498c973e30c6f8335783",
            "input": "Carlos Saura's Carmen is one of the finest achievements in world, let alone Spanish, cinema. It manages to excite interest in flamenco in its wonderful staged adaptations from Bizet with powerful physical force. At the same time we see the impact of the creation and rehearsal of a new interpretation of Carmen on the choreographer/director and the principle dancers. The fine line between life and art is dazzling.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e1523b5984994f34b73e3c96d013179a",
            "input": "A cheap exploitation film about a mothers search for her daughter who has been kidnapped by people who make snuff porno films. The trail leads the mother all over Europe as she searches for her child and we in the audience struggle to stay asleep.This is one of the countless soft-core sleaze films that are made for people who want the excitement of porno with out the stigma or danger of it showing up on their credit card bill.Personally I'd rather have the stigma since those films tend to be more interesting and honest about what we're seeing. This is suppose to be a sexy thriller but its not. Mostly its people talking about things followed by lots of walking from place to place and lead to lead.Periodically through out the film various people get undressed and everything has more than a touch of S&M to the proceedings. The violence and fetish material is of the sort to provoke laughter rather than horror or even excitement, its all so incredibly fake. Worse there is not even enough nudity to keep it interesting. (Basically par for the course for many of these films)You'll forgive my lack of details but it simply is a dull boring film that I stayed with to the end hoping for something remotely prurient to occur, but there was nothing. The most interesting thing was the blonde haired villainess with the huge over bite and nose the size of a Buick. I watched her with morbid fascination wondering what she had looked like as a young girl and wondering whether she had had plastic surgery, not the type of things you should be thinking about in a gripping thriller.Avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31ff3ef39fc64f709f708b61bada9f7a",
            "input": "I'm not entirely sure Rob Schmidt qualifies as a \"Master\" in the genre of horror, since he previously just directed one horror film called \"Wrong Turn\" and that one was actually just was slightly above mediocre, but fact is that he made with \"Right to Die\" one of the best and creepiest episodes of the entire second season of the \"Masters of Horror\" franchise. There was a similar underdog story in season one, when William Malone made on of the best episodes with \"The Fair Haired Child\" even though his other long feature films \"Fear Dot Com\" and \"House on Haunted Hill\" sucked pretty badly.The story of \"Right to Die\" cleverly picks in on the nowadays piping hot social debate of euthanasia, but thankfully also features multiple old-fashioned horror themes like ghostly vengeance, murderous conspiracies, pitch black humor and comic book styled violence. Whilst driving home late one night and discussing the husband's continuous adultery, the Addison couple are involved in a terrible car accident. Cliff walks away from the wreck unharmed but his wife Abby is fully burned and needs to be kept alive artificially. Whilst Cliff and his sleazy attorney (Corbin Bernsen of \"The Dentist\") want to plug the plug on her and sue the car constructor, Abbey's mum sets up a giant media campaign to keep her daughter alive as a vegetable and blame everything on Cliff. Meanwhile Abbey's hateful spirit comes back for revenge and kills someone in Cliff's surrounding whenever she has a near fatal experience with the medical devices. After a few victims, Cliff realizes it might be safer for him to keep his wife alive if he wants to remain alive as well. \"Right to Die\" is a stupendous episode and exactly the type of stuff I always hoped to see from a TV-series concept like \"Masters of Horror\". It's violent and gory with a sick & twisted sense of humor and loads of sleaze sequences. The euthanasia theme and the whole obligatory media circus that surrounds it is processed into the script very well, yet without unnecessarily reverting to political standpoints or morality lessons. The atmosphere is suspenseful and the killing sequences are suitably nasty and unsettling. Actresses Julia Anderson and Robin Sydney both have pretty face and impressively voluptuous racks, which is always a welcome plus, and Corbin Bernsen is finally offered the chance again to depict a mean-spirited and egocentric bastard. Great \"MoH\" episode; definitely one of the highlights of both seasons.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-77646e59087741f684c9ff234410d41b",
            "input": "A typical Goth chick (Rainbow Harvest looking like a cross between Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice and Boy George) gets even with people she feels have wronged her with the help of an old haunted mirror that she finds in the new house she and her mom (horror mainstay, Karen Black, the only remotely good thing about this travesty) buy. The acting's pretty laughably bad (especially when Rainbow interacts with the aforementioned mirror) and there are no scares or suspense to be had. This film inexplicably spawned thus for 3 sequels each slightly more atrocious than the last. People looking for a similarly themed, but far superior cinematic endeavor would be well advised to just search out the episode of \"Friday the 13th: the Series\" where a geeky girl finds an old cursed compact mirror. That packs more chills in it's scant 40 minutes than this whole franchise has provided across it's 4 films.My Grade: D Eye Candy: Charlie Spradling provides the obligatory T&A",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6708866fef83476087d88637a0f01529",
            "input": "For some strange reason the film world is driven by fashion . Someone makes a film about a killer shark then all of a sudden the film world`s oceans are awash with giant Squids , killer octopusses and sea monsters of every ilk . A man is stalked by an erstwhile lover from hell then every film character is stalked by a cop from hell or a flatmate from hell or a babysitter from hell . Then when a major Hollywood company produces a big budget FX laden blockbuster about tornados then other film producers jump upon the bandwagon , the fact that they don`t have the budget to pull it off doesn`t stop them. NIGHT OF THE TWISTERS is a case in point . What struck me about this made for television film is the fact that it tries to hide its lack of budget by cutting to the ad breaks . Everytime a tornado appears the camara locks onto the horrified expression of the actors as they scream things like \" Oh my gawd it`s heading this way \" and \" Run for your lives \" then the screen fades to black saving the producers the need to up the special effects budget . Unfortunately NIGHT OF THE TWISTERS budget should have been upped to include better actors . The cast are by no means bad but they are unimpressive and lack the skill to carry a film which is character driven . Where`s Josh Hartnett and Elijah Wood when you need them ?And the last word on this being a TWISTER clone ..... Yes NOTT was released a couple of months before TWISTER but TWISTER had been hyped for several months as being the Summer blockbuster of 1996 and NOTT has a rushed feeling to it which leads me to believe that it was made and released to tie in with the hype surrounding TWISTER",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2b014bf4a244d96aacc1126f5c464f3",
            "input": "...for the Lt to have chosen this one. First, the film wasn't horrible, it was just Hollywood. Worst case I-need-this-to-happen-or-we-have-no-movie scenario: if Willis' mission was to save the doctor, but she was adamant that her \"people\" make it out of the missionary, he would have put her on that first chopper and marched those refugees to the border without her. He would not have compromised his package for the refugees. That's not how it works. But, as I pointed out, this is Hollywood, we must have drama. This is why we make movies, because reality isn't quite so complicated. However, I did think that Willis and the good doctor had workable chemistry. That said, there are also some well done battle scenes in the film. It's not a waste of time, \"Tears of the Sun\" is worth the dvd rental fee. Check it out on a rainy day and you'll be satisfied.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65c21b6669064502a38d98891a497b18",
            "input": "This oddity in the new DORIS DAY COLLECTION doesn't really need to be included as she is only in the film for less than 30 minutes. What she does do however, is shine when she's on screen. The near plot less movie is just an excuse to showcase some Warner contract players of the day. JANCIE RULE shows promise and it's a shame she didn't become a big star. RUTH ROMAN handles the role of the \"go-getter\" with aplomb. Better if this was in color. The Travis Air force base locations with some rear projection work well. What's best about the movie are some wonderful musical interludes. If you enjoyed THANK YOUR LUCKY STARS and Hollywood CANTEEN you'll like this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37628aa2ac8d4dda823f6d8c13aaf04a",
            "input": "This film is stunningly beautiful. Goldsworthy's art really benefits with the medium of film because you can see the art at its most beautiful, moving and changing and blossoming. I strongly recommend this movie to everyone. I can think of nothing else to say about it. It's just the kind of movie you HAVE TO see, because it's so visually compelling and left me very refreshed when I left the theatre.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f9e14dd22b443268fb43531f58ce0f5",
            "input": "What can you say about a grainy, poorly filmed 16mm stag film, where the best and most attractive performer is a German Shepherd? Nothing that would be positive. Avoid this travesty at all costs. In any case, it would be difficult to find, since bestiality remains a taboo and illegal subject in the USA. I strongly suggest IMDb to re-visit their weighting formula for establishing ratings, since an 8.8 rating for this piece of fecal matter is absurd! I am, by no means, a prude and have spent many hours enjoying the classic porn movies of the 70's & 80's; but this is inferior product even by the looser standards of the (then illegal) stag loop.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-442d0f333b484c749ecd9630690cfa71",
            "input": "Enterprise, the latest high budget spin-off to the most successful franchise in film and or television history opens to the tune of a 90-minute episode called 'Broken Bow'. First we are swept into a massive action sequence with a Klingon being chased by some Suliban (who are the main enemy in the first season of the show). From there the televised movie takes us on a journey that seldom gets as good as it is, with some of the best character development, story and action/visual effects ever seen in such a short amount of time.The opening-credits is a debatable subject among the minority of Enterprise fans, whom some believe that the song is out of place. What they fail to realise is the lyrics themselves. If one listens to the actual song, instead of the theme, then they will begin to piece the parts of the puzzle together. And eventually as the series progresses further and further, and we learn more about our valiant captain and his crew, will the song actually become meaningful. Overall Diane Warren's theme is beautifully orchestrated and is sung just as well by opera singer Russell Watson.What makes any television show watchable and worth watching time and time again is its characters and the way they become structured and layered. Enterprise is (in my opinion) one of the most well cast shows since The Next Generation. Choosing Scott Bakula, as Captain Jonathan Archer was the best decision since Gene himself cast Patrick Stewart as Jean-Luc Picard. As the captain always leads the show, Bakula adds a subtlety to his role and brings a huge smile to the faces of anyone with blood pumping in their veins. He simply is (both actor wise and character wise) a superb human being and his charm, wit, and compassion are overwhelming to watch. As for the other cast members, a favourite of mine is John Billingsley who plays Dr. Phlox. It's also nice to see a non-human playing a role, and the decision to give the captain a dog, named 'Porthos' was a well-received idea. Throughout the show character development was brilliant, it was fast, well timed and almost perfect. I say almost because sadly Travis Mayweather's character played by the Briton Anthony Montgomery is a little weak at the end of the first season. He does have some things to say here and there, but remains in the hands of the producers to make him more important. Jolene Blalock is wonderful as the sometimes harsh but equally loveable Subcommander T'Pol. Dominic Keating as Lieutenant Malcolm Reed plays a strong role and is convincing as the armoury officer. Connor Trinneer plays Commander Charles \"Trip\" Tucker who always adds charm and comedic style to his character and finally Linda Park as Ensign Hoshi Sato, who often plays a weaker character but thankfully quickly becomes interesting. All of these characters make up Enterprise, and all bring a quality that Star Trek hasn't seen in a long time. Each person makes this show worth watching. Smiles and feel-good senses are guaranteed right from the first time we see them all together on the bridge of the starship Enterprise NX-01.The ship itself, the NX-01 is somewhat questionable in design. The series is set 150 years from now and 100 years before Captain Kirk. So why then does the ship appear to be similar in design to mid 24th century ships, namely the Akira class starship? Continuity has been an issue in Enterprise, but thankfully Rick [Berman] and Brannon [Braga] offer suitable explanations for each and everyone of them. Continuity is only a problem if you are forever scrutinising shows and are obsessed with the tiniest of details. If you see the show with and open mind, then you'll have no problems, but there is an urge to know 'why' all the time. So what did Berman and Braga offer to the Star Trek fan-base with the issue of the deign of the ship itself? According to them the NX-01 is how it is because of the incident in First Contact. When Zefram Cochrane saw the Enterprise-E through his telescope and from speaking with the away team lead by Commander Riker, it changed the ideas in his head. That's a good enough explanation for me.lets move on. Of course its not as easy for some fans to accept that sort of answer, some go as far as to refuse to see the show until they get a reasonable answer. Come on guys grow up.When George Lucas destroyed the Star Wars saga with the launch of his profit making new trilogy, fans couldn't do anything, only watch and sap it all up anyway. And then they learned that, well maybe its not that bad after all. If you can't accept a quality show for what it is, not what it should be in your mind, then go elsewhere. Or try becoming a producer on the show and then see what you can do.The sets on Enterprise remind me very much of the Defiant from Deep Space Nine. They often appear cold and have an eerie look of modern structure to them and they cry out that they belong to the military. Perhaps that why the crew of the USS Enterprise (aka flagship of the American fleet) like it so much. They are striking sets, and represent the show perfectly.Rick Berman 'the overlord of the empire' as John Logan so accurately put it and his counterpart Brannon Braga has hit the nail on the head exactly where they should have, and in all the right places. Whether that be technicalities, visuals, sound, editing or score. Enterprise is a fine demonstration to just how good televised science fiction can ultimately be, when in the hands of geniuses. The late Gene Roddenberry would be proud of this series and as a Star Trek fan, so should you.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-676be63eeb5b4219806d4a83c01d0180",
            "input": "Another American Pie movie has been shoved down our throats and this one is the worst one of them all. It doesn't deserve the name American Pie. They should have stopped at \"The Wedding\".This movie feels like just a stupid porn movie which they slapped the title American Pie on. When i was watching this i felt like i was watching a different series. It doesn't fell like American Pie at all. It has different humor and it is much more rude and has many more sex scenes then the other American Pie movies.I don't recommend it ever. Actually i don't recommend any of the \"American Pie Presents\" movies. Just stick with the nice original trilogy.2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-701571f12cbc4010880fee44bbadc4a1",
            "input": "This movie makes a promising start and then gets very confused and muddled. Kamal Hasan has made a lot of effort in getting the period look right, pity he did not spend more time on the plot. Most of the small characters in the movie show up for no particular reason.Overall very disappointing, I would recommend avoiding this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a591870d9fc54c12a6eda29cf0bd6597",
            "input": "The best part of An American In Paris is the lengthy ballet sequence at the end, where Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron are the living personification of several major painters. Kelly has earlier been established as a pavement artist in Paris, so the sequence is the logical ending to a musical bursting with life and energy, Gershwin tunes, and cast members like Georges Guetary and Oscar Levant. Kelly was at his best here - it's a little different to Singin' in the Rain, and the effect of all the film as one topped with the ballet gives it a definite wow factor. No wonder the sequence ended 'That's Entertainment' after all other MGM musical highlights had gone by!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1be6086250e04c55a1367a8a9fb369de",
            "input": "Best of the Zorro serials and one of my favorite serials, period. This is a period serial set right after the birth of Mexico. The new nation is counting on the gold produced by this one town to keep the republic solvent. However a gold god, Don del Oro is stirring up the Indians and stealing the gold for himself. Its Zorro and his band of men to the rescue. Reed Hadley is a winning Zorro and he cuts a dashing figure as he gets into a nice selection of scraps (most all of which were reused by the later Zorro serials as well as other serials as well).The story moves and its nicely not clear who the real bad guy is. There is a reason that I've seen this the most of any serial I've seen, its simply a great action adventure film. The only thing I can compare it to is the Mark of Zorro with Tyrone Power or one of the other swashbucklers of the period. Its super and highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-18ebe87d5582453cb932e302b8753718",
            "input": "Special effects? Good.Script? Terrible. No plot. No depth. No meaning. This film rendered Superman as a meaningless hero, a hero with no archetype. In the original film, he represented America in the Cold War. Here, he represented nothing but a Hulk.Sure, the actors were fine. Kevin Spacey was a fine choice, among others.This still does not resolve the problem that this film had no depth whatsoever. I cannot see how anyone can come away with anything meaningful from this film, when Superman was, and is, daily created to be a meaningful hero in not only comics but also in people's minds. This was a real waste of money considering how many directions this film could have taken.Just a few instances: Lex Luthor could have been a villain of global corporatism, political domination, totalitarianism, and on and on and on. He was just another goofball Hackman incarnation.And Superman? For what did he stand in this film? Nothing but another hack \"savior\" figure.Wait until it comes to the dollar theater if you see it at all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7224c95536e4433daa0dcf79eee8d2fc",
            "input": "But it does have some good action and a plot that is somewhat interesting. Nevsky acts like a body builder and he isn't all that attractive, in fact, IMO, he is UGLY. ( his acting skills lack everything! ) Sascha is played very well by Joanna Pacula, but she needed more lines than she was given, her character needed to be developed. There are way too many men in this story, there is zero romance, too much action, and way too dumb of an ending. It is very violent. I did however love the scenery, this movie takes you all over the world, and that is a bonus. I also liked how it had some stuff about the mafia in it, not too much or too little, but enough that it got my attention. The actors needed to be more handsome...The biggest problem I had was that Nevsky was just too normal, not sexy enough. I think for most guys, Sascha will be hot enough, but for us ladies that are fans of action, Nevsky just doesn't cut it. Overall, this movie was fine, I didn't love it nor did I hate it, just found it to be another normal action flick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08257665f3f241fcb23f70612944ab14",
            "input": "Skullduggery is a strange, strange film based on the novel \"Ye Shall Know Them\" by Vercors. To unleash criticism at the film feels really unkind, since it is a movie that deals with earnest themes like humanity, and pleas for upright moral standards and tolerance. But in spite of its honourable intentions and its well-meaning tone, Skullduggery simply isn't a very good film. For me, the main problem is the terribly disjointed narrative which can't make its mind up how best to convey its message. The first half of the movie is like watching a standard jungle expedition flick of the Tarzan ilk; later it teeters into sci-fi fable; by the end it slips into courtroom melodramatics. The differences in tone between each section of the movie are too great, too jarring, to overlook. They stick out like a sore thumb and remind you constantly that you're watching a muddled, disorganised movie.An archaeological expedition into the jungles of New Guinea is led by adventurer Douglas Temple (Burt Reynolds). One of the main archaeologists involved in the excursion is attractive lady scientist Dr Sybil Greame (Susan Clark). After an arduous trek they stumble upon a tribe of strange ape-like creatures. These primitive, long-lost people are covered in hair and have survived for centuries without being in any way touched or influenced by the developments of modern man. There is some evidence that they may the ancestors of early man – the \"missing link\" in the evolution of apes into humans. Or perhaps a race of humans who simply look and behave differently from usual? Or even a race of animals that have begun to develop human characteristics? The archaeologists call the tribe \"the Tropi\" and are initially thrilled by the implications of their discovery. But things take a devastating turn when nasty opportunist Vancruysen (Paul Hubschmid) declares his intention to exploit the tribe and their idyll on behalf of developers. He questions whether the Tropi are truly \"human\" and takes his argument to the courts, where he hopes to be granted legal backing so that his own greedy ambitions can be continued.This was a very early film in Reynolds' career, and he actually unbalances this movie by acting like he's in a comedy while the rest of the cast take it all very seriously. Not that Reynolds can be blamed – he has an impossible role, asked to play a charming adventurer who really belongs in a Tarzan flick. His character and the film are not relevant to each other. Clark fares much better as the earnest lady archaeologist, and there are nice supporting roles for British actors Edward Fox, Alexander Knox and Wilfrid Hyde-White. A major shortcoming in Skullduggery is the lame and ineffective make-up used to give the Tropi their strange hairy appearance. Rather than making the actors look like believable hominoids, the stuck-on hair merely makes them look unintentionally comical…. and that's just not the right idea. We're meant to feel great sympathy for these creatures, but that's awfully hard when they look so unconvincing. Skullduggery is a failed attempt to tell a story that could have been poignant, philosophical and stimulating. The honourable intentions are there for all to see, but the end result doesn't do them justice. A worthy failure it might be but a failure nonetheless.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0eb01717fa834f12b4b49affcab0fc00",
            "input": "This two-parter was excellent - the best since the series returned. Sure bits of the story were pinched from previous films, but what TV shows don't do that these days. What we got here was a cracking good sci-fi story. A great big (really scary) monster imprisoned at the base of a deep pit, some superb aliens in The Ood - the best \"new\" aliens the revived series has come up with, a set of basically sympathetic and believable human characters (complete with a couple of unnamed \"expendable\" security people in true Star Trek fashion), some large-scale philosophical themes (love, loyalty, faith, etc.), and some top-drawer special effects.I loved every minute of this.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6aeb5f7606a44a58a33d96cf758b1780",
            "input": "While it contains facts that are not widely reported, it is not exactly the truth. They took a lot of liberties in rearranging events, excluding people, and using sets that do not meet the facts of their lives in the 30's. There were more than just Bonnie, Clyde, and W.D. in the gang at various times, and those people had as much to do with the facts as those included. Buck and Blanche went to convince Clyde to go straight much earlier than the one shootout, and in fact got drawn back into crime. Some of the events that were portrayed in daylight actually took place at night. Bonnie's wound was much more severe and never healed right. It was so bad she had to be carried around by someone until it healed up, and even then it stiffened up so she walked stiffly. Clyde also walked with a limp because while in prison he cut off a big toe. I know, I'm being nit picky, and it was a TV movie, but even without these factual errors in this \"TRUE\" story, the movie moves too fast from event to event and comes across more as several separate snapshots of their lives, rather than being a cohesive flowing story.I'd recommend reading a book or seeing a documentary if you want to get closer to the truth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c358c3d171794777a617c67e8795dc83",
            "input": "I found about the movie \"Holes\" by hearing from people that it wasn't typical Disney, that both kids and adults both got into the story. Folks, let me tell you I wasn't disappointed. \"Holes\" is based on the novel by Louis Sachar and follows the adventure of Stanley Yelnats, a boy who gets sent to a strange juvenile detention camp out in the desert. He befriends a boy nicknamed Zero and together they set out on adventure that changes their lives. It was a very interesting, unique, different and funny story. I didn't know quite what to expect when I watched it. It was interesting to see the story come together like pieces of a puzzle. The boys who played the juvenile delinquents were all very funny and Jon Voight was just hilarious as Mr. Sir. Now that I've seen the movie, I have to read the book. Most recommended!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a10dd579520347b085ee32f28a432940",
            "input": "Poor Robert Englund makes another flop and to the expense of Tobe Hooper who usually makes pretty good horror movies but he failed pretty bad at this one. Englund plays the well known Marque De Sade who in the 17th century was enprisoned for his obsession of pain and the pleasure of bringing pain upon himself as well as watching others also be in pain. The story is so confusing with the flip flop from one century to another and I became confused as to what was going on and what was the purpose of this movie. All I saw was a young lady that became entrapped by a strange lesbian who desides to keep her to herself and the young lady became fascinated by this Arabian with alot of money and finds out that he's out to have her killed and then Englund steps in from one century to another claiming to be a descendent of the de Sade and tries to kill her because she reminded him of the Madam Momoselle(spelled that wrong) or whoever it was in the picture above De Sades wall. The movie was terrible, I am surprised at Hooper for hireing Englund in this film and the special effects were so fake and laughable, especially the part about the eyes. Englund tries to make a comeback from his once hit move \"Nightmare on Elm St.\" by using these pull in and out needles to put out peoples eyes. Terrible, absolutely terrible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f9dee99ae3be4036bbb659494ff04d5e",
            "input": "Ghost Train is a fine and entertaining film, typical of the better British comedy chillers of the 1930s and 40s. The antics of comedian Arthur Askey are not as funny as they once apparently were, but this can be overcome by viewing him as a period piece or a curiosity.For a low-budget wartime production, Ghost Train is atmospheric, effective, and it provides some genuine suspense. Great fun for a dark (and, yes, stormy) night. Lighten up, take off the critic's hat, and enjoy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6300cb8c4d95495782ebed6db9c1a6f3",
            "input": "\"Margaritas and Cock...\"This tremendously entertaining film grabs you from the opening scene and never stops delivering laughs, surprises and unexpectedly touching moments. I had more fun watching \"The Matador\" than almost any other film from 2005. It is a wacky film with an unforgettable character, played to perfection by Pierce Brosnan.Julian Noble (Brosnan) is a facilitator (hit-man) who specializes in high-end corporate gigs (assassinating rich dudes). He is also experiencing something akin to a mid-life crisis. After coming to realization that he has no real friends, no permanent home and no planned future, he stumbles into a Mexican hotel bar one night and runs into Danny Wright (Kinnear).Danny is a down-on-his-luck family man who is on the verge of losing the big business deal that just might turn things around for him. He loves his wife dearly, especially so since they lost their young son a few years earlier.The two men are chalk and cheese, hardly any common ground other than that they are in the same desolate bar one night. And somehow a conversation is struck that sets in to motion a chain of events that will change their lives forever.The friendship they form reminded me a lot of Laurel and Hardy. One is the straight man and the other is the persistent fool who gets them into trouble. The interplay is superbly timed and finely tuned, due in no small part to the wonderful performances from Brosnan and Kinnear.But make no mistake... This is Brosnan's film. He imprints one of the most memorable and despicably likable characters of the decade. He could shoot your mother and apologize immediately thereafter and you'd probably forgive him. Brosnan may be cinema's ultimate charmer, but this is his most endearing and complete performance to date. I wouldn't be averse to seeing an Oscar nod for this role.Consider one scene where he overtly ogles a high-school girl with the impurest of thoughts and utters the line, \"All blushy blushy... No sucky fucky\". He does it with the familiar Bond smirk and manages to get away with it. He manages to tell a young boy, \"Tell your mother to lose 30lbs and 20 years. Then get back to me\" without coming across as unlikable. In fact, it makes us like him even more.And yet the film manages to surprise us with some truly touching scenes, most of which come toward the end when the film takes some unpredictable turns. However, when Julian thumbs through his little black book to find someone to call on his birthday, or when Danny and his wife (Davis) console each other in their bedroom one night, the film reaches an unexpected depth of emotion.\"The Matador\" is stylish and energetic. It is constantly entertaining. And it contains a career-defining role for Brosnan as the lonely hit-man looking for normalcy, friendship and a means to do at least one good thing in his life. This is an overlooked gem in 2005 and you should make an effort to see this film as soon as possible.TC Candler of IndependentCritics.com",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7804835cc515453994fe7e9c1258303b",
            "input": "\"An album of songs so old everyone thinks they're new.\" This film has the elusive combination of pace and mood that set some films apart from the opening moments. And why not? Towering talent from Dame Judith Dench as a widow who plays saxaphone with a street musician to help him get the songs right, to Olympia Dukakis as the merry widow living in a Scottish castle on the alimony of her many marriages, to Ian Holm as the drummer who loved all the members of a World War II all girl (more or less) swing band. But wait, there's more. Add in Leslie Caron on bass, and the incomparable Clio Laine on lead vocal, at last, and the Blonde Bombshells are the hottest band in England since the Beatles. Well, OK, not really, but this movie is a winner.Elizabeth (Dench) spends the whole film trying to reunite the Blonde Bombshells to play at her granddaughter's school dance. And before you roll your eyes, imagine how difficult and courageous it would be for a bunch of sexegenarian women to step onstage in front of the Britney Spears generation following an act called \"Open Wound.\"In an age when actresses careers are over by the time they're 30, most bands' second album is a greatest hits compilation, and music more than a month old has almost no chance of airplay, it's great to see real talent, real music and a really good movie come from, where else, the BBC.I love this movie, and I know I'll watch it many more times, and enjoy it more each time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d516ed369f44f5780f19766528c2f35",
            "input": "One of my favorite scenes is at the beginning when guests on a private yacht decide to take an impromptu swim - in their underwear! Rather risqué for 1931!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-96d6a8312b1e4572b71ee9a99931d4f7",
            "input": "Caught this film at the Arizona International Film Festival. I wasn't expecting a lot (though the festival's director told me it was one of the best films submitted). Five minutes into it I was sold. Shot in B & W on a shoestring budget, this film is hilarious. The acting is solid, the writing is solid and the look of the film is solid. The acting is probably the biggest revelation, since most films shot on low budgets tend to have amateur or stagey acting. Not this one. It features one of the most convincing, endearing and funny portrayals of a character with Tourette's Syndrome I've ever seen. The plot is convoluted without being confusing and raunchy without being gratuitous. If you get the chance, see this movie. Filmmakers like Majkowski (hope I got that right) deserve the chance to strut their stuff to a wider audience.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-384957fab4a54f2bb1316b9d14154f6c",
            "input": "This film was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a revelation to us. We actually thought that we were the only gay and lesbian couple who had ever married and had children. Obviously we were wrong. Love may come from where you don't expect it and maybe don't want it. But we both chose that love anyway.And no, it never changed our sexual orientation. That kind of stuff is for the Christian wackos.When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b554238f3f954bf397bbfedc6c963cfe",
            "input": "When the young Kevin gets the boat of his dead uncle as a gift, he invites five friends of him to a trip to Catalina Island for the weekend. While in the journey, they drink booze, have sex and play games, with each one of them telling his or her greatest fear. Later Kevin drowns in the open sea, the engine stops, and they are haunted and murdered by their greatest innermost fear.Yesterday, my wife, son, daughter and three other friends joined to watch \"Haunted Boat\" on DVD. With less than 30 minutes running time, the group gave up watching this messy and boring amateurish piece of crap, and we decided to see another film. Later, I decided to watch the rest of this flick to see how bad it could be and it would have been better off going to bed to sleep. The confused story has an awful cinematography and camera work, with a cast that is probably studying to be actors and actresses and in the end this film seems to be a bad project of cinema school. The terrible and pretentious screenplay shows a ridiculous twist in the end, actually a complete mess that made me not understand what the story is all about. Was the girl insane and traveled alone in the boat, imagining the whole situation with imaginary friends? If that is true, are their friend again in the very end fruit of her madness? My vote is one.Title (Brazil): \"Viagem Para a Morte\" (\"Trip to the Death\")",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d2c8e65d4c840a4ada9290822e3b168",
            "input": "This is the kind of movie i fear the most. Arrogant and Irresponsible, it presents a sketch of the colombian conflict so cliched and dumb it represents an insult to all Colombian people. The performances are godawul, from Grisales (her naked scene is absolutely pitiful), to Bejarano, to Fanny Mickey (who looks right out of a Tim Burton nightmare), to Díaz, who makes a notable effort to bring life to a character so one-dimensional, so cliched and so badly written all he´s left to work with is a mustache. Not to mention the gratuitous ending, a gore fest so cheesy that it would make Ed Wood cringe. It fails in all ways, cinematography, art direction, costumes, makeup, editing, and most of all directing, Jorge Alí Triana has always been a lousy filmmaker but at least his previous movies had some dignity. I can't say anything good about this waste of money, except that i hope Colombian filmmakers learn a lesson about honesty, integrity and responsability from this mean-intended fiasco.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-554359926d7c4a2e8ebceb56706bed0f",
            "input": "This movie is a great way for the series to finally end. Peter (the boy from Puppet Master III) is all grown up and is now the Puppet Master. Well, this girl comes to destroy the puppets and learn Toulon's secrets but instead she listens to the story about the puppets. Most of this movie is footage from Puppet Master II, Puppet Master III, Puppet Master 4, Puppet Master 5, Curse of the Puppet Master, and Retro Puppet Master (sorry... But I guess Paramount wouldn't let them use scenes from 1). Personally I wish Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys would finally be made but the way this movie ends they basically say \"This is THE final movie in the series...\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13f39677a15d4359ae3fef383307aea5",
            "input": "i have to say that this was the worst film of priyadarshan(releasing alongside much better kyonki which was also his directorial venture) ,it contains no specific storyline and just focuses on body showing by debuting actresses and some silly comedy sequences. I think priyadarshan is becoming too much repetitive in his comedy flicks just like govinda and David dhavan had done in the past after giving some good entertainers they also went on to loose their audiences.So it will be good for him to concentrate more on script and try some variations in his direction.Give us more of herapheri's and malamal weekly's rather than giving duds like garam masala!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11a46577ae1442528d848c2cc89edbdf",
            "input": "The TV guide calls this movie a mystery. What is a mystery to me is how is it possible that a culture that can produce such intricate and complex classical music and brilliant mathematicians cannot produce a single film that would rise above the despicable trash level this film so perfectly represents. This is Bollywood at its best/worst, I honestly cannot tell the difference. Nauseatingly sweet, kitschy clichés on every level, story-line, situations, dialog, music and choreography. To put it bluntly, you must be a retard to enjoy it. I watched it to satisfy my cultural curiosity, but there were times when I had to walk away from it, because I could not take it any more. The only redeeming quality of the movie is the exquisite beauty of the leading actresses. ",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2adca53c25d4d4eb2272fd9baccf9e8",
            "input": "This picture started out with good intentions, Bacon the scientist out to test the theory of invisibility, and Shue is cute as usual in her role. It all falls apart after that, it's your typical Hollywood thriller now, filmed on a soundstage with special effects galore, minus any kind of humour, wit or soul. In other words, don't waste your time watching this. Get the audiocassette tape with John DeLancie as the Invisible Man instead, also starring Leonard Nimoy. Now that was good, and HG Wells is well served, unlike with this mess.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f0a2e78c0604a3eb0945430b2f49d47",
            "input": "This was stupid funny movie.. Cheech and Chong are the dopiest wasted guys ever... i rate this film a 7.. but if you like this one then go see Jay and Silentbob! There funnier and crazier. Now Cheech is a sellout working on kids movies..... wheres chong?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2f9c56f407244e4ab2f2e26af907c60",
            "input": "Admittedly, I find Al Pacino to be a guilty pleasure. He was a fine actor until Scent of a Woman, where he apparently overdosed on himself irreparably. I hoped this film, of which I'd heard almost nothing growing up, would be a nice little gem. An overlooked, ahead-of-its-time, intelligent and engaging city-political thriller. It's not.City Hall is a movie that clouds its plot with so many characters, names, and \"realistic\" citywide issues, that for a while you think its a plot in scope so broad and implicating, that once you find out the truth, it will blow your mind. In truth, however, these subplots and digressions result ultimately in fairly tame and very familiar urban story trademarks such as Corruption of Power, Two-Faced Politicians, Mafia with Police ties, etc. And theoretically, this setup allows for some thrilling tension, the fear that none of the characters are safe, and anything could happen! But again, it really doesn't.Unfortunately, the only things that happen are quite predictable, and we're left with several \"confession\" monologues, that are meant as a whole to form modern a fable of sorts, a lesson in the moral ambiguity of the \"real world\" of politics and society. But after 110 minutes of names and missing reports and a spider-web of lies and cover-ups, the audience is usually treated to a somewhat satisfying reveal. I don't think we're left with that in City Hall, and while it's a very full film, I don't find it altogether rich.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52be90fc710f4cb4b6f6c79551b61340",
            "input": "After reading tons of good reviews about this movie I decided to take it for a spin (I bought it on DVD, hence the \"spin\" pun...I'm a dork). The beginning was everything I hoped for, a perfect set-up (along with some quotes that I've heard on Various Wu-Tang albums) to what should have been a good movie. But the plot I heard was so great, was so predictable. Every time I saw a character (except for the Lizard) I guessed which Venom he was. Plus, the only cool character gets killed off in the middle of the movie. Ok, so the plot wasn't very good but at least there was some good kung-fu right? Wrong. The fights were very short and few and far between. Granted the different styles were all pretty cool but I wish the fights were longer. I kept hoping to see the Lizard run and do some crazy ish on the walls but it never happened. I was hoping to see the Centipede do some tight speedy ish but it never happened. I was hoping to see the Scorpion in the movie for more than 7 total minutes but it never happened. In short, not much happens. The fighting is all pretty routine. Don't be fooled just becuase this movie has a plot, it does not mean it's a good one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c220bb80ae9a46ca89afcd2b06e01bbf",
            "input": "Shamefully, before I saw this film, I was unfamiliar with Helena Bonham Carter.I had to do some research, in order to assure myself she wasn't actually afflicted, as was her character, with (well?), what she was afflicted with. I was in absolute awe of this beautiful lady. She pulled it of flawlessly.Who would have thought that sexually explicit circumstances involving the final wants, and needs, of a unique young lady, could be interpreted as tender, and romantic? Well, they can be, when the right performers present them in the proper manner, as they did in this wonderful movie. I forgot to mention how dynamically beautiful Miss Carter looked in this movie. I have often said she was the most beautiful creature to have ever graced the face of our earth, but she seemed to have out done herself in this particular movie.I hope any of you who watch this movie enjoy it as much as I did. Thank you for letting me express my opinion.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8dfa14322e7a430a86cf87000638283d",
            "input": "This low budget B horror's plot comes with all the amenities - mad scientist complete with sidekick, malicious corporate greed of pharmaceutical industry, eccentric and extreme genetic engineering, and information technology....can't leave that out.Start with strange sequence of hot looking nameless boaters that foolishly decide to take a dip in the waters near an uncharted island and end up chum for swarming hammerhead sharks.....Cut to weak back story implying the stock decline of a generic pharma corporation which motivates its wicked Shakespeare quoting CEO to entertain an un-solicited offer made by a former employee/scientist that was jilted out of his job as head of research and who also happens to be a nut...of course (total Herbert West wannabe). He is offering up a new stem cell technology that could make tons o' cash...or so it seems...This lures in several employees to his Moreau-ish island (must have been quite an impressive exit package from the company when he was let go for him to afford an island) to validate his scientific findings including the CEO and, co-incidentally, the ex-fiancé of the mad scientist's son now morphed sharkuman (how convenient)....The plan, sort of, is to rekindle lost love between the former nuptials while exacting revenge on the former colleagues for his termination. (Sheez, how can this guy be bitter? He has his own friggen' island after all...).Soon, everyone is on the run (from endless supply of security guards toting heavy weaponry, from mutant plants – can there be an uncharted island without man-eating plants?, from sharky son's appetite for carnage, from quack daddy's breeding plans, and from lack of a cell phone signal)...and they all must learn to work together to get off the island alive! Will anyone escape? Will a new species be created? Watch it and find out.There is some entertainment value in this movie, but don't expect much...for the true Combs fan, this is not to be missed. Don't say I didn't warn you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f2340e8cf3f4ad2af58029578dc2931",
            "input": "I just came back from Hong Kong on my summer vacation and saw the Legend of ZU. I thought it kicked a*s! It was so creative and unique. It's the Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon with a lot less drama. Even if some thought there was too much special FX(yeah right!), you can't complain about the cast. Zhang Ziyi and Cecilia Cheung are so fine!!! The Legend of ZU.....kicks a*s!!!!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88274f2a18c747af8208b7cb09d5ac83",
            "input": "To my surprise, I really enjoyed Disney's latest animation installment. The Film had its lows, but overall I felt the story was strong and the characters were easy to relate to. It was also pleasant to see an Animated Disney film that was not a musical. I was about pushed to the limits with Tarzan. Thankfully they gave the music thing a rest. Another nice feature about the film is that the comedy was not completely dumbed down (a la Hercules), rather subtle so it still made the kids laugh while not make the adults feel giddy or just plain stupid.One disappointment was the animation. With all the great animated films happening outside Disney studios, you would think they would move along and catch up a little. There is something to say about tradition, but imagine the possibilities with the story of Atlantis! Overall the film was entertaining, and definitely worth a trip to the multiplex.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e4d3924c0f04617ab1acf721256996c",
            "input": "Always enjoy great films which deal with the super-natural and the deep thoughts of the Spiritual world. However, this film just turned me off as far as its production and direction. There is nothing to go into deep discussion about what this story has to tell; all I can say is that it was a big waste of time and effort to put it on the big screen. The actors, namely: Mark Addy, Thomas Garrett, gave an outstanding performance in his native land England, and we have seen him in \"Still Standing\" a TV Series. Heath Ledger, played the real wicked dude and we have recently viewed him in \"Brokeback Mountain\",'05, gave a great supporting role. Shannyn Sossaman, (Mara Sinclair), did a good job of seducing a priest from a church not recognized by any faith. Don't waste your time, you will be sorry!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6737e78d9df4d8d912e0e0f0b716534",
            "input": "I'm still trying to decide if this is indeed, the worst film I have ever seen - A very disturbing problem with this film is that real scientists are interviewed, but their footage is edited to make it look as though they support the ideas of the many BSers who populate this film. The BS to signal ratio of the interviews is about ten thousand to one - at the end, the interviewees seem to be saying, \"We want you to _think_ !!\", but they themselves are too lazy to do simple research about things they assert as fact.If you feel that you are open-minded, and wish to expand your consciousness, please be open-minded enough to read some actual books about quantum theory: \"Einstein's Universe\", Nigel Calder (a slim volume, not a challenge), \"The Cosmic Code\", by Heinz Pagels. If you can't bring yourself to read a book, please don't complain to reviewers about being \"open-minded\".To recap, this film is just unbelievably bad.You know what's a really good film which questions the nature of reality? \"Thirteenth Floor\", directed by Roland Emmerich, with Craig Bierko, Gretchen Mol, Vincent D'onofrio. Smart, sexy, thought-provoking.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01df3e172b6e4a48a1561a968c24c48a",
            "input": "The violent and rebel twenty-five years old sailor Antwone Fisher (Derek Luke) is sent to three sessions for evaluation with the navy psychiatrist Dr. Jerome Davenport (Denzel Washington), after another outburst and aggression against a superior ranked navy man. Reluctant in the beginning of the treatment, he gets confidence in Dr. Davenport and discloses his childhood, revealing painful traumas generated in his foster house. Meanwhile, he meets Cheryl Smolley (Joy Briant), and they fall in love for each other. Resolving his personal problems, Antwone becomes a new man. This true familial drama is a touching and positive story of a man who finds a friend and is sent back to a regular life. The direction of Denzel Washington is excellent, making sensitive, attractive and with good taste, a story about child abuse. In the hands of another director, it might be a very heavy story. My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): 'Voltando a Viver' ('Returning to Live')",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f214ec117b944a4884f44409d76fa6ec",
            "input": "2002's undeservedly popular \"I Love the 80's\" is an inane, idiotic, offensive and downright disgusting pop-culture mess of a show that was the first in a long-line of horrid television programming that ultimately spelled out the end of VH1, which was at one time the only real music-oriented channel left on TV! I used to practically live on VH1 up until the spring or winter, I forget which one now, of 2002 when garbage like this started to appear for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Out of sheer morbid curiosity (I'd guess that's what you'd call it) I had decided that I would go ahead and give it a look-see anyhow the first night it came on even though the advertisements looked like complete crap. At least I can honestly say that I wasn't a bit disappointed by it because my expectations were obviously bottom basement-level to begin with. The emphasis of this show I found out within the first 5 minutes was less on each year of the 1980's and what was and wasn't culturally significant or popular (which is what I was expecting to see), but instead more of an impromptu platform for a whole slew of really god-awful no-name comedians to display what they more than likely think is their comedic skills *rolls eyes*...more like lack-thereof if you ask me! It's pretty easy now to see why no one had ever heard of any of these idiots before they appeared on this show because they are all so terribly unfunny and pathetic in their attempts at so-called \"humor\" that I swear I could feel my intestines knot up with each and every rancid one-liner they shot off one after another! Altogether, I have no problem in saying that \"I Love the 80's\" was/is trash of the lowest denominator, and one of the main reasons why I almost never watch VH1 anymore.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7d4404e292394532b835ea9036b97e5c",
            "input": "KING KONG VS. GODZILLA (1963; which I recall having rated BOMB) had been my introduction to cult director Honda's work; this one isn't necessarily better – it's just that I've learned to be more tolerant towards such intrinsically lowbrow fare! Here, we actually get two Kongs for the price of one: an ugly and dopey-looking giant ape and a robot variation of it which looks even worse! The simian creature lives on the island of Mondo(!) – where it's shown fighting a couple of other monsters, and befriends a trio of humans. Naturally, it falls for the blonde (and bland) heroine; in fact, more intriguing is a femme fatale in cahoots with the film's villainous mad genius – called Dr. Who and sporting the anemic look and cape usually associated with a vampire!!He kidnaps King Kong and hypnotizes it in order to retrieve the Element X, which is embedded in the icy wastes of the North Pole; apparently, the giant ape is more impervious to radiation than its mechanical counterpart (and, to ensure its full co-operation, Who even captures its three 'companions')! The female agent then has a change of heart, helps the heroes (one of whom, typically, is a nondescript American) and is killed by Who. Kong eventually escapes and makes it to Tokyo, where it has a final showdown with the robot. The doctor flees the ensuing mayhem in his sub – which, on a request by Kong's dreamgirl, is summarily trashed by the giant ape.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf2a3924cbb3447fa3a924b06a5eb0f0",
            "input": "You know when you're on the bus and someone decides to tell you their life-story, and you sit there with a pathetic smile on your face when all you really want to do is slap the fool and walk off? Well I had a similar sensation while watching this film. Okay, I did actually choose to go and see Aprile, and I knew about Nanni Moretti's taste for making himself the one and only star from Caro Diario, but after about half an hour of this latest installment from his memoirs I wanted to give Moretti the madre of all slaps. Caro Diario was funny, unusual, and at least a couple of other characters managed to get a word in edgeways. In Aprile, however, Moretti has exclusive rights to the dialogue, so that all you hear for an hour and a half is a high-pitched whine going on about how his politics are best, or what quirky piece of popular culture is tickling his fancy at the moment. He also finds time to slag off films that he doesn't like, something I thought was reserved for losers like me. Surely being in a position like his you'd think he'd try and make a point about cinema a little more intelligently than this. By making a proper film perhaps, one with some ideas and a decent structure, or maybe one that isn't completely dominated by his annoying voice. And when he started fawning over his newborn baby, I just wanted to go and be in the company of someone normal, preferably not a self-obsessed film director with a strange penchant for tacky music. The next time someone you don't know tries to tell you their life-story, give them a slap from me. Every blow will be a small victory in the fight against Morettiism.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a7fcce823a946b2917183cd1dfec25d",
            "input": "Alan (Anthony Steffen), an English multi-millionaire with a few screws loose (thanks to his first wife's infidelity and untimely death during childbirth), entices sexy, red-headed women to his castle, offering them bundles of cash to stay the weekend. Once back at his ancestral pile, he gets them nekkid, proceeds to flog them with a bull-whip, and then kills them.But when he meets blonde hottie Gladys (Marina Malfatti) and falls for her ample charms, he decides to give up his murderous ways and get married. Their wedded bliss is short-lived, however, thanks to Alan's iffy mental state, which becomes increasingly fragile when his dead wife Evelyn starts to appear outside his window and a spate of gruesome murders occur within the castle grounds.So let's recap: a groovy 70s Euro-horror with loads of tasty women in various states of undress; spooky Gothic retreats and misty graveyards; a sadistic rich psycho with a penchant for drop-dead gorgeous babes with cracking bods; several vicious murders (including a great bit where one victim has her head bashed in with a rock and her entrails eaten by foxes). Normally, a checklist like that would guarantee me a good time—so why did I find 'The Night Evelyn Came Out Of Her Grave' so dull? Well, for starters, the plot is way too convoluted: there are red herrings, crazy plot developments, and suspects galore, and it all becomes a bit too much. By the ridiculous ending—in which we discover that, all along, several people have been plotting to get their greedy paws on Alan's wealth, and that our red-head killing nut-job is actually supposed to be the hero of the movie—my head was hurting too much to care! Secondly, Emilio Maraglia's direction is pretty torpid. Stylish, yes; but as slow as molasses at times.And then there's the bits that are just too damn silly, possibly even for a giallo: the death by poisonous snake bite (surely one of the most bizarre choices of weapon ever); Alan's Aunt Agatha, an old crippled relative who is played by a pretty young woman; the hiring of a group of identical curly headed blondes as maids; the poor attempt at convincing the audience that the film is set in England (mentioning 'pounds' and hiring a crap police uniform for one of the extras is not enough); and then, of course, there is the unlikelihood of finding a bag of sulphuric acid laying next to a swimming pool...'The Night Evelyn Came Out Of Her Grave' isn't a total waste of time (how could it be, with so much female flesh on show?), but there are much better giallo's out there. Watch this one if you're a fan of the genre and you've already seen the best—but don't expect too much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b63e593ed7974a78aa3da884f0f142fb",
            "input": "Hopefully the score has changed by now due to my brilliant and stunning review which persuades all of you to go and watch the film thereby creating an instant chorus of \"8\"s, this movie's true score.As mentioned before Chris Rock is The King! Previous to going to see this movie I wasn't that over the top about him but now I'm banging on the doors of Chris Rock's website begging him to take me on as his protege. This film is truly funny, if you don't find this movie funny you REALLY need therapy and it's humour which targets all areas of society including race(predictably), class division, love, wealth, employment, dreams, stand up comedy... the list goes on.There was one slight disappointment for me however. This was that in going into this film I didn't realise that it was actually a remake of \"Heaven Can Wait\" another quite good movie made in 1971 with Warren Beatty. As such I was quite surprised when I watched this movie and suddenly the plot began to unravel to be distinctly similar to an older movie I had watched on TV a few weeks ago.. Regardless this movie is in my opinion the better version out of the two of them simply because of the different areas it covers and the fact that Chris Rock is funnier than Warren Beatty any second of any day of any week of any year of any...you get the picture.Well to the actual plot of the film.Don't spoil the experience for yourself! Don't read the plot! Just go and watch a movie because there have been two reviews on IMDb so far that have raved mad about it, go see it because it is the funniest thing you would have seen in a long time, go and see it because it's a cinema experience that doesn't leave you grumbling ad nauseum at the cost of cinema tickets. Go see it because it is a good movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23435c4a400d402ebd56d58cf9e4e573",
            "input": "I cried my heart out, watching this movie. I have never suffered from any eating disorder, but I think this must be a very true picture.Alison Lohman is excellent! She expresses these feelings amazingly well. My teenage years came back to me so vividly. Anyone who has gone through difficult times as a child or teenager will be able to relate to this movie. I recommend you all to see it!The music is great too - I've now discovered Diana Lorden.I'm also looking forward to seeing Alison Lohman in White Oléander, because I am positive she is perfectly suited for the role as Agnes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7138772d8654cddbf09c11a9f1b5d25",
            "input": "I had tried to rent this on many occasions, but was always with the girlfriend, who, as a general rule, usually rejects heist flicks and ensemble comedies with the comment \"Uhm... looks good, but i'm not in the mood for that movie.\" Thus entereth the \"Almighty Solo Movie Night\"!Anyway, I found Welcome To Collinwood a rather enjoyable movie. While ultimately fairly forgettable, it does have moments of fun and a few laugh out loud moments. I was unfamiliar with the fact that it was a remake, and as a general rule watch movies trying to ignore that fact and watch them on their own merits anyway. George Clooney puts in a humorous and brief cameo as a wheeled safe cracker that, for the most part left me wondering two things... 1. wouldn't every comedy be better if Mr. Clooney put in a strange 5 minute cameo? and 2. How do they make fake tattoos that look old and faded, and how easily do they wash off? The cast, all fine actors in their own right, put in a great job, and you get the impression that they had a good time working together which is fairly important in a movie like this. Needless to say all does not go as planned in this movie, both plot-wise and humor-wise, but it made me check out the special features and consider watching the original, so I consider it a success! Rent this one for a good time, maybe grab a few friends and a pizza. you'll have a good time.***7/10***On a side note, the soundtrack is spectacular. It's great to hear the far under appreciated Paolo Conte used, and it left me humming snippets of the score long after the credits rolled.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e34211299dac48f59bde73cdc299c203",
            "input": "What is most disturbing about this film is not that school killing sprees like the one depicted actually happen, but that the truth is they are carried out by teenagers like Cal and Andre...normal kids with normal families. By using a hand held camera technique a la Blair Witch, Ben Coccio succeeds in bringing us into the lives of two friends who have some issues with high school, although we aren't ever told exactly what is behind those issues. They seem to be typical -a lot of people hate high school, so what? A part of you just doesn't believe they will ever carry out the very well thought out massacre on Zero Day. The surveillance camera scenes in the school during the shooting are made all the more powerful for that reason. You can't believe it's really happening, and that it's really happened. The hand held camera technique also creates the illusion that this is not a scripted movie, a brilliant idea given the subject matter.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e668a134c9a84487a2956646dc6fedc0",
            "input": "The guy did a lot of title design for a bunch of movies and I guess one day he said; I should pick a cheap scenario, try to put as much title in it as a can ( cause after all i'm a title designer ) and try to persuade people that this is in fact a movie. One of the worst i've even seen that's for sure. If you fell the urge to see nice titles, go check out some posters don't waste your time watching this.It kinda ironic don't you think, did you saw the poster? the only part of his project that SHOULD had title work done have almost none !",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-54f399d0510f4a2f9f3d5a813d965493",
            "input": "I couldn't make sense of this film much of the time, and neither could anyone else, based on other reviews. The opening scene of this film has virtually nothing to do with the rest of the story. In it, a photojournalist with a big mustache cancels his vacation to get away from his girlfriend. He is assigned to photograph a mountain range. It's rumored to be haunted, but I couldn't tell whether he heard that from his boss or later in the film. On his way, he meets a beautiful writer (Patty Shepard) and convinces her to join him on his working trip. Throughout the film, there is this terrible music score, mostly consisting of noisy singing that makes you want to scream \"SHUT UP ALREADY!!!\" What really will gall a person is that the film always seems like it's about to become good, though it never does. There is beautiful mountain scenery and some genuinely creepy atmosphere. The inn and the silent, abandoned old buildings scattered on the mountain are rather ominous. The foggy nights look real, not like someone put an artificial fog machine on the set. And the idea, while not original, had potential. But it never does improve, at least not enough to be worthwhile. Here's how it goes, more or less. They stop at this inn run by a weird innkeeper (you expect him to be named Igor) with a hearing problem. There is a scene where the writer thinks a peeping tom is in her window, but the scene is so dark, I had no idea what was going on. Whether this was poor lighting or a poor film transfer is unknown to me. In any event, we never find out know what happened. There is a scene where she wanders off during the night. Whether she is sleepwalking or mesmerized by the witches of the title is never explained. Another scene which is never explained is when their car is stolen, then found again, with nothing stolen. They wind up in this apparently abandoned mountain village whose sole inhabitant is this seemingly kindly old woman. There are other things, including a chained wild man in a cave who is never explained, an attempt to sacrifice the writer in some way (will they kill her or brainwash her into joining them?), the witches themselves, a bunch of brunette women in white robes who don't show up until the last 15 minutes of the film and whose practices and beliefs are never explained. Even the closing scene doesn't make any sense. When all is said and done, most people will be saying, \"Huh?\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cddd22de70dc49f5a3ce7d048e0cb404",
            "input": "THE TEMP (1993) didn't do much theatrical business, but here's the direct-to-video rip-off you didn't want, anyway! Ellen Bradford (Mel Harris) is the new woman at Millennium Investments, a high scale brokerage firm, who starts getting helpful hints from wide-eyed secretary Deidre (Sheila Kelley). Deidre turns out to be an ambitious daddy's girl who will stop at nothing to move up the corporate ladder, including screwing a top broker she can't stand and murdering anyone who gets on her bad side. She digs up skeletons in Ellen's closet, tries to cause problems with her husband (Barry Bostwick), kills while making it look like she is responsible, kidnaps her daughter and tries to get her to embezzle money from the company.Harris and Kelley deliver competent performances, the supporting cast is alright and it's reasonably well put-together, but that doesn't fully compensate for a script that travels down a well-worn path and offers few surprises.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d89670463ce42e4b33faebcaa2b2862",
            "input": "I had quite high hopes for this film, even though it got a bad review in the paper. I was extremely tolerant, and sat through the entire film. I felt quite sick by the end.Although I am not in the least prude or particularly sensitive to tasteless cinema--I thouroughly enjoyed both Woody Allen's 'Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Sex,...' and Michael Hanneke's 'Funny Games'--I found the directors' obsession with this ten-year-old wanting to drink women's milk totally sickening. And when the film climaxed in an \"orgy\" where the boy drinks both his mother's milk, as well as that of the woman he has been lusting after for the whole film, I almost vomited with disgust for the total perversion and sentimental pap that it is.Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the vast majority of European cinema, as well as independently made films, so this flick should have pleased me enormously. Avoid this film at all costs, it should be relegated to the annals of History as a lesson in bad cinema.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b5e68e370724b82abaf49d718e8e62c",
            "input": "WHEN I first saw this film, in London, in 1958, I was bowled over. I had never seen a film like this before. It had a strange, hypnotic effect, quite unlike the films that I had seen previously and it left a lasting impact.I believe that Odile Versios & Marina Vlady are sisters, if not twins. Certainly the interaction is amazing in its power to influence the viewer.If this has been converted to DVD - in Region 2 format - and in the original French language, I would love to hear about it & where it can be purchased.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bd4b7fd0f9f64559962fc11f2b5ca529",
            "input": "This movie was very good because it remember when I was young when I maked snow castle. It was so fun. This movie is interessant. This is a good quebeker movie with no much money and is also a magical movie because their wonderfull castle is very big and beautiful.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb4b8bc4ab3c47b996181e203e9a380e",
            "input": "The synopsis for this movie does a great job at explaining what to expect. It's a very good thriller. Well shot. Tough to believe it was Bill Paxton's directorial debut, though some shots do look EXACTLY like a storyboard version. Still, there are a few shots that really look good and show some real imagination on the part of Paxton. It's a solid story with some great twists at the end, several of them, all believable, all fun, and best of all, obscured well enough to make them true twists. The child actors in the movie do a great, too. I'm usually wary of movies with kids in starring roles because all too often they come off as Nickelodeon rejects, but both these kids do a good job.This movie is not gory. It's not very scary. But it IS very, very creepy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2f6f08cb89b4104af2df2b59427fedb",
            "input": "in this movie, joe pesci slams dunks a basketball. joe pesci...and being consistent, the rest of the script is equally not believable.pesci is a funny guy, which saves this film from sinking int the absolute back of the cellar, but the other roles were pretty bad. the father was a greedy businessman who valued money more than people, which wasn't even well-played. instead of the man being an archetypal villain, he seemed more like an amoral android programmed to make money at all costs. then there's the token piece that is assigned to pesci as a girlfriend or something...i don't even remember...she was that forgettable.anyone who rates this movie above a 5 or 6 is a paid member of some sort of film studio trying to up the reputation of this sunken film, or at least one of those millions of media minions who can't critique efficiently (you know, the people who feel bad if they give anything a mark below 6).stay away...far away. and shame on comedy central, where i saw this film. they usually pick better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6d66a39f86542998548fface2df16b2",
            "input": "-me and my sister have right now watch that movie. we have laugh to the deaf. can u imagine on covers there is nomination for Oscar?? --first, musician have mix about 4-5 different style of music... and the music is not synchronized with the scenes and the character moves...---main character Silvester do not fit in there. he look like Mexican Tarzan.----Russian soldiers are everything but not Russian faces :-) -----ok, the main points: 1. airplane called charter painted in black...2. what is an idea when Rambo go to jump from the airplane, but he stuck? rope mix 3. a Girl? the best scene is when she dies. She means a lot to him. he knows her for ages? he cries for her, ... o my god samurai 4. how many arrows is he got? his arrow bag is always full of the arrows? i didn't notice a scene where he collect them - but i have seen the scene where arrow stay in the Vietnam solder head - that is very important 5. how many rockets helicopter can hold??? (real one) i have seen 4. but Rambos have hit about 20 of them.6. the main part. what the Russian special army helicopters do in Vietnam????????? after the war? 7. first scene when he enter into Vietnam's camp... his first idea was to liberate the refuge who is standing on the tree on the open space' wow, what an idea than again: 1. with the knife u can cut the iron wire? maybe only made in Vietnam? 2. mortar - using for hit one running man? o my god, u Americans really need to learn about the weapons! do u know how much it takes to calibrate the mortar (i think writer have been watching to much movies from II world war)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71167dfd0a164df1a633b3e6e93154f2",
            "input": "When Sabrina first came onto our screens i was about 12, and therefore spent my teenage years watching the teenage witch get into all kinds of weird predicaments.It was always one of my favourite programmes, the witchy feeling of sixties sitcom 'Bewitched' but this time the character was cooler. I always liked Sabrina because she was smart. She was also friendly and easy going which made her enjoyable to watch. The characters at the beginning were great; Harvey, Jenny, Libby, the quizmaster, Salem and Mr. Poole (my personal fave, shame he left so early on) Hilda and Zelda her aunts started off OK, but then became irritating.I liked Mr. Kraft too as he was always that little bit closer to discovering Sabrina's secret. What i loved about the first three series was the original ideas, the discovering of the family secret and learning new spells but as it went on it became more predictable. Too many characters came and left, such as Valerie, Dreama and Brad and then they decided to do Sabrina at college which ruined it for me.Sabrina became self-absorbed at college, there was less magic, no spell book, no aunts living with her and Roxie, Miles and Morgan were annoying.The last series was boring, and i only watched to see what happened in the end. Not having Hilda and Zelda seemed wrong somehow and Miles was gone just like that. The last episode made me feel a lot better though (SPOILER)having Sabrina end up with Harvey on her wedding day to dullard Aaron was great! Overall a great programme if you forget the poor last two or three series which reminded me of so many teen shows. Magical.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c99e36b3fff84b90a6f678d8e8b414ee",
            "input": "The story is extremely unique.It's about these 2 pilots saving Earth from alien beings but they have to use a special speed that makes everything around them age rapidly.The whole series is about the pilots dealing with the loss of time,friends,and mentors.The ending COULD have been fantastic.It started to end on a total down note and leave a real mark but instead ended on a super happy Disney note and annoyed me VERY bad.The animation is decent for 89 but can't compare to nowadays.I have also heard many complain about the cheesiness of the nudity.I actually found it to be somewhat decent.The nudity for the most part was warranted except in episode 2 where there was an excess.Overall it deserves a look but the ending keeps it from being a classic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66ae15d60e944f1aa5034d937e8d2b2a",
            "input": "Val Kilmer and Dylan McDermott are terrific. I have seen Kilmer on The Doors, however his interpretation of John Holmes is superb. Nothing compared to Boogie Nights which was kind of slow. Wonderland is a movie which is able to show you a horrible crime story from the perspective from a guy who is just indulged in his drug vice and indolent of what ever happens around. At the same time, the John Holmes character shows a very clever hustler who is able to pass through the nastiest and ugliest situations almost unharmed. The movie deserves being watched more than once. The seventies ambiance sensual and full of drugs is amazing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ee7bf2aa5da4167b72040fabaf32deb",
            "input": "Several years ago the Navy kept a studied distance away from the making of \"Men of Honor,\" a film based on the experiences of the service's first black master chief diver's struggle to overcome virulent racism. Ever eager to support films showing our Navy's best side the U.S.S. Nimitz and two helicopter assault carriers, with supporting shore installations, were provided to complement this engrossing tale of a young sailor's battle with uncontrollable rage. Some of the movie was shot aboard the U.S.S. Belleau Wood.Antwone Fisher wrote the script for Denzel Washington's director's debut in which he stars as a Navy psychiatrist treating Fisher, played effectively and deeply by Derek Luke.Fisher is an obviously bright enlisted man assigned to the U.S.S. Belleau Wood (LHA-3), a front line helicopter assault platform. Fisher can't seem to avoid launching his own assaults at minimal provocation from his fellow enlisted men. Sent to the M.D. as part of a possible pre-separation proceeding, Fisher slowly opens up to the black psychiatrist, revealing an awful childhood of great neglect and shuddering brutality.The story develops as Fisher cautiously but increasingly trusts his doctor and gets the courage to pursue a love interest, an enlisted sailor named Cheryl, played by a stunningly beautiful Joy Bryant.Fisher reluctantly engages with the doctor by asking long simmering questions but soon realizes he must seek the answers, however painful, in order to grow and move away from conflict-seeking destructive behavior.While all the main characters are black, this story transcends race while unflinchingly showing the evil of exuberant religiosity and concomitant hypocrisy in foster family settings. Viola Davis, a versatile actress seen in a number of recent films, is a picture of sullen immorality but is nothing compared to foster mom, Mrs. Tate (Novella Nelson), who in short but searing scenes would earn - if it existed - the Oscar for gut-churning brutality.Films about patient-therapist interaction follow a certain predictability (all that transference and counter-transference stuff) but the earnestness of Fisher and his doctor/mentor is realistically gripping. It's a good story, well told. Period.While set in the Navy, \"Antwone Fisher\" is not in any real sense a service story as was \"Men of Honor,\" an excellent movie that dealt with crushing racism directed against a real person. Nor is it truly a film about blacks. It's about surviving terrible childhood experiences and, as Fisher says, being able to proclaim in adulthood that the victim is still \"standing tall.\" The persecutors shrink in size and significance as a brave and strong young man claims his right to a decent life with the aid of a caring doctor.My only quibble is that Washington is a lieutenant commander but is addressed as commander. With all the Navy support people listed in the end credits, someone should have told Director Washington that his character, like all naval officers below the rank of commander, is addressed as \"Mister.\" Not a big criticism, is it? :)I don't know why this film is playing in so few theaters. It deserves wide distribution. Derek Luke may well get an Oscar nomination.8/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9cef6d2555884b6ebcd72a1ce7d75471",
            "input": "At the end of this episode Holmes asks Watson not to record the case for posterity.For a good reason! The super sleuth left his little grey cells(sorry Agatha)at home for this tale. There is no deductive reasoning,no acute analysis of signs at crime scenes. Holmes bumbles along fifty yards behind the plot. The dastardly CAM is finally dealt to by an old frail-in a manner that would have made Charles Bronson's heart swell with pride-six bullets in the breadbasket.In an ensuing chase a pursuer gets hold of one of Watson's shoes.Mercifully the writer didn't decide to tack on the story of Cinderella to lengthen the film.The murderess,Holmes and Watson,escape scot free. Oh well,it is a bit of a change of pace in late Victorian London.A bit of sixgun law:-)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c5d5d75b47c4925a531783e6a564e61",
            "input": "Madhur Bhandarkar directs this film that is supposed to expose the lifestyle of the rich and famous while also providing a commentary on the integrity of journalism today.Celebrities party endlessly, they like to be seen at these parties, and to get due exposure in the media. In fact the film would have us believe that this exposure MAKES celebrities out of socialites and the newspapers have a huge hand in this. IMO there is much more synergy between the celebrities and media and it is a \"I need you, you need me\" kind of relationship. However, the media needs celebrities more and not vice versa. Anyhow, in this milieu of constant partying is thrown the social column (page 3 of the newspaper) reporter Konkana Sen Sharma. She is shown as this celebrity maker, very popular at the social gatherings. She has a good friend in the gay Abhijeet and in the struggling model Rohit (Bikram Saluja). She rooms with an air-hostess – the sassy Pearl (Sandhya Mridul), and a struggling actress - Gayatri (Tara Sharma). The editor of the newspaper is Boman Irani and a firebrand crime beat reporter is played by Atul Kulkarni. The movie has almost too many plot diversions and characters but does work at a certain level. The rich are shown to be rotten to the core for the most part, the movie biz shown to be sleazy to the max with casting couch scenarios, exploitation of power, hunger for media exposure. Into all this is layered in homosexuality, a homosexual encounter that seems to not have much to do with the story or plot, rampant drug use, pedophilia, police \"encounter\" deaths. In light of all this Pearl's desire to have a super rich husband, a socialite daughter indulging in a sexual encounter in a car, the bitching women, all seem benign ills.The film has absolutely excellent acting by Konkana Sen Sharma, Atul Kulkarni has almost no role – a pity in my opinion. But the supporting cast is more than competent (Boman Irani is very good). This is what saves the film for me. Mr. Bhandarkar bites off way more than he can chew or process onto celluloid and turns the film into a free for all bash. I wish he had focused on one or two aspects of societal ills and explored them more effectively. He berates societal exploitation yet himself exploits all the masala ingredients needed for a film to be successful. We have an item number in the framework of a Bollywood theme party, the drugged out kids dance a perfectly choreographed dance to a Western beat. I hope the next one from Madhur Bhandarkar dares to ditch even more of the Hindi film stereotyped ingredients. The film is a brave (albeit flawed) effort, certainly worth a watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-928cc0fe3fce4fe5a0202a400ea53272",
            "input": "The premise of the story is simple: An old man living alone in the woods accidentally stumble upon a murder of a small child, and tries to convince the police that the murder has occurred. Though very little dialog is provided throughout the film, the visual narrative told by the camera's eye alone made the film quite engaging. The setting of the gray woods conveys a feeling of loneliness, which complements the quietness of the characters themselves. We can also sense helplessness in the old man's inability to convince the police of the murder, which parallels the silenced child's inability to tell her own story.True horror lies in feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, and irrationality. This film successfully addresses these elements by visuals alone, rather than relying on cheap sound effects or blood and gore that other bad horror films use when the narrative is weak.Cleverly, the story unfolds at a slow pace to build up tension for a few creepy and startling moments. The ending is also unexpected and believable. Reminiscent of Japanese horror films, such as \"The Ring,\" and \"Dark Water,\" or English horror films, such as \"Lady in Black,\" and \"The Innocents,\" this film provides viewers the experience of true atmosphere horror. I recommend anyone who enjoys a good chilling to the bone scare to give this film a try.By the way, if you haven't seen the films I just mentioned above, you might want to give them a try as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9313e027db3441c29e1b6414976e314b",
            "input": "OK, first of all, ignore the last person' review. They admit to falling asleep through it so it's no wonder they didn't understand what was going on!!! As thriller/horrors go, this film ain't too bad, it is certainly very watchable. Right from the opening scenes you get a general idea exactly what is going to be the cause of all the craziness that follows, and come the end you are proved right with everything being made clear.I enjoyed this movie, it was quite eerie at times and as old films go it was passable. Great to watch late at night! I give it a generous 7 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43611d9d3a184474b7c43db2dd8be899",
            "input": "I LOVED this movie! I am biased seeing as I am a huge Disney fan, but I really enjoyed myself. The action takes off running in the beginning of the film and just keeps going! This is a bit of a departure for Disney, they don't spend quite as much time on character development (my husband pointed this out)and there are no musical numbers. It is strictly action adventure. I thoroughly enjoyed it and recommend it to anyone who loves Disney, be they young or old.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-49f7d687bc56443ba44d4ace45eadcb2",
            "input": "Being from the Philadelphia suburbs and extremely interested in local history, this film provides an excellent vintage view of Philadelphia in the 1940s. There are scenes of downtown, a train station that no longer exists, 30th Street Station--which still does exist, as well as scenes from the Northeast part of the city. Good shots of the old row-homes as they appeared then. The movie gets a bit \"chatty\" at times - causing the viewer to briefly lose interest...but the overall storyline is solid and very moving. Anyone who enjoyed this movie should also try to see the film \"Bright Victory\", also with local footage of the Valley Forge Army Hospital in Phoenixville, PA - and scenes from downtown Phoenixville. The Army Hospital has since become a college campus. Neither of these films are out on any format and I can't imagine why. I have them both on VHS from home recording, as shown on TCM in recent years. I highly recommend them to any other history buffs out there from my area!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b352bf161e5443d496b3dc829800cd92",
            "input": "This is one excellent Sammo Hung movie. Actually, this is a great piece of Hong Kong action cinema. The story tells the story of pedicab drivers in Macao looking for love and getting mixed up w/ a vicious pimp. The performances are excellent and the characters are all likable and well-defined. The story is involving and has enough romance, drama, comedy, and suspense to keep one watching between fight scenes. Sammo Hung proves here that he's probably the best fight choreographer in the business. The action is simply amazing, esp. the fight w/ Lau Kar Leung and the finale. Billy Chow and Sammo Hung are amazing. A must see for any fan of action.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6f8ffc9fa3c41bc830c192fdcd3b32f",
            "input": "Worth watching twice because of the rapid-paced causal shifts among several compelling stories, \"Bug\" emerges as a wholly satisfying work of art that plays ever-optimistic love against myriad examples of frustrating reality.My favorite characters are Wallace (John Carroll Lynch)whose overriding concern for life--from that of a cockroach to the airline passengers for whom he is partially responsible--frames the film; Olive (Christina Kirk), who spends considerable time creating surreal but tasty meals for her impossible husband Ernie (Chris Bauer); and Mitchell, a cable TV technician with unbounded trust in fortune cookie messages: \"You will meet the girl of your dreams.\"Against such optimism are the forces of quirky reality, all generated by actions of the characters: parking tickets, a clogged drain in a Chinese food/donut shop, TV disruption, a crushed auto fender, an obliterated dinner reservation that eventually results in cancellation of a Hawaiian vacation.The film is funny: Olive getting drunk at a Chippendale performance, Johnston (Michael Hitchcock)as a customer service rep attempting to deal with an irate customer, the germ-obsessive Cyr (Brian Cox) facing a restaurant inspector, Dwight (Jamie Kennedy) reacting to his girlfriend's refusal to have children by writing hostile Chinese cookie fortunes: \"Your girlfriend is lying to you\" and the guy who falls asleep while manning a jackhammer because he spent the night looking for his girlfriend's missing cat.A minor story with public cable access host (Darryl Theirse) and a local acting teacher reading from \"The Boy in the Bubble\" expresses the major theme: love comes from the heart.\"Bug\" entertains on much the same level as \"trains, planes and automobiles\" but on a lower budget and with a fresher eye.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38b44909a06b47b8a904445a737ce099",
            "input": "ANTWONE FISHER is the story of a young emotionally troubled U.S. Navy seaman. His problems lead him to Jerome Davenport, a psychiatrist who helps him realize that his troubles stem from his childhood upbringing. Get ready to shed a tear or two. The movie could thaw the coldest heart. I loved the story, which turns from something so very awful to happen to anyone into a positive ending. ANTWONE FISHER is a powerful movie, most importantly about forgiveness. Other important issues that get you thinking are child abuse, adoption, and foster care.Oscar winner, Denzel Washington does an impressive job in his directorial debut. There were many scenes which I enjoyed watching. They included the beginning (dreams of a little boy – check out the gigantic-sized pancakes!) and the ending (dreams turned into reality), which beautifully tied the story together. Another wonderful scene occurred when the doctor encouraged Antwone to search for his family to find answers to his questions about his family that abandoned him. My favorite scene happened when the young man finally confronted his mother and her reaction towards him. Priceless.All the actors represented their parts well. In addition to directorial responsibilities, Mr. Washington continues to show why he won an Oscar award and is successful in all his acting roles. He had a strong presence in this movie.Actor, Derek Luke demonstrated why he was so right for the part of Antwone Fisher. He portrayed very real and heart-tugging work.Joy Bryant who played the part of Cheryl, Antwone's love interest, resembled a ray of sunshine on the screen. The chemistry flowed well between the romantic characters.Novella Nelson who played the part of Mrs. Tate, a despicable character, deserves special mention.Although we only see her for a few minutes, the actress who played Fisher's mother gave an outstanding performance.Everyone should see ANTWONE FISHER.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f4ef764a7a4405c9d99b4b1307681ed",
            "input": "Do not waste your time with this movie. This is a total thrash in terms of acting, directing, sound editing, soundtrack... There was such a waste of performance by some of the very good actors. The movie does not do justice to Paresh Rawal who is perhaps one of the most talented actors in Bollywood. Akshay Kumar who is also an emerging star did quite a poor job. John Abraham, what is wrong with him? Is that what you call acting? I mean he should thank God that he has a pretty face otherwise he'd be winning Razzie awards in India if there were any such awards in Bollywood. Asrani a great talent, but overdoes his bit as before.Screenplay which was not to mention a rip-off from the 1965's Boeing Boeing was quite badly framed. First of all, people in Bollywood just can't make something original. On top of that they don't even know how to copy well. The jokes in the movie were so overdone, it was getting painful to sit through them. Priyadarshan may be a star in the south, but he's just not fit to make a decent Hindi movie. The sound editing is amazingly crappy. I can go on and on this matter, but the bottom-line is that Bollywood should be shameful of making such a film.The worst part is that some people seemed to love this movie. What is wrong with you guys? This is the reason why Bollywood is where it is. Did you know that Bollywood makes more movies than Hollywood every year, however, most of the movies are unheard of abroad, because of movies like this one. I am an Indian and I am utterly shameful of Bollywood for producing this piece of thrash. Movies like Dil Chahta Hai and Lagaan were just terrific. They are world class films which are timeless... among the best of this decade. Garam Masala, however, is perhaps one of the worst of this century. Period.I give it a 1 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4655ef1116bc4a32bdb00e3e937fb8d9",
            "input": "We laughed our heads off. This script is so incredible you either zap to CNN or go to sleep.My dad was a sea captain for 30 years, he could not believe his eyes when he saw the movie.During his experience as an officer he once claimed command over the ship, the captain drunk 3 bottles of whiskey/daily and (sorry) s**t on his desk. Of course this was not on a nuclear mission.For instance, the fire in the kitchen, fire is the most important thing on any ship, nuclear or not. To give a drill at that time is just Hollywood script. When a captain is put under arrest, he IS under arrest, you take all his keys and open the safe where the guns are kept. This is stored within minutes in a well guarded room. He CANNOT escape, it's just like in prison.Funny thing is, my dad also had a dog on board, however, we see how Hackman let him pee in the control room. This is not done, ever. My dad cleaned all the mess the dog made wherever he was.Hackman and Washington make the three stars this movie is credited for, all the rest is bulls**t.When we do know that 23 people were still alive on the Koersk, this film gets an extra dimension.If you want to see a real thriller about a submarine rent: Thas Boat.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4dd716dd9f224553b9c51495899e1fcb",
            "input": "I had just watched one episode of this program and I couldn't even get to the end of the program. Every minute I had watched this program my I.Q must of dropped about 10 points. This is basically like a children's program but with swearing. Not even the swearing and the insults she tells other people made me laugh. Anyways the story must of been written by a monkey and the people who actually put this script for this program through for filming must of been held at gun point and had no choice but to film this retarded, disappointing, horribly acted program. Sarah Silvermann should use the little money she actually made from this program and get some god damn acting lessons.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db1d3746bb484f008f2600cf8bfaa04c",
            "input": "Wow, I can't believe i'm the first and only one to post a comment on this great movie.Although the movie itself seemed interesting enough the real thing that attracted me to this one is Matt lillard, granted most people probably either think he's too caffeine happy or just plain sucks but we're both the same age and from the same generation and i've watched this guy so many times that he's one of my favorites now. This is one of the few movies where he is the big shot and main star kind of like in SLC Punk, another great Lillard film.Baiscally this is storywise your usual heist movies but with more twists than anything, which start to amount to craziness. Also very notable in this movie is another great actor named vincent D'onofrio, a very under appreciated person in the film industry. The woman in the movie is a newcomer and she isn't too bad although you know they hired her mainly for her accent and the nude scene =)It's a game of jack vs jill vs bob as each want to reap the rewards but share with no one. They all try to get eachother to kill off the other and it's a timebomb waiting to explode. Matt shows his true prowess as the scheming JAck who initially starts the whole scheme. Vincent and woman play a couple of art thieves who are in need of money due to a lack of business. Vince's character is a bit deranged and skitz's throughout the movie but that only add to the intensity of the film.The surprises left and right are well welcomed and the ending is very non cliche and makes you feel happy, well maybe that depends on the type of endings you like. This movie kept me very interested besides the fact Matt was in it, it's a great movie and i'd highly recommend it to anyone who likes movies. Critic's probably won't like this movie, but they don't watch movies cause they like movies anyway.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4cd8016d8b7480e93344223d2feceeb",
            "input": "I never was an avid viewer of \"Crocodile Hunter\", but did occasionally see an episode, or a bit of an episode, and when the news spread about Steve Irwin's death from a stingray attack in 2006, it certainly caught my attention. This movie, with Steve and his wife, Terri, playing themselves, but in a fictional story, was released in 2002, but I didn't hear of it until several years later, and even after that, it took me a while to get around to seeing it. Well, now I have seen it, and after looking here first (more than once), and seeing its rating, I was not surprised at how unimpressive it turned out to be, though it could have been a BIT better. Apparently, it's supposed to be a comedy, so a major problem with it is that it isn't very funny at all.A U.S. satellite beacon falls down from space and lands in Australia, where it is swallowed by a crocodile! While Steve and Terri Irwin are on a mission to capture this crocodile from a place where it terrorizes the cattle on a ranch owned by the crazy Brozzie Drewitt, and are unaware of what's inside it, two CIA agents are sent to Australia to retrieve the beacon! The agents are assisted by Jo Buckley, and the ranch owner and her dogs might make the mission more difficult for them! On Steve and Terri's mission, they face other types of dangerous wildlife, not just the crocodile, and since they have no clue that the croc has anything unusual inside it, when Steve sees the CIA agents after them, he mistakes them for poachers! Not only did I not laugh once while watching this film, the only part that really made me smile was Steve Irwin using a big snake to scare off one of the CIA agents. Apart from that, I don't think I found anything even mildly amusing. It's also a bit of an incoherent mess, switching back and forth from the Australian Outback to the CIA headquarters, and it seems like clips from \"Crocodile Hunter\" and clips from an action thriller (or something like that) put together for some reason. Also added to that mix are the ranch scenes, which also seem to be from somewhere else, and as funny as Brozzie Drewitt, played by Magda Szubanski, is supposed to be, she's not. At one point, we see her farting, so we have a fart joke, a MAJOR cliché in modern comedy! Are they SO hard to resist?! I also found the typical \"Crocodile Hunter\" scenes, with Steve wrestling crocodiles and holding other dangerous creatures and talking about them to viewers, to be tedious, but I guess the fact that I was never a devout fan of the show didn't help.Steve Irwin was admired by many as a conservationist, and is sadly missed by them, while there are also those who say he messed with nature and had it coming to him. No matter which side you're on, \"The Crocodile Hunter: Collision Course\" is not a well crafted movie. I'm sure it does help if you're a big Steve Irwin fan, but even if you are, there's no guarantee that you would like this movie, as some fans clearly haven't been impressed. In fact, it seems that some of them have found this movie to be worse than I have, so maybe it WON'T help. Like I said, there's no guarantee. I would say whatever you may think of Steve Irwin and his show, this movie was unnecessary. The attempt to combine what is usually seen in \"Crocodile Hunter\" with a fictional story unfortunately failed, and a viewer may find that this film seems longer than ninety minutes!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2fe999aaf751404cb220a4e30c3c55f9",
            "input": "This is not really a proper review since I did not see most of the film. I stopped watching it. The film is very violent, with nasty drug dealers and street punks, but that is not why I stopped watching.Here was the problem: I watched just enough to be introduced to several characters, all of whom were not interesting. Everyone was a tedious, despicable psychopath, with no engaging personalities, giving me nothing to look forward to. I found myself not the least bit curious about what they would do next or what might happen to them.If there had been even one person of interest, and I don't mean good or nice person, I mean an interesting person, I could have stayed with it. Watch \"State of Grace\" to see what I mean. In that film the Gary Oldman character is a complete lunatic, but he is *very* interesting. Al Pacino perhaps did a good job in Scarface, but his character just did not engage me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd8abcd57087439391e46e2338ab4a73",
            "input": "This is, ostensibly, a movie about multiple grief. As such, it ought to move viewers and make them empathetic with the plight of the main characters. However, its irritatingly postmodern style makes it almost incomprehensible. The camera continually switches from one scene to another, from one personal crisis to the next, creating a choppy, disjointed effect. Most characters appear to live aimless, unstructured lives, held together by their professional commitments. (It also stretches credibility that a man who has just been given what amounts to a likely death sentence, would cheerfully indulge in a sex romp with a woman he has just met). The storyline (if there is a storyline) is difficult to follow. In sum, the overall effect is rather disappointing. In spite of all that, the acting is generally good and some of the scenes are quite powerful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ca8192ebd1248c4b61f9cb19d654dcb",
            "input": "Rated R for Strong Language,Violent Content and Some Nudity. Quebec Rating:13+ Canadian Home Video Rating:14AFear Of A Black Hat is one of the funniest, most original comedies I have ever seen.Its basically a gangsta rap version of the film This Is Spinal Tap.Its a shame not many people have heard of this gem of a film.If you manage to find this film anywhere don't hesitate to buy it even if you don't like rap music.There are not too many comedy films that I give a perfect 10/10 to.The only ones I can think of at the moment are this film,Clerks,The World According To Garp,The 40 Year Old Virgin and Chasing Amy.This film is a hilarious stereotype of the gangsta rap culture.The movie is about a woman named Nina Blackburn who is making a documentary about the fictional rap group N.W.H(N****z with hats).They are basically the stereotype of a rap group making many controversial rap songs about killing and being a gangsta.Fear Of A Black Hat is an excellent comedic film and I recommend it even if you are not a fan of the gangsta rap scene.Its a shame this film is not in the Top 250.Runtime:88min 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8fe3f0aedb6849b9a34798d75ac652c5",
            "input": "If you like Sci-Fi, Monsters, and Ancient Legends, then you will love this movie!! The Special Effects are by far the best I have seen since Juarassic Park hit the big screen years ago. While the acting may have been a little less than desirable, the story line and effects adequately compensated for it.I wish now I had seen this at the movies on a theater screen instead of our 42 inch big screen TV.If you like non-stop action, awesome visuals, and taste for myth and lore....you have to see this movie!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-143f8504db74444b8ea57ac38a281bec",
            "input": "I recently found a copy for $5 at a video store, and snapped it up eagerly. While the music and (obviously) graphics aren't up to the standards of my favorite of the series, Beyond the Mind's Eye, I am still entranced by one segment:Stanley and Stella in \"Breaking the Ice\". The music is brilliant, and the emotions feel real. The clip on Odyssey's website doesn't have the story nor the music, unfortunately.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ba7e105de0e4fecae32258af04fb9c4",
            "input": "I pity people calling kamal hassan 'ulaganaayakan' maybe for them ulagam is tollywood ! comeon guys..this movie is a thriller without thrill..come out of your ulagam and just watch some high class thrillers like The Usual Suspects or even The Silence of the Lambs.technically good but style over substance kamal doesn't look like a police officer, there is no thrill whatsoever dragging and boring till end you might be saving 3 valuable hrs of your life if u skip watching this movie.kamal at his best is the best in tollywood",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba2bf04ab7b648b289dc20482d33a13c",
            "input": "This is the touching story of two families in Israel and the relationships within each family. Each family has a gay son. The stories are interrelated at that point but this film is about all of the family members, not just the two sons. The portraits of each of the family members in both families are well drawn and the story is consistently interesting if a bit bleak.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac1b4ac07dcf4972915cad1a70ff13ea",
            "input": "I really enjoyed this movie. The humor was a bit absent at times but I enjoyed how the story moved between dramatic and serious throughout the film. This is the only the second movie where I saw Verdone acting (the other was 'Un sacco bello'), and I can see why Italians find him tiresome, but he think he played his role well as the loving father.My one drawback with this movie was that I knew it took place in Italy - somewhere in the center or south, I presume, but I felt like there was no representation of a place. This movie could have taken place in New York, Boston, Melbourne, New Dehli...I always think it is important for movies to have a place to give the viewers something to relate to. (Maybe I missed something?) :) If you like Italian films, then I think that you will enjoy this. It's not a Fellini or a Rossellini - it's not realism or neo-realism. It's a comical story with serious moments that could really happen to any of us.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6fef51a8bc9e40d19103242190fca3fc",
            "input": "Spinal Tap was funny because if you knew a little about heavy metal, you saw in-jokes all over the place. If you know anything about porn, this mock documentary will leave you cold. Everything in it rings false.Spinal Tap was funny because it took a familiar world and pushed it over the top. This film is decidedly not funny because it paints a picture of how porn is made that bears no relationship to the real world.The acting here is uniformly awful, but that would not matter much if the core idea of the movie were good. But it's not.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6cbe36ae0fc472b884b8690db4c47a8",
            "input": "I just saw this film last night in the 2006 Tribeca Film Festival and it seriously makes me wonder if the folks at the festival actually screen the films before selecting them. The film was simply awful - I say that without hyperbole or ulterior motives - it was awful. Matthew Modine's days as a leading man are way over. Gina Gershon sported an inexplicable and unnecessary English accent - she should be ashamed of her participation in this film. Gloria Reuben had a weird little cameo in it - she should also be ashamed. The script was terrible and the we were given absolutely no reason to care about the characters. I highly doubt this will be picked up, but then again, people in Hollywood are known to make mistakes sometimes. I really think \"Kettle of Fish\" is a serious contender for the worst movie I've ever seen.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7da6d919f5f04bcea12a5fb9ef9b4644",
            "input": "\"Panic in the Streets\" was a decent thriller, but I felt a bit disappointed by it. The central theme of a city being attacked by a plague in modern times is fascinating, but the film never really explores or develops it. Its well made and entertaining, but its not as interesting as it should have been. The screenplay for this one is really weak and brings the whole film down. None of the central characters are really compelling or believable.Fortunately, the film is very well made so it compensates for the weak scripting. The direction by Elia Kazan keeps the film suspenseful and moving at a lightning quick pace. There are some standout sequences, particularly the memorable chase climax. When his direction was combined with better screenplays several years later, the man could mostly do no wrong.The acting is also very good. Richard Widmark was always a watchable leading man and does what he can with an underwritten character. Paul Douglas spends his time yelling a bit too much but does a decent job as well. The standouts in the cast are the two villains. Zero Mostel, known primarily for his comic roles, is effectively slimy as one of cinema's ultimate toady characters. Jack Palance is, unsurprisingly, a chilling villain. \"Panic in the Streets\" is disappointing but still worth watching. (7/10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7749d7d263f94c71a682db69dac9969a",
            "input": "Student Seduction finds Saved By The Bell Alumni Elizabeth Berkley on the other side of the desk and attracting the attention of young and hunky Corey Sevier. Speaking for myself I can truthfully say that no teachers save one ever did anything for me hormonally back when I was a student. That was a Ms. Diaz who was a music teacher in Junior High School. Even as a young gay kid, I could see what she was doing to the rest of the class. She was the only teacher I had who in any way could have been played by Elizabeth Berkley.Corey being the hotty he is, is also used to having his own way with women whether they agree or not. The fact that he comes from rich parents reinforces that belief. He's flunking chemistry which is what Berkley teaches and to keep his GPA up she agrees to tutor, but believe no more. So when he attempts a rape and gets no for an answer it's damaging to his ego. When Berkley goes out of channels and reports the crime to the police, the cops who are keeping in mind the cases of Pamela Smart and Mary Kay LeTourneau just don't believe here. Sevier's parents have the wherewithal to get a good publicity spin on this for their boy.Student Seduction which is a misnomer of a title if there ever was one is trash all the way. After the beating that Berkley took for Showgirls this TV film was not an upward career move.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c49a9cb8d6a44829b04f337380711e87",
            "input": "\"How To Lose Friends & Alienate People\" is not based on Tiger Woods' infidelities. It is a mediocre romantic comedy based on Toby Young's book on his experiences working as a journalist covering celebrities. The film stars Simon Pegg as Sidney Young, a zany British journalist who takes a job in an illustrious celebrity magazine in New York. Young is restless in getting caught up all type of shenanigans to alienate all around him, hence movie title. He is uproarious, daring, and moronic. But nevertheless for some very bizarre reason, he is a somewhat likable character. Sidney befriends a fellow journalist, the composed Alison Olsen, played quite admirably by Kirsten Dunst. However, Sidney is primarily longing for the sexpot actress Sophie Maes played by the Fantastic Ms. Megan Fox. This foxtrot is short on acting proficiency but high on \"eye candy\" material. Sidney gets in all kinds of tomfoolery in order to move up the journalist ladder in the magazine co. Those are the peak comedic moments of the film. However, I think that Director Robert Weide and Screenwriter Peter Straughan might lose some viewers and alienated authentic rom-com material by developing an implausible romantic plot line between Sidney & Alison; even though Team Weidstraughan did formulate an entertaining narrative otherwise. Pegg did peg his character down to the wire with his hilarious performance as Sidney Young. Jeff Bridges was again building \"The Dude\" bridges with his enigmatic supporting work as Clayton Harding, the magazine's suave prez. But the rest of the film's acting was not worthy enough to feature here. \"How To Lose Friends & Alienate People\" should not be alienated entirely, but you might lose some movie friends if you publicize it as a superlative romantic comedy. *** Average",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6223f8c73488480386301ebd6e985e55",
            "input": "Well, how do you even rate a movie such as this one? Does it even have cinematic value really? It's a movie that tries to get as close to being a snuff movie as possible. Basically the entire movie is purely a bunch of guys torturing a young girl. Not very appealing and on top of that also not that realistic really.It's obvious that the movie tried to be as realistic and shocking as possible. However the movie is just all too fake for that to work out as intended. The slapping and stumping is all soft and fake looking, as well as sounding. They are often just kicking into the floor, rather than into the girl, obviously. Also the way the girl responds to all the torments is pretty tame. I mean if this was real, surely she would had screamed it out. There is more moaning than screaming in this one though.The movie is obviously low budget and it's a valor attempt at trying to achieve something shocking and realistic as well as original and provoking, with very limited resources. Don't really think this movie made much impact though at the time it got released, though it must had done something well, since a total of six sequels got released after this one.Fans of shock and gore will most likely be disappointed by this movie, though there are still some fetish people out there who will get a kick out of this movie.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b47695c14d247819c79bb8036d72fe6",
            "input": "I saw the movie as a child when it was released in the theater and it was so bad that it became the makings of a family joke. If the ranking had a zero, this movie would get it. The dinosaurs were awful. The storyline was ridiculous. The acting really doesn't qualify to be called acting. The only reason I even remember the name of the movie so well is because my family still talks about how BAD it really was.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-812cd33012e04eaf9111dd54a682838d",
            "input": "I first saw this movie about 4 years ago and i was expecting something funny, similar to CB4. I was blown away. I was on the floor laughing my butt off this movie is so great. Way better than CB4, the characters, the songs, the plot, everything. Top notch independent film that was given \"Two Thumbs UP\" by Siskel and Egbert (and if two old white guys can understand the humour in this flick, you know it's good).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69afc8e7cdde4e19a98250c54c5dd86c",
            "input": "I saw this movie in the theater, and was thoroughly impressed by it. Then again, that was when Claire Danes was a good actress, not the foolish, arrogant, Hollywood-ized bitch she is today. Anyway, this film really struck me as one of the more raw, realistic, beautiful friendship films. How far would you really go for your best friend? I was moved to tears at the end, and still tear up when I watch it now (I own it). I remember as soon as I left the theater, I called my best friend and sobbed to her how much I loved her. This is a great film to watch with your best girlfriend. However be prepared for the almost certain conversation afterward where she turns to you and asks if you'd do something like that for her....",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-047ced722f3b4412ab5f156c07b3297a",
            "input": "A hot-headed cop accidentally kills a murder suspect and then covers up the crime, but must deal with a guilty conscience while he tries to solve a murder case. Andrews and Tierney are reunited with director Preminger in a film noir that is as effective as \"Laura,\" their earlier collaboration. Andrews is perfectly cast as the earnest cop, a good guy caught up in unfortunate circumstances. The acting is fine all around, including Malden as a tough police captain and Tully as Tierney's protective father. The screenplay by Hecht, a great and prolific screenwriter, is taut and suspenseful, and Preminger creates a great atmosphere.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9d034a7d9494598b2cddcf54894107a",
            "input": "Bad script, bad direction, over the top performances, overwrought dialogue. What more could you ask for? For laughs, it just doesn't get any better than this. Zadora's over-acting combined with the cliched scenarios she finds herself in make for an hilarious parody of the \"Hollywood\" machine. Almost as funny as \"Spinal Tap\" even though it was clearly not intended as such. Don't miss Ray Liotta's debut film line, \"Looks like a penis.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a7495de22fc843a0a2a1c108487f8c44",
            "input": "As I am not a blood and guts fan I found the gory scenes totally unnecessary (you spell it) and too real for my liking, if you're the type of person who gets their rocks off on beheadings on the internet or snuff movies I say go for it, it beggars belief what sort of person dreams this sick crap up though.Apart from that it had the potential to be a great movie, the music was top class too (through the movie and especially the end credits). Some parts though were a bit unbelievable, like you've just been found by your girlfriend trust up awaiting torture and death and all you do is tell her about what had happened and how you got there, (why didn't he ask her if she happened to have any wipes or even some air freshner or a piece of gum while he was at it?), come on now, most would probably just scream \"hurry up and untie me then lets get the f*** out of here QUICK!\". where were the flys, maggots etc, and when the girl accidentally came across the place surely the stench of rotten flesh would have sounded a few alarm bells! I would only recommend this movie to friends of Dennis Niellson and the like, I'm sure a video like this would make sickos like that have a very happy Christmas.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf2d37528e0c4c31861bd8ca00108181",
            "input": "Poor Tobe Hopper. He directed an all time horror classic \"Texas Chaimsaw Massacre\". Since then everything he's done has been horrible. This is probably the worst...and that's saying a lot. It's about a man (Brad Dourif) who has the ability to make things (and people) catch fire...or something like that. Hardly an original idea (anyone remember \"Firestarter\"?) It's a real mess...literally EVERYTHING is done wrong! Pathetic acting (even Dourif!), asinine script, loust production values, crappy special effects...everything is BAD!!!!! A must miss...not even good for laughs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ffbccb4078d74bf39a92627a34946fcd",
            "input": "Kind of hard to believe that the movie from this book could succeed in topping its awfulness! The plot is so contrived and unbelievable. . . starting with laying a ton of guilt on a small child to spare her pain! Then we have the collusive behavior of at least six and maybe more people(including clergy) involved in what is a crime everywhere. Next we have a wife who seemingly in the length of a ferry ride goes from being comparatively happy to very shortly kicking over the traces. A very unpleasant and coo coo mother, aided, abetted and supported by a politically correct group of friends! Moving the setting from an island off the coast of South Carolina, did not help the story although it may have helped the film makers budget. The very beautiful buildings supposedly housing the monastery did not seem to logically suit an island small enough to need golf carts and such a small ferry service. Kim Basinger whom I do really like is painfully thin in this movie and her hairdo certainly belongs in another decade. Also there is simply no chemistry at all between her and either of the male leads. I thoroughly disliked the book from which this was taken but did read it all. The movie I kept surfing back and forth to, had to leave whenever that saccharine music got too much. Unless you like an unbelievable story, wooden acting, a contorted mixture of religious/mythological/allegory my advice is to skip this one. Oh and maybe a small carping criticism, but wouldn't a caring father have a life jacket on a small child on a small boat? The best part of this movie is the scenery",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-654104638ef8450d9ded2f3ae4aa64d2",
            "input": "Religious bigotry is rampant everywhere. Australia is not immune to it.A dingo snatched a baby and the mother was tried and sent to prison for having \"killed\" her own baby. I don't mean to spoil the story for you, but you need to know the basics before getting knee-deep in what caused this woman to find herself inside a prison.Buy or rent the movie and discover how deep-seated human hatred of those who are different continues to thrive around the globe.This is a very moving motion picture with a terrific cast of actors.Both Meryl Streep (with her famous Aussie accent) and Sam Neill, whose accent is his native-born pronunciation, are outstanding. Those with supporting roles are also quite good.You will remember this movie for many years.See it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35b2cd22a24643829afa45e3c6036072",
            "input": "First off, this is an excellent series, though we have sort of a James Bond effect. What I mean is that while the new Casino Royale takes place in 2006, it is chronologically the first adventure of 007, Dr. No (1962) being the second, while in Golden Eye, the first film with Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench is referred to as the new replacement for the male \"M\" so how could she have been in place in the beginning before Bond became a double-0, aside from the fact that she is obviously 14 years older? This is more or less a \"poetic\" license to thrill. We need to turn our heads aside a bit if we wish to be entertained. No, the new Star Trek movie does not have any of the primitive electronics of the original series from nearly half a century ago. In the 1960's communicators were fantasy. (now we call them cell phones) and there were sliding levers instead of buttons. OMG, do you think 400 years from now, they would have perfected Rogaine for Jean-Luc Picard? So, please, let's give the producers some leeway.But to try and make things a bit consistent, let us just ponder about the Cylons creation just 60 years prior to the end of Battlestar Galactica. If that is the case, where did all the Cylons that populated the original earth come from? We know that the technology exists for spontaneous jumps through space. Well, what happened if one of the Cyclon ships at war with the Caprica fleet was fired upon or there was a sunspot or whatever and one ship, loaded with human-looking Cylons, wound up not only jumping through space, but through time, back a thousand or ten thousand years with a crippled ship near Earth One. They colonized it, found out they could repopulate it and eventually destroyed themselves, but not before they themselves sent out a \"ragtag\" fleet to search for the legendary Caprica, only to find a habitable but unpopulated planet, which they colonized to become the humans, who eventually invented the Cylons. Time paradox? Of course. Which came first, the chicken or the road? Who cares? It's fraking entertaining!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23ee5346473542029ed78bd5cf746e9d",
            "input": "The first step to getting off of that road that leads to nowhere is recognizing that you're on it in the first place; then it becomes a matter of being assertive and taking positive steps to overcome the negative influences in your life that may have put you on that road to begin with. Which is exactly what a young Latino girl does in `Girlfight,' written and directed by Karyn Kusama. Diana (Michelle Rodriguez) is an eighteen-year-old High School senior from the projects in Brooklyn, facing expulsion after her fourth fight in the halls since the beginning of the semester. She affects a `whatever' attitude which masks a deep-seated anger that threatens to take her into places she'd rather not go. She lives with her father, Sandro (Paul Calderon), with whom she has a very tentative relationship, and her younger brother, Tiny (Ray Santiago). With her life teetering on the brink of dissolution, she desperately needs an outlet through which to channel the demons that plague her. And one day she finds it, without even looking for it, when she stops by the gym where Tiny trains. Ironically, Tiny wants nothing to do with boxing; he wants to go to art school, but Sandro is determined that his son should be able to take care of himself on the streets, and pays the ten dollars a week it costs for his lessons. When Diana convinces Tiny's trainer, Hector (Jaime Tirelli), to take her on, and approaches her father for the money, under the guise of calling it a weekly allowance (she doesn't want him to know what she wants the money for), Sandro turns her down and tells her to go out and earn her own money. Ultimately, with Tiny's help she finds a way, and the ring soon becomes her second home. It's an environment to which she readily adapts, and it appears that her life is about to take a turn for the better. And the fact that she will have to fight men, not women, in `gender blind' competitions, does not faze her in the least. Diana has found her element.\tFirst time writer/director Karyn Kusama has done a terrific job of creating a realistic setting for her story, presenting an honest portrait of life in the projects and conveying that desperation so familiar to so many young people who find themselves in dead-end situations and on that road that leads to nowhere. And there's no candy coating on it, either; as Hector tells Diana when she asks him how he came to be where he is, `I was a fighter once. I lost.' Then, looking around the busy gym, `Like most of these guys, they're going to lose, too. But it's all they know--' And it's that honesty of attitude, as well as the way in which the characters are portrayed, that makes this movie as good as it is. It's a bleak world, underscored by the dimly lit, run-down gym-- you can fairly smell the sweat of the boxers-- and that sense of desolation that hangs over it all like a pall, blanketing these people who are grasping and hanging on to the one and only thing they have, all that they know.\tMaking her screen debut, Michelle Rodriguez is perfectly cast as Diana, infusing her with a depth and brooding intensity that fairly radiates off of her in waves. She is so real that it makes you wonder how much of it is really Rodriguez; exactly where does the actor leave off and the character begin? Whatever it is, it works. It's a powerful, memorable performance, by an actor from whom we will await another endeavor with great anticipation. She certainly makes Diana a positive role model, one in whom many hopefully will find inspiration and the realization that there are alternative paths available in life, at least to those who would seek them out.\tAs positive as this film is, however, it ends on something of an ambiguous note; though Diana obviously has her feet on the ground, there's no indication of where she's headed. Is this a short term fix for her, or is she destined to become the female counterpart of Hector? After all, realistically (and in light of the fact that the realism is one of the strengths of this film), professional boxing isn't exactly a profession that lends itself to, nor opens it's arms to women. And in keeping with the subject matter of the film, and the approach of the filmmaker, an affirmation of the results of Diana's assertiveness would have been appropriate.\tThe supporting cast includes Santiago Douglas (Adrian), Elisa Bocanegra (Marisol), Alicia Ashley (Ricki) and Thomas Barbour (Ira). Though it delivers a very real picture of life to which many will be able to identify, there are certain aspects of `Girlfight,' that stretch credibility a bit, regarding some of what happens in the ring. That aside, it's a positive film that for the most part is a satisfying experience. I rate this one 7/10.  ",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47632afaca3c4e73857d09e8208a0150",
            "input": "If you ever watched the Dukes of Hazard you know that you never had to worry about drugs or cussing or crude behavior being seen by young children. If you've seen the movie you know that is no longer the case! This movie was HORRIBLE! Main characters doing drugs and thinking it is funny and cool is certainly not what I call entertainment. They took a wonderful show and just turned it into trash. Daisy who was a little flirtatious in the original show now looks and acts like she belongs on the street corner getting paid for her services. I was so excited about seeing this movie before it came out, 15 minutes into the movie I was ready to leave. I stayed thinking it had to get better but instead it got worse by the minute. I wish I had never seen this movie. It trashed a good show and left nothing but horrible taste in my mouth when I left. Do yourself a favor, go see something worth your money, cause it's not only a waste of money but a waste of 2 hours of your life you will never get back!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16b46b938de4469f8d6d1a617a7b64ee",
            "input": "Meryl Streep was incredible in this film. She has an amazing knack for accents, and she shows incredible skill in this film overall. I really felt for her when Lindy was being persecuted. She was played realistically, too. She got cranky, upset, and unpleasant as the media and the government continued their unrelenting witchhunt. I didn't expect much from the film initially, but I really got interested in it, and the movie is based on a real person and real events. It turned out to be better than I had anticipated. Sam Neill was also outstanding; this is the best work I've seen from him, and I've really liked him in other movies (The Piano, for example). I gave the film a 7, but if I could rate just the acting, I'd give the it a 9.5, and a perfect 10 for Streep.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eeca08ea65e848b8a7c6685c0b23c545",
            "input": "Despite the patronage of George Lucas, this captivating and totally original fantasy in \"Lumage\" (a combination of animation through live action cut-outs) is about as far removed from the usual kiddie fare as anything made by Ralph Bakshi in his heyday. Brilliantly conceived characters such as the shape-shifting dog Ralph (one of a duo of bumbling, rejected heroes), Synonamess Botch (the hilariously foul-mouthed villain) and Rod Rescueman (the pompous novice superhero) breathe life into a uniquely clever concept: Frivoli vs. Murkwood or, the eternal fight between dreams and nightmares. In this context, the MOR-infused songs on the soundtrack ought not to have worked but somehow they do. It's a real pity, therefore, that I have had to watch this via a truly crappy-looking boot (culled from a TV screening) of the uncensored version – there is also a milder variant that toned down the language for its VHS release – since the film is otherwise unavailable on DVD. Interestingly, both Henry Selick and David Fincher worked on this picture in subordinate capacities.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-545b19c40eee493eb62a35099d11d0e1",
            "input": "By rights, there should never have been a \"First Blood Part II\". The original script for \"First Blood\" had John Rambo committing suicide at the end of the film, but this was changed to allow him to live, not because the producers wanted to make a sequel but because test audiences found the original ending too depressing. Nevertheless, someone obviously thought that the character was too good to waste, because he ended up as the hero of two more films in the eighties, plus the recently released fourth instalment.The official title of this film was \"Rambo: First Blood Part II\", but it is more commonly known simply as \"Rambo\". It starts with the title character in jail, where he is presumably expiating the crimes he committed in \"First Blood\", although this is never made too explicit. He is removed from prison by his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman, for a secret mission. Rambo is to return to Vietnam to investigate reports that American POWs are still being held captive by the Communist regime. He is under strict instructions not to attempt to rescue any prisoners or to engage the enemy; his is to be simply a fact-finding mission.What Rambo does not realise is that he is being set up, not by Trautman, who is portrayed as brave, honourable and incorruptible, but by the organiser of the mission, a military bureaucrat named Murdock. Murdock intends that the mission will prove that there are no American prisoners in Vietnam, partly because that will improve relationships between the American and Vietnamese governments, partly because it will make his own life easier. Unfortunately for Murdock, Rambo discovers that not only are Americans still being held prisoner, they are also being kept in hellish conditions. Of course, he is far too much of a hero to leave them to their fate, and tries to rescue them. The rest of the film is more or less one long battle between Rambo and a few allies (including a beautiful Vietnamese girl) and the evil commie soldiers and their Russian allies. Most of the evil commies, of course, end up dead, although I was surprised to learn from your \"trivia\" section that the total death toll was as low as 67. At times it seemed as though Rambo was trying to wipe out the entire Vietnamese army.The tone of this film is very different from the first. In \"First Blood\" Rambo was unquestionably a criminal, even though his responsibility for his crimes was lessened by severe provocation and by his mental instability. In \"Rambo\" he is a bona fide all-American hero. A few years earlier the director, George Pan Cosmatos, had made \"The Cassandra Crossing\", a biased piece of left-wing anti-American propaganda. Cosmatos, however, was nothing if not versatile, and \"Rambo\" proves that he could also turn his hand to biased right-wing pro-American propaganda. The one thing the two films have in common is that both are laughably bad.\"First Blood\" had its faults, but it also had its virtues. Its stance, that the anti-war movement was partly to blame for the problems faced by Vietnam vets in readjusting to civilian life, was a controversial one, but at least the film was trying to make a statement about war, social attitudes to war, and the roots of violence in society. \"Rambo\", by contrast, has very few virtues, except that the action sequences are well enough done to please those who like that sort of thing. It is essentially a sort of jingoistic revenge fantasy for those Americans who were still sore about the Vietnam war. Rambo re-fights the war single-handed, and this time the right side wins. Take that, Charlie Cong! By this point, no doubt, the film's admirers (and there seem to be plenty- more than 2,000 voters have already given it ten stars) will have concluded that I am a liberal commie-loving pinko. Far from it- in fact, I have always despised Communism as a pernicious ideology. What I dislike about the film is not its politics but its lack of subtlety and its suggestion that the solution to all problems, including ideological disputes, is to go in with all guns blazing and to try and kill as many people as possible. It makes no attempt to understand the political complexities of South-East Asia or why not everyone in the region was pro-American. For all its anti-Communism, the film is the sort of moronic sledgehammer propaganda that the Communists were very good at churning out themselves- except that they attributed all the world's problems to Capitalism, or Imperialism, or Revisionism, or whatever other ism they had taken a dislike to. Compared to \"Rambo\", \"The Green Berets\" was a masterly piece of political analysis. 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9ba0e0f8f5b497d9354e30df34c5634",
            "input": "Woody Allen, when at his best, has one of the sharpest pens around. He can make an acute observation and wrap it around a punch line like nobody else. However, when he's at his worst his movies can stench of pretentiousness. Unfortunately, \"Melinda and Melinda\" has this stench from opening to closing. The set up is one of his more intriguing ideas in a while. Four friends sit in a restaurant discussing whether the essence of life is comedy or drama. To help settle the argument, one man relates the beginning of a story and asks the two other men arguing (one a comic playwright, the other a dramatic playwright) whether the story is a comedy or a tragedy. The two men then continue the story and the movie plays out the stories that they weave. Now, when I first heard about this film, my understanding was that they tell the exact same story, the genre (comedy or drama) only changes by how you look at it. Now that would have been interesting. However, the stories only share one main element and a few side elements. They are entirely different stories with major plot differences. The drama is so stiffly scripted and pretentious that it can only really work as self-parody. If this was the point, then it failed because these elements prevent the audience from feeling any emotional investment in any of the characters. The comedy is the story that has moments of success, but they are still short and fleeting. Will Farrell is obviously meant to be the stand-in for Woody, but he could have played this character so much more believably without adding Woody's stutters and hand-ticks. Woody is the best at being Woody. When someone else tries, they're not playing a character, they are modeling a recognizable actor. This type of thing only pulls the audience out of the story.My favorite Woody Allen movies make me leave the theater a little bit lighter in spirit than I walked in. This one made me wish I could get my money back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d07c7700c9b2481da546cff534ea031f",
            "input": "The scenes are fast-paced. the characters are great. I love Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending. However, I was disappointed that this movie didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only blossomed when they kissed each other.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fae8fc02e08d4c8b8fe07bc0c9620e5c",
            "input": "If your idea of a thriller is car chases, explosions, and dozens of people being mowed down by gunfire, then \"House of Games\" is definitely not the movie for you. If you like and appreciate psychological drama and suspense, then, by all means, see it.\"House of Games\" tells the story of an esteemed psychologist and writer, Dr. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse), who tries to help a patient and gets involved in the shadowy world of con men led by the charismatic Mike (Joe Mantegna). To say anything more about the plot would ruin the suspense. Frankly, I find it hard to believe anyone who says they saw the twists coming. Just like a clever con artist, this movie draws you into its web and lulls your vigilance.The story is taut and well-crafted, the dialogue smart and laconic, the acting uniformly good (Mantegna is superbly charismatic). Some have complained that Dr. Ford is not a very sympathetic character, and wondered why Mamet would make Lindsay Crouse look so physically unattractive. But Dr. Ford is supposed to be cold and aloof; moreover, her homeliness is in a way essential to the plot (at one point, I believe that an injury to her sexual self-esteem is a key part of her motivation ... I'll say no more).\"House of Games\" is a dark look at the underside of human nature that concludes on a note of discomforting ambiguity. It will hold your attention every second while you are watching, and stay with you for a long time afterwards.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b9223062b0a47fd92e5356a7e583aec",
            "input": "This movie was incredible. I would recommend it to anyone, much better than what I had already anticipated. It was definitely a heart-wrenching spectacular movie. It is an amazing story, with amazing actors and creators. Definitely another great movie with Denzel Washington. (shouldn't surprise anyone) Derek Luke did a wonderful job as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b9205d7b38b4c1e9618f69e1d7e7e34",
            "input": "Gédéon and Jules Naudet wanted to film a documentary about rookie New York City firefighters. What they got was the only film footage inside the World Trade Center on September 11.Having worked with James Hanlon's ladder company before, Jules went with the captain to inspect and repair a gas leak, while Gédéon stayed at the firehouse in case anything interesting happened. An airplane flying low over the City distracted Jules, and he pointed the camera up, seconds before the plane crashed into Tower One.Jules asked the captain to follow him into the Towers. The first thing he saw was two people on fire, something he refused to film. He stayed on site for the next several hours, filming reactions of the firefighters and others who were there.The brothers Naudet took great care in not making the movie too violent, grizzly, and gory. But the language from the firefighters is a little coarse, and CBS showed a lot of balls airing it uncensored. The brothers Naudet mixed footage they filmed with one-on-one interviews so the firefighters could explain their thoughts and emotions during particular moments of the crisis. Unlike a feature film of similar title, most of the money from DVD sales go to 9/11-related charities. Very well made, emotional, moving, and completely devoid of political propaganda, is the best documentary of the sort to date.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3ff88492d6c4c9caf1d1e311fc73588",
            "input": "This is an exquisite film about the search for some bliss in everyday life. The pacing, the camera work, the emotion, the haunting musical score and the pure charm of this picture make it a must see. It isn't easily appreciated by the immature or emotionally stunted. The only flaw I can see about this film is that it wasn't captured in a more technically perfect film format. It deserved Todd-AO, Technicolor and the very finest sound format available.(An intimate film can be made in seventy millimeter.) The gorgeous Italian villas effect on its inhabitants would have rendered even more lushly and the small lovely moments would be even more beautifully seen and heard. As it is, it still demands attention as a sweet moving small film. I can't stop myself from watching it every time it comes on satelite. The transformations of the characters from contained, tight and mistrustful is always a joy to watch and I really should recommend it more often.The casting is perfect, the mood is perfect, the acting is above reproach. It is a film about middle age and the choices people make.It is deep and thoughtful without beating the viewer up with heavy handedness. Watch it in one sitting and let it have its effect on you. If you don't get it, perhaps you haven't lived enough, or something else is wrong with you.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50c7b7d38c4d4ee19355c0f162536b12",
            "input": "One more of those brilliant young men who went all out and dared to make a teen romance film( can i actually call it that?- it would invoke the devil out of its fans)on a micro budget but packed with such taste, sensitiveness and maturity. Peter Sollett- you deserve more admiration and respect.Thanks once again for demonstrating to the powers that be in the \"industry\" that stereotypes can be flushed down the toilet. One location,a handful of rich characters, low budget,good acting(and that too amateurs),decent lighting - worshippers of true indie cinema should watch more of this and STOP watching...well...you know what.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3915ec1391924bab93a77db8f6afeb52",
            "input": "Here's the good news first. \"Spirit\" is the most visually incredible animated film in current home theater release. The artwork and effects are revolutionary, and I recommend that you give this movie a look by virtue of the visuals alone.And now for the bad news. I really mean it when I say that the animation is the only thing this movie has going for it. You may remember that \"Spirit\" got badly trounced by \"Lilo and Stitch\" last summer. The first person who argues that it was because Disney is more well-established and had better advertising can write me a four page long essay entitled \"Why 'Lilo and Stitch''s Script Didn't Stink\".For all the incredible new animation technology on display in \"Spirit\", the story is almost *astonishingly* dull. There is a lesson here, and (needless to say) it doesn't just apply to animated movies. You can have the most mind-blowing visual effects ever to grace the eyes of a mortal, but if your story is boring and, more importantly, we don't care about your characters, it's bad film-making. Simple as that. The animation is still mind-blowing; I just can't wait to see what somebody with more imagination does with it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00c72fa6e367416b9daaa34b0761f9b9",
            "input": "***One Out of Ten Stars*** Because if it was, it gets an F. Holy Mother Mary of God was this bad. I mean, I gave it every reasonable accommodation considering it was a straight to video film, but it let me down at every turn. Like so many other B movies, the basic storyline was decent and the filmmakers seemed to have a reasonable level of resources, but the execution was ridiculous. It's a shame they attached the good name of Halloween to this fiasco.The basic premise surrounds some frat douche bags hosting their annual Halloween haunted house fund raiser, when a satanic spell book shows up out of nowhere and hurls the frat boys into a living hell. Well that's the idea anyway, but instead most of the film is devoted to displaying these frat boy's relationship escapades, abound with an outrageous lesbian subplot. Very little of the actual story is devoted to Halloween or the mysterious spell book. It actually makes me mad that the film makers thought they could get away with making such dribble. The film is essentially about frat boy relationships. This IS NOT what the movie is billed as. I'm tempted to track down the producers and at the very least threaten them with bodily harm. The acting is about as bad as it gets, it's atrocious! The script is unintentionally funny. The cinematography is just plain lazy. The whole film is amateur night. This movie actually makes the SyFy channel movie productions look like masterpieces.The last half hour of the film felt like the film makers realized they weren't producing a soap opera and had to throw in some sort of horror sequences. The evil spell book finally comes into play and turns everyone in the haunted house into the character their dressed up as. I almost feel like crying as I write this review. Wow! I mean wow! This thing was an undecipherable chopped up disaster.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bc02b98da7ca4340ade2285ffabe902c",
            "input": "I went to a screening of this movie and while it had a couple moments that made me laugh, it had some very major flaws. It first of all presents itself to be the humorous exploits of a real-life divorcee trying to find love in LA. What it morphs into is a depressing, narcissistic, and unfunny romp through the history of the film director's love life and professional life. Jokes wear thin quickly and you find yourself suddenly not caring how this man's dates progress. The ridiculousness is that the director simultaneously presents himself as an extremely annoying and heavily flawed character and then expects us to be concerned.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05aef27c9834430d80f3a3e8d6e76913",
            "input": "...This would be the worst film i'd ever seen. Hmmm, OK maybe tied with Boogeyman then. Awful, truly awful.I had low expectations and it failed to meet them! I honestly cant think of one good thing. so here are the worst points...1. THE ACTING 2. THE PLOT 3. THE CGI (Xbox 360 has better graphics....seriously) 4. THE PLOT 5. THE DIALOGUE and finally.... 6. THE PLOT There are so many unanswered questions, Did they make a 2:32 hour long movie then realize they hadn't put Lex Luthor and Superman in a scene together and were forced to settle for the 3 minute bit or did they actually think no-one would notice that the main hero and villain have less screen time together than Superman's son and the henchman he kills?!!Was half the budget spent on persuading Kevin Spacey to do it?When Superman goes to hospital, why don't the doctors ask \"What the F*** do you want us to do?! He's a F***ing alien! We don't know jack about his anatomy!\"? What happened in the 5 years Superman was away to cause technology to advance 28 years? Where the people who wrote good reviews watching the same movie?and finally, Why? Just, Why? BTW, for those of you wondering how come Superman could lift an entire continent of krypyonite, i think i've figured it out......since superman is unaffected by the kryptonite till he sees something green in the rocks, it is clearly all in his head. therefore the continent thing is just him suppressing his fear of shiny green rock....either that or the writers are slack-jawed half-wits who didn't think that was a fairly obvious mistake.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-15c149de3f754e718e8f0ce7b72ad734",
            "input": "I think you would have to be from the USA to get a lot of the jokes. But if you liked Princess Bride and Forest Gump, You would like this movie. You can't compare the quality of the filming to those of course, but having the cameraman trip was obviously done on purpose. Killer Tomatoes is a hundred times better than Nepolean Dynamite. Just my opinion. I'm sure that people from France would not appreciate the caricatures of the French. So this film isn't for a world audience. And while I am not a trained film critic, I know what I like. I couldn't stop laughing through the whole movie. My sides and my jaws were hurting at the end of the movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dac9ec6981e49ea84ec0f314b961e03",
            "input": "Based on Christy Brown's autobiographical novel, this endearing film tells the story of his life, him being affected by cerebral palsy and being considered basically not a person by everyone including his mother. Amazingly, he teaches himself to draw and write using his foot, which is the only part of him he can control. An amazing story of courage with a truly amazing and unforgettable oscar winning performance by Daniel Day Lewis. 9 of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a7b14b729c54d739c4dc31e5d5a28b8",
            "input": "I loved Dedee Pfeiffer (is that spelled right?) in Cybil. Haven't seen her for awhile and forgot how much I missed her. I thought she did a great job in this. The supporting cast was pretty good too. In some angles, the daughter even looked like a young Nicole Kidman. The abductor was pretty creepy and the story generally had some good twists. The young boyfriend was a hottie. I thought the husband definitely had something to do with it for sure.Just got the Lifetime Movie Network for Christmas and am loving these movies. Kept my interest and I'll watch it again when they rerun it. Can anyone else recommend any similar movies to this? You can post on the board or send me a private email if you want. Thanks in advance. Aboutagirly.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63836fe21843484b9c395e060e0c8253",
            "input": "As the story in my family goes, my dad, Milton Raskin, played the piano for the Dorsey band. After Sinatra joined the band, my dad practiced with him for hours on end. Then, at a point in time, my dad told Sinatra that he was actually to good to be tied up with such a small group (band), and that he should venture off on his own. By that time Sinatra had enough credits 'under his belt' to do just that! Dorsey never forgave my dad, and the rest, as they say, is history.I have some pictures and records to that effect, and so does Berkley University in California.I have seen just about every Sinatra movie more times than I wish to say, and his movies never get old . . . Thank you Frank",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3346ee72f32743adb1bc36cc5d0f00a0",
            "input": "Some of the worst, least natural acting performances I've ever seen. Which is perhaps not surprising given the clunky, lame dialog given to the one note characters. Add to that the cheap production values and you've got a movie that doesn't look like it even belongs on television. One doesn't expect much from a Lifetime movie, especially one this old, but this is nearly unwatchably bad.Plot-wise, it's a dreadful, clichéd romance of a type even Harlequin would consider beneath them. It's possible to guess how the remainder of the movie will go by simply watching the opening couple of scenes. Surprise, the only female character who gets any focus and the mysterious stranger end up falling in love.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-45bbea86a6044154a52d60eda5f35995",
            "input": "Sadly not available on DVD as yet, but worth pursuing on TCM or VHS. A secretary believes her boss is wrongly accused of murder, and courageously takes on many dangerous characters in an effort to establish the truth. A movie with many twists and dark alleyways, none of which I will mention! The jazz band sequence where our heroine seeks the information about the killer, is one of the most erotic scenes in Hollywood history, despite being at very low budget and made during WWII in black and white. Despite the low budget - Long Island looks somewhat mountainous - this is a movie of original style and outstanding vision. Ella Raines was a great actress discovered by Howard Hawks who knew much about these matters, casting the feistiest women - Joanne Dru, Hepburn, Angie Dickinson, Lauren Bacall, Ann Sheridan - of their era. Robert Siodmak was of one of several German, Hungarian & Czech film-makers - Sirk, Wilder, Zinnemann, Lubitsch, Curtiz,Lang, etc - who émigrés relocated to Hollywood, and brought a highly original fresh vision with them. Sadly Ella Raines was never given such a great part again, and eventually ended up in poorly produced westerns.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37ea63cb0ed943d1a29d93ac114a785f",
            "input": "The Japanese have always had incredible ambitions in their fantasy movies. They have always been ready to destroy cities by huge plastic monsters coming from outer space and elsewhere. The problem is they have never had the money to succeed in making convincing special effects. This film, released in France under the title Les envahisseurs de l'espace, is no exception. Its ambition is to show three creatures from the giant octopus to the giant lobster trying to have the upper hand on the humans. It's extremely awkward and laughable, but well quite enjoyable too. After all, we do like these creatures and these films after all, don't we?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-023cc5ae0d064c099094783814a825c3",
            "input": "Stephen King adaptation (scripted by King himself) in which a young family, newcomers to rural Maine, find out about the pet cemetery close to their home. The father (Dale Midkiff) then finds out about the Micmac burial ground beyond the pet cemetery that has powers of resurrection - only of course anything buried there comes back not quite RIGHT.Below average \"horror\" picture starts out clumsy, insulting, and inept, and continues that way for a while, with the absolute worst element being Midkiff's worthless performance. It gets a little better toward the end, with genuinely disturbing finale. In point of fact, the whole movie is really disturbing, which is why I can't completely dismiss it - at least it has SOMETHING to make it memorable. Decent supporting performances by Fred Gwynne, as the wise old aged neighbor, and Brad Greenquist, as the disfigured spirit Victor Pascow are not enough to really redeem film.King has his usual cameo as the minister.Followed by a sequel also directed by Mary Lambert (is it any wonder that she's had no mainstream film work since?).4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6de278a4d50d4e74be696c85e99ff8a7",
            "input": "I once promised never to walk out of any film ( a personal policy that made me suffer through the most different kinds of dreck, such as Rambo 3, Baise Moi, Deep Impact) - but Mr. Seidl almost succeeded. Hundstage was a truly awful experience. Anyone who sees this movie will think that Austrians are a miserable, pathetic bunch of retards. It shows a world where love and humanity don't exist, a world where people humiliate each other only for one reason - to distract from their own miserable existence. By choosing a documentary-like style with non-professional actors (most of them look like straight from the imagination of Austrian shock-cartoonist Deix) director Seidl wants to make us believe that this is real life in Austrian (European? Western?) suburbs. The viewer is confronted with depictions of sex orgies, violence against women and handicapped people, madness and degradation. But this isn't social criticism. This is just pure shock without any aesthetic value. Instead you get bad acting, bad cinematography, bad filmmaking. If anybody needs a film like this to realize that there are things wrong in our society then this person must have walked through life with closed eyes. This is pseudo-social criticism with a sledge hammer. And it looks down on people in a disgustingly condescending way. It shows ugly people - that is not the reason why I hate it. But it depicts average people in an ugly, misanthropic way. And this is why this film is truly despicable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-27388c14a9a9419788472f7dbda0b159",
            "input": "I saw this movie with my dad. I must have been pretty young, around 15. It was on Star Movies one afternoon.The movie started a bit vaguely, but you could tell those robbers were gathering up for a score. It really caught pace after the first half hour.All the actors are great, especially Blades and Lou Diamond. I Guess it's the ensemble, they just play so well together. I can watch this film anytime.I think it is the relative stupidity of the plot and the characters trying to deal with a very weird score. The jokes are not corny but they are subtle and extreme at the same time that make them so hilarious.A perfect comedy for a lazy afternoon.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ea5e42880cca4869a9ce84583d255718",
            "input": "John Huston's Wise Blood was a more horrifying misrepresentation of Flannery O'Connor's book than I could have imagined. From the utterly terrible acting performances (and don't you, \"Oh that was done on purpose, you just don't get it\" me!) to the musical score that was more suited to an episode of Rockford Files, this film was revolting. I viewed it with no ill-will at the outset, and, in fact, expected a pleasant experience. But the misrepresentation of the southern characters, from the ridiculously fraudulent southern drawl to the lilting, comedic way their faith was portrayed, was inexcusable. Right down to it's end, which was completely devoid of any character sentiment, it failed in every place that O'Connor's book shined and resonated. The actors portraying the \"southern\" policemen may as well have been eating smothered hot-dogs from NYC street stands and quoting Godfather. The one redeeming acting performance was Ned Beatty's lively and dead-on representation of Hoover Shoates, a religious con-artist who hears Moates preaching the Church of Christ Without Christ and sees dollar signs and business opportunities. O'Connor's powerful book is most well-known for it's creepy, religious undercurrent that jibes the seemingly lifeless cadaver of \"Faith\". Mr. Huston's film is a shameful mockery of the author's intentions, as they are understood by me and most of her fans, if I may be so bold as to say so. While I acknowledge that I can't know exactly what the author wished to convey, I have enough affection for her and her works to desire to remain a fan. If I viewed Wise Blood the way Mr. Huston apparently did, I would have thrown it in the trash. For Flannery's sake, and mine, I forgive you, John Huston. The forgetting....that will take some time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7494c25d120340abbb675b87e7fe7848",
            "input": ".... this movie basks too much in its own innocence. It doesn't tell a story; it's more a big time snooze fest. While the actors are all personable, the story is so trite and goes nowhere. I think Victor Rasuk has great charisma, but deserves a real film from a real storyteller.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1bb7f8f21b524ab69d289f2a4cfe7559",
            "input": "I'll tell you a tale of the summer of 1994. A friend and I attended a Canada Day concert in Barrie, and it was a who's who of the top Canadian bands of the age. We got there about 4am, waited in line most of the morning, and when the doors opened at 9am, we were among the first inside the gates. We then waited and waited in the hot sun, slowly broiling but we didn't care, because the headliners were among our favourites. At one point, early in the afternoon, I sat down and dozed off with my back to the barrier. I was awakened to my shock and dismay by a shrieking girl wearing a Rheostatics t-shirt. This is the reason I have hated the Rheostatics to this day. There's nothing reasonable, nor taste-determined, nor really anything except their fandom. Snotty of me, isn't it? So, I, in my hatred of the band, have denied myself the delight that is Whale Music.Desmond Howl had it all. It's hard to say what he's lost, since he lives in a fantastic mansion wedged between the ocean and the mountains (the BC region where the movie was shot is breathtaking). The life most of us dream of is dismantled by dreams, phantoms, and his own past, until the day a teenaged criminal breaks in...and, trite as it sounds, breaks him out.Canadian cinema suffers from several problems. Generally, a lack of money, as well as an insufferable lack of asking for help (as if somehow the feature would cease to be Canadian) leads to lower production values than American or British films, and most people don't like to watch anything that sounds or looks like, well, not like an American film. Next, Canadian screenwriters often seem so caught up in being weird that they lose sight of how to tell a good story, and tell it well. Third, they seem to think that gratuitous nudity (often full-frontal) makes something artistic. I'm sure anyone who watches enough Canadian movies, especially late at night on the CBC, knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's almost like a \"don't do this\" handbook exists out there somewhere and Canadian film-makers threw it out a long time ago.In the 90s and 00s, however, some films (such as Bruce McDonald's work and the brilliant C.R.A.Z.Y.) have broken this mold, and managed to maintain what makes them Canadian, while holding onto watchable production values and great stories. Whale Music is such a film, on the surface. Deeper than just its Canadian-isms, it's a deeply moving story of a man who's lost his grip, through grief and excess, who is redeemed by music then by love. And that redeems even the Rheostatics. :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37f199228d224a189c9661c701b6105c",
            "input": "Although Lang's version is more famous,Borzage's work is not devoid of interest ,far from it:its \"celestial\" sequences are even better.The metaphor of the train (perhaps borrowed from the ending of Abel Gance's \"la roue\" ) is eventually more convincing than the \"up above\" heavenly world.Borzage's tenderness for his characters shows in Marie's character and love beyond the grave is one of his favorite subjects (the ending of \"three comrades\" ).The amusement park seems to be everywhere: we see it even when we are in Marie's poor house.I do not think that the sets are that much cheesy,they are stylized to a fault.The fair from a distance almost gives a sci-fi feel to the movie.Borzage never forgets his social concerns: in the heavenly train going up,the Rich cannot stand to be mixed up with the riffraff but as \"chief magistrate\" tells :\"here there's no more difference\" .Not a major work for Borzage (neither is Lang's version),but to seek out if you are interested in the great director's career.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ce52e530e5249e6bd292e2a37997435",
            "input": "i thought this movie was really really great! Helena did an amazing job in it! I thought she played her character very well! she's an AWESOME actress!! :)the movie was also really funny too! The jokes were great! i couldnt stop laughing! :)i think everyone should see it... :)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7dc46754baf4d41a2a64b1b39b7d368",
            "input": "This movie is a little unusual in that it's got a very slim plot and the movie itself is done at a very slow and leisurely pace. While this makes it pretty different from the average Grant film, it is still highly watchable and entertaining. It's sort of like someone said \"let's just follow Cary around and watch as he gets perturbed at all the little problems that come up when you are having a house rehabbed\". Considering what a fun actor he is in the film and the great support he gets from Myrna Loy and Melvin Douglas, the film works very well. While the film has pretty modest pretensions, it makes the most of the material. It's a great film for Cary Grant fans or for the whole family.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05d53c93aa6c41f7965237d3a397f597",
            "input": "David Duchovny and Michelle Forbes play a young journalist couple who want to go to California, but can't really afford to, so they 'ride share\" with another young couple (Brad Pitt and Juliette Lewis) to save on expenses. The idea is for them to stop at various murder sites along the way, sites where serial killers did their thing, since Brian (Duchovny) is a writer and Carrie (Forbes) is his photographer. What they don't know is that Pitt (Earley) and Lewis are serial killer and girlfriend who just goes along with whatever HE says. I don't care for Pitt as a rule but he does justice to psycho roles. The scary thing is that he does them so well; I've actually KNOWN people like him before, no, not killers, but with pretty much the same mindset. Anyway, as the road trip goes along, Carrie guesses that the others are about out of money, but Earley seems to always come up with the cash somehow....never mind that he leaves someone dead here and there to do it though. Lewis does her role well, one that she excels at, a not-too-bright waif that has a good heart but doesn't understand that she doesn't have to put up with being beaten up by Earley when she does something he doesn't like. As things begin to get more unacceptable Carrie insists that the other couple be put out at a gas station, and unfortunately it's at that point where she's inside that she sees a news bulletin that tells her exactly who they've been ride-sharing with, after which things go downhill for them at a rapid clip. This is not the greatest flick in the world, but it's not bad...I watched what was supposed to be the 'unrated' version but I wonder how much was cut out of the rated version, because this seemed fairly tame to me, really...not that this makes it family fare or anything, unless it's maybe the Manson Family. 7 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41d1b4f390b34ce59b7dd5cc137bdd9f",
            "input": "What the hell of a D-Movie was that? Bad acting, bad special effects and the worst dialogues/storyline i ever came across. The only cool thing here was Coolio, who had a nice cameo as a freaked out cop. However, the rest of the film is awful and boring. It's not even so bad, you can laugh about it. Just plain crap. And whoever compares this to the Evil Dead Series might as well compare Tomb Raider to Indiana Jones (well, ok, at least there was Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider)! 1 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b27e7518b9e42dab41be770913e2d67",
            "input": "Mat Spirogolou's (Toby Malone) family know he is a talented footballer, and are pleased when he secures an audition to join a big club. They hope that when he arrives in the city his cousin will look after him.But the cousins are like chalk and cheese: one a naive farm boy, the other a streetwise spendthrift who has managed to get mixed up with drug dealers and gangsters. Mat is unlikely to have a quiet evening in before his big day.Having missed his cousin George (Damien Robertson) on arrival in the city, Mat encounters further trouble when a young biker takes him for a ride in more ways than one.Toby Malone, probably better known for his work in theatre, puts in a commendable performance as the bucolic teenager. There are telltale signs of a low budget, but as with so many other low-budget movies there's more fun, seemingly more spontaneity, and more charm, than there is to be seen in the average Hollywood blockbuster.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3cb17495131a4644ad90ec39e3142b80",
            "input": "This is not really a zombie film, if we're defining zombies as the dead walking around. Here the protagonist, Armand Louque (played by an unbelievably young Dean Jagger), gains control of a method to create zombies, though in fact, his 'method' is to mentally project his thoughts and control other living people's minds turning them into hypnotized slaves. This is an interesting concept for a movie, and was done much more effectively by Fritz Lang in his series of 'Dr. Mabuse' films, including 'Dr. Mabuse the Gambler' (1922) and 'The Testament of Dr. Mabuse' (1933). Here it is unfortunately subordinated to his quest to regain the love of his former fiancée, Claire Duvall (played by the Anne Heche look alike with a bad hairdo, Dorothy Stone) which is really the major theme.The movie has an intriguing beginning, as Louque is sent on a military archaeological expedition to Cambodia to end the cult of zombies that came from there. At some type of compound (where we get great 30s sets and clothes) he announces his engagement to Claire, and then barely five minutes later, she gives him back his ring declaring her love for his pal, Clifford Greyson (Robert Noland). It's unintentionally funny the way they talk to each other without making eye contact. This would have been a great movie for 'Mystery Science Theater 3000', if they hadn't already roasted it.It's never shown how Louque actually learns the 'zombification' secret, but he then uses it to kill his enemies, create a giant army of rifle carrying soldiers and body guards. We won't see such sheer force of will until John Agar in 'The Brain From Planet Arous' (1957).Finally Claire consents to marry him if he will let Greyson live and return to America. Louque agrees, but actually turns him into one of his hypnotized slaves. On their wedding night he realizes that Claire will only begin to love him if he gives up his 'powers.' To gain her love, he does so, causing the 'revolt' of the title, in which all his slaves awaken and attack his compound and kill him. Greyson embraces Claire, and we seem to be at the end of a parable: \"Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.\" So really then, it's not that bad of a film, despite the low IMDb rating it currently has. On repeated viewings (?) one can see the artistry in the well formed script! Dean Jagger had yet to develop into a good actor, and is almost unrecognizable in his youngness -- is that really his own hair? We remember him more for his bald, old man roles in 'White Christmas' (1954), 'X The Unknown' (1956) and 'King Creole' (1958). The story borrows a lot of its basic themes from the Halperin brothers better, earlier film 'White Zombie' (1932) in which hapless Robert Frazier (as Charles Beaumont) uses 'zombification' to win the love of Madge Bellamy (as Madeline Parker).If you want real zombie movies (of which there are hundreds!) I'd start with 'White Zombie' (1932), 'King of the Zombies' (1941), 'I Walked with a Zombie' (1943), 'Night of the Living Dead' (1968), 'The Last Man on Earth' (1964) and its two remakes. In the modern era of classy films, there are 'Horror Express' (1972), 'The Serpent and the Rainbow' (1988), '28 Days Later' (2002) and its sequel, as well as many, many, others too numerous to mention.This one is not really a zombie film. Judging this movie on its own terms, it's more of a semi-Gothic romance. As such it ranks a little below some of Universal's bottom billed B horror movies of the late 30s and early 40s. So I'll give it a 5.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b880239837840b6a8234e7ab3a6fc25",
            "input": "Should this be an American movie I'd rate it 7: we've seen this before. Being this an Argentinean movie, and being myself Argentine, I'd like to give it a 10, since it's the kind of quality I'd been hoping -rather than expecting- for. It's superb quality is astonishing, given all the limitations imposed by the 3rd World...I can't forget the scene when Díaz forces Silverstein's fiancé to confess -you know what I mean if you saw the movie. I think that's the key moment of the movie, not surprising maybe, yet original. That's when the real action begins.Before watching a movie I always try to gather some previous information. Being this a mainstream, satyric, commercial one, I press \"Play\" and make a suspension of reality and logic, I'd say the best state of mind to enjoy movies like this. It's impossible to discuss the plausibility of the whole plot, yet it's believable in a certain way. As for me, I couldn't stop laughing at every single joke and commentary -\"sos malo\" (\"you're mean\")... put in the mouth of Díaz, the greatest one.I'm rather tired of seeing movies \"designed for\" Peretti. I know he's a superb actor, but sometimes I feel his roles unfairly opaque the rest, Luis Luque's role in this case. I'm not very fond of Argentine television, so I haven't seen much work from Luque, but it's pretty obvious that he's an excellent performer. His physical role, his stares, his content attitude in this movie made me fall in love with his performance. I think his role should need some upgrading, just to let him show us how great he can be!I don't know whether Szifrón is planning to make a sequel or not. I know he won't make it if it's to follow the rule that \"second parts were never good\", so if he makes it, I'll surely go see it. And I hope that, in the future, takes into account the possibility to give Peretti's counterparts the same chances to develop their roles.Great movie, great performances, and lots of laughs!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42d023097f984e0c886851edb2beb1c5",
            "input": "I didn't know Willem Dafoe was so hard up for bucks that he'd disgrace himself with such shocking hamming in this monstrosity. Hell: I'll donate that money that I was going to send to Ethiopia if he's that desperate. I have never seen such a pathetic and disgusting film for a long time...who paid for this? They are either pulling some tax scam or insane. A 5-year old would be ashamed of the plot, and I'd rather get cancer than sit through more than the hour I suffered already. Everybody involved should be locked up for a year in the sodomy wing of a third world prison. Avoid at all costs. I'd give it minus 10 if possible...unbelievable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f7d1a76a2fe24bbaa42230a7f8a2cf43",
            "input": "I watched this movie recently together with my sister who likes the performances of Sophia Loren. I'm a person who they call a Cultural Barbarian. I hate art in any kind of shape or form. Rambo is more my kind of movie, action, kills, blood, horror. If you recognize yourself in this avoid this movie like the plague. No one dies, no action, no nudity, nothing of the kind. Let me give you a résumé in a few sentences. It starts out with 5 minutes in black and white Nazi propaganda. Every Italian in a housing block attends a parade in honor of Hitler, except for a housewife, an anti fascist and a caretaker. The housewife who is cheated by her husband, meets the anti fascist. She falls in love with him, wants to make love to him, but the anti fascist is gay. Despite of this they make love with each other. At the end of the day, the housewife reads a book from her gay lover, and the guy himself is deported by agents. The end. You want an even shorter résumé? BORING... That short enough? The guy should have used his gun in the beginning of this movie and shoot himself, to save the audience from this atrocity. On a side note my sister loved this movie. Like I said, I'm a Cultural Barbarian...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55c9b6d66277406c82fbc88ed44ba087",
            "input": "...in an otherwise ghastly, misbegotten, would-be Oedipal comedy.I was the lone victim at a 7:20 screening tonight (3 days after the movie opened) , so there is some satisfaction in knowing that moviegoers heeded warnings.The bloom is off Jon Heder's rose. The emerging double chin isn't his fault; but rehashing his geeky kid shtick in another bad wig simply isn't working. It would be another crime if this were to be Eli Wallach's last screen appearance. Diane Keaton will probably survive having taken this paycheck - basically because so few will have seen her in this, the very worst vehicle she's chosen in the last few weeks.Sitting alone in the theater tonight I came alive (laughed, even) whenever Daniels was given the latitude in which to deliver the film's sole three dimensional character. He really is among our very best actors.In summary, even Jeff Daniels's work can't redeem this picture.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ab620abff6945b689354152528857f4",
            "input": "I'm on the opposite end of the previous comment.First of all, I don't think this was intended to be a straight sequel to \"The Jerk\". I mean, it's not titled \"The Jerk 2\"... it's \"The Jerk, Too\", which leads me to believe that while a lot of the character names are the same, it actually revolves around a completely different person.Think about it: Virtually no connection to the previous movie, other than character names; a totally different story; different cast; and the fact that it's a partial musical.I say give this movie some credit. It does have plenty of laughs in it.. Mark Blankfield at his prime.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5827c1e1bace4a80b2b12567d6b0da53",
            "input": "Definitely one of funny man Eddie Murphy's lesser films is this nonsense about a kidnapped mystical child, three hundred year old dragons and a \"Chosen One\".Murphy is the \"Chosen One\" in question, and as the opening song suggests, he is \"the best man in the world\". A finder of lost and missing children, he is approached by a mysterious Tibetan woman (Charlotte Lewis) who tells him he is \"The Chosen One\", and that it is his destiny to find and rescue \"The Golden Child\". For if the child were to die, compassion would die with him, as he is the bearer of compassion.If all this hocus pocus rubbish hasn't ruined it for you now, it surely will once the movie begins. Suffice to say the plot is abominable and destroys the whole film. Meant to be another vehicle for Murphy's egotistical brand of humour (the comedy isn't so great mind you), the movie fails on many levels. Even Charles Dance as the evil Sardo Numspa can't do much for proceedings. Very silly and disappointing.Sunday, December 12, 1993 - T.V.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bea87aca50044c3ca96566dbb8996f6a",
            "input": "Warped take on the Pinocchio theme, and set during the Christmas season(..after the previous entry abandoned ties to Christmas) has booby-trapped toys sent to murder a child(..yet through this, other victims are accidentally harmed in the process)perhaps by a toy maker's \"son\". Screaming Mad George was responsible for the killer toys(..including a larvae which enters a victim's mouth and out his eye, another where soldier toys actually shoot real bullets at a babysitter after her boyfriend was practically strangled by a severed hand toy, operating from a remote control). The little target is a mute child named Derek(William Thorne)whose stepdad was murdered by a red ball with extending arms that ensnare his face, causing him to land on a fireplace poker. Mother Sarah(Jane Higginson)worries about her son's mental state, figuring his reluctance towards opening presents or, more importantly, talking, derives from watching her husband's horrific murder. Derek's real father, Noah(Tracy Fraim)fears for his son't safety, and informs, reluctantly, his ex-girlfriend Sarah that the local toymaker, Joe Petto(Mickey Rooney)once was arrested for setting traps in toys to harm kids due to the loss of an unborn child when his wife was killed in a car crash..kind of a retaliation in saying that if he couldn't have a son, then others shouldn't either. Still quite a heavy drinker(..often seen swigging Jack), Petto seems to have set aside his feelings towards kids, but his creepy son Pino(Brian Bremer)hasn't and Derek he harbors angst towards. Why? You'll soon understand.Pretty disappointing special effects and rather goofy premise. Rooney's name adds an allure to the film, gaining it a notoriety, but his histrionics can only help so much. Attractive lead actress Higginson(Slaughterhouse)and Fraim as the man who re-enters her life aren't so bad, but the lame plot that develops is hard to take seriously. I'm guessing that's the point, but Rooney has no reason to be in such a film as this..he has no room to bring any personality to his toymaker other than rage and desperation, quite volatile, barely holding himself together as he explodes in anger towards Pino, when not downing liquor. Bremer is appropriately weird and \"robotic\" as Pino, longing to have Sarah as his mama. The practical effects used during the attacks on victims are rather unconvincing..Screaming Mad George's work with Savage Steve Holland was far more effective than what we see in this film. The sex everyone talks about isn't as gratuitous as many would have you believe(..I can't even recall any nudity). Probably the best of the numerous sequels greenlighted, but that's not exactly an endorsement. I'm pretty sure written on paper, this was an entertaining concept, the idea of spoofing Pinocchio using horror elements, but the result doesn't exactly blow you away.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01288d828dce4fe6abd7cf9c7e76f5a8",
            "input": "this movie was fantastic great movie all through scary as hell. and i mean it freaked me out as much as pulse and IT and the omen etc. but with a great movie comes a crap ending right? RIGHT! this movies ending was pathetic stuff. i mean a ghost turned back time in a chicks house and it thinks now i have done that it means i can call her and itll be the right time cause she thinks it is. right? wrong. my ass! i don't care if the ghost is Satan, it just doesn't happen. its a movie yes but most evil movies or praised movies like this are meant to make sense but it didn't. it just showed us what i just said and people don't think anything of it. can someone please tell me why you all haven't noticed that pathetic part. the movie for me ended in the hospital and that is all. check out number 3 its much more kick ass",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a18119b8ec844ad492930764dd34d308",
            "input": "First off, I didn't know what to expect when I started the video.Anytime someone brings back a cult type movie genre and adapts it into the present, something gets inexplicably lost in the translation.That's not the case here. This movie just starts off on the right track. It's part familiar territory but manages to take it over the top as well. Crockzilla scene anyone? That has to be seen, and just try and keep a straight face. This movie takes some of the old fun cult movie classics and manages to blend it seamlessly into a modern production. It's good to see someone is filling the need in this market. Very well done.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99dafe5e67714ffe84b275389123cba5",
            "input": "Alas, poor Hamlet. I knew him, dear reader, and let me tell thee, THIS VERSION SUCKS! I don't know who of all people put up the money for this flotsam, but I hope that they're proud of themselves. They took THE classic play and turned it into the most boring melodrama imaginable. This version is quite literally so bad, that not even the presence of a great thespian like Maximilian Schell in the title role can save it. This movie's only redeeming quality is that it made great fodder for \"MST3K\"; Mike, Servo and Crow had a lot of fun with this one.But either way, I'm sure that Shakespeare, had he been alive when they made this, would not have wanted his name associated with it. This \"Hamlet\" is not even so bad that's it good; it's just plain bad. Absolutely dreadful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-548a499392c24eacbd324b8a64151688",
            "input": "I thought this was a sequel of some sorts, and it is meant to be to the original from 1983. But a sequel is not taking the original plot and destroying it.I actually had very little expectations to this movie, but I just wasted 95 minutes of life. No suspense - I actually feel clairvoyant, poor acting, and so filled with technical errors, so I as a computer geek just couldn't believe it. They have tried to make it a mix between a generic war movie and 24 hours. But this is not even worthy of a low budget TV movie.Do not see this movie, this is a complete waste of time. Instead get the original. The theme is still valid. Don't let to much power into a machine. And the acting and plot is far more exiting and compelling.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ca3fdfdc0d74748a9c1b1a08c330cee",
            "input": "Before Cujo,there was Lucky the devil dog. In 1978,on Halloween night the movie\"Devil Dog,The Hound of Hell\" premiered. A story of a family getting a new puppy (from a farmer who just happen to be in the neighborhood selling fruits and vegetables) because their dog Skipper was killed.Coencidence? Everyone loves the new dog,but there is something strange about him. It isn't long until the father Mike Barry(Richard Crenna,First Blood)starts to notice.His wife Betty(Yvette Mimieux,Where The Boys Are,Jackson County Jail,Snowbeast)is different and his kids Charlie and Bonnie(Ike Eisenman,Witch Mountain and Fantastic Vourage and Kim Richards,Witch Mountain,Nanny and the Professor,Hello Larry,Tuff-Turf)also have changed. Does the dog have something to do with it? He's determined to find out and do whatever it takes to save his family.This movie is great because it has Ike and Kim playing a darker side of themselves than what we saw on those witch mountain movies. This is one of the many 70's made-for-TV horror movies that was actually scary for a made-for-TV horror movie. The music was creepy and even the ending which I won't tell made you think.This movie also stars Ken Kercheval(Cliff Barnes of Dallas)and R.G. Armstrong(who couldn't stay away from devil movies remember\"Race with the Devil\"?)It's worth watching.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00ca755dc89f41e3bf844085ecc6cb76",
            "input": "i was lucky enough to see A Chorus Line when it came to my city.. i was younger then.. but it was an Excellent play.. so would someone please tell me why in heavens name did they have to make a movie out of it.. and why Michael Douglas ??? He didnt suit the role.. this movie really sucked BIG time !!!my advise is NOT to rent this movie.. save your money for something better like \"Cats\" ....",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d0c7f24ac6d9438bb3e688c54a436e40",
            "input": "This is one of the very few movies out there which are very erotic without being pornographic, despite there being only a very rudimentary plot. There's not much live sound or dialogue; instead, the actors do voice-overs describing their experience, why they participated, etc.It's a document.It's mind-blowing.I can totally understand why nobody else ever tried to do something like this. There already is something like this. This. :-)NB: The producer doesn't have the rights to distribute a DVD version. I've also never seen it being sold anywhere; one may email Mr. Boerner and order a copy on VHS.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a0884ae62d2468b8df2680d2ed61c78",
            "input": "This is one of the worst films I've seen. The only positive thing I can say is it was so bad that is seemed comical. First off, there's no plot. The actors appear to be reading off cue cards and do the dumbest things. Such as being chased by dead people but yet wanting to go out and look for their friends. Also the zombies were terrible, no where near as fun as any of Romero's work, who gets s plug in the movie. And the dumbest part of all was they kept showing flashes of the video game in the action sequences. Like we don't get the video game is about shooting zombies. Also, all the 20 somethings some how know how to use automatic weapons and hit a target without even aiming the gun. And the way the people die is so stupid. It's like they run out of ammo so stand around waiting to be jumped on. And when cornered in front of the house they run out of ammo instead of shooting the door open, So dumb.FINAL VERDICT: If any of these actors appear in another film, then they've been blessed with a second chance. Definitely the worst film I've seen in years. A B-movie on cinemax is better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-191a810da2f443da82a203cd8d458ee9",
            "input": "I would reccomend this film to everyone. Not only to the fans of the rocker Luciano Ligabue, but to all film-buffs. Because it's sincere, moving, funny and true. Because Ligabue is a born storyteller and a film lover, and every frame of his film is made with love and care. Because his characters are loved and ask to be loved. Because most of the Italian debut films are lousy and this one, done by an outsider, is a real joy to watch and to listen at. Because Stefano Accorsi is gorgeous and reminds me of Andrea Pazienza, who was, like Freccia, beautiful and talented and good and lost his life because of the heroin, that Ligabue shows as it is, unglamorous and ugly, without indulging in easy moralisms. Because it's a film that speaks to our heart, our ears, our souls. And because I lived the experience of the FM radios and it was exactly like that. Thanks, Luciano!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-379881b406424f279e19f165dd8a5ad5",
            "input": "\"Stories of the Century\" was a half hour series and appeared in first run syndication during the '54-'55 television season. It was also the first western TV series to win an Emmy award. Starring veteran western actor Jim Davis as railroad detective Matt Clark, the series set Clark and his fellow railroad detective partners (Mary Castle as Frankie Adams for the first half of the season and Kristine Miller as \"Jonesy\" during the second half)against historic western outlaws of various periods ranging from the mid-1860's to the early 1900's. The series was very satisfying, easy to watch, and fairly realistic due mainly to the easygoing charm of Jim Davis in the lead role. He seemed like an actual western character. One other note. When Matt Clark would arrive in town after a long ride he actually looked like he had been on a long horse ride as he would be covered in dust.A very good early adult western.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-568ec0449ac54978847785d13237fd67",
            "input": "A Cinderella story made for adults who live in dreamland. The romance is very unrealistic, fluttery, lovey dovey, perfect etc. The Cinderella plot till the very end and Shahid Kapoor is the only reason for my stars. If you're looking for a dreamy romance with a twist, this is definitely you're movie, but for the rest of us real world people, I'd highly recommend saving your three hour watch time. Wake up people!Four out of the five people that saw the film with me would not recommend the film. We had a great time bashing majority of the unrealistic scenes. Maybe I'm missing something.. I just can't believe a movie like this can beat a classic like HDDCS!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-94a2907bfdc348f1b3a47f8b04449a29",
            "input": "Whenever I see most reviews it's called 'a misfire for Eddie Murphy'. These critics want to take a look at some of the stuff he's doing these days, and maybe soften their stance in retrospect... \"The Golden Child\" is not highbrow entertainment, but thanks to some of the cast it breaths new life into old clichés, and gives Murphy one of his best roles. I don't understand the pervading lack of 'love' for its efforts, at all. Perhaps it was released at a time when the establishment had grown weary of knockabout, thrill-a-minute adventures? Steven Spielberg started it with Indiana Jones; it's unfair to make this one a scapegoat when what is possibly its biggest sin is also utterly harmless. There's nothing necessarily wrong with trying to capitalise on trends.Yes it's silly, but even an occasional observer should be able to understand that 'ridiculous' is where Hollywood's idea of mysticism begins and ends. What's more important than believability with a story like this is that the audience have entertaining tour guides on hand to show them the mysterious sights. Michael Ritchie and Eddie Murphy fit the bill for this capacity just fine. My advice to you is to buy the ticket and take the ride.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a004a38bdd04864b13b854a14ccd244",
            "input": "I found this a very entertaining small kids movie that actually is geared more for adults with a lot of jokes and humor only they would understand. A few things are inappropriate for the kiddies, but just a few. Othewise, \"The Grinch\" (Jim Carrey) cracks so many jokes you can't keep up with them all, ranging from sexual to cultural to insider-Hollywood to racial.The film is very colorful and looks great on DVD. The little girl in here, \"Cindy Lou Who\" (Taylor Momsen) is really cute and the costumes and hairdos of the little people in here are fun to view. Anthony Hopkins' voice is pleasing, too, so having his narrate this elevates the movie further. His rhymes are fun to hear.I saw this in the theater, though it was \"fair,\" but on DVD, it was far better. I've seen in three times and it got better each time.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc60402bdd6d4824936e97ab67b29ebe",
            "input": "I have no idea how anyone managed to stay awake during this show. The acting was ham-fisted and amateur, the story was old news, and plot development (or lack thereof) invariably had my eyelids sagging less than halfway through each episode. That's about all there is to say of it, because it genuinely lacked substance of any kind.How can you people like crap like this? It's freaking stupid, it's an insult to your intelligence. I don't even know how to further explain it... It's as if some of you will stare mindlessly at junk like this solely because you like the way some of the actors look, or because, for whatever crazy reason, you haven't seen the same formulas in dozens of shows a million times before.I just.. forget it. This show sucked, and thankfully it's gone forever. I wish they'd get to work on demolishing The O.C. once and for all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8621494fe014c57a26cb59ceb9e0390",
            "input": "\"Such a Long Journey\" is a well crafted film, a good shoot, and a showcase for some good performances. However, the story is such a jumble of subplots and peculiar characters that it becomes a sort of Jack of all plots and master of none. Also, Western audiences will likely find the esoterics of the rather obscure Parsee culture a little much to get their arms around in 1.7 hours. Recommended for those with an interest in India.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30c30724bc2c4bfa90ea7e713a08a1e3",
            "input": "I go to the cinema to be entertained. There is absolutely nothing entertaining about this film. From beginning to end, there is no respite from the gray, grinding reality of this woman's life. It is one-paced, with no change of mood. I remained until the end only because I was convinced that things must get better. They don't, and I don't think I was the only one, as evidenced by the many groans ringing around the cinema as the film drew mercifully to a close. Honestly depicting social depravation is no crime, but boring your audience to groans is not the way to win the sympathy of the public. A dreadful film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-edc240bc26f146beb79a52a92aa1dde9",
            "input": "***SPOILERS*** Like some evil Tinkers-to-Evers-to-Chance double-play combination we have in \"Omen IV\" the evil seed of the deceased AntiChrist Damien Thorn come back. Terrorizing his parents his schoolmates his neighbors and finally the entire world as a she named Delia York, Asia Vieila. After being given to a \"deserving\" couple the Yorks Karen & Gene, Fay Grant & Michael Woods,by the Catholic Church's St. Francis orphanage.Little Delia didn't waste any time making her peasants felt by scratching her mom at a house party. Later Delia almost get killed by a runaway truck only to have herself saved by this \"Devil Dog\" named Ryder. Going to school Delia takes care of the local bully by getting the big guy to wet himself in front of all his classmates. Later when his father threatens the Yorks with a law suit she has his head sliced off in a self-induced traffic accident! Delia is someone that you never mess with if you know what's good for you.Meanwhile Dalia's dad Gene becomes a big man in town on his own, or so he thinks, by getting elected to the congress as a champion of the clean air and green trees crowd instead of letting the smog and concrete boys take over the neighborhood with his eye now on he White House itself! Did his bratty and strange daughter Delia have anything to do with Gene York's sudden good fortune?It's only later when Jo, Ann Hearen, is hired as Delia's nanny that the truth's comes out about her strange and evil powers. Jo a New Age type realizes that Delia is a bit weird, after turning all her white crystals black, and calls her New Age Guru Noah, Jim Byrnes, to come over and check her out. Noah is so upset by what he sees in Delia Kirilian color vibrations ,all black and blue with a little pinch of red, that it flips him out so bad that he almost crashed into Delia's moms car.Taken on a trip to a psychic festival by Jo Delia turns the entire event into an inferno setting the place, through mental telepathy, on fire and heaving everyone there run for cover including poor Noah who was at the festival and ended up with his leg broken. The and shaken and battered Guru was so shook up by the whole experience that he later checked out of the country to become a hermit in the Tibetan wilderness. Jo herself is later thrown out, with the help of the sweet and cuddly family pet Ryder, of a second floor window to her death because she knew and talked too much. It's when Karen is again pregnant that she decides, finally, to find out the truth about the real parents of Delia. That's when she,and we in the audience, come face to face with the truth. She's not only the feared AntiChrist of Revelations she's his twin sister! Her brother the AntiChrist himself is about to come on the scene as her kid brother the sill unborn Alexander York!Three times were more then enough for the AntiChrist coming back to earth to bring about Armageddon. The movie going public were already getting a little tired of of him and his evil adventures. With a fourth really not necessary since Daimen Thorn, the original AntiChrist, had been dead and buried for years. Were put through the usual ringer with no one believing that little Delia is \"Thee\" AntiChrist until it was almost too late to stop her in her deadly rounds of destroying the entire human race. The movie as bad as it is is also far too long, 97 minutes, for a horror flick that could well have told it's story is as little as 80 minutes.Having a private eye Earl Knight, Mchael Learner,and later a former Catholic nun sister Yvonne,Megan Lehch,and now faith healer Felichy in the film only to be killed off didn't help the plot either. It only prolonged the suffering of those of us watching the movie. You could see the surprise ending coming almost as soon as the film \"Omen IV\" began with the bases being cleared for Delia's eventual takeover of the civilized as well as uncivilized world. What was a bit of a surprise was Delia doing it with a little help from friends.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b893817046d14484b610bdf48c1012c3",
            "input": "This is a film i decided to go and see because I'm a huge fan of adult animation. I quite often find that when a film doesn't evolve around a famous actor or actress but rather a story or style, it allows the film to be viewed as a piece of art rather than a showcase of the actors ability to differ his styles.This film is certainly more about style than story. While i found the story interesting (a thriller that borrows story and atmosphere from films such as Blade Runner and many anime films), it was a bit hard to follow at times, and didn't feel like it all came together as well as it could have. It definitely had a mixed sense of French Animation and Japanese Anime coming together. Whether thats a good thing or not is up to the viewer. Visually this film is a treat for the eyes, and in that sense a work of art.If you like adult animation, or would like to see a film that is different from most films out at the moment. I would recommend it. All i can say is that i enjoyed the experience of the film but did come away slightly disappointed because it could have been better",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-638b562b9c374578891aa8c9935a1d63",
            "input": "\"ASTONISHING\" Screams the LA Times from the front of the DVD box. They must have been referring to the fact that such a sorry piece of crap was ever released. The film revolves around a bunch of girls who have a disease which forces them to become cannibals, and murder innocent people just to stay alive. Their skin peels off throughout the film, we also see severed legs, heads etc that are about as convincing as a Halloween Fuzzy Felt set. There is an awful lot of talking b*ll**ks, a bit of human cuisine and some weird zombie hunter chap who imprisons the sufferers of said skin illness in his closet strapped to a chair, before stabbing them in the head, chopping them into bits...You get the picture. Considering there is no acting talent on display at all, and the gore is laughably unrealistic, what is the point of this whole farrago? Again looking at the video box, the guy responsible for it is an \"underground cult director\". Would that be like those weird religious cults where they brainwash you into thinking one way when clearly the opposite is true? Because that's the only possible reason I can think of for anyone to derive pleasure by watching this tax write-off. Then, on the same paragraph he compares himself to Mike Leigh, Ken Loach and George Romero. HAHAHAHAHA oh stop it. Now you're just being silly.Do you enjoy this film? Are you offended by the above opinion? If so, you must be a member of said cult. Do they pocket your wages? Do they let you see other family members? Do they force you to watch Andrew Parkinson films till you think he's the best director since A.Hitchcock? Do tell... this sounds like a Panorama special brewing to me. And say hello to the critic of the LA times when you return to your colony, will you? 0/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f97487247304aa1bc1be2477da71c42",
            "input": "Nope, I am just not going to get with it here. I refuse to go along with the program. Don't you supposed that perhaps this movie is just a tad over-rated? Look at the reader comments and their star ratings: Most are 6/10, 7/10 or better. I think this is an instance when the ratings may say more about the people rendering them than the movie itself, which is unique. How many other sex fantasies about simulated bestiality complete with horse couplings have become mainstream hits as catalog DVD titles? I watched this movie with a pervading sense of anticipation, expecting fireworks, and instead got someone popping a Gucci shopping bag. It looked great, but once the thrill had been spent even the twist ending didn't do much to save it.The film's background story says it all: Director films about 25 minutes of borderline hardcore fake bestial sex for another movie, is informed the footage will not be appropriate, sets it aside, waits two or three years for a smattering of critical acclaim to build up, then constructs an entire feature around that 25 minutes, filming roughly 70 minutes of otherwise unrelated, excruciatingly boring footage and inserting the 25 minute chunk in as a dream sequence. That the 25 minutes of film in question is strikingly odd, original and shocking in a deliberate, calculated manner goes without saying. But we aren't here to evaluate that 25 minutes alone, we must consider the entire film, and ask ourselves why people are so enthusiastic about the movie? Or are they just enamored by it's background story and history of having been banned by people who were stupid enough to be offended by it?Perhaps it is an anti-clerical agenda that appeals to them. Hating the western religions of catholicism and Christianity is one of the few remaining socially acceptable bastions of intolerance -- Just today it was revealed that the BBC routinely skews their broadcasts with anti Christian & anti Western sentiment in the furtherance of political correctness. You can say anything you want about the Bible, pedopheliac priests, the institutionalized cruelty of the church, and how much white men and their inhuman religions suck the dimpled skin off a golf ball ... But say one negative thing about non-westernized religions, and you are toast. This movie was tailor made for such a sentiment, with a wrinkly old dried up priest who has an entirely unwholesome on screen relationship with two pretty 14 year old French boys complete with inappropriate touching, fawning, fondling, fumbling, groping, and patting of the backsides. Ewww.And then there is the horse couplings, photographed in such fetishistic closeup detail that portions of the film could be used as visual aids for a biology class on animal husbandry. Yes I understand the thematic relevance of the imagery -- large animal phallus's with a wealth of reproductive fluids just waiting to be unleashed like fire extinguishers -- but if I wanted to watch horses, you know, do it, I would like go live on a farm. Having their genitals in my face is about as entertaining as watching someone use a bathroom.Is this movie just a sort of artsy diversion for social deviants? Probably, though I will grant the artistic execution of most of it, filmed in a kind of arty Euro detail that even has a dappled forest pond right out of a Monet painting, complete with a spanning arched bridge. And the ending (which even I managed to be surprised by) does sort of wrap it all up into a neat if distasteful package. But you have to remember that there are certain things that cannot be deconstructed for their design elements and many artists are guilty for exploiting them in their work to lend a sort of gravitas that would not have been achieved without it. That isn't fair, and even Clint Eastwood has fallen prey to the urge with his new movie about Iwo Jima. Whether or not his film is any good stands as a separate consideration from whether or not that battle was a noble cause fought by men who were heroes. The problem is that most people will not be able to separate out the two aspects of the movie and will be lining up to give it Oscars because of it's noble message -- not because it is a particularly good or original movie.While it may seem like an odd parallel, I see one with THE BEAST: How can anyone not see the basic beauty of nature in the sight of two horses mating? And who cannot see the logical culmination of the repressed sexuality from fairy tales in the film's explosive set-piece where Beauty and the Beast finally do the nasty? Somehow I managed to miss both points, and am delighted that I have seen this film so that I can trash it as being what it really is: 25 minutes or so of eye opening over the top adult fairy tale imagery surrounded by 70 minutes of skull drainingly boring artsy-fartsy Euro Trash dreck about some guy getting a haircut, and a great ending. It's art for sure, but it sucks hard.3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-790af070b7d849b0b3fbbec9e8e81196",
            "input": "...let me count the ways.1. A title-only 'remake' that pulls out every cliché in the slasher handbook.2. A plot so predictable that it becomes quite pathetic.3. A completely weak execution of all attempts at suspense or thrills.4. A PG-13 rating that insures no gore, violence, or sex.5. A villain that is not frightening or even mysterious.6. A cast of characters that are so thinly written and stereotyped that we couldn't possibly care about them.7. A lack of any effectively creepy atmosphere (much unlike the original Prom Night).8. A script of dialog that's beyond poor - it's mind numbing. 9. A series of cardboard performances (not sure whether to blame the actors or the lousy aforementioned script for that).10. A completely inept teen-targeted slasher remake that's not brave enough to attempt to have an imagination - or even to show a puddle of blood.It's a no-brainer horror fans, save your money.BOMB out of ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-111ba4f764fa42d7b3fd0604b71fe5ca",
            "input": "My first clue about how bad this was going to be was when the video case said it was from the people who brought us Blair Witch Project which was a masterpiece in comparison to this piece of garbage. The acting was on the caliber of a 6th grade production of Oklahoma and the plot, such as there was, is predictable, boring and inane. 85% of the script is four letter words and innumerable variations on them. Mother F seems to be the \"writer's\" favorite because it is used constantly. It must have taken all of 10 minutes to write this script in some dive at last call. Thank God I rented it and could jump through most of it on fast forward. Don't waste your time or money with this.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b1b3195c4fc4ee6959e2ed0848e8c57",
            "input": "Loved it! What's not to like?--you got your suburbia, you got your zombies, you got your family issues, you got your social dilemmas, you got yourself one Fine Retro-1950's-style Flesh Eating Under Class Held At Bay By An Uneasy Worried About Whether They're The Next Meal Upper Crust. You couldn't ask for more.Cast is superb. Carrie Ann Moss is absolute perfection as a debutante social climbing housewife. She's both wanton, and criminally conspiratorial. Every fellow's dream. K'sun is really great as the son just trying to be as normal as possible in this nightmare existence, and somehow succeeding. He's a genuine screen presence. Very photogenic, and natural. Without naming them all, the rest of the cast is wonderful. Henry Czerny plays a suspicious policeman with honed instincts and little squeamishness as if it's his everyday persona. Billy Connolly is delightful as Fido. A fine actor: I wish that he had played the title role in \"Braveheart,\" with Gibson directing. My sense is that his William Wallace would have been closer to the actual character. His Fido is contained, yet accessible. A nice touch.In short, a great and marvelous satiric poke at morals, values, social pinnings, feelings, growth, coping in uncertain times, and compensatory adjustments to impossible conditions. A true reality show.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd5d67008afd4cc4b5b69a9c1e4a72d6",
            "input": "One would think that a film about a young person's coming to terms with his burgeoning homosexuality would be anything but boring. Think again. This production should be bottled and sold as a cure for insomnia because it's about ten times as potent as any sleep aid on the market. It's almost as if the film maker *considered* making a movie, but got lazy and decided instead to run a series of random (and randomly BORING) images and go-nowhere scenes, throw in a couple of actual scenes featuring actual acting, pretend that good lighting ins't important in the film-making process, and wrap it up under the auspices of an \"arthouse\" film. This is exactly kind of crappy product that makes it easy for a lot of traditional film-makers to poo-poo the indie film movement, and which keeps the general public from more easily embracing indie films.If you're interested in films covering this subject matter, you'd be much better off tuning in to some of the great short films available at Logo's website or renting Get Real. Better yet, read Stone Butch Blues. Whatever you do, skip this long-winded piece of dreck.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72435eb2f2a5460ab62f12da13ee6d1e",
            "input": "This film is pure, distilled, unadulterated boredom. I knew nothing of it before I entered the dark room, took my seat. I was seduced by the \"mysterious and suspenseful\" blurb on the poster I suppose. Also, Lena Headey is nice and unconventionally sexy, and Richard Jenkins is always a reliable guy to have around, so the cast seemed reasonable. It may have been his name above the title that convinced me to go with this instead of whatever else was on. I should've gone to see Valkyrie for the second time instead.The thin plot revolves around Headley's Gina McVey, her boyfriend, her father, her sister and her sister's husband who for some reason are being stalked, in a very louche and unenthusiastic manner, by their evil doppelgangers who emerge from mirrors that mysteriously smash. There could be a great film behind this idea (not exactly an original idea, mind you, but still...) and in fact, if the filmmakers had shorn away all the supporting cast and simply stuck to Headey's character's story, The Broken could've made a reasonable 20-minute short. As it is, it is desperately unmotivated and boring, and terribly inconsistent.For instance, in one scene, a mirror smashes on its own in a room housing all the main characters; they look puzzled but quickly forget about it. In another scene, a mirror smashes in an empty room, and a doppelganger is visible as she \"steps out\" of the shards left hanging on the wall. So why did the first mirror smash if no creepy crawly was to come crawling out? Just for a little thrill? There are far too many scenes of the characters in the dimly-lit London flats, peering around corners cos they thought they heard something, but seeing nothing there and moving on. We begin to wonder, why doesn't this malevolent doppelgang actually ever want to try to scare them? Scare the characters and you have a chance of scaring the audience. But we, the audience, will need to start threatening each other, in the darkness of the theater, if we want to have any thrills during The Broken. By the way, once we've spent time with these evil doubles, we are totally bemused as to why anyone should be expected to be frightened of them - they just stand around, blank looks on their faces, perhaps totally harmless after killing their others.There are some nice moods and touches throughout, and I dare say director Sean Ellis could fashion a genuinely stylish and suspenseful mystery movie if he was to hire an imaginative screenwriter next time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2caae991d6f8413cbb6fdae194ee6331",
            "input": "To be fair, I expected car chases in this film. There was only really one, but apart from that, 'Freeway' was a great movie which I am glad to own on DVD. The only really big names in the cast are HOMICIDE's Richard Belzer as the radio psychiatrist and B-Movie villain par-excellance Billy Drago as the Revelation-quoting Freeway Killer. But the rest of the cast generally give good performances. I especially liked how Darlanne Fluegel gave her character, Sunny, a bit of guts. She could have been a helpless victim character but she is fully rounded as she seeks out Drago with the help of bounty hunter James Russo.Russo, I'm afraid, comes across as rather wooden, but then again, the character he plays, Frank, isn't very well fleshed out save for a back story Sunny is given by his former commanding officer. The tone of menace is kept up superbly throughout the film and the atmosphere of the lonely LA freeway at night with the killer prowling its' length in his sinister grey sedan is an excellent way of building tension, and the music used to underscore the film is suitably composed. I don't know why there are some people who hate this movie so. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose. But I absolutely enjoyed 'Freeway' and I can strongly recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4978e5123cdd420892d8c88f52eb1446",
            "input": "Maybe this isn't fair, because I only made it about halfway through the movie. One of the few movies I have actually not been able to watch due to lameness.The acting is terrible, the camera work is terrible, the plot is ridiculous and the whole movie is just unrealistic and cheesy. For example - during a coke deal, the coke is just kept loose in a briefcase - I'm no expert, but I think people generally put it in a bag.They use the same stupid sound effect whenever a punch is thrown (it's that over the top 'crunching' sound\" and they use toy guns with dubbed in sound effects.Worst movie ever.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac6b1d78f0a94f0d85c5ba99b400fb4e",
            "input": "This is a great adaptation and a great miniseries in its own right. The plot cutdowns might disappoint the fans of the book (but really how many modern readers have read Bleak House without seeing a film version first? I know of only a few). I think it is quite appalling to see reviews critical of the series which have clearly been written by people who haven't a clue about the story - did you actually SEE the series or did you just bag a BBC production because Gillian Anderson was in the newer version?The series captures the mood, pace, characters and plot-drivers (cutting out the Dickensian flourishes which aren't needed and detract from a film treatment like the Turveydrop story, the Smallweed family dynamic and the extra lawyers - Tangle, Vholes etc are very truncated). The only omission that I wish had been kept was the Jellyby incident but as the first episode is already a trifle slow (after the first episode the pace is perfect) I can see it had to go. The only other criticism I have is that Jo's death could have been more faithfully done. I can see that would have practically canonized Woodcourt and he's kept a little more human for not having that scene but really I think Jo's death is one of the most poignant points of the book and I missed it even though it always makes me cry.Has theowinthrop actually seen the series? HOW did he think that Esther was raised by her aunt and UNCLE?? Who is this uncle? I suppose someone who could mistake the name of DENHOLM Eliott for Desmond isn't really an appreciator of English art (film or literature).I also think he mistakes the treatment of the law. YES the law is drawn VERY badly in Bleak House. It fails the descendants of Jarndyce whose valuable inheritance is eaten up by the costs of litigation, it fails the deceased Tom Jarndyce and Rick Carstone and all who have faith in the suit. It fails Miss Flyte. In some sense it also fails Captain Hawdon who is driven to his death by the monotony of law copyist work. Yes it feeds the scavengers of Vholes and Tangle. But it also makes men like Guppy and Kenge able to move beyond their station in life. Though not kind to social status-climbers Dickens clearly would have preferred that they weren't bound to being stuck in the station to which they were born (contrast Jo and the brickmakers' families to the climbing out of poverty by Charley Neckett). Also, the law, while misused by Tulkinghorn and the Chancery vultures, is actually the source of security for the wards of the Court Ada and Richard, and for Esther who is simply Jarndyce's ward. Their security was ensured by the law which delivers them to Jarndyce.I can't see how anyone could have trouble following the story - remember you aren't supposed to realize Esther is Lady Dedlock's daughter right at the beginning. Neither are you supposed to \"get\" all the connections immediately. Instant gratification just doesn't happen in Dickens.As for \"seeing clearly\" through the fog - gosh the Gillian Anderson had such scatty editing that I found IT impossible to follow and I knew the plot already!I found Diana Rigg absolutely brilliant (overacting and drama don't make a good Lady Dedlock but if you think they do try the Gillian Anderson version).It's ADA and Rick not \"Kate\"! and you get all you need of the Rouncewell subplot.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af685ed6139b4cfd8abb2574c02eeb17",
            "input": "I had heard this movie was good from a lot of my friends that saw it, and they all said it was amazing, so I had very high expectations- and Nancy Drew exceeded those high expectations! It had funny parts, it kept me entertained with the action and all the dudes trying to kill her, and Emma Roberts was amazing as Nancy Drew. The rest of the cast was very good, also. I would definitely recommend this movie!! Nancy: \"I wonder why those guys were trying to kill us?!\" Corky: \"Yeah, I was wondering that too. Actually, it's kinda creeping me out!\"Nancy: \"I hate when people try to kill me. It's so rude!\"~Nancy Drew",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dee4ed8732e46ba99320b21c40a19df",
            "input": "I've bought certain films on disc even though the second rate presentation wasn't an option. A certain company I won't identify here has put out several pan and scan dvds (\"Clean and Sober\", \"Star 80\", and this one, to name just three!) of films I don't think anyone wants to see in this compromised format. Some discs give the viewer a choice of 16x9 or full screen and others are just in their theatrical release 1.66:1 ratio.That off my chest, I'll say \"Deathtrap\" was a spooky and oddly enough, amusing picture. My only complaints are the tinny score (what IS that f____g instrument that is usually dragged out for films set in 18th century France?) and Dyan Cannon screaming at regular intervals. Couldn't her character have been an asthmatic who grabbed for an inhaler when she was stressed? Minor complaints, both. The benefits of discs include being able to fast forward to get beyond those things which you don't like.I never saw a staged version of \"Deathtrap\", so having these folks in the roles sets a great impression of their careers at the time. Before Broadway tickets cost an arm and a leg, the theatre was more affordable to average people. Now, anyone paying less than a king's ransom to get live entertainment probably isn't going to a hit show on the great hyped way.Michael Caine and Christopher Reeve were both large, virile specimens in the early 80s and that's integral to how we'll react to their profession and overall image here. They're definitely not bookish men who can't fight or will back down from an obstacle. The two are equally great as their criminal stubbornness becomes their ultimate \"deathtrap\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6f4ad240a734b2e9f00e0fb81dceaf5",
            "input": "I got to say that Uma Thurman is the sexiest woman on the planet. this movie was uber cute and I mean uber cute. It had all the \"sex\" content that most Ivan Reitman comedies have but with something a lil extra, CHEMISTRY. Uma and Luke both have this awkrawrd but believable chemistry that seem to transcend in each scene . Both seem to create this odd, twisted and interesting relationship with powerful \"sexual\" tension that you laugh until you can't feel your face anymore. Anna Farris and the rest of the supporting cast seem to play off each other's roles perfectly and even Wanda Sykes' rather small role will keep you laughing. Though these kind of comedies aren't for everybody, but I have to say I went with a person that doesn't usually enjoy these films and he was laughing like crazy. This movie is certainly not for everyone. especially younger children since some moments are little too...well lets say ADULT for younger viewers. All in all I was pleasantly surprised by this movie, tough the ending I found was a little weak compared to the rest of the film. (3 1/2* out of 5*)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d3d37cfeccd4813ae0da5c0c3da52a1",
            "input": "Any movie with \"National Lampoon\" in the title is absolutely guaranteed to die a death in London,England,Paris,France,Rome,Italy,and anywhere in Germany.It may be an institution in the U.S. but it is practically unknown in Europe to the larger audience.\"National Lampoon's European Vacation\" is unlikely to rectify that situation. The appalling Griswalds are just that - appalling.They are not funny. Clearly Mr Chevy Chase thinks he's funny, after all Miss B.di Angelo laughs a lot at his jokes,but she's getting paid for it and didn't have to fork out £2.50 for the privilege. The section set in England is typical.The same old same old TV performers, Messrs Idle,Smith,Coltrane,Miss M.Lippman trot out the same old same old tired clichés,Mr Chase gets lost in the hotel corridor....yawn,yawn,yawn.. Bucking - ham Palace,Big Ben......I feel cheated that we never saw bobbies on bicycles two-by-two.........rosie red cheeks on the little chil - dren,need I go on? The English are buffoons,the French vicious - tongued Yank-haters.The Germans pompous and puffed up,(don't mention the war,Clark),and the Italians lecherous bottom-pinchers.Have I forgotten anything? Every possible \"comic\" situation is worked to death,Mr Chase gurns desperately,Miss di Angelo dimples sweetly,the children are embarrassingly bad. The fact that this franchise ran as long as it did must bring comfort to those who propound that you never lose money by underestimating public taste.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-016c5aeb59c540ad810921f7834b2838",
            "input": "No cinematic achievements here, however that's not even the important question. How does it fare in its endeavour to be a competent date movie--and star vehicle?The formula requires the cute female lead a la Ryan or Aniston--check; there's a built-in TV audience!Add thick-headed, compliant men, usually including the problem ex-boyfriend/fiancée--check. Assemble a plot that maximizes the bankability of the stars. So far, so good.What is the male lead to consist of? He has to make all the women in the movie and in the audience (and the gay flight stewards) instantly swoon. But...he cannot be so hunky as to threaten to the male audience, and he can't outshine the star. Roll cameras...The problem is Messing thinks she's still in a sitcom...she has only one presentation: as the wide-eyed doormat that she's made a career out of. A capable actress might have pulled it off after the love scene, where things promptly nosedive into the soap suds. You can't help feeling good for Mulroney...you can read it in his face that he sees through all of this. He's gotten all the respect of a lifetime .260 hitter. This time, he smacks one out to the warning track, and no one can figure out what to do, as he amusedly takes home plate.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-263d24c72d4241f9be120a6c86239de4",
            "input": "This is one of the funniest movies i've ever seen. I rented it as a joke, expecting to get a giggle out of the first few scenes, and let me just say I've never laughed so hard in my life. The first scene where ninjas randomly pop out of the air and start a huge and ridiculous fire fight is one of the most incredibly funny stupid action movie moments of my life. This is not a dinosaur movie, but more a movie that makes fun (and doesn't mean to at all) of the action genre. I didn't see the first two, but judging by the complexity of the plot, I don't think there's to much I missed. If you wanna see a movie that goes great with a six pack or any herbal remedy, than I insist you rent this movie and sit back and watch a 100 years of advancement in cinema get thrown in the trash and get shat on by carnosours",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c3dbb0e19c294b408d159c8f03029382",
            "input": "***SPOILERS*** Seething with hatred and revenge half breed Zach Provo, James Coburn, had spent the last 11 years on a chain gang planing his escape. What Provo want's more then freedom is to even the score with the man who captured him and in the process, during a wild shootout, killed his Navajo wife: The former Pima County sheriff Sam Burgade, Charlton Heston.Making his escape after killing two prison guards Provo makes his way towards Yuma knowing that that's not just where Burgade lives but where his his young daughter Susan, Barbara Hershey,resides as well. Using his fellow escaped convicts to lure Burgade into the vast Arizona Desert, by promising them $30,000.00 in gold coins that he buried there, Provo plans to exact his bloody vengeance on Burgade. But only after having him witness his daughter being brutally raped by his fellow convicts or are, in not being with a woman for years, as horny as a rabbit during mating season!Brutal and very effective western that updates the John Wayne 1956 classic \"The Searchers\" in a father searching through dangerous Indian territory for his kidnapped daughter. Charlton Heston as the guilt-ridden Sam Burgade in his felling somehow responsible for killing Provo's wife and then having to face the fact that the same thing can very well happen to his daughter Susan is perfect in the role of the aging and retired sheriff. Charles Coburn as the vengeful half breed Zach Provo is also at his best as the obsessed with hatred and murder escaped convict.The man who escaped with Provo are really not interest in his personal affairs but have no choice, in that he knows the territory like the back of his hand, but to go along with him. It's only the thought of them having their way with Susan, when Provo gives them the green light, as well as the buried $30,000.00 in gold coins that keeps them from breaking up and going their own way.Also going along with Burgade is Susan's boyfriend Hal Brickman, Chris Mitchum, who proves in the end that he's as good as Burgade is, who felt that he just didn't have it in him, in both tracking down the escaped criminals as well as using common sense, which in this case Burgade lacks, in doing it.***SPOILERS**** The unbelievably brutal and blood splattered showdown between Burgade and Provo is almost too much to sit through. Provo who's hatred of Burgade bordered on out right insanity wanted him to suffer a slow and excruciating death. it was that hatred that Bugrade took advantage of and, after taking some half dozen bullets, thus ended up putting the crazed and blood thirsty, as well as mindless, lunatic away for good!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9498a081c1c845b8accdf5823988bc98",
            "input": "Family is about two families who are after each other's blood.Viren Sahay (Amitabh Bachchan) is an underworld don, operates from Bangkok. He has a family in India. Once by mistake he kills Shekhar (Akshay Kumar). Like Viren Sahay, he also has a family (a brother, wife and parents). Aryan (Aryaman), Shekhar's brother is out to take revenge of his brother's death. He kidnaps Viren Sahay's family for the same reason.The film has got one turning point (Amitabh Bachchan). Second half of the movie belongs to him completely where instead of his dialogs, expression matters more. Akshay's minuscule role has also put him at par with Amitabh. I didn't understand what Bhumika Chawala was doing in this movie.There were a few loose points in the script; like; Amitabh has been shown as the most wanted criminal of the city still he walks scot-free in the city. Kidnapping of his family is also seemed vague. How can the family of such a big don doesn't have any security cover?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d9466030056c4fe6a1e78df0584b527a",
            "input": "When I started watching this movie I saw the dude from Buffy, Xander, and figured ah how nice that he's still making a living acting in movies. Now a weird movie I can stand, given that it's a good dose of weird like for example David Lynch movies, twin peaks, lost highway etc. And you sort of have to be in the mood for one. This one however made me mockingly remember the crazy websites about there about conspiracy theory's that make absolutely no sense. I mean come on people Nazi's who conspire with America to make an unholy trinity of evil powers? I was surprised they didn't mention the hollow earth in this movie with Hitler flying saucers and lizard people. Maybe if you had like 60 grams of heroine with this movie it would make some sort of sense, but seriously I don't condone drugs like I don't condone this movie. It should be burned, shredded and forgotten just so good ol' Xander might get another acting job. It wasn't his acting though, that was alright, but the script just didn't make any sense. Sorry.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f048a6c714df4a37b3067fbecf673900",
            "input": "Acclaimed Japanese director Takashi Miike can't seem to get the wheels moving with this torpid thriller, an adaptation of Yasushi Akimoto's book concerning an evil old woman (and child abuser!) who is part of a new urban legend: if your cell-phone rings with a strange tone--and you see the message 'One Missed Call'--you will replay the message only to hear your own final words before your death. Most successful part of the film is the trenchant satire of Reality TV cameras intruding on the future victims, but the not-so-elaborate deaths (which include a hidden piece of red candy!) are disappointing and dispiriting. The frequent shots of ravaged dead bodies are actually displayed rather discreetly, and this overall politeness may be the reason why the film is ultimately so staid. Hollywood predictably jumped on the far-fetched plot in 2008, yet the U.S. version fared no better. NO STARS from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e701e0bec7304fdba35f80135902ffd0",
            "input": "Many critics have felt offended that R.W. Fassbinder has portrayed both protagonist Wilkie and the Nazis in this movie in a human-like manner. Connoisseurs of other Fassbinder films, however, will realize that \"Lili Marleen\" (1981) belongs to Fassbinder's \"women movies\" like \"The Marriage of Maria Braun\" (1979) and \"Lola\" (1981). Fassbinder was convinced that \"stories can be told much better with women than with men\", because, according to Fassbinder, while men usually fulfill their determined roles in society, \"women are capable of thinking in a dialectic manner\". Dialectics, however, means that there is not only a thesis and its antithesis like usually in our black-and-white world, but a synthesis where the oppositions coincide. Moreover, dialectic means that because of the third instance of synthesis the absolute opposition of the difference between thesis and antithesis is abolished. Concretely speaking: Starting from a dialect point of view and portraying the fascist state, the underground fighters must necessarily use the basic means like the rulers do, and between offenders and victims there is thus a chiastic relation, so that every offender is also victim and every victim is also offender. Fassbinder has illustrated this abstract scheme, that transcends classical logic, in his play \"The City, the Garbage and the Death\" (1975) which was filmed by Daniel Schmid under the title \"Shadow of Angels\" (1976).Therefore, approaching an a priori controversial topic like Nazi Germany, in a dialectic manner, the depiction of this time in the form of a movie gets even more controversial, especially for people who cannot or do not want to see that our recognition of the world is by far not exhausted with a primitive light-switch schema, but needs the third instance of synthesis as controlling instance of its opposite members thesis and antithesis. The mutual relationship between offenders and victims has to scrutinized, since it is simply not true that the offenders are the bad ones and the victims the good ones. In a synthetic viewpoint, the bad ones participate on the goodness as the good ones participate on the badness. They are mutually related. In a world-view based on classical logic, a relation between good and bad cannot even been established, and in an ethics based on this insufficient system of logic, the bad conscience of the survivors of Nazi Germany, feeling (illogically enough) responsible for the deeds of their ancestors, exclude the possibility of a relationship between the two extremes and thus a synthesis in the form a new evaluation based on this relationship as well. From Fassbinder's dialectic viewpoint, it follows that neither Lili Marleen nor Lola nor Maria Braun can be condemned for their \"misuse\" of the ruling system for their private purposes, because they don't misuse them, they just use them. In the opposite, since victims must repeat the actions of the offenders as the offenders must repeat the actions of the victims, because \"good\" and \"bad\" are no longer simple mirror images of one another like in two-valued logic, their strategies are legitimated by the chiastic structure of a logic that describes our world, that is not black and white at all, much better than a black-and-white logic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-140613b6d2fe41f4be41443bfe60654d",
            "input": "After you see Vertigo, then watch Bell, Book and Candle, made within months of each other.My second favorite Kim Novak film, with Picnic, coming in as third.All three performances are great, Vertigo, being the best, of all.They came to my nowhere Kansas Prairie town, near by, at Salina, Kansas in the 50s, to film, Picnic. Bell, Book and Candle's musical score, I believe is one of Alex North's. Perfect for this bit of comedy.After Vertigo, Stewart and Novak, did this comedy, how amusing to note the dramatic contrast.Worth your time, if you like Kim Novak. The Greta Garbo of my youth.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa6b6437c9b04521885b690176e4dbce",
            "input": "It was disgusting and painful. What a waste of a cast! I swear, the audience (1/2 full) laughed TWICE in 90 minutes. This is not a lie. Do not even rent it.Zeta Jones was just too mean to be believable.Cusack was OK. Just OK. I felt sorry for him (the actor) in case people remember this mess.Roberts was the same as she always is. Charming and sweet, but with no purpose. The \"romance\" with John was completely unbelievable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5681e5d757104cc2a4e233d5f3feff90",
            "input": "I was up late flipping cable channels one night and ran into this movie from about 10 minutes into the start - every time I even thought going to bed, something kept on telling me to keep on watching it even though it was way way way past my bedtime.This movie could have been another easy slam dunk anti-gun film, but instead they chose to examine the aftereffects of the shootings. And even better, the movie kept on with the real life - just when you think they are going to take the easy and obviously contrived way out, a twist comes along and changes the whole outlook of the movie. This film not only doesn't follow the formula, it shows how other events often lead up to and/or affect what happens afterwards.I only wish the filmmakers had explored the issues around anti-depressant drugs more - the kids from Columnbine who did the shootings were on them for years and it was frightening to watch the way Deanna popped them every time the nightmares started. Up until recently they were dispensing the stuff like candy and only now do they even begin to understand what long term effects the drugs have. It was very refreshing to see that the mental illness aspect of the story was given quite a bit of film, having a relative who suffers from a mental illness, I can say that the movie was dead nuts on in every aspect of mental illnesses. Bravo to the director and writer who obviously did their homework on those issues. And for those who think certain things couldn't happen in a hospital (I don't want to tell any particulars), you're dead wrong on that too - I've been there. The script was so real it was amazing.Go BUY this film and show it to your teenage kids before it's too late. Someday they'll thank you for it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0f2ed9cf7504a0e823baa50f304c968",
            "input": "Had the original casting idea been kept (hunting Rutger, not Ice-T), this movie might have worked. Sadly, racism had to come into the picture (literally) and mess it up. The predominantly black production staff couldn't allow the antagonist be black, so they swapped Rutger's and Ice-T's roles. This was only the start of the downward spiral of this film. Ernest Dickerson's news-room approach to 'directing' only verified that this was another affirmative-action job assignment. Master shot, close up, close up. Gads, 'Who's Line Is It Anyway' even uses more creative camera work. Eric's rewrite of 'The Most Dangerous Game' is at least an attempt at modernizing the classic tale, but fails to give us any motivations for why the characters are doing this. We are never given the reasons, other than \"no one will miss these people\", why the leader (re-written as Rutger) does these things. Aside from a heart-felt performance by John McGinley, and a fair job by Charles Dutton, do not bother with this one. One small bit of trivia, there was a real drunk-driving accident during filming that injured F.Murray Abraham, and resulted in the death of the intoxicated young driver that caused the accident.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f44e5b4571c4b2f9c359486f2aff6d6",
            "input": "I first saw a track from this DVD at a hifi show Nov 2006 in London ( i was not really into cream until now!!).It was through a high end Arcam system,it sounded great with dts.I had to get this DVD and i'll tell you this is by far the most exciting music DVD i have ever watched.The performance of Cream at their age was just mind blowing and sound quality is the best i have heard on a music DVD.It does not matter what type of music you like,this one will definitely grow on you.It's the sheer brilliance of their performance that will make you watch it again and again.Even new musicians don't cut the mustard these days, as these old rockers do.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db36f031607e426a974baedfa78b01d1",
            "input": "If you're a fan of Mystery Science Theater 3K, Attack of the Giant Leeches, or Pinata Survival Island, this movie might be for you.I live in Nashville and I didn't even know of this movie's existence until the day prior to its release, when the advertising company panicked and blanketed Music Row with dozens of fliers and billboards. It barely lasted two weeks in theaters anyway.Bad acting, bad writing, and poor production only begin to describe this embarrassment of a film. For starters, the names are a bit much: Bo Price, Angel, and Dixie? Eesh.Toby's awkwardly slow delivery of lines makes one wonder what production assistant got stuck holding the cue cards off camera. Angel's character rapidly transitions from her city-slicker ways to a cowgirl, slipping into southern slang after two days on the ranch. Her wardrobe goes from chic to a female version of Toby's--in fact, in the final scene, their outfits are identical, making one wonder if the wardrobe assistant called in sick.The audio is inconsistent - perhaps the most noticeable example is when Toby decides to go for a swim and his voice suddenly sounds like he's shouting in a gymnasium.There's never quite enough explanation or character development to suffice what happens on-screen. Overacting, exasperation, grimaces, and moodiness best describes the actors' interpretation and direction of the terrible script.This movie is best enjoyed after consuming a couple of alcoholic beverages and in the company of your wittiest friends. But that's not saying much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e3faf7791d7488fa635f7f0ae163698",
            "input": "I was lucky enough to have seen this on a whim during a film festival and was smacked so hard with what I saw I returned the next night for its second of three screenings. A funny, savage and sharp-toothed attack on every aspect of mainstream entertainment passively swallowed without tasting by the lowest-common-denominator target audience waged by a lone-avenger journalist who slowly takes in members for his guerilla-war on predictability is what the movie's all about, and is executed in such an unpredictable and refreshing way that you're left after the credits roll with hope renewed, and excited that original films can still be made. Anyone frustrated with unfulfilled expectations for something to light up their imaginations would do well to hunt (and I do mean hunt) this scarcely-seen item down. For fans of Fight Club and any Charlie Kaufman film, and required viewing for anyone who avoids multiplexes like a rabid dog.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b00dfbb85c64f678edb3037ac93cd3f",
            "input": "Cinematography--Compared to 'The Wrestler,' a degree of verite and cinematic skill that disarms the viewer, and then hypnotizes as well.Acting--The dialogue is minimal, but the pauses and silence poignant.Story--The conflict in a 'balkanized' Denmark is volatile, as we saw recently jihad murders in the Netherlands and riots in France. While I harbor no love for Islam, the departure from the West from Christian values holds no cause for celebration.The director of this film managed to mirror the two societies in a way that belabored neither, emphasizing the development of Aicha as an individual who became a champion, not so much in the ring, but to all those around her. Even her worst . . . I will stop here to avoid the spoiler.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1c3490018ec4ab9b40c135005682af5",
            "input": "The premise, while not quite ludicrous, WAS definitely ridiculous. What SHOULD have occurred, by the second encounter with Tritter was that Tritter should simply be wasted. House hires some guy and de-physicalizes Tritter. In real life, Tritter would have been hauled up for harassment, the rectal thermometer episode would have been exposed in court, providing motive and opportunity and the hospitals lawyers would have made mincemeat out of Tritter and the particular department he worked for. He would be in prison as would anyone complicit in the harassment of House, Chase, Foreman, Cameron, Wilson and Cuddy. The lawsuit would have won House a tasty settlement, enough to keep him supplied with Vicadin well into his old age. While Tritter would wind up somewhere driving a cab, trying to rehabilitate himself by doing good for people for two years before people tumbled to the fact that they'd seen it all before.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3de8ef2d381451781ac2e488f01678c",
            "input": "This movie was so good. Leon Phelps is hilarious. I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!! I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!I went out after and bought a case of Cognac!!!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8354e2b730d344e1bb495363a715b4b4",
            "input": "If you want your vision of Chaplin limited to a lovable tramp and you get your belly laughs from pathos, watch something else. If, however, you love slapstick comedy as performed by one of the best, do watch this one.The image is of the tramp who really cannot get the girl. He spots another couple kissing on a park bench, and he has a blast ruining their fun.This is one of Chaplin's \"park comedies,\" filmed in Mack Sennett's park, with pickpockets and cops and couples. These shorts work, as the format allows Chaplin to shine as he weaves through predicaments.I checked the box, as this could be considered a spoiler, though it's not if you've seen these films. Everyone ends up in the pond except Chaplin. He gets the girl, who in this case was played by Minta Durfee, a.k.a. Mrs. Roscoe \"Fatty\" Arbuckle.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-57a32a4e75a24e82884d61ff2d634590",
            "input": "This is the kind of film one watches in gape-jawed, horrified silence, and yet continues to watch, mesmerized, as if watching a train wreck in slow motion. And yet, in the back of your mind, thoughts are churning: \"Who on EARTH green-lighted this garbage?\"Some of the preceding user comments say things like, \"A good way to introduce children to Laurel and Hardy\" -- an insult to children everywhere. That children would need some sort of training plan to learn to love slapstick comedy shows a profound misunderstanding of the nature of children the world over. Others have commented on the faithfulness of the two stars' characterizations of Laurel and Hardy to which I would respond: so WHAT? One would think that the rash of movie BOMBS based on beloved series (Rocky and Bullwinkle, Avengers, Flipper, Mod Squad, ad nauseam) would have taught Hollywood that there are some things that simply can't be recreated. The films of Laurel and Hardy are readily available on video: why bother with this?As for F. Murray Abraham, a fine actor of stage and screen... well, all I can say is, he must have been in trouble with the IRS.Run, don't walk, away from the television if this trash comes on!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e7716fd2db34f9fad82e1b9607d7401",
            "input": "\"Read My Lips (Sur mes lèvres)\" (which probably has different idiomatic resonance in its French title) is a nifty, twisty contemporary tale of office politics that unexpectedly becomes a crime caper as the unusually matched characters slide up and down an ethical and sensual slippery slope.The two leads are magnetic, Emmanuelle Devos (who I've never seen before despite her lengthy resume in French movies) and an even more disheveled than usual Vincent Cassel (who has brought a sexy and/or threatening look and voice to some US movies).The first half of the movie is on her turf in a competitive real estate office and he's the neophyte. The second half is on his turf as an ex-con and her wrenching adaptation to that milieu.Writer/director Jacques Audiard very cleverly uses the woman's isolating hearing disability as an entrée for us into her perceptions, turning the sound up and down for us to hear as she does (so it's even more annoying than usual when audience members talk), using visuals as sensory reactors as well.None of the characters act as anticipated (she is not like that pliable victim from \"In the Company of Men,\" not in individual interactions, not in scenes, and not in the overall arc of the unpredictable story line (well, until the last shot, but heck the audience was waiting for that fulfillment) as we move from a hectic modern office, to a hectic disco to romantic and criminal stake-outs. There is a side story that's thematically redundant and unnecessary, but that just gives us a few minutes to catch our breaths.This is one of my favorites of the year! (originally written 7/28/2002)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f0decc7dc2e74b90a9052b0dd3afb0b6",
            "input": "Filmatography: Excellent, nice camera angles (I don't remember seeing a movie of late, with good close-ups, until this one). Could have avoided gruesome scenes with a soft camera. NY is pictured good.I liked the upside down angles, in particular (a different touch).Music: Not impressive. Songs don't stick around in your mind even after watching the movie. May be, I expected same quality like \"Anniyan\". A disappointment. Actors: Kamal needs to slowly pull away from hard-core action sequences. His age and belly really show up. Also, he should avoid close romantic sequences going forward. It was a very awkward to see a mature/aged star still trying to play like a 20+ heroes scenes. Love can be expressed at any age; as we get older, you still can express love nicely from a distance (without touching a woman too much. For example, the love expressed by Rajinikanth in \"chandrmukhi\").Jyotika just appears for the namesake in the movie. Not sure why she accepted this. Well, that is not my problem, I guess.Others just have a small presence.Direction: I expected Gautham to excel (or measure-up) to his other movie \"Kakka Kakka\". He disappointmented me. It took a long time to release the movie due to various issues. He slips in few scenes. Even abvious things got slipped from a famous director.Overall: Just a okay movie. Too much graphics. DEFINITELY not for kids (and adults who expect some kind of \"Entertainment\").Thx",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8b661d4616e46e5a94e9c092e6bed8e",
            "input": "The idea was awesome, the actors were incredible, the story could of been very scary, but the writing was poor and there was no depth. I couldn't really get into this movie. I couldn't feel for the characters, there were a lot of cliffhangers, and the movie just ends very weirdly. Was it a happy ending? I don't know. Was it a sad ending? Again, I don't know. You leave the theater feeling unsatisfied. The movie had so much to give, but couldn't. Just because you can edit, doesn't mean you should, right? I wouldn't really recommend this movie because you just can't say that you left the movie feeling like it was completed. You'll just be confused. Trust me, you will probably thank me if you don't watch this movie.3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-97c0189f273f419dbcf4f6b31b1e348a",
            "input": "This is a great story of family loyalty which, thankfully, doesn't resort to the usual tricks (or at least the ones I'm used to seeing in American and European films) of supersentimentality or high dramatic tension.It's very watchable and very lovable. It has some beautiful cinematography, but doesn't rely on that alone to entertain.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-91615c6634bb40739214b9a0b4467a70",
            "input": "Just saw the movie this past weekend, I am upset, and disappointed with it. Basically, the movie tells you that immigrants, the ones from former Soviet Union especially, come to this country, bring everyone they can with them from the old country, and invade and take over what Americans have been working for. Which is a very wrong way of looking at immigration, and a much worse way of telling people about it. That's the main thing. Another thing, the overall writing, directing and filming is on the level of village amateurs. The actors did pretty well, but it wasn't up to them save this bunch of crap. A few jokes were funny, but most were bad and cheesy. Couldn't wait to get out of the theater, want my money back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1fe1774b1f464f699fda6d0eb01c263d",
            "input": "After a slow beginning, BRUCE ALMIGHTY is a very funny film that had something positive to say. It wasn't one of Jim Carrey's best performances, but he was still OK. Morgan Freeman was just right as God. Jennifer Aniston had some good moments. I miss Steve Correll on \"THE DAILY SHOW!\"I like director Tom Shadyac's choices of movies. He also did LIAR LIAR, PATCH ADAMS, and THE NUTTY PROFESSOR. In all three of those and in Bruce Almighty, he takes a big comedy star and tells a human story with him. A director who knows comedy, can get the talent he gets, and can tell a meaningful and intelligent story with it is hard to find.My biggest complaint is that they should have used more biblical references. I only remember three specific biblical references and they were the three funniest parts of the whole movie. My guess is that the first few drafts of the screenplay had more biblical references, but they were cut out because the producers were afraid of offending people. That's too bad because I thought it was a missed opportunity.My Grade:7 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04b23fee6f1c4803a26d305c0a01a2a6",
            "input": "This show is without a doubt one of the greatest shows ever to be on television. I mean the acting is great, the suspense, the drama, the comedy, it has everything, and with such a simple story: A plane crashed on an island. The characters are great and Evangeline Lilly is HOT!!!!!! Matthew Fox once again shows us what a great actor he is, Josh Holloway is so great, Jorge Garcia is Hilarious, I could go on and on. Also, the unexpected plot twists, the back stories of the characters, the music that is at the end of every episode. J.J. Abrahms has once again proved what an excellent writer and producer he is. I mean this is better than ALIAS, and I loved ALIAS. Whoever isn't watching this show, should definitely consider getting the DVD's and watching it, because they are missing something great. This show could possibly be the best show in television history!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc2b5c02343842678c2e99f402a17927",
            "input": "Really no reason to examine this much further because of a few very glaring and bias misleading statements.A perfect example is when the filmmaker claims \"Saul\" or Paul of Tarus (the writer of The Book of Hebrews He asserts) has no idea Jesus is or was a human being, this assertion is either purposely false as he accuses others of presenting, or he is ignorant of what \"The Bible\" says.first we can examine his misleading claim about Hebrews 8.4; which he shows a quote \"If Jesus was on earth, he would not be a priest\", hence right here He sets up the ignorant and unlearned viewer to accept his false premise.. why? He does what most so called Bible believing people he accuses of doing, the same.. That is TAKING things out of context.verse one of Hebrews 8 is; 1..\"Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens\" The context above is CLEARLY speaking of a Jesus who was on earth and ASCENDED into heaven after his alleged resurrection.It has nothing to do with how the filmmaker wants the viewer to take his out of context scripture. Here he offers a foundation, that \"Paul was not aware of a HUMAN Jesus, but only one in \"heaven\"follow?lets see if the filmmaker is being honest; Hebrews 7; 14. \"For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.\"heh, didn't the filmmaker just quote from the writer of Hebrews trying to show the writer of that book has no knowledge of a \"Human Jesus\"? it's likely anyways Paul didn't write Hebrews, but I will not go into that here, but The film maker asserts Paul did, and that is the premise of the point given here.It is not like this film maker does not make decent points in certain areas, he does, but he is engaging in the same blind bias of the religion he is bashing on. Once he engages in these tactics, in my strong opinion, he loses credibility as the religion he picks out, and the film is no longer a documentary, but a personal opinion, and a bias of the film maker, nothing more, nothing less.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb9ceeca7c564ba28cfe8d57cefbb8f8",
            "input": "Mark Hamill should have felt mighty embarrassed with CORVETTE SUMMER! This time, he uses a new kind of \"force\" to regain the possession of his dream machine, a bright red 'Vette. It looks like another sour teen-age flick the first half-hour and does a U-turn in heading for the wrong direction. The writing and directing jobs are dreadfully done, with a few scenes you can't hardly take. You're expecting this to happen anyway, and you're also sniffing the smell of late-70s hodgepodge. Only a former newcomer like Annie Potts would easily steal the show and save this poor movie from the repo creeps! Her impractical but delightful personality holds on to your interest for good, and this is the finest chance to see her in a swimsuit. Hooray for Annie! Sorry, Mark! I guess the Force wasn't with you this time around.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b5e506671c948b69adc271e2e066f5d",
            "input": "In Iran, women are not admitted to soccer games. Officially it's because they are to be spared from the vulgar language and behavior of the male audience. But of course it is about sexism. Women are lower forms of human beings.Some brave girls oppose this and try to get into the stadium by using different tricks. They are caught by soldiers and hold in a kind of cage, until the police will come and pick them up.Despite the insane situation, this is a film with lots of humor. It's also encouraging to see how people always find different ways of fighting oppression. You'll get touched at the same time as you have lots of laughs. Good job by director Jafar Panahi. This is in many ways a heroic comedy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cecf8fbf4c244f00be2963ea19c9888e",
            "input": "As an ordinary movie-watcher I can't say I enjoyed watching this one. It's not too emotional for a drama, not too gripping for a thriller, not too fast for an action. Plus, some moments of the movie are hardly credible. OK, I understand, soldiers become a bit out of their mind out there, but it's hard to believe that a person would risk his life, carjack into the middle of a hostile city, and after being shouted at by a professor's wife run away, without having asked a question (in a proper way). It would seem terribly romantic if it were an animation or so, but it's supposed to be a SERIOUS film about war.. There are several episodes like this, so the whole picture makes an impression that it's just a raw preview of a movie, and it needs considerable work.It feels like the movie makers wanted to create an image of an emotional brave soldier, but all these 'curves' of his psychology seem simply unnatural.This picture left a question in my head: WHY? Why they gave it an Oscar? Why SIX? And IMHO it's the most thrilling part of the movie :)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c46d840f25ff4057bd2b0696e1bbea49",
            "input": "This stirring western spins the tale of the famous rifle of the early west that was coveted by one and all. James Stewart is the cowboy who wins the prized Winchester in a shootout, only to lose it in a robbery. The story details Stewart's pursuit of the rifle and a certain man through the film. The rifle changes hands time after time, as though the owner is fated to lose it through violence. The picture has plenty of action and suspense as Stewart closes in on his quarry. A great cast supports Stewart here, namely Stephen McNally, Dan Duryea, Millard Mitchell, John McIntire and Jay C. Flippen. Shelley Winters seems miscast here and the purpose of her role is rather obscure. Tony Curtis and Rock Hudson, teen heartthrobs in later years, have brief but good roles.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e8dc6e3da3d84b569e5576252974b252",
            "input": "I was reviewing some old VHS tapes I have and came across The TV show John Denver & The Muppets A Christmas Together.This made me go to my computer and look it up to see if I could find a DVD version of this show to buy. I was disappointed not to be able to find it yet on DVD. The show aired in 1979 and was a delightful show. I have the record and the CD but I would love to buy a DVD version of this show. The tape is old and picture quality is pretty good but fading, the sound is not as good as the CD. There is also a few other songs not put on the CD. As a Fan of John Denver and of the Muppets, a DVD of this show would really be a good seller. If you don't have the CD it is a wonderful Chritmas collection of songs taken from that show. The album is also good if you can find it and still have a record player to play it on.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e789e9f59624140a52a2ae67d0a49bc",
            "input": "As a great admirer of Marlene Dietrich, I had to (finally) watch this very, very dull picture. It is Miss Dietrich's first color film, and the world's most beautiful blond is a redhead! Bad start. The story is a tremendous bore, involving a subject which itself bores bores me stiff: religious guilt. (Who needs it???) Suffice it to say, perhaps, that of all Dietrich's films (and I have seen most, including \"Pittsburgh\") this is the only one where even her performance is barely worth watching. The color photography is OK (this is a very early Technicolor release), but to no purpose. Ridiculous casting: C. Aubrey Smith, Basil Rathbone (enough said?). The only thing of any interest at all is John Carradine's outlandish caricature of a performance as \"The Sand Diviner,\" who foretells all that will happen. The supposed \"happy ending\" is one of the most depressing ever conceived. Yet another example of David O. Selznick's highly inflated reputation (did he ever make a really good film? -- other than That One?) And, for one final annoyance, the soundtrack of the MGM DVD is a mess, with volume levels seemingly randomized. Highly unrecommended.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eeedf6109eba494b95cb0ebbfa3da065",
            "input": "Almost a two-person play, and as such the dialog and the performances of the leads will be important. Neither are particularly good. This might have been stronger, in fact, if it had first been crafted as a two-person play, and then worked into a film.Anyway, a twitchy vampire who seems slightly autistic becomes infatuated with a stripper (as a result of watching too much porn in his crappy home). He wants to have her tell him about the daylight. He would have been better off finding someone with a day job, or someone who excels at painting a picture with words like a poet, but then they might not have a hot bod.After he gets her to do whatever he wants (and he's not terribly good at it), he intends to feed on her at 6 AM, at which point the sun rises. Much is made of that deadline, despite the fact that he also says that he can go without feeding, it will just make him hungrier. Additionally, he claims he can't let the stripper go, since she knows about him, but he lets a number of other people go who learn what he is. There are a lot of inconsistencies.Why this vampire chooses to live in a house so poorly boarded up that light from streetlamps and neighboring buildings pours in as if it were daytime, I'm not sure. With all the time in the world, you'd think he'd have done a better job, or fixed the place up a bit. He's clearly not a wealthy vampire.This is supposedly a remake, and I'm curious to see the original version of this, Dance of the Damned. Although, that was directed by Katt Shea, and the other films she directed for Corman (Stripped to Kill, StK II) were pretty bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32dbfdaa91d9412690828f228b860106",
            "input": "\"The Woman in Black\" is easily one of the creepiest British ghost stories ever made.A young solicitor,after arriving in a small town to handle a dead client's estate,is haunted by a mysterious woman dressed all in black.The film is loaded with extremely eerie atmosphere and the frights are calculated for and deliver the maximum effect possible.The action keeps the viewer deeply involved and the finale is quite disturbing.The acting is excellent and the tension is almost unbearable at times.So if you want to see a truly creepy horror film give this one a look.I dare anyone to watch \"The Woman in Black\" alone at night with the lights off.Highly recommended.10 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c3e901dd7e25415b891196ca271dbb80",
            "input": "HUSBANDS BEWARE is a remake of the Shemp classic BRIDELESS GROOM. The film's new cooking scene at the beginning of the film is great. The stooges are always funny when they cook. However after the first few minutes of cooking footage, we cut to original footage of BRIDELESS GROOM. One thing I noticed about these 1953 to 1956 remakes are that they do fit with the new story. They do an insert shot if the old story line doesn't match.HUSBANDS BEWARE does have a new ending, but I won't give it away to those who want to be surprised. **** out of 4 stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a49944f44044e8796d30c120db6f2d5",
            "input": "\"The Bourne Ultimatum\" begins recklessly mid-chase and in pulse-pounding fashion explodes from there as Jason Bourne (Matt Damon, absolutely superb) tracks down the masterminds behind the CIA black-ops that turned him into the perfect killer in a final attempt to learn his true identity. A devastatingly icy David Strathairn as the \"man behind the curtain\" is added to the returning cast of regulars including Joan Allen (excellent) and Julia Stiles (non-existent).Like the second entry in the series, I wished Paul Greengrass' shaky hand-held camera would go static at least for the few minutes of downtime. However, that being said, it's a perfect way to capture the tense, claustrophobic feel of the intimate hand-to-hand-combat scenes and works equally well in the chase scenes which are mostly on foot and across rooftops with the occasional big car pile-up. Part of the fun of the Bourne series is the constant globe-hopping and manipulation of technology and communications that seem to defy the laws of physics and current capabilities. The Bourne films seem to exist in some sort of gritty hyper-reality that is full of technological-based magic. It makes no sense that everyone seems to be just in the right place at the right time, but I'll be damned if it isn't a blast to watch them get there.With the absence of the emotive and involving Franka Potente, the writers attempt to create some emotional connection between Damon and Stiles, but she is so blank-faced an actress it never really leads to anything. Still, this can be forgiven, for unlike the \"Identity\" and the \"Supremacy\", this \"Ultimatum\" reveals all and we finally learn the truth about Bourne's past. It's an entertaining and satisfying conclusion to the series, and if they have any good sense, and Damon gets his wish, this will be the perfect end to it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-757366dff1044dec865221980cd07501",
            "input": "And that's why historic/biographic movies are so important to all of us, moreover when they are so well done, like this one!Before I saw \"The Young Victoria\", I knew a few things about Queen Victoria, but in the end I got much more knowledge about it. Emily Blunt is simply GREAT as Victoria (Who would guess that!) and She probably will get a nomination at this years Oscar's. Personally, I'm cheering for her...For technical issues, I am pleased to say that is a very successful production, with wonderful Art Direction/Set Decoration and, of course, like It was expected to be, a terrific periodic Costume Design! The one drawback is that I want to see more and know more about this interesting queen, but foremost, incredible woman and mother! BRAVO: 9 out of 10!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3e9b553729ce48bcb55f21fca036e143",
            "input": "Muscular man-ape in the jungles of Africa is hunted by an opportunistic expedition team; the comely daughter of the team's leader finds him first. Much-ballyhooed version of the Tarzan tale has an OK production, but is crippled by the single-handedly worst direction of a film I have ever seen. John Derek is bereft of inspiration beyond cheesy slow-motion action shots and peek-a-boo glimpses of wife Bo Derek's unclothed body; he has about as much talent behind the camera as Ed Wood. Trying for tongue-in-cheek sexuality, the Dereks lack finesse, snappy timing, and taste. They have a sense of self-parody and bravura abandonment (they do throw caution to the winds), but after a promising opening it all goes to hell. Miles O'Keeffe (who possibly had marbles in his mouth the entire time) has the title role, but plays third fiddle to John Derek's ego and Bo Derek's sense of self-importance. * from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04ea5b5524414b98887017298fda41b2",
            "input": "Frank McCarthy who produced the Academy Award winning biographical film Patton follows it up with a strong tribute to another of America's fighting generals, Douglas MacArthur. Gregory Peck gives a strong characterization of the man, his genius as well as his egotism. With MacArthur you never knew quite where one began and the other left off and too many times they blended.The whole story of Douglas MacArthur would be a six hour film or a TV mini-series. It would cover him from his days on frontier posts with his family to his time at West Point where he still has the highest scholastic average ever achieved by a cadet. It would talk about his service in the Phillipines as a young officer, his legend building bravery on the battlefields of World War I in France. It would also have to tell about him firing on the Bonus Marchers of World War I veterans in 1932, probably putting the final kabosh on any chances President Herbert Hoover had of getting re-elected. During MacArthur's last years he and Hoover had penthouse suites at the Waldorf Astoria in New York City. That must have been a subject they avoided.This film concentrates on the years 1941 to 1952 and it is told in flashback. The film opens with MacArthur addressing the student body in 1962. As he speaks the words of the famous Duty Honor Country speech, MacArthur's mind goes back to World War II and his desperate struggle against the advancing Japanese on the island of Corregidor and the fields of Bataan on Luzon. The film takes him through his struggle to win back the Phillipines, the occupation of Japan and the first 18 months culminating in his relief of command by President Truman.MacArthur as a film would not work at all if it wasn't for the portrayals of Dan O'Herlihy and Ed Flanders as Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman respectively. It's the part of the film I enjoyed the best, seeing MacArthur and his relations with both these men.FDR by O'Herlihy captures the aristocratic squire and exceptionally devious man that was our 32nd President. Roosevelt was a man who got his points across with unusual subtlety and cleverness. Sometimes he liked scheming a little too much for its own sake, but he was the master politician of the last century. Note how he deals with MacArthur both as a battlefield commander and potential rival at the same time.Truman by Flanders is as people remember him, a blunt spoken man of the people who disliked MacArthur's haughtiness from the gitgo. Of course it's in the history books how Truman relieved MacArthur in 1951 for insubordination. MacArthur was insubordinate, no doubt about it.Yet I could write a whole thesis on the Truman-MacArthur relations. Along the way it need not have ever come to a crisis. I've always felt that FDR would have dealt with the whole matter in a far better way had he still been president then.MacArthur was also grandly eloquent and Gregory Peck captures some of that eloquence in some of the orations that made him as much a legend as victories on the battlefield. Listen to Peck at the Japanese surrender, at MacArthur's farewell to the nation before the joint session of Congress, and of course his speech to the cadets in 1962. Watch the newsreels and see if you don't agree.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eecc20b5977347e18b045dc132f81887",
            "input": "I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the worst Laurel & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as close to as bad as \"Air Raid Wardens\" and \"The Bullfighters\", but there are some definite huge flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a \"London Bridge\" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in \"Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood\", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a \"2\" as opposed to a \"3\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-efae8a6603b747ceb596a6b07374d77a",
            "input": "\"Voodoo Academy\" features an \"Academy\" like no other, one that houses only six male students in one bedroom. These teenage guys are instructed in religion by a sinister young priest, who enjoys tormenting and comforting them simultaneously. The sole administrator of this \"Academy\" is a young and seductive headmistress, and she retains her handsome charges on a short leash, so to speak.Sexual overtones abound, and the director obviously has high regard for young male bodies. These young actors occasionally strip down to their designer underwear to sneak about the \"Academy,\" and their sexuality is the entire focus of the movie. If you're not interested in the male form -- stay away!Burdened by weak and awkward dialogue, this low-budget exploitation piece just stumbles along with a few laughable special effects tossed in between the yawns. The mood is claustrophobic, with tediously long takes, a handful of cheap sets and few costume changes. These visual elements come interspersed with seemingly unending sequences of banal dialogue, intended as character and plot development. It gives one the feeling it was filmed in three days...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c38394093c7a4918bc9a578a8e360a0f",
            "input": "I had a lot of expectations from this movie and more so since it was a Yashraj Film.Jimmy operates a call centre and one day he is invited by Pooja Singh to teach her boss, Lakhan Singh, English. The two fall in love and decide to run away but Pooja tells Jimmy that she can't do this as she owes a debt to Lakhan Singh, who is also known as Bhaiyyaji. But they decide and steal money from him and its only then that Jimmy finds out that Bhaiyyaji / Lakhan Singh is a Don. In the meantime, Bhaiyyaji hires a man, Bachchan Pandey, to track down Jimmy and Pooja.Starring Saif Ali Khan, Kareena Kapoor, Anil Kapoor and Akshaye Kumar, the movie is directed by first time director Viay Krishna Acharya and is produced by both Aditya Chopra and Yash Chopra.\"Tashan\" has to be one of the worse films that I have ever watched. Yes! The scenery is good and Kareena Kapoor (and her much publicised weight loss) looks good. But plot is extremely thin on story and at times makes no sense from one scene to the other - hence why I have said at the beginning that I had expected more from this film as it was a Yashraj Production. With reference to songs, unfortunately, there is not one song that I can remember now.There are moments where one can laugh and that is mainly thanks to Akshaye Kumar and Saif could have definitely done better while Kareena Kapoor played her part well. But this cannot be said for Anil Kapoor - it did not suit him at all as a villain. Lastly,never mind Aditya Chopra, who in the past has produced and directed good films such as \"Mohabbatein,\" what was Yash Chopra doing by producing such a trash movie? Conclusion: Bad movie, not worth wasting your time and that is my first and last impression.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bb7df437896b43e49410acd545f6883f",
            "input": "I got lured by the title... I was expecting an insightful and intriguing journey into alcoholism, instead I got a rather boring and uninspiring story about a rowdy Scot.The leading character isn't given much psychological depth, unless you are willing to classify cheesy teen-like poetry as psychology.It was a shame, because the core of the story could have been good, with a better effort to depict the inner feelings of a man who had to live with alcohol and violence since his youth.Sadly, the general idea seems to be more like \"I'm the way I am because that's the way I am\". And the laughingly bad attempt at giving some sort of poetic edge to a lower-class man makes things even worse. Resorting to the overused cliché of the \"poète maudit\" reeks of a quick fix, a cheap way to make a dull movie seem smart, artsy and meaningful.But \"16 years of alcohol\" isn't much smart, artsy or meaningful... The leading character doesn't evolve at all, and the feeble attempt of changing fails without a good explanation. Just like the initial attempt happened rather out of the blue.The movie borrows heavily from classics such as A Clockwork Orange and Trainspotting, but it ultimately fails to recapture their greatness, not even for a few seconds.Jobson put too much emphasis on the artistic side of the story, and neglected the rest, giving us a movie which is pleasant to the eye but insipid to the brain.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8bbcbbe80f1249ffa3fcdbdb7fe6ae9e",
            "input": "I saw this film at its premier at Sundance 09.Since American Beauty is a movie that had something to say, I had hopes for Towelhead. Unfortunately, it was a disappointment. In fact, of countless movies I've seen in almost a dozen Sundance festivals, Towelhead is the only Sundance movie I've ever wanted to walk out early from.The worst problem with Towelhead is that it so obviously originates with a collection of \"provocative\" concepts concerning cultural stereotypes, rather than with an organic human drama. The screenplay derives from the novel of the same name by Alicia Erian. The famous Edith Wharton quote comes to mind: I have never known a novel that was good enough to be good in spite of its being adapted to the author's political views. That observation is especially devastating for Towelhead because its political views are so stale and simplistic. If there ever was a time when Towelhead's white male villains, condescending portrayals of blacks, ironic treatments of foreign cultures, etc., were fresh, it's long past.For a more detailed review, please look up any of the many professional reviews available online. Almost all rate this movie poorly and expose the shallow and manipulative tissue it is based on.On the other hand, the amateur reviewers seem more easily bamboozled. As you read through the reviews in this and similar sites, you'll frequently come across superlatives: \"stunning,\" \"breathtaking,\" \"profound,\" \"shocking,\" ... It embarrasses me to read them, but it does not surprise me. Indeed, I've encountered many people who seem to regard any book or movie dealing with racial, cultural, gender, or sexual issues as deeply moving, thought provoking, full of profound insight. If you are such a person, by all means, rent Towelhead and be moved by it. On the other hand, if you set your standards higher, you can safely pass on this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-108bd145741249cf84f19932061b72dd",
            "input": "The movie was TERRIBLE!!! Easily the worst movie I have seen in the past few years. One of those movies I will be able to tell people for the next three years that it was the worst movie I can think of. Thank you for giving me an answer to that burning question \"What is the worst movie you have seen?\" Answer: Celestine Prophecy. Trust me...I read the book, enjoyed the message and was excited to see the movie, but then, they treated the audience like we are r*tarded. There is no story and the story that is there is crippled by too much magic and coincidence. It is too bad they have to spell out the nine prophecies and can't simply weave them into a story that is entertaining to follow. They didn't spend any time on character development and it was easy to not care if any character died. It was embarrassing to be one of the few people who stuck around until the end of this incredibly boring movie. The book is pretty boring too but I enjoyed the parallels that could be seen in everyday life while you read the book. The film does not offer the same opportunity and I would suggest not seeing it if you want to continue to hold the words of the book close to your heart. DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE. Trust me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00b9f4cb7bfd4733bfac192233750f90",
            "input": "This was a \"cute\" movie at first, then then got too sappy and featured mediocre songs, at best.There is too much King James English spoken with is not only annoying in today's world but not always easy to interpret. Can you imagine young people of today trying to listen to this film? Forget it.Bing Crosby has some good lines in here and is likable as \"Hank Martin.\" Rhonda Fleming (\"Alisande La Carteloise\") was, too, in addition to her good looks and beautiful, long red hair. It's a nice movie with a feel-good ending, and I can't knock that. Maybe this is worthy of a rental, for historical sake or if you're a big Crosby fan but, overall, it's not that much.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-91cf34f7820a46c5a6552edefad65597",
            "input": "If this movie were any worse, it would have been directed by Uwe Boll. This nonsensical mess makes Ed Wood look like Hitchcock. It has been a while since I have seen this steaming pile , but I do remember that I wanted to do grievous bodily harm to all those involved. How anyone can give this movie any more than 1 star amazes me to the graciousness of all those that viewed this tripe. I give it one star because there is not a rating lower. All copies of this movie should be burned the ground sowed with salt and reserved as a landfill for the most toxic of waste. No, one copy should be kept under ultra hi security and shown only to film makers as an example of how not to do it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d23b4e4e137e49edb74920b9f94b4d37",
            "input": "The team of Merian Cooper and Ernest Schoedsack produced a documentary of 50,000 Bakhtiari people and their animals on the Summer migration to winter grazing. The basic worth of this film today is as a time capsule of a \"forgotten people\" and how they lived during what we in the West knew as the \"roaring twenties.\" A more drastic contrast could not be imagined. Raging river and barefoot mountain crossings are brutally realistic and the animals that disappear under the water do in fact die. To make sure that the audience of the time believed that the story took place, a signed certificate of authenticity is offered up at the end. The version that I saw had fascinating Iranian music that can stand alone and be appreciated without the film. Having said all this, the film is probably of more value to the anthropologist than the casual viewer in search of a good evening's entertainment. The crew had just barely sufficient stock to take the shots that they recorded and there is no fancy camera work resulting from multiple re-takes. The Western inter-titles detract from the experience but are in fact a part of the record since they demonstrate how Hollywood tried to put their spin on the lives of an indigenous peoples lives so that they would be appreciated by the audience of the day. Off-duty entertainment by desert police becomes a \"policeman's ball.\" The producers went on to make the docu-drama Chang (1927) and the totally commercial King Kong (1933). The migration theme is used again in People of the Wind (1976) and in Himalaya (1999). Recommended for those who know in advance what they are getting into -- and then highly recommended for them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dff1f2ec7f8e41cd9faa60f5e9f5cfd0",
            "input": "I never wanted to see this film, then one day, for a joke I watched it to see how bad it was; my preconceptions were confirmed.For starters I'd like to question the politics of the film. It hides behind of mask of women 'making it big in the city' but the only way that women can make it big is through using their sexuality rather than their intelligence or skills. These women are nothing more the whores. Are slightly less attractive girls not allowed to be successful? This is not the only right wing message of the film, there are hundreds of shots of American flags and huge wads of cash. A fine example of how the only powerful thing in America is capitalism and anything of spiritual, moral or artistic value is not even given a look in of this film. Money is depicted as the only important thing to young people.The manageress of the bar states that she does not allow drug users in her bar, and then she goes on to poor gallons of hard liquor down her own neck and then the necks of her staff and customers. Any one who knows anything about intoxicants will know that liquor can be just as dangerous as heroin and more dangerous than most illegal drugs.And finally, why are scenes in which the lead character is a point of sexual interest to the audience (when she is getting undressed or with her boyfriend) is her father always involved? We watch get her undressed with the camera virtually caressing her legs while she is one the phone to her father. She 'auctions' her father just as she 'auctions' her boyfriend. I find this most strange.In conclusion, this film is immoral, fascistic, degrading to women and frankly, disturbing. But what else do you expect from Jerry Bruckhiemer?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b6e24934718546d2b7c6067d647d95b7",
            "input": "John Thaw, of Inspector Morse fame, plays old Tom Oakley in this movie. Tom lives in a tiny English village during 1939 and the start of the Second World War. A bit of a recluse, Tom has not yet recovered from the death of his wife and son while he was serving during the First World War. If you can imagine Inspector Morse old and retired, twice as crochety as when he was a policeman, then you've got Tom Oakley's character.Yet this heart of flint is about to melt. London children are evacuated in advance of the blitz. Young William (Willie) Beech is billeted with the protesting Tom. Willie is played to good effect by Nick Robinson.This boy is in need of care with a capital C. Behind in school, still wetting the bed, and unable to read are the smallest of his problems. He comes from a horrific background in London, with a mother who cannot cope, to put it mildly.Slowly, yet steadily, man and boy warm to each other. Tom discovers again his ability to love and care. And the boy learns to accept this love and caring. See Tom and Willie building a bomb shelter at the end of their garden. See Willie's joy at what is probably his first ever birthday party thrown by Tom.Not to give away the ending, but Willie is adopted by Tom after much struggle, and the pair begin a new life much richer for their mutual love.In this movie, Thaw and Robinson are following in a long line of movies where man meets boy and develop a mutual love. See the late Dirk Bogarde and Jon Whiteley in \"Spanish Gardener\". Or Clark Gable and Carlo Angeletti in \"It Started in Naples\". Or Robert Ulrich and Kenny Vadas in \"Captains Courageous\". Or Mel Gibson and Nick Stahl in \"Man Without a Face\".Two points of interest. This is the only appearance of Thaw that I know of where he sings. Only a verse of a hymn, New Jerusalem, but he does sing.Second, young Robinson also starred in a second movie featuring \"Tom\" in the title, \"Tom's Midnight Garden\", which is based on a classic children's novel.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8d8be5e89565498784263b8f1e0a339d",
            "input": "When I heard this film was directed by Ang Lee, I made sure to see it. This Taiwanese director burst into fame with \"The Wedding Banquet\" and \"Eat Drink Man Woman\" a few years ago and then moved on to \"Sense and Sensibility\" and \"The Ice Storm\". Now, he turns his attention to another American icon -- the Civil War.This story takes place in Missouri, a Union state with Southern sympathies. These never officially joined the Confederate army. Instead, they formed outlaw bands, called \"bushwhackers\", grew they hair long, and sometimes would confiscated Union uniforms which they wore over their regular clothing.The movie depicts their moral dilemma, the high drama of the times, and their supposedly heroic missions of killing storekeepers and farmers who aided the Union. There are no stars in this movie, unless you consider \"Jewel\" the singer, well cast as a young confederate widow as a star.Tobey Macquire is cast as a young German farm boy who is derided for his heritage because the Germans were supposed Union sympathizers. This young man is an excellent actor, full of fresh faced youth whose performance encompasses his wonder and subtle realizations as he's exposed to the horror of war.Jeffrey Wright is a freed slave who travels with the bushwhackers because of his loyalty to the young man who bought him his freedom. He gives a fine and understated performance.Some of the acting, however, is wooden, especially in the long conversations they have about morality. And their costumes are too new. And the \"southern gentleman\" theme of manners and hat-tipping and politeness to women comes across as a bit much -- especially since they make it a point to murder all the men who they pull from their women's arms, then burn down the stores and houses.While I don't think that this will go down as one of Lee Ang's \"great\" movies, I did find myself fascinated by it, in spite of the slow parts and its excessive length of 140 minutes. I was interested in what was happening next and felt empathy for each of the characters who all came across as real and imperfect human beings caught up in the forces of history.Not as much action as the usual war movie, but yet still recommended -- especially for Civil War buffs.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f96b224e2279447fb945a0f34e81db93",
            "input": "Yaitate!! Japan is a really fun show and I really like it! It was shown in our country just recently in Hero TV and ABS-CBN every 5:30. It is about Azuma Kazuma who is trying to fulfill his dream to make Japanese bread that will represent his country. He is working in the Southern Toyo branch of Pantasia and he is also helping his friend (Tsukino Azusagawa) along with other bakers (like Kawachi Kyousuke and Kanmuri Shigeru) to beat St. Pierre and take control of Pantasia. They fight other skillful bakers from many other countries and not only learn to make different kinds of bread but also learn to cook other food. It is a really funny and unique anime because they also mimic characters from other anime(like Naruto, Detective Conan and One Piece)and famous people from real life. It is one of the best works of Takashi Haschiguchi and is really a must-see for people of different ages.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-870d600d34294c85bd68cc579cfb5fab",
            "input": "This is a rip off of the old Frankenstein premise. An acclaimed scientist is killed in a freakish accident and his father, a noted brain surgeon saves the brain. It is then put into a robotic body of his own design. His brother, an electrical genius, gives the 'colossus' impetus to transfer thoughts into motion. The whole project goes bad, when the creation goes berserk.Special effects are undeveloped. The script is lacking. And it is humorous that this is not scary a bit. Well, very small kids will think this is good. If you are wide awake at three in the morning and this comes on....night, night.The lead characters are played by Otto Kruger, John Baragrey and Ross Martin. Ed Wolff played the 'Colossus'.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2044e36046b44db9b0668c6243da3689",
            "input": "Superb. I had initially thought that given Amrita Pritam's communist leanings and Dr Dwivedi's nationalist leanings film will be more frank than novel but when I read the novel I was surprised to find that it was reverse.Kudos to marita Pritam for not being pseudo-sec and to Dr Dwivedi to be objective. This movie touches a sensitive topic in a sensitive way. Casualty of any war are women as some poet said and this movie personifies it. It is also a sad commentary on Hindu psyche as they can't stand up against kidnappers of their girls or the Hindu Brother who can only burn the fields of his tormentor. On the other hand it also shows economic angles behind partition or in fact why girls were kidnapped in the first place. I think kidnappers thought that by kidnapping girls they Will become legal owners of the houses and thus new govt. will not be able to ask them to return the houses. This apart one has to salute the courage of characters of Puro and her Bhabhi they are two simple village girls unmindful of outside world and risk everytihng by trying to come back after being dishonored . Because there are many documented cases when such women were not accepted by their families in India.No wonder that it required a woman to understand the pains of other women.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ae17ee25378d4e30ae51821b4b10a50b",
            "input": "I have to say that this was not very exciting but talk about fashion and weird ways to solve a mystery. A little too simple, Nancy Drew (Emma Roberts) uses IMDb... that's fantastic! I really liked about that part of the movie...Corky (Josh Flitter) is however extremely hilarious... and Ned Nickerson (Max Thieriot) seemed really hopeless... he should have been more angry with her for how she has treated him...Alright, this movie is tour and fashion in disguise. Anyhow, I recommend this movie, just for summer fun. Encore Nancy, just for fun. More teen spy movies by Emma Roberts.. Spymate... remember? She's becoming good at this tricky detective work.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a910beab49ad4670ae5578d4bb68ed8b",
            "input": "\"Intensive Care\" by Dorna von Rouveroy is easily one of the worst horror movies ever made.This extremely cheap Dutch slasher flick offers some gore and plenty of absurd situations.A horror veteran George Kennedy is completely wasted as as Professor Bruckner.The acting is abysmal,the action is slow and the climax is laughable.A famous surgeon has a car accident.He lies in a coma seven years and then he wakes up and goes on a bloody rampage.\"Intensive Care\" is clearly influenced by American slasher films including \"Halloween\" and \"Friday the 13th\" series.The killings are hilarious and the dialogs are painfully stupid.Still if you are in the right mood you can give this piece of trash a look.You'll laugh until it hurts with this one-you can believe me!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-02ed3f55301548d496d23c3e47a54dbc",
            "input": "...dont read any plot summaries because in words the plot might seem trivial, brain-dead and pointless. The film is excellent, the acting by both Denzel and Dakota (she will go sky high, trust me on that)are just fabulous, and the plot is mind blowing. Actually \"fabulous\" is a small word to use for such talented actors. The film is just based on actual facts and some characters are not fictional, a fact that adds up to the shock that i was having during and after the film. If you are fond of both actors and of somewhat deranged films, you still haven't watched your favorite one yet...Trust me, in the end you will have a weird and inexplicable feeling. The film is awesome, see it, rent it, buy it or whatever...just don't miss it",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b20a83e0da344e8eb9e79b0174b94333",
            "input": "It's hard to believe that in 1997 David Duchovny was at the top of his fame, with X-Files, one of the best sci-fi series ever, being at the top of the glory. Nine years later he is almost forgotten, and his tentatives to make it on the big screen failed miserably. I cannot even explain why, he is a fair actor, but probably his moment of fame cast him in a eternal role that takes big talent to break from.At the same time Angelina Jolie was much less known, and she was really lucky that a film like 'Playing God' did not led her career into a dead-end. Fortunately for her, 'The Bone Collector' and 'Girl, Interrupted' were waiting beyond the corner, and when Lara Croft came, her career was launched.There is not too much to be told about this film. It's the only big screen film of Andy Wilson, and there must be a reason. All is banal and most of what happens on the screen expected in this story of an ex-doctor who saves the life of a shooting victim in a bar only to find himself working for the mob. The off-screen voice is especially bad, with a moralistic text that kills any shade of cinematographic experience from the film. You probably will not meet the film but in DVD rental stores, or on TV. Try to look for something better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21ea55c1e9df4528970d4574f5f5b130",
            "input": "Distortion is a disturbing, haunting film, about life imitating art and art reflecting life. Haim Bouzaglo, the director of the film, plays the role of Haim Bouzaglo, artistically blocked and sexually impotent playwright, who finds inspiration in his suspicions about the subject of his girl friend's documentary. As an Arab suicide bomber, disguised in skullcap and American t-shirt, wanders through the landscape in search of his target and his nerves, Haim transcribes his girl friend's life as she films her documentary and incorporates himself and his actors' lives during rehearsals. But the bomber has already struck and Haim has left the restaurant just minutes earlier. Despite the manipulation of time and space, the story is crystal clear, comprehensive and absorbing, a brilliant commentary on the \"distortion\" of everyday Israeli life, where the political is intertwined with the personal, where everyone lives \"on the edge,\" and people never know whether they are playing leading roles in their own lives or are merely dispensable bit players in someone else's dramatic narrative.Bouzaglo plays with this notion of everyone being an actor in someone else's production brilliantly. We are always voyeurs, seeing what the fictional director sees illicitly but also what the \"real\" director chooses to reveal. To remind us that these glimpses are violations of privacy, Bouzaglo takes us into the bathroom and the bedroom (sometimes the bedroom is the street and rooftop), and repeatedly frames his views within TV, video, or security screens. Actors play the role of actors who represent the \"real\" characters played by actors. Of course, each of the actors is the star of his or her own production, only dimly aware of their diminished roles in their fellow actor's personal films. The detective hired by the playwright becomes a character in the play. The actor hired to play the role of the detective seeks out the detective for \"tips\" on how to play the role, is caught by the detective on surveillance tapes, and they attend a cast party as their real selves.Despite this multiplicity of views, there is no mistaking the clear lines of this narrative: the playwright searches for subject matter, the bomber seeks a target, and the detective stalks the filmmaker. Nor is there any difficulty locating Bouzaglo's ultimate target—enervated and impotent Israel, fully conscious of the threatening peril but incapable of meaningful action. Israel is Bouzaglo, the impotent fictional playwright cannibalizing his own life for his play. Israel is also the bankrupt soldier-entrepreneur who is the subject of the filmmaker's documentary, the cheating actors and actresses, and the cuckolded husband. They are all Israel because they are all helpless, caught in inaction or aimless action, as the bomber scans the landscape for his best target. All the characters can do as another bombing is reported is have sex and keep \"score\" of victims.There is personal triumph, vindication, perhaps revenge at the end of this play within a story within a film, but viewers will be left aching for the state of Israel even as they are filled with admiration for Bouzaglo's memorable rendition of a nation's plight within the telling of an individual's story.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-319cc9c82fde4ddf8c7090ba988c752e",
            "input": "Follow-up to 1973's far better \"Cleopatra Jones\" has statuesque black actress Tamara Dobson returning to her signature role as chic, super-tough narcotics agent, here busting a heroin ring in Hong Kong. Cross-pollination of blaxploitation action-flick and kung-fu B-movie is fun at the outset but eventually flags. The shoot-out finale is right off the assembly-line, and Dobson herself seems less energetic than before (she's still sexy, and she puts a unique spin on her comically-stilted dialogue, but these surroundings may have been too much of one thing for her--she's jaded). Stella Stevens plays the villainess this time; she's good, but can't match Shelley Winters in the predecessor. ** from ****",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-01cffab572cb4b8bb04cf6f263a3c303",
            "input": "This is a strange, cerebral, surreal, esoteric film. If there is such a thing as \"intellectual horror\" cinema, this film is it. I started to get scared and wish there was someone else watching it with me, and it barely has a plot! I'm going to have to see this film again multiple times before I feel I really understand it. If you're the kind of person who likes \"My Dinner With Andre\" and films by Godard, or if you do a lot of mind-altering drugs, you will probably enjoy this film. Wow.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4338c45ebbf64b74a724abd8b7f083fd",
            "input": "Today, Bea Arthur died so I was cruising around the IMDb Web site and somehow wound up on a show called \"Gloria.\" \"All In The Family\" was a brilliant show for its first four or five years and I bet I watched every episode more than once. However, I swear that I did NOT know a show named \"Gloria\" existed. Maybe, that's a good thing. Maybe, it means I had a life as a young adult rather than watching television.On the other hand, it is pathetic that the \"All In The Family\" franchise had deteriorated so much that it begat a show I never heard of -- and one that is rated very poorly by the previous reviewers.I rated the show a 1 for two reasons -- the system did not allow me to register a no vote and writers and TV execs should be condemned for starting a show that had no business being on the air and besmirches the memory of one of the greatest shows in TV history.Shalom, ZWrite",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aeda885bc3f34ef7a988d486fe4894a0",
            "input": "This movie could have been so much better with a script rewrite. Not that I expect a great deal of plausibility in movies, but you'd think that even the homeless and urban-dwelling Jack Mason would question why a group of experienced hunters would want to hire him as a hunting guide. And upon reaching the hunting grounds, poor Ice-T plays his part as if he is actually going to lead these men through woods he's never seen before.And how does Jack Mason find Thomas Burns back in Seattle?I'm assuming this movie was based on Richard Connell's short story \"The Most Dangerous Game.\" A few years ago I showed this movie to a class of 9th grade students after they read the story. I reedited the movie, cutting out all the pointless scenes and all the profanity. It ended up being 43 minutes long.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-63dc0bc758984943a96b1ddd46c3b7ff",
            "input": "Being a big fan of the \"other\" PLANET OF THE APES films, I rented this DVD despite my aversion to all things Tim Burton. Once again, he doesn't fail to disappoint with his uninspired direction. Even the ape makeup looks second rate, which is unforgivable considering the monstrous budget of this monstrosity. Mark Wahlberg proves once and for all that he is not an actor (as if BOOGIE NIGHTS wasn't proof enough). I was embarrassed for genuine talents such as Tim Roth and Helena Bonham Carter. No doubt their paychecks motivated them since it couldn't possibly have been the cliche-ridden screenplay. I rented this DVD on a special $1 night and I still feel ripped off.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0048a6031bfb4d3485cd4fe0ee63fd9c",
            "input": "This movie has Richard Pryor, Rosey Grier and others. It's a curious WW2 movie, and serves as a statement about racism. It is worth watching to understand the fact that Movies reflect how we feel about the issues when they are produced and not about the period of time they portray. Meaning this is a 70's movie not a 40's movie (WW2). Still, there is some good action scenes of 7 seven black men led by a white captain trying to capture a Dam. The story centers on the Captain learning that these men are soldiers and not just a service company. There is a scene that could be from a Civil War movie and not a WW2 movie that reflects what the movie is all about. The Black Lt. gives a German women a innocent peck on the cheek, and the white Capt becomes upset. I enjoyed the movie from a curiosity stand point since the stars and the Genre were interesting to me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9c7a3f19d826437da7df6589de669091",
            "input": "Financially strapped Paramount pulled out all the stops for this '34 stage adaptation entry: big budget, large cast, extravagant production and Mitch Leisen tagged as the director. What happened? Two things: Busby Berkeley didn't work for the out-of focus rock and a murder mystery script that didn't deserve to be in the same trash can as the worst Charlie Chan first draft down the street. I have to believe that the cutting was out of Leisen's hands since the great Duke Ellington's number is savagely chopped, but that doesn't mean that it ain't worth a look: the 'Sweet Marihuana' number featuring topless chorus girls is a mind blower, considering the looming production code and it also has the ravishing Toby Wing (whose unfortunately fed horrible lines and playing the prototype dumb blonde) as a chorion hot for an otherwise preoccupied Jack Oakie. Carl Brisson's acting is bland as Melba Toast but he's a competent singer. MacLaglen reaches for new plateaus as a stereotypical dumb detective. And try to spot Lucy in the chorus. This rates a 7.0 as a curiosity. Feb 2010 re-think: I recently gave the film another look and now feel I was wrong to berate the lack of Busby Berkeley production numbers. I can understand Leisen's argument for more realistic production numbers within the context of the plot. I still have enormous issues with the editing however. Paramount, the raciest major studio in town, faced huge issues with the Production Code at the worst possible time in it's history, financially speaking, and pulled out all the stops on this one (also check out 1934's Search for Beauty). A must see for pre-code buffs.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e71c90ec868a4c429e96a95102def862",
            "input": "...because this was simply awful. 101 Dalamatians was funny even if formulaic, but this is nothing more than puerile drivel. The same plot except with the story excised from it; the world's most intelligent and horribly annoying macaw; Tim McInnerny proving that he really can't do comedy (everone remembers Percy in Blackadder but that was his high spot - it's all been downhill since then); direction so poor that if a group of college students had made this you'd throw it in the bin and tell them to do it again - properly this time. Ieuan Grufford better go back to Hornblower sharpish, whilst Glenn Close and Gerard Diepardieu ought to go into hiding for several years.Perhaps I could be too harsh; after all I didn't manage to sit through the whole film. It gets 1/10; only because I can't give it 0.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-657bae42922e4116bdd348de80e38fff",
            "input": "I am a lover of B movies, give me a genetically mutated bat and I am in heaven. These movies are good for making you stop thinking of everything else going on in your world. Even a stupid B movie will usually make me laugh and I will still consider it a good thing. Then there was Hammerhead, which was so awful I had to register with IMDb so I could warn others. First there was the science of creating the shark-man, which the movie barely touched on. In order to keep the viewers interested they just made sure there was blood every few minutes. During one attack scene the camera moved off of the attack but you saw what was apparently a bucket of blood being thrown by a stagehand to let you know that the attack was bloody and the person was probably dead (what fabulous special effects). Back to the science, I thought it was very interesting that the female test subjects were held naked and the testing equipment required that they be monitored through their breast tissue. Anyway this movie had poor plot development, terrible story, and I'm sorry to say pretty bad acting. Not even William Forsythe, Hunter Tylo or Jeffrey Combs could save this stinker.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4abc2644de63487da303305ac2b71802",
            "input": "I thought this film would be a lot better then it was. It sounded like a spoof off of the spy gener, and the start of it reminded me of Pleasantvil, but this film came up short.The plot is just to ridiculous. The KGB and Soviet Union in Russia have started up a spy school to teach their spies' how to act like Americans, but the town they set up in it for training is a bit dated, so they grab two yanks from the US to spice things up. I don't know, but this seems just to out there. It gets really odd when next to no one in this all Russian town speaks in a Russian accent. Someone screwed up in the casting job.Also, for a comedy this is painfully dry. There is one, two funny spots tops, and they are nothing to sing and dance about. The film in the end will likely put you to sleep.And, as a twisted punch in the face, this film is so pro the US it makes me sick. The movie keeps on saying again and again, the US is God and Russia is the devil. This is the kind of smear campaign that was done against the Japanese in World War 2. It's films like these that makes everyone think that the US is full of itself.This gets a 4 out of 10, and I'm being kind. It should really get a one, but the dance scene was funny, but then again it dragged far to long to be really funny.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1de303f3daab4d7e96fb4853230824f3",
            "input": "No need to detail what others have written in other reviews - here goes the summary: * Much of the nested animation work is downright gorgeous - the colors are superb - would love to have it done in silk as a necktie* The story and execution is a total snooze - it was quite difficult to stay awake at timesIf you are a student of the fine arts, medieval calligraphy, early religion and so forth - have at it. This is a FILM for you.If you want an engaging, entertaining MOVIE - look elsewhere - this is a failure as anything other than an artistic statement.Vikings didn't have horns by the way...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3f8bcc9f6fb48c2bf903d0d9f4569b6",
            "input": "Very bad film. Very, very, very bad film. It's a rarity, but it defenitly is not worth hunting down. This Italian Jaws rip-off makes little sense most of the time, and no sense the rest. The \"alligator\" is not at all convincing, and many of the sub-plots go nowhere. If it's at the local video store, you may want to watch it if you're a fan of monster movies, but it's not worth hunting down.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b0c2a668107e42979ba25fce76539700",
            "input": "I thought this movie seemed like a case study in how not to make a movie for the most part. Since I am a filmmaker, I give it a 2 for consistency.The problems remain from beginning to end with the plot being extremely predictable using bits and pieces of most, if not all, previous successful war stories. The computer generated graphics were too much like viewing a video game at points and there seemed to be no attempt by the director to add some realistic quality to the story. I was interested in the budget to get an idea of what he had to work with, but did not find that information.It seemed like this project pushed the limits of a low budget movie too far resulting in a production that drags the viewer along with the story without their imagination being engaged. The actors weren't bad, but the plot needs more innovation.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66759ea7c0c84dc8b50289aca96be0e5",
            "input": "I had several problems with the movie: (1) The screenplay -- specifically, Kim Basinger's voice over: Movies are not books; they should *show* the action rather than have a voice over *tell* us what's happening. Occasionally I find a movie with a voice over that works, but here it seemed more of a lazy way of writing the script. In fact, it sounded to me as if she was practically reading excerpts from the novel in her voice over.(2) I felt no emotion in the relationship between Jessie and Brother Thomas and also felt that Alex Carter's acting was pretty bad. That's a significant failure for me in defining Jessie's and Thomas' characters -- with no connection between them, it seemed to me as if she just wanted a stud and that for him it was a matter of being sex-deprived. If it had been properly done, the relationship between them would have given much more context to the story.(3) With the book, I understood Jessie's mid-life crisis. In the movie, it seemed more like just plain boredom.On the plus side, I didn't think the movie was so bad as for me to turn off the TV . . . though that thought did occur to me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-32ab1698d1d2428597e3b72d178e8df6",
            "input": "This movie is a 90 minute Ramones concert with brief periods of stupidity and absolute boredom. What kind of high school is this anyway?Unless you are a major Ramones fan, DO NOT and I repeat DO NOT waste your time like I did. This is utterly unwatchable from start to finish. This movie should be called Ramone Fever. Everyone appears to like them in this movie. There is not a plot to be found in this flick. As far as teen comedies go, you are scraping the bottom of the barrel with this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7fb615ce2e744fb3a48802c34a334509",
            "input": "Poor acting, no script, no plot, no convincing killer, no suspense, no original setups, it uses the same closet/under the bed/person-behind-you-in-the-mirror tactics over and over again making it repetitive and boring, and NOT in a foreshadowing way either, and the fact that NOBODY ever \"really\" gets killed (at least not on screen) , which in turn zaps any suspense it may invoke right out of it and makes everyone feel eve MORE cheated for spending money on their admission ticket....its a horror film w/o any horror LMAO. The MOST you see is what looks like someone having taken a ketchup bottle and spraying it across a plastic sheet.You have to be a teen who was sitting there screaming in the theater and scaring yourself to have enjoyed this, or you were high/drunk at the time.Honestly, I have a life and don't bother writing reviews that often unless I really really hated something, or enjoyed it tremendously.But this film is AWFUL and I feel I have a duty of sorts to warn you NOT to give your money to Hollywood and encourage this kind of filmaking ever again! It is one thing to rent a \"bad\" movie at blockbuster from the Weinsteins, its another when you have to sit through it in a theater.Also, in case you want some remake nostalgia, forget it! This is NOT a remake, nor is it a re-imagining. It is not scary, nor engaging, nor is it satisfying enough to be \"funny\" like others on IMDb have claimed...it is just stale and booooring.Here is what you will take away from this film: remembering the scar on Brittany Snow's head that stands out more than the plot, the fact that Jonathan Schaech MUST be having some sexual affair with J.S. Cardone of \"The Forsaken\" to have gotten another role as a killer(because he is as frightening as my poodle, and too cute to kill just about anyone) and that for some reason (duh) everyone who goes back to the hotel suite never comes back. What kind of person would NOT get worried at the prom when they decide to announce the candidates for prom king and queen and the fiercely competitive girl just somehow doesn't show up? This is my warning to you. DO NOT waste you're money like I did. The \"original\" sucks too but is more of a guilty pleasure for Jamie Lee Curtis fans, though no way near as bad as this piece of crap (sorry to sound vulgar or rude, but once you see this, you will understand why I say what I say).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0249cb3fdf6c4eba9a233882313b3eb0",
            "input": "I love this movie. It is great film that combines English and Indian cultures with feminist-type issues, such as girls wanting to play sports that were previously reserved for men. It shows the struggles of both an Indian person wanting to break outside her cultural barriers and women wanting to break outside the gender restrictions found in sports, especially in England at the time. I feel that the cultural struggles are more emphasized than the other issues.In contrast to the other comment, I do not think this movie is anything like Dirty Dancing or any other such chick flick. This move is loved by many types of people, men and women, young and old alike.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69a8e0dde4c14ec49d7d5b5010d1476e",
            "input": "This movie is so bad, I knew how it ends right after this little girl killed the first person. Very bad acting very bad plot very bad moviedo yourself a favour and DON'T watch it 1/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7c2328f027684c0a9140f3bce14ef643",
            "input": "How this piece of garbage was put to film is beyond me. The only actor who is at all known to me is Judge Reinhold, an accomplished actor whose presence is merely a justification for putting it into production.I don't even think it is worth a nomination for a rotten tomato award, this film really does make B movies a cinematic enjoyment. A car travelling along the freeway with police in tow, and no one knows how to stop the car, yeah, right.The script must have been written on the back of a cigarette carton. Most made for TV movies are awful but this redefines the word. Check out the acting skills of the bridge operator, pure Oscar material.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a065f3fb5f3a40d2939b9294a5f8c1d4",
            "input": "The Menagerie parts one and two was the only 2-parter during the 3-year run of the original Trek series and it was because Roddenberry was able to insert most of the footage from the 1st pilot \"The Cage.\" The move was made out of necessity, to combat deadline problems in getting episodes produced (such a sf show back in the 1960s was a hassle to get done on time). One positive outcome back then was that audiences, unaware of the pilot produced almost a couple of years earlier, were treated to a whole new crew and captain for these two episodes on top of the regular cast of characters, as if the producers had spent double the money on these episodes to present a TV epic spanning a dozen years of Starfleet history (though they still used terms such as 'United Space Fleet' in these early episodes).The wraparound story begins as a space mystery plot: the Enterprise is diverted to Starbase 11 for unknown reasons and very soon Spock is a suspect in these shenanigans. Astonishingly, though even McCoy belabors the fact that Spock's Vulcan heritage makes subterfuge on his part impossible, it does turn out that Spock is indeed acting out some mutinous scheme to shanghai our precious starship and kidnap his former captain, Pike, now horribly crippled. Well, Spock is half human, we tend to forget. Or has he simply gone mad? It may very well be, for he's directing Enterprise to Talos IV, a planet so off-limits it's the subject of the only known death penalty on Starfleet's books. When the jig is up, there's a great scene of Spock surrendering to a flabbergasted McCoy, as Uhura looks on in shock. Even Kirk, usually steady as a captain should be, doesn't know what to make of his first officer's illogical conduct.In the 3rd and final acts, we begin to see transmitted images of a mission of the Enterprise from 13 years prior, when Capt. Pike was commanding and Spock was one of his officers. We really don't know where all this is going and what Spock hopes to accomplish - and that's another thing that makes this a very good 2-parter - we really need to find out what it's all about in the 2nd part. Not only is Spock facing severe penalties, but it looks like Kirk's career may be finished, as well. Double jeopardy, folks. This is also the 1st televised episode to feature one of those shuttlecrafts (none were available in the earlier \"The Enemy Within\" when the crafts were really needed). There's also one of those neat matte paintings to convey the ambiance of a futuristic starbase - this was the only way to visualize such things back then. Finally, check out Kirk's smug approach at the start of the episode - boy, do things go sideways on him as the story progresses.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b238b6f6b72437ca2b22c79073dd0b7",
            "input": "I've heard nothing but great things about the 2006 television mini-series, \"Planet Earth,\" narrated by my childhood idol David Attenborough. Nevertheless, whether it was screened down here in Australia or not, I never caught up with it, and when I happened upon the opportunity to see 'Earth (2007)' – a feature-length compilation of the same nature footage – on the big screen, I jumped at the chance. The theatre was basically empty; just one other patron sat in the row ahead of me, and it was as though I had, not only the big screen to myself, but, indeed, the entire planet Earth. For 90 minutes, I was lowered into the beauty and perils of the isolated wilderness, amongst some of the most beautiful living creatures ever captured on film. Awesome in its scope, and yet painfully intimate at times, 'Earth' is a heartfelt plea from the filmmakers to recognise the delicate balance of life on our planet, and how the intrusion of humans has placed countless glorious animal and plant species on the brink of extinction.Though the film, directed by Alastair Fothergill and Mark Linfield, obviously argues for the conservation of the wilderness, it refrains from beating us over the head with propaganda, and the puzzle that is politics is ignored altogether; indeed, there is not a human in sight. Instead, we are simply taken on a breathtaking journey into the majesty of the natural world, to experience the resilience, and also the fragility, of life on Earth. I hear that the original mini-series, which ran for eleven episodes, delves a lot deeper into the scientific background of world ecosystems, but I think that, here, the filmmakers made a wise decision to replace information with emotional impact: I can't remember the last time that I felt so inspired, and yet utterly heartbroken at the same time. By establishing an emotional link between the audience and a select few individual animals, anthropomorphising them to an extent, we are suddenly able to appreciate the \"human side\" of each species, and their hopeless plight for survival becomes less a statistic and more an unacceptable tragedy.'Earth' is basically comprised of a selection of dramatic episodes, whether it be the struggles of a female polar bear to lead her young cubs to the Arctic ice, or the tramp of an elephant herd towards the life-saving seasonal floodwaters of the Okavango Delta. The documentary demonstrates the delicate balance between life and death, most heartbreakingly exhibited in the desperate ballet of predator-prey interactions. Though occasionally, perhaps to cater towards a younger audience, the footage cuts itself short at the crucial moment, I regularly shed at tear at the inevitability of death in nature, and the raw instinct that fuels these animals' final, hopeless efforts at survival. There's even a haunting beauty to be found in the hunt, both in the slow-motion footage of a cheetah bringing down its prey {the result of a single fateful misstep}, or the majestic mid-air leap of a Great White Shark as it engulfs a hapless sea lion. It is this frail balance that has been fatally disrupted by the selfishness of our own species.Aside from these main stories, we are also treated to brief snippets of wildlife from around the world, including the birds of paradise of Papua New Guinea, and the autumn migration of the demoiselle cranes. Of course, entire films might have been dedicated to these species alone, and an inevitable consequence of having to sift through so much footage is that some interesting ecosystems are glossed over far took quickly. By choosing to focus most closely on the polar bear, elephant and humpback whale – tracing their lifestyles, via some astonishing high-definition time-lapse photography, throughout a calender year – the filmmakers were able to avoid any structural problems that might arise from having so much to show, and only 90 minutes to show it. Consequently, 'Earth' left me thirsting for more, and, fortunately, I now have approximately eleven hours more, as soon as I can track down a copy of the DVD box-set for \"Planet Earth.\" Uplifting and tear-jerking, awe-inspiring and heartrending, 'Earth' is a truly magnificent documentary experience, and it might just be my favourite film of 2007.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82c328a6649a471aaf0824d3d57200fe",
            "input": "Although she is little known today, Deanna Durbin was one of the most popular stars of the 1930s, a pretty teenager with a perky personality and a much-admired operatic singing voice. This 1937 was her first major film, and it proved a box-office bonanza for beleaguered Universal Studios.THREE SMART GIRLS concerns three daughters of a divorced couple who rush to their long-unseen father when their still-faithful mother reveals he may soon remarry--with the firm intention of undermining his gold-digger girlfriend and returning him to their mother. Although the story is slight, the script is witty and the expert cast plays it with a neat screwball touch. Durbin has a pleasing voice and appealing personality, and such enjoyable character actors as Charles Winninger, Alice Brady, Lucile Watson, and Mischa Auer round out the cast. A an ultra-light amusement for fans of 1930s film.Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58f694f1061c4048957ed219f7ea24f1",
            "input": "Fot the most part, this movie feels like a \"made-for-TV\" effort. The direction is ham-fisted, the acting (with the exception of Fred Gwynne) is overwrought and soapy. Denise Crosby, particularly, delivers her lines like she's cold reading them off a cue card. Only one thing makes this film worth watching, and that is once Gage comes back from the \"Semetary.\" There is something disturbing about watching a small child murder someone, and this movie might be more than some can handle just for that reason. It is absolutely bone-chilling. This film only does one thing right, but it knocks that one thing right out of the park. Worth seeing just for the last 10 minutes or so.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47222355338d4663939c23769fe57675",
            "input": "One of my favourite films first saw it when I was about 10, which probably tells you a lot about the type of humour. Although dated the humour definitely has a charm about it. Expect to see the usual Askey & Murdoch banter so popular in its day, with lots of interesting, quirky co-characters. The lady with the parrot, the couple due to get married and are in trouble from 'her', and my favourite, the stationmaster, \"Nobody knows where it comes from ... nobody knows where it goes..\" Interestingly the ghost train was written by Arnold Ridley of Dads Army fame (Private Godfrey the medic) Watch it on a rainy Sunday afternoon after your lunch and smile.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73762402f9b14b768261208be1e8f0b0",
            "input": "There were a lot of films made by Hollywood during the war years that were designed to drum up support for our troops from the public. Seen today, some might dismiss them or just see them as propaganda--which they technically are, but of a positive sort and meant to unify the nation. This film is a pretty effective and entertaining example of the genre--having a pretty realistic script and good production values. Pat O'Brien plays pretty much the same character he played in MANY other films (you know, the tough-talking, hard-driven but \"swell guy\"). Randolph Scott is, as always, competent and entertaining and the rest of the extras are excellent (look for a young Robert Ryan as one of the bombardiers in training). While the story is reminiscent of several other movies about our pilots and crews, the film is well-crafted enough to make it interesting and not too far-fetched. That it, perhaps, except for the very end--where the film is a bit over-the-top but also VERY satisfying. About the only serious negative, and this is mostly for nitpickers, is that some of the stock footage is somewhat sloppily integrated in the film and \"nuts\" like me who are both history teachers and airplane lovers will probably notice this--all others probably won't notice.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-676de78aeade4ddfb6a6641f75e134ea",
            "input": "Well, first off, if you're checking out Revolt of the Zombies as some very early Night of the Living Dead (1968)-type film, forget it. This is about \"zombies\" in a more psychological sense, where that term merely denotes someone who is not in control of their will, but who must instead follow the will of another. The \"zombies\" here, as little as they are in the film, are largely metaphors for subservience to the state or authority in general, as in wartime. It is quite a stretch to call this a horror film.The film is set during World War I. A \"French Cambodian\" contingent had heard strange stories about zombification--supposedly Angkor Wat was built by utilizing zombies--and there are tales of zombie armies easily overcoming foes. Armand Louque (Dean Jagger) brings back a priest who supposedly knows the secret of zombification, but he won't talk. So Louque and an international military contingent head to Angkor Wat on an archaeological expedition designed to discover the secret of zombification and destroy the information before zombies have a chance to \"wipe out the white race\".One of the odd things about Revolt of the Zombies is that it seems like maybe writer/director Victor Halperin decided to change his game plan while shooting the script. The film begins as if it will explore the zombie/military metaphor, and maybe even have adventure elements, but after about 15 minutes, it changes gears and becomes more of a love triangle story.Halperin does stick with a subtext about will and power (and a Nietzschean \"will to power\"). The film is interesting on that level, but the script and the editing are very choppy. This is yet another older film for which I wouldn't be surprised if there is missing footage, especially since some scenes even fade or cut while a character is uttering dialogue.Amidst the contrived romance story, Halperin tries to keep referring to the zombie thread, but little of the zombie material makes much sense. Louque discovers the secret of zombification, but it doesn't mean much to the viewer. The mechanics of the zombie material are vague and confusing—Halperin even resorts to using superimposed footage of Bela Lugosi's googly-eyes from his 1932 film, White Zombie, but never explains what it has to do with anything. There are big gaps in the plot, including the love story. Promising, interesting characters from early reels disappear for long periods of time. One potential villain is disposed of unceremoniously before he gets to do much.If you're a big fan of old, creaky B movies, Revolt of the Zombies may be worth watching at least once--the acting isn't all that bad, and if you've got a good imagination, you can piece together an interesting story in your mind to fill in all of the gaps. But this is the second time I've seen the film, with the first only being about five years ago, and I could barely recall anything about it--so it's not exactly memorable.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b07280c03934f11910cc2d142d7b8a8",
            "input": "Hidden Frontiers-is more than fan fiction- it is well thought out and organized series keeping the worlds of Star Trek alive and growing. From a fun little fan project to now a well known net series; Hidden Frontiers has a bit of something for every star trek fan in it. Set in the Late Star Trek: Next Generation/DS9 and Voyager time lines Hidden Frontier takes on topics and issues raised in other Star Trek series with set stories using a well developed characters, plots, and story arcs. Star Trek Hidden Frontier has taken on social context stories that Gene Roddenberry failed to bring to the screen and has shown the development of characters in long term space assignments - the real things that happen in close quarters as well as an exciting spatial wars and conflicts Sci-Fi addicts know and love. Done in a \"Green Screen\" studio; Hidden Frontiers brings a rollicking cast of regulars on to the screen and into your hearts. The large ensemble cast of actors plays well together and lovingly gives their time and energy to the project. Inventive use of green screen technology, props, makes up and costumes work to make the Hidden Frontier worlds of Star Trek fun and believable. Hidden Frontier has gone where few tread to go in the world of science fiction, and thrived once they got there. Hidden Frontier offers a wonderful bonus feature of a well thought out website, with interesting discussion forums, access to creative, production and acting staff and a fun weekly chat. I highly recommend taking the time to down load and watch.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40c7891abb9b4955a8616ff337e2cdd5",
            "input": "If you fast forward through the horrible singing, you will find a classic fairy tale underneath. Christopher Walken is very humorous and surprisingly good in the role. His trademark style of acting works well for the sly Puss in Boots. The other actors are well for their parts. I did not find any of the acting terribly fake or awkward. The king in particular appears a real dunce though, and I wonder if he is supposed to be. I can not remember the original tale. The special effects are typical of the eighties, but at least they are not overly fake like some of the computer generated fare that we see today. Overall, I recommend this movie for children and adults who are a child at heart.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6e9597a7445a45cbb74b615ce74dd2c1",
            "input": "This movie was very enjoyable, though you'll only like it if: - you hate going to the dentist but aren't afraid of a movie where one of them goes beserk - you love horror moviesI particularly liked the fact that some care was given to explaining the brute actions of the main character. The fact that he's totally obsessed by cleanliness (especially in the mouth) and then catches his wives providing some oral pleasure to the mud-covered pool-man is a pretty believable reason to go overboard.Liked it. I give it an 8.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d0e3ab13ce1472f8c55383be00cd072",
            "input": "Superhero movies pretty much always suck, and this is no exception. Its only redeeming quality is the fact the movie COULD have been even worse. I would put 'Batman & Robin' and 'Steel' above this movie, so yes it is that bad...If your looking for a black superhero, check out 'Blankman' its not a \"serious\" superhero movie but at least its entertaining.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-654cea10b57248f39f7fcd8d4da51f59",
            "input": "I was quite pleased to find this movie in the local video library - Cary Grant in a comedy set in the services, director Stanley Donen, so far what's not to like? It's the sort of film that has me wondering two things - when did all involved (including some well-known names) realize they had a turkey on their hands, and what's the worst thing about it among a number of contending aspects? Still pondering the first, but my vote for the latter goes to the meandering storyline, ahead of the wordy sometimes pretentious script, the uncertain tone, the lack of consistent and well-developed characterization, and the lack of rapport between the characters. You have to add very uneven acting to the criticism but it's understandable that the actors were struggling with this stuff and in addition seem under-rehearsed. Quite often they can hardly get their lines out quick enough. Cary Grant tries to portray his usual charming and urbane persona but at times seems uneasy and staccato in his delivery. I have to say however that I was relieved when the initial suggestions his character will be paired with the unspeakably vulgar Jayne Mansfield go away with the appearance of Suzy Parker. What's to like about the film? - for me chiefly the beauty of Parker who also acts with restraint and a Grace Kelly-like dignity. Generally speaking the film is nice to look at. The naval characters are very smart in their uniforms - however you have to truly wonder at the ghastly black Fu Manchu tunics they don in their luxury hotel suite. Even Grant can't look elegant in his. Back to the credit side, Ray Walston does a commendable job with his character and for me there was an interest in hearing a pre-Hogan's Heroes Werner Klemperer speak without an assumed German accent!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-337c0653f2b94d87b331e05024b71a4f",
            "input": "This has to be one of my favourite movies of all time. The dialogue, with the constant use of puns is very tight, the cast are superb, and the plot is highly original.Don't take my word for it - watch this movie and enjoy it for yourself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e623d16274fa42f289152075f49a6f8f",
            "input": "I saw \"The Grudge\" yesterday, and wow... I was really scared, a good thing. I love horror-movies, and I really liked this one. There were so many 'surprise'-scenes (what's the English word?) that made you jump in your seat. Though, too much screaming from the audience made it difficult not to laugh. I think the most scary scene was... on the bus, when the face flashes by on the window, or when Yoko's walking without her chin. The make-up is also VERY good. Sometimes you could really see it was there, but it was still adding a freaky look to the scene. The boy was very good indeed, so cute without make-up and so terribly scary with it on. The next time I hear a cracking noise I will probably feel pretty scared...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e05c400b85614a9693f46b89ddac8abb",
            "input": "...then you'd better not watch this movie. They've completely ruined the premise of the show. In the movie the Duke boys are idiots, Daisy is trampy, Roscoe is sinister, Boss Hogg is capable, Uncle Jessie is a criminal...only Cooter and Flash are true to the original characters. At least Enos is kinda close.At one point they open the doors to get into the General Lee -- nuff said.The original show may not have been great TV, but it was entertaining and the characters made sense. This movie is like Dumb & Dumber meets the Simple Life.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1174df065c1448c988a433c657508386",
            "input": "A group of people are invited to there high school reunion, but after they arrive they discover it to be a scam by an old classmate they played an almost fatal prank on. Now, he seeks to get revenge on all those that hurt him by sealing all the exits and cutting off all telephone lines.Dark slasher film with an unexceptional premise. Bringing it up a notch are a few good performances, some rather creative death scenes, plenty of excitement & scares, some humor and an original ending.Unrated for Extreme Violence, Graphic Nudity, Sexual Situations, Profanity and Drug Use.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b91cced60b44a9781c6e7c46ce2ea55",
            "input": "It's a refreshing breath of air when a movie actually gives you a story line with a beginning, a middle, and a end, a nice, clever mystery, with an appealing heroine for all ages, who wins us over with her wit and charm. Andrew Fleming's film is indeed a modern marvel, a comeback to the good old reliable storytelling that was the norm in Hollywood. He puts away the over-reliance on special effects that now passes for entertainment and gives us a terrific film, with a very capable young actress, and a talented supporting cast.The film is based on the old books, but it has been given updated enough to put in this century; however, the props might be different, the heart still is a good mystery, and there is clever one here, one that ties the traditions of the old and the nuances of contemporary youth. Emma Roberts is an old fashioned girl, who believes in good behavior and respect for others; details that are sorely missing from today's films. She is still good enough to get boys' attentions but she also knows how present poise and self respect. She earns her medals by working hard and is not afraid to show a little guile when it is needed to achieve her goals.While taking a vacation to California, our heroine is drawn into the mystery of a Hollywood actress who was the victim of foul play; suddenly she is \"visited\" by her ghost and this sets off a series of events that might solve the mystery or result in something dreadful for herself. What makes the movie quite entertaining is the little details, as she discovers that her customary world is nothing compared to the California scene, and this is well presented, without resorting to unnecessary vulgar language or anything graphic or overtly sexual. Eventually, the director has enough control to make it all very palatable to all types of audiences, from the young ones to the adults in the audience. It is a movie that deserves to be seen, appreciated, and enjoyed, a film that is rare and delicate, and it's not afraid to be classified as fun! Five Stars",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-88bfd42310dd4602ad2f88a2229a9d88",
            "input": "Did you ever wonder how far one movie could go? Schizophreniac relentlessly explores the world of the extreme with Harry Russo. Harry is an aggravated writer, killer and drug addict scumbag who will stop at nothing to destroy those who stand between him and insanity. Driven by the demonic voices of his ventriloquist dummy rubberneck, Harry begins his killing spree. From director Ron Atkins comes the 1st installment of the vilest story ever to be filmedThe only other movie I have seen similar to this would happen to be the 2nd installment entitled Schizophreniac NecromaniacThis is a really low budget film and will not be for everyone, but if you are looking for something disturbing, different and horrific then this would make a fine choice.DO NOT EXPECT ANYTHING LIKE MODERN DAY HORROR (Such as Scream)Viewer discretion is advised",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8b4ea0d3a8014b3fb4db28e40f657767",
            "input": "How has this piece of crap stayed on TV this long? It's terrible. It makes me want to shoot someone. It's so fake that it is actually worse than a 1940s sci-fi movie. I'd rather have a stroke than watch this nonsense. I remember watching it when it first came out. I thought, hey this could be interesting, then I found out how absolutely, insanely, ridiculously stupid it really was. It was so bad that I actually took out my pocket knife and stuck my hand to the table.Please people, stop watching this and all other reality shows, they're the trash that is jamming the networks and canceling quality programming that requires some thought to create.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-451b4a79f18a487eae91ea9fd1eead8b",
            "input": "And this is a great rock'n'roll movie in itself. No matter how it evolved (at point being a movie about disco), it ended up as one of the ultimate movies in which kids want to rock out, but the principal stands in their way. Think back to those rock'n'roll movies of the 50's in which the day is saved when Alan Freed comes to town with Chuck Berry to prove that Rock & Roll Music is really cool and safe for the kids, and Tuesday Weld gets a new sweater for the dance. Forward to the 1979, repeat the same plot, but throw in DA RAMONES, whom no one then realized would become one of the most influential bands of the next quarter century (and then for the obligatory DJ guest shot, \"The Real\" Don Steele). Throw in, too, all the elements of a Roger Corman-produced comedy-exploitation film, except for the two-day shooting schedule, some of the familiar Corman repertory players like Clint Howard, Mary Wournow and Dick Miller (there since \"Bucket of Blood\"), and you've got one of the great stoopid movies of the day. One of the few films that uses deliberate cheesiness and gets away with it. I showed the new DVD to a friend who could only remember seeing parts of it through a stoner- induced haze at the drive-in, and he agreed that this is one of the great movies to be watching drunk, not the least for the lovely leading ladies and the great Ramones footage.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ac5f95c3b06246718f9f40ea2e60fdcf",
            "input": "This is the biggest load of crap that I have seen in a long time. The last time I hated a movie so much was whilst watching \"28 Days later\" and \"Magnolia\". There is absolutely no point to this movie, except to see some really sick and twisted sex/rape scenes, Gillian Anderson relieving herself on the side of the road, and every single sentence of dialog having to use the \"F\" word at least a couple of times in it. It has extremely cheap acting and is very low budget. My friend and I eventually turned off the movie after about half an hour. We had tried to give it a chance, but nothing could save this crud. DO NOT WATCH IT!!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-062330b2a654456fa9d188afbd6ec88a",
            "input": "While others may contend that by viewing other works by Bilal, one will better appreciate this movie, it does fail in one major way. It does not stand on its own. The plot is a mishmash that is confuses symbolism with substance. Here's an idea start with a definite story. Then craft symbolism around it. We start with two different narratives, this female that is somehow turning human, a \"god\" that is for some reason being judged, but getting one last fling on Earth, and this mysterious John character who seems to be developing some sort of \"resort\" just beyond the bounds of the city. Why? None of these questions are answered. But do we care, no. There is no development to want us to empathize with any character in the story, the closest we get Jill and even then the development is spotty at best. Unfortunately the movie gets caught up in the the whole visually impressive (which it is,) but at the expense of motivic development. I would love to see this rewritten by someone who could distance themselves from the material a bit and not have to feel that every image has to be in the picture.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef0be5b7f24f4c95a3095e3f2aa274ca",
            "input": "For starters, \"Hobgoblins\" tries to ape the more successful \"Gremlins\". That's bad enough but they don't even try to make anything that closely resembles a movie here. Instead, it's more like a bargain basement, everything-must-go clearance of embarrassing scenes, inappropriate sound FX, acting as bland as unflavored tapioca and a script that takes everything humans hold sacred in their motion pictures and throws 'em down the old tube-aroo.The plot? Grrrr.... Meddling kids track down gremlin-like creatures from movie lot before they kill people by projecting their fantasies. Sound cool, does it? Well, see that wall on the other side of your room? Run right at it, top speed, face first. See, THAT is cooler than this movie.You dare to doubt? Quick, name something else one of the leads has been in other than this. What other scripts have the writers done since \"Hobgoblins\"? Name another Rick Sloane directoral effort. How many \"Hobgoblins\" action figures do you have? See? THANK you.I cannot believe I took so long to write about such a horrible film. I'd rather write about more important things; like the separation of church and state, economic restructuring in Europe, that kind of thing. But no, \"Hobgoblins\" it is and it is bad - bad like your grandparents' wallpaper, bad as pink flamingos on your lawn, bad like underwear that says \"Home of the Whopper\"...and I think we'll stop there.Well, Mike and the robots fight valiantly but try as they might, they can do only so much with \"Hobgoblins\" before they realize that, yes, the director DOES need kicked in the shin.Real, real hard.One star for \"Hobgoblins\", seven stars for the MST3K version.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d3e07268754443cae359419eed786d7",
            "input": "Unlike many other films, which are disturbing either by dint of their naked unpleasantness (Man Bites Dog) or their sheer violence (most Peckinpah films), Deliverance shocks by its plausibility. Certainly, the buggery scene is pretty straightforward in its unpleasantness, but the film's effect derives far more from its slow build-up and the tangible sense of isolation surrounding the four leads, both before and after everything starts to go wrong. The moment when the canoes pass under the child on the bridge, who does not even acknowledge the men he had earlier played music with, let alone show any sign of human affection towards them, is among the most sinister in modern film. The tension increases steadily throughout the canoe trip, and perseveres even after the final credits - the ending makes the significance of the characters' ordeals horrifically real. The movie's plausibility is greatly aided by the playing of the leads, particularly Ned Beatty and Jon Voight as the victim and reluctant hero respectively. Burt Reynolds, too, has never been better. The film's cultural influence is demonstrable by the number of people who will understand a reference to 'banjo territory' - perhaps only Get Carter has done such an effective hatchet-job on a region's tourist industry. I can think of only a handful of movies which put me into such a serious depression after they had finished - the oppressive atmosphere of Se7en is the best comparison I can think of. Although so much of it is excellent of itself, Deliverance is a classic above all because there are no adequate points of comparison with it - it is unique.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-314ccdb0b275434a83dfc7cce9da1a5f",
            "input": "Not being a fan of first person shooters I was very hesitant to play this game. After having played the demo however I was sold. \"Undying\" really manages to pull you in the game and be part of the universe that your character is in. You have this green amulet,called the \"Gel'ziabar Stone\" that has special powers and warns you of particular events or things to look at. With a special spell \"the scrye\" you can see certain things that otherwise would be invisible to you. Walking in a hallway you suddenly hear the magical stone whisper:\" Look\",with the stone glowing at for example a painting. And then using the scrye spell you can see some weird and creepy stuff on the painting. Let me tell you to witness something like that is scary as hell. People who expect to finish this game in a few hours can forget about that even with the use of cheats. This game relies on the character using wits and walking carefully around. Because like in any horror movie your surroundings are usually pretty dark. And ghosts and monster appear at random when you don't expect them and can kill you very quickly. There is this one scene where you want to enter a room where you are pushed back with such great force that it takes moments for you to realize what happened. This was a scene that could have come straight out of the horror classic \"Evil Dead\"! To experience something like this is a real accomplishment. There are a lot of elements that take \"Undying\" to the level of the best classic horror movies ever produced. But sadly I have to report that there are some flaws. For one thing the universe you are playing in is huge. You start out in a big mansion with all sorts of hidden,secret rooms and even a hidden hell dimension called \"Oneiros\". That is all fine in the beginning. But with all the loading times and some difficult enemies in between that can become frustrating. And there is no map. The game demands you memorize your surroundings. So patience is required. Also there are some jumping puzzles that you have to do otherwise you can't progress. I don't mind jumping on platforms in third person adventures. But in first person mode that can be an annoying task. Luckily you can save at anytime and anyplace. And trust me you will need it. Overall \"Undying\" is an extraordinary first person shooter that deserves to be played by any horror or game fan.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3de1b0ffecdd4af5835f235d76f1029f",
            "input": "I saw this movie in its own time period, when having a baby out of wedlock not only ruined your life, but stamped your child as a bastard. In these days of 'single mothers' that may seem very far-fetched, but it was very true. And I'm not crazy about laughing at someone who is stammering, either. Between these two problems I had difficulty finding this movie funny. At that time I didn't know who had directed it or what a marvelous reputation he had. I did know who Betty Hutton was, and she just made me nervous because she was so frenetic. I loved \"Bringing Up Baby\", but I find this movie just embarrassing. I'm sure the punch at some church functions probably was spiked, but I was the one needing a drink after watching this again. The idea the girl would have to be drunk in order to 'get married' and get pregnant just added to the misery. An entire town could turn on you under these circumstances, so the outcome of this movie is really the funny part. Of course, shoot me, I don't like \"It's a Wonderful Life\" either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a6e844a7cbe45ecaaa92c039a9545a9",
            "input": "One of, if not the worst film to come out of Britain in the 80s. This tawdry tale of a middle aged lecher who 'seduces' two teenage scrubbers who babysit for him and his faux-posh wife has nothing to redeem it.In turns gratuitous, puerile, uncouth and unrealistic, this film plumbs the depths as it fails miserably in its attempts to be funny, provocative, intellectual and controversial. Perhaps the worst thing about this film is the way the strong cast of George Costigan, Michelle Holmes and Siobhan Finneran are completely stitched by such a lame script. It's no surprise that this was the late Andrea Dunbar's only work to make it onto the screen. Complete and utter rubbish on every level.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef3d79856df948e18ce40e3f0c3718a6",
            "input": "The perfect space fantasy film. a group of kids go up accidentally in space and have to get back down, but do they, sure they do.This would not be a family film if they all died. Then it will all be sad. You don't want that Kate Capsaw, the leading lady gives a Golden Globe performance, but sadly, she nor Lea Thompson won one. That sucks so bad.I can't say it enough, this film is so great, Lea Thompson- o lord, a perfect girl for this film. This film is the best for sure. Sorry, but better than Star Wars. Star Wars is so over- rated and space camp was so under- rated. It should of been the other way aroundexcellent 10/10- 0r maybe 11/10. Iam not good at math",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1a5ae88ec1642ebb9c0492704170ed1",
            "input": "Let me being by saying the I followed watching this video by watching Saw and after Bleed, Saw looked like the all time greatest horror flick ever even though I thought it was only fairly good. Bleed is pretty bad. The best part is seeing the female cast nude. The gore is very fake looking and over-done. It has its funny parts but its extremely predictable and I didn't want to stay to see the horrible ending. If I could, I would ban these actors and actresses, the only reason being is that Debbie Rochon (Maddy) has been in over a hundred other videos and I've also seen two other members of the cast in equally or worse motion pictures. They should not allowed to continue this madness.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed569d2df1ec433bb04fdf4e1fedfa53",
            "input": "It appears that there's no middle ground on this movie! Most of it takes place in a dream and, like most dreams, it's often foolish and illogical. It's also a gorgeous production with some great songs and fine performances, especially by our angel.Jeanette's deadpan, unknowing insults and various other faux pas at the dream reception are hilarious, and her jitterbug with Binnie Barnes is a surprise and a delight. At one point, she gets to sing a snippet from Carmen, followed by the final trio of Faust (holding a lapdog, for some strange reason), then \"Aloha Oe\" on the beach! It's a surreal comedy--tremendously entertaining if you can get into the groove.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-89ab33457cdd4d5db85edaa612385109",
            "input": "For such films like `Anchors Aweigh', few have been bestowed with as many Academy Award accolades in a warm up for happy hour. Either 1945 was a beleaguered year for good film or they were still suffering advance shock by Billy Wilder's `The Lost Weekend' that they wrote anything starting with A on the ballot for best picture to please the still musical picture faithful public. Since Gene Kelly was nominated for this performance instead of his role in `Singin' in the Rain', then there had to be something wrong with the behind the scenes rigging systems at MGM. Of course, the studio is on its best behaviour during this much lauded tour of the great studios and of Hollywood itself, handy for those stuck on the other side of the world.Yet a sailor suit musical with the brilliant talents of Gene and Frank Sinatra is certainly an enjoyable farce, despite the need for more people to yawn at the previews for the musical so today's audiences wouldn't be slapped with an unnecessary runtime. There have been many longer pieces before and since, but in this case all of the charming Kathryn Grayson's scenes could have been eliminated. Until the viewing of `Kiss Me Kate' it may have been necessary non-opera enthusiasts to watch any of her films with remote control in hand. If there was a need to practice picking up women for 1949's `On the Town', then perhaps the shore leave lucky sailors did not have to promise an audition with Jose Iturbi and strike up the piano for a whole hearted `Susie' rendition. Few are lucky to get a screen test at the golden studios of MGM. Then few are even luckier to be attended to. There are no regrets to be had about the successful screen tests of Susan Abbot or Kathryn Grayson, but it makes the continual non-opera enthusiast hope for the eventual pink slip to be handed out to both. But for all, the star talents are good shape and an above average score thrown in with a slight, but fun great navy story intertwined with young ambitious navy boys good for late bursts of wartime morale, makes `Anchors' at least doesn't question picking the wrong MGM film. The direction holds up as the cast carries the story in lovely colour cinematography. Whenever anyone bursts into music or song, the film makes for a joyous occasion.The natural highlight of the film is Gene Kelly's cartoon adventures in a fantasyland, climaxing in a brilliant dance with Jerry the mouse. This is a well-deserved masterpiece number of Kelly's career, and it's nice to know he thought of it before Fred Astaire started taking to dancing on walls and ceilings.It's not exactly sitting down to a triple flavour, rainbow sprinkled, chocolate wafer, cream and cherry and banana split sundae, but it is a square solid lump of sugar that somehow eventually melts in your mouth and despite the guilt, is still a pleasant feeling.Rating: 7/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-66368bbef3e24f18bcea8e4884526f01",
            "input": "A warning to you not to be seduced by the names Bigelow and Red. _Undertow_ is pointless and unengaging, and made me think often of a phrase by Twain about wishing all the characters would be drowned together. When someone brings up the category of Worst Films Ever Made, it's not the likes of _Plan 9_ or _Attack of the Killer Shrews_ that I think of; it's the likes of this. What a complete waste of time--my own and everyone who was involved with this flick.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a142f30772264083b1fdd25d3db1af2c",
            "input": "I saw this movie in a theater in Chicago and should have enjoyed it, since I love Nemesis… but if the first half an hour is skillfully done, the rest is just sub-Predator video fodder, a long chase through those post-modern empty factories Pyun affectionnates. My girlfriend fell asleep. I still like Pyun though, but not this",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10a3433c7e4e438c9380ed67dbdf58d3",
            "input": "***Possible Spoilers***When I saw this today I had some expectation of how it would be like, not too high, but not low either. This was nothing like I expected at all though, it seems to me like the movie makers couldn't make up their mind of what kind of movie to make.In the begining of the film it's somewhat mysterious and kinda exciting, but that'll soon change to some ridiculous scenes - very obvious scenes... As I watched further I almost fell asleep a couple of times.The ending is the most ridiculous of all though, almost splatter/comedy...I'm not saying it doesn't have some good scenes it's just that the film never becomes \"whole\".4/10 Movie-Man",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f644833aed3c43f88f7e48e586e3f0c4",
            "input": "CB4 was awful, but it may have given Cundieff the idea to it better. More like Spinal Tap than anything else, the film is clever from the start. Surprising anyone who saw it back in the mid nineties. The performances are played for laughs but not so much so that they are cartoon characters, more like Marx brothers. These guys are real and slightly diverse. They react to situations like any of us might. Well, we may not throw a tantrum when our performance hats are late to the gig, or pull guns and beat down a record company exec, but you get the picture. N(n***as) W(with) H(hats) takes itself seriously enough to reel you in, then you're hooked. rent or get this at all costs, even if you're not really into rap music, this will still leave you gassing out loud. Comparing this to CB4 is like comparing George Lucas' Star Wars to Gil Gerards'Buck Rogers' I think you see my point",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ccce6caa02ac4e16b22253e3b633f68a",
            "input": "Certainly any others I have seen pale in comparison. The series gives balanced coverage to all theatres of operation. No one country is given undue credit for the Allied victory. Laurence Olivier brings great weight and dignity to his role as narrator.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fdcd73ddcd84c62b18331a2752728d6",
            "input": "\"Heartland\" is a wonderful depiction of what it was really like to live on the frontier. The hard work and individual strength that were needed to survive the hardships of the climate and the lack of medical care are blended with the camaraderie and the interdependence of the settlers. The drama was especially meaningful because the story is based on the diaries of real people whose descendants still live there. It was also nice to see the west inhabited by real people. No one was glamorous or looked as if they had just spent a session with the makeup or costume department. Conchatta Ferrell is just wonderful. She is an example of the strong, persevering people who came to Wyoming in the early 20th century and let no hardship stand in their way of a new life in a new land.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-504dbbfc4a7e4d78847c76fe52d8d0f9",
            "input": "Midnight Cowboy is not for everybody. It's raw, painful, and realistic but very entertaining. The lead actors Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman who would go on to become Oscar winning actors deliver amazing performances. Voight as the Texas hustler, Joe Buck, who migrates from small town Texas to New York City to become a hustler. He does not apologize for his chosen profession but it is not that easy. The New York City women like the rich lady played by Georgeann Johnson and Cass played by Oscar nominated Sylvia Miles are different than Texas women. Sadly, Buck is trying to escape from his past life in Texas. He was raised by his grandmother, Sally Buck, played by the wonderful actress Ruth White who died in 1969 from cancer. The locations in New York City are wonderful to watch as is the relationship between Fatso played by Hoffman and Buck's characters evolve into a moving male to male friendship. The men are struggling to survive the New York City life by not playing by the rules like getting a real job. As the film evolves, Buck's past comes to the surface and it's haunting but not clear. The film is not for children but compared to today's films and television programming, Midnight Cowboy might be more tame. I can't forget a young Brenda Vaccaro and a party that you can't forget. It's also a tearjerker of a film, so get your hankies out too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1cbf47942c3744d88783060fd7b344fb",
            "input": "First off, I'm not some Justin Timberlake fangirl obsessed with making him look good, in fact I'm not even a huge Justin fan, but I did like this movie.I work at a video store and when I saw this movie with its huge cast that I'd never even heard of I had to see what it was about. I didn't find Justin's acting that bad, it was clearly the worst out of the group, but it's a pretty impressive group, with Cary Elwes and Dylan McDermott being two names that didn't even make the first credits list. The story is basic, a journalist uncovering corrupt cops, but I found it well done. L L Cool J's character was clearly conflicted, but I honestly didn't know what he would do in the end. Morgan Freeman is as always, the wise mentor figure he does so well, and as much as I love Kevin SPacey, he was kind of just there. HIs character didn't have a whole lot of substance, but it's Kevin Spacey, he can do no wrong.Surprisingly I thought Dylan McDermott gave the best performance as a homicidal cop. Truly believable and really in character, he freaked me out a couple of times.I was really expecting a lot of cheesiness to be honest. Horrible catchphrases, unjustified action sequences, stuff like that, but it was surprisingly well done and I didn't find any of that. Every shooting had a point, it wasn't clichéd, pretty solid really.overall, amazing cast, decent story that kept me interested and just enough action to make me jump. I don't know why it didn't appear in theatres, it was better than some garbage I've seen on the big screen. I would say it's worth seeing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-397139f69e224cb4aeb760dc8955703c",
            "input": "We all create our own reality, or do we? That is the core question behind this highly original and masterfully crafted examination of the illusionary nature of reality. Blending Eastern and Buddhist philosophies with the visual chicanery of M.C. Escher, this fascinating treatise manages to take on the rather cerebral question of `Who are we and what is our place in the universe?', and turn it into a captivating and fun-filled 100 minutes. The film centers on Bart, a writer struggling with his screenplay, `The Sea That Thinks.' As he sits at his computer, the work begins to unfold as nothing more than a description of his sitting at the computer, writing the screenplay. Before long he is stuck in a whirling conundrum in which everything he writes becomes reality. Director Gert de Graaff approaches his subject with an impish sense of humor and dazzles the viewer with a series of astounding visual tricks that confront the nature and validity of our perception. Ultimately, de Graaff's film challenges the audience at several levels to question whether anything we see or touch or taste is really what it appears to be, or whether our entire understanding of the universe and our place in it is merely a trick played on us by our senses. Note: AFTER you've seen the movie, check out the film's entertaining web site. (Dutch with English subtitles) --Eric Moore",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e7e37688fcc04971a31273bec477cb27",
            "input": "This movie has Wild Bill Hickok, Calamity Jane, Buffalo Bill and General Custer all together. Gary Cooper plays Wild Bill and Jean Arthur plays Calamity Jane and Charles Bickford plays the bad guy who sells weapons to the Indians and you can hardly recognize him. This was the first time Cecil B. DeMille and Gary Cooper worked together and the next movie the made was basically the same but set in a different time. This movie starts out with Lincoln's assassination and it also deals with an Indian war. Calamity Jane is in love with Wild Bill and Buffalo Bill has gotten married and now wants to stay home. This movie also deals with Custer's last stand and is far from accurate. Gary Cooper is good as usual and i usually don't like Jean Arthur but i liked her here.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-907e8403de104b54a47cb0e268545392",
            "input": "I don't give much credence to AIDS conspiracy theories but its sociologically interesting to see the phenomenon dramatized. In the early years of the AIDS epidemic, the suffering and paranoia of the scared and dying often generated such dark fantasies. This was especially true in the politically radical and sexually extreme demi-monde of San Francisco. The city, renowned for its beauty, has rarely appeared uglier than in this film. A sense of darkness and decomposition pervades every scene.While the acting and plot can't be said to be well-done the films unique cultural context and oppressively dark mood at least partly saves the film from being a complete loss. Actually, I found the most interesting performance to be Irit Levi as a crusty and cynical Jewish, lesbian (?) police detective. She's interesting, though not necessarily convincing.Highlights: the film's use of the garishly tragic Turandot is an effective motif and there is a sublime silent cameo by iconic performance artist, Ron Athey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b108c7214fde4c0b8514da6817cf84a2",
            "input": "This movie is one I strongly recommend. It's about a boy, Stanley Yelnats (Shia LeBeouf) who is wrongly convicted of a crime and sent to Camp Green Lake, a boys' detention center. There, he is forced to dig holes 5 feet deep and 5 feet in diamiter. While there, he meets the other boys of the camp (Zero, Magnet, Armpit, Squid, x-Ray, and ZigZag). All of them are digging, not to 'build charactor', but to find outlaw Kate Barlow's treasure. Throughout the movie (and book) Stanley learns more about the past, more about himself, and more about digging holes. I give this movie a 9.5, because, I am very picky when it comes to books to movies, (I want the movie to follow the book EXACTLY). But, still it did real well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9706323f144e4b41bdd22295990bf528",
            "input": "Sorry. Someone has to say it. This really is/was a dull movie. Worthy perhaps, but dull nonetheless. I nearly cried with boredom when watching it. The acting is pretty dire, the story drawn out and predictable, the score and camera-work totally standard and unexciting. It's one of those movies you are not allowed to hate (becase it is about disabled people) but hate it I suspect nearly everyone does. It is interesting that critics have been so kind to this movie. I suppose they too are not allowed to be objective. This was made to win awards - which I remember it duly did. But it was neither interesting nor entertaining. I haven't seen the play so cannot compare.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-96b6c887af8b4d029b8da6d2af60714c",
            "input": "Dolph Lundgren stars as Murray Wilson an alcoholic ex-cop who gets involved with a serial killer who kills during sex, after his brother is murdered, Wilson starts his own investigation and finds out a lot of his brother's secrets in this very dull thriller. Lundgren mails in his performance and the movie is flat and lethargic. Also when has anyone watched a Dolph Lundgren movie for anything but action?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd8c790a895f4166833ea5d372cf3c85",
            "input": "Bertrand Blier is indeed l'enfant terrible of French cinema and in the seventies he always could shock the public. Filmed with his fave duo (Depardieu and Dewaere) and the usual dose of sex (Miou-Miou plays her typical role, at least the one from the seventies as little could we know that a decade later she would be the best French actress ever). In first \"Les Valseuses\" is also one of the first roadmovies as the viewer is just taken to some journeys of two little criminals. Those who only are satisfied with family life, or simply know nothing more, the movie would be quite a shocker but this movie is more than just that, it just let you think of all the usual things in life (working for the car, being bounded at work etc.). It's a sort of critic towards the hypocrite society we're living in. Great job and it just makes you wish two things : Dewaere died just too young as he was a topactor and of course Depardieu, he'd better should have stuck with French movies as he proves here that no one can beat him. Timeless classic and 20 years later it will still shock some...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-65ff416c537c4ce48f75cc1767828d69",
            "input": "I have made it my personal mission to go after those responsible for this film. I even got the rental company to give me my money back because I argued that they perpetrated false advertising.It's not enough that the movie itself is a p.o.s., but the cover art is what sold me. I've done better make-up effects on my children at Halloween than what the movie actually depicts versus the cover art. Can you say \"raccoon eyes?\"I'm not going to waste more of my time by going into the full details, but come on, the movie's main character is an L.A. cop who was born and raised in Alabama - but has a German accent!?! It's beyond insulting.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a502838b0c64454b77829366dd733f7",
            "input": "Somerset Maugham's characters are brought to life in RKO's \"Of Human Bondage\"; but the movie is a too skeletal version of the novel, with Bette Davis' star-making performance sucking up all of the energy. Otherwise, it's the story of Leslie Howard (as Philip Carey); he dreams of becoming a painter, but is told he has no talent for the arts. As the film progresses, Mr. Howard's struggles, instead, to become a doctor. His efforts seem to indicate some bad advice regarding the arts; though successful in medicine, his painting seemed easier - also, note the symbolism of his disability, a \"club foot\" (explained in the film).Along the way (right away, in this version), Howard becomes infatuated with waitress Davis (as Mildred Rogers). Davis' characterization of \"Mildred\" is extraordinary, culminating in a spectacular speech, when she tells Howard, among other things, that she had to \"WIPE MY MOUTH!\" after kissing him. Howard also performs well, but the story fails to explain his prolonged fascination and love for Davis; so, their performances are wasted. Still, a film to watch for the acting, including some good supporting players. Bette Davis' characterization was famous for inspiring a \"write-in\" campaign for the 1934 \"Best Actress\" Academy Award. For the record, she placed third. The results were: 1. Claudette Colbert - \"It Happened One Night\" 2. Norma Shearer - \"The Barretts of Wimpole Street\" 3. Bette Davis - \"Of Human Bondage\" 4. Grace Moore - \"One Night of Love\" ******* Of Human Bondage (6/28/34) John Cromwell ~ Leslie Howard, Bette Davis, Reginald Denny",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3d04ba92c15640a2820425a4b60c89ee",
            "input": "I almost drowned in CHEESE watching this movie. In fact I could not even finish it. I want my money back. One more of Hollywood's feeble attempts to come up with a new idea. Good thing I keep a bowl of lemons in the fridge. Just in case. They should of gave Nic Cage a hat and a bull-whip. Swashbucklin'. Cage's performance in Raising Arizona or Leaving Las Vegas beats this \"lemon\". People who are completely and totally marketed(and most of them are) should love this movie. If this film had been animated, I would have taken it more seriously. I would of rather paid to see a completely stupid movie that did not try to hide it. In my opinion, this was a incredibly stupid movie and it made a even more incredibly sad attempt to try and hide that FACT.All the SHEEP seem to love it though.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf653c5002cd4e65a9b078bb9b3b7be8",
            "input": "As this movie is completely in Swiss dialect, it's probably hard for most German speakers to really follow this movie. I'm not from Switzerland, but I worked there for some years, so I had the chance to understand this great spoof of the Lord of the Rings. I've seen a lot of movies of this kind (eg. Scary Movie, loads of Scifi spoofs etc.) but this one is the best one of that kind, I've seen so far. I give a 9 of 10. The only reason I can't give a 10 is, because there are some little details which could have been done better and because they supplied no subtitles in any language on the DVD, so there's almost no chance for non-Swiss to understand.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c86afd4b8c74e7dae10b665e628dfc5",
            "input": "It's interesting to see what the director tried to do with this film. But the problem is that it's not very good. There was nothing really original in the film and while the plot was well presented, the main characters were all a bit to shallow and you didn't bother for any of them.Rather bland (and sometimes downright bad) photo leaves a bit to be desired but I guess you can't expect to much from people who are just doing a low budget film for the heck of it. It's unfair to review the film and compare it to other high-budget films. But alas, that is what one must do. On its own, it's not very good. And compared to others, it's still not very good. But it is not without its good points! I liked the plot. It was built up rather nicely and tied together well at the end. Sometimes in the really dark scenes, it managed to build up a creepy feeling as well.However in the end the film fails to impress. The characters are pretty much non-existent and we don't care for any of them. Any of them might die, but it's possible to pinpoint the final \"survivor\" from very early on.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78a944ebdd7943d4b52cf00eaee07043",
            "input": "Without doubt the best of the novels of John Le Carre, exquisitely transformed into a classic film. Performances by Peter Egan (Magnus Pym, The Perfect Spy), Rudiger Weigang (Axel, real name Alexander Hampel, Magnus' Czech Intelligence controller), Ray McAnally (Magnus' con-man father) and Alan Howard (Jack Brotherhood, Magnus' mentor, believer and British controller), together with the rest of the characters, are so perfect and natural, the person responsible for casting them should have been given an award. Even the small parts, such as Major Membury, are performed to perfection. It says a lot for the power of the performances, and the strength of the characters in the novel that, despite the duplicity of Magnus, one cannot help but feel closer to Magnus and Axel than to Jack Brotherhood and the slimy Grant Lederer of U.S. Intelligence. I have read the book at least a dozen times, and watched the movie almost as many times, and continue to be mesmerized by both. If I had one book to take on a desert island, A Perfect Spy would be the choice above all others.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-40543e5681c245f0bd794d80e95c1863",
            "input": "There is no doubt that Halloween is by far one of the best films ever not only in its genre but also outside.I love the films creepy atmosphere like the whole it could happen here sort of situation makes it scary to think about.Also to imagine if you were ever in this situation what would you do.This is a movie that i enjoy watching highly, especially around Halloween time.John Carpenter is a very professional directer i love a lot of his other films, but there is no doubt that his best known movie is the film Halloween.Oh and if your thinking about watching the Rob Zombie remake don't.It is pure crap and a true Halloween fan would like the 1978 John Carpenter version better.Michael Myers is one of the coolest slasher killers in any film, and is a very well known one.So by all means go see this masterpiece you will really like it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-347e607b806d45689c60267a0a4f334d",
            "input": "Zombie Chronicles isn't something to shout about, it's obvious not a award winning movie but it is a entertaining B-movie directed by Brad Sykes who directed Camp Blood which was another entertaining low budget flick. The acting is bad like most cheaply made movies but that's what makes it more entertaining, the zombie make-up is cool and effective especially with the budget, the gore is also great and gross, the film is sort of like a zombie version of Tales from the Crypt since we get two tales about zombie encounters in the woods, the stories are fun and do leave you guessing especially the first tale. Zombie Chronicles is a lot better than some low budget zombie movies out there, if you love low budget B-movies or cheaply made zombie flicks then check out Zombie Chronicles.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-819502807d52411e93f6f94bfd21e100",
            "input": "I haven't seen anything this bad since I walked out of the James Bond movie \"Moonraker\" twenty years ago. I managed to sit through the entirety of this one only because of Tilda Swinton, but there was nothing she could do to save this beast.As a cross between \"Pi\", \"Orlando\", and \"Tron\", this movie failed miserably in every aspect of moviemaking. The characters were cardboard and unable to evoke any kind of sympathy. The plot was wholly unbelievable. The acting was, with the exception of Swinton, amateur. The computer graphics were worse than in \"Tron.\" Timothy Leary was extremely annoying. I could go on, but what's the point.The only good thing I can say about this film is that Tilda Swinton was in it. I have no idea why an actress of her caliber consented to appear in such a dud, but she most likely regrets it now.Don't waste your money or your time on this stinker. There's nothing worth seeing here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a3fbb8bb2aaa4407a2b76cd0e03b3c0f",
            "input": "This made-for-TV film is a brilliant one. This is probably the best and favourite role by BAFTA winning John Thaw (Kavanagh Q.C. and Inspector Morse). Tom Oakley (Thaw) widowed man has lived in a village alone for a while since his wife and son died, and now he has been landed with an evacuee called Willaim Beech (Nick Robinson). As he gets to know this child he starts to develop a friendship. Until Willaim's Mum (Annabelle Apsion) wants him back. After Tom gets worried about William not contacting him he goes to London to find him. In the end Willaim gets his home with a loving family (or Dad). Set during the Second World War this is an excellent film. It was nominated the BAFTA Lew Grade Award, and it won the National Television Award for Most Popular Drama. John Thaw was number 3 on TV's 50 Greatest Stars. Very good!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5c692894b6ec445ba6a7309b4a261099",
            "input": "A very enjoyable film that features characters who do bad things and who let emotions like anger and a desire for vengeance bubble over. The cast is very good, there's plenty of action, and Stewart gets the girl and his revenge (with a twist) in the end. I've seen this film several times, and always watch when it's on AMC or cable. Highly recommended...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a98ac4271f6c4ff48465730926b713a6",
            "input": "This movie is amazing! While being funny and entertaining, it is also profoundly deep and eye-opening. I will watch it again and again. Bruce is a guy who is unhappy with his life. He has a job and a life, but it isn't what he thinks it will take to bring him happiness. Bruce is bitter, unsatisfied, and resentful that his life isn't the way he envisions it should be. As a result of this state of mind, Bruce ends up losing his job and blaming God for everything that he thinks is wrong with his life. God comes to Bruce and grants him Godly powers. Bruce uses these powers to get everything he has always wanted. His life is finally exactly what he envisioned it would take to make him happy.....with one exception. In the process of gaining everything, he loses the one person who truly loved him. As the movie unfolds, Bruce learns that the real change that needed to occur in his life was not the circumstances, but his perception of what was truly there. This movie was inspirational and deep. If you really pay attention, it forces you to look at your life with a deeply humbling respect for the fact that a lot of the time we are so much more blessed than we recognize. As my wife says, \"Since when does anybody know what it takes to make them happy?\" and my humble addition, \"May we not lose ourselves and those who matter while we try to find out.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f6a699d3c94545f692df8f11773b98c3",
            "input": "As Most Off You Might off Seen Star Wars: Return Off The Jedi You May Knows Its A Good Movie But As You Might Have Seen On Video They M|might have a party At The end And They Just Probably End The Movie with the party with no a spirits or anything But on the original one (Live TV) When they are Partying But before i say more when Ben obi-wan dies in the Imperial Ship Or Death Star They Saw him Disappear And Yoda Dies From Either Old Age Or Internal Illness But because Luke killed Darth Vader (Real Name: Anakin Skywalker) When They All Are Partying At The end when Luke Or Someone Stops the Spirits Off Ben And Yoda Stands Starring At Him And Smiling While Another Spirit Appears Is its Darth Vader but not as A Sith As The Old Usual Selve off Him And Started Smiling with Ben And Yoda I reckon That made the movie ending a little bit interesting But the Producers or anyone should off made a spirit off Padme And Mace Windu And Other Jedis that got killed with Younglings Under There Arms in the back ground",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a1c4bf0172a40558d78783121084057",
            "input": "This movie had so much potential - a strong cast, a reasonably strong idea and clearly a decent budget. I'm not sure where it all went wrong, but each of those elements was wasted. The story went nowhere, the characters were hollow to say the least and the result was a very boring, pointless, waste of a film. I hated it. Judging by the other votes, I'm in the minority here and must be some sort of freak. However, I thought this movie was dreadful. I had high hopes, but was very disappointed. A particular disappointment was Jody Foster's character. A very cocky \"fixer\" of sorts makes a nice idea. Jody was confident and sexy, but the character did nothing and went nowhere. Denzel Washington played the same character he always plays - enjoyable but nothing new.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f568938d2edd4fb7bc56751b5702e7cf",
            "input": "This crew-versus-monsta has been done a hundred times, sometimes better. This one was pretty slow-moving ; only the monster's resurrection was really worthwhile. Attempts at character developments gets botched by routine. Yeah, \"routine\" is the word. Went straight to video in France. No wonder",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4de0f00f15f24fe7a9d0e189707ca696",
            "input": "When I saw that this film was only 80 minutes long, I thought we were in trouble. Condensing the gigantic W. Somerset Maugham novel down to a movie that clocks in at under an hour and a half seemed like a disaster waiting to happen. But you know, the movie's not half bad, and it even manages to retain much of what makes the book resonate so much with its readers.I've heard many film buffs complain that Leslie Howard was a wet noodle of an actor, and he was, but I can't think of anyone more suited to play the role of Philip Carey than a wet noodle, for that's certainly what Carey is. Howard plays him well, which means you want to shake him and slap him upside the head repeatedly, then finally take him out and buy him a spine.Ah, and then there's Bette, as the girl with whom Carey is obsessed and who brings his world crashing down around him. I didn't know what on earth the appeal of Mildred was in the book, and the movie stays true to that detail. But as played by Davis, she does become the most fascinating character in the story, and if she's nasty and unlikable, she's at least the most dynamic person on screen at any given time. Davis's performance here is credited with changing the course of screen acting, much as Brando's would do nearly 20 years later when he screamed out \"Stella!!\" in that little-known Tennesee Williams play, and it's not hard to see why. Davis is intense to the point of scary. She makes no effort to wring any sympathy from the audience, and she allows herself to look ugly and most unglamorous. Her appearance when Carey walks in on her late in the film to find her dead or nearly dead of an unnamed disease (though not much care is taken to hide the fact that it's an STD) is shocking. Of course, it helps that this movie squeaked out just before the Production Code went into effect; if it had been made a year later, you can bet things would have been a bit different.Yes, much of the novel, and many of its most interesting parts, are left on the cutting room floor, and the story really does become about Carey and Mildred and not much else. I found that to be the least interesting and most tedious part of Maugham's novel, but it is the part that gives the novel its title and seems to be the part that readers are still drawn to now, so it strikes me as a wise decision on the part of the film makers that they chose to adapt the novel the way they did.Grade: B+",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf14a60aa8f3476487a227a52fc733bb",
            "input": "Uneven Bollywood drama. Karisma Kapoor is excellent as an Indian woman in Canada who marries a friend (Sanjay Kapoor), has a child, and then visits his family in India only to find they are terrorist warlords. Drama and tragedy ensue, and the film becomes a kind of NOT WITHOUT MY BABY styled thriller. Film is compelling, its few song/dance numbers are uninteresting and needless, the gaity of Bollywood song and dance is really out of character for the intensity of this film's drama, at least once we've left the comforting confines of their Canadian love nest – although one number involving a cameo by the stunning Aishwarya Rai is enjoyably provocative, if ultimately misplaced as well. Likewise, the inclusion of Bollywood superstar Shahrukh Khan as a happy-go-lucky drifter who helps Kapoor in her escape from the clutches of the warlord turns what had been a very serious drama into a silly farce, and it only gets back on his feet when his character – and his fantasies about Rai that generate her cameo dance – are dispensed with. His throw-away comic-book dialog and the silliness of his fight scenes detract from the film's primary gripping drama. The cast is nicely supported by Nana Patekar as the warlord, and the elegant Deepti Naval who is outstanding as his long-suffering wife who finally choses to stand up against him in one of the film's best scenes; Ritu Shivpuri and Rajshree Solanki are also very good as Sanjay's sisters in India, and very pleasing eye candy. But Sanjay himself overacts terribly, especially during obvious ad-libs. The directorial style of writer/director Krishna Wamsi is sloppy, rampant with rough transitions and abrupt cuts, although his camera movement is good. The musical underscore is also quite effective, moody, featuring wordless female voice over a small orchestral ensemble (too bad little if any of that made it onto SHAKTI's soundtrack cd, but Bollywood hasn't yet discovered the value of including score along with songs on their soundtrack albums, at least not in most cases). But SHAKTI is Karisma Kapoor's film, all the way, though, and the intensity of her performance once the film switches to India contrasts nicely with the gentle romance with which she engaged with Sanjay in the initial Canadian scenes. Despite the unevenness of much of the picture, Karisma's performance completely sells the film and solidifies its otherwise inconsistent measures. In a strange way, also, I found the story to be another take on the ostentation of royalty I'd noticed in CURSE OF THE GOLDEN FLOWER and MARIE ANTOINETTE, both of which I'd seen just prior, although SHAKTI of course is an entirely different kind of film; but the focus on a dysfunctional royal family – here living in the austerity of terrorism-controlled poverty in India rather than the elegance of Versailles or the massive megalomania of feudal China's Tang Dynasty – whose self-serving seeking of power brings ruin upon many others and forces an uprising of one kind or another provides the film with a notable subtext.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9047a61974c24aebb4dcfc9875cb1071",
            "input": "Stumbling upon this HBO special late one night, I was absolutely taken by this attractive British \"executive transvestite.\" I have never laughed so hard over European History or any of the other completely worthwhile point Eddie Izzard made. I laughed so much that I woke up my mother sleeping at the other end of the house...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a1cf710406934245b31aa0dbd9accd27",
            "input": "True, the setting in Paris is great. The actors are fine. The story is a twisted morality play. Is it supposed to say that if you want someone badly enough, it's OK to hurt everyone else along the way? In a real romance, you sort of want less cliché than the man who has become bored with his wife and is willing to dump his family, and the woman who is OK with encouraging him to do this. So what if they are decent looking and if Karen Allen shows off her body? The characters are still self-absorbed and reprehensible. Maybe the moral of the story is \"you get what you deserve\". I give it a 4, only for the fast scan potential through the \"male interest\" bits.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87a38b5ea2b047b598f438c01f46e667",
            "input": "Rather than move linearly from beginning to end, this story line of a gay couple impacted by AIDS \"orbits\" in time around their \"perfect day.\" The film is organized as a life remembered in asynchronous fragments rather than in a sequential flow as one directly experienced.The narration has its lyrical moments, particularly in describing the impact of loss anticipated or experienced. The dialog unfortunately lacks such grace. The script frequently compels the actors to say startlingly stupid or insensitive things that seem utterly out of character at the moment. On their second accidental encounter, clearly smitten with each other, sensitive Phillip encourages a reluctant Guy to tell him about his difficult week. But the moment Guy begins to open up, Phillip, an English Major, blurts out \"You're not a Crisis Fairy, are you?\" Later, watching his lover's naked, chiseled body stride across the bedroom toward him, our young Shakespeare in love begins to render the beauty of the moment in words, \"The way you cut through space....I can't even describe it\"--but lacks the verbal skills to complete his thought. This kind of drivel continues through the AIDS Hospice scenes, bejeweled with lines like, \"What made me think death would be all neat and tied up with ribbons?\" and \"You make Florence Nightingale look like Nurse Ratchet.\" The film often suffers from a bruising lack of subtlety. Unlikable characters are far more jarring and steamroller-flattened than they need to be. Phillip's thoroughly annoying friends--an arrogant trust fund brat and a whining, needy dweeb--maintain a running caustic diatribe about every one crossing their path. Such patter could offer a writer a wealth of opportunities for clever social commentary, but sadly, their remarks are merely unpleasant, ungraced by wit or insight. It's hard to know if our scriptwriter intentionally crafted intellectually limited characters or if he was simply running his tether's perimeter.The plot may be what most appeals to and resonates with those who praise this film. It does seriously explore 1980's US middle class gay life: first encounters, courting, coupling, nesting, the complexity of open relationships, friction and fracturing, dissolution, physical abuse, rapprochement, forgiveness, terminal illness, death and survival. Leads Phelan and Spirtas give fair to good performances rendering complex characters over time. Their fetching good looks help explain both the chemistry that held these two together through insensitivity and selfishness as well as the chemistry that helped some some viewers overlook this film's painful weaknesses. The decision to chop the plot arc into tidbits and present them in out-of-sequence flashbacks added complexity without any evident dramatic utility, and in several cases left the sequence and thus the implications of a given event unclear.Could I recommend the film? To sticklers for literary and technical quality, absolutely not! For easy going viewers in serious need of an AIDS survivor catharsis or in the mood for a guilty-pleasure tearjerker with a little eye candy thrown in, maybe. But better written alternatives exploring the impact of AIDS on relationships of that era include: Philadelphia, And the band played on, Longtime companion, Angels in America, An early frost, Parting glances, Love! Valour! Compassion! and even Jeffrey.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-19e0df111a69467dbe32cd5f27bb575b",
            "input": "`Our Song' gives us the lives of the three teenagers Lanisha, Maria and Joycelyn - best girlfriends hanging at the end of summer. Adolescent summer - even if we don't know the signals and landmarks of this particular terrain, Crown Heights, Brooklyn - is/was the same for us all. A lazy respite from the pressures and tumult of school. Welcome heat and idleness.But if this experience of adolescence is universal, the inner city of the 90s is a different place than most of us know - maybe as foreign a country as any. Young bodies carving new silhouettes...beckoning new territory...the maze towards adulthood. The young mind coming into itself, speaking for itself, saying this is who I am, this is who I want to try to be. It is/was always thus. But this is how it plays out in Brooklyn in the late 90s.Jim McKay is the writer/director of this film project but he acknowledges all who have shouted suggestions at him. The opening title slide `A film by' seems to list everyone in the universe. It's a gesture but by the end of the film, we know it to be a genuine one. [The closing titles also have some of the most on-the-money and appreciative credits I've read.] The vivid sound recording by Jan McLaughlin deserves to be especially noted. McKay's a modest leader who knows who is telling this story - it's his three graces Lanisha, Maria and Joycelyn. They're the real thing, their interactions have the fire of real friendship and the focus of reality. This ain't no music video shorthand telling of teenage life. It has the seriousness of the long unblinking stare.Hanging out with them, we don't quite feel included but we do feel privileged to be listening in. These are real voices speaking with plainness about the crises and dullness of daily life. We are witness to the modern math of teenage life - how its problems are interpreted, calculated and summed and solved. Small scenes illustrate large thoughts throughout. Lanisha hangs with her dad at his security job - it's the only way she gets to spend time with him. We see the love that exists between them but also the failures of family and fatherhood. In a connected scene, Lanisha defends her dad to her mom, and we see how desperately she needs to love them both and for them to love her in return. Later, the three friends lay in the dark sharing visions and dreams - and we remember how crazy/funny kids are and more tragically, how realism hammers idealism these days. And at the end, Maria simply walking down the street is a short story in itself. We see her gather up the courage to hold all her fears and doubts at bay. She demonstrates for us the strength one needs to have to be able to embrace the fragility that makes life livable.`Our Song's greatest gift is that we really feel deeply the terribly ephemeral nature of friendship - how, one day, alive and enlivening, that intimacy can, in the next, just turn and drift away. It's awful, but that's just the way it is, isn't it?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d110f7fa8fa84891957cfe88b0ca270e",
            "input": "I recently watched the first Guinea Pig film, The Devil's Experiment, and I must admit to being disappointed.This film is invariably included in any list of the \"nastiest\" films and maybe I was expecting more because of the hype. The truth is though, I don't rate it.If I'd been watching it believing the opening text to be true (\"I found this tape...\"), I might have been a bit disturbed by it, thinking it was real. Even without the benefit of knowing it not to be real though, I think I'd have worked out that it indeed wasn't.Throughout the film, the girl's reactions to what is being done to her just aren't what they should be. She should be screaming like a banshee in pain. The fact that she isn't means that it's obviously not real. I wouldn't want to watch it if it were real but if she were to be more convincing in her acting, the film would be more disturbing.And then there are the notorious scenes: nothing affected me at all up until the scalpel in the hand. The hot oil, maggots and innards just didn't bother me. I'm not saying I'm \"hard\"; just that I wasn't able to suspend my disbelief, partly because of the girl's inaction.The scalpel made me wince a little but the hammer to the hand just made the hand look rubber. And the final scene with the eye was again a little wincing but nothing more. I didn't want to look away and neither did I feel nauseous.Perhaps it's because the film is twenty-odd years old, or perhaps I'm just jaded. The truth is, I didn't find this film at all disturbing.It's the kind of thing you might expect to see playing on a loop as a modern art installation and as an exercise in stripping away characters, story etc. and just leaving the torture, it works on some levels. As a disturbing piece of film though, it didn't work for me at least.I watched Guinea Pig with my wife, who is of the \"it's just a film\" bent and she wondered what all the fuss was about. We got to discussing why I watch these films and my reasons are many but include a desire to be affected by a film. She said that she didn't think any film could be so convincing as to disturb her and challenged me to do exactly that. I played her the fire extinguisher scene from Irreversible and she was indeed disturbed.I'm not sure I have a point, other than that both of us were more disturbed by a scene in a non-horror genre film than any film thus far which sets out to disturb.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ca71698094748e8801fea3b9c75d67c",
            "input": "(possible spoilers)Someone once asked Dr. Seuss if they could secure the movie rights to his 1957 Christmas classic How the Grinch Stole Christmas. He turned them down, insisting that no one could do better than the marvelous Chuck Jones TV special from 1966 (also in mind, perhaps, was his bitter experience writing the script to 1953's The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T). When the good Dr. died in 1991, his widow, Audrey Geisel, still obstinately refused to sell the movie rights. But with the commonplace use of CGI effects becoming a reality, Mrs. Geisel had a change of heart. Universal made her a generous offer she accepted; she also accepted the casting of Jim Carrey as the title character. Supposedly she was satisfied with the final result. Well, Mrs. Geisel, that makes one of us.The film was given a $123,000,000 budget (which is more than even Heaven's Gate cost, including the adjustment for inflation), which obviously went towards the very elaborate makeup, set design, and special effects (which are underminedsomewhat by the rather hazy cinematography). Unfortunately, it seems that none of that money was set aside to get a better script than what Jeffrey Price and Peter S. Seaman (scribes of Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, which made much betteruse of a high budget) turned in. Whereas the TV special was a trim 26 minutes without commercials, this film tries to fill a running time of 105 minutes with more background information about the Grinch. It turns out that, as a child, he was the subject of ridicule, including an especially humiliating experience one Christmas at the age of eight. So it turns out that everything that ails our poor Mr. Grinch is directly because of the Whos. Trouble is, it seems like a rather long 105 minutes, with too much dead wood clogging up the story. That might not seem so bad if only the Grinch were a little more...well, Grinchy. The character that Dr. Seuss wrote and Chuck Jones later animated was a sly fox whose slick attempts to hijack the holiday season were undermined by his sudden change (and exponential growth) of heart. Carrey's Grinch is a loud, hyperactive oaf and, at times, a thug who, when made the holiday `Cheermeister,' trashes the Whoville town square in anger(hopefully the scenery tasted as good as it looked). This undermines the script's attempt to make the Grinch more sympathetic, with all the Whos down in Whoville so unsympathetic (at least in this interpretation).The Whoville of Dr. Seuss's vision was a small town populated by honest folk who knew in their hearts the true meaning of Christmas. The Whoville of the movie is a rather noisy and crowded place populated by spoiled, selfish, materialistic ninnies; an obvious attempt to comment on American consumerism. This is offensivelyhypocritical inasmuch as the film industry has benefitted greatly from American consumerism, and as this film contributed to it with a huge merchandisingcampaign.The film also expands and redefines the character of Cindy Lou Who, a small but crucial character in the original. The innocent two-year-old waif who walked in on this spurious Santa is now older and wiser, constantly questioning the false values of the Whos and trying to understand the Grinch's point of view (her one major scene from the original is re-enacted, making it seem out of character). Sheseems to be the only one who would ever know that Christmas is more than just gifts and decorations, thus making her a completely different, and more annoying, character.Those who celebrate Christmas should sooner accept a lump of coal in theirstockings on the morning of December 25 than a copy of this overlong, overacted, excruciatingly tedious, ham-handed, crude attempt to turn the children's classic into a feature film. It proves once and for all that darkness, vulgarity,manipulation, and heavy-handedness are inadequate substitutes for charm, wit, sincerity, and heart. The folks at Universal should get down on their collective knees and thank God that this truly bilious $123 million stink bomb grossed $260 million domestically or they'd not be here today. Furthermore it made Mike Myers' The Cat in the Hat possible!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2311849a1cb349a6b4eb1176bab742de",
            "input": "I watched, entranced and mesmerized, by the vocal and physical acting. The roles each character played were done with excellence.The lyrics,the words, every gesture, the sunrise, told it all.The movie spoke to me. It enlightened me to a different perception of a person who believes in mankind. Who believes in peace and gentle behavior. I was also held in disbelieve, by the sacrifices and human dignity was portrayed. Power without grace, is demented and without feelings. To want power at the cost of mankind, is so unbelievable. This movie made me so afraid for the people who are no longer in this world. And, it is with sadness that I think of them. I like this movie for the conversations and face expressions to it all. May this movie be blessed.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-42d7138e51b5461d80d65f108cb11f1a",
            "input": "I think that this film adds to diversity and is very accurate in terms of historic reconstruction. The way it shows the various communities leaving together in Thailand is very interesting...The Portuguese, the Japanese, and the various communities being managed by the king. The plots around the court are as usual a struggle for power with a lot of treason. The wardrobe is fine. The film is also done locally in Thailand in a reasonable production. The scene with the elefant as executors is very interesting. It is fun and I think that is also usable in schools for its historic accuracy because it shows that the European in Asia were subjects of the local kings in way very different from the traditional Hollywood perspective.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b30cb46e43b44a77ad4b804fa4fc4fe1",
            "input": "With lots of sunshine, gauzy light and shadow filtering through windows and into rooms, tracking shots moving through crowds with hand-held camera, quick-paced editing and extreme close-ups here and there, the photography is the thing in this interesting, artistically done film.The plot of this film starts out as a bit of fluff about a beauty contest. The film begins on a warm Sunday at the local swimming pool, where we meet the lovely Lucienne aka Lulu (played by Louise Brooks) - a bit of a show-off in front of the gawking men by poolside, she soon decides to enter herself to represent France in the Miss Europe beauty contest, much to the chagrin of her very jealous, stick-in-the-mud fiancé (a pretty annoying fellow, really). Strutting down the runway the ten contestants display themselves in swimsuits, while the winner is chosen as the contestant who receives the longest applause (I was wondering, couldn't the girls just walk slower to prolong their length of time - and thus applause - on the catwalk?!). Lulu is soon being chased by a Prince and a Maharaja, but her hot-headed beau doesn't like the attentions paid to her by other men or her adoring public, for that matter (I guess he just wants her in his house, cooking his meals, and staying out of sight, eh?!).Louise Brooks is beautiful and charming, her presence helps enhance this film, but it's really the way it is photographed that held my interest the most. A bit distracting is the odd dubbed sound, which is a bit off. The print on this version looked very clear and full of nice contrast though. Watching this I just tried to overlook the sound problems and watch the film visually, and I found the movie to be excellent, well worth seeing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bda6a753a57446118aa3f05a8564344f",
            "input": "(First of all, excuse my bad English) Of course only a movie starring Jessica Simpson can include serious goofs like this.. I'm a norwegian and I felt offended and shocked the makers of this movie did not take the time to do their research upon making this American/\"Norwegian\" movie. Even Wikipedia is more accurate when it comes to facts about this country.So I'm posting my corrections out of my frustration: -The Country is named Norway, not Norwegia. -\"Da\" is Russian, not norwegian. -Norwegian priests never use those black capes with that white paper by the neck as the protestant church is the dominant by far -It's true we have a native traditional folk-outfit (that we only use like twice a year) but the outfit in this movie is more like a German outfit. -I could NOT understand the so called \"norwegian\" in this movie.. Jessica was not making any sense.. neighter did the \"norwegian priests\"The only thing I recognise is the norwegian flag (and the viking hats, but that's so stereotypic what people think about norway - vikings!:O gosh)Well.. I guess the people who made this film will never read this comment. but at least I cleared some things up and got rid of some of that frustration..!I'm proud of my country and I'd love if people in the US were less stereotypic and more accurate when they talk about this country.That was all.. Lenge leve Norge ! ;p",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d30483af0fa644a8b8e919f04ec42a58",
            "input": "Antonio Margheriti's \"Danza Macabra\" aka. \"Castle Of Blood\" of 1964 is a beautiful and incredibly haunting masterpiece of Italian Gothic Horror, and after Mario Bava's \"La Maschera Del Demonio\" (aka. \"Black Sunday\") of 1960 and Roger Corman's \"Pit And The Pendulum\" of 1961 (starring the great Vincent Price) another must-see that earned the wonderful Barbara Steele her more than deserved fame as the most important female Horror icon in the history of motion pictures. But not only is the beautiful and brilliant Barbara Steele one of my favorite actresses of all-time, the screenplay to \"Danza Macabra\" was co-written by no one less than the cinematic genius Sergio Corbucci, who directed such ingenious Spaghetti Western milestones as \"Django\" (1966) and \"The Great Silence\" (1968). Italy's number 2 in the field (right after Mario Bava), Director Antonio Margheriti is one of the all-time masters of Gothic Horror, and \"Castle of Blood\" is doubtlessly his greatest achievement. Hardly another film works so brilliantly in creating an incredibly haunting, yet beautiful atmosphere as it is the case with this creepy masterpiece. When he encounters the famous writer of brilliant macabre stories, Edgar Allen Poe, in a gloomy London tavern, young journalist Alan Foster (Georges Rivière) accepts a bet from a nobleman, that he can not spend a night in his haunted castle in the night of all souls' eve. As soon as Foster enters the eerie castle, mysterious things start to happen. After a little while, however, he encounters an enchanting resident of the castle, the stunningly beautiful Elisabeth Blackwood (Barbara Steele). The mysterious events so far, however, have only been forebodings of the terrors the castle bears, however...The eerie castle setting alone would be sufficient to create a gloomy mood, the excellent black and white cinematography and a great score by Riz Ortolani create an incredibly haunting atmosphere that is eerie beyond comparison. The wonderful Barbara Steele is fantastic as always, I simply can not find enough words to praise this wonderful actress. No other actress has ever been capable of uniting ravishing beauty with the uncanny as it is the case with Steele, and no actress ever will. Besides Steele, the movie's cast contains another stunning beauty, Margarete Robsahm, and she also delivers a great performance. George Rivière's performance as Alan Foster is great, and the rest of the performances are also very good. \"Castle of Blood\" is outstanding in many departments: Barbara Steele Delivers one of her best performances, the cinematography and locations are beautifully haunting beyond comparison, the atmosphere is incredibly eerie... The film simply is a perfect whole of atmosphere, Gothic beauty and the art of terror. In short: \"Castle of Blood\" is one of the most atmospheric and greatest Gothic Horror films ever made, and must not be missed by anyone interested in the genre! 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd2df5a0338e405c8f1c9ec32c0845df",
            "input": "This is the kind of movie which shows the paucity of French cinema when it comes to making thrillers.The director's desire to \"sound American\" is so glaring that you will not be fooled a minute,unless you have not seen a serial killer movie since \"Peeping Tom\".Two male cops (or one and a half,more like,as you will see),horrible murders,a plot more complicated than complex.Charles Berling is not lucky with the genre(see the astoundlingly dumb \"l'inconnu de Strasbourg\" a couple of years ago).The scenes with his pregnant wife -which are supposed to be a counterpart for the otherwise noir atmosphere of the rest of the plot-are among the worst ever filmed.Add a steamy love scene between them and a gory autopsy to get a PG 12 and thus to attract the huge adolescent audience.A violent and absurd conclusion,followed by a silent epilogue who could make a nice commercial for the côte d'azur,it's really the silence of the lame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e88b0cbc69f4306a2ea6234960f6696",
            "input": "This movie will always be a Broadway and Movie classic, as long as there are still people who sing, dance, and act.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-951aa6548bab4698a6202ad9fc5d3bf2",
            "input": "this is a piece of s--t!! this looks worse than a made for t.v. movie. and i shutter to think that a sequel was even concieved and the results... war is prettier than this. jean claude van shame has done it again and he wonders why his career is where it is now. no script, no story and no time should be wasted on this. i mean that. 1 out of 10 is too high, way too high. goldberg should be jackhammered for this. van shame is no actor.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67d04d4c69854bbc96271d2df0fccc3d",
            "input": "Once again Jet Li brings his charismatic presence to the movie screen in the film Black Mask. In this film Li plays Tsui, an escapee from a super soldier program who seeks to regain the humanity that the program had taken away from him. To do this Tsui decides to become a librarian in order to live a normal and peaceful life, but fate demands that he clean up problems from his past before he can continue to seek peace. Other members of the super soldier program had escaped at the same time as Tsui, but they want to get even with the world rather than find inner peace. Thus Tsui becomes the only thing that can prevent his former team mates from releasing information that could cost many innocent people their lives. This film screams across the screen at a frantic pace and never lets its audience go. The martial arts is amazing, but because it uses wires it may not be appreciated as much as it deserves by American audiences. If you like action movies that have an interesting story and demand good acting performances because they deal with psychological as well as physical conflicts, then Black Mask is for you. I am glad to see that some of Jet Li's movies are finally getting main stream release in the United States and look forward to seeing how the changes that that release will require (things like dubbing and soundtrack) will affect the film. This is one of Li's best films, go out and see it on May 14 when it is released in America.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7183a476627b42bc9471e30879df7845",
            "input": "This movie has received a lot of bad press from people who don't understand what it was meant to be. One must understand that this movie was never meant to be taken seriously. It's camp, along the same lines as \"Army of Darkness.\" AoD was silly, but funny and bad in a good way. \"House of the Dead\" fails to be \"good bad.\".There are qualities inherent in good campy movies, most important of those being believable fantasy. One needs to believe what's happening in a movie to see the humor when a situation goes incredibly wrong. Without boundaries, the movie becomes absurd. HotD lacks any believability.Worse still, HotD brings nothing new to the genre, and repeats the same plot twists and character reactions that many horror movies inevitably start to exhibit. For example, all too often, horror movies fall into the trap where the main characters find love amongst the gore and destruction. I don't know about you, but when I'm being chased by zombies, I wanna make out with a hot chick. Believe it? No? Then, you probably won't believe it when the characters start sucking each other's faces in this movie.Beyond the obvious issues that plague this movie like so many other horror movies, Uwe Boll elected to add scenes from the video game of zombies being shot, randomly whenever a character shoots a zombie in the movie. Not only is there no clear rationale for this artistic choice, but it distracts one from an already unbelievable plot. Further, there are frequent and numerous examples of bad acting, and seemingly no attempts by the director to guide the actors' reactions to events... leaving the movie with no redeeming qualities. Avoid...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-80f25f7664dd4e8285868c67df38e008",
            "input": "The Lives of the Saints starts off with an atmospheric vision of London as a bustling city of busy, quaint streets and sunshine. I was hoping it would maintain this atmosphere, but it gets bogged down in a story that goes pretty much nowhere.Othello works for big, fat Mr. Karva, his crime-boss step-dad (at least I think that is what he is supposed to be because it's never really defined, but he does drop kittens into deep fat friers, so trust me, he's a prick) doing scrappy little errands while his skanky girlfriend gives daddy hand-jobs. One of his colleagues is Runner, a black dude who is always dashing from A to B. Until the day he comes across almost mute homeless child who grants him his wish of being able to stop running. Runner dumps the lost boy in Othello's flat, where he promptly starts granting more wishes. Keen to have some of his own desires fulfilled, Karva has the boy kidnapped. But he isn't sure of what would really bring him happiness. Is it the innocence of being a child again or is it another hand-job? Either way, I don't want to see the little boy grant him the second.It just takes ages to get going and there are loads of repetitive scenes. The ending tries to be shocking but since there's hardly any back-story on investment in any of these characters it only serves as a release for the bored audience.Writer Tony Grisoni, a favourite of Terry Gilliam, tries to blend in some kind of religious allegory which ends up being pretentious as all hell, ironically. If he gave us something more accessible or at least had better explanations for the characters suddenly acting all weird then it would have been a more enjoyable film. As it is, we are introduced to a bunch of annoying loudmouths who then miraculously seem to develop intelligence when confronted by the mysterious boy. Who's origins are never revealed. That's just plain irritating! Aside from sporadic moments of atmosphere and a moody score, this film has little to recommend.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e129c708996845e1a6c8f057d1e98160",
            "input": "(Rating: 21 by The Film Snob.) (See our blog What-To-See-Next for details on our rating system.)Here's a movie that will have you clawing at your own face in an attempt to earn release from the on-screen tedium. You'll not be wringing your hands, nor rolling your eyes, nor sighing into your popcorn. No indeed. For a movie of *this* averagousity, only clawing at your own face will do. When you begin to claw your own face -- as begin you must! -- start in at the lower portion. You'll need your upper portion, with its handy tear ducts, intact for the Truly Tear-jerking third act which may bring you to your knees if you haven't clawed your way clear of the entire theatre by then. In a season celebrating Joe Six-Pack and Hockey Moms as the new Gold Standard for leadership and foreign diplomacy, permaybe a movie this tedium will be welcomed as A Thing that anyone could create. *Watching* it, however, is a much more dangerous undertaking. Here's our story... Sidney Young, the London publisher of a fourth-tier celebrity/entertainment magazine is just about to see his magazine go under. He needs a miracle, and what he gets is a phone call from New York City, in the USA.The publisher of Sharp's magazine, Clayton Harding (played by Jeff Bridges) says \"Come work for me!\" With his own employees carrying out the fax machine out of his apartment/office in the background, saying \"Yes\" is a no-brainer.Soon Sidney is at work in New York City, doing allllllll the wrong things. His interviews consist of asking Broadway musical directors if they are (1) Jewish, and (2) gay. He kills the pet dog of Sohpie Maes, the industry's hottest movie star, when she leaves it in the magazine's offices during a business luncheon.This is a spot of bad luck for everyone, for, among other things, Sidney imagines that he is in love with Maes, before he wakes up to the Dunst character.Worst of all, he totally alienates Alison Olsen (played by winsome scripting-confusion by Kristen Dunst), a colleague assigned to show him the ropes of the magazine *and* The Big Apple. (We have, of course, been to a movie before, and so we know how this relationship is going to end up. This is therefore why we'll need intact tear ducts for the movie's third act.)The problem with The Thing is, the script just never jells, excepting for the one tear-duct set piece in which True Love prevails.Publisher Harding is supposed to be a son-of-a-bitch who also wants to just throw the whole job over. The script never comes down firmly on one or the other sides of this dichotomy, however, and Bridges is left to twist and waffle in the breeze.Alison Olsen is supposed to despise Sidney Young, but whenever he comes up to her (as he does constantly) she makes a point of engaging him in conversation, instead of attempting to discourage his existence.The \"comedy\" of early scenes is built around a piglet destroying an expensive hotel room, and then taking the elevator downstairs to urinate on the expensive high heels of a celebrity at a cocktail reception.The hot starlet Maes confesses that she is attracted to Young because he is \"wounded.\" The character never shows us *why* he is wounded, however. This is yet another resultant of the movie's mortally wounded script.At one hours and fifty minutes, This Thing feels longer (and more deadly) than Napoleon's retreat from Moscow. It is uninspiring, unfunny, unredeemable, and not even rentable. Run Away",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62aa906747d04381892e2254263153ee",
            "input": "I found this film embarrassing to watch. I felt like it was shoving the storyline down my throat as if I couldn't pick up the subtleties I needed a voice over to spell them all out for me constantly.Having a father who IS still an alcoholic, I didn't really feel it was a film about alcoholism as such. Alcoholics, true alcoholics are very lonely people inside, in my opinion of course. They find it hard to communicate, something that the main character had no problem with really, except he DID have a problem saying I love you at one point- which was a bit of a feeble effort at establishing his cold character. He was constantly surrounded with people too!? I felt cheated that at no point were we really alone with the character to really get a sense of his inner loneliness and turmoil. I couldn't connect with the character and felt no link at all considering my father. I felt nothing at all when it had finished, just relief it was over.Kevin McKidd is an okay actor but not a tough guy feature lead! The clockwork orange thing was as subtle as a brick. McKidd was too old for the teen, they should have got three different characters or avoided the teen stage and concentrated more on the adult McKidd.On a good note, I felt the little boy actor was really good at the start of the film!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17357a44dafd457cb0c3b34d70ee7f45",
            "input": "Disney goes to the well one too many times as anybody who has seen the original LITTLE MERMAID will feel blatantly ripped off. Celebrating the birth of their daughter Melody, Ariel and Eric plan on introducing her to King Triton. The celebration is quickly crashed by Ursula 's sister, Morgana who plans to use Melody as a defense tool to get the King 's trident. Stopping the attack, Ariel and Eric build a wall around the ocean while Melody grows up wondering why she cannot go in there.Awful and terrible is what describes this direct to video sequel. LITTLE MERMAID 2 gives you that feeling everything you watch seemed to have come straight other Disney movies. I guess Disney can only plagiarize itself! Do not tell me that the penguin and walrus does not remind you of another duo from the LION KING!Other disappointing moments include the rematch between Sebastien and Louie, the royal chef. They terribly under played it! The climax between Morgana and EVERYONE seemed to be another disappointment.I will not give anything away, but in 75 minutes, everything seemed incredibly cramped and too much to handle. An embarrassment to Disney, LITTLE MERMAID 2 is better left to rent and laugh at. Then you can prepare for the rest of the other sequels Disney is going to drown you in later on.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-842e4e9fe01c47bab5e0ccf5ecf66b4c",
            "input": "If this documentary had not been made by the famous French director, Louis Malle, I probably would have turned it off after the first 15 minutes, as it was an incredibly dull look at a very ordinary Midwestern American town in 1979. This is not exactly my idea of a fun topic and the film footage closely resembled a collection of home movies. Considering I didn't know any of these people, it was even less interesting.Because it was a rather dull slice of life style documentary, I wondered while watching what was the message they were trying to convey? Perhaps it was that values aren't as conservative as you might think--this was an underlying message through many of the vignettes (such as the Republicans whose son was a draft resister as well as the man and lady who thought sex outside of marriage was just fine). Or, perhaps the meaning was that there was a lot of bigotry underlying the nice home town--as several ugly ideas such as blaming Jews for financial conspiracies, anti-Black bigotry and homophobia all were briefly explored.The small town of 1979 was explored in great depth and an idyllic sort of world was portrayed, but when the film makers returned six years later, the mood was depressed thanks to President Reagan. This seemed very disingenuous for several reasons. First, the 1979 portion was almost 90% of the film and the final 10% only consisted of a few interviews of people that blamed the president for just about everything but acne. What about the rest of the folks of this town? Did they all see Reagan as evil or that their lives had become more negative? With only a few updates, it seemed suspicious. Second, while it is true that the national debt doubled in the intervening years, so did the gross national product. And, while Malle shows 1979 as a very optimistic period, it was far from that, as the period from 1974-1980 featured many shortages (gas, sugar, etc.), strikes, high inflation and general malaise. While I am not a huge fan of Reagan because government growth did NOT slow during his administration, the country, in general, was far more optimistic than it had been in the Ford and Carter years. While many in the media demonized Reagan (a popular sport in the 80s), the economy improved significantly and the documentary seems very one-sided and agenda driven. Had the documentary given a more thorough coverage of 1985 and hadn't seemed too negative to be believed (after all, everyone didn't have their lives get worse--this defies common sense), then I might have thought otherwise.Overall, not the wonderful documentary some have proclaimed it to be--ranging from a dull film in 1979 to an extremely slanted look at 1985.By the way, is it just me, or does the film DROP DEAD GORGEOUS seem to have been inspired, at least in part, by this film? Both are set in similar communities, but the latter film was a hilarious mockumentary without all the serious undertones.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-761e0b227d054562ab26651e728020fe",
            "input": "I'm not sure how I missed this one when it first came out, but I am glad to have finally seen it.This movie takes place in and around the 19th century red light district of Okabasho, Japan. It tells the tale of prostitution, caste systems and women who are strong in a society based upon the strength of the samurai code of Japan.It is uniquely Akira Kurosawa! Even though he died before he could direct this movie, his adaptation of the screenplay shows. His view of the Japanese world and caste system is renowned and sheds light upon how these systems interact with each other. The characters may revolve around each other, but the caste system stays intact when each character goes back to the world they belong in. The samurai warrior who drifts into the good hearted and loving prostitute's world goes back to his life, while she embarks on a another road with a man who is part of her caste system..lowest of the low. Many prize the world of the samurai above all others, but yet, it is the lower caste inhabitants who can support each other and who can love without restraint. The samurai in this movie turns out to be the weak one, while the classless lovers prove to be the honorable ones. The movie deserves a higher rating. It is a tale of survival of women in feudal Japan. During this time frame, men were thought to be the survivors..the strong ones while women were thought to be just mindless and weak property. This movie highlights the strength of Japanese women and how they did what they had to for survival, and how their strength enabled the Japanese culture to continue on as it has.I recommend \"The Sea is Watching\" to anyone who is a fan of Akira Kurosawa and even if they're not a fan. It is a lovely, quiet and soul sustaining movie, and one to be treasured for any movie collection.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e3a3b110b004c0d9f388e9dba467219",
            "input": "My first exposure to the Templarios & not a good one. I was excited to find this title among the offerings from Anchor Bay Video, which has brought us other cult classics such as \"Spider Baby\". The print quality is excellent, but this alone can't hide the fact that the film is deadly dull. There's a thrilling opening sequence in which the villagers exact a terrible revenge on the Templars (& set the whole thing in motion), but everything else in the movie is slow, ponderous &, ultimately, unfulfilling. Adding insult to injury: the movie was dubbed, not subtitled, as promised on the video jacket.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d97597da47034a7f8ef7e5a465bbe59b",
            "input": "Not only is this film entertaining, with excellent comedic acting, but also interesting politically. It was made at the end of the Soviet Union, but makes fun of the soviet mentality through and through. The story is set during the early days of the soviet union, and it questions the rationale behind the revolution both in cultural and practical terms. Of course, by the late 80s and early 90s, the bizarre strictures of soviet society are already relaxed, but the ideology and mentality is still alive and well and ready for some well-deserved deconstruction. Happily, all this deep philosophical commentary is wrapped in a funny and entertaining package!Jur",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6590e6db7744ba293f3c8331cc0a63d",
            "input": "Men In Black 2 was a real disappointment for me. While the actors did a pretty good job, especially Smith, there just isn't a cure for a poor script once in production. The movie really had a \"sequel\" kind of feel, playing off partial events of the first film. The story was, in a word... bad, at best. It wasn't thought out well, and seemed very choppy and incoherent at times.In the first flick, the MIB Organization had a kind of \"elite\" force feel. You had a few special agents, and it had a \"clandestine\" kind of feel to it. In the sequel, the MIB Organization has a JROTC Summer Camp vibe.The movie wasn't terrible or anything.. it just lacked the \"coolness\" (for lack of a better phrase) of the first movie. A lot of the same old humor was recycled from the first to the second, and didn't really add any originality to the MIB Universe.A perfect analogy would be Episode 1 to the first 3 films. Was it decent? Yeah. Is it worthy of bearing it's title? Not really.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c585ca624e9b464db07877fa00fdad06",
            "input": "I just saw this recently, after an interval of nearly forty years. It holds up well, especially Lionel Bart's outstanding songs. (\"Who Will Buy\" with it's magical counterpoint, just one of many standouts.)I disagree with the other post that decried its G rating. The ratings system, brand new at the time, never intended the G (General) rating to mean \"completely devoid of conflict\".Characterizing it as unsuitable for kids reminds me of the description I once saw of The Wizard of Oz: A girl arrives in a strange land and kills the first person she encounters. She then goes on a road trip with three male companions and kills again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa9a39b2e75c4c6cba8133fd5c348433",
            "input": "SWEET SIXTEEN (1983) **/***** 86 minutes Director Jim Sotos Cast Bo Hopkins, Susan Strasberg, Aleisa Shirley, Patrick Macnee, Dana KimmellFifteen year old bad girl Melissa is new in a desert town and it isn't long before folks around her start dying off. The detective has to put together the clues with the help of his Nancy Drew good girl daughter played by Friday the 13th alumni Dana Kimmell. The local Native Americans are prime suspects since they seem to upset the prejudiced townsfolk. These events all lead up to the revealing of the killer at Melissa's sixteenth birthday party.This below average slasher isn't too memorable. It has a made for TV feel, without much score besides the title character's own corny theme song which plays a couple times throughout. Lines like \"the killer will turn us into coleslaw.\" Fit into standard eighties slasher screenplays. Marci calls Melissa a bad name then somehow immediately they develop a friendship. Apparently Marci sees how hard it is to fit in because Melissa knows how to wear make-up. This movie would be hard-pressed to be made today with the main character being fifteen and the director inserting multiple gratuitous close-ups of her. The social commentary on Indians wasn't developed enough to be taken seriously. I am too surprised at the fairly high rating this movie gets. Both Sweet Sixteen and Ed Hunt's Bloody Birthday had the potential to capitalize on that time honored tradition of the birthday party to create an intense sequence of carnage but I feel failed to deliver. But on the bright side releasing obscure movies like this on DVD gives hope that others will follow.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c528255afee49a99a2e1f74e2c3581d",
            "input": "This was an absolutely spellbinding series and was sorry that I was only able to catch a few shows way back when it aired late night in the UK. The style of it was so different from others of its kind and the whole thing had an unnerving air of stylish dread to it. All you have to do is read all the positive comments (not a single negative that I can see) to realise what a really innovative series this was and how it caught at the imagination. I now understand from reading the comments it got CANCELLED that's just so unbelievable. What a bunch of 'headless overpaid suited turkeys' there must have been (or just maybe still are) running around to do that.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-724ed26b987846edb5d46e08acd541a1",
            "input": "At last! A decent British comedy that isn't centred around some mockney bank robbers or spun off from a TV series. John Ivay's film is a psychoactive tale of discovery, dressed in biker gear. The three protagonists are gentle fools with a penchant for failure and each at a turning point in their lives, giving a sensitive, emotional trio of sub-plots to sew the riotous comedy together. The chemistry between the three amigos is palpable and makes for a touching companionship with hilarious dialogue and some classic comedic moments. It feels part Withnail and I, part American Werewolf in London, and part Quadraphenia (but only because of the bike gangs, and Phil Daniels). In fact, Phil Daniels' lovable rogue reminds you of Danny the dealer in Withnail and I, with his scholarly approach and scientific commitment to drugs. This is a great film, particularly for those who've dabbled in psychoactive substances in the past, who will relate to many moments in the film. A personal favourite is the brilliant scene in the Welsh corner shop, buying munchies while tripping on 'shrooms. This gentle comedy will warm the cockles of your heart and have you laughing out loud. And you don't have to ride bikes or even like them to enjoy it. But it'll add to it if you do. Brilliant.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-007ab7b95c504d9f83854d999ee2c77c",
            "input": "This move is slow, plodding, cold, dark, and without a plot or hope. It follows that tried and true European formula that they love to subsidize, that is never seen, but that the critics think makes an \"important point\".The movie is valuable if nothing more than to show the huge difference in the thinking between Americans and Europeans regarding employment. In this movie the men are still nursing their wounds from years ago and feel it's the government's duty to provide them with work. Whereas in the U.S. we know we have to go out there and create value for someone.Spain never looked so backward!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-37411e388416414cbbec6a4613afee5a",
            "input": "Besides the fact that it was one of the few movies that I ever shed a tear over (bye-bye manhood), this is one of the most beautifully crafted Indian films that has ever been made. From the finely crafted sets, to those haunting looks Meena Kumari gives, no one can ever forget it. The music of Pakeezah is amazing, all the more if you can understand the sublime poetry, and is definitely one of those \"OMG, 5 minutes another song\" movies. You get the feeling of how trapped Sahibjaan is in among all the amazing jewelery she wears and fountained court yard she casually walks past.A parody of all the dreams you've ever had..........",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7dc3184f84fb423c9dcd7a75cb0d3ea5",
            "input": "I've never been a fan of Farrah Fawcett...Until now. She was truly amazing in this movie. The emotion she must have gone through shooting re-take after re-take doesn't bare thinking about. This was a very hard movie to watch, the subject matter is decidedly unpleasant and you feel so helpless just sitting and watching a woman being abused for what seems like an eternity. I actually felt that the whole thing deflated somewhat when her friends returned to the house and I didn't find the conclusion at all plausible. The director seemed very keen in using height in his shots and loved using mirror reflections, I believe he should have paid more attention to the pace in the second half of this piece. I'm sure this makes a heck of a powerful piece of theatre, this movie for me, although it had merit, just fell short.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8761a3fe45ff430b973bfe8aaa55174f",
            "input": "The Dentist was made on the time when almost every profession had it's psycho. We had mad police officers, ambulance men, secretery's and that was just for starters. The Dentist came suprisingly late because going to dentist is usually everyman's nightmare.The plot is twisted. Super clean dentist Doctor Feinstone lives perfect life in his great \"white house\", he has beautiful blond wife and great place to work as a dentist. Dark clouds are coming to his horizon in the form of nasty IRS guy (Terminator's Earl Boen), dirty pool cleaner \"cleaning\" his wife and suddenly everyone's teeth seems to have gone through dark filter. He goes nutso and starts to take care of people teeth in the nasty way. And you don't want to come to his path.Crew were professional. Producer/director Brian Yuzna had produced stylish horror movies like Re-Animator and From Beyond. He directed the sequel to Re-Animator and his first movie Society was nice spinoff from John Carpenter's They Live. Film's producer Pierre David is known from movies like Scanners. Cast was great. Corbin Bernsen really suprised me. I knew him from LA Law and Major League, but I could newer dream him as a psycho dentist. He was actually great in his role and he was kind of sad person. Linda Hoffman was beutiful and dumb as Feinstones wife. Micahel Stadvec did not have much line's, but after I saw him with ladies of the neighbourhood I knew my future profession. Ken Foree (Dawn of the Dead, From Beyond) was nice sight as cop on the case. Virginya Keehne was the innocent teen who is about to be next client to Feinstone.Final warning: If you're like me and have problem with dentist's then maybe you should skip this one. But if you want to try than you should prepare yourself with dark humor and lots nasty drillings.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e23707c7f7446efa3040dd583dbffee",
            "input": "Robert Altman is my favorite American director. I must admit that I have enjoyed the films that are usually scorned: \"Quintet\", if only for giving me the pleasure of seeing a grown-up and beautiful Brigitte Fossey, who was unforgettable as the little girl in \"Forbidden Games\"; \"HealtH\", for having Lauren Bacall, Carol Burnett, Alfre Woodard and Glenda Jackson, all in the same cast; \"Popeye\", for that splendid and surreal world, Shelley Duvall's Olive Oyl and the wonderful Malta locations; \"O.C. & Stiggs\", for its proposal of an anti-\"adolescents flick\"; \"Beyond Therapy\", for all its lunacy and for the presence of Genèvieve Page, who for all her effort to look Parisian chic is taken for a travestite... I have even enjoyed his one-act TV movies, like \"The Dumb Waiter\" and \"The Laundromat\". When there is not much plot to develop in his films, you have wonderful performances, from Burnett, John Travolta, Kim Basinger or Jane Curtin. I perceive and enjoy the different approach and description he makes of the many different cultures of the United States. It is a pity that his genius is seldom appreciated, and that he is always forgotten when the time comes for giving out American prizes and awards. He is not your typical mainstream purveyor of fantasies. He is more of a maverick. So it is not surprising for me to find so many bad comments posted here about \"The Gingerbread Man\", his most 'mainstream' effort to date and to my knowledge. I did not know there were so many people who thought like Leonard Maltin, who does not like Altman at all. In this case, one may dislike \"The Gingerbread Man\", but for me the reason has more to do with Grisham than with the director-screenwriter. Some of Altman's trademarks are here: improvised dialogue, great performances, a funny lawyers' office with typical irreverent receptionist and secretary. While some people find it boring, I found the first act fascinating, thanks also for the great cinematography by Changwei Gu, the man who shot \"Red Sorghum\", \"Ju Dou\" and \"Farewell My Concubine\". He has a way of showing us the same things we see in other American movies, but under a different light. Through his \"foreigner's gaze\", almost everything seems new and different. In this first act, things were so logical and true! Wait until you get older. You may get in trouble if you fall under the spell of someone younger and beautiful as Embeth Davidtz. I know for myself what I have done fascinated by someone who is younger than I am! Then you have Robert Duvall's repellent, menacing and mysterious character, while that Geraldo storm is threatening Savannah. The second act gets a little phony and even funny, because Altman may have conducted it with a grin. I remember laughing aloud in several instances with his ironic remarks. I think he was applying a bit of Brecht, distancing us, preparing us for the third act, which is plain Hollywood pastiche. Altman does it with expertise. Being a wise man, and an intelligent director, luckily he did not fall into the traps of today's action movies. He was directing a tale of lust, greed and death. I was not disappointed a bit with the movie. If I give it a nine instead of 10, it is because of Grisham. The American reader has turned him into a best-selling author. So why complain? Maybe we should thank Altman for showing us the seams in his stories, the dullness, the flatness and the silliness of them all. However, he does it with so much gusto and humor, that I cannot but disagree with the negative comments. For me, these persons saw another movie... And vice versa.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1badb71829f24371900f8d6dcb5a5bb7",
            "input": "I admired Rob Marshall for Chicago, but Memoirs of Geisha turns out to be yet another failure of combing western and Asian arts. Overall, the scene is beautiful, but after restless emphasis on exoticism-oriented scenes some might just find himself fed up with them. The excessive cherry blossom was, frankly, overdone. It's probably the cultural difference of perception here: the ultimate beauty is not the showy type, as truly beautiful geisha would not be the over westernised pumpkin in the movie. Some other comments have rightly mentioned the biggest flaws. As a Taiwanese, I have no doubt the actress are great. An actor/actress can play any kind of role when he/she can look like it. Gong Li is great, but the power of emotions that she showed in this movie had not been translated into Japanese style. All I saw was a bittersweet and jealous Chinese WOMAN. Michlle Yeoh, one of my favourtie actress, did not even LOOK LIKE a Japanese. Some comment has mentioned the peculiar delicate, feminine characteristics of Japanese women, with which I can't agree more. These are so delicate that I assume not even all modern Japanese actresses are eligible for the roles in Geisha, let alone the two Chinese and one Malaysian actress who grew up in different cultures and probably did not know Japanese culture that much.Geisha is a good shot for arousing the curiosity of American audiences. But it would be an insult for the movie itself and for art alike if the movie wins the Oscar for best costume, best director or best picture.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1815acfbfe184612aef11341d281fc88",
            "input": "Just re-saw this movie after thirty seven years. I was eleven years old and caught this flick on South Beach at the long gone Cinema Theater on Washington Avenue. In 1969, I thought Where it's At! was a very good movie. Now, however, after almost forty years, it's not as good as it was. Times have changed, and this movie is now a tired old re-hash of the war between the generations. It did however, catch a place in time which is just a memory. It's really interesting to see the mod fashions, the old Vegas, a slim Don Rickles, chain smoking, and a hip opening song. The acting was decent, the script somewhat out-dated, but the memories were still fresh. Where it's At, may not be where it's at for you, but for me, it was still a nice and entertaining trip down memory lane.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a032fdd1e32a4d5ea59d590613dfe503",
            "input": "From the blocky digitised footage to the acting that makes Keanu \"I'm so wooden I could be a Plank me\" Reeves look like an Oscar winner this film bites (pun not intended). The best thing about it is the box of eRATicate in the 2nd segment (which out of the three seemed to be the strongest piece in terms of storyline and 'twist'). Wish I'd spent the £3.99 it cost me on something else, like erm.... Natural Born Killers: Directors Cut. If you do buy this, you're really in for a disappointment, do yourself a favour and avoid it like the plague. If you're looking for something amateurish and with actors that are more wooden than a 2x4 then go ahead. However if you want some quality werewolf action look elsewhere, like Dog Soldiers, Wolfen, Romasanta:The werewolf Hunt.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e53f8601180f4d60974b4500a1545e12",
            "input": "This film is about a male escort getting involved in a murder investigation that happened in the circle of powerful men's wives.I thought \"The Walker\" would be thrilling and engaging, but I was so wrong. The pacing is painfully and excruciatingly slow, that even after 40 minutes of the film nothing happens much. Seriously, the first hour could be condensed into ten minutes. That's how slow it is.The fact that it lacks any thrills or action scenes aggravates the boredom. It's almost shocking that even argument scenes are so plain and devoid of emotion. Maybe it is because of the stiff upper lip of the higher social class? It's sad that \"The Walker\" becomes such a boring mess, despite such a strong cast. Blame it on the poor plot and even worse pacing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e95ed2a3750d40a2a47da0a4d1fd8ba0",
            "input": "Home Alone 3 is one of my least favourite movies. It's the cream of the crop, or s*** if you tend to be more cynical, as it ranks up (or down) there with stuff like Battlefield Earth and Flinstones: Viva Rock Vegas. In fact, it could even be worse than those two, since those two at least intermittently made me laugh at their stupidity. This just made me cringe in pain constantly and clap when the credits started rolling. No other movie has made me cringe in pain. Now I will point out exactly why this movie is so incredibly atrocious.First off, the plot is ridiculous. It revolves around a chip in a remote control car (?!) that is misplaced and how these terrorists want it. Dumb stuff.The action that ensues is similar to that of the other two Home Alones, with boobytraps and all, but watching these boobytraps being executed is, rather than being funny, incredibly unpleasant to watch. I didn't laugh (or even so much as smile) once, rather, I cringed constantly and hoped that the terrorists would nail the kid. The bird, rather than providing comic relief, was unfunny and annoying.The acting, as done by a bunch of no names, ranges from poor to atrocious. There is not a single good performance here. Alex D.Linz is absolutely unlikeable and unfunny as the kid, while the terrorists act (and judging by their movie credits, look) as they've been hastily picked off the street...and well, that's it.I can see some people saying: \"Man, it's for the kids. Don't dis it, man.\" Well MAN, kids may like this, but they can get a hell of a lot better. See Monsters Inc. and Toy Story before even considering getting this out. Hell, even Scooby Doo and Garfield (which suck - see those reviews for more) are better than this! So in short, this is an irredeemably atrocious movie. This was clearly recycled for the money, as it almost completely rips off the first two; the only thing is, it completely insults the first two as well. No human, kid or otherwise, should find any reason to see Home Alone 3. Ever. It's THAT bad.0/5 stars",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8ad165b345f04be9a787aa052064e7c9",
            "input": "I really enjoyed this film because I have a tremendous interest in American History... the Antebellum years and the Civil War in particular. I purchased it recently from a rack of previously-viewed videos on sale at the supermarket and I was very glad to add this one to my history video collection. Though not of the caliber of Civil War films such as \"Glory\" or \"Gettysburg,\" provides a lot of history on the pre-Civil War brotherhood among cadets at West Point.Maybe it's the gray uniforms, the youth, or the military discipline, but I am fascinated by the story of the Corps of Cadets from around 1830 to the brink of the War. I imagine what it must have been like to sit in a classroom with other young men, learning how to make war, then later putting the lessons to use against your own classmates!Actually, there were two classes graduated in 1861: one class in May, the other in June. the movie makes no real mention of this, except to mention Henry A. DuPont, first graduate of the May Class; and George Custer, last grad of the June Class. the reason for the two classes was not so much about the war, but it was the result of switching back to a four-year course of study, after a few years of experimenting with a five-year course (I think the first class had attended five years, the other for four). As the movie portrays, cadets were like brothers and often had nicknames for each other... George \"Fanny\" or \"Autie\" Custer; Alonzo \"Lon\" Cushing; James \"Beauty\" Stuart (for J.E.B. Stuart, class of 1854), etc.I say this film is \"Santa Fe Trail\" as it should have been because that 1940 film, while enjoyable, really fudges history. Cadets from several different classes are all graduating together. JEB Stuart and George Custer are portrayed as the best of friends and are side-by-side in stopping John Brown's 1859 insurrection at Harper's Ferry. In fact, Stuart and Custer were never friends, but enemies during the War. They faced each other (for the first time, I think) at Gettysburg in 1863 (Stuart was at the Harper's ferry Raid, but Custer was still a cadet at the Point when it took place).\"Fanny\" Custer plays a role in \"Class of '61,\" though his classmate chums, Dev O'Neill and Shelby Peyton are fictional. I believe they are respectively based on Partick Henry O'Rorke and John Pelham, two people you can look up.Anyway, I truly enjoy this film or any film which provides a window into mid-19th Century America.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb4258c51d114244b3046892c9055356",
            "input": "I just saw this Movie on a local TV Station (TV8's \"Big Chuck and Little John\" in Cleveland, Ohio) I had never heard of this movie and decided to watch it.I know of no thesaurus that can even come close to aiding me in describing how bad this movie really is. The script is awful. The acting, well other than one of two exceptions, is pointless since there is nothing in this material that merits any real effort.It looks like a bunch of little ideas, leftover from various writing sessions, that where thrown into a blender. It's not just funny. The \"parody\" aspect is strained at best. Some references where almost out of date (even for the time of it's release). No wonder I had never heard of it, it's really bad, worse than anything Saturday Night Live, MAD TV or even In Living color put out in their worst days.If you see it on TV, it is a great example of how NOT to make a movie. Whatever you do DON'T WASTE A CENT.Adam",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-652380084e4440ef8a3c053af60b09da",
            "input": "I just don't understand why this movie is getting beat-up in here. Jeez. It is mindless, it isn't polished and it is (as I am reading) wasted on some. The cast of this movie plays their characters to the 'T' (If you watched Permanent Midnight and became a Ben Stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). These are misunderstood, well-intentioned misfits trying to save the city/world with nothing but grit and determination. The problem is they don't realize their limits until the big showdown and that's the point! This is 3 times the movie that The Spy Who Shagged Me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group, likely the same people who feel the first AP movie pales in comparison to the sequel. I just don't get it. The jokes work on more then one level; if you didn't get it I know what level you're at.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c84442670aa24e1ba12c869f378e9df1",
            "input": "Would that more romantic comedies were as deftly executed as this one? I never thought anything as mundane as the simple sale of a music box could leave me catching my breath with excitement. Margaret Sullavan makes a marvellous saleswoman, and she and James Stewart always brought out the best in each other. This movie sports what I think is Frank Morgan's most winning performance, and with \"The Wizard of Oz\" and \"Tortilla Flat\" under his belt, that is saying a lot. The way he finds a Christmas dinner partner left me giddy with joy. Director Ernst Lubitsch might have thought \"Trouble In Paradise\" his favorite, but this one he must surely consider a triumph. With some of the wittiest dialogue American movies of the 30's has to offer.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b360d0e8080c44f889401c595acb7e1f",
            "input": "This movie will tell you why Amitabh Bacchan is a one man industry. This movie will also tell you why Indian movie-goers are astute buyers.Amitabh was at the peak of his domination of Bollywood when his one-time godfather Prakash Mehra decided to use his image yet again. Prakash has the habit of picking themes and building stories out of it, adding liberal doses of Bollywood sensibilities and clichés to it. Zanzeer saw the making of Angry Young Man. Lawaris was about being a bastard and Namak Halal was about the master-servant loyalties. But then, the theme was limited to move the screenplay through the regulation three hours of song, dance and drama. What comprised of the movie is a caricature of a Haryanavi who goes to Mumbai and turns into a regulation hero. Amitabh's vocal skills and diction saw this movie earn its big bucks, thanks to his flawless stock Haryanvi accent. To me, this alone is the biggest pull in the movie. The rest all is typical Bollywood screen writing.Amitabh, by now, had to have some typical comedy scenes in each of his movies. Thanks to Manmohan Desai. This movie had a good dose of them. The shoe caper in the party, the monologue over Vijay Merchant and Vijay Hazare's considerations, The mosquito challenge in the boardroom and the usual drunkard scene that by now has become a standard Amitabh fare.Shashi Kapoor added an extra mile to the movie with his moody, finicky character (Remember him asking Ranjeet to \"Shaaadaaaap\" after the poisoned cake incident\"). His was the all important role of the master while Amitabh was his loyal servant. But Prakash Mehra knew the Indian mind...and so Shashi had to carry along his act with the rest of the movie. It was one character that could have been more developed to make a serious movie. But this is a caper, remember? And as long as it stayed that way, the people came and saw Amitabh wearing a new hat and went back home happy. The end is always predictable, and the good guys get the gal and the bad ones go to the gaol, the age-old theme of loyalty is once again emphasized and all is well that ends well.So what is it that makes this movie a near classic? Amitabh Bacchan as the Haryanvi. Prakash Mehra created yet another icon in the name of a story. Chuck the story, the characters and the plot. My marks are for Amitabh alone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0ac3e45eb08a4265bb4378dc1beaa179",
            "input": "This movie is not only poorly scripted and directed but is simply distasteful. A beautiful novel is terribly misrepresented in this film. Many changes have been made to the storyline, presumably to streamline the timeframe. But what results is simply confusing. The acting can't possibly overcome the script which removes the characters' motives for their behavior. Plus, the conversion to English does not work when everyone refers to the patriarch EsTEban as ESteban. Horrible. Please please please read the gorgeous novel, in Spanish if possible. DON'T SEE THIS FILM. It will ruin for you what could be a wonderful experience.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2da9322d129f459088bf0620810e8a70",
            "input": "What can I say, this is a piece of brilliant film-making that should have won an Oscar. A copy should be kept safe in a secure vault for posterity. It should be required viewing for all high school students across the world. Sam Mraovich is a genius, perhaps the most genius writer/director/producer/chef/babysitter/walmart greeter to ever grace the cinema world with his art.Where do I begin with this one? Every millisecond of Ben and Arthur was so completely breathtaking! And Mraovich as Arthur, wow, he is so attractive I'm surprised he didn't go for Mr. Universe. I couldn't contain myself during the nude scene. I loaned this movie to my brother and he called me on the phone saying how Arthur's nude scene turned him gay. I am totally supportive of course, because of this film and it's beautifully crafted lessons in tolerance. Why just yesterday I burned down a church and I wrote \"for Sam and Arthur\" in its smoldering ashes.The cinematography was the best thing about this film. When that Fed-Ex plane took to the skies amid the palm trees of Vermont, I wept! Why, I never even knew they had palm trees in Vermont or that people could travel on Fed-Ex planes before this film. It opened my eyes to a new realm of possibilities. This film inspired me to enroll in Sam Mraovich's school of Screen writing, Acting, Directing, Composing, Casting, Producing, Production Design and Real Estate. I just want to say, \"Thank you, Mr. Mraovich. Thank you for bringing this creation into the world. We can never re-pay you enough.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-43cbd0da4bea4a6ca2e98422b411bdb7",
            "input": "*****probably minor spoilers******I cant say i liked it, but i cant say i didn't...its very strange. It has bad things in it like for example a shark that came out of nowhere with the worst CGI you can imagine,if i was the director i would cut that part for sure, gave me the urge to stop seeing the rest of the movie... For some people it will be boring cause it lacks action, feels home made sometimes... Take for example a scene that one of the friends died and next thing they are doing is what? nop,not crying...their telling horror stories to each other..*sighs*(just after crying for hes lost)Another stupid thing was when they were talking inside the boat they had like \"hundreds\" of candles in the table in front of them...the boat is surrounded by some kind of rag curtains(old rags covering the windows) and sofas/Couches ...i thought it was dumb, using candles but not thinking about the surroundings, besides being in high sea alone...The good, some scary scenes they are nicely done i liked some. Sometimes horror works better when its hidden when its behind something instead of showing of, so this movie does it good, maybe because its a low budget i don't know, but it works fine for me! You will feel tension if you forget some holes like the ones i mentioned above.Do not expect much of it! but if you like anykind of movie watch this one, be patient, try to enjoy.. lol(sorry about my raw English) =)Cheers",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30f88bd4420447cab240f05333d24a12",
            "input": "Not that I want to be mean but this movie really surprised me a lot. During the whole film, I was like...erm...what is this movie all about? I don't get the animations at all. Probably this movie will only be suitable for those who belongs to the 1980s. During the film, there is a group of people walked out. After the movie, many people said, \"That's it?\" Frankly speaking, I cannot believe that this movie was awarded the best children film award. If you are thinking of watching this film, I strongly recommend you not to. You will regret it. I'm not joking. You will find that you are just wasting both your time and money of you go and watch it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc29274865004576be4835d9518a86e7",
            "input": "One of my favorite movies which has been overlooked by too many movie goers, an observation which mystifies me. Not only directed by the acclaimed Ang Lee,it had many young actors who were to become major stars, e.g., Tobey Maguire (before Spiderman), Skeet Ulrich (before Jericho), Jonathan Rhys Meyers (before Tudors), James Caviezel, Simon Baker, Mark Ruffalo, Jeffrey Wright, Tom Wilkinson, and Jewel. All of the acting was superb and each of the actors mentioned gave memorable performances, especially Meyers who portrayed an evil villain who killed for the sake of killing.When the biographies and accomplishments of the director ( even when he won an academy award) and the actors are listed, this film is usually omitted from their past performances. I discovered the film on DVD by accident and it became one of my most often watched films. However, it is seldom every seen on cable. I look forward to reading what others suggest are the reasons this film is not well known.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4de8a98f02340628b7c784e80fa50ee",
            "input": "After reading the previous comments, I'm just glad that I wasn't the only person left confused, especially by the last 20 minutes. John Carradine is shown twice walking down into a grave and pulling the lid shut after him. I anxiously awaited some kind of explanation for this odd behavior...naturally I assumed he had something to do with the evil goings-on at the house, but since he got killed off by the first rising corpse (hereafter referred to as Zombie #1), these scenes made absolutely no sense. Please, if someone out there knows why Carradine kept climbing down into graves -- let the rest of us in on it!! All the action is confined to the last 20 minutes so I'll attempt a synopsis. John Carradine comes out to the cemetery to investigate, and is throttled by Zombie #1. So far, so good. But then we get the confusing scene where John Ireland and Jerry Strickler, out for a little moonlight filming in the graveyard, discover Carradine's dead body. Strickler repeatedly tries to push Ireland into the open grave from whence Zombie #1 had emerged, but Ireland succeeds in flipping him into the open grave instead, and PRESTO! Strickler comes out as Zombie #2! Yeah, I guess we can infer that Strickler was dead all-along (a witch?), but why he changed from normal appearance into rotting-flesh version by flying into Zombie #1's grave is never explained. (Considering how excruciatingly slow-moving these zombies are, I'd of thought he would have preferred to stay in his \"normal\" form until his business was concluded). This scene also brings a question to mind -- just who the heck IS Zombie #1 ??? We can only assume Zombie #1 is one of the original murder victims shown during the movie's opening credits, but who knows which one, nor why he has a particular grudge against the film crew.Anyway, after Ireland sees this transformation and runs away, we see the EXACT SAME SHOT of Zombie #2 shambling through the trees as we saw for Zombie #1. (This leads to momentary confusion over just how MANY zombies there really are). Then in best 1950's horror-movie fashion Ireland manages to trip while fleeing. He conveniently knocks his head on the small headstone of Faith Domergue's dead cat (wasn't that nice of John Carradine to chisel a tombstone for a cat that he barely knew?)Meanwhile, Zombie #1 has been wrecking havoc up at the house. He easily dispatches three film-crew members, then starts up the stairs. Faith Domergue hears him, and thinking it's lover John Ireland back from his night-shoot, goes out. Upon seeing it's only Zombie #1, she lets out a scream and retreats into a bedroom where she retrieves Ireland's revolver. While starlet Carole Wells is showering at this point and can't hear the scream, her co-star Charles Macauley (who's boozing and hamming it up at a mirror in his bedroom) does. Taking his sweet time (and only after some more swigs from his hip-flask) he finally decides to investigate. (One thing that strikes the viewer during the last quarter of this movie is how SLOW TO REACT the stars are to screams and gunshots). Domergue comes back out into the hallway armed and ready, but mistakes Macauley for Zombie #1 and shoots him six times! He does a nice acrobatic flip over the railing, then a horrified Domergue backs up, right into the waiting arms of Zombie #1.Carole Wells is by now out of her shower and drying off when she hears gunshots and Domergue's screams; she too feels no great urgency in running out to investigate. So during this time Zombie #1 has time to string Domergue up from the neck with a rope. Wells sees Domergue's hanging corpse and faints dead-away. The next time we see her is in a stream outside the house (???) -- but more on that later. Meantime, Ireland has recovered his senses and stumbles into the house where he discovers Zombie #1's bloody carnage. Though Ireland has just stumbled upon 3 murdered people he's more concerned that his film has been exposed and ruined! Mercifully for him (and the audience), Zombie #1 throws some movie equipment down on his head from the 2nd floor. That's the last we see of Zombie #1. At this point the audience is treated to a montage of all the deaths, showing that the new ones \"mirror\" the old ones. How profound.Zombie #2, meanwhile, has gotten near the house (remember, these zombies move as slow as molasses in January) where he happens to see Carole Wells floating by in a stream, and fishes her out. How did she get there? Did Zombie #1 carry her down, throw her in, then zoom back upstairs just in time to crush John Ireland? Apparently one of the original victims was drowned in the tub, so Wells has to drown too (but why outside in a stream, instead of in the tub, is never explained). Zombie #2 never makes it into the house himself (everyone's dead by now, anyways, thanks to Zombie #1) but instead he carries Carol Wells back to the graveyard. As the end credits flash on screen, we see Zombie #2 with his dead love still in his arms, descending into the open grave.The viewer is left wondering: Yes, but wasn't this Zombie #1's grave? Why is Zombie #2 taking up residence? And what if Zombie #1 comes along and wants to climb back in -- is Zombie #2 gonna let him, or will there be a zombie fight? Will the zombies share both the grave and the newly deceased Carole Wells? And what about now-dead John Carradine -- where's he gonna stay? After all, from the earlier scenes we know he's clearly at home in the grave... If this plot synopsis of the finale has left you confused, don't worry cause you're not alone.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e12c89f8c0b541d8b3df1087b9f41db6",
            "input": "I fell in love with Emily Watson in Breaking the Waves, then grew even more fascinated by her range and adeptness in Hilary and Jackie. Now comes this stunning portrayal of a rich girl who spurns breeding and convention in favor of mothering the tortured soul of the child of a man clearly in need of mothering. Her eyes are the mirror to his soul --and what gentle and beautiful eyes they are.Those who take things literally will find Marleen Gorris' poetic and allegorical direction quite frustrating. Romantics who are willing to go with the amazing kinetic energy is this filmed allegorical poem will be well rewarded.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe33e7653e0c4a96a7d07db182e53271",
            "input": "I've read a lot of comments about the film and how it's so hard for people to believe that it is a sequel to Henry Fool, and even though it technically is, I think that Fay Grim needs to be looked at as an entirely different film. Just because it is the sequel doesn't mean that it has to be a direct continuation of the first, and I enjoyed that so much about it. The whole point of the film was to change direction from the first, which makes sense because the movie isn't called Henry Fool 2, it's Fay Grim. All that aside, the film, I thought, was so well made and thought out that it actually surprised me. I was expecting to rent another nearly-released-straight-to-video film and have to endure 2 hours of bad editing and an almost hard to follow story-line (aka parker's last direct to video feature the Oh in Ohio) but this was so surprisingly well focused that it almost doesn't seem so, which I absolutely loved. There are so many nuances in the film making and writing that I crave to see in films, but never do. The cinematography was brilliant due to it's simplicity and truly making the film seem 'Grim' throughout - in terms of setting. The writing was so well put together as well, whoever said this movie isn't as witty as Henry Fool needs to watch again and actually listen; I almost can't even begin to explain how actually hilarious it was, and pertinent. And well, Parker Posey, who could complain? The scene in which Fool and Jalal were talking in the dark was so captivating and emotional. And I thought the spy-ness throughout the film was just so hilarious and spot on (in hindsight because i do agree that at times during you kind of felt lost). The main thing that struck me so powerfully about the film, and i believe the point of the film, was Parker's love and naivety about Fool, which was so endearing and turned, yes very quickly, from denial to outright passion. The last five minutes of the film were perfect. Obviously there were things that weren't excellent, but nothing is perfect; some of the acting was poor, and at times I did think that some of the new back story and dialogue about terrorism got a little hard to follow and out of hand, but in the end you got it and didn't even mind that at the time it may have slipped from your comprehension. (This may also have to do with Goldblum's tendency to talk extremely fast) On the whole I would say that it was probably one of the best films I've seen this year; stylistically pleasing, clever and witty writing, performances that were so impressive I now have gained new respect for some of the actors, and a truly touching film, and don't forget, a complete departure from Fool. Which was the point.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e37ee58386514ec2b610292f0ed372cc",
            "input": "\"Vanilla Sky\" was a wonderfully thought out movie. Or rather, \"Abre Los Ojos\" was well thought out. I watched that movie late one night, excited about what was to come. I wasn't disappointed. By the end of the movie, I was awstruck. I couldn't get it off my mind. The whole idea of it just blew me away. The ending, was more of a surprise than Shyamalan could ever do. The plot line was also something that kept me interesting through and through. The cast, superb. It was an all around wonderful movie. The kind of movie you can watch again and again and always find something new. I've seen it four or five times and I'm always finding something new. It's a movie to keep you interested forever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13ca37e33a324b44b6e48b40e763e484",
            "input": "This movie is pure guano. Mom always said if you can't say anything nice... but even Mom would say I had to do my part to warn others of this movie.I can guarantee this is the film that Geoffrey Rush wishes would just go away. I would hope that Greg Kinnear fired his agent..from a cannon for giving him the script. After this Ben Stiller is probably praying for someone to pitch \"There's Still Something About Mary.\" I have always been a fan of Wes Studi's, thank whatever you hold holy that he wore a mask through the film so maybe people won't identify the film with him.It starts of promisingly with a stylistic spoof of the cinematography of the Batman films and then just loses something...like a coherent plot and half decent effects.The jokes are telegraphed an hour before the punchline comes, and even then they fall flat. If you want to see an effective spoof of the comic book world see \"Chasing Amy\".RUN! DON'T WALK AWAY FROM \"MYSTERY MEN\"!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6df614151d3940a0a1c34c1f75b19a4d",
            "input": "Something about the 40 Year Old Virgin and the other comedy hit of the summer, Wedding Crashers, is similar, but they are two different films in some respects. Both are romantic comedies that have that kind of over-the-top, crazy sensibility that keeps the teens and guys in their 20's along with the usual dating crowd to go see the films. Both have some sort of formula to the stories as well. But by the end of the 40 Year Old Virgin, I think I found overall it was more satisfying than 'Crashers'. Although one can guess where the relationship story with Steve Carrell's character Andy and Catherine Keener's character Trish will go to, it isn't too basic for one to figure out like with Crashers, and the characters both leading and supporting are realistic, more rounded than most of the one-dimensional or unexplained people in the other. And, perhaps, it may also depend on how much you identify (or just find the lunacy) in both.The thing is some people may go into The 40 Year Old Virgin not knowing Steve Carrell as well as Owen Wilson or Vince Vaughn, as Carrell has built up his cult status on The Daily Show (one of my favorite shows on now) and in small but unforgettably riotous roles in Anchorman and Bruce Almighty. This is his first starring role, but it's not treated like some third rate vehicle. He and co-writer/director Judd Apatow treat the character of Andy with a certain level of sincerity that keeps the audience on his side all the way, even early on as he talks to his action figures while re-painting them. It's also a tricky line to walk on- in lessor hands this could be no more or less entertaining than the Lackluster 40 Days and 40 Nights with Josh Hartnett (also about sexual dysfunction). As the title suggests, Andy is the 40 year old who is like the nice guy friend with still a little Pee-Wee Herman in him (the opening over the credits of his his apartment is hilarious, a good sign).So, his friends (among them Paul Rudd, Romany Mancoy, Seth Rogen, all very good comic foils) try and devise different strategies and tips to finally break the sort of curse over Andy's head to pop his cherry, so to speak. He almost gets with a overly drunk woman, he almost gets with a freaky kind of girl, and almost with his own boss (Jane Lynch, also very funny in the mockumentaries) as a (explitive) buddy. But this soon all starts to fade as he gets into a meaningful relationship with Trish, who works across the street from him. As they build on a relationship not based at all on sex, one might worry that the plot gear of \"how is he going to tell her such and such\" might get in the way of the comedy. It doesn't. In fact, if anything, Carrell and the cast build on it to a very high degree. For practically an hour and a half of the film's two hour length, there was barely a moment I wasn't laughing, whether big or small.The big laughs though make up for not just any kind of formalities with the plot, or one or two little stray stories (the fellow co-workers have their own relationship problems as well, Rudd's being the funniest). The big laughs come through because of Carrell's reactions, and that the people around him can either back up with their own sort of humor/charm, or that its with some truth. Keener gives a very good performance and makes it so that there is a genuine spirit to their relationship (and, un-like 'Crashers', there isn't as much that doesn't make sense character wise). For someone like me who loves it when a comedian can get laughs just from the way he looks on his face, Carrell gets very high points here. And like with a Farrelly brothers movie, the more raunchy or outrageous scenes are done with total absurdity; the 'waxing' scene (which was done for real, by the way) and the sort of Aquarius musical number towards the very end of the film (the way it comes out at first is a total, uproarious surprise). But if you're willing not to get offended by it, there's more where that came from. This is one of the funniest films of the year.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0d7a6913faa64c45a9f2b9cbcc65049a",
            "input": "Madhur from CHANDNI BAR started making realistic films, which some people called dry He made SATTA which was another realistic though filmy film but a great filmAAN men at work was a formula film by him which floppedHe returns with his superlative PAGE 3A film which dwelves into the lives of journalists and it's a brilliant filmThe film is well narrated though the half baked romantic portions of Konkana could be avoided but that is forgivenThe entire Upendra Limaye track is superb toowhile the Atul Kulkarni track is great tooThe dial between Manoj Joshi and his friends are funny at first but repetitive at timesThe subplot of Bikram- Tara is brilliant and so is the entire hospital scene and also the final child abuse which shocks youThe film has a open ended ending which is nicely handledMadhur does a great job Music is okayKonkana excels as Madhavi, using her expressions to the best Tara Sharma is decent except her voice Sandhya Mridul is good as usual Upendra Limaye excels in his part as the cop, one of the talented actors Sadly he isn't used well nowdays Atul Kulkarni too is good in his small part Boman Irani is restrained and does a great job rest are okay",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-59df8a330ba24c8f94cd598b326fa2f9",
            "input": "Absolutely one of the worst movies of all time.Low production values, terrible story idea, bad script, lackluster acting... and I can't even come up with an adjective suitably descriptive for how poor Joan River's directing is. I know that there's a special place in Hell for the people who financed this film; prolly right below the level reserved for child-raping genocidal maniacs.This movie is a trainwreck.(Terrible) x (infinity) = Rabbit Test.Avoid this at all costs.It's so bad, it isn't even funny how bad it is.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8224a729f1cb4e4f84e5c1110783b83e",
            "input": "Five years after the original Creepshow, another inferior horror sequel is penned by George A. Romero and Stephen King: Creepshow 2. This time there are only three stories instead of five. None of the three stories is really original or distinguished either. The first story is a horror staple, formulaic story about a wooden Indian statue seeking revenge against the killers of its owners. The effects are really neat in this story, but it's just too familiar to be compelling enough. George Kennedy and Dorothy Lamour play the elderly store owners. The second story, \"The Raft\", is a Stephen King story. It's about four teenagers that unwittingly spend the day on a wooden pallet in the middle of an isolated lake. Soon the kids are screaming for their lives as a watery blob does each of them in for no apparent reason. However, instead of being suspenseful, the kids are saddled with bad dialog and dopey-headed behavior, preventing us from really caring about what happens next. There is also some unintentional humor in this segment. The third and final story is \"The Hitch-hiker\", which is actually a retread re-adapted for Creepshow 2. The original story, by Lucille Fletcher, was filmed in 1953 as a film noir suspense film. Then it was adapted for a famous Twilight Zone episode featuring Inger Stevens. \"The Hitch-hiker\" works the best out of these three offerings, but it's not without its problems either. Lois Chiles plays a cheating spouse, who ends up running over a hitch-hiker, or so she thinks. However, we don't know whether to sympathize with her or condemn her. As in many average stories of this type, the characters exist merely to tell the stories with their twists and turns. The wrap around story with the bullies seems a bit out of place. Tom Savini appears as the \"creep\" in this installment. The good thing is there haven't been any more sequels. *1/2 of 4 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b2ddd6f48e4a49128b4c689dc03bd724",
            "input": "I didn't agree with any of the theology in the Left Behind series, but nonetheless I found the books gripping and I read 8 of 12 of them. Undeniably good writing and interesting story. However, I didn't have very high expectations for the movie. There was no way mainstream Hollywood would have taken up a Christian series and produced a big-budget movie. So it was done independently... and it just felt like I was watching a really long TV show. It just didn't FEEL like a movie; it didn't have that movie \"experience\" to it, if anybody knows what I'm talking about. So the movie suffered because of that, and the low-budget, poor special effects were another detraction for me.On top of that, I feel that Gordon Currie was woefully miscast as Nicolie Carpathia. Reading the book, my impression of NC was that he was supposed to be this charming, dazzling, amazingly handsome guy who spoke English with almost zero trace of an accent. So I imagined somebody like Pierce Brosnan in the role. Instead, they found some Clay Aiken pencil-neck who looks like an employee of the month from Best Buy, and gave him a really bad fake accent. So that lost a few stars for me right there. A movie is just not convincing when the major villain doesn't look or sound the way he's supposed to.The acting was okay, but nothing to write home about. Some of the scenes - like one of the conversion scenes (can't remember which one) - were real seat-squirmers for me. And some of the Christian rock music or whatever it was, was really out of place for some of the scenes, like in the one with Kirk Cameron praying in the bathroom.In short, it wasn't a bad movie, but it just didn't do it for me. Stick to the book, folks, it's much better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a7d154261734c09b44ec4bc4d0e87f8",
            "input": "Although I gave a rating of \"9\", my expectations were higher than what the film delivered. I would have been happier had there been more deep diving since I am a diver myself, but it was supposed to portray the life of Carl Brashear and that's what it was about. This film made me angry in the beginning, but happy in the end.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9b82f8e0cd50461a904263847ce3f728",
            "input": "This is not \"so bad that it is good,\" it is purely good! For those who don't understand why, you have the intellect of a four year old (in response to a certain comment...) Anyways, Killer Tomatoes Eat France is a parody of itself, a parody of you, and a parody of me. It is the single most genius text in cinematic history. I have it and the three prequels sitting on my DVD rack next to Herzog and Kurosawa. It embodies the recognition of absurdity and undermines all that you or me call standard. I write scripts and this movie single-handedly opened up a genre of comedy for me, the likes of which we have never seen. It can only be taken in portions... its sort of exploitive... by now I'm just trying to take up the ten line minimum. My comment ended a while ago. Hopefully it works when I submit it now.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08a71163e36548f7a7c575d64cca477b",
            "input": "THAT'S certainly a strange way to promote a film upon which a great deal rested. And it seems like plain suicide on the part of the studio, given that (1) The feuds between the cast were well known long before the movie's release. (2) The feud between the Producer(Robert Fryer) and Director ( Michael Sarne) was also common knowledge. (3) The cast made no secret of their contempt for the film and made it public at every opportunity, with daily bulletins from the set gleefully reported by gossip columnists everywhere.And (4) The author, Gore Vidal hated it practically from day one. Nevertheless, that tagline just about sums it up. Raquel Welch does give a decent performance as Myra, and she looks lovely besides. John Huston is very funny as Buck Loner, the ex-Cowboy Star who runs a phony acting academy. Mae West, (in her first screen appearance since 1943) naturally rewrote her part to suit herself, and she is great as ''oversexed'' (and that's putting it mildly) ''Talent Agent'' Leticia Van Allen. Still, she must have wondered (after waiting so long for a good vehicle in which to return) how she ever ended up in this mess.Tom Selleck (in his film debut) is one of her ''clients''. John Carradine and Jim Backus, as Doctors, also amble in briefly. Rex Reed as Myron, Farrah Fawcett and Roger Herren, as the victims of Myra/Myron's sexual passion, are neither here nor there. The same goes for the script, which not only fails to focus on the basic plot of the book, but seems to head in at least three different directions at once. Although West's part was originally larger, she was reduced to a cameo role by the time Sarne was through with the editing. And, partly because of this, she seems to be in a different movie. Apparently, at some point, the Producers realized that Mae was going to be the film's big draw, and, unable to replace most of her cut footage, they rushed her back to the set at the end of filming for the second of her two songs, both of which come out of nowhere. The device Sarne used of throwing in old film clips of bygone stars to emphasize whatever points he was making, doesn't work at all. By the time the movie concludes, all a weary spectator can do is wonder what in the hell it was all about. Not surprisingly, just about everyone connected with the production felt the same way, and it died at the box office. A technically flawless DVD includes, (among other extras) separate commentaries from both Welch and Sarne, each of whom have completely opposite opinions of just what went wrong.No doubt it's home video re-release was prompted by a 2001'' Vanity Fair'' piece, which attempted (in great detail) to do the same thing. True, the structure of the novel made a screen adaptation a dubious undertaking, but, with Sarne at the helm of what was obviously a ''troubled'' production, it really never had a chance.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a19b23cb1d141c0b8173393b837b69e",
            "input": "It's hard for me to criticize anything that Mitzi Kapture does. She just radiates beauty and grace on the screen and is a phenomenal actress. That notwithstanding, yes, the plot was predictable. I think perhaps if Jill HAD slept with Richard then it may have made him a little crazier than he already was, which would have added more to the suspense. It would have also been nice to see Jill and her husband find out about Richard's little problem with his ex-wife, maybe a bit more back story. I was a little disappointed with the ending of the movie. I would have liked to have seen more closure with Zack's death and possibly closure with her husband. I do have to say though, I will never be able to look at a flare gun and not picture her standing there. It was a very fitting end for Richard. Of course, Mitzi ROCKED! I am so looking forward to her future projects.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-123549d2facf406fad1f47087e13725c",
            "input": "I enjoyed this film very much. Many Korean people will feel familiar with this film because many of them have tutors when they go to school. Cinematography was average. The movie would have been better if the angel or the movement of the camera was more irregular. Editing, however, was very neat and unusual.The acting was also very good. Kim Ha Neul usually played an innocent, weak girl in the Korean soap-opaeras. But this time, she plays a cute tomboy very well. Kwon Sang Woo also plays his role very believable.What I like the most about this film is, the emotion of the characters are not too exaggerated. There are many Korean romance films that the characters cry river before the audience and I always thought it was very stale. There was no such crap in this movie.Very funny and well-done.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d7b18ee2e6842d6bb261f71ca7bbf0f",
            "input": "Ok, after reading a couple of reviews on Atlantis: The Lost Empire, I just want to clear up some misunderstanding as to it being a direct rip off from Nadia: Secret of the Blue Water. The only part that was a ripoff from Nadia is that the pendant from Nadia and the pendant from Atlantis bear so much resemblence in terms of how it's used, origins and how it's created from the source of life that there's no doubt about it being copied. If you want to consider how Kida and Nadia is dressed alike then you could put that against Disney too(It was kind of wierd for Nadia and Kida to wear that bikini style clothing in an adventure sci-fi, not to mention they both move in a similar style too). As an anime fan I have to agree there's some degree of copying but it's only on the minor details and even though not many of the ideas are original (like the encryption design on the wall in Laputa, the ancient mask from Princess Mononoke, the resemblence of the vehicles to the Garfish submarine in Nadia, etc)...The plot itself I believe it's highly original and it's quite amazing that Disney can pull it off without the use of Captain Nemo(the main character in Jules Verne's 20k Leagues Under the Sea which is also the main character in Nadia). As for Mylo and Jean wearing similar style glasses...As shown in the novel \"Lord of the Flies\", glasses is a symbol of wisdom and intelligence. I think Mylo, Jean, the main character from Stargate and a dozen of other \"INTELLIGENT\" characters would look kind of unfit for the role if they went in without glasses. As for the submarines, and how the submarines fight(with those wide blast torpedos which really resembles what Nautilius does), I want to state that it's a required element for either one if Atlantis is involved in the plot(after all it's a sunken city beneath the waters). As for the crew having some charactistical resemblence with the crew from Nautilius in Nadia, it might be the artwork but I don't sense any copyright infringement there as the character's personalities were perfectly original to me. As an anime fan that rated Nadia as the #1 best anime I ever watched even now today. I do have my doubts about Atlantis when I first saw the preview. But now that I watched the movie, I once again regained my confidence with Disney and have high hopes for their future movies after Atlantis. Overall, the best Disney movie yet without me shivering at the sound of their songs at the middle of the movie and it's a plus that they revised their cheesy scripts to make it even better. Also, it's amazing that they actually portray the bad guys look normal with out making them overly evil in the beginning (I was wondering who the bad guys are and only the blonde girl kind of resemble the looks of a bad character in terms of how Disney draws it aka make the bad guys look really menacing)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a2a4296481749d2ac046fe13ac4801a",
            "input": "This film is shoddily-made, unoriginal garbage. I like romantic comedies sometimes. Watching a good one is like eating ice cream for dinner. It's not something you are going to do all the time, but the experience is so pleasurable that you can ignore how unwise you are being. This movie made me think about how stupid I was for continuing to remain seated for its entire running time. Everything about it screamed made on the cheap. It actually looks like they overexposed the film at certain points it is so washed out. It boasts cheesy CGI and lame sets, too.The writing was clunky. I know that you can usually expect some plot problems in a screwball comedy, but you usually don't really care because you are laughing. This movie is so unfunny that you actually sit there and wonder about the unlikely series of coincidences and completely unbelievable behavior involved. Events were placed in the film just to move the characters from one scene to the next or to provide exposition. Sure, this is how all movies work, but you shouldn't notice that it's happening. Inelegant. That's the term I should use.There was almost no one in the movie who was really likable. I didn't care who ended up with whom, as long as they all stayed the hell away from me, and I didn't have to listen to them talk about it anymore. Why would the only really cool character in the movie, the Paul Rudd character, want to have anything to do with the completely bitchy, condescending, control freak played by Eva Longoria? Also, almost all of the characters involved consistently picked the sleaziest solution to any situation. A straight man pretends to be gay for five years just to hang out (and bathe with) with a woman he is attracted to? The best feel-good moment they could come up with was to tack on a happy ending for the same schmoe where he gets together with Rudd's equally annoying lying, kleptomaniac sister? Lake Bell and Eva Longoria are very attractive, appealing women. Maybe they will find something better to appear in down the road.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1503eb77c4c24e2f8c25b43420669c6e",
            "input": "A film starring Salma Hayek and Colin Farrell, two respected and talented actors, sounds like a great idea. An independent film sounds even better. The studios will control less of the content allowing the actors and writers and director more creativity.But then why is this movie so bland? Ask the dust.This film assumes right off the bat that we are deeply invested in the characters. No one is given a proper back story, so we don't ever know why the characters act the way they do.Explanations for physical and emotional scars are left to our imagination, if you still have one left at the end of this movie.I told a friend that I went to see this film, and that I thought it was awful.Her question: \"Not even Colin Farrell could save it?\" My response: \"Not even Colin Farrell's ass could save it.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50e5c29f4e034768a2283c70fd6224ee",
            "input": "Not only does this movie have a poor plot, bad direction, and terrible acting, its opens up a whole new meaning to racism.In this film \"White\" chicks are the sluts, \"White\" boys are the wana-be gangsters, and successful (yes again) \"White\" businessmen are revolting toilet shitters.I just wonder what would happen if I made the exact same movie with the exact same story line and script, only I made it about Caucasians. \"He dude, its good to finally see your've stopped dating those black chicks\".Nobody seems to notice it, but watch this film again and you'll vomit at how they have portrayed the new Zealand \"white boys\". All of a sudden its white folks who are the main cause of gang aggression, and whores out for a quick bang. Only Samoans girls have a heart, there's no such thing as a non-slutty white girl.It disgusts me that they couldn't make this film without giving the Caucasian community in New Zealand a repulsive profile. If you think I'm overgeneralizing, go watch this film, and see what you make of the \"white boys\". Just because Samoans choose to call us \"white boys\" in actual life, doesn't mean its funny. If I said hey black boy I'll loose my teeth.Don't see this movie. Don't waste your money. Don't be racist.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61669bc0d6d041d5b052c8706ee4350e",
            "input": "A friend of mine lent this video to me and I was fairly excited to watch it, but after ten minutes of James Hetfield's slow pitched vocals and Lars banging on his drum set in what appeared to be slow motion I began to think, `Why am I watching this?' That question will be coursing through your minds in 5 – 10 minutes after you hit Play. I gave the tape back the same day, as you would suspect, not worth buying or watching!Just my opinion!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c07ffba7ca0d4dd4a3b7058f31fc107a",
            "input": "I wouldn't bring a child under 8 to see this. With puppies dangling off of buildings squirming through dangerous machines and listening to Cruella's scary laugh to name a few of the events there is entirely too much suspense for a small child. The live action gives a more ominous feel than the cartoon version and there are quite a few disquieting moments including some guy that seems to be a transvestite, a lot of tense moments that will worry and may frighten small kids.I don't know what the Disney folks were thinking but neither the story nor the acting were of their usual level. The puppies are cute But this movie is spotty at best.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-242b5b635c2d42d8a597210748eda7a9",
            "input": "How can you gather this respectable cast of young British actors and come up with such a pile of filmic manure? Horrible script, annoyingly hectic camera, awfully edited, gruesomely badly acted. Only Rhys Ifans tries to fill his role with life. Another painful proof that \"different\" sometimes equals \"dreck\". Why do the money people fail to read the scripts beforehand? Do yourself a favour: spare yourself and do something else - like hitting a mallet onto your knees. It's less painful and more fun than this movie!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f8fafb185beb4302b4e14cdc467c5739",
            "input": "UK newspaper reviews seem to have concentrated on the fact that the reviewers tend to know Toby Young, the journalist on whose real-life experiences this movie is based. The key word here is \"based\". How To Lose Friends is a fictitious romcom.Sidney Young joins a prestigious gossip magazine in New York, where he proceeds to make gaffe after gaffe before finally Getting It Right and Making It. This involves him selling out, and the movie has some serious points to make about journalistic integrity. However, they are not overdone: the main substance remains a comedy which centres around Sidney's misadventures. The script has its cake and eats it in that Sidney is a stupid, well-meaning buffoon at the same time as being a smart, moderately obnoxious skilled writer. This contradiction is never that much of an issue, because Simon Pegg (as Sidney) projects likability too well.Jeff Bridges underplays Sidney's editor a little too effectively, and Kirsten Dunst is rather anonymous as the conflicted eventual object of Sidney's affections And, with regard to Megan Fox (who plays an airhead bimbo starlet), I can say only this: just say the word, Miss Fox, and I will leave my wife, sell all my belongings, and buy myself a plane ticket in order to take my place at your side as your consort. Of course, given that I'm a fat 56-year-old English accountant, you might not find my offer too enticing, but it's there on the table anyway. Given how short her career has been so far, one might think it is a little too soon for Megan Fox to take on a role which mercilessly lampoons the sort of actress she might be thought to become: however, she does it sweetly, with some skill, and extremely sexily. This girl will go far.There is stalwart support from a variety of seasoned performers - Miriam Margolyes and Bill Paterson from the UK, Gillian Anderson and Danny Huston from the US.There are several laugh-out-loud moments, and I smiled most of the way through. As ever, the F-word makes appearances when it really doesn't need to, although at least a couple of these are very funny.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8d2aa0554ed420698673f42014f2f8d",
            "input": "I hate this movie. I hate the show. i hate just about everything about it. it's so annoying and stupid. everyone's saying that nat and alex wolff are heroes in the music world and that they're going to make it big. WHAT KIND OF DRUGS ARE YOU TAKING???!!!?!?!?!?! nat and alex are going to end up as either hobos or end up like Jane Hudson from \"Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?\". i could only get through not even 20 minutes of this one, barely 30 seconds of the show, and i managed to survive about half an hour of 'Battle of the Bands'. How anyone could cheer for these guys in the audience at the Kid's Choice Awards, i have no clue. days before the movie premiere on Nick, most of the teen girl actresses on Nick (Jamie Spears, Emma Roberts, Lindsey Shaw, etc.) showed up in a commercial influencing brain-dead kids about how awesome nat and alex wolff are. first off, they didn;t trick me, and second of all, nat and alex probably either drugged them or payed them loads of money in order to say that and sound convincing, because i don't see how anyone could find this show/movie entertaining. the music is just awful. nat's singing sounds like a sick, dying moose on crack. alex is the most annoying movie/TV show character EVER. he's not funny, he's annoying, he's really weird, and he thinks he's hot and knows everything about girls. this guy's lucky if he ever manages to get laid. you know this show is fake when you find out that some of the characters (in real life) don't even exist!! the character Jesse is actually played by Nat and Alex's cousin jesse Draper (they mustve had some budget problem). Their father is not single, he's married to Polly Draper, but she doesn't appear on the show, making it seem the Wolff's are mom-less. Rosalina doesn't exist either. Her name is Allie DiMeco. I'll tell ya, the Naked Brothers are gonna be in some deep sh** when their \"fans\" find out the whole thing is staged. 0/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1f888158427406bb72a198cb4aad450",
            "input": "Spoilers? Maybe a few details, but nothing too plot related. Not like it would matter with this movie. Air Rage blatantly rips off the mid-air infiltration premise of Executive Decision. Ice-T leads a team of four \"elite\" commandos who wear baggy black shirts that we can only imagine must conceal invisible body armor as their idiotic tactics (similar to what 3rd graders use when playing Star Wars on the playground) lead them to absorb a hail of gunfire. What entertained me the most about this flick was the use of look-alike has-been actors. You'll immediately recognize Cyril O'Reily as someone who once acted in a movie that you really liked, though it was so long ago that you probably won't be able to place it (it was Porky's). Here Cyril plays a decent knock-off of a Bill Paxton character. Most Hilarious is porker Gil Gerard, who's so fat that you will never recognize him as TV's Buck Rogers. Instead of evoking his mildly heroic character past, Gerard gives us a passable performance of the crusty fat tough guy persona, which was clearly imagineered for John Goodman. Finally, Alex Cord gives us a nice hybrid look-alike performance as a Chuck Connors/Kirk Douglas type. In the 10 years since New Jack City, Ice-T's acting has deteriorated remarkably. It's not acting so much as regurgitation of lines that he might have actually memorized. One of the items that plays into this movie is a CD-ROM of classified information. It's being hand carried, and it's apparently and unbelievably not encrypted, despite the security-savvy aura of Gerard's NSA character. What a joke. I'm severely doubting that the information purported to be on the CD would ever even all be assembled into a portable format. Despite being in a closed aircraft without silencers, the gunfire is about as loud as canned air, and causes nary a person to flinch, so apparently no foley budget. The assortment of weapons chosen is pretty funny. The flight attendant's use of a coffee pot is about the most realistic depiction of violence in the film. When she takes intuitively to the mini-Uzi pistol, which has got to be one of the worst pistol designs ever, that's just too stupid. A true elite team would carry MP-5s for this type thing or maybe SOCOMM .45s, or even customized Hi- Powers if they were really old school, or maybe something FN 5.7 if new school... The lame-o standard issue 92Fs are totally unbelievable, having lost most of their cool after Lethal Weapon I. The bad guys, supposedly experienced soldier of fortune types, have an assorted mixture of absurdity, like the aforementioned mini-Uzi pistol and a Tec-9 with the infamous non-functional barrel extender that isn't a silencer. There was one touch of realism on which I would like to correct the other reviewers: The flight attendant and Ice-T did lower the craft to 10,000 feet for \"breathable air\" before they opened the door. And I also got the impression that the flight attendant was NOT able to get the door closed, that she basically just gave up on that point. As far as the landing, there was no mention of flaps until about 2 seconds before touchdown. Sigh. Only the Dukes of Hazard eluding Roscoe P. Coltrane at the \"pass\" could shame this movie for use of stock footage. They obviously chose the incredible (and retired) SR-71 because they couldn't get stock of an F-117. Aside from the fact that they were mothballed already in 2001, let's also forget for a moment that the SR-71 is not a pure stealth aircraft in the sense of the B-2, and that at point blank range... Well, I'm no expert, but I'm having doubts as to whether it would be invisible on Radar. As others have pointed out, the repeated references to \"F-15s\" when they were showing F -16s was laughable. Details of the 747 were pretty stupid. No airline would put that few passengers on a 747 to begin with, not to mention everything else that was idiotic about it. Pay attention to the use of exposed electrical wiring. Wow. What a show. Catch it on Stars or something. Don't pay to rent it, but do watch it for laughs. In contention for worst movie ever, right up there with No Holds Barred, which at least had some originality.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11bb3ede0b8a440abf77eaefe73d4d59",
            "input": "I really don't have anything new to add but I just felt like I had to comment on this sack. So here goes:Atrocious. I'm running through my MST3K DVD collection again and I just watched Hobgoblins for about the 10th time. It's really, really painful but it was next on the list... You can see that there is a tiny kernel of an actual movie buried under all the crap that is \"Hobgoblins\" but it just couldn't get out. Everything about this movie is 4th rate. The story, the acting, the effects, the women, the \"action scenes\", the... ahhhh forget it. I can watch a piece of crap like \"The Bloodwaters of Dr. Z\" (aka \"Zaat\") over and over and over with hardly any ill effects (I like it in fact- btw, it will be on TCM later this month- October, 2009) but \"Hobgoblins\" is a whole 'nother ballgame.The worst part of it all may be that it's now about 12 hours after the movie ended, I had a good night's sleep, some coffee and some dry toast, my medications, and yet the ersatz \"New Wave\" dance music that Amy, Red Shorts, and Laraine Newman were frolicking to in the living room is STILL RUNNING THROUGH MY HEAD. This torment will last for days. Good luck, won't you?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d83122395e7f48db898f9af11b73a06a",
            "input": "Visually cluttered, plot less, incredibly mind-numbing rubbish. Not even close to Greenaway's better work. Avoid at all costs!The overlapping 'split screen' effects do nothing more than confuse, the film is very dark for a lot of the time and the 'artistic' composing of images is pretentious in the extreme.There is absolutely nothing to recommend about this film; even the nudity is incredibly unerotic, which seeing it fills a large part of the film soon gets very boring.Plus, how anyone can say that the acting of Ewen MacGregor is brilliant is beyond me. He showed more ability in the Star Wars series, and that's saying something.I've not been so unimpressed with a film since I saw 'Darby O'Gill and the Little People'!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc9e3ec6834649448b24f3c370165714",
            "input": "I saw this in the theater and I instantly thought that it is good enough to own on video. I am a big nut for Sci-Fi action flicks though anyway.Without giving any of the story away, it is worth seeing if you like Sci-Fi without requiring much thought. The story is basic, and the plot is very good. Worth your time to see!Maybe they will make a sequel? :)8 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-168ad11ea8b04e148bfdf546e5eadd93",
            "input": "I find this movie the best movie I have ever seen, because it reflects the inner strength of a young girl during the second world war. The movie is impressive, not least because it actually happened. It reminds me of the story of Anne Frank.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-be2b5cadf44d427886e26da9624c2aad",
            "input": "First saw this movie in about 1990, and absolutely died laughing through it. It became a cult favorite with my circle of friends, and we'd quote from it at the drop of a hat (\"I'm going home in a bag!\"). Needless to say, the humor is still there, 15 years later. It's become a tradition at Halloween time to expose many of my new friends to this film (good thing you can still buy it off Ebay!) I've found that Halloween candy tastes much better with your tongue planted firmly in your cheek..and this movie provides it all- pathos, suspense, unrequited love,nobility and the list goes on. Royal Dano provides an amazing heartfelt performance as Old Man Wrenchmuller. I remember seeing him in \"The 7 Faces of Dr. Lao\" as a bad guy who met a bad end. Here, you really feel for the old guy right from the beginning. If you aren't careful, you'll miss some of the levels of humor in this movie. The creators got real subtle in many ways with offhand comments, little subtle costume digs at other sci-fi movies, and even a scene ripped from the pages of Wile E. Coyote!Don't spend too much thought processes trying to analyze a movie, people- this is fun fare without the need for nitpicking, and shouldn't be offensive to anyone (well, maybe stupid people, but they won't know they're being mocked..).-Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go get a 'Zag-nut' bar....-Ramsay \"RC\" Cowlishaw, karaoke DJ/entertainer",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48ae5d2676e0441e980dfa35900b306e",
            "input": "This movie has some things that are pretty amazing. First, it is supposed to be based on a true story. That, in itself, is amazing that multiple tornadoes would hit the same town at night in the fall-in Nebraska. I wonder if the real town's name was close to \"Blainsworth\" (which is the town's name in the movie). There is an Ainsworth, Nebraska, but there is also a town that starts with Blains-something.It does show the slowest moving tornadoes on record in the the seen where the boys are in the house. On the other hand, the scene where the TV goes fuzzy is based in fact. Before Doppler radar and weather radio, we were taught that if you turned your TV to a particular channel (not on cable) and tuned the brightness just right, you could tell if there was a tornado coming. The problem was that by then you would be able to hear it. Since I know something about midwest tornadoes, it made this movie fun for me. I enjoy it more than Twister. I mean, give me a break-there is no way you could make it through and F5 by chaining yourself to a pipe in a well house.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f8235ad48b54bb9b671e5ca534919ae",
            "input": "I wish more movies were two hours long. On the other hand, I wish more American Civil War movies were MERELY two hours long. \"Gone with the Wind\", \"Gettysburg\" - that's about the length I've come to expect; although those two at least entertained for however many hours they lasted; and even \"Gettysburg\" lasted as long as it did because things HAPPENED in the course of it.By contrast Ang Lee's film is bloated and uneventful. It actually feels as if it takes much less than two hours. That wasn't a compliment. It's really no different to any other form of sensory deprivation: at the time it feels as though it will never end, afterwards it seems to have taken no time at all.The film gets off on the wrong foot, as Lee plays his interminable credits OVER the opening footage (bad mistake) in which we are introduced to some characters we take an instant dislike to and will later come to loathe. The central two are Jake, the son of German immigrants who are staunch supporters of Lincoln, and Jack, an equally staunch Southerner whose values Jake shares. (I had to re-read that sentence to make sure I hadn't written \"Jack\" instead of \"Jake\" at some point or vice versa.) The two go off to become \"bushwhackers\" - Southern militia who so strongly lust after revenge and violence that they can't even be bothered to join the official Southern army, which I presume they think is for sissies. I'm afraid Lee lost me right there. It's easy to feel for characters who make moral mistakes: if we have some independent reason to like them, or feel as if we know them in some way, then their moral flaws can make us care for them all the more. Not so here. We aren't properly introduced to Jake for at least an hour; when we are, it becomes clear he's a gormless pimple of a man, who isn't a confederate by choice so much as by habit - the kind of person who says and does what everyone around him says and does, whose psychology is purely immitative. The people he associates with are either just the same or positively evil in some uninteresting way. I found myself cheering whenever the Northern cavalry appeared on the screen. I thought: good - kill the rebels, end the damned war, let me go home.Aggravating this problem is the horrible, horrible dialogue. Everyone speaks in the same whining Southern accent. I've heard accents from all over the English-speaking world and this is the worst of them all. I don't care if Southerners really did talk like that, it's simply not fair to ask an audience to listen to it for two hours. And believe me, we do listen to it for the full two hours: Lee's picture is a talky one, largely because characters take so long to say what they mean in their ungrammatical, say-everything-three-times, folksy drawl. It would help if they talked faster, but not much. Can't these people find a more efficient language in which to communicate?In short: the film is little but a gallery of uniformly unattractive characters with no inner life, who talk in an offensively ugly mode of speech, who don't bathe often enough, to whom nothing of interest happens, despite their being involved in a war. Good points? Jewel was nice to look at, and so was the scenery. But I have complaints even here. The cinematography, nicely framed, looked as if someone had susbtituted colour film for black and white by mistake; and as for Jewel, we were teased with her body, but never actually allowed to gaze upon it, which I think is the least we were owed.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3fd3a6b8bef5489cbffae16834b54bb4",
            "input": "Nothing can prepare you for another lousy bimbo outing! This time, it's being brought to you by the never-inevitable Fred Olen Ray! As far as exploitation movies go, this one doesn't click! As science fiction, it's plain unoriginal! All that we see is an an ugly feminine android wearing a bikini out to destroy the Earth, and showing off all that's nearly bare to resist! Give me a f---ing break!!! If this kind of entertainment is your thing, then why not dust off those old SI swimsuit mags from the attic for a change?! This would have been much better if it didn't set the sleaze factor on very high, but that still wouldn't make this one great. I'd like to point out another film called THE ASSAULT (1996) by Jim Wynorski, which resembles the identity of ALIENATOR. It illustrates why top-notch 1st-person \"femme fatale\" action movies don't translate well in America. Sorry, fellas!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e61181dc30ec49f7b25902a054ae231f",
            "input": "THE MAN IN THE MOON is a warm and moving coming of age drama centering around a farming family in the 1950's. The main story follows a 14-year old girl (Reese Witherspoon) who develops a crush on a 17-year old neighbor (Jason London) who ends up falling for her older sister (Emily Warfield) and how an unexpected tragedy alters this family's dynamics forever. The 1950's are lovingly evoked here and the screenplay gives you characters you come to care about almost immediately. Witherspoon already begins to show the Oscar-winning talent she would develop in this early role and London makes a charming leading man. Warfield lends a quiet maturity to the role of the older sister that is effective as well. Kudos to Sam Waterston and Tess Harper who play the girls' parents and Gail Strickland, who plays London's mom. I was unexpectedly moved by this quiet and affecting drama that stirs up strong emotions and gives deeper meaning to the phrase \"family ties.\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-20f2bfc018ba41c489d07d130f63c2c9",
            "input": "I happened upon this film by accident, and really enjoyed. Timothy Busfield's character is without redeeming qualities, and at one point, Busfield and star Meloni ogle women as they pass by...Meloni's take on the parade is different from Busfield's. Janel Maloney is terrific...She looks very much like Tea Leone, but the major difference here is that Janel can actually ACT. Some very nice things in this film and well worth your attention when it's on cable.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f40db4ae4ad45ccabe86d7e921a7fd7",
            "input": "Pandora's Clock is among the best thrillers you will ever read and this is one of the best thrillers you will ever see. A highly faithful adaptation of John J. Nance's novel ,which had a frightfully real scenario in the novel,is made even more so here. Despite being made for TV, this is first rate entertainment. The cast is great and slips into characters from the novel so well that you would think they were reading the novel. Richard Dean Anderson steps way outside the shadow of Macgyver and gives the best performance of his career to date. Jane Leeves is great her role as an ambassador's assistant in a role that proves she can be a fine dramatic actor. Daphne Zuniga is great as Dr. Sanders and despite the character being a man in the book, it works incredibly well. Robert Loggia, Edward Herrmann, Robert Guillaume, and the rest of the supporting cast are top notch and fit their novel counterparts tot he letter.There are changes to the story of course (including and a slight change in the ending) but those changes are for the better when compared with the novel. The plot is realistic and very see to believe in the way its presented making this the best airplane set movie since the original Airport movie. The production values are high and though the special effects might look as good as they did a decade or so ago, they work fine. Sets are great, especially CIA HQ and the Oval Office showing that the filmmakers spent a lot of time to make this work.It doesn't matter if you see this first and read then read the novel or vice versa. Just do both and you won't regret losing four hours to this film and however long it takes to read the novel. This will leave you breathless.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00fdc550e3704075a430f2d11077449b",
            "input": "...from this awful movie! There are so many things wrong with this film, acting, writing, direction, editing, etc. that it's amazing that something rises to the top and proves itself to be the absolute worst. The music! I noted that the film has two composers listed. This must be the reason why every single frame has music, of the absolute worst \"D\" movie style drivel. They have never heard of the expression \"less is more\". It got so painful to listen to, I muted the sound every time there was no dialogue, not that the dialogue was that good. You have to feel sorry for Robert Wagner and Tom Bosley, I'm sure they didn't see roles like this in the twilight of their careers. See it at your own risk.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f801f1be46e4cea990f0d28eb31c961",
            "input": "Hi folksForget about that movie. John C. should be ashamed that he appears as executive producer in the credits. bon jovi has never been and will never be an actor and the FX are a joke.The first vampires was good ... and it was the only vampires. This thing here just wears the same name.Just a waste of time thinks ...JAKE Scorpio",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-60211cd0c48f45ffb883feeafb711556",
            "input": "Deodato brings us some mildly shocking moments and a movie that doesn't take itself too seriously. Absolutely a classic in it's own particular kind of way. This movie provides a refreshingly different look at barbarians. If you get a chance to see this movie do so. You'll definitely have a smile on your face most of the time. Not because it's funny or anything mundane like that but because it's so bad it goes out the other way and becomes good, though maybe not clean, fun.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3a476a822e1340778785c25f01be1a91",
            "input": "Pendragon Pictures' new film \"H G Wells' War of the Worlds\", the first faithful adaptation of the original novel, has been in development for about 5 years. A theatrical release was intended for earlier this year (March, 2005) but this never happened. The DVD was rushed out to coincide with the release of Spielberg's version, which hits theatres June 29.I liked this film, with certain reservations.How faithful is the adaptation? It's not quite 100% faithful to Wells' book, but 90 - 95% faithful is good enough for me. At least several scenes were totally new, such as Ogilvy the astronomer's confrontation with a farmer, and the unnamed writer/narrator awkwardly having tea with his cousin. But on the whole, this film follows the book very closely -- certainly much more than the classic 1953 version by George Pal.Its greatest fault is that it was obviously made on a very cheap budget. The majority of it seems to have been shot blue-screen and composited with digitally rendered backgrounds. This is particularly annoying during most of the interior shots, and scenes of crowded city streets. The overviews of 1898 London look like something from a video game. Numerous scenes in horse-carriages were faked -- I guess they couldn't afford to rent a horse. The only scenes shot for \"real\" seem to be those in open fields or forests.But within those budget restrictions, they managed to do quite a lot. Artistically, the film looks right. The Martians and their tripods are quite well done, and very true to Wells' descriptions. I was particularly impressed with the heat ray. Although the Thunder Child sequence, which should have been one of the film's highlights, is very disappointing. It's a great shame that they couldn't afford more actual sets, or better quality animation.The acting and direction won't win any Oscars. For the most part, they are competent, not bad, but not outstanding. The music is quite good also, though not on a par with any of the major Hollywood composers.I'm actually glad this didn't get a theatrical release, because the budget limitation would have made it look much worse on a big screen. As it stands, I would rate this similarly to a BBC-TV adaptation of classic literature.A few nitpicks: Most of the scenes are presented with various colored filters (mostly red). This may have been an artistic choice, but it is used very inconsistently, and seems more like a sloppy job of mastering the DVD. And the writer/narrator's obviously fake moustache mutates from scene to scene.Bottom line -- Is it worth seeing? If you can look past the technical and budgetary limitations, and get into the story, I think you will enjoy this, especially if you've actually read the original H G Wells novel. If, however, you are easily put off by cheap production values, you'd best pass on this (unless you're a MST3K fan). Be warned, however that the film runs a full 3 hours, so I don't recommend watching it all in one sitting.BTW: An entirely different version of War of the Worlds (aka \"INVASION\") came out on DVD the same month that Spielberg's hit the theatres. This was also made on a budget, but is updated to the present day like the Spielberg film - but it's much better! And to top it off, Jeff Wayne is making an animated film of his best-selling album from 1978, but that won't be out until 2007.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5e2ac017875d455f8ce4cf3bd45f1bb0",
            "input": "My roommate had bought this documentary and invited me to watch it with her. She's from China and only heard so much about 9/11 and wanted to know the cold hard truth and she wanted me to tell her more after the documentary. I felt awful watching this documentary, it was like reliving the nightmare and it still brings tears to my eyes.But I'm extremely grateful that I watched this documentary, because on the day of September 11th, I'm sure we all remember where we were and what we were doing when we heard, all of us could only think certain questions: \"Why?\", \"How?\", \"What's going on?\", \"Oh, my God!\". Almost all the Americans were grateful for the brave firemen and policemen that risked their lives to save others. But I don't think we thought about what they were really going though. This wasn't actually supposed to be a documentary about 9/11, the cameraman was just filming a typical day on the job and they just happened to be a couple blocks away from the World Trade Centers and got everything, outside and in, on tape.On Sep. 11th, I thought to myself \"It's OK, the policemen and firemen will get the people out that survived\". To be honest, I thought it was an accident, I was in my junior year of high school and getting changed from gym and getting ready to go to my science class. Someone came into the locker room shouting \"Some building just got bombed in New York!\", we all got dressed quickly and ran to our classrooms as we watched the first tower burning on TV. Not only 15 seconds later live on TV does the second plane crash into the other World Trade Center and we knew this was no accident. A few minutes later, we heard about the Pentagon and that there was a plane headed for Chicago but was shot down. So many thoughts ran through our heads and I kept on thinking \"What are the firemen and policemen going to do?\". But it's procedure to them I thought, they'll know what to do.The first tower collapsed, we knew it, so many lives are now gone, the second tower crashed, things would never be the same. Those firemen in this documentary showed courage, confusion, and strength, the real raw human emotions. They didn't know what to do, they were just as scarred as those other people who were in the towers. They heard the bodies collapsing on the ground from people jumping out the windows. And here I was in a classroom just crying seeing all that was going on on TV. I was amazed with this film and just wanted to go to New York and tell them how grateful all the Americans were for their help. I know they feel like they were just doing their job, but they did more, they were hero's. Every day after Sep. 11th for 3 weeks they kept on digging knowing that there were no survivors, but they kept on hoping and praying. May God bless their kind and brave hearts.As for my roommate she was crying and admitted this was her first time crying at these attacks. She got to see the truth of what had happened that tragic day. She asked \"Why?\". I didn't know what to say, it breaks my heart that people can be that evil. \"It sounds clique', but it was a normal day for everyone\" one of the firemen said in the documentary. No one expected this to happen. Not like that, those people in the World Trade Centers or the Pentagon or the planes that were hijacked, they were just doing their job, happen to be there, or even just was there for a second passing by. They were not just murdered, they were slaughtered, and those hijackers did it with a song in their heart. Then seeing in the middle east all the people celebrating, why do people do this? They celebrated death and the lose of: mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, friends, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. Why? So, thanks to those people for making this documentary. You truly think about the firemen, policemen, and the troops in Iraq and it keeps your hope up that there are good people in this world. Thank you to all those people, you are our heroes.10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b8dc633fc5049bda6112e0b438d3268",
            "input": "Bela Lugosi appeared in several of these low budget chillers for Monogram Studios in the 1940's and The Corpse Vanishes is one of the better ones.Bela plays a mad scientist who kidnaps young brides and kills them and then extracts fluid from their bodies so he can keep his ageing wife looking young. After a reporter and a doctor stay the night at his home and discover he is responsible for the brides' deaths, the following morning they report these murders to the police and the mad scientist is shot and drops dead shortly afterwards.You have got almost everything in this movie: the scientist's assistants consist of an old hag, a hunchback and dwarf (her sons), a thunderstorm and spooky passages in Bela's house. Bela and his wife find they sleep better in coffins rather than beds in the movie.The Corpse Vanishes is worth a look, especially for Bela Lugosi fans. Great fun.Rating: 3 stars out of 5.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b7949c60e6440aab0e91f32bcbfc149",
            "input": "Simply well written, directed and acted... Woody's best of the 2000's if not his best since the 80's!! Hugh Jackman was the perfect pick for his roll. Scarlett Johansson's banter with Woody proves how well rounded an actress she has become.It's refreshing to not being in a romance on screen with the leading lady. He plays the perfect bumbling magician.There have been a few reviews maligning this movie. Don't let them stop you from seeing the wonderfully done film. People in the crowd I saw this with were laughing so loud at some lines i missed the next line. If you like Woody Allen films of the 70's, you'll regret missing this one.I suggest you go to watch this film with an open mind, if you do, you might walk out smiling.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-234a0eed1e0240219933bb1c1f0ef804",
            "input": "The Invisible Maniac starts as a young Kevin Dornwinkle (Kris Russell) is caught by his strict mother (Marilyn Adams) watching a girl (Tracy Walker) strip through his telescope... Cut to 'Twenty Years Later' & Kevin Dornwinkle (Noel Peters) is now a physics professor who claims to have discovered a way to turn things invisible using a 'mollecular reconstruction' serum. However during a demonstration in front of his fellow scientists it fails & they all laugh at him, Dornwinkle goes mad kills a few of them & is locked away in a mental institute from which he escapes. Jump forward 'Two Weeks Later' & a group of summer college students discuss the tragic death of their physics teacher when the headmistress Mrs. Cello (Stephanie Blake as Stella Blalack) says that she has hired a replacement, yes you've guessed it it's Dornwinkle. The student don't take to him & treat him like dirt, however Dornwinkle has perfected his invisibility serum & uses it to satisfy his perverted sexual urges & his desire for revenge...Co-written & directed by Adam Rifkin wisely hiding under the pseudonym Rif Coogan (I wouldn't want my name to be associated with this turd of a film either) The Invisible Maniac is real bottom of the barrel stuff. The script by Rifkin, sorry Coogan & Tony Markes is awful. It tries to be a teenage sex/comedy/horror hybrid that just fails in every department. For a start the sex is nothing more than a few female shower scenes & a few boob shots, not much else I'm afraid & the birds in The Invisible Maniac aren't even that good looking. The comedy is lame & every joke misses by the proverbial mile, this is the kind of film that thinks someone fighting an invisible man or having Henry (Jason Logan) a mute man trying to make a phone call is funny. The Invisible Maniac makes the Police Academy (1984 - 1994) series of films look like the pinnacle of sophistication! As for the horror aspect that too is lame. It's also an incredibly slow (it takes over half an hour before Dornwinkles even becomes invisible), dull, predictable, boring & has highly annoying & unlikable teenage character's.Director Rifkin or Coogan or whatever does absolutely nothing to try & make The Invisible Maniac an even slightly enjoyable experience. There's no scares, tension or atmosphere & as a whole the film is a real chore to sit through. He does nothing with the invisibility angle, just a few doors opening on their own is as adventurous as it gets. There is very little gore or violence, a bit of splashing blood, a few strangulations & the only decent bit in the whole film when someone has their head blown off with a shotgun, unfortunately he was invisible at the time & we only get to see the headless torso afterwards.The budget must have been low, & I mean really low because this is one seriously cheap looking film. Dornwinkles laboratory is basically two jars on his bedside cabinet! When he escapes from the mental institution he has all of one dog sent after him & the entire school has about a dozen pupils & two teachers. The Invisible Maniac is a poorly made film throughout it's 85 minute duration, I spotted the boom mike on at least one occasion... Lets just say the acting is of a low standard & leave it at that.The Invisible Maniac is crap, plain & simple. I found no redeeming features in it at all, there are so many more better films out there you can watch so there is no reason whatsoever to waste your time on this rubbish. Definitely one to avoid.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e91af2fd7e0e48ef9194bf97e6a9609a",
            "input": "Exceptionally horrible tale that I can barely put into words. The best part of the movie was when one of the murder victims turns up at the end, alive and well, only to be massacred again. There is the chance that I missed some crucial plot elements since I may have been in a slight coma during the time this baby was on. The box that the movie comes in shows scenes that are never even in the film. I was lured in by the crude images of bondage torture and promises of a 'Euro-trash, sexy horror flick.' I get the feeling this was the budget version and about one quarter of the film was left out. All the good stuff more than likely. I got the PG-13 addition that made about as much sense as the end to the new 'Planet of the Apes' movie. Watch this one with a friend and a bottle of the hard stuff. You'll need it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39ab9bec653f4d5287c8c22d3acfe2e2",
            "input": "As I understand it, after the Chinese took over Hong Kong, the infamous Cat. 3 Hong Kong movies kind of disappeared. At least until now, and what an amazing movie this one is. I knew it was a rough crime drama going in, but being the first Cat. 3 I've purchased that's been made recently, I wasn't sure what to expect.A Cambodian hit-man goes to Hong Kong to knock off the wife of a judge, who is also a lawyer. Turns out, the Judge made the arrangements for the hit-man, because she was divorcing the judge, and threatening to take all his money. This is all known within the first ten minutes, so nothing is being given away. After the hit, the cops locate the hit-man pretty fast, but in trying to arrest him, several police officers and civilians are killed. He eludes the police and now the race is on to catch the guy, before he escapes back to Cambodia. This is a movie that never stops, and hardly gives the viewer a chance to catch their breath. Yes, it is very violent and intense, many cops are killed, as the hit-man proves very very hard to track, and take down when they do locate him. Along the way, the hit-man in trying to hide in a dump, finds a women being raped and mistreated by some man. He helps her, and saves her from the guy, and she persuades the hit-man to take her along with him in his escape. I loved this movie, it's like a roller-coaster that just keeps moving and moving at high speed, as one incident leads to another, and the police at times are just as bad or worse as the hit-man. The acting is exceptionally good, and the location filming and photography is at time breathtaking. There's no let up in this movie, not even with the very very incredible ending. The ending is pretty much unbelievable, and also a fitting end to all the action and violence. Yes, the violence is brutal at times, but this is a very no nonsense crime drama, that will knock your socks off. \"Dog Eat Dog\" definitely needs a more widespread release, including an R1 release for sure. Great movie, highly recommended.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-207788bb06764ddf87372d42ec1bfe1a",
            "input": "Ten out of ten stars is no exaggeration. This documentary provides the viewers with unique footage about the 2003 coup in Venezuela. This great film is now the minimum knowledge requirement if you want to express a competent opinion about Venezuela or Hugo Chavez.The dramatic, electrified atmosphere, the unique footage will allow you to experience a true historic moment. You'll feel like you're in the middle of the situation. The film will help you gain unique insight in the happenings of 2003 and will help you hear a side you will rarely hear on TV. It's something you shouldn't miss.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a786cdd7bba44be9edec863557017c3",
            "input": "Just okay film about a woman who is a twin having disturbing visions of her sister in danger back at home. She then returns home to find all is not well and that she is going to have to find out what happened to her sister and why.This is the sort of thing that kind of almost works but doesn't quite. I can't really put my finger on why it didn't work but it was good enough that I kind of wished it was better, or at least had gotten the little things right- like having the girls who play the twins in the flashbacks be closer in size. I think perhaps thats whats wrong with it there are lots of little things that just are wrong.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1ba9ed9da0dd42758ed391f7baedbc1c",
            "input": "The memory of the \"The Last Hunt\" has stuck with me since I saw it in 1956 when I was 13. It is a movie that was far ahead of others at the time in that it addressed the treatment of the natives, the environment, and the ever present contrast between the short and long term effects of greed. It is as relevant today as in 1956, a cinemagraphic discussion of utmost depth and relevance. To top it off the setting is beautiful and the cinematography excellent. The memory of this movie will be with me to the end of my days.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a49284c2571470e9478283897cc14ec",
            "input": "While in her deathbed, Ann Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) repeats the name \"Harris\" and recalls the day on the 50's when she was an aspirant singer and traveled from New York to be the maid of honor of her wealthy friend Lila Wittenborn (Mamie Gummer) in Newport. Ann Grant (Claire Danes) is welcomed by Lila's alcoholic and reckless brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) in the Wittenborn's cottage at seaside and he tells her that his sister is in love actually for their friend and servant Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), who fought in the war and has graduated in medicine. Later the bride-to-be confesses her true feelings about Harris to Ann. However, when Ann meets Harris, she has a crush on him and they have a brief affair during one night stand while a tragedy happens with Buddy. Meanwhile Ann's daughters, the insecure and unstable Nina Mars (Toni Collette) and the happy wife and mother Constance Haverford (Natasha Richardson), are worried with their mother and have differences to be resolved.\"Evening\" has one of the best feminine casts I have ever seen in a movie, with magnificent performances. The resemblance of the stunning Mamie Gummer with her mother Meryl Streep is amazing and she has a performance that honors the name of her mother. The locations, costumes, set decoration, cinematography and soundtrack are also awesome. Unfortunately the plot is confused and I have not clearly understood the message of this film. Why motherhood is so important in the story? Was Constance engendered in the night stand of Ann and Harris and he would be her father? Why Ann and Harris have not stayed together, if the guy really loved her like he confesses in their occasional encounter in New York? Which issues Ann Lord has resolved after the visit of Lila Ross? Was Buddy Wittenborn bisexual or his love for Harris was a fraternal love? Why Nina Mars changed her thoughts about motherhood in the end? It seems that the screenplay writers or the director failed since they were not able to make sense and fulfillment to the beautiful love story. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): \"Ao Entardecer\" (\"In the Eventide\")",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8465b3fab99c44089f13665b512a2247",
            "input": "I saw this movie in the middle of the night, when I was flipping through the channels and there was nothing else on to watch. It's one of those films where you stop to see what it is - just for a moment! - but realize after twenty minutes or so that you just can't turn it off, no matter how bad it is. One of those movies that is somewhere in between being so bad it's good and so bad it's, well, just plain BAD, it's worth seeing just to experience the confusion of realizing that it's both! Great middle-of-the-night fare, if only for the fabulous tennis drag. Don't even bother asking yourself why nobody can tell that Chad Lowe is so obviously male, because logic does not apply.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-954d021a12b94be0a8184e8c887550ad",
            "input": "The next-to-last episode aired of the original Star Trek series is an interesting, sometimes melancholy installment that proves the show was still exploring its characters even at this point in the third season; though flawed, 'All Our Yesterdays' has its moments and overall a moody, compelling feel to it. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy beam down to a planet, assuming they are arriving in the nick of time to save or at least give some warning to whatever populace is there, since the planet's sun is due to explode within hours. But as it turns out, the people there are all too aware of the planet's fate, and using a kind of time travel device, have escaped into the past. Each person has been able to choose the time and place in the past where he or she would like to live at a 'library,' run by an elderly man named Mr. Atoz. Atoz assumes the three men are looking for a past to live in as well, and shows them various periods from which they can choose on viewers. There is some rather forced confusion at the start of the episode, with lines like:McCoy- Where did they go? Atoz- Wherever they wanted to.The misunderstanding could be cleared up rather easily, but for plot purposes, it isn't, and soon Kirk finds himself transported back to a period resembling 18th Century England, while Spock and McCoy are sent to an ice age, 5000 years in the planet's past. From here, the main focus is on Spock and his relationship with a woman exiled to this time by a tyrant as punishment. Spock begins acting increasingly emotional, showing anger toward McCoy and deep affection for Zarabeth, the woman. He eventually realizes that he is reverting back to the primitive emotional state of his ancestors on Vulcan, 5000 years ago. Kirk makes his way back to the library first, and finally convinces Mr. Atoz they don't belong in his planet's history. Spock and McCoy return just before it's too late, leaving Zarabeth behind; the Enterprise beams the three up and speeds away as the sun explodes, destroying the planet. The interaction between Spock and Zarabeth provides this episode's most memorable moments, though Kirk's adventure into the 'English' past is amusing. All in all, a very decent latter-day Star Trek outing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-25324b74a0d0464fbc656f48d57cc9e0",
            "input": "Add to the list of caricatures: a Southern preacher and \"congregation,\" a torch singer (Sophie Tucker?), a dancing chorus, and The Mills Brothers -- it only makes it worse.Contemptible burlesques of \"Negro\" performers, who themselves often appear in films to be parodying themselves and their race. Though the \"Negro comedy\" may have been accepted in its day, it's extremely offensive today, and I doubt that it was ever funny. Though I wouldn't have been offended, I don't think that I'd have laughed at the feeble attempts at humor. As an 11-year-old white boy, however, I might not have understood some of it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a26ad4343e274336b94d4c7b42a20060",
            "input": "War Inc. is a funny but strange film. The actors are likable, the film is likable also, but I don't know how to describe the plot. I will go into the plot later on. This is a movie with some weird casting choices. Besides John Cusack as a hit-man, which we saw years ago in Grosse Point blank which I liked. Here we have Hilary Duff playing a Russian pop star named Yonica Babyya or something like that. Her character is odd. There is a scene where she sticks a scorpion down her pants. And hits on Hauser(Cusack). There is a twist in the end involving the two characters. It makes sense.That is the only casting choice I am going into. Cause it just plain strange. The whole movie is strange. But at times incredibly funny and I was never bored. Here we have some of the best actors out there. Excluding Miss Duff. She ain't great. But here we have John Cusack, Marisa Tomeii, Joan Cusack, Ben Kingsley. See what I mean?This is the story of a hit-man named Hauser(Cusack). He is sent down to some Middle Eastern city to put a hit on an oil man named Omar Sheriif(not the actor). While trying to deal with his own personal problems, he has to help out the wedding of a popstar(played by Hilary Duff). And he falls in love with a news reporter(played by Marisa Tomeii). There is a thing about the popstar though. Hauser is disgusted by her. There is a scene where she is singing a song to him and afterwards he throws up.The twist in the end of the film reveals kind of why. The thing about the twist is that I did kind of see it coming. But that doesn't matter. This is a strange, funny, and entertaining comedy. I love most of the actors. So really, how could I not recommend it?War,Inc.:3.5/5",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9bab5bfcc7e8482a8355f4471b787af2",
            "input": "There are a number of problems with this movie, but the bottom line is that it tried to do too much with too little. The base story is quite good, but the money just wasn't there to do the story justice. The non-existent budget really killed this movie. Stuart Gordon (the writer/director) has writing credit on 'Honey, I Shrunk the Kids', which was a box office smash. However, that movie had some serious cash backing from Disney. Honestly, this is a good example of when to not make a movie. Had he waited a few more years, technology would have made it cheaper to do many of the effects. (not to mention he could have found a company with money.)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17c3f3a150ce4731853d900c13c058ee",
            "input": "Six GIs, about to be send home and discharged, get drunk and sneak into a cult meeting in Asia. Surrounded by hooded figures, two male dancers pretend to have a fight. Behind them, on an altar, a woven basket opens and a figure painted emerges and begins imitating a snake, finally biting one of the dancers on the neck. The imitation snake is dressed in some scaley looking body tights. (This is definitely a female imitation snake.) The cult member who has sneaked them into the secret meeting has warned the six men repeatedly that the ceremonies must not be interrupted and, most definitely, no photos must be taken or else they will be hunted down and killed. Naturally, the GIs take a flash photo, send the cult members into an angry hysteria, steal the basket containing the \"snake\" and run off with it into the Asian night.One of the guys, the most offensive and snarky, dies from a cobra bite on the neck, though no one can explain how the snake got into his hospital room.Back in New York, it all seems rather old news as the discharged men settle down into their civilian lives, still maintaining their bond with one another. Their jobs range from manager of a bowling alley (David Janssen) to graduate research student (Richard Long). James Dobson, Jack Kelly, and Marshall Thompson are also part of the neighborhood. Richard Long has a nice blond girl friend. Kelly is a somewhat reckless womanizer. But they all get along well enough and all of them seem happy.Then a dark, shifty-looking, mysterious woman (Faith Domergue) shows up and Marshall Thompson takes a liking to her and insinuates her into the group.Guess what happens. First Janssen is terrified by a shadow in the back seat and dies in a car crash. Then Kelly gets a visit from Domergue. Something scares him so badly he tumbles through the window and dies in the fall to the sidewalk. Long and Dobson begin to suspect what the viewer already knows -- that Domergue has had something to do with the deaths. They also reckon that maybe she's turning into a cobra, which is the case. Dobson confronts her with his suspicions and she proves his point.By this time Long and Thompson are thoroughly frazzled, particularly Thompson, who is in love with Domergue and has discovered that she is attracted to him, too, although he must explain to her what \"love\" is. No matter. A final reckless attack by the cobra woman against Long's girl friend -- not one of the six original offenders -- and Thompson must throw the snake out the window. On the pavement below, the body changes to that of Domergue. The end.I think I'll skip over most of the questions that the plot raises. I'll just mention one of the more prosaic ones in passing. Who paid for Domergue's fare from somewhere in Asia to New York? Who's paying her utility bills in the hotel? Who paid for her spectacular wardrobe? How come she speaks American English so well? What the hell's going on? The writers and director have clearly seen some of Val Lewton's modest horror films and, though not much effort has gone into this production, they've unashamedly stolen some gimmicks from Lewton. In Lewton's \"The Cat People\", for instance, the woman is transformed into a black leopard but, with one tiny exception, the threat is always kept in the shadows and is all the more spooky for it. Most of the transformations here use shadows too, but unlike Lewton's, the shadows are clumsy and unambiguous.Lewton also made occasional use of what he called \"buses\". Lewton's first \"bus\" was a literal one. A potential victim is hurrying alone through the dark tunnels of Central Park with only the sound of footsteps. Something or someone is following her. She freezes with fright under a street lamp. Something rustles the branches of the shrubs above her. She looks upward. There is a loud, wheezing shriek that makes your hair stand on end. It's a bus using its air brakes to stop for her. The producers used at least two \"buses\" in this film and they amount to nothing. A guy is walking distractedly across an intersection, for instance, and there is the sudden rumble of a truck that almost hits him. There is no set up to the shot. It's jammed in with a shoe horn.I don't much care for movies that perpetuate the stereotype of serpents as slimy, ugly, venomous, and phallic. As a matter of fact, no snakes are slimy, most are harmless, and many are extraordinarily beautiful. Furthermore, they're more feminine than masculine in their sinuous movements and serpentine approach to goals. You want a reptilian symbol for masculinity? Try a six-lined racerunner. It's a really fast lizard. When it sees something to eat, it rushes up and gobbles it down.Anyway, if you want to see some fine, low-budget scary films, don't bother with this one. Find \"The Cat People\" or one of Lewton's other minor masterpieces, of which this is an obvious copy.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7a6786b777824d5796e43e1271a91d75",
            "input": "Sure, he became rapidly uneven after this film, but from \"Knife In the Water\" up till \"The Tenant\", Roman Polanski could always be counted on to deliver something fascinating and unique. Despite many running themes (alienation, paranoia), no two of his films are really alike. The story of this is somewhat similar to his own \"Repulsion\" from ten years earlier, but the tone is completely different. \"The Tenant\" manages to balance darker than dark absurdity (I'm a bit hesitant on calling it humor, even though the protagonists bizarre behavior and dialog was occasionally funny) with some truly suspenseful paranoia. Polanski was always a master at building unease, and moments in this film are almost unbearably creepy. The overall weirdness of the film is also a plus.In addition to Polanski's exquisite as usual direction, the rest of the cast and crew offer great contributions. Polanski the actor is often overshadowed by Polanski the director, but his performance here truly captures his characters awkwardness and sense of being an outcast. The themes of social discrimination make this film more than just strangeness for the sake of being strange. The rest of the cast offers strong performances also, especially Isabelle Adjani's sympathetic turn, and Melyvn Douglas and Shelley Winters' appropriately annoying ones. \"The Tenant\" is often underrated because of how ready people are to heap praise on both \"Repulsion\" and \"Rosemary's Baby\", but its just as brilliant as either of those classics. (9/10)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dacd8eb257c94f56a25d35edb69adec0",
            "input": "This kind of storytelling is unacceptable The only reason this film is anywhere above the 5 stars out of 10 line is because it's got George Lucas behind it, and it has the words \"Star\" and \"Wars\" in its title. That is an insult to aspiring filmmakers, and many others out there who have made clearly superior films with superior story, writing and acting, but did not get the credit. This is a travesty.First things first. The story. Anakin's evolution? There is none. Apart from a little make-up around the eyes, and a little yelling, there is none. He becomes young, stupid, cocky Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader in a single blow. The only thing consistent about Darth Vader in the original series was his intelligence, how good he was at almost everything he did, planning, fighting, you name it. The only consistent thing about Anakin that is perceived in the prequel trilogy is his consistent stupidity. He even loses his body because of a bout of stupid cockiness.What part of the Emperor Palpatine telling him legends of the Sith does not point to the Emperor being a Sith? Unacceptable!The fight scenes used too many digital doubles. Everyone's flying all over the place like teddy bears in a make-believe doll house. Count Dooku, Emperor Palpatine, Anakin, Obi-Wan, almost every fighter had a rubbery digital double jumping around.In one specific fight scene, Obi-Wan and Anakin in the climactic battle, they both actually stop in the middle of parries and ripostes, to twirl their sabers a few times while inches apart. I realize the fights are choreographed, but that just got me shaking my head in disbelief and disgust.The writing was awful. All the dialogue was of tremendously low quality. The good actors like Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman did the best they could with their lines, but that just wasn't enough. I can't say enough bad things about this film. Too much special effects, plot holes bigger than the centre of the universe, and absolutely no insights into any of the characters. This is the biggest mistake of this film: nothing new is offered. We know the rough picture of everything, all Lucas did was colour it in.We knew Anakin lost his limbs. We knew Luke and Leia are brother and sister, we knew Luke is Anakin's son, we knew Obi-Wan and Yoda go to exile, we knew everything. Nothing new is offered in this film. If that's all the fans wanted, then that's fine, Lucas couldn't have gone wrong.But when Anakin finally becomes Darth Vader, and he asks after Padme, and hears she is dead, he reaches out his arms awkwardly and screams \"Nooooooooooooooooooooo.\" That scene screamed B-movie all the way, and I was half expecting Darth Vader to go \"DANGER WILL ROBINSON, DANGER\" at any time. That is what this is. A B-movie, disguised by a huge budget and a ultra-loyalist fan base that will settle with anything now that the first two movies have pulled their standards down to the pits of the Earth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-396eaceebf654f76bee7d5919e47053b",
            "input": "Just another example of why Stepehn King's books should not be made into movies. (Even Carrie, one of the best, is ruined in the adaptation from book to screen.) The premise of the story revolves around a fat lawyer, always on a diet, who \"accidentally\" kills an old gypsy woman. In court, with the help of the judge and the local police chief, he gets off, even though the accident was sort of his fault as he was not paying attention as he was driving. The father of the dead gypsy woman places a curse on the 3, with our main character, Billy (the lawyer) getting thinner and thinner by the day. Though the movie kept with the book, for the most part, and has your typical King ending, the acting was stilted and felt forced. We went from one scene to the next without much of anything in between, sort of like reading acts in a play. King himself made a cameo in the movie (sort of like Dave Barry), which reinforces my belief that authors should stay just that: authors. Leave the acting to actors. Not that anyone in this movie was that great. I've seen the major characters in movies where they were much better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5430eab41c1343d6824be82b4ca0bf6b",
            "input": "I gave this film 10 not because it is a superbly consistent movie, but for it's pure ability to evoke emotions in its audience. The story of one-woman's-struggle-against-all-odds is an old cliché by now, but very few films have carried it off with so much warmth and sincerity as The Color Purple.It also showed a different side to the African-American experience - showing that after slaves were granted freedom many fell into the ways of the hated 'white man' and were abusive of their own people. I find this an important point as it goes against the portray-white-on-black-violence-and-win-an-Oscar trend.Also the acting performances are superb - especially Oprah who I now have a new found respect for.Well worth watching - but keep some tissue handy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30452b2ee6e74f89b26b59b0891e4373",
            "input": "The premise of Cabin Fever starts like it MIGHT have something to offer. A group of college teens after finals (in the fall?) goes to a resort cabin in the woods where one by one they are attacked by an unseen flesh eating virus.Unfortunately, the first paragraph is where any remote elements of film quality stop. Cabin Fever is little more than college kids looking for sex, booze, talking non-stop about nothing, and seeing how many F-bombs they can get into 1:40 minutes or however long this mess is.The kids act and react stupidly to everything around them. One of them for instance discovers that the skin virus has infected her legs, so what does she do? She keeps shaving her legs failing to take proper medical attention for her wounds. The scene is little more than a gross out. In another scene, Rider Strong from \"Boy Meets World\" gets bitten on the hand by some kid who only says \"Pancakes\" and likes to do karate kicks on those who sit next to him. If you can figure out the reason for why the \"Pancakes\" kid was included, I'd love to know. Anyway, Rider pets a wild dog and goes off to wash his bitten hand in a most likely contaminated creek. Another kid likes to drop F-bombs in reacting to everything around him and shoot squirrels. Why? Your guess is as good as mine!Rider Strong is the ONLY kid with any recognition in this movie. He tries to calm people down in-between the yelling and screaming and F*** Y**! bombs that people are throwing around. When the kids aren't yelling, they are having or talking about sex or talking nonsense to the other adult characters who are EVEN MORE (if that is possible)idiotic than the kids! The idiot cop with an IQ of 60 at best may be one of the WORST acting jobs I have ever seen in a movie. You talk about people not playing with a full deck, this dork doesn't even know how to find the cards! LOL! I was like, \"Will you PLEASE shut up already?!\" He makes the kid actors look like geniuses! The only part that I sort of liked was Rider's scary story (although gory) about the deranged bowling alley guy. In interviews, Rider said that he had a great deal of respect for director Eli Roth. But the problem is that Mr. Roth appears to be going for little more than shock and gore. There are far too many bad things about this movie for Mr. Roth to get any credit. I wish I could agree with Rider and find something likable about this movie. Maybe the fall scenery in the beginning? Actually, Rider Strong JUST saves this movie from being a 1! Hopefully, he was compensated for this junk!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab379972865f4cda9e4bbc40aa134f83",
            "input": "To confess having fantasies about Brad Pitt is a pretty tough admission for an heterosexual to make. But what can I tell you? Maybe is that famous extra something that everybody talks about and makes a star a star. It crosses that barrier. It pulls you into unknown sensual and emotional territory. Brando had it in spades, Montgomery Clift, Gary Cooper, James Dean of course and in more recent times, Tom Cruise, Jude Law, Johnny Depp, Ewan McGregor and Billy Crudup. Women fell in love with Garbo, Dietrich, Katharine and Audrey Hepburn, Grace Kelly, Marilyn Monroe, Julie Christie, Charlotte Rampling, Meryl Streep, Vanessa Redgrave, Julia Roberts and very very recently Natalie Portman. But Brad Pitt has, singlehandedly, redefined the concept. He is the only reason to go out, get in the car, find parking, buy a ticket, popcorn and get into a theatre to see \"Troy\" If you liked epics in the \"Jupiter's Darling\" style you may enjoy this. But if you don't, go all the same, we want to keep Brad Pitt in business.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-177423247613482e927f3dd0dcf90d21",
            "input": "This story about three women is a very sensitive study about: Muriël (Charlotte Van Den Eynde) the youngest, Laura (Els Dottermans) who is about 37 and Martha (Frieda Pittors) the oldest who is the mother of Muriël. They live together in the same building. They have different expectations of life. The vital Laura wants a child. Muriël comes from a village and wants to change her life in Brussels. Martha dreams about her youth when she was a young girl. In fact nothing happens in this movie so you wait for something - for instances an accident - which could dramatize this story. As times goes on, you discover that the director Dorothée Van Den Berghe only wants to develop a psychological portrait of the three women and nothing more. This movie is disappointing because you expect the women to learn from their experiences which is not the case, so one is left with a feeling of emptiness.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6865bd245b2e4bb885ca37bdc5fa951c",
            "input": "I borrowed this movie because not only because its gay theme but the thought of role playing really intrigued me. I was pleasantly surprised that it was shot in San Francisco since I live near SF. And of course it was nice to see shots of the Castro district (although the castro to me really caters more to gay male than female). But other than that I can't really recommend this movie. The characters aren't really developed for me to care and when they finally started to get to the \"role playing\" I was already bored out of my mind. And the role playing scenes that I did see were a bit embarrassing to watch. The acting leaves something to be desired. Needless to say I didn't finish the movie. I'd skip this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9a51e757c3484de9b148b6e6abc669e2",
            "input": "I had high hopes for this film. I thought the premise interesting. I stuck through it, even though I found the acting, save Helena Bonham Carter, unremarkable. I kept hoping my time spent would pay off, but in the end I was left me wondering why they even bothered to make this thing. Maybe in George Orwell's version there is a message worth conveying. If this film accomplished anything, it has inspired me to read Orwell's classic. I find it hard to believe his tale could be as disappointing as this adaption. If the film maker's message is \"the mundane life is worth living\", well then, they've succeeded. I would recommend this film to no one; 101 minutes of my life wasted.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fb36cb5e37f94f7c84e9663e7a5acfbe",
            "input": "William Powell is a doctor dealing with a murder and an ex-wife in \"The Ex-Mrs. Bradford,\" also starring Jean Arthur, Eric Blore, and James Gleason. It seems that Powell had chemistry going with just about any woman with whom he was teamed. Though he and Myrna Loy were the perfect screen couple, the actor made a couple of other \"Thin Man\" type movies, one with Ginger Rogers and this one with Arthur, both to very good effect.Somehow one never gets tired of seeing Powell as a witty, debonair professional and \"The Ex-Mrs. Bradford\" is no exception. The ex-Mrs. B has Mr. B served with a subpoena for back alimony and then moves back in to help him solve a mystery that she's dragged him into. And this isn't the first time she's done that! It almost seems as though there was a \"Bradford\" film before this one or that this was intended to be the first of a series of films - Mr. B complains that his mystery-writer ex is constantly bringing him into cases. This time, a jockey riding the favorite horse in a raise mysteriously falls off the horse and dies right before the finish line.The solution of the case is kind of outlandish but it's beside the point. The point is the banter between the couple and the interference of the ex-Mrs. B. Jean Arthur is quite glamorous in her role and very funny. However, with an actress who comes off as brainy as Arthur does, the humor seems intentional rather than featherbrained. I suspect the writer had something else in mind - say, the wacky side of Carole Lombard. When Arthur hears that the police have arrived, she says, \"Ah, it's probably about my alimony. I've been waiting for the police to take a hand in it,\" it's more of a rib to Powell rather than a serious statement. It still works well, and it shows how a good actress can make a part her own.Definitely worth watching, as William Powell and Jean Arthur always were.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b7e3ceedd9f34830a0965463ee7b7e20",
            "input": "Funny. Sad. Charming. These are all words that floated through my head while I was watching this beautiful, simple film.It is rare that a movie truly moves me, but \"Shall We Dance?\" accomplished that with grace to spare. Gentle humor mixed in with occasional subtle agony made this easily one of the best experiences of my movie-viewing history. It left me with a quiet sense of exultation, but with a small touch of sadness mixed in.And the dancing, oh yes, the dancing. Even if you are not a lover of the art, or can't put one foot in front of another, the steps displayed here will take your breath away, and make you want to sign up for classes as fast as you can. It was absolutely enchanting, even the parts that show Sugiyama's (touchingly portrayed by Koji Yakusho) stilted steps when he was first learning to dance were lovely in a humorous, child-like way. And yet, this film was not entirely about dancing, but more about the subtleties of human behavior and feelings. We witness a shy man learning to express his repressed feelings through dance, a beautiful dance instructor rediscovering her love for the art, and the personal growth of every member of the wonderful supporting cast.Beauty. Pain. Emotion. All the love and little agonies of life are here, expressed with the delicate feeling of a fine Japanese watercolor painting combined with the emotional strength and grace of the culture.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9d0d99fc5b454c12999d3360d5ae9053",
            "input": "Exactly what you would expect from a B-Movie. Deritive, gratuitous nudity, boring in parts, ridiculous gore and cheesy special-effects. Of course it could have been better, better acted (defintly) better written, directed, etc. But then I guess it wouldn't have been a B movie. The actors pretty much sucked, in fact this pretty much seemed like an episode of buffy the vampire slayer or something except with a lot of blood, profanity and nudity.Tiffany Shepis must be singled out. She absolutely is the scream queen of the new millennium. Not that acting really matters in these movies, but she was better than any of the other actors. She's also smokin hot, in that plastic jump suit thing she wore for the whole movie - wow! Her posterior is absolutely stunning in that outfit, I mean it every single time she turns around you can help but check her out. And near then end of the film the viewer is rewarded with seeing her completely nekked.So if your a looser b-movie horror buff (like myself), check this out. If not, you should probably avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-659f848bf3c9468c9c75468d4cc9fc78",
            "input": "Where can I begin. I heard this movie was coming out and I was very mad. I am a huge fan of the original Carlito's Way and when I heard about this, I thought it would be just like almost all the other sequels that come out in Hollywood. I thought it would be bad. Boy was I wrong, this movie was much worse than I expected. Not saying all sequels are bad, but thats the problem with Hollywood these days, they make too many sequels and remakes and rush them. This was not a theater release, it is a DVD release. Still, in my opinion, there was no reason at all for this to be made. After I heard about this film was in progress, I then later heard Pacino was not in it. That right away killed any chance this movie had of being good. Why did I check this movie out then some of you may ask? Well I had the opportunity to see it so I did. I don't only watch movies that I have high expectations of, I had low expectations on this one obviously. I just wanted to see if it would have anything relevant in it. Now, if any of you reading this are a Carlito's Way fan, you know a lot of the story in the first one has to do with him going to jail.*VERY MINOR SPOILER* I wont ruin anything, because this may actually make you not want to waste 2 hours watching this trash. All I will say is- in the end of Carlito's Way 2, we don't see Carlito go to jail. Now, I don't know about any of you, but I would have thought a prequel to Carlitos Way would show how he ended up in jail. I even had some interest in actually seeing what happened.Now, thats not my only problem with the film. The actor who played Carlito did not do too bad a job, but he could not have saved this film if he tried. There's not even all those little things that should be thrown in there that Carlito's Way fans would like. You don't see any appearance of Kleinfeld or other key characters in the first one, I would have liked to see something like that. What is even worse, is Luis Guzman is in this film, yet he doesn't play the same character he plays in the first film. Big mistake on their part, why cast the same actor for a different character, it made the movie worse than it already was.Bottom line, I am a Carlito's Way fan, this new straight to DVD release is a disgrace. If you are a fan, don't watch this movie coming in with high expectations. This movie did basically nothing for me, and it is definitely one movie I wont be picking up on DVD, or watching ever again.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2b35a0782dcf4e66b2a748be79fe2050",
            "input": "A hint I think may be gathered by the various comments on this thread.I was quite amazed at the number of people who liked this film who want to make it \"mandatory\" or \"compulsory\".I think this gives us a little bit of insight into the reason this film and the issue underlying it is so polarizing.The Global Warming issue appeals a lot to people who want to force others to \"do right\". It appeals particularly to more \"liberal\" leaning people because it doesn't have to do with bedroom morality which is what usually gets conservatives who want to force you to \"be good\" going.And that's the problem with the film. Al Gore is a politician. And a very successful one at that. He just can't help himself from appealing to those people who want to force others to do as they would. The political appeal is just too great.And there we are left with a scientific issue that may be of huge importance, reduced to a political issue appealing to those in the body politic with a predilection to force other to \"do right\".Another interesting question is how did the Environmental movement get hijacked by such people?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-edbc112808934498a8230f2abd917986",
            "input": "Reese Witherspoon plays Dani, a young country girl that falls madly in love with the new 17 year old neighbor, Court, played by Jason London. Court tries his best to make Dani realize that the difference in their ages would make a love relationship improbable. Soon the nubile charm of Dani starts winning over Court's will. Next enters the meeting of Dani's older sister, played by Emily Warfield, and the beginning of a short lived love/jealousy problem.Tess Harper and Sam Waterston round out the cast. This is a fresh, free spirited; but heartbreaking drama that touches down deep. Feel free to cry.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3134feb3d89640cda9ac3e63899088da",
            "input": "\"Shower\" is an story about loyalty, about the unstoppable advance of modern world in the detriment of rather traditional and more human ways of life. A man forced to choose between his successful career in business, his big-city life, his wife, and his retarded young brother. The eternal doubt between what we WANT to do and what we SHOULD do. The modern China versus the ancient one. The public baths with its gatherings, its cricket fights versus the shopping centres and the skyscraper. Lots of old men and women that are no longer needed. China, one country, two systems, as Xiao Ping said ... though one of them is killing the other. Tender, moving, full of funny moments, and of bitter-sweet ones.The sensitive ones will cry and laugh equally. The actors are enormous, especially the one who performs the role of the retarded boy; and Yang Zhang makes a good job, easy, simple, letting the story just flow by itself.My rate: 8/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-23411bd8941e4beca7419aaa06a56039",
            "input": "Wow, I can't believe I waited so long to see this film. I just never got around to watching it. The plot has nothing that interests me. I know nothing about soccer (football.) I am one of those American fools that has no clue. I had never even seen David Beckham before this film. I chose to ignore the buzz surrounding this film at the time it was released in America. Enough about me. Truth be told, it was a mistake to ignore this little piece of movie-making heaven. What a fun film. It's full of color and exuberance. I had a goofy grin on my face through the whole movie. Parminder Nagra is so sweet and lovable, you can't help but root for her. No wonder why the American television show E.R. has snatched her up. I have a new appreciation for Indian culture. Those people know how to have a good time. The wedding scenes are dazzlingly beautiful. The only problem I had was deciphering some of the British slang and dialogue through the accents. I turned on the English subtitles to make sure I didn't miss anything. (This is not a criticism of the film!) I'm sure audiences worldwide have trouble understanding the constantly changing slang in American films as well. This is a perfect date film. It has a great sports plot like Rocky, and a strong sense of feminism that is empowering for women. I watched it with my wife, and sixteen year old niece, and we all loved it. I highly recommend it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2583309b189b4ff69c5fa6f978210700",
            "input": "Scary, but mostly in the sense that will it be over before I turn 70. I saw this as a late night re-run in about 1976 and thought it would never end. Like crackers, it's better than nothing (but just).Ray Milland is a little scary because he looks as if he's been stuffed by a taxidermist. Yvette Mimeux looks as if she's smoked up all the Beautiful Downtown Burbank Brown. It's a sort of Roy Rogers version of Rosemary's Baby. This is one turkey that should never have been made. If you have insomnia and it's 1:30 on Saturday morning and there's nothing on but replays of the 1972 Roller Derby Chamionship, then I guess it beats that. But God help you if this is your only choice for entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad96fabd179a4b7399a6d9a9b7991799",
            "input": "This is one a most famous movies of the French sexual empowerment of the seventies, starring Gerard Depardieu and Patrick Dewaere in extremely sarcastic roles. It is also one of the many dark psychological dramas of the seventies/eighties, such as \"Serie Noire\", \"Buffet Froid\", \"Beau Pere\", all realized by Blier.However, I would like to correct the previous comment that was posted on the movie: the translated title in English is very far from the French version. It is true that both protagonists are \"going places\", but the title in French could be literally translated by \"the waltz dancers\", which is a metaphor for the movement of the testicles...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf2d19581fbf41fabdb5091df042730a",
            "input": "this movie is just great. if you have a chance to see it, then you should run to see it. even though the movie has almost nothing to do with its original from 1932, Pacino does a great job playing as Tony Montana to get around. Pacino has this way about him where he can say anything in anyway and make it sound just great. if you thought that Pulp Fiction was good with the swear words (if you saw it) then you should also see Scarface to see another angle at how an actor can say them. (its quite sweet) even though the movie is has a lot of action and the plot moves very fast through time, not keeping the realtime aspect ratio correct, it is still easy to follow along, but you must keep your eyes peeled at all times to not lose anything. personally, i have found that watching this movie makes three hours seem like a breeze, it is really just that great. this movie is one of thoe movies that is acted and directed so well that not only do you forget that this movie was made in the crappy 80s but that it makes you actually root for the bad guy... \"So say good night to the BAD guy\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3727c6a891ef4ce6971567ba66b7fad2",
            "input": "The movie never becomes intolerable to watch. And to tell it straight, it has nothing to show either, except maybe part-sexy Alicia Silverstone in a nerdy non-sexy character in revealing quite-sexy dresses. The story is very easy to follow or there's nothing to follow -- you can see in either way. There is no suspense, little action, unimpressive dialogs, unsatisfactory sensuality, same boring locations and very bland acting. Kevin Dillon is totally worthless. Silverstone... well, I didn't concentrate too much on her acting, I confess. Yet as I said earlier, if one has nothing to do except watching a movie, this won't look so bad. 4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-696889bec3a84683a57535aa4f913e2d",
            "input": "Feature of early 21 century cinema of lets pit different evil creatures and bad guys against each other. We haven't seen stuff like this since Godzilla v King Kong and the like. Always sounds great on paper when you're splicing up and in a haze of the good stuff you have an inspired idea and see the whole playing out before you like Beethoven's symphonies. Then you come to writing it. Great ideas like all vampires are female. Ergo hot, seductive deadly but in a way I want to perish sort of way. And all zombies are men. well thats what men are like to a woman just after shes been dumped or cheated on right? So it all looks good up to actually making it. Then the rot starts to set in. Mosters have fight. Nothing much happens. Another fight. Philosophical noodling and cods wallop. Eureka we've found how to win. Big fight again and the End. Sounds great doesn't it? If it was made an indie company it would be great. But this is Hollywood with the eye on the bucks: gloss instead of what the fans want. It all could have been gore soaked beautiful.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c54b5061a54a455080d2f6f3defca10d",
            "input": "This is truly one from the \"Golden Age\" of Hollywood, the kind they do not make anymore. It is an unique, fun movie that keeps you guessing what is going to happen next. All the actors are perfectly cast and they are all great supporting actors. This is the first movie I saw with Ronald Colman in it and I have been a fan of his ever since. Reginald Gardiner has always been a favorite supporting actor of mine and adds a certain quality to every movie he is in. While he played a different kind of character here, he still added something to the movie that another actor cast in this character would not have added.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3668d47fdb9349cfa84d6abe29c7e687",
            "input": "Another turgid action/adventure flick from the Quinn Martin Productions factory. Roy Thinnes plays undercover agent Diamond Head (Mr. Head, to you), working for his G-Man handler \"Aunt Mary\", looking for \"Tree\", who's on a mission to...well, just watch the movie. This one deserved and got the full MST3K sendup. As the boys and various reviewers have pointed out, the movie \"Fargo\" had more Hawaiian locations than this film. Apparently shot on a puny budget, this movie highlights Hawaii's broken-down dive shops, gas stations, and cheapo hotels. Zulu -- later to star as Kono in Hawaii-Five-O -- appears as Thinnes' lumpy, inept sidekick, while France Nguyen models the Jenny Craig diet gone horribly wrong. Others sharing the flickering screen include a drunken Richard Harris knockoff, a George Takai imitator, a not-so-smart hit-man with sprayed-on Sansabelt slacks, and the villain \"Tree\", sporting a veddy British accent. You can pretty much figure out the plot halfway through the opening credits, but relax--just enjoy the giddy mediocrity of this 70's movie-of-the-week.Whenever I think of this movie (and I think of this movie often), I catch myself humming the theme, written for flute and tuba...no one knows why. Trivia note--Diamond Head was directed by Jeannot Szwarc, one of three contract directors at Universal who would go on to make much bigger films, in his case Jaws 2. The others were John Badham (War Games), and a young fellow named Steven Spielberg...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a24bab3eef894578ad5e53b2172aeb16",
            "input": "I happen to run into this movie one night so I decided to watch it! I was very pleased with the movie... I thought it was a wonderful plot. It's a great feeling knowing a deceased one has come back and you get that second chance to say what you want to say! And this wife stayed devoted for 23 years!!! I thought it was a great movie!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e736b43c52254cf288f9151acf9be803",
            "input": "i went into watching this movie knowing it wasn't going to be great. but what i witnessed was to awful for words. i don't mean to be harsh, its just the movie was terrible. overall it had bad, i mean AWFUL special effects, the acting wasn't too bad, but wasn't good either, and sasquatch himself was like.... well, not sasquatch. in my opinion the best sasquatch movie is Harry and the Hendersons. its not violent or horror, but it has the best depiction of sasquatch. at least its a suit and not some half-ass cgi rip-off. only see this movie if you are desperate, or really appreciate anyone in the film. or go watch boondock saints, it is MUCH better.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4d58de4482ed49c5a0066dc639986405",
            "input": "Jackie Chan is considered by many film and martial arts movie fans as one of the greatest action stars ever to grace the silver screen and Police Story cemented his reputation as the likely successor to the late, great Bruce Lee. If Enter The Dragon bared the so-called bench mark of Lee's greatness in the 70s, then the same can be said about Police Story and Jackie Chan in the 80s.Forget about the Rush Hour trilogy, or any of his US efforts- the one film that really typifies Chan's excellence, not to mention kick starting his status as a high kicking, bone-crushing kung- fu talisman, as well as his movie career was this, Police Story- the first in a series of successful cop films, set in mainland, present day Hong Kong.I've seen many of his efforts- likewise the US-based Rush Hour, Rumble in the Bronx, The Medalian and The Tuxedo to name- and frankly many of them pale into insignificance compared to Police Story. In those movies, we saw a less 'dumbed down' version of Jackie, of whom didn't get the opportunity to utilise his fighting abilities to the maximum, not to mention the fight sequences were no where as good as those in such efforts as Drunken Master, Police Story to name. The stunts in this movie are extraordinary and are the best featured in any action movie. The shopping mall scene is literally one of a kind and has to be seen to be believed: the flying shards of glass, Chan who is left dangling outside the bus only by his walking stick as a madman frantically drives through the streets of the town, and Chan successfully making usage of all sorts of inanimate objects and prop devices as weapons to fight the bad guys with. Considering he is known for injuring and breaking every bone in his body and putting himself in harm's way, Jackie's persistence in showing his versatility as a stuntman himself by not relying on one, is somewhat of a testament to his reputation as a kung fu expert. Especially as he has the bruises to show for it. Thus, he has proved that he is no one-trick pony when it comes down to devising and coming up with various and clever looking moves.Story-wise, there is not much to discuss but what it lacks in narrative, it makes up with its end-to end action and fight sequences. As for the dialogue, well it's not a really huge aspect of the film- which is why most fans of Jackie's and martial arts films are more interested in action, as opposed to the story.Unlike say The Matrix, there are no wires or CGI, or any form of computer trickery involved. What you see is what you get- and what you get with Police Story is a great Jackie Chan epic, full of action and pulsating stunts.It is miles better than Rumble In The Bronx, Rush Hour and all his other American efforts.Police Story is an excellent film and one I'd definitely recommend to anyone who is a novice Jackie Chan fan, but of whom are unsure which one they should watch first.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21558c41f642449cae70504a40741abd",
            "input": "This is a story about Shin-ae, who moves to Milyang from Seoul with her young son Jun to start over after the accidental death of her husband. Her husband was born here, and she is opening up a piano school, but also has ambitions to own some land with the insurance money she received from the death. If that is what the film was about, it probably would have been like a Hollywood film, with her falling for some local guy and being happy with her son in their new home. But, this is not Hollywood. Her son gets kidnapped and murdered, ostensibly because it is known she has cash from the settlement. The grief process, attempts at moving on, attempts to clear her conscience of guilt, are all done admirably, and the lead actress is superb. The only caveat, and it has to be stated, is that this is a depressing film. You have to know that going in. You want Shin-ae to go through her grief and find some measure of happiness. Again, this is not Hollywood, it is Korea and in Korean cinema, especially drama, they pull no punches. Life is what happens to you. Great acting, but sometimes a tough film to watch, due to the goings on. If you stay, you'll be rewarded. Do that.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73167bc606484386b682294247e88aff",
            "input": "I love these actors, but they were wasted in this flick.I can only wonder, what WERE they thinking agreeing to this crap???Debra Winger just phoned it in; Dennis Quaid and Arliss Howard were caricatures. Some people thought it was deep. Well, if you liked \"Breaking the Waves\", you'll probably like this too. I hated both. 3/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6bed308e683543af81a5baa942e494f9",
            "input": "I absolutely loved this show. I watched it from the time it first aired in the late 90's to the very last episode. In my honest opinion it was a wonderful family drama that is so rare these days. Definitely a show you could watch with a friend or your children. Yes things have changed a bit with Jo since we last saw her in the books, but it's still compelling with great stories and good lessons. The actress that portrays Jo Bhaer (Michelle Burke) does a wonderful job as does as the actor who plays Nick Riley (Spencer Rochfort) Throughout the series we get to see the developing romance between Jo and Nick as well as the daily stories and lessons the kids and students learn. I recommend this show to anyone.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-065398c2ac744573b9c25a9505129e77",
            "input": "**Possible Spoiler*** Adam Sandler is usually typecast in Comedy,but in \"Reign\",gives a deeply moving performance.While there are people who showed Courage facing post September 11,2001,Sandler plays Fineman,a widower who is lonely and \"lost in his own world\".Johnson(Cheadle),a practicing dentist,encounters his old College buddy(Sandler)and wants to catch up on \"Old times\".We see,as in Rain Man(Dustin Hoffman),Fineman also gets emotional and withdrawn in stressful situations.Oldies music,appears to be a comfort and \"Psychological\" crutch for him to lean on.Johnson looks for,in Fineman,that certain pleasure and ease missing in his Family.He also feels unhappy and unsatisfied in his Job.In the same instance,He also wants to make sure his friend does not fall through the social \"cracks\".I came away from this movie,with a different outlook and more sympathetic Compassion for grieving families.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-154da86731064c3f9a34cbd86fe0fceb",
            "input": "Memoirs of a Geisha is a beautifully filmed movie, there is no doubt about that. And the acting is generally excellent, at least in terms of how it portrays the characters as they are scripted.However, so many details small and large are just _wrong_ that it just bothers me too much to be able to enjoy it fully. A small detail that typifies the kind of lack of sensitivity of sorts is one scene (no this does not spoil anything) where Mameha rings a bell that hangs at the door of the house where Sayuri lives, on a snowy winter day. The bell she's ringing is a fuurin, or wind chime - that is only left hanging outside of houses in Japan in the summer! People in traditional Japanese homes didn't have doorbells - they just opened the door and announced themselves. (You may think this is such a trivial detail, but I would equate this to a movie made about America where a Christmas wreath is hanging on the door in July and no one thinks anything of it.) And don't even get me started on the totally wrong hairstyles given to the maiko and geisha, which is vaguely pan-Asian/Chinese/kung-fu-ish, and nothing like real thing. I think this rather cavalier attitude towards the culture they are trying to portray really comes out in the attitudes and the portrayals of people and situations too. So, I suppose that the less you know about Japanese culture and the world of the geisha and maiko in Kyoto (which is what \"Miyako\" is), then I suppose the more you will enjoy this. I honestly think this movie could have been so much better...as it is, it's just another Hollywood version of \"exotic Japan\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-62e9f58ba66b4aa5bf7b3454968cdbbb",
            "input": "I started watching The Apprentice about 4 years ago(maybe 5) and I really really liked it. The first thing that strikes you about it is the refreshing format, which though similar to a lot of other reality shows at its core, is still very entertaining. Donald Trump is wonderful as the host and the main judge of the show as well. The casting coup with intelligent people having good looks being picked as contestants is appreciated as well. But the best part of the show is New York city. Mark Burnett may have made a lot of crap in his time but his handling of the cinematography is excellent as he makes NYC look like a character unto itself. The jazz tunes coupled with some great camera-work make New York look spectacular.The Apprentice will easily alway make my top 3 reality shows of all time(The Amazing Race is no. 1,however).But just like the amazing race this show is always best watched in moderation. If you keep watching it for a while the originality of the show will wear off fast(the same case as with TAR).Star World, the broadcasters in this country, did a bang up job in presenting the show. The first three seasons were shown in a row, then after 2 years the next two seasons were shown, which kept the concept fresh.In conclusion, you will love this show, especially the first 2 seasons. However if you keep watching the show continuously, thereafter its charm WILL wear off and FAST.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca1eb034ffd24387a8097ac6ed8d1c71",
            "input": "I loved the Batman tv series and was really looking forward to this. But they tried to do too much.Why they had the story of Adam West and Burt Ward trying to recover the batmobile was beyond me. I don't want to knock Burt or Adam for the way they look now.....It's been 35 years since they appeared at Batman and Robin, but to see them dressed in dress suits and fighting 'badguys' was kinda sad. I would rather of just seen the ex-stars do commentary. The batmobile side story was stupid.As for the flashback movie, I think it was too short and left out way too much. It was really just a quick overview in my opinion. I'd like more background. They showed the Penguin and Joker for about a minute each just to tell the same stuff I already knew. The Joker had a mustache under his makeup and the penguin had to smoke even though he hated it and was an ex-smoker. That was it on those 2.I'd love to read the book. I am sure it has more in it that this showed. Like why was there 2 Riddlers or why 3 Catwoman's or 3 Mister Freezes. Where was Commishioner Gordon, Cheif OHara, Alfred, Mister Freeze, King Tut, etc. the List goes on. Like I said even the ones that were in this one were barely in it.Very disappointing. And really corny.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ac7f3f463194b05a7cbcbde26e5f9e0",
            "input": "So, Prom Night was supposed to be a horror and thriller movie. I'm a big wuss and was scared to see this movie at the beginning, but upon seeing it, it is neither horror or thriller.I was basically making fun of the movie in my seat because it was so predictable. You could predict what was going to happen next. The young actors were alright at playing their characters, but I'd have to say the killer was definitely at the top of the game - acting wise.Yes, I'll give props for the plot because it was good, but it's not thrilling or scary. There were almost zero \"jump-in-your-seat\" scenes. So, don't waste ten dollars seeing it in theatres, wait 'til it comes to DVD.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4c2e1aeb3be144e79a8941f8b81a1b51",
            "input": "This movie is stuffed full of stock Horror movie goodies: chained lunatics, pre-meditated murder, a mad (vaguely lesbian) female scientist with an even madder father who wears a mask because of his horrible disfigurement, poisoning, spooky castles, werewolves (male and female), adultery, slain lovers, Tibetan mystics, the half-man/half-plant victim of some unnamed experiment, grave robbing, mind control, walled up bodies, a car crash on a lonely road, electrocution, knights in armour - the lot, all topped off with an incredibly awful score and some of the worst Foley work ever done.The script is incomprehensible (even by badly dubbed Spanish Horror movie standards) and some of the editing is just bizarre. In one scene where the lead female evil scientist goes to visit our heroine in her bedroom for one of the badly dubbed: \"That is fantastical. I do not understand. Explain to me again how this is...\" exposition scenes that litter this movie, there is a sudden hand held cutaway of the girl's thighs as she gets out of bed for no apparent reason at all other than to cover a cut in the bad scientist's \"Mwahaha! All your werewolfs belong mine!\" speech. Though why they went to the bother I don't know because there are plenty of other jarring jump cuts all over the place - even allowing for the atrocious pan and scan of the print I saw.The Director was, according to one interview with the star, drunk for most of the shoot and the film looks like it. It is an incoherent mess. It's made even more incoherent by the inclusion of werewolf rampage footage from a different film The Mark of the Wolf Man (made 4 years earlier, featuring the same actor but playing the part with more aggression and with a different shirt and make up - IS there a word in Spanish for \"Continuity\"?) and more padding of another actor in the wolfman get-up ambling about in long shot.The music is incredibly bad varying almost at random from full orchestral creepy house music, to bosannova, to the longest piano and gong duet ever recorded. (Thinking about it, it might not have been a duet. It might have been a solo. The piano part was so simple it could have been picked out with one hand while the player whacked away at the gong with the other.) This is one of the most bewilderedly trance-state inducing bad movies of the year so far for me. Enjoy.Favourite line: \"Ilona! This madness and perversity will turn against you!\" How true.Favourite shot: The lover, discovering his girlfriend slain, dropping the candle in a cartoon-like demonstration of surprise. Rank amateur directing there.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e9d55151f8714ba1b9e0ce6d951fe307",
            "input": "I thought that My Favorite Martian was very boring and drawn out!! It was not funny at all. The audience just sat through the whole movie and didn't laugh at all!!! Not even the kids laughed!! That is sad for a Disney movie!! I thought they could have found somebody better to play the martian rather than Christopher Lloyd!! He was really stupid!! And he was not funny!! I thought the talking suit was really dumb!!! In the original television series the suit doesn't talk and move around!! In my opinion they should not have wasted their time on this movie!! I give it two thumbes down!! Really a waste of time and I would not recommend the movie to anybody!!! Thank You!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e7ad4a3098c433faddc134e13970bb8",
            "input": "Eyeliner was worn nearly 6000 years ago in Egypt. Really not that much of a stretch for it to be around in the 12th century. I also didn't realize the series flopped. There is a second season airing now isn't there? It is amazing to me when commentaries are made by those who are either ill-informed or don't watch a show at all. It is a waste of space on the boards and of other's time. The first show of the series was maybe a bit painful as the cast began to fall into place, but that is to be expected from any show. The remainder of the first season is excellent. I can hardly wait for the second season to begin in the United States.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-31dc1edf24574a50b0b615e26f78f1b6",
            "input": "Here is one of those educational short films made to learn the unknown people out there about facts of life. This time the target audience is preteen girls, the fact of life is menstruation. This animated film, created by Walt Disney Pictures, apparently with some sponsoring from Kotex.It starts with explaining how hormones make you grow and develop. With the help of animation and a female narrator it shows us how the body, especially the ovaries, uterus and vagina, work and why this all leads to menstruation. It is almost amazing, becoming the comic note here, how the subject of sex is avoided. Even the word is never mentioned although \"furtilized\" will pass once. I don't really know why I saw this, but since it is one of those rare short films that could give an impression of an innocent time, you might want to give it a try.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3461c84966554493988ea80f1ed982e8",
            "input": "the town of Royston Vasey is a weird, but wonderful place. The characters would be just wrong and too disturbing but the fantastically brilliant writing means that it works, and it works very well. Most people will know others with a touch of some characters, but hopefully no one knows people with extremes of personalities such as Tubbs and Edward, the stranger-hating owners of the local shop, or the pen-obsessed Pauline who treats \"dole scum\" with much contempt.That was only a few of the strange inhabitants. The TV works consists of 3 series and a Christmas special. There are references to many horror films, such as the wicker man. A more recent addition to the range of works is a film, the league of gentlemens apocalypse, of which I will not say much but highly recommend. All in all the league of gentlemen is a hilarious comedy show with genius writing and brilliantly bonkers characters. I would definitely say that it is worth watching as you wont regret it!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3dec91fae39c4254bb1c5c7bc3c1a86a",
            "input": "Throughout this film, you might think this film is just for kids. Well, it is mainly pointed towards them, but it's also well-rounded enough with the jokes pointed also at the adults in the audience. This time around, the Muppet gang try to get on Broadway, with the dire straits keeping them from getting it produced, leading them to splitting up. But Kermit won't stop, and his determination keeps things moving along until after getting the deal together he gets hit by a car and sent into amnesia! It's a send-up, in part, of those old starring vehicles from the 40s with musicals actually as the topic of a musical, only here there's the usual lot of zaniness and wonderful moments thrown into a pot of hysterically funny moments (Lou Zealand's boomerang fish; Gonzo's water-stunt display, the whisper campaign, among many others), but also with a lot of heart too. The Muppet writers aren't shy of the conventions, on the contrary, they embrace them to the point where it's almost refreshing to see such a 'lets put on a show' story where through thick and think the characters will meet their dream. While not as totally original in scope as the Muppet Movie, it's got many catchy and memorable songs, excellent locations all over Manhattan, and even some intonations of inter-species dating (and marriage)! Cameos include Liza Minneli (\"a frog?\"), Elliot Gould (as the cop), Brooke Shields (propositioned by a rat), Edward I. Koch, Gregory Hines and Joan Rivers. So get ready to sing-along, or just have a lot of big laughs and romantic (yes romantic) times with one of the best Muppet movies.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00d3187c0562447a80b57627854d7c40",
            "input": "This is so bad, so very very bad. The acting is the biggest joke in history. Don't even bother to see it, i did ff it after 20 min and it was just as disappointing in the end as in the beginning... I really don't understand peoples taste, I'm a horror movie fan and I'm not fastidious but I DO HAVE A LIMIT! Maybe it was a quarter of a star better then the beginning of The Hoast but that's it. So I recommend you don't waste the 15 minutes you'll be able to watch. I mean the acting is better done by monkeys. And the big brother with the parental role is just awful. Don't they pay characters in C-movies? No I must say it's not the first time I think a horror movie is bad but it's absolutely one in my down ten movies and it will be charing places with Portrait of a vampire, Cabin by the lake, The Hoast!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a34ec834e9541f6bf44007d6ce67eb1",
            "input": "...and I love it. Lots of special effects, and for a movie that's not made on mega budget, this movie really does great job of creating a fantasy masterpiece. I'm one of the guys who didn't understand the story at all, but this was still a great flick to watch. It's definitely up there in standards surpassing Bored of the Rings, and on par with movies like Harry Potter. Which is saying a lot for a movie again, made on a fraction of the budget of these international hits.One thing I really love about this movie is that it so stretches the envelope of adventure movie to come out of Hong Kong. The topic is exotic and original. Production quality is unlike anything seen coming out of HK for fantasy action movie, and acting is great.One of the best movies to come out of Hong Kong, this is the Infernal Affairs of Hong Kong fantasy movie, and I hope they'll continue working in this area, until they surpass Hollywood adventure movies.Just fantastic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1513db282c9b4cbfa42ad4f25b43ee8f",
            "input": "Have you ever had a cool image in your mind that you thought it would be nice to be in a movie: Like seeing a detective peeking through the cracks of a broken fence of some abandoned house? Or seeing a woman walking down a street looking cold and intense and awfully alert? Yeah. Imagine stretching that image to a whole movie, you pretty much got the idea of Broken, though there's no detectives in this movie, I'm just using it as a visual example. But, the intense looking woman is here and she filled pretty much 99% of the screen time. I got nothing to complain about that woman, she's a perfect choice for this role.I consider myself a very open minded individual who can find enjoyment out of all kinds of artistic expressions and I can truly enjoy some really moody stuff. It would be really cool if I can frame one of the scene from this movie and hang it on the wall. Let's be honest here, the acting is superb. Some of the expressions on the actors face are what keep me watching.Now onto the problem of this movie. Beyond the mood, there's not much anything else here. The director basically took an obsession of an idea and ran it far beyond what it was worth. I don't consider it to be a spoiler if I say the obsession is \"mirror\". Let's face it, this singular idea is all over the bloody place and that's all the director got to work with. Granted, there are a few twist and turn here and there. If you paid any attention, nothing is going to surprise you in the end, obvious plot holes aside.Now, I'm not picking bones with this style of art since I enjoyed them most of the time. I still believe that we should judge an art base on the medium it uses to express whatever the artists want to express. Movie is not a piece of music, or a picture, or a painting, or even a poem, and certainly not just a cool image in your mind. It's all that plus a good story and character development. I consider the Lynch style of movie making cheating. It is irresponsible and cheap and a waste of the medium. We gave movies 2 hours running film time for a good reason. Therefore, we should judge it differently than judging a single frame of imagery such as a photograph or a painting.This movie is not completely Lynch style, thank goodness. It has a linear development and eventually came to a conclusion. It does not have much story or character development. It presented itself rather seriously with characters composed of common folks, thus distance itself from other fantasy stuff at least from the surface. It does not offer any explanation of the fantasy element nor did it ever attempt to build a coherent world around it. The oddity came from nowhere and seems rather isolated and accidental. Maybe the coherency remains in director's head but from what I can see he did not put much effort into realizing it on the screen.Where did he put his effort in then? It seems that he spent a lot of effort in building the mood and enhancing it with the music. The music often built up tension which eventually turn into a tease. Only in the later part of the movie the scare and tension materialized.In the end, I felt like: OK, I know what you are trying to say here but is that the point you are trying to make by spending two hours building up all these tension? It is rather irrelevant with who the characters are and what kind of life they have. And we are given very little about who the characters are. All we have is this circumstance that just took placed. Disappointing but I guess the director did not have much material to work with and it shows.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-78df619a397140d4b7e3bcb7bf5e57ae",
            "input": "Yes, the plot is predictable; yes, there are a few plot holes; yes, it has a made-for-TV quality; and yes, Britney Spears \"wrote\" the book with obvious self-promotion.But forget all of that... this movie is fun.Fun in an After School Special sort-of-way, but fun nevertheless.Virginia Madsen as the mother does a great job... so good that I'm going to start watching for her movies. She reminded me of Diane Lane for all the good reasons.The rest of the cast does a fine job, too. If I was a casting agent, I'd be scouting some of these young actors.The production values are above usual TV standards and the music was really great... better than several big-budget movies I've seen.If you're in the mood for German noir this movie isn't for you. If you want a safe, fun and underrated movie, this is a good one. It's one you could show to your 10 year old daughter but enjoy it yourself too.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-873e755a0aef46ef89b3fc8ee792c2c7",
            "input": "You can debate Prince's acting talent, or even his choice to parody his own life in this film. There is no debate about his musical talent either then or now. He seems like a shadowy has-been twenty years later, but the music remains relevant and fantastic. Having lived through the hype of this movie (graduated high school in'85) I can tell you that there was nothing bigger at the time. From Tipper Gore (Al's wife) trying to censor \"Little Nikki\" and every thing else under the sun via the PMRC (Parents Music Resource Center) to every \"Air Band\" at the time impersonating Prince, it was the absolute hottest thing out. For a few weeks at least, Prince was bigger than Madonna and Michael Jackson. We all waited for the film and were soooooo excited when it premiered. It didn't disappoint. EVERYONE was caught up. I was an MTV junkie at the time(they actually played music then....all the time)Prince played at least once or twice an hour. I must qualify this commentary by saying that, at that time, my favorites were Billy Idol, Oingo Boingo, The Fixx, Flock of Seagulls and others in the Punk/ New Wave genre' The music of Prince at the time transcended all types and styles. One of the reasons that some of it seems so cheesy and contrite now is that it was SOOOOOOOO big then. All the things that remind you of the 80's were iconic then. It was mainstream and it seems like a cliché' now. It got so popular that it became ridiculous. It's like the rappin' Granny commercial for Wendy's Hamburgers. It looks stupid now because EVERYONE was caught up in it (sadly, kind of like a bizarre purple macarena or something. Anyway, I hope this gave you all a little insight.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f3518d297c64333b0f7d14f78ad50b9",
            "input": "Jeopardy has the feel of being a stock movie of sorts - one of the movies that the studios pumped out inbetween big budget/box office ones. It's a mere 70 minutes and doesn't feature many sets, and the only star is Barbara Stanwyck. But what a star, of course. Stanwyck is a tough lady once again as she runs into an escaped convict while seeking help for her trapped husband in the Mexican desert. The majority of the movie is focused on how she deals with her captor, who wants her to submit to him in exchange for his help. Some psychological battling there. It's a surprisingly effective little movie - its short length makes it taut, and that Stanwyck is great should go without mention (but I'll still praise her every time).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8974d5cb0cc44bc18ef050a9c4efdc85",
            "input": "BRIEF ENCOUNTER is a ghastly and pointless remake of the 1945 David Lean classic, which was based on Noel Coward's play \"Still Life\". A doctor removes a particle of grit from a woman's eye at a railway station, he is in a miserable relationship, she is happily married social worker of Italian ancestry. They meet by accident on another occasion, form an instant attraction and arrange to meet each other every Wednesday. The pair fall in love, but after spending a few afternoons together they realise that they have no realistic chance of happiness and agree to part. Coward's original one-act play concerned two ordinary people who fall in love. Sophia Loren and Richard Burton, two Super Stars and veterans of Hollywood Epics, are nobody's idea of 'ordinary people'. Loren in particular is miscast - Sophia Loren in full make-up, looking like a million dollars, working as a part-time voluntary social worker at a Citizen Advice Bureau just doesn't ring true. Burton, looking haggard, with dyed hair, too much make-up and wearing platform shoes, doesn't come across as your average General Practitioner. That said, you can't really blame them for having an affair after seeing their spouses. Burton is married to a literary critic who spends her evenings penning poisonous reviews and who treats her husband with total contempt. Loren's husband, Jack Hedley, potters around the house all day and is terminally boring: the most exciting thing he has ever done is nearly have an affair six years previous. Their final scene together will induce nausea, (\"You've been a long, long way away\", etc.). That great British jobbing actor, John LeMesurier, has a three minute cameo as Burton's friend, and appears to be slightly inebriated, speaking his lines in a barely audible voice. It's a sad and forgettable performance in a dismal, awful rehash of a cinema classic. Avoid at all costs.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1e3c3d3679524817b9fed09d6ce9d55f",
            "input": "This film, I thought, was the great journey that Forrest Gump should have been. It's a rare treat to watch a cable movie in the middle of the day and come across a foreign film that is done so well. This film is very well acted, and I strongly suggest it to anyone who can take sub-titles.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6b3a82139294fe49690edcc755df522",
            "input": "Why has this not been released? I kind of thought it must be a bit rubbish since it hasn't been. How wrong can a girl be! This film is, in a word, enthralling.You will be captivated. It holds your attention from the start and its pace never slows.The final part of the film, the \"episode\" as it were (not giving anything away, you saw that in the trailer) is also unmissable. You will chose a favourite, you will be shocked, you wont be able to go and make a cup of coffee because you need to find out what happens. The adrenalin rises and you cant not watch. Cudos to the actors, it's very believable. And it doesn't stop there, they have a final shock for you.It also makes you question reality TV and if you would watch. And how far away from this are we, really? Endemol (who make big brother) made a TV show in Holland last year offering a dying woman's kidney to patients in need of a transplant. The show was revealed at the end to be a hoax, ostensibly to raise awareness of organ donation, but are we getting too close for comfort?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afcd4ef85d134f79b84a64c52239c4c2",
            "input": "I won't claim to be a fan of Ralph Bakshi, because i am not. I have only watched 5 of his animated films so far: Coonskin, Wizards, Fritz the Cat and Lord of the Rings and finally \"Fire and Ice\". What i CAN claim, is that i found \"Fire and Ice\" to be the most enjoyable of the lot. It is a straightforward fantasy tale of swords and sorcery along the lines of Conan the Barbarian, but the beautiful artwork, realistic animation and lively film score effectively lends a very classic charm to this movie.Deserving first mention, is the animation itself. I do not care what people say about rotoscoping but in my opinion Ralph Bakshi used that technique very effectively here. I was amazed at how realistic the movements of the characters were. The style of directing and the photo-realistic character designs made \"Fire and Ice\" feel more like a big budget fantasy blockbuster than a cartoon. Sadly the level of art detail tends to get a little inconsistent, especially near the end of the movie. Some scenes just look really flat with little to no body contour details or fabric folds and shadows on the characters.With realistic moving characters, realistic action would naturally follow. Not only was the action well choreographed, but it was really brutal. I would be so bold as to compare the brutality of the action to live action movies like Zack Snyder's 300. I did notice however that though there was blood shed, the blood splatters were kept to a minimum. Again, a great choice by the creative team that only heightens the viewing experience by not taking things too \"over the top\".Though i do not recognize any \"big names\" in the cast, the voice actors manage to deliver a satisfying performance; keeping the delivery of every line realistically subdued and only hamming it up in the case of the bad guys.Did i say bad guys?? yes i did. Because that is exactly what the story is about, a standard good vs evil tale. Nothing really original about the story which seems to merely be a mix of pre-existing fantasy film clichés that involve scantly clad warriors and maidens. Anyone looking for \"depth\" would be sorely disappointed. THe characters are not given much development and some of them like Nekron and Darkwolf are one dimensional at best(I did however hear rumor of some deleted scenes that explains Darkwolf's obsession with killing Nekron and his mother. Scenes like that deserved full restoration and should have been included in the final cut to add a level of depth to the show). In fact, i would not be surprised to find out that the whole movie was just a \"tech demo\" of sorts to showcase the awesome animation and art, with the story cobbled together and thrown in as an afterthought in order to pass it off as a proper \"movie\".A true classic of a bygone era, \"Fire and Ice\" really captures the blazing spirit of adventure and mysticism with its beautiful renderings of fantastic creatures and charming characters. It is a unique vision of a world created by Ralph Bakshi and artist Frank Frazetta with a good measure of action and suspense. Would it hold up to animated film standards of today? Definitely not. But i urge animation fans in general to \"get off your high horse\" and give this simple but beautiful film a chance to grow on you. It is Truly a gem of the 80s worth checking out.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a082dadbd9b4d40b66ca4e7218bbd67",
            "input": "Clint Eastwood is Bronco Billy, the leader of a Wild West troupe, one of six regular misfits who comprise a struggling-to-break-even touring show. The seventh member of the bunch is a woman, Billy's assistant, but such women never last long, and the position is chronically open. Enter Antoinette Lilly (Sandra Locke – Eastwood's girlfriend at the time). It seems Miss Lilly, as Doc (Scatman Crothers) calls her, is a would-be heiress who will only receive her long-deceased father's estate if she's married by the time she turns 30, so on the eve of that birthday she gets hitched to the cartoonish Geoffrey Lewis.So, what's the plot of this film? It's hard to say. There's the romantic tension between Billy and Miss Lilly, but the problem is that for the first half of the movie she's so haughtily insipid and detestable that when she suddenly becomes 'one of the troupe' halfway through the film, it's not only unbelievable, but the audience is well past caring about her. There's the chronic lack of funds behind the Wild West show, but this topic isn't touched upon enough to really be the raison d'etre of the film. There's Miss Lilly's predicament of being stranded in the rural west, cut off from the funds that fuel her spoiled life of luxury (she's mistakenly believed to be dead by her family and the press). But are we really supposed to believe that she couldn't get back to New York and her waiting fortune if she gave it a bit of effort?No, the point of this film seems to be that Billy is the leader of a family, a lovable bunch of losers who hang together through thick and thin. This is a warm, fuzzy film – or at least tries to be. Along the way, Clint shows us his skills with a gun, even foiling a bank robbery in a shooting that is grotesquely out of place in an otherwise relatively non-violent film. One of the gang is arrested on an old draft evasion charge; Billy bribes the local sheriff. The show's tent burns down; an orphanage makes them a new one. But numerous mundane pitfalls do not a plot make.Compounding the problem is the acting, or lack thereof. Aside from Scatman Crothers, the supporting cast is quite amateurish. Eastwood isn't on top of his game either, though he looks better simply by virtue of being surrounded by such a lackluster bunch.And for all this, the film plods on for 116 minutes. To what point? Good question … 4 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3cea444c4a7944ed98951a2491385384",
            "input": "This is a really heart-warming family movie. It has absolutely brilliant animal training and \"acting\" (if you can call it like that) as well (just think about the dog in \"How the Grinch stole Christmas\"... it was plain bad training). The Paulie story is extremely well done, well reproduced and in general the characters are really elaborated too. Not more to say except that this is a GREAT MOVIE!My ratings: story 8.5/10, acting 7.5/10, animals+fx 8.5/10, cinematography 8/10.My overall rating: 8/10 - BIG FAMILY MOVIE AND VERY WORTH WATCHING!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5813cecc6ff940e6b5dd7d54e29ef1ad",
            "input": "Before he became defined as Nick Charles in the Thin Man Series, William Powell played another urbane detective named Philo Vance. The supporting cast is strong in this early talkie, and Powell's star quality is evident. Mary Astor, who eight years later would be defined by her portrayal of Brigid O'Shaughnessy, does a good job here as the featured woman who finds herself in the middle of it all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcfff144506347b6a14d600334dc23d1",
            "input": "Trot out every stereotype and misrepresentation you've heard about semi-devout Mormons, and you'll see they've all starred in this ridiculous excuse for a film. Finally Kurt Hale's fortunes have changed (thank goodness) and hopefully it will be a long while before we see any of his features in theaters.The cinematography was amateurish (I think they used a camcorder for some of the basketball scenes). The plot was limp and very unfunny. You really didn't understand why anyone did anything. It was like I had sand in my eyes, and a 300-pound lady was sitting on my face, it was that painful.The only reason I didn't give this movie a negative rating was because the scale won't let me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00f19825ae784cc9b9e2c6fc090628a4",
            "input": "Darius Goes West is a film depicting American belief that everything is possible if you try hard enough. This wonderful fun filled and sometimes heartbreaking film shows a young man who never expected, but longed to see, what was outside the confines of his lovely city of Athens, GA. Darius wished to see the ocean. His longtime friends Logan, Ben and several other good friends decided to make Darius' wish come true. They started small - Ben & Logan's mom started an email campaign to bring awareness to Darius' condition: Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and to raise funds for the fellas to take Darius to not only see the ocean but to see these great United States. To say the young college buddies succeeded in bringing hope and awareness to this dreaded disease would be an understatement. They realized Darius' dream and then some. They put their lives on hold while showing love, care and tons of fun to Darius while helping Darius see how he can in turn show those same traits to others suffering from DMD. Darius went on to volunteer for the Red Cross - sitting in his chair collecting money (along with his buddies) outside a local grocery store. His wonderful smile tells the world that dreams do come true - all you need is hope and a group of college friends to support and care for you. Give Darius and all the guys an Oscar - no one else deserves it more. Martha Sweeney.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-04dfdf85afac403caeea1cd13c4bbc2e",
            "input": "This film is outstanding and wonderfully scored. Prince's Oscar for music was richly deserved (many people don't know he won one). I think this is one of the best films to watch as a couple late at night on DVD. A great surprise: Prince does a fine job acting, and is pretty good at conveying pain on camera. Morris Day, Wendy, and Lisa are good in their supporting roles. Very cool landmark film.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c8ce7c8369974945826aef47b72d03a2",
            "input": "Rohmer returns to his historical dramas in the real story of Grace Elliot, an Englishwoman who stayed in France during the apex of the French Revolution. One always suspected that Rohmer was a conservative, but who knew he was such a red-blooded reactionary. If you can put aside Rohmer's unabashed defense of the monarchy (and that is not an easy thing to do, given that, for instance, the French lower classes are portrayed here as hideous louts), this is actually an elegant, intelligent and polished movie. Lacking the money for a big cinematic recreation of 18th century France, Rohmer has instead the actors play against obvious painted cardboards. It is a blatantly artificial conceit, but it somehow works. And newcomer Lucy Russell succeeds in making sympathetic a character that shouldn't be.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d99a4dbd42d04d4d87505af84b2a9342",
            "input": "A blockbuster at the time of it's original release (it was the second-highest grossing film of 1976), the third screen version of A STAR IS BORN has always divided critics and fans alike. The film open to scathingly negative reviews, however, $5.6 million-budgeted picture went on to gross over $150 million at the box office and won an Academy Award and five Golden Globes. It's not without some irony that Streisand's most commercially successful film would also remain her most controversial. For every ten fans who state that STAR is Streisand's best film, there are always ten more who claim it is the weakest film in her filmography. Although both sides have some merit to support their claims, it should still be noted that the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN remains one of the most touching and highly entertaining showbiz dramas that Hollywood ever produced. For my money, it's the best version of the often-told tale.The film is solidly enjoyable and throughly absorbing. Changing the setting from the old Hollywood studio system to the competitive world of the music industry was actually a great idea, and the screenplay forges a realistic contrast between the characters' romance and their careers. This is the main area that the 1976 version of A STAR IS BORN actually surpasses it's classic predecessors. For example, the film is especially successful when depicting the clashing personal and professional difficulties during recording sessions and the never-ending phone calls that interrupt Kristofferson's songwriting attempts. This version of the story is also more believable in it's portrayal of the lead characters. For example, the female leads in the two previous versions were so virtuous and self-sacrificing that they came off as saints. On the other hand, Esther, the female lead in this version, is not only portrayed as being strong and passionate, but also flawed and conflicted. This makes her feel more \"real\" than the Janet Gaynor or Judy Garland characters felt in the previous films, and makes the story that much more effective.The performances are all on target, even if some of the supporting characters aren't fleshed out enough. If you're looking for an actress/singer who can walk the fine line between tough and vulnerable without making herself seem like a script contrivance, Streisand is definitely the girl you want. She's one of the few film stars who can make even the most banal dialogue seem fresh and natural, and, as usual, she manages to make a strong emotional connection with the viewer. Simply put, her Esther is a fully-realized, three-dimensional human being. Kris Kristofferson may not get much respect now for his laid-back characterization, however, he's always interesting watch and displays a magnetic charisma here that he seldom displayed elsewhere in his career. Kristofferson actually received rave reviews at the time from NEWSWEEK, TIME, and even the NEW YORKER's usually vicious Pauline Kael. Gary Busey and Paul Mazursky also give believable performances, but both have a fairly minimal amount of screen time.The film's soundtrack recording was also a massive success, hitting the #1 on Billboard's Hot 200 and selling over four million copies in the US alone. The Streisand-composed \"Evergreen\" (with lyrics from Paul Williams) is unarguably one of the most gorgeous songs in contemporary pop, brought to even-further life by an absolutely incomparable vocal performance from Streisand. The rest of the film's original songs (mostly composed by Williams and Rupert Holmes) are pretty good as well, and Streisand sounds fantastic - her live solo numbers remain in the memory long after the rest of the movie has faded. Streisand's vibrant performances bring \"Woman In The Moon\" and \"With One More Look At You\" to thrilling life, and make even sillier numbers like \"Queen Bee\" work far better than they have the right to. Kristofferson's solo numbers sound somewhat tuneless, however, that may have been intentional since he is playing a singer in decline.Though naturally dated in some respects (it definitely does reflect the decade in which it was made), the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN still holds up remarkably well. The film is well-mounted and slickly produced, the chemistry between the leads is extremely powerful and always feels genuine, and Streisand has two emotional scenes near the finale that are both aching effective. In conclusion, A STAR IS BORN is not only entertaining and moving, but it also transcends all criticism.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dedcf69e3f2742eaa9518582b3e7ca6e",
            "input": "This movie was 100% boring, i swear i almost died from boredom at the theater. It wasnt funny and didnt really hve that much action in it either, it was BORING and i hope whoever out there that liked this movie, god be with you in the future when you find out what this movie was really like and try to jump off a bridge or something like that",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-230a6aeb6cf8435f9c527adb9d32280c",
            "input": "OK heres what I say: The movie was excellent. I am a huge Nancy fan and I have read all 1-56 original books and I went on to read more. I am now on 96. Beware of villains giving this movie a lower grade than it should have. All clues point to a wonderful movie! I loved the whole thing. So what Nancy is in current time. She is still old fashioned like she is in the books! People who haven't read more than 5 books are complaining about the view of Nancy. I have read all of them and I think Emma is perfect and that Nancy was perfect. I found parts of the movie spooky. I loved the exciting car chases and get aways. I loved the clues. I solved the mystery myself! It was really wonderful. I suggest you go see it since people who have been complaining know nothing of A what a good movie is and B about Nancy Drew. Go see it. It may not be Oscar worthy but its really a good movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-06f0f2d2cb924e41a5b036a8b8a5e416",
            "input": "What starts out as an interesting story quickly disintegrates into nothing. Don't bother watching to the end hoping for an explanation of what is stalking the visitors, there is no ending. No explanation, no resolution, zip. This could have been a good movie it they had purchased an entire script.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-264b5b7ae459489ab832776ac8811a1b",
            "input": "'Presque Rien' ('Come Undone') is an earlier work by the inordinately gifted writer/ director Sébastien Lifshitz (with the collaboration of writer Stéphane Bouquet - the team that gave us the later 'Wild Side'). As we come to understand Lifshitz's manner of storytelling each of his works becomes more treasureable. By allowing his tender and sensitive love stories to unfold in the same random fashion found in the minds of confused and insecure youths - time now, time passed, time reflective, time imagined, time alone - Lifshitz makes his tales more personal, involving the viewer with every aspect of the characters' responses. It takes a bit of work to key into his method, but going with his technique draws us deeply into the film.Mathieu (handsome and gifted Jérémie Elkaïm) is visiting the seaside for a holiday, a time to allow his mother (Dominique Reymond) to struggle with her undefined illness, cared for by the worldly and wise Annick (Marie Matheron) and accompanied by his sister Sarah (Laetitia Legrix): their distant father has remained at home for business reasons. Weaving in and out of the first moments of the film are images of Mathieu alone, looking depressed, riding trains, speaking to someone in a little recorder. We are left to wonder whether the unfolding action is all memory or contemporary action.While sunning at the beach Mathieu notices a handsome youth his age starring at him, and we can feel Mathieu's emotions quivering with confusion. The youth Cédric (Stéphane Rideau) follows Mathieu and his sister home, continuing the mystery of attraction. Soon Cédric approaches Mathieu and a gentle introduction leads to a kiss that begins a passionate love obsession. Mathieu is terrified of the direction he is taking, rebuffs Cédric's public approaches, but continues to seek him out for consignations. The two young men are fully in the throes of being in love and the enactment of the physical aspect of this relationship, so very necessary to understanding this story, is shared with the audience in some very erotic and sensual scenes. Yet as the summer wears on Mathieu, a committed student, realizes that Cédric is a drifter working in a condiment stand at a carnival. It becomes apparent that Cédric is the Dionysian partner while Mathieu is the Apollonian one: in a telling time in architectural ruin Mathieu is excited by the beauty of the history and space while Cédric is only interested in the place as a new hideaway for lovemaking.Mathieu is a complex person, coping with his familial ties strained by critical illness and a non-present father, a fear of his burgeoning sexuality, and his nascent passion for Cédric. Their moments of joy are disrupted by Cédric's admission of infidelity and Mathieu's inability to cope with that issue and eventually they part ways. Time passes, family changes are made, and Mathieu drifts into depression including a suicide attempt. The manner in which Mathieu copes with all of these challenges and finds solace, strangely enough, in one of Cédric's past lovers Pierre (Nils Ohlund) brings the film to an ambiguous yet wholly successful climax.After viewing the film the feeling of identification with these characters is so strong that the desire to start the film from the beginning now with the knowledge of the complete story is powerful. Lifshitz has given us a film of meditation with passion, conflicts with passion's powers found in love, and a quiet film of silences and reveries that are incomparably beautiful. The entire cast is superb and the direction is gentle and provocative. Lifshitz is most assuredly one of the bright lights of film-making. In French with English subtitles. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3f2014ebe27c4b7b979a33a250eae542",
            "input": "As seems to be the general gist of these comments, the film has some stunning animation (I watched it on blu-ray) but it really falls short of any real depth.Firstly the characters are all pretty dull. I got a hint of a kind of Laputa situation between Agito, Toola and the main antagonist Shunack. However maybe my mind wanderd and this was wishful thinking (Laputa being my favourite animé, original Engilsh dub). The characters are not really lovable either and as mentioned in another post they fall in love exceptionally quickly, leaving poor old Minka jealous and rejected (she loves Agito, who seems oblivious of this). However she promptly seems to forgive Toola at the end with no explanation for the change of heart other than it makes the ending a little bit more \"happy\". There is also a serious lack of explanation. Like who are the druids really? Are they people? and who are the weird women/girls who seem to hang out with them and run the forest? There is nothing explaining why they are there and how they can give regular humans superpowers. The plants coming from the moon still does not fill in the blanks about this. It is almost like a weird version of The Day of the Triffids.And who does call Toola? why bother with this if it wont be explained?I really wanted to like this film but I found the plot no where near as deep as a film like Ghost in the Shell or having any real character like those of Miyazaki. I do not resent watching it but I do sort of wish I hadn't bought it. My advice? Give it a go if you have a couple of hours to spare, but borrow it, or buy it cheap! Perhaps if your new to animé films and don't have much to go by you will enjoy it. It certainly is visually pleasing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-03a18bfb9c2747d3bad79722d6487223",
            "input": "When I look back on my college days at Ohio University, there will always be one event in which I will remember with fond memories. Channel 23 is OU's local access channel and until the last few years, pretty much played anything they were sent. This included many DIY movies ranging from a guy microwaving marshmallow Peeps and then scanning pictures of them online, to a version of Macbeth starring 8th graders who had apparently just learned how to make squibs.However, the king, in my opinion, of the channel 23 lineup was Midnight Skater. The first time I watched it was around 2AM. I should have been studying. Or sleeping. Or watching regular TV. But no, all that is for pussies. My roommate and I watched Midnight Skater, and when it was complete, I don't think either of us believed that any of the movie had just happened. But sure enough, it was on a few nights later, and we had to come to grips that this movie did, in fact, exist.I could go on and on about how awful it is, but its the sort of awful that makes life worth living. The plot is disjointed, the acting terrible, the everything soul scarring, but by god, if there are others watching with you, its impossible not to have a good time watching it. Its sort of like the first time you hear \"Guts\" by Chuck Pahalniuk. You hear it, you're disgusted and shaken, but five minutes later, all you want and desire is to make someone else experience the abject horror you just endured.Long story short, Midnight Skater, for all of its epic flaws, makes for some very late night fun. Plus, I desperately want the Theme to Midnight Skater. Kudos to whoever wrote it and sang it. Sweet God I love that song.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b8613386d4254ef4a943c681ff4e85e5",
            "input": "Jim Henson's Muppets were a favorite of mine since childhood. This film makes me feel like a kid again. Okay, the Muppets are back with Miss Piggy and Kermit the Frog and their friends. The premise is that they are trying to get on Broadway in a musical show in where else but New York City. You will see cameos by the then New York City Mayor Ed Koch. Anyway, the film turns 25 this year and I hope the kids of today will learn to appreciate the lightheartedness of the Muppets Gang. The problem with the show is Kermit goes missing and the gang has to find him in New York City. It's worth watching for kids and even sentimental adults like myself.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da9617507f3543e7a70b2bbcc6578fa2",
            "input": "A few weeks ago, I read the classic George Orwell novel, 1984. I was fascinated with it and thought it was one of the best books I've read recently. So when I rented the DVD, I was intrigued to see how this adaptation measured up. Unfortunately, the movie didn't even come close to creating the ambiance or developing the characters that Orwell so masterfully did in his book. The director seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the book, because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do. John Hurt, the main actor, is droll the entire way through, and hardly does any acting until the end. We never really find out what he does for a living, or why his love affair is forbidden, or what the political climate is and why the main character desires rebellion. This book cannot be done justice in movie form without proper narration and explanation of the political system oppressing the characters, and the fact that those are missing is the greatest shortcoming of this film. Besides that, John Hurt was a terrible casting choice, looking about 15 years older than the 39 year old Winston he was supposed to be portraying. On a more positive note, however, the rest of the cast was well chosen. It's just too bad they were put in such a horribly adapted film with the wrong lead actor. -Brian O.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a92496c9181f4451a9c4850e34f13637",
            "input": "I wouldn't be surprised if Soderbergh was pressured to avoid making pre- revolution Cuba as graphically corrupt as it was. Merely reciting a few statistics isn't going to make it with the younger crowd. Still, part one, which is almost entirely shot in the jungle, does capture the feel of that place, especially when traversing the mountainous areas of Cuba. I liked Del Toro's interpretation of Che Guevara's personality. And the actor who plays Castro, Bichir, also did a great job, against all odds. It's clear Soderbergh doesn't look down on these people, but it's also clear he's not going to plea their case to 'yanquis' far removed from the recent past. Some of the more important historical aspects contradict what I've read. To my knowledge Castro did not court the Soviet Union until all attempts to gain acceptance from the United States were exhausted. But on other aspects he is right on, especially as to the looting by the expatriates as the island went other rebel control. The country's treasury was left empty.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba6995e0f41a4e629831ada857721e7c",
            "input": "I must give How She Move a near-perfect rating because the content is truly great. As a previous reviewer commented, I have no idea how this film has found itself in IMDBs bottom 100 list! That's absolutely ridiculous! Other films--particular those that share the dance theme--can't hold a candle to this one in terms of its combination of top-notch, believable acting, and amazing dance routines.From start to finish the underlying story (this is not just about winning a competition) is very easy to delve into, and surprisingly realistic. None of the main characters in this are 2-dimensional by any means and, by the end of the film, it's very easy to feel emotionally invested in them. (And, even if you're not the crying type, you might get a little weepy-eyed before the credits roll.) I definitely recommend this film to dance-lovers and, even more so, to those who can appreciate a poignant and well-acted storyline. How She Move isn't perfect of course (what film is?), but it's definitely a cut above movies that use pretty faces to hide a half-baked plot and/or characters who lack substance. The actors and settings in this film make for a very realistic ride that is equally enthralling thanks to the amazing talent of the dancers!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b2e93f7d4204abbb5093e9eb7a29ae2",
            "input": "Definitely one of the lesser of the Astaire/Rogers musicals. It's just very poorly plotted and paced. It only runs a few minutes longer than Swing Time, for example, but it feels a heck of a lot longer. This is partly due to the secondary romance between Randolph Scott and Harriet Hilliard. Scott is rarely ever interesting. I like Hilliard. She's sweet, and I love at least one of her songs, \"But Where Are You?\" (\"Get Thee Behind Me Satan\", her other number, is a weak leftover from Top Hat, thankfully cut from that masterpiece). Follow the Fleet would actually be a bad film if not for at least three brilliant dance sequences between Astaire and Rogers. The dancing contest vies for the top spot of any of their numbers. The dance is just fantastic. \"I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket\" presents the two rehearsing a dance that they don't quite have perfected yet. Its imperfections make it all the more perfect. And \"Let's Face the Music and Dance\" is easily one of Irving Berlin's best songs. So the film is well worth watching for its great moments.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3419f59519824e74b6577788b74301b2",
            "input": "Wang Bianlian is an old street performer who is known as a 'King of masks' for his mastery of Sichuan change art. Liang is a famous opera performer of Sichuan art and respects Wang as an artist and as a person. Liang is worried that a precious art shouldn't die with Wang and so he sows the seed of an heir in to Wang's mind. The film is about prejudices, male domination, state of art, values and most importantly warmth.I can't recommend this film enough. The whole film is in loops. Everything has a significance. Its a long story which has been edited so well that the length of the film is just 91 minutes. A total satisfaction. For five minutes it is an artistic film, next five minutes its a sad film, next five minutes its a thriller. It just keeps changing its mood like its protagonist changes his face. Last scene on the rope is phenomenal. Story and script is flawless. Actors are brilliant. Both the protagonists are artists you can tell the way they have performed. Very impressive. It was not even nominated for Oscars. That year 'English patient' got the best film Oscar and in the foreign film category 'Kolya' won. 'Kolya' was just OK and about 'English patient' the lesser said the better. Watch it 9/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9934cb844db1459e9278bc9c8f396fd9",
            "input": "Riff Randell is a wildly, obsessed fan of the rock group; The Ramones and so are most of the students in the school. But a new tyrant of a principal, Ms. Togar thinks rock 'n' roll is a bad influence on the students, especially the music from The Ramones. So, when Riff finds out they're performing in town, she skips class for a couple of days to get tickets for herself and her friends. But when Ms. Togar discovers why she really took those days off she confiscates the tickets. While, this is happening Tom Roberts is totally love struck over Riff, but Riff's friend Kate Rambeau feels the same way about Tom. But Riff has her eyes set only on the lead singer Joe Ramone and hopefully in getting to that concert to get them to play her song.Fun! Fun! Fun! Yep, that's right 'Rock n Roll high School' doesn't drift away from it main focus… a boisterously, daggy romp! It wasn't what I was expecting, that's for sure. Everyone participating in this dandy project looks like they're having a great time and the relaxing nature of it shows on screen with the energy providing such a glowing spirit, which makes it a priceless experience. That's not to say I think its art and the plot is as pointless as can be. But watching this passionately, crazy ride that escalates into some good harmless high jinks, I just couldn't wipe the grin off my face. It's tacky, very cheesy, densely chaotic, but damn it's funky-dory! This low-budget, b-grade feature from producer Roger Corman and John Dante who was co-writer ( and plus he co-directed some scenes when director Allan Arkush was hospitalised on the last day shoot). Is basically a glorious homage on the rocking 1950s flicks by sticking with the fruitful clichés and throwing into the stew the teenage rebellion tag because of the generation gap between them and the adults (who always know best). These features might not be particularly fresh, but they do rack up some appeal because of the dynamically, gusto treatment. The film has just one thing on mind, to go out on a bang! And they manage to do that. Courtesy of 'The Ramones', who play themselves. Really, you could say its one big trendy video clip, since it's all about the Ramones… well, most of it anyway. I see a lot flack towards The Ramones' acting ability. These are musicians not actors, which means it's not about their acting here, it's the music we're suppose to dig. They're here to perform! Which, they deliver in that front with some kick ass tracks that peppered the film to create a totally upbeat vibe. Especially, their flamboyant concert performances. The buzzing soundtrack also had some killer tunes from some other artists such as Devo, The Velvet Underground, MC5, Fleetwood Mack, Eddie and the Hot Rods and Alice Cooper. But these jumping tracks fitted in well with the carefree feel and even the score was worked in rather well. Especially in the scenes involving Ms. Togar with the score grasping the right mood that surrounds her mind set. The playful mood of the film is pretty much like a roller coaster ride with such a racy pace between the electrifying tunes and comical segments ranging from scattered slapstick routines to it's sometimes clever, tongue-in-cheek dialogue. Thrown in for good measure is a variety of light and heavy gags, which I found very pleasurable and it gave it such a wider range to express itself.What else gave the film an added boost had to be the divine PJ Soles (better known for her performance in Halloween), who gave such a bang up performance as the peachy Riff Randell. Other exemplary performances were Dey Young, as the extremely cute Kate Rambeau, Vincent Van Patten as the gawky Tom Roberts and the go to man Eaglebauer who's stupendously played by Clint Howard. Also some top drawer Corman regulars pop up with great send up performances by Mary Woronov who's excellent as the demanding Ms. Togar who's pushing her unfair reign on the students, Paul Bartel as Mr. McGree and a small support role from Dick Millar towards the end. The enthusiastic acting is pretty campy, but that goes down well with the material and there's a certain likability stemming from these characters, but we totally despise Ms. Togar and her hall monitor goons.There's no beating around the bush here when I say 'Rock 'n' Roll High School' is an intoxicating hoot, of a rad time!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e04b0876137c4b92968a545859389ed5",
            "input": "I do find it a bit overrated. Maybe it's just because I've never seen a subtitled version (dubbing stinks!), but I just don't get into it like a lot of other people do. The finale is really great though as Jackie trashes a mall, a scene that plays in my head every time i go shopping!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ac9f4f9138943fc9c930c370e399b76",
            "input": "What did producer/director Stanley Kramer see in Adam Kennedy's novel and Kennedy's very puzzling screenplay? Were there a few pieces left out on purpose? And what about Gene Hackman, Richard Widmark, Edward Albert, Eli Wallach and Mickey Rooney? What did they see in this very muddled story?And why did Candice Bergen, who gave a horrible performance, accept such a thankless role?The Domino Principle wants to be on the same footing as The Parallax View or The Manchurian Candidate and misses the mark by a very wide margin. A major misfire by Stanley Kramer.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a0577022251a4bacb086f9cc72fb77dc",
            "input": "As someone who was born to a German mother and English father (who spent five years in a prisoner of war camp) I come from unique position. One of having to deal with the various Nazis on one side of the family and the victors of WW2 on the other. This miniseries cannot delve into every single part of Hitler's psyche and must give the viewer a general flavor of the situation at the time and as best as one can Hitler's state of mind. In this the series does quite well. Carlyle is very good as is O'Toole, I would however liked to have got more information on the relationships with others in party Because Hitler did not do anything on his own. He had people around him that followed him to the letter often without question and certainly without question later on in his murderous career. What was going through Goebbels, Goring and Hess's mind? It would have been helpful to see more of these relationships. But I hope it will make people research the subject more. It might also make people understand why someone like Saddam Hussein cannot be allowed to continue in power.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-599337448bef4635b6176543808d8208",
            "input": "Eddie Izzard is a one-in-a-million comic genius. He goes from squirrels to WWII to Stonehenge to religion to Englebert Humperdink and it's absolutely hilarious and it all makes sense! Get a copy of this now, you won't regret it! I give this an 11 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7279387461a4b25a9b8fc3f8f4d8348",
            "input": "The Dukes of Hazzard is quite an achievement – a $53m film that's worse than any given episode of a downmarket 25-year old TV show. The plot is serviceable enough but the mindless fun is rarely to be found and the casting is pretty atrocious: Johnny Knoxville is more passenger than protagonist, M.C. Gainey's Sheriff Roscoe is a bland thug, Michael Weston's Enos tiresome, a seemingly ideally-cast Willie Nelson just seems to be waiting for the check to clear and Burt Reynolds, stuck in some purgatory where he's doomed to relive his old movies as a bit player, is a curious choice for Boss Hogg to say the least but does have one good moment with a heckler and a hundred dollar bill. You know a film is in trouble when Seann William Scott and Jessica Simpson are the most charismatic screen presences… But worse than the script or the casting is Jay Chandrasekhar's hopeless direction: seemingly born with no conception of comic timing, unable to do much more than basic two-shots and seemingly clueless as to how to shoot a car chase let alone the couple of decent stunts in the film, he seems determined to sap the film of any signs of life before they materialise. There are a couple of neat post-modern moments revolving around the Confederate Flag and Daisy's stereotypical role in every episode, but no film that makes you pine for the days when Hal Needham was directing this sort of thing (and badly) can be a good thing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-67420147533347e1a5e25b0fa3a6f182",
            "input": "This movie does not really promote kids to be nicer and have better attitudes, as a family movie should, and this wouldn't be considered family anyway because it has some things in it that children shouldn't be seeing. Not the best ABC Family film if you ask me. If there were less sexual themes in the movie, then maybe it would be better. Hollywood isn't doing anything to make a movie better by adding in sexual situations. There's really no reason for them. At least this is a TV movie. I wouldn't want to waste my money on this garbage by renting it. If you have other things to do other than watch this movie, please proceed to them.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ce9d95ebfaa4d3eab9f7038a23a9246",
            "input": "It gets really bad. The only half-way redeeming quality is the effects from the thousands of bullets used during the film. There are context errors everywhere. The acting is horrible, save Kirk. The story is as holey as the grail, and the belief that the movie is a video game in itself just kills the movie, if it wasn't already a corpse. So all in all it's a waste of your life. I would have given this a zero had that been an option on the rating scale.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7d7dc697659478582d52f829addc1ca",
            "input": "A Kafkaesque thriller of alienation and paranoia. Extremely well done and Polanski performs well as the diffident introvert trying hard to adapt to his dingy Paris lodgings and his fellow lodgers. Horrifying early on because of the seeming mean and self obsessed fellow tenants and horrifying later on as he develops his defences which will ultimately be his undoing. Personally I could have done without the cross dressing element but I accept the nod to Psycho and the fact that it had some logic, bearing in mind the storyline. Nevertheless it could have worked without and would have removed the slightly theatrical element, but then maybe that was intended because the courtyard certainly seems to take on the look of a theatre at the end. I can't help feel that there are more than a few of the director's own feelings of not being a 'real' Frenchman and Jewish to boot. Still, there is plenty to enjoy here including a fine performance from a gorgeous looking Isabelle Adjani and good old Shelly Winters is as reliable as ever.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-942b737a81ef4f2baba207b303abf108",
            "input": "I discovered this movie on IFC, and I thought it would be interesting. For \"tiny\" love stories, some of the stories really dragged on in this movie. The fact that none of these women had names almost makes you suspect that the actresses were talking about their own real sex lives, including Kathy Baker and Alicia Witt. I have to admit, I want to start seeing some more romantic views of first sexual encounters again, like in \"Strike!(1998),\" when Odette Sinclair's acquaintances started asking about her presumed first time, and Tweety asked \"Was it beautiful?\"Some might think re-enactments and flashbacks would improve this movie. I think it would make things even worse. It doesn't necessarily have to be hardcore porn to get my attention, but somehow I just expected more.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e9ef22c7011459bbbf861d836dd9122",
            "input": "A definite no. A resounding NO. This movie is an absolute dud.Having been recommended to me by a friend very much into \"that sort of thing,\" I watched this movie with some anticipation of being informed, changed, moved, altered, uplifted, and all the other positive mystical things that could happen to me when I suddenly see The Truth. Now this may sound like someone who is already predisposed to poo-pooing anything dealing with the metaphysical, the metaphysical/physical boundaries of existence. Believe me, I am not such a person. I try to be open about any presentation and then decide accordingly.In terms of content, the only thing I found mildly interesting and informative, was the bit about peptides, emotions, addiction, and cellular receptors. That was the only \"unifying\" element I could find in the documentary part of this film. The rest of the documentary rambled around several topics and never seemed to unify and cohere, try to tie up and conclude to a point. And what was all that stuff about native Americans not being able to see the ships that Columbus came in? Who told the \"authorities\" in this film that that was what happened in 1492? Where they there too? Had they compared this to scientific work being done in visual cognition (the famous gorilla video, for example, visit the Visual Cognition Lab at the University of Illinois site) there may have been a more convincing point made. Here, however, it seemed like unsupported mystical mumbo-jumbo.As a film: this wasn't one film, it was two. I found the documentary part mildly interesting, just to hear the people talking about what they were talking about (I was annoyed that their credentials weren't presented at the bottom of the screen when they spoke, at least initially!) But I found the \"story\" part of the movie with Matlin in it annoying, disjointed, intrusive, non-related and downright stupid. That bit about the Polish wedding with that dance was not in the least bit funny. It was laughable, ludicrous, sophomoric, and stupid. And I found the use of the word \"Pollack\" offensive. It just seemed so out of place and wrong. Is such usage okay because a member of the group uses a pejorative term to refer to the group because he or she is a member of the group? That may be okay to make a point, but it didn't seem to be used that way here. And in any case, I don't care what the reason, it offended me, a Pole. I never call myself or refer to my ethnic background as \"Pollack.\" And I certainly don't like like it when others do. Can I watch or listen to a bigoted conversation in which this term is used? You betcha! But again this didn't seem to be the case here. It just seemed so out of place. Unprovocked, unmitigated.The acting was abysmal. Elaine Hendrix's performance was totally unbelievable. At times, it seemed like she was just reading her lines that had just been given to her. Marlee Matlin for the most part seemed to be sleep walking through this whole thing. Perhaps she was baffled by the material. I know I was. If she was supposed to be portraying a disillusioned drugged-up anxiety-prone malcontent, it just didn't seem to click. But by far, the world's worst was Hendrix! All in all, I found this a disjointed, poorly acted piece of clap-trap.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af59dbda749842fd9b16284e4172f458",
            "input": "The premise of this movie was decent enough, but with sub par acting, it was just bland and dull.SPOILERS The film does not work because of the nature of the death, it was accidental, so although it was a murder it wasn't like the guy set out to do it. Also through some flashbacks there is a secret that is revealed that sort of makes the events like justice to a degree. There is no emotion in this film. The first 20 minutes or so is just this woman calling her sister, and hearing her message. It was dull and boring.With some polishing, and better acting it could have been pretty good.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7689213f405f4357b805b6b63da4d4b1",
            "input": "I only saw IPHIGENIA once, almost 30 years ago, but it has haunted me since.One sequence particularly stays in mind, and could only have been fashioned by a great director, as Michael Cacoyanis undoubtedly is.The context: the weight of history and a mighty army and fleet all lie on King Agamemnon's shoulders. An act of sacrilege has becalmed the seas, endangering his great expedition to Troy. He is told he must sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia to Apollo in order to gain the winds for the sails of the Thousand Ships. He initially resists, but comes around, and tricks his wife Clytemenstra to bring their daughter to the Greek camp in order to marry the greatest of all warriors, Achilles.Clytemnestra and Iphigenia arrive, find out about the sacrifice, and rage to the gods for protection and vengeance. Meanwhile, the proud Achilles discovers that his name has been used in this fraudulent, dishonorable way. He climbs a hill to tell Iphigenia that he will protect her.The shot: The camera circles the two young people, without looking directly at each other. They bemoan their fate, and the weakness of men that deceive their loved ones and lust for war. Suddenly, they gaze at each other and, for one moment, we feel both their power and beauty, and the unstated--except by the camera--irony that in another time, another place, they perhaps could love each other and be married. It is a sharp and sad epiphany that lasts only for an instant.What direction! What camera! What storytelling!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ad4049ca14f74c13b018e9e8b4519bae",
            "input": "I'm not usually one to slate a film . I try to see the good points and not focus on the bad ones, but in this case, there are almost no good points. In my opinion, if you're going to make something that bad, why bother? Part of the film is take up with shots of Anne's face while she breaths deeply, and violin music plays in the background. the other part is filled with poor and wooden acting. Rupert Penry Jones is expressionless. Jennifer Higham plays Anne's younger sister with modern mannerisms. Anne is portrayed as being meek and self effacing, which is fine at the beginning, but she stays the same all through the film, and you see no reason for captain Wentworth to fall in love with her. Overall the production lacks any sense of period, with too many mistakes to be overlooked, such as running out of the concert, kissing in the street, running about in the streets with no hat on (why was this scene in the film at all? the scene in the book was one of the most romantic scenes written.). To sum it up, a terrible film, very disappointing.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f2d04cc704b548759c8ce3f71e7789e2",
            "input": "Devil Hunter gained notoriety for the fact that it's on the DPP 'Video Nasty' list, but it really needn't have been. Many films on the list where there for God (and DPP) only known reasons, and while this isn't the tamest of the bunch; there isn't a lot here that warrants banning...which is a shame because I never would have sat through it where it not for the fact that it's on 'the shopping list'. The plot actually gives the film a decent base - or at least more of a decent base than most cannibal films - and it follows an actress who is kidnapped and dragged off into the Amazon jungle. A hunter is then hired to find her, but along the way he has to brave the natives, lead by a man who calls himself \"The Devil\" (hence the title). The film basically just plods along for eighty five minutes and there really aren't many scenes of interest. It's a real shame that Jess Franco ended up making films like this because the man clearly has talent; as seen by films such as The Diabolical Dr Z, Venus in Furs, Faceless and She Kills in Ecstasy, but unfortunately his good films are just gems amongst heaps of crap and Devil Hunter is very much a part of the crap. I saw this film purely because I want to be able to say I've seen everything on the DPP's list (just two more to go!), and I'm guessing that's why most other people who have seen it, saw it. But if you're not on the lookout for Nasties; there really is no reason to bother with this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8afb9b1b1d7740028f9b62ef61fd6aec",
            "input": "Intriguing. Exciting. Dramatic. Explosive. Complex. Epic. Words that only touch the tip of the iceberg in terms of the grand story that is LOST being told.From the acting down to the rare visual effects, LOST is the essential show on television for fans of science-fiction, fantasy, action, adventure, and lots and lots of mystery.Each cast member is so well chosen, and so good in their roles, that you either love them, or hate them, or downright wish them dead.The visual effects, when used (which is rare) are actually quite well done considering the usual production of shows. Be it the \"smoke monster\", to the polar bears, LOST is believable in terms of eye-candy.As far as story goes, nothing can compare to the vast complexity this show has made viewers like me endure. Beginning to End, continuity is virtually perfect, characters are developed, and the ever-evolving story slowly gives the answers to its questions so many crave.Overall, there is practically no flaw in LOST. It does for dramatic/sci-fi television what Arrested Development did for comedy: it has set the bar.I highly recommend LOST to those that are patient, intellectual, and love every moment of the ride, no matter how long it takes to reach the end.See this show.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-64078789becd4b978b41c29a18025a9e",
            "input": "In Lizzie Borden's \"Love Crimes\" (1992), Sean Young plays a gritty D.A. in Atlanta. She's a loner who gets herself too deeply involved in the case of a man (Patrick Bergin) who poses as a famous fashion photographer and seduces women, takes compromising photos of them, then leaves them.Naturally, this tough loner decides to enter the phony shutterbug's life by posing as his prey, intending to bring him to justice. They meet, they make love, then the next thing she knows, she is over his lap, getting spanked. (Note: The spanking scene is only in the \"unrated\" version of this film. The R-rated version omits it and several other scenes that would make the plot more lucid.) This psychological thriller includes several scenes of female nudity and disturbing images, such as Bergin chasing one of his victims around the room, flailing at her with a riding crop.As a thriller, \"Love Crimes\" is at its best when Sean Young is playing her cat-and-mouse game with Bergin, trying to catch him in an incriminating act. It's unfortunate that the film doesn't end, it just stops. That's true. Director Lizzie Borden may have just run out of story to tell, but after 92 minutes the credits roll, and we are left with a puzzling \"what just happened?\" bewilderment.The unfolding of Young's plan is played out in engaging style, but the lack of a coherent ending will be a turn-off for some viewers.Dan (daneldorado@yahoo.com)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08d913c6542241099b4db812b01c45ee",
            "input": "The first time I came upon Delirious, I only heard it. I listened to the entire comedic performance and never have I laughed so much in my life. Eddie's ability to paint hilarious pictures in our minds and do great imitation is captivating. When I finally got to see him perform this act, I had to have it. Eddie Murphy's performance on Delirious shows his genius! With it being the new millennium, his acts in 1983 is just as funny today as it was then. My parents loved it as teenagers and I (age eighteen) love it as well. From that point on, I had to view Murphy's other movies such as Coming To America and Harlem Nights. There will be no other comedian like Eddie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d5e6c0f68612491d97b0bdef55ddd7fa",
            "input": "This was just another marvelous film of the Berlin Festival. But unlike \"Yes\", by Sally Potter, which I had seen some days before, where after leaving the cinema I felt a strong desire of wishing to embrace the whole world and was just happy to be alive, this time quite the opposite thing happened: there was something that dragged me down, and the air suddenly felt cold and hard to breathe. It was as if, all of a sudden, there was nothing left, all hope, all future had been taken away to a dead place.Nina's life seemed to be dismal and locked, but then, one lovely day, there appears that kind of luminosity that opens up the horizon and makes her believe in the fulfillment of her dreams. There was nobody at her side but suddenly she finds a companion, just out of nothing, someone who was able to share the most hidden feelings of her life. That person was Toni, a vagabond girl who does not seem to have any roots, just like herself.But the film's title is \"Ghosts\", and ghosts appear and disappear as they wish, there is no way to retain them… Ghosts also represent the hidden fantasies of people, strange ideas that occupy your mind and are only perceived by yourself, hiding away from all other people. Françoise, a French woman, is a victim of such ghosts. She once lost her child daughter in Berlin, who apparently had been robbed from her in a supermarket, in just one moment of inattentiveness. Now time has passed, and Françoise is back in Berlin, still looking for the missing child.Nina could be that child, after all she has got that same scar at her ankle and the heart-shaped birthmark between her shoulder blades which seems to prove her true identity.And Nina adopts that idea, after all she is not only in desperate need of a companion, she also longs for a mother. But in the end she is empty-handed, Toni has disappeared with a man, and her supposed mum turns out to be a sick woman. \"Marie is dead,\" concludes Françoise's husband, and the statement could not be more disillusioning. Nina is just a \"niña\", a girl without name, there is no hope for any divine fulfillment. There is no Marie in this world to accompany our lonely lives. Therefore, in the end, we see Nina all alone, about to walk along the road that has opened up before her, into a future that seems joyless and uncertain.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-623ff6aa77c54e829a75ccdb454afabe",
            "input": "I thought \"Intensive Care\" was quite bad and very unintentionally funny. But at least not as bad as I thought it might be. Sometimes it's somewhat suspenseful, but never a good shocker.SPOILER AHEADThe fun lies in ridiculous moments. But the all-time classic moment is this: Peter (Koen Wauters) is stabbed and beaten by the killer. He lies moaning in the corner of the hallway. Amy (Nada van Nie) kneels beside him and asks \"Poor Peter, shall I get you a band-aid?\".This movie was shot in Dutch and English. To spare costs, all license plates are USA, and the background in the news studio is a skyline of Manhattan. Very funny if you're Dutch and watching the original version in Dutch.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-de8c142705b9437082d3c6726bf95f3e",
            "input": "Up until the last few minutes of the movie, I would have given the movie a score of 7 or 8 stars. However, the ending is so terrible and \"Hollywoodized\" that it completely undermines the first 80% of the movie.The plot revolves around a submarine and the possibility that they received an order to fire their nuclear missiles. The Captain, Gene Hackman, is all for launching, while his first officer, Denzel Washington, is in favor of confirming the launch orders first. The problem is, to launch BOTH the captain and 1st officer must simultaneously use their launch keys. Hackman is determined to launch and Washington stands firm until eventually this results in armed insurrection aboard the sub. Eventually, the mistake is discovered and the missiles are not launched. Cool. However, here comes the part that just doesn't ring true. After they are back on land and go before a review board, Washington and Hackman (who'd just spent half the movie trying to kill each other) shake hands and are all buddy buddy! Huh?! Too trite an ending to make the movie worth while for me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-11eeb4451a3f4fe4a7ba61ee879bd970",
            "input": "'The Luzhin Defence' is a good film with fine central performances, but too much of the novel and not enough of the filmmaker's craft shines through. It felt through most of the film that the characters just helped to push the narrative along. Marlene Gorris could perhaps have examined the psyche of Luzhin, rather than depicting him as a tortured innocent victim torn apart by the cruel motives of others.Adapting literature for the screen is clearly a difficult task, especially a novel written in the early 20th century. This film does not go deeply enough into the relationship between Luzhin and Natalia. Natalia's rift with her mother comes across a churlish disagreement by the mother rather than a dramatic flashpoint in the film. I felt that I was put through Luzhin's torment and eventual tragic end, without being given the pleasure of having his unusual and complex personality unravelled. However, this was a moving and enjoyable film but certainly not a great one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d2e042d0d8b64c4f811bce13fdc8501c",
            "input": "I tried. I really did. I thought that maybe, if I gave Joao Pedro Rodrigues another chance, I could enjoy his movie. I know that after seeing O FANTASMA I felt ill and nearly disgusted to the core, but some of the reviews were quite good and in favor, so I was like, \"What the hell. At least you didn't pay 10 dollars at the Quad. Give it a shot.\"Sometimes it's better to go to your dentist and ask for a root canal without any previous anesthetic to alleviate the horror of so much pain. I often wonder if it wouldn't be better to go back to my childhood and demand my former bullies to really let me have it. On other occasions, I often think that the world is really flat and that if I sail away far enough, I will not only get away from it all, but fall clear over, and that some evil, Lovecraftian thing will snatch me with its 9000 tentacles and squeeze the life -- and some french fries from 1995, still lingering inside my esophagus -- out of me.Is there a reason for Odete? I'd say not at all... just that maybe her Creator thought that writing a story centered on her madness (one that makes Alex Forrest look like Strawberry Shortcake) look not only creepy, but flat-out sick to the bone. She first of all decides to leave her present boyfriend (in shrieking hysterics) because she wants a child and he believes they're too young. She later crashes a funeral of a gay man, and -- get this -- in order to get closer to him, she feigns being pregnant while insinuating herself into the lives of the dead man's mother and lover in the sickest of ways. Oh, of course, she shrieks like a banshee and throws herself not one, but a good three times on his grave. And there's this ridiculous business that she progressively becomes \"Pedro\" which sums up some weak-as-bad-tea explanation that love knows no gender. Or something.I'd say she's as nuts as a can of cashews, unsalted. But then again, so's the director. And me, for taking a chance on this. At least the men look good. Other than that... not much else to see here.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-33703c963eb04c15ab374fe698884a9f",
            "input": "This has to be the best adaptation I have seen it's my favourite and I think it stays very close to the book.What really makes this a must see though is the casting of the two lead actors.The wonderful Timothy Dalton is the best Rochester I have seen on screen brooding and tragic,while Zelah Clarke is the perfect combination of strength,courage,shyness and gentleness as Jane. The story(as i'm sure most people know)is this,the young and plain Jane Eyre is a teacher at a charity school for girls in the 1800's who advertises her services as a governess in the newspapers.She is offered the post of governess at the big mansion Thornfield Hall to tutor Adele the young ward of the halls mysterious and respected owner Mr Rochester. As the months go on he falls in love with Jane and puts into effect a few situations to try and see if Jane is as madly in love with him as he is with her.However there is a secret still waiting to be discovered at Thornfield Hall and when it is it's effects are devastating.This is a moving and well acted drama with nice locations and gorgeous costumes plus as I said earlier excellent acting especially from Zelah and Timothy.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-12aaa98f98b24338844dcf6b21b54fae",
            "input": "Istanbul is another one of those expatriate films that Errol Flynn was making in the last decade of his life trying to support his family and stay out of trouble with the IRS. It's a remake of the Fred MacMurray- Ava Gardner film Singapore from a decade ago.Unlike that studio product, Istanbul has the advantage of that great location cinematography right at the sight of the Golden Horn. But Errol Flynn, who was aging exponentially before the camera in every film, was way too old to be playing these action/adventure types any longer. His scenes with Cornell Borchers really do lack conviction.As for Cornell, she plays Errol's former sweetheart who through the trauma of being saved from a fire now has amnesia. She both doesn't remember Errol and is now married to Torin Thatcher. But Errol's got some nasty people led by Martin Benson and Werner Klemperer who are after some diamonds which have come into his possession. Got to deal with them too.Best reason to see Istanbul is to hear Nat King Cole sing and play the piano. Most people today don't realize that Cole was an accomplished jazz pianist, they only think of him as a singer. Actually he was a pianist first, the singing was an afterthought.Istanbul is a routine action/adventure film for those who are fans of that type of movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-479f86b6aaa645b48316aec640002f73",
            "input": "I saw this film in a London cinema in 1975 and have not seen it since. I found it hilarious. I loved it's originality. It's rare that someone MAKES a movie like this - and it's sad too.What I mean is, I once read a book called \"The Black Hotel\" - and as a film-fan, I always \"picture\" books as films. Kinda \"adapt\" them, you know? But as I read it, I thought, well, this would make a great movie - but of course it would have to be \"adapted\" - to the point where it would bear little relationship to the book.But then I thought, well WHY? Sure, it could never be shown on Sunday afternoon TV, but provided it were shown in cinemas to ADULTS, who knew what it contained, where's the HARM? Dammit, my civil liberties were being crushed here. A director SHOULD be able to make a literal film adaptation of \"The Black Hotel\".In an ideal World, censorship of films for adults should not EXIST. But sadly, whilst I accept that with INTELLIGENT adults, such freedom might be harmless, there would always be those who would lack the rationality to differentiate between fantasy and reality, and who might be spurred on to commit foul deeds.However, it's hard to see how \"La Bete\" falls into that category.On it's appearance in England, the British censor dismissed it out of hand. Despite the '69 relaxation on nudity, given the film's theoretical theme of bestiality, had the censor passed ANY of it, he'd have been looking for a new job on Monday.BUT... in those days, there was an alternative. The G.L.C. This was a local town council with a department who had the power to pass a film just for London, where it was deemed audiences were more \"sopisticated\" than those who lived out in the sticks.The film was duly submitted and PASSED. However, it later emerged that the \"board\" consisted of just four people - three who voted, plus a \"chairman\". And on the day, one of the voters was off sick. Thus the remaining two voters and the chairman sat down to view \"La Bete\".One of said voters thought, like me, that the film was hilarious and hardly likely to encourage foul deeds by ANYONE. The other lacked imagination and simply thought the piece disgusting. And the chairman didn't understand it, so decided to err on the side of FREEDOM.When the missing voter finally saw the film, they too thought it disgusting, but it was TOO LATE! The film had received its \"X-London\" certificate and opened to mixed reaction. The G.L.C. film censorship board was disbanded soon after! Thus \"La Bete\" only opened in London by what could best be termed a FLUKE! But I'm glad it was. It's GREAT! If you haven't seen it, DO so. It's a FANTASY, and as such, it's far less disturbing than most things you see on the news these days...",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3165a1cca59e4e0480358bb083168d5a",
            "input": "Well, what can i say about this movie. I'm speechless. I could go on about how stupid this movie is forever though the one thing that REALLY pi*sed me off was the music. And to top it all off someone commented on how much they LIKED it. To them all I have to say is that it was ripped off from one of the best martial arts movies of all time Fistsof fury starring Bruce Lee. IF he was still alive and ever came across this movie he'd be horrified. the rest of the movie is absolutely ridiculous and a waste of tape. I say tape because a movie like that couldn't possibly have been shot on film.I now feel more stupid for wasting 30 minutes of my life watching it. The only reason why i even saw it was because my roommate downloaded it out of morbid curiosity. What is this world coming to.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ff8eba50bb744209bf3039a4e4e77148",
            "input": "Typical 90's comedy, situational comedy similar to our modern day \"My Family\". Thatcher being the height of most political jokes, Bill (Belinda Lang) blames Thatcher for anything she can. \"Bloody Thatcher\" possibly shared with most of us. David the typical teenager, cutting up brains with bread knives, Jenny, the moody older teenage child, only interested in boys and more boys. Bill and Ben working as much as they can to keep their family afloat struggling within the economical climate of the early 90's. Granted the first two series were not as successful as the latter however, series 3 onwards is where it all kicks off with more laughs that i care to count. overall this show didn't get the best viewing times and they ought to have held on a bit longer. clearly they couldn't have carried on after Gary Olsen died but i think they should get rid of \"catherine Tate\" \"the office\" \"little Britain\" and bring back the classics!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0cfb38f8848a404dbb116165a5b873f9",
            "input": "Nick Cage is Randall Raines, a retired car thief who is forced out of retirement when he's forced to save his the life of his brother Kip (Giovanni Ribisi) when he screws up on a job, by completing his brothers job of stealing 50 cars in one night. He has to get together his old crew that he can trust to help him pull it off and get his bro out of dutch. But the cops are onto him, so can he pull it off? This was one of the great candidates of a film to re-make as the Original was far from a classic. And if you don't go into it expecting much, and turn the thinking portion of your brain off so you can ignore the plot hole ans just take the movie for what it is. You'll end up enjoying the ride. Watch it on a double-bill with \"The Fast and the Furious\" for a night of high-speed hijinks, just don't take the car out for a spin right afterwards.My Grade: B- DVD Extras: 7 minute Jerry Bruckheimer Interview; Bruckheimer Bio/Filmography; Action Overload: Highlight Reel; The Big Chase; \"0 To 60\" featurette; \"Wild Rides\" featurette; Stars On The Move; The Cult \"Painted On The Heart\" music video; Theatrical Trailer, and Trailers for \"Shanghai Noon\", \"Mission to Mars\" and \"Coyote Ugly\"",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4f00947d6b00415d8b5c12940c1d215b",
            "input": "After seeing this film at the SF Independent Film Festival, I couldn't wait to hear about how to get a copy. Jim McKay gave a talk (Q&A) about the film afterward which presented his ironic situation: how to get distribution for a film which portrays minorities (women, non-whites) working on resolving controversial issues (teen pregnancy, teen motherhood, racial identity, single-mother households), and how to write a faithful script on all of these topics being a mid-thirties white male. The multi-racial, multi-gendered audience of mostly-adults raved about the film's fantastic storyline, detailed characters, and fantastic portrayal of \"real teen life.\" Most of the teens, however, had left the building--leading me to think this is a film best seen by adults with kids, as a starting point for discussion rather than, as many adults there felt, \"a film teens should see because it's about them.\" Hence, distribution questions--how do we get our hands on it? The Internet (retail) would be a great path--this is a film that will be buried, like \"Pups\" or other radical modern teen films--and McKay seemed responsive. As for his credits as a writer/director, McKay was _extremeley_ sensitive and detailed in his work--allying himself to the Crown Heights neighborhood in which the film is set, working with actors to portray characters in their own vision of what they think should be--with the results being disarmingly realistic.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5a924555b9af48cfb47bc4c43a2ad8b8",
            "input": "I really do fail to see the actual surplus value of this movie. It's not bad enough to be hilarious. There's no sleaze or gratuitous nudity (although there was plenty of opportunity). There's no gore. There's no suspense in the first hour of the movie 'cause there's way to much scenes of tourist having a party and natives playing funky tribal music. That last part was actually funny on many occasions: You see these natives hitting congas and 'jembés' and that's indeed what you hear (badly synchronized) on the soundtrack. But they also added this funky bass-line on the soundtrack. So, where was the bass-player? At one point the natives get angry and start killing the tourists. Why all of the sudden? It's supposed to be because the evil white men build this tourist complex, which according to their myth awakened the wrath of the river-alligator-god (I actually missed the explanation for that one). But the natives did help for several months to build the tourist complex, so why the sudden angriness? And how in the hell did they manage to push the helicopter in the water??? It's all silly and pointless. This movie also features the skinniest Afro-American model I've ever seen.At one point our heroic leading couple visits this cave where a weird, crazy old man lives. The only point to that scene is that they make the \"shocking\" discovery that the killer-crocodile is actually an alligator. Crocodile or alligator, what's the difference? It's big, it's made out of plastic and it eats people. All the same to me. The alligator is a rather silly creation. It's very stiff & motionless and doesn't even flap its feet when it swims. The eyes don't even move when they're shot in close-up. I guess they didn't know 'animatronics' back then in Italy during 1979. There's also a lot of pointless inter-cut shots of the local wildlife. I suspect it's stock footage.Like, I said, the first hour was pretty lame and the only reason I didn't switch off the movie was because my cat was asleep on my lap and I didn't want to wake the sweet thing. But the last half hour of the movie did get better. We finally get to see some action when the alligator swims through a horde of panicking people snapping its teeth and munching on them. The most entertaining (and at the same time funny) scene is when Alice and Daniel drive a van over a bridge and it collapses. We're looking at a matchbox-version of the van falling in the river here. Funny. But nicely shot. In fact there are several other nice traveling camera-moves. Surprisingly for this type of flick. I was gonna point out some stupid details concerning the end of the movie, but I don't wanna spoil it completely, in case you do decide to watch this movie. My advice is to stay away from it. If you wanna see a decent alligator movie, then see Lewis Teague's ALLIGATOR. I admit, that one isn't Italian and isn't a JAWS rip-off, but it certainly is more fun. And if you're interested in other movies made by director Sergio Martino, then I strongly recommend the highly entertaining 2019: AFTER THE FALL OF NEW YORK. That one's an over-the-top rip-off of every possible existing post-apocalyptic-future-of-doom-movie. \"Italians\" and \"rip-offs\", two words that go together very well.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-81fe8547038249de8e8650f897889de5",
            "input": "My friends and I went into this movie not knowing what to expect, but hoping for the best. When we came out, we were only slightly more informed on what the plot of the movie actually was. Though not the worst movie I've ever seen, I definitely do not recommend spending your money to see it in theaters. Maybe have a friend rent it for you (it's not even worth the rental cost, either) if you really want to see it.When a movie is so convoluted that you have no idea what's going on until the last five minutes, there's really not much that can be said in its defense. The acting was decent, more than you'd expect to get from this movie, and some of the shots were good, but it was all bogged down by a lame plot and poor script.This movie was actually so bad that as soon as it got out, I went and purchased a ticket to see a good movie just to cleanse my mind. I recommend that all of you just skip the first step and go see a good movie instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-075ddf4d5bc645eda46500c35b34b5df",
            "input": "Overall I would have to say that I liked the movie. Some of the fight scenes are really good. Especially the fight against Leung Ka-Yan. One point that really bothered me was the fact that they used an Asian to play a black man. I mean really. Talk about bad taste. During a fight scene, you see one of the fighters on the floor is laughing. Otherwise, Sammo copies Bruce Lee's fighting moves perfectly. 5 out of 10 Stars.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b1fc0eddc5944883bbde34ab2c17b6c4",
            "input": "The 60's is a great movie(I saw it completely in one night) about the hippy movement in the late 60's. Although the title would suggest otherwise the first 5 years of the 60's are not really important in this film.The main character of the movie is Michael,a political activist who goes on the road in the US against the Vietnam-war. There he meets his girlfriend,Sarah.Michael's brother,Brian,goes to Vietnam to fight(what a surprise!).He comes back from the war and changes in a \"Tom Cruise Born on the fourth of July\" look a like and then into a Hippy.His dad is a pro-vietnam war type of guy(what a surprise!!).Michael's sister Kate gets pregnant from a Rock & Roll artist and runs away from home and goes to San Francisco during the summer of love. The ending is very poor(father becomes a liberal and everybody is happy),but I let this slip away from my vote(the rest of the movie is very good!). The performances by the actors are pretty good and the soundtrack of the movie is absolutely brilliant. All the main events of the sixties are in the movie,like the murders on JFK and Martin Luther King aswell as the big hippy protests,the summer of love and Woodstock! Look closely for Wavy\"Woodstock Speaker\"Gravy(What we have in mind is breakfast in bed for 400.000!) as a first aid employee at the Woodstock festival!In the end,the 60's is a beautiful movie about a beautiful decade! 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ca45b70bb1d54f1db60fef0ef9f5fa18",
            "input": "I saw The Big Bad Swim at the 2006 Temecula film festival, and was totally caught off guard by how much I was drawn into it.The film centers around the lives of a group of people taking an adult swim class for various reasons. A humorous idea in its own right, the class serves as a catalyst for greater changes in the students' lives.What surprised me about the film was how real it felt. Rarely in ensemble pieces are characters treated so well. I enjoyed the scenes in the class immensely, and the drama that took place outside was very poignant. Nothing seemed out of place or out of character, and ultimately it left a very strong feeling, much like attending school or summer camp - where you find fast friends, form strong bonds, and make discoveries about yourself, yet have to depart all too soon.My only complaint was that the character of Paula had a very strong and unusual introduction, which made you want to know a little more about her than was ultimately revealed. I suppose you don't get to meet everyone in class, though...Aside from this, I found the film very well-rounded and quite enjoyable. See it if you get the opportunity.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-85813f450de941e49b93833a8ad05e0d",
            "input": "This movie is wonderful.I was 'enchanted', i should say, and surprised because of how uniquely it was done. The cast, the sequencing, the effects...everything! Magnificent! I mean, it was a love story, yes, but what made it outstanding from the rest was that it was told in an entertaining, wholesome manner.For me, it is the representation of modern fairy tale. It's like the modern peter pan...simply amazingi surely would buy a copy of this the moment it hit the market.This movie is really a double MUST SEE one...!!!! 10 stars for that!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8e5d5e1deef24834a35ad0b6dd1bc885",
            "input": "You could say that the actors will make a movie, but this clearly proves that statement wrong. Most of the characters in this film lack anything to hold on to. They play the part of cardboard cut outs being moved about in predictable and uninteresting ways. The story is very simple. It could be summed up in a few words, but I'll hold back in case anyone reading does want to see this film.I had to fast forward the parts where Jack showed us how to be an obnoxious eater. I'd have to say that 70% of this film revolved around cooking, eating, or getting ready to eat. Quite frankly, I'd rather not spend my time watching Jack chew noisily with an open mouth. Personally, I could have done without the footwear references and jokes that pepper the first half of the film too.Outside of my own personal dementia, the film really lacked anything worth it's time. There were countless scenes and camera shots that felt like it was dragging. When something happens, the reactions of the characters are vague and dry.Best not to look this one up.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cf0c07bbfc124672bd2cb48fbae7b781",
            "input": "They sell it as a horror movie, it's supposed to be a thriller, but I found it pretty funny (comedy?, don't think so), I laughed the whole movie I think it was because of the ridiculous acting and plot. I don't blame the actors, I think they were not very good, but O.K. I think Cillian is a very good \"bad guy\" I loved his acting in Batman Beggins, and Rachel McAdams.. whoa! she's a beauty, and a good actress as well, but let's try to be a little objective here, the story mm mm... the direction mm mm... it lacks a lot of good suspense in fact is a really boring movie, but there's one good thing tho, it's a short movie, only 1 hour and 30 minutes (FOR ME IT WAS LIKE 10 MINUTES UNDER THE WATER!!!)I just don't know why this movie is rated so high, and in rotten tomatoes, even higher, what's wrong with good, rational and objective criticism?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58ed16d8efe443b8935a64110a96b72f",
            "input": "I really have to disagree with guy-yardley-rees who (should he have watched the entire film) would have seen some absolutely stunning Scottish scenery (some of the best ever shot in Skye) and found a film with a difficult start come together into a really poignant whole.This is not a big budget film. Rather it is a film that has a strong community feel.I can't say how much 'standard' films bore me - pushing out the same polished stuff again and again. Seachd doesn't seem to be about that at all. It really seems to be trying to offer something more real and certainly more Gaelic than any recent Scottish film.OK, so the acting isn't in the style a blockbuster. That's because the actors are seemingly real people. I actually thought that the key roles of the boy and his Grandfather were really convincing - and at times unusually beautiful.Seachd really bears a second viewing, since there are many threads that become clearer second time around - that really do feed into the ending.Overall, the combination of music and (at times) stunning visuals, plus a community approach to the acting and non-normal structure has turned Seachd into quite a distinctive and memorable film. More of these please!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-673fa31d46a04d538a99a38d917f94e8",
            "input": "If you want an undemanding and reasonably amusing hour or so, then it's OK to watch this. It's not all that bad, really. Yeah, it's got more lapses in logic than I care to describe here and might tax the patience of people - like myself, I have to admit - who are inclined to throw things at the TV on occasion, but it's funny at least. Just because it's not always INTENTIONALLY funny, there's no need to let that get you down.However, if you've read the book - or any of the other books by Brookmyre - then you'd probably best avoid it. I've read them all and when I first watched this film, I despised it. I've trashed it in detail and at great length on another site, in fact. The TV plot bears practically no relevance at all to that of the book and served only to outrage and infuriate many faithful (and admittedly rabid) Brookmyre fans.Best bit of advice..? Watch this, then read the book and only THEN make your comparisons and submit your judgement.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2f74f594e4744a97959f22987ee9dc31",
            "input": "The message of a world on the brink of war is disregarded by the masses; the mythical city of Everytown in 1940 represents England in general, but it could just as well stand for any nation of the world. When war finally does arrive, it's ravages continue not for another five years, but until 1966 at which time Everytown is completely destroyed. Adding to the desolation and toll on humanity is the \"wandering sickness\", a pestilence that continues for another four years.\"Things to Come\" balances both a fatalistic and futuristic world view, where science holds out a hope for a revived civilization. The \"Wings Over the World\" concept plays out a bit corny, though it's spokesman Cabal (Raymond Massey) is unwavering in his mission and dedicated to his cause. If he fails, others will follow. This message is continually reinforced throughout the film, brought home convincingly in Massey's end of movie speech. Man's insatiable need to test the limits of knowledge and achievement requires an \"all the universe or nothing\" mindset.The film's imagery of automation and machinery in the second half is reminiscent of the great silent film \"Metropolis\". As Everytown is rebuilt and transformed by the year 2036, the spectacle of the city's rebirth strikes a resonant chord, as architecture of modern cities of today suggest the movie's eerily prophetic vision is coming to fruition. Where the movie gets it wrong by sixty seven years though is man's first mission to the moon, but in 1936, a hundred year timetable probably seemed more legitimate than 1969.\"Things to Come\" is one of those rarities in film, a picture that makes you think. Which side will you come down on, the forces for advancement in the face of uncertainty or maintain the status quo? It's not a comfortable question, as both choices offer inherent dangers and unknowable outcomes. Those who choose to be bystanders risk being swept away by forces beyond their control.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a9db5852bc9f450fa20b7c3e9097bfd7",
            "input": "Madhur Bhandarkar has given it all raw. But the best part is he hasn't forgotten to give the ingredients. It has come short and crisp to the viewer and it is the audience to make the choice now. Page 3 is a revelation of the naked truth irrespective of the crudeness attached to it.Madhavi (Konkan Sharma) is a journalist and enjoys her work. A simple and peaceful life adores her with a caring boyfriend and a nice roommate Pearl. She covers the Page 3 (Celebrity Page) of Nation Today, where she has a very supportive editor Deepak Suri (Boman Irani.) But life takes turn for her as she hits the first bump and takes herself away from Page 3 and goes into Crime bit. Omigosh! a whole new world was waiting for her there. She is shocked, excited, stunned with the revelation. Her reaction has resulted in losing the job. At the end she is back to Page 3. Now when she meets any celebrity in a party, she knows the actual looks of each, hidden under the illusive face.The movie has a message and it is crude. The audience needs to get it in their own color. The theme and the screenplay was fantastic. There are some very good thoughts applied to prepare the audiences. Like the foreplay-club is shown before the pedophiliac exhibition, the short suspense before gay-actions in bathroom. The dialogs are strong and the actors are really good at delivering it. Charu Mohanty's 2 words speaks volumes and he is very successful in uttering those two words with such ingenuity, it leaves an impact. The set selections could have been better. The songs don't stand anywhere; but they were needed in the background. Atul Kulkarni has a small role with high-impact. There were a few flaws visible. Atul Kulkarni explaining Konkan Sharma that honesty should be tagged along with intelligence. There could have been a better dialog as this sounds like a preach. The meeting between Thapar and his daughter doesn't call for acting. That scene looks very unprofessional.Overall it is a must-watch movie with selective options before the pedophilia incident. That may spoil your mood.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1624f3ba194849a2b792d3dc98432558",
            "input": "Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, the sixth installment of the Nightmare on Elm Street series and once again another bad sequel. I think this is tied up with the last sequel of the Dream Child. I was lucky enough to get the Nightmare on Elm Street series box DVD set for my birthday, so I got to see all the sequels. May I say that I'm just getting more and more disappointed though with these sequels, at least the past two, it just seems like Freddy lost his edge. It's almost like the writers were trying to give Freddy a soul and they're just destroying it instead of reinventing the story. This was a sequel that wasn't needed, sorry to Robert Englund, but this was very much below what Freddy Krueger represents.Freddy is back, but he's got something we don't know about, a daughter. Maggie, she's not aware that he is her father, but soon she finds out what his dark secrets are and he wants her help. She has to do her best to resist his powers, but it's hard with all the good memories she has of her loving father. Ironic, isn't it? But Freddy isn't giving up without manipulating her into his ways.Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare is also presented in 3-D, radical, huh? Note the sarcasm. This is one of the worst sequels, it's tied up with the fifth sequel of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, I'd rather watch the second Nightmare on Elm Street to be honest. This just had bad acting, stupid editing, and just over all a bad idea for a story. I didn't like the concept of it and it just ruined the whole idea of who Freddy Krueger really is, the death master of nightmares, not Father Knows Best.2/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf459898ebcb4352b55305bdc7ff8c20",
            "input": "I know that you've already entered this in film festivals (or at least I think you have, I may just be making that up) but I think this should get \"best animated short film\" in every one. Bravo. I can't wait for the full film. I realize that you may not hear this often enough because of the bizarre nature of your animations, but hear it now and accept it as the truth. Kudos, my friend. Okay, now I'm just trying to get ten lines of text... Though I still mean it. And here comes yet another -SHOE!- and I cannot stop here yet. This is extremely annoying and yet at the same time I have nothing better to do. In fact, I'll probably watch all of your movies in yet another spasmodic \"Jason Steele Marathon.\" I do have a lot of those.-R",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c1f2adf5177f4212a65539bf76a5f078",
            "input": "Clint Eastwood reprises his role as Dirty Harry who this time is on the case of a vigilante (Sondra Locke)who is killing the people that raped her and her sister at a carnival many years ago. Eastwood makes the role his and the movie is mainly more action then talk, not that I'm complaining. Sudden Impact is indeed enjoyable entertainment.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f837af802b3a433db6b29012405299fe",
            "input": "The acting in the film is really well done honestly, but the movie is so slow and so boring, as soon as it gets interesting everything slows to a major halt. I am glad to see Sam Rockwell in this, he did a great job, so did the other actors as I mentioned but man... this is one of the worst dragged out films I have ever seen. Now maybe in a short film form this movie would be good, but other than that, avoid it. This film has so much filler it makes a Twinkie cake jealous. I never, ever, walk out on films, but watching this one at home with family, I walked out. Yeah, it was that boring. Apparently my comment doesn't have enough lines to post, so here's some more filler. I guess I was inspired by the movie I just watched.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c0e53ff08df34e1ea9c528959747e546",
            "input": "I wouldn't call it awful, but nothing at all shines in this movie, and it is encumbered with some seriously unbelievable basic plot development. It starts out well, but once the main hit is done, it devolves into a long subplot around a young girl which is not compelling, and some action scenes which are theatre of the absurd unrealistic. For example there is a prolonged shootout at the airport in which the lighting is all stroboscopic. No explanation for that. How credible is it that a airport storage area is going to have lights that flash on and off confusingly, and just enough to let Snipes do his incredible escape schtick? This is one of far too few action scenes punctuated by pointlessly drawn out set ups that just fails to draw one into suspending belief.In addition, the whole premise seems to be that the United States CIA team can shoot the place up but get away with it by saying \"national security\" to the Brits. This gimmick relies on a stereotype that is to far afield from reality to be satisfying.There are a lot better action movies out there. Better formulated, better executed. This one is entertaining at times but there is just not enough meat on the bone and after a while it becomes downright boring -- something that should never happen in a good action movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5dba440be4b548e19c7cf73096f4e630",
            "input": "In 1967 I visited the Lake Elsinore glider-port and flew a yellow Pratt Read sailplane. Returning to Germany the above serious ran on TV and one segment was about the high altitude sailplane flights in California in the early 50ies. (The real life pilot was Bill Ivans, I don't know who played him in the series) It turned out that the sailplane in the film was the same (same N-number) as the one I had flown at Lake Elsinore. Ever since I saw that segment I have been searching for it and have been wondering if it is somewhere available. (other segments in that serious were about the Baker Ejection Seat; an instrument to find avalanche victims etc.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-149c8050324544ce93d53a57381eab43",
            "input": "This film really disappointed me. The acting is atrocious. Unbelievable. And it's about actors. The story is incredibly obvious: A group of independent actors stage a Passion Play and, in turn, they start to live out the lives of the characters they play. I've been watching a lot of movies lately, thanks to Netflix, and this is the first one I haven't watched all the way through in a long time. I felt I didn't need to see the end; we all know the end of this story.For some, it seems, this \"modernization\" of the Gospels is either sacrilegious or enlightening. I cannot speak to any of this as I wasn't raised in the Christian church. That being said, I was raised in the US and I live in an increasingly Christian culture. I'm curious enough about Jesus and about the modernization of the religion, for better or worse. I haven't seen Mel Gibson's version, but I'm guessing that those who liked that one will like this, except for the most conservative. I just wish this was a better film.Lots of these reviews praise Arcand's direction and especially the cinematography. I liked neither. The film itself is rather prudish and preachy. I didn't believe the characters' personae and I was never involved with their on screen lives. The play within the play is very much dated and would not, I think, carry it's own weight in a real time production. But that's beside the point. What I really needed for this to work would have been stronger development of the characters and the plot to support the philosophical and theological questions the film would like to be about. And the musical choices are obvious and unoriginal.There were two examples of this that come easily to mind. Firstly, there is a reenactment of the parable of Jesus driving the money lenders from the temple: the lead actor, who has fallen for the woman who will play Magdalene and who is also a model and dancer, becomes enraged that she must debase herself by auditioning for a commercial (with a wicked producer and plenty of panting men in the audience) with her pants off. He trashes the place and chases them all out. I guess this is the level that the film wishes to reach. The romance between these two is entirely arbitrary and not at all emotionally realized and the scene is played out like a high-school rendering of Death of a Salesman, i.e., not well. Please stop hitting me over the head with this high-handed \"significance.\" The other is the relationship between the other female lead and the priest who has asked them to do the play and who, eventually, turns against them and betrays them to the nowadays-corrupt Church. Why. Why does she sleep with this guy. \"It brings him so much pleasure and me so little pain.\" Ah, the saintly whore and the lovable old coot. It seems to be just enough for Arcand to signify but not worth the trouble to enrich and enliven these characters. They are going through the motions and I'm reaching for the eject button.Feel free to write me off as bored, jaded or just not interested. Feel free to watch this movie and see the Passion, in all its beauty, sadness and inspiration, delivered as an amateurish and gimmicky charade. Feel free to have all your preconceived ideas affirmed and see any shred of artistic integrity forsaken for monotonous drivel. But don't say I didn't warn you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd60e7634c5c4b1d9daeed07536ce30b",
            "input": "Recently, I had opportunity to view a working print in Kansas City (Olathe, KS.) of this title. It is difficult for me, being a lover of the art as I am, to report the following, but, the truth sometimes hurts, and quite frankly after sitting through this tripe (I'm using the slang definition here - worthless statements or writing) for an hour and a half, I feel obligated to share (WARN) any interested parties. Let's begin at the beginning, a good place to start as always. The first 15 minutes are not really that bad, a couple of laughs, and decent development, but then it is downhill from there. This is the story of a woman, in her mid thirties, that (as the writer would like for you to believe) is dissatisfied with her life and unfulfilled. The first major difficulty occurs when if you don't know that fact going into the movie, you won't know it when she suddenly risks it all for, in my opinion, a very unkempt and unlikely fling with a local salesman. There is little development (drastically insufficient development) to justify her actions for the affair she has, and when it occurs, one feels, as I did, that she is just of low moral character. The word \"slut\" comes to mind, hopefully, they'll let that pass the review and post the comment. This, in my opinion, is the first fatal flaw of the film. If you're married or have ever been in love, irregardless of whether you are male or female, its going to turn you off. Quite frankly, I feel that it would have made a much better \"blue movie\" - that's the level in my opinion of which the screenplay is deserving. The second fatal flaw is the casting, Diane Lane just didn't work for me here, and Viggo Mortensen is not the right man for the job, believe me. The only saving grace to the entire film is Anna Paquin, the depth of her ability as a fine actress shines in places, conveying a subtle yet very blunt (I apologize for the dichotomy but it is accurate) portrayal of an emerging teen. Bravo, well done. I'm not going to give the ending away, but I was disappointed, being billed as a slice of life romance is one thing... but an ending like that.... Well, if that teased you enough to see this picture, don't say I didn't warn you, but you better look fast - if this celluloid is released, I doubt it goes four weeks before bursting into flames. I'd say wait for the video, but the free sex education tapes at most video rental outlets have more entertainment value. Hmmm, Dustin Hoffman produced this, you think he'd learn after Ishtar. This film once carried the working title \"Blouse Man\" and should have been left on the rack. If you've never in your life wanted to walk out on a film, give this one 35-40 minutes, the only thing worth staying for is Anna Paquin, if you can stomach the fact that you'll find your mind drifting to whether or not you took out the garbage before you left home, which is probably where you should have stayed in the first place if you're off to the movies to see this one. That's my two cents, for what it is worth.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-611c025781a24c63af793d55359ba6ea",
            "input": "I'm not a Steve Carell fan however I like this movie about Dan, an advice columnist, who goes to his parents house for a stay with his kids and ends up falling in love with his brother's girlfriend. Its a story thats been told before, but not like this. There are simply too many little bits that make the film better than it should be. The cast is wonderful, and even if Carell is not my cup of tea, he is quite good as the widower who's suppose to know everything but finds that knowing is different than feeling and that sometimes life surprises you. At times witty and wise in the way that an annoying Hallmark card can be, the film still some how manages to grow on you and be something more than a run of the mill film. Worth a look see",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2a89412b326642abb186c21835aea05f",
            "input": "Near the beginning, after it's been established that outlaw John Dillinger (Warren Oates), is an egomaniacal rapist, another bandit of the 1930s is cornered in a farm house and surrounded by the FBI. Second-in-command Melvin Purvis (Ben Johnson), surveys the situations, sticks a lighted cigar in his mouth, picks up two loaded .45-caliber automatics, and stalks off into the distant house alone. Bang, bang, bang. Purvis emerges alone from the house, carrying the female hostage, the miscreant dead. All in long shot.If you're enthralled by stories like Red Riding Hood, this should have considerable appeal.Oh, it's as exciting as it is mindless. Pretty Boy Floyd meets his demise dramatically. Multiple violations of the civic code. Plenty of shoot outs with Tommy guns and pistols. Blood all over.As history, it stinks. Few remember Melvin Purvis as an FBI hero, partly, I would guess, because of his name. Melvin PURVIS? We all remember J. Edgar Hoover, who fired Melvin Purvis because he was a rival in the quest for public attention though.The picture was written and directed by John Milius. He's the guy who had it written into his contract that, should any animals be shot and killed in the course of one of his productions, he should be the designated shooter. Milius is the guy, a compleat gun freak, who had Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders in the Spanish-American war shouting quotations from Henry V -- \"Saint Crispin's Day\" and all that.Exciting, yes, and complete garbage. \"I knew I'd never take him alive, and I didn't try too hard neither.\" That is, kill 'em all and let God sort them out.You'll just love it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-022bc75164ea489b940b9c57adb6baa7",
            "input": "This is a rotten movie.The cast seem to know just how bad it was.it starts badly and by the end is truly bad.the acting is woeful.the script could of been written on the spot.and although the movie is a horror film it has no scary scenes.Crap 1 out of 10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e848a26d54f447c692feb431844cd0da",
            "input": "At least I was able to enjoy mocking the movie which is surprising since I was barely able to sit through it. In all honesty, my guess is the cover to the DVD case cost more than the entire movie. And saying that it is the same director as The Boogeyman, when a new version of that just came out...nice touch guys, it was misleading enough to rope me in. The only thing that frustrated me more than the insufferable acting of the copycat was his haircut. Usually you only see that kind of hair on a ten year old boy and the character acted like it. The film looks like it was shot by a D+ grad student of some film school excited to use every film technique he ever learned while attending classes....sometimes, less is more buddy. Through out I would get lost by random plot twists that led nowhere or were unexplained. All this makes a bad movie but when the ending doesn't even come close to pulling it together, well, that makes it an exceptionally bad movie. Without a doubt this is the worst movie I have ever seen, and that includes my friends' french final video for senior year of high school, but hey maybe i'm a bit biased, I mean I did get to play an extra. P.S. I don't even think this deserves a star...not even a half. NONE FOR YOU!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2d2d0c7df5b34646821dacc1b056e828",
            "input": "Finally! An Iranian film that is not made by Majidi, Kiarostami or the Makhmalbafs. This is a non-documentary, an entertaining black comedy with subversive young girls subtly kicking the 'system' in its ass. It's all about football and its funny, its really funny. The director says \"The places are real, the event is real, and so are the characters and the extras. This is why I purposely chose not to use professional actors, as their presence would have introduced a notion of falseness.\" The non-actors will have you rooting for them straightaway unless a. your heart is made of stone b. you are blind. Excellently scripted, the film challenges patriarchal authority with an almost absurd freshness. It has won the Jury Grand Prize, Berlin, 2006. Dear reader, it's near-perfect. WHERE, where can I get hold of it?",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e954dc87840c4eb2bea9ece986c076e9",
            "input": "Just kidding! This was one of the worst movies I have ever seen! It was so bad though, that it was hilarious. My friend and I purposly rented it because it looked so bad. Cheesy old horror flicks are always good for some laughs. The plot stunk, some of the voices were dubbed, the quality was horrendous. But I sure had a blast watching it!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9e751c0521be4bec96782c0fa47de6ba",
            "input": "I jumped at the chance to view this movie uncut and uninterrupted, remembering rahs and raves for it. But wherever it seemed about to slip into being truly scary, it backed off and went somewhere else. The dripping water throughout the house, the black rain, the prophetic dreams, taking the wrong turn in raw sewage were dropped before they could work up to a scream.What a disappointment. Chamberlain's nearly expressionless mask of a face offered little but confused disbelief, something I found myself mirroring as the film wore on. What could have been eerie Aboriginal chanting and instruments in the background were instead a cacophony seemingly designed to beat terror into one's head. The ideas that modern people can embody ancient gods, that the Aboriginal peoples believe red-haired white men were the first priests, and many other possibilities are passed along more like a shopping list than a hint at another dimension (the Dream Time).[SPOILER] In the final scene, it wasn't clear to me what the director was trying to tell. Is there a big wave? So what? How big? A tsunami? Yeah, okay. That's devastating but not apocalyptic. Is it the end of the world? From a wave? The last wave? That'd have to be a pretty darn big wave. Why? Was the world that bad a place? It didn't seem so awful in this movie. Actually I didn't think the wave came off, since the shadow left Burton's face that had been cast by the wave. Was it only Burton's apocalypse? Heck, that happens every day to people who lose it. It wasn't of any interest if it was only him.The most frightening scene, and the one that gives the best indication of Weir's potential, was in Charlie's apartment where Burton has gone to confront the old man for scaring Burton's wife. Charlie keeps asking him \"Who are you?\" and it becomes truly disturbing after a while. Unfortunately, the movie never followed suit.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-10da89c5993449babdd8a301c4a39e6b",
            "input": "I would have given this otherwise terrific series a full 10 vote if Claudia Black had not continued on in it! Her inclusion as the silly 'Vela' has brought the series down in my estimation. To bring her in as a regular at the same time as including Ben Browder to replace RDA was a mistake.Unfortunately we were just reeling from the loss of 'Jack' and really didn't need this great series turned into new episodes of 'Farscape'.I was a great fan of the film \"Stargate\" and when the series was first announced I had reservations that it could live up to the film, but after watching the first episode I have to admit I was hooked. I have always looked forward to new episodes with great anticipation",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0dd0afc453574cb6b944753c40788541",
            "input": "The only scary thing about this movie is the thought that whoever made it might make a sequel.From start to finish \"The Tooth Fairy\" was just downright terrible. It seemed like a badly-acted children's movie which got confused, with a \"Wizard of Oz\" witch melting and happy kiddies ending combined with some bad gore effects and swearing.Half of the cast seem completely unnecessary except for conveniently being there to get murdered in some fashion. The sister of the two brothers, Cherise the aura reader and Mrs. McDonald have entirely no point in the film - they could have included them in the main plot for some interesting side stories but apparently couldn't be bothered. The people watching the film know the characters are there for some bloody death scene but come on, at least TRY and have a slight plot for them. The story in general is weak with erratic behavior from the characters that makes you wish they all get eaten by the witch.Add the weak plot and the weak acting together (the children are particularly wooden) and the movie ends up a complete failure. If only MST3K could have had a go at this one ...",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fa0a2f9ac63a4ef381d1959c2442ab14",
            "input": "For a film that's ostensibly about sex and leather, it doesn't have any right to be as oddly sweet as it is. The story of Bettie Page, a good Christian girl from the South who's momma wouldn't let her date until she married, who moved to New York and ended up becoming the most successful pin-up of her age, is driven by an outstanding performance from Gretchen Moll. Her Page can't quite reconcile the pictures that she takes (nobody's allowed to touch, it's all fun and respectful) with the pornography trials and supposed ill-effects that her images have on the world around her.Page has been an inspiration to every burlesque artist since, not just because she had a figure to die for, but because she invested every picture with an innocent sense of fun that was uniquely sexy and simple at the same time. Rather like this film, in fact. Filmde in both black and white and glorious technicolour, it's a lovely way to spend a couple of hours.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0eca239549854689ba5e0b969882c304",
            "input": "i, too, loved this series when i was a kid. In 1952 i was 5 and my family always watched this show. My favorite character was the one played by Marion Lorne as a rather stuttering, bumbling and very lovable \"aunt\" type person. i can still recall her \"ubba bubba um um\" type comments as she would try and say something important. And then when she came back and played Aunt Clara in Bewitched it was great casting! It was the first time that i can remember seeing Walter Matthau whose career i followed as a fan for many many years.i have a question if anyone can verify: was the title or end credits music the \"Swedish Rhapsody\" by Hugo Alfven? Every time i hear it played on my classical radio station here in Southern California it brings back memories of the image of Mr. Peepers walking away with his back to the camera. i'm not even certain if this image in my mind's eye is correct.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6453d030b9d5474a982ffb10daf04fa9",
            "input": "One of the best movies for all ages. You will never be able to look at LION KING again without thinking of the extra history this movie adds. Nearly 40 years old, I watched this with my wife and two sons after work tonight & I have not laughed & enjoyed a movie so much in a long time.Take time out and watch this with the kids. It will remind you of how Disney used to be when you were a young one.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0e914b85429d40b1a50c37346ad3477f",
            "input": "Let me start by saying that I totally agree with the basic thesis of the film, that there probably was no historical Jesus and Christianity is a sham. With that said, this movie does a pretty poor job of proving that thesis. It makes good arguments--the gap between Jesus' theoretical life and the writing of the Gospels, filled only by the writings of Paul, who doesn't indicate a historical Jesus--and then utterly fails to convincingly argue them. It makes broad statements without presenting the evidence the statements are based on, and it resolutely ignores counter-arguments presented by Christian apologists. The intellectual dishonesty, emotional manipulation, and lack of serious argument are obvious, and stunning. The only Christians we hear from in the film are the head of the filmmaker's old school--who comes off like a reasonable, rational person attempting to deal with a twit with a chip on his shoulder--and various Christians encountered apparently at random in a parking lot. I'm sorry, but revealing that average Christians don't know much about their religion isn't exactly damning evidence of Christianity's fraudulence. You may as well claim that Jay Leno has disproved the existence of Michael Dukakis on his Jay-Walking segment. The interviews with experts can be interesting, but the film is filled with too much of, let's be honest, the filmmaker just being snarky. Within the first five minutes the film has already conflated Jerry Falwell with Charles Manson and the writers of the Left Behind series with the Branch Davidians. And by the end, the film becomes so self-centered that there's no rational argument left, just an angry former Christian lashing out at the people and places he blames for his messed up childhood. Y'know, maybe that movie could've been interesting, but it's misplaced in a documentary about the historicity of Jesus, and it's so self-congratulatory as to deflate any sympathy. This is a Michael Moore film without the humor or the film-making acumen combined with a Richard Dawkins book without the wit or the intellectual rigor. Skip it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b14ceb7804414cb6a06b98baee601e64",
            "input": "Definitely spoilers in this review! I **adore** American Gothic and have done since I first saw it late at night when it first aired on Ch4 in the UK when I was 14. The comparisons made to Stephen King are just about right. It's small town supernatural eeriness but with fantastic layered characters. Best of all, and the reason I love it so much, is it had the guts to never be black and white! Lucas Buck though lacking any conscience often works by, as he says, giving people enough rope to hang themselves with. His manipulation only works because of other people's weak morals. Caleb though generally a thoughtful, kind, insightful boy can at times show the latent dark side inherited from his father. None of the characters are wholly good or bad with even the angelic Merlyn showing a wrathful side through reckless vengeance in The Plague Sower. Not only that but having Gail, the closest thing to a mother figure for Caleb, not only sleep with but fall in love with Lucas despite all she knows made me realise this show would just go there and not apologise for it. I'm a huge Buffy fan, but when that show tried to go really 'dark' in later seasons it failed miserably because it lost it's humorous side and didn't commit fully to its ideas. AG shows that you can have a morally bankrupt character right at the heart of the show, and still have a hell of laugh doing it.I can't even think about why it was cancelled as I'll just get too angry at the ridiculousness of it all. So much rubbish on TV and good, original shows get kicked around and stamped on. Thanks to the emergence of DVD at least I can see the show in it's entirety! Yes some of the visuals look dated now, but the creepy strange atmosphere is provided well enough by the story lines. The actors also all give such perfect performances that it more than makes up for some odd camera work.The only reason why I think someone may not like this show is that it isn't like the X-files where there are cases to 'solve' or Lost where there's huge unanswered questions. It's pretty obvious from the get go that Lucas Buck has some kind of evil powers, and that the show is all about fighting for Caleb's soul. So this show might frustrate people looking for a purpose or an unknown 'truth' to find. Yes there are some mysterious unanswered aspects, with some such as the truth about Gails parents getting resolved, but unlike Lost and X-files this show isn't about trying to find out more 'facts' about what's going on IMO. It's all about the characters and the way they have to confront moral choices in the twisted world of Trinity. Personally I would just get such a kick out of seeing Lucas turn every situation to his advantage.All in all the main thing I have to say is CHECK IT OUT. I'm pretty certain most fantasy/horror fans will LOVE it. Also even though it got cancelled all characters have arcs and there is enough in the finale to give some small sense of closure. The only hanging thread I felt was Dr Matt. Having him not be in the final episodes is strange. I would have done anything for a second season, but at least the full 22 episodes exist and perhaps given how brainless some TV execs appear to be I should be glad this wonderful show got made at all!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4bb0d4e98e1948d9b2ea3beed2020316",
            "input": "The Matador is better upon reflection because at the time one is watching it, it seems so light. The humor is always medium-gauge, never unfunny but never gut-busting. The story is a very simple thread. The characteristics of the plot are often recycled features, namely the unscrupulous bad guy in need of a pal and the straight-laced glass-wearing good guy in need of security in life team up and learn from each other and somehow complement each other's lifestyles. I also find the bullfighting parallel to the story unnecessary, as it is a simply cruel thing and the symbolism is hardly potent enough to carry itself. However, it really is a good film, because though it seemed so thin and unaffecting at the time, it wasn't. It has a subtle way of connecting with the audience.I believe the reason it slowly but surely gives the audience something to take with them is because though it's a formula that is nothing new, even most of the humor, both main characters, virtually the only characters in it, are somehow met and gotten to know. Forget calling them real. That's not at all what I mean. What I mean is that though Pierce Brosnan's filthy, womanizing, boozing hit man is a detached comical character, he's grasped firmly by the writer and definitely by Brosnan, who is aggressively communicating how much he enjoys his breath of fresh James Bondless air. Greg Kinnear's character seems quite the same in his detached scriptedness, but he's given certain very unexpected footnotes that for a moment due to the film's lightfootedness pass us by but then hit us only a moment later. We then realize the film is not simply Analyze This or Planes, Trains and Automobiles told stalely over again. Its truly saying something.The film's climax is of a sort that wants to partially be a thriller with twists. But with its lightness, how can that possibly be the focus of the film, though the plot has been leading up to it? No, the focus is what Brosnan and Kinnear get out of their unlikely relationship to each other. Strangely, The Matador is a film about regret and loneliness. Brosnan deals with loneliness and regret every day, and though we don't understand why Kinnear is so lenient and accepting with Brosnan continually interrupting his life, it's slowly understood that Brosnan is salvaging Kinnear from a more down-to-earth version of his own feelings as a means of redemption. The very last scene of the movie stays with me. It, I think, is where the film's subtle side-stepping impact finally begins to seep.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0824f39b9e3d4e0d91b56cd79522f075",
            "input": "True, there are many movies much worse then this movie. This movie was no Manos: The Hands of Fate, or Troll 2 (yes, I have seen them both.. twice) but at the same time this movie is No Alien, Predator or even Alien Vs. Predator (Yes, even that movie surpassed this). Movies like this make Battlefield Earth look like a Star Wars it is so bad. Razzie awards lookout, your biggest competition has just arrived in theaters. This film I'm talking about is of course Alone in the Dark. I'll try to take you though a step by step process on why this film was so bad.Acting- I'll first start off with what perhaps was the best component of this film (next to the ending credits, which played 'Wish I had An Angel', the acting. Christian Slater must be proud of himself, he successfully proved that it is possible to act decent in a film worse then drinking antifreeze. Though all his awful dialog he had to speak, it made me wonder why he just didn't walk off the set halfway. Perhaps it was because of Stephen Dorff being in the film as well (somebody he wishes he could be but fails at it). Tara Reid is a bad actress but good looking and that's all that really matters in films like these. That is not to say the acting was perfect though, it was average, not good, and perhaps the only thing in the film not good.The Soundtrack- Except for 'Wish I had An Angel', the soundtrack is pointless and bad heavy medal being pumped into the viewers ears, perhaps to disguise the awful story (something I will get to soon). A long and very expensive 2 CD soundtrack is now up for sale for those musically challenged.The Directing- Directed by Hollywoods favorite director Uwe Ball who brought us the classic House of the Dead. Telling us \"Yes, movies can get this utterly bad and that's just the beginning to my deadly saga of awful movies\". At least it is said to be directed by Uwe Ball. Without being told I would have guessed a monkey was kidnapped from the Congo, brought here and forced to make opinions on how to make the movie under penalty of being shocked. The director of photography was probably a camcorder taped onto a skateboard and pushed forward until it hits a wall. On the scenes where the camera should stay still it is constantly moving, not allowing us to stop anywhere and when it should be moving in action, the camera stops for some reason.The Producing- Who on earth is stupid enough to put money towards this bomb? I pity the fool... sometimes. Sometimes I'm glad he or she was taught such a lesson to never put money towards garbage worse then dog dung tied up in a bag.The Writing / Storyboard- Trying to Analise the story is more painful then jamming an ice pick under a big toe and kicking a soccer ball as hard as I possibly could with it right after but I will still attempt it.Edward Carnby escapes as a child from an orphanage where 20 children where to go under science experiments. He escapes and hides in an electrical outlet where he is electrocuted (this is the point where it got so bad i started to laugh out loud). Then it fast-forwards many years later where he's a paranoia detective. He get's attacked by some zombie that can't be shot to death, kills it and moves on with life. Later on he gets attacked by some crazy looking monster and he discovers secrets that nobody else knows.Yeah, the plot is bad, really really bad. The film beings with expecting us to read approximately 10 minutes, which felt like 100, of random text about an untrue civilization called the Abskani. The film goes not to have one twist after another, more then the audience can handle, more then the audience wants to handle, more then the audience could ever care about. This storyline is rock bottom bad that even Double Dragon does better.Overall, miss out on this movie. I gave it a 1 out of 10 but that is because there is no 0.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1f233d03358b4131980b350cb9f98134",
            "input": "I can see little girls enjoying this show, but calling this a family show is ridiculous. I'm amazed how well remembered it is after all these years. It's an extremely unfunny and stupid show about widowed father of three living with his dead wife's brother and his stupid friend from school, and others as the seasons go on. All of the plot lines generally have a really dumb lesson. In the middle of each episode somebody is mad at somebody else and each episode they make up and it ends on a light unfunny joke. As for the actors, I didn't like them either. Bob Saget was painfully unfunny as the dad with the mom responsibilities. Dave Coulier is a one note joke 30 something year old that does cartoon voices and acts like a kid, and he's horrid. John Stamos was the most tolerable character but he was so clichéd it was hard to watch him. The oldest girl, DJ, on the show was a genuinely bad actress and showed no emotion ever. The middle girl Stephanie was too clichéd as the annoying little sister. The youngest girl Michelle showed what bad actresses the Olsen twins were. You can always tell when they are switching them off. The plot lines to too many story lines were so unrealistically stupid it's cringe worthy. This is a \"family\" show that tried to replace any good substance with cuteness and love, and though those are needed for a show about a family they overdid it way too much. This will be remembered as my least favorite sit-com from the 80's and 90's.My rating: Terrible show. TVG 30 mins.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d622bb6224bd41b6a7fbc1310cd5cd5b",
            "input": "Kim Novak's a witch on the prowl for a mortal lover, and James Stewart's her choice. Scintillating comedy of manners, from the Broadway stage; shot by James Wong Howe in Witch Color, and performed by a sterling cast. Ernie Kovacs is wonderful as the perpetually dishevelled writer Redlitch. I love this movie, though few others seem to. Kim alone makes it a winner in my Book. Ha! My #5 film of 1958.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4a08334a6bce4f13ab9f76655945d194",
            "input": "Claire Denis' debut is both a brave and self-assured one. In this depiction of life towards the end of French colonialist Cameroon, she explores the relationships between men and women, black and white.With the black servant 'Protée' as the film's primary object of desire and oppression, the film enters taboo territory from the beginning. Denis builds a picture of life through a series of character relationships that keep the informed viewer fixed to the screen. The mood of the film is captured perfectly by the camera-work and (lack of) lighting.A great discourse.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-701d5b3f48a74104b5f3165c62a900c0",
            "input": "As a big fan of gorilla movies in general, I anticipated that this one would be great - and as for the gorilla effects, They were quite good, however - that is the only thing I can write about this flop. The film claims to be based on a true story but in effect, it does not even come close to what actually happened to \"Buddy\" - who in real life, was the famous Gargantua, sold to Ringling Bros. by our supposed \"heroic\" Gertrude Lintz, known by many animal enthusiasts as a woman who hardly had her animals' welfare in the best interest. As far as Buddy being portrayed as becoming aggressive, this was total fiction and at no time did the gorilla, in real life, resort to such behavior. buddy did, in fact, escape his wooden crate (not a plush cage room as depicted in movie) during a storm, to seek shelter and comfort in the house, which frightened Gertrude Lintz into selling him. No, Buddy was not released into a gorilla family surrounded by lush trees in a zoological paradise - he was abandoned in a wooden crate, deep in the back of a garage for some time with only a single light bulb for comfort and then sold to the circus - where he actually lived a better life having peanuts thrown at him until he died (historically the oldest living gorilla on record, by the way) before a show in Miami. Notice also, in the film, how Buddy grows older but the chimpanzees never age. (The chimps, by the way, were not raised simultaneously with other animals, including Buddy, as portrayed in the film)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-93cf63125c1349c2b8e26c826a974c94",
            "input": "I tried to watch this movie twice and both times I still couldn't make it to the end credits. First time I managed to sit through the first fight sequence then lost interest. Second time I managed to force myself to digest over an hours worth of shoddy acting, lame SFX and extremely poor direction. Pales in comparison to the original.Anyone ever hear about the old ET Atari 2600 fiasco? For those who haven't let me fill you in. It's 1982...ET is one of the biggest box office smashes of all time...Atari decides to release a movie tie-in game on their 2600 home console system. To cut a long and financially painful story short the game flopped big time and resulted in thousands upon thousands of Atari 2600 ET games to be dumped in landfills because they couldn't even give them away let alone sell them.What does Universal Soldier: The Return have to do with this story? Look at the 3.2 rating and figure it out for yourself.Awful film...IMDb forced me to give it a 1 out of 10 because their rating systems doesn't go as low as 0 let alone into the negatives.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6a4f8fca99794c64a3eaa8a37824c025",
            "input": "Ah, Domino is actually a breath of fresh air, something new to the cinema world. I enjoyed the movie a lot because of the intricate plot, the varied characters, and the intense camera effects. I've seen some complain about the camera work and, in fact, according to the creators themselves, the flashy and wild shots were all the culmination of mistakes made through time. All of what you see was the desired effect. Perhaps some complain because something quite like this has never been done before, although that's what sets it apart. In a deeper aspect, what you are seeing is just how Domino sees things through her eyes, think about it.When it comes to the story, I don't see anything quite bad about it. Despite it's \"messy\" nature, according to some, it is in fact just a rapid form of storytelling. The plot really isn't all that hard to follow, if you actually focus on what's going on. Maybe it's just me because I see movies from many different aspects such as the acting, the plot, etc. I'm no \"interpreter\" or anything who picks movies apart, it just comes to me. With that said, I believe this is quite an excellent movie indeed, despite it's future as a cult-classic, blockbuster, or whatever.And the characters, well there's no doubting how varied the cast is. I believe the cast is excellent as they all do fine jobs portraying their characters effectively, that's what makes a movie ladies and gentlemen. The characters are all very unique and a plus is that you get to witness a small piece of each one of their lives, setting them apart even further. Basically, I personally loved the cast and characters.All those who bash and burn this film perhaps just don't see it as I do, or it just doesn't appeal to them. No matter, this is a great film in it's own right, no, it's a great film period.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b31a732378674c53bb730489eb2ee1e6",
            "input": "A wonderfully quirky film with enough twists for a sack of pretzels. Parker Posey plays Fay Grim as a sexy, vulnerable, loving mother who may or may not be what she seems. The story is very tongue in cheek, and the dialog skillfully understated. Hints of humor and intrigue, neither of which overpower the characterization Posey pulls off so well. The supporting cast is stellar. The downside? This film needs your full attention, almost to the point of stopping the film and taking notes. Posey has more sex appeal in her lifting of an eyebrow than most actresses have in their entire body. She's worth your time, even if you don't understand the denouement.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c609728b1a30479eb226c7d591db4eb5",
            "input": "With the amount of actors they have working on the project they have a wide variety of cast. Nice starship CGI in places BUT their green screen needs some work. Anyone heard of Adobe After Effects 7, they should buy it get their keying better.Stories are well thought out, plenty of trek elements in this to keep it in the right context. BUT BUT the idea of two guys kissing makes me wind forward the episode. Im not homophobic but i cant help that i don't find men kissing entertaining (dont mind women). Anyway... For a fan series this is good stuff. With minor improvement in their green screen, brush up acting and some guidance ratings this series is stunning. Anyway i recommend this series to who ever enjoyed TNG and DS9.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4021d2351326498090e50422dc5b00fb",
            "input": "Dark Angel is a cross between Huxley's Brave New World and Percy's Love in the Ruins--portraying the not too distant future as a disturbing mixture of chaos and order, both in the worst sense of the word. Once one swallows the premise that all modern technology can be brought to a standstill by \"the Pulse,\" it provides an entertaining landscape for exploring the personalities of and relationships between the two primary characters--Max (the Dark Angel/bike messenger) and Logan (the rich rebel). It seems uneven, perhaps a result of a variety of authors, but is held together by the energetic, beautiful, and charming Jessica Alba, who seems both strong and calloused yet vulnerable and sensitive. I think that Fox has done it again.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f1dd26488b014fa7b9ae470ce30a54ce",
            "input": "I bought this on DVD for my brother who is a big Michelle Pfeiffer fan. I decided to watch it myself earlier this week.It is a reasonably entertaining piece containing two completely separate story lines. The section with Michelle Pfeiffer was by far the more interesting of the two. She plays a rising Hollywood actress who has had many short unfulfilling relationships. She literally bumps into Brian Kerwin (A regular married guy with Kids)after driving her car into the back of his. After being initially hostile to one another he offers to drive her home as she no longer feels comfortable to drive. Romance develops eventually leading to tragedy when his wife finds out. What happens at the end I was not prepared for but the slow pacing and routine TV direction takes any drama out of the plot.The other section involves an old Studio boss played by Darren McGavin. This section actually has the better cast with Kenneth McMillan, Lois Chiles, Steven Bauer & Stella Stevens. They all want something from the studio boss but in the end when he is asked to resign, they all realize their careers will now be going nowhere. It passes the time but is not all that interesting and I am glad this was not bought for me. I am not a Michelle Pffeifer fan but she was admittedly the only actor worth watching in this film and even in 1983 she was a decent actress. Overall though unless you are a fan of hers avoid this as it is very routine.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a4a91e0d722a41788d72897a8f62ee42",
            "input": "Before I start, I _love_ Eddie Izzard. I think he's one of the funniest stand-ups around today. Possibly that means I'm going into this with too high expectations, but I just didn't find Eddie funny in this outing.I think the main problem is Eddie is trying too hard to be Eddie. Everyone knows him as a completely irrelevant comic, and we all love him for it. But in Circle, he appears to be going more for irrelevant than funny, and completely lost me in places. Many of the topics he covers he has covered before - I even think I recognised a few recycled jokes in there.If you buy the DVD you'll find a behind-the-scenes look at Eddie's tour (interesting in places, but not very funny), and a French language version of one of his shows. Die-hards will enjoy seeing Eddie in a different language, but subtitled comedy isn't very funny.If you're a fan of Eddie you've either got this already or you're going to buy it whatever I say. If you're just passing through, buy Glorious or Dressed to Kill - you won't be disappointed. With Circle, you probably will.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e6a8ea9305e641a092c333e97ac4f5a1",
            "input": "This movie is so bad it hurts. The car doing 30 mph when it's supposed to go 100... the shift lever that's stuck (in Park!), the nurse that drives for almost 2 hours with the cell phone on the shoulder...can't any of the 2 morons take this damn phone? There's nothing credible in this crap. I would be ashamed to be seen in a movie like this!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-900c20002342465b8e42c40b64a31658",
            "input": "Most horror movies are in fact horrible movies. They get to be same ol'-same ol'. Same ol' pack every minute with some cheap thrill (usually 'splatter') and nowadays they can pack every second with gaudy special effects. One of the goals of a really good horror flick is to suspend the sense of disbelief of the audience. For instance, I saw both of the recent Mummy movies and nearly got dizzy viewing ridiculous special effects every second. It probably costs a million dollars per second to make those movies and my sense of disbelief was never suspended, it grew roots.Subtlety can be more terrifying. Less is more. I first saw 'The Woman in Black' on the A&E channel. After flipping through the usual 987 channels of very bad television I stopped to watch it. This movie almost has the feel of a 'Masterpiece Theater' production. That was fine with me, I've always preferred British TV & movies anyway.Most viewers would find this to be too slowly paced. But the slow pacing helps give the story credibility. The special effects are few which lulls the viewer into thinking that this film is set in the real world thus making us a bit more uneasy. The makeup and costume for the ghost are kept simple and believable. Hollywood would have made her look like a she demon from hell with glowing eyes-fangs-claws etc. Hollywood would have done an overkill and turned this idea into a mediocrity.The woman only makes about five appearances in the film. Most of them are where she appears in the distance and even that creates a good fright. If she appeared too often, it could've cheapened the mood that gets set. However this movie is so well made that through much of the film we're led into sensing that she is there the whole time but not visible. The scene where she 'visits' Arthur Kidd late at night and we see her just a little too close is a masterpiece in horror.This is just an extraordinary film that I think should rate as one the finest horror films ever made. I have a copy of 'The Haunting', 'The Changling' and a zillion more. I haven't seen anything that tops 'The Woman in Black' yet although I'm still looking. This movie is so well made that it gives even the most hardened skeptic (like me) a moment where I almost had second thoughts about the non-existence of ghosts. I joke to people that I occasionally get brief fears that she could appear standing in the middle of the road or that I'd see her staring through my window, etc. Maybe she could be in a crowd at the mall glaring at me with her look of hate. This is how a really great horror film should be. Like a LaFanu novel, The Woman in Black very slowly pulls you in and wraps herself around your neck and before you realize it, she's squeezing the life out of you and then it's too late.Closest thing I have to a criticism is that this was made for the small screen... and it's a terrible shame that this is out of print. I just paid over $40 for my second copy of this movie. It's a major prize in my collection. Now I'm on a quest to find an even better horror movie that not only gives the chills but also qualifies a sound drama.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8681ef61642a48e0b05037ab7f81614b",
            "input": "This spectacular film is one of the most amazing movies I have ever seen. It shows a China I had never seen or imagined, and I believe it shows 1930's China in the most REAL light ever seen in a movie. It is absolutely heart-breaking in so many situations, seeing how hard life was for the characters, and yet the story and the ending are incredibly joyful. You truly see the depths and heigths of human existence in this film. The actors are all perfect, such that you feel like you have really entered a different world. I simply can not recommend this movie highly enough. It may just change you forever once you have seen it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0c078a561af4171bbecb8c71ad7d8c2",
            "input": "I had such high hopes for this film because I loved the original so much. It seems that Disney, however, is trying to perfect the art of crappy straight-to-DVD sequels. They deserve a razzie. Several, in fact. I thought the idea had merit, but the music was absolutely awful and the story wasn't much better. What happened to the great music Disney used to have in their films. Mary Poppins, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King...even Hercules and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. They've made so many great movies over the years that it's really sad that they've sunk to point of making sequels that aren't even good enough to put in theatres.I hope this movie is not an indication of things to come for the Walt Disney Corporation.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-90d741bf10084f75bd5c07787b95d284",
            "input": "Following the success of \"Paris, Je T'Aime\", a group of directors decided to get together and make a similar anthology style film based in New York. Unlike the original film, the stories in this film seem to sometimes come and go too quickly--by the time you think are getting into a story, it's over in too many cases. And, the often start up and stop and then begin again--with the stories woven together. As a result, there is no title to indicate that a story is complete and it is less formal in structure.Sadly, however, while \"Paris, Je T'Aime\" was hit or miss (mostly hit), most of \"New York, I Love You\" was miss. The stories tended to be much more sexual in nature but also far less sweet--and often quite terrible. It was an amazingly dull and uninteresting film with only a few exceptional stories--and perhaps the often depressing music made it seem more so. Now understand, it was good quality music but its somber tone really, really made me feel like cutting my wrists! Among the better ones was the story about the young man who took a girl in a wheelchair to prom, the couple talking about cheating outside a restaurant (though this was also in the first film) and the crotchety old couple. This is all so sad because I had loved the first film so much--and I really WANTED to love this film. I respected what they tried but simply didn't like it very much.By the way, and this is NOT really a complaint, but I was amazed how many people were smoking in the film. For a recent film, that was unusual in our more anti-smoking culture.Also, if you get the DVD, there are two segments included as extras that were not included in the film. One consists of Kevin Bacon (wearing a cool fedora) eating a hotdog....and absolutely NOTHING more for almost ten minutes. The other features a teen who spends the film videotaping the world--including a very unhappy couple.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f4fda232fd904deaaddc9bbab85902ee",
            "input": "The sexploitation movie era of the late sixties and early seventies began with the allowance of gratuitous nudity in mainstream films and ended with the legalization of hardcore porn. It's peak years were between 1968 and 1972. One of the most loved and talented actresses of the era was Monica Gayle, who had a small but fanatic cult of followers. She was actually able to act, unlike many who filled the lead roles of these flicks, and her subsequent credits proved it. And her seemingly deliberate fade into obscurity right when her career was taking off only heightens her mystique.Gary Graver, the director, was also a talent; probably too talented for the sexploitation genre, and his skill, combined with Monica Gayle's screen presence, makes Sandra, the Making of a Woman, a pleasantly enjoyable experience. The film never drags and you won't have your finger pressed on the fast-forward button.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fd7a30a74624444f95a257bdbca80106",
            "input": "This film is so ridiculously idiot that you may actually laugh at it. But no, even this is too much for this lost meters of celluloid. I found it as an offer in a magazine and that's why I've seen it. I regret the time I lost to see this. 1 out of 10 (because they don't have a lower grade).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-db9eccba61314bb6a6a50c33fb894e39",
            "input": "Old People Show???? I'm 15 and have been watching the show since I was 12, recoding it onto my Sky+ box everyday from Hallmark and BBC 1. I really wish they hadn't cancelled it, they didn't even get a proper farewell. But what an adventure, all those episodes, I think I've seen them all, and not one comes to mind that I didn't like and enjoy.Its a shame the BBC keep swapping between Diagnoses Murder and 'Murder She Wrote'- Never watched it and don't intend to. Anyways, he characters in Diagnoses Murder are so in-depth, and the chemistry between the actors is amazing. It really was a sad day when they cancelled this show........",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-490f0636168d42d5bc9832b874042d05",
            "input": "So I'm looking to rent a DVD and I come across this movie called 'End Game'. It stars James Woods and Cuba Gooding JR and has the synopsis of a taught political thriller. Well worth a look then. Or so I thought.Boy, was I wrong.End Game has just about the most ridiculous plot I have ever had the displeasure of enduring. Now being something of a whodunnit, I can't really tear into it as I would like without 'ruining' it for those who have yet to experience this monstrosity. But questions such as 'Why has he/she/they done this?', and 'Where on earth did they get the resources to pull this off?' are all too abundant following the film's unintentionally hilarious conclusion.As for the acting - you know those films where you can almost feel that an actor's realised that they've made a terrible mistake in signing on for a movie, and this then shows in their performance? This is one of those. Accompany this with a laughable script and seriously flawed, irritating direction and you have the recipe for cinematic poison.Of course, this didn't make it to the cinema, and for the same reason you should not allow it into your living room; it is appalling.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1247e99952ca4b47b036828e47816609",
            "input": "For those who think of Dame May Witty as the kindly, slightly batty, old lady from Hitchcock's The Lady Vanishes, this movie requires an adjustment. Here, she's anything but kindly or batty. Instead, her son, George Macready is the loony one. Just don't give him a knife, otherwise his eyes light up and no furniture cushion in the house is safe. Now we know what he has in mind for the trapped Nina Foch if he can just get out from under Mother's domineering hand.Really tight little woman-in-danger film that keeps the suspense on high throughout. The script never strays from Foch's dilemma. She's held prisoner in a big old Gothic house on the edge of an angry sea. They're going to kill her, but why. Her predicament makes no sense. The tension mounts as she tries one escape ploy after another, but even strangers seem against her. We begin to feel her helplessness and mounting paranoia as the world turns away from her.Director Joseph H. Lewis took a big step toward cult status with this film and understandably so. Then too, watch Foch run subtly through a gamut of emotions without once going over the top. Witty too shines as a really intimidating matriarch who knows what she wants and how to get it if she can just keep her wacko son in line. My one reservation is the climax which seems too contrived considering the timing of the events. Nonetheless, it's a good, nerve-wracking way to spend a little over an hour, courtesy Columbia studios.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-51ac373586334411ad1499e1996eac8c",
            "input": "After having seen the movie the first question arising in my mind was: Is this supposed to be irony or not? After reading a few comments about the character Doc Savage and the comic series, I knew this film was not meant to be ironic. So, the story tells us about an US-American Super-Doc saving a south American republic from evil. Sounds like a typical story. But this one comes in such an unrealistic way that it becomes ridiculous. The mandatory end-fight shows the worst presentation of martial arts I have ever seen. The film might be interesting for low budget movie designers as a bad example.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d3f560051cb34b4dbdba23f5c4796cba",
            "input": "An average TV movie quality, totally formula story of religious fanatic (Ron Perlman, who gives good \"I'm not just the President of 'Psychos R Us,' I'm also a client.\") who gets control of a biochemical virus (think the virus from the movie \"The Rock\"). Too bad for him that he also gets stuck in a bank building during an earthquake with bank robbers and the government agents trying to stop him (led by the impressively physiqued, mildly entertaining Wolf Larson, backed by Fred Dryer) along with the standard \"in the wrong place at the wrong time\" spunky female (the forever bland Erika Eleniak) and \"lived as a wimp but died as a hero at the last minute\" male (Brandon Karrer). Has the standard background story to give sympathy to the religious fanatic (wife and son killed in a police raid a few years previous). Basically a decent rainy day movie.Favorite line, spoken by Ron Perlman after he finds the vial of the virus hidden in Erika Eleniak's cleavage: \"A woman and her mystery.\"Worth a rent.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a6600119c4c546f6a714c4e3ef484a74",
            "input": "The 1930s. Classy, elegant Adele (marvelously played with dignified resolve by Debbie Reynolds) and batty, frumpy Helen (the magnificent Shelley Winters going full-tilt wacko with her customary histrionic panache) are the mothers of two killers. They leave their seamy pasts in the Midwest behind and move to Hollywood to start their own dance school for aspiring kid starlets. Adele begins dating dashing millionaire Lincoln Palmer (the always fine Dennis Weaver). On the other hand, religious fanatic Helen soon sinks into despair and madness.Director Curtis (\"Night Tide,\" \"Ruby\") Harrington, working from a crafty script by Henry Farrell (who wrote the book \"Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?\" was based on and co-wrote the screenplay for \"Hush ... Hush, Sweet Charlotte\"), adeptly concocts a complex and compelling psychological horror thriller about guilt, fear, repression and religious fervor running dangerously amok. The super cast have a ball with their colorful roles: Michael MacLiammoir as a pompous elocution teacher, Agnes Moorehead as a stern fire-and-brimstone radio evangelist, Yvette Vickers as a snippy, overbearing mother of a bratty wannabe child star, Logan Ramsey as a snoopy detective, and Timothy Carey as a creepy bum. An elaborate talent recital set piece with Pamelyn Ferdin (the voice of Lucy in the \"Peanuts\" TV cartoon specials) serving as emcee and original \"Friday the 13th\" victim Robbi Morgan doing a wickedly bawdy dead-on Mae West impression qualifies as a definite highlight. David Raskin's spooky score, a fantastic scene with Reynolds performing an incredible tango at a posh restaurant, the flavorsome Depression-era period atmosphere, Lucien Ballard's handsome cinematography, and especially the startling macabre ending are all likewise on the money excellent and effective. MGM presents this terrific gem on a nifty DVD doublebill with \"Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?;\" both pictures are presented in crisp widescreen transfers along with their theatrical trailers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cc4eef4641114ecfa91cb49069be638c",
            "input": "How viewers react to this new \"adaption\" of Shirley Jackson's book, which was promoted as NOT being a remake of the original 1963 movie (true enough), will be based, I suspect, on the following: those who were big fans of either the book or original movie are not going to think much of this one...and those who have never been exposed to either, and who are big fans of Hollywood's current trend towards \"special effects\" being the first and last word in how \"good\" a film is, are going to love it.Things I did not like about this adaption:1. It was NOT a true adaption of the book. From the articles I had read, this movie was supposed to cover other aspects in the book that the first one never got around to. And, that seemed reasonable, no film can cover a book word for word unless it is the length of THE STAND! (And not even then) But, there were things in this movie that were never by any means ever mentioned or even hinted at, in the movie. Reminded me of the way they decided to kill off the black man in the original movie version of THE SHINING. I didn't like that, either. What the movie's press release SHOULD have said is...\"We got the basic, very basic, idea from Shirley Jackson's book, we kept the same names of the house and several (though not all) of the leading character's names, but then we decided to write our own story, and, what the heck, we watched THE CHANGELING and THE SHINING and GHOST first, and decided to throw in a bit of them, too.\"2. They completely lost the theme of a parapyschologist inviting carefully picked guest who had all had brushes with the paranormal in their pasts, to investigate a house that truly seemed to have been \"born bad\". No, instead, this \"doctor\" got everyone to the house under the false pretense of studying their \"insomnia\" (he really invited them there to scare them to death and then see how they reacted to their fear...like lab rats, who he mentioned never got told they are part of an experiment...nice guy). This doctor, who did not have the same name, by the way, was as different from the dedicated professional of the original movie as night from day.3. In direct contrast to the statement that was used to promote both movies \"some houses are just born bad\", this house was not born bad but rather became bad because of what happened there...and, this time around, Nel gets to unravel the mystery (shades of THE CHANGELING). The only problem was, the so-called mystery was so incoherently told that I'm sure it remained a mystery to most of the audience...but, then there was no mystery in the first place (not in the book), because the house was bad TO BEGIN WITH. It's first \"victim\" died before ever setting eyes on it.4. The way the character of Luke was portrayed was absolutely ridiculous. He was supposed to be a debonair playboy who was someday to inherit the house (and was a true skeptic of it's \"history\")...and in this one he was just a winey-voiced, bumbling nerd who couldn't sleep(insomnia remember) and was a compulsive liar.5. I was also annoyed with the way the movie jumped from almost trying to recreate original scenes word for word (the scene with Nel's sister's family, and Mrs. Dudley's little opening speech...) to going off into flights of fancy that made me think more of these other movies than THE HAUNTING. It's like it couldn't make up its mind what it wanted to do.6. I missed Nel's narrative through the whole movie. The original was so like a gothic novel in the way that the story was mostly told in the first person, through Nel's eyes, and we always were privy to her thoughts. That totally unique touch was completely lost in the new version. They also tried to make Nel much more of a heroine. The original Nel was not a bad person, but she was a bitter person (could she be otherwise after sacrificing 11 years of her life to a selfish old woman and a spiteful sister?) and she liked to moan, and she lost her temper... This one was almost too good to be true. This was never more apparent than in the climax of the movie where the writer's had obviously been watching GHOST one too many times.7. They changed the history of the house and it's occupents too much. There was no Abigail Crain (the daughter of Hugh whose legend loomed large in the original versions), there was no \"companion\", and there was no nursery. There was also no \"Grace\" (wife of the original doctor) and Hugh Crain's wives died in totally different ways. These changes, changed the story WAY too much. I don't know whether the producers of this movie should be glad Shirley Jackson no longer walks this earth or whether they should...BE SORRY (if ya get my drift!!! The hauntings she could envision are not something to be trifled with!!!).In conclusion, let me just leave you with some words from the original Luke (appropriate substitution of the word \"house\" for \"movie\"!): \"This 'movie' should be burnt to the ground, and the ground sprinkled with salt!\" My favorite movie of all time remains so. No competition from this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5b19dd6706c248dc8cb376e8da3f8cf7",
            "input": "I think this movie is well done and realistic. I you are used to watching Hollywood \"action\" movies, and use that as a standard to rate this movie, you are bound to be disappointed. This movie is much closer to real life than 95% of what Hollywood can produce, and that is what lifts it above the average action movie. I have no experience with Swedish military whatsoever, and can therefore not point out any mistakes in the way they act. But as i have seen the \"making of\" extra I'm convinced that there has been done a lot to avoid any mistakes. This is a movie i will recommend for others to watch. High quality realistic story and movie.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-61c76d652e9f4abb87bd10b36123db42",
            "input": "VAMPYRES Aspect ratio: 1.85:1Sound format: MonoA motorist (Murray Brown) is lured to an isolated country house inhabited by two beautiful young women (Marianne Morris and Anulka) and becomes enmeshed in their free-spirited sexual lifestyle, but his hosts turn out to be vampires with a frenzied lust for human blood...Taking its cue from the lesbian vampire cycle initiated by maverick director Jean Rollin in France, and consolidated by the success of Hammer's \"Carmilla\" series in the UK, Jose Ramon Larraz' daring shocker VAMPYRES pushed the concept of Adult Horror much further than British censors were prepared to tolerate in 1974, and his film was cut by almost three minutes on its original British release. It isn't difficult to see why! Using its Gothic theme as the pretext for as much nudity, sex and bloodshed as the film's short running time will allow, Larraz (who wrote the screenplay under the pseudonym 'D. Daubeney') uses these commercial elements as mere backdrop to a languid meditation on life, death and the impulses - sexual and otherwise - which affirm the human condition.Shot on location at a picturesque country house during the Autumn of 1973, Harry Waxman's haunting cinematography conjures an atmosphere of grim foreboding, in which the desolate countryside - bleak and beautiful in equal measure - seems to foreshadow a whirlwind of impending horror (Larraz pulled a similar trick earlier the same year with SYMPTOMS, a low-key thriller which erupts into a frenzy of violence during the final reel). However, despite its pretensions, VAMPYRES' wafer-thin plot and rough-hewn production values will divide audiences from the outset, and while the two female protagonists are as charismatic and appealing as could be wished, the male lead (Brown, past his prime at the time of filming) is woefully miscast in a role that should have gone to some beautiful twentysomething stud. A must-see item for cult movie fans, an amusing curio for everyone else, VAMPYRES is an acquired taste. Watch out for silent era superstar Bessie Love in a brief cameo at the end of the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-444b6b478138468ca70d94804c25f804",
            "input": "\"Bend It Like Beckham\" is a film that got very little exposure here in the United States. It was probably due to the fact that the movie was strongly British in dialogue and terminology and dealt a lot with football, (soccer here), which some may have trouble relating too in the U.S. It's unfortunate because this movie is absolutely fantastic and deserved much more coverage over here. I think the basis of the storyline, (following a dream), is something many people can relate to and in the end, \"Bend It Like Beckham\" proves to be a good-feeling film with a source of inspiration and really good acting. I was not overly excited about seeing this film initially but now I regret not seeing it sooner. I highly recommend this movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2c614f96e7f41258ca175599e3e2ca5",
            "input": "*SPOILERS*I'm sure back when this was released in 1958 it was much appropriate for its time. Back then films were slower paced to allow audiences to follow and analyze the story. Here a man moves into a house owned by his last wife that died mysteriously with his new wife. The gardener Mickey (played by Alex Nicol, who also directed he film) really is an underappreciated character. He gets a skull to indirectly warn Jenni that she is in trouble, since he knew that there was foul play in the first wife's death. He can't tell Jenni directly what happened, so he tries to scare her off with the skull. Jenni, we also find out, saw her parents die, thus causing a lifetime of mental anguish that lead to institutionalization. Like many audiences today, I found the pacing to be a little too slow for my tastes. But if you like slow-paced horror without a lot of gore, this film is for you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f754300a13514129a4666a9db78f03bd",
            "input": "I can't say that Wargames: The Dead Code is the worst movie I've ever seen, as it had one or two decent moments, but I can easily say it's the most transparent movie I've ever seen. Not once did a plot device present itself without me guessing it 10+ minutes in advance. There was no subtlety to anything the movie did, no intelligence evident at all behind the scenes. Every spoken or typed line's intent was so glaringly obvious it was impossible to \"get into\" the movie.I found myself laughing at the horribly thought out plot line, and the bumbled attempts to reclaim the audience, far more often than I found myself enjoying the movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2a2e8d4dbfb47c19a8d8474bc8eca04",
            "input": "Although I don't usually go for relentlessly heartwarming fare like this, I happened to catch the 1994 version of ANGELS IN THE OUTFIELD (AitO) on cable one Saturday morning just as it was starting. Being an Adrien Brody fan, I was curious to see what Brody was like as a youth of 21 (20 when he filmed it, I suppose) in this early role as Danny Hemmerling, utility infielder for the California Angels (in the 1951 original, the hard-luck baseball team was the Pittsburgh Pirates. The name change is a nice touch, since it turns the title into wordplay). I decided to give the flick a chance, and it turned out to be a pretty painless, even amiable experience, with a decent balance of laughs, tears, sweetness, and baseball-based excitement. Also, my 7-year-old daughter liked the angel effects! :-) Directed by Mike Nesmith's frequent collaborator William Dear, AitO is the story of Roger (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a foster child who prays real hard after his ne'er-do-well dad (the convincingly sleazy Dermot Mulroney) sarcastically says they'll be a family again once the last-place California Angels win the pennant. Soon Roger starts seeing real angels at the Angels' games, led by Christopher Lloyd, whose usual zany, eccentric irreverence keeps AitO from plummeting irretrievably into The Schmaltz Zone. Crusty manager George Knox (Danny Glover in world-weary, exasperated mode) is a hard sell, but once the team starts winning, he believes Roger's angel sightings, and soon Knox has Roger and his cute li'l pal and fellow foster kid J.P. (the adorable Milton Davis Jr.) at every Angels game for good luck. Knox even starts toning down his own temperamental outbursts and profane language, as much to appease the angels as for the kids' sake, resulting in a funny bit when he starts dressing down an umpire in his usual way but starts editing himself as he goes along. Predictable obstacles ensue, such as obnoxious sportcaster Ranch Wilder (Jay O. Sanders) trying to make trouble for Knox because of the angel angle. Sure, it all works out fine for our heroes in the end, but they're so darn amiable you don't mind! :-) Baby-faced Brody has a couple of good lines (I especially like his exchange with Glover about the emotional impact of the National Anthem at a ballgame) as well as a cute bit where a pretty blonde angel massages his shoulders before he goes up to bat. Brody isn't the only future star in AitO's lineup: his teammates include Matthew McConaughey and Neal McDonough, and of course, young Gordon-Levitt went on to co-star in TV's 3rd ROCK FROM THE SUN as well as such films as 10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU. The always-amusing Taylor Negron and Oscar winners (but not for this film :-) Brenda Fricker and Ben Johnson lend able support. If you're a baseball fan who wants to rent a movie appropriate for the kids and check out some notable young actors before they became stars, AitO '94 will do nicely.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6ca787189edc49bcacb4fe8ac480febd",
            "input": "I cannot believe how bad this piece of garbage is! I want my $3.99 back! Words defy description of this poorly made piece of crap! The dubbing in no way shape or form aligns with the actor's mouths. The movie looks like it was filmed with a 1970's vintage camcorder. I have shot better movies with my cell phone camera. The gore is laughable due to the silly unbelievable plot. The acting is what one would expect if you called all your friends over on a Saturday afternoon and proceeded to get completely ripped, then tried to put on a play in your garage. Don't get me wrong...I wasn't expecting O'Neil and I love Zombie movies, but the production values are so low in this film as to make it unwatchable. Avoid!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-87c266ade0c944fa9344dc52ab99c573",
            "input": "...that Jamie Foxx would ever deliver such a wonderful, Oscar-winning performance. One of the reasons why I was so impressed with Foxx's performance in \"Ray\" was because from watching his hammy, obnoxious acting in movies like \"Bait\" and \"Booty Call,\" I would never imagine he would ever hold the Oscar. If people told me five years ago that Jamie Foxx was one day going to win an Oscar, I would laugh right in their faces. Who knows? Maybe he's better off sticking to drama, because if you watch \"Bait,\" it's clearly evident that comedy is not his forte. I swear, Jamie mugs so much in this movie that I'm surprised his face didn't fall off. And why does he have to do those stupid voices at every chance he gets? Anyone familiar with comedians like Bob Newhart and Steven Wright knows that doing comedy doesn't require being loud and obnoxious. If a joke is funny, it's funny. If it's not funny, then doing some crazy accent is not going to make it any funnier. The problem I have with some comedians who decide to try acting is that they favor getting laughs over being in character. In real life, normal people don't always have witty comebacks and quips. Like Albert Brooks said in an interview discussing his character in \"Taxi Driver,\" it's important to be funny as your character, rather than be funny as a comedian. A prime example of Jamie violating that rule is the nauseatingly awful scene where his mug shots are being taken, and he starts posing for the photographs like a model. If a regular person were being thrown in jail, would he really be acting goofy while having his mug shots taken? And wouldn't the police try to scold him if he was? There are many scenes like that throughout the film. Another awful sequence is one where Jamie is on the unwittingly on the phone with the villain, and he starts doing a phony Caribbean accent. Not funny! Not to mention Jamie never seems to acknowledge the timing of a joke. Giving a comedic performance requires patience, whereas he goes straight to the punchline, whether it's the right time for it or not. I'm not even a big Mike Epps fan, but even his performance is good in comparison to Jamie's. As a matter of fact, this is the first time I felt somewhat relieved whenever he would appear on screen. Epps has the same flaws when it comes to comedy, but at least he chooses a more low-key approach. One of the few bright spots in this clunker of a comedy is David Morse, a highly underrated actor mostly known for his supporting roles as villains. He seems to be the only actor in the film concerned with grounding it in reality. However, fellow \"Green Mile\" star Doug Hutchison is disgustingly over-the-top as the villain. A big surprise, considering he gave a superb performance in \"The Green Mile,\" also playing a heavy. Antoine Fuqua has proved his directing chops in movies like \"The Replacement Killers\" and \"Training Day.\" Even in \"Bait,\" he shows he can direct a hell of an action sequence. His only problem seemed to be in disciplining Jamie Foxx, who probably improvised half the script with one bad joke after another. Unless you're a die-hard fan of Foxx, please don't take the bait.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0694e8ba19a74e6b92fa056352dbac9e",
            "input": "There seems to be only two types of reviews of this film on the net. Those who hate it and curse Ralph Bakshis name and those love it and call it work of genious. I'm inclined to be in the middle. I'am forced to agree with most of the criticisms of this film (e.g.the cruel cutting of the story, badly rotoscoped charecters, over acting etc...) But dispite this I still love this film. The rotoscoping (when done properly)adds an eerie lifelike dimension to the charecters and the final battle scene at the end of the film is fantastic. The surrealistic scenes when the nineriders chase Frodo are stylish and well executed and the musical score... magic. Sadly the bad points outweight film but if you can bring yourself to ignore them it is a great film.(No doubt I'll be lynched by an angry mob of people who hate this film after writing this review, ah well, such is life)",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0903e0f2a96f432287ef2c15dfc5f747",
            "input": "Boy this movie had me fooled. I honestly thought it would be a campy horror film with absolutely no humor in it whatsoever, boy I got the cold shoulder that time. This movie was, and I'm truthful, pretty damn good. It was not scary at all but the campiness and the sly humor really mad this movie interesting. Some to the horrible acting and cliché killings were so painful to watch, I almost laughed at how bad it was, but to some extent I enjoyed it. The killings all vaguely relate to snow sports and Christmas, which made things more intriguing. The POV camera angles were awesome.The movie is about a viscous killer who dies in a car accident collision with a chemical truck while being transported to prison. He is later resurrected in that very same chemical with snow spliced into the mixture. These were the ingredients chosen to make the perfect killer snowman. He than takes his revenge, as the snowman, on the police officer who convicted him.This movie had such bad acting, with the exception of Christopher Allport, that is was funny. I will say that I am also pretty disappointed that this movie was not a horror, but in fact a dark sitcom. They had a great story with a good plot but it wasn't executed right. All in all I like the movie at first but now it is really annoying. But this movie is way better and darker than the sequel.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8be91c854dc84e80ad66609831bab649",
            "input": "Warning: Spoilers Galore!Tim Burton remaking this sui generis movie is about as sensible as remaking Psycho - oh, that's right, some idiot already did that - I rest my case.Movie opens with chimpnaut blundering a simulation, proving he's not that smart from the outset. Marky Mark appears in shot without his characteristic underpants showing, then is turned down by a plain woman who prefers the touch of chimpanzees.The perfunctory establishing shot of the space station orbiting Saturn for no apparent reason, interior of ship a-bustle with genetic experiments on apes. Must we travel 1,300 million kilometers to Saturn to conduct these experiments? The special effects team decrees it.Marky's chimp gets lost in that staple of 60s sci-fi cinema - the Time Warp. Marky then demonstrates the space station's mind-boggling security ineptness by stealing a pod without anyone noticing, while simultaneously demonstrating his abject stupidity in mounting a deep-space rescue mission into a worm-hole for an expendable test chimp, with a million dollar vehicle with limited fuel and oxygen supplies.Before anyone can say `Pointless Remake' Marky has surfed the worm-hole, crashed on an alien planet, removed his helmet without any thought to the lethality of the atmosphere and is being chased through a sound stage that almost resembles a lush rainforest, if it weren't for the kliegs backlighting the plastic trees.Surprise! It's APES doing the chasing - or at least, it *would* have been a surprise if no one saw Planet Of The Apes THIRTY-THREE YEARS AGO.Since Marky Mark did not get to show his pecs, take down his pants, or bust his lame whiteboy rap, he was characterless. Michael Clarke Duncan's gorilla teeth being inserted crookedly helped immensely in establishing *his* lack of character. Helena Bonham-Carter (aka irritating chimp activist), at a loss without a Shakespearean script, did a fine job of outdoing both Marky and Clarke as Most Cardboard Cutout. Paul Giamatti, the orangutan slave trader, secured the role of token comic relief and interspecies klutz. Though I have grown bilious in hearing puns relating to this movie, one review headline captured the essence of this Planet Of The Apes `re-imagining': `The Apes Of Roth'. While everyone else minced about looking like extras from One Million Years BC or Greystoke, Tim Roth, as Chimpanzee Thade, chews massive amounts of scenery and hurls kaka splendiferously. As entertaining as his portrayal of the psychotic Thade was, his character lacked a behavioral arc: Thade is mad when we first meet him... and he's pretty much at the same level of mad at film's end. Nice twist.The original POTA (1968) featured a leading character, Charlton Heston's Taylor, who was so disenchanted with mankind that he left earth for space with no regrets - yet as that film progressed, Taylor unwittingly found himself locked in a battle to prove mankind's worth - as their sole champion! The original film was ultimately a tale of humiliation, not salvation: when Taylor discovers the Statue of Liberty, he is forced to realize that his species had NOT prevailed. Is there anything that cerebral or ironic to Marky Mark's Leo? Or Roth's Thade? No, but there's lots of running.The slogans cry: Take Back The Planet .but it's the APES' planet. In this movie, humans and apes crash-landed here together, the humans having degenerated to cavepeople, allowing the apes to acquire speech and sensual body armor; the apes DESERVED to inherit the planet! Along comes Marky Mark, in true anthropocentric arrogance, taking it for granted that humans HAVE to be the apex predators, simply because they're there. `Taking it back' is as ludicrous as apes landing here in 2001, complaining, `A planet where men evolved from APES??!!' and then causing trouble with their overacting and hairy anuses.Heston was cast in the 1968 POTA because he had established his reputation as a maverick: he WAS Ben-Hur, Michelangelo, Moses! To cast him as the mute, dogged animal in an alien society was to stupefy an audience's expectations: how crazed must a world be where Our Man Charlton cannot command respect? Marky Mark has currently only established that he has tight underpants.Though Heston was denigrated constantly by the ape council, he dominated the screen with his charisma and stupendous overacting. When Marky Mark tries to instill fervor in the mongoloid humans, it's like that unpopular guy in school suddenly being made classroom monitor, who tells you to stop drawing penises on the blackboard and you throw a shoe at him. Burton tries to elevate Marky to humanity's icon, but he comes off as a chittering deviant. In the original film, the apes deem Taylor a deviant, yet he was, to audience and apes alike, an icon of humanity. That irony again.It was apt that a man who elevated scene-chewing to an acting technique - Heston - should play the father of this film's primo scene-chewer, Thaddeus Roth. As Roth's ape-dad, Charlton utters his own immortal lines, turned against the HUMANS this time, `Damn them! Damn them all to hell!'The movie gets dumb and dumber towards the end. While Thaddeus is giving Marky an ass-beating lesson, a pod descends from on high with Marky's chimpnaut in it. Apes demonstrate their hebetude by bowing in obeisance to this incognizant creature, while Marky proves his own hebetude by muttering, `Let's teach these monkeys about evolution.' Firstly, they're not monkeys, you ape! Secondly, it was genetic tampering and imbecilic plot fabrications which brought the apes to this point, not evolution. And what you intend to teach them by blowing them away with the concealed lasergun is called misanthropy, not evolution.Giving away the twist ending would only confuse viewers into believing that Estella Warren's half-nekkid role was actually integral to the plot (be still my pants.).No matter that he was humankind's last underpanted hope; in the end, cop apes take Marky away to Plot Point Prison where he was last heard ululating, `It's a madhouse! A MADHOUSE!!...'",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d46b543f862846eba37ba18b89abbc10",
            "input": "I rented this DVD for two reasons. A cast of great actors, and the director, even though Robert Altman can be hit or miss. In this case, it was a big miss. Altman's attempt at creating suspense fell on its keester. After seeing Kenneth Branagh in a good film like \"Dead Again\", I didn't think he could possibly contribute to such a turkey, and I hope it didn't ruin his reputation. Robert Duvall seems to have fallen the way of most one-time Oscar winners. On a downward spiral that includes acting in eating-money films such as this one. Duvall was once a great actor in excellent films, even though his best performance was not \"Tender Mercies\", but \"The Great Santini\". This movie was truly a big waste of time. I give it a 2 out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2789895ad47a40c984da4541865c338e",
            "input": "Evidently lots of people really like this, but I found it infantilising and reasonably offensive codswallop, saved from oblivion by Jane Russell and a couple of memorable musical numbers, especially the opener (but there's a marked dip in invention later on). I don't get on with Monroe - she's supposed to be playing a dumb blonde who ain't that dumb, but she just comes over as dumb. Russell can't quite convince when she claims never to have been in a gymnasium, but is otherwise rather wonderful. The men are staggeringly uninteresting, as is the plot. By no means atrocious, but so patchy that, if this is a classic, God help us all.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-55b83a4a0ab04667a0c9073d3feb8cb7",
            "input": "very badly made film, the action/violence scenes are ridiculous.1 point for the presence of Burton and Mastroianni + 1 point for the real tragic event of the massacre of the innocent italians: 2/10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7093b1e9d6ca4f688003231d7903c954",
            "input": "A warm, sweet and remarkably charming film about two antagonistic workers in the same shop (James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan) who are carrying on a romance via mailbox without either of them knowing it. The key to this film's success is that Ernst Lubitsch keeps any syrupy sentimentality absent and calls on his actors to give low-key, unfussy performances. As a result, you fall in love with virtually all of them.There's a strong undercurrent of melancholy running through this film which I appreciated. Loneliness is a major theme, most obviously represented in the character of the shop's owner and manager, played wonderfully by Frank Morgan. He discovers that he's being cuckolded by his wife, and realizes that the successful life he's created for himself isn't enough to keep him from feeling lonely when he doesn't have a partner to share it. This makes the timid romance between Stewart and Sullavan all the more poignant, because they're both reaching out to this unseen other, who each thinks of as a soulmate before they've even met. Of course we know everything will turn out right in the end, but the movie doesn't let you forget the dismal feeling either of them would feel if they found that the reality didn't live up to the fantasy.Lubitsch fills his movie out with a crackerjack cast that has boatloads of chemistry. The little group of shop employees refers to itself throughout the movie as a little family, and that's exactly how it feels to us as well.This is a wonderful, unsung romance.Grade: A+",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1b3aa759fe6844f0970da1b429ece510",
            "input": "This episode of Twilight Zone combines a silent section (1890) with melodramatic acting and sight gags, an homage to the early Buster Keaton films. Lots of slapstick: Buster falling on a bulkhead door, falling in a puddle, running around pants-less. Silly scientist's invention of a Time Helmet, reminiscent of a Flash Gordon idea of what the future would be. Cheap prices, like $1.95 for ladies hats, or 17 cents a pound for beef seem outrageously high to Buster. Even the world of 1890 is too much for Buster/Mulligan. How shocking when he is mistakenly transported to the \"modern\" world of 1960! Buster was trying to go backwards! The \"scientist\" of that time wants to return to a calmer world, the 1890 that he has studied and admired. They go back together, and Buster/Mulligan is now happy and the \"scientist\" regrets not having electronic equipment, modern beds or an electric blanket. So Buster sends him back with the crazy helmet.This Twilight Zone doesn't have a heavy message. Since Buster Keaton died in 1966, it is one of his last efforts. That's enough.One other cute thing--longtime underutilized Maytag Man Jesse White is a repairman who fixes the Time Helmet--foreshadowing his washing machine career.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-14f7f3a44c7840489539fb7a7e95b20b",
            "input": "This movie is about a cop (Ching Wan Lau) trying to catch a super-clever thief (Ekin Cheng) who blackmails an insurance company headed by a Kelly Lin. Basically, whatever plans the cop tries the thief somehow knows them beforehand. This movie, covered by handsome lead actors, beautiful lead actress and good camera shots of Hong Kong scenes, really has no substance at all. It's all flash, and the flash quickly becomes dull too. I lost all interests a third of the way into the movie, and there is no redeeming quality after that, except for the cinematography, which looks good. Only consider seeing this movie if you can do so for free. Also, consider stopping watching the movie 20 minutes into the movie because it's all the same to the end: BORING. 6/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39f96529f8af45d2b68643e8286e1e30",
            "input": "A far as B-movies go, SCARECROW is one of those that are so bad, that it becomes incredibly annoying to sit through. A lonely loser high school student who is constantly picked on by classmates and rejected by girls, ends up walking in on his trailer trash mother having sex with a drunk redneck. He then chases the kid out into a nearby cornfield and kills him. Apparently, the kids soul was transfered into a scarecrow which then goes around killing the bullies who tormented him as well as teachers. This scarecrow, aside from having a snappy one-liner for each of his victims, can also do Matrix-like flips through the air and kill people on sidewalks in broad daylight. Also, why did he always look like a rotted corpse? Just like the two needless sequels that followed this, this isn't even worth a laugh.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f6a4aaa3bb54138a3d560b3440ff326",
            "input": "While I would say I enjoy the show, I expected something completely different from when I first saw 'What I like about you' I expected to find something along the lines of 'All That' (I am not sure if it is going on anymore) but I have to say I do like the show and while i don't classify it as a breakthrough show, it is very charming and I do like the chemistry between the characters as well (including the supporting cast)I would definitely say that it is great to see Wesley Jonathan back on the screen because I really loved him in City Guy. I had also seen the woman who plays Valerie's friend in Popular and while I think that was an okay show, I do not really like her character in this show because she's just not my cup of tea but she rounds it out pretty well",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50f089828d104d5a9b0c40609f84308d",
            "input": "In a future society, the military component does not have to recruit; rather, their candidates are chosen at birth, culled from nurseries and designated to spend their entire lives in the service of the government. They are given over to the war machine, body and soul, for no reason other than to protect and serve; they have no personal identity other than a name and rank, and no autonomy whatsoever. This is the fate of those whose destiny is predetermined for them in `Soldier,' directed by Paul Anderson and starring Kurt Russell. The scenario is hard and bleak as the movie begins by depicting the training of the soldiers during advancing periods of time, from preadolescence to adulthood. Russell is Sergeant Todd, the best of the best, and we glimpse his career as he discharges his duties in an exemplary manner in campaign after campaign; he is what he was born to be, a soldier. But even the best cannot go on forever, and the day arrives when Todd and his peers are no longer the elite. A new generation of soldiers has been created, products of advanced genetics and technology, and Todd's generation is suddenly obsolete. What follows is the story of a man who must fight for his life, while struggling to discover his own sense of humanity and individuality, traits new to a soldier who has known only two things his entire life: Fear and discipline. Russell gives a commanding performance as Todd, the soldier who above all else must obey orders without question while suppressing all emotion and individual thoughts. He has few lines in this movie, but Russell speaks volumes with his eyes. This role demonstrates that he is, in fact, one of the under-appreciated actors of our times; that he can disappear so entirely into the character of Todd is a credit to his ability, and with this part he has created someone quite different from any he's done before. And he's given Todd a depth and credibility that someone of lesser talent could easily have rendered as nothing more than a pretentious and superficial stereotype. Notable performances are also turned in here by Connie Nielsen (Sandra) and Jason Isaacs (Colonel Mekum). Rounding out the supporting cast are Jason Scott Lee, memorable as Caine 607, one of the new generation of soldiers; Sean Pertwee (Mace); Gary Busey (Captain Church); Michael Chiklis (Jimmy Pig); and Mark Bringleson (Rubrick). Anderson has delivered an action film with a message, a cautionary tale that transcends the genre of science-fiction. `Soldier' reminds us of the importance of keeping the humanity of our lives intact. It's an entertaining way of making us consider the alternatives, like a bleak future and a world in which good movies just wouldn't make a whole lot of difference. Much like `1984,' and `Mad Max,' this movie, which is ultimately uplifting, is going to make you take pause and think about the kind of Universe in which we all must live together and share. I rate this one 7/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2f1e8a2e160493a9a4e5ca4afec9938",
            "input": "Since my third or fourth viewing some time ago, I've abstained from La Maman et la putain while I wait for the DVD. In the meantime, I've read the french screenplay as well as Alain Philippon's monograph on Jean Eustache. The latter ends with a frustrating filmography, eleven films, fiction, doc, and in-between, impossible to see or, in the cases of Mes petites amoureuses and Le Père Noël..., re-see.A few questions that hit me this moment: Polish Véronika's French is plenty colloquial (un maximum d' \"un maximum d'\"). Even so, does she have an accent? I think I can tell she does. What does the absence of color add, especially at the single spot the fringe of the city is glimpsed? How does this fringe differ from the sleep and journey that separates worlds of The Tempest and The Winter's Tale? Ditto Alphaville. We may imagine the elapsed years since have done it, but does Eustache deliberately circumscribe the film's milieu? Is this an enchanted isle? Is Alexandre's a fairy tale? Alexandre's always choreographing himself, worrying about how or where to stand or walk, what to say when, announcing these decisions to who have to care less than he does what he does. Or is this his way of trying to choreograph others by doing it to himself? How different is he from Vertigo's Scottie? (I say, I think, very.) What's the difference, and is there one, between Eustache's Léaud, and Truffaut's, and Godard's? How different is the present Léaud? Isn't he still doing it, whatever it is, in recent roles, Irma Vep, Le Pornographe, whatever, approaching old age? Once I arrived early for one in a series of mostly Antoine Doinel (Léaud's character) Truffaut films. For a long while, every three or five minutes, down the aisle would come a twenty-something male in scarf, tweedy coat, Léaud hair, with a direction-seeking nose. I have no idea whether this was conscious or unconscious mimicry. I was that age, but have no idea what I myself looked like then. No scarf, at least. I do have a brother, though, who seems to have learned his carriage from Bresson.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7f2316a55977465da92b01375b30f9a8",
            "input": "No, I've never seen any of the \"Santa Slasher\" series, i.e. 'Silent Night, Deadly Night,' the original 'Black Christmas' or this one, 'Christmas Evil.' I've heard all about their reputation, or, MADS (Mothers Against Deranged Santas.) I thought I would rent this one as I've heard it pop up as a reference on a 'Fat Guys At the Movies' segment.Mothers should be against this, but not for the ooooohhhh \"killer\" Santa, but for the fact this movie was just plain crap. Boring, long – even at only 92 minutes, crap.Little boy sees Santa arrive down a chimney in 1947, deliver presents, eat some goodies and miraculously, float up the chimney. Boy goes to bed, but returns to living room to witness Mommy and Santa (sort of) getting it on. Apparently this messed up that kid for the rest of his life, though the scene was about as steamy as when Ralphie's dad got the \"Leg Lamp\" in 'A Christmas Story.' He was sooo disturbed, he went to the attic and, well cut his own hand.Fast forward to the future! Now, it's 1980 and messed up boy works in a toy factory. We get a whiff of him being a little off-kilter, and he stalks both kids and parents alike. Who's naughty, who's nice, blah blah. It takes a good two-thirds of the film to get him to finally snap – as if that's not foreshadowed from frame one. NO MOVIE should take that long.I will admit, this movie had its tension building, but only because I kept expecting him to do something, anything to anyone. When he finally does, well, punish \"who's naughty,\" it's as graphic as a \"Garbage Pail Kid\" card. And I haven't mentioned the WTF ending. I'm thinking it was a metaphor, but in reality, it's just as weird as the rest of the movie. (Take the brother who's upset his sibling is killing, and his solution is…uh, killing.) Don't open this mess, even on Christmas Eve, or Evil. Again, I didn't watch the other \"Santa-Slashers\" but this one sucked bad. It built up suspense due to the nature of the movie and never once delivered a decent present.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-839d8cfef9fb40419d26458cc805dd22",
            "input": "It looks like the brilliant team of Shonda Rhimes outsourced the writing of this one somewhere offshore, maybe to the MediocreLand? \"PP\" reminds me any one of the many tedious, promising at first but predictable within 1 season David Kelly flicks (Picket Fences, Ally McBeal, and now Boston Legal). The crazy cases they get are so outlandish, they barely evoke sympathy or sadness. And that's what actually makes good medical dramas tick - dramatic situations you are afraid of, \"This could be me\" sentiment. They are not funny either.The actors are quite good, but the plot lines are dead and cannot be brought back to live. I'm a therapist, and let me tell you - Amy Brennan plays the most unbelievably incompetent, unethical, untrained therapist. Whoever writes her stuff flunked the ethics and the transference/counter-transference courses in Stanford. Somebody should give them a Code of Ethics to read (the episode with the nose-bleeding wife and the therapist's involvement in it). No therapists are that bad.Women yearning for men who have moved on - had been done to death, we've all graduated \"Sex and the City\". Addison in her youthful aggression towards the guy she likes - very age-inappropriate, looks so unnatural on a woman over 40, and this otherwise talented actress doesn't believe it herself and doesn't deliver it very well. The only successful/palatable developments are Addison struggling with her decision to move to LA, and the \"Voodoo Dr\" and his coping with widowhood.This concept might work with a whole new writing team.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a093520ff54d4a65a9af9a4d61f3767f",
            "input": "The Neil Simon's Sunshine Boys starring Walter Matthau and George Burns is a funny comedy on the strange bond to the life and its shortness, but the laughter always bitter taste. Seeing Willy Clark(Matthau) and Al Lewis(Burns) two big theatrical comedy actors now reduced on the imbecility from the hard and unceasing old age you can feel only anger and blue. Willy not ever surrender and continue to look work, while Al is tired for players and he is retired to the country in the house to his daughter. The couple in his old time was truly funny and harmony, but out the scene was a continue squabble and to quarrel, and for eleven years after their broken they not talk between. Now if they would work, they must return together another time for do one of his best old sketch for a comedy story TV show. The meets is explosive and liberating for the old questions…. The Neil Simon's screenplay give a certain corrosive spirit to the story and the melancholy and blue overwhelming the many gags and laughter succeeded to generate a good mix also thanks to a great couple Walter Matthu(Nomination Academy Award as Best Actor) and George Burns(Won the Academy Award as Best Support Actor). The two actors are very believable and real and the their harmony seems almost as they real work together for all that time and that realty they not bear between them. The movie is very touching also for its all consuming reality as the story is narrate and how the report Love-Heat that bind the two actors is totally real part to the strange but at the same time ordinarily comprehensible things to the life. My rate is 7.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a5f401687ea045fb8ffe1c513825a64f",
            "input": "Whattt was with the sound? It sounded like it was all dubbed.Otherwise, bad. Plot = bad. Accents = bad (even Dougray, and we live in Scotland), Acting = bad, Harp = bad, Sex scenes - bad/cringeworthy.Still, we watched it until the end in disbelief. How could such a good roll call of actors perform so badly? Will they ever get a decent job again? Bad, Bad, Bad. By the way, we gave it 3 because we at least were enticed to watch it to the end due to its bizarre plot, etc.And to the older reviewer - I totally agree, it was like a romantic farce from the 1940s. How did it get made in 2004?OK, OK, there were some OK bits. They had a nice house in Bristol. Dougray had a nice boat. Jennifer looked nice in a little outfit. But how come the sister got all the men?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b250fc493294b5c8e344f14126e62e7",
            "input": "What an awful movie! The Idea of robots fighting each other is cool, but the storyline is ridiculous, real human action laughable, acting non-existent and special effects (on which, this type of movie must depend) are archaic. I thought it must have been made around '80-'84 and was amazed to see it was from 1990. That's 5 years after Aliens! OK, lots of people said it was good considering the low budget, but I just think 'what's the point?'. it looks totally unbelievable. I wouldn't mind seeing a remake with modern special effects and a completely re-written story because I still like the idea of huge robots beating crap out of each other.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ef7aa1bede8c4f4ab8c2f7035ad4af9f",
            "input": "Surely one of the most ill-advised remakes of a classic in film history – especially since the promise of its tag-line, “The most beautiful woman of our time in the most erotic adventure of all time”, isn’t even properly exploited! Although this film was regularly shown on TV in my neck of the woods since my childhood days, its notoriety (for awfulness not erotic content, mind you) kept me away from it until now – and I only relented because I have recently enjoyed Bo Derek’s previous film, 10 (1979), and have been watching a lot of fantasy stuff as well over the Christmas period.Lead actress/producer Bo Derek is rather ridiculous playing the schoolgirl-ish sexual innocent (witness the inept banana scene) and, as was to be expected, she is made to get her clothes off a few times but, as welcome as these scenes were, she came off as far more sensual in 10 than she does here; Richard Harris, then, chews the scenery incessantly as Jane’s obsessed explorer father, but John Philip Law barely registers as his aide who meekly shows some initial interest in Jane herself; newcomer Miles O’Keeffe has the title role and he only makes his entrance 45 minutes into the movie, is completely silent throughout except for his famous yodel (which is probably lifted from Johnny Weissmuller anyway!) and, furthermore, is as inexpressive as one of the trees he dangles from at regular intervals throughout the film’s second half!; for the record, he later starred in two ATOR movies (or would-be CONAN imitators) for Joe D’Amato and the King Arthur-era set, SWORD OF THE VALIANT (1984).When still an actor, director John Derek (who also serves as his own cinematographer here) had worked with some good film-makers (Cecil B. De Mille, William Dieterle and Robert Rossen) and a few great ones (Otto Preminger, Nicholas Ray and Don Siegel) but he clearly learned zilch from them as his direction of this one is a major liability: appallingly pretentious at times (witness the perfectly horrid python attack sequence) with a senseless overuse of the slow motion technique and cheesy transitions; this was Derek’s seventh film as a director (and his second of four with wife Bo) and, eventually, he would only get to make two more.The film’s utter failure only needs to be gauged by the fact that the Tarzan legend was tackled once more on film – in GREYSTOKE: THE LEGEND OF TARZAN, LORD OF THE APES (which, surprisingly enough, I haven’t watched myself yet) – a mere three years later!! Nominated for six Razzie Awards (including John Derek, Richard Harris and Miles O’Keeffe) and winning one for Bo Derek herself, TARZAN, THE APE MAN was co-written by Gary Goddard, the future director of another highly anticipated but ultimately disappointing transposition to the silver screen of a (this time animated) heroic figure, MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE (1987) which I will be revisiting presently as well (yay)! Despite a charming closing credit sequence showing Tarzan and Jane playing with around with an orang-utan and a music score that is not half bad actually and quite rousing on occasion, any belated good intentions are defeated by an extremely silly climax involving natives painting Bo completely white and, fatally, John Derek’s clear disinterest in the character of Tarzan himself which makes him come off as an unimportant supporting character in his own self-titled movie!!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-16ab7dde6d7a440baf50d67e10033b6b",
            "input": "I'm giving ten out of ten it's one of the best movies ever. Absolutely smashed, stunned and dazed by the whole picture, marvellous playing of Jason Statham, Ray Liotta and all the crew, amazing plot... Just look into yourself and pluck up your courage to admit-it touched your soul, because it's strange, but there are all the answers you've been ever looking for... The very best, mr. Ritchie! THE VERY BEST EVER. Those who were looking for a simple figtings and skirmish keep yelling they are disappointed. But there are lots of shallow movies in Hollywood nowadays, you can't remember what it was about the next day you had seen it. On the contrary, Revolver is unique, I could have hardly expected it's possible to portray such a clear and genius picture of myself, of everyone who was to watch it. Absolutely unsurpassed, astounding, dazzling... One can get insight watching this, I have no doubt about that. Actually, no words can express my admiration... I'm still wondering how it was possible to shoot such a movie after years of giddy Hollywood rubbish we had been watching. Thank you from all heart, it's simply the best.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b759bdfefd704d1cb224215bdfad1362",
            "input": "MY EYES! IN THE NAME OF GOD AND ALL THAT IS HOLY MAKE ME UNSEE THIS MOVIE! what drugs are you people on! this could very well be the worst movie ever! i felt like i was on a bad acid trip the whole time, i need to call a therapist to help me deal with the trauma of this epic disaster. From start to finish glow ropes is an unholy masterpiece of satanic cinema. when i thought to watch this movie with my Jewish best friend and his family we thought \"oh hey, this may be funny! it will probably be bad but still a little funny\" how wrong we were, we were not prepared for how awful this movie could be. All of my friends lined up for lobotomies as soon as the film was over, and during the course of the movie, one of my friends attempted to hang himself with his belt while another tried to slit his wrists with a wooden spoon. I wish I had watched the video from The Ring instead, that way the pain and suffering would be over in only seven short days. For all who wish to see this movie, YOU ARE NOT PREPARED! you may think you are some sort of \"tough guy\" by renting this but this movie will break you, push you to the ground and urinate on you.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7e89772f6e8845f48ecab18b4e220a51",
            "input": "Boring and appallingly acted(Summer Pheonix). She sounded more Asian than Jewish. Some of the scenes and costumes looked more mid 20th century than late 19th century. What on earth fine actors like Ian Holm & Anton Lesser were doing in this is beyond me.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-112179ee154e49b79300382cc6242289",
            "input": "I disagree with previous comment about this movie. I think it was cute and fun and it carried a good message for young girls like my daughter. You don't have to dress like a cheap hooker to be cool. You can be smart and pretty and classy all at once.I think the cast was good and the story was fine for the target audience. All-in-all my wife, daughter (10) and I each thought it was a good movie. I certainly recommend it. It also has encouraged my daughter to start reading the original Nancy Drew mysteries which I am sure she will love much as I loved the Hardy Boys. It was a struggle to get her to sleep tonight because she wanted to start reading right away. I can't think of a better outcome for that movie than rekindling interest in that classic series.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bf4fef63fab24afc8cdf1df91ff274cc",
            "input": "Several posters have quoted Renoir voicing his desire to make a film showing Ingrid Bergman smiling to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all whilst the harsh reality is that only a select few got to do so. At this stage of her career Bergman couldn't get arrested; in 1949 she left Hollywood to make a picture in Europe, fell for director Roberto Rossellini and never looked forward. After five turkeys in Italy she was probably ready to open a vein but within the year, after making this for Renoir, she was back where she belonged and with an Oscar to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three movies that Renoir made in color around this time and on balance it's better than The Golden Coach, which isn't hard, and about even with French Can Can. Renoir probably figured that with so much going for her Bergman could get away with a couple of wooden leading men and Renoir picked two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid mahogany in both cases. The plot is actually based on a real incident in French history but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and concentrate on replicating the paintings of his father in set up after set up. In its pastel colors it resembles another film of the period Les Grandes Manouvres which is no bad thing. All in all it remains a pleasant trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b93fa4d8a16c4d7ebc7ba5b62b47671c",
            "input": "I saw this in the theater when it came out, and just yesterday I saw it again on cable. This I was able to reacquainted myself with the feeling of just how revolting this film is. The whole bunch of characters are self-absorbed narcisstic preeners. Worst of all, it reinforces every negative stereotype about 20-something dating, even as it purports to celebrate people \"finding themselves\". The nice guys finish last, the jerky guys make out great, the jerkiest guys do best. The girls are all boy toy pushovers. Only one character (\"Wendy\") is seen doing anything remotely useful to society, and she dispenses with her long-saved virginity in a throwaway one-night stand with a scumbag, in a lushly filmed scene that we're supposed to think is romantic. What this really is is Hollywood's concept of young America: permissive, detached, promiscuous, conceited.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dee042e7b43d48ddbc3314b20747a391",
            "input": "This is apparently the second remake of this film, having been filmed before in 1911 and 1918. And, in so many ways it reminds me of the later film, A YANK AT OXFORD. Both films concern a conceited blow-hard who arrives at one of the top schools in the world and both, ultimately, show the blow-hard slowly learning about teamwork and decency. In this film, William Haines is \"Tom Brown\" and his main rival, \"Bob\" is played by Frances X. Bushman. And, in a supporting role is Jack Pickford--always remembered as the brother of Mary. Of these three, Pickford comes off the best, as the sympathetic loser who becomes Tom's pal--he actually has a few decent scenes as well as a dramatic moment just before the Big Game! All the standard clichés are there and the movie, because it was done so many times before and since, offers few surprises. However, it is pleasant film and is enjoyable viewing.In my opinion, for a better silent college film, try Harold Lloyd's THE FRESHMAN--it's football scenes are frankly more exciting and Harold is far more likable and sympathetic than the annoying Tom Brown. THE FRESHMAN is probably the best college picture you can find from the era. Another reason why BROWN AT HARVARD is a lesser picture is that William Haines played essentially the same unlikable and bombastic character with the same plot again and again and again (such as in WESTPOINT and THE SMART SET, among others)--and if you've seen one of these films, you've seen them all. Well made, but certainly NOT original! And, because it is just a rehash of his other films, anyone giving the film a score of 10 is STRONGLY advised to see these other films.4/25/08==I just checked and saw this this small film was the highest rated film on IMDb from the 1920!! Talk about over-rated! There are dozens and dozens of better films--how this film got to be #1 is anyone's guess.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3b84e9af31704c0baa3efd43cd309b21",
            "input": "There isn't a whole lot going on in this story -- just two men employing very different ways of handling memories of Vietnam. But what it lacks in premise, it more than makes up for in acting and realism. It's a quiet film about the bonds of friendship and shared experience. We even get romance (not gratuitous -- just another very real piece of this story). It's well worth seeing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4ee4302867b74b2da364532f0573ed4d",
            "input": "Most movies I can sit through easily, even if I do not particularly like the movie. I am the type of person who recognizes great films even if I do not like the genre. This is the first movie I could not stand to watch. Cat in the Hat is the worst movie I have ever seen--and I've seen a lot of movies. The acting is okay (Myers is good as the cat, it's just that he is REALLY annoying). The silly songs the cat sings were boring and monotonous, even for the children in the audience. The plot drags on and on, and viewers must suffer through poor dialogue. The \"witty\" parental remarks are disgusting, not funny (I remember some awful comment about a garden hoe being compared to, well, a type of person people call a \"ho\"). Even though the movie is really short, it seemed to last FOREVER. Do not waste your time. I know small kids who hated this movie. If children can't stand it, I do not know how any adults can. I would like to fume more about this film but I do not even feel like wasting anymore time writing this review about it. I HATED IT! So, in summary, do not spend 90 minutes of your life watching this! See a GOOD movie!1/10 stars--the lowest review I have ever given a movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-30db3fd63eb942d3bdd1486be9f67a48",
            "input": "This film is not even worth walking to the movie theatre. No jokes, but stupid and boring laughing on repeated disgusting stuff. The music and the girls are great, unfortunately you have to watch the whole movie to enjoy them. It was weak, very very weak.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8c25ad3477b04510a67f6dd871aec17e",
            "input": "Very bad but watchable science fiction film that suffers from abominable special effects, poor acting, and a ridiculous story. The film opens with a spaceship returning from exploration on Mars with a woman and a man with green slime on his arm. She, through some hokey plot contrivances, begins to tell what happened on this fateful trip as almost all the tapes seemed to be magnetically wiped off. Four astronauts take on this journey: a military type played by Gerald Mohr, a poor man's Humphrey Bogart who enjoys saying the word \"Irish\" and has the acting savvy of a codfish, then there is Naura Hayden, a beautiful redhead and only female crew member on flight with three men wearing the most formfitting suits possible to accentuate all her curves, next, Les Tremaine, a wonderful character actor from cheap sci-fi films like this as the egghead, and last, Jack Kruschen as Sammy - the guy from Brooklyn with jokes and doesn't seem too bright although chosen for his expertise in electronics. None of these performers are really any good, and all of them say their dialog with little conviction. Watch Tremaine as he utters that scientific nonsense! Really, the best out of the four is Kruschen - and that really says a lot about this film. But bad acting aside, the movie just falls apart when they land on Mars via flashback. The Angry Red Planet had a real cheap budget because Mars is really the American Southwest with a heavy red tint over it. When the story calls for something that might look Martian, there are drawings placed with a heavy red tint over them. You can tell they are drawings The monsters are perhaps even worse as we get a Bat-rat-spider with a size upwards of 40 feet that looks like some kids got together piecing dead animals together. The other significant creature is a giant amoeba with an oscillating eye. Whew! These are bad. There is a nice drawing of a Martian city, but there just was not enough of this in the film. Despite all these big problems, The Angry Red Planet is a fun bad film. It is really fascinating to see how far we have come as a civilization. Most of the stuff they used in the movie is so outdated. One guy is using an electric razor with a cord and I thought they can get to Mars but they are still using cords. Director Ib Melchior gives an interesting look to much of the film even with the budgetary constraints, but the story by him and Sid Pink doesn't fly. And how bout that ending with the music and the psychedelic colors? Groovy man!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c9a705c3a11b4c0aa8a8eb98da2b0b6d",
            "input": "Big splashy film of the Broadway music. Nathan (Frank Sinatra) loves to roll the dice and organize illegal crap games. Blonde loving Adelaide (Vivian Blaine) wants to marry him IF he gives up craps. He decides on one last game when Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando!), who bets big, is in town. He bets Sky that he can't get mission worker Sarah Brown (Jean Simmons) to go with him to Havana. That may sound like a strange plot summary but so is the movie!This is a real mixed bag--there's some wonderful stuff here. The songs are all good and the dancing is incredible. The real show stopper is at the crap game at the end. Also Brando is really quite good here--it might seem strange to think of him singing and dancing but he pulls it off. I have to admit seeing big, bulky Brando pulling off some difficult dance moves was a lot of fun! Also Sinatra is pretty good and Blaine is just wonderful as his long-suffering girlfriend. Her song and dance numbers are definite highlights here.Now for the bad parts--Jean Simmons is a wonderful actress but she's stuck with a drab colorless role and can't do much with it. The movie is far too long at 150 minutes--the scenes between Brando and Simmons really drag and should have been shortened. Also most of the characters speak in very precise English--contractions are never used. Maybe it's trying to be amusing coming out of the mouths of gangsters but I found it jarring and it kept throwing me out of the movie.It's worth catching for the songs and dances but the over length of it does get to you after a while. I give it a 7.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ba01ed051e9345e3a9ccf05855ee87a5",
            "input": "I don't see much reason to get into this movie in much detail. Sylvester Stallone is once again John Rambo, author and survivor of \"A Season in Hell\", recruited from prison by his only friend, Major Richard Crenna, to secretly return to Vietnam, take photos of the American prisoners believed to be still held in horrible camps, and return without engaging the enemy.Fat chance. What if he actually DID nothing more than sneak in, take pics, and sneak out? Who would come to see the movie? It's essentially a celebration of Stallone's muscles. Preparing for his mission, we see his well-oiled muscles bulging. (They are oiled and bulging throughout.) There is the ritual strapping on of black leather, ugly guns, and even uglier knives. The black guns are cleaned, assembled with loud clacks, and almost as oiled as Stallone's muscles. The bow is tested and, yes, it has enough poundage to drive a bolt through an enemy's forehead. The knife is sharpened with slick snicks.Stallone and one of his POWs are betrayed by one or two of the suits from Washington, cynical politicians who, you can bet, were never even in a fist fight in grammar school. No guts, you know? Just sit around with their feet on the desk and drink foreign beer.The movie does what it set out to do, but what it set out to do is meretricious. It deliberately cashes in on the myth popular in the mid-1980s that there were uncountable numbers of MIAs quietly kept in wretched camps by the North Vietnamese. The bumper stickers were ubiquitous. (Free Our MIAs.) Why would they keep them? It was never quite reasoned out but perhaps to turn the POWs into a slave labor force -- in a country that has absolutely no resource other than labor. Or maybe for their propaganda value as an instrument to humiliate the United States -- a propaganda weapon that the Vietnamese kept secret from the world.As a captive, Rambo is treated in a Medieval fashion by the North Vietnamese. Dipped to his neck in pig excrement and then hauled out of it by his wrists, his muscles still on display. Then, not content with subhuman Vietnamese, a Russian officer is brought in to play the part of the Gestapo officer -- \"Vee haff vays of MAKING you remember.\" A high-tech type, the Russian uses psychology and electricity, not just pig dump.Rambo returns and declares that he intends to drift aimlessly until \"this country loves us as much as we love it,\" bringing up another myth that Vets returning from Vietnam were uniformly spat upon and cursed, which is why I guess we elected so many to the Congress and appointed others to high-echelon positions. The last three losing presidential candidates were among that despised group. At least Rambo's aimless drifting left room open for a sequel, which arrived apace.The action movies with Schwarzenegger and Willis and others were leavened by wisecracks but Rambo is humorless. It marches dully through it's phantasmal ideological swamp, killing without mercy, barely speaking, barely able to speak. To speak is a sign of weakness.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9aae4e17910f4c00b8c80f3e33ec9100",
            "input": "I hated the first episode of this show ( 'Protesting Hippies' ) so much in 1999 that I shunned the rest. However, when it came on 'The Paramount Comedy Channel' I watched it in full and, to my surprise, found it absolutely hilarious ( Motto: never judge a comedy series in its first week )! Set in 1969, 'Hippies' stars Simon Pegg as 'Ray Purbbs', editor of an 'Oz'-like underground magazine called 'Mouth'. His friends are the feminist Jill, laid-back Alex, and the half-wit Hugo. Back in the late '60's, there was a feeling of incredible optimism amongst the young, that they could change the world through the printing of magazines nobody read. Rather than sneering at the hippies' naivety, 'Hippies' is affectionate towards it. Arthur Mathews' scripts cheekily parody a number of that era's icons - 'Hair', 'Woodstock', 'The Graduate', even the infamous 'Oz' obscenity trial of the early '70's. Excellent performances from the cast; Julian Rhind-Tutt's 'Alex' strangely put me in mind of the Richard O'Sullivan character from 'Man About The House'. Its a shame that there was never a second series, possibly because of people like me. If you missed 'Hippies', give it a try. Once you get past the dire opener, you're in for a treat!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-17b3ff4545e549128251468b324f6045",
            "input": "Well, I have to say, this movie was so bad that I would have walked out if i didn't have to review it for work. ANd the worst part is, I wanted to see it so badly that I drove all over the city, paid $10 parking two times because the newspaper listings were wrong. Vince Vaughn plays the guy he always does -- the only time I've seen him play someone else was in that movie with John Travolta. Anyways, the plot has potential -- it sounded great in the preview, but it is filled with totally ridiculous, predictable, weak plot turn points. And I was hoping that this would be one Christmas movie where Christmas DIDN\"t have to be saved, and that Santa didn't need a replacdmetn, but nope. The only cool part was the sleigh rides, and the little bladck kid was the best character. I'm sure this movie would be great for young kids, but for adults it's so lame that it's chore to sit through.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-72fb42a2efba48a4a14358ed0c51b1e3",
            "input": "Warning: Does contain spoilers.Open Your EyesIf you have not seen this film and plan on doing so, just stop reading here and take my word for it. You have to see this film. I have seen it four times so far and I still haven't made up my mind as to what exactly happened in the film. That is all I am going to say because if you have not seen this film, then stop reading right now.If you are still reading then I am going to pose some questions to you and maybe if anyone has any answers you can email me and let me know what you think.I remember my Grade 11 English teacher quite well. His name was Mr. Krisak. To me, he was wise beyond his years and he always had this circuitous way of teaching you things that perhaps you weren't all too keen on. If we didn't like Shakespeare, then he turned the story into a modern day romance with modern day language so we could understand it. Our class room was never a room, it was a cottage and we were on the lake reading a book at our own leisure time. This was his own indelible way of branding something into our sponge-like minds. I begin this review of Vanilla Sky with a description of this brilliant man because he once gave us an assignment that has been firmly etched in my mind, like the phone number of a long lost best friend, and it finally made some sense to me after watching The Matrix. Now if I didn't know better, I would have thought that the Wachowski brothers were really just an alias for my teacher Mr. Krisak. But giving them the benefit of the doubt, we'll assume it wasn't him. But that was the first time this assignment was anything more than impalpable. He had asked us to prove to him and to ourselves that were real. Show me how you can tell that you are real. This got the class spouting off all of the usual ideas that I'm sure you can imagine. Everything from pain, to sense of touch to sense of loss to sense of hunger were spouted off to our teacher to prove to him that we were real. After every scenario that we gave him, he would come back with the one answer that would leave us speechless.\"What if you are nothing but someone else's dream?\"What if you were someone else's dream? What a messed up question that is. This was a question/scenario posed to us about 15 years ago, before the astronomical use of the Internet and rapid advancement of computers. How possible could it seem back then? But if you look at today's technology, now ask yourself, what it you were a part of someone else's dream.Another brilliant but surreal film this year, David Lynch's Mulholland Drive explored similar areas. But Vanilla Sky goes deeper than any other film could hope to. In short this is one film that will literally (if you let it) blow your mind from all of the possibilities that surround you.Open your Eyes.Tom Cruise plays David Aames, a young, hot shot, righteous, full of himself publisher and owner of several magazines. He inherited this from his father and although he has talent and business savvy, his board of governers, the Seven Dwarfs, think he is a rich dink born with a silver spoon in his mouth. They feel he has done nothing to deserve the pinnacle of success that each and every one of them believes should go to them. Early in the film we meet one of David's gorgeous toys named Julie Gianni, played with pernicious but bombastic perfection by Cameron Diaz. David and Julie play a good game, both claiming they are just there to use each other and are not the slightest bit interested in a monogamous, committed relationship. This is the type of relationship commensurate with David's other flings he's had in the sexual prime of his life. And although both talk a good game, we can tell that only one is really telling the truth. Next we meet Brian Shelby, played with a stroke of genius by Kevin Smith's good buddy Jason Lee. Brian is writing a book that David is going to publish but they are also very good friends. This is something that David has very little of in his life and you can sense a real caring for one another early on in the film. Brian has one famous line that he keeps telling David over and over again. And that is \" the sweet ain't so sweet without the bitter.\" He goes on to tell him that one day he will find true love and not just this part time lover status that he seems to perpetrate with all of the floozies who inhabit his bed for a night or two.At David's huge birthday bash, (so huge that the likes of Steven Spielberg wish him a happy birthday) Brian enters with his date, Sofia Sorrano, played of course by Penelope Cruz with what has to be the best performance of this year by an actress. This is a bash by invite only and at first David and Sofia seem intrigued with one another. And in typical David fashion, despite his best friend being there, he begins to flirt with Sofia. To complicate things, Julie shows up uninvited and begins spying on David. David then spends the night with Sofia, but they only talk and draw caricatures of one another. There is no hanky panky. The next day, as David is leaving Sofia's apartment, he is greeted by Julie, who offers him a ride and from there.......well, I think we have all seen the commercials.That is all I will really say about the plot, because from here the film teases us with what is reality and what is blurred perception. We are introduced to a character played by Kurt Russel and a few other shady characters that all play a part in this labyrinth like haze. There is a subtext of death and possible panacea-like cure-alls that may or not be able to create the possibility of eternal life. This is just one of the intriguing possibilities the movie offers us, but it doesn't end there.Like many movies seem to thrive on today, this film has a secret. Sixth Sense may have began this craze, but look even further back and you can maybe thank Angel Heart for starting the craze. Regardless of how it originated, Vanilla Sky has one of it's own surreptitious gut busters. And what makes this one so much fun is that the film gives you many obvious clues along the way but not enough to give you an apodictic solution to the gauntlet of truth and lies you have just put yourself through. I have seen this film four times and every time it has been because I want to see if there is something more I can pick up, something more I can understand. To be able to work your mind in the theater, to enable it to open up to new possibilities is something rare in a film. All of the ersatz so called \"Best Pictures of the year\" have been good but nothing spectacular. They lack substance. A Beautiful Mind was intriguing but flat, The Royal Tenenbaums was interesting but uneven. Vanilla Sky is a rarity because it is a film that leaves you yearning for more yet guarantees your satisfaction because the film and those that made it care about it. I know this film has received mixed reviews but I just think that those who don't like it don't quite understand it. This is what film making is supposed to be like. This is what a film is supposed to do to you. It is supposed to make you feel something. Most of the other films this year have been just empty spaces. This one isn't.10 out of 10 The best film of the year. I would love to see this get nominated for best picture and I would love to see Cruz up for best Actress, Diaz for best supporting, Cruise for best actor and Jason Mewes should be a shoe in for best supporting actor. Cameron Crowe should there as well. None of this may come to pass, and that is a shame. This is one film that should not be missed. And on a final note, I am quite sure Mr. Krisak would like this film and maybe this is the one film that may answer his question. Can you prove you are real? Or are we just a figment of someone's imagination? Are we artificially transplanted for someone else's bemusement? This is a film that spawns more questions than it does answers. And I'm sure that is just fine with him.Open Your Eyes",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-58c559d6042a40dd83262d22851dae39",
            "input": "This is a VERY entertaining movie. A few of the reviews that I have read on this forum have been written by people who, apparently, think that the film was an effort at serious drama. IT WAS NOT MADE THAT WAY....It is an extremely enjoyable film, performed in a tongue in cheek manner. All of the actors are obviously having fun while entertaining us. The fight sequences are lively, brisk and, above all, not gratuitous. The so-called \"Green Death\", utilized on a couple of occasions, is not, as I read in one review, \"gruesome\". A couple of reviewers were very critical of the martial arts fight between Doc and Seas near the end of the film. Hey, lighten up... Again, I remind one and all that this is a fun film. Each phase of this \"fight\" was captioned, which added to the fun aspect. The actors were not trying to emulate Bruce Lee or Jackie Chan. This is NOT one of those martial arts films. Ron Ely looks great in this film and is the perfect choice to play Doc. Another nice touch is the unique manner in which the ultimate fate of the \"bad guy\" (Seas) is dealt with. I promise you that if you don't try to take this film very seriously and simply watch it for the entertainment value, you will spend 100 minutes in a most enjoyable manner.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0fc73c9900ed43f7ad5950e1a2edfc07",
            "input": "This movie is brilliant. The comments made before is from someone who obviously doesn't get it. The movie is campy- yes! But it is uplifting and fun. This movie is an underground hit and brings comparisons to Absolutely Fabulous. It is a must see!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47e1c044c37c484db84a4974f46d5d23",
            "input": "I love movies, and I'll watch any movie all the way through, just to give it a chance. I can finally say that I found a movie I can't watch all the way through. The acting is terribly stale and monotone, the CGI looks like a computer geek did it in his mother's basement with minimal software, and.....the long scenes of just...walking!!!! And this movie is THREE HOURS LONG!!! I didn't even make it 15 minutes until I fast forwarded the DVD. The scenes with the aliens are very short. Ummm, instead of naming this \"War of the Worlds\", lets name this \"War of the Walking Long Distances\". This cost 5 million dollars to make! What they spend the money on, the dramatic opening song?Oh, but on a positive note, one scene you need to watch is when the aliens first begin killing people. That's hilarious, not because people are dying, but because when they turn to skeletons, they still squirm for 20 seconds afterward.So....like I said, if you are a fan of boring, stale, action-less movies, here is one for you DVD collection. But I didn't write this for you, I wrote this for the billions upon billions of other people who will HATE this movie. It is not worth your time or moneyI know this is by the book, but the book isn't that long, and I'm a complete book worm/nerd/geek/whatever, but why? Just get the Steven Spielberg version, it's not all that good, but it's 10 times better than this!! I give this a BIG, FAT ZERO out of 10.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-9f0e2c7dab254ec3bd3b996bdba9e324",
            "input": "In all honesty, this series is as much a classic (as television goes) as the original poem is to the world's literature. Far from being crassly exploitative, it is a beautiful and respectful rendering of one of the western culture's defining texts.I was moved by the plight of Odysseus and his followers; touched by the drama of the fall of Troy (which was felt but not seen); intrigued by the way the gods played with the fate of mortals. (It should be mentioned that the gods appearing here are not ridiculous CGI creatures flitting around on their ankle wings, or poorly-cast fashion models in bikinis. As in Homer's work, they act through mortal agents or, rarely, are represented by classical statuary).It's a pity it's not available in DVD, especially given the vastly inferior and cheesy adaptations of the Odyssey that one can find in video stores.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b59769dca6784b9d8cf8b321e468fe0c",
            "input": "Best animated movie ever made. This film explores not only the vast world of modern animation with absolutely boggling effects, but the branches of the human mind, soul, and philosophy. The story features a family of cats, where in the big sister dies, the younger brother sees this and rescues her body, but when she awakens she is left without a soul. So, the two sibling cats embark on a journey to find it. I have related this journey to many things. The history of the world, the bible, the cycle of life, and every time I watch it I discover more and more hidden themes and metaphors. If you aren't so into the physiological aspect of it then, you will still adore it. The animation is superb, and the creative scenes will have you attached to the screen. For example, the ocean freezing in time, god eating soup out of the earth, a strange and slightly SNM retelling of Hansel and Gretel. To conclude, Cat Soup is an absolute treat for anyone.PS- Not for kids, gratuitous violence included.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-47784b558f8b437f8da69b8140c52fc6",
            "input": "I found out about this film because Jewish Ben Chaplin from Game On was in it. Game On is a funny British sitcom and apparently he left because he wanted to break into Hollywood and star in this film. He failed thank God.The film is a very simple romantic comedy with Janeane Garofalo playing an ugly woman who uses her neighbour Uma Thurman to date Ben Chaplin because she thinks Ben Chaplin won't like her because she's ugly. The film is just bad for so many reasons. The plot is unbelievably predictable from the overtly slapstick bits to the serious mushy bits: ugh just that montage where all three of them are having fun and then the photograph bit. Those two scenes made me cringe! Janeane's character is sickeningly arrogant (and guessing from her role as stand-up \"comedienne\" and arch-feminist is in real life too). She claims that the film is \"anti-feminist\" when in fact it's just realistic. Men more often than not go for looks over personality. It's interesting to note her hypocrisy too. She'd been a feminist and \"comedienne\" for years before taking this role and then suddenly decides afterwards that the film was bad. I imagine she hated the idea and script of this film before it was released but she made sure she kept that quiet so she could get paid for this travesty of a film. I mean come on! She acted in it for Heaven's sake! What this film was really was anti-men if anything. It portrays men as stupid animals whose brains are in their groins with the men doing stupid things to attract the attention of Uma Thurman's character Noelle.There are other bad things about this film too like Ben Chaplin's character being the British man every American girl finds cute and Jamie Foxx being the token black best friend of Chaplin and of course Foxx had to try and mimic his accent a few times for good measure. Is that the best the script writers could come up with? Blimey they've never done that before except with every Hugh Grant and Dudley Moore film ever made. There's also a truly awful phone sex scene which is just grotesque and proves how cheap the film is. The other comments on here all say how Janeane Garofalo isn't ugly but is actually beautiful. Erm was I watching the same film as they were? She's certainly no looker and the only good thing about this film was that she was rightly cast as the ugly one. Although having said that, I fail to see the appeal of Uma Thurman as well: she's lanky and gaunt looking.I guarantee three things about this film if you've never watched it:You will know what the ending will be;You will find the phone sex scene painfully embarrassing and;You will be bored after ten minutes.Watch at your own peril.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e378c2c6bcb146b397cda5d7b8b746e2",
            "input": "A Compelling Thriller!!, 10 December 2005 Author:littlehammer16787 from United StatesJust CauseStarring:Sean Connery,Laurence Fishburne, and Blair Underwood.A liberal,though good-hearted Harvard law professor Paul Armstrong is convoked to the Flordia Everglades by unjustly convicted black guy Bobby Earl.Confessing that sadistic,cold-hearted cops vilifyied and beat him to a pulp to get the confession of a gruesome murder of an eleven year old girl. As he digs further and further into the mysterious case he realizes that Bobby Earl is a victim of discrimination.That the black police detective Lt.Tanny Brown of the small community is corrupt and villainously mean. When the infamous,psychotic serial killer Blair Sullivan is introduced.He discovers that he knows the location of the murder weapon that butchered the little girl.When Armstrong finds that there are lucid coincidences of Sullivan's road trip through the small town and the letter he personally wrote. Bobby Earl gets a re-trial.Is unfettered from prison and eludes his horrific punishment. All seems swimmingly well until an unexpected phone call from serial killer Sullivan comes into focus.Armstrong discovers a lurid double killing which happens to be Sullivan's parents.Whom he immensely detests.Sullivan divulges to Armstrong the truth of Joanie Shriver's heinous murder and why he was brought here.It turns out that Bobby Earl is a psychopathic murderer and he really did rape and kill Joanie Shriver.He just merely struck a bargain with fiendish psycho Sullivan. To get loose so he could kill again for revenge.Upon Armstrong's beautiful wife and daughter.Now Sullivan is executed to his death. Armstrong and tough good guy Brown chase the malevolent villain to the Everglades in order to thwart him.When they arrive Armstrong learns that the psychotic sicko Bobby Earl plans to kill his wife and daughter for a former rape trial that inevitably made him endure agonizing pain and castration.But good,virtuous cop Brown emerges and thwarts the brutal baddie.Is stabbed and eaten by ruthless,man-eating alligators.Paul Armstrong,Tanny Brown,his wife,and daughter survive and live happily ever after. A good thriller that works.Delivers both mystery and subterfuge.How reluctant blacks are hazed by racist lawmen.Sentenced to unfair penalties.Even though sometimes the wrongfully convicted innocent, friendly black man may in truth be the vicious baddie. Sean Connery is great as the oblivious,holier than thou hero.Laurence Fishburne is watchably amazing as the mean,arrogant,but good guy cop. Underwood and Harris are over the top and invigorating as the malevolent psychos.Capeshaw is okay.Ruby Dee is great as the tenacious grandmother.The rest of the cast is wonderful as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e16093fa79404dc686e4826b7c868a3e",
            "input": "So many educational films are nothing more than mind-numbing drudgery, saved only by the fact that \"MST3K\" mocks them (\"Why Study Industrial Arts?\" comes to mind). \"Hemo the Magnificent\" is actually quite well done. It's all about blood, the heart, and the circulatory system. I admit that I don't remember everything from it, but it does a good job explaining everything, keeping it serious but entertaining. I guess that you can always count on June Foray (most famously the voice of Rocky the Squirrel, she plays a deer here).Since \"Hemo the Magnificent\" itself may be hard to find, probably the best place to see it is in \"Gremlins\": a class is watching it while a gremlin is forming.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-41c2b744806d44ffb37623ffca8ba046",
            "input": "This is a great movie but there could be more about Soylent Green. There should be more scenes of what they do to people. How people act in 2022. I think it would be neat to see if all this does happen in the year 2022 and beyond. Even if you still know what the secret is it is a great movie. So go rent or buy this movie right NOW!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d7d9d3b906da403cbdf1d31415cc2c81",
            "input": "This has to be the most brutally unfunny \"comedy\" I've ever seen in my life. Ben Stiller, Jack Black, and Christopher Walken as a crazed homeless man CAN'T make me laugh? Something's got to be wrong with this picture. This is the only movie I've ever felt like walking out of. I used free passes, and still felt like I wanted my money back. I can wholeheartedly say that the only movie I've ever seen worse than this one was HOUSE OF THE DEAD. The. ONLY. worse. movie. I laughed very slightly at the merry-go-round scene, and that's it. Spending 2 hours in something billed as a comedy should get you more than one laugh, right? I don't know, I guess the filmmakers thought that \"flan\" was a funny word, or something. And the other running joke really is beating a dead horse--literally.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-268baf3bce3f4e1494aa78a3cd8dca6a",
            "input": "This is a great movie that I don't think gets enough credit as Saturday Night Fever or Grease in John Travolta's career. He plays a man who is in love with a girl but is too pig headed to admit his feelings to her. Instead, he wants to engage in mechanical bull riding because he thinks it will show his manhood. Even though it was made in 1980, it is still timely today. The great country music soundtrack is terrific. 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c7b470a1d07d45e9afe5ef2c3dc8f647",
            "input": "This was yet another big screen outing for a US TV show from the sixties It is amusing enough but was very much to formula. Intelligent Martian lands on Earth and meets the not too bright humans, in his view.The usual wackiness ensues with the human, Bridges, eventually bonds with him and helps him to get home. Along the way he also gets the girl, Hannah.This is a nice outing for some pleasant Hollywood stars who I had not seen for a while.Pleasant enough to pass some spare time if you have not got anything better to view.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ebd4b08cbeca43dda15b6b9dce0a88d3",
            "input": "the acting itself wasn't even that bad, since it did't come to mind in the movie but whatever had this director in mind? the intended climb towards some climax completely missed the mark,..almost all scenes involve acting that stand so far from our own intentions and way of reacting on things that you don't really attach to any actor in the movie,..Empty silences,..In this case, see through cheap method of boasting your way into potential metaphorical brilliance,..which just wasn't here at all,..I guess I'm bitching but shit,..2 hours of my time,..",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b24cd73892f04515b868b7c5f08d95c6",
            "input": "'Stanley and Iris' show the triumph of the human spirit. For Stanley, it's the struggle to become literate and realize his potential. For Iris, it's to find the courage to love again after becoming a widow. The beauty of the movie is the dance that Robert DeNiro and Jane Fonda do together, starting and stopping, before each has the skills and courage to completely trust each other and move on. In that sense it very nicely gives us a good view of how life often is, thus being credible. Unlike some other reviewers I found the characters each rendered to be consistent for the whole picture. The supporting cast is also carefully chosen and they add a depth of character that the main characters get added meaning from the supporting performances. All in all an excellent movie. The best thing I take from it is Hope.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afddbd2278844629a4a99830cbf06e33",
            "input": "Vincent Price's follow-up to HOUSE OF WAX (1953), the film which cemented his reputation as a horror icon, similarly revolves around a bitter – albeit resourceful – showman. Though a remake, the former (shot in Technicolor) remains the superior effort; that said, apart from some resistible comic relief, the obligatory resort to cheap gimmickry (it was another 3-D showcase) and occasional narrative shortcomings (whatever happened to the missing bag which supposedly turned up at some police station containing a severed head?), this offers more than enough Grand Guignol-type thrills and overall camp value (Price hamming it up in a variety of disguises as an inventor of illusions impersonating 'missing' star conjurers who had taken advantage of his genius) to stand on its own two feet. Incidentally, director Brahm's involvement here proves no mere coincidence – since the narrative incorporates elements from two horror titles (both starring Laird Cregar) he had previously helmed i.e. THE LODGER (1944) and HANGOVER SQUARE (1945). The young leads are played by Mary Murphy (as Price's ingénue assistant) and Patrick O'Neal (as her police detective boyfriend – curiously enough, he would himself take the lead in a similar piece, CHAMBER OF HORRORS [1966], which I have acquired just in time to serve as an encore to this one). An interesting sideline here is the latter's adoption of a novel detection technique, fingerprinting, which is crucial in bringing about Price's downfall (in a predictable but rather awkward fiery climax)…though the persistent snooping of his amateur crime novelist landlady has at least as much to do with it in the long run! Watching the star in a made-to-measure role, the film emerges a good deal of fun – particularly at a compact 73 minutes.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d64d19d8fd744369834ace0cbc7c6494",
            "input": "A beautiful piece of children's cinema buried in a world of archaic Celticism. Setting the story around the famous Book of Kels, believed to have been comprised by monks from the small island of Iona, off the western coast of Scotland.Telling the tale of a young abbots apprentice who goes off into the forest in search of Crom-Cruic, the fierce headless horseman of pagan mythology. In hopes of recovering a lost artefact.The films true beauty lies in its' animation. Cell shaded in a bright and inspirational style of deep complexity resulting in a look of seem less simplicity. Deriving much from the artistic style of the brilliant Cartoon Network series 'Samurai Jack' for its genius use of mark making and background depth, The Secret of Kels creates a consistently affective Celtic world living under the shadow of Viking invasion.The history may be intensely inaccurate and the ways of life portrayed lacking realism but these facts are utterly irrelevant as the film sets itself in a world of fantasy and Celtic-revivalist mysticism. The girl of the forest is a wonderful addition and in my opinion makes the picture what it is, as she glides from branch to branch. Appearing and disappearing like a mysterious nymph with qualities resembling the legendary Cheshire Cat from Alice and Wonderland.The Secret of Kels is an absolute treat. For all genders, all ages, it's a lovely piece of family cinema.Don't expect to be awed but instead pleasantly impressed!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6f58e48ba8234e80b270399b9580ac6a",
            "input": "Bad actors, terrible script, totally unbelievable ending - this film had it all. After seeing films like this, you wonder why the makers bothered at all. This film has absolutely nothing to say, all the methods used to create a scare have been used over and over again in previous horror films. A total waste of time.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e957f468dce848b8a582bcc528e7ab17",
            "input": "This is easily the worst Ridley Scott film. Ridley Scott is a wonderful director. But this film is a black mark on his career. Demi Moore and Viggo Mortensen, both totally miscast in an overaggressive film about a girl going to the army. Very stupid. And there is never one scene that is convincing in any way. It is really not difficult to make a film such as this. Everything the crew makes could have been an idea of just anybody. The writers didn't have much inspiration either; many foolish dialogs that made no sense at all; and some brainless action. I strongly recommend to stay away from this rubbish. I hope that the many talented persons involved in this project realize this type of film does not deserve their attention, and that in the future they will work on more honorable and more intelligent movies than this useless mess.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-1543603baf914a7cb0eb269f4c540e0b",
            "input": "I wish Spike Lee had chosen a different title for his film. \"Summer Of Sam\" conveys the impression that the film is about the infamous serial killer, David Berkowitz. It's not. It's a gritty, earthy portrait of NYC street life during the hot summer of '77 when Berkowitz terrorized that city.The film follows several young fictional characters in an Italian-American neighborhood, and their reactions to the Son of Sam threat. There's Vinny and his wife Dionna; there's Richie and Ruby, and several other characters.The problem is that these characters are not likable. They are routinely annoying, and at times unbearable. Lee then belabors their high energy, chaotic lives, which are filled with anger, lust, and general turmoil. There are at least two protracted fight scenes between Vinny and his wife, redundant disco dance scenes, countless gabfests ... Over and over I kept wondering: where's the film editor?Meanwhile, with all that bulk, the film passes up the chance to convey any real sense of fear or dread arising from the Son of Sam menace, which is too much in the background. Lee is more successful at showing a different kind of menace, that arising from neighborhood vigilante groups.The acting is uniformly good. That, combined with 70's disco music, and lavish attention to costumes and production design, make you really feel like you are in an Italian-American neighborhood in NYC in 1977.The film's atmospheric authenticity, however, is not nearly enough to offset a rambling, overblown script about the lives of grossly irritating people.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8887dc342acb4124bcc2f66b6767c536",
            "input": "As someone who has both read the novel and seen the film, I have a different take on why the film was such a flop. First, any comparisons between novel and film are purely superficial. They are two different animals.The novel is probably intended as a satire, but it arrives as a cross between tragedy and polemic instead. Any comedic elements such as those which later formed the stylistic basis of the film version are merely incidental to the author's uniformly cynical thrust. And lest the omnipresent white suit of the author fool you into thinking this is another Mark Twain, think again. A more apt literary precedent would be the spectre of Ambrose Bierce in a top hat and tails. Tom Wolfe is equal parts clown and hack, more celebrity than author, always looking for new grist for his self-absorbed mill. It is therefore no wonder that the excellent production skills and direction lavished on the making of the film were doomed from the start. Unlike true satire, which translates very well into film, polemics are grounded not in universally accessible observations on some form or other of human behavior, but in a single-minded attack on specific people -- whether real or fictional straw men -- who have somehow earned the wrath of the writer. Any effort to create a successful filmed story or narrative from such a beginning must have a clean start, free of the writer's influence or interference.Having said that, I too find fault with the casting. It is not merely that incompetents like Bruce Willis and Melanie Griffith fail to measure up, but that real talents like Tom Hanks, F. Murray Abraham, and Morgan Freeman are either totally wasted or given roles that are mere caricatures.There is enough topical material here for a truly great film satire, but it fails to come even close.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-927723daf2984283bd13007ee0618392",
            "input": "This film should have never been made. Honestly, I must admit that before I saw it I had some serious doubts. The director is not a great actress, though she did a lot of movies in Holland, and the young woman who took the main part is a TV-personality with a constant smile on the face and not much self-criticism. The actor who played the other main part I recently saw in Bride Flight and although that film is better, he did not convince me than. To start with the the story, I have not read the novel it is based upon, but the script that underlays the film is something that might have been done with in mind kids having a birthday party on a rainy Sunday afternoon, not someone of the same age as the director who likes to watch a good movie. Something really disturbing were the overdubbed dialogues, it was most of the time spoken out loud. My regards go to the cameraman, at least he tried to make something out of it. It is a pity that the film is edited lousy, if not, some scenes were certainly more credible.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3ae3a66460b1427dad7b2d2c0d385a43",
            "input": "In Don Siegel's 1971 masterpiece \"Dirty Harry\", Clint Eastwood epitomized the super-tough, super-cool unorthodox, no-nonsense cinema-cop with his role of the eponymous Inspector 'Dirty' Harry Callahan. Two sequels followed, the first of which, \"Magnum Force\", tamed down on the delightfully politically incorrect attitude of the first one that had outraged many critics but enthused audiences. The second sequel, \"The Enforcer\" was grittier again, and was promoted as \"the dirtiest Harry of them all\". This title, however, truly belongs to the fourth film in the series, Clint Eastwood's own \"Sudden Impact\", which is doubtlessly the grittiest, nastiest, most violent and downright dirtiest of all Harry films, and, in my humble opinion, the second-best after the masterpiece original.***Warning! SPOILERS ahead!*** In a small town near San Francisco, a mysterious sexy lady (Sondra Locke) lures men into being alone with her. What these men don't know is that mysterious beauty is their former rape victim, longing for bloody revenge. As fate wants it, San Francisco's toughest cop, Inspector Dirty Harry Callahan, who has been suspended once again for angering his superiors, spends his leisure time in this exact little town... \"Sudden Impact\" is the dirtiest Callahan film in several aspects. The film is extremely gritty and graphically violent. Harry Callahan himself is dirtier than ever. Not afraid to make use of his 44. Magnum in order to stop trouble, Harry treats 'punks' as they are to be treated and even allows a person to get away with several murders because the revenge-murders are justified in his opinion. Clint Eastwood is, as always, brilliant in the role of Harry Callahan. Eastwood epitomized coolness and bad-assery as the \"Man With No Name\" in Sergio Leone's Dollar Trilogy, and he did so again in the Dirty Harry films. \"Sudden Impact\" gives us the dirtiest Harry we have ever seen. Eastwood's real-life girlfriend Sondra Locke fits very well in the role of the vengeful beauty. The great Pat Hingle, who had already worked with Eastwood in Ted Post's tough-minded Western \"Hang 'Em High\" in 1986 plays the police chief of the small town. The film furthermore includes a wide range of truly despicable scumbag characters, including a pathetic criminal played by Kevin Major Howard (best known for his role in Stanley Kubrick's \"Full Metal Jacket\") and a woman named Ray Perkins (Audrie J. Neenan), doubtlessly one of the most disgusting and despicable female characters ever in cinema. Albert Popwell, who played the bank robber in the famous \"Do You Feel Lucky?\" scene in \"Dirty Harry\" and the black militant leader in \"The Enforcer\" is also part of this one again, this time as Harry's colleague and buddy. Overall \"Sudden Impact\" is the grittiest, dirtiest and probably the most violent of all \"Dirty Harry\" films, (though \"The Dead Pool\" isn't exactly tame either), and my second-favorite after the brilliant 1971 original. An absolute must-see for Callahan fans, and highly recommended to all lovers of police thrillers and cinematic bad-assery. My rating: 8.5/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a256bc7d34b042cf94f559c1a5021e51",
            "input": "I own Ralph Bakshis forgotten masterpiece Fire & Ice on an old OOP rental videotape. Well for one thing, this is better than any other Conan-esque film you'll ever see. Sure, it's cheesy, but who cares? It stood the test of time, and the only way it started to look cheesy is in comparisons to modern fantasy epics like LOTR:FOTR (though I love that film.) The plot goes like this: After a battle between Fire & Ice, a kings daughter is kidnapped by Jarols (Ice) subhuman creatures, while a sole survivor of a victimized village rescues her. Yeah it doesn't sound as a original as Nurse Betty, but that's not the point. It is really to bring to life an interesting idea of a world of two enemies: Fire & Ice. And it succeeds. As for the action scenes: superb. They are well handled, have terrific suspence, and have plenty of loud noises. Just check out the climatic battle, now THAT'S an ending! The acting and dialogue: competent. Really. They aren't gonna be nominated for an Oscar, but they are OK and don't get on your nerves. The animation is quite good. Shot on 3D and rotoscoped (I THINK), it looks pretty good. A lot of the backgrounds look really detailed and well drawn, and although the character designs feel a little 1-dimentional, they are OK. Overall, this is a fine neglected little gem and will entertain you more than any of the superfical \"entertainment\". 10/10",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08ca1b0ac5074880b51d3943c8f53d7c",
            "input": "This would have worked a lot better if it had been made as \"Mitchell in Malta.\" At least then we would have been spared the sight of Joe Don Baker running around an otherwise scenic Mediterranean locale clad in that ridiculous looking cowboy outfit...not to mention acting like an Old West gunslinger. Mitchell being Mitchell, the film wouldn't have suffered from a lack of gratuitous police brutality either. Oh well. At least the comic comments of Mike and the Bots made this enjoyable fare as an episode of MST. I can't imagine watching it on it's own, however.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-4eb7d8c4e7534010adaf454b8773bcd6",
            "input": "It's hard to believe that this is a sequel to Henry Fool. Hard to believe that the same director and actors were involved in both movies. While Henry Fool is refreshing, witty, comical, Fay Grim is slow, boring, and doesn't go anywhere. Where has the wit gone? I am baffled.It is 10 years since I saw Henry Fool and many of its dialogs and scenes are still vivid in my memory. Fay Grim is painful to watch. This is no fault of the actors, who are good (Parker Posey) or great (Jeff Goldblum) -- the blame lies entirely with the plot, the dialog, and even some of the filming (low budget is no excuse). A huge disappointment. Sorry I couldn't pay attention to the plot, I was so bored, so disappointed... if you enjoyed this one you might not enjoy Henry Fool so much... the two movies have absolutely nothing to do with each other... there is no continuity in the characters' personalities... it's all a fraud to entice fans of Henry Fool to watch the sequel.I'm switching this off now -- Henry in some sort of jail with a Taliban?!?!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-f3f2b262edaf490a8ed50f6f6cad524e",
            "input": "If you look at Corey Large's information here on IMDb, apparently there's a movie called \"Reload\" in production (as of June '08) in which he's playing a character named Sebastian Cole.First of all, how does such a crappy movie ever earn a sequel ... and second, didn't Sebastian get killed at the end of \"Loaded\"?I watched this in the wee hours of the morning when I was battling insomnia, and so I was drifting in and out while it was on. I'm sure I missed some plot points, but overall, it seemed really weak. Large's performance was (for me) one of the stronger parts of the film. I'm also a bit surprised at all the people commenting on the beautiful girls, since I thought the actress playing Brooke was pretty, but not exceptional.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-21b6bd8249c84e6fbd7f8a206b6b80b5",
            "input": "If you enjoy Cleese & all the British 'Pythonesque' humour of the time, then this little gem is absolutely hilarious.Arthur Lowe is a real treat!I saw this with friends on TV when it first came out, and its classic quotes have formed a part of our jokes for 30 years, and will do forever! I have it on tape and it is continually appreciated.Perhaps some reviewers are taking it too seriously.I can't believe it is now only available in the US (NTSC of course), and not in UK, where it should be an essential part of the history of British humour!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dcff284f5c7948d4a78c9753cdb62c5d",
            "input": "When I decided to watch THE BARBARIANS, starring those twin bodybuilders, Peter and David Paul, I thought it couldn't be that bad because the film was directed by Ruggero Deodato, who has a reputation for creating sleazy movies but well made sleazy movies. Well, THE BARBARIANS is remarkably trashy action/adventure movie that wants to be another CONAN THE BARBARIAN, and fails at every level. The look of the film is all wrong. Some scenes were well shot but the tone and the schintzy, tacky \"disco\" look of the clothes and hair people are adorned with just doesn't make any sense whatsoever, even for a low budget flick like this one.Richard Lynch looks like an old woman with that ridiculous hairdo and costume. He's supposed to be menacing but he comes across as a buffoon. And it's funny to see Eva LaRue Callahan, one of the stars of ALL MY CHILDREN, appear in her first movie, walking around in skimpy fur bikini. I'm sure she wants this dreck to disappear from the face of the earth! The so-called Barbarian twins are okay as the muscle bound heroes but it's almost impossible to construct a proper critique of their acting because their roles are, like everything else in this mess, really ill-conceived. The only way the film tries to differentiate one twin from the other is by having one twin wear a loincloth that covers his ass, while the other twin's loincloth barely covers his muscular butt. I'm not kidding! Don't ask me who's who though.Deodato must have been really desperate to agree to make this film. And his desperation is reflected perfectly in this trashy flick. It's just bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b27d6e49f2874b8dbc10dd219a573e35",
            "input": "I'm a big fan of fan of film noir, and this film by Otto Preminger easily stands as one of the best that I've seen! Preminger has reunited two of his stars from the hit 'Laura' - Gene Tierney and Dana Andrews, for an entirely different sort of crime film. Laura was based around love, and this film is based around hate; as we watch police detective Mark Dixon, a copper already suffering scrutiny from his superiors for his heavy handed tactics, accidentally kill a suspect and try to pin the murder on a known criminal; a man by the name of Tommy Scalisi. The plot is brilliantly worked, and Preminger excellently balances several plot points; but it all comes back down to the main moral implication surrounding our main character. The fact that the film is set in the criminal underground means that the plot is given an excellent base to work from, and director Otto Preminger expertly captures the sleazier side of life by showing the main characters gambling, beating one another (and their women), shooting and more - and this also helps to offset the film from the earlier 'Laura', which was very much set in upper class society.The role of Mark Dixon gives Dana Andrews one of the most interesting parts of his career. Here, we have a character that is difficult to like as he's so cold - but the fact that we can understand his motives ensures that he's easy to sympathise with, and that allows the audience the ability to plug into his plight. The character development is well timed, and as we've follows this character and his motivations throughout the film; everything makes sense by the end. His co-star is the beautiful Gene Tierney, who isn't given as much to do in this film as she was in Laura; a film that made Tierney its linchpin. She does well with what she's got, however, and the lead duo's chemistry is excellent and Tierney helps to complete every scene she's in. I can't say that this is a better film than the earlier Laura; that's a hard act to follow, but this film certainly fits into the film noir formula better than Preminger's earlier film. The film also makes a good comparison piece for Laura; as just about everything in this film is opposite to the 1944 movie, yet it's all strangely familiar. Highly recommended to all!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-08ccef1d0e5f41bda5d676917c783089",
            "input": "\"A Bug's Life\" is like a favorite candy bar -- it's chock-full of great little bits that add up to something really tasty.The story couldn't have been better; it's clever, has \"heart\" (emotion), and every character has a nice \"arc\" (a growth or change). By comparison, the only characters in \"Toy Story\" to have an \"arc\" are Buzz, who learns to love being a toy, and Woody, who overcomes his resentment of Buzz. There are tons of laughs and cute moments in \"A Bug's Life\". All of the actors turn in great voice work, and the animation, both the motion and detail, is superb.This serious movie buff doesn't throw around \"10\"s lightly, but this movie certainly deserves the \"10\" I gave it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-34aaedd65dbc481ebd489e688e8e8d2c",
            "input": "Radiofreccia is a movie about all of us, about our dreams, our friends, our obsessions, our addictions, our fears. It is a brilliant movie where a group of friends like all of us have lives through the hardships of growing up in a small town in one of the most significant decades in the last century. The movie doesn't take a happy or sad approach on things, it just tells us a story, one that all of us could have experienced. One of happiness and excitement, sadness and grief. The power of this story is in that we grow to love the characters, it is one of those movies you will watch over and over again, feeling closer to the little town in Emilia Romagna where it takes place. Hoping one day to be able to finally walk its streets next to Freccia and his friends, listening to the music that changed the world through the crackling sound of an old radio playing Radio Raptus International, playing their dreams, our dreams. Radiofreccia will make you laugh, it will make you cry at times, it will shock you and comfort you, it will give you and take from you. Personally I believe it to have played an important part in my life, and that of my friends, and I suggest you all watch it and let it become part of yours.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-22b14773a62243efb7ff003271216461",
            "input": "\"Iowa\" wants to be \"Requiem for a Dream\" for Midwest meth, but it comes across as a hard R rated \"Reefer Madness\". Yes, drugs are bad, and meth is horribly pernicious, as an addiction and how it destroys people, families and communities. But these characters who are either dumb or ridiculous and the eye-rolling plot won't teach that lesson to anyone. While writer/director/star Matt Farnsworth has some charisma on screen, his partner Diane Foster plays a wincibly silly wide-eyed innocent corrupted by drugsas was already satirized by Susan Sarandon in \"The Rocky Horror Picture Show\". I really felt sorry for her for all the totally unnecessary nudity she was put through. It wasn't until the end of the film that I realized I was supposed to think these two were recent high-school graduates to explain some of their naiveté, as we are bombarded by their school photos, but if so, they even looked older than the folks on \"The O.C.\". While they have good chemistry on screen, they are a pale imitation of a \"Badlands\"-type couple. The guest stars are badly used. Michael T. Weiss, who was so good in TV's \"The Pretender\", is completely ludicrous as a corrupt parole officer and his brutal violence is just plain crazy, as his character pretty much ruins any social significance for the film. Rosanna Arquette has to be even sleazier than she rolled around for David Cronenberg as a very low rent Livia Soprano. John Savage even has to mouth the old baby boomer excuses about I did pot but this is worse. A Goth chick shows up, with the odd explanation that she's a stripper from Des Moines. The obligatory Latino drug dealer appears - in Iowa? With a limited budget, the interior view of meth use is portrayed quite vividly, with quite scary hallucinations. We certainly see them go crazy. While the Iowa locations are used very well (including an amusing scene of a propane gas robbery), the accents and church references are confusingly Southern Baptist. Guns seem to be used by law abiding and law breaking citizens here more than in any inner-city drug-dealing movie.The songs of Iowa's best known bard Greg Brown are used throughout, but oddly are not listed in the credits. I hope they were used with permission.I caught this at its commercial run in NYC because I missed it at the Tribeca Film Festival where it got considerable-- and inexplicable-- buzz.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-a17af3ebcc464ff6923f0f76b727e4e2",
            "input": "Sure it was well shot and made, very well shot and made! But the story was just so weak. And the portrayal of Lincoln was even weaker. Not that Henry Fonda wasn't good but the character he played was nothing but a loon. Do you mean to tell me that Lincoln was a wise cracking smart ass with no respect of the law or the court. I mean who the hell was he supposed to be? Cousin Vinnie? I mean come on, \"I'll just call you Jackass then\"???? I understand that Ford was going for great funny hero guy but I didn't really like this guy at all. He cheats in sports, talks like a real sweet simpleton and does not seem to know were to sit in a courtroom. How am I supposed to take this seriously.The twist was even weaker. I mean come on! That was just stupid. The whole story seemed like it was thought up by some 5 year old in his or her dreams. Saying that I liked it enough, it was very entertaining and made me laugh at several occasions so I can't say it's a bad film. In fact I must say that I must say it's good enough, nothing that entertains me and makes me laugh can be bad BUT this vivid and silly story was just so ridiculous that I can't understand how anyone could consider it great.I have no idea how historically accurate this film was but if any of it was true I would really have to shake my head.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aae20c1c5ff0429fae53a2c390d64dff",
            "input": "I get the feeling that the producers of this mess were out to make the most painful, ridiculous Western ever made. \"PAINFUL\" is the best word I can think of to describe it.On the plus side you have nice color photography and beautiful and well-spoken Rhonda Fleming. My sympathy goes to Jacques Aubuchon (who played the cripple), who acted well enough in an annoying role, written so atrociously that no actor could give an enjoyable performance. The production values were quite good, which only served to highlight the terrible story and screenplay.Things I hated: Stewart Granger looked so little like a western figure, what with his British accent, neat tailored outfit, and silly immaculate always-white kerchief tied around his neck. It got tiresome the way the townspeople and his son were constantly haranguing and insulting Granger, and he never spoke up or replied back. I know we are supposed to suspend disbelief and appreciate Westerns as symbolic morality plays, but this one broke the spell with it laughably unrealistic and predictable scenes, the worst being at the end where Granger miraculously, speedily and single-handedly plants dynamite around a canyon pass that the bad guy's cattle will pass through, and then Granger plants himself in the perfect spot so he can shoot the dynamite from a very far distance to create rock slides to bury and spook the cattle and bad guys, seemingly destroying them all, save the two main bad guys. Next worst is everything about the plot, which is loaded with soap opera scenes. Nothing in the movie seemed believable: I couldn't believe what all the conflict was about. The bad guy was driving his herd through to market and wanted the cows to chew some grass along the way; I don't see why something couldn't have been worked out. You need a land ownership dispute for that? Don't bother to see it.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-cb48d5de03ca4617b9800464e0b68665",
            "input": "I believe this is the most powerful film HBO Pictures has made to date. This film should have been released in theaters for the public to view on the big screen. It is available on video so make sure you look for it and check it out. Chris Gerolmo did a great job with the direction and the screenplay. The performances from Stephen Rea, Donald Sutherland and Jeffery DeMunn are flawless. A masterpiece of the genre.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-99518f27e9774235b5e862103fbe1fb7",
            "input": "This film is an attempt to present Jared Diamonds theory of \"Guns, Germs and Steel\", explaining how Europeans have dominated much of the globe.The version I saw of this documentary came on 2 discs covering 3 hours. I think the information could have been presented in 20 minutes. There are completely useless scenes of: Professor Jared Diamond watching birds through binoculars, Professor Jared Diamond failing to use a bow and arrow properly, Professor Jared Diamond firing a muzzle-loader badly. Was this documentary supposed to make a hero out of \"Professor Jared diamond?\". This part of the documentary was so bad, it could have been a spoof. The worst was when Diamond is shown breaking down and weeping when touring the malaria ward in an African hospital. None of this helps me understand his theory of \"Guns, Germs and Steel.\" BTW, \"Guns, Germs and Steel\" is said about 100 times. \"Can the Europeans guns, germs and steel get them out of this dire situation? Stay tuned and find out!\" When he finally gets down to business, his theory is equal parts interesting and utterly boring. Europeans conquered the natives peoples of other lands, because they had guns and fine blades against stone and wooden weapons. Do I really need a professor to convince me of this? The parts of his theory that explain how the Europeans came to have the advantages that allow the conquest are interesting, but the coverage is paper-thin.In the end, I think the documentary was only trying to convince me that non-Europeans are as capable as Europeans. If I'm not a racist, I already know this. If I'm a racist, Jared Diamond is not going to convince me with his bumbling use of native implements.I don't think adults are the intended audience for this documentary. Kids may enjoy this more than I, though. I have read that the book from which this documentary is much better than the documentary.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc09c11a1b5c4be4ae3428c18a0baf46",
            "input": "The legendary Boris Karloff ended his illustrious career by making four cheapie fright flick clunkers in Mexico. This is the token moody period Gothic horror entry from the bunch. Karloff gives a typically spry and dignified performance as Matthias Morteval, an elderly eccentric patriarch who invites several of his petty, greedy and backbiting no-count relatives to his creepy rundown castle for the reading of a will. Pretty soon the hateful guests are getting bumped off by lethal life-sized toy people who populate the place. Onetime Mexican sex symbol Andres Garcia of \"Tintorera\" infamy portrays the dashing police officer hero and Julissa looks absolutely ravishing as the sole likable female character. The clunky, plodding (non)direction, trite by-the-numbers script, ugly, washed-out cinematography, ridiculous murder set pieces (a gross fat slob gets blasted right in the face by a miniature cannon!), overwrought string score, morbid gloom-doom atmosphere, largely lousy acting (Karloff notably excepted), cheesy mild gore, poor dubbing and rousing fiery conclusion all lend this enjoyably awful lemon a certain endearingly cruddy and hence oddly amusing ratty charm. A real campy hoot.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-061d60bd3f8c4563a2427cd3c7e799d0",
            "input": "David Chase's \"The Sopranos\" is perhaps the most over-praised television show in recent memory. Not only is the series devoid of intellect and passion, it's devoid of a soul. As anyone reading likely knows already, James Gandolfini *IS* Tony Soprano, a big, fat a**hole of a mob boss with a spoiled b*tch of a wife, and two bratty, sh*t-brained kids living in - you guessed it - the armpit of America (that's New Jersey, by the way). Not only is Tony a womanizing adulterer, he's also an unrepentant murdering scumbag, with a crew of \"Saturday Night Live\" skit-worthy caricatures for subordinates. It's not the fact that Tony is a piece of sh*t mobster that offends me (and apparently only me). Allowing characters to be who and what they are, without judgment, is something American TV hardly allows. But Chase - and his entourage of money-gorged, Emmy-gored writers - have not simply allowed us to observe Tony and his crew as they behave, nor have they even attempted to provide any insight into the action / reaction reality of (even obviously fictionalized) organized crime (a la \"The Godfather\"). Instead, Chase glorifies and endorses his characters' greedy, violent, and corrupt lifestyle in the same way that Tony, his wife, and even his hair-brained psychologist do week after week (or should I say month after month. Or is it year after year? It seems like the show's paltry 13-episode seasons come out with the same regularity as a lunar eclipse). Much has been made of the series' refusal to adhere to \"network\" structure, with plot lines that go nowhere, and characters that pop-up and disappear like backyard vermin. But if the show is so brilliant in its lack of structure, why does it always feel like I'm watching a soap-opera? Tired mob clichés, bored housewives, self-serving, irredeemable characters AND plots that go nowhere. More than ever, I can see why so many Americans of Italian heritage are p*ssed at this show. It's enough to make you want to curl up with a good book (Danté's \"Inferno\" springs to mind).People on IMDb love to claim that there's nothing good on television, and therefore \"The Sopranos\" is a breath of fresh air. Are these same people too busy paying their cable bills to watch \"The Shield\"? (It's included in Basic, ya know). How about the (still good) \"The West Wing\"? Or the brilliantly acted (if erratically written) \"Boston Legal\"? What about possibly the best comedy of the last few decades, \"Arrested Development\"? And lest we forget that we live in an age of DVDs - nobody *has* to watch *anything* new. I'd much rather shell out $40 for an over-priced boxed set of, well, pretty much *anything*, than give HBO $10 a month (or $80 a DVD set!) to continue to prove how much of a hack-factory it can be.You want good television? Watch \"Homicide: Life on the Street.\" Or \"Murder One\". Or \"Picket Fences\". Or even Chase's prior show, \"Northern Exposure.\" If you're already among \"The Sopranos\"'s legion of brain-washed fans and critics, it's too late for you. But if not, leave Tony and his worthless kin where they all belong - rotting with the fishes. (\"Sleeping\" would be way too kind)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3886fa293dc0456d926b6d43ff1ebd4f",
            "input": "Once upon a time in the mid 1990s I used to write for DOCTOR WHO fanzines and the whole of fandom was holding its breathe about the new American produced DOCTOR WHO TVM . As soon as it was announced that the Doctor`s arch enemy the Master was going to be played by Eric Roberts everyone scratched their heads and exclaimed \" Who is Eric Roberts ? \" . I should point out this was before the IMDB came online when all you had to do was type in a name into this website to their resume , but one helpful soul wrote into a publication I wrote for to explain that Eric Roberts was best known for a role where he starred opposite F Murray Abraham , the film was called BY THE SWORD and was about a fencing school . Actually looking back now Roberts is best known for THE POPE OF GREENWICH VILLAGE and RUNAWAY TRAIN but that didn`t stop the person putting the boot into both Roberts and BY THE SWORD and his mind was made up that this American Master with his southern drawl was going to a debacle . Strangely most fans were furious about Roberts playing the Master but after they saw the DOCTOR WHO TVM a great many fans ( Myself among them ) thought Roberts performance was the best thing about the disappointing American production Yeah I`m digressing but BY THE SWORD was a film that I wanted to see simply because it was the first time I`d heard the name of Eric Roberts but I didn`t get the chance to see it untill this weekend and I was fairly disappointed with it . I know nothing about fencing ( Everyone else on this page seems duty bound to mention if they fence or not . I don`t fence ) so I don`t know how accurate it all is , but as mentioned the film feels somewhat anachronistic even if you saw it on its release in 1991 , the hairstyles seem a few years out of date along with its mixed teenage cast doing a little dance routine that makes you wonder if it wouldn`t have worked a lot better if it`d had been produced by Jerry Bruckheimer in the mid 1980s . You could argue this would have meant the relationship between Max Suba and Alexander Villard being off centre for most of the film but I wasn`t convinced about their love/hate relationship and Abraham and Roberts have given much better performances before and since BY THE SWORD",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-70438dd807184317bb14fce998e254a2",
            "input": "It is not obvious from viewing this film (so I recommend viewers research the people who present their case in it) but this presentation on the realities of Islam, and its encouragement of violence and intolerance against all non-Muslims is lacking objectiveness, and also completely fails to factor in the human condition. It is one thing to document that the Koran says many things about how a devout Muslim is required to interact with non-Muslims, but any realist is able to realize that not every human who feels himself or herself to be a follower of Islam, will agree with and comply with all tenets of that faith and system. There is reason to call much about the presenters into question, such that viewers need to see the presentation with a healthy skepticism; don't swallow it all, hook, line, and sinker, without some thinking of your own.One specific, for instance, is researching the person Walid Shoebat; who claims to be a former Muslim who perpetrated an act of terrorism in Bethlehem. There are many wise people in the world who believe neither of these assertions. I am not nor have I ever been a Muslim. I have never read the Koran. I am not a Christian, nor a member of _any_ faith. But I am an intelligent and discerning human. While the film is quite disturbing, in its presentation of how SOME Muslims view their obligation to Islam; I remind you that there is more to Islam than the views of the fundamentalists. Just as their are fundamentalists and evangelical Christians, so, too, there are variations in the intensity of belief and obligation among Jews and Muslims.When you watch this film, you need to have the salt shaker on hand. One grain will not be enough, you'll need more. Please use your own mind and think for yourself, research what is presented, and evaluate the state of the world and how Islam fits within it based on more than what is said in 98 minutes of video. There is a common thread of political affiliation among those who put this film together, indicating a definite bias. Be your own brain.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-047e62654ffe4cf1924120d7f8a51046",
            "input": "Now I've always been a fan of Full Moon's puppet work. But I have to say that Robot Jox is one of there better projects. Yes, you heard me. The story works wonderful, the atmosphere really works and the actors do a first rate job. Gary Graham who really makes his mark on TV in shows like ALIEN NATION THE SERIES and STAR TREK ENTERPRISE shows that he can be an action star who kicks ass and takes name. The stop motion effects could have been a tiny bit better. The color was wrong, they look plastic to me instead of the metal they were suppose to be. But that is a minor complaint compared to the whole that is the Robot Jox, if you like Gary Graham or other Full Moon movies, then you will like this movie. 9 STARS OUT OF 10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-48e14f2a9a454df79bf469ceeab23563",
            "input": "Sarah Silverman is really the \"flavor of the month\" comic right now. Is she really worth all the hype? Yes and no. She is funny at times, sometimes hilariously so (her standup routine is actually quite interesting, though not always funny). Other times, you're feeling cheated by the media for overhyping yet another performer. She is one of those really cute comedians that men especially flock to, saying that they dig her intelligence and wit. But if you corner them, most men will admit that they just want to sleep with her, and that's why they watch her. She reminds me of why many men flocked to Margaret Cho and Janeane Garofalo, even though neither of them are really \"hot\" now in terms of popularity. Sarah doesn't drink or smoke (at least cigs), so she should be hot when she's 60, so her fans (especially the male ones) can rejoice.As for this show, it's very much like her comedy. When it works, it's hilarious. When it doesn't, it's full blown tedium and very, very boring. The AIDS episode here is the best one. It's consistently funny, and has some really good satire in it. Brian Poeshn's character has an unhealthy obsession with Tab in one episode, and it's hilarious seeing him in a Tab T-shirt. But they never really go anywhere with it, and it eventually wears out its welcome. Sarah's character in the series is rather annoying, the gay couple (Brian Poeshn and some other guy) seems tacked on and never really does anything for the show as a whole, and the supporting players (including Sarah's real life sister, Laura, who doesn't look a thing like her) are OK. When the jokes hit, they're brilliant. When they don't, they're awful, and I mean really awful. There's also an obsession with coprophilia here (aka poop jokes), which seems to have replaced actual wit and intelligence in comedy today. So should you watch this show? If you have a crush on Sarah, go for it. You can gaze at her and pretend she's yours. As for her show, it's ranges from good to absolute zero.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-69c921ad09a64d25ba924ddf2ac37b8b",
            "input": "This film is exactly what you get when you really over stretch your abilities, it's like someone who has just passed there driving test and then pitting them in a formula 1 Grand Prix (not I might add, the US Grand Prix as everyone might pull out due to dodgy tyres and you might just win), that is how far short this film falls. Now don't take this the wrong way, I love B-Movies, around half my collection is made of B-Movies but I don't think there are enough letters in the alphabet to describe how bad this film is.First of the story (for a B-Movie) isn't that bad, it has potential there to make a B-Movie brand, were not talking Friday 13th potential, but potential none the less. But what really lets this film down is the acting, at not one second do I believe anything, it's like watching QVC except the presenters on QVC tend to have a heavier tan.In summary I'd like to say I've seen worse films, but I can't.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b4b22b0138ba44649579f40237a70d14",
            "input": "I have grown up with Scooby doo all my life, My dad grew up with scooby doo. We have just watched the first episode of the travesty that calls itself Shaggy and Scooby get a clue. What planet are Warner Bros on allowing this shambles to air. The characters could have been drawn better by my younger sister. The story could have been better written by my 3 year old twin cousins (who are Scooby Doo fans too). Scooby and Shaggy just aren't!!!!! if anyone but Casey Kasem does the voice of Shaggy it just isn't gonna work folks!!!! trust me.This program was disgraceful. What's New Scooby Doo is much better. Why change a winning format. Bin this piece of garbage and go back to the true Scooby",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-73097536f6644c649d6793e7d57be828",
            "input": "An interesting idea for a film, both showing the last dragon on earth and showing the struggle he and someone evil have together. When he was younger, Einon got stabbed in the heart, so Bowen (Dennis Quaid) took him to the dark lord who gave him half his heart. Now grown up Einon (David Thewlis) is now the selfish and evil king. Meanwhile, Bowen is using a new friend Draco the Dragon (voiced by Sir Sean Connery) to get rewards for \"killing\" dragons. But because Einon has half of Draco's hear, they both feel the pain in one of them is hurt, or killed. Also starring Pete Postlethwaite as Gilbert of Glockenspur, Jason Isaacs as Lord Felton, Julie Christie as Queen Aislinn and John Gielgud as King Arthur. It was nominated for the Oscar for Best Visual Effects. Worth watching!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e838e029865943c99510301a51892d82",
            "input": "The Scots excel at storytelling. The traditional sort. Many years after the event, I can still see in my mind's eye an elderly lady, my friend's mother, retelling the Battle of Culloden. She makes the characters come alive. Her passion is that of an eye-witness. One to the events on the sodden heath a mile or so from where she lives.Of course, it happened many years before she was born, but you wouldn't guess from the way she tells it. The same story is told in bars the length and breadth of Scotland. As I discussed it with a friend one night in Mallaig, a local cut in to give his version. The discussion continued to closing time.Stories passed down like this become part of our being. Who doesn't remember the stories our parents told us when we were children? They become our invisible world. And, as we grow older, they maybe still serve as inspiration or as an emotional reservoir. Fact and fiction blend with aspiration, role models. Warning stories. Archetypes. Magic and mystery.\"My name is Aonghas, like my grandfather and his grandfather before him.\" Our protagonist introduces himself to us. And also introduces the story that stretches back through generations. It produces stories within stories. Stories that evoke the impenetrable wonder of Scotland, its rugged mountains shrouded in mists. The stuff of legend. Yet Seach'd is rooted in reality. This is what gives it its special charm. It has a rough beauty and authenticity, tempered with some of the finest Gaelic singing you will ever hear.Aonghas (Angus) visits his grandfather in hospital shortly before his death. He burns with frustration. Part of him yearns to be in the twenty-first century, to hang out in Glasgow. But he is raised on the Western shores among a Gaelic-speaking community.Yet there is a deeper conflict within him. He yearns to know the truth. The truth behind his grandfather's ancient stories. Where does fiction end? And he wants to know the truth behind the death of his parents.He is pulled to make a last fateful journey, to the summit of one of Scotland's most inaccessible mountains. Can the truth be told? Or is it all in stories?In this story about stories, we revisit bloody battles, poisoned lovers, the folklore of old and the sometimes more treacherous folklore of accepted truth. In doing so, we each connect with Angus, as he lives the story of his own life.Seachd: The Inaccessible Pinnacle is probably the most honest, unpretentious and genuinely beautiful film of Scotland ever made. Like Angus, I got slightly annoyed with the pretext of hanging stories on more stories. But, also like Angus, I forgave this once I saw the 'bigger picture.' Forget the box-office pastiche of Braveheart and its like. You might even forego the justly famous dramatisation of The Wicker Man. To see a film that is true to Scotland, this one is probably unique. If you maybe meditate on it deeply enough, you might even re-evaluate the power of storytelling, and the age-old question of whether there are some truths that cannot be told but only experienced.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6fe510bcd90d4288b1f53bc4ca62f252",
            "input": "I don't know where to begin, so I'll begin with a snippet from the back of the cover of this movie. \"Alive combines the tension of Vincenzo Natali's Cube with Kitamura's own Versus.\" I have not seen Versus, so I can't comment on that, but I think Cube was an excellent movie which I recommend to everyone. However, in this case someone has clearly confused \"tension\" with \"boredom\".I'll just go ahead and spoil the entire plot, because besides being one holy Swiss cheese of a plot, it's also moldy cheese, and the movie is not worth spending any time on even if you don't know the plot beforehand, so it doesn't matter. If I have misunderstood the plot, don't hit me - it's probably because I had to struggle to keep my eyelids open.So the American military in Nevada once lost a UFO i the Nambi desert. This apparently makes sense because they're both deserts so surely they're practically the same place. Different continents or not. A monkey broke into the UFO and acquired an alien something which was passed on to a Japanese researcher who had to eat the monkey to survive in the desert. What ever. The alien thing is now passed on to anyone who's \"bloodthirsty\" enough to kill the current host. The Japanese military wants to use it for military stuff, so they decide to make it pass from the current host (the researcher's daughter) to some other dude. But instead of just picking someone out of the military, which is full of people who are bloodthirsty AND already on the military's side, they decide that it's probably a good idea to pick some criminal out of death row instead. Oh, and the reason they pick this particular criminal from death row is because he was the first person in history to not die from the non-lethal electric shock which is the standard execution method, because everyone dies from the placebo effect when they get electrocuted. I don't know if they do this so they can giggle in the staff room at how everyone dies even though it's not deadly, or if they just want to cut down the electricity bill.Then the movie turns into what The Matrix would have been if it had been really lame, and superfluous fighting bores us to tears for what feels like an hour. And oh wait, now they remember that they already had a dude who was infected with the alien thing, so the entire movie up to this point was actually a totally waste of time and also human lives. Then everyone dies. The end.The only one moment in the movie where I didn't want to go away and sleep or eat a sandwich instead, was when a dude was pinned to a wall by a pipe through his chest, and he's hanging around up there and another dude walks by. The dude hanging on the wall says \"I'm in pain, shoot me\". And the living dude looks at him, and it's not like he's a mean dude or anything, so he really looks sorrowful and doesn't want the guy on the wall to suffer. So he shoots him.(Rhetorical pause.)In the stomach. \"Gee THANKS A FREAKIN' HEAP.\"",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8a23aaf494684608a12656a263d2ec8e",
            "input": "What would happened when a depressed cop works with a shrink on probation? May be a lot of fun... This movie set a benchmark in the action/comedy genre of the Argentinean cinema. Dearable characters, probable story and a pace that between laughs has some thrill. I recommended it for a pleasant time of entertaining. Peretti and Luque join their efforts to fight against a cold and daringly foe in a time when it's difficult to trust someone. This movie will surprise you, the other side of the coin of \"Analyze me\", but not alike, with nothing to envy. And if you like to know Bs.AS there where few scenes of downtown and the city center.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-00987eaf6c15460dbc243e598bffb18b",
            "input": "Gorgeous bodies, gorgeous colors and camera work, pretentious dialog, banal plot. The name of the prima donna, Camilla, and the eponymous flowers that appear frequently, are enough to remind us of the plot similarities from Dumas' novel La Dame aux Camelias, the movie Camille starring Garbo and (I think) Robert Taylor, and last but not least Verdi's opera La Traviata. Beautiful, not-too-virtuous young ladies, social outcasts for one reason or another, loved, split up, reunited just in time to die of tuberculosis in the last scene... One forgives banal plots and stupid unrealistic dialog in opera, but why waste Hayak, Don Sutherland, a beautiful rendition of LA in the 30s, a deus ex machina earthquake that conveniently kills the other woman, and all that beauty on this mediocre turkey where there isn't even any beautiful singing?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-af3bccdba85f44b7a16177616fcefd41",
            "input": "Finally got to see this classic TV movie on an unofficial disc recorded from an old VHS, it is a classic piece of horror. Its a pity more of this neglected corner of horror in terms of official releases on DVD and VHS ... the TV horror movie. Recommended for all fans of the 70's TV movie much like trilogy of terror. Those interested should get the book on the subject by David Deal - Television Fright Films of the 70's. Email me for a chance to see it.....its fabulous to see it again.It does have it problems like many TV movies they have to be rather inventive in the effects dept and even at 70 mins it can seem to drag possibly we are all used to more modern editing but still great stuff and far better than many theatrical frights released today.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e88c95224ae745bfb3368f80c705ff08",
            "input": "In São Paulo, the upper middle class teenagers Cristiano, Chico and Gabriel have just joined the university and on the eve of the opening class, they go to a party with drugs and booze. On the next day, after their classes, the date of Cristiano in the previous night comes to his house and the three friends rape the girl. The girl dies, they panic and decide to get rid off the body, but Cristiano's mother arrives, startles with Gabriel and rolls the staircase, breaking her neck. The trio decides to dump and burn the corpses in a garbage landfill, but along the night other tragedies happen.The polemic and shameful \"Cama de Gato\" is an overrated pretentious crap about alienation of the youth, and is certainly the worst Brazilian movie that I have seen along many years. The shallow, tragic and dark story is actually a black humor comedy of bad taste. The screenplay is not funny, with stupid lines and dialogs, and boring, manipulative and silly footages with interviews with morons teenagers in the beginning and in the end. The acting is terrible, apparently with many improvisations, but no talent, and I was disappointed with presence of the promising Caio Blat in this trash. The camera, framing, cinematography and edition are amateurish and of very low quality. The sound is awful and in many parts it is impossible to understand what the actors and actresses are speaking (probably it is a plus, since this flick sucks). The gang bang is very realistic and used to promote this mediocre movie in a very poor marketing of sex-exploitation. My vote is one (awful).Title (Brazil): \"Cama de Gato\" (\"Bed of the Cat\")",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c2f3a09aca0043749ccc3f2a214742c8",
            "input": "There seems to be an overwhelming response to this movie yet no one with the insight to critique its methodology, which is extremely flawed. It simply continues to propogate journalistic style analysis, which is that it plays off of the audiences lack of knowledge and prejudice in order to evoke an emotional decry and outburst of negative diatribe.Journalism 101: tell the viewer some fact only in order to predispose them into drawing conclusions which are predictable. for instance, the idea of civil war, chaos, looting, etc were all supposedly unexpected responses to the collapse of governmental infrastructure following Hussein's demise: were these not all symptomatic of an already destitute culture? doctrinal infighting as symptomatic of these veins of Islam itself, rather than a failure in police force to restrain and secure? would they rather the US have declared marshall law? i'm sure the papers here would've exploded with accusations of a police state and fascist force.aside from the analytical idiocy of the film, it takes a few sideliners and leaves the rest out claiming \"so-and-so refused to be interviewed...\" yet the questions they would've asked are no doubt already answered by the hundred inquisitions those individuals have already received. would you, as vice president, deign to be interviewed by a first time writer/producer which was most certainly already amped to twist your words. they couldn't roll tape of Condi to actually show her opinion and answer some of the logistics of the questions, perhaps they never watched her hearing.this is far from a neutral glimpse of the situation on the ground there. this is another biased, asinine approach by journalists - which are, by and large, unthinking herds.anyone wanting to comment on war ought at least have based their ideas on things a little more reliable than NBC coverage and CNN commentary. these interpretations smack of the same vitriol which simply creates a further bipartisanism of those who want to think and those who want to be told by the media what to think.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d61475ad863c474e801ff8a87cce75ca",
            "input": "...but it's certainly not without merit. Already writer-director Preston Sturges is experimenting with unusual cinematic effects in telling his stories, creating broadly drawn yet distinctive characters and situations, and writing clever and sometimes unexpectedly wise and compassionate dialogue. (No wonder the Coen brothers' next movie is going to be an homage to Sturges.)The major problem is that the plot's not all the way there yet; it lacks surprise, the unexpected plot twists and sudden changes of fortune that keep viewers guessing. The coffee slogan is a lousy thing to hang the plot upon, and the ending is thoroughly predictable. Frank Capra does this sort of thing much better.If you're new to Preston Sturges, check out \"The Lady Eve\" or \"Sullivan's Travels\" or \"The Miracle of Morgan's Creek\" first. If you've seen these already, then go ahead and watch this one.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-35eacbd53ed84035a20f78f0f89d90e4",
            "input": "I remember seeing this film at the West End theater in Louisville, Kentucky when I was a boy. The scene where Dr. Carmus finds the gardener's coffin, and the breathing dead body therein, was the scariest part of the movie for me, only intensified by the darkness of the film. I also wondered about the people hanging from the trees at the end, until I recognized the part of the film in which the family name of the Blackwoods was changed from Blackblood, due to the fact that in the family history there was a character who was known for his many hangings of various people. Sir Thomas Blackwood seemed to get his kicks out of adding to the deaths caused by his family. I also noticed that as Foster first enters the gate of the cemetery, he is careful in noticing the sharp object of the gate, where he meets his end. I would not hesitate to recommend this film to horror movie lovers.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-149a02e1b86e45249126d99f968b8dc6",
            "input": "definitely needed a little work in season 2. Such as the Virus between Max and Logan, and Ames White along with his ancient, super cult. During season two, however, the only thing that kept me watching was to see if Max and Logan would ever get rid of the nasty virus infecting Max. Very good drama in season two. But of course like all TV shows, if there's something a little wrong with it, the broadcasting company takes it off the air. I was seriously hoping for a third and final season. Season 2 leaves you hanging, unless you read the books by Max Allan Collins, then you will know what happens.Dark Angel should be put back on the air for one more season even though it might cost a lot just to get all the original actors again. since Jessica Alba's carrier sky rocketed after the show. If that would be the case, then there should be a movie to complete it. just like the show Firefly, which of course FOX canceled as well.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b92f853e9bfc47cbbb1b00dfd994e04c",
            "input": "I've been watching this movie by hoping to find a pretty and interesting story yet the story line wasn't good at all. The play of the actors weren't any better.Of course Shahrukh Khan was there yet he wasn't enough to make this movie \"credible\" and interesting.I've read that this movie was based on the novel of Flaubert \"Madame Bovary\" yet for me I didn't see it matching with the Indian mentality.In general we buy movie to dream and have a good time, not to waste our time and change our mood into worse. I just can't understand how it could get such a \"high\" vote with an average of 6.8/10.So it's the kind of movie you should run away & ignore because there is nothing to appreciate in it! You will just waste your time unless if you like \"dark movie\" with \"strange and non sense story\".",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d37e096155bb4097accde035dc68a79a",
            "input": "Freebird is the perfect marriage of road trip comedy, gang caper, \"stoner\" film and feel-good British movie.It is the brilliant lead characters that set this movie apart from other films in this genre. Stars Phil Daniels, Gary Stretch and Geoff Bell have a great chemistry and make their characters hugely likable and realistic. The main story centres around their road trip from London to Wales, and the adventures and mishaps that occur along the way. This small film also has a great heart - it is not just for bike fans, as it bases around the character's relationships with each other including dreams and regrets, such as Gary Stretch's Fred longing for the family he left behind. The cinematography is also great - a love letter to the Welsh countryside as well as capturing the grittiness of London streets and typical pub life in the Welsh country towns.Stylish, slick, fantastic soundtrack, likable characters and funny storyline - I would recommend Freebird in a heartbeat!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bfcb8f39584a43c8a95e9cccac35225e",
            "input": "I like the cast pretty much however the story sort of unfolds rather slowly. Danny Glover does a good job making you wonder if he's the bad guy. Meanwhile, the other characters are just part of the story. Dennis Quaid didn't have as much room in the story as he could have had. I thought the first scene was a bit over the top grim compared to how the story unfolded. I'd watch it again though. I rated it a 5 (wish I could rate it a 5.5)",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5fe6f5f1dc1e43c29b61f4352b694b7c",
            "input": "Beautifully done. A lot of angst. Friendship may not endure all, but in the end it's all that matters, or so a group of friends learn. I have watched it over and over again. The music is also amazing. When Kei loses the one friend he has he gives up until he meets Sho, an orphan boy who is not repelled by his true nature. In the lawless streets of Mallepa they struggle for their own place among a melting pot of Asian races, and learn that sometimes being on top can cost you more than you are ever ready to pay. A surprise ending that grips as much as the whole movie does. I couldn't get enough of it. Gackt and Hyde do a wonderful job of acting, proving they are more than pretty boys who sing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-244dd9d8e4a643c58a4bd9e4a5a7519a",
            "input": "To summarize this movie: Without a real plot, this movie consists of 80 minutes of deranged characters either drinking or making bad jokes. The music is just awful, the humor isn't funny and all the female characters slutty idiots or total geeks. It seems to me, that the movie has actually been written by a 14 year old boy, who thinks that drinking is cool, women are designed to please men and all that oppose that view are geeks. Also, the movie has nothing to do with the original American Pie movies, other than a few names and Mr. Levenstein who is a minor character in this one. The only good thing about this movie are the nice looking girls. Don't watch this movie and don't be fooled by the 5.4 rating, because it obviously overrated and doesn't deserve anything above 2.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2e30a18d0b7a4f57b1f14a0211e36fcf",
            "input": "But I doubt many were running to see this movie. Or \"Some Came Running Out Of The Cinema\". Okay, that's a bit harsh.The film starts in an unintentionally comical way: Frankie-boy comes back to his hometown after many years (this already smells of clichés) and the whole town is shaken by his arrival: he is talked about, everyone wants to talk to him, and every woman he meets flirts with him like there's no tomorrow - even his niece hints that she would gladly have dropped her date to chat with Frankie-boy a little longer! Even his pretty niece wants a piece of him! Sounds like one of those laughable \"Mike Hammer\" episodes where EVERY single female wants Stacey Keach. And, like Stacey Keach, Frankie-boy is anything but a good-looking woman's wet dream. In real life, someone like Sinatra (without the fame) wouldn't get within 100 m of someone as beautiful as MacLaine. But in this Hollywood movie it's the other way around: MacLaine is absolutely nuts about Frankie-boy, but HE couldn't care less! Sinatra plays his \"cool\" shtick much too often in his movies, and it is rarely credible. Dean Martin is kind of miscast; he isn't miscast as a card-player, but rather because of the accent which simply doesn't suit him. MacLaine is charming as ever, but she plays a caricature - and this reliance on caricatures is one of the basic problems with the film. The main characters are all some sort of stereotypes out of bad or seen-it-all-before movies and cheap novels; Frankie is the \"cool cat\" who comes back to town to get all the women, and he couldn't care less about his writing (which, predictably, eventually garners recognition); Martin is a sleazy but friendly card-player; MacLaine is the dumb, but very likable bimbo; Frankie's blond love-interest is a snotty literary expert; Frankie's brother is the successful guy who married into his wife's business and has a lousy marriage; and so on. Clichés.The story contains a couple of coincidences which are a little too far-fetched for my taste: Frankie just happens to bump into his niece in a locale; his niece just happens to be meters away from her daddy when the latter kisses his secretary for the FIRST time; and then there is the awful, stupid ending.In it, a drunk guy bent on killing Frankie-boy somehow manages to find him in a carnival of all places! The place is utterly crowded, with the typical noise and chaos - plus it's happening in the evening - and yet the guy somehow finds Frankie (in spite of being drunk as a doorknob) and shoots at him. But guess who he kills? MacLaine. She jumps in front of the bullet to save Frankie: a cliché which comic-book writers might cringe at. This utterly pathetic, over-dramatic, and annoying ending certainly cannot please any, even semi-intelligent, viewer. And this happens on the same day that MacLaine and Sinatra got married! The writer of this nonsense seems to have read crappy dime novels his whole life - how else is the writing of this movie to be explained? There is even a card game in which a brawl ensues with Frankie & Martin vs. some cliché caricatures out of the writer's \"vivid\" imagination. (It was like a damn Western suddenly.) Another dumb thing is the way Sinatra was crazy about the boring snotty-nosed bimbo and pretty much ignored MacLaine. As the movie progresses we find out that Sinatra finds MacLaine to be too dumb for him, just as the blond bimbo finds Sinatra to be too low-class for her. There is a certain snobbism and disdain to be detected in the script regarding MacLaine. MacLaine is treated as worthless by everyone, while the blond bimbo is treated as a princess and an intellectual; the ironic truth is that the latter's character comes off as rather dumb and not at all as intellectual; her behaviour, comments, and opinions are mostly clichéd, silly, confused, pretentious, and primitive. At least MacLaine's character KNOWS that she (MacLaine) is dumb. There is another irony that I didn't fail to notice: Sinatra had trouble finding an ending for his latest story - much like the writer of this movie, and that's why he came up with the corny, crappy finale.The film basically has a solid cast, and the photography is nice, but the script, though sometimes okay, relies to heavily on silly nonsense instead of on reality-based characters and events.If you're interested in reading my \"biographies\" of Shirley MacLaine and other Hollywood intellectuals, contact me by e-mail.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39743fe14c344ae3af8dbf39085fd739",
            "input": "Amateur, no budget films can be surprisingly good ... this however is not one of them.Ah, another Brad Sykes atrocity. The acting is hideous, except for Emmy Smith who shows some promise. The camera \"direction\" needs serious reworking. And no more \"hold the camera and run\" gimmicks either; it just doesn't work. The special effects are unimaginative, there's a problem when the effect can be identified in real time. If you're going to rip off an ear, please don't let us see the actor's real ear beneath the blood. The scenery is bland and boring (same as Mr. Sykes other ventures), and the music is a cross between cheap motel porn and really bad guitar driven metal (see the scenery comment).Did I mention the lack of any real plot, or character development? Apparently, the scriptwriter didn't.Whoever is funding this guy ... please stop. I've seen some of his other \"home movies\" (which I will not plug) and they are just as bad. Normally, a \"director\" will grow and learn from his previous efforts ... not this guy. It's one thing to be an amateur filmmaker, but anyone can be a hack.Definitely not even a popcorn film ... of course, chewing on popcorn kernels would be less painful than this effort.Award: The worst ever military push-ups in a film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7ae559ce534144d3a3467b3d13d029b0",
            "input": "Dreyfuss plays a mob boss who lost his mind, but now he's \"fixed.\" Lane is his girl who's been messing around with his Number One (Goldblum), who's supposed to have something going with Lane's sister (Barkin).With what anyone could consider an all-star supporting cast (Burt Reynolds, Gabriel Byrne, Kyle MacLachlan and even an appearance by Richard Pryor) can't help this plot, as Dreyfuss proves he's not \"fixed\" and tries to kill just about everyone in sight.You know, it's not like you didn't know what was coming. The first ten minutes were nothing but guys trying to tell Goldblum what was in store for him when Dreyfuss gets out, but I'll save you all the trouble: skip this movie.The actual reason I picked this movie is because I've been on a Diane Lane kick lately and have been trying to see all her movies. The real let-down for me wasn't just the terrible plot, but also the fact that she doesn't show up until the last fifteen minutes of the movie (although we hear about her all through the movie). Even being a fan of over half of the cast can't help me enjoy this film. The parts where the suspense was supposed to mount found me laughing at what was actually going on.3 out of 10 stars.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-367e6191f1cc4f4c9cccdfa0d20f910c",
            "input": "That's right, you heard me. I am a huge fan of James Patterson. I own 10 of his books, and I have read the entire series about Lindsey Boxer. In my opinion, the screenwriter should be shot. What right did any film maker have to slaughter a terrific work of fiction and make it into a mockery of the mystery genre? If I ever thought that Harry Potter was butchered, then Michael O'Hara has proved me wrong. I can only pray that the next screenwriter who tackles this fabulous book will do it a great deal more justice. To Michael O'Hara and Russell Mulcahy: don't quit your day job.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-50b8753c789f477abb32a2358d0dd760",
            "input": "I have lost count of how many reviews I've written on Slaughter High. I've read a lot of bad ones and I will say right now this is a fantastic movie. Simon Scuddamore made his fame in a short time for his well known suicide, and even though this was his only film, he is what made the movie so great. At first I did not know anything about Simon until I read a review about his suicide. Then I found out due to the current webpage at www.IMDb.com he was born in 1957, in Dayton, Ohio. Simon may have played the most pathetic character known to man, but his real life self certainly had their strenghths and weaknesses. He did a good acting job, who can disagree? I always wondered how he felt showing himself naked in a movie. Must have been pretty embarrassing to say the least. I first saw this movie when I was 12 in the sixth grade. I agree with some pointers like the girl would not take a bath after somebody was murdered, and that high schools do NOT have bath tubs! I think Caroline Munro who was 36 at the time was the only other star that had any dignified acting talent, and unfortunately for Simon's death he made no future films. The reason(s) for his suicide are a mystery, and hopefully will be discovered in the near future. Doing the math on his webpage it tells you he was 29 years old when he made Slaughter High. He looked like a teenager. I give this film two thumbs up, the best horror film made. Probably because of their horrible acting the others didn't make fame in the movie business. -Jacob Young",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3859a4a0363e404c950b73082e6090ec",
            "input": "This is the story of a young woman seduced and then dumped by her older, married lover after she gets pregnant; she avenges herself against him, and his entire family, through black magic — which, disappointingly, she doesn't do herself but has someone else do for her. Good production values for a Thai horror flick. But the bland script never generates suspense, the director approaches the material entirely conventionally, and the final act loses viewer sympathy for the victims by throwing logic to the winds. At one point, a character has a prime opportunity to simply shoot the villainess dead, and instead she gets up and runs away without picking up the gun. Bad writing — you're soaking in it! Some icky gore effects, including a really tasteless late-term-fetus corpse and one guy dying from having hundreds of live eels burst out of his stomach. Only recommended for genre completists who simply have to see every horror film produced in Asia in the last 15 years.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-afa020af1dd4420aa665bd82a7d2669b",
            "input": "I saw this film with a special screening of the work of Owen Alik Shahadah. It is so interesting where did this guy come from. Now he is probably the key independent African filmmaker in the world. And I am not talking about black filmmakers I am talking about filmmakers who are rooted in culture. The idea if anything testifies to the diversity and range of African themes, with his film 500 Years Later it is a African issue. But the Idea doesn't fit that mold. Showing the artistic diversity. The film is an all African cast but the topic is a human topic which most of us could relate to. I just love the mild comedy in it. And the Kora of Tunde Jegede is just amazing, it is really a art-house gem.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3706c65a231b468dabd39d464528f11f",
            "input": "When converting a book to film, it is generally a good idea to keep at least some of the author's intended tone or conveyed concepts, rather than ignoring the author altogether. While it is clear that the director had access to and went on the advice of Elinore Stewart's children, it is key to note that the children believed their mother to be a complete liar in regards to the good, enriching, strengthening experiences of homesteading her land. The book details her life on her and her husband's adjoining homesteads in the vast Wyoming frontier; she chronicles daily adventures with her numerous friends and acquaintances, though they lived dozens of miles apart. The film, however, takes a standard stance for the time it was made, portraying this woman's experience as harsh, unforgiving, and nearly pointless. Perhaps the director was bringing some of his Vietnam War experiences with him to this movie (as some film aficionados have said), but it seems to be a lousy excuse for taking all the joy and beauty of the book and twisting it into a bleak, odious landscape devoid of friends or hope. Don't waste your time with this movie; read the book instead.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-da639060c24748158ccaf249986eac6a",
            "input": "Young Erendira and her tyrranical Grandmother provide for a great fantasy from the new world. This interpretation of Gabriel Garcia Marquez'\"La incréible y triste historia da la cándida Eréndira,...\" may not rub Marquez purists the right way eventhough The story stays intact and still carries the full force of the work. The strength of this film is in its acting especially Papas as the Grandmother. Marquez fans and Marquez novices alike will enjoy this movie for its real gritty brand of witt.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-71fdeac6ff694c98bf94830a14073c66",
            "input": "Body Slam (1987) is a flat out terrible movie. The low budget reeks, the direction is pedestrian (at best) and the writing and acting is lame. But if you're into old school wrestling (circa 1970's through the mid-80') then you'll be more entertained than the average viewer. I have to warn you, this movie stinks on ice. I gave it a two because I felt like being generous. This turkey was \"directed\" by stunt master Hal Needham. The stars are Roddy Piper, The Tonga Kid and a bunch of scrub wrestlers and c-list actors (Dirk Benedict).The synopsis of this \"movie\" is about a promoter who wants to combine \"hair rock\" and wrestling. But their are others that don't want him to succeed. There's more but I don't want to SPOIL it for you. If you can stomach the bad acting and inane storyline, there's a few surprises near the end for die-hard wrestling fans. I wouldn't recommend this to my worse enemy (and I mean it).",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2aeb036136ca4221b6fa72a98d32f83c",
            "input": "An interesting look at Japan prior to opening to the West. John Wayne as America's first consul to Japan arrives in accordance with agreements resulting from Perry's gunboat diplomacy. He is not welcome. Wayne eventually wins his meeting with the Shogun after bring a cholera epidemic, introduced by an American ship, under control. There follows a colorful procession to the capital bearing gifts for the Shogun, including a bottle of Old Tanglefoot. The meeting with the Shogun, the debates among the Japanese nobles and an assassination during an archery exhibit present an interesting look at the politics of the period. Altogether a rather enjoyable movie and besides how often do you get to see the Duke lose a fight to a guy half his size.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e5d4c247fd334494a7dbd87f0f4eed73",
            "input": "Women have never looked so attractive and pathetic as in Salazar's film Piedras. Although editor's cut here and there might help the film, it is exciting and enjoyable with an intense mark from Pedro Almodovar's latest films. 5 different women are coping with their male partners and families. Beginning with several different stories bound to meet as the plot goes on, Salazar portraits his women characters in the same neurotic and border-line behaviour familiar to Almodovar. A kleptomaniac high society lady with a fattish to smaller shoes, a burlesque house madam taking care of her disabled daughter, a drug addict dancer obsessed with her former boyfriend and a taxi-driver taking care of her late husband's disturbed kids, all roaming the streets of Madrid in well designed scenes. Using some of Almodovar's familiar actresses, the director succeeds in it's first film to give depth to all the characters sharing the film, and to create genuine sympathy with each of them. The women controls the plot line, and the men are bound to be left with each other, eventually... Surprisingly good for a first film, and worth the time in any standard. It is noticeable that Salazar hesitated in some needed guidelines to the actresses, but an impressible act is shown anyway on the screen, especially by Monica Cervera, which played in his former short film.A must to all Almodovar's fans, and enjoyable to all.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-79d74c3f94ce47a99b5536fb5a31b73b",
            "input": "This movie is to Halloween what the hilarious \"Christmas Story\" is to Christmas: both are relatively low-budget, no-big-name-stars type films...and both are two of the absolute greatest and funniest movies available, both seasonal CLASSICS!!! \"Spaced Invaders\" comes galloping out right from the start with warmth and humor and a superb cast of characters...all five goofy Martians, Klembecker the Realtor, Russell the deputy, Vern at the \"fuel dispensing depot\" and so many more! You just have to see this movie to believe it, and, like \"Christmas Story\", it just keeps getting better and better with each viewing, and you pick up on fun little things each time!! MOST DEFINITELY A TEN!!!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-39d7214f9c7f4597b85c6156e1ba499e",
            "input": "I watched this film so many times through my child hood that even to this day i can pretty much re-sight all of the dialogue. And when I watch it now it just makes me happy and surprisingly still laugh. I think it's amazing how they managed to train animals especially the cat to the extent that they are able to play the main role of a feature film. However watching it now I can also unfortunately notice that it isn't the masterpiece i once thought it was. But i prefer to remember how i felt about it when i was younger watching it on VHS on my fist TV that would cloud the image in yellow. And and bearing in mind it is a children's film, that is why i would still definitely give it 10/10.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ab0696380b7a445ea8c4347be609a9c5",
            "input": "I'm disappointed that Reiser (who wrote the film) felt the need to use so much profanity for no reason whatsoever. Maybe that's his idea of \"adult\" films, plenty of nasty words with bathroom humor thrown in? I thought better of him and think less of him for this movie.Falk's acting and some moments of humor as well as some possibly important themes are what made me give it such a high rating.This might be a good movie for adult children to watch and laugh over about their own folks and their foibles. But the lack of consideration for audience families seriously detriments what could have been a family film but fails. Certainly not worth spending money on, though it might be worth a watch for free on television.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e3c336e94ce1479cbad25f6a4a7cc84b",
            "input": "OK the plot is, wait you got me there is no true discernible plot here just a string of optically fogged sex scenes, strung together by scenes of photographers taking pictures of pretty ladies (Sometimes a combination of the two) Then a demon comes around kills the men, rapes and kills the women, and waxes poetic about the meaning of life. Moronic special effects, bad acting and bizarre philosophy aside, you get what you expect from a film with a title like this. I guess it would have to be someone's cup of tea, just not mine as I have yet to see a good Kazuo 'Gaira' Komizu directed film.DVD Extras: Subtitled Interview with Director Kazuo Komizu Part 1 (Part 2 is on the Entrails of a Beautiful Woman DVD); and Theatrical TailerMy Grade: F",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ed339a5286b440ea94b18dd7a5dcf748",
            "input": "I originally caught this back in 1996 in its one week run at a movie theatre. I was under impressed by it and my feelings haven't much changed.Documentary about the infamous Edward D. Wood Jr. covering his life and movies. There are interviews with people who worked with him or knew him. They include: Vampira, Dolores Fuller, Bela Lugosi Jr., Loretta King, Gregory Walcott and Paul Marco. Interviews are mixed with clips from the movies or some bizarre recreations. It is interesting (somewhat) but was this really needed? I've seen all of Wood's films and they're just terrible. Wood had ambitions but not a bit of talent to carry them out. I wouldn't say he was the worst director ever but he's down there. Do we really need a docu on a very mediocre film maker? I do like the fact that they didn't try to make Wood out to be some sort of saint. More than a few of those interviewed (especially Lugosi Jr.) pretty much hated the man and it comes through loud and clear. Also they totally ignore his films in the adult film industry in the 1960s and 70s. Still it's of interest if you're a Wood fan. The best interviews are with Vampira (who tears Wood apart) and Dolores Fuller (a long time girlfriend).",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ce4a45b5b454d8cbc968eb49d878bbd",
            "input": "It's really unfortunate that most people outside of Canada think that the only things that Canada produces are snow, mounties and hockey players. This film is the second superlative Canadian film I have seen within the past few weeks (the first was \"The Red Violin\"), far better than all but the best Hollywood efforts.Gustad Noble is anything but that; he is a middle-aged Parsi bank employee in Bombay in the 1970s. This film sensitively explores various things that happen to him concerning his family, his friends and his work, and their effect on him. At the same time, it is a fascinating, and, I would assume, accurate, portrayal of middle-class, urban life in India at the time.However, I was somewhat prepared for this, having read Rohinton Mistry's book a few years ago. The film, as might be expected, cannot capture all the complexities of the book, but, if you want to read a really good book, and see a really good film, read and see \"Such a Long Journey\".",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-05d7f6018908484492fe2bfc9ac7b331",
            "input": "Let me first state that while I have viewed every episode of StarTrek at least twice, I do not consider myself a Trekker or Trekkie. Those are people who live in their parents basement and attend conventions wearing costumes with pointed rubber ears. I gave this movie a seven casting aside the fiction historical errors. The acting was better than average, but the plot held no surprises. They tried very hard to reverse engineer the technology but still the special effects were just to great a temptation. Now as to the historical errors, if you call them that, the first Capitan to pilot the Enterprise was Commander April, then Capt. Pike, Jim Kirk, etc.. According to a statement made by both Riker and Kirk we dicovered the Klingons and educated them and gave them the technology (that's the reason a prime directive was created) but like I said these are no reason to discredit this fine series. I hope the plots will get deeper, and then special effects can take a backseat.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-0b8e76eda92e4d5f8d593477fb5d2ef7",
            "input": "It utterly defeats me why Godard is taken so seriously - and One Plus One is a great example of his ineptitude as both a filmmaker and an 'intellectual' polemicist. It's hard to credit that Godard actually believed all that Marxist and Maoist kant. Anyone with half a brain could work out the bankruptcy of those 'isms' and how many people they had destroyed and were continuing to destroy even as Godard was making his films supporting them. As a filmmaker, ask yourself: would you have boring voice-overs reading tedious political diatribes at your audience, and then, when you couldn't think of anything else to do, layer another voice-over to the first voice-over, which had lost its listeners after the first 100 words in any case? Brilliant, Jean-Luc! As for Godard insisting on making a film with the Rolling Stones: of course he did; wouldn't you? It was the only guarantee of getting such mindless rubbish seen in the first place: the genius of the Stones eclipsing a talentless and babbling political idiot set loose with a camera. The bookshop scene wasn't worthy of even the worst fringe theatre, and was an insult to the intelligence of even the young children who were used to play in it - as could be readily seen. Copping-out by allowing friendly critics to claim that all this artless crap was a satire on mainstream film-making is no more than a safe get-out to offer those who clearly see Godard's poverty of intellect and arrogant contempt for his audience. Ironic that Godard's one-time great friend, Truffaut, with Nuit Americain, made the best film about film-making ever, and Godard made the worst with Le Mepris! Incidentally, Godard didn't choose the Stones' track of Sympathy With the Devil. It just happened to be the track they were working on when the 'film' started shooting at Barnes Olympic Studios.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-bac681d7f5aa4b7e8220272da2bba5cc",
            "input": "A common plotline in films consists of the main characters leaving the hustle and bustle of the city behind, and finding themselves in the tranquility of nature. In Power of Kangwon Province, we are shown two stories of individuals doing just that, trying to find themselves through a trip to the popular Korean parks in the mountains of Kangwon Province. However, rather than epiphanal moments, we have two characters whose trip into nature was just another form of escape.The pace of this movie is slow, contemplative. We learn in the end what really brought each to Kangwon Province and we learn how they're connected. For those who want Hollywood glam and for a movie to give them a definitive answer, this movie will not satisfy. But for those who want a movie that leaves them thinking, wondering, affecting them years after, this movie will more than satiate that longing.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e2ca02706e9648208492f5c9c7d54ca8",
            "input": "...then they will have a proper place to file this crap. Sorry, not a \"mystery\" as claimed, it is religious mumbo-jumbo. I kept waiting for the \"unimaginable evil\" that was promised me, but the \"evil\" in this flick would only be unimaginable by a five year old with learning disabilities.I can't believe that they actually managed to find some bigger name actors willing to be involved in this embarrassment. Unfortunately it has forevermore changed my opinion of them, and I will likely avoid anything they do in the future. I'm also a little cheesed off that I now have a writer's name and director's name to memorize as I'll be avoiding anything they do like the plague from now on too.It's really unfortunate that all the religious fanatics posting on here and saying that this movie is 10 out of 10, etc. will get their reviews posted first. This could lead to more people getting tricked, as I was, into believing this movie was something other than religious preaching.Well, it's off to the video store to get my money back for false advertising. Too bad they can't give me back the 105 minutes I wasted watching this thinking that it was actually a Hollywood horror/supernatural film.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd69c6859b7c468fa6cbf888f41a07f2",
            "input": "If there was a 0 stars rating i would gladly hand it out to this absolutely horrid pile of waste. The fact that the actual summary is perfectly fine and that if it had been made different it could have been brilliant only makes it worse. The basic task of locking up a group of people in an experiment chamber is fine, but WHERES THE EXPERIMENT? All i see is a bunch of unintelligent surfers and blondes chatting about music and culture i don't know or want to know about... The challenges are pathetic and silly. The whole point of reality TV is to show REALITY. If you set a 'challenge' don't make them play with exaggerated props of food and stereotypical cultural elements in 'friday night games'. make them do an actual challenge. And as for 'earning' prize money, thats fine, if they actually earnt it! These people are nuts. If only they would make the show better, the actual idea would be glorious. But that ain't gonna happen!",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-2cc1df257e144ce082913a511c53eae1",
            "input": "If you are hoping for ANYTHING new, you have chosen the wrong movie. Who can think that a movie that is a virtual replay of it's predeccesors can be good. Maybe the producer and maybe the director but hopefully they were not serious when they made this THING. This whole movie is like making a greatest hits DVD of the 1st 3 films, but changing the actors. BHHAAAAD.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ddc453f2176e497db195b4eacd922146",
            "input": "REALLY? REALLY???? I know if you make a political war movie you will get noticed but this movie was just garbage. Horrible in every sense. Terribly inaccurate in so many ways. I have an easier time believing the president of the United States suiting up, flying a jet fighter, and shooting down aliens. It is easier to note the few things that were right. My jaw dropped when I saw some one say that this movie was the best in the last 25 years. It was overacted, seemingly pointless plot diversions, and had questionable cinematography at times.X-box, YouTube, ACUPAT utilities… did anyone check that these things did not exist in 2004? It's not like you had to do extensive research, it was only five years before this movie came out. I am an Iraq war Veteran and if you spent ONE day with an infantry platoon or an EOD squad you would realize how B.S. this movie is. To compare this to Platoon or Saving Private Ryan is ludicrous. Why don't you just throw Commando and Red Dawn in there too; I think those might be more accurate. If for some reason you can see past the unbelievable plot, the historical and factual discrepancies, then this movie might just be OK. Nothing more. If you keep on hearing \"Oscar buzz\", and have to add your own pompous review, go right ahead. As for me, I am writing the director to see if I can get my 131 minutes back.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-b29b3556085c44d29f07f5d12754d140",
            "input": "This is a movie of tired, yet weirdly childish, clichés. There's a Nazi witch master performing sf-related experiments in the basement? Oh please! Aiming for a creeping sense of horror and fear, the general impression of the film is that of a very immature conception of fright. Not having any expectations beforehand, I am left with: an aged Xander from Buffy and a heroine with ape-like face who doesn't seem to know how to act. Said Adrienne Barbeau have I only only encountered before in the much more enjoyable \"Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death\".Camera and editing adds to the general impression of lame.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-68d87ea502a741b38543b06e4f3922d8",
            "input": "I would say for it's time, this movie was awesome...and yes if you have no desire to become a Christian, then why bother watching it. I saw this movie after I had already been saved and found it to be very moving. I see now they have taken these movies to another level and have created the Left Behind series...they run a close comparison and definitely are more modern to reach people. I think in order to actually judge this movie, you should see it,,,there are 3 or 4 of them in the series if I am not mistaken...don't use our comments to judge, see the movie for yourself!! God will bless you if that is why you are watching them.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6578a12cc1ea4c0fbee7054518885e0b",
            "input": "Tripping Over. I must say at first I was a little disappointed in the first few episodes, but having faith in the show, and Abe Forsythe's unquestionable talent, I continued to watch. I can safely say I'm now glad that I did. The story did develop quite well, and all the characters have a strong base, and most don't have any information missing.The only thing I can fault in this production is the somewhat annoying voice and pronunciation possessed by the character Lizzie.Some good acting coupled with a stellar plot really gets this show over the line. Here's to hoping for another season!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f460e76e1724d60ba1e8fa7678b1287",
            "input": "Another movie that relies upon the trite, worn-out cliché of the mad scientist gone madder. The movie centers around a surgeon whose life's ambition is to bring the dead...back to life. I know, I know...you've never heard that one before! Of course, as all of these movies go, the experiment goes very, very wrong and creates a maniacal, bloodthirsty creature. For this promising setup, you'd think that it'd be at least a bit suspenseful. Wrong. Like many movies of this era, the idea is nice, but the execution and the script is mediocre. Not the worst horror movie I've seen (no, Abominator: the Evilmaker 2 still takes the cake)...but not one of the gems, either.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5f17a6a9815243789ede84a61e653fd9",
            "input": "It could have been a better film. It does drag at points, and the central story shifts from Boyer completing his mission to Boyer avenging Wanda Hendrix's death, but Graham Greene is an author who is really hard to spoil. His stories are all morality tales, due to his own considerations of Catholicism, guilt and innocence (very relative terms in his world view), and the human condition.Boyer is Luis Denard, a well-known concert pianist, who has sided with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. He has been sent to England to try to carry through an arms purchase deal that is desperately needed. Unfortunately for Denard he is literally on his own - everyone of his contacts turns out to be a willing turncoat for the Falagists of Spain. In particular Katina Paxinou (Mrs. Melendez) a grim boarding house keeper, and Peter Lorre (Mr. Contreras) a teacher of an \"esperanto\" type international language. Wanda Hendrix is the drudge of a girl (Else) who works for Mrs. Melendez. The local diplomat, Licata (Victor Francken) is already a willing associate of the Falangists.The Brits (Holmes Herbert, Miles Mander, and best - if not worst - of the lot, George Coulouris) don't give much hope to Boyer's cause (which he soon grasps may be Britain's before long). Herbert and Mander just retreat behind the official policy of neutrality ordered by the Ramsay MacDonald's and Stanley Baldwin's governments during the Civil War. Coulouris here is a typical Col. Blimp type - always impeccable in his native English diction, he is sharp in showing his dislike for foreigners in general.The one ray of hope is Lauren Bacall (Rose Cullen), here trying to play her role as well as she can - but she can't really. She's an aristocrat - the daughter of a Press lord. It was Bacall's second film, and (sad to say) almost sank her long career. She does act well, but the spark she showed in her first film was due to the dual effect of starring with Humphrey Bogart and being directed by Howard Hawks. Boyer is a fine actor, but he's not Bogie, and Herman Shumlin is not Hawks. Her next film returned her to Bogie and Hawks again, and her star resumed it's ascendancy.It's a bleak film (as was the novel). Boyer's mission never succeeds, as he has too many hidden foes all over the place. But the villains are likewise also losers - frequently with their lives.With Dan Seymour as a suspicious foreign tenant of Katina Paxinou (and the man who destroys her). It is well worth watching to catch the Warner's lot of character actors doing their best given the weakness in direction.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-fe2583bc7ea7469195a7cc2b294a4a15",
            "input": "This shorter movie is the epitome the expected results when the imbecile runs the asylum. It is sad how the futures of these young people were rolled down a craps table when neither Saddam Hussein nor the people of Iraq, God rest the souls of the 350,000 plus that have been killed, had anything to do with terrorism nor al-Quida.Following this movie the astute viewer will need to pick up or download a copy of \"Loose Change.\" This movie is available free on the internet, until the Bush cabal locks it down, by googling-up the very title, as indicated in parenthesis.God Save our country. This will not be done by following the Christo-fascists that controlled the Halls of Congress for over 10 years prior to November, 2006!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd8ad9f65c4149958e00b9afcd660dc9",
            "input": "The Honey, I Shrunk the Kids franchise was a huge deal and not to mention very famous. I loved Honey, I shrunk the Kids when I was little. It was an original story and had such an exciting plot! The sets were so amazing and the cast seemed like they enjoyed each other's company. Now Honey, I blew up the kid was pretty stupid, so I think they wanted to go back to the story that everyone loved.Basically, Adam is a little more grown up now and the mom's are going on vacation to leave their husbands with their children. But when Wayne's favorite item is threatened for the garbage, he wants to shrink it and keep it, but he and his brother get in the way. But when the wives come back after forgetting to give some meds to their son, they get caught in the machine as well, leaving the kids in the house alone!The plot is silly, but like I said, it was just a family film that I think some might get a kick out of. The original Honey, I Shrunk the Kids is the best, I think everyone could agree. The third one wasn't so bad, I would recommend this one at least over Honey, I Blew Up the Kid movie, it was at least a little more fun.4/10",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dfb458293deb44fbad00591798f1554b",
            "input": "So...we get so see added footage of Brando...interesting but not exactly Oscar worthy stuff. Susannah York was hardly a slouch. New scene where Lois finds out Clark is Superman is slightly unbelievable in that he doesn't notice that there are blanks coming out of the gun instead of real bullets. Real bullets would have penetrated his clothes and then bounced off him onto the floor but forget that...let's listen to Donner make fun of Lester's version that made more logical sense. The president talks of the Zod \"defacing\" the Washington monument when it was originally Mount Rushmore. Tweaking that scene made that line quite absurd. Superman's \"freedom of the press\" line sounded silly compared to \"..Care to step outside\" which was delivered better and had a fitting connection to Clark's earlier scene in the truck stop. Then there is the ending with the \"turn back the world to go back in time\" effect. It turned back everything in the whole movie and made you wonder where exactly the rocket aimed for Hackensack, N.J. ever went since it doesn't free Zod and company any more.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-5ec3cc72ff3e454c8d356c660d65811a",
            "input": "This is a film that was very well done. I had heard mixed reviews while it was in production and have been waiting for its release! Cheers to the director and all the actors. The supporting cast gave Eva Mendez what she needed to take this to the top. As everyone else here states, the latter portion of the film is riveting. Katie Cassidy did an amazing job with her character, being she had not done a lot of work when this film was made. She has quite the career ahead of her. I was amazed at her performance. I completely enjoyed the film, questioned my values in life and priorities, and am a better person for it! A great message lies within the film. Release it so all can enjoy!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-d6311f73a8814c9ab8943709981f049f",
            "input": "I used to watch Pufnstuf every weekend when I was about 10. It was on right after Bay City Rollers. I saw it come on to Family Channel one day, and taped it for my then three-year old daughter. I'd forgotten all the things I'd loved as a child, the magic flute, the zoom broom, Witcheepoo's makeup.This show is decidedly low tech. The mayor is surely a precedent to Mayor McCheese, and everyone is a stuffed creature with annoying googly eyes. But kids love this stuff. They would way, way rather watch a guy work a sock puppet than sit in front of high-tech computer animation. There is (mild) slapstick, but no adult themes such as sex or people dying, and kids accept Jimmy's schemes. Kids think it would be neat to carry a bag of smoke around and convince someone their house was on fire, and I loved how every time my daughter saw a jet stream in the sky she thought Witchypoo was flying overhead. The music is old, but you really get used to it, and my daughter really loved it. She used to sing \"different is hard, different is lonely\" in the car. My daughter watched this show at least once a day for about 5 months, and it's still one of her favourites.I see that a new Pufnstuf 2000 is in the works. I really hope they try to keep the old flavour and don't do anything like computer-animating characters etc. I think a whole new generation would love Pufnstuf.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0195cf198d7493ba68018c1f612ec9e",
            "input": "At first,this movie seems so bad that i almost fell in a trance the first time i saw it.It was like a bad dream.A cosmic bore.But i gave it a second chance,then another and another,etc...I finally got addicted to this film,due to it's dreamlike slow pace,wonderful natural sets,bathed in a mellow autumn light and especially the musical score,which is made of some 70's progressive rock and absolute exquisite folk songs by actor/singer/songwriter Derek Lamb(the Troubadour).You should notice the song about hazel wood,silver trout and lady vanishing in the air...,heard in the middle and near the end of the film.There are some carnal scenes in the beginning ,wich allow us to appreciate the natural charms of Elizabeth Suzuki.If that movie had been made by some \"repertoire\" directors like Bergman,Lars Von Triers or Jean-Luc Goddard,critics would have rolled on the floor,raving about that movie as if it were a cosmic masterpiece.I personally think this film is one million times superior to any of Fellini's cinematic sh#¤@t!Definitely not for the pretentious.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-e0d3f437f37b4ad3800ad00d59fbc42e",
            "input": "A tragically wonderful movie... brings us to a Japan that does not exist anymore. Despite Hollywood's technical expertise, I have yet to see a (hollywood) movie that can match the authenticity of the atmosphere in this small town by the river near the sea... Tom Cruise's The Last Samurai looked liked the last installment of the Lord of The Rings in trying to capture rural Old Japan.If you like serene but intense story lines, this is a must see film. It will be a respite from hollow flashy films much like the last 1000 blockbusters you saw. I think this is one of Kurosawa's better stories.Even if it's a movie about geishas and brothels and the complicated rules that govern life in such settings, it did not turn into a skin flick. The characters are full of depth and act with much intensity.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-7b48d0b1de144d9b8299028bf6a73369",
            "input": "This sweeping drama has it all: top notch acting, incredible photography, good story. It is often compared to \"Braveheart\" because both movies take place in historical Scotland. Even though I love Braveheart, I think this is the better of the two films. Jessica Lange gave an incredible performance (should have been nominated for an Oscar). Liam Neeson is fantastic in the title role. Tim Roth plays one of the most evil, despicable, characters in film history (he was nominated for an Oscar). John Hurt is excellent as Lord Montrose, another dislikeable character. I am always amazed at the incredible range of characters that John Hurt can play. This is a story of a dispute over money between Rob Roy and his clan, and Lord Montrose. Rob Roy is a self made man, who will not solve his problems with Montrose if it violates his sense of honor. Montrose, who, inherited his title, has no sense of honor. And that is basically what this story is all about; honor of the common man versus corruption of the nobility. This movie is very entertaining, it should appeal to all. It has romance, action, beautiful scenery, and has a exciting plot. One of my favorite films.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-52f340f4e2e4419bacbad1f40da1527c",
            "input": "Lindy (Meryl Streep) and her husband Michael (Sam Neill) have just welcomed a baby girl, Azaria. As Seventh Day Adventists, they live their beliefs every day and soon have Azaria dedicated to God at their church, with their two older boys looking on. Michael gets a vacation and the family decides to head to Ayer's Rock, one of the most impressive tourist spots in all of Australia. Not being wealthy, the family camps near the site. After a wonderful first day, Lindy puts baby Azaria to sleep in one of the tents. Suddenly, she hears Azaria crying. As Lindy rushes to the tent, a dingo dog is just exiting, shaking his head. The baby is gone and soon, so is the dingo. Although the entire camp looks for the baby, she is not found. Concluding she is dead and that the dingo made off with their beloved child, the Chamberlains struggle to accept God's decision and go on with their lives. But, unfortunately, the story gets sensational coverage in the news media and soon the tale is circulated that Lindy murdered the baby. She is subsequently arrested and put on trial. How could this happen? This is a great depiction of real events that shows how \"mob rule\" is not a figment of the imagination. The entire country turns against the Chamberlains, in part because they are seen as odd. Streep gives her best performance ever as the complex Lindy, whose own strong-willed demeanor works against her every step of the way. Neill, likewise, does a wonderful job as the hesitant and confused Michael. The cast is one of the largest ever, with depictions of folks around the country getting their digs into Lindy's case. The costumes, scenery, script, direction and production are all top of the line. If you have never seen or heard of this film, remedy that straight away. It is not a far cry from reality to say that this \"Cry\" should be seen by all who care about film and about the misused power of the media.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-125f46f47d0c4dbc8ac94255c0222f15",
            "input": "THHE2 is entertaining in that you'll laugh a lot and cringe and probably say \"oh sh*t!\" and \"get your face away from the goddamn hole you dumb**s\" or things along those lines but I don't know if its really worth seeing- I was very annoyed throughout the entirety with the horrible military characters who don't seem to know the first thing about combat.Yes there was more violence, gore, and a higher body count than the first one but I am still am debating whether that cancels out my feeling throughout the whole movie about how ridiculous it is (and not a good ridiculousness like Dead Alive or Feast). My time would have been better spent watching Aja's remake for the 5th time.So go for some laughs, or go for some gore, but don't go hoping to come out of it satisfied.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-aef94842e1ca48f5a3d82ddc3a6c03fa",
            "input": "There is no such a thing as perfect murder.Lieutenant Columbo knows that.Ken Franklin, who is the other half of the writing team of detective stories doesn't know that.He kills his partner Jim Ferris who had plans on going solo.Now Columbo steps into the picture and asks all sorts of questions from Mr. Franklin.And returns for one more question.Columbo: Murder by the Book (1971) is directed by the young Steven Spielberg before his days of fame.Steven Bochco wrote it.Columbo is a fantastic character with his shabby look.It's hard to believe this man could solve any crime.But he could.Each and every one of them! Peter Falk is the one and only person in the world that could portray this character.So no remakes, please.This part is a very good example of how Columbo worked.Jack Cassidy plays the murderer and Martin Milner plays the victim.Rosemary Forsyth plays the victim's wife Joanna Ferris.There's something endearing in the scenes between Columbo and her.How he makes the omelet and everything.Barbara Colby plays Lilly La Sanka.She actually met a tragic fate when she died after a homicide like she does here.I've been a fan of Columbo since childhood and I still enjoy watching them.There was a break for many years that they weren't showing Columbo stories at all but now he's back.Back for one more question.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-38200c13c0fa4174940a98185a36f2cf",
            "input": "This movie was on the Romance channel, and I thought it might be a goofy 80's movie that would be enjoyable on some level, so my brother and I watched it. Boy did it suck. Boy gets crush on girl--correction, his *dream*-girl (apparently there is a difference; and I'm surprised he realized she was his dream girl--he was smitten with her from over 30 feet away. I guess that just goes to show the power of dream-girls), boy ends up masquerading as a female to be near dream-girl (creative in the sense that it's a far-out plan, but un-creative in the sense that there are probably better solutions one might think up), awkward situations ensue, a match is made (all of which takes seems to take place around late afternoon--either the location was somehow responsible for this odd lighting, or the actors had to wait until they got off of their day-jobs to come to the set; I suspect the latter). Very clumsily done, very pathetic. It's almost never even amusing *accidentally*, so there really is nothing to redeem it. Unless you're interested in seeing Chad Lowe's early days, before he finally got his piece of the pie with his role as the HIV-positive gay guy on the series \"Life Goes On\", or Gail O'Grady who was on NYPD Blue and probably got to stare at Dennis Franz's buttocks). But those are unlikely motives--I'd say \"systematic derangement of the senses\" would be a more justified purpose. I'm surprised I watched it all. I guess it's the kind of thing where, halfway through, you find yourself *still* watching due to some morbid, self-flagellistic inner-issue, and think you might as well finish it so you can tell your friends and family that you actually sat through such a horrible movie, on the off-chance that it'll garner you some sympathy for the questionable state of your mental health. Can *You* Take the Challenge?",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6d04c30e3eb640e8977497ececa7b4ad",
            "input": "\"After the atomic bombs carried by a shot-down Soviet bomber explode in the Arctic, the creature 'Gammera' is released from his hibernation. The giant prehistoric turtle proceeds on a path to Tokyo and destroys anything in his path. The military and the scientific community rush to find a means to stop this monster before Tokyo is laid to waste,\" according to the DVD sleeve's synopsis. The re-produced for American audiences version of this, the first film in the \"Gamera\" series, adds English language material that is even funnier than the regularly dubbed Japanese fare. Clearly, the monster is following in the footsteps of \"Godzilla\". Taking his cue from ABC's faddish \"Batman!\" TV series, musician Wes Farrell's ludicrous theme song heightens the US version's camp appeal.*** Gammera the Invincible (12/15/66) Sandy Howard, Noriaki Yuasa ~ Dick O'Neill, Brian Donlevy, Albert Dekker, John Baragrey",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-c325e2107dfc44a696a84ad12bb4fee4",
            "input": "\"Proximity\" tells of a convict (Lowe) who thinks the prison staff is out to kill him. This very ordinary film is an action/drama with a weak plot; stereotypical, poorly developed characters; and a one dimensional performance by Lowe. A forgettable film not worthy of further commentary.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dd53c7bbba7342369fe5fa5ddc8a0667",
            "input": "I recently found this movie on VHS after looking for it for a number of years, I was not disappointed. It gets better every time I see it. Peter Ustinov stars and co-wrote the original screenplay (nominated for an Academy Award). Other stars you've heard of include Karl Malden, Bob Newhart and Cesar Romero. Ustinov plays an accountant/embezzler, just released from England's infamous Wormwood Scrubs prison (he had embezzled from the Conservative Party headquarters, selected because he is a Liberal). He immediately begins a search for a new employer from whom he can embezzle, and discovers that computers are the wave of the future. He social-engineers his way into a London men's club and learns the identity of the best computer experts in town, he steals the identity of one Caesar Smith, who has just left town for South America to pursue his hobby of collecting moths in the wild. He talks his way into Ta-Can-Co, an American conglomerate headed by Carlton Klemper (Karl Malden). Klemper hires Smith and shows him around the computer center, especially its security feature consisting of a flashing blue light. Ustinov asks the computer how to defeat its security and the computer obligingly tells, him, \"Disconnect blue light.\" Using hacking techniques from 30 years in the future, Ustinov breaks into the system and programs the computer to generate checks written to various bogus companies. The scheme starts to unravel when Klemper's assistant Willard G. Gnatpole (Bob Newhart) notices the amount of business Ta-Can-Co appears to be transacting with Ustinov's scam companies. With the help of his secretary Patty Terwilliger (Maggie Smith), Ustinov manages to avoid prosecution and lives happily ever after. To tell you how would spoil this very funny, romantic, intelligent, and ahead-of-its-time picture.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-82711f1a9eea4da5b80f4a5976988a6b",
            "input": "I sincerely consider this movie as another poor effort of Dominican Movie Industry. The first 30 minutes of the movie are a little funny but then when they switch their role in the society (men doing what women usually do and women doing what men usually do) the movie falls. Becoming boring and not funny at all. They let many things without explanation and the end of the movie is predictable. I didn't like the way as a Roberto Angel played his character and his little either. I went to the movies theater hoping to see a good work but I went out really disappointed.I don't recommend this movie.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-3c4364febd294d79ad9d44cf0444deeb",
            "input": "You might be a bit confused if you watch this silly made-for from the beginning, since the credits list Susan Dey as \"Special Guest Star.\" Um, why would a one-off MOW like this have a guest star? Well, if you stick with it, you'll find yourself paying attention to little else but Ms. Dey's butt, wiggling in a flowered bikini as the \"Partridge Family\" house babe frolics on the beach to which that imaginative title alludes. Susan's derrière is especially compelling when she shakes it at the camera while teasing and tickling her pseudo-disaffected brother in one mildly incestuous scene. Sadly, Susie and her tush fight a losing battle: the jiggle-TV craze that might have put that bottom over the top was three years off, so that sweet booty just gets a supporting role. In 1976 Fat Freddy Silverman would have put that behind right out front and used this flick as Susan's audition tape for \"Charlie's Angels.\" As is, our Susan was denied cheesecake immortality and had to settle for a very commendable career playing somber, neurotic women.The view beyond Susan's heinie, it must be said, is not very compelling. The scenery is nice, and photographed in a bizarre, hazy way that briefly fools you into thinking there might be some quirky creative intelligence at work behind the camera. Nope. It's just a typically suspense-challenged 70's made-for-TV thriller that allowed weekly series stars to make some extra cash(and collect some cable residuals, though they obviously didn't know that at the time) and show off their \"range.\" Here we're treated to a TV-scale nuclear family, squaring off against TV-scale thugs who can't decide whether they're a motorcycle gang or a hippie cult (thus the filmmakers split the difference by putting them in dune buggies) and have never learned one of the primary lessons of 1970s television: don't mess with Dennis Weaver (see \"McCloud\" and \"Duel\"). The only potential for depth in this movie is in the aforementioned teenage-son character of Steve, played by the long-forgotten (if ever-remembered) Kristoffer Tabori, who is supposed to be rebellious and troubled and might feel some sympathy for and attraction to the lawless mob that is (supposedly) menacing his family. But Steve, as played by Tabori (gosh, why didn't we see more from this wunderkind?), is actually just grumpy and moody and isn't one bit conflicted when big D gets serious and draws a line in the proverbial (and literal) sand. For the sleep-deprived and Susan Deyniacs (there must be some of you out there) only.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb1b7f0055b046d5a4327d38a2fc8ac1",
            "input": "If you like occasional nudity with junior high school level slap stick comedy, then look no further.Starting at about the halfway point, the beautiful and erotic Arielle Dombasle starts disrobing at every opportunity. That is the only thing that made this movie worth watching.The story is both lame and preposterous, the humor is corny, and character development is basically non-existent.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-6276ff9dd75c4c4eaf32ff27cbe370ae",
            "input": "The magnetism radiated from Elvira, drawing her legions of devoted admirers, has a primordial quality. With her lengthy, well-toned figure, large-bust, innocuously mischievous attitude and grab-bag lexicon of me-generation valley slang, the character of Elvira has a universal and timeless appeal. As an aspiring folklorist and an individual deeply interested in the structure of storytelling, it is evident that the Elvira persona has certain archetypal elements that help to make the character more than the sum of her corny one-liners and large chest. As initiated from the manner in which the children of the town react to her, she represents the deep adolescent fantasy for an experienced woman whom can connect to them of their level: a strange mixture of one-dimensional romantic yearning, boyish sexual craving and the desire for non-threateningly lighthearted fun. She symbolizes an undeveloped ideal of womanhood perfected for the boys and a source of strength for the girls of the town. The other adults have trouble with her for the same reasons. In the end, however, her film cannot move pass its more campy ingredients. The end result is that while Elvira is infinitely interesting, her film is limited by how weak a showcase it is for her talents. Nearly everything is tailored to an adolescent mindset and although it is a straightforward comedy, only those who can still process information with the mind of a young person will be able to enjoy the nonsense. Fortunately, I have such ability and found the film to be a delightful charmer.Best Quote: Bob Redding: How's your head? Elvira: I haven't had any complaints.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-8f9a15dee94b4b629e85c9d8960084c0",
            "input": "This film is scary because you can find yourself relating to ideas they have and can recall other people saying and having simialr ideas make this a haunting well done movie.... the camra style is not shakey to point it draws you out of film like blair witch it only adds to the raw \"real\" feeling of the film that makes it.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-dc1aeddda3054eddb38a354fe3de1e80",
            "input": "Absolutely fantastic. Now, before a legion of cinema purists choke on their lattés, allow me to elaborate. Much as I enjoyed it, this is quite simply one of the worst films I have ever seen and is certainly the worst film I've seen at the cinema (an impressive claim, as I remember seeing Daredevil on the big screen). The two leads (Daniel Gillies and Elisha Cuthbert) were unconvincing at best and downright awful at worst. Of course, they weren't helped by a script that had as much emotional depth as a Daphne & Celeste single and characterisation that was about as convincing as the OJ defence. The plot (to stretch the term slightly) was thin to non-existent and the 'gore' scenes, whilst undoubtedly brutal, were irrelevant and laughably formulaic. What plot there is revolves around a twenty-something model (Cuthbert) who is abducted, imprisoned and subjected to various visceral tortures, both psychological and physical. The torture scenes feel like disconnected set pieces and the emphasis was laid squarely upon shocking rather than scaring the audience. Whilst there really are very, very few positives to draw from this film, its redeeming features are the very flaws that make it such a dreadful film. I have never heard a more vocal audience in a cinema. Within twenty minutes, the entire cinema was in stitches and remained that way throughout. For my part I came out flushed with laughter, buoyed by a film that had ascended to the pinnacle of appalling film-making. Whichever way you look at it, this is truly a cinematic achievement and a blueprint for future directorial wannabes detailing minutely how not to make a film.P.S. I omitted to mention that I managed to get in to the film free...so I can afford to laugh about it. I was still tempted to ask for my money back...it really was THAT bad.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-eb513560e53541b18f769a55a7e78f39",
            "input": "I thought this movie was a lot better than most movie critics are giving it credit for. Though it has its confusing parts of the plot, it doesn't greatly interfere with your understanding of the movie. That being said, If you're not open to more liberal political ideas, then this probably isn't the movie for you. I thought all the actors in the movie were outstanding. Each character has their funny moments and the audience at the Tribeca Film Festival was laughing throughout the whole thing. I thought the satire was a tad over the top in one particular area, but that's intentionally done. John Cusack is right in that although it's set in the future, it really makes you see the present.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-926dd22f41ac4920bbac74368b653542",
            "input": "No scenario, bad actors (poor Melissa Gilbert)... Beurk Beurk Beurk ...Give a such budget to make this... In Belgium, we make ten films which win all prices in Cannes with this.Last time that I've seen a such NULL-Film was Hypercube. But scenario was better.Is anyone knows if the director was a graduate in school-film or a cop ?The better things in this film was the word \"End\".Why authorize to sell this ? 1ç is to expensive. I've pay ten dollars to buy this.For me, pay for this was my BIG MISTAKE of millennium.Too bad.Next time I'll break my arm but buy this type of sh*t.",
            "output": [
                "negative"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-13f0875d111f433382255243d3e4de3d",
            "input": "According to the director this movie was popular in Asia. It is somewhat difficult to take these Mats Helge movies seriously since most of his films are shot on a very tight budget. Almost no USD at all. But it is fascinating to establish that Mats Helge eventually completes something which can be called an action movie. The Ninja Mission is - I think - the best one among all movies directed by him. Some special effects are quite enjoyable. This is not a \"B\" or \"C\" movie. It is a \"Z\" movie - but an enjoyable and fun \"Z\" movie!",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        },
        {
            "id": "task284-ce36840fd11d453a8d11a0d805190355",
            "input": "As a long-standing Barbra fan, any posting like this will be biased. That aside, this film ranks as a classic. It has it's flaws (emphasized in other postings), but gives a glimpse of a time (late 70s) that will never be there again, and is fascinating to watch unfold on screen.Streisand fought hard to make this movie her own. I don't think she was ever satisfied. But it gives her fans a new Barbra (for the time) with LIVE singing, a young fresh appearance, and some very heavy-duty acting.The story is rough, but exciting, and holds your interest throughout. The extended one frame \"finale\" is hard for most non-Barbra fans to sit through, but it speaks volumes to those who admire her talent.",
            "output": [
                "positive"
            ]
        }
    ],
    "Instance License": [
        "Unknown"
    ]
}